Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law?

[Danceswithwires]

Why indeed, http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGY3MTI4YTRjZmYwMGU1ZjZhOGJmNmQ0NmJiZDNmMDY=

[two shoes]

Why indeed, http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGY3MTI4YTRjZmYwMGU1ZjZhOGJmNmQ0NmJiZDNmMDY=
Simple, when our gov't lets them do terrible things to US (us), we have no means of redress...

[two shoes]

More than just an untouchable repository for all of the files that may or may not be generated....

[Irving]

ANGER

[Troublco]

One wonders why an EO can be made that violates the Constitution. Wouldn't that be an illegal order?

[Irving]

Maybe Obama plans on hiring Interpool to torture our war criminals since we aren't allowed to do it.

[two shoes]

Maybe Obama plans on hiring Interpool to torture our war criminals since we aren't allowed to do it.
More likely dissidents to the current regime...

[Irving]

Could Interpool potentially do things now, that before might be considered an act of war?

[two shoes]

Yes, I believe that it would be, but who's going to stop him?
We The People...

[Danceswithwires]

One wonders why an EO can be made that violates the Constitution. Wouldn't that be an illegal order?

Personally I don't see where EO's are constitutional in the first place

[Irving]

Here is an article from the other side of the spectrum that explains a little more about what Interpol actually is: http://www.undispatch.com/interpol-under-siege-uninformed-bloggers

Doesn't make this any less unconstitutional though, at least in my opinion.

[BPTactical]

What I cant help to wonder is this:
Does this open the door to "Other" foreign agencies/organizations to the same immunity?
Under whose authority?

At what point in times does ones actions constitute Treason?





The chair is against the wall......
John has a long moustache.......













[Sofa]

[uhplumber]

Just more of Obama's giddy globalization ideas. Every day it is something off the wall with this guy. [Bang]

[SA Friday]

Almost every embassy and consulate posted position around the world from every country and in every country has diplomatic immunity. Even many military members assigned to these positions have diplomatic immunity. For US passports, blue is a civ passport, maroon is a military passport, and black is a diplomatic passport with the immunities agreed upon with the country they reside attached.

It would take a DOJ international relations lawyer to explain this one. As it so happens, I just might send this to a lawyer friend of mine that did just that job for a while and ask a few questions.

[SA Friday]

OK, here's what my DOJ lawyer friend had to say about it. (Side Note; I never worked with Interpol when a Fed. I have no working knowledge of their agency.) She wrote the following:

While you may not care for the NYTimes, here is an article that I read there a day or two ago, which gives a pretty good explanation: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/world/31interpol.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=interpol&st=cse (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/world/31interpol.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=interpol&st=cse)

In particular, it explains as follows:
Contrary to its portrayal in some movies, Interpol has no police force that conducts investigations and makes arrests. Rather, it serves its 188 member countries by working as a clearinghouse for police departments in different nations to share law enforcement information — like files on wanted criminals and terrorists, stolen cars and passports, and notices that a law enforcement agency has issued an arrest warrant for a fugitive.

In the United States, a bureau at the Justice Department staffed by American officials transmits information between law enforcement agencies and Interpol. If a foreign country issues an arrest warrant for a person inside the United States, it is up to the United States government, based on its own laws, to decide whether to apprehend the suspect.

So, it's probably not as scary as it sounds.

[GunTroll]

OK, here's what my DOJ lawyer friend had to say about it. (Side Note; I never worked with Interpol when a Fed. I have no working knowledge of their agency.) She wrote the following:

While you may not care for the NYTimes, here is an article that I read there a day or two ago, which gives a pretty good explanation: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/world/31interpol.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=interpol&st=cse (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/world/31interpol.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=interpol&st=cse)

In particular, it explains as follows:
Contrary to its portrayal in some movies, Interpol has no police force that conducts investigations and makes arrests. Rather, it serves its 188 member countries by working as a clearinghouse for police departments in different nations to share law enforcement information — like files on wanted criminals and terrorists, stolen cars and passports, and notices that a law enforcement agency has issued an arrest warrant for a fugitive.

In the United States, a bureau at the Justice Department staffed by American officials transmits information between law enforcement agencies and Interpol. If a foreign country issues an arrest warrant for a person inside the United States, it is up to the United States government, based on its own laws, to decide whether to apprehend the suspect.

So, it's probably not as scary as it sounds.

Lets hope so. Anyone else getting chaffed from your hat?

[mutt]

I have to agree with SA Friday's lawyer friend that this is really a non-issue. I'm more worried about the so called Patriot Act than this. In case anyone cares, here's a pretty good write up on what INTERPOL is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol

[SA Friday]

When considering legislation/regulation/etc, it is rarely the intended purpose a person really needs to worry about or consider. It is the potential for any future misuse that naive legislators never considered when they passed it that one needs to potentially worry about.

"The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions".

Thought about this for a day before responding. This really isn't a valid arguement. It could be used for an legislation/regulation/etc. Nobody can predict the future, and arguing an unknown future misuse as justification for potential bad legislation is dangerous. Afterall, isn't that want the anti's argue about the 2nd ammendment? Our founding fathers would have been hard pressed to envision repeating firearms?

I don't know if this EO is going to turn out to be potentially dangerous or not, but my initial fears concerning the EO are much less now that I have a better understanding how Interpol interacts with US LE, and has no independent capability to attempt to enforce law in this country.

[Irving]

My concern is directed at setting the president that it is okay to grant immunities to foreign bodies that local agencies don't have. Actually just granting immunities to foreign bodies at all. Say no to global government.

[mutt]

Nobody can predict the future, and arguing an unknown future misuse as justification for potential bad legislation is dangerous. Afterall, isn't that want the anti's argue about the 2nd ammendment? Our founding fathers would have been hard pressed to envision repeating firearms?


I find it interesting that you equate our founding father's inability to envision repeating firearms as an unintended consequence of the 2nd Amendment SA Friday. Care to elaborate what you mean?

[SA Friday]

I find it interesting that you equate our founding father's inability to envision repeating firearms as an unintended consequence of the 2nd Amendment SA Friday. Care to elaborate what you mean?
Actually, if you go back and read it, I don't unless I'm considered in the Anti-gun camp...

[SA Friday]

OK, what do I have to do to make everyone understand my previous post concerning the anti's saying all the time that our founding fathers could have never invisioned repeating firearms in this context is a METAPHOR. The Anti's say this all the time, and it's BS. That's the metaphor here.


The Denver inpoundment provision isn't really a good example. Almost anyone could see the potental for abuse with that piece of garbage.
What's the foreseeable threat with the Interpol EO? Giving foreigners Dip immunity? Dude, there are 100's currently running around in the Denver area and up in the shi resorts daily with that already. There are probably well over 10k in the USA with Dip immunity on any given day. We have about the same around the world with the same immunity in foreign countries. It's the price to have govt relationships. It there was no Dip Immunity, there would be a lot of countries with no US relations at all and vice versa.

[mutt]

Actually, if you go back and read it, I don't unless I'm considered in the Anti-gun camp...

ok, I gotcha. Guess I need to learn to read better =)
No doubt you're pro-gun. I was just thinking you had some interesting view of the 2A and the evolution of firearms.

[Marlin]

In particular, it explains as follows:
Contrary to its portrayal in some movies, Interpol has no police force that conducts investigations and makes arrests. Rather, it serves its 188 member countries by working as a clearinghouse for police departments in different nations to share law enforcement information — like files on wanted criminals and terrorists, stolen cars and passports, and notices that a law enforcement agency has issued an arrest warrant for a fugitive.
It's more than just the standard diplomat getting immunity here. This is a foreign law enforcement agency that now has NO requirement to provide any of their data collected on U.S. citizens to anyone in the U.S. No recourse for Congress to supeona the data, etc. It's powers beyond what our own LE agencies are allowed.

It's dirty and bodes of lots of really bad things happening. Something smells really rotten here.

I'm beginning to think that the only reason He did the EO was to get some of you to put the tinfoil on tighter...


Interpol IS NOT a law enforcement agency, all they do is SHARE information.. They have been doing it for years..

As to "why" they need the protection of an EO,, that I do not know.. As long as you do not commit a crime and beat feet to Lativia or some such, Chances are,They will never know you exist..

[SA Friday]

It's more than just the standard diplomat getting immunity here. This is a foreign law enforcement agency that now has NO requirement to provide any of their data collected on U.S. citizens to anyone in the U.S. No recourse for Congress to supeona the data, etc. It's powers beyond what our own LE agencies are allowed.

It's dirty and bodes of lots of really bad things happening. Something smells really rotten here.
[ROFL1]
That's what half of the standard diplomats are doing... The 'diplomats' just are not collecting info on US citizens unless they are interesting US citizens. They are too busy collecting information from companies making controlled technologies.

I had the opportunity at one of my secret squirrel training classes to do a Q&A session with an ex-KGB agent that defected to the USA. He was very honest about what he did, what he collected, his tactics and techniques... They don't have to steal the stuff from us. They just have to sit and wait for someone with access to come sell it to them.

What info does Interpol collect on US citizens independent of what is given to them by the DOJ? They don't have any investigation/collections arm.

I'm not defending the EO here, I'm just trying to understand the danger involved. There seems to be some misconceptions about what Interpol's mission and capabilities are from all of us, me included until I asked some questions to a friend that works with them regularly. I can see Interpol being infiltrated by a foreign govt to use as a channel to smuggle out info gathered via espionage, but why would they go through the trouble? There are easier ways in place already.

[Irving]

Explaining that this decision doesn't effect anything does not placate me though. If this decision does not change anything, then why was it done? People are worried about what kind of doors this has potentially opened.