Story Comments

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

i don't know i'm not an attorney.. or expert in international law..

and quite frankly.. they could have done as in the past.. and just kept quiet about it.. it would be very naive to think that the CIA doesn't have WAYS to get information.. and I don't give two sh*ts if a scum bag terrorist dies.. but for god sakes.. don't write it down as policy.. .. don't brag about doing it..

just STFU and do what is necessary to protect America..

TORTURE as a matter of POLICY is flat out WRONG..

4 Replies

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

FTA:
Combatants who do not qualify for POW status

A combatant who does not qualify for POW status can, under the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, expect to be treated humanely; and before he is punished, can expect to get a trial in "a regularly constituted court."

The last time that American and British unlawful combatants were executed after "a regularly constituted court" was the Luanda Trial as mercenaries.

Now get back to the subject of the story. Hannity says it's not torture and yet he is reluctant or flat out refuses to be waterboarded. That's the main gist of the story. You even admitted it's torture.

0 Replies

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

"well if all we tortured was enemy combatants that were wearing no uniform or mark identifying who/what they are fighting for, then that UN policy we agreed to doesn't apply to them and therefor not against the law.

also i thought they had to be a signature of the actual convention in the first place for it to apply to them?"

FROM YOUR POST!

"In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (29 June 2006) the US Supreme Court did not rule on the subject of unlawful combatant status but did reaffirm that the US is bound by the Geneva Conventions. Most notably it said that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention, regarding the treatment of detainees, applies to all prisoners in the War on Terror."

0 Replies