claim: "the geneva convention did not apply, until 2005, to the war on terror."
author: lindsey graham
evidence_1: rumsfeld (29 june 2006) the u.s. supreme court did not rule on the subject of  unlawful combatant status but did reaffirm that the u.s. is bound by the geneva  conventions. most notably it said that common article 3 of the geneva  convention, regarding the treatment of detainees, applies to all prisoners in the  war on terror ...
evidence_2: feb 14, 2005 ... gonzales, the new attorney general, argued during his confirmation proceedings  that the u.n. convention against torture's ban on “cruel, inhuman, and  degrading treatment” of terrorist suspects does not apply to american  interrogations of foreigners overseas. perhaps surprisingly, the fiercest internal ...
evidence_3: volume 87 number 857 march 2005. 39. casting light on the legal black hole:  international law and detentions abroad in the “war on terror”. silvia borelli*. ph. d. (università degli .... principles relating to the extraterritorial application of  human rights law, and ..... did not “have any rights under the geneva convention  [sic].”38.
evidence_4: the chapter shows that a number of the actions taken by the administration in its  war on terrorism present genuine threats to the individual rights of american  citizens and .... although title ii requires warrants for searches and record  seizures in terrorism investigations, it does not require the government to notify  those being ...
evidence_5: jan 1, 2011 ... ihl - sometimes also called the law of armed conflict or the law of war - does  not provide a definition of terrorism, but prohibits most acts committed in armed ...  the fourth geneva convention ( article 33article 4 ) states that " collective  penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are ...