666
1 posted on
03/10/2003 8:33:32 AM PST by
kinghorse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
To: kinghorse
US should exercise her VETO power on this one !!!
2 posted on
03/10/2003 8:35:18 AM PST by
PetroniDE
(Zimmerman Telegram (1917) - Pearl Harbor (1941) - WTC (2001) - NEVER AGAIN...)
To: kinghorse
We can only hope that France, Russia, and Germany succede in their effort to make the UN irrelevent before Bubba takes over.
To: kinghorse
this story is bunk, it is required by UN Charter that the SG has to be a CONVICTED criminal thug
To: kinghorse
Does Clinton own this newspaper?
United States will veto as you cannot have a new Secretary General approved without all five positive votes from permanent members of the Security Council.
Why does this keep coming up?
5 posted on
03/10/2003 8:37:27 AM PST by
PhiKapMom
(Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US)
To: kinghorse
Get out of the UN NOW and evict and deport all the bloodsuckers in their building immediatly.
Problem solved, the bent one can't be appointed head of something that doesn't exist!
6 posted on
03/10/2003 8:37:31 AM PST by
dalereed
To: kinghorse
WTF? Where are they getting this lead..
7 posted on
03/10/2003 8:38:01 AM PST by
ewing
To: kinghorse
The morph into the NWO is about to be complete.
8 posted on
03/10/2003 8:39:06 AM PST by
Lysander
(smoke 'em if ya got 'em)
To: kinghorse
9 posted on
03/10/2003 8:39:22 AM PST by
BOBTHENAILER
(Just like Black September. One by one, we're gonna get 'em.)
To: kinghorse; Admin Moderator
I just checked the date -- no wonder I thought I had read this before. Why post something that has already been posted numerous times on here?
10 posted on
03/10/2003 8:39:24 AM PST by
PhiKapMom
(Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US)
To: kinghorse
With any luck, the UN will be irrelevant if not non-existent by then.
Antichrist? Don't be silly. Maybe his wife.
11 posted on
03/10/2003 8:39:47 AM PST by
Salman
To: kinghorse
Give him a day or two in his new office and then the U.S. should drop out of the U.N.
12 posted on
03/10/2003 8:40:00 AM PST by
Hatteras
(The Thundering Herd Of Turtles ROCK!)
To: kinghorse
This is fine with me. As long as the U.N has long since been disbanded. He can pretned to be whatever he wants.
13 posted on
03/10/2003 8:41:10 AM PST by
1Old Pro
To: kinghorse
Yet, ANOTHER reason why should disban the UN.
14 posted on
03/10/2003 8:41:15 AM PST by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it.)
To: kinghorse
"Bill the Beast"? Does anyone really know who his father really was?
To: kinghorse
I'm sure that there would be a legal way to suspend his USSS protection and other tax-payer-subsidized perks if he becomes the new anti-Christ. Think of it, though. If we boot the UN out of the U.S., this piece of slime would have to relocate as well.....
17 posted on
03/10/2003 8:43:06 AM PST by
tracer
(/b>)
To: kinghorse
I TOLD YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have been saying this for 4 years now!
He was running for head of the UN since he was president.
He wants to empower the UN so he can see himself as first LEADER OF THE WORLD.
OOOoooooohhh the smarmy things he will say when it happens...
19 posted on
03/10/2003 8:44:15 AM PST by
Mr. K
(looking for love in all the right places (not left))
To: kinghorse
Clinton does not want to be UN Secretary General. He just wants publicity so that he will seem relevant. He is not. Nor is ever going to accept such a post...that would involve having to work! Clinton just wants to be talked about.
Of course the rest of the world applauds this ridiculous idea. Why? Because such a move would take political oxygen from the Bush administration (which will never approve the appointment anyway) and generally lessens US power and prestige.
Here is some advice: Next time you see some news story saying Clinton may do this or may do that, don't believe a word of it. These stories are floated by Clinton and the Democrat machine to make him appear more relevant than he is.
23 posted on
03/10/2003 8:45:28 AM PST by
OldCorps
To: kinghorse
Assuming the US has veto power, the purpose of the Clinton candidacy will be to divide the country over what they think is a "bedrock" issue and open the way for a "more reasonable" Hillary to take the presidency.
The pressure on W not to veto will be enormous. He can't let it happen, even if he loses the presidency over it. If the given reason for the veto is conflict of interest (being forced to work against his own country), I "think" it will fly. He also needs to find a palatable alternative to the Slickster (any suggestions?).
God help us if we ever have the Witch in the White House and the ARIFPOTUS (Accused Rapist and Impeached Former President of the United States) in charge of the UN.
To: kinghorse
"the Chinese love Bill almost as much as Monica did."
That's the best line in the article.
666 and the man with the mark of the beast on his forehead (remember Gorbachev and his Green Cross?)--wouldn't they make a great One World Co-Dictator!
To: kinghorse
The current anti-American attitude in the UN will not permit any American to get that job......ever!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson