Based on your response atomou it would appear my entire post was irrelevant.
We're not even on the same page. You're post suggests someone said let's make life hell for all refugees, and do our best to reject them. Please clarify where you got this impression.
To quote redgreek "anyone wanting to move to Oz must go through the right channels, and ultimately have similar values and integrate into society". How you read it - "anyone wanting to move to Oz should go through an unreasonable screening process. They should be herded into concentration camps, followed by dehumanising interrogation"
Your inflammatory remarks are going off on a tangent. If we have a refugee, redgreek suggests they go through an established process, to make sure their claims are legitimate. You're the one who embellished, throwing in terms like concentration camp, dreadful examination.. or is checking immigrant status inherently evil?
I don't care to comment on how well the current immigration system is working, it seems to have it's share of problems, but that has zero to do with redgreeks comments. If the government is screwing up the process with a poor implementation (and I won't argue against this), it is a separate issue from whether we should have an immigrant screening process in the first place.
Who am I to judge? Who are you to judge we should go down the path France has taken, with all the problems they are experiencing. Do you deny there are problems in France that are a direct result of immigration policy? Is this fair on the citizens, does it give them a "fair go"? This is a complex problem, I don't claim to have the answers, but to attack people offering valid suggestions isn't constructive.
You have honourable intentions, and are passionate about this topic no doubt - just don't allow that to betray your objectivity.
