Topic: What does the Geneva Convention say about this? (Read 1930 times)

Gambler · « **on:** January 23, 2004, 10:42:27 am »

Sirgod · « **Reply #1 on:** January 24, 2004, 09:12:27 am »

Wouldn't It fall under the Cruel and ammussing act of 2001?

Stephen

Toten · « **Reply #2 on:** January 24, 2004, 12:10:27 pm »

When enacted properly the Geneva Convention gives POW's a surprising amount of legal protection.

However, the haircut can be deemed necessary to contain the possibililty of lice or other vermin infestations.

TheBigCheese · « **Reply #3 on:** January 24, 2004, 12:45:15 pm »

He is a War Criminal not a POW and should be treated as one

Gambler · « **Reply #4 on:** January 23, 2004, 10:42:27 am »

Sirgod · « **Reply #5 on:** January 24, 2004, 09:12:27 am »

Wouldn't It fall under the Cruel and ammussing act of 2001?

Stephen

Toten · « **Reply #6 on:** January 24, 2004, 12:10:27 pm »

When enacted properly the Geneva Convention gives POW's a surprising amount of legal protection.

However, the haircut can be deemed necessary to contain the possibililty of lice or other vermin infestations.

TheBigCheese · « **Reply #7 on:** January 24, 2004, 12:45:15 pm »

He is a War Criminal not a POW and should be treated as one

Gambler · « **Reply #8 on:** January 23, 2004, 10:42:27 am »

Sirgod · « **Reply #9 on:** January 24, 2004, 09:12:27 am »

Wouldn't It fall under the Cruel and ammussing act of 2001?

Stephen

Toten · « **Reply #10 on:** January 24, 2004, 12:10:27 pm »

When enacted properly the Geneva Convention gives POW's a surprising amount of legal protection.

However, the haircut can be deemed necessary to contain the possibililty of lice or other vermin infestations.

TheBigCheese · « **Reply #11 on:** January 24, 2004, 12:45:15 pm »

He is a War Criminal not a POW and should be treated as one

News: