Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law?
in [Adoption]
|
Prev: Dan doesn't want to talk about anything ON TOPIC!
Next: Serco - Privatization of government functions gone mad - Corporate Feudalism?
From: Greegor on 1 Jan 2010 07:48 How is this not treason against the US Constitution? http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGY3MTI4YTRjZmYwMGU1ZjZhOGJmNmQ0NmJiZDNmMDY Wednesday, December 23, 2009 Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? [Andy McCarthy] You just can't make up how brazen this crowd is. One week ago, President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes an international police force immune from the restraints of American law. Interpol is the shorthand for the International Criminal Police Organization. It was established in 1923 and operates in about 188 countries. By executive order 12425, issued in 1983, President Reagan recognized Interpol as an international organization and gave it some of the privileges and immunities customarily extended to foreign diplomats. Interpol, however, is also an active law-enforcement agency, so critical privileges and immunities (set forth in Section 2 (c) of the International Organizations Immunities Act) were withheld. Specifically, Interpol's property and assets remained subject to search and seizure, and its archived records remained subject to public scrutiny under provisions like the Freedom of Information Act. Being constrained by the Fourth Amendment, FOIA, and other limitations of the Constitution and federal law that protect the liberty and privacy of Americans is what prevents law-enforcement and its controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical. On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States. Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the International Criminal Court which the United States has refused to join because of its sovereignty surrendering provisions, though top Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported war crimes i.e., for actions taken in America's defense). Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? Why would we immunize an international police force from the limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement agencies? Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice Department, a repository for stashing government files which, therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law- enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize? Steve Schippert has more at ThreatsWatch, here. http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/print/wither_sovereignty/ 12/23 07:59 AM
From: Keith on 1 Jan 2010 10:59 On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 04:48:16 -0800 (PST), in alt.true-crime you wrote: >How is this not treason against the US Constitution? It is no different then diplomatic immunity for foreign embassy personnel. > >http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGY3MTI4YTRjZmYwMGU1ZjZhOGJmNmQ0NmJiZDNmMDY > >Wednesday, December 23, 2009 > >Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? [Andy McCarthy] Because it is a agreement between all nations to allow members of Interpol around the world diplomatic immunity. BTW, Interpol makes no arrests or issues warrants. It is a international clearing house regarding criminal warrants, information on criminal associations and associates and missing persons. http://www.interpol.int/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol For example, A man robs a bank in Ireland and flees to the United States. Interpol can relay the warrant information to the United States for arrest and extradation. If a Interpol member violates the law they are prosecuted in their own country if it is warranted under law.
From: richard on 1 Jan 2010 12:52 On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 04:48:16 -0800 (PST), Greegor wrote: > How is this not treason against the US Constitution? > > http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGY3MTI4YTRjZmYwMGU1ZjZhOGJmNmQ0NmJiZDNmMDY > > Wednesday, December 23, 2009 > > Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? [Andy McCarthy] > > You just can't make up how brazen this crowd is. One week ago, > President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes an > international police force immune from the restraints of American law. > > Interpol is the shorthand for the International Criminal Police > Organization. It was established in 1923 and operates in about 188 > countries. By executive order 12425, issued in 1983, President Reagan > recognized Interpol as an international organization and gave it some > of the privileges and immunities customarily extended to foreign > diplomats. Interpol, however, is also an active law-enforcement > agency, so critical privileges and immunities (set forth in Section 2 > (c) of the International Organizations Immunities Act) were withheld. > Specifically, Interpol's property and assets remained subject to > search and seizure, and its archived records remained subject to > public scrutiny under provisions like the Freedom of Information Act. > Being constrained by the Fourth Amendment, FOIA, and other limitations > of the Constitution and federal law that protect the liberty and > privacy of Americans is what prevents law-enforcement and its > controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical. > > On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued > an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, > Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and > confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This > international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice > Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. > Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States > and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United > States. > > Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the > International Criminal Court �X which the United States has refused to > join because of its sovereignty surrendering provisions, though top > Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign > courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that > are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported > war crimes �X i.e., for actions taken in America's defense). > > Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? > Why would we immunize an international police force from the > limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement > agencies? Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice > Department, a repository for stashing government files which, > therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law- > enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize? > > Steve Schippert has more at ThreatsWatch, here. > > http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/print/wither_sovereignty/ > > 12/23 07:59 AM Perhaps one should understand what interpol actually is. No persons are actually badge carrying officers. It is a network of information. Much like the NCIC database in the USA. http://www.interpol.int/ Although Interpol does have and maintain an office staffed by nearly 600, none of the employees are police officers per se.
From: Greegor on 1 Jan 2010 14:00 On Jan 1, 11:52 am, richard <mem...(a)newsguy.com> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 04:48:16 -0800 (PST), Greegor wrote: > > How is this not treason against the US Constitution? > > >http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGY3MTI4YTRjZmYwMGU1ZjZhOGJm.... > > > Wednesday, December 23, 2009 > > > Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? [Andy McCarthy] > > > You just can't make up how brazen this crowd is. One week ago, > > President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes an > > international police force immune from the restraints of American law. > > > Interpol is the shorthand for the International Criminal Police > > Organization. It was established in 1923 and operates in about 188 > > countries. By executive order 12425, issued in 1983, President Reagan > > recognized Interpol as an international organization and gave it some > > of the privileges and immunities customarily extended to foreign > > diplomats. Interpol, however, is also an active law-enforcement > > agency, so critical privileges and immunities (set forth in Section 2 > > (c) of the International Organizations Immunities Act) were withheld. > > Specifically, Interpol's property and assets remained subject to > > search and seizure, and its archived records remained subject to > > public scrutiny under provisions like the Freedom of Information Act. > > Being constrained by the Fourth Amendment, FOIA, and other limitations > > of the Constitution and federal law that protect the liberty and > > privacy of Americans is what prevents law-enforcement and its > > controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical. > > > On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued > > an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, > > Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and > > confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This > > international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice > > Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. > > Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States > > and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United > > States. > > > Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the > > International Criminal Court which the United States has refused to > > join because of its sovereignty surrendering provisions, though top > > Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign > > courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that > > are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported > > war crimes i.e., for actions taken in America's defense). > > > Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? > > Why would we immunize an international police force from the > > limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement > > agencies? Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice > > Department, a repository for stashing government files which, > > therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law- > > enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize? > > > Steve Schippert has more at ThreatsWatch, here. > > >http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/print/wither_sovereignty/ > > > 12/23 07:59 AM Keith > Because it is a agreement between all Keith > nations to allow members of Interpol Keith > around the world diplomatic immunity. Keith > BTW, Interpol makes no arrests or Keith > issues warrants. It is a international Keith > clearing house regarding criminal Keith > warrants, information on criminal Keith > associations and associates and Keith > missing persons. richard > Perhaps one should understand what richard > interpol actually is. No persons are richard > actually badge carrying officers. richard > It is a network of information. Much richard > like the NCIC database in the USA. http://www.interpol.int/ richard > Although Interpol does have and maintain richard > an office staffed by nearly 600, none of richard > the employees are police officers per se. Then WHY give them Immunity from US Law? Who is above the law in the USA?
From: Deadrat on 1 Jan 2010 14:59
Greegor <greegor47(a)gmail.com> wrote in news:45698360-ecf0-4ba9-ae9c-28e5048999ae(a)a15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com: > How is this not treason against the US Constitution? Because if you actually read the Constitution instead of making things up and believing people who tell you things that they've made up, you'll find that treason is confined to US citizens waging war against the US. > http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGY3MTI4YTRjZmYwMGU1ZjZhOGJmNm > Q0NmJiZDNmMDY > > Wednesday, December 23, 2009 > > Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? [Andy McCarthy] > > You just can't make up how brazen this crowd is. One week ago, > President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes an > international police force immune from the restraints of American law. Another rightard lie. Interpol is now immune from customs duties, federal taxes, and seizure of its records. Just like the IAEC, the IMF, and the Red Cross. > Interpol is the shorthand for the International Criminal Police > Organization. It was established in 1923 and operates in about 188 > countries. By executive order 12425, issued in 1983, President Reagan > recognized Interpol as an international organization and gave it some > of the privileges and immunities customarily extended to foreign > diplomats. Interpol, however, is also an active law-enforcement > agency, so critical privileges and immunities (set forth in Section 2 > (c) of the International Organizations Immunities Act) were withheld. > Specifically, Interpol's property and assets remained subject to > search and seizure, and its archived records remained subject to > public scrutiny under provisions like the Freedom of Information Act. > Being constrained by the Fourth Amendment, FOIA, and other limitations > of the Constitution and federal law that protect the liberty and > privacy of Americans is what prevents law-enforcement and its > controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical. When it operates in this country, Interpol would still "constrained" by the 4th Amendment. If it could even request search warrants. Which it can't. The provision against the seizure of records is a reciprocal arrangment that basically prevents governments from spying on Interpol. > > On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued > an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. Interpol established an office in the US in 2004. The only thing inexplicable is why the WPE didn't extend these immunities to Interpol then. Just soft on international crime, I guess. > That is, > Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and > confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This > international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice > Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. > Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States > and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United > States. Interpol must still abide by the "Constitution and American law." > > Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the > International Criminal Court � which the United States has refused to > join because of its sovereignty surrendering provisions, though top > Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign > courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that > are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported > war crimes � i.e., for actions taken in America's defense). Ah, now we're getting to it. You're afraid that the WPE and his cronies will be hauled into foreign courts to account for their crimes, like torture. Don't worry. They're gonna get away with it. Interpol has no independent authority to arrest criminals in the US, and this executive order doesn't give them any. Your friends are safe. > > Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? We wouldn't and didn't. And the President has the authority to waive these immunities in specific cases. > Why would we immunize an international police force from the > limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement > agencies? We wouldn't and didn't. > Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice > Department, a repository for stashing government files which, > therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law- > enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize? You mean like FBI files? You think records of active FBI cases are subject to the FOIA? > > Steve Schippert has more at ThreatsWatch, here. > > http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/print/wither_sovereignty/ > > 12/23 07:59 AM |