Plus 1. so the red cross is special then? On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 5:48 AM, David Cake <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On 05/10/2011, at 8:36 PM, Marc Perkel wrote: > > > I will agree with you that I also share the opinion that the Red Cross > should be nominated for sainthood. The question is though - should that be a > reason for special privileges? > > > The philanthropic activities of the Red Cross should not qualify it > for special privileges. > > The Geneva Convention, and various national laws that implement it > nationally, do, however, specifically protect not just the Red Cross symbol, > but the words 'Red Cross'. The vast majority of the states in the world are > parties to the Conventions. The words Red Cross are granted unique special > legal status in terms of their use in many, if not most, legal > jurisdictions. > > So, the philanthropic nature of the Red Cross should not qualify it > for special privilege. The Geneva Conventions, however, make a pretty good > case. > > > So - let's play a game here. What other organizations would qualify for > special privileges, and what would be the rules for granting them? > > I think 'organisations granted those rights by near universally > ratified international treaty' is a pretty good limiting case for which > organisations deserve special privileges. I can't think of many such except > the Red Cross (and perhaps the IOC - but the treaty of Nairobi does not > grant the rights they are asking for). > > > After all, if we start playing favorites don't we invite lawsuits or at > least accusations of cronyism? It this going to be an arbitrary process > based on feeling good? > > Nope. I think it is a bar set extremely high, requiring > extraordinary levels of international support. > > Cheers > > David