Thursday, December 24, 2015

Muslim Family Barred from Disney Land

A Muslim family from the UK has been barred from flying to the United States in a planned visit to Disney Land.

The family claims it is because they are Muslim.

Media claimed it was because of Donald Trump.

A British news looked into the claim and spoke to the man in the video following.

Question:  Is he telling the truth?

This is opportunity for both Statement Analysis and some body language analysis.  


29 comments:

Anonymous said...

Okay, won't have time to play the video just now, but will say that in a sense I understand this without even knowing the details. I was in a Walmart grocery section recently when a Muslim woman dressed head to toe in the garb they wear came up to a shelf where I was standing and stood next to me. We looked at each other, eye to eye, and that was one hard cold stare she gave me. I backed off and walked away. But I left that store thinking she could have had a bomb under that garb she was wearing and could have blown us all to kingdom come. I tell ya, it was a frightening thought. Merry Merry Peter, family & all. Have a good one! ABB

Hey Jude said...

Ah, you're a hard-task master, Perer, at Christmas and all.:). Well, he stopped to think a fair bit, so his responses were not quite spontaneous. Evasive about his brother (he wasn't charged with anything - he didn't say he hadn't done, or intended to do anything). He said he knew 'exactly' what was going on under his own roof, when evidently he does not, as he had just said that he'd only just been told about the activity on his son's Facebook, which the news research team had uncovered.

Jen Ow said...

He repeatedly claims that he was given no explanation, but then he relays the explanation he was given.

When confronted with the details, and research done by the news outlet, he acknowledges that he is aware of it, (although he claims to have just found out, which is unlikely considering the one issue with his brother/Israel took place a decade ago).

Bottom line, it seems there were legitimate reasons to deny he and his party entrance into the US. If he was truly unaware of his son's email being affiliated with the radical pages, then he should be angry at his son, or the so-called "hackers" he suggests are responsible...not the US, or the travel policy.

rjb said...

"No explanation was given" or some variation thereof was repeated several times, making it sensitive.

His body language seemed to me to be quite tense. No visible hand movements, minimal head movements. Everything seemed very controlled and deliberate.

Anonymous said...

Very close to my son
nothing he'd ever dream of doing

Vance Holmes said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Peter Hyatt said...

Vance, where did you find media blaming Obama?

Please let me know so I can correct the post.

Peter


The international news media hyped the story of a “outraged” British Muslim family who blamed Donald Trump and “Islamophobia” for their being stopped before boarding a U.S.-bound plane for Disneyland.

The Muslim-appeasing British Prime Minister even promised to “investigate” the alleged “anti-Muslim” action.

There was just one very big problem with the media narrative….it was a complete lie.

The British Muslims bound for Disneyland were stopped before they got on the plane. The Muslim father claims, “We were barred from plane due to religion.”

He blamed Donald Trump’s “Muslim ban” as if that was in place, despite Trump not even being the Republican nominee, let alone president.

The media exploded. CNN took the story and ran, “the kids were devastated. “They had big tears in their eyes.”

On December 15, the extended family waited at the gate. Their bags were on the plane. The family included Mohammad Tariq Mahmood with two of his children; his brother Zahid and sister-in-law Sadaf, with five of their children; and two nieces who were accompanying them.

While they waited to board the plane, Mohammad Mahmood was called on the intercom and told that at least some of the family would not be allowed to board. They were not given a reason for the ban, according to Mahmood. Their bags were removed from the plane, and they were ordered to return all the duty-free goods they had purchased, and then escorted from the airport.

Prime Minister David Cameron promised to investigate.

ABC News reported, British Prime Minister David Cameron will look into claims that U.S. officials prevented a British Muslim family of 11 from flying to Disneyland for a planned holiday.

The issue is sensitive because U.S. Republican presidential contender Donald Trump has called for a temporary ban on Muslims visiting the U.S. due to concerns about extremist attacks.

A top Muslim group said cases like this appear to be related to religion and are worrying for British Muslims.

But after hours of ridiculous coverage of the “Islamophobic” incident and plenty of Trump-bashing, the truth finally emerged:

It was discovered that Facebook pages linked to the Taliban and Al Qaeda were registered to the same address as the British Muslim father whose Disneyland trip was blocked by Homeland Security.

Mohammad Tariq Mahmood tried to travel from London’s Gatwick Airport to L.A. He, his brother and nine children were stopped on the orders of the U.S. DHS.

Mr Mahmood says the family were barred ‘because we are Muslim’

No, he was barred because at least one member of his family may support Islamic terrorists, and enemies of both the U.S. and UK.

Anonymous said...

He doesn't deny the reporter's assertion that the facebook page in question has links to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. He goes on to refer to the facebook page as "my son's facebook page". The reporter didn't say it was his son's facebook page; HE said it was his son't facebook page.

Anonymous said...

son's

Anonymous said...

I loved how the show host owned him.

Anonymous said...

He looked like he had more to say at the end - as if he felt he was getting cut off after getting trounced on. Also he looks like he works out.

Anonymous said...

This might be an interesting transcript to analyse:http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/24/black-lives-matter-protester-says-disrupting-christmas-travel-is-a-good-idea-video/

Anonymous said...

I have to ask:
Are his 9 kids all boys? Are they between the ages of 9-27? Some adopted?

If California stopped them from coming, then YAY! for California! Never thought I'd say that.

Even IF some feelings get hurt, it's more important to protect our citizens from people who mean us harm.

Anonymous said...

Okay, sorry, just read the article in the comments.

Hey Jude said...

Hi, Peter - I just listened to him again (and watched him) and he is all 'we' and 'us' at the airport - so he's wanting to share responsibility for the kids' disappointment and reasons (or claimed lack of reasons/explanations) as to why they couldn't board the plane. Then it transpires that he's very close to his son, and spends a lot of time with him - so either he does know about the dubious links and email, and is lying to cover for his son, or if, as he claims, his son 'would never do something like that' - then he's not truly aware of what goes on under his roof - so either way, he's not truthful, as his son having jihadist links is hardly a minor parental oversight, if they are close he knows what his son is doing. Also, I noticed the newscaster said that only some of the party were not allowed - probably the women and children would have been able to have their holiday, and the menfolk were unwilling to let them go unaccompanied - brother iffy, son with Jihadi links, himself the property owner, one or all must have been on the radar.

He looks scary, so into body-building - that's enough of his body language for me - I think that's intended to intimidate.

--

Yes, I like The Beatles - 'Blackbird', 'Fool on the Hill', 'Penny Lane' but 'Hey Jude' won the toss.


A Merry Christmas to you and to yours, and to everyone here. :)

Rob said...

The newsman did what no US newsman would do and presented the facts. It had nothing to do with Trump, one or more of his family is on the no fly list. How old are these 'kids'? I'm feeling this isn't a grade school bunch.
If I'd had been waiting to board and saw him, I'd have missed the flight

Boston Lady said...

What I find fascinating is the reaction of the international community and their statements that this incident will be looked into. Did they forget that the USA is a sovereign nation and can refuse entry to any non citizen and do not require a reason? This isn't one world government. So regardless of the multiple alleged reasons being bandied about, it's still not going to change. Any country can refuse entry to any non citizen. I wonder if this "family" will try to sue? Should we take bets? :)

Also, I love how this whole incident was portrayed as the "family" was stopped at the gate and were unable to go to Disneyland. I guess they didn't want to go to Euro Disney? :) It has also been revealed that this "family" of 11 were not only going to Disneyland but to visit family , see the Grand Canyon. I bet more will be revealed as time goes on.

trustmeigetit said...

I am glad they were stopped. I can only imagine what could have been planned. Anyone that would have a single link to any terrorist should be banned.

How dare anyone allow them to blame this on discrimination or racism.

And I'm sorry, regardless of how you feel bout Trump, his motives are to protect America. It's not about racism.

And still, letting in 2% of those suffering (refugees) is not solving anything. Since there are still millions left there. It's only allowing more terrorists into America. Yes they are not all terrorists, but a handful will turn into 10, into 100 etc.

Look at Sweden.

And don't forget, most of their religious beliefs are dangerous to women. So even if they are not extremists, their religious beliefs do affect our human rights.


Anonymous said...

O/T but @Anonymous 1:58

"YAY! for California! Never thought I'd say that."

Then I guess you don't like to eat.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/explainer/2013/07/california_grows_all_of_our_fruits_and_vegetables_what_would_we_eat_without.html

I get sick n tired of people maligning my beautiful adopted state. The rest of the nation and much of the world would be up the creek, and very hungry, without us.


Anonymous said...

@trustmeIgetit

"And don't forget, most of their religious beliefs are dangerous to women. So even if they are not extremists, their religious beliefs do affect our human rights."

Hell yeah, Christian beliefs are so much more beneficial to women. Like Hobby Lobby, for example, refusing to pay for birth control pills for their female employees due to their sincerely held Christian beliefs.

That isn't dangerous in the least to women who take them on to alleviate periods heavy enough to cause anemia, or relieve the debilitating pain of endometriosis.

So those gals should just suck it up and be glad they don't have to cover their hair in public, because that would be SO MUCH WORSE.



Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 10:15: Are you joking? I sure hope so. Denying birth control pills is way different than being beaten, burned, raped or killed. Women can control their fertility, close your legs and you won't need birth control!

Anonymous said...

NO I am not joking. Are YOU joking? Did you not read what I wrote?

Birth control pills have enormous health benefits for women who keep their legs closed at all times. Virgins who have periods so heavy they are at risk for anemia. Birth control pills can alleviate that condition.

Abstinate women who suffer from debilitating endometriosis can benefit enormously from those same pills.

It's not as black and white as you might think it is. And why is it the woman's responsibility to keep her legs closed and not the man's to stop trying to open them up?




Trigger said...

I agree with Jen.

He contradicted himself when he said, "No explanation was given" then said that "they" gave him a reason.

His pronouns gave him away.

I think that he had prior knowledge of this situation. He used his family as a cover for his hidden agenda in an effort to disarm anyone who might think of him as a dangerous person.

Peter Hyatt said...

Good listening, Trigger.

1crosbycat said...

It costs $30/ month for birth control pills, depending on the brand/type. Doesn't that marvelous nonprofit "charity" Planned Parenthood provide free pills anyway? (Now that would be a great subject for undercover video-determining if Planned Parenthood actually gives away anything for free). I don't think its a stretch to think the religion that promotes female genital mutilation might not pay for birth control pills, even if the gal has bad acne. Hey, no one can see her face under the bourka anyway.

Wreyeter72 said...

You are wrong about Hobby Lobby. They did not object to ALL birth control - only the "morning after" pills, which have no medical benefits to women other than preventing pregnancy, which HL owners believe is akin to abortion. Women receiving health insurance through HL can get all other forms. It bothers me that people are still misinformed as such.

trustmeigetit said...

I actually do not like any organized religion.

There's a video on YouTube. They were reading passages...they were telling people it was from the Quran when it was actually the bible.

But many middle eastern countries still feel women are less than man. It's those extreme beliefs that are dangerous.

Matt Whan said...

First and foremost, the interviewer didn't use proper questioning techniques. Not only did he not use open ended questions, bUT he repeatedly controlled the substance of the man's answers by doing so. "Either this is a hoax at your expense or there is more going on under the roof of your home than you know about" therefore limiting the responses of the answerer to two avenues.

Secondly, the interviewee responds to direct questions by "sharing" the responsibility: "we weren't told anything" "that's all they told us" etc.

Unnecessary information given when talking about his brother being held including: "He didn't take anything, he wasn't convicted of anything" convicted or not does not eliminate guilt. It could have been a lack of evidence.

Peter Hyatt said...

Matt,

How I wish more journalists would have interview training!

Peter