On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 10:53:31PM +0000, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 16:33:28 -0700, zfh wrote in > [🔎] 360937.25915.qm@web83205.mail.mud.yahoo.com: > > > > Sorry to break into your offtopic rants, but I can't resist this one. > > Under the Geneva Conventions, enemy combatants that wear no uniforms and > > ..like the passengers onboard flight UA93 on 9/11? > ...who were civilians acting in self-defense? > > commit acts of murder and sabotage are considered to be spies and may be > > ..you speak of murderers, saboteurs and spies, who may only be shot after > having received a verdict so ordering in a trial for the murderer, and in > an Article 90 hearing _and_ a trial for the saboteur and the spy. The > latter 2 generally need to commit some war crime to earn a verdict, but > can still be held as POW for the duration of the war without committing > any war crimes, read especially the commentary to Article 46 for > background: > http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/470-750056?OpenDocument > http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/470-750056?OpenDocument > They can be held as POWs, but the right of communication can be witheld (GC IV, Art 5): Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State. Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention. In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be. It seems, like the prisoners at Gitmo *are* being held in accordance with the GC (less the isolated cases of guards acting in contravention to the other GC protections). > > Al Queda and the Taliban don't care about anyones rights or > > freedoms. We need to follow the rules because we are who we are and > > need to stay that way if free nations are to survive. Though there have > > been some abuses, military tribunals and Gitmo are not necessarily > > outside the rules when dealing with an organized terrorist threat. > > ..really? ;o) They are. On one line: > http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/ihl-article-300906? > opendocument > Umm. That document is an article about International Humanitarian Law. It mentions nothing of tribunals. > ..a good starting point for further reading: > http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/section_ihl_in_brief? > OpenDocument > Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature