Lybia calls for end of Switzerland

Here is some light hearted entertainment.
Lybia takes over presidency of the UN this year. Their first action:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/32691162


And people wonder why nobody takes the UN seriously.

What's the UN got to do with it.. it's Gaddafi that is the mad dog. They only hold the position for a month, the US allowed them to hold the rotating position after previously always blocking it.

His son said he'd nuke Switzerland if he could, all because he's a ***** who assaulted his staff & the Swiss arrested him. They are still holding Swiss nationals hostage. Some right wing Swiss are suggesting military action against Libya, don't think that would go down too well.
 
it's not because he's an ***, it's because Switzerland had no rights to arrest diplomats, as they hold immunity. If a country doesn't follow such basic principle of international relationships, it might as well cease to exist.

but i've heard it's all good now, Swiss had apologised:

It's not all good - Libya is still holding 2 Swiss hostages, that's what the apology was for in an attempt to free them. This a-hole deserves no apology, and Merz was slammed in Switzerland for making it.

And Gaddafis son is not a diplomat, although he's used that ruse to escape prosecution in other counties after running amok bashing & pulling guns on people & destroying hotel rooms.
The Swiss didn't fall for it so he spat the dummy & ran to daddy.
 
lol @ Libya - what a joke of a nation.

i think their only claim to fame is that george lucas flew overhead on his way to filming the tatooine parts of star wars in Tunisia.
 
And Gaddafis son is not a diplomat, although he's used that ruse to escape prosecution in other counties after running amok bashing & pulling guns on people & destroying hotel rooms.
The Swiss didn't fall for it so he spat the dummy & ran to daddy.

if a person holds diplomatic passport - as far as international law is concerned he is a diplomat with immunity. i doubt that gaddafi's son doesn't have diplomatic passport, that'd be pretty silly
 
it's not because he's an ***, it's because Switzerland had no rights to arrest diplomats, as they hold immunity. If a country doesn't follow such basic principle of international relationships, it might as well cease to exist.

The UK should have arrested the so called "diplomats" who shot and killed PC Yvonne Fletcher in London. Don't give us this crap about the country might as well cease to exist. Diplomats should conduct themselves with courtesy and statesmanship or they have no rights being granted diplomatic status. Well done by the Swiss!
 
Nope, he doesn't, and if anyone should know its the Geneva police that arrested him and stand by it, a city full of diplomats.
More about the prik: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article510293.ece

that was 4 years ago. would be pretty silly for him not to learn the lesson and get diplomatic passport.

i'm more inclined to trust this source:

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/news_di...to_Libya.html?siteSect=104&sid=11103277&ty=st

if you read on the right, it says following:

In April 2009, Hannibal Gaddafi filed a civil complaint against canton Geneva, arguing that the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations had been breached.

According to the lawyer representing the Libyans, Charles Poncet, records of civil proceedings against the canton will be filed in a court of first instance in Geneva on September 24, 2009.

i doubt he would file complaint and open himself for more embarrassment if he didn't actually have a valid case. i might be wrong of course, and it might all quietly die down.
 
The UK should have arrested the so called "diplomats" who shot and killed PC Yvonne Fletcher in London. Don't give us this crap about the country might as well cease to exist. Diplomats should conduct themselves with courtesy and statesmanship or they have no rights being granted diplomatic status. Well done by the Swiss!

for the ignorant ones: embassy of foreign state is considered a territory of foreign state. hence the laws of foreign state apply. attack on foreign embassy by government is usually considered an act of war.

England actually did the right thing and resolved the conflict as it should've been resolved:

The British Government eventually resolved the incident by allowing the embassy staff to depart the bureau (on the day of Fletcher's funeral) and then expelling them from the country. The British government then broke off diplomatic relations with Libya.

Now if you don't know what diplomatic immunity means, you can read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_immunity
 
Back
Top