Guantanamo Bay is a ridiculously false equivalency. It is a POW camp more than anything else. 

So no presumption of innocence or standard of reasonable doubt for just this one category of criminal charges? I hope others can see the glaringly obvious logical fallacy with your proposal.  

What you're really proposing is pitching out a key tenet of highly evolved western jurisprudence, one that underpins civil society. So what other offences should the state then lock people up for with a weak threshold of evidence? Ill-considered posting about legal principles perhaps. 
Not inspired by deep thinking.