If controlling suspects by restraining their hands is a violation of the Geneva Conventions then yes it does. Of course if this is a violation of the Geneva Conventions then who gives a fuck about the Geneva Conventions?
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
I Forgot To Even Write A Title For This One.
The Independent asks- "Does this picture show British soldiers broke Geneva Conventions?":
If controlling suspects by restraining their hands is a violation of the Geneva Conventions then yes it does. Of course if this is a violation of the Geneva Conventions then who gives a fuck about the Geneva Conventions?
If controlling suspects by restraining their hands is a violation of the Geneva Conventions then yes it does. Of course if this is a violation of the Geneva Conventions then who gives a fuck about the Geneva Conventions?
So the Geneva convention gives those bent on killing our soldiers in action more protection than we have against private security guards who can be "authorised" to handcuff us ?
ReplyDelete"then who gives a fuck about the Geneva Conventions"
ReplyDeleteThe Army?
As none of the men on the ground are wearing the uniform of a nation's army they're not covered by the Geneva Convention if they were combatants captured during conflict.
ReplyDelete