40 Dead , 100 Injured In Casablanca Terrorist Bombings

[Moonbeam]

Got any proof you're water said the horse to the stream to which he'd been led.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Got any proof you're water said the horse to the stream to which he'd been led.

What was I thinking? It's so obvious that this was the result of the war in Iraq it simply doesn't require any proof.

Thanks for straightening me out MB. I really got off the tracks there for a minute.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Got any proof you're water said the horse to the stream to which he'd been led.

Ahhh Mr. Horse I do... look deep into my being... it is YOUR reflection you see not mine... now look to the sand... tell me what is it you see now... if it is not your reflection is it mine?
Now, Mr Horse, what faith do you have to step upon your reflection? Will it sustain you like the sand or will it fail you like the sea... ? Answer this and you'll know.. either way I give myself to you freely... to quench and sustain... freely mind you... or do you doubt this too?

The above obfuscation is meant only as poetic muse not for the value of analogy...

 

[Moonbeam]

Ah, yes, HJ, to drink or not to drink, that is the question.
----------------
Thanks for straightening me out MB. I really got off the tracks there for a minute.
--------------------
Not so much off track, but down the wrong alley. For example imagine if you had to produce the proof of the assertions you disagree with to the opposite. Try proving, for example that the latest terror attacks weren't the result of "Bush aggression" or that Bush didn't know this would happen. In every line of reasoning one ultimately comes to rest of some fundamental assumption you cannot prove. We have this thing known as the duck test, or common sense to help us sort out some of the imponderables. Naturally everybody doesn't have the same basic sense. You for example want Bush to look a certain way. I don't feel any such need. What I see about him is what I see. I have no fundamental reason not to trust him other than the fact that he obviously lies. Everything is an opinion, no, in politics? You just happen to think you're right. Me, I try not to buy anything too seriously. I don't trust even me.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: phillyTIM

Originally posted by: etech
So what you are saying is that is was all right for the Arabs(Saddam) to massacre thousands if not hundreds of thousands of other Arabs. It is only because infidels stopped that killing that the Arabs are upset?

Are you saying that all Arabs are upset? How many of the Arabs are going to attack US targets or is it just the terrorist organzation Al-Queada which attacked the US before the US removed Saddam and would have continued their attacks in any case?

Dude: i'm not sayin' S##T to you because you always turn around what i say into something i didn't. what i said is what i said: nothing more nothing less. from now on just consider that i'm not addressing you.

I warned you above....it's classic etech.


/etech mode

So, what are you saying? That you won't reply because you love Saddam? Are you saying you will say sh*t because you love gays?

/end etech mode

I know it's hard to defend an indefensible position. Some do it with obfuscation, some resort to personal attack. In either case, the point still stands.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Not so much off track, but down the wrong alley.

Like I said Moonie, thanks for getting back on track. I had forgotten that Bush is responsible for everything that is wrong in the world. Until proven otherwise, of course. I bow to, and am humbled by, the great wisdom that is you. I hope to one day be able to perform the "duck test" as proficiently as you do. My life will then be complete and I will die a happy and contented man.

 

[Moonbeam]

Some do it by trying to control the nature of the dialogue.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Some do it by trying to control the nature of the dialogue.

In the hands of the Master Debater is often found the solution of life or the reckless waste of vision. Dialogue is the tool of the debater and the diplomat. They each have a role and a place but, both must listen to be heard. Truth can stand on its own where Lie must have support. Let each be free to stand or fall.

The above is obfuscation and analogy.

 

[Insane3D]

I know it's hard to defend an indefensible position. Some do it with obfuscation, some resort to personal attack. In either case, the point still stands.

So..are you saying that by having an indefensible position, you like to dress up in woman's clothing and dance a little jig?

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

I know it's hard to defend an indefensible position. Some do it with obfuscation, some resort to personal attack. In either case, the point still stands.

So..are you saying that by having an indefensible position, you like to dress up in woman's clothing and dance a little jig?

No, I haven't tried that yet. Does it work for you?

 

[LunarRay]

So..are you saying that by having an indefensible position, you like to dress up in woman's clothing and dance a little jig? [/quote]

This I don't get at all... must be really deep... and calls for a moonbeam analysis..
Help!!!

 

[Moonbeam]

This I don't get at all... must be really deep... and calls for a moonbeam analysis..
Help!!!
----------------
I think I can, HJ. etech is something like Anandtech's Grand Inquisitor and Insane owing to his inordinate perspicacity has picked up on it. etech likes to direct a debate by taking command of the inquisition chair. I, etech, will ask the questions and from my lofty position dispense judgment on the quality of the answers or their lack. The questions generally take the form of, 'have you stopped beating your wife' or 'are you an idiot or a moron', or 'how do you justify being a traitor'. etc. Like any good diagnostician, Insane is prescribing etech's own medicine as described in these posts:

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: phillyTIM

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by etech : I thought there wasn't any link between Iraq and Al Queada. Now you seem to be saying that there is. Interesting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I said nothing of the sort. Simply, I said that the Bush Regime's aggression in the Middle East would cause terroristic repercussions. I never linked Iraq to Al-Quaida. I think you should take care to not stick words in my mouth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No worries...that is quite the norm for etech... He seems to love taking someone's post's he disagrees with and trying to put words in people's mouths. Nothing new here...


Dude: i'm not sayin' S##T to you because you always turn around what i say into something i didn't. what i said is what i said: nothing more nothing less. from now on just consider that i'm not addressing you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here insane makes this more concrete:

I warned you above....it's classic etech.


/etech mode

So, what are you saying? That you won't reply because you love Saddam? Are you saying you will say sh*t because you love gays?

/end etech mode
------------------------------------

And illustrates the technique again in the example that confused you, I think:

etech Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know it's hard to defend an indefensible position. Some do it with obfuscation, some resort to personal attack. In either case, the point still stands.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Insane, in etech mode responds:

So..are you saying that by having an indefensible position, you like to dress up in woman's clothing and dance a little jig?
------------------------
True to form etech responds with another grab at Inquisitor:

No, I haven't tried that yet. Does it work for you?

A question he could easily answer for himself by knocking of the pirouetting and changing back out of his tutu.

 

[LunarRay]

MB partial quote

And illustrates the technique again in the example that confused you, I think:

etech Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know it's hard to defend an indefensible position. Some do it with obfuscation, some resort to personal attack. In either case, the point still stands.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Insane, in etech mode responds:

So..are you saying that by having an indefensible position, you like to dress up in woman's clothing and dance a little jig?
------------------------
True to form etech responds with another grab at Inquisitor:

No, I haven't tried that yet. Does it work for you?

A question he could easily answer for himself by knocking of the pirouetting and changing back out of his tutu.[/quote]

Oh Great Beam of Light you have opened my eyes again... I can not repay you for the wisdom and clarification nor do I think you'd accept payment. The truly secure need no payment in the ordinary sense in that their mission is to edify all the needy and you are such a sage. If I could, I would offer you total enlightenment but, this too you posess... what to give one who has everything.... admiration!

 

[Moonbeam]

Well we mustn?t forget that etech is a proponent of the war on Iraq and history has yet to tell us if it was a good idea. Bush may have lied about the reasons we went, but that in itself doesn't change the possibility that in the long run things will be better there by our going than not. I think the issue is still in the balance.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Well we mustn?t forget that etech is a proponent of the war on Iraq and history has yet to tell us if it was a good idea. Bush may have lied about the reasons we went, but that in itself doesn't change the possibility that in the long run things will be better there by our going than not. I think the issue is still in the balance.

Well who shall we ask if we become interested in how better things are? I have no clue who is the resident truth teller among the washington crowd or the mid east crowd?

 

[Moonbeam]

Like most things I guess we'll have to rely on the consensus of time. I just turned my TV off. I listen to the news while I'm asleep to better appreciate what's being said. When I awoke there was some reporter in NY for an award on Iraq reporting, he's been living there since before the war and he indicates that internally things have ceased to function and life for the people is a huge mess. Like Jelly's post in another thread, very depressing. Those who feared a can of worms may have been right. Perhaps we should have studied the Mongols a bit better. I'm thinking they may have had the fortunate strategy of killing everybody so as not to have these messy tidy up after problems. I spose there aren't as many buzzards as there used to be though what with the invention of mass graves.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Edited because someone I respect asked me to.

 

[Moonbeam]

Ultra Quiet, the Silent Quack, does the Duck Test. Great!