Slashdot Mirror
INTERPOL Granted Diplomatic Immunity In the US
ShakaUVM writes "A couple of weeks ago without any fanfare or notice in the media, President Obama granted INTERPOL full diplomatic immunity while conducting investigations on American soil. While INTERPOL has been allowed to operate in the US in the past, under an executive order by President Reagan, they've had to follow the same rules as the FBI, CIA, etc., while on American soil. This means, among other things, the new executive order makes INTERPOL immune to Freedom of Information Act requests and that INTERPOL agents cannot be punished for most any crimes they may commit. Hopefully the worst we'll see from this is INTERPOL agents ignoring their speeding tickets." Update: 01/05 02:57 GMT by KD : Reader davecb pointed out an ABC News blog that comes to pretty much the opposite conclusion as to the import of the executive order.
This country soverignty has been slowly eroded over the years. The founding father's effort is now all lost. Time to fight the 2nd Independence war in 2012.
New Economic Perspectives
This is really a change of a default assumption than freedom to do anything without penalty. If INTERPOL starts going crazy, it only takes a presidential signature to take this exception back.
So if the INTERPOL guy says "I won't, and I don't have to!" and the fed guy says "It's a matter of national security!"... all he needs to do is get the message up to the top of the chain-of-command, and suddenly that fed guy can grab whatever info he wants.
Yeah, high standard, but it's not going to change things much.
This means, among other things, the new executive order makes INTERPOL immune to Freedom of Information Act requests and that INTERPOL agents cannot be punished for most any crimes they may commit. Hopefully the worst we'll see from this is INTERPOL agents ignoring their speeding tickets.
I'm sold. INTERPOL, sign me up!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
My first reaction is WTH, but on the other hand don't embassy staffers have pretty much the same deal?
Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.
three... two... A shame really as from the outside it looked as if at least the rule of law existed in the land of the free even if its foreign policy was to deny it to the rest of the world.
But the question on everyone's mind is, can RadioHead expect the same deal?
They spy on us with impunity and share the intelligence with our government. In return our government does the same for them.
Both countries get to perform full-scale spying on their own citizens without violating any laws or causing an uproar.
the headline says:
INTERPOL Granted Diplomatic Immunity In the US
The actual article says: "these privileges are not the same as the rights afforded under "diplomatic immunity," they are considerably less. "Diplomatic immunity" comes from the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which states that a "diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State." That is NOT what the International Organizations Immunities Act is.
The headline seems to be wrong.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Not quite sure this story got filed right. Nothing to do with our online rights... this has more to do with all our rights.
Come on, you're telling me that INTERPOL now has the same protection as the "International Pacific Halibut Commission and Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission".
Yeapsireee, gotta watch out for those rouge Halbut operatives. Goodness me.
More seriously, remember INTERPOL actually has very little power - they're a coordination agency. They have no powers of arrest. They don't even DO investigations. What they DO is if a cop in Australia is tracking down a criminal who's fled to Los Angeles and therefore needs the LAPD assistance, INTERPOL is the agency that makes that inter-police-force connection happen. There are no "INTERPOL" officers in L.A. that do the arrest - that's for the LAPD (or FBI).
If in the conduct of their business does that mean they can ignore habeaus corpus or bill of rights in regard to suspects?
Bond's license to kill came from the British government. He understood the risks when performing assassination on foreign soil. If he was caught, he would be killed or at least tried for murder.
What INTERPOL has is *BETTER* than a license to kill!!! It says, you can use deadly force within the US, and can't be prosecuted by the US! It's a get out jail free card!!!!
That is sheer insanity. So we grant a foreign agency extra-legal protections to operate within our borders. There must be some sort of protections for American citizens to prevent us from being subject to tyranny. We put limitations (with damned good reasons) on our own law enforcement agencies but we turn around and grant Interpol (not even responsible to any one particular government) near unlimited authority within our country.
The long espoused fears of a world government (something that has been claimed as a threat by right-wingers) suddenly looms much larger in the rear-view mirror.
Tisha Hayes
This is not diplomatic immunity. This is just protection against searches, IRS, etc. This basically allows a law enforcement officer to carry out his duties. It is identical to when the FBI comes to a local town to investigate, they can not be hindered or stopped by the local law enforcement. This is obvious and should not raise any issues.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
So, basically, we trust foreign agents more than our own? HOLY CRAP! Exit stage left, already!
As for foreign officials having similar rights, that's more for political courtesy and to keep the whole cultural difference thing out of our courts. That's somewhat understood. However, there is a CLEAR difference from some over-the-hill politician getting pulled over for speeding compared to an amped-up INTERPOL cop on the verge of a conviction. The mindset, purpose, emotions... hell, the whole scenario... is completely different.
Diplomatic Immunity doesn't mean they get to violate our laws, it just means they don't go to jail for violating our laws. If complaints start to pile up (thanks to the ACLU I'm sure) then they will loose their immunity.
Right? Or am I acting like a sheeple?
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
Think about this in context. We just had a near-disaster of a plane exploding in Detroit and US airport screening is worthless to block this threat because the attacker boarded elsewhere. So, the response is to give INTERPOL agents here more power, and most likely the hope is that our INTERPOL guys elsewhere get the same powers so they can do their job there are we don't have to worry about who's being flown in here.
The title and summary are pretty misleading, it appears the only thing Obama did was exempt INTERPOL from certain taxes and provided them with immunity from search and seizure. The article explicitly states that it is not the same thing as diplomatic immunity.
How would you feel about any other police agency that was immune to FOI requests or legal challenges to misbehavior? How about legal authorities working on behalf of the RIAA? Isn't filesharing international? Another brilliant move from this administration. What could go wrong?
Because it is not a US government agency, Interpol has never been subject to FOIA requests, therefore this change does NOT make them "immune to Freedom of Information Act requests."
There's no such thing as an interpol agent. They delegate to national agencies (ie the DoJ) who do /not/ get immunity. What they do have is a bunch of committees and advisors, and a (shared) database of people 'of interest'.
Somebody's been watching the man from UNCLE a few too many times
. . . there's an app for that!
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Hell, all they have to do is say that filesharing is an international crime, pay off some corrupt UN bureaucrat to sic INTERPOL on folks, then all those pesky FOI suits go away. And that is only one of the least damaging outcomes. Obama just wants to kiss multinational UN ass.
What makes INTERPOL so special? Other rock stars like the who, avril lavigne have been ignoring US laws forever by trashing their hotel rooms
Nevermind, this is more evidence the Alex Jones crowd blows things out of proportion.
In countries like Paraguay, Argentina and others in South America, this is pretty standard. Now (since very few years) with left governments immunity is being revoked.
From 2005 in Paraguay:
"the U.S. troops in Paraguay could not be taken before the International Criminal Court if they were accused of crimes against humanity, genocide or war crimes. "
In Argentina, joint naval exercises like Unitas are cancelled because our government don't want to give immunity to US army.
DNA in your Linux: DNALinux
Here are the sections that were addressed by the order, according to the linked article:
Section 2(c), which provided officials immunity from their property and assets being searched and confiscated; including their archives;
the portions of Section 2(d) and Section 3 relating to customs duties and federal internal-revenue importation taxes;
Section 4, dealing with federal taxes;
Section 5, dealing with Social Security; and
Section 6, dealing with property taxes.
Whether or not they have criminal immunity (don't know offhand), there doesn't seem to be ANYTHING in the above executive order addressing such matters. Might have FOIA implications, but doesn't seem to have anything to do with punishment of crimes committed by agents. Summary is wrong.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
I mean... it seems like an article posted by him. Inaccurate headline (they did not get a grant of full "diplomatic" immunity). Inaccurate summary (agents? INTERPOL is a coordinating entity - there ARE no agents!).
I didn't RTFA because I am on my way out the door, but does anyone know whether or not INTERPOL has to respect our Constitution while operating here? As in, no unlawful searches and seizures, no requirement to house troops (would an international police agency qualify as troops?), protection against self-incrimination, etc. What about Miranda Rights, does INTERPOL know about them? Anyone?
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
Why are you linking to this "article"? It contains no information, only the Obama-bashing expected from your American right-wingers and unsupported hypotheses.
If you care about facts, you can find them, a few seconds of searching revealed this for instance.
Quote:
In other words there appears to be nothing to get worked up about. Even if you believe whatever republicans do is right. Because they would have done the same.
You Americans are crazy.
Are you shitting me? Are you really so ignorant of 1) what Interpol is, and 2) what Obama signed that you're actually believing Alex Jones now?
Obama granted Interpol the same diplomatic status as the International Pacific Halibut Commission. Interpol has no agents; they investigate no crimes and bring no charges. They're an information sharing/clearinghouse staffed by international bureaucrats, and nothing else.
Now, go change your underwear, and quit listening to Glenn Beck, and to your coworker who repeats everything he says.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
They had diplomatic immunity since Reagan's executive order. The statement in the original post that "the new executive order makes INTERPOL immune to Freedom of Information Act requests and that INTERPOL agents cannot be punished for most any crimes they may commit." is factually wrong. The infallible mr. Reagan's executive order did that ... it and not the new executive order gave Interpol the following :
"(b) International organizations, their property and their assets, wherever located, and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy the same immunity from suit and every form of judicial process as is enjoyed by foreign governments, except to the extent that such organizations may expressly waive their immunity for the purpose of any proceedings or by the terms of any contract."
AND
" (a) Persons designated by foreign governments to serve as their representatives in or to international organizations and the officers and employees of such organizations, and members of the immediate families of such representatives, officers, and employees residing with them, other than nationals of the United States, shall, insofar as concerns laws regulating entry into and departure from the United States, alien registration and fingerprinting, and the registration of foreign agents, be entitled to the same privileges, exemptions, and immunities as are accorded under similar circumstances to officers and employees, respectively, of foreign governments, and members of their families.
(b) Representatives of foreign governments in or to international organizations and officers and employees of such organizations shall be immune from suit and legal process relating to acts performed by them in their official capacity and falling within their functions as such representatives, officers, or employees except insofar as such immunity may be waived by the foreign government or international organization concerned."
Reagan gave Interpol diplomatic immunity, Obama removed their duty to pay taxes and extended their immunity to an immunity to searches.
Means they can break into people's houses to conduct illegal searches without recourse?
And kidnap Americans, to take them across the border, for interrogation, also without judicial recourse?
Doesn't it?
Congratulations Mr. President... you just made a successful end-run around the constitution's 11th, 14th, 3rd ammendment, 4th ammendment, 5th ammendment, 6th ammendment, and the rule of law.
If George Bush would have signed the exact same executive order, this post would be modded +5, insightful, and with that said, the very people who are heading for the hills because Obama signed it would be trying to defend Bush in that onslaught.
So really, all that is changed is that we substituted one guy for another, but the erosion of liberty continues at pretty much the same or even accelerated pace.
This is my sig.
How fucking classic is it that the submitter linked the words "granted INTERPOL full diplomatic immunity" to an article that explicitly states in caps and everything that this is NOT a granting of diplomatic immunity?
According to the article titled "Just What Did President Obama's Executive Order regarding INTERPOL Do?", what it didn't do is grant diplomatic immunity, and what it did do is grant a limited amount of immunity mostly related to taxes and document seizure. The idea seems to be to to allow international organizations like Red Cross, IAEA, IMF, and now INTERPOL to do their work without participating nations worrying that the U.S. will spy on them by reading these organization's records.
Now I'm not sure I like granting a police force any more immunity of any kind, but that's a hell of a lot less than diplomatic immunity and not as hard to revoke. Maybe other countries were getting concerned about the U.S.'s nosiness and this will enhance international cooperation. I'm not sure how I feel about it, but I do know the summary was classic bullshit.
The enemies of Democracy are
This is a dumb move; it undermines our sovereignty and diminishes our status in the rest of the world. It may be constitutionally unsound to the extent that it deprives citizens and residents of the USA full protection under the Constitution. Co-operation is one thing, but this may be an assault on our civil rights by giving Interpol powers denied our own law enforcement agencies under the Constitution.
On the other hand, we've been bullying less powerful countries into fighting our legal disputes for years. It is only fitting that a more powerful government entity than the USA would make us buckle under, too.
This is the most a**-kissing president in US history. Where's Teddy Roosevelt when you need him?
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
Interpol is basically an information exchange entity between national police forces of member countries. Interpol doesn't not have its own officers making arrests, extraditions, etc--they are not a police force.
The order signed by Obama puts Interpol on the same diplomatic footing as the International Pacific Halibut Commission. Interpol has no agents; they don't investigate crimes or bring charges, and they certainly don't do anything that would deprive anyone of any rights. They're an information clearinghouse amongst worldwide police agencies. They're staffed by bureaucrats and hold a lot of committee meetings. That's it.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
After Lethal Weapon 2, the words "Diplomatic Immunity" will always sound a certain way when I read them in my mind's eye.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiXNUaSjXRY
In theory, it makes for a handy way around Constitutional protections: the Interpol cops can tap phones, conduct illegal searches, etc. and then hand over the results to US authorities who can use it (if not admit it at trial.) However, in practice the Bush and Obama administrations haven't bothered with warrants for wiretaps, searches, etc. anyway.
Domestic cops can get away with crap like shooting an unarmed and unresisting "suspect" dead (on video camera!) and still avoid prosecution, so it's not like diplomatic immunity matters all that much either.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Do you know where the text for the original Executive Order is? Why is it so hard to find? Why is the White House refusing to talk about it? Why should an international organization's rights differ from any domestic entity?
RTFA. The summary is wrong. Interpol is not being granted diplomatic immunity.
Stupid be-atch.
So your in government and you want your office to keep certain records and info free from FOIA. You also want to keep tabs on the "other team" but on the DL...
What do you do?
1) Give all your records to an outside organization.
2) Grant that organization immunity from FOIA.
3) And for an added bonus make this organization immune from search and seizure laws..
4) ???
5) Profit!
Now they can do all your digging for you with out the hassles of warrants or probable cause.. and anything they find is untouchable..
It really is a brilliant idea.
I have to return some videotapes...
Nevermind, this is more evidence the Alex Jones crowd blows things out of proportion.
Sir, please award yourself 100 Internets for recovering from your kneejerk.
I, too, was almost willing to believe Obama handed INTERPOL diplomatic immunity, and thought "gee, that sounds important enough that I should read the article!" and discovered that it was quite clearly nothing like diplomatic immunity.
Now, thanks to a really (and a good chance deliberately) shitty and misleading summary, a lot of people now think INTERPOL can break into their house and butt-rape their dog and nobody can do anything.
The enemies of Democracy are
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information
This EO allows various people to classify or reclassify documents.
But most specifically, Section 1.7(d) states:
The immunity belongs to the organization, not the people (even when sometimes they attach to people because of their relationship to the organization.) Like much stronger diplomatic or consular immunities, they are not individual rights; particularly, the institution to whom they are granted may waive them, whether or not the individual affected wishes them to. The rights exist to protect the operation of the institution (particularly, for the protections granted to international institutions, they exist principally to get other countries to cooperate fully with the institution by assuring them that the host country of the institution's facilities won't either use them to seize property acquired by other nation's funding of the organization or to seize sensitive information shared with the organization outside of the scope of the information sharing carried out under the procedures of the organization.)
The immunities at issue that INTERPOL was previously specifically excluded from that apply to international organizations are:
* Immunity to search and confiscation of the organizations premises, property, and archives
* Freedom of customs duties for baggage of staff
* Immunity from various taxes (Social Security, property taxes, federal income taxes)
(Note, all of this is laid out in TFA)
The personal immunities that apply to international organization staff (exemption from immigration controls, and immunity to suit based on official acts) already applied to INTERPOL, because the Reagan Administration order that added INTERPOL to the list of organizations getting the standard set of protections set out for such organizations in US law didn't exclude those personal protections, just some of the institutional protections. All the Obama order did is remove the special limitations that were applied to INTERPOL (and which were irrelevant at the time of the Reagan order, since INTERPOL didn't have offices in the US at the time.) No special privileges beyond those usually granted to international organizations that the United States participates in (and some that it doesn't!) have been granted to INTERPOL.
It doesn't give them universal immunity to do as they will within our borders. Interpol has no police force. It's just an administrative organization that basically acts as a go-between between countries.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/interpol.asp
This modification specifically allows INTERPOL the ability to enter into contracts, own and dispose property and has some ancillary language regarding taxes and immigration.
The real provision that is possibly dangerous is Section 7. (b) Representatives of foreign governments in or to international organizations and officers and employees of such organizations shall be immune from suit and legal process relating to acts performed by them in their official capacity ... http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/International_Organizations_Immunities_Act#Title_I
If an agent of INTERPOL is "just doing his job" then he can do whatever he wants. Fortunately for us INTERPOL is very limited in what it can do.
INTERPOL's constitution is very clear as Article 3 states: It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character. http://www.interpol.int/public/icpo/legalmaterials/constitution/constitutiongenreg/constitution.asp
Thus, we are safe from the administration asking INTERPOL to conduct operations on US soil. If that charter were to change though... it would be a different story.
Also, Obama's actions have had no change on their status in this regard. They have always had this status.
This flat out lying on Slashdot for the sake of pushing politics has to end. Anyone can read Obama's executive order. It's on the White House website. All it does is give INTERPOL the rights from the 1945 International Organizations Immunity Act. Previously, there were some exemptions placed on INTERPOL that the new order removes. It grants nothing beyond the original 1945 act, however, which is completely different from diplomatic immunity. The article summary is flat out sensationalist nonsense.
However what it does mean, since INTERPOL has a list of Terrorists - if you somehow wind up on that list you could be denied the ability to get onto a plane in the U.S. - and since INTERPOL's records are no longer subject to search, you could be denied the ability to rebut or even see why you are on the list.
"You are, officially, an asshole."
He's become quite Republican since winning election, which makes sense if he wants to win the next one.
Obama can take Democrat votes for granted, so all he need do is split the Republicans (with the eager if unintentional help of Sarah Palin and the Teabaggers).
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
You only just figured this out.
Allow me to clue you in, all politicians are arseholes, automatically assume they are going to be arseholes from the outset and you avoid this unpleasantness.
There are two saving graces however,
1. We get to pick which arsehole we don't want running the show.
2. Every now and then they remember they are our arsehole.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
They don't have any of those things, still...they have immunity from search and seizure, meaning they can now send things to and from the USA via diplomatic packages, something they can do in almost every other county in the world, now. The FOI immunity is retarded, because you've never been able to, and it certainly wasn't anywhere in the executive order. The reason you've never been able to, is that INTERPOL isn't part of the US government. You can't send FOI requests to the Canadian Consulate in NYC, either. Well, I'm sure you can send them one, but don't expect an answer. Additionally, this is INTERPOL itself. This means, yes, official documents sent by them can't be searched at the border, and their offices can't be searched, either. It doesn't mean a person who happens to work for INTERPOL can't be searched if they're suspected of a crime, unlike a diplomat. They can be searched, and they can be arrested. I imagine they could say "That suspicious package is property of INTERPOL, not me, you can't search it." Which is true, but if somebody else at INTERPOL says "No it isn't" they can go ahead and search it. No diplomatic plates for their car, either, they can still get a ticket. Further, they don't even actually have their own office, they use desks at the DoJ, so there's no real reason the DoJ would ever need to be trying to search their stuff, anyways! So if it doesn't matter, why make an executive order of it? Like I said, now they can use diplomatic pouches for sensitive information, so it does matter. Finally, as you've already been told, INTERPOL isn't a police agency. Only in "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego" do they have actual powers to arrest people. They're just a agency responsible for forwarading information on international criminals from one nations police to others who might need to know about it. An INTERPOL "agent" can't arrest you, he can tell the FBI that there's an outstanding arrest warrant for you in France, and then the FBI goes and arrests you, while the INTERPOL "agent" stays at his desk at the DoJ.
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Seems really strange that if interpol has no agents, that tons of movies, bbc shows, books show interpol agents knocking on doors introducing themselves as interpol, chasing people down shouting stop interpol, etc. Guess all these shows/books have gotten it wrong for years.
I have no idea who Alex Jones or Glen Beck are, but an international information sharing entity that is exempt from prying eyes through immunity. Think about it.
Have you ever known someone in politics to do anything unconditionally or altruistically? I can't say that I have.
As for FOIA, they were never bound by the FOIA, since they are not a part of the US Government. If you tried to sue them and use discovery to gain access to their records, that was not possible since they were already covered by Section 2(b), which protects them from judicial processes.
Cause you can't get a tan from an amber monitor. If you do, there is something horribly wrong.
You're blick.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
It seems like for many criminal offenses, the US laws are more severe than the international counterparts anyways; as far as I know very few international fugitives would ever opt to hide out here. So why would interpol even bother to poke around here? I suspect there are more than a few people here in the US who would like to see interpol start enforcing US-style laws in other countries; especially when you see how rabid some Americans get when it comes to international spammers / phishers.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Technically they were already immune? That's a rather important technicality ... because you explicitly blamed Obama for giving them immunity from prosecution. In actuality 12425 is the executive order which gave them that ... the one with Ronald Reagan's signature below it.
If these agents work for INTERPOL, doesn't this order (and it doesn't really matter whether it was Reagan or Obama who authorized it) give those INTERPOL members immunity?
What does President Obama expect Interpol to do that would require this immunity? What are they expected to do with this immunity that they could not do without it? Why make this change?
Because the Slashdot editors mangled my entry. There was no link to the ABC News article in what I submitted, but I did have a link to the story on unpaid UN parking tickets.
Ah, so a slashdot editor actually managed to improve a submission by linking to accurate information? I'm honestly shocked.
What really irks me is that this actually is a granting of full diplomatic immunity. If you go through the list of all the possible options for diplomatic immunity (it comes in different kinds), INTERPOL now has them all. So, yeah, I called it full diplomatic immunity.
No, it isn't, as your own links state.
Either you don't understand the difference between "immune to prosecution" and "immune to prosecution for official acts", or you don't understand what INTERPOL's official business is in the U.S. Or you somehow think "immunity for some actions" is the same as "full" immunity.
FULL diplomatic immunity means free from prosecution for any and all acts.
Let me spell it out for you.
If I was the French Ambassador to the U.S., and I was caught in L.A. snorting cocaine from from the ass crack of a dead 12 year old boy who I'd just raped and killed (not necessarily in that order), then the worst that the U.S. or local governments could do to to me would be to kick me out of the country -- unless of course France revoked my immunity, which you can certainly imagine happening in this case, but you get my point.
Now if I were an employee of INTERPOL, I would be prosecutable under U.S. and local law. As in NOT full immunity.
Unless you can explain how rape, murder, and drug use are official actions,
And you know what INTERPOL's official business is in the U.S.? Handing information provided by other nations' police forces over to U.S. police forces. That's it. That doesn't cover a very wide variety of actions, thus doesn't provide immunity for a very wide variety of actions, and thus only someone either completely foolish or deliberately stirring shit would call that "full immunity".
If you weren't wrong, I'd agree with you.
If you were any judge of right and wrong, you wouldn't have written such a shitty summary to begin with.
The enemies of Democracy are
He's become quite Republican since winning election, which makes sense if he wants to win the next one.
But Fox News told me that Obama is a dangerous liberal Marxist fascist radical!
This whole "socialist" meme is getting tiresome. Obama is a center-right politician, like 99% of the people in Washington today. The center moved so far to the right under Reagan and Dubya that even someone in the (actual) center is a socialist by comparison to someone like Limbaugh.
If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
Interpol is an organisation whose member are nations and their police. They coordinate information sharing between member states. They don't do police work themselves. The only Interpol employees stricto sensu are administrative staff. That's it. The only "agents" are those of the FBI in the US, or the RMCP in Canada, and so on and so forth for other members. Nobody's going to show up at your door with an Interpol badge -- ever. Or maybe as a joke or a fraud.
That slashdot falls for this right wing scaremongering bullshit is disheartening. Goddamn it, it's not that hard to look shit up on Wikipedia, morons.
They act as points of contact rather than as agents, as far as I know - but its a good question if they get immunity. Given that every major police force in the US would have such officers already - and this law was brought in because INTERPOL opened an office in NY with half a dozen folk - I would think not.
Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
Sorry, the article has diplomatic immunity.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
If by "agent" you mean anything like "FBI agent" or "CIA agent". The only "agents" it can be seen to have in the US are those of the FBI, but they will only do Interpol's bidding insofar as the Department of Justice wants them to. Interpol has no direct authority over said agents. It doesn't even have indirect authority, for that matter. What happens is that a member state will ask the US representation for cooperation on a criminal matter, and the Dept. of Justice will do what it wants.
It's just a way to share information and to have a single point of contact. There are 188 member states. If you find that a national of one of those 187 other members has killed someone, and time presses to to catch him, you don't want to have to find out who to contact, and possibly realise that you can't speak his language, or have no idea how to present the request to make sure that it doesn't get rejected on a technicality or that it gets forgotten or something. You just call interpol, they handle this, and put you in contact with the right person and handle the paperwork.
And by "you" I mean a DEA agent, a Wichita police officer or a NY DA.
Interpol doesn't not have its own officers making arrests, extraditions, etc--they are not a police force.
That we are aware of, and at this point in time, that is probably true. We can rest assured, however, that law enforcement agencies never have or create secret undercover departments or seek to expand their scope and power, so everyone can go back to watching American Idol.
This is part and parcel of the trans-national views held by many on the left that now find themselves with federal power instead of being relegated to moonbat status. They wish to reduce the US' sovereignty however they can, as they view the US as evil and rightly view it as *the* major threat to a trans-national world-government framework. They'd love to have Interpol investigate, and possibly extradite to the Hague under war-crimes charges, thorns in their sides like Dick Cheney among others, and possibly even Bush Jr. This is an incremental step in that direction.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
As WP and the law itself clearly states, agents of International Organizations are immune from prosecution for official acts only.
That is nothing like "full diplomatic immunity", which is immunity from all prosecution.
INTERPOL's official business in the U.S. is one of information coordinator between the police forces of various nations, NOT anything related to actual investigation or law enforcement. They do not arrest. They do not investigate.
So to answer the salient question raised by the summary: Can INTERPOL agents now violate due process or other Constitutional protections within the United States with impunity, is a big fucking NO because any such action would not be an official act and thus not protected.
The enemies of Democracy are
And by "operate" I mean fill forms, translate documents, maintain a directory, do some criminology research and hold lots of committee meetings.
There are no "Interpol agents". The only "agents" are those of the FBI or local police, and they don't need fucking Interpol to infringe on your rights. And Interpol doesn't even tell them to do anything, they just inform them that such or such member state's police needs or has info on the activities of a suspect that has been or may come to the US.
That's it.
Stop the conspiracy theories. Interpol has a tiny budget, in the tens of millions of dollars, and they have 188 member states -- they couldn't even pay the salaries of one lonely "agent" in each member country! Instead, each member has people they delegate to work with interpol.
It has an office, it has employees, it has files. They are now immune to search and seizure by the federal government.
The only office that belongs to Interpol are in Lyon, France. (There are also a few small branch offices around the world but none in the US). Good luck searching and seizing that.
The only "office" they "have" in the US is those of the employees of the DOJ that have been charged with coordinating with Interpol. They do not belong to Interpol, they are employed by the DOJ, just like my accountant and his file cabinets do not belong to the tax administration even though he files my taxes.
Seriously, what do you think they do when they travel to the US?
I thought Interpol was a band based out of NYC
For fuck's sake, you people are so fucking ignorant.
Interpol. Is. Not. A. Police. Force.
It's not a force.
And they don't do police work, any more than the World Postal Union carries letters. They help various member states coordinate police work. They have people's phone number, basically, that's about it. They also have a "most wanted" list or something. Scaaary.
Thing is, Interpol members are STATES.
A person cannot be a member of Interpol. Only a STATE.
Go ahead and try to apply for UN membership. Same difference. You can't.
Yes, and in the United States, the NCB is staffed by members of the Justice Department www.justice.gov/usncb/
That does not exist. Just like the Universal Postal Union will not deliver letters to your home, nor will you ever be able to lease a phone line from the ITU.
Goddamnit, you people are so fucking stupid, it's unconscionable.
Actually, the Mounties should have been given the responsibility, since the crime was committed over the village of Petrolia, Ontario (;-))
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
The US was bound by treaty to finance parts of the UN, and they weren't paying what they had promised. So that's a bit hypocritical right there.
Yes, it does. In fact, this is a pretty slick way in which to give local law enforcement (those assigned to INTERPOL) immunity not only to prosecution, but to to giving American citizens their due rights. And FBI Agent needs a warrant, has to marandize, etc. etc. etc. Under this new legal arrangement, that very same FBI Agent can forgo all of this and simply snatch-n-grab whoever they like, so long as it's done under the auspices of INTERPOL.
The EU can vote "directives" which member states are forced to implement.
Interpol has no such authority over members. It has a phone directory and can forward mail or phone calls. Actually it will probably not even do that, it will just give members the contact info of the person they need to contact. That's about it.
Actually it turns out that they already have diplomatic immunity.
Hint: they don't deliver letters. How come there's "postal" in their name?
Of a limited sort... For official acts only, and INTERPOL's official acts are rather limited.
The enemies of Democracy are
In December of 2009 the FDA duped Interpol to achieve illegal kidnapping and deportation of herbal formulator Greg Caton: http://www.naturalnews.com/027750_Greg_Caton_FDA.html Whatever you may think of Greg Caton and his herbal products, this was an illegal kidnapping by US officials. This executive order was likely to cover their asses after the fact.
If I hadn't seen all the bullshit in this thread I would be inclined to think that you're trolling, but given the amount of disinformation and psychotic paranoia we're witnessing here, it's not entirely unlikely you're serious.
Interpol does not have investigative powers. They do not have investigative staff. They do not do that. They can't do that. They do not have any power over anyone. Member states provide contact information and some meager funding, so that other members know who to call and can request assistance in formulating requests to other member states' police. That's IT.
For fuck's sake, their budget is in the few dozens of millions of dollars, and they have 188 member states! That'd be barely enough to pay for one full-time employee and his office supplies in each member state, not even counting the head office staff!
It's an international organization.
It can't be Saint Reagan who gave them immunity. It must be Obama! This is Slashdot . . . who are we going to scream and complain about?!
is probably guaranteed by the Constitution.
It doesn't make them real, though.
Imagine Interpol mistakenly tells the FBI that you, iammani, are a wanted fugitive from Cameroun.
Turns out it's not true.
You can't sue them for libel or something.
That's about it. That's about the worst they could do to you.
Goddamnit. They have no power. They're an information center.
Long gone. Have you ever had any to begin with?
Tell me, do you know where the closest Universal Postal Union post office is?
...by staying home on election day dressed up as a clown!
As WP and the law itself clearly states, agents of International Organizations are immune from prosecution for official acts only.
Since they and their property are immune from suits, how does an ordinary citizen protect himself from them, obtain redress if they have damaged him by their illegal behavior, or even determine that they have committed a crime so he can beg a federal prosecutor to act?
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
It's not an "Organization of international police officers", it's an international organization of police forces, in the same way as the Universal Postal Union is NOT an Organization of International Postal Workers, but an international organization of postal services.
Do you know of any UPU post offices? Ever gotten a letter delivered to you by an UPU truck? No, you haven't, because such things are just as unreal as an Interpol police officer.
The bizarre world you suggest where diplomatic immunity grants you the right to snatch and grab others obviously doesn't exist. Otherwise, why use INTERPOL? Why not just get a diplomat from another country to do it?
Considering they're almost all US citizens employed by the DoJ, I'm wondering.
by this logic, why not just use the military, after all NATO has diplomatic immunity and our forces are part of NATO. This article is just tinfoil hat wearing.
If you read the supplied Snopes link, it will tell you that the local governments have the right to decide upon the legality of warrants passed on by Interpol, meaning they are allowed only as much latitude as the states deign to grant. The local governments decide on the legality, the local governments send law enforcement if needed, etc. Interpol does not of those things. Interpol doesn't even issue warrants, it requires one of the member countries to do so. They simply pass them on to the necessary recipient.
Interpol does NOT have a police force, it does not conduct criminal investigations, and it does not make arrests. It acts as a data manager of sorts, for any member nations, coordinating information, passing warrants as needed from one member country to another, etc. They are basically an administration/secretarial service on an international scale. Whatever odd idea of Interpol people may have gotten from the Bond flicks or whatnot, are not quite accurate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol
For those that don't want to read through all of the Snopes/NYTimes information:
These are the same standard rights that are granted to some 70+ other international organizations. These additional rights were not granted to Interpol because it did not have a local office on US soil at the time. This was submitted prior to Bush leaving office and the State Department suggested approving it so that Interpol had the same legal status as other international organizations. It was not completed before Bush left office however. This is a bit of house cleaning to complete the request.
The bizarre world you suggest where diplomatic immunity grants you the right to snatch and grab others obviously doesn't exist. Otherwise, why use INTERPOL? Why not just get a diplomat from another country to do it?
Desire to not cause an international incident (and to split infinitives)?
$ make available
Almost all of what Interpol does is send info around. So if it sends info to the US, it's for the US DOJ. When it's in the DOJ's hands, it's in the DoJ's hands, and it's not magically tainted as immune to laws or something just because it was sent through Interpol -- that's just retarded.
No, what it protects is that if information sent by Interpol to a third member transits through the US for some reason (say, an Interpol employee or, more likely, a member states' delegate transits through the US with a bag of papers) it can't be seized. Not because Interpol wants to hide things from the US (although I can't stop you from believing that) but because it could be used to harass the organization (think subpoena granted by some random judge), or, more likely, because security people in airports could want to have a look at it, and they shouldn't have to be trusted with that info.
Why don't you point the EXACT part of the site Interpol.int where they "do more than coordinate"?
Rhetorical -- we all know there is no such thing and you're full of disgusting shit.
Yeah, but diplomatic immunity does not free you from prosecution in your home country--so if this person is an American, it is irrelevant.
Not necessarily. If you look at the quote, it states, "The NCB is the designated contact point for the General Secratariat, regional offices and other member countries..." There's nothing there that says that the officers at the NCB work for Interpol. In fact, most likely, they don't.
To analogize, Interpol does for warrants what a hub does for network packets. It handles the logistics of ensuring that all member nations of Interpol receive the warrant for an international fugitive. In this analogy, the NCB is like the host computer's network card. It takes the warrant from Interpol and ensures that the law enforcement agencies within the host nation know who to look for. Just as your network card is separate from the hub that sends the packet, the NCB isn't part of Interpol.
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
c.f. the Echelon arrangement - GCHQ do NSA's dirty work.
This is just a framework to let Interpol go where the FBI/CIA can't.
The two things you quote mean the same thing.
You're quibbling over the meaning of "actual investigation". Interpol does not perform investigations. They collate the information resulting from investigation. I don't know how it could be clearer. Want an analogy? Google Maps does not make maps nor do they operate satellites. They collect maps and satellite pictures and display them. Want a car analogy? Ok. Ebay is not involved in car making. However you can buy a car on eBay. But they won't even deliver it to you. But you can use their services to buy a car. OMFG you just said they're not involved in making cars, yet they're making cars available!
I mean, it's possible.
Today, though, they don't make food.
And next time I go to the bathroom, I will be shitting turds of solid gold. Can you prove I won't?
exactly well... Mostly US Citizens. Why should they have immunity from our laws then? While I see your points in differentiation from a role... does that lesson the actuality? I'd be interested in how you feel about Swiss Banks? Should a UBS Warburg's employee working in the US be able to be compensated with funds outside of our taxable reach with the full secrecy of the Swiss system at their fingertips? Or should we not question or worry about indiscretions that might occur until they have been proven, regardless that the very system being put in place is making it more difficult to prove things?
Walk with Music;
INTERPOL isn't a police force, numbnuts.
How exactly was the US government going to search the records of INTERPOL anyway when it's headquartered in France?
Okay, so if I read this correctly, the only law enforcement officers in the NCB in the US are U.S. citizens, and work for the U.S. That takes care of my objection. Thanks for the information.
I mean, it's possible.
Today, though, they don't make food.
And next time I go to the bathroom, I will be shitting turds of solid gold. Can you prove I won't?
Smelly strawman, much?
I mean, I'm no statistician, but I'm betting the chance of rare metals being anally excreted by humans is (thankfully, as wearing a Rolex would never be the same) quite tiny as compared to the chances that a law enforcement/investigative/coordination organization will grow in size, scope, and reach.
At least, that's how it is on *this* planet. How is it on yours?
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Sure INTERPOL agents in the US can have automatic weapons. Once you invent an INTERPOL agent. Then maybe Godzilla can get some too. INTERPOL is just bureaucrats like everyone has painfully pointed out, but then again, you do live in Texas.
... left unstated (perhaps to save embarrassement) is what others are giving up to get the INTERPOL immunity. Perhaps US SecSvc or FBI dipl.immunity in the EU / G-8 ?
Diplomatic negotiations like these are always on a like-for-like reciprocal exchange, so I'd bet it is for US services to operate abroad as they do inside the US. There have been quite some incidents with the US SecSvc running afoul of national police during POTUS and other protectee visits.
Don't need no stinking FBI to do this. DHS (dept. homeland security) already has that authority granted under the Patriot Act. It's called Suspension of Habeous Corpus and the only agency granted that suspension was DHS. So they already have the right to grab you without warrant or charges and hold you as long as they like for any reason so long as the grab is done by DHS or under the Order plus they have to right to tell you to shut up or they can grab you.
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
To split infinitives is English, always has been, and incidentally it is likely that 'to' should not be considered part of the infinitive. : )
Intelligent idiots are we. | Evil men do not understand justice.
It is completely indisputable that tin foil hats can stop one particular type of voice heard in peoples heads. I apologise for the website I have linked directly to BUT it has its own excellent links to credible resources. Anyway, /.ers should know about this stuff anyway.
NATO does not have blanket diplomatic immunity. Its deployments, short of all out war, are usual carried out under a Status of Forces agreement which details, amongst other things, which laws individuals can be held to account under and how transgressors will be brought to justice. Additionally, it will detail when a State is responsible for an action and when the individual carrying out the action will be held responsible. For example, if soldiers carrying out lawful orders attack an unarmed civilian group then it is usually the State that controlling those soldiers that is responsible. If the soldiers commit the atrocity while not under under orders then they are responsible for their own actions but the SOFA might specifically say that they will be punished by legal means in their own country rather than in the country in which the offence occurs. This prevents soldiers, for example, from being awarded a death sentence if their own country does not support the death penalty. The problems usually arise (but not exclusively so) when a crime is committed yet those committing the crime are not punished by the State that sent them. This is a breach of the SOFA and tends to devalue the SOFA for ALL nations and not just the one involved with the incident. In wartime, a completely different set of laws are applicable, include national laws and the Geneva Conventions.
Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view
To split infinitives is English, always has been, and incidentally it is likely that 'to' should not be considered part of the infinitive.
True. However not to split them, especially where it sounds almost akward consciously to avoid splitting them, is a device employed by the "better" kind of English speakers in identifying each other.
Are they hiring?
Because I bet every criminal in existence will want to “work” there (read: terrorize others, rape, steal and kill).
INTERPOL: The SS of the 21st century? Now global!
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Don't the tinfoil-hat brigade even bother to read articles before deciding they confirm their worst nightmares?
Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum videtur (anything said in Latin sounds important)
The issue is not whether or not they have immunity but what they have immunity from. They will only get the same level of immunity as Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. They still have to pay their parking tickets. They cannot have their records seized. This is the blindingly obvious requirement for an unbiased international police force. A requirement that any clear thinking person would expect them to have in any country in which they operate. Only the xenophobic would expect their country to be exempt.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Yes, I'm quite terrified that the International Pacific Halibut Commission is exempt from prying eyes.
Any information in Interpol is available to all members of Interpol--that's its whole point. You wouldn't put information in there if you didn't want it to see wide distribution, and for all intents and purposes it's not secure, so no government will put something in there they don't want others to see.
Interpol itself has only about 600 employees--the rest are national law enforcement officers seconded to a local National Crime Bureau. In other words, the New York NCB is staffed by FBI, the Ottawa NCB by RCMP, etc., all of those people subject to national laws like FOIA just because they're local national law enforcement officers. What Obama did by signing his executive order was to give those 600 the same diplomatic protections with respect to local taxes, customs, and diplomatic pouches as the Red Cross.
This is not a powerful international organization, it's a co-ordinating committee.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
Notice, the act protects the organization, as well as the property and assets, "from suit and every form of Judicial process". Now, as others have pointed out, it looks as though INTERPOL doesn't have any agents in the U.S. The only people stationed in the U.S. associated with INTERPOL are American law enforcement. But that doesn't mean that this will never be an issue. INTERPOL has a huge government bureaucracy, which can be seen here. How much immunity the people that constitute this bureaucracy have is a legitimate question, is it not? Again, this isn't about records, because the plain language of the act doesn't limit itself to the organization's records or assets.
They don't have "immunity from (your) laws." The organization is immune to some laws.
I'll tell you a secret. Most organizations are immune to some of your laws. Corporations can't be put on the sex offender list. Yup, that's right.
By your logic that would mean that anyone employed by a corporation could not be put on the sex offender registry.
Think about it.
Then think about it some more.
So you don't understand what UPU means and how it differs from the USPS?
Ambassadors are not members of the UN, even though their countries are, and they are members of their country.
I was going to explain it further but let's it keep simple: you suck at maths. It's hopeless.
How do state's rights fit in? If I lived in Texas could shoot INTERPOL agents for trespassing? They aren't United State law enforcement officers on official business, so the laws of some states likely are not prepared to grant INTERPOL agents the same protections.
I think people forget that it is very difficult to make a decision on a national scale in the US, and usually requires a fair amount of cooperation from the states. or at least not an excessive amount of non-cooperation from the states.
(ps-I don't think I'm allowed to shoot anyone in California, unless they actually committed murder against me first. Or maybe I just won't care about the civil and criminal repercussions postmortem)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Since they don't, the point is moot anyway.
Interpol has no agents.
Got it? No agents. They don't have them.
Do they have agents? No they don't.
How many agents do they have? None.
If you were to count the number of agents they have, what would be that number? That would be zero, sir.
Okay if you doubled the number of agents Interpol have, how many more would they have? They would have the same.
And if you tripled? Still the same.
Although I agree with most of what you said, why should they be except from paying taxes? Not sure what the IRS has to do with anything on what they do as a rule....but that bit is a little bit interesting to me. I just can't see how a paper pusher paying taxes is bad for an inter-national agency. Yes, give them the immunity to do their jobs, but give me the tax exemption instead please.
That's where the HQ is located anyway. In the same line of thought, the UN's "home country" is the US, since that's where the HQ is.
What kind of crimes could they commit against you anyway? Go ahead, give us an example.
So that allows you to just make stuff up and it's true? Forget about honesty . . . what an outdated, unfashionable concept! We're libertarians!
Obviously it's about their employees. You can be UN employee. You can be interpol employee.
Actually .... it mostly does. Jurisdiction is based on national boundaries. Except for very few crimes, you cannot be punished for comitting a crime outside of the U.S. by a U.S. court (or a court of any of it's states). Diplomatic immunity provides you with a blanket exception to getting sued by the only court that has jurisdiction. Ironically this exception is the result of muslim pressure (ottoman pressure to be exact), as they wanted to be able to violate for example divorce law, and have the ability to forcibly repatriate the ambassador's wife if she attempted to divorce him (happened in London).
This jurisdiction thing is e.g. why the RIAA put up such a big fight to make the court declare downloading from Holland as an act that at least partially took place in the U.S. (and why the UN pushed through that sending a byte from the U.S. to Europe only involves US and EU law, even if that byte passes through Iceland, or China and Russia (the backup connections))
Except "they" are American citizens, directly controlled by the elected president, DHS may employ and train the people that do the actual grabbing, but the order comes from Obama. Interpol is neither elected, nor accountable to anyone (they're more like the EU, or the UN. They're totally unaccountable except insofar as they could have member states leaving). And they do indeed grab people.
This is a pattern, there are few, if any, international organisations that are elected. Yet the EU (and especially the Lisbon treaty EU) is by far the most powerful unelected government in the world. One might almost think that in political circles, democracy is something that they'd mostly like to get rid of, but can't (yet ?).
This basically allows a law enforcement officer to carry out his duties.
Why, exactly, do they need this protection? Especially given that criminal infiltration of law enforcement is something to guard against.
It is identical to when the FBI comes to a local town to investigate, they can not be hindered or stopped by the local law enforcement.
What if they hinder otherwise interfere with the investigations of local law enforcement? What if they break the law in the course of their activities?
This is obvious and should not raise any issues.
Anyone being "above the law" comes with a whole host of issues. Even more so if they are "law enforcement".
Interpol does NOT have a police force, it does not conduct criminal investigations, and it does not make arrests. It acts as a data manager of sorts, for any member nations, coordinating information, passing warrants as needed from one member country to another, etc. They are basically an administration/secretarial service on an international scale.
In Which case why do they need any special rights in the first place? "Diplomatic immunity" is granted by treaty, which treaty is involved here?
These are the same standard rights that are granted to some 70+ other international organizations.
Do such rights make sense in any of these cases? Even if some are justified does it make sense to have a "one size fits all" approach.
These additional rights were not granted to Interpol because it did not have a local office on US soil at the time.
Which presumably means there are people to whom these special protections apply.
"Hopefully the worst we'll see from this is INTERPOL agents ignoring their speeding tickets" Good.. I hope they don't.. at least until the American Embassy in London gets round to clearing the > £200,000 they owe the city for their unpaid congestion charge.
so we need a global police force. this is obviously superior to one country being the world's police force, right? so interpol in the usa, and everywhere else, obviously makes sense
however, you have american nationalist retards who believe its some sort of horrible insult to sovereignty. its not, morons, its just common sense in a complicated world. so get your heads out of your asses, its not a secret plot to destroy the usa. get your paranoid schizophrenia treated and take more medication please
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
A country is not a government either.
A country is not a language.
A country is not the set of its inhabitants.
A country is not just exactly a nation.
A country is not its flags.
Yet it possesses all of these things, more or less.
And yes, a country can be a member of an organization, just like a corporation or a non profit organization can be a member of another organization.
Again, you should have stayed in school and learned some set theory. It's not that hard.
Crimes defined as what and by whom? If it is the law of the sovereign nation that they are in at the time, no harm no foul. If it is some collection of laws determined by anybody else, it very well could be a violation of sovereignty. That would be a impeachable offense, in just about ant country I would imagine.
This is really not good, when you give a governing body a full pass on your laws...all the need to do in any event is to outsource perticular aspects of a case, (like planting wiretaps without a warrant) which could be challenged in court, and
then accompanied by charges for breaking the law, they get to do what they need without so much as batting an eyelash.
The FBI could call them when they need something beyond their power to get, and INTERPOL could get some extra money for using their "services" this way. No one is safe anymore...thank you Obama, thank you very much!
Obama's Executive Order is nothing more than a tax cut for international organizations!
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Real numbers are a set.
Functions over that set are a set.
No real number is a member of that set.
Persons are a set.
Countries are a set whose members are persons.
The UN is a set whose members are countries.
No person is a member of that set.
No matter how often you repeat that line, members of the UN are countries, and they do vote. You might not like it, but that's how it is. It sometimes lead to weird occurrences, such as when Taiwan was China in the UN, and mainland China wasn't, but that's how it is.
The Saudi people don't get to elect their government, yet the country is a member of the UN.
Go ahead, deny that fact.
But even if what you are saying where blanket correct this is irrelevant if the person from the US in in the US doing the act.
Actually, INTERPOL had a limited subset of the immunities available to international organizations under US law, which are far less than the privileges that attach with diplomatic immunity.
That's your argument? That a person is doing the button pushing? That's fucking idiotic.
Hey let me as stupid as you are: since they vote electronically, it's a computer that's making the decision. There.
Duh.
Most jobs in international organizations are tax free. That include IMF, EU, etc. The organization is funded by the member nations, and salaries set to attract needed talent. The purpose of taxes is partly to force a certain behaviors. This may be to drive a Hybrid vehicle, send your kids to university etc. It is seen as important that an employee of an internationally sanctioned organization is not subjected to this 'local' pressure, but can act independently in the best interest of the organization. The organization, with the support of the signatory nations, sets all the needed requirements. This of course has nothing to do with diplomatic immunity, and any tax imposed on such an amployee, would just have to be paid back in increased salary, so really no use. It may only push the person to select a place to operate based on tax level, and not job performance.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
Second, brothers and sisters, our Chuppah holders - Andy Zebrowitz, Arbel Harpak, Shakked Harpak and Lotem Harpak. Additionally, we would like to thank all ...
Just what the Hell ever happened to Europol??? I thought they had changed their name from Interpol to Europol after the European Union came into existence? What the hell is going on???
Would somebody please keep the frigging nomenclature straight!!!!
Geez, aren't things bad enough already? First, we had the first Black Alberto Gonzalez (A.G. for Chiquita, Eric Holder) -- and everyone (that is, the faux crats who dare call themselves Democrats!!) was so delirious with joy: first Holder's Justice Department went after the whistleblower on that crooked Reilly's staff, who turned evidence for Gov. Siegelman, who was railroaded by the Karl Rove Gang, but to no avail -- then Holder's Justice Department extended the more nefarious aspects of the USA PATRIOT Act -- then Holder's Justice Department continued on the Bush Administration's legal case to kill habeaus corpus, and succeeded -- then they successfully put in jail that whistleblower from Switzerland's UBS (oopsy, Phil Gramm's evil bank) -- instead of jailing all those chronic and law-breaking tax evaders.
And now they can't even get Europol's name right.....