The ‘suspicious' holiday plan that led to two teens being deported from Hawaii
Two German teenagers, Charlotte Pohl and Maria Lepère, were denied entry to the U.S. and deported from Hawaii despite having the required travel authorisation.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents deemed their trip "suspicious" due to their lack of pre-booked accommodation for their entire stay.
The teens were reportedly interrogated, subjected to body scans and strip searches, handcuffed, made to wear prison uniforms, and detained overnight in a holding cell.
They were eventually deported back to Germany via Tokyo, Qatar, and Frankfurt.
This incident follows a travel advisory update from Germany regarding stricter U.S. border control measures and an overall decline in European visitors to the U.S.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
4 hours ago
- Spectator
How a Luxembourg village divided Europe
I am in the most EU-ish bedroom in the EU. That is to say, I am lying in a refurbished room in the handsome 14th-century Chateau de Schengen, in the little village of Schengen, Luxembourg. From my casements, opened wide onto the sunny Saarland afternoon, I can see the exact stretch of the river Moselle where, on a boat floating between Germany, France and Luxembourg, the Schengen Agreement was signed in 1985. This was the agreement that sealed Free Movement as Europe's defining ideal – one whose consequences are still unfolding. I've been in Luxembourg for a week, on assignment, and this week has given me an insight into why the nations of the EU undertook their bold, remarkable experiment of no more borders. The first and obvious motivator was war. Luxembourg can look oddly new, or newish. Ancient-sounding villages are full of blocky 1960s houses. Supposedly medieval churches are clearly modern, lacking the rich patina of age. This is because they were all flattened in war – especially the last German offensive of the second world war, the Battle of the Bulge – which raged across snowbound Luxembourg from December 1944 to January 1945. As a result, much had to be rebuilt or heavily restored. Reviving international trust took even longer, as the war here was brutal. In little towns like Diekirch, teenage Nazi conscripts casually gunned down innocent civilians in the streets. The angered Allies felt no huge need thereafter to take German prisoners alive. The yearning to overcome this evil trauma – and reconcile – was one big driver of the EEC, which reached its frontierless, post-national apotheosis here in Schengen. But another was sheer practicality. Yesterday, my local guide, Anna, told me how she once had to show her passport every day to cross the Moselle to and from Germany. She can remember the queues and frustration. She recalls a crimped, claustrophobic Europe – like an office with too many cubicles. Nowadays the quaint old customs houses have been turned into tourist bureaux or posh chocolatiers, and everyone breezes between countries with total freedom. The other day I drove a meandering route through the rustling green winelands and must have crossed between Lux and DE half a dozen times, barely noticing. At its best, Schengen is indeed wonderful. But there's the geopolitical rub. Schengen at its Platonic best is magnificent. In practice, it may be turning into a tragic failure. A primary reason is migration – not within Europe, but without. To illustrate my point, Anna told me another story of Luxembourg. She explained how, in the 1970s, the now-prospering little Duchy required workers. As she put it, with bracing candour: 'We chose the Portuguese because they were poor and wanted the work, but also because they are European, Christian, Catholic, like us. We felt they would assimilate.' And so they have. You can see unexpectedly good selections of Douro wines in Luxembourg supermarkets. Otherwise, the 15 per cent of the population that is Portuguese is barely discernible. Schengen might, perhaps, be in much less trouble if every other country had followed those careful Luxembourg policies. But they didn't. France drew people from its old empire – Algeria, Morocco, sub-Saharan Africa. Germany imported millions of Turks, then another million Syrians under Merkel's idealistic Willkommen policy of 2015. Britain turned to the Caribbean, then Pakistan, India, Bangladesh. Combining open internal borders with sovereign external migration policies – inviting millions from far outside Europe – was, in retrospect, bound to create a problem. It's like a flat share where everyone agrees to leave their doors open and split the rent, but each person gets to invite their own guests, who then stay forever, use the bathroom, and host loud parties. Irritation is guaranteed. Some housemates will get seriously annoyed. Take, for example, the Somali migrant population in Holland. Tens of thousands of them moved to the UK under Free Movement. The UK could do nothing to stop this – as Britons duly noted. This is one example of how Free Movement, which peaked with Schengen, led quite directly to Brexit. It was perhaps sheer bad luck that Schengen coincided with one of the most ill-conceived experiments of recent times: multiculturalism plus mass immigration. Or maybe it wasn't coincidence, and they derive from the same well-meaning, liberal universalism – only this time taken too far. Frontiers are intrinsically sad – divisions within humanity made all too real Whatever the case, as I write this in my room in the Chateau de Schengen, I can also read the daily and unhappy news that springs from Europe's mass immigration experience: of riots and deaths in France following the football victory of Paris Saint-Germain; of another call for an inquiry into rape gangs in the UK; of a hard-right Polish politician becoming president, vowing to keep Poland migrant-free; of once-peaceful Sweden – now 'the bombing capital of the West'. Or I can read about de facto blasphemy laws in Britain and Denmark, introduced to placate militant Islam. And I can read of endless terror shifting across Europe untracked, leading even mainstream politicians in Germany, Austria, Italy to argue for the suspension of Schengen. Yes, of course there are multiple good, successful stories of integration and assimilation across Europe. But for many Europeans, judging by the remarkable electoral shift to the hard right, the good is now majorly outweighed by the bad. Is there any hope for that faded but shimmering Schengen ideal of a borderless Europe? I'd like to think so. Frontiers are intrinsically sad – divisions within humanity made all too real – even if Robert Frost knew what he was talking about when he said 'good fences make good neighbours'. The day is closing here in the Chateau de Schengen, and the summer sun sets lazily over the Auxerrois vines. They have a nice restaurant in the hotel, which has a classic French menu. I want to eat French food in Luxembourg while looking at Germany. It feels Schengen-y. But as the waitress brings my tranche de foie gras maison, the capricious Luxemburg weather turns. It's been in the forecast for a while – now it has arrived: a cold wind from the Ardennes is sweeping down the Moselle valley. The rain lashes the ancient gardens, and the waiters drift toward the windows, watching as the parasols surrender to the storm.
Daily Mirror
5 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Four European countries 'outraged' over new airline luggage rules passed by EU
Last week, the Council of Europe made two major decisions on the future of commercial air travel. The first was on compensation rights, and the second related to free hand luggage Four European countries are outraged at new rules that could limit how much delayed passengers can claim in compensation and when airlines can charge passengers for carrying hand luggage. Last week, the Council of Europe made two major decisions on the future of commercial air travel. The first was on compensation rights. The Council decided that passengers on short-haul flights would have to be delayed by four hours or more before they could claim compensation, rather than the current three. For long-haul flights, delays will have to be six or more hours. The good news for passengers is that compensation for those delayed on short-haul flights will increase from €250 (£211) to €300. However, compensation for long-haul flights will be cut from €600 to €500. The changes were first tabled 13 years ago and must still be approved by the European Parliament before they become law. The European Consumer Organisation, the BEUC, has argued that the changes will be a huge blow for consumers and deprive 'the majority of passengers from their compensation rights". The BEUC claims that most delays are between two and four hours. While the UK now sets its own compensation rules following Brexit, the changes will impact Brits if they come into force, as it will apply to passengers taking flights with an EU carrier. This means it could affect a passenger travelling to and from an EU country on an EU airline. The second decision relates to baggage allowance. Under the new rules, the concept to free luggage will be limited to 'personal items' that can be placed under the front seat. That will leave other stowed cabin bags exposed to charges. Spain, Germany, Slovenia, and Portugal voted against the changes, warning that they could mean passengers end up paying extra for almost any cabin bag. The Spanish government criticised the new rules as 'too restrictive.' Spain's Minister for Social Rights, Consumer Affairs and the 2030 Agenda, Pablo Bustinduy, described the changes as an 'outrage'. The political agreement, adopted by a qualified majority in the EU Council, was voted against by Spain, Germany, Slovenia and Portugal. Minister Bustinduy argued that the new rules would violate consumer rights and "only strengthen the power and profits of airlines." If the rules are accepted, then Ryanair would have to change its free hand luggage policy. Right now, the budget Irish airline require customers to have a bag no larger than 40x20x25 centimetres, which must fit under the seat in front. Under the new rules, the dimensions will be changed to 40x30x15 centimetres. That means Ryanair would be obliged to allow a bag 10 centimetres wider, but could also reduce the depth currently allowed by 10 centimetres.
Daily Mirror
6 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Passengers flying with major airlines to face new 4 hour rule at airports
In a huge blow to Brits, EU countries have green-lighted controversial plans to lengthen the wait time before delayed passengers can claim compensation for both short and long-haul journeys Customers flying with some big name air operators on short-haul flights have been hit with a brutal four-hour warning over a controversial shakeup. After 12 years of wrangling, EU countries have green-lighted plans to lengthen the wait time before flyers can lodge claims for delayed flights. Currently, passengers have to be delayed by more than three hours before qualifying for compensation. However, under the new stipulations - which still have to be negotiated with the European Parliament before they become law - short-haul travellers will only be eligible to claim compensation after being delayed by four hours or more, while those on longer journeys will have to sit tight for a six-hour hold-up before they can lodge a compensation claim. It's not all bad news though, as EU nations have also agreed to increase the amount of compensation for those delayed on short-haul journeys from €250 (approx £210.47) to €300 (£252.56). But, passengers hit with delays on long-haul flights could see their compensation reduce from €600 (£505) to €500 (£420). The trade body Airlines for Europe (A4E), which represents companies such as Ryanair, easyJet and Lufthansa, and The European Consumer Organisation, the BEUC, both slammed the rules - arguing it would deprive the majority of passengers from being able to claim compensation. This is because most delays are only between two and four hours. "Europe has been waiting for transparent and workable passenger rights for 12 years and member states have fallen at the final hurdle to deliver," A4E said. "Member states have diluted the European Commission's original proposal and introduced even more complexity." According to Yorkshire Live, German members of the European People's Party have also expressed their disapproval, stating that 'decreasing the rights to compensation for air passengers would be a step in the wrong direction'. "Reimbursement after a three-hour delay has been standard for many years and should remain so," they added. A senior EU diplomat is believed to have said that 'no politician wants to say more than four hours' at risk of dampening Europeans' holiday plans. The news comes amidst accusations by 16 consumer protection associations from 12 Member States against seven budget airlines for imposing unfair charges on passengers' hand luggage. "The European Court of Justice has made it very clear that hand baggage is an integral part of the basic ticket price. Normally, there is no surcharge on the price as long as the hand luggage is of a reasonable size," explained Steven Berger, a solicitor with the European Consumers' Organisation (BEUC). "All we're seeing is a proliferation of airlines charging for this baggage... We're calling for very clear rules. Passengers must be able to take one piece of luggage, a small suitcase or a rucksack." He added: "At the moment, there are two different opposing positions among the member states in the Council. On the whole, you have the camp of the member states that are going to defend the three hours to be able to benefit from the right to compensation and others that are going to ask for five hours and nine hours based on distance. So right now this is really the big source of conflict." *Prices based on EUR to GBP conversions at the time of writing.
