Andy McCarthy is just as full of shit as you are.
The bottom line is that the Executive Order did nothing to FOIA's applicability to the USNCB and FOIA has never applied to INTERPOL because it is not a United States government agency.
Executive Order #13524
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
Andy McCarthy is just as full of shit as you are.
The bottom line is that the Executive Order did nothing to FOIA's applicability to the USNCB and FOIA has never applied to INTERPOL because it is not a United States government agency.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
wrong again.... interpol's sub bureau is the USNCB....do you know what a sub bureau is?
you have yet to offer any evidence to substantiate your claim, all you have is your meager opinion and clear lack of understanding regarding interpol
So you continue to assert that two Presidents took time out of their busy schedules to ensure that an entity that didn't need it is not subject to search.
I think you are full of it. I think it is evident that you are solely seeking to excuse something that is astoundingly unexplainable.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
"Subject to search" and "subject to FOIA" are not at all the same thing. Your conflation of the two betrays your profound lack of understanding of what you are talking about.
FOIA is a search. You again are playing obtuse.
I picture you with your fingers in your ears shouting "Lalalala!"
It isn't going away. Your fundamental misunderstanding of INTERPOL has led you into an argument where you argue that Presidents constantly sit around and give immunities to entities that laws do not apply to. I guess they do it so they can watch us talk about it on the website and giggle hysterically while taking another hit off the bong...
Your argument makes no sense at all. "Two Presidents issued orders to give immunity to an entity that it would never apply to!"
Do you know what the Department of Justice is?
And for the guy that claimed that "it took reagan's EO to classify [INTERPOL] in america as an international organization" when the United States has been a member of INTERPOL since 1938 to say that I have a clear lack of understanding of what INTERPOL is just takes my breath away.
I applaud your confidence. It'd be nice if it weren't so damned misplaced though.
A FOIA request is not a "search" under any reasonable definition of the term. A FOIA request is a request to the government by a citizen for government records. "Search" in the context of this Executive Order and the International Organizations Immunities Act refers to searches by the government of individuals or entities.
Edit to respond to your edit: I'm not claiming that the Executive Order grants immunities that would never apply to INTERPOL. I'm merely stating that the Executive Order does not grant immunity from FOIA requests because FOIA does not apply to INTERPOL. However, there are a whole variety of searches to which the Executive Order does indeed apply. For example, imagine a foreign agent entering the United States while in possession of INTERPOL property like a laptop computer. This Executive Order would prohibit U.S. government personnel from searching that laptop computer upon entry to the United States. That's one example. I'm sure you could think of many others if you tried.
Last edited:
FOIA carries the weight of the court who orders its application, it is a search and can be considered no other thing, except by people who think that entities that do not exist in any other way in the US, except by the one office I have spoken of here today, are constantly granted immunity from laws they could not be possibly subject to and could never use. This applies 2(c) and makes the database (what INTERPOL really is) inaccessible by any means, including FOIA. There is no reason to exempt offices from search when, as you insist, no office exists other than the one INTERPOL office in the US that you pretend isn't really an INTERPOL office because it is inconvenient to your "argument"...
Ugh... It's like following the path of one of my daughters' arguments.
There is only one possible office that this immunity could apply to, because it is the only one.
FOIA carries the weight of the court who orders its application, it is a search and can be considered no other thing, except by people who think that entities that do not exist in any other way in the US, except by the one office I have spoken of here today, are constantly granted immunity from laws they could not be possibly subject to and could never use. This applies 2(c) and makes the database (what INTERPOL really is) inaccessible by any means, including FOIA.
First, read my edit.
Second, do you have any evidence whatsoever that the term "search" as used in the International Organizations Immunities Act includes FOIA requests? Any at all?
Third, does the term "search" as used in the 4th Amendment include FOIA requests?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
ok...i was wrong, it was congress in 1945, not reagan, i was just thinking of reagan's EO and stated that....it was an simple mistake, especially since i'm the one who cited the act in the first place....doesn't change the fact that you're wrong in stating the interpol is an international organization....its not, it is a PRIVATE organization with members who pay dues, members who join create sub bureaus which fall under interpol's heirarchy....you should read interpol's constitution, it would clear up many of your incorrect statements
why can't you answer my question:
what is a sub bureau?
No need. I'm quite embarrassed for you. As with Yurt, I appreciate that you really think you are right and that I'm an idiot. I'd just appreciate it more if you weren't so off base and if there were some rational basis for your certitude.
This nonsense was drummed up by anti-Obama right-wing jackasses that believe (or pretend to believe in order to convince others) that Obama wants to completely cede U.S. sovereignty to international organizations and the ICC. They are vapid conspiracy theorists that I expect folks like AHZ to believe but I presumed that fair-minded people would see them for what they are. I guess I was wrong.
I expect that if you took a poll of people that believe the Andy McCarthy/ThreatsWatch.org nonsense you would find that almost all are birther or birther-curious, yourself included.
First we'll have to find out what you consider a "search"...
A search, IMO and that of every law I have ever heard, is a term that applies to any request (subpoena) for information, like the FOIA, that has the force of law behind it. In this case, the FOIA, it applies as courts can and do issue direct orders and if the entity is still intransigent enforcement may take place by force.
In yours, apparently, the only thing that could be called a "search" is something called a "search"... nothing else can possibly apply... but it's childlike.
If I get a subpoena and am ordered to give information it is a "search"... even though they aren't calling it one.
Your question is irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is that the USNCB is part of the DOJ and is, and has always been, subject to FOIA whereas INTERPOL is not and never has been subject to FOIA.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
translation:
i'm to scared to address yurt's question because it will show i have no clue what i am talking about
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
yet....not a single person has mentioned anything about ceding authority in this thread....
you're losing it, so you're creating strawmen because all you have left is straw. you can't debate the points damo and i bring up....
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
[TRANSLATION]I just had my ass handed to me and it really hurts, so would you pleae stop spanking it[/TRANSLATION]
So we no responsibility to the country that we live in and benefit from?