Secretary-General Bill Clinton

Los Angeles Times ^ | May 28, 2006 | Editorial

[adorno]

Clinton reportedly told an aide that his dream job would be secretary-general of the United Nations

Nothing could be worse for the country and the world than to have Clinton involved in any policy making capacity in any organization at all. Eight years as the president of the U.S. should be enough bad experiences.

And yet, for all that, the world would be a much grimmer place if the U.N. didn't exist.

The reality is that with the U.N. in its current state of corruption and inneffectivess, the world would be a lot better without the organization.

Whether the writer of the article wants to believe it or not, the U.S. is better at carrying out the U.N. charter and aiding the world and keeping it in relative peace than the U.N. has been. Without the U.S., its military and its economic power, the world would be a hell lot worse off. The U.N. is basically, inconsequential. He

[deport]

Does this article discuss how they would get around the fact that the UN Charter prohibits permanent members of the Security Council from holding the position of Secretary General?

---

Could you cite or link the section of the UN Charter that states this prohibition?

[Cinnamon]

maybe then the American public would rise in sufficient numbers and disassiciate itself from the UN..

[DoughtyOne]

I've called for that for a long long time. I don't think the chances are very good that we ever will. I wish that weren't the way I see it.

[BW2221]

Will Clinton have time for the UN with the new babe?

[Jessica24]

"THE BEST THING HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON could do for humanity is not run for president."

Hee. This made me laugh, even though I know that wasn't the author's intention.

Bill would likely be a step up. I don't think he's responsible for nearly as many deaths as Kofi. Maybe. And hey, Kofi doesn't have his own line of condoms, so how effective can he possibly be? God I love the LA Times.

[ConservativeMind]

I like it! Let's put him in charge of an institution we can cut off and has no viable authority to do anything.

[woodb01]

 

Klinton would fit PERFECTLY into the Corrupt United Nations Socialists (the United Nazis).  After all, under his watch, and already corrupt Democratic Party reached totally new depths in undermining and attacking America

  · DNC-China Threat (15)
  · DNC-Corruption (20)
  · DNC-Racism (14)
  · DNC-Treason (12)
  · DNC-Vote Fraud (9)
 

Treason and corruption are absolutely NOTHING NEW to the Democrats. However their media outlets RARELY cover this.

 

[conservative physics]

I got a job appropriate for the x President... working security on the other side of a one way mirror in the womens department at K-mart.

[rbg81]

As much as I dislike Clinton, its hard to believe he could be worse than Kofi Annan. Face it, whoever gets that post will be a weak kneed, commie simp. At least Clinton would provide us with some entertainment. Think of all the foreign tail he could shag in that post--no wonder its his dream job! Would also pi$$ Hiliary off as a bonus.

[diverteach]

Could you imagine Bill Clinton running the UN and his wife as President. OMG would that be the most f'ed up thing I could ever imagine.

All soveriegnty would be ceded to the UN.

[Quix]

Where was the barf N hurl alert?

Wouldn't be surprised tha the puppet masters would slate him for that job.

We can expect even more traitorous actions, if so.

[ModelBreaker]

I mean, I can't stand Clinton anymore then anybody else here, but I can't see how he could possibly be worse then Kofi Annan.

With Kofi, the UN looks like what it is--a corrupt, anti-american organization. Bill would manage to make it warm and fuzzy.

[freekitty]

Ha....You have seen what Clinton can do. He already goes by no rules. He could really turn himself into a dictator and the UN is ripe with the posibilites of dictator of the world.

This man needs to be put in a jail cell for a long long time with his wife as well as the people behind them.

[Michael.SF.]

LOL

Maybe so!!

[DumpsterDiver]

Could you cite or link the section of the UN Charter that states this prohibition?

This link is from Post 51:
http://www.unsg.org/role.html

Post 51 -- In addition, informal rules often influence the selection process. The best known is that nationals of permanent members of the Security Council - China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom or the United States - cannot be considered for the post, as such would invest an unwise amount of leverage over international decisions in one government, notwithstanding the statutory independence of the office.

Less commonly known, and perhaps more questionable, is the informal requirement that candidates for UNSG must be fluent in English and French, which while the dominant languages of international relations, are only two of the UN's six official languages.

snip

[freekitty]

And in order for this dictatorship to work, he and Hitlery both have to have the power; she being head of the most powerful country in the world and he head of the UN. It could be pulled off. I wonder sometimes if they are working for the anti-christ.

Don't think it couldn't happen. That's why neither of them ever need to be in or near power again. They need to be put in jail.

[LegendHasIt]

Y'all realize that "informal rules" are not actual laws.

This is something that can be 'changed in committee' or merely ignored with impunity should the leadership of the UN so desire.

Nowhere in the UN Charter itself can I find anything preventing Clinton from becoming Secy. Gen. should they so desire, and that is the only document that would approach having the force of law over this situation .

Besides; When have any inconvenient laws ever prevented the UN or the Clintons from doing what they want?

[DumpsterDiver]

Besides; When have any inconvenient laws ever prevented the UN or the Clintons from doing what they want?

Never?

[deport]

Yes but that isn't a section of the UN Charter as stated by the other poster. Any one of the Big Five have the power to veto the UN Sectretary General appointee and thus it can be expected that one of the five would veto someone from one of the other four but that isn't in concrete.

I'm looking for the section of the UN Charter that prohibits such an appointment which I can't find and no one to this date has been able to provide but the claim stays out there.