Home » Obama News » Obama grants immunity powers to FOREIGN INTERPOL OVER our Constitution?

Obama grants immunity powers to FOREIGN INTERPOL OVER our Constitution?

“I do solemnly swear  that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United States.

The Federal Government of the United States is the central government entity established by the United States Constitution, which shares sovereignty over the United States with the governments of the individual U.S. states.

The policies of the federal government have a broad impact on both the domestic and foreign affairs of the United States. In addition, the powers of the federal government as a whole are limited by the Constitution, which, per the Tenth Amendment, states that all powers not expressly assigned to the federal government are reserved to the states or to the people.

Below is another link that ties back to the European Union and the United Nations. I wonder HOW granting a foreign Police force immunity from our Constitution and laws can be considered DEFENDING, PROTECTING or PRESERVING that precious document?

An international law enforcement arm assisting a court we are not a signatory to has been ELEVATED above OUR CONSTITUTION upon our OWN SOIL! America  get ready for the guys in Blue Helmets, they are coming!!

Wither Sovereignty

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

By Steve Schippert, Clyde Middleton | December 23, 2009

Post Source found at: http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/wither-sovereignty/

Last Thursday, December 17, 2009, The White House released an Executive Order “Amending Executive Order 12425.It grants INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) a new level of full diplomatic immunity afforded to foreign embassies and select other “International Organizations” as set forth in the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945.

By removing language from President Reagan’s 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates – now operates – on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release December 17, 2009

Executive Order — Amending Executive Order 12425

EXECUTIVE ORDER
– – – – – – –
AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL
AS A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION ENTITLED TO
ENJOY CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, EXEMPTIONS, AND IMMUNITIES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words “except those provided by Section 2©, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act” and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.

BARACK OBAMA THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 16, 2009.

After initial review and discussions between the writers of this analysis, the context was spelled out plainly.

Through EO 12425, President Reagan extended to INTERPOL recognition as an “International Organization.” In short, the privileges and immunities afforded foreign diplomats was extended to INTERPOL. Two sets of important privileges and immunities were withheld: Section 2© and the remaining sections cited (all of which deal with differing taxes).

And then comes December 17, 2009, and President Obama. The exemptions in EO 12425 were removed.

Section 2c of the United States International Organizations Immunities Act is the crucial piece.

Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable. (Emphasis added.)

Inviolable archives means INTERPOL records are beyond US citizens’ Freedom of Information Act requests and from American legal or investigative discovery (“unless such immunity be expressly waived.”)

Property and assets being immune from search and confiscation means precisely that. Wherever they may be in the United States. This could conceivably include human assets – Americans arrested on our soil by INTERPOL officers.

Context: International Criminal Court

The importance of this last crucial point cannot be understated, because this immunity and protection – and elevation above the US Constitution – afforded INTERPOL is likely a precursor to the White House subjecting the United States under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). INTERPOL provides a significant enforcement function for the ICC, just as our FBI provides a significant function for our Department of Justice.

We direct the American public to paragraph 28 of the ICC’s Proposed Programme Budget for 2010 (PDF).

29. Additionally, the Court will continue to seek the cooperation of States not party to the Rome Statute and to develop its relationships with regional organizations such as the Organization of American States (OAS), the Arab League (AL), the African Union (AU), the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), ASEAN and CARICOM. We will also continue to engage with subregional and thematic organizations, such as SADC and ECOWAS, and the Commonwealth Secretariat and the OIF. This will be done through high level visits, briefings and, as appropriate, relationship agreements. Work will also be carried out with sectoral organizations such as IDLO and INTERPOL, to increase efficiency.

The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute – the UN treaty that established the International Criminal Court. (See: Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court)

President George W. Bush rejected subjecting the United States to the jurisdiction of the ICC and removed the United States as a signatory. President Bill Clinton had previously signed the Rome Statute during his presidency. Two critical matters are at play. One is an overall matter of sovereignty and the concept of the primacy of American law above those of the rest of the world. But more recently a more over-riding concern principally has been the potential – if not likely – specter of subjecting our Armed Forces to a hostile international body seeking war crimes prosecutions during the execution of an unpopular war.

President Bush in fact went so far as to gain agreement from nations that they would expressly not detain or hand over to the ICC members of the United States armed forces. The fear of a symbolic ICC circus trial as a form of international political protest to American military actions in Iraq and elsewhere was real and palpable.

President Obama’s words have been carefully chosen when directly regarding the ICC. While President Bush outright rejected subjugating American armed forces to any international court as a matter of policy, President Obama said in his 2008 presidential campaign that it is merely “premature to commit” to signing America on.

However, in a Foreign Policy in Focus round-table in 2008, the host group cited his former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power. She essentially laid down what can be viewed as now-President Obama’s roadmap to America rejoining the ICC. His principal objections are not explained as those of sovereignty, but rather of image and perception.

Obama’s former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power, said in an early March (2008) interview with The Irish Times that many things need to happen before Obama could think about signing the Rome Treaty.

“Until we’ve closed Guantánamo, gotten out of Iraq responsibly, renounced torture and rendition, shown a different face for America, American membership of the ICC is going to make countries around the world think the ICC is a tool of American hegemony.

The detention center at Guantánamo Bay is nearing its closure and an alternate continental American site for terrorist detention has been selected in Illinois. The time line for Iraq withdrawal has been set. And President Obama has given an abundance of international speeches intended to “show a different face for America.” He has in fact been roundly criticized domestically for the routinely apologetic and critical nature of these speeches.

President Obama has not rejected the concept of ICC jurisdiction over US citizens and service members. He has avoided any direct reference to this while offering praise for the ICC for conducting its trials so far “in America’s interests.” The door thus remains wide open to the skeptical observer.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Methodology Of INTERPOL

Each member country maintains a National Central Bureau (NCB) staffed by national law enforcement officers. The NCB is the designated contact point for the Interpol General Secretariat, regional bureau and other member countries requiring assistance with overseas investigations and the location and apprehension of fugitives. This is especially important in countries with many law-enforcement agencies. This central bureau is a unique point of contact for foreign entities, which may not understand the complexity of the law-enforcement system of the country they attempt to contact. For instance, the NCB for the United States of America is housed at the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). The NCB then ensures the proper transmission of information to the correct agency.

Interpol maintains a large database charting unsolved crimes and both convicted and alleged criminals. At any time, a member nation has access to specific sections of the database and its police forces are encouraged to check information held by Interpol whenever a major crime is committed. The rationale behind this is that drug traffickers and similar criminals have international ties, and so it is likely that crimes extend beyond political boundaries.

In 2002, following United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 passed in the aftermath of September 11, Interpol began maintaining a database of lost and stolen identification and travel documents, allowing member countries to be alerted to the true nature of such documents when presented. Passport fraud, for example, is often performed by altering a stolen passport; in response, several member countries have worked to make online queries into the stolen document database part of their standard operating procedure in border control departments. As of early 2006, the database contained over ten million identification items reported lost or stolen, and is expected to grow more as more countries join the list of those reporting into the database.

More about INTERPOL at : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol

Current Secretary General of INTERPOL: Ronald Noble

Current President of INTERPOL: Khoo Boon Hui

———————————————————————————————————————-

Another IMPORTANT Executive order—Obama’s FIRST one after swearing in as President of the US.

On January 21st, 2009, his very first day in office, Barack Obama implemented and signed into law  Executive Order 13489.

For those of you who can’t take the time to read it. here is the section that applies:

“Sec.2

Notice Of Intent To Disclose Presidential Records

When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records  pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines providied by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege.”

Now for all of you who commented on our previous articles that we were no more that right-wing nut jobs, that this thing about Obama’s birth certificate was a non-issue, and those of you who tried to shift the focus of the stories, doesn’t this strike you as just a little odd?

That the first order of business Obama took care of on day one of his Presidency was to sign off on an Executive Order that states that only the records he chooses to be made public will be released?

This is the subject that was at the absolute top of his agenda?

If this isn’t proof that Obama is hiding something, I don’t know what is.

http://www.infowars.com/obama-signs-executive-order-barring-release-of-his-birth-certificate/

===============================================

Related Links:

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/terminator-seed-1-plot-to-control-our-food-supply/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/terminator-seeds-2-plot-to-control-our-food-supply/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/terminator-seed-3-plot-to-control-our-food-supply/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/bilderbergers-creating-a-new-world-order-or-completing-work-of-the-ages/

Possible Related Links:

http://patriotroom.com/article/obama-exempts-interpol-from-search-and-seizure-on-us-lands

http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/wither-sovereignty/

Advertisements

24 thoughts on “Obama grants immunity powers to FOREIGN INTERPOL OVER our Constitution?

  1. Mc
    I agree. That he refuses to produce these documents is Mind Blowing! And even MORE SO that he got elected without them being verified REALLY has me shaking my head in wonder!
    Thanks for commenting and hope to see more of you. 😛

  2. This guy is supposed to be the man that knows the US Constitution. He knows how to destroy it.

    Why so secret? I don’t believe that we have ever had a POTUS who has hid his records so well.

  3. Pingback: Terminator Seed 3: Plot to Control Our Food Supply? « LisaInTX's Blog

  4. Pingback: Terminator Seeds 2: Plot to Control our Food Supply? « LisaInTX's Blog

  5. Pingback: Terminator Seed 1: Plot to Control Our Food Supply? « LisaInTX's Blog

  6. Pingback: Bilderbergers: Creating a New World Order or completing “Work of the Ages”? « LisaInTX's Blog

  7. AFVET
    No One knows WHO this cat is! NO ONE has COME FORWARD to admit that THEY or their ‘department” EVER vetted this man from NOWHERE!!
    I find that VERY ODD, especially when it was OUR SENATE with the help OF then, Sen. Obama, that VETTED John McCain, but did NOT do the same for Nobama???? Tell me this is NOT MIND BLOWING??

  8. In perusing this post I found infowars.com.
    Very interesting.
    Who knows what this jerk has done to keep his history out of the public knowledge.
    Hell, we have no idea what the hell he’s done !
    Now he has signed a paper to eliminate any public knowledge of his history.
    Gotta see what Mark Levin has to say about this!

    Interpol my ass !

  9. Pingback: Obama grants immunity powers to FOREIGN INTERPOL OVER our … | Arableague News Station

  10. Pingback: US Economic Crisis 2010: FIX or FAIL « ON MY WATCH – the writings of SamHenry

  11. This is an example of tyranny, from the White House.
    Gird your loins folks, the Marxist is far from done.
    He will not tolerate any setbacks.

    2010 will be very interesting.

  12. Pingback: Year End Reality Check « Moonbat Patrol

  13. I agree 100%…..but the problem is, they hold all the Aces right now.
    The HOUSE has to agree to Impeachment and the Senate decides the fate.
    It’s a Stacked HOUSE with Pelosi at the reins—the witch from hell.
    But, good news is, 2010 is just around the corner. We must spread the word to out those commies…..and hopefully bring back balance.

  14. Impeachment proceedings may be commenced by a member of the House of Representatives on their own initiative, either by presenting a listing of the charges under oath, or by asking for referral to the appropriate committee. The impeachment process may be triggered by non-members. For example, when the Judicial Conference of the United States suggests a federal judge be impeached, a charge of what actions constitute grounds for impeachment may come from a special prosecutor, the President, a state or territorial legislature, grand jury, or by petition.

    The type of impeachment resolution determines which committee it will be referred to. A resolution impeaching a particular individual is typically referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. A resolution to authorize an investigation regarding impeachable conduct is referred to the House Committee on Rules, and then referred to the Judiciary Committee. The House Committee on the Judiciary, by majority vote, will determine whether grounds for impeachment exist. If the Committee finds grounds for impeachment they will set forth specific allegations of misconduct in one or more “articles of impeachment.” The Impeachment Resolution, or Article(s) of Impeachment, are then reported to the full House with the committee’s recommendations.

    The House debates the resolution and may at the conclusion consider the resolution as a whole or vote on each article of impeachment individually. A simple majority of those present and voting is required for each article or the resolution as a whole to pass. If the House votes to impeach, managers are selected to present the case to the Senate. Recently, managers have been selected by resolution, while historically the House would occasionally elect the managers or pass a resolution allowing the appointment of managers at the discretion of the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

    Also, the House will adopt a resolution in order to notify the Senate of its action. After receiving the notice, the Senate will adopt an order notifying the House that it is ready to receive the managers. The House managers then appear before the bar of the Senate to impeach the individual involved and exhibit the articles against them. After the reading of the charges, the managers return and make a verbal report to the House.

  15. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and misdemeanors. ”

    The Constitution also allows for involuntary removal from office. The President, Vice-President, Cabinet Secretaries, and other executive officers, as well as judges, may be impeached by the House of Representatives and tried in the Senate.
    Any convicted by impeachment is immediately removed from office. The Senate may also choose to bar the removed official from holding any federal office in the future.[5] No other punishments may be inflicted pursuant to the impeachment proceeding, but the convicted party remains liable to trial and punishment in the courts for civil and criminal charges.

  16. AFVET
    I agree 100%!!! He must have had his fingers crossed when he swore to DEFEND our Constitution!
    It’s time the HOUSE got busy and started Impeachment proceedings—-if any of them have the jewels to do it!!!

  17. I say impeach him, his policies are destroying our Country.

    Wake up America !!!!!!!!!!!

  18. “The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals… [I]t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.” –Albert Gallatin, letter to Alexander Addison, 1789

    Unless of course, IMMUNITY has been granted to those who do NOT follow our Bill of Rights, but the dictate from “International Law”.

  19. INTERPOL is an “arm” of the EU and the UN…looks like who ever is in charge of those are in charge of INTERPOL.
    How exciting—our founding fathers fought against a foreign King and that country’s rule, only to have Nobama get elected and turn our F-ING country back to them without a shot fired!!!!!

  20. JC
    Thanks. I hear ya…I also saw the postings but did not report on it until I found a clear LINK proving the story.
    I’m sure we will hear from Beck on this subject and hopefully the judge too!!
    I’ve pinged several of your recent posts here. Feel free to ping me back anytime!! :-}

  21. SH
    I can not take credit for much of the above. It was written by others and so well stated, I felt I would just pass on their info and links. I have added the videos and done some research into a few backgrounds and posted them to help verify the info.
    As to WHO can change “immunity” status, I’m assuming ONLY Nobama can add or subtract as he just did with this latest executive order created under Ronald Reagan.

    I personally find this order a WITHOUT a DOUBT TREASON as it allows a FOREIGN POLICE STATE aka ARMY of police, full access to our US Citizens in whatever means they choose fit to do.

  22. Lisa, your historical knowledge of events in addition to your already considerable knowledge of the Constitution is stunning and your writing laying this issue out before us excellent. I am sincere in this.

    Question: This part of obama’s “amendment,”
    “unless such immunity be expressly waived,” who is authorized to waive Interpol’s immunity? TX SH

  23. Pingback: Alex Jones: Prison Planet Under attack? « LisaInTX's Blog

Comments are closed.