Beck spoke for a host of other government watchdogs when he asked on the air, “We’ve been asking ever since it was signed: why? Who can tell me what special interest group asked for this? If it were about terror, why not tell us that when he signed it? This Congress attacks our CIA and FBI, but Interpol gets immunity? Why? It makes no sense.”
Glenn, I agree. It makes absolutely no sense, if Obama signed the executive order for no other reason but to arbitrarily broaden Interpol’s legal exemptions. But I think I’ve recently seen behind the veil on the White House’s covert mission and mystery with Interpol.
The remaining of Obama’s executive order reads, “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(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act’
and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.”
So at least a partial answer as to why Obama gave this executive order can be found by answering what further gain is made “by deleting from the first sentence (of the Executive Order 12425) the words ‘except those provided by Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act’ and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.”
Critical to my hypothesis here is Obama’s deletion of Section 2c exceptions from the United States International Organizations Immunities Act, which reads, “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.” (As threatswatch.org noted, “Inviolable archives means Interpol records are beyond U.S. citizens’ Freedom of Information Act requests and from American legal or investigative discovery.”)
But why at this point in U.S. history would the White House want Interpol exempt from the regulations of search and seizure as mandated and outlined in the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution? White House and Interpol officials contend that the only reason for Obama’s executive order was to update Reagan’s 1983 executive order to accommodate Interpol’s permanent residency and bring equity to its standing among other international organizations.
But are we going to believe that, in the midst of the president’s first year and most intense political holiday season of his life, Interpol’s benefit package somehow made the docket of Obama’s critical Christmas agenda merely because it needed administrative updating?
The White House explained that it put out no initial statement about the president’s executive order because it viewed the matter as benign and uninteresting. “There is nothing newsworthy here,” said Christina Reynolds, a White House spokeswoman.
But was that really the case? “Nothing newsworthy?” Or was there some reason the White House was trying to slip the executive order under the radar from the media and public’s notice during the Christmas rush so that few would notice?
While many in the conservative world have accused Obama of extending Interpol’s legal exemptions for the purpose of empowering a global police force, I believe there’s a much closer goal and strategic reason he gave this presidential edict. And it dawned on me when I read the seven words of Rachel Billington, an Interpol spokeswoman, who explained to the New York Times the applicable location of the president’s executive order: “It’s only for the New York office.”
“Only for the New York office”? Mmmmm.
Is it possible the Obama administration specifically and soon plans to use Interpol’s New York office for some covert purpose that would require Interpol’s exemption from having its property or records subject to search and seizure?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that New York is the feds’ city of choice to place 9/11 terrorists on trial in federal court?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that, if for any reason the White House can’t give terrorist detainees U.S. constitutional privileges by being tried in civilian courts, they now have the close proximity of Interpol archives that are exempt from American legal or investigative discovery?
Is it merely a coincidence Obama signed this executive Interpol order that now makes Interpol exempt from Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, requests by U.S. citizens?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that the feds want to try these 9/11 terrorists in civilian courts rather than military courts, and undoubtedly don’t want to lose the cases in public opinion by the dissemination of the trials’ details and evidence?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that Interpol’s U.S. central operations office is under the umbrella and within our own Justice Department offices? (Interpol, which was started in 1923 and is made up of 188 country members including the U.S., has a bureau in the Department of Justice.)
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that the following events are converging at this time in America’s history: the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, the closure of Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility, Obama’s indifference and even defense of Islamic extremists like the Fort Hood shooter or Northwest flight 253′s attempted bomber, the feds’ decision to conduct jihadists trials in New York and the search and seizure exemption of Interpol in New York and throughout the U.S.?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that Interpol spokeswoman Rachel Billington explained “It’s only for the New York office,” whose five staff members now have access to law enforcement information submitted by other countries that no U.S. authority, official, agency or citizen can ever view (without Interpol’s waiver)?
Again, threatwatch.org hit the nail on the head: Immunity from search and seizure “cannot be understated, because this immunity and protection – and elevation above the U.S. 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.”
If international terrorist criminal records are somehow even merely allowed to “pass through” or “temporarily be housed in” New York’s Interpol storage bin, they will be as safe as the gold at Fort Knox. Al Capone’s vault had nothing on Interpol’s new repository!
But, in the midst of an increased onslaught of global and domestic terrorist activity, is this really the time in America’s history when we want to grant an eternal waiver from search and seizure laws to any international law enforcement agency? Even the most ignorant of politicians must recognize it as incredibly foolish and even further jeopardizing America’s safety.
I have no doubt that Interpol will become Obama’s secret vault for terrorists’ criminal records and evidence – and whatever else he and his Cabinet want to place in there. This is just the beginning of what Washington can and will do with this executive order that Obama signed. And it’s just one more example of the way your federal government has got the backs of those who are attacking our country, abandoning our Constitution and dissolving America’s sovereignty.
It’s, of course, not too late for the White House to be transparent and confess exactly why Obama granted Interpol’s exemption from search and seizure laws at this critical point in the war on terror. One thing we now know, however, is why the wisdom of President Reagan limited Interpol’s immunities, and why Obama’s deletions of Reagan’s executive order should have stayed intact for this international law enforcement agency.
And the words that keep coming back to my mind are those from White House spokeswoman Christina Reynolds: “There is nothing newsworthy here.”
In the end, there appears to be one true advantage for the president’s executive order to exempt Interpol from search and seizure: There will always be a safe and tamper-proof place where Obama can store his original, long-form birth certificate.
(For more on how to reawaken America to God and our founder’s vision for this country, check out Chuck Norris’s brand new expanded paperback version of his New York Times best-seller, “Black Belt Patriotism”)