If you look at the treaties dealing with enemy combatants, you will see that enemy combatants need to be wearing uniforms, etc. before they qualify for Geneva (or Hague) convention treatment.

-- Tommy777

No, if you look at the treaties...

Court Holds in Hamdan that Geneva Convention Applies to Detainees

Posted Jun 29 2006

*

The Supreme Court issued a much anticipated decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld this morning. The case addressed the Bush Administration's power to establish military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees. Marty Lederman, writing on SCOTUSBlog, looked to what he saw as the "enormous significance" of the decision.

The Court held that Common Article 3 of Geneva applies as a matter of treaty obligation to the conflict against Al Qaeda. That is the HUGE part of today's ruling. The commissions are the least of it. This basically resolves the debate about interrogation techniques, because Common Article 3 provides that detained persons "shall in all circumstances be treated humanely," and that "[t]o this end," certain specified acts "are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever"-including "cruel treatment and torture," and "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." This standard, not limited to the restrictions of the due process clause, is much more restrictive than even the McCain Amendment.

(Linked at Signature)

The suggestion that President Obama should order Attorney General Holder to abort the investigation betrays a misunderstanding of the role of the attorney general as well as the relationship between the attorney general and the president. Where there is evidence of criminal conduct, the attorney general has not just the authority but the duty to investigate. The attorney general is the people's lawyer, not the president's lawyer, and it would be profoundly inappropriate for President Obama to interfere with his work.--ACLU

(At Signature)

No, no-- Obama will perceive that in this best of all possible worlds, that letter was just a friendly and welcome piece of advice from a group of distinguished and eminently respectable Concern Patriots.

-- Little Brother

Very, very humorous, Little Brother. I've been listening to "Emotional Intelligence" this morning, and was reminded to call up my come at them with humor mode rather than my come at them with my 'f U you stinking creep' mode. Not for the sake of the guilty as charged, mind you, but for my sake.

"If you disagree with me you must be F'd up" and instant insult does nobody opinions well.

-- gedicht

That's not always true. In some cases, such as yours, there is not much more to say to someone as full of the crapass as you have come of as then what Tommy Franks said about Doug Feith being "The dumbest fucking guy on the planet".

So I write this slowly, hunched over the keyboard as not to give you the idea that I'm demanding anything from you (really, I'm not interrogating you, I left my water board at school!).

Is there ever a need for a Clandestine Service?

-- gedicht

How to make an ass of yourself in three easy lessons by DickFace: 1)Act really, really scared of everything. 2)Act like people don't understand when you've asked an idiotic question. 3)Show that you have no sense of humor at all by trying to be funny.

Answer to your idiotic question: Clandestine does not mean illegal. And a "clandestine service" need not act illegally.

I asked C_C the question, and now I ask it of both of you: Is there any reasonable rationale to have any type of clandestine service? Or do we leave all exposed to the vagaries of fate, bad luck, or the unique human capacity for evil?

-- gedicht

That's not a question, DickFace, that's the demands of a four year old to his/her mother that he/she is going to hold his/her breath until he/she turns blue if Mommy doesn't give him/her their toys back. Right now!

So now you adopt a "Holier than thou" (ridiculous on it's face from many who define themselves as Atheists) attitude and judge those who did a job they had to.

-- gedicht

Look at this asshole. On top of all of his or her blathering on and on as if he were one of the POS's who actually participated in these crimes he has the audacity to toss out 'atheist' as though that's supposed to be an insult while he is busy excusing murder and even cheering on murder. If any of you Christians would like to speak up for yourselves rather than allowing geditcht to pretend to speak for you, please have at it.

Senator Lieberman, has put it: “to do their dangerous and critical jobs"

Leave it to Lieberman to disgust me more than even all of the arrogant mealy-mouth CIA directors put together. What's so damned "dangerous" about beating to death a man who is in captivity and has been sleep deprived, starved and generally weakened to the point of being totally defenseless?

I don't quite understand why Glenn asked Eviatar to fill in for him while he was on vacation.

-- stevedew

Okay then, as you just expressed, you're confused. And, as I said, I'm not confused. And the reason why I'm not confused is that it never occurred to me that everyone who Glenn invited to fill in for him during his absence would have agreed with him on everything, or that they would have had the exact same ideals as Glenn does, or that they would have the same style or ability to express their ideals in the same way that Glenn does.

I was surprised by what Eviatar wrote in that post that you are referring to, and I wondered at the time if what she wrote was really what she meant to say. But that was her, that wasn't Glenn, so, for the reasons I've stated, there was no confusion on my part.