It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Reinterpreting Geneva Conventions

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 12:23 PM
We know that Mr. Bush in his war on terror is trying to change some Geneva Convention articles specially article 3.

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

What could be the repercussions of doing that? What will stop any other country from doing the same thing in order to pursue agendas involving our soldiers in foreign lands.

Is this only limited to the US? is our country the only one that can change the articles?

posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 12:28 PM
Under the latest assault, Pres Bush bill -- Congress repeal Clinton's /96 bill re Geneva convention effects all military matters re War Crimes.
I don't think the Geneva Act could be altered under the present circumstances. Just my thought on it.


posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 12:31 PM
Will that means that any other country can change articles also? and if it does how can that protect our soldiers in war.

I see the whole thing a littler bit confusing unless US is the only one that can change articles at will.

But then again who redacted the Geneva convection act and how can the congress do amendments to it without asking other countries.

new topics

log in