First arselifter Gaddafi jr flees from Switzerland, leaves back 500 000 CHF bail (recent developments, according to swiss media)
Michael Laudahn eOpposition
The son of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi has been charged in Switzerland for
allegedly assaulting two of his servants.
Hannibal Gaddafi and his pregnant wife were arrested after an incident at a
luxury hotel in Geneva, his lawyer Alain Berger told Swiss radio.
The couple face charges of bodily harm, making threats and coercion, he
added. They have since been bailed.
Swiss reports said two of Mr Gaddafi's domestic servants have accused the
couple of repeatedly beating them with a belt and a hanger at the President
Wilson Hotel, which is next door to the UN's human rights office.
A Tunisian woman was hospitalised, according to Switzerland's Tribune de
Geneve newspaper.
Mr Berger said Gaddafi and his wife reject the allegations.
He added that that the 32-year-old spent two evenings in detention while his
wife, who came to Geneva to give birth, was transferred to a maternity unit.
It is not the first time the Libyan has been in trouble with the law.
In 2004, he was at the centre of a commotion when police in Paris stopped
him for speeding on the Champs-Elysees and his bodyguards attacked several
officers.
The bodyguards were taken into custody but released after a delegation from
the Libyan embassy apologised to police.
In 2005, he was convicted by a French court for striking his pregnant
companion in a Paris hotel.
He was given a four-month suspended prison sentence and a 500 euro fine.
----------------------
By the way, 'Hannibal' was the would-be conqueror of Rome, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal .
--
Give us back our countries: Stop the criminal multiculturalism ideology
enforced upon the white world against the will of its peoples, leading to
mass immigration from the third-world: Mul-cul + pol-corr = lethal mixture
for the white world. And give us back our freedom: Dismantle all
surveillance technology.
Sir John Howard
> Gaddafi's Son Charged Over Assault
>
> The son of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi has been charged in Switzerland for
> allegedly assaulting two of his servants.
Oh? He assaulted them?
> Hannibal Gaddafi and his pregnant wife were arrested after an incident at a
> luxury hotel in Geneva, his lawyer Alain Berger told Swiss radio.
>
> The couple face charges of bodily harm, making threats and coercion, he
> added. They have since been bailed.
>
> Swiss reports said two of Mr Gaddafi's domestic servants have accused the
> couple of repeatedly beating them with a belt and a hanger at the President
> Wilson Hotel, which is next door to the UN's human rights office.
LOL!
> A Tunisian woman was hospitalised, according to Switzerland's Tribune de
> Geneve newspaper.
>
> Mr Berger said Gaddafi and his wife reject the allegations.
>
> He added that that the 32-year-old spent two evenings in detention while his
> wife, who came to Geneva to give birth, was transferred to a maternity unit.
Why didn't she give birth in Libya?
> It is not the first time the Libyan has been in trouble with the law.
>
> In 2004, he was at the centre of a commotion when police in Paris stopped
> him for speeding on the Champs-Elysees and his bodyguards attacked several
> officers.
>
> The bodyguards were taken into custody but released after a delegation from
> the Libyan embassy apologised to police.
>
> In 2005, he was convicted by a French court for striking his pregnant
> companion in a Paris hotel.
>
> He was given a four-month suspended prison sentence and a 500 euro fine.
>
> http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Gaddafis-Son-Hannibal-Charged-Over-Assault-In-Switzerland/Article/200807315046226?lpos=World%2BNews_0&lid=ARTICLE_15046226_Gaddafi%2527s%2BSon%2BHannibal%2BCharged%2BOver%2BAssault%2BIn%2BSwitzerland
>
> ----------------------
>
> By the way, 'Hannibal' was the would-be conqueror of Rome, see
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal .
The Romans eventually killed him.
Ördög
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal.
Amazing! Does this mean, Helicopter Michi that you are trying to have
a second attempt at obtaining a half decent education.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wer ist Michael Laudahn?
Ein Sozialabzocker und Asylant da in Dänemark....
UseNet Spammer, Nazi, mehr scheinst du Wixer nicht zu sein.
<> --
<> Proudly introducing the concept of HATE to the World
<> 'Freedom of speech - abuse it and then ban it!
The above is an excerpt from Helicopter Michi's membership application
sent to the Danish Branch of the Grand United European Neo and
Traditional Nazi Boys Club.
Ördög (Your scary shadow that says "Boo" in the dark)
Either the neocons go or civilisation does!
Deppen crossposterei beendet, fup wie es gehört!
B J Foster
Why is this shit relevant to Australia?
üDoug±Ç
news:48810498$0$1026$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Why are you exiled from Germany?
>
> Why is this shit relevant to Australia?
Who the fuck appointed you the net 'nazi who determines what
is relevant to Australians?
Ördög
delusional.
> "B J Foster" asked nicely:
> > Why is this shit relevant to Australia?
> Who the fuck appointed you the net 'nazi who determines what
> is relevant to Australians?
What is relevant to Australia and what is not is determined by
Australians and not fucking mad Yanks.
Shut the fuck up you freaking foreigner shit stirrer.
What is relevant in aus.politics and what is not has been determined
long before you've started your trolling here.
There is a FAQ published, and you should read it before you open your
stupid mouth
blowing lots of arrogance and verbal vomit at those who demand that
you behave like any normal,
civilised and good Netizens should do.
Ördög
(The friendly Hungarian Devil in service of aus.politics and Usenet)
Ördög
endorses the inequality bias:
> ..... such xenophobia....
Xenophobia? Really. Well, suppose it depends on the your definition.
But I am afraid my definition is quite unlikely to match yours either
now or ever.
In my book reminding someone in no uncertain terms that in a debating
forum with well specified topics there are rules which all debaters
should observe in order to avoid endless dirt slinging and chaos that
blocks out proper analysis and good arguments has nothing to do with
xenophobia.
The US extremist troll above I was responding to ignores all rules of
sane debate, and trolls in countless newsgroups abusing disagreeing
posters as a form of silly entertainment.
He attempts to set the tone of discussions to match his own propaganda
agenda in from his point of view foreign newsgroups, thereby
disregarding the specific interest of these groups.
And you are giving him support and attacking me? Amazing!
> ....from the well known .......
Thanks for admitting here quite publicly that by now I am indeed well
known among racist, right-wing extremist, neo and old Nazi shill, and
religious nut case posters.
Interestingly, till now many of you have asserted that I am ignored by
all posters on Usenet.
It is nice to see such a sudden a change of heart by my detractors.
It looks like I am doing something right after all.
Now on the issue of bigotry again the exact definition seem to depend
on where one stands.
And obviously your lot stands on all issues completely somewhere else
than I do.
If I did not I would have to spit at the image I see in my bathroom
mirror every morning.
So call me bigot all you like I must say that I am quite proud of
being different from you.
> What a surprise...
I don't think there are any surprises about my stance.
From day one I have made clear on Usenet where I stand on most
relevant issues.
> There's little to choose between you and Laudmauth, really...
I suppose you would not want to deliberate on this assertion point
beyond just throwing around ad hominems.
It seems to me that according to you there is no difference between a
Nazi who wants extermination of humans on a grand scale and someone
who wants an egalitarian society without borders, without
discrimination and without social disadvantage of any kind for all. It
will be interesting to see how you intend to defend your particular
position.
parr...@yahoo.com
> parri...--------...@ConsolidatedRightoidSockpuppets.org firmly
> endorses the inequality bias:
Oh dear.. Ördog has to lie to defelct from his own bigotry...
>
> > ..... such xenophobia....
>
> Xenophobia? Really. Well, suppose it depends on the your definition.
An irrational hatred of foreigners, vis:
" What is relevant to Australia and what is not is determined by
Australians and not fucking mad Yanks.
Shut the fuck up you freaking foreigner shit stirrer."
> But I am afraid my definition is quite unlikely to match yours either
> now or ever.
Yours won't ever match the dictionaries? That's no surprise.
Now then, let's sit back an enjoy watching your attempts to wriggle
out of your bigotry's exposure:
> In my book reminding someone in no uncertain terms that in a debating
> forum with well specified topics there are rules which all debaters
> should observe in order to avoid endless dirt slinging and chaos that
> blocks out proper analysis and good arguments has nothing to do with
> xenophobia.
So why on EARTH would you need to insult someone on the basis of their
nationality to do so?
> The US extremist troll above I was responding to ignores all rules of
> sane debate, and trolls in countless newsgroups abusing disagreeing
> posters as a form of silly entertainment.
..and you expose your well known hypocrisy..
> He attempts to set the tone of discussions to match his own propaganda
> agenda in from his point of view foreign newsgroups, thereby
> disregarding the specific interest of these groups.
> And you are giving him support
My my, you ARE paranoid, aren't you? Just like Laudmauth!
Listen, sonny, because two peopel point out you are an idiot, it
doesn't make teh two people doing so in league with each other.
>and attacking me? Amazing!
More an observation than an attack - my , we are thin-skinned, aren't
we?
>
> > ....from the well known .......
>
> Thanks for admitting here quite publicly that by now I am indeed well
> known among racist, right-wing extremist, neo and old Nazi shill, and
> religious nut case posters.
..and among rational ones too. But rationality has never been your
strong suit.
> Interestingly, till now many of you have asserted that I am ignored by
> all posters on Usenet.
Once again, I'm not a member of some group opposing you, you paranoid
fool.
> It is nice to see such a sudden a change of heart by my detractors.
LOL! We ARE self-important, aren't we?
> It looks like I am doing something right after all.
If you want to be seen as a bigoted, hypocritical, hysterical
arsehole, you are doing EVERYTHING right.
> Now on the issue of bigotry again the exact definition seem to depend
> on where one stands.
Nope, there is a clear, concise and consensual dictionary definition.
Stop your wriggling!
> And obviously your lot stands on all issues completely somewhere else
> than I do.
Who are "my lot"? My mad, paranoid little friend?
> If I did not I would have to spit at the image I see in my bathroom
> mirror every morning.
> So call me bigot all you like I must say that I am quite proud of
> being different from you.
You're proud of being an inarticulate, uneducated, illogical bigot?
HOw strange.
>
> > What a surprise...
>
> I don't think there are any surprises about my stance.
> From day one I have made clear on Usenet where I stand on most
> relevant issues.
Indeed. See your .sig for just more of your bigotry.
>
> > There's little to choose between you and Laudmauth, really...
>
> I suppose you would not want to deliberate on this assertion point
> beyond just throwing around ad hominems.
Try and form a coherent sentence, sonny..
> It seems to me that according to you there is no difference between a Nazi who wants extermination of humans on a
> grand scale >and someone
> who wants an egalitarian society without borders, without
> discrimination and without social disadvantage of any kind for all. It
> will be interesting to see how you intend to defend your particular
> position.
Ah.. your self deception is a marvel to behold.
There's little difference between Laudmauth's stance "Either the
untermenschen go or civilistaion does!" and your .sig
They are both repugnant.
I'm not surprised you lack the sophistication to notice that, but
that's often the case with underdeveloped, prone-to-hysteria minds
like yours.