HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

⬐ pbadenski

I was wondering if it's legal what this person did. I thought others would too. Here's what I found:

"Although some asylum seekers might enter the UK illegally, once they have applied for asylum they are no longer ‘illegal’. Anyone seeking protection is entitled to stay in the UK while awaiting a decision on their asylum claim." (http://www.asylumaid.org.uk/the-asylum-process-made-simple)

⬐ jkot

I am Czech, he used passport of my country. For fake passport there is a sentence for upto 3 years in jail.

⬐ None

None

⬐ thats_cute

This person clearly knew the risks. And what's the harm? It's not like he was visiting your country.

⬐ spacecowboy_lon

There is a European arrest warrant.

⬐ jkot

That passport has an owner. It could come from robbery... and identity theft is nothing nice...

⬐ smcl

Since you're Czech you probably know that "Ferredo Nesterova" is not a Czech man's name, so I suspect it was never a real passport.

⬐ jkot

Some of my relatives have similar non-czech name. And he said himself on video that passport has some owner.

Is there some other way to get valid passport number?

⬐ smcl

Which do you mean, not-traditionally-Czech name ("Javier") or mixed up gender surname?

⬐ JorgeGT

This is like saying a "Javier Fernández" cannot be a British citizen because it is not a British man's name. And he specifically says (00:40) that the passport digitally contains a different picture, of maybe the real owner.

⬐ smcl

Nope, it's much simpler (and I wouldn't make that judgement). Male Czech having a feminine surname ("-ova") probably wouldn't happen.

Edit: you updated your comment with the bit about the picture so it looks like I ignored it even though I didnt. He's speculating, we have no idea on the origins of the passport.

⬐ JorgeGT

Fair point (here in Spain males and females have sometimes the "son of" surname). But I think that he's trying to say that the smuggler has warned him that the passport contains the biometric data of someone, so when scanned a different photo will pop up (you can see the electronic passport symbol in the cover).

Probably the forger has just altered the name and picture on the paper, but can't tamper with the microchip that contains the data of the real owner.

⬐ devy

Passport theft / identity theft have been very common in many countries like Thailand. The missing MH370 had surfaced a lot of those identity theft incidents. [1]

[1] http://www.interpol.int/News-and-media/News/2014/N2014-038

⬐ countryqt30

Well, this is only true as long as UK is part of EU. It's an EU law.

⬐ jvdl

I must be missing something. Why didn't he apply for asylum in France then?

⬐ ljf

From listening to him, he speaks excellent English - I might also assume he'd find it easier to settle here for that reason.

⬐ throwaway049

Some motivations for travelling on from France to UK (as mentioned in various news media over recent years)

Smugglers telling people that it is better to live in UK (the smuggler then gets to charge for the trip).

Easier to get work without papers

Community of people from same country of origin

More generous welfare provision (UK still gives 'normal' accommodation, other EU countries are re-purposing non-residential buildings to house asylum seekers)

⬐ RockyMcNuts

more flexible / stronger / better paid labor markets ... easier to get a job in UK than France for most immigrants

⬐ nraynaud

It's essentially psychological, the UK is more popular amongst refugees, and they natively speak english, the 2 other big countries speak either French or German.

I forgot to add: when the application is done, he's legally pinned to the country.

⬐ Perixoog

He's an English teacher.

⬐ DominikR

Social services don't pay enough.

⬐ curiousgal

You'll probably get downvoted but you are correct. As an Arab it sickens me how these "refugees" are choosing what country to stay in despite the fact they say they escaped war and torture. It saddens me how they are giving us, potential future immigrants with degrees and a desire to be functional parts of society, more bad rep.

⬐ NetStrikeForce

> It saddens me how they are giving us, potential future immigrants with degrees and a desire to be functional parts of society, more bad rep.

Does having a degree make you a better person or a more functional part of society? Does not having a degree bring bad rep?

And.

Why do you think these people don't have degrees and can't be functional members of society? Do you think they're stupid because their country was at war? or are they stupid because they have no means to just catch a plane and get a visa?

Your comment is extremely unfortunate.

⬐ DominikR

> Does having a degree make you a better person or a more functional part of society?

I think it would be safe to say that in case of the parent commenter this is true.

It seems obvious that he/she is educated and actually wants to be a part of society.

⬐ NetStrikeForce

Nothing of that makes you a better person. This whole thread is fucked up and I'm totally losing faith in humanity.

⬐ DominikR

Who cares what you believe in?

⬐ NetStrikeForce

It must be shit to be you :-)

⬐ DominikR

What kind of reply did you expect with this insult? ;-)

You can either argue with me based on facts or at least come up with some thoughtful insights but not with "I'm loosing faith in humanity".

⬐ curiousgal

>Does having a degree make you a better person or a more functional part of society?

I can't answer that. However, I can say that having a degree makes an Syrian immigrant a better person or a more functional part of a Western society.

A degree in the Third World is often associated with education (duh), work ethics and a sense of civility. I know this might sound elitist as heck but what use would a developed country have for someone without any of those qualities?

>Why do you think these people don't have degrees and can't be functional members of society?

Simply because they couldn't even be functional in their own society.

I never said they were stupid but if Third Worlders were so bright, why isn't the Third World developed?

Unfortunate? What's unfortunate to me is that I have to point out why countries like my own are far behind. Like it or not the reason for that regression is people.

⬐ NetStrikeForce

Wow. You're going to have a hard time adapting to Europe, unless you only mingle with the elites.

Here is the thing, our values are not "get a degree". Our values are respect, treating and considering each other as equals, help each other, you know, stuff like that.

Unfortunately you seem to be very far from understanding it. Hence why you'll have issues in Europe. You're welcome to come and learn about our values, but be ready to respect everyone equally regardless of their origin, studies or money.

Good luck in your life.

⬐ widforss

As a refugee one is looking for a better life per definition. Surely the primary goal is to get away from war or threats of violence and death, but if you were starting over, wouldn't you want to start with the best possible odds?

⬐ charlesdm

Absolutely. Given he speaks excellent english, the UK is pretty much the only logical choice.

⬐ Tehnix

Except for the fact that you can easily get by with english in most european countries.

⬐ zorked

If you are a tourist sure. If you hope to get a job, especially if your occupation isn't in high demand, then no.

⬐ foldr

In France?! You've got to be kidding.

⬐ socialist_coder

Yeah, this is a huge misconception. You pretty much need to be able to learn the language to successfully live in a country long term.

Even if you can find a job in English (which is possible, things like startups or video game developers are sometimes in English), you will need the local language to talk to shop keepers, repair men, salespeople, any government worker, etc. Basically all the day to day bullshit errands you need to do are only doable in the local language.

Nordic countries are probably OK with English only since a huge % of the population speaks English. Everywhere else though, no chance. The English speaking % is far too low.

⬐ Tehnix

>Even if you can find a job in English (which is possible, things like startups or video game developers are sometimes in English), you will need the local language to talk to shop keepers, repair men, salespeople, any government worker, etc. Basically all the day to day bullshit errands you need to do are only doable in the local language.

In Nordic countries at least, that is indeed not a problem. Literally everybody speaks english at some level, and the whole especially in the larger cities you can often end in shops or restaurants where the people that work there only speak english.

⬐ curiousgal

The worst of those odds still beats living in Syria by a long mile believe me. For this particular guy, going for the "best possible odds" definitely doesn't justify the risk he took.

In a nutshell, beggars can't be choosers.

⬐ jamespo

It would seem they can in this case, maybe you don't want them to.

⬐ curiousgal

Beggars can't be choosers.

Person A can choose.

Ergo, Person A is not a beggar.

Of course they can choose, but they have to stop playing the "refugee" card.

⬐ vidarh

Of course beggars can be choosers.

What that statement generally means is that beggars can't generally afford to turn down charity, hoping for others to give something better.

But in this case this is not what we are talking about, but a situation where someone has to decide which country they will try to apply for asylum in, amongst multiple possible options. In that case, they most definitively can choose to some extent, even though the alternatives may have different perceived risk profiles.

And as with everything else, of course some people will choose badly.

⬐ PeterisP

But these aren't simply "multiple possible options" that differ only in the final country.

One option, getting asylum as soon as you can, is your right, and the other option - crossing the border with forged documents to get asylum elsewhere - is a crime.

Yes, you may prefer A to B - but if one of them is permitted and the other is not, then there is a big ethical difference, and simply choosing whatever benefits you most is not appropriate.

⬐ cabalamat

> it sickens me how these "refugees" are choosing what country to stay in

Why is it sickening? Surely it makes sense for any person to choose the best option of those open to them?

⬐ curiousgal

That is precisely the point. Some options are not open to them. Something about having to go through smugglers and secretly cross borders gives that out.

⬐ danso

I don't agree with breaking the laws of a host country when coming in as a refugee, but it's important to realize that many refugees had normal lives and were functional parts of their society before war befell them. They aren't just the dregs of society, looking for the next host to scam and rummage before moving on, though your use of "refugees" in scare quotes seems to imply that you don't see them as real people.

⬐ curiousgal

I only used "refugees" to refer to the dregs of society you mentioned, not the actual refugees.

⬐ obj-g

For me, the disgusting thing was when the large amounts of immigrants were coming in all together and they were complaining about being in Denmark or wherever. This guy, I mean, in this situation, I guess it's wiser for him to choose -- but the people in the first situation should have just been grateful, not complaining that they don't want to be here in X. The way they expressed it made them come off really poorly, in my opinion.

⬐ magic_beans

Are you serious? Do you understand what the situation is in Syria? Why do you deserve to be in a country any more than a refugee? What exactly does your "degree" do to contribute to "functional" society any more than a refugee's job?

⬐ curiousgal

I never said I deserve to be in a country more than they do but when someone illegally enters a country and accidents start to happen. Citizens of that country can't help but question immigrants in general and that's all I've said.

I used "refugees" intentionally to refer only to immigrants with solely economic motives not all refugees.

⬐ patates

When uneducated immigrants seek social services, I don't look at them in a negative light. Dismissing them just like that, however, comes to me as too elitist.

⬐ peteretep

    > it sickens me how these "refugees" are choosing what
    > country to stay in despite the fact they say they
    > escaped war and torture

Having escaped war and torture, why wouldn't you then want to maximize your chances of a successful rest of life?

⬐ tibiapejagala

Because the law says you can't do that. Well, you might not agree with that certain rule, but note that many do not agree that any form of taxation is fair. Maybe they just want to maximize their chances of a successful rest of life?

⬐ peteretep

The law says you can't do what, exactly?

⬐ vidarh

If it's social services you are after, the UK should be far down the list of places in the EEA to go to. Benefits payments here are laughable compared to large parts of Europe.

⬐ overlordalex

I haven't watched the video, but it would more likely be things like already having a basic grasp of English, being more familiar with the culture, etc, that would make integration easier.

⬐ gutnor

Is that true though ? It seems to be a recurrent theme, both in the press talking about benefit tourism in the UK and from apparently the believes of the immigrant like those desperately trying to cross the Channel tunnel at Calais.

However, I'm a European living in the UK. About all areas I have looked seem to pay less or way less than France, Belgium or northern countries.

For example, unemployment benefits are a fraction of the one in France. State pension is a joke. As soon as you start earning an average salary, child/housing benefit are pretty much inexistent, especially considering that stuff like nurseries cost 3 to 4 times more than equivalent private nurseries in France or Belgium. Public school do not offer facilities for children outside hours and start later and close earlier than on the continent, meaning you need to "go private" for that too while it is free in both France and Belgium. Your workplace rights are laughable: after 8 years my wife would get the same redundancy package than a new starter in the same company in France. The list goes on and on.

What exactly is so amazing about the UK benefits that is worth the trouble compared to staying in France ?

The real stuff that the UK has going for it is that you pay less tax, there are more work opportunities and in big cities, there is less employment discrimination. But that means that immigrant come to work not as benefit leeches as they are picture in the news.

⬐ lotsofcows

This idea that paying less tax is a good thing boggles the mind. Do you think tax payer money is just burnt or something?

Paying taxes provide services that maintain the sensible level of social movement and pay differential that has been demonstrated to advance entire societies.

Why do so many people want to be the richest person in a shit-hole?

⬐ mindcrime

Do you think tax payer money is just burnt or something?

No, some small percentage of it is used for "social good" and the rest is wasted or funneled to well connected / powerful political insiders and their cronies.

⬐ jamespo

You would not be earning if society didn't exist due to the taxes you pay

⬐ aianus

In my experience the countries with lower tax rates have higher gross salaries and higher net immigration so this argument that low-tax regimes are shitholes seems to break down.

⬐ DominikR

Until the first world war there was no income tax in the US. Yet they still had a society and earned money.

Edit because I'm not allowed to reply anymore to below comment: I once lived in a Communist country. Never again. I'd rater die.

⬐ akiselev

I'm assuming you've never lived in a country without a vast social safety net, extensive national highway network, department of education, or a well funded TVA/EPA/FDA/FTC/FCC/FAA/NIH/NSF/etc?

Trust me, "society" was very different before the federal government had vast amounts of money to fund everything we take for granted today as "government waste."

⬐ gutnor

> This idea that paying less tax is a good thing boggles the mind. Do you think tax payer money is just burnt or something?

Let me rephrase that.

With everything I listed that you don't receive in the UK, this idea that paying less tax than the French is a good thing boggles the mind. Do you think tax payer money is just burnt or something?

edit: OK in case it requires more explanation: I don't mind paying more for more, but if I receive less then at least I want to pay less. And by "I", I don't mean personally receiving more or less. As a middle classer I know that I'm more likely to be a net positive contributor to the tax coffer and I'm ok with that.

⬐ DominikR

> Is that true though ? It seems to be a recurrent theme

Does it really matter? It's sufficient if many believe it. Apparently I could be wrong, but also you yourself are not taking a clear position if that's the case or not.

⬐ None

None

⬐ krona

As the original documentary laid out this week, one of the biggest motivations for them to get to the UK is that once they have asylum, it's far easier for them to get their dependents (the entire family) to move to the UK legally, for free. In other countries in the EU (Germany and France were mentioned), it can take 2-3 years for this to happen; in the UK it can take weeks.

⬐ pjc50

Why is this?

⬐ glomph

Probably because France and Germany just accept a lot more asylum seekers.

⬐ Fiahil

Indeed, Germany accepts more asylum seekers than any other in Europe. However, here in France, the problem is the bureaucracy involved. It's legendarily slow, inefficient, and painful.

There is little political incentive to change it since our right wing (profoundly anti-immigration) has gained in popularity in recent years. More generally, anytime you'll have to deal with our administration, it will be incredibly painful (for foreigners and locals alike).

⬐ pjc50

No, it's part of the UN convention on refugees: http://www.unhcr.org/uk/1951-refugee-convention.html

⬐ widforss

No, it's in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 14.1:

"Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."

⬐ nraynaud

No, it's directly Geneva Convention. There are some EU specific things, like the country of entry is responsible to handle the refugee status application, and the European Court Of Human rights is merciless with States giving in to their instincts on refugees, but the base principles are linked to the big treaties on war.

⬐ cabalamat

> European Court Of Human rights is merciless with States giving in to their instincts on refugees

Is it? Do you have examples?

⬐ roel_v

"and the European Court Of Human rights is merciless with States giving in to their instincts on refugees"

Not disagreeing with you, just clarifying: the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU, and AFAIK there is no intention of Britain leaving the Council of Europe (essentially, complaints can be brought to the ECHR against members of the CoE).

⬐ tremon

AFAIK there is no intention of Britain leaving the Council of Europe

Britain's new PM seems to have that intent: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leav...

⬐ andyjohnson0

Theresa May (new UK Prime Minister) has unfortunately been very clear about her desire to leave the European Convention on Human Rights [1] though not afaik the Council of Europe. The Europhobic wing on the Conservative Party may be satisfied with just leaving the EU, or they may not, but I suspect the idea of abrogating the treaty will reappear at some point post-Brexit.

(Just to be clear: I profoundly disagree with her on this.)

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/uk-must-leav...

⬐ matthewmacleod

While I agree with this, I would point out that she explicitly ruled out moving forward with this policy as prime minister.

⬐ Spearchucker

What people say is no guarantee for what they may end up doing. Doubly so for politicians. Brexit was a stark and recent example.

⬐ nraynaud

He broke quite a few laws (and documented it), but there are strong treaties protecting refugees against some national laws. He could go to jail if France were to sue him for using a fake document, but that would not change that he's protected against deportation to Syria.

⬐ tankenmate

And since he wanted to go to the UK the French authorities are more likely to caution him rather than jail him as once he successfully leaves then he is no longer France's problem.

⬐ dmytroi

What's annoying for me that's for other people (non-asylum, non-EU) the system is very bureaucratic and usually not so supportive, for example for someone from post-soviet country it might take up to a year to get a working permit in Sweden. Even if you apply for EU blue card it doesn't help much. But for asylum applications there is a "fast track" with all support possible, sure some part of them are fleeing from war, but some (or even probably most) of them are just economic asylum seekers, just check last statistic from Sweden [1].

It might be safe to assume that economic asylum seekers are looking for better life, which is fair and reasonable, but in this case the system is broken : why economic asylum seekers should get easier/faster/priority process over workers from non-EU countries, or why workers from non-EU countries should even bother with immigration process if they can just apply for asylum and be done with it?

- [1] http://www.migrationsverket.se/Om-Migrationsverket/Statistik...

⬐ TazeTSchnitzel

> why economic asylum seekers should get easier/faster/priority process over workers from non-EU countrie

What makes you think they do? The UK locks many asylum seekers in immigration detention centres.

⬐ DominikR

I just fail to understand how the BBC can portray this as something great. I mean the guy tries to enter Britain 2 times with fake passports and he was already in France. (what is he fleeing from in France?)

And then there's the fact that this guy had contacts to criminals that can create fake passports. I guess nobody did something about that too, their smuggling and fake passport business is probably still making profits!

⬐ oneloop

I read your other comments, and I have a honest question for you. First let me say that I completely agree with you in that when a refugee illegally moves from France to the UK, he is doing so for his own convenience. You're right, after he's in France he's not running for his life, he's doing something illegal just because he prefers one over the other.

But at the same time, I would like to understand why you are so vehemently opposed to him being legally allowed to pick wherever he prefers. If I'm born in France I can legally move and work in the UK, what in your mind is the rationale for not extending the same privileges to someone who's been given refugee status in France? Honest question.

⬐ DominikR

I see it this way: If somebody is about to die or be seriously harmed giving refuge is the moral thing to do.

But once some person is in a safe place where there is no threat for him then immigration laws apply instead of asylum laws.

So why do I want to differentiate between immigration and asylum? (and generally all Western countries do so)

Asylum is something you grant based on moral principles, immigration is something that we grant only voluntarily.

And here I want my country to choose new immigrants based on what skills we need, what skills the migrant brings to the table and of course we also have to take into consideration if we are capable of absorbing them into society.

Meaning: Do they have a chance to integrate and lead a successful life here or not. This is very important because in Europe we already have no go zones where police cannot enter and the inhabitants basically implement some kind of Sharia law.

I will never accept living under some kind of alternative law without a fight. This does not mean that I am against Muslims, but I want to preserve the culture that we have here and more importantly the freedoms and the social order.

⬐ buckbova

A nation should protect its sovereignty and the welfare of its people.

Perhaps the UK would prefer to do its own background check on the man before just letting anyone in.

⬐ gakada

In the documentary they said that ~70% of Syrians who made it to the UK were granted asylum. So evidently the UK is doing its own background checks.

⬐ joosters

What makes you think that the BBC are portraying this as 'great'? The report contains no views other than the asylum seeker himself (and of course he thinks it great, it was his aim after all!)

⬐ DominikR

Oh come on, just listen to the music they overlay at the end when he has tears in his eyes because he is so happy that he made it. Sounds like a happy end to me.

Edit: And he is no asylum seeker in my book. He was in France so what is he fleeing from?

⬐ wercab

I hope in your hour of need that you don't encounter someone such as yourself.

⬐ DominikR

Someone that tells me I can't move to UK with a fake passport, I must stay in a safe and industrialised Western country like France? Must be terrifying!

⬐ jamespo

Congratulations on your escape from Syria

⬐ andybak

You are all arguing past each other and being difficult. Make an attempt to interpret each other in the way you actually suspect they intend and respond to that rather than trying to trip them up.

⬐ JshWright

Personally, I would think 'we' (humanity as a whole) would prefer him to be in a country where he is more likely to be able to contribute meaningfully to society. Unless his French is as good as his English (which is certainly possible), the UK seems like a better place for him to be.

⬐ jay-saint

> And then there's the fact that this guy had contacts to criminals that can create fake passports.

The fact the you are reading this on HN probably means that any one of us could have contacts capable of creating fake passports. I am certain that most tech savvy people with the right motivation could easily learn to use dark net tools and purchase fake documents within a few hours. This is 2016, contact with criminals no longer means hanging out in seedy drug dens or back alleys.

⬐ gtirloni

Absolutely not what was stated. Being able to create a fake passport or contacting someone who can do it is in no way comparable to actually doing those things.

It's 2016, where engaging in criminal activity is still a crime.

⬐ arca_vorago

Tell me that when Hillary Clinton gets indicted, or Tony Blair gets charged, until then I will continue to say that the rule of law is increasingly farcical and the elite are not subjected to nearly the same kind of justice as the middle class or poor.

⬐ djaychela

I would respectfully request that you watch the series of programmes the BBC has just shown highlighting the journeys these people undertake - indeed the guy in question was in the last episode, shown here in the UK on Wednesday. His testimony of his treatment in Syria was heartbreaking. It's easy to say that these people are this and that, and that we wouldn't do what they have from the comfort of our homes. The reality of it, when subjected to the same treatment would probably be quite different. And yes, I live in the UK, and am glad he made it.

⬐ mstrem

what is he fleeing from in France? => nothing. France is a great place.

However, I have lived both in the UK and in France. If I had a choice, and if I was looking for asylum, I would choose the UK every time. In another video from him he says his two friends made it to the UK before him. The best country to get into Europe (as an asylum seeker) is the UK. It is also a reason why there is such a big fuss about immigration. The benefits are great, it is a very safe country, wealthy, lots of opportunity... etc etc. I might be very biast but the UK is quite a bit ahead of the other European countries in my opinion (with a few exceptions). If the UK was on mainland Europe it would have waayyy more immigration problems.

Edit: I am happy he made it. I am pro immigration.

⬐ prodmerc

Well, I dunno, the UK is easier for business, it's easier if you already speak English, health care is really universal, lower taxes, cheaper and easier to get a license and a vehicle, some more good stuff.

But for someone who takes public transportation to and from work and just wants good food, an apartment for cheap and safety (UK - only country where I've seen drunk people yelling, bothering other people and throwing trash bins around and some guy threatening staff in a bank), as well as security in the future (pension, health care), Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, maybe France, they seem better. Cleaner too, sorry (except maybe France haha)...

⬐ preetbhinder

It is also an ethnically diverse English speaking country. A lot of immigrants will know at least a little English and find it easier to find community and assimilate into the UK.

⬐ pvaldes

> If I had a choice, and if I was looking for asylum, I would choose the UK every time.

It depends on your previous education. If he speaked both french and english (thus, language were not a relevant part in the decision), then France would be a better destiny. Is a Mediterranean country, so there is a lot of shared context. More similar climate (in the South), familiar ingredients used in the kitchen easily available, and because France have stronger historical bounds with several African, and by extension Islamic, countries. For islamic people to be able to find food halal prepared by other muslim of their same branch is a must. Finding a suitable job out of the capital would be also much easier. There are more locations suitable in France.

⬐ jvdl

I agree. I find this terrifying. This just shows how easily a terrorist could have done something similar.

⬐ ggus

Getting on a plane in EU with EU passport is easy. Getting off the plane in London will get you to a proper security check. They would have caught him there, hadn't he declared his syrian nationality.

⬐ atomwaffel

Hell, most of the times I've flown between European countries, nobody even looked at my ID. If somebody did, it was usually check-in staff, so there would have been nothing preventing me from checking in under my own name and then handing my ticket to somebody else.

⬐ None

None

⬐ simonh

This has very little to do with terrorism. I'm sure you can find the odd counter-example, but most terrorists enter their target country perfectly legally and are often radicalised while resident in the West. Terrorist organizations know that such people can operate much more easily and are less likely to be monitored by authorities so that's where they focus their recruitment and operational activities. Anyone conflating illegal immigration with terrorism is snowing you in order to push an agenda.

⬐ oolongCat

Well, let's hear what you would do if you were in a war torn country, if you had to fear for your life, if you were tortured by horrible people.

There are so many innocent people, who has nothing to do with the violence. Show some compassion towards your fellow man, please.

⬐ DominikR

I would get myself a gun and start killing ISIS maniacs.

Because I'm not ever going to give up my country to these radicals.

⬐ jvdl

Last I checked, France was not a "war torn country".

He was already in France, then obtained a fake passport to illegally cross into the UK.

⬐ mjpuser

RE: what is he fleeing from in Franch?

Maybe he doesn't know, and doesn't want to learn French?

RE: something great or terrifying

Classic case of "do the ends justify the means." It's not a simple thing.

⬐ DominikR

There is no right for asylum seekers to pick and choose where they want to live once they are in safety, not even by UN and human rights conventions.

I couldn't care less if he doesn't want to learn french or hates baguette, what kind of ridiculous excuse is that?

Do we soon have to enable refugees to live in Monaco, Disney Land or Hawaii just because they feel like it?

⬐ ggus

Short answer: Yes. There is more to life than just "safety".

Do you think that you yourself should be able to pick where to live and work? If yes, why shouldn't he?

I definitely do. I am happy to be EU citizen able to move and relocate freely in EU. I would be even happier being a world citizen able to move wherever I would feel like.

Alas asylum seekers are pinpointed to the place where they ask for asylum.

While this (badly designed) solution stands, the countermeasure they have to pursue is to ask for asylum in the final destination of your journey.

And I cannot see a good reason why Monaco, Disney Land (seriously?) or Hawaii should be exempted from helping asylum seekers.

⬐ DominikR

> Do you think that you yourself should be able to pick where to live and work? If yes, why shouldn't he?

No, I don't want this. And I don't want anyone to being able to settle in my country just because they would like to.

Anyone that believes otherwise (like you do) denies all members of a society the right to control and choose who can join and live with them.

If we take in people they should be sufficiently educated to have a chance on the job market and willing to be a part of our society and culture.

⬐ dkersten

denies all members of a society the right to control and choose who can join and live with them

This is a good thing. Nothing good has ever come from xenophobia, racism and discrimination.

⬐ lmz

That is only a good thing if the members of the society were not obliged to provide welfare and social services to the newcomers. Open borders and the welfare state do not mix.

⬐ DominikR

There is nothing racist about selecting new members for likelihood of being productive. So like I said before, selecting for education, job experience, willingness to be part of our society and culture, willingness to learn our language.

Btw: do you believe that sexual selection is racist? Because it works exactly the same way.

Maybe it would be better if Socialists and Liberals take that choice away from us and make sure we are not racist by allocating sexual partners to each one of us?

Or how about companies? Don't they hire along the same lines? Education, job experience, proficiency in local language. Are companies racist if they don't hire a guy from Afghanistan who can't read and whose only job before was herding sheep?

⬐ Flimm

Actually, almost every society does accept people without selecting them, if they are born there with citizenship. People born in the UK don't have to take some sort of test to stay in the UK, they don't have to prove that they are more productive and more integrated into society than an immigrant, they have the right to stay regardless.

⬐ DominikR

This is because they will go through mandatory schooling (if they don't the kids will be taken away from the parents) which provides ample time for socialisation into our society and learning our rules, customs, culture and language.

At least if our school system isn't a total failure like it already is in some areas.

Now imagine how well some guy will fit that comes here in his thirties only knowing Sharia law, cruel physical punishment and who is used to subjugate women by force if necessary.

It is not his skin color or genes that will likely cause him to be a problem in our society, it is the culture he grew up in that had him internalise these rules as being the just way to live your life.

Edit: And of course local people are privileged in this regard. Why shouldn't they? They were most likely raised by citizens who paid taxes and worked on improving their society. It would be kind of crazy to then forcefully send their children away.

⬐ dkersten

This is because they will go through mandatory schooling (if they don't the kids will be taken away from the parents)

Plenty of kids are homeschooled.

⬐ corobo

> what kind of ridiculous excuse is that?

A made up one. Your parent made up "learn french" and you made up "hates baguette". I think you've invented something to argue against here.

⬐ dalke

Umm, Monaco is signatory to the refugee convention and accepts refugees, so ... yes? There are 30 some odd refugees in the country, or over 15/sq. km. Both as a fraction of population and fraction of area, this is higher than in, say, Spain.

Disney Land is a private company. They are not signatory to any treaty on refugees and have no obligation to accept refugees. Should the US decide to use eminent domain to seize Disney Land and put refugees there, it would be possible, but very expensive and face much outcry.

The US has signed the 1967 Protocol on refugees. There is a right of free movement in the US, and I don't think there's any legal reason which prevents refugees in the US from moving to Hawaii should they feel like it.

In addition, Hawaii has accepted refugees before and the governor has said he is not opposed to accepting Syrian refugees: http://khon2.com/2015/11/17/gov-ige-defends-position-on-syri... .

⬐ DominikR

You are intentionally "misunderstanding" my comment.

Once a refugee enters any country that is deemed safe, he or she has no right to flee any further. It would be really hard to argue in court that someone had reason to flee France.

Countries can of course have bi or multilateral laws in place that allow free movement, but in case of the EU we have the Dublin Regulation that explicitly forbids this for refugees. The EU country where a refugee first sets foot on has to take care of the asylum process. If the refugee decides to move to another EU country then this country has the right to send them back and this is also executed.

⬐ thesimon

> Once a refugee enters any country that is deemed safe, he or she has no right to flee any further.

>If the refugee decides to move to another EU country then this country has the right to send them back and this is also executed.

I guess you are not aware of the court rulings regarding deportation back to Greece?

⬐ DominikR

The ruling stated explicitly that refugees in Greece cannot be guaranteed that their basic human rights will be looked after.

So basically the court said that Greece is not safe for refugees.

If you know about this ruling then I'm sure you also know about this detail, it is widely known here in Europe.

Why do you then give me this reply? What is this about? You just wanting to be right, no matter if you deceive us by not mentioning this fact?

⬐ dalke

Well, yes - you make an outrageous comment, I might make an outrageous reply.

Also yes, the Dublin Agreement is the current law. That does not make it just. I hold with a minority (alas) party of the country I live in - strike down that unjust law and, yes, require all EU and/or Schengen countries to share the effort of providing asylum. Including Monaco, which seems to be doing a good job of it already.

If you want to defend that unjust law, then there's another solution - promote more legal ways to enter the EU, rather than force them through land and dangerous ocean routes, and overloading the border countries.

Get rid of carrier liability and let asylum seekers hop a plane into whichever country they want. As it stands, airlines don't want to bear the penalty for transporting someone who might not get refugee status.

Charter boats so places which are willing to accept refugees (for example, in Spain, https://www.yahoo.com/news/barcelona-waits-refugees-arent-co... ) don't end up with only a trickle.

Quoting from that last link, "human rights are above European legislation".

⬐ throwawaydavex

Because the whole 'refugee crisis' is planned. Just look up what are the EU's objectives, who were it's founding members and their agenda. It's purposeful relocation, that's why gov. officials do not care.

⬐ Broken_Hippo

People in all sorts of desperate situations find different ways to get their needs and goals met. You might not think that you are a theif, but go hungry enough and you might change your stance. Simply being on such a refugee journey can get you certain contacts for this sort of thing, I'm guessing, and as the previous poster mentioned, the internet and technology makes things much easier.

In addition, folks work and walk alongside criminals (who may or may not have gotten caught) every day, and they don't realize it. Stereotypes generally aren't true, and some have less truth than others. Not everyone is doing technically criminal things to hurt others, nor are outwardly bad folks.

⬐ audunw

> and he was already in France. (what is he fleeing from in France?)

You seem to have no idea how the asylum system works.

If this was a valid reason for not getting to seek asylum in the UK, then the UK would for all practical purposes be exempt from having to accept asylum seekers.

As others have pointed out, his main reason for wanting to seek asylum in the UK, is probably that his english is good, which makes it easier and faster for him to be a productive citizen there than in France.

Most people involved with this is aware of the fact that there's problems with the asylum system. If you think this is so awful, how about you propose an alternative system that distributes asylum seekers evenly and fairly across industrialized nations in a way that doesn't require them to cross borders illegaly. We sure could use more people who think about solutions, rather than pointing out problems that everyone is aware of.

⬐ kleiba

I don't quite understand it, but he was already in France when he tried to fly to London, right? He could have just applied for asylum there, it's all EU. Or was this in the light of the UK at some point in the future leaving the EU?

⬐ AdamN

The UK is not part of the Schengen zone so being a temporary resident of France would not entitle you to enter the UK.

⬐ kleiba

Yes, you're right. But my point was: if what he wants is to seek asylum because he's from Syria, he could as well have applied for it in the E.U.

⬐ thesimon

You can't really apply for asylum in the "EU", you need to apply for asylum at a country. Often there are also travel restrictions in place and asylum status e.g. in Greece doesn't allow you to just move to Germany, Italy or France.

And as some comments have pointed out: With very good English, your opportunites are obviously a lot better in the UK than in any other country.

⬐ JshWright

Given his fluency, it seems likely he would prefer a primarily English speaking country (it's likely a win-win, as he is far more likely to be able to become a productive member of society in a country where he speaks the language).

⬐ kixpanganiban

This was incredibly moving. I don't come across content like this in HN that often. Kudos, he was brave.

⬐ None

None

⬐ None

None

⬐ jglauche

Does anyone have a mirror that does not require flashplayer to be installed?

⬐ cantrevealname

See my tip elsewhere in the comments about the Flash problem.

⬐ ommunist

Part of Mrs May propaganda.

⬐ TazeTSchnitzel

If it's propaganda, it's probably not propaganda for her, she's taken a very hard line on immigration.

⬐ ommunist

Making immigration the issue at BBC. This is propaganda. Britain instead of trying to solve internal economical problems, caused by greed and incompetence, goes the easy way - demonisation of immigration.

⬐ pskocik

Smuggling tip: On a Slavic passport, if your last name ends in ova, it says you're female.

⬐ charlesdm

Smuggling tip: don't use the same credit card to buy 20 tickets.

I was surprised he got through so easily. Good for him, though!

⬐ patates

Interesting... So one's surname changes according to their gender?

⬐ stratocumulus

Only the endings, for example the feminine form of Novák becomes Nováková. When moving to a country where there's no distinction, one usually stays by the masculine form in the official documents, regardless of gender. For example, an American-born daughter of Polish immigrants inherits and uses Kowalski as her last name, but if she were born in Poland, she would use the form Kowalska (and her son would be called Kowalski, etc.)

⬐ pavel_lishin

I'm Russian, and it's very jarring sometimes to meet or read about the daughter of immigrants who has a traditionally Russian name, but keeps the masculine last name. (e.g., Katerina Ivanov - which sounds really strange due to the gender mismatch.)

⬐ chillydawg

If you come from a place where you surname is simply FathersnameSon or FathersnameDaughter, then yes. Eg: Bjornson or Einarsdottir (sorry Scandi friends for typos)

⬐ stiGGG

How does this scale? Because i have never heard of a Bjornsonsonsonsonsonsonsonsonsonsonson, i think you are all called after the first ones who came up with this? What a master plan...!

⬐ falsedan

Recursion is bound to one iteration max:

     Magnus Þórsson
           |
           v
    Baldur Magnusson
           |
           v
     Erik Baldursson

⬐ patates

Well, I actually come from such a place. In Turkey it's not uncommon that a surname ends with "oğlu", meaning "son of X" where surname is the form "Xoğlu". Because of "reasons", there are no surnames ending with "kızı" ("daughter of") though - at least I've never came upon one.

Also, we never change them, even if the holder is not male.

⬐ vidarh

> Also, we never change them, even if the holder is not male.

They got "frozen" in most languages once written records got widespread enough that it became common to want to be able to cross-index registers and track family relationships. It varies by country, but often it coincides with the introduction of tax authority registers or other large national databases.

⬐ NetStrikeForce

Funnily enough, this is more widespread than one would think. I didn't know about the Turkish example.

In Spanish, all the surnames ending in -ez also mean "son of". Even many Spanish speaking people don't know (or don't care? :)) about it, as they've been used as "normal" (sorry) surnames for long now.

Lopez: Son of Lope Rodriguez: Son of Rodrigo Perez: Son of Pedro Martínez: Son of Martín etc

⬐ magic_beans

I had no idea!! Was there ever a "daughter of" convention?

I love when etymology pops up in random threads :)

⬐ NetStrikeForce

Actually, when I said "son of" in my head I was using the gender neutral "hijo", so it applies actually to sons and daughters :-)

⬐ bontoJR

Yes, exactly, in fact I thought he has been caught because of that, not about the credit card thing...

Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_name#Female_surnames

⬐ ktt

Exactly but not for all surnames. See: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-in-Russian-culture-a-w...

⬐ falsedan

First names, too, see Valērija/Valēris in Latvian (male names -s, female names -a). Same for family names.

After we were married, my wife's family name changed to 'match' my non-Latvian name, and our son got a different family name on his LV passport. e.g.

    John Smith <-> Jana Smitha
                |
                v
    Josefs Smiths/Joseph Smith

We use the LV passports for primary ID, which sometimes causes some confusion when setting up family accouts etc. with non-passport-control staff.

⬐ pskocik

Czech (his passport) changes endings all over the place. It's how our grammar works. Nouns and adjectives have different endings depending on their contextual gender associations. Czech last names are either adjectives (rarer), in which case the male form ends with ý and the female form ends with á (the latter generally denotes femininity), or nouns, in which case the female form gets turned into an adjective with the ová ending. For example, if your last name is Kovář == Smith, your wife's or daughter's last name would be Kovářová, which could be loosely translated as "of Smith" or "of Smith material" (Kovářka would be the Czech noun for "a female Smith", but female noun surnames don't turn up in formal Czech -- though they make reasonable abbreviations/nicknames among friends). Czech has also the very similarly sounding ova ending (as opposed to ová) which literally denotes possession in addition to the female gender (Kovářova == a (male) Smith's). This doesn't turn up in Czech last names, but it does in other Slavic last names (notably in Russian last names), which makes it sound familiar. Whether it also denotes possession in those languages, I don't know.

⬐ thats_cute

This kind of reminds me when I would be writing a nodejs application, and I have to jump into C to get down and dirty with the optimizations. The kernel can only do so much when it's under panic, so I believe I made the correct choice.

⬐ Retr0spectrum

Are you a Markov chain?

Edit: For those curious, this is what the parent comment said:

    This kind of reminds me when I would be writing a nodejs application, and I have to jump into C to get down and dirty with the optimizations. The kernel can only do so much when it's under panic, so I believe I made the correct choice.

⬐ cantrevealname

A tip for anyone who can't play the video:

If you're trying to view the video under Windows, you'll get an error that says, "You need to install Flash Player to play this content. Download Flash Player now."

Tip: Install a browser add-on to change the user agent to report "iPad" or another platform for which a Flash Player does not exist. The video will then play. I personally use the Firefox extension called "User Agent Switcher" which works well.

It's so ridiculous that we have to do this. I thought Flash was dead. I'd like to ask the BBC's web developers why they don't just show the non-Flash video if Flash is not installed in the user's browser?

⬐ 0xmohit

BBC recently figured out how to (partially) migrate to HTTPS [0].

Give them a few years to realize that video can be played without using Flash too.

[0] http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/internet/entries/f6f50d1f-a879-49...

⬐ jsingleton

Good news, but a shame it will stop me injecting a fake breaking news banner. Will have to settle for just DNS blocking, but that doesn't cache for as long.

https://unop.uk/block-bbc-breaking-news-on-all-devices/

⬐ chadscira

Thats crazy... So they do have alternative support but they decide not to use it?! I was able to get the video to play by using chromes built in device toolbar. https://img42.com/XL9PR+

⬐ jsingleton

This is my favourite: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTtIx5yWsAErmyY.png

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34799790

Oh the irony.

⬐ jsingleton

They do have their reasons. See the sections in this blog post on "Are you planning to add support for Safari on Mac OS X?" and "Firefox".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/internet/entries/8be5501d-43e7-4b...

That being said, I've documented some workarounds here:

Firefox - https://unop.uk/how-to-watch-bbc-news-videos-on-a-desktop-wi...

Safari - https://unop.uk/how-to-watch-bbc-news-videos-on-a-desktop-wi...

⬐ profeta

Ads.

Video ads are 99% flash still. even if your platform is html5, nobody will pay if you can't show their flash crap.

⬐ bisby

This would make sense if they didn't have a non Flash option (like Twitch.tv for instance, although they just announced an HTML5 beta).

But if they have a way to serve the video without flash, it just blows my mind.

⬐ jsingleton

iPlayer defaults to HTML5 if flash isn't installed, but this hasn't been rolled out to the news player yet by the looks of it.

If I visit http://www.bbc.co.uk/html5 in Firefox with no Flash installed then I get:

  Flash is not installed or enabled

  If you would prefer not to use the HTML5 Player beta on this device you must download or enable Flash.