Dialectic Role Playing in the Dungeon!

[Bonobo]

OK. I have a great idea!

Let's all try to come to some common ground.

Yes, I know how impossible that sounds, but we may as well try.

Everything else has already been said and done.

In this thread, there are 2 basic rules.

1. ONLY MAKE STATEMENTS THAT YOU REALLY THINK BOTH SIDES CAN AGREE WITH.
or
2. ASSUME THE ROLE OF THE OTHER SIDE AND ARGUE FROM THEIR POSITION.

You are not allowed, in this thread, to present an argument designed to overcome or defeat the other side's position, but you may seek agreement if you really think you can achieve it.

OK?

So who wants to start this experiment?

PS. If you don't want to participate, fine. Please do your insulting in another thread. There are plenty to choose from.

[SDuderstadt]

1. I think we can all agree...

we all despise the Bush administration.

[Bonobo]

2. An excellent place to start.

Might I also add that their administration was much more full of lies than truth.
He was a liar about even inconsequential matters, a congenital liar not to be trusted.

I also would like to add that the fact that the hijackers' nationalities were mostly Saudi Arabian lends credence to the story since if it was ALL fabricated, they probably would have preferred to have all Iraqi hijackers.
How about that?

[Bolo Boffin]

3. I would not call Bush a congenital liar.

I would call him a practiced one, one who would feel quite secure telling lies to advance his goals.

I would also say that if the truth supported what he wanted, he would also say the truth.

[Bonobo]

4. I wouldn't disagree with that.

But I think if I looked, I could find examples of off-the-cuff lies that were for no particular gain. I seem to remember some, but no biggie.

Can we agree that AFTER that attacks, he manipulated the situation so that he could prosecute the war against Iraq?

Can we agree that he used intelligence agencies, torture and other methods to tie the two events together?

[Bolo Boffin]

5. Yes, I agree with all that.

[Bonobo]

6. See? Isn't this nice?

Do you think that Bush gave up on Bin Ladin in Toro Boro so quickly because he is totally incompetent for one thing, and was more interested in pursuing a war in Iraq anyway? (perhaps a combo revenge for slights against his father and pursuit of oil)?

Or do you think it might be more sinister, something to do with Bin Laden and a secret double-agent kind of thing? Or because of his royal ties? What do you think the deal with that is?

BTW, I am NOT trying to lead you in any particular direction, honestly. Right now, I am looking for common ground to start with.

[jberryhill]

9. There are a range of options there...

Because "gave up on" does not seem as accurate as "farmed out to the B team". That may have been a politically motivated decision that it would be better for natives to have scored the point; but was hopelessly naive about the natives.

[Bolo Boffin]

26. "See? Isn't this nice?" is patronizing.

I will say this: Having definitive proof of bin Laden being dead would have ended the need for further retribution in the Middle East for most Americans.

However, I can't say that the invasion of Iraq would have played out any differently, Osama being captured or killed at Tora Bora or not. The Bush Administration was gearing up from Day One to attack Saddam Hussein. They had to have a PR plan to force the issue, and I don't see why it would have consisted of anything else that what they said anyway. 9/11 made their case easier.


I think that you've said somewhere else that it would have been easier to invade Iraq had the 9/11 hijackers been proven to be Iraqis. If not, can you say that?

[Bonobo]

27. I did say that, several times. And I am going very far to be nice. Stop reading into it.

Please don't be on such a hair trigger. I am trying to improve the air in here. There is nothing more to it than that.

[SDuderstadt]

18. Me, too...n/t

[jberryhill]

8. Those two premises are mostly correct

On point two, it seems that they were using torture to get what they wanted to hear, and that intelligence reports were manipulated. As far as selling the Iraq war to the public goes, however, it was primarily "9/11, Terra, Terra!, smoking gun, mushroom cloud..."

[jberryhill]

7. The fact that they were all Saudis was a political problem for the Bush Administration

There's an unfortunate reflex that people have with regard to what lawyers call "bad facts".

I see this with my clients all of the time. Even if they have not done what they've been accused of doing, there are facts which don't make them look good. More often than not, when someone comes to me with a problem, they've already done something stupid in order to "clean up" those facts, when it would have been better just to deal with them. So, the problem then becomes one of not just the "bad facts", but the appearance of having attempted to conceal them.

[Bonobo]

11. Yes, indeed. I was actually giving that point to your side.

I truly am looking on your side for the purposes of this exercise.

I just watched Bolo Boffins video link from another thread. I didn't like the tone of the person who did it. It was unnecessarily insulting and foul-mouthed -"idiot" "Liar", etc. but I learned something new.

I had not seen the collapse of the penthouse on WT7 before.

And while I am not sure that I would consider that to be part of the same umm, collapse motion, I must say it would be an unnecessary component in a CD also, so I must admit that it does not fit well with the argument for a CD.

[Bolo Boffin]

13. Yes, Alien Entity was recently banned by YouTube because of complaints by AE911Truth

So he's sore.

[Bonobo]

15. He sure sounded it.

You can attract more bees with honey, assuming you still want to attract bees that is.

Actually I never understood that phrase.

WHY would you want to attract bees anyway?

[OnTheOtherHand]

24. flies?

E.g., lyric from Pippin (as I remember it) -- "So put down the vinegar, pick up the honey jar: you'll catch many more flies."

If one isn't trying to catch the flies, then your question stands. :)

[greyl]

25. Honey is a TRAP for the flies.

They get stuck there, and can then be disposed of.

[OnTheOtherHand]

29. right, it makes sense if one is catching flies... n/t

[greyl]

30. .

[LARED]

10. OK

Please clarify your statement

Saudi Arabian lends credence to the story since if it was ALL fabricated


What exactly do you mean by "the story", and I don't understand your emphasis on the story being "ALL fabricated."


The credibility of the story, assuming you mean the so called official story, is not dependent on the number of hijackers from any particular nationality.

[jberryhill]

12. I took that to mean....

That if one was engineering 9/11 to suit the purposes of the Bush Administration - supposing that purpose to be an invasion of Iraq - then one would not have cast Saudis in that role.

[Bonobo]

16. Yes, that IS what I meant. I am all turned around now. But yes, that's it. nt

[LARED]

20. I agree with the point that if

the Bush administration executed the hijacking in order to provide a opportunity to invade Iraq, then using Iraqi hijackers would make for a more coherent story.

Can you agree with that statement?

[Bonobo]

22. Yes!

[LARED]

28. Can we also agree that the 9/11 connection is but one

element in Bush's campaign to enter Iraq.

The Bush administration used many tactics to make the case against Saddam.

WMD's (although it proved false Saddam convinced the world of their existence)
Oppressive brutal government
Use of chemical weapons
Aggression to other nations
Non compliance with a litany of UN sanctions

So what say you?

[LARED]

31. Can I get an agreement to the above statement? nt

[Bonobo]

14. This is my attempt to make an admission that it would have been more advantageous

to the "Bush cover story" (assuming there was one) to have claimed all hijackers were Saudis. This would have made a "tighter" fit to the Bin Ladin claim. Therefore, from a certain point of view, it lends credibility to the actual identities of the hijackers being what they were purported to have been.

Was that any better? Sorry I don't feel like I put that very well either. On the other hand, perhaps you are suspicious of my motives in writing that and it is clouding your ability to read and comprehend what I mean.

[LARED]

19. Part of the dialectic process is

some back and forth to ensure everyone has the same understanding of words and concepts. If we are using the same words but pour different meanings into them, the process is stymied.

OTOH accusing me of questioning your motives is NOT part of the dialectic process.

[Bonobo]

21. My bad, I didn't mean offense.

[Bonobo]

17. Any points that you would like to concede?

For the purposes of this experiment only of course... :eyes:

[vincent_vega_lives]

23. The War in Iraq

is Bush's vietnam, and just as a waste of human life.