British MP Angry After Constituents Barred from US Entry

According to sky there seemed to be some link between the family and some radicalist Facebook group.

Can't say I'd be surprised at the US not wanting someone like that in.

As for the 9 grand, ought to get their money back since it was a situation that was out of their hands.

a reply to: SprocketUK

Dunno if the little brat was looking at extremists sights then see no reason why they should get a refund.
The kids at fault and the father should have done a better job looking out for his children.

Flying is also not a right. It is a privilege. I have no opposition to a no-fly list. There are ways to be removed but there is 99% of the time a good reason that someone is on there.

This shows us also that there is quite a bit more vetting now that the attack happened in SB, a please they would have been less than a half hour from after landing.

I would venture to say there was a link to the same site that is being tracked based on the shooting in SB. 2+2=4 sometimes....common sense.

I would expect that if they were not allowed to fly that the cost of the flight would be refunded but as for seeing the rat, well, they would be SOL...

a reply to: matafuchs

If the allegations are true then the US hasn’t done anything wrong except maybe poor communications.

If they had spotted the kid was looking at extremists stuff online the US authorities should have alerted our authorities and we could have sent a policeman or social services round to talk to the father.

If we are to fight extremism we need to work better together and our agency’s need toon the ball and if they spot something that looks like radicalisation they need to share with the police and community’s so we can stop it before it grows into something more serious.

There is some further news. One of the brothers is on CBS, and has stated that the other brother had been refused entry to Israel. It's not clear if they were told by officials that was the reason for the revoked visa, or that the brother on CBS offered that as a possible reason.
The other issue about Facebook or twitter was that a family members account had been hacked. Again it's not clear if that was the case.

British Prime Minister David Cameron's office said on Wednesday it was looking into the case of a family of 11 British Muslims who were refused permission to board a flight from London to Los Angeles to visit Disneyland.

...

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency said in a statement issued in London: "The religion, faith, or spiritual beliefs of an international traveler are not determining factors about his/her admissibility into the U.S,"

"... applicants for admission bear the burden of proof to establish that they are clearly eligible to enter the United States," it added. "In order to demonstrate that they are admissible, the applicant must overcome all grounds of inadmissibility."

Source: www.reuters.com...

Interesting view and wonder what final reason would be... and who provided data for last minute change.

a reply to: smurfy

someone asked why to 2 wives were not going on this trip...found some news

www.dailymail.co.uk...

quote "Wives stayed at home because one was ill and one child had no passport."

if you are planning this huge expensive trip, how do you end up with one child who doesn't have a passport??

but in the article it says that one of the wives is in Pakistan, so I am not sure what to think at this point.

I know it is just the "daily mail" so I will look for other soursces

Of course, someones Facebook was hijacked so they could view jihadi sites. What a bunch of BS. Throw Paki wives and no entry to Israel into the fray and I can see some red flags.

Good job!

a reply to: raymundoko

DHS was creating through an executive order bypassing congress..

According to Wikipedia the original Office of Homeland Security (OHS) was created based on action from the Bush administration, presumably an executive order:

In response to the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush announced the establishment of the Office of Homeland Security (OHS) to coordinate "homeland security" efforts.

However the actual Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created by an act of congress and elevated to a cabinet level position:

The Department of Homeland Security was established on November 25, 2002, by the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

-dex

They were not denied entry because they were Muslim, they were denied entry because they were British...

a reply to: DexterRiley

Nothing you posted disagrees with me. It clearly states in your first link that OHS became DHS. It was started as an executive order and eventually approved by congress.

DHS enforces existing laws and EO's from the Administrative branch. If the legislative or judicial branches have a problem with an EO they will take it to task but that takes time. An EO often sits unchecked for lengthy periods of time.

This has gone to the PM now.

This is stupid.

Looks like the USA had valid concern over a couple of members in the group.

There border there rules.

a reply to: raymundoko

Nothing you posted disagrees with me.

True. I was making more of a technical point of order. And in researching the validity of your statement I re-educated myself a little about the origin of DHS.

I've never been a fan of the Department of Homeland Security. Beginning with its name. Both of the words "Homeland" and the Nazi-era "Vaterland" (fatherland) evoke in me the same feeling of dread.

-dex

a reply to: DexterRiley

"Homeland" security is a lot more covert, it somehow feels as though the term "Home" could be a relative target.
Sort of like..

originally posted by: SuperFrog
...
So it started... Decisions like this might bring issues with our friends, like Britain and isolate us in something that really should not represent America, but now it is really doubtful what really should represent us in world. (If you look at GOP candidates, it might be stupidity

)

Wonder on scale from 1 to 10 how high threat are kids wanting to go to Disneyland..

ATS, what you think?

Considering DHS and such fall under the Executive branch of the US government, justified or not, the current stupidity appears to be drawn from current Democrats in office.

A British member of Parliament has written to Prime Minister David Cameron, asking him to challenge the United States after a British Muslim family was denied permission to travel to southern California at the last minute.

However the story did not tell about the many other muslims traveling in and out of the UK at the same time as this family was denied travel. Point is, they would have been denied due to some other reasons of proving their intentions which was obviously not met.

muslims this, muslims that.......... could I give a rats a**.

a reply to: BlackProject

Hundreds of thousands of Brits travel back and forth to the USA each week no problem Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Atheists and Satanists.

So the fact that ONE family got stopped is not a big deal, especialy if one member had a kid looking up extremists web sites.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: BlackProject

Hundreds of thousands of Brits travel back and forth to the USA each week no problem Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Atheists and Satanists.

So the fact that ONE family got stopped is not a big deal, especialy if one member had a kid looking up extremists web sites.

That was what I wrote......

or is that you agreeing? I dont know.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Hundreds of thousands of Brits travel back and forth to the USA each week no problem Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Atheists and Satanists.

The Queen was here?

originally posted by: BlackProject

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: BlackProject

Hundreds of thousands of Brits travel back and forth to the USA each week no problem Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Atheists and Satanists.

So the fact that ONE family got stopped is not a big deal, especialy if one member had a kid looking up extremists web sites.

That was what I wrote......

or is that you agreeing? I dont know.

I was agreeing.