OBAMA GIVES INTERPOL A PASS ON AMERICAN SOIL

The act of distracting with one hand while perpetrating something else with the other hand seems to come as naturally to Barack Obama as breathing. On December 16th, 2009, while the country is already distracted at Christmas time by an obscene healthcare debate, Barack Obama signed an amendment to Executive Order 12425 (EO), giving Interpol (International Police) who are on American soil, immunity from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Andy McCarthy at NRO explains, in part, why this is such a big deal:

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.

Guess what else. Interpol operates inside the U.S. Justice Department, headed up by Attorney General Eric Holder. Holder's DOJ has been stonewalling quite a bit lately. Could we be seeing information that is harmful to this administration being sent to Interpol and the amendment to EO 12425 being invoked?

In the United States, the FBI works very closely with the DOJ. Similarly, in this one-world Utopia envisioned by these hardcore socialists, Interpol works closely with the International Criminal Court (ICC). Imagine a scenario in which the FBI was permitted to target an individual or entity in the United States, arrest individual(s), and not have to release information that could prove said person(s) innocence. Essentially, that framework appears to be getting built with Interpol and the ICC.

In any case, Interpol will be allowed to operate inside the United States while not being bound by the U.S. Constitution.

For much more detail on this, THREATS WATCH breaks it down quite well. Word of caution, Threats Watch makes the argument that it's conceivable the "assets" it wouldn't have to relinquish to information requests could include "human assets". I tend to come down on the side of Ed Morrissey at HOT AIR who claims that may be a bit of a reach. Nonetheless, considering all of the problems with transparency this administration has been having, it is more than just a little troubling to see Obama, with the stroke of his pen, give an international police force immunity from accountability for its actions as it operates inside Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Threats Watch speculates that the next step might be for Obama to allow members of the American military to be tried in the ICC after being arrested by Interpol. Think about this angle in terms of the CIA and the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques debate this past year. Under such a framework, Holder would be off the hook in the arena of public debate. He would simply be able to defer to Interpol / ICC and say they're immune from releasing information - end of story.

Domestically, the U.S. Constitution is being shredded before our very eyes. Obama's actions indicate he views it as a huge nuisance. In any case, in light of this amendment being signed, think about Amendments III and IV to the U.S. Constitution and see if this EO begins to encroach upon them, if ever so slightly.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Could members of Interpol one day be considered "soldiers"? If Interpol barged into your home and took property to be used against someone in an ICC court, would they be immune from presenting it at trial?

That takes bullying tactics to an entirely new level. I wonder if ACORN or SEIU thugs might be offered jobs at Interpol soon. For some reason, this just came to mind.



Remember, we have watched this president seemingly have more disdain for a significant segment of his country's own population than he does for the world's most seediest of dictators.

Why?

h/t to FR