flyguy

active 1 year, 5 months ago

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 7 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #856

      flyguy
      Participant

      The question would be how you eliminate multiple voting, with people voting online and in person, or multiple locations. It does need sorting though… as it is quite easy for people to vote in two constituencies now, as there is no central system.

    • #841

      flyguy
      Participant

      Poorly worded op, as usual from me.

      But are we killing good bacteria as a consequence in our guest to kill harmful germs. Have we become germ adverse which is being played upon by advertisers selling Stuff like bleach and hand gells?

    • #397

      flyguy
      Participant

      No idea if a Casino would let you do this but don’t try it on the online roulette games, I’m convinced they’re rigged to weed out exactly this kind of thing and you’ll lose all your money.

    • #380

      flyguy
      Participant

      I sort of do. Not the exact date, but a pretty good idea of the timeline courtesy of cancer. Strangely, it hasn’t fazed me. In fact, I’ve found it quite liberating as I no longer have half a mind on trying to survive for as long as I can, as that option has been removed. It feels a bit less stressful. As far as financial planning goes, it would help if I had any finances to plan with!

    • #362

      flyguy
      Participant

      Thanks for your replies guys. I went to see my Doctor and he said that I have plantar fasciitis and said that I need to rest my feet but didn’t really have too much time to explain how I could prevent it from coming back when its healed.

    • #354

      flyguy
      Participant

      @andypandy You are missing the point spectacularly, and I thought I was the one with English as their second language….

      The UK government cannot refuse dealing with an asylum application solely for formal reasons, whether the person claiming asylum arrived legally or illegally. They can of course refuse asylum and deport the applicant, but they have to hear their case first. This is an essential part of the 1951 refugee convention referenced in the opening sentence of your linked document.

      The point of your document merely is that the UK embassy in, say, Damascus, is not obliged to issue travel documents to someone they suspect will be entering the UK for the purpose of claiming asylum there.

      Le Tocquet does the same thing: If the immigrant is stopped by UK border control while still in France they cannot claim asylum in the UK, as they will have to get there first. Once an immigrant reaches Dover the UK government would be bound to hear their case.

      Whether they arrive legally or illegally is irrelevant, anyone can claim asylum in any signatory country of the UN declaration of refugees. This is the reason inter state agreements like Dublin or Le Tocquet or extraterritorial transit zones at airports exist.

      Nothing at all in your document says that an asylum seeker must seek asylum in the first country they reach, in fact such a constraint would not be permitted under the 1951 convention. In fact, that would not at all be practical. Do you seriously propose that the millions of poor refugees from Syria should be dealt with by the neighboring countries like Jordan, while only the wealthy who can pay for a flight or hire a yacht that takes them to directly to Cyprus or Greece are free to claim asylum?

      Nevertheless, states in common travel areas like Schengenland can make an agreement (between states!) that the first state registering the refugee is stuck with them administratively (an amazingly stupid idea that of course had to fail), and that the states collectively will only hear one application (a better idea).

    • #352

      flyguy
      Participant

      @andypandy Why? I do not see the relevance of your link to what I have claimed. As I read it, your link says that you have to be in the UK to apply for asylum, but that the UK claims it is not obliged to admit anyone who made it, say, to France to enable them to do so.

      This is not the same as refusing to consider an asylum application for formal reasons (once the asylum seeker has made it to the UK) just because it would have been the refugee’s duty to claim asylum in Italy or France.

      This is exactly why the UK are paying France to have UK immigration checks on the continent: If a refugee made it across the channel they would have no formal reason to refuse at least checking their asylum claim.

      Plus if you are hoping on the Dublin agreement then sorry to disappoint. The Dublin agreement is an agreement between member states that the first state coming into contact with a refugee should deal with any asylum claims, it puts no onus on the refugee to do so.

    • #350

      flyguy
      Participant

      @everyone For those thinking that refugees have a duty to apply for asylum in the first safe country they enter… it is a nasty piece of disinformation that is deliberately spread all the time by the usual suspects.

      Presumably the aim is to discredit both the way the EU tries to cope with the refugee crisis, and even more importantly, to blanket criminalize any refugees arriving further North, thus my angry reaction

    • #858

      flyguy
      Participant

      Yeah. There is a case to argue that the person who spares just those few extra minutes travelling to a polling station will have considered how they vote a little bit more.

    • #831

      flyguy
      Participant

      Too right they are! They help “tolerise” our immune system so it knows what is safe or dangerous so it responds appropriately. 99.99% of the bacteria form a biome that keeps the 0.01% of nasty bacteria in check.

Viewing 7 reply threads