Canada Girl Guides restricting scout unit travel to USA

[Back Pack]

Really folks? Just read what the last administration did. No hysteria. No one with a valid visa was denied entry or return.

 

Good Lord, get real.

[RememberSchiff]

I expect on any flight, there will be a problem at the airport. If one or two are delayed (I really mean detained) by TSA, do we all stay behind, scrap the trip, and eat the expenses. No.............

 

CP Response: Actually, yes, yes you do - until the situation with the TSA is resolved, especially if the situation is with a Scout or two that you are traveling with and you are acting in loco parentis.

 

Like I said, be prepared. At least four adults in group, so two adults available to stay back. Hopefully, any problem will appear at first departure point (home airport) where parents are on just other side of the gate.

[Stosh]

 Gee, now we have a travel warning to America?  Careful, when one gets to the border one may get turned away.  On the other hand, Americans traveling to foreign countries are allowed in, but have major travel restrictions such as getting shot at or robbed.   It's unfortunate that it has come to this, but getting turned back is not that big of a deal.  Be prepared, are all the travel visas approved?  Everyone has their passport?  All medical issues cleared up?  Any problems with non-Canadian travelers with the group?  If not, check with customs before getting in the car....or even before planning an American visit. 

 

All these things could have, and should have, been taken care of before leaving.  It's called planning and is part of any scout activity.  If one gets to the border and has problems, the leaders have not done their homework and should be pointing fingers at themselves for not being prepared.

 

That is like showing up at the border without appropriate authority to cross and then complaining about being tagged a criminal.

[David CO]

So If just 1 of the Girl Guides of Canada's 90,000 members isn't allowed access into the USA, than none of them may take the trip. This is an impossible standard to meet.  It always has been.  It always will be.

 

If the Girl Guides were to stick to this policy, then they would never be able to take a trip to the USA ever again.

 

The USA would never guarantee universal access to all Girl Guides of Canada and their leaders.  This would only invite terrorists to  use the organization to gain access to our country.  It would never happen.  Not under this administration, and not under any other administration.  

 

Of course this is just political posturing.  

[MattR]

Yes, they are idiots. The reason being that if they want to make a political statement it would be much much louder if they went ahead with the trip and a girl scout got stopped at the border. Just imagine the publicity. Girl scouts as terrorists? What a photo op.

 

"We just wanted to trade unicorn patches with our sister troop in Duluth and this big man with a gun said we couldn't come in and now we have to go home."

[NJCubScouter]

It's unfortunate that it has come to this, but getting turned back is not that big of a deal.

It seems to me that when you are in charge of an international trip, you get to decide how "big of a deal" it would be if someone gets turned back. In this case the persons in charge are the Girl Guides of Canada, not any of us.

 

If the point here is that the Girl Guides have decided that if some of their members are unwelcome in the U.S., then none of them will travel here under their group's auspices, it's their decision to make. They are answerable to their own members as to whether that is a good decision.

[Back Pack]

I hear the Girl Guides are going to Pakistan. They stand a much better chance of freedom and being treated equally there.

 

South Park had it right: Blame Canada.

 

Good grief.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Back Pack

[ianwilkins]

 Gee, now we have a travel warning to America?  Careful, when one gets to the border one may get turned away.  On the other hand, Americans traveling to foreign countries are allowed in, but have major travel restrictions such as getting shot at or robbed.   It's unfortunate that it has come to this, but getting turned back is not that big of a deal.  Be prepared, are all the travel visas approved?  Everyone has their passport?  All medical issues cleared up?  Any problems with non-Canadian travelers with the group?  If not, check with customs before getting in the car....or even before planning an American visit. 

 

 

British passport holder with valid visa refused entry to the USA

 

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/british-muslim-teacher-denied-entry-us-school-trip

 

I mean, he is Welsh, but no need to hold that against him.

 

Mind you, that story is now a month old, and that seems an awful long time in politics currently.

 

It's really the last thing you want on an international trip, one of the leaders getting turned back. One of the kids getting turned back isn't great either. You just want everything to run smooth as silk.

[Back Pack]

Why would someone get on a plane knowing they fell in to one of the categories a sovereign nation put on a travel ban?

 

If England were to say blond haired Swedes were not allowed to travel to London, regardless of the valid Visa I had I wouldn't be getting on a plane for Heathrow. That's just moronic.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Back Pack

[Stosh]

I'm a bit confused, but I did read the article 3 times to make sure.  Nowhere in the article does it say this gentleman is a British citizen.  If I were in Norway teaching "English as a Second Language" I would be a Norwegian school teacher, but a US citizen.

 

He had a "valid" visa is all it says, and the protectorate ban cancelled those visas so it was no longer valid.

 

I can surmise from the op-ed piece that this gentleman was a passport carrying citizen from one of the 7 nations mentioned in the ban, working in Great Britain that got caught up in the political mess caused by the terrorist movement.  We need to view these issues from all sides using all the information rather than the information cherry picked to promote a political agenda.

 

I don't see myself as a bigot against anyone, BUT on a dark street, a small group of "people" are coming down the street all wearing hoodies.  I can't tell if they are male or female, white or black, young or old, Muslim or Christian,   And I guess it wouldn't make much difference if they were wearing ski masks, hoodies, or scarves, their identity is hidden.  Well, like 99% of the people in this country, at least, when someone wishes to hide their identity they are most likely involved in an agenda.  Everyone has a fear of the unknown, one cannot be blamed for that, it's the hallmark of self-preservation.

 

Young kids wear hoodies..... I have a hoodie too.  Does that make me up to something nefarious?  One doesn't know and that invokes fear and a fearful reaction.  It's only natural.  Unless it's necessary,

 

It would be nice to know the whole story of this school teacher, but for some reason, all the facts are not exposed in the article which would indicates something is being purposefully left out or hidden from the reader.  Are we not back full circle to fear of the unknown?

[ianwilkins]

Why would someone get on a plane knowing they fell in to one of the categories a sovereign nation put on a travel ban?

 

If England were to say blond haired Swedes were not allowed to travel to London, regardless of the valid Visa I had I wouldn't be getting on a plane for Heathrow. That's just moronic.

 

They didn't. They were a British citizen. They had no reason to suspect they were in one of the categories in the travel ban, as I understand it. Okay, read on...

 

I'm a bit confused, but I did read the article 3 times to make sure.  Nowhere in the article does it say this gentleman is a British citizen.  If I were in Norway teaching "English as a Second Language" I would be a Norwegian school teacher, but a US citizen.

 

He had a "valid" visa is all it says, and the protectorate ban cancelled those visas so it was no longer valid.

 

I can surmise from the op-ed piece that this gentleman was a passport carrying citizen from one of the 7 nations mentioned in the ban, working in Great Britain that got caught up in the political mess caused by the terrorist movement.  We need to view these issues from all sides using all the information rather than the information cherry picked to promote a political agenda.

 

 

If it says he's British, I'd have assumed he has a British passport, if he was an Iraqi, that's moved to Wales to teach, I'd have expected it to say he was an Iraqi citizen.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-39032062

 

"The council confirmed Mr Miah has a British passport and does not have dual nationality. His family's ethnic background is Bangladeshi."

 

I can't see any hiding of information or identity.

 

Of course, the left leaning press may well have made hay on this one, as it suits their agenda, but that doesn't take away that this happened.

 

Yes, I agree, it would always be nice to know a bit more info on the story.

[perdidochas]

How is this nonsensical? I think it's a reasonable precaution. I'm a natural born US citizen, but I wouldn't take a scout unit into Canada in the current environment as I'm not sure I would be able to get them all back into the US without a problem. Especially if they are or look Muslim.

 

If they have valid U.S. passports or foreign passports with green cards, you shouldn't have any problem.

[Back Pack]

Maybe he's on a no fly list. Maybe the database mixed his name with another. Maybe his name is the same as someone on the no fly list. Maybe a passenger complained about him. Maybe it's simply a mistake. Maybe the US intel knows more about him than MI-6. Who knows.

 

I was detained at Gatwick in the 1990s traveling through England to Sweden. No reason given. Held for 2 hours and then let go with a "you can leave now". No apology. No call to the press. I accepted people doing their jobs and moved on.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Back Pack

[Col. Flagg]

Even I have been detained coming back from international travel. US Citizen and so white a snow man has a better chance of tanning than I do.

 

Customs and Border Patrol has detained me on several occasions over the last 20 years. I have been asked to step out of line and go through enhanced security in Germany, UK, France, the Middle East, Asia, etc. Heck, when I was 8 I was strip searched leaving the Munich airport after the '72 Olympics. No parents allowed in. What's an 8 year old going to smuggle out of Germany? Kinder Ueberraschungs? I've had my passport checked sitting in a pub in Dublin. I have been asked to produce "papers" in Paris. I had an AK-47 shoved in my face on a train going from Vienna to Budapest in 1992 because I was speaking German but had a US passport and they (border security) wanted to know why. I have been spit on by Mexican border guards crossing from Mexico to the US.

 

Point is, none of this has deterred me from travelling to any of these locations again. From time to time countries secure themselves. It used to be a fact of international travel. Anyone who traveled in the 60s and 70s, even 80s, can remember that international travel was always somewhat of a risk.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Col. Flagg

[David CO]

It's the same with Canada.  I was detained and questioned once when I was crossing over with a group of boys to see the Canadian falls. 

 

It turns out that one of the boys parents had a restraining order out on someone, and I fit the description. They wanted to make sure that the boy wasn't being abducted.

 

The parent was very embarrassed.  Had no idea that it could make it difficult for us to take her son into Canada.

 

We are all assuming that this British teacher was stopped because he is a Muslim, but we don't actually know that.  There are many reasons a person can be detained or turned back at the border.

Edited March 15, 2017 by David CO