U.S. placed under international police-state.

#1

gsvol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
14,179
Likes
10
#1
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.

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.

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.

OH wait, we have the ACLU to protect our rights, dambit, I forgot there for a moment. :crazy:

Some of the things this action byobozo may mean.

* Investigations can be conducted by international police under orders from the U.N, or maybe the white house.

* No warrants will be needed for searches of property, records or private communications.

* No Habeus Corpus laws will apply for prisoners who may be moved from our soil for reasons which do not have to be explained.

* No records need to be kept or produced detaining investigations or arrests.

* American citizens may be kidnapped and sent to Brussels to face 'justice' in the world court.

* With this change in the law, InterPol cannot be subpoenaed into court and forced to testify/reveal the how and why information on the criminal activity was obtained.

* We're talking about an international police organization that is now allowed to operate free of 4th Amendment constitutional constraints within the United States and to collect information on US citizens that can later be used to support the arrest and prosecution of those citizens. If the case is prosecuted outside the US, then the US citizen who is being prosecuted will not have the benefit of US constitutional protections at the prosecution stage either. That is the very definition of a secret police.


-------------------------------------

Interpol was founded in Austria in 1923 as the International Criminal Police (ICP). Following the Anschluss (Austria's annexation by Nazi Germany) in 1938, the organization fell under the control of Nazi Germany and the Commission's headquarters were eventually moved to Berlin in 1942. It is unclear, however, if and to what extent the ICPC files were used to further the goals of the Nazi regime.

However, from 1938 to 1945, the presidents of Interpol included Otto Steinhäusl (a general in the SS), Reinhard Heydrich (a general in the SS, and chair of the Wannsee Conference that appointed Heydrich the chief executor of the "Final solution to the Jewish question"), Arthur Nebe (a general in the SS, and Einsatzgruppen leader, under whose command at least 46,000 people were killed), and Ernst Kaltenbrunner (a general in the SS, the highest ranking SS officer executed after the Nuremberg Trial).

After the end of World War II in 1945, the organization was revived as the International Criminal Police Organization by European Allies of World War II officials from Belgium, France, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom.

Its new headquarters were established in Saint-Cloud, a town on the outskirts of Paris. They remained there until 1989, when they were moved to their present location, Lyon.

Interpol has operated in America since WWII or thereabouts, it's headquarters in the DOJ in Washington, DC.

This order by obambi seems rather odd though, and certainly unconstitutional, can't wait for the next news conference, oh wait, I'll be they don't ask him about it.

obama+golf+3.jpg
 
#4
#4
Here's an article to singe your nose hairs.

I agree except for # 6, Corker asked the question of Bernanke; "So you intend to nationalize the banks?"

Bernanke laughed and said; "No we are privatizing the banks."

I suppose even senators don't realize the federal reserve is a private institution perhaps 60% of which is owned by European oligarchs.
 
#5
#5
They should impeach this guy, what a slime ball the American people have elected. Man i don't think at anytime i can remember there being so many extreme Leftists in office, truly scary times.
 
#6
#6
Is there a Conservative that can win the general election?

More importantly are there conservatives that can win congressional and senate seats??
 
#7
#7
Is there a Conservative that can win the general election?

More importantly are there conservatives that can win congressional and senate seats??

Absolutley on all 3 accounts. Conservatism will always win over liberalism. Obama will not win reelection, Rs will take the house back and will gain seats in the senate.
 
#8
#8
Is there a Conservative that can win the general election?

More importantly are there conservatives that can win congressional and senate seats??

1. Hard to tell at this point. BHO will have a lot to do with the ease/difficulty of this. Presidential elections are very different, than House and Senate elections.IMO


2. Yes
 
#10
#10
If so, they deserve to be a VP of Marketing for the rest of their life, after the disaster that was 2001-2008.
Well the way this new administration is going, in two years you're going to wish it was 2001-2008. Just think, Obama is spending your grand kids money right now and mine. I bet he doesn't give a crap too, just a guess though.:ermm::whistling:
 
#11
#11
Well the way this new administration is going, in two years you're going to wish it was 2001-2008. Just think, Obama is spending your grand kids money right now and mine. I bet he doesn't give a crap too, just a guess though.:ermm::whistling:

042109.gif
 
#12
#12
Absolutley on all 3 accounts. Conservatism will always win over liberalism. Obama will not win reelection, Rs will take the house back and will gain seats in the senate.

Democrats in Washington do have large majorities in Congress. But instead of reflecting popular opinion, they are pursuing wide-ranging initiatives in defiance of the views of the majority of Americans.

The most striking example is health-care reform. It is intensely unpopular but was approved by the House in November and the Senate on Christmas Eve. Asked in a Rasmussen poll in mid-December if they'd prefer no bill to ObamaCare, 57% said they would. Only 34% said they'd rather ObamaCare be enacted.

Yet Democrats are forging ahead as if the public actually approves of their health-care reform.
--------------------------------

Democrat Michael Bennet, the appointed senator from Colorado........was asked by CNN's John King whether he'd vote for ObamaCare "if every piece of evidence tells you, if you support that bill, you'll lose your job." Mr. Bennet said "yes."
-------------------------------------

A Democratic strategist told Byron York of the Washington Examiner that Mrs. Pelosi "believes losing 20 or even 40 Democratic seats in the House would be an acceptable price for achieving a goal the party has pursued since Franklin Roosevelt." Now that Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith has bolted the Democratic Party, Republicans need 40 seats to capture control of the House.
---------------------------------

With large congressional majorities, Democrats decided to forget about Mr. Obama's campaign theme of bipartisanship. They brook no compromise with Republicans and forge ahead on issue after issue—health care, cap and trade, Guantanamo, spending, the deficit—despite the public's mounting disapproval.

That arrogance shaped the economic stimulus passed in February. Republicans wanted tax cuts to spur investment and create jobs. Democrats rejected that idea and enacted a huge increase in spending. As unemployment continued to rise, public opinion turned against the stimulus. Nonetheless, House Democrats passed a new, smaller stimulus bill last week with the same emphasis on spending.
----------------------------------------

With history in mind, cutting procedural corners becomes acceptable. Thus Democrats have set arbitrary deadlines, scheduled post-midnight votes and put limits on debate, all in the name of achieving a breakthrough.
 
Last edited:
#13
#13
And here I thought only Liberals could be moon bats...
 
#15
#15
And here I thought only Liberals could be moon bats...

That's funny, since your avatar so resembles a barking moonbat.

make sure it's secured tightly, gsvol.

So you think giving Interpol extra constitutional powers is a GOOD idea??

Methinks you are suffering from CAIS! (cranial anal inversion syndrome.

In plain language that means having a numbskull compounded by a bad case of the dumbass. :crazy:

l_c6326634658145bd85d01db2c7312c5e.jpg
 
#17
#17
Its time we took the Second Amendment to its full potential:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
 
#19
#19
Can you name 1 right that has been taken away from you since Obama has been elected? Last time I checked, I was able to do pretty much the same things now as I was then.

Guns, check. Religion, check.
 
#20
#20
Can you name 1 right that has been taken away from you since Obama has been elected? Last time I checked, I was able to do pretty much the same things now as I was then.

Guns, check. Religion, check.
Apparently we had the right, via FOIA, to know what Interpol was collecting and disseminating about our nation and its citizenry.
 
#21
#21
Can you name 1 right that has been taken away from you since Obama has been elected? Last time I checked, I was able to do pretty much the same things now as I was then.

Guns, check. Religion, check.

Some sweet new rights have been granted 9/11 terrorists. Implied right to pay exorbitant sums for a predictably disastrous show trial for sorry ass terrorists is problematic for me.

Unions supplanted secured creditors in the capital stack of an auto company.

The gov't capped pay at any institution that took TARP funds, coerced or otherwise.

We now have the right to stimulus funds.

We are about to have the right to provide insurance to the uninsurable.

More to come.
 
Last edited:
#22
#22
Can you name 1 right that has been taken away from you since Obama has been elected? Last time I checked, I was able to do pretty much the same things now as I was then.

Guns, check. Religion, check.

What he is doing now will affect the future of America more than the present. We are stewards of this country and should afford the next generations with the same freedoms we have. Talk to some older people, a WWII vet would be the best, and see what they think of Mr. Obamas presidency.
 
#25
#25
Oh, come on. This news about Interpol is no worse than the CIA and NSA spying on US citizens without warrants, US citizens being arrested and held without being charged..ect, etc thanks to the Patriot Act. But, the Patriot Act was all in the name in fighting terror and it was passed by a Republican president and a Republican Congress so that makes it OK. That bill is more of an assault on American rights and freedoms than anything that Obama has done in the past year.
 

VN Store



Back
Top