>I disagree to some extent (not completely). The question is are we at war? Are they prisoners of war? they are not designated as such. during war, prisoners of war are afforded rights according to the geneva conventions, however, they are not afforded lawyers and trial in a civilian court and they are contained until war is over. If we are not at war and they are not prisoners of war, then they should be afforded the full protection under the law and the same due process as our judicial system provides citizens. The problem is that they are not classified as anything that is provided either treatment and protection according to the geneva conventions or due judicial process.

Because they choose to fight that way. The do not fight for a country or a recognized government, and many of them are fighting in countries that do not want them or allow them to be there legally.

No Geneva rights. No legal rights in this country.

Too bad. Closest you get is to call them spies by Geneva definitions (not in uniform, under arms, fighting recognized entities) - shoot them.

>
>>>This poor lad was held by the bad guys at Guantanemo.
>>>
>>>Luckily he got a lawyer.
>>>
>>>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354209,00.html
>>
>>
>>I don't think anyone has said these guys are all saints. Only that they are entitled to protection under the law, which used to be a pretty important right in this country.
>>
>>Some say those rights only apply to U.S. citizens. To me you either believe in the principle or not.