Obama and Guantanamo Bay

[Tiberius]

There seems to be a confusion with the different definitions of the word "guilty". From Google:

1) Culpable of or responsible for a specified wrongdoing.
2) Justly chargeable with a particular fault or error.

The first definition is the non-legal one. If I murder someone, I am guilty of murdering someone. Whether I have been convicted or not does not change the fact that I am guilty of murdering someone.

The second definition is the legal term. If I am found guilty of murdering someone, then in the eyes of the law, I have murdered someone. This definition is far more relative that the first, as people can be found guilty of murder without having actually murdered someone. Conversely, people can be found not guilty of murder after having actually murdered someone.

What Shell said was:

Yes, some of them are not terrorists, but many of them are guilty.

In other words, many of them are guilty (first definition), despite not having had a trial. This is not saying that they should be convicted without a trial; this is saying that they have done what we claim they have done. All that is required is for the court system to show it for the defendant to be found guilty (second definition).

As far as I am aware, Shell never said we should treat them as if they were guilty either. She wants them treated humanely; presumed innocent, with a right to a fair trial. She just doesn't want them to be allowed on US soil.

[Shell B]

Hey, Apo, learn how to read. I pointed out that there are some who have been tried and found guilty. If you are going to accuse someone of lying, you better read the whole thread before you dive in.

[Angrboda]

Hey, Apo, learn how to read. I pointed out that there are some who have been tried and found guilty. If you are going to accuse someone of lying, you better read the whole thread before you dive in.

Liar.

[Tiberius]

Exactly on what grounds are you calling her a liar?

[Annik]

We have no proof that they have committed any wrong-doing, as they have not stood trial.


We can make no assessments as to their guilt, in any sense of the word, because we have not officially assessed it yet. Saying that anyone in GITMO is guilty that hasn't already stood trial isn't right.

[Hovik]

A person not being found guilty in court does not make them innocent. Period.

I guess the phrasing "innocent until proven guilty" means nothing to you, huh?

[goddamnit]

A person not being found guilty in court does not make them innocent. Period.

I guess the phrasing "innocent until proven guilty" means nothing to you, huh?

Should suspected murderers not be temporarily held in jail until the trial comes up? Should all of them be on the loose until trial?

[Hovik]

I guess the phrasing "innocent until proven guilty" means nothing to you, huh?

Should suspected murderers not be temporarily held in jail until the trial comes up? Should all of them be on the loose until trial?

Did I say anything about suspected murderers? Naturally somebody suspected of a crime should be held assuming there is probable cause to do so, but holding somebody indefinitely without due process cannot be justified under any rationalization.

[goddamnit]

Should suspected murderers not be temporarily held in jail until the trial comes up? Should all of them be on the loose until trial?

Did I say anything about suspected murderers?

Did I say you said anything about suspected murderers? (HINT: The answer is "no.")

Naturally somebody suspected of a crime should be held assuming there is probable cause to do so, but holding somebody indefinitely without due process cannot be justified under any rationalization.

OK, but I do not disagree with this.

[Hovik]

Naturally somebody suspected of a crime should be held assuming there is probable cause to do so, but holding somebody indefinitely without due process cannot be justified under any rationalization.

OK, but I do not disagree with this.

To clarify, you don't disagree with what, exactly?