It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

President Gives Foreign Cops Power Over Americans

page: 2
40
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Polynomial C
organized crime, crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes, Piracy, major illicit drug production, major drug trafficking, weapons smuggling, human trafficking, money laundering, child pornography, white-collar crime, computer crime, intellectual property crime and corruption....

If none of these crimes fits you .. then the INTERPOL will not even look at your name ..


If they are truly capable, and intent on confronting these crimes and are ready to deal with high level corruption and criminal activity then more power to em'

There is a level of corruption within U.S. government agencies that needs to be dealt with, and obviously we can't hope that they will deal with these internal issues on their own. It just will not happen, That corruption and criminal activity has unfortunately grown exponentially over several decades and reached a level where one could accurately asses and claim that several U.S. agencies have become not much more than extremely powerful criminal organizations.

While I am highly skeptical of the true intent of INTERPOL, I am also willing to withhold my skepticism and give them an opportunity to prove themselves on these issues.

If they can successfully take on and bring down corrupt U.S. agencies, then that is something everyone should support because in this area we can't do it internally.

For me, on this one, the jury is still out until I see what they actually are going to do with this opportunity.

If they can prove themselves worthy, I will contact them with some vital information they could find quite helpfull.



This can go either way... Either it will prove to be a monumental mistake or one of the best decisions the Obama administration has made yet.




posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Yeah, it is a sad case of affairs when people on this site feel this is okay. I use to believe the left and the Dems actually had backbones.

I guess as long as their quarterback is in office they are as blind as children. Is that narcissism or what? I do not understand how Obama can do the same things as Bush and they cheer him on.

Or are these folk just window dressing?

Attempts to make us think their are folk backing him?

I am hoping they are not all this unknowledgeable.

I guess they will wake up when they come for the rest of the freedoms but by that time it will have been too late. Foolish, foolish children.

[edit on 1/4/2010 by endisnighe]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
Yeah, it is a sad case of affairs when people on this site feel this is okay.


This is the danger of incrementalism
every so often the people accept more and more



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
It's fun watching my Americousins grow up.

So yes, listen up to what the rest of the developed world has been doing for a long time. In developed nations we share what we know about criminals with a central 'database' which is made up from workers from all international members police departments.

This database sends the known whereabouts and activities of top criminals, I mean real scumbags, to local police authorities who then step in and arrest said criminals. These criminals may face prosecution in the country they were apprehended in or be extradited to another country due to evidence supporting more heinous crimes committed there.

The only thing these guys do is take Carlos the Face-eater away from your children and send him back to Spain were the tax payers there will pay for his prison time. Perhaps Joe the gun-runner of Rwanda is an American citizen; it'll be local cops that will pick him up and more than likely American courts that will put him in jail.

The reason for immunity is for impartiality for political or big media stories. Evidence for a UK crime is not to be raided or taken without permission because it could topple the balance of justice.

Chances are you'll never notice INTERPOL anywhere, rarely even hear about them unless you watch international news and will certainly never meet them unless they've sent local cops to your house to question you on matters of huge international criminal activity. When your next door neighbour comes back from Holland with smuggled diamonds on them. INTERPOL will have supplied that information to the local police. When Hannibal Lecter gets a job as a chef in your favourite restaurant - INTERPOL will have him busted.

It's called partnership work.

And if you like that; wait till you see what happens when everyone gets free healthcare, free high school and further education (and boy do some of you guys need it), effective welfare programs to develop industry skills and an equal court room for when you need it.

You may be considered developed at the moment, but wait till you actually get developed - you'll love it!

EDIT: To add story just broke on Breaking News Forums too. Best to let everyone get educated as to the benefits of INTERPOL.

-m0r

[edit on 4/1/2010 by m0r1arty]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
However harsh these bills may seem but actually they were long due awaited. In one perspective because US Soldiers/ military contractors enjoy such rights in other countries for eg. Iraq/ Afghanistan without the having same rights on US soil. This may help bring some realization upon many American citizens how it feels to have foreign officers have immunity in own country. Even though INTERPOL does not go around policing them.

Secondly, Interpol officers have these rights in many other countries and no such rights within US were hindering their operations. Interpol is not controlled by USA so the ability to operate within the territorial limits of the United States without being subject to the same constitutional restraints that apply to all domestic law enforcement agencies such as the FBI does not apply to them.

It may hinder/ touch with some rights but one has to be flexible with time and continuous changes in global events. If one remains rigid they break, to survive one has to be flexible.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Well I believe this has the possibility of going either good or bad, but at the moment I am thinking it is going to be good in a sense. Sharing infromation about real dangerous, and I mean real dangerous criminals, is a good thing and this may help get the bush/cheney crimes to, but I wouldnt keep my hopes up about that one just yet.

We just have to wait and see how this all turns out in due time. If we start to see random kidnappings and all that police state stuff, then im pretty sure we can say this was a terrible move, but we just have to wait and see. I still doubt that will happen just because of interpol being around.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 



Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by endisnighe
Yeah, it is a sad case of affairs when people on this site feel this is okay.


This is the danger of incrementalism
every so often the people accept more and more


I agree entirely! Like you've been saying, just because Interpol hasn't utilized that freedom in other countries doesn't mean they're not going to use it now. Good behavior in the past is not in any way an accurate predictor of good behavior in the future. I, personally, don't like it.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I lived overseas the last ten years with the foreign police.. German . french. Israeli, Austrian, spanish, Slovakian, Holland, belgum and more sorry if I forgot to list you. Many of them are really great and ran to our country rescue after 9-11. Others where full on the other team LOVING AMERICA while they stuck a knife n our backs/.. in fact it was with them I ended up sick and some tried to help and get me the right medicine but someone HERE stopped them.. meaning the ones against america seem to have someone n the USA gov that watches there backs and helps, maybe special warfare us navy..... just seems so not stating a fact and I want to be wrong do not want to be a conspiracy theorist but ....



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Polynomial C
I am going to say it ONE MORE TIME .. okay ?? ..

The INTERPOL has been operating freely in almost every 1st and 2nd world country (expect in the U.S, 'till now) for a long time .. not one case of them arresting a random citizen .. not one case of "POLICE-STATE" actions ..

The INTERPOL is here to catch INTERNATIONAL CRIMINALS .. Kidnappers, Mafia people, Organ Harvesters, ETC.. ETC..

If you have never been involve in any International Crime .. the INTERPOL will NOT knock in your door ..

[edit on 4-1-2010 by Polynomial C]


Some people can rationalize anything apparently. How can you possibly support an action that gives a foreign police force more power in US than our own Law Enforcement agencies? How could you possibly support this? Really there is not plausible explanation that makes this ok.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnny2127

Originally posted by Polynomial C
I am going to say it ONE MORE TIME .. okay ?? ..

The INTERPOL has been operating freely in almost every 1st and 2nd world country (expect in the U.S, 'till now) for a long time .. not one case of them arresting a random citizen .. not one case of "POLICE-STATE" actions ..

The INTERPOL is here to catch INTERNATIONAL CRIMINALS .. Kidnappers, Mafia people, Organ Harvesters, ETC.. ETC..

If you have never been involve in any International Crime .. the INTERPOL will NOT knock in your door ..

[edit on 4-1-2010 by Polynomial C]

Well except... If someone in USA dd a false flag terror attack then for sure no one n USA well touch them or arrest them n that case I could see it being a good thing.

Some people can rationalize anything apparently. How can you possibly support an action that gives a foreign police force more power in US than our own Law Enforcement agencies? How could you possibly support this? Really there is not plausible explanation that makes this ok.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Apparently thier Response team has already acted within the borders of the U.S. on Obama's watch.

Deployment of INTERPOL Response Teams
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2008

Aug: Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan (plane crash)
July: Bissau, Guinea Bissau (drug seizure)
June: Philippines (ferry disaster)
May: USA (Operation IDent – following arrest of a suspected child abuser)
March: Bogota, Colombia (forensic investigation of computers and hardware seized from a FARC camp by Colombian authorities, and subsequent delivery of report in May)
Feb: Monrovia, Liberia (drug seizure)

Interpol Website

Also for those who are not familiar with the scope and core functions you may want to look through thier website. Lots of good info. Generally speaking Interpol generally acts as a worldwide investigation/tracking/database agency. Only in cases where local authorities do not have the expertise or capabilities to act on international bad actors or during major cross border crises do they even dispatch what little they have in the way of "expert police". Most of the time they are utilized as consultants.

Also here is the U.S. case: Operation IDent

[edit on 4-1-2010 by djvexd]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
The executive orders pertain to a law written in 1945.

en.wikisource.org...

Definition of international organization


For the purposes of this title, the term ‘‘international organization’’ means a public international organization in which the United States participates pursuant to any treaty or under the authority of any Act of Congress authorizing such participation or making an appropriation for such participation, and which shall have been designated by the President through appropriate Executive order as being entitled to enjoy the privileges, exemptions, and immunities herein provided


en.wikisource.org...

Regan amended it in 1983

en.wikisource.org...

Clinton amended it in 1995

en.wikisource.org...

Obama in 2009

www.whitehouse.gov...


I don't see how this affects the average American.


Thanks jam321 for the research .. i am sure this will shut the paranoid's mouth



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Polynomial C
 


Beat me to it.

I was about to post here.

Thanks



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Clearly anyone who voted for Obama should be barred from ever voting in anything including kindergarden beauty paegents!

Interpol?

The plain reality is that the United States of America already imprisons as well as executes more citizens than any other nation on earth including China.

We need more law enforcement like we need another hole in our heads.

Foreign based law enforcement operating inside the United States?

Absolutely rediculous. If other weak minded nations want U.S. Law Enforcement operating within their borders well that's their choice. If other weak minded nations want Interpol Agents operating within their borders well that's their choice.

This is not a choice the President should get to make by executive decision.

This is treason, we have a right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures.

How does the President intend to protect us from those when a law enforcement agency that does not operate under any local, state or federal jurisitiction but is foreign based can conduct search and seizures.

Only a fearful mindless sheep would advocate allowing such foreign interlopers abroad in our land.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Polynomial C

Originally posted by jam321
The executive orders pertain to a law written in 1945.

en.wikisource.org...

Definition of international organization


For the purposes of this title, the term ‘‘international organization’’ means a public international organization in which the United States participates pursuant to any treaty or under the authority of any Act of Congress authorizing such participation or making an appropriation for such participation, and which shall have been designated by the President through appropriate Executive order as being entitled to enjoy the privileges, exemptions, and immunities herein provided


en.wikisource.org...

Regan amended it in 1983

en.wikisource.org...

Clinton amended it in 1995

en.wikisource.org...

Obama in 2009

www.whitehouse.gov...


I don't see how this affects the average American.


Thanks jam321 for the research .. i am sure this will shut the paranoid's mouth



How is that NOT a perfect example of incrementalism?
Aside from Raegan's ammendment

[edit on 4-1-2010 by ModernAcademia]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 



While Section 2 (c) does provide some immunities that are of concern, these immunities are of concern not just as applied to INTERPOL, but as applied to every designated international organization. If there is a debate to be had, it’s whether or not Public Law 79-291 should provide such absolute immunity from lawful, court-approved search and seizure for any organization operating within the United States, international or otherwise.

Rather than concocting wild theories about how U.S. citizens are now at the mercy of INTERPOL, which is flatly untrue, we should be asking Congress to review the law and decide if the “inviolable” immunity from lawful search and seizure pursuant to a warrant of international organizations is appropriate. Of course, as Mr. Whiteley points out in his paper, the reason such immunities are offered is because other countries offer the same sort of privileges and immunities to U.S. organizations operating in their countries


thebroadside.freedomblogging.com...

Read the article.

It applies to certain organizations, not individual citizens.

Think about it. A 1945 law. If US wanted to give foreign cops power over Americans, I'm sure they would have included it in the Patriot act



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Obama should be charged with treason for sure. How can you left wing idiots think that letting International police have more rights than our own police force is okay? Our own police force has too many rights the way it is. And people wander why others are talking of a revolution?

Our Constitution hardly means anything to TPTB anymore. They do what they want when they want. I think its all a part of a bigger picture of having the NWO and world government. Or maybe Obama is trying to spark the upcoming revolution by doing these absurd things against America. This is a sad day for America...



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnny2127
How can you possibly support an action that gives a foreign police force more power in US than our own Law Enforcement agencies?



Originally posted by kennylee
Obama should be charged with treason for sure. How can you left wing idiots think that letting International police have more rights than our own police force is okay?



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Foreign based law enforcement operating inside the United States?

This is treason, we have a right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Only a fearful mindless sheep would advocate allowing such foreign interlopers abroad in our land.


Oh no!! Obama has turned over our country to foriegn powers!!!

Some exotic international (not like us) police force has dominion over our citizenry!! I knew this would happen!!!

Interpol Officers will be kicking in our doors and seducing our wives with funny french accents!!!

Before this idiot festival gets carried away....

Interpol is NOT A POLICE FORCE. They don't have officers flying around the world tracking down criminals.

What do they have? Besides central databases tracking international crimes and criminals....they have LOCAL POLICE in each nation that are assigned as Interpol Liasons.

When one country wants to track down a criminal in another they call Interpol and Interpol will call the LOCAL INTERPOL REP (a US Law Enforcement Agent) in the home country that would be responsible for that criminal...in the US it typically would be someone that is assigned to Interpol (when needed) from the FBI, ATF etc. and the LOCAL Authorities carry the ball while "Liaisoning" with International Interpol.

That local persons day job would be with the FBI, ATF, State Troopers...whatever, but when Interpol needs a criminal tracked in his territory...he serves as Interpol Liaison...No foriegn police force is running unabated in our streets.

But as long as we can scream about Obama letting wierd international police kick in our doors...lets just pretend we don't know this...shhh





­­­­ ­­I­nterpol differs from most law-enforcement agencies -- agents don't really make arrests themselves, and there's no Interpol jail where criminals are taken. The agency functions as an administrative liaison between the law-enforcement agencies of the member countries, providing communications and database assistance.

This is vital when fighting international crime because language, cultural and bureaucratic differences can make it difficult for officers of different nations to work together.

For example, if FBI officers track a terrorist to Italy, they may not know who to contact in the Polizia di Stato, if the Polizia Municipale has jurisdiction over some aspect of the case, or who in the Italian government needs to be notified of the FBI's involvement. The FBI can contact the Interpol National Central Bureau in Italy, which will act as a liaison between the United States and Italian law-enforcement agencies.

people.howstuffworks.com...

[edit on 4-1-2010 by maybereal11]

[edit on 4-1-2010 by maybereal11]

[edit on 4-1-2010 by maybereal11]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


hi

isn't it funny how everyone keeps saying Interpol does not do what Obama gave them the power to do?


I mean isn't that an off-topic argument that has nothing to do with anything?



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   
all i can see is people crying over the loss of American sovereignty. if you hadn't noticed already, America has already lost its sovereignty. apparently the whole notion of working with the rest of the world never crossed your minds. you want to believe the America can continue pulling strings on the rest of the world but you forget that this is what got us in trouble in the first place. so like most American's you would sit and cry at the lost of liberty and such when you have already lost it way before when you felt that times were good. so now people are out raged when they see Obama bow to the Japanese emperor or actually show humility in front of other nations. just when hes opening the door to work with other nations because he knows we desperately need their help people are crying about the loss of American sovereignty. i don't see how you can have something you don't have taken from you. not that I'm trying to make Obama look good or i agree with most of his policies but at least give the man credit for actually realizing how much # we are in.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join