Litmus Paper

I was reading the piece “The world needs more humanity if it’s going to solve the refugee crisis, activists urge at TED conference” on the Washington Post (April 26, 2017) by Colby Itkowitz:

“Now is not the time to be banning refugees — it’s the time to be embracing people who are victims of terror,” Miliband said to overwhelming applause.

Overwhelming applause for that?? Okay, fine. Nothing wrong with it. But nothing special about it either. Is there?

I really want to correct their sentences. I am the editor on the Internet! Oh no, I need help. Editing the Internet is a huge task. It actually is an impossible task. Not even Atlas cannot accomplish.
      Okay, I revise a bit. What about “The Editor of the Internet, Responsible for articles on refugees and migration.” Here I go:

I believe the biggest question in the 21st century concerns our duty to strangers,” said David Miliband, president of the International Rescue Committee. “The world is more connected than ever before, yet the great danger is we’re consumed by our divisions — and there’s no better test of that than how we treat refugees.”

I believe the biggest question in the 21st century concerns not our international duty but our moral duty towards strangers,” said Gülin De Vincentiis, a nobody. “The world is more connected than ever before, yet the great danger is we’re consumed by our divisions — and there’s no better test of that than how we treat refugees and migrants; that is, all strangers.”

Now it makes more sense. That might be something worth an applause.

Süleyman Soylu, the Interior Minister of Turkey, has said “The issue of migration has been a litmus paper.”
    It really has been.

What color do you turn when placed on the migration question?