Why does it always have to be so black and white.  Liberals accuse the
current government of being fascists and those of a more conservative bent
say if you against the war you want to coddle the enemy?  
What ever happened to being the good guys, the ones in white, where it's
more important to take the high road than be dictarial and heavy handed.
The bad guys have been around for a long time, so how long does the war last
and we get our freedom back?  At least in the cold war we knew when it was
over.
I can tell you as a member of the armed forces who served during a war, I
would like to be protected with the Geneva convention (by the way I was
never waterboarded to protect me from interrogation tactics), as a believe
all should be, even the Nazi's got a trial.   
When you have great power, you have great responsibility. Morally,
ethically, I want to be better than the bad guys, not resort to their
tactics and thus become them.
As a Christian, I refuse to live in fear and paranoia, I know there is a
better place, so, I do the best I can to make this place I live in better.


Beth t.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cerebral Palsy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
> On Behalf Of ken barber
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 7:41 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: another black eye for the administration...
> 
> hey, i know, we take them out into a big field, build a camp 
> fire, make s'mores, and by the third stanza of Cum Ba Ya, 
> they'll be our buds for life. if they know of any impending 
> attacks they'll surely tell us after that. 
> 
> --- "Kendall D. Corbett" <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> 
> > As I read article 4 of The Geneva Convention, the 
> combatants should be 
> > considered prisoners of war.
> > 
> >  I didn't bring up waterboarding, so apparently there are 
> some on the 
> > list interested in discussing this topic.  I guess Mike and I could 
> > discuss it off-list, but it's a lot more fun to discuss things when 
> > there's a difference of opinion!
> > 
> > ;-{)}
> > 
> > http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm
> > 
> > 
> > Notice that Article 4-A says persons belonging to _one_ of the two 
> > categories
> > (4-A-1 or 4-A-2)  shall be considered POW's.
> > 
> > Article 4
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > 3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a 
> > government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
> > 
> > 4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being 
> > members thereof, such as civilian members of military 
> aircraft crews, 
> > war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour 
> units or of 
> > services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided 
> > that they have received authorization from the armed forces 
> which they 
> > accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity 
> > card similar to the annexed model.
> > 
> > 5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and 
> apprentices, of the 
> > merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the 
> Parties to the 
> > conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any 
> > other provisions of international law.
> > 
> > 6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the 
> approach of the 
> > enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, 
> > without having had time to form themselves into regular 
> armed units, 
> > provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of 
> > war.
> > 
> > B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of 
> war under 
> > the present Convention:
> > 
> > 1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed 
> forces of the 
> > occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by 
> > reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has 
> > originally liberated them while hostilities were going on 
> outside the 
> > territory it occupies, in particular where such persons 
> have made an 
> > unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which 
> they belong 
> > and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to 
> comply with a 
> > summons made to them with a view to internment.
> > 
> > 2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the 
> > present Article, who have been received by neutral or 
> non-belligerent 
> > Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are 
> required to intern 
> > under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable 
> > treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with 
> the exception 
> > of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 
> and, where 
> > diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the 
> conflict and the 
> > neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles 
> concerning 
> > the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the 
> > Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be 
> allowed to 
> > perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as 
> provided 
> > in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which 
> > these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and 
> > consular usage and treaties.
> > 
> > C. This Article shall in no way affect the status of 
> medical personnel 
> > and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present 
> Convention.
> > 
> >  On 10/27/06, ken barber <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> > > i do not think these guys meet the description to have the geneva 
> > > convention apply. and i do not
> > think
> > > they should have contitutuitional rights conferred
> > on
> > > them. i think if we could get their home countries
> > to
> > > take them they should be turned over to their own governments for 
> > > trail. but, many of their
> > countries
> > > don't want them either. the other things to do is
> > turn
> > > them loose and find them again on the battle field
> > as
> > > has happened with some that were turned loose in
> > the
> > > past. the other is to use the law that just passed
> > the
> > > congress.
>

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy