Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:35:55 -0500, JohnH wrote:
As you liberals like to say: "it's not quite so black and white". The GC specifically addresses the issue of illegal combatants...and states that they're not entitled to protection under the GC. That's a canard, a bull**** issue. No, it's *the* issue. It wouldn't allow for liberal bitching and whining however, so I can understand your comment. Well, then perhaps we should get it right. "Illegal combatants" are not covered under the Third Geneva Convention, but they are covered by the Fourth Geneva Convention. They are afforded rights, just not the same rights afforded "legal combatants". |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT Question about BushCo Convention | General | |||
OT--Oh, the irony! | General | |||
( OT ) Geneva convention concerning treatment of prisioners doesn't apply to US | General | |||
OT The Incredible Lying BushCO! | General |