Interpol was not granted diplomatic immunity or as was stated in the sensational correspondence put forth by the muck stirrers.
The quote I put in my previous post is taken verbatum from the law so it seems they do have diplomatic immunity, or simply immunity but again Im not a lawyer I only know common english so I could well be wrong. However the whole subject is missing the point I keep trying to get too.
My point being if an executive order can cause a vast reinterpertation of any law then it in itself becomes a law making tool. That is not to say that every EO is creating a law but rather to illuminate the level of power that can be used.
Certainly EOs can and have been reviewed but have been found in a least a case or two to exceed constitutional authority. That alone tells me in my layman way that this is a potential threat to freedom. I see no clear mandate in the constitution for EO's. I see this as a path that is ripe for abuse and given the nature of any given administration a tool that might well be misused. Freedom is not subject to presidential whim (regardless of person or party) and the fact that it takes a court review to undo a EO shows its power for misuse.
Repetitively good people all over assume others read whatever given document and interpert it the same way they do, when in fact others do not. Who says the president (any president) knows what congress intended..
In any case my point remains, some have no problem using any means to get to an end and EO is a potentially potent way to do so, even if the EO ultimately gets challenged..I dont really care about the Interpol EO, its just a tool in a illustration...