Letter to the editor: Enemies the real border risk |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Enemies the real border risk

While I would never question Dr. Amesh A. Adalja’s professional expertise, his op-ed ( “Undocumented immigrants, open borders are not an infectious disease risk,” Sept. 10, TribLIVE) left out a few important details. His major concern was that undocumented immigrants through our southern borders do not carry the threat of infectious diseases that we should concern ourselves with.

Adalja does not address the disease (not my definition of this condition) of drug addiction within this group. Nor does he address mental health issues. While I realize he was limiting himself to communicable diseases, unfortunately, just making it OK for anyone to come here just for a flu shot is really not the issue.

He glosses over the real issue and attempts to minimize the real problem. As our government continually steps up security on the average American citizen, our border allows people in with very little screening. Communicable diseases are the tip of the iceberg. The reality is we have no idea what nationalities are coming in. Dark-haired, brown-eyed men from the Middle East could easily blend in with those who just walk in. They could be our enemies carrying Ebola virus or anthrax. Do we really want our children exposed to this possibility?

It rankles me that the media is so eager to publish something by a Ph.D. just because it is compassionate with no concern for the real common-sense threat this issue presents. It should be glaringly apparent how vulnerable our nation really is and how dangerous this world can be.

James Chrisner

Mt. Pleasant Township

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.