noworldsystem.com


Obama’s Secret Executive Order: INTERPOL to Operate in U.S.

Obama’s Secret Executive Order: INTERPOL to Operate in U.S.

habeldash.com
January 5, 2010

The health care debate and the Copenhagen Climate Summit were some of the high profile activities that occurred during the month of December. But secretly signed by President Obama on December 16th was an amendment to an executive order that gives police officers and international agencies exemption from laws and regulations that U.S. officers must comply. The secrecy of this is disturbing, but more so is the ability for foreign police officers to operate in America without following our laws.

Foreign cops will not be subject to comply with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which poses a threat to any American that might be investigated. INTERPOL, as taken from NewsWithViews.com, has already enjoyed the same privileges given to foreign diplomats. Some INTERPOL countries include Venezuela, Syria, Yemen, Bolivia, Cuba, Iran and Somalia – all of which are anti-American in some form.

The previous executive order was amended by President Reagan in 1983 during the Cold War, but had limitations requiring that INTERPOL operations be subject to U.S. laws, including FOIA. But President Obama has removed these limitations, essentially giving foreign police agencies more power than American police officers. Here is the amendment:

    Amending Executive Order 12425 designating INTERPOL as a public international organization entitled to enjoy certain privileges, exemptions and immunities

    “By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words “except those provided by Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act” and the semicolon that immediately precedes them,” Obama wrote.

Obama has granted an international police authority to overrule the U.S. government. The intentions of this secret amendment are unknown, but it did occur before the Christmas day terrorist attack, proving this wasn’t in response to the radical Muslim Abdulmutallab.

The sections amended by President Obama also address federal and property taxes and Social Security. The law prohibits U.S. law enforcement from searching and seizing INTERPOL records, but Obama officials say this can be waived by the president. INTERPOL is a forum for cooperation of law enforcement agencies of its member states that helps coordinate police efforts, but this amendment brings an entirely new meaning to the Secret Police.

As if Obama didn’t have his Brown Shirts doing enough reporting neighbors to flag@whitehouse.gov This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , it now looks like they have a secret force operating within U.S. boundaries without adhering to American laws. Obama has said before that he sees a strong need for a civilian national security force. And here we thought the SEIU Purple Shirt union thugs were bad.

 

U.N. Genocide

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5525404669120383223&hl=en#

 



WACO Murderer To Lead Global Police Force

Waco Siege “Enforcer” To Lead Global Police Force
Man who both approved and covered-up government slaughter of 76 people, including 20 children, will lead move to establish international model of law enforcement

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
October 12, 2009


Ronald K. Noble

UN and Interpol officials will meet today to discuss the formation of a “global police force” that would enjoy access to a worldwide database of DNA, biometric and fingerprint records. The effort will be spearheaded by a man known as “The Enforcer” who helped federal authorities both conduct and cover up the murderous Waco siege which killed 76 people in 1993.

“Interpol and the United Nations are poised to become partners in fighting crime by jointly grooming a global police force that would be deployed as peacekeepers among rogue nations riven by war and organized crime, officials from both organizations say,” reports the New York Times.

The emergence of a global police force is of course something that people like Alex Jones have been warning about for well over a decade. The global police force, just like the world army, is a key centerpiece of the march towards a dictatorial global government.

Those who were once called paranoid conspiracy theorists for claiming that the plan all along has been to centralize law enforcement into a global body run by the world government under the auspices of the UN and Interpol have been proven right once again.

For a taste of what Americans who aren’t so favorable to taking orders from foreigners on home soil can expect, consider the fact that the secretary general of Interpol, and one of the men at the forefront of setting up the global police force, is none other than Ronald K. Noble.

Noble, who is known as “The Enforcer,” has been instrumental in working with Chinese authorities to provide policing in the Communist country for major national events. However, his most notorious role was in ordering and then, in his position as Undersecretary for Enforcement of the United States Department of the Treasury, whitewashing the actions of the BATF following the federal government’s murderous siege on the Branch Davidian compound at Waco which killed 76 people including more than 20 children and two pregnant women in April 1993.

As Carol Moore writes, “Noble had approved the decision to go ahead with the raid,” and therefore, “had little interest in issuing a report that either would challenge significantly the BATF’s investigation or modus operandi or would admit these led to crimes against the Davidians.”

Noble ignored in his report more than a dozen eyewitness reports, along with photographic and video evidence, of a BATF helicopter firebombing the Waco church during the siege. He also ignored David Koresh’s July 1992 invitation to the BATF to inspect the Waco compound, which if it had gone ahead could have prevented the siege and the murder of 76 innocent people altogether.


February 28, 1993, Waco Siege.

“During the hearing, Friend-of-Bill Webster Hubbell denied repeatedly that he and Clinton had discussed the Waco situation informally, and improperly. However, an Associated Press article claimed Hubbell had revealed he was giving Clinton updates on Waco. And House staffers discovered a memorandum in which then-Treasury official Ron Noble asserted Hubbell would take the matter up with Clinton if the Treasury Department’s review did not downplay BATF errors. Clearly, Noble condones covering up government crimes against citizens,” writes Moore.

Noble was picked directly for the position of secretary general at Interpol by fellow Waco siege accomplice, former Attorney General Janet Reno.

During his September 2005 secretary general re-election acceptance speech in Berlin, Noble attributed Interpol’s ‘rebirth’ to the events of 9/11, saying that the terrorist attacks allowed the organization to go from being treated as largely irrelevant to setting it on the path to becoming an international police force.

Noble told the New York Times that one of the main roles of the global cops would be to stop people to check their identities against a global database.

“The police will be trained and equipped differently with resources,” Mr. Noble said. “When they stop someone, they will be consulting global databases to determine who they are stopping.”

As we previously reported, Interpol is setting up a huge biometric facial scan database of international travelers so they can cross-check everyone against a database of terror suspects, international criminals and fugitives. The database will hold the records of every citizen who has ever traveled in and out of the virtually every country in the world, representing intelligence agency style bulk interception of information.

According to the NY Times report, Interpol agents would be given special electronic passports that would allow them to speedily cross international borders.

“With the meeting of justice ministers on Monday, which coincides with a general assembly of Interpol police members, the group is expected to debate the global police issue and to craft a declaration that would lead to an action plan for international police peacekeeping within 12 months,” reports the Times.

The danger of having a global police force conducting law enforcement on U.S. soil under the control of Interpol and the UN is self-evident. Global cops who do not have to swear an oath to uphold the Constitution have no obligation to follow it. Operating outside of the realms of the U.S. legal system, global cops will have carte blanche to snatch, grab and intern citizens without recourse. A highly centralized system of policing guarantees hardly any liability whatsoever and therefore encourages rampant illegality and police brutality.

With many experts predicting a Soviet-style collapse of the United States within the next few years, the prospect of U.N. peacekeepers and Interpol global cops ordering Americans around is a harrowing possibility.

The fact that this move is all being spearheaded by a man known as “The Enforcer” who was instrumental in ordering the killing of 76 innocent people at Waco, including 20 children, and then covering it up, should send shock waves through the liberty movement and lead to intense scrutiny on Noble’s position at Interpol and his agenda to head up a global police force.

 

Support Your Global Police?

Lew Rockwell.com
October 14, 2009

When last we checked in with Ronald K. Noble, he was enjoying a lucrative career as a reward for helping cover up a crime against humanity in which he was deeply implicated.

In 1994, Noble was appointed undersecretary of the Treasury Department, a position that appears to have been created especially for him by then-Attorney General Janet Reno.

A year earlier, both Reno and Noble had been involved in the decision-making process leading to the April 19 holocaust at Mt. Carmel, in which scores of people were immolated as a result of what at very best could be called the depraved indifference of presiding federal officials.

During the hours leading up to that atrocity, FBI-operated tanks filled the Branch Davidian sanctuary (a combination worship space and living area invariably referred to as a “compound” once it came under federal assault on February 28) with a highly combustible variant of CS gas that was banned for battlefield use by an international treaty.

Around noon, something – an upended Coleman lantern, a badly thrown Molotov cocktail, one of hundreds of “ferret” rounds fired by FBI commandos – ignited a small fire that was quickly propagated into a blaze by the arid Texas prairie wind. Much of the world watched in horror on live television as the sanctuary burned to the ground, bringing to an agonizing end the lives of scores of people trapped within.

The victims had already endured fifty days of torment and ridicule by a government that had attacked their home without legal cause, killing several of their friends in the process. Firemen and other emergency personnel were prevented from reaching the site before the flames had consummated their awful work. This was supposedly done to protect the emergency workers from attack by the people who were being consumed by the fire.

A more plausible explanation is that the people who had arranged that holocaust were trying to keep independent witnesses away from the scene of their crime. Forward-Looking Infrared (FLIR) footage of the event provides damning evidence that FBI commandos (and, reportedly, at least a few Delta Force operators) directed automatic weapons fire into the burning sanctuary, cutting off escape routes and cutting down anyone who attempted to flee.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sBzs3ZBihk

A wrongful death lawsuit filed on behalf of Davidian survivors and the estates of the victims listed Noble among the “U.S. Treasury officials” who “planned, organized, and or led” the original February 28 assault against Mt. Carmel, despite knowledge that the warrants were obtained “without probable cause and with defects that rendered them illegal.”

Those same officials, continued the complaint, permitted the assault to proceed “even though they knew that the Davidians were expecting an assault by law enforcement and, thus, were in a state of mortal terror,” and “were so reckless in their preparation for and planning of this assault, that they did not even have a written plan in place prior to conducting the attack.”

Noble was thus deeply involved in the decisions that led to the avoidable deaths of six members of the Branch Davidian sect, and four ATF stormtroopers, on February 28. His involvement in the planning and execution of the siege and the final April 19 assault isn’t as significant. But he played the definitive role in covering up those crimes by serving as the “lead investigator” in the Clinton administration’s internal “inquiry” into the federal atrocities at Waco.

So patently fraudulent was Noble’s “investigation” that a second bogus inquiry was necessary: In 2000, Attorney General Reno chose former Missouri Senator John Danforth to preside over an “independent” investigation that was mounted in what proved to be a successful effort to derail the wrongful death lawsuit cited above.

By that time, however, Noble – who had been given the Alexander Hamilton Award by the Treasury Department, as if anything named after that individual could be construed as an honor – had been given another coveted post with Reno’s help: He was nominated to serve as secretary-general of Interpol, a position he occupies to the present day.

On October 12, Noble’s agency announced that it would be collaborating with the United Nations by providing technical support – including access to voluminous, detailed databases – to UN “peacekeeping” personnel, including those that belong to the world body’s police force, UNPOL.

Noble himself said that his organization is pursuing a “visionary model,” an “alliance of all nations” under a “global police doctrine.” This would, in effect, create the first genuinely planetary police force in human history.

In an address before justice and law enforcement officials from more than 60 nations who had assembled in Singapore, Noble elaborated on that “visionary model”: “In the framework of our partnership with the UN, INTERPOL will provide deployed police peacekeepers with access to the world’s only secure global police communications system; global police databases including names of criminals, fingerprints, DNA profiles, stolen passports, and stolen vehicles; and specialized investigative support in key crime areas, including fugitives, drugs, terrorism, trafficking in human beings, and corruption.”

Apart from some very serious issues of jurisdiction and sovereignty, the most troubling aspect of INTERPOL’s “visionary model” is its potential to help create a UN-directed global panopticon – a “Your Papers, Please” system of world-wide scope.

It would certainly be of great use to the UN’s International Criminal Court, a pseudo-judicial body that claims global jurisdiction.

Significantly, one of the “core” offenses recognized in the ICC Statute is genocide, as that offense is defined in the UN’s Genocide Convention. Article II of that instrument describes the offense of genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical [sic], racial or religious group”:

“(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part….”

Some very serious and sober people contend that this definition is over-broad. No serious person of a constitutionalist bent considers the UN or its treaties a legitimate source of law.

However, it would be expected that Noble, as someone working to provide that body with a rudimentary global constabulary, would be among those who accept the legitimacy of its treaties. But to do so would put Noble in a completely untenable position: He is directly implicated in an assault that resulted in the near-destruction of an entire religious community, which – by the UN’s definition – qualifies as a form of attempted genocide.

At the very least, he is an accessory after the fact to genocide (once again, as defined by the UN). Given the UN’s history, however, that line on Nobel’s résumé might actually be counted on the asset side of the ledger.

Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, who headed the organization’s “peacekeeping” division before being appointed to the top post, was censured in the so-called Carlsson Report on the 1994 Rwandan genocide, which claimed as many as a million lives.

Annan had received detailed advance intelligence about the impending massacres of the Tutsis from both the on-scene UN commander, Canadian Colonel Romeo Dallaire,* and various informants within the Hutu-led government. He nonetheless continued with the program to disarm the Rwandan civilians and ordered Dallaire to burn his own sources by sharing his intelligence with the same regime that was planning the slaughter.

After the report came out in 1999, a group of Rwandan survivors, working with Australian attorney (and former UN investigator) Michael Hourigan, attempted to file a lawsuit against Annan and others implicated in the Rwandan genocide. But, drat the luck, wouldn’t you just know that UN officials are clothed in official immunity for such trivial offenses as aiding and abetting genocide, as long as this is done in an “official capacity.”

So rather than being sued or prosecuted, Annan had to settle for receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. That was the most offensive selection ever made by the Nobel Committee. Well, at least until this year.

Thanks to the near-ubiquity of inconspicuous digital cameras and the technological blessing of internet file-sharing sites, Americans are just now coming to realize how commonplace criminal abuse by the police has become – and how difficult it is to hold an abusive police officer accountable for crimes against innocent people. But this is the square root of the problem we would confront in the event that the UN actually created the global police force the foundation of which is being laid by Noble and his comrades.

It’s entirely typical of the UN that its secretary general was implicated in what has been described as “the first undisputable genocide since the UN Charter was signed,” and that a key architect of its “crime-fighting” agenda was involved in planning and covering up a quasi-genocidal massacre here in the United States. This is a useful illustration of the fact that even though abolishing the UN wouldn’t solve all or even most of our problems, it’s a badly overdue step in the direction of restoring moral sanity.

*Despite the fact that Col. Dallaire tried to prevent the genocide, he blamed himself for the tragedy, which included the death of many men under his command. He returned to Canada where he descended into alcoholism and suicidal depression, even as Annan was elevated to the post of secretary general. I interviewed Dallaire by telephone several years ago and discovered, to my amazement, that he still believes in the misguided principle of “collective security,” even if he is understandably jaded about the UN as the vessel of that vision.

U.N. GENOCIDE

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2634703139474212867&hl=en#

 



Ratification of LOST Gives UN Control Over Earth’s Oceans

Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty Would Give the UN Control Over Everything About the Oceans

JBS
November 7, 2007

The Senate is poised to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), which would give total regulatory jurisdiction over the world’s oceans and seas to a United Nations body, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Follow this link to the original source: “25th Anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea”

On October 31 the authoritative Capitol Hill news publication, CQ Today, stated:

The Senate is likely to ratify a 1982 U.N. treaty governing the use of the world’s oceans despite grumbling from a few conservative GOP senators.

That’s right. After 25 years of stalemate, the Senate is poised to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), which would give total regulatory jurisdiction over the world’s oceans and seas to a United Nations body, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

This is the same UN famous for its corrupt oil-for-food scandal. This is the organization that consistently votes against American interests.

In order to understand just how comprehensive and sweeping are the powers over the oceans that LOST would confer on the UN, read what was said at an official UN celebration of the 25th anniversary of LOST on Oct. 17:

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea … is perhaps one of the most significant but less recognized 20th century accomplishments in the arena of international law…. Its scope is vast: it covers all ocean space, with all its uses, including navigation and overflight; all uses of all its resources, living and non-living, on the high seas, on the ocean floor and beneath, on the continental shelf and in the territorial seas; the protection of the marine environment; and basic law and order…. The Convention is widely recognised by the international community as the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and the seas must be carried out. (“25th Anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,” Oct. 17, 2007; emphasis added.)

In short, the LOST treaty provides the legal framework within which all activities on, over and under the oceans and the seas must be carried out. In other words, the LOST treaty would give the UN jurisdiction over everything concerning the oceans and seas of the earth.

Everything would certainly include military and commercial uses of the oceans and seas. How do you think the anti-American UN would rule on U.S. Air Force planes and U.S. Navy ships using the oceans for military purposes? What would this mean for our national security? How about our commercial airliners flying over the oceans? How about the necessary transportation between our mainland states and Hawaii? And, on and on.

We would not have veto power protection in the UN’s International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea like we do in the Security Council. We’d have one vote among a membership of over 150 nations.

For confirmation of just how bad it would be for the Senate to ratify LOST, take a look at these two videos of recent Senate hearings, featuring one of LOST’s most articulate critics, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.): (1) DeMint on Law of the Sea Treaty: Part 1; (2) Round 2: DeMint on Law of the Sea Treaty.

This vote on LOST is arguably the most important vote the Senate will cast this year. The John Birch Society is urging its members and allies, especially the leaders and members of other organizations that also believe in preserving American sovereignty and security, to phone their senators within the next few days in opposition to the LOST treaty. Click here for a link to your senators’ phone numbers and talking points for the calls.

If enough Americans contact their senators, we can stop LOST just like we stopped amnesty back in June. However, fewer organizations are involved in this fight, so those of us who understand the long range threat posed by surrendering our sovereignty to the UN need to step up our activism and get the job done!

Our personal freedom and security depend on preserving American sovereignty and security by winning this fight against LOST!

 



Law of the Sea Will Usher In A One World Navy

Law of the Sea Will Usher In A One World Navy

Rogue Government
November 4, 2007

The Law of the Sea Treaty which the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted in favor of ratifying by a vote of 17-4 is part of a plan to average U.S. naval forces into a world Navy that would enforce international law on the world’s oceans. The Law of the Sea Treaty will allow the U.S. Navy to more easily police the world’s oceans while further undermining U.S. national sovereignty by recognizing United Nations authority over the majority of the world’s oceans. Prior to this vote on the Law of the Sea Treaty in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the U.S. Navy combined with the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Marines released a document entitled “A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Sea Power”, which outlines how U.S. naval forces will seek stronger international cooperation to protect the tyrannical global system that is currently being formed. It is interesting to note that the document focuses more on how there is a need to protect the global system and seek closer ties to international partners instead of defending the United States. The timing of the Law of the Sea Treaty being re-introduced in the Senate and the release of this document from the Navy is not pure chance. Admiral Michael Mullen, the recently promoted Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has spoken on many occasions about the formation of an international 1000-ship naval force. Clearly, this is all part of a plan to use U.S. naval forces as a foundational building block to form an international navy force that will enforce international law on the world’s oceans for the coming one world government.

Over 150 nations have signed and ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty which is an international treaty that gives authority of most of the world’s oceans to the United Nations. The U.S. has signed but not yet ratified the treaty. George W. Bush wants the Senate to ratify this treaty because he has said that it would allow U.S. naval forces to move freely around the oceans. Ratification of this treaty would essentially transform the U.S. Navy into the core of the naval security enforcement arm for the United Nations. Since the treaty turns over authority of the world’s oceans to the United Nations, the U.S. Navy would be policing the world’s oceans not on behalf of the United States, but the United Nations.

This would be speculation if it wasn’t for the recent release of the document entitled “A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Sea Power” which describes how U.S. naval forces will need to protect the global system and seek closer ties with the international community. The document cites the phony war on terror as one of the key rationales for both of these items.

From the introduction section of the document:

The security, prosperity, and vital interests of the United States are increasingly coupled to those of other nations. Our Nation’s interests are best served by fostering a peaceful global system comprised of interdependent networks of trade, finance, information, law, people and governance.

We prosper because of this system of exchange among nations, yet recognize it is vulnerable to a range of disruptions that can produce cascading and harmful effects far from their sources. Major power war, regional conflict, lawlessness and natural disaster—all have the potential to threaten U.S. national security and world prosperity.

Later in the document under the section called “Maritime Strategic Concept”, the following paragraph describes how U.S. naval forces should seek relations with more international partners to protect international order on the world’s oceans.

Foster and sustain cooperative relations with more international partners. Expanded cooperative relationships with other nations will contribute to the security and stability of the maritime domain for the benefit all. Although our forces can surge when necessary to respond to crises, trust and cooperation cannot be surged. They must be built over time so that the strategic interests of the participants are continuously considered while mutual understanding and respect are promoted.

The document also cites the Global Maritime Partnership which is clearly a foundational building block for a one world naval force. What’s interesting is that Admiral Michael Mullen who was recently promoted to the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff worked extensively on and touted the Global Maritime Partnership prior to his promotion.

Mullen the former head of U.S. naval forces, was quoted as saying the following in 2006 at the Regional Sea Power Symposium regarding the Global Maritime Partnership.

“As mariners, we knew instinctively that the greatest power of the sea is to unite, not to divide. There is a common bond between us.”

“My country saw this on our Gulf Coast during Hurricane Katrina, just as others have after the tsunami in Indonesia, the Earthquakes in Pakistan, the submarine rescue off Petropavlovsk, the mudslides in the Philippines and many other places.”

“These things encouraged us to think about and to believe that we could bring together a “1000-ship navy”, a global maritime partnership that unites navies, coast guards, maritime forces, port operators, commercial shippers, and many other government agencies to address mutual maritime concerns.”

Considering Mullen’s statements on this Global Maritime Partnership which would in essence form a one world naval force, it makes perfect sense as to why he was recently promoted to the position of Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff. It also makes sense that the Law of the Sea Treaty is being brought up again in the Senate at around the same time.

There is no doubt that the Law of the Sea Treaty is being re-introduced in the Senate as part of an effort to form a one world naval force that will enforce international law dictated by the United Nations. The U.S. should not ratify this treaty, and our naval forces should not be averaged into a 1000-ship navy as Admiral Mullen describes. Hopefully, the Senate will fail to get the 2/3’s majority they need for ratification of this treaty. Any Senator voting in favor to ratify this bill is a traitor for granting even more authority to the United Nations over U.S. sovereignty because the United Nations has proven throughout its sorry history that it is an extremely corrupt and morally bankrupt institution.