This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this article if you can; the talk page may contain suggestions. (March 2008)

The First Geneva Convention governing sick and wounded members of armed forces, signed in 1864

The law of war is a body of law concerning acceptable justifications to engage in war (jus ad bellum) and the limits to acceptable wartime conduct (jus in bello or International humanitarian law). The law of war is considered an aspect of public international law (the law of nations) and is distinguished from other bodies of law, such as the domestic law of a particular belligerent to a conflict, that may also provide legal limits to the conduct or justification of war.

Amongst other issues, modern laws of war address declarations of war, acceptance of surrender and the treatment of prisoners of war; military necessity, along with distinction and proportionality; and the prohibition of certain weapons that may cause unnecessary suffering.^[1]

Early sources and history[link]

Attempts to define and regulate the conduct of individuals, nations, and other agents in war and to mitigate the worst effects of war have a long history. The earliest known instances are found in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). For example, Deuteronomy 20:19-20 limits the amount of acceptable collateral and environmental damage:

When thou shalt besiege a city a long time, in making war against it to take it, thou shalt not destroy the trees thereof by forcing an axe against them: for thou mayest eat of them, and thou shalt not cut them down (for the tree of the field is man's life) to employ them in the siege: Only the trees which thou knowest that they be not trees for meat, thou shalt destroy and cut them down; and thou shalt build bulwarks against the city that maketh war with thee, until it be subdued.^[2]

Similarly, Deuteronomy 21:10-14 requires that female captives who were forced to marry the victors of a war could not be sold as slaves.^[3]

In the early 7th century, the first Caliph, Abu Bakr, whilst instructing his Muslim army, laid down the following rules concerning warfare:

Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman, nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock, save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone.^[4][5]

Furthermore, Sura Al-Baqara 2:190-193 of the Koran requires that in combat Muslims are only allowed to strike back in self-defence against those who strike against them, but, on the other hand, once the enemies cease to attack, Muslims are then commanded to stop attacking.

In medieval Europe, the Roman Catholic Church also began promulgating teachings on just war, reflected to some extent in movements such as the Peace and Truce of God. The impulse to restrict the extent of warfare, and especially protect the lives and property of non-combatants continued with Hugo Grotius and his attempts to write laws of war.

Modern sources[link]

The signing of the First Geneva Convention by some of the major European powers in 1864

The modern law of war is derived from two principal sources:^[1]

• Lawmaking treaties (or conventions) — see the section below called "International treaties on the laws of war".
• Custom. Not all the law of war derives from or has been incorporated in such treaties, which can refer to the continuing importance of customary law. (see Martens Clause). Such customary international law is established by the general practice of nations together with their acceptance that such practice is required by law.

Positive international humanitarian law consists of treaties (international agreements) which directly affect the laws of war by binding consenting nations and achieving widespread consent—see the section below called "International treaties on the laws of war".

The opposite of positive laws of war is customary laws of war,^[1] many of which were explored at the Nuremberg War Trials. These laws define both the permissive rights of states as well as prohibitions on their conduct when dealing with irregular forces and non-signatories.

The Lieber Code, promulgated by the Union during the American Civil War, was critical in the development of the laws of land warfare.^[6] Historian Geoffrey Best called the period from 1856 to 1909 the law of war’s “epoch of highest repute.”^[7] The defining aspect of this period was the establishment, by states, of a positive legal or legislative foundation (i.e., written) superseding a regime based primarily on religion, chivalry, and customs.^[8] It is during this “modern” era that the international conference became the forum for debate and agreement between states and the “multilateral treaty” served as the positive mechanism for codification.

In addition, the Nuremberg War Trial judgment on "The Law Relating to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity"^[9] held, under the guidelines Nuremberg Principles, that treaties like the Hague Convention of 1907, having been widely accepted by "all civilised nations" for about half a century, were by then part of the customary laws of war and binding on all parties whether the party was a signatory to the specific treaty or not.

Interpretations of international humanitarian law change over time and this also affects the laws of war. For example Carla Del Ponte, the chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia pointed out in 2001 that although there is no specific treaty ban on the use of depleted uranium projectiles, there is a developing scientific debate and concern expressed regarding the effect of the use of such projectiles and it is possible that, in future, there may be a consensus view in international legal circles that use of such projectiles violate general principles of the law applicable to use of weapons in armed conflict.^[10] This is because in the future it may be the consensus view that depleted uranium projectiles breaches one or more of the following treaties: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the Charter of the United Nations; the Genocide Convention; the United Nations Convention Against Torture; the Geneva Conventions including Protocol I; the Convention on Conventional Weapons of 1980; the Chemical Weapons Convention; and the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material.^[11]

Purposes of the laws[link]

Some of the central principles underlying laws of war are:

• Wars should be limited to achieving the political goals that started the war (e.g., territorial control) and should not include unnecessary destruction.
• Wars should be brought to an end as quickly as possible.
• People and property that do not contribute to the war effort should be protected against unnecessary destruction and hardship.

To this end, laws of war are intended to mitigate the hardships of war by:

• Protecting both combatants and noncombatants from unnecessary suffering.
• Safeguarding certain fundamental human rights of persons who fall into the hands of the enemy, particularly prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, and civilians.
• Facilitating the restoration of peace.

Example substantive laws of war[link]

To fulfill the purposes noted above, the laws of war place substantive limits on the lawful exercise of a belligerent’s power. Generally speaking, the laws require that belligerents refrain from employing violence that is not reasonably necessary for military purposes and that belligerents conduct hostilities with regard for the principles of humanity and chivalry.

However, because the laws of war are based on consensus, the content and interpretation of such laws are extensive, contested, and ever-changing.^[12] The following are particular examples of some of the substance of the laws of war, as those laws are interpreted today.

Declaration of war[link]

Section III of the Hague Convention of 1907 required hostilities to be preceded by a reasoned declaration of war or by an ultimatum with a conditional declaration of war.

Some treaties, notably the United Nations Charter (1945) Article 2, and other articles in the Charter, seek to curtail the right of member states to declare war; as does the older Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 for those nations who ratified it.

Lawful conduct of belligerent actors[link]

Modern laws of war regarding conduct during war (jus in bello), such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, provide that it is unlawful for belligerents to engage in combat without meeting certain requirements, among them the wearing of a distinctive uniform or other distinctive signs visible at a distance, and the carrying of weapons openly. Impersonating soldiers of the other side by wearing the enemy's uniform is allowed, though fighting in that uniform is unlawful perfidy, as is the taking of hostages.

Red Cross, Red Crescent and the white flag[link]

Modern laws of war, such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, also include prohibitions on attacking doctors, ambulances or hospital ships displaying a Red Cross, a Red Crescent or other emblem related to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. It is also prohibited to fire at a person or vehicle bearing a white flag, since that indicates an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate.

In either case, persons protected by the Red Cross/Crescent or white flag are expected to maintain neutrality, and may not engage in warlike acts; in fact, engaging in war activities under a protected symbol is itself a violation of the laws of war known as perfidy. Failure to follow these requirements can result in the loss of protected status and make the individual violating the requirements a lawful military target.

Applicability to states and individuals[link]

The law of war is binding not only upon States as such but also upon individuals and, in particular, the members of their armed forces. Parties are bound by the laws of war to the extent that such compliance does not interfere with achieving legitimate military goals. For example, they are obliged to make every effort to avoid damaging people and property not involved in combat, but they are not guilty of a war crime if a bomb mistakenly hits a residential area.

By the same token, combatants that intentionally use protected people or property as shields or camouflage are guilty of violations of laws of war and are responsible for damage to those that should be protected.

Remedies for violations[link]

During conflict, punishment for violating the laws of war may consist of a specific, deliberate and limited violation of the laws of war in reprisal.

Soldiers who break specific provisions of the laws of war lose the protections and status afforded as prisoners of war, but only after facing a "competent tribunal" (GC III Art 5). At that point they become an unlawful combatant but they must still be "treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial", because they are still covered by GC IV Art 5. For example in 1976 foreign soldiers fighting for FNLA were captured by the MPLA in the civil war that broke out when Angola gained independence from Portugal in 1975. In the Luanda Trial, after "a regularly constituted court" found them guilty of being mercenaries, three Britons and an American were shot by a firing squad on July 10, 1976. Nine others were imprisoned for terms of 16 to 30 years.

Spies and terrorists may be subject to civilian law or military tribunal for their acts and in practice have been subjected to torture and/or execution. The laws of war neither approve nor condemn such acts, which fall outside their scope. However, nations that have signed the UN Convention Against Torture have committed themselves not to use torture on anyone for any reason. Citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed the Fourth Geneva Convention are also not protected by it (Article 4: "Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it".), whether they are spies or terrorists. Also, citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed and do not abide by the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions are not protected by them. (Common Article 2: "[The High Contracting Parties] shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to [a Power which is not a contracting party], if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof" (emphasis added).)

If someone is (or is suspected to be) a citizen or soldier of a nation which has signed or abides by the Fourth Geneva Convention (see Art. 2 and Art. 4 citations above), or is (or is suspected to be) a "prisoner of war" (POW) per the definitions of such "protected persons" in the Third Geneva Convention (see Art. 4 and Art. 5), the following applies: A POW who breaks specific provisions of the laws of war may be penalized, but not penalized worse than the tribunal would penalize its own soldiers for the same offense (and usually a disciplinary, not judicial, punishment if its own soldiers normally wouldn't be brought to trial for a particular offense) and POW's may not be penalized based on rank or gender, nor with corporal punishment, collective punishments for individual acts, lack of daylight, or torture/cruelty (GC IV, Art. 82 through Art. 88).

After a conflict has ended, persons who have committed or ordered any breach of the laws of war, especially atrocities, may be held individually accountable for war crimes through process of law. Also, nations which signed the Geneva Conventions are required to search for, then try and punish, anyone who has committed or ordered certain "grave breaches" of the laws of war. (see GC III, Art. 129 and Art. 130)

History has shown that the laws of war are traditionally more strictly applied to those defeated, as the victorious faction are placed in the role of policing themselves.^{[citation needed]} While it can be argued that the victors may be less strict on their own forces, it can also be argued that the signing of the treaties involved in the laws of war implies a good-faith promise to adhere to them equally.^{[citation needed]} As with many facets of war, the aftermath and subsequent legal proceedings depend heavily on circumstance, and are different for each conflict.

There is an emerging trend in the US to hold private corporations civilly liable for aiding and abetting in war crimes, by knowingly providing substantial assistance in the commission of the crimes. Under international law, the mens rea element is knowledge, not intent that the crimes be carried out. This opens the door not only to hold private security contractors liable, but also other kinds of corporations which employ violent mercenary or terrorist groups as private security forces. Although conflict zones often lack functioning legal systems, and government may even have passed laws immunizing private mercenaries from criminal liability, aiding and abetting a war crime can still be the basis for civil liability in a foreign court with jurisdiction over the defendant corporation.

International treaties on the laws of war[link]

see also List of international declarations

List of declarations, conventions, treaties and judgements and on the laws of war:^[13][14][15]

• 1856 Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law abolished privateering
• 1864 First Geneva Convention "for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field"
• 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Explosive projectiles Under 400 grams Weight
• 1874 Project of an International Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War (Brussels Declaration).^[16] Signed in Brussels 27 August. This agreement never entered into force, but formed part of the basis for the codification of the laws of war at the 1899 Hague Peace Conference.^[17][18]
• 1880 Manual of the Laws and Customs of War at Oxford. At its session in Geneva in 1874 the Institute of International Law appointed a committee to study the Brussels Declaration of the same year and to submit to the Institute its opinion and supplementary proposals on the subject. The work of the Institute led to the adoption of the Manual in 1880 and it went on to form part of the basis for the codification of the laws of war at the 1899 Hague Peace Conference.^[18]
• 1899 Hague Conventions consisted of four main sections and three additional declarations (the final main section is for some reason identical to the first additional declaration):
  • I - Pacific Settlement of International Disputes
  • II - Laws and Customs of War on Land
  • III - Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of Principles of Geneva Convention of 1864
  • IV - Prohibiting Launching of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons
  • Declaration I - On the Launching of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons
  • Declaration II - On the Use of Projectiles the Object of Which is the Diffusion of Asphyxiating or Deleterious Gases
  • Declaration III - On the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body
• 1907 Hague Conventions had thirteen sections, of which twelve were ratified and entered into force, and two declarations
  • I - The Pacific Settlement of International Disputes
  • II - The Limitation of Employment of Force for Recovery of Contract Debts
  • III - The Opening of Hostilities
  • IV - The Laws and Customs of War on Land
  • V - The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land
  • VI - The Status of Enemy Merchant Ships at the Outbreak of Hostilities
  • VII - The Conversion of Merchant Ships into War-Ships
  • VIII - The Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines
  • IX - Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War
  • X - Adaptation to Maritime War of the Principles of the Geneva Convention
  • XI - Certain Restrictions with Regard to the Exercise of the Right of Capture in Naval War
  • XII - The Creation of an International Prize Court [Not Ratified]*
  • XIII - The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War
  • Declaration I - extending Declaration II from the 1899 Conference to other types of aircraft
  • Declaration II - on the obligatory arbitration
• 1909 London Declaration concerning the Laws of Naval War largely reiterated existing law, although it showed greater regard to the rights of neutral entities. Never went into effect.
• 1922 The Washington Naval Treaty, also known as the Five-Power Treaty (6 February)
• 1923 Hague Draft Rules of Aerial Warfare^[19]
• 1925 Geneva protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare^[20]
• 1927-1930 Greco-German arbitration tribunal
• 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact (also known as the Pact of Paris)
• 1929 Geneva Convention, Relative to the treatment of prisoners of war
• 1929 Geneva Convention on the amelioration of the condition of the wounded and sick
• 1930 Treaty for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval Armament (London Naval Treaty 22 April)
• 1935 Roerich Pact
• 1936 Second London Naval Treaty (25 March)
• 1938 Amsterdam Draft Convention for the Protection of Civilian Populations Against New Engines of War.^[21]
• 1938 League of Nations declaration for the "Protection of Civilian Populations Against Bombing From the Air in Case of War"^[22]
• 1945 United Nations Charter (entered into force on October 24, 1945)
• 1946 Judgment of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg
• 1947 Nuremberg Principles formulated under UN General Assembly Resolution 177 21 November 1947
• 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
• 1949 Geneva Convention I for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field
• 1949 Geneva Convention II for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea
• 1949 Geneva Convention III Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
• 1949 Geneva Convention IV Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
• 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict
• 1971 Zagreb Resolution of the Institute of International Law on Conditions of Application of Humanitarian Rules of Armed Conflict to Hostilities in which the United Nations Forces May be Engaged
• 1974 United Nations Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict
• 1977 United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques
• 1977 Geneva Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts
• 1977 Geneva Protocol II Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts
• 1978 Red Cross Fundamental Rules of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts
• 1980 United Nations Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW)
  • 1980 Protocol I on Non-Detectable Fragments
  • 1980 Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices
  • 1980 Protocol III on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons
  • 1995 Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons
  • 1996 Amended Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices
  • Protocol on Explosive Remnants of War (Protocol V to the 1980 Convention), 28 November 2003, entered into force on 12 November 2006^[23]
• 1990 Ottawa Treaty banning the use of landmines.
• 1994 San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea.^[24]
• 1994 ICRC/UNGA Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Time of Armed Conflict^[25]
• 1994 UN Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel^[26]
• 1996 The International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons
• 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (Ottawa Treaty)
• 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court entered into force on 1 July 2002.
• 2000 Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, entered into force on 12 February 2002.
• 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions, entered into force on 1 August 2010.

See also[link]

	War portal
	Law portal
	UN portal

• International Humanitarian Law
• Customary international humanitarian law
• List of Articles of War
• Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts Project (RULAC)
• Command responsibility
• Debellatio
• International law
• Islamic military jurisprudence
• Lawfare
• Law of occupation
• Law of the Sea
• Roerich pact
• Nuremberg Principles
• Right of conquest
• Total war
• Journal of International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict
• Targeted killing

References[link]

• Roberts, Adam and Guelff, Richard (Editors); Documents on the Laws of War; Third Edition; Oxford University press; ISBN 0-19-876390-5
• Texts and commentaries of 1949 Geneva Conventions & Additional Protocols

External links[link]

• International humanitarian law- International Committee of the Red Cross website
• Customary international humanitarian law International Committee of the Red Cross
• International humanitarian law database- Treaties and States Parties
• Customary IHL Database
• International Law of War Association
• The European Institute for International Law and International Relations
• The Program for Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at Harvard University, "Brief Primer on IHL"

Further reading[link]

• 1976: Death sentence for mercenaries (source BBC).
• The Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts Project
• A Brief History Of The Laws Of War
• Crimes, Trials and Laws
• For the Sake of Warriors: Accepting the Limits of the Law of War
• The Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law and free access to a Documentation Database of primary source materials.
• Trial of Otto Skorzeny and Others, General Military Government Court of the U.S. Zone of Germany, 18 August to 9 September, 1947
• When the Law of War Becomes Over-lawyered, JURIST
• International Law on the Bombing of Civilians (Gene Dannen).
• A Brief Primer on International Law, 2007. With cases and commentary. (Nathaniel Burney)
• What is a war crime? BBC online 31 July 2003 (Tarik Kafala).
• Sharon cannot be tried in Belgium, says court The Guardian 15 February 2002 (Andrew Osborn)
• reviews of Michael Byers, War Law, and David Kennedy, Of War and Law, Democratiya, Autumn 2007 (Irfan Khawaja)
• UN Charter
• [1]

Footnotes[link]

Edwin Starr (January 21, 1942 – April 2, 2003) was an American soul music singer. Starr is most famous for his Norman Whitfield produced singles of the 1970s, most notably the number one hit "War".

Biography[link]

Starr was born Charles Edwin Hatcher in Nashville, Tennessee, in 1942. He and his cousins, soul singers Roger and Willie Hatcher, moved to Cleveland, Ohio, where they were raised.

In 1957, Starr formed a doo-wop group, The Future Tones, and began his singing career. Starr lived in Detroit, Michigan, in the 1960s and recorded at first for the small record label Ric-Tic, and later for Motown Records after the latter absorbed Ric-Tic in 1968.

The song which began his career was "Agent Double'O'Soul" (1965), a reference to the James Bond films popular at the time. Other early hits included "Headline News", "Back Street", a cover of The Miracles "Way Over There", and "S.O.S. (Stop Her On Sight)". He recorded more soul music for the next three years before having an international hit in "25 Miles" (1968), which peaked at #6 in the United States the following year.

The biggest hit of his career, which cemented his reputation, was the Vietnam War protest song "War" (1970). Starr's intense vocals transformed a Temptations album track into a #1 chart success, which spent three weeks in the top position on the US Billboard charts, an anthem for the antiwar movement and a cultural milestone that continues to resound in movie soundtracks and hip hop music samples. It sold over three million copies, and was awarded a gold disc.^[1] "War" appeared on both Starr's War and Peace album and its follow-up, Involved. Involved also featured another song of similar construction titled "Stop the War Now", which was a minor hit in its own right.

Moving to England in 1973, Starr continued to record, most notably the song "Hell Up in Harlem" for the 1974 film Hell Up in Harlem, which was the sequel to Black Caesar, an earlier hit with a soundtrack by James Brown. In 1979, Starr reappeared on the charts with a pair of disco hits, "(Eye-To-Eye) Contact" and "H.A.P.P.Y. Radio". "Contact" was the more successful of the two, peaking at #65 on the US pop charts, #13 on the R&B chart, #1 on the dance chart, and #6 on the UK Singles Chart. By now he had joined the well-established disco boom, and had further singles on 20th Century Records. Over the years he released tracks on many labels, including Avatar, Calibre, 10 Records, Motown (a return to his former label for a 1989 remix of "25 Miles"), Streetwave and Hippodrome.

In 1985, Starr released "It Ain't Fair". Despite garnering the attention of many in the soul and dance clubs, it fell short of becoming a hit. Starr appeared on the charity number one single "Let It Be" by Ferry Aid in 1987. Later that year, Starr teamed up with the Stock, Aitken and Waterman production company for the club hit "Whatever Makes Our Love Grow". In 1989, a number 17 UK hit by the Cookie Crew called "Got to Keep On" sampled a portion of "25 Miles".^[2] This track was then featured on a 1990 dance medley made for the BRIT Awards, which made number 2 in the UK Singles Chart.^[3] A club mix of various artists, it included the previous years remix of "25 Miles".

In 1989, Starr also joined Ian Levine's Motorcity Records, releasing six singles and the album Where Is the Sound, as well as co-writing several songs for other artists on the label. Starr resurfaced briefly in 2000 to team up with the UK band Utah Saints to record a new version of "Funky Music Sho Nuff Turns Me On". He appeared again in 2002 to record a song with the British musician Jools Holland, singing "Snowflake Boogie" on Holland's compact disc More Friends; and to record another track with Utah Saints, a so-far-unreleased version of his number one hit "War" — his last-ever recording.

Starr remained a hero on England's Northern Soul circuit and continued living in England for the remainder of his life.^[4]

On April 2, 2003, at the age of 61, Starr suffered a heart attack^[5] and died while taking a bath at his home in Bramcote near Nottingham.^[4] He left a wife, Annette Mary Hatcher, a son André Hatcher, and two grandchildren Alonté Renfroe and Maryah Hatcher.

His brother Angelo Starr is now fronting the Team, the band Edwin Starr had been touring with for over 20 years. His previous band, Total Concept Unlimited, became the band Rose Royce after adding a female singer.

Discography[link]

Albums[link]

• Soul Master (1965)
• 25 Miles (1969) (#73 US) (#9 R&B)
• War and Peace (1970) (#52 US)(#9 R&B)
• Involved (1971) (# 178 US)(# 45 R&B)
• Hell Up in Harlem (1974)
• Free to Be Myself (1975) (#43 R&B) (#210 US)
• Clean (1979) (#80 US) (#22 R&B)
• Happy Radio (1979) (#115 US) (#44 R&B)
• Stronger Than You Think I Am (1979) (#203 US)
• For Sale (1983)^[6]

^[7]

Singles[link]

• "Agent Double-O-Soul" (1965) (#8 R&B) (#21 Pop)
• "Back Street" (1966) (#33 R&B) (#95 Pop)
• "Headline News" (1966) (#84 U.S.) (#39 UK)
• "I'll Love You Forever" (1966) with The Holidays (#7 R&B) (#63 Pop)
• "Lonely Summer" (1966) (written by Starr and performed by The Shades Of Blue)
• "S.O.S. (Stop Her On Sight)" (1966) (#9 R&B) (#48 Pop) (#11 UK)
• "I Want My Baby Back"
• "I Am The Man For You Baby" (1968)
• "Grits Ain't Grocery" (1968)
• "25 Miles" (1969) (#6 R&B and Pop) (#36 UK)
• "Oh How Happy" (1969) (#92 U.S.) with Blinky Williams
• "I'm Still a Struggling Man" (1969) (#27 R&B) (#80 Pop)
• "Way Over There" (1969)
• "Time" (1970) (#39 R&B) (#117 Pop)
• "War" (1970) (#3 R&B) (#1 Pop) (#3 UK)
• "Stop the War Now" (1970) (#5 R&B) (#26 Pop) (#33 UK)
• "Funky Music Sho Nuff Turns Me On" (1971) (#6 R&B) (#64 Pop)
• "My Sweet Lord" (1971)
• "There You Go" (1973) (#12 R&B) (#80 Pop)
• "Big Papa" (1974)
• "Easin' In" (1974)
• "Hell Up in Harlem" (1974)
• "I Just Wanna Do My Thing" (1978)
• "Contact" (1979) (#65 U.S.) (#6 UK)
• "H.A.P.P.Y. Radio" (1979) (#79 U.S.) (#9 UK)
• "Tell-A-Starr" (1979)
• "It's Called The Rock" (1979)
• "Twenty-Five Miles (Remix)" (1980)
• "Get Up-Whirlpool" (1980)
• "Stronger (Than You Think I Am)" (1980)
• "Smooth" (1983)
• "I Wanna Take You Home" (1983)
• "Marvin" (1984)
• "It Ain't Fair" (1985) (#56 UK)
• "Missiles" (1985)
• "Grapevine" (1985)
• "Soul Singer" (1986)
• "Whatever Makes Our Love Grow" (1987)
• "Got To Keep On" (1989) (#17) with the Cookie Crew
• "25 Miles" (Remix) (1989)
• "Funky Music Sho Nuff Turns Me On" (2000) (#23 UK) with Utah Saints
• "Snowflake Boogie" (2002) with Jools Holland
• "War" (2002) with Utah Saints
• "25 Miles 2001" (2001) (UK #36) with The Three Amigos

References[link]

External links[link]

• Official site
• Edwin Starr at the Internet Movie Database
• Edwin Starr interview by Pete Lewis, 'Blues & Soul' 10/92
• Edwin Starr at Allmusic
• Film of Edwin Starr career made in UK 1995 / Windrush Productions
• "Edwin Starr". Find a Grave. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=7322959. Retrieved September 3, 2010. 

Peter John Ross is a U.S. filmmaker and published author from Columbus, Ohio. He has written and directed over 30 short films, as well as the feature film Horrors of War, and has produced the feature In the Trenches of an Indie Film. In 1999 he founded Sonnyboo Productions as a means to produce his shorts and feature films.

Ross has also written the book Tales from the Front Line of Indie Film and continues to write for magazines such as Videomaker and MovieMaker.

Filmography[link]

Short films[link]

• Accidental Art at the Internet Movie Database
• Relationship Card at the Internet Movie Database
• Refractory at the Internet Movie Database
• The Manhattan Project at the Internet Movie Database
• Therapy Group at the Internet Movie Database
• The Line of Masculinity at the Internet Movie Database
• Bitter Old Man at the Internet Movie Database
• License Exam at the Internet Movie Database
• Elevator at the Internet Movie Database
• Always Late at the Internet Movie Database
• Minivan at the Internet Movie Database
• New World at the Internet Movie Database
• The Bank Robbery at the Internet Movie Database
• Pulp Diction at the Internet Movie Database
• Vote No to Mayor McCheese at the Internet Movie Database
• Simulacrum at the Internet Movie Database
• Friend or Foe? at the Internet Movie Database
• Uncle Pete's Play Time at the Internet Movie Database

Feature films[link]

• Horrors of War at the Internet Movie Database
• In The Trenches of an Indie Film at the Internet Movie Database

Awards[link]

• AUDIENCE AWARD - 48 HOUR FILM PROJECT 2004 [1]
• EMERGING TALENT AWARD - B MOVIE CELEBRATION 2007 [2]
• CHRIS AWARD - THE COLUMBUS INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL 2006 [3]

References[link]

• Official website
• Official blog
• Interview on WikiNews
• Interview on Sony's Crackle site
• Interview in Videomaker
• Interview in Resolution magazine
• interview in Village Voice
• Interview on Cox Cable's Indieflix show

This biographical article related to cinema of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. v t e

Colonel Lindsey Graham
United States Senator from South Carolina
Incumbent
Assumed office January 3, 2003 Serving with Jim DeMint
Preceded by	Strom Thurmond
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from South Carolina's 3rd district
In office January 3, 1995 – January 3, 2003
Preceded by	Butler Derrick
Succeeded by	J. Gresham Barrett
Personal details
Born	Lindsey Olin Graham (1955-07-09) July 9, 1955 (age 56) Central, South Carolina
Political party	Republican
Residence	Seneca, South Carolina
Alma mater	University of South Carolina (B.A./J.D.)
Occupation	Attorney
Religion	Southern Baptist
Website	www.lgraham.senate.gov
Military service
Service/branch	United States Air Force
Years of service	1982–1988 (active) 1988 – present (reserve)
Rank	Colonel
Unit	Judge Advocate General's Corps
Battles/wars	Gulf War Iraq War War in Afghanistan

Lindsey Olin Graham (born July 9, 1955) is the senior United States Senator from South Carolina and a member of the Republican Party. Previously he served as the United States Representative for South Carolina's 3rd congressional district.

Early life, education and career[link]

Graham was born in Central, South Carolina, where his parents, Millie and Florence James Graham, ran a liquor store, the Sanitary Cafe.^[1] After graduating from D. W. Daniel High School, Graham became the first member of his family to attend college and joined the Reserve Officers' Training Corps. When he was 21 his mother died, and his father died 15 months later. Because his sister was left orphaned, the service allowed Graham to attend University of South Carolina in Columbia so he could be near home and care for his sister, whom he adopted. During his studies, he became a member of the fraternity Pi Kappa Phi.

Graham graduated from the University of South Carolina with a B.A. in Psychology in 1977 and from the University of South Carolina School of Law with a J.D. in 1981. Upon graduating, Graham was commissioned as an officer and judge advocate in the United States Air Force, placed on active duty and sent to Europe as a military prosecutor. He eventually entered private practice as a lawyer.

Military service[link]

Graham decided to join the United States Air Force in 1982, and served on active duty until 1988. Following his departure he stayed in the military, joining the South Carolina Air National Guard^[2] and the U.S. Air Force Reserve. During the Gulf War, he was recalled to active duty, serving as a Judge Advocate at McEntire Air National Guard Station in Eastover, South Carolina, where he helped brief departing pilots on the laws of war.^[3] He later transferred from the Air National Guard to the Air Force Reserve.

In 2004, Graham received a promotion to Colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve at a White House ceremony officiated by President George W. Bush.

Graham served in Iraq as a reservist on active duty for short periods during April and two weeks in August 2007, where he worked on detainee and rule-of-law issues.^[4] He also served in Afghanistan during the August 2009 Senate recess.^[5]

Through 2010, Graham served as a senior instructor for the Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Air Force.^[6]

South Carolina House of Representatives[link]

In 1992, Graham was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives from a district in Oconee County, and served one term.

U.S. House of Representatives[link]

Committee assignments[link]

During his service in the House, Graham served on the following committees:

• Committee on International Relations, 1995–1998
• Committee on Education and the Workforce, 1995–2002
• Committee on the Judiciary, 1997–2002
• Committee on Armed Services, 1999–2002

In Congress, Graham became a member of the Judiciary Committee during the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in 1998. Graham opposed some articles, but vigorously supported others. In January and February 1999, after two impeachment articles had been passed by the full House, he was one of the managers who brought the House's case to Clinton's trial in the Senate which did not convict Clinton.^[7]

U.S. Senate[link]

Committee assignments[link]

• Committee on Armed Services
  • Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
  • Subcommittee on Personnel (Ranking Member)
  • Subcommittee on Strategic Forces
• Committee on the Budget
• Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
  • Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia
  • Ad Hoc Subcommittee on State, Local, and Private Sector Preparedness and Integration
  • Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery (Ranking Member)
  • Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight
• Committee on the Judiciary
  • Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts
  • Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs (Ranking Member)
  • Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law
  • Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights
• Committee on Veterans' Affairs
• Special Committee on Aging

Previous assignments[link]

• Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, 2003–2005
• Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, 2007–2009
• Select Committee on Intelligence, 2007–2009

Caucus memberships[link]

• International Conservation Caucus
• Senate National Guard Caucus (Co-Chair)
• Sportsmen's Caucus
• Senate Oceans Caucus

Graham is a member of the board of directors of the International Republican Institute.^[8]

Alito confirmation hearings[link]

During the Judiciary Committee's confirmation hearings for the nomination of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court, a question arose concerning Alito's membership in a Princeton University organization which some said was sexist and racist.^[9][9][10] Alito "deplored" racist comments made by the organization's founder.^[11] While Graham said that Alito may be saying this because he wanted the nomination, he concluded that he had no reason to believe that because "you seem to be a decent, honorable man."^[11] Alito's wife and sister characterized Graham's statements as supportive.^[12][13]

Political positions[link]

Though Graham's stances are often politically conservative,^[14] he has gained a reputation for sometimes speaking out against or criticizing the party line, as well as being open to making economic decisions, such as was demonstrated with his support for bank bailouts.^[15] Graham notably supported John McCain's presidential bid in 2000, and served as national co-chairman of McCain's 2008 presidential bid.

Free speech[link]

During an appearance on Face the Nation on April 3, 2011,^[16] Graham "suggested that Congress take unspecified though formal action against the Koran-burning by Florida preacher Terry Jones," in light of an attack on United Nations personnel triggered by Jones' actions.^[17] In asserting that "Congress might need to explore the need to limit some forms of freedom of speech,"^[18] Graham argued that "Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war," and claimed that "during World War II, we had limits on what you could say if it would inspire the enemy."^[17][19]

Gang of 14[link]

On May 23, 2005, Graham was one of the Gang of 14 senators to forge a compromise that brought a halt to the continued blockage of an up or down vote on judicial nominees. This compromise negated both the Democrats' use of a filibuster and the Republican "nuclear option" as described in the media. Under the agreement, the Democrats would retain the power to filibuster a Bush judicial nominee only in an "extraordinary circumstance", and three conservative Bush appellate court nominees (Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen and William Pryor) would receive a vote by the full Senate.

Detainee interrogations[link]

In July 2005, Graham secured the declassification and release of memoranda outlining concerns made by senior military lawyers as early as 2003 about the legality of the interrogations of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay.^[20]

In response to this and a June 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing detainees to file habeas corpus petitions to challenge their detentions, Graham authored an amendment^[21] to a Department of Defense Authorization Act attempting to clarify the authority of American courts which passed in November 2005 by a vote of 49–42 in the Senate despite opposition from human rights groups and legal scholars because of the lack of rights it provides detainees.^[22][23]

Graham has said he amended the Department of Defense Authorization Act in order to give military lawyers, as opposed to politically appointed lawyers, a more independent role in the oversight of military commanders. He has argued that two of the largest problems leading to the detainee abuse scandals at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib were this lack of oversight and troops' confusion over legal boundaries.^[24]

Graham further explains that military lawyers had long observed the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Convention, but that those provisions had not been considered by the Bush administration in decisions regarding the treatment of detainees in Guantanamo Bay. He has claimed that better legal oversight within the military’s chain of command will prevent future detainee abuse.^[25]

The Graham amendment was itself amended by Democratic Senator Carl Levin so that it would not strip the courts of their jurisdiction in cases like Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that had already been granted cert; this compromise version passed by a vote of 84–14, though it did little to satisfy many critics of the original language. The Graham-Levin amendment, combined with Republican Senator John McCain's amendment banning torture, became known as the Detainee Treatment Act and attempted to limit interrogation techniques to those in the U.S. Army Field Manual of Interrogation. Verbal statements by Senators at the time of the amendment's passage indicated that Congress believed that Levin's changes would protect the courts' jurisdiction over cases like Hamdan, though Levin and his cosponsor Kyl placed in the Congressional Record a statement indicating that there would be no change.

In February 2006, Graham joined Senator Jon Kyl in filing an amicus brief in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case that argued "Congress was aware" that the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 would strip the Supreme Court of jurisdiction to hear "pending cases, including this case" brought by the Guantanamo detainees.^[27]

In a May 2009 CNN interview, Graham referred to the domestic internment of German and Japanese prisoners of war and US Citizens as a model for domestic detention of Guantanamo detainees by saying, "We had 450,000 Japanese and German prisoners housed in the United States during World War II. As a nation, we can deal with this."^[28]

Immigration reform[link]

Graham was a supporter of "comprehensive immigration reform" and of S. 2611, the McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reform Bill of 2006 as well as S. 1348 of 2007, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. His positions on immigration, and in particular collaborating with Senator Ted Kennedy, earned Graham the ire of conservative activists.^[29] In a synergy that would boost the US economy, Graham once said that illegal aliens were needed to provide cheap labor for golf courses.^[30] The controversy prompted conservative activists to support a primary challenge in 2008 by longtime Republican national committeeman Buddy Witherspoon,^[31][32] but Graham won the nomination by a large margin.^[33]　

In July 2010, however, Graham suggested that U.S. citizenship as an automatic birthright guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution should be amended, and that any child born of illegal immigrants inside the borders of the United States should themselves be considered illegal immigrants.^[34] "Half the children born in hospitals on our borders are the children of illegal immigrants," pointed out Graham.^[35]

Second Amendment[link]

Graham has been given an A rating by the NRA and a B rating by the Gun Owners of America.^[36]

Health care[link]

Graham opposed President Barack Obama's health reform legislation; he voted against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in December 2009,^[37] and he voted against the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.^[38]

Graham is a cosponsor of the Healthy Americans Act.

Same-sex marriage[link]

As a member of the House of Representatives, in 1996 Graham voted for the Defense of Marriage Act.^[39] As a Senator, in 2004 he voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment.^[40] He received a rating of 0% from the Human Rights Campaign, a lobby group which promotes LGBT rights in the United States, in each reporting period from 1995–2008, with the exception of 1999, when he received a rating of 9%.^[41]

Climate change[link]

On December 10, 2009, Graham co-sponsored a letter to President Barack Obama along with Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman announcing their commitment to passing a climate change bill and outlining its framework.^[42] Graham has been identified as a leading supporter of passing a climate change bill and was thought to be a likely sponsor for the final bill. The Senators have identified a green economy, clean air, energy independence, consumer protection, increasing nuclear power and regulating the world's carbon market as the key features to a successful climate change bill.^[43] In response to Senate Democrats shifting their priorities to immigration issues, a reaction to Arizona's passage of an anti-undocumented immigrant law, Senator Graham withdrew his support for the climate bill, leaving its passage in doubt.^[44]

In June 2010, however, Graham told reporters that "The science about global warming has changed. I think they've oversold this stuff, quite frankly. I think they've been alarmist and the science is in question. The whole movement has taken a giant step backward."^[45][46] He also stated that he planned to vote against the climate bill that he had originally co-sponsored, citing further restriction of offshore drilling added to the bill and the bill's impact on transportation.^[46][47]

Foreign policy[link]

Graham has supported an interventionist foreign policy. On November 6, 2010, at the Halifax International Security Forum, he called for a pre-emptive military strike to "neuter" the Iranian regime.^[48] He has also argued that "the U.S. needs to keep at least 10,000 troops in Iraq into 2012," saying that "If we're not smart enough to work with the Iraqis to have 10,000 to 15,000 American troops in Iraq in 2012, Iraq could go to hell."^[49]

In August 2011, Graham co-sponsored with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen Senate Resolution 175, wherewith he contended that "Russia's invasion of Georgian land in 2008 was an act of aggression, not only to Georgia but to all new democracies." The claim that Russia instigated the aggression in South Ossetia, however, has been contradicted by many observers, including a European Union investigation. The resolution passed unanimously.

He is an advisor to the Atlantic Bridge.

Taxation[link]

Graham believes that "There are ways to raise revenue without raising taxes".^[50]

Political campaigns[link]

In 1994, Graham was elected to the United States House of Representatives from South Carolina's 3rd congressional district in the northwestern part of the state after 20-year incumbent Butler Derrick retired. With U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond campaigning on his behalf, Graham won by a large margin, becoming the first Republican to represent this district since 1877. The margin came as something of a surprise; none of the 3rd's living residents had ever been represented by a Republican before. In his first reelection bid, in 1996, Debbie Dorn, daughter of longtime 3rd District congressman W.J. Bryan Dorn and Derrick's niece, challenged Graham. However, Graham turned back this challenge fairly easily, winning by almost 20 points. He was unopposed for reelection in 1998 and handily defeated an underfunded Democrat in 2000.

In 2002, upon Thurmond's retirement, Graham defeated his Democratic opponent, Alex Sanders, the former president of the College of Charleston. Graham became South Carolina's first new Senator since 1965, and the state's first freshman Republican Senator since Reconstruction when sanctions were imposed on South Carolina by Radical Republicans. Graham served as Junior Senator for only two years, serving with U.S. Senator Ernest "Fritz" Hollings. Graham became Senior Senator in 2005 when Jim DeMint won election to Hollings's seat. In 2008, Graham was easily reelected against North Myrtle Beach native Bob Conley.^[51]

Electoral history[link]

Personal life[link]

Graham has never been married and, when questioned by Robert Draper of the New York Times, said, "I know it's really going to upset a lot of gay men—I'm sure hundreds of them are going to be jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge—but I ain't available; I ain't gay. Sorry."^[53]

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Lindsey Graham

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Lindsey Graham

• United States Senator Lindsey Graham official U.S. Senate site
• Lindsey Graham for U.S. Senate official campaign site
• Biography at WhoRunsGov.com at The Washington Post
• Biography at the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress
• Voting record maintained by The Washington Post
• Biography, voting record, and interest group ratings at Project Vote Smart
• Congressional profile at GovTrack
• Congressional profile at OpenCongress
• Issue positions and quotes at On the Issues
• Current Bills Sponsored at StateSurge.com
• Financial information at OpenSecrets.org
• Staff salaries, trips and personal finance at LegiStorm.com
• Campaign finance reports and data at the Federal Election Commission
• Appearances on C-SPAN programs
• Collected news and commentary at The New York Times
• Profile from the Senate Republican Caucus
• Profile at SourceWatch
• "Swing Conservative: The perilous bipartisanship of Lindsey Graham." Washington Monthly, April 2005
• "The American Ghosts of Abu Ghraib", Sam Provance, Consortium News, March 27.2007

v t e United States Senators from South Carolina Class 2 P. Butler Hunter Pinckney Sumter Taylor W. Smith R. Hayne Calhoun Huger Calhoun Elmore Barnwell Rhett De Saussure Evans A. Hayne Chesnut Robertson M. Butler Tillman Benet Pollock Dial Blease Byrnes Lumpkin Peace Maybank Daniel Thurmond Wofford Thurmond Graham Class 3 Izard Read Colhoun P. Butler Gaillard Harper W. Smith Miller Preston McDuffie A. Butler Hammond Sawyer Patterson Hampton Irby Earle McLaurin Latimer Gary E. Smith Hall Johnston Russell Hollings DeMint