Homeland security deports British twenty-somethings based on "joke" tweets

[elbows]

The Brits are so hot about this, because it happens, to them, infrequently.

Canadians and Americans? Happens to them with disturbing frequency. So it’s kind of Meh, for us over here. Sometimes border guards are dicks, but in their defense, I wouldn’t know a Family Guy quote from an actual threat, to save my damn life. That it’s a cartoon quote doesn’t seem like a great defense to me.

I’d be interested to know how many border crossings there are in England compared to the US. Or, for that matter, the number of people crossing daily, in and out. I’d wager there is a larger difference there. Not that it’s an excuse, but definitely a factor, I would guess.

Was it silly? Yes! Was it an international scandal? Hardly.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@John_Mace

All we know, and I’m not sure we even know this, is that the “destroy America” tweet raised a flag. We don’t know what DHS learned about these two people while they were in custody. All we’ve heard is their side of the story.

That’s about all you have left to hang your argument on now, and it’s a slender, slender thread indeed.

Perhaps the two lads knew where the WMD in Iraq were to be found - Maybe they’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Or it’s possible that they were the Irish leaders of the Lizard People, and were going to try to sneak into Area 51, which as all agents know, is code named “Marilyn”

I mean, we just don’t know. We must trust the government. right?

[Gagundathar]

What are you saying?
That Marilyn was a lizard person?
You cad!

[John_Mace]

@SciFiSam

There could be more to the story; the statement doesn’t say if there is or isn’t. (I doubt it was drugs, though - more than refused entry would have happened then). But this thread is about what we do know and all through this thread you’ve been defending sending them back on the basis of these two tweets.

Nope. I’ve said it’s not clear that they did anything wrong. And it isn’t. You, and most of the others in this thread, have instantly assumed that the the story we heard from the two youngsters is the truth. I said early on that the system we have should have false positives. If this is one of those times, then so be it. But still, we don’t have all the facts, and so I’m not going to condemn the DHS for having denied entry to these two people. This sort of thing happens all the time.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

If you have any other facts, bring them. Otherwise, all we have to comment on is what has been published.

If we assume that we can’t discuss any topic until we have a perfect outline of all the facts and can ascertain from afar the veracity of all the players with certainty… well we might as well shut down the SDMB.

[John_Mace]

The only “facts” we have is that these two were held for about a day and they weren’t cleared. We don’t know what procedures DHS went through to try and clear them. There is not fact in evidence that they were thrown you because of the tweets. The two travelers don’t know that. It’s their conjecture, but it’s not a fact.

[Norse]

@John_Mace

I don’t want to have to determine whether someone trying to enter the US is using some sort of ridiculous slang or not.

Let CBP, TSA et al keep up their good work, and all you’ll have to worry about in border control is poor wannabe-immigrants who would sell their left testicle and their firstborn’s virginity for a green card and the occasional nutjob terrorist. More and more people from the slightly more sensible and affluent parts of the world - people who sometime in the past would consider visiting your country, parting with some vacation money or business money and then leaving the Best Country In The World™ - are seeing more and more perfectly good reasons to avoid the USA.

It’s a sort of pity, though, because once upon a time we had a positive picture of your country.

[Gary_Kumquat]

@John_Mace

The only “facts” we have is that these two were held for about a day and they weren’t cleared. We don’t know what procedures DHS went through to try and clear them. There is not fact in evidence that they were thrown you because of the tweets. The two travelers don’t know that. It’s their conjecture, but it’s not a fact.

In the article linked there is a photo of the form “US Department of Security - Withdrawal of application for Admission”. It says:

"On January 23, 2012, Mr Leigh Van Bryan, a 26 year old male citizen of Ireland, arrived at Los Angeles International Airport on board Air France Airlines Flight #AF-72 from Paris, France. My BRYAN presented his Ireland passport and completed form 6059B, and applied for admission as a WT under the Visa Waiver Program as a visitor for pleasure. Mr. BRYAN was referred for being a match to a One Day Lookout.

During secondary examination, Mr. BRYAN was placed under oath and his sworn statement was taken by C&P Officer Wahman, Mr BRYAN confirmed that he had posted on his Tweeter website account that he was coming to the United States to dig up the grave of Marilyn Monroe. Also on his tweeter account Mr. BRYAN posted that he was coming to destroy America"

So, unless they were leaving the big stuff to page two, then that seems pretty consistent with their story.

[SciFiSam]

@John_Mace

The only “facts” we have is that these two were held for about a day and they weren’t cleared. We don’t know what procedures DHS went through to try and clear them. There is not fact in evidence that they were thrown you because of the tweets. The two travelers don’t know that. It’s their conjecture, but it’s not a fact.

And the ‘fact’ that the DHS only gives those two tweets as the reasons for their expulsion.

And you have repeatedly condoned them being expelled purely because of their tweets. You have defended that specific reason for refusing entry.

Elbows, are you saying there isn’t much international travel in and out of England?

[elbows]

No, I’m saying there are not nearly as many border crossings, and numbers of people’s crossing in any given day, as there are in America. That’s a lot of, not terribly well educated, border guards making a lot of calls, day after day.

They are just people. They screw up. Shit happens. It happens to Canadian’s going to America, and to American’s coming to Canada, all the damn time. If y’all are determined to get your panties in a twist I highly recommend something of more weight than this.

I once went to see a Rolling Stone’s concert in Buffalo, New York, from Canada, with a bunch of other young people in a rented car. In the car were; An Aussie girl, in Canada illegally, and working, no ticket home, and no concert ticket, but had a multiple entry visa for the US. A British couple, both in Canada on vacation, with visas, concert tickets and tickets back to their homes. Of course, all the way there, we were making contingency plans to drop the Aussie in Niagara Falls and continue on to the concert, if need be. Not how it played out. They refused to admit the Brits, for no reason really. But the Aussie, sailed right through.

I had an Asian roomie when at the uni, being so far from home there was no place to go for holidays. Her roomie from the previous year had married a Philadelphia stock broker over the summer. My roomie was happily looking forward to visiting them over spring break. Took a two hour bus to the city to get an America visa -denied, no reason given. A small Asian girl.

Both of these events occurred well, well, before 9/11, or homeland security. Furthermore I don’t know a single person who doesn’t know a similar story.

Tons of people cross, tons of border crossing, all day, everyday. Monitored by people not machines. Shit happens. No one got shot, or prison raped, or put in jail. They were detained, at the airport, then refused entry. Yes, it was a very silly reason. Would no reason at all have pleased you more? Because we’ve all seen that too.

I’m just saying until our borders are monitored by machines, mistakes will happen. It’s not an international incident. If it pleases you to believe that people will stop visiting in droves, have at it. But it ain’t gonna happen, I assure you.

Canadians routinely, it seems, turn up dead while on vacation in Mexico, but the planes are still full. This has clearly hit a button for you, but I think you’ll see in about two days no one will remember anything about it. Tempest in a teapot, at it’s heart.

[AK84]

@elbows

I’d be interested to know how many border crossings there are in England compared to the US. Or, for that matter, the number of people crossing daily, in and out. I’d wager there is a larger difference there. Not that it’s an excuse, but definitely a factor, I would guess.

Was it silly? Yes! Was it an international scandal? Hardly.

Well number of people who visited the UK in 2011 was (PDF)28.29 million. Which is not much less than the population of Canada. Note this is the number of people who visited at least once. Not number of persons who came inbound, many were multiple (like me).

For the US it was 56 million people

So proportionally the number of people who visit the UK is far higher (about half the population of the UK, versus about 1/6 for the US and A)
On the issue of the border crossings, I’ll note that the UK has only one land border (which IIRC does not have checks). But visits to the UK from residents 2010 came from France, the Irish Republic, Belgium and Holland which are the only border “countries” are more than a million a year. And these means nationals of those countrise, it does not include the many manyy British nationals who live and work in the EU and who visit.

I can assure you that the US border control is the worst. I suspect N Korea might be worse, but then again I have never been there.

[amanset]

@elbows

Canadians and Americans? Happens to them with disturbing frequency. So it’s kind of Meh, for us over here. Sometimes border guards are dicks, but in their defense, I wouldn’t know a Family Guy quote from an actual threat, to save my damn life. That it’s a cartoon quote doesn’t seem like a great defense to me.

@John_Mace

I’m unimpressed with the “slang” argument. “Destroy America” is “destroy America”, and if some sub-culture wants to use that as “slang”, then fuck 'em. I don’t want to have to determine whether someone trying to enter the US is using some sort of ridiculous slang or not. It’s a privilege, not a right, to enter a foreign country.

I’ve never heard of that “slang”, and I not some yahoo from Bufuck GA. And the idea that only such a person would be unfamiliar with that type of slang is laughable.

@BwanaBob

Then todays youth are stupid if they choose to make slang expressions using words that have serious meanings. How about they decide to call a really rough handshake a “rape”? What happens when they say they are going to rape someone? Are we supposed to excuse it, or actually waste time assessing if they’re serious?

Buy a clue.

Replying to all three of you.

Not wanting to beat a dead horse, but just forget about the “Family Guy” aspect. Are you seriously trying to tell me that after a good ol’ grilling the authorities weren’t able to adequately decide that they were or were not going to try and physically destroy the United States of America? Seriously?

I’m sorry of this implies that you are all out of touch idiots that clearly have no idea of the concept of slang, the history of slang or how language develops … but you are all out of touch idiots that clearly have no idea of the concept of slang, the history of slang or how language develops. Seriously. Slang like this, where an existing word is used in a way completely different to its original definition, is so common it is amazing that anyone seems to be arguing against it. When people talk about “getting slaughtered” are they expecting to be murdered? When a teen on Xbox Live talks about “raping” someone, is he really threatening sexual assault? Is “Facebook Rape/Facerape/Frape” a sexual assault? Is the ebonics use of “ill” really a description about how somethign isn’t very well? When teens in 80s Britain referred to things as “wicked” did they mean they were in some way evil?

Seriously guys, get a fucking grip. They were innocuous tweets and yet somehow after an interrogation process THAT NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED IN THE FIRST PLACE IF THE AUTHORITIES HAD HALF A BRAIN the idiots getting all hot because they’ve got a shitty little badge still couldn’t work out if this was a threat? Seriously? And then the people get sent back, probably at considerable cost to themselves (hint: it costs a lot more to cross the Atlantic than it does to go US<->Canada, for all those trying to make that comparison).

At the absolute very least those involved in the case at the airport should be sacked.

[amanset]

Whilst I’m at it:

Synonyms to “destroy”:

“Tear it up”
“Rip it up”

Neither actually means to cause any damage to anything.

[grude]

@Acsenray

As a citizen of the United States I expect to be able to take advantage of free travel anywhere as almost on the level of a human right in a globalized world and in furtherance of that principle I expect my country to offer the same courtesy to the rest of the world and not capriciously deny entry to any tourists based on harmless tweets. .

I agree with you, yet you really should realize this is not a reality for most of the world.
Even Canadians are denied entry for blogging about how they took part in a medical study involving LSD decades prior http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/04/canadian_psycho/ and the USA no longer honors the visa waiver system as now everyone worldwide requires 72 hour prior approval for USA entry.

Come from a “3rd world” country and travel to the USA is a laugh, even the rich grovel before bored embassy officials who deny for anything and everything.

[shijinn]

@elbows

… They are just people. They screw up. Shit happens. … I’m just saying until our borders are monitored by machines, mistakes will happen. …

first, just because it happens all the time doesn’t make it right.

this is also not an accidental mistake. it is a decision that the thought police would make. America’s definition of freedom has become a very unique one, after 9/11.

[jjimm]

@amanset

I’m sorry of this implies that you are all out of touch idiots that clearly have no idea of the concept of slang, the history of slang or how language develops … but you are all out of touch idiots that clearly have no idea of the concept of slang, the history of slang or how language develops. Seriously. Slang like this, where an existing word is used in a way completely different to its original definition, is so common it is amazing that anyone seems to be arguing against it. When people talk about “getting slaughtered” are they expecting to be murdered? When a teen on Xbox Live talks about “raping” someone, is he really threatening sexual assault? Is “Facebook Rape/Facerape/Frape” a sexual assault? Is the ebonics use of “ill” really a description about how somethign isn’t very well? When teens in 80s Britain referred to things as “wicked” did they mean they were in some way evil?

This paragraph is sick.

[bengangmo]

I guess my terrorist wife better stop saying “bomb china” when she takes a dump. And who knows what " lay a cable" will be taken to mean.

Not to mention that I sometimes get " massacred " when I drink too much. Then what would " sinking a few tinnies" be taken to mean?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@John_Mace

The only “facts” we have is that these two were held for about a day and they weren’t cleared. We don’t know what procedures DHS went through to try and clear them. There is not fact in evidence that they were thrown you because of the tweets. The two travelers don’t know that. It’s their conjecture, but it’s not a fact.

As has been pointed out, there is a form “US Department of Security - Withdrawal of application for Admission”. which I assume you did not see. We do know that the interrogation got the lads to admit the horrible things they posted on their “tweeter website” (sic) Tweeter website? Seriously?

The only one conjecturing here is you, when you suppose that there might be different reasons (other than the tweets) for expelling the lads.

Maybe when they stripped them down, they found their “I Heart Taliban” underwear.

[elbows]

Proportionally is not what I meant. In sheer numbers no one is doing as many entry /exits as America. And I’d also point out that consistency is much easier to maintain when all your entrants are coming into 2 or 3 gateways, not so in the US, there are many, many more.

And I don’t believe that I said or implied it was ‘right’. Yes, it was wrong.

Now…chin up, and carry on, what say?

[John_Mace]

@Gary_Kumquat

In the article linked there is a photo of the form “US Department of Security - Withdrawal of application for Admission”. It says:

So, unless they were leaving the big stuff to page two, then that seems pretty consistent with their story.

It does say that it’s continued on another page, and there is nothing in there about what happened during their detention, so yeah, maybe the “big stuff” is on another page. But note that the box checked for denial was VWPP, which is the Visa Waiver Program. According to that web site, they must be able to show that:

They can demonstrate the intent to stay 90 days or less in the United States and demonstrate sufficient funds to support themselves while in the United States. Learn more on the CBP website.