Executive Order Amended to Immunize INTERPOL In America - Is The ICC Next?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Revmitchell, Dec 29, 2009.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784
    In light of what we know and can observe, it is our logical conclusion that President Obama's Executive Order amending President Ronald Reagans' 1983 EO 12425 and placing INTERPOL above the United States Constitution and beyond the legal reach of our own top law enforcement is a precursor to more damaging moves.

    The pre-requisite conditions regarding the Iraq withdrawal and the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility closure will continue their course. meanwhile, the next move from President Obama is likely an attempt to dissolve the agreements made between President Bush and other states preventing them from turning over American military forces to the ICC (via INTERPOL) for war crimes or any other prosecutions.

    When the paths on the road map converge - Iraq withdrawal, Guantánamo closure, perceived American image improved internationally, and an empowered INTERPOL in the United States - it is probable that President Barack Obama will once again make America a signatory to the International Criminal Court. It will be a move that surrenders American sovereignty to an international body whose INTERPOL enforcement arm has already been elevated above the Constitution and American domestic law enforcement.

    For an added and disturbing wrinkle, INTERPOL's central operations office in the United States is within our own Justice Department offices. They are American law enforcement officers working under the aegis of INTERPOL within our own Justice Department. That they now operate with full diplomatic immunity and with "inviolable archives" from within our own buildings should send red flags soaring into the clouds.

    This is the disturbing context for President Obama's quiet release of an amended Executive Order 12425. American sovereignty hangs in the balance if these actions are not prevented through public outcry and political pressure. Some Americans are paying attention, as can be seen from some of the earliest recognitions of this troubling development here, here and here. But the discussion must extend well beyond the Internet and social media.

    Ultimately, a detailed verbal explanation is due the American public from the President of the United States detailing why an international law enforcement arm assisting a court we are not a signatory to has been elevated above our Constitution upon our soil.

    More Here
     
    #1 Revmitchell, Dec 29, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 29, 2009
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784
    Obama exempts INTERPOL from search and seizure on US lands

    What does this mean? It means that we have an international police force authorized to act within the United States that is no longer subject to 4th Amendment Search and Seizure. The "property and assets of [INTERPOL], wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation."

    INTERPOL, an international criminal police organization, is now poised to reside above the United States Constitution - in a place of sanctity beyond our FBI, CIA, DIA, and all other criminal investigatory domestic organizations.

    President Obama has just placed our Constitutional rights under international law.

    More Here
     
  3. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,646
    Likes Received:
    223
    Viva la Resistance!

    This cannot be allowed to fall to the bottom.
     
  4. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    he works very hard to destroy our country, while supporters cheer him on.
     
  5. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,646
    Likes Received:
    223
    Hey, Paul3144, where's all your belchin' about the "rule of law?"
     
  6. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    The URL is pure bull pippy. As described the URL, I support the executive order. Interpol is a database, that's all. Citizens have no business accessing interpol files.
     
  7. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,646
    Likes Received:
    223
    Keeping this to the top.
     
  8. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, if I understand this correctly, this non-American "force" could determine any of us to be a global "enemy" and come deal with us any way they see fit, without consent or benefit of our own national laws? So, what if preaching against abortion means you're an international "enemy?" What about our overseas missionaries who are American citizens? Why would we even NEED this force on our own soil when we have our OWN laws and our OWN judicial system?

    It seems to me that this executive order is taking away our sovereignty as Americans and placing us under global rules. That is treason!
     
  9. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784

    Exactly! :thumbs:
     
  10. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, what constitutes being an enemy? Why, when, and to what extent can this force be used? Who then makes those rules? Any other global power besides the USA?
     
  11. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784

    What ever the world court decides.
     
  12. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pardon my ignorance, but is this now valid, or do "we the people" get a say? Does the house or senate vote on this?

    I really need to brush up on my knowledge of this stuff. . .:tonofbricks:
     
  13. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, all it does is give diplomatic immunity to INTERPOL. What the extreme right wing is trying to scare you into thinking is that there's some kind of global police that will be knocking down your door. This article explains how INTERPOL actually works. It's customary and usual to give diplomats and some international groups diplomatic immunity. There's no reason to be scared. :1_grouphug:
     
  14. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784
    You did not read all of the article. You should try it before commenting.
     
  15. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Diplomatic immunity to higher level representatives of foreign governments is one thing - generally a good idea and reciprocal - but immunity to foreign law enforcement officials is another thing - a bad idea and, most likely, not reciprocal. An ambiguous "international" law enforcement agency is even more dangerous because it is not clear to what nation it answers. International cooperation among willing law enforcement agencies - each retaining it's own jurisdiction and authority - is fine and was the purpose of Interpol. It's employees don't need and should not have police powers as an international agency. Every nation should retain that for itself or work out whatever agreements it needs and wants on a case by case basis. We don't want Interpol to become a UN controlled police force with arrest powers of its own and especially in our own nation. That is, fortunately, not the case today but there is certainly reason to be concerned about tomorrow given some of the trends. Obama's change to Reagan's and Clinton's executive order doesn't specifically grant arrest authority to foreign agents operating in America although it does give Interpol increased immunity for its activities as an international agency. I don't think it needed to be "changed" because our own law enforcement agencies are capable of doing what needs to be done and sharing appropriately with Interpol when needed. Perhaps, this is more in line with the "change" Obama meant was coming to America. It bears close watching at the very least! He's a very dangerous man, the United Nations is a very dangerous organization, and getting both of them together could be fatal to America!
     
    #15 Dragoon68, Dec 30, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 30, 2009
  16. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,646
    Likes Received:
    223
    If international law enforcement officers are immune to prosecution, what's to deter them from searching your house, reading your mail or otherwise violating the Bill of Rights.

    Your shortsightedness is staggering.
     
  17. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    There aren't any. All INTERPOL does is co-ordinate between different countries police systems to catch fugitives and such.
     
  18. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    If that's the case, I still don't understand why Reagan's order needed changing.

    Can anyone answer my question as to whether or not this is now law or if the house and senate get to vote on it?
     
  19. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784
    Executive orders are final and law. No vote from congress necessary.
     
  20. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    King Obama at his finest, I guess. . . .
     

Share This Page

Loading...