Was this him 'publicly stating that he works for an occupying enemy with in 1 year of occupation' as required by the Geneva convention and the dod law of war????
'Might have been' isnt statinf FACT as required.
Its too late.
Them and all accomplices are now considered a 'belligerent occupying force' and will be handled thusly.
Was this him 'publicly stating that he works for an occupying enemy with in 1 year of occupation' as required by the Geneva convention and the dod law of war????
'Might have been' isnt statinf FACT as required.
Its too late.
Them and all accomplices are now considered a 'belligerent occupying force' and will be handled thusly.