Oh Chucky....
Jan. 12th, 2010 11:15 pmChuck Norris is on a mission
You have to go read it, but the highlights are just precious.
The White House explained that it put out no initial statement about the president's executive order because it viewed the matter as benign and uninteresting. "There is nothing newsworthy here," said Christina Reynolds, a White House spokeswoman.
But was that really the case? "Nothing newsworthy?" Or was there some reason the White House was trying to slip the executive order under the radar from the media and public's notice during the Christmas rush so that few would notice?
right... because everyone waits, with bated breath, to find out what the latest excutive order is.
This one exempts Interpol's New York office from FOIA requests. Why? I'd guess it's because Interpol is an agency which collates police reports on working investigations and those are full of things like informant information (you know, the ID of people who are acting as sources and moles in the course of investigations of things like plots to blow up airplanes with homemade bombs).
But maybe I'm just being naive. Chuck will explain it all if we let him.
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that New York is the feds' city of choice to place 9/11 terrorists on trial in federal court?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that, if for any reason the White House can't give terrorist detainees U.S. constitutional privileges by being tried in civilian courts, they now have the close proximity of Interpol archives that are exempt from American legal or investigative discovery?
Is it merely a coincidence Obama signed this executive Interpol order that now makes Interpol exempt from Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, requests by U.S. citizens?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that the feds want to try these 9/11 terrorists in civilian courts rather than military courts, and undoubtedly don't want to lose the cases in public opinion by the dissemination of the trials' details and evidence?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that Interpol's U.S. central operations office is under the umbrella and within our own Justice Department offices? (Interpol, which was started in 1923 and is made up of 188 country members including the U.S., has a bureau in the Department of Justice.)
Yes.
There's a lot more of that, but it's even less coherent. I like the, "is it merely co-incidental." Nice bit of schtick. He gets to insinuate, and make his non-sensical accuasations, all in the guise of wondering about co-incidences which only exist because he happend to make them up.
Is it merely co-incidence that he listens to Glenn Beck and then comes up with this sort of balderdash?
Again, threatwatch.org hit the nail on the head: Immunity from search and seizure "cannot be understated, because this immunity and protection – and elevation above the U.S. Constitution – afforded Interpol is likely a precursor to the White House subjecting the United States under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Interpol provides a significant enforcement function for the ICC, just as our FBI provides a significant function for our Department of Justice."
Um... no. Interpol has no enforcement arm, anywhere. They can't arrest anyone. They are an intel-agency. They are not the FBI of the ICC.
I suspect the real reason is pretty straightforward, just think of the co-indicences likely to happen if Chuck were able to file FOIA requests on those offices.
You have to go read it, but the highlights are just precious.
The White House explained that it put out no initial statement about the president's executive order because it viewed the matter as benign and uninteresting. "There is nothing newsworthy here," said Christina Reynolds, a White House spokeswoman.
But was that really the case? "Nothing newsworthy?" Or was there some reason the White House was trying to slip the executive order under the radar from the media and public's notice during the Christmas rush so that few would notice?
right... because everyone waits, with bated breath, to find out what the latest excutive order is.
This one exempts Interpol's New York office from FOIA requests. Why? I'd guess it's because Interpol is an agency which collates police reports on working investigations and those are full of things like informant information (you know, the ID of people who are acting as sources and moles in the course of investigations of things like plots to blow up airplanes with homemade bombs).
But maybe I'm just being naive. Chuck will explain it all if we let him.
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that New York is the feds' city of choice to place 9/11 terrorists on trial in federal court?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that, if for any reason the White House can't give terrorist detainees U.S. constitutional privileges by being tried in civilian courts, they now have the close proximity of Interpol archives that are exempt from American legal or investigative discovery?
Is it merely a coincidence Obama signed this executive Interpol order that now makes Interpol exempt from Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, requests by U.S. citizens?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that the feds want to try these 9/11 terrorists in civilian courts rather than military courts, and undoubtedly don't want to lose the cases in public opinion by the dissemination of the trials' details and evidence?
Is it merely coincidental that Obama signed this executive Interpol order and that Interpol's U.S. central operations office is under the umbrella and within our own Justice Department offices? (Interpol, which was started in 1923 and is made up of 188 country members including the U.S., has a bureau in the Department of Justice.)
Yes.
There's a lot more of that, but it's even less coherent. I like the, "is it merely co-incidental." Nice bit of schtick. He gets to insinuate, and make his non-sensical accuasations, all in the guise of wondering about co-incidences which only exist because he happend to make them up.
Is it merely co-incidence that he listens to Glenn Beck and then comes up with this sort of balderdash?
Again, threatwatch.org hit the nail on the head: Immunity from search and seizure "cannot be understated, because this immunity and protection – and elevation above the U.S. Constitution – afforded Interpol is likely a precursor to the White House subjecting the United States under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Interpol provides a significant enforcement function for the ICC, just as our FBI provides a significant function for our Department of Justice."
Um... no. Interpol has no enforcement arm, anywhere. They can't arrest anyone. They are an intel-agency. They are not the FBI of the ICC.
I suspect the real reason is pretty straightforward, just think of the co-indicences likely to happen if Chuck were able to file FOIA requests on those offices.
no subject
Date: 2010-01-13 06:54 pm (UTC)