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.
"Hello, INTERPOL? Yeah, that's right. It's me, FBI. You know the story. Constitutional 'problem' the Exec would like to avoid if possible.
There's a little black-bag job we've got. Some problems with getting a 'citizen' disappeared. The way we have it figured, you can cover this - and we'll be sure and give you access to Total Information Awareness, in exchange.
Sure. Glad we all have arrangements."
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
So Afghan, Pakistani, Saudi, and Yemeni INTERPOL agents are now allowed to carry weapons and explosives into the US with impunity? Am I the only one who sees a problem with this?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Well, after all, it's a Dog's Life^W^WMan's Life in the BDA!
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
>>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?
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.
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_immunity#Diplomatic_immunity_in_the_United_States
>>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
It did grant full diplomatic immunity. They had partial immunity before.
>>INTERPOL to do their work without participating nations worrying that the U.S. will spy on them by reading these organization's records.
Yes, heaven forfend we have transparency in our law enforcement agencies. :p
>>but that's a hell of a lot less than diplomatic immunity and not as hard to revoke
It's full diplomatic immunity.
>>I'm not sure how I feel about it, but I do know the summary was classic bullshit.
If you weren't wrong, I'd agree with you.
>>The actual article says:
Which they added to my submission. I just linked to the actual executive order, and to a story about UN parking tickets. The inclusion of the ABC News story was standard Slashdot editor brilliance. Especially since it's wrong.
>>"diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State." That is NOT what the International Organizations Immunities Act is.
In actuality, INTERPOL employees now have full diplomatic immunity when operating in an official capacity on American soil, and are immune to suit and legal proceedings for anything they do as part of their job.
So ABCNews is wrong, not me.
Don't believe me? Read section 7:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/International_Organizations_Immunities_Act#Sec._7.
Granted he isn't referring to our two parties
My own explanation of your (US) parties as viewed from a distance ...
Republican: Someone who is constitutionally unable to tell the truth.
Democrat: A dissembling Republican.
Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
Yeah, it might be easy come and easy go, but AFAIAC, that should work both ways.
To clarify that, I mean that any actions one of our citizens takes against an interpol agent who is illegally hassling him, including leaving his body for the scavengers, should be just as ignored. No questions are to be asked other than where do they want the remains to be shipped. After all, what is sauce for the goose, really ought to be sauce for the gander. If a few of their over stepping agents meet with an untimely demise, it just might convince TPTB that it wasn't such a great idea after all.
We used to burn witches at the stake. It was sorta barbaric, but so is this.
Huh?
Umm, no. Bush wouldn't have signed it. And Bush didn't sign it.
If Bush had signed on to National Healthcare, you'd be against it! Right?
Oh wait, he wouldn't have signed it, would he? That's why they are DIFFERENT people from DIFFERNET parties.
But I guess If Linus Torvalds had signed it, it would have been +10 Insightful.
What a moronic post.... And +3 Insightful, no less....
What if Stallman told you to buy Microsoft stock - you'd be buying it, right?
You Republicans are crazy.
This will be modded troll, but fixed anyways.
My father's AM radio (dial only turns to the right) has been giving off fumes all day long.
Sigh.
There's a difference between putting policeman A in contact with policeman B, and providing policeman A with data from a privately held database. That's my point, and the point that the other poster is apparently too dense to understand. They do more than just "coordination".
You can read up on it at Interpol's web site, or read a brief here:
http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/FactSheets/GI01.pdf
Interesting choice of state, North Dakota. As an American I don't imagine people from North Dakota having political views, or more accurately, I don't imagine there being people that live in North Dakota =P