Fw: [Team] MAYAN CALENDAR NEWS: THE BETRAYAL OF BARACK OBAMA - U.S. placed under international police-state

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Carlos Perez

unread,
Jan 4, 2010, 5:15:30 PM1/4/10
to donr...@aol.com

Sent: Mon, January 4, 2010 4:11:53 PM
Subject: [Team] MAYAN CALENDAR NEWS: THE BETRAYAL OF BARACK OBAMA - U.S. placed under international police-state

OK MCN READERS:
 
What have I been warning everyone about? Under "W"...and now Oama takes it even further....
 
TOLD YA!!!
 
Carlos Perez
Founder/Editor
Mayan Calendar News
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. placed under international police-state
 
 

In the dead of night on December 17, 2009, President Barack Hussein Obama placed the United States of America under the authority of the international police organization known as INTERPOL, granting the organization full immunity to operate within the United States.

(AP Photo/Peter Dejong).

According to Threatswatch:

Last Thursday, December 17, 2009, The White House released an Executive Order "Amending Executive Order 12425." It grants INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) a new level of full diplomatic immunity afforded to foreign embassies and select other "International Organizations" as set forth in the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945.

By removing language from President Reagan's 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates - now operates - on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

What, exactly does this mean?  It means that INTERPOL now has the full authority to conduct investigations and other law enforcement activities on U.S. soil, with full immunity from U.S. laws such as the Freedom of Information Act and with complete independence from oversight from the FBI.

In short, a global law enforcement entity now has full law-enforcement authority in the U.S. without any check on its power afforded by U.S. law and U.S. law enforcement agencies.

A bit of background is in order here, and Hot Air provides it:

During his presidency, Ronald Reagan granted the global police agency Interpol the status of diplomatic personnel in order to engage more constructively on international law enforcement.  In Executive Order 12425, Reagan made two exceptions to that status.  The first had to do with taxation, but the second was to make sure that Interpol had the same accountability for its actions as American law enforcement — namely, they had to produce records when demanded by courts and could not have immunity for their actions.

Barack Obama unexpectedly revoked those exceptions in a change to EO 12425 last (week)...

Thus, Interpol now can conduct its operations on U.S. soil with ZERO accountability to anyone in this country.

And you beginning to understand now just what the 'end game' is on the part of those who are currently running the U.S. Government?

Let's go a step further in fleshing out exactly what this means in practical terms.  It gets ugly...and scary.  Again, from ThreatsWatch:

Section 2c of the United States International Organizations Immunities Act is the crucial piece.

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. (Emphasis added.)

Inviolable archives means INTERPOL records are beyond US citizens' Freedom of Information Act requests and from American legal or investigative discovery ("unless such immunity be expressly waived.")

Property and assets being immune from search and confiscation means precisely that. Wherever they may be in the United States. This could conceivably include human assets - Americans arrested on our soil by INTERPOL officers.

Why would INTERPOL be arresting American citizens on our own soil, without oversight from our own law enforcement agencies?  And remember, citizens who are thusly arrested would have no legal authority to demand full documentation from the International Police concerning the charges brought against them.

Andy McCarthy at National Review asks these crucial, sobering questions of the secretive Obama order:

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?

At least one answer to these questions is very clear.  A coup is underway in the United States of America, the goal of which is to establish complete, unquestioned authority over the citizens--a 'fundamental change' to the United States where citizens have no legal recourse against an authoritarian central government.

 

 

BUT THAT AIN'T ALL....READ ON !!!! ED.

 

Obama Double-Crossed Progressives on Health Care

By Matthew Rothschild

December 23, 2009 "The Progressive" -- - Are you feeling like a chump yet?

If you're a good progressive, and you wanted single-payer health care for all, or, second best, Medicare for All Who Want It, or third best, a robust public option, or fourth best, a paltry public option, now you've got nothing, nada, zippo.
Has it ever crossed your mind that this is the way President Obama wanted it to be?
That he tossed in the public option at the beginning only to get progressives on board, knowing full well that he was going to jettison the public option by the end?
Have you considered that maybe Max Baucus wasn't the problem?
And that maybe Olympia Snowe wasn't the problem?
And that maybe even hideous Joe Lieberman wasn't the problem?
But that Obama himself was the problem?
After all, Obama never once said he wouldn't sign a health care bill that didn't have a public option in it.
After all, Obama dumped on the public option at almost every opportunity, calling it just a "sliver" of the overall package, and not the most important sliver at that.
After all, Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, was huddling regularly with Max Baucus when the Montana Senator squashed the public option the first time.
And after all, Obama didn't even ask Lieberman to back the public option.
Seems to me that Obama played us all for fools.
His discussion of the public option was a cynical charade from the start, and now he expects all good progressives to rally around this "historic" health care bill?
Forget about it.
The most historic thing about Obama's health care bill is the double-cross he dealt progressives.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine.
© 2009 The Progressive


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages