Republican governors across the country, including Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, are saying that they will not take Syrian refugees in their states. Boston Mayor Marty Walsh has said, “As a city and as a country it is not our custom to turn our backs on people who are in need and who are innocent.” Mass. Congressman Seth Moulton, was the first Massachusetts politician to actually criticize Baker’s reaction, saying that “it’s a shame that the governor “doesn’t know the difference between refugees and those from whom they need refuge” and sharing his own experience of welcoming a refugee into his home. Attorney General Maura Healey and Somerville Mayor Joe Curtatone both quickly followed suit. (Both Healey’s and Curtatone’s names come up often as possible challengers to Baker in 2018, as does our own Mayor Setti Warren.)
Which Massachusetts mayor is going to be next to say that his/her city will — or will not — take Syrian refugees? Will they all stay quiet or will it turn political like it has in New York/New Jersey?
Of course, it’s all a moot exercise. Mayors can’t keep refugees out of their cities any more than states can, although they could make them feel unwelcome.
Which brings me to my questions: Should Warren pipe in? And what should he say? Should Warren make it clear that Newton will welcome Syrian refugees?
Or is that not true in a city where residents don’t want to add any new people, let alone refugees from the middle east?
Note: I have a call into the mayor’s office and am awaiting a response.
Update: I spoke with Mayor Warren who said that he’s been briefed by the state department on the vetting process for Syrian refugees. He was careful to point out his respect for people’s concerns but, he said,
“We should be a welcoming country and we should be a welcoming community to people who are fleeing a war-torn country. That’s who we are.”
Rep. Moulton’s act of kindness should be applauded. However, it’s not comparable to the topic at hand. The Rep. had a trusting and personal working relationship with Mohammed, his translator from Iraq.
Huh? The topic at hand is “Should Newton welcome Syrian refugees?” How are Moulton’s comments not applicable?
Absolutely yes. This process does not pose a security risk (especially in comparison to things like overstaying a visa or sneaking across the border). It is very difficult to become a refugee in the United States and the vetting is extremely detailed. There are basic identity checks and biometrics, then there are in-person interviews in the staging-area countries, then there are health tests, then there is verification of biographical information, database cross-checks, and if you are approved there is supervision and guidance by the government upon resettlement. It’s a very long process — usually well over a year. The odds of a random jihadist making it through that process without breaking or being caught are basically nil, which is why they would find a different way to get here, if they really wanted to.
It is undeniable that taking in a group of people fleeing ISIS and Assad would be a net asset to the United States as a whole. I also think that Newton in particular could benefit from the cultural exchange and getting to know more about Syria and (in some cases) about Islam firsthand from ordinary people. Decades from now, we won’t regret taking these refugees in if we do. But we would definitely regret NOT taking them in, much as we now regret not taking in more Jewish refugees from Europe before and during World War II.
Fox News (!) just reported that “Gov. Charlie Baker has declined to sign a letter from other Republican governors asking President Barack Obama to suspend efforts to resettle Syrian refugees in the U.S. A spokeswoman for Baker said Friday the governor believes Massachusetts “has a role in welcoming refugees.” “
Yes, we should welcome Syrian refugees. The anti immigrant–anti muslim sentiment in this country is out of control. I applaud Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren for addressing this issue head on. I’m pretty sure those two women would disagree with my next opinion… We should deport Obama to Syria. Maybe seeing that country first-hand would give him a clue how badly he’s screwed up in Syria. The only president with a worse foreign policy was Bush.
Very interesting. We have another thread going about a homeless woman from Newton who can’t get a place to live here. And there are countless homeless and in-need people in our own backyards. We can’t seem to take care of our own never mind refugees from other nations. I’m not a cold hearted or heartless person but I am tired of seeing our own AMERICAN children and families pushed aside and neglected, left to live in shelters or on the streets. Shame on us that we won’t step up and take care of our own before we take care of others. Just my opinion…
@TheWholeTruth: We can do both. We have chosen not to. That bad choice doesn’t have to be permanent.
Yes. Yes, we should. Some of my colleagues and I are already working on a letter to Gov. Charlie Baker, asking him to reverse his previously stated position and welcome Syrian refugees to Massachusetts. Our Congressman, Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy, III, has already voted against legislation that would hinder the resettlement of displaced Syrian and Iraqi refugees. So I hope his good friend Mayor Setti Warren (and mine) will publicly welcome Syrian refugees as well.
Darn, if only you could resist the temptation to insert that next-to-last sentence about Newton residents.
@TheWholeTruth– That’s not only a fair point, it’s a great one! But are refugees and immigrants really the problem? In my opinion, we need to stop spending so much money on war, and start spending it in places of direct benefit to the American people.
Actions speak louder than words. I can attest to the fact that City of Newton welcomes refugees and people who seek a safe place to raise their children. Over the past 6 years, I’ve taken students who have no reason to believe on field trips to City Hall. The goal is specifically to reassure the students that they live in a safe and welcoming community. David Olsen leads them on a tour of the building and the aldermanic chambers. Then the students meet with Mayor Warren in his office where he talks with them, the students ask questions, and have a picture taken with him. We then cross the street to the Library where a member of the staff shows students how to find books and helps them get a library card.
@jane, that’s great, it really is. But does the City do the same for local kids living in shelters? Or for kids from some of the poorest places in this country? Does the Mayor or any of the aldermen spend time mentoring a local kid? Is anyone part of Big Brothers or Big Sisters? Do we bring kids from the Home for Little Wanderers to City Hall and show them around. I could go on but I’ve made my point.
Again, I feel for these people who are victims of circumstances in their country that they can not control. I just feel more for the victims in this country.
Yes, we should help both refugees and locals. The situation of the refugees is urgent – they and their families are facing imminent death.
A lot of these same arguments were made to keep Jewish refugees from the Nazis out of the US – worries that there would be Nazi infiltrators, etc. We all know what happened. I have no family left in Eastern Europe due to the unwillingness of countries to let Jews in.
@Jane – that’s wonderful. Thank you.
What should the Mayor and aldermen do? I can speak as someone whose ancestors fled Syria (specifically, a part of Syria that is now Lebanon) for the United States. They should focus on the real issues that Newton faces. 1) Starting high school later, 2) Making sure we use accurate accounting numbers to assess the cost of students on the Newton public schools, and 3) Making sure we use accurate numbers to asses our pension liabilities.
Once we do these three things, then we can turn our attention to political posturing that has no impact on anything.
TWT – My students are local residents. When you move to Newton, you become a resident. Of course the NPS is committed to educating homeless children in our community. I’m shocked to be asked the question.
How, where, or when any elected official volunteers his/her time is not the issue and is frankly not my business or my place to ask them about that. At issue here is whether the City of Newton is committed to providing a welcoming community to refugees and people who come from countries where daily life is unsafe, and I can say after 27 years of experience in the system that the answer is Yes. I gave one example of an action that I have taken, which you clearly find inadequate. Fortunately I’m surrounded by people – teachers, administrators, city electeds and municipal employees – who walk the walk on daily basis without fanfare or need for publicity. It’s what keeps me going.
I have less and less interest in contributing to this blog because of comments like yours. This is a great city to live in – not perfect, but still pretty terrific – but it’s a very tough community to work in.
Wow Tricia I had not seen that, thank you! Also reported here.
Is it a coincidence that both Maura Healey and Seth Moulton made statements opposing him on it just this morning?
It’s almost like he’s well aware he won a heavily Democratic state by only 40K votes…
Bill Humphrey has it nailed. We can welcome both and in this instance I hope a few of the Syrian refugees find their way to Newton and the peaceful tolerance we have here.
FDR was so right. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” whether it’s Syrian Muslim refugees or homeless people. I’m much more concerned about the hate filled, gun toting Americans that have shot up, firebombed, or blown up schools, college campuses, movie theaters, African American churches, government buildings, synagogues and shopping malls over the past several years. Why? Because I know these kinds of attacks are going to continue to occur with regularity in the years ahead because there is little in place to stop them. I think we have a much better chance at identifying and preventing attacks from terrorists with their distorted visions of Islam and their vision is grossly distorted.
The US House was as fear driven in its vote yesterday as it was when it was stampeded into the Iraq war. How quickly we forget. Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley issued powerful statements on the Syrian refugees that were powerful antidotes to what some other presidential candidates and much of the media have been peddling.
To be fair, Hillary Clinton has also issued strong statements in defense of the Syrian refugees. Bernie has a petition supporting the Syrian refugees up on his website, Berniesanders.com.
Folks might find this column on the refugee process of value to this discussion:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/20/politics/paris-attack-refugee-visa-waiver/index.html
My first reaction was no, but I have changed my mind. My problem is with illegal immigrants, not with people who are making the effort to be a citizen and people who were vetted at the border. For many people, this is a difficult issue. No one should be chastized for thinking about protecting American citizens. BUT I say, bring them on.
I also recall that crazy gun toting Americans have also gunned down people in mosques and even at a Sikh temple because the perpetrator thought that the Sikhs’ large headdress somehow made it certain that they were all fanatical terrorists. I wonder who feeds these people this terrible nonsense.
Remember the recent Chechnyan Muslim refugees, the Tsarnaev’s. Seemed like they adjusted well to the US. All the vetting in the world doesn’t take out of them ingrained hostilities that won’t show up at the time of entry.
Note this, from Wikipedia
“”The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC; Arabic: منظمة التعاون الإسلامي; French: Organisation de la coopération islamique, OCI)[a 1] is an international organisation founded in 1969 consisting of 57 member states. The organisation states that it is “the collective voice of the Muslim world” and works to “safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony”.[1]
The OIC has permanent delegations to the United Nations and the European Union. The official languages of the OIC are Arabic, English, and French.””
So, why do they need to come to the US? Or Europe? There seem to be a lot of places they could go where they might not eventually develop the resentments of the Tsarnaev’s or the French-born Muslims who were part of the attacks in Paris. They would fit in nicely.
Ted wanted to bring a Gitmo detainee to Newton. I wouldn’t go by his opinion on anything in this regard.
Off topic:
Just my thoughts. US/members of Nato are allowing Syrians to leave Syria in hopes to evacuate all the innocent Syrians from the country so that members of Nato can comeback and sweep the remainder terrorist from Syria and clean house over there. The reason why Obama and everyone else is keeping quiet is due to not wanting to give their plan away.
If this is true, we should certainly support it, but how do we know it’s true? Any thoughts?
On the facts of the situation, Ted was right on that too, actually. *Wrongfully held* and unconvicted detainees to be released under supervision of and sponsored by those who knew them best, their own defense attorneys. That was also not a problem, just an opportunity for more politicized hysteria.
@Barry. Can’t you acknowledge that all but the tiniest, tiniest minority of Muslims who have settled in the USA are loyal and peaceful Americans? When my grandparents arrived here from Ireland during the mid 19th century, many people already here thought their first allegiance was to the Pope in Rome and not to America. That was malarkey then and it’s been malarkey ever since for any group of people that came here for a better way of life.
Bob,
I don’t know that what you say is true or not true. I’ve never seen data, nor have you. I do know that there are enclaves of Muslims around the US now who really aren’t supportive of the America we believe in, from Dearborn to Jersey City to Brooklyn and other areas. I don’t want to risk more and have another blind Sheikh who tried to blow up the Trade Center first or another Tamerlin Tsarnaev or another Major Hassan, or another Anwar al-Awlaki, and on and on.
Why don’t you answer why those 57 Muslim countries can’t provide a haven for them? Why do they need to come here or to Europe?
I know that there was a difference then in being Catholic from what is going on today in the world of Islam. I think it’s risky to bring people from Syria. ISIS isn’t the only terrorist group there. Many others are operating there in opposition to ISIS or Assad and are losing, but still are not really pro-democracy or yearning for America. Screening out ISIS supporters, which really can’t be done well, doesn’t guarantee they won’t be a problem.
Looks like our governor is having another Confederate flag moment, and walking back his initial position.
I must say these fears of importing terrorists among with the refugees is overblown. None of the Paris attackers were Syrian, and it is telling that President Hollande has committed France to taking 30,000 Syrian refugees over the next two years. In fact, most of the attackers were Belgian nationals, and I don’t see a rush to ban them. Could it be something to do with the fact that most Belgians are white and Christian?
And may I express my disgust at those who are using this issue for election-year pandering? Keeping a register of Muslims, Mr Trump? But not guns?
Robert,
Why can’t people disagree with you without being accused of “election year pandering”. Stick to the facts, not innuendo. Bringing in a horde of people from a screwed up war-torn zone, where we don’t know who is who and with Islam turning a lot of people into fanatics, world-wide, is a risky proposition.
I recommend they go to those 57 Muslim countries.
@Ted, would be interested to see that letter. Might want to sign it, too.
There would be no more fitting time to send it to Beacon Hill than Thanksgiving, as we celebrate how our Commonwealth was founded by refugees from internecine religious wars, long-traveled and ill-treated, seeking peace and the opportunity to work hard and prosper.
@Ted. Count me in, too.
Barry — It’s too bad you haven’t been following all the other violent religious extremist trends of the past few years worldwide. Buddhist fanatics in Sri Lanka and Burma, Christian fanatics in Central African Republic, Hindu fanatics in India, and so on. There’s another big example of a non-Muslim religious extremist faction that took control of a certain overseas government in the past year, but I’ll leave that to your research and imagination. All of them have involved very serious mob violence or even state violence in support of the mobs. In any case, there’s a lot of bad behavior going around in the name of a lot of religions right now. So that’s not exactly a compelling or fair reason.
You’re right about this part, Barry: There’s no guarantee there won’t be problems. Ted Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, Dylan Roof, … Since 9/11, the deadly threat in the U.S. from right-wing attacks has been about twice that of jihadist attacks. (And both pale in comparison with drunk driving and random gun violence.)
But I think you’re wrong about another point. It’s not “Islam turning a lot of people into fanatics.” It’s fanatics turning people into fanatics, using a warped view of Islam not accepted by the vast majority of Muslims.
We’re not going to keep terrorists out by closing doors and putting the Statue of Liberty in mothballs. These are our people, after all — because they are people.
Bruce,
Thanks for the link. I clicked on it, saw the first page which lists murders by “right wing” and randomly clicked on a link to a murder by “right wing”. The first thing to come up described the murderer as “a self-described neo-Nazi and white supremacist”.
Whew – that is a stretch. Bit harsh of the site and you to tie the continual parade of deranged people this country seems to produce totally at the door of the right wing, isn’t it?
Also, I note with interest that the site on the first page, apparently does NOT, as in the case of the marathon bombing, list the numbers of the “collateral damage” of the HUNDREDS maimed and injured by the large scale actions of the islamic fanatics.
I mention this not in direct relation to the topic at hand but in the interest of balance and fairness. This site has their finger on the weighing scale.
The Mayor and I talked about this yesterday, and I think he and I agree that a joint, nonpartisan statement along the lines of what he said above, which includes as many of our local elected officials as possible, would send the strongest, clearest message that Newton would welcome Syrian refugees because that is who we are as a community and as a nation.
Unfortunately, I live in a country where people make decisions like I see here which are based upon fantasies. The reality is clearer. It might make your bleeding heart liberal souls feel better to bring them in, but you are acting in a self-destructive way.
I again ask what is wrong with expecting some of the 57 Muslim countries to take these people? Europe has serious problems with Muslims, beyond terrorism. And, as most people know, Jews are leaving France quickly because of the anti-Semitism of many Muslims there, and the violent attacks that occur, but don’t rise to the level of international news. And those Jews have not hurt anyone. They are simply Jews. But probably none of the BHL’s here cares much about that. No suicide bombers, wielders of knives and AK-47’s, no preachers of hate. But they as well as the average Frenchman are paying the price.
Barry Cohen, Muslim countries have been taking most of the 4 million plus Syrian refugees, mostly neighboring countries: Turkey has 1.9 million; Lebanon has 1.1 million; Jordan has 629,000; Iraq has 249,000; Egypt has 132,000. In Lebanon, Syrian refugees now comprise 25% of the population. President Obama is proposing that America, with a population of over 300 million, take in a modest 10,000 refugees.
Okay, Ted,
So, those are five countries that border Syria. We are far away and a different culture. What about the other 52 Muslim countries that don’t border Syria and weren’t faced with a flood of refugees?
My bottom line question is this. What’s the point of moving these people all over the place? Set up safe zones for the families. Enlist the young men to fight and make an effort to destroy ISIS which is the source of this. France, England, and Russia are finally going after them. Obama is too wimpy and undecisive.
When ISIS is conquered, these people can move back, and they do so more easily from bordering countries.