Are we into precrime now? A criminal is one who is proven in court to be a criminal. Civilized societies use courts to decide the truth, not questionnaires filled out by shady people.
While on vacation maybe 15 years ago, I went to a library to get internet access. When I went to Google, the search dropdown box showed me that the previous several searches were all about burglary tools. Should the police be interested in that? (They were. And I don't blame them.)
An enemy combatants gets no such treatment. Since we're in a war against terrorism (the state's words, not mine), the legalese has mainly been argued from that distinction.
In an ideal world, it takes a crime to make a criminal. The consequences of commiting a crime are enough to keep most people from committing them. But if your crime involves suicide, what earthly consequence can we invent to reduce the numbers? I'm sure it would be helpful if whatever factors that are developing the perceived rewards of killing a bunch of people could be routed, but other than that, our thinking on the justice system doesn't really net a solution to politically motivated murder suicide. I.e. is this precrime? Under the western ideal of innocent until proven guilty, yes. Do the incentives of that system overcome terrorism? No.
This is not about deciding the truth or convicting criminals. This is "precrime" in the same way that a cop watching someone sneak around an empty house at midnight might identify them as a "precriminal". That's cause to watch them or go ask them what they're doing, not arrest them.
A widely acknowledged function of law enforcement is the anticipation of and prevention of crime.
Courts provide some restraint upon information gathering, such as the approval of search warrants - but mostly courts are only involved after an alleged crime has occurred.
