[The_Egg]

» Executive Order: International Police Granted Full Immunity in US and Not Subject to FOIA Requests - Big Government


In 1983, President Ronald Reagan issued an Executive Order which gave permission to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) to operate within the boundaries of the United States. Reagan’s EO put INTERPOL under the same basic guidelines as the CIA, FBI, ATF and other Federal law enforcement agencies.

Two weeks ago, without any announcement, debate, discussion or inquiry from journalists charged with “speaking truth to power” President Obama issued an amendment to this EO. The amendment removed part of Reagan’s order that kept INTERPOL from having full diplomatic immunity while operating within the United States. In other words: Under Reagan and right up until two weeks ago, INTERPOL was authorized to operate within the USA but they did not have full diplomatic immunity and had to adhere to certain laws set forth for investigative agencies. Laws that prohibit authorities from violating our constitutionally protected rights.

This story has begun to make the rounds at some other blogs and web sites. Some scream about the on-set of the New World Order, some merely question the timing, motives and logic behind such a move while we are still fighting foreign wars and under threat of attack from Al Qaeda and other international terrorist bodies. I certainly don’t walk down the New World Order/One World Government path, I don’t look good in tin-foil hats… but, I do wonder why this move was made so quietly and why the White House Press Corps has not made any hay about it.
I also wonder why my friends on the left, who screamed from the rooftops about phone companies conducting analysis of phone calls made from the US to known over-seas terrorists, about members of the Saudi family being allowed to leave the country in the days following 9/11, about the EVILS of the Patriot Act and how it would lead to the stripping of basic civil rights to anyone checking out a book in a library. I wonder how they feel about the President granting permission to an international organization to operate within our borders under full diplomatic immunity.
One other tasty tidbit: Due to the amended language created by President Obama, INTERPOL is now, no longer subject to Freedom of Information Act Inquiries.
I wonder if during his vacation in Hawaii if one of the intrepid reporters could ask the President:

“Mr. President, is it true that due to your amendment to Executive Order 12425, INTERPOL may break into a home without a warrant, seize private property of a US citizen, hold a citizen for questioning without the right of legal representation and not be subject to any legal or criminal repercussion?”

I’d really like them to ask that question. Wouldn’t you?

[AnnonUSA]

This is not surprising, and don't think the American people cannot be sold on this under the guise of Terrorism and Keeping Americans safe.

I see no way to even, as described above, determine when such transgressions occur on American Soil. Seems it would be in the Governments best interest to keep any and all issues related to INTERPOL carefully guarded and covered up.

[AnnonUSA]

Irish atheists challenge new blasphemy laws | World news | guardian.co.uk

Irish atheists challenge new blasphemy laws

Secular campaigners publish series of anti-religious quotes and say they will challenge law if charged with blasphemy


Björk's comment on Buddhism has been included in the series of anti-religious quotes published by Atheist Ireland. Photograph: Getty Images

Secular campaigners in the Irish Republic defied a strict new blasphemy law which came into force today by publishing a series of anti-religious quotations online and promising to fight the legislation in court.
The new law, which was passed in July, means that blasphemy in Ireland is now a crime punishable with a fine of up to €25,000 (£22,000).
It defines blasphemy as "publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted".
The justice minister, Dermot Ahern, said that the law was necessary because while immigration had brought a growing diversity of religious faiths, the 1936 constitution extended the protection of belief only to Christians.
But Atheist Ireland, a group that claims to represent the rights of atheists, responded to the new law by publishing 25 anti-religious quotations on its website, from figures including Richard Dawkins, Björk, Frank Zappa and the former Observer editor and Irish ex-minister Conor Cruise O'Brien.
Michael Nugent, the group's chair, said that it would challenge the law through the courts if it were charged with blasphemy.
Nugent said: "This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic states led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level.
"We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous."
He said that despite the published quotations being abusive and insulting in relation to matters held sacred by various religions, Atheist Ireland "unreservedly support the right of these people to have published or uttered them, and we unreservedly support the right of any Irish citizen to make comparable statements about matters held sacred by any religion without fear of being criminalised, and without having to prove to a court that a reasonable person would find any particular value in the statement".
Nugent said that the group would be prepared to take on the state if anyone complained about the quotes and that the campaign to repeal the law was part of a wider battle to create a more secular republic.
"You would think that after all the scandals the Catholic church endured in 2009 the introduction of a blasphemy law would be the last thing that the Irish state would be considering in terms of defending religion and its place in society.
"We ask Fianna Fáil and the Green party to repeal their anachronistic blasphemy law, as part of the revision of the defamation act that is included within the act. We ask them to hold a referendum to remove the reference to blasphemy from the Irish constitution.""We also ask all TDs and senators to support a referendum to remove references to God from the Irish constitution, including the clauses that prevent atheists from being appointed as president of Ireland or as a judge without swearing a religious oath asking God to direct them in their work."
God noes

Richard Dawkins: "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
Björk: "The Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren't lesser beings, they're just like us. So I say fuck the Buddhists."
Frank Zappa: "To hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of The Cloud Guy who has The Big Book, who knows if you've been bad or good – and cares about any of it – is the chimpanzee part of the brain working."