Where Does It Say In The Geneva Conventions That Terrorists Have Rights?

Question

To Crabby: Article 3 deals with prisoners of war. Terrorists are not prisoners of war. Terrorists attack without allegiance to any country.

Answer 1

They are not covered. Specifically:
* Article 4 defines prisoners of war to include:
o 4.1.1 Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict and members of militias of such armed forces
o 4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:
+ that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
+ that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
+ that of carrying arms openly;
+ that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
o 4.1.3 Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
o 4.1.4 Civilians who have non-combat support roles with the military and who carry a valid identity card issued by the military they support.
o 4.1.5 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.
o 4.1.6 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.
o 4.3 makes explicit that Article 33 takes precedence for the treatment of medical personnel of the enemy and chaplains of the enemy.

These are the individuals covered.

Answer 2

The Third Geneva Convention banning torture and abuse of Prisoners of War, as well as non-combatants and unarmed ("enemy") combatants held in detention; and Articles 4 and 32 of the Fourth Geneva Convention... these declarations and treaties being ratified by the United States Senate and therefore the supreme law of the land as according to Article VI of the Constitution. Torture is also in violation of the Federal Torture Statute [18 USC Sec. 2340A]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/pIch113C.html
http://www.capdefnet.org/fdprc/contents/fed_cap_off/18_usc_2340A.htm
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/detainees/WorkinGroupReportAnalysis_Brief_81004.pdf

Kidnappings and Renditions for Torture.
Are in violation of the United Nations Convention Against Torture, Article 3, and the Fourth Geneva Convention, Articles 31 and 45, the said conventions having been ratified by the United States Senate and therefore the supreme law of the land as according to Article VI of the Constitution.

Answer 3

Article 3.

The point the neocons want to avoid is this:

Lets say someone is an enemy soldier (compatent). They are then covered by the Geneva Convention.

But let's say there is evidence they are a terrorist or have otherwise commited crimes. Then--why not put themon trial? If they're guilty they'll be convicted.

But what the neocons don't want to admit is that they know good and well that most of the "detainees" aren't criminals--and that they are moraly and legaly wrong for treating them as they do.

What is going on at Gitmo is wrong. And it is not helping America. OUr country is strong because of our belief in human rights, liberty, and the rule of law. Its only the neocons who lack that faith--that's why they are so afraid they will abandon everything that makes America great out of their fear and lack of faith inour country.

Answer 4

It does not. The GC deals with prisoners of war not terrorists.

Answer 5

Only in the self-destructive mind of far lefts should terrorists be given rights that are normally afforded to American citizens.

Answer 6

Terrorists aren't mentioned in this convention

Answer 7

Nowhere BUT we are plagued with delusional humans who have been infected with the
"Nothing said or written is valid until it has been re-interpreted/put in "context" or redefined " VIRUS
(ok maybe its not a "virus" but irrational desire to achieve a "goal/need/vision" using any tactic ,destruction and death as tools is beyond a "disagreement/difference of opinion/belief/preference)
This "infection /plague"is common in liberals ,many politicians,media/press journalists and those easily duped because they want/desire a different rule, meaning or result.
.by DEFINITION
-Terrorists commit murder,destroy others property,torture -coerice etc Why they chose to commit these acts is irrelevent.They are humans that will kill to achieve "x". Their alligience is to No country just an ideology /belief/goal.
-Armed combatents are waging war as directed by countries /nations.When a "war" is over,prisoners are returned .
...Other examples of the effects of this "virus" and the subsequent mental derangement..........
An illegal alien is defined as a foreigner without authorization to enter/reside in the USA.The specified penality is deportation.. YET those infected actually believe that THEIR interpretation of an "illegal" is justified by simply re-defining or renaming . An illegal is morphed into a "undocumented worker" or a "immigrant". doesnt matter that the word "immigrant" is already defined nor can they grasp the meaning of the word "illegal"
The term "marriage is defined as a union between male/female YET Gay right's activests believe that marriage must be re-defined to include same sex /gender unions...A new word/term that defines same sex unions is not acceptable simply because they want to use an already defined word..
The UN bans" inhumane weapons " (cluster bombs) yet fails to grasp that a weapon is designed to kill..are their defined levels of humane killing?? is there a chart listing the inhumaneness scale of death by knives,guns,be-heading,torture,small bombs( roadside) poison (chemical/biological) ..etc
This virus or disease is apparently infectious or those affected are simply scamming with the hope that they will succeed in bullying others into acceptance/compliance.
(Their motives/rational -like terrorists or murderer's- is irrelevent) Whether truely deranged,"infected" or simply convicted with a fanatical desire to achive their desire/goal or "vision" of a perfect world/society, these individuals are dangerous. They should be contained before they provoke violence or decide to eliminate all those that will not accept their "vision",definition/rules/ etc.
Crazy humans are dangerous.as they will harm/kill to achieve their goals/desires.
Saying that xx means zz INDICATES Mental illness or brain damage ...If a person violently demands that all fruits will be called "fruit".and intends to kill anyone who wished to retain the actual names of fruits.They are not argued with or tolerated. They are contained (mental health ward ) to protect society from harm. When confronted with folks/organizations that demand /insist /try to legislate their delusions,desires, goals, the sane folks need to "help" the deluded,irrational infected. Some will -like a rabid animal never be cured- and suffer.
-->The alternative is historical fact..humans will wage war,kill and destroy when challenged by other humans with irrational desire to kill those that refuse to "comply".
Words are defined to enhance communication,show intent and knowledge; Actions also indicate knowledge and intent.
When threatened,some humans run and some fight to preserve their lives and the lives of their loved ones. All HUmanity "knows" that irrational humans exist and kill to achieve/obtain their desire/goal. History confrims that establishing peaceful coexistance with diverse and tolerant neighbors has always been disrupted by the actions of irrational groups/leaders/nations willing to kill others to impose their rules or obtain /steal others assests/resources.

Answer 8

In the Left's decoder book on Genava Convention what they ment to have in it.

Answer 9

Geneva applies to uniformed armies.

Answer 10

They clearly dont play by the rules so why shoud we?