Threats from refugees unfounded

To the editor,

Sunday’s guest editorial (“US has no need for new refugees,” page A6), and the discussion about refugees, remind me that opposition to refugees is nothing new. In Boston, where I grew up, 0each immigrant group, when they arrived, was viewed with suspicion and hostility. That includes Irish and Italian immigrants (!) — and Jews like my own family, refugees from the Nazis. These Jews practiced a different religion, had different customs, and spoke English with an accent. Somehow the nation did not fall apart as a result.

The current wave of desperate refugees, from Syria and elsewhere, are not a realistic threat. They are trying to survive and give their children a better life; and why shouldn’t they be looking to the U.S., where we boast of being the land of opportunity? What about terrorism and Muslims? The Southern Poverty Law Center tracks terrorism and hate crimes. Its review of studies from the Rand Corporation and universities finds that many would-be terrorists have been uncovered by tips from fellow Muslims, and that “the vast majority of America’s Muslim immigrants…overwhelmingly reject jihadist ideology.” One study, typically, recommends that law enforcement work closely with them, “providing assistance in assimilation, earning trust, and preventing discrimination … needless alarm and exaggerated portrayals of the Muslim terrorist threat actually encourage terrorism.”

So let’s be a little skeptical when we hear talk-show hosts and politicians talking about the scary immigrants. What they don’t talk about is the real threat from home-grown non-Muslim hate groups and people they influence (think Timothy McVeigh, Dylann Roof). Meanwhile, a bit more compassion and openness toward refugees “different from us” would be a good thing.

Phil Somervell

Palmer