First, let's define what the "Bill of Rights" actually is. Is it a document that grants rights? No, it is a document that "documents" rights that already exist. In fact, many of the founding fathers hated the idea of having a Bill of Rights due to the fact that they were concerned that there would be some who would be led to believe that the document was the source of rights.
Now, if the "Bill of Rights" is not the source of these rights, from where do they originate? The Declaration of Independence makes it quite clear that these are God given rights that exist from the Creator, and that they are thus unalienable/inalienable. In other words, they cannot be taken away. The Declaration also makes it clear that these rights are for all men, everywhere.
As a result, all men, everywhere have rights. Anyone who thinks that the "protections" of the Bill of Rights only extend to US citizens knows nothing about rights, or their origin.
Oops. looks like I came late to this thread. I certainly hope that someone else raised my points somewhere back in the first 670 posts of this thing! (And if so, why are we still discussing this?)