Just as I thought, SPQR.

Not one single link to sites "which spout nothing but: 'asylum seekers are dear sweet little darlings'"

Just a feeble attempt at bluff and bluster, together with a laundry list of organizations of which you personally disapprove, and therefore imagine would hold views opposite to your own. I'm willing to bet that you have never visited any of their sites, which is why you can only imagine what their position might be on the topic. And also why you suggested that I do your research for you.

>>Now, I don't intend to serve them up to you (à la breakfast in bed) but I’ll give you a clue (since you’re lacking in that regard).<<

It is so glaringly obvious that you haven't a snowball's chance of supporting your ridiculous proposition that they "spout nothing but:'asylum seekers are dear sweet little darlings'", that you now pretend that it is not your responsibility to back up your claim. Good try. But fundamentally unconvincing.

And this was a good attempt at muddying the water, too:

>>...if your purpose was to be better informed (rather than to try and catch me out) it’ll give your something to chew on.<<

My sole purpose was to find out whether you had anything to support your ridiculous suggestion. At which I have succeeded, quite convincingly.

Pericles or should I say Ian Rintoul -
Quote "Just a feeble attempt at bluff and bluster," I see it a different way, you are just too scared to look for yourself because you know you will find them.

"Staggering, really. Still you don't get it, Pericles."

As previously stated a discussion with you is like talking to a brick wall.

Pericles or should I say Ian Rintoul - Quote "My sole purpose was to find out whether you had anything to support your ridiculous suggestion. At which I have succeeded, quite convincingly."

Congratulations because you were too lazy to look you now perceive yourself to be a legend (in your own mind).

So you now have a fan base of 1.

Perciles,

<<Just as I thought, SPQR...Not one single link to sites "which spout nothing but: 'asylum seekers are dear sweet little darlings'">>

Doh! [he slaps his head Homer Simpson style]

Did you go searching the sites for the exact wording "asylum seekers are dear sweet little darlings"?
I thought you were more sophisticated than that Pericles!
Of course, I meant: words to that effect.
Of course, all those sites couldn't all use the exactly same phrasing--if they did they might get had for plagiarism!

<<Just a feeble attempt at bluff and bluster, together with a laundry list of organizations of which you personally disapprove, and therefore imagine would hold views opposite to your own. I'm willing to bet that you have never visited any of their sites>>

I DID TOO!

LOL

Frankly, I couldn't give a damn whether you believe me or not.

But I am very interested in how peoples thought processes work.

So, how did you conclude from this little exchange (paraphrased, of course --in view of what happened above I though I had better spell that out)
Perciles: Give me the links, SPQR
SPQR: I'll not spoon-feed you the links but here's the organizations names

To this conclusions?
SPQR you have "NEVER VISITED" those sites.

Are we to conclude my refusal to spoon-feed you is sure fire proof that I didn't know where to look? The only thing it means is that unless you pay me substantially more than you pay your butler I will not be serving things up for you.

And as for this: <<And this was a good attempt at muddying the water, too:>>
It is your red herrings which are muddying the waters!

Cheers

Yep, as I thought.

Still no links.

What a surprise.

And more comes out GOOD JOB LABOR.

Asylum seekers involved in violent attacks while in immigration detention are being released into the community, including one man who assaulted staff and was involved in more than 250 incidents.

The violent detainees are released before security checks into their background are completed, according to an insider with intimate knowledge of the detention system.

The disturbing account by the whistleblower follows Prime Minister Julia Gillard's decision on Wednesday to launch an inquiry into the release of a convicted terrorist into a low-security detention facility, where he remained for months even after his background came to light.

According to the latest account of security problems in the immigration network, one man, Khoda Doost, was involved in more than 250 incidents, including assaulting staff, and released in Victoria where he threatened to kill people and burn down his house.