RTO Trainer wrote:
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...
"Colin Campbell" (remove
underscore)
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:07:29 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


'Arrest' is a specific legal status. A person
detained by
military authorities is _not_ under arrest.

Tell that to the boys at gitmo.

Why? My teams captured some of them and we processed some
of them.
First, they are not "boys", they are men. Second, at least
in the case of those members of Al Qaeda and of the Taliban
that we caught, they were armed, were capable of planning
and or leading groups of persons in either acts of terror or
of engaging in various forms of "hostile acts" including
acts of terror and had been engaging in "hostile acts"
against both the United Front (Northern or Eastern Alliance)
and the US Army. Dangerous men, who are detained as
"illegal combatants" as defined in The Laws of Land Warfare
(FM 27-10).
Which states as follows;
81. Individuals Not of Armed Forces Who Commit Hostile Acts
Persons who, without having complied with the conditions
pre-scribed
by the laws of war for recognition as belligerents (see GPW,
art. 4; par. 61 herein), commit hostile acts about or behind
the lines
of the enemy are not to be treated as prisoners of war and
may be
tried and sentenced to execution or imprisonment. Such acts
include,
but are not limited to, sabotage, destruction of
communications facili-ties,
intentional misleading of troops by guides, liberation of
prisoners
of war, and other acts not falling within Articles 104 and
106 of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice and Article 29 of the Hague
Regulations.
82. Penalties for the Foregoing
Persons in the foregoing categories who have attempted,
com-mitted,
or conspired to commit hostile or belligerent acts are
subject
to the extreme penalty of death because of the danger
inherent in their
conduct. Lesser penalties may, however, be imposed.



The people at Gitmo are 'civilian detainee' as per the
Laws and
Customs of War.

So in your opinion, the boys at gitmo are not under
arrest?

Its a matter of established law. They are not under
arrest.

POWs wouldn't be under arrest either. Simply detained
under a
different status.

RTO Trainer is absolutely correct. Iraqi Soldiers and
guerrillas who fall under the following definition are
considered Prisoners of War.
61. Prisoners of War Defined
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention,
are
persons belonging to one of the following categories, who
have
fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1)Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict,
as well as members of militias or volunteer corps form- ing
part of such armed forces.
(2)Members of other militias and members of other volun-teer
corps, including those of organized resistance move-ments,
belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating
in or outside their own territory, even if this territory
is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps,
including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the
following conditions:
(a)that of being commanded by a person responsible for
his subordinates;
(b)that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at
a distance;
(c)that of carrying arms openly;
(d)that of conducting their operations in accordance with
the laws and customs of war.

Note that the Al Qaeda fall under the category of
Individuals Not of Armed Forces Who Commit Hostile Acts,
because they are not Afghani (therefore not a party to the
conflict as defined under the Geneva Accords). Do not have
a fixed distinctive sign or uniform. Do not conduct their
operations (see 9-11-2001 attacks, sabotage of USS Cole and
US Embassy bombings) in accordance with the laws and customs
of war as defined in the Geneva Accords.


Snark