billvon 3,107 #51 May 14, 2004 >Maybe it's still legal to hang spies, traitors, and guerillas. Yikes! Many US contractors are not uniformed but carry weapons, and are often used to do things like interrogate Iraqis. Surely they are not to be considered guerillas? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #52 May 14, 2004 Bill, there was a press release recently mentioning a new rule that civilians in Iraq were not to carry firearms. Also, from the Third Geneva Convetion, Article 4, Section AQuote 4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model. Civilians working with the miltary would qualify as POWs. Civilians working in the rebuilding effert fall into an even more protected status. I believe they are covered more in the Fourth Geneva Convention.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #53 May 14, 2004 >Bill, there was a press release recently mentioning a new rule that >civilians in Iraq were not to carry firearms. Apparently there is still a gray area, then. Because contractors who provide security still do carry weapons, and they do not always do so with explicit permission of the US. Some are security for private concerns i.e. security for Halliburton facilities and personnel. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #54 May 14, 2004 QuoteSome are security for private concerns i.e. security for Halliburton facilities and personnel Halliburton: Sounds like a bad joke. So many employees and security personnel of Halliburton are missed! Perhaps they (Halliburton) didn't spent enough $$ in securities? On the other hand, Halliburton already keeps huge orders to produce oil in Iraq in their drawers: They really should be able to invest few $$ for security purposes, right? Sorry, off topic but actual. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
