Yes it does and I'm opposed to it. A change like this would allow something that I might say or something you might say to be construed as inflamitory and both of us wind up being held indefinatedly. I would prefer to take my chances with domestic and/or foreign terrorists than give up my civil liberties. My right to a speedy trial. My right to habeas corpus. My right to face my accusers. My right not to incriminate myself. My right to bail. My right to an attorney. The Patriot Act as well as many pieces of special interest legislation have taken too much of our Constitution from us already.

Can you show a source?

To my understanding, he is working to do just the opposite. The Bush administration did that, and we still have terrorists on ice who have NEVER had a fair trial. Some of them, just as our own legal system has shown, aren't even guilty. It was merely THOUGHT that they knew something, when in actuality, they did not. If a terrorist is found guilty, then fine. Let him reap what he/she has sewn. But we cannot KNOW whether they are guilty or not without a fair trial! Keeping someone imprisoned indefinitely is the worst act of tyranny. It is the ultimate corruption of power. When we do that, we are no better than the terrorists, themselves. Human Rights do not stop at the US borders. They are supposed to extend to everyone who is HUMAN. +5

Yes, which is why I quit sending money to Obama's campaign fund. http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/22/preventive_detention/index.html But, of course, the Teabaggers are too busy worrying about ACORN and imaginary "death panels" to protest REAL threats to their liberties...:-P...

Obama pisses me off with this one. He is extending a policy adopted by Bush to indefinitely detain terrorist suspects. I think it's damned funny that so many were silent when Bush claimed this right and now we see this question. This is a pretty complex legal issue. As those on the far right said repeatedly through out the Bush presidency. I am not sure what you heard? Maybe some good doublespeak from FOX? From the news 29 Sep 2009 "The Obama administration will not seek a new law spelling out how it can hold terror suspects indefinitely without bringing charges." http://www.newser.com/article/d9atqokg0/obama-administration-wont-seek-new-law-for-indefinite-detention-of-terror-suspects.html Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd says the administration has informed Congress it does not believe new laws are necessary to hold the remaining inmates at Guantanamo Bay or future detainees. Some detainees have challenged their imprisonment with civil lawsuits in U.S. federal courts, and the administration says that process provides fair judicial review of their cases. Boyd said Thursday that the government's authority to hold someone indefinitely without charge will be based on the congressional military force authorization passed after the 2001 terror attacks. The Washington Post first reported the decision in Thursday's editions.

The simple answer to this is yes, however this has been kicked around since before obama even took office, its just now being implemented, Do i like this No i absolutely don't, but what are you going to do about it. Wouldn't matter who the president was, this would have happen'd, this 9/11 thing stirred up a whole lotta mess.

What rock have you been living under? This is the way it has been since the first Patriot Act. Your right to habeas corpus, a defense, a speedy trial judged by peers, disclosure of charges, notification of family, communication with counsel, was all removed and you don't know about till eight years later. God, you are stupid.

As far as I know, this isn't actually going to happen. It was talked about, but nothing is actually going to change. It's not like much needs to change, though. People can still be held indefinitely with no trial. It was started under Bush first (PATRIOT Act, dur), and Obama continued it for some stupid reason.

I don't see any difference between Obama wanting to hold on to this and "the decider" creating it! Happy Wednesday to you!

No, the Patriot act has been in force for quite a while. ...as has this one: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/mo-111301.htm In it, Bush authorised himself to have any foreigner he suspects to be a terrorist secretly arrested, secretly tried and secretly executed. All details of the trial are determined by his people, including the suspect's witnesses, attorney and evidence.

Just another campaign promise broken.

Government issued Slavery Sweet, he ain't no Lincoln more like the leader of the Confederacy

Freedom of speech no longer exists. Speak against the government in any fashion and you're considered a terrorist. I am standing up against the New World Order in full force, so it will only be a matter of time until they detain me or rub me out.

yes that is exactly what that means. I don't like terriosts(sp)and you should have some kind of control over them. however i don't trust Alfred E. Obama any more then i would trust a bad guy. the song he is singing now is not the song he was singing a few years ago. I remember him saying a few years ago that our constitution need restructured,"holy hole in a dounut bat man" i will say again,what Obama is(and i don't mean a black thing)speaks so loudly that i can't hear what he says. back during WWII we(americans) locked up all of the people we considered foregin(sp) in prison camps,it's worse now then it was then. did you ever read the books that Obama endorsed? read the part where he says if worse comes to worse i will follow the muslin way.

It is interesting that the things Bush did are now being attributed to Obama. You just gotta love the right wingers.

CHANGE? I thought it was G.W. Bush who ENACTED such laws/statutes!! Where the FUCK have you been for the last eight years? Oh, wait... we did the same to Kevin Mitnick LLOONNGG before 9/11!!!

What bothers me about the change is what is now considered a terrorist. People who protest tax or abortion for the first time are getting this label. That could easily be my grumpy dad at tax time, or my church going mom who believes abortion isn't about choice. They shouldn't go to jail for it, and as far as I knew could say what they wished, until this administration.

from what I understood this was already the law after 9/11. How is this obama?