Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
So, then, do you think that the protections of the Geneva Conventions should apply to Padilla and should have applied to Walker Lindh? Think carefully
|
The GC has a specific definition of what types of POWs fall under the protections of the GC. My understanding is that AQ types don't fit that defintion.
Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Or, if not -- and he's regarded as a plain-clothes spy and traitorous enemy operative, shouldn't he get his day in Court before being executed? Or not.
S_A_M
|
I consider him an enemy POW, who can be held until the war is over and some sort of truce has been declared or a surrender or whatever the end of this war will be like and the terms of release of the POWs have been settled.
Whether the GC applies to him or not is determined by the language of the GC. Not every enemy POW falls within the GC. Only those enemy POWs that are defined by the GC as falling within the GC. If the countries signing onto the GC wanted to include AQ terrorists as having protection, they could have written the GC to include terrorists. My understanding is that the GC does not define terrorists organizations as falling under its protection.
