Refugees flee to nearby states, not the best welfare
Play
Ref: "Refugees, not Migrants", Letters, yesterday.
I have a few questions for writer Duhigg. If these “refugees” were truly “fleeing” for their lives, then why did they go all the way across the sea rather than just pass into surrounding countries?
It would seem that if you were being persecuted in Pennsylvania, you would “flee” to Ohio, not choose to go to California because the weather is better and they have a more liberal welfare programme.
If I were fleeing for my life, I would crawl under the nearest rock or climb the nearest tree. Not “flee” across the desert to find the nearest oasis.
People had better wise up to this ploy, or Western countries will no longer be fit to live in, because I assure you along with their “need”, they are bringing their questionable religion and lifestyles.
If they are being persecuted, then let them pick up a gun and fight those who would persecute them, as the citizens of all other countries who have faced strife have done. Enough with the welfare and free rides.
These people’s leaders lecture them that they are righteous in their beliefs and that we are corrupt and unholy because we make money. Then when those same leaders create turmoil for them, they run for our corrupt, unholy shores. What is wrong with this picture?
John Arnone
