Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (52319)	10/19/2006 4:01:29 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

And the detainment is strictly because it is considered that they are likely guilty and a probable risk to others. "Probably guilty", but not found to be so (yet) beyond all reasonable doubt. "Probable risk to others" exactly my point. Edit - OK, I see the reason for confusion. In my earlier post "at risk" should be "a risk". On what basis do you form your belief that someone determined to be an "enemy" is presumed innocent? They are presumed innocent of any crime. Nazi POWs were not held because of a crime. Some of them might have been accused and tried (certainly some of the leaders where after the war) but the typical POW was assumed to be innocent of any crime. There is no connection between "guilt" and "enemy" only a connection between "danger" and "enemy". They where held entirely because they where considered dangerous, not because they where thought to have violated a law.