German student throws puppy at biker gang after mooning them, escapes on bulldozer.

[Revy]

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/10333211.stm)



Puppy thrown at German biker gang


A German student "mooned" a group of Hell's Angels and hurled a puppy at them before escaping on a stolen bulldozer, police have said.



The man drove up to a Hell's Angels clubhouse near Munich, wearing only a pair of shorts and carrying a puppy.


He dropped his shorts and threw the dog, escaping on a bulldozer from a nearby building site.


He was arrested later at home by police. The 26-year-old is said to have stopped taking depression medication.


After making his getaway on the bulldozer, he had driven so slowly that a 5km tailback built up behind him on the motorway.


After driving about 1km, he had abandoned the bulldozer in the middle of the motorway, near Allershausen. He continued his journey by hitchhiking.


"What motivated him to throw a puppy at the Hell's Angels is currently unclear," a police spokesman said.



The puppy is now being cared for in an animal shelter.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

What. The. Fuck.

[Lyev]

Good for him, that's all I can say.

[Invincible Summer]

Holy shit I had no idea that Hell's Angels were worldwide.


But this is pretty bizarre.

[Animal Farm Pig]

Obviously not a leftist. If he were, he would have used a forklift.

[gorillafuck]

That's so funny.

[Panda Tse Tung]

The mooning and the puppy in 1 sentence, i can dig. But the bulldozer makes the story a bit too bizarre.

[Lulznet]

I wonder what kind of dog it was. :cool:

[Sasha]

I wonder whether this was an attempt at suicide by angels or that the guy felt invincible by dropping his meds.

[leftace53]

how did he get a puppy and a bulldozer :blink:

[this is an invasion]

how did he get a puppy and a bulldozer :blink:

pet store

[Invincible Summer]

how did he get a puppy and a bulldozer :blink:


pet store


LOL! :lol:

[Crusade]

The headline sounds like the result of madlibs. Oh and by madlibs I don't mean angry liberals.

[Agnapostate]

Hell's Angels is worldwide in the sense that it's white-worldwide. This is their world map:

http://www.hells-angels.com/gfx/HAMC-world-map.jpg

Mexico and Central America are bypassed entirely, along with Peru, Bolivia, and the other predominantly Indian countries of South America. The only African location is South Africa, unsurprisingly. Of course, that exclusivity earned them problems with the Vagos and the Mongols...

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Perhaps he should have used a forklift. Otherwise his actions could be considered "lifestylism"

[Invincible Summer]

Hell's Angels is worldwide in the sense that it's white-worldwide. This is their world map:

http://www.hells-angels.com/gfx/HAMC-world-map.jpg

Mexico and Central America are bypassed entirely, along with Peru, Bolivia, and the other predominantly Indian countries of South America. The only African location is South Africa, unsurprisingly. Of course, that exclusivity earned them problems with the Vagos and the Mongols...

Please excuse my ignorance, but how are Brazil, Chile, and Argentina (if my geo is correct) part of the "white world"

[Tablo]

Please excuse my ignorance, but how are Brazil, Chile, and Argentina (if my geo is correct) part of the "white world"
All of those countries are believed to have very large white populations. Just because they are south of the border doesn't mean they can't have white people.

[Agnapostate]

^ What he said.


Please excuse my ignorance, but how are Brazil, Chile, and Argentina (if my geo is correct) part of the "white world"

Contrary to popular misconception (in the U.S., anyway, I don't know what perceptions are in Canada), the countries south of the U.S.-Mexico border aren't characterized by a homogenous race of "Hispanics" or "Latinos." Hispanics are persons with origins in Spanish-speaking countries and Latinos persons with origins in American romance language speaking countries (which means that the citizens of Quebec would be "Latinos" if the region were autonomous), but people in those countries can be of any race. The highest pre-Columbian Amerindian population densities were in Mesoamerica and the Andes, so although those regions came under the colonial administration of the Spanish monarchy, there were not a sufficient number of Europeans to overcome their racial character, even after the Indians endured infectious plague that killed the large majority of the population. Conversely, in regions where Indian settlement was not as high to begin with (though not necessarily low, just not as high as those hotspots), disease reduced the inhabitants of those places to a number sufficiently low for European admixture to dominate.

Argentina is noted by the CIA World Factbook to be, "white (mostly Spanish and Italian) 97%, mestizo (mixed white and Amerindian ancestry), Amerindian, or other non-white groups 3%," Brazil to be "white 53.7%, mulatto (mixed white and black) 38.5%, black 6.2%, other (includes Japanese, Arab, Amerindian) 0.9%, unspecified 0.7% (2000 census)," and Chile to be "white and white-Amerindian 95.4%, Mapuche 4%, other indigenous groups 0.6% (2002 census)."

All of these people are technically "mestizos" (mixed; equivalent to the French word "Metis"), but the word "mestizo" is extremely imprecise, which is why I try to avoid its usage. The majority of the "white" populations of these countries possess Amerindian admixture, but not so significant an amount as to make them predominantly Indian or even visibly mixed in many cases. I'm actually surprised that there isn't a chapter in Uruguay, which is whiter than Brazil and Chile, though I suppose it's because it's a smaller country.

Damn, this is off-topic. :cool:

[Tablo]

^ What he said.



Contrary to popular misconception (in the U.S., anyway, I don't know what perceptions are in Canada), the countries south of the U.S.-Mexico border aren't characterized by a homogenous race of "Hispanics" or "Latinos." Hispanics are persons with origins in Spanish-speaking countries and Latinos persons with origins in American romance language speaking countries (which means that the citizens of Quebec would be "Latinos" if the region were autonomous), but people in those countries can be of any race. The highest pre-Columbian Amerindian population densities were in Mesoamerica and the Andes, so although those regions came under the colonial administration of the Spanish monarchy, there were not a sufficient number of Europeans to overcome their racial character, even after the Indians endured infectious plague that killed the large majority of the population. Conversely, in regions where Indian settlement was not as high to begin with (though not necessarily low, just not as high as those hotspots), disease reduced the inhabitants of those places to a number sufficiently low for European admixture to dominate.

Argentina is noted by the CIA World Factbook to be, "white (mostly Spanish and Italian) 97%, mestizo (mixed white and Amerindian ancestry), Amerindian, or other non-white groups 3%," Brazil to be "white 53.7%, mulatto (mixed white and black) 38.5%, black 6.2%, other (includes Japanese, Arab, Amerindian) 0.9%, unspecified 0.7% (2000 census)," and Chile to be "white and white-Amerindian 95.4%, Mapuche 4%, other indigenous groups 0.6% (2002 census)."

All of these people are technically "mestizos" (mixed; equivalent to the French word "Metis"), but the word "mestizo" is extremely imprecise, which is why I try to avoid its usage. The majority of the "white" populations of these countries possess Amerindian admixture, but not so significant an amount as to make them predominantly Indian or even visibly mixed in many cases. I'm actually surprised that there isn't a chapter in Uruguay, which is whiter than Brazil and Chile, though I suppose it's because it's a smaller country.

Damn, this is off-topic. :cool:
Thanks for the statistics. :thumbup1:

[Invincible Summer]

All of those countries are believed to have very large white populations. Just because they are south of the border doesn't mean they can't have white people.

Obviously it doesn't mean they can't have white people, but I was surprised that there were enough white people to consider them predominantly white.




Contrary to popular misconception (in the U.S., anyway, I don't know what perceptions are in Canada), the countries south of the U.S.-Mexico border aren't characterized by a homogenous race of "Hispanics" or "Latinos." Hispanics are persons with origins in Spanish-speaking countries and Latinos persons with origins in American romance language speaking countries (which means that the citizens of Quebec would be "Latinos" if the region were autonomous), but people in those countries can be of any race. The highest pre-Columbian Amerindian population densities were in Mesoamerica and the Andes, so although those regions came under the colonial administration of the Spanish monarchy, there were not a sufficient number of Europeans to overcome their racial character, even after the Indians endured infectious plague that killed the large majority of the population. Conversely, in regions where Indian settlement was not as high to begin with (though not necessarily low, just not as high as those hotspots), disease reduced the inhabitants of those places to a number sufficiently low for European admixture to dominate.

Argentina is noted by the CIA World Factbook to be, "white (mostly Spanish and Italian) 97%, mestizo (mixed white and Amerindian ancestry), Amerindian, or other non-white groups 3%," Brazil to be "white 53.7%, mulatto (mixed white and black) 38.5%, black 6.2%, other (includes Japanese, Arab, Amerindian) 0.9%, unspecified 0.7% (2000 census)," and Chile to be "white and white-Amerindian 95.4%, Mapuche 4%, other indigenous groups 0.6% (2002 census)."

All of these people are technically "mestizos" (mixed; equivalent to the French word "Metis"), but the word "mestizo" is extremely imprecise, which is why I try to avoid its usage. The majority of the "white" populations of these countries possess Amerindian admixture, but not so significant an amount as to make them predominantly Indian or even visibly mixed in many cases. I'm actually surprised that there isn't a chapter in Uruguay, which is whiter than Brazil and Chile, though I suppose it's because it's a smaller country.

Damn, this is off-topic. :cool:

Thanks for the info. In Canada, the perceptions are pretty similar. I personally thought that there were more people who identified as "mixed/mestizo" or are categorized as such, but I guess I was wrong. I am aware that there are various ethnic groups and not just a homogenous "Latino" population, but I was never aware that Europeans were dominant in some countries.

So the Spanish colonialists' descendants are "white," i.e. "European?"

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Don't throw puppies throw capitalists. Puppies are on our side, obviously.

[Agnapostate]

Thanks for the info. In Canada, the perceptions are pretty similar. I personally thought that there were more people who identified as "mixed/mestizo" or are categorized as such, but I guess I was wrong. I am aware that there are various ethnic groups and not just a homogenous "Latino" population, but I was never aware that Europeans were dominant in some countries.

So the Spanish colonialists' descendants are "white," i.e. "European?"

Well, again, it's not a matter of pure whiteness. The majority of American white populations sustained some admixture with the Native American populations, though it's higher in areas where the character of European contact was invasive conquest led by male soldiers and rapid assimilation of the local indigenous populations into colonial societies as opposed to a more fragmented approach of alternating peace and war, with isolation and relocation rather than assimilation the preferred mechanism of "Indian removal." But many Spaniards (along with Italians and other Mediterranean whites situated only a short distance from Africa) themselves are not "pure" whites, since they've acquired Middle Eastern/North African (Sephardic Jewish and Berber) racial admixture, and some sub-Saharan African racial admixture. They also have some non-white admixture from a point before the Moorish occupation, since the rates don't decline in the north as they should (though the Basques are thought to be the oldest population of Europe and are relatively "pure-blooded.")

But in the relative sense, there are millions of Spanish-descended people in America considered white, along with other European immigrants that have assimilated, such as Italians and Germans (several Nazi war criminals fled to Argentina, where Eichmann was captured by the Mossad). Even in countries where they don't constitute a majority, they're usually the dominant racial group (an informal relic of Spanish colonial administration), at the top of political and economic hierarchies. That's why I regard the labels of "Hispanic" and "Latino" (and even individual national labels when they're used as racial labels would be used, i.e. "half Mexican"), as obfuscatory and misleading.

I didn't mean the homogenous "Hispanic/Latino population" in the sense that you did, perhaps. I meant actual racial differences between them in the sense of distinct populations of whites and Indians. I used to understand the Latin American ethnic/national groups along the lines of European ethnic national groups in that they were distinct, but were all members of one "race." Now I know that to be false.

[manic expression]

Between this and the samurai sword porn-actor...ummm, what the f*ck is going on?

Anyway, yeah, I'm almost positive the Hell's Angels is a white-only club...maybe I heard wrong.

[Dimentio]

Poor puppy

:crying::crying:

[Dimentio]

Between this and the samurai sword porn-actor...ummm, what the f*ck is going on?

Anyway, yeah, I'm almost positive the Hell's Angels is a white-only club...maybe I heard wrong.

They are not explicitly racist or white supremacist, though they in Scandinavia tend to fight against organised criminal gangs where people from the Balkans and Turkey are predominant. In Denmark, they have become openly anti-immigrant and have even helped the police to quench both left-wing and immigrant riots.

[Panda Tse Tung]

They are not explicitly racist or white supremacist, though they in Scandinavia tend to fight against organised criminal gangs where people from the Balkans and Turkey are predominant. In Denmark, they have become openly anti-immigrant and have even helped the police to quench both left-wing and immigrant riots. In addition: the map showed they we're present in Turkey as well. And iirc it's no homogenic organisation. Just sayin...

[Martin Blank]

how did he get a puppy and a bulldozer :blink:

Wal-Mart

[4 Leaf Clover]

whats mooning ?

[Panda Tse Tung]

whats mooning ?
Showing your ass to someone or multiple people by pulling your pants down.

[revolution inaction]

In addition: the map showed they we're present in Turkey as well. And iirc it's no homogenic organisation. Just sayin...

yes i was going going to ask, since when was turkey consided to be white?

[DecDoom]

How is it that a gang on motorcycles couldn't catch one student on a bulldozer?

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Obviously not a leftist. If he were, he would have used a forklift.
It's sad because this is the first thing I thought.

[Sasha]

the dutch state tried to bann the hellsangels and their supposed all white policy was one of the grounds they used for the ban. the state lost, didnt help that the current official president of the amsterdam chapter (widely believed to be the leading/ruling chapter in europe) is an molukan (indonesian decent)

[piet11111]

How is it that a gang on motorcycles couldn't catch one student on a bulldozer?

Probably because they where all going -> :blink:

[LebenIstKrieg]

What. The. Fuck.
I completely agree with you.:confused:

[Mannimarco]

I laughed so hard I keeled over.