Re: Attn: Fran - Ref Military Lawyers

In article <313030303930323944F43AE178@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Janet Baraclough <janet.and.john@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The message <c4VIg.4206$yO7.180@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
from spambait@xxxxxxxxxx (Doug Miller) contains these words:

In article <313030303930323944F3848858@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Janet Baraclough
<janet.and.john@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The message <sfKIg.21430$gY6.17964@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
from spambait@xxxxxxxxxx (Doug Miller) contains these words:

In article <313030303930323944F3739802@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Janet Baraclough
<janet.and.john@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


You mean, according to the USA, they were illegal conbatants.

No, actually, it is a matter of objective reality that the detainees at
Guantanamo are not eligible for Geneva Convention protection.

The USA govt has recently admitted that they are eligible for GC
protection, and should always have been. It continues to be in breach of
the GC.

That is not correct. The US has stated that they will be treated
_as_if_ they
were eligible -- even though they were not, and are not, we're doing it
anyway.
To be eligible,
a combatant must wear the uniform, or bear the insignia, of a military
organization. People in civilian clothes, carrying weapons, have no
claim on
G.C. protection

You appear not to have grasped Article 5.

"Article 5

Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a
belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to
any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy
the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status
has been determined by a competent tribunal. "

You appear not to have grasped the idea that there is not, in fact,
any doubt
about the eligibility for GC protection of armed men in civilian
clothing on a
field of battle.

The error is yours. Article 4, Prisoners of War, makes clear, you
are plain wrong about "To be eligible for GC protection, a combatant
must wear the uniform, or bear the insignia, of a military
organization.". Read it for yourself.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.

Here's the portion of Article 4 that describes prisoners of war. Note 4A2(b):
"fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance" -- in other words, uniform
or insignia.

Terrorists don't fulfill *any* of the definitions below.

<begin quote>
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons
belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power
of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members
of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including
those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict
and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is
occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such
organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and
customs of war.
<end quote>

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: News Release
    ... members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. ... customs of war. ... The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article ... the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Attn: Fran - Ref Military Lawyers
    ... Guantanamo are not eligible for Geneva Convention protection. ... about the eligibility for GC protection of armed men in civilian ... must wear the uniform, or bear the insignia, of a military ...
    (misc.rural)
  • Re: Attn: Fran - Ref Military Lawyers
    ... Guantanamo are not eligible for Geneva Convention protection. ... People in civilian clothes, carrying weapons, have no ... about the eligibility for GC protection of armed men in civilian ...
    (misc.rural)
  • Re: Attn: Fran - Ref Military Lawyers
    ... Guantanamo are not eligible for Geneva Convention protection. ... any doubt about the eligibility for GC protection of armed men in civilian ... must wear the uniform, or bear the insignia, of a military organization.". ...
    (misc.rural)
  • Re: Attn: Fran - Ref Military Lawyers
    ... Guantanamo are not eligible for Geneva Convention protection. ... You appear not to have grasped Article 5. ... about the eligibility for GC protection of armed men in civilian clothing on a ...
    (misc.rural)