Darn Geneva Convention is Too Confusing

President Bush thinks Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention is too vague and needs to be clarified in order to prosecute the terrorists being held at Guantanamo. Well, here it is for your perusal, and I'm sorry if it confuses you. I'll try to help out:

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed 'hors de combat' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(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.

(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

The reason Bush wants this changed?

Its also alot easier to convict people of terrorism if you don't have to actually produce evidence or if you accept hearsay, or better yet, if the suspect doesn't have access to the information his case is based upon:

NY Times: (T)rials at Guantánamo Bay in military tribunals...would allow evidence obtained by coercive interrogation and hearsay and deny suspects and their lawyers the right to see classified evidence used against them.

Now I see why President Bush thinks the Geneva Conventions need clarification: They bring humanity to the brutality of war.

Molten Carbon