Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Subject: Geneva Convention
The copy which I am using is from the University of Minnesota:
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/y3gctpw.htm
I was originally doing a search to see what the rules are with regard to prisioners and dead enemy (such as if it is okay to display them after we kill them, and then when someone says "that's not udie", to give him a shave so he looks more like he did in public photos).
After reading the rules dealing with prisioners, I can tell you I have had one of the best laughs since reading Joseph Heller's Catch-22. I thought I would share some of the finer points. Yossarian would be happy to be a prisioner, he was an officer.
Article 38
While respecting the individual preferences of every prisoner, the Detaining Power shall encourage the practice of intellectual, educational, and recreational pursuits, sports and games amongst prisoners, and shall take the measures necessary to ensure the exercise thereof by providing them with adequate premises and necessary equipment.
Prisoners shall have opportunities for taking physical exercise, including sports and games, and for being out of doors. Sufficient open spaces shall be provided for this purpose in all camps.
Article 49
The Detaining Power may utilize the labour of prisoners of war who are physically fit, taking into account their age, sex, rank and physical aptitude, and with a view particularly to maintaining them in a good state of physical and mental health.
Non-commissioned officers who are prisoners of war shall only be required to do supervisory work. Those not so required may ask for other suitable work which shall, so far as possible, be found for them.
If officers or persons of equivalent status ask for suitable work, it shall be found for them, so far as possible, but they may in no circumstances be compelled to work.
Article 60
The Detaining Power shall grant all prisoners of war a monthly advance of pay, the amount of which shall be fixed by conversion, into the currency of the said Power, of the following amounts:
Category I: Prisoners ranking below sergeant: eight Swiss francs.
Category II: Sergeants and other non-commissioned officers, or prisoners of equivalent rank: twelve Swiss francs.
Category m: Warrant officers and commissioned officers below the rank of major or prisoners of equivalent rank: fifty Swiss francs.
Category IV: Majors, lieutenant-colonels, colonels or prisoners of equivalent rank: sixty Swiss francs.
Category V: General officers or prisoners of equivalent rank: seventy-five Swiss francs.
Article 72
Prisoners of war shall be allowed to receive by post or by any other means individual parcels or collective shipments containing, in particular, foodstuffs, clothing, medical supplies and articles of a religious, educational or recreational character which may meet their needs, including books, devotional articles, scientific equipment, examination papers, musical instruments, sports outfits and materials allowing prisoners of war to pursue their studies or their cultural activities.
Article 87
No prisoner of war may be deprived of his rank by the Detaining Power, or prevented from wearing his badges.
Article 91
The escape of a prisoner of war shall be deemed to have succeeded when:
1. He has joined the armed forces of the Power on which he depends, or those of an allied Power;
2. He has left the territory under the control of the Detaining Power, or of an ally of the said Power;
*****
I will post my comments when I stop laughing. This really is somthing out of Catch-22. My question is, what rights did that guy from California have who joined the Taliban in Afghanistan? I seem to remember a photo of him tied to a table, blindfolded, in a cage, naked while on a navy ship for 3 months. I think he missed out on his rights and benifits.
Subject: Re: Geneva Convention
But John, he, along with the poor b... at Guantanamo, are NOT prisoners of war. They are illeagal ememy combatants, or whatever the euphamism. Geeze, get you facts streight. Its the victors who make (or interpret) the rules. If it succeeds, none dare call it treason (although some of us might disagree).
NOT very "playfull" I fear.
Subject: Re: Geneva Convention
Quoting:
But John, he, along with the poor b... at Guantanamo, are NOT prisoners of war. They are illeagal ememy combatants, or whatever the euphamism. Geeze, get you facts streight. Its the victors who make (or interpret) the rules. If it succeeds, none dare call it treason (although some of us might disagree).
NOT very "playfull" I fear.
End Quote
Start Crazy Rant...
What I thought was so funny is this: If we have prisions like the supermax in california where I think the cell is less than 70 square feet, and the height of the ceiling is too low for most people to stand up in, and they keep you locked up for 23 hours a day, well it kinda hit me funny that we have all these rules for prisioners of war. Look at rule 72, which states POW's must be given access to scientific equipment. If I was a POW, with those rules, I think it would be an excellent time to enroll in a distance education university and get some credits. Maybe they will send me a chemisty set.
I also remembered the sketch from SNL where George Bush and Al Gore were eating dinner in a fancy resturant with steaks and wine, and then off in the far dim-lighted corner of the room was John McCain eating a bowl of rice while blindfolded. Bush asked Gore: "What's with McCain" and Gore responded: "He has been eating that way ever since Vietnam".
If they really followed the Convention rules, I doubt you would have Guantanamo, because I do not think you could define some of the people captured as enemy combatants. And the Vietnamese would have not beaten our boys either. It is all so absurd it becomes funny. Everything is agreed to and then as soon as they sign the papers, they do the exact opposite. It all just strikes me funny that Bush will go to such legnths to give "official sounding names" to what he does, when it is all hypocritical to agreements we have entered in. Does anyone keep track of this, or do we all look the other way?
Maybe the post was innapropriate, but I needed a laugh with some of the serious posts. It was funny. Plus, if you ever read Joseph Heller's Catch-22 you will see parallels. And Catch-22 was the funniest book ever written.
...End Crazy Rant
Subject: Re: Geneva Convention
Quoting:
Start Crazy Rant...
What I thought was so funny is this: If we have prisions like the supermax in california where I think the cell is less than 70 square feet, and the height of the ceiling is too low for most people to stand up in, and they keep you locked up for 23 hours a day, well it kinda hit me funny that we have all these rules for prisioners of war. Look at rule 72, which states POW's must be given access to scientific equipment. If I was a POW, with those rules, I think it would be an excellent time to enroll in a distance education university and get some credits. Maybe they will send me a chemisty set.
I also remembered the sketch from SNL where George Bush and Al Gore were eating dinner in a fancy resturant with steaks and wine, and then off in the far dim-lighted corner of the room was John McCain eating a bowl of rice while blindfolded. Bush asked Gore: "What's with McCain" and Gore responded: "He has been eating that way ever since Vietnam".
If they really followed the Convention rules, I doubt you would have Guantanamo, because I do not think you could define some of the people captured as enemy combatants. And the Vietnamese would have not beaten our boys either. It is all so absurd it becomes funny. Everything is agreed to and then as soon as they sign the papers, they do the exact opposite. It all just strikes me funny that Bush will go to such legnths to give "official sounding names" to what he does, when it is all hypocritical to agreements we have entered in. Does anyone keep track of this, or do we all look the other way?
Maybe the post was innapropriate, but I needed a laugh with some of the serious posts. It was funny. Plus, if you ever read Joseph Heller's Catch-22 you will see parallels. And Catch-22 was the funniest book ever written.
...End Crazy Rant
End Quote
Not crazy at all, and I hope you know I was just kidding - agreeing with you back-handed. I think its spelled "fascitious" but I'm not sure - and too lazy to look it up. "These are the times that try men's souls..." as the great patriot said.
Don't read many novals, but the film was great (Catch 22).