Re: The U.S. War on Journalists

Andrew Swallow wrote:
> Vincent Brannigan wrote:
>> Andrew Swallow wrote:
>>> Vincent Brannigan wrote:
>>>> Andrew Swallow wrote:
>>>>> Vincent Brannigan wrote:
>>>>>> Andrew Swallow wrote:
>>>>>>> David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WTF was an "enemy combatant" or a "detainee" _before_ 911 ??!??
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Murderers and traitors the USA, as a sovereign state, had the
right
>>>>>>> to kill without trial.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrew Swallow
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> only in comic books
>>>>>> Common artiicle 3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including 
>>>>>> members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those 
>>>>>> placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any 
>>>>>> other cause, shall in 
>>>>>
>>>>> Enemy combatants are taking part in hostilities and have not laid
down
>>>>> their arms, so the rest of Common article 3 does not apply.
>>>>>
>>>>> It may apply after they have surrended.
>>>>
>>>> nonsense
>>>> you described "murderers and traitors"
>>>>
>>>> omitting traitors, which is merely a municipal crime
>>>
>>> Traitors may cover the actual 9/11 people since they were inside the
>>> USA.
>>
>> OFCS only US citizens can be traitors
>>
>> Your ignorance of the law is simply total
>>
> 
> That excuse will not work in Britain.  When you enter Britain the
> treason laws apply to you irrespective of your nationality.  That
> rule preceeds the Declaration of Independence.
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason>
> The two Towers were inside the USA and so were the air****ts - see
> Ligeantia localis.
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegiance>
> 

you are simply wrong

look a the case of William Joyce

"During the processing of the charges Joyce's American nationality came 
to light, and it seemed that he would have to be acquitted, based not 
upon innocence of the charges of aiding the Nazi war effort but rather 
upon a lack of jurisdiction; he could not be convicted of betraying a 
country that was not his own. He was acquitted of the first and second 
charges. However, the Attorney General, Sir Hartley Shawcross, 
successfully argued that Joyce's possession of a British pass****t, even 
though he had mis-stated his nationality to get it, entitled him (until 
it expired) to British diplomatic protection in Germany and therefore he 
owed allegiance to the King at the time he commenced working for the 
Germans. It was on this technicality that Joyce was convicted of the 
third charge and sentenced to death on 19 September 1945. His conviction 
was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 1 November, and by the House of 
Lords (on a 4-1 vote) on 13 December."

wiki

>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> you are suggesting that there is a group which the government may
>>>> declare that they will kill on sight without trial merely on the say 
>>>> so of the leader. in other words the the leader points and they
follow
>>>> no, that is not the law.
>>>> that was Hitler
>>>>
>>>
>>> The traditional power of kings was enormous.  King John was not
>>> happy to sign Magna Carta, which required trials.  The US
>>> Constitution had clauses inserted to limit the powers of the
>>> president.  Any limitations in the US Constitution are self
>>> imposed rather than international law and only apply within
>>> the jurisdiction of the USA Federal Government.
>>
>> nonsense
>>
>> Common article 3 applies all over the world to everyone
> 
> Common article 3 comes with a built in limitation.

what limitation ?



>>
>>>
>>>> Can you shoot at people currently actively engaged in belligerent 
>>>> acts sure.   But it requires an "act" RIGHT NOW
>>>> you have to be "taking an active part"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Only members of armed forces can be attacked based on their status
>>>>
>>>
>>> That comes down to whether Al Qaeda count as an armed force.  Osama
>>> bin Laden did actually declare war/jihad against the USA.
>>>
>>>> If you are attacking them based on that status then you have to make 
>>>> them POWs when they surrender
>>>>
>>>
>>> Only if they meet the criteria in Article 4 of the Geneva Convention.
>>
>> but they have to be POWs until they get a tribunal
> 
> Article 5 second paragraph "Should any doubt arise ..."
> If they are out of uniform they is no doubt.

you have to prove it at a tribunal

otherwise its just the "commando order"

>> in any case they get a proper trial
>>
> 
> Yes.  Either a local criminal trial or an US military court, Article 84.

As long as it is a proper trial

>>>>>> (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions 
>>>>>> without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted 
>>>>>> court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized 
>>>>>> as indispensable by civilized peoples.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vince
>>
>> Vince

Vince