Where in the Geneva Convention did America agree to give non-Americans rights as Americans?

Question

I am sick of the liberals saying that terrorists need rights. Where in the Geneva Convention does it say that enemy combatants have the same rights as Americans on American soil.

All I know is you have to fight for a country and wear a uniform, both of which terrorists do not.

I want exact text.

Liberals want terrorists who are captured on the battlefield to have rights to courts.

The ACLU has sued so that terrorists in Gitmo have access to our federal courts. There is your situation.

Answer 1

The Geneva conventions deal ONLY with the rights of POW's, those who fight according to the Geneva Convention's rules of war. It does NOT apply to any of those at Gitmo.

Answer 2

I heard this story too yesterday or today, I believe on NPR for those who say you are making it up.
Yupchagee is right, the terrorists are not part of any formal war declared by any country, but rogue elements from different nations who believe in the same radical ideology.
That is why they are classified as terrorists and why the Geneva Conventions don't apply. POW's are from a nation that has declared war against somebody. The countries the terrorists come from have not declared war on us.

Here is the link to the story in question

http://blog.aclu.org/index.php?/categories/1-Torture,-Abuse-and-Accountability

Answer 3

The argument against detaining enemy combatants is anyone can be declared an enemy combatant and the secrecy surrounding it. Any one could be whisked off to a black sight for any reason, even if it is speaking out against the government. Kidnapping foreign nationals on allied soil and citizens on our soil and sent to black sites is not a good idea ever. That is why the ACLU is involved and I agree with the reasoning. However I do agree if captured in a war zone, you are technically an enemy combatant for you were captured in BATTLE.

Answer 4

The ACLU was founded by (and for) Communists. Their mission is to destroy the USA as we know it.

Radical Islamic terrorists have filled the vaccum left by the collapse of the USSR as a challenge to the West. The ACLU commies have joined forces with terrorists.

Answer 5

The geneva convention does not cover terrorists. The geneva convention only covers uniformed soldiers. Libs are mixed up again.

Answer 6

I may be wrong but i do believe the G.C. says something to the affect that if in times of war with another country or army and a person is caught out of uniform committing acts of sabotage can be shot as spy's. and since most of the terrorist groups we are at war with have openly declared war on America choose not to ware uniforms,
they can be shot as spy's.
and if they were to sit off a few bombs in some of you peoples neighbor hoods you might not feel to liberal about how they were treated.
Hypo. there is and old battle cry, ask no quarter & give none. it means take no survivors, but not to expect any different if you are defeated, they do take survivor's but only so they can torcher them to death.
know I'm not saying we should torcher survivors, but why should we even take them?

Answer 7

Yes, you desperately need the exact text, because you don't understand the Geneve Conventions at all. You don't even understand what liberals are saying about it. They're not saying "terrorists need rights."

As for wearing a uniform, it's true that there's not necessarily a requirement to give terrorists protections under the Geneva Conventions, but it's still in our interest to do so. But if they're not soldiers, then they're criminals, and to try them as criminals we have to give them legal rights to defend themselves in a fair trial. So which is it?

And when they capture our soldiers or civilians and don't treat them with respect and give them rights, what can we say? How can we complain? If our soldiers are tortured, how can we say torture is wrong is we do it too?

Answer 8

It will be too long to cite exact text, but I've provided specific articles of the Geneva Convention and links to the exact text. Regarding torture... I think the confusion is that most only associate Geneva Convention with treatment of POWs,
(Third Geneva Convention), but it also addresses treatment of civilians (Fourth Geneva Convention).

Below are links to Geneva Conventions, the applicable UN agreements and the US Constitution/Bill of Rights:
(Third) Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War:
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm
(Fourth) Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War:
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/92.htm

UN Charter:
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/unchartr.html
UN Convention Against Torture (CAT):
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html
US Constitution and Bill of Rights:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html#amendments

Using the above references, following is a subset of impeachment charges against George W. Bush specific to non-Americans:

1) Promoting Torture:
In direct violation of, and as part of a pattern of consistent attempts through executive orders, legal memoranda and alterations to regulations such as the Army Field Manual, to undermine the Federal Torture Statute [18 USC Sec. 2340A];
"The Third Geneva Convention banning torture and abuse of Prisoners of War, as well as non-combatants and unarmed ("enemy") combatants held in detention; and Articles 4 and 32 of the Fourth Geneva Convention...
these declarations and treaties being ratified by the United States Senate and therefore the supreme law of the land as according to Article VI of the Constitution"

2. Promoting Kidnappings and Renditions for Torture:
In direct violation of the United Nations Convention Against Torture, Article 3, and the Fourth Geneva Convention, Articles 31 and 45, the said conventions having been ratified by the United States Senate and therefore the supreme law of the land as according to Article VI of the Constitution.


3. Promoting Illegal War:
In direct violation of Articles 41 and 42 of the United Nations Charter, a treaty ratified by the United States Senate in 1945 and therefore the supreme law of the land as according to Article VI of the Constitution.

This may not be answer you wanted to hear, or would agree with, but you did ask for facts. ~~Cheers!

Answer 9

I'm pretty sure that the Geneva Convention is a nationally agreed upon document. Your own statement burns you as they have been taken captive on foriegn soil, not american soil, so they are due international process. Thanks Bubba. By the way, using your logic, any american taken prisoner by a muslim country does not deserve international justice, but should be subject to their law. Behead away.

Answer 10

THANK YOU.

And anyone who wants to know where Libs think terrorists need rights, read anything by Charles Swift.

Here's just one link from an article in Esquire magazine:
http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0307swift