"Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law?" is the question Andy McCarthy asks in commenting on the Executive Order that President Obama issued on December 17 to lift restraints on the international police agency. Andy goes on to describe these restraints first put in place in 1983 by President Reagan to bring Interpol under key aspects of American law when investigating Americans and American interests:
Specifically, Interpol's property and assets remained subject to search and seizure, and its archived records remained subject to public scrutiny under provisions like the Freedom of Information Act. 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.
On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.
Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the International Criminal Court — which the United States has refused to join because of its sovereignty-surrendering provisions, though top Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported war crimes — i.e., for actions taken in America's defense).
Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? Why would we immunize an international police force from the limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement agencies? Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice Department, a repository for stashing government files which, therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law-enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize?
A hawk-eyed reader writes in with an answer to Andy's questions:
McCarthy says he sees no reason for Obama to do this. Well, I do.
This could be but one seemingly innocuous step toward getting us into the grips of the International Criminal Court at the Hague.
It is no secret that the Muslims swing a heavy hammer at the U.N. and in the Netherlands (a la Geert Wilders' legal problem). Slobodan Milosevic was tried, convicted and imprisoned by the International Court, if I recall correctly, for war crimes against Muslims in Bosnia, yes?
It's also no secret that the current U.S. adminstration, including the C.I.C., David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder and the entire World of Islam are salivating at the thought of getting Cheney, Bush, the C.I.A., certain military personnel and others who are accused of torturing prisoners at Gitmo into criminal Court for prosecutions as war criminals.
I would note here that there is an answering geyser of slobber over this prospect on the mutliculturally orthodox Left.
If Obama and friends can pull off this little end run, incrementally, with no one objecting, all of them can eventually wash their hands of having to do the dirty work of investigating and prosecuting the prior administration in American Courts. They can passively allow INTERPOL do the investigations, get the warrants, and let the International Criminal Court jerk whomever is to be prosecuted for war crimes into the Hague, thence off to prison.
It happened to Slobodan Milosevic; it can happen here under this adminstration.
That's my read on it. McCarthy's analysis is excellent, but Obama and crew do everything with a carefully thought-out strategy to destroy us. He has a plan.
The depth of guile and evil in this man Obama and Axelrod is beyond anything I can imagine. That's straight from the heart, and the heartland, folks.
Does anyone notice? Does anyone care? Michelle Malkin notes that ABC's Jake Tapper -- one of scant few MSM reporters apparently interested in this hyper-sinister story of eroding US sovereignty voluntarily surrendered by a US president -- has twice asked the White House for comment and twice received no response. The Washington Examiner editorial today reports that the newspaper has been similarly stonewalled:
The Examiner has asked for but not yet received from the White House press office an explanation of why the president signed this executive order and who among his advisers was involved in the process leading to his doing so. Unless the White House can provide credible reasons to think otherwise, it seems clear that Executive Order 12425's consequences could be far-reaching and disastrous. To cite only the most obvious example, giving Interpol free rein to act within this country could subject U.S. military, diplomatic, and intelligence personnel to the prospect of being taken into custody and hauled before the International Criminal Court as "war criminals."
If the White House won't answer the media, I think the people need to put the question themselves to the White House.
Phone: 212.456.1414. Fax: 212.456.2461.