What Form Of Treason?

On December 17, 2009 the White House released President Obama’s Executive Order 12425. With it President Obama committed what any true American would consider treason. The question remains though on what form Obama’s treason took.

Did President – for now – Obama blithely cede US sovereignty to an international body in the form of INTERPOL, or is Obama’s plan to use these international “law enforcement personnel” as foreign troops to rid himself of certain problematical American citizens and foreign visitors?

Yes, those are the only two rational reasons I can think of for why anyone claiming to be an American, much less the POTUS, would place foreign police forces above US law and the Constitution.

Can anyone come up with another reason for Obama placing foreign “police” above US law? If so, speak up! I would truly like to hear another explanation.

But this bit of treason is straight from the The White House and the mind and pen President Obama and, this time, it can’t be passed off as an ill-advised comment or misunderstanding on the part of one of his staff :

Executive Order — Amending Executive Order 12425

EXECUTIVE ORDER

– – – – – – –

AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL

AS A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION ENTITLED TO

ENJOY CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, EXEMPTIONS, AND IMMUNITIES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words “except those provided by Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act” and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,

December 16, 2009.

So let us look at what restrictions President Obama has decided to remove from foreign “law enforcement” agents operating on American soil. Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the International Organizations Immunities Act of 1949 are quite innocuous and pertain only to customs duties and various forms of taxation. Section 2, however, is a totally different matter.

Section 2 – International organizations shall enjoy the status, immunities, exemptions, and privileges set forth in this section, as follows:

(c) 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.

So why would Obama want to make INTERPOL’s records inviolate? Why does someone installed as the President of the United States desire to make an armed foreign force’s facilities within America immune from search by American law enforcement? Why would he need them to be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act?

One reason could be that President Obama doesn’t believe in or endorse American sovereignty. Many of his speeches and espoused beliefs seem to support that hypothesis. Obama seems to want the United Nations to actually be the world’s government and have the United States to be subordinated to it.

Another possibility is that Obama is hoping to use INTERPOL to remove problematical people like: President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and various members of the US military and intelligence agencies without he and his boy, Attorney General Holder having to deal with the American laws and the US courts system.

In either case, it is treason, or at least solid grounds for such a charge, and President Obama should be dealt with like any other traitor to America – except that the penalty he and his should suffer must be the maximum one available to the American people.

Not that the Liberals ruling Congress would ever act in America’s interests in this matter and impeach Obama, remove him from office, and have him tried for treason.

No; I’m afraid the American people currently have no protection and no recourse under the law.

As for any of INTERPOL’s operatives – the only response an American should ever have to someone or something trying to enforce foreign laws upon Americans within the borders of America is an armed response.

Keep your eyes open. Travel light but load heavy, and always put another round in the enemy after theyre down. 😉

Related Reading:

Obama: An Oral History
Gospel Treason: Betraying the Gospel With Hidden Idols
A Practical Guide to INTERPOL and Red Notices (Criminal Practice Series)
Rise to Globalism: American Foreign Policy Since 1938

Tags: | | | | |

11 Responses to “What Form Of Treason?”

  1. Interpol isn’t the New World Order « Agree to Disagree Says:

    […] Reflections From a Murky Pond – who thinks that Obama doesn’t believe in US sovereignty and calls for him to be impeached, tried for treason, and punished to the full extent of the law. […]

  2. zhann Says:

    This is a ridiculous claim. You are completely ignoring the fact that INTERPOL is neither the first to receive immunity, nor the last. Not to mention, American Intelligence have been enjoying these privileges for decades now. Can you imagine what would happen if the CIA did not have immunity in European nations?

    Lets not be hypocritical or overly dramatic. In all honesty, I was always under the assumption that INTERPOL already had these privileges in the USA, so I am more shocked that it took so long for our administration to grant them these rights.

  3. jonolan Says:

    Actually, zhann, our intelligence community does NOT have such immunity in foreign nations. We rely on plausible deniability and the normal “back scratching” that takes place between allies to provide security for CIA operations in Europe.

    Also, INTERPOL is, in fact, the first foreign law enforcement body to receive such immunity in the US.

    I am, however doing research into exactly how INTERPOL operates within the US. The findings of that research may cause me to either make an addendum to this post or a separate clarification post.

    But still…Can you come up with a good reason why any POTUS would grant an extra-national police body such immunity?

  4. zhann Says:

    While diplomatic immunity is common place, prosecuting intelligence officials ‘seems’ to fall under the same umbrella. You are right about the CIA immunity, I forgot about the Italian problem a few months back.

    INTERPOL is a unique organization made up of 188 nations. While I know little of the organization as a whole, I would much prefer to see them going after terrorists and answering for their actions rather than the CIA.

    My initial thoughts on why Obama would do this is so that CIA agents could claim INTERPOL status, and gain immunity in the future. Personally, I don’t think anyone should ever have immunity, diplomats included, but I don’t think much can be done here. I am sure that Obama’s actions were not his own in this case, and there is likely a much more sinister reason for this than even my cynical mind can come up with.

  5. Elric66 Says:

    Unreal: U.S. trades top Iranian-backed Iraqi terrorist for British hostage

    http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/31/unreal-u-s-trades-top-iranian-backed-iraqi-terrorist-for-british-hostage/

    Might want to add that to the al-Thuggy treason list

  6. Jay Burns Says:

    If the POTUS wants to make firearms illegal, and I believe he does, he is going to need a foreign police force to do the confiscation. Local police and sheriff, even the National Gaurd are made of conservative americans who would hold true to their oath and would never go door to door to slay the rights of the people. Interpol or Nato troops on the other hand would be just the right sort of people for the job.

  7. in2thefray Says:

    I think the rightosphere should revisit the original executive order signed by Reagan. The EO seems to primarily support taxation and immigration points.

    Although I agree the average citizen should be aware of government especially those entities that can deny one their freedom I don’t see that here.

    I also see no evidence that an agent of Interpol has ever arrested,questioned etc. a US citizen on US soil. They have been involved in the pursuit and prosecution of Americans though including the November 09 prosecution of a child porn/raper scum bag in NJ. That person was avidly pursued by ICE though.

  8. jonolan Says:

    So you’re not overly concerned about a foreign law enforcement unit having all of their records protected from scrutiny by Americans under any circumstances – which is what Obama just did?

    Have you considered that INTERPOL could then be used as a method of sheltering investigations of various American citizens from the Freedom of Information Act?

  9. in2thefray Says:

    I don’t think the Eo gives INTERPOL any power.
    I don’t think FOIA would apply to INTERPOL with or without the EO.
    Call me when Obama overturns Bush regards the ICC

  10. jonolan Says:

    Reagan specifically withheld from INTERPOL the secrecy privileges granted to other International Organizations under the International Organizations Immunities Act when he added them to the list.

    Obama has now rescinded that limitation. The ability to conduct investigations without having any of your records subject to any form of scrutiny whatsoever is power in my book.

  11. What Form Of Treason? | Mizozo Says:

    […] Reflections From a Murky Pond […]

Leave a Reply