Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[Animal]

On this small point, I have to say, I agree with KotA. Bush should, on hearing the news, have stood up, apologised briefly to the children, and said that something important had happened that needed him as President to deal with it. He should then have calmly left the room to consult with his retinue and decide what to do next. Instead, he acted like a rabbit in the headlights, and although it's unlikely he could have done anything useful in the eight minutes it took him to figure out how to react, it made him look extremely stupid, unprepared and easily derailed.

It also made it fairly clear that he was utterly shocked and surprised at what happened, which doesn't exactly support the claim that he was one of the people behind it.

Dave

I don't think getting up and running into the hallway would have accomplished anything either, and his detractors would have spun it in a bad light just as well. The "made him look extremely stupid" etc was a media myth started well before he became president. ( I met him in person once before he became president......a camera guy then was already spreading the "stupid" memo. Bush off camera was totally different than what tmost of the public saw....when those camera lights went on, he really did morph into a "deer in the head lights" ) I am not a big Bush fan, but I would have have someone uncomfortable in the spot light rather than someone that can shed tears on cue.

 

[GStan]

snip
There is NOTHING in the NIST reports about WTC 7 leaningbeing demolished by explosives or thermite. That would be a major factor and would be included if it had happened.

Fixed. See how that works. Move on.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I don't think getting up and running into the hallway would have accomplished anything either, and his detractors would have spun it in a bad light just as well.

I didn't suggest he should have got up and run into the hallway, as you can see very clearly from the post you quoted. If he had stood up calmly, explained briefly to the children, and then left the room to consult with the officials around him, nobody with any sense could possibly have taken exception (although conspiracy theorists would, of course, have claimed it was proof of foreknowledge. That's not much of an objection, as they'd claim anything as proof of foreknowledge) and he'd have looked a lot more in control of the situation than he did.

Dave

 

[Animal]

I didn't suggest he should have got up and run into the hallway, as you can see very clearly from the post you quoted. If he had stood up calmly, explained briefly to the children, and then left the room to consult with the officials around him, nobody with any sense could possibly have taken exception (although conspiracy theorists would, of course, have claimed it was proof of foreknowledge. That's not much of an objection, as they'd claim anything as proof of foreknowledge) and he'd have looked a lot more in control of the situation than he did.

Dave

It would have been spun by his detractors as jumping up and running into the hallway or something to that effect. Being in the spot light essentially 24/7 there will be a way to spin ANY situation. ( I remember my reaction when told of the 2 plane impacts.....that of being stunned and believing it impossible) I don't fault Bush for feeling the same. I agree that it does not jive with the whole conspiracy foreknowledge claim.

 

[Dave Rogers]

It would have been spun by his detractors as jumping up and running into the hallway or something to that effect.

No doubt it would. But sitting motionless looking at a children's book for eight minutes didn't really need any spin; it made it obvious that he was too shocked to react.

Dave

 

[RedIbis]

Ah yes. But, nonetheless, there was not much Bush could do right there. There was not much he could do later either.

That's as bare of a bare assertion fallacy as I've ever seen.

 

[Dave Rogers]

My opinion: They notice how effective it is when rational opponents point out to them that they're not properly stating the base oppositional argument. Or not properly representing the pertinent facts (eg. "No plane struck WTC 7"). So they simply try to turn it around on others when they think they have the opportunity.

It's basic mimicry. It occurs on all levels of trutherdom.

That's as bare of a bare assertion fallacy as I've ever seen.

Yes, I see what you mean.

Dave

 

[Reheat]

Ah yes. But, nonetheless, there was not much Bush could do right there. There was not much he could do later either.

That's as bare of a bare assertion fallacy as I've ever seen.

Well.....

Enlighten us, oh mighty one. Or else, you can go into hiding and avoid revealing your typical truther wisdom.

 

[RedIbis]

Yes, I see what you mean.

Dave

You must have forgotten that earlier in the thread you said this:

On this small point, I have to say, I agree with KotA. Bush should, on hearing the news, have stood up, apologised briefly to the children, and said that something important had happened that needed him as President to deal with it. He should then have calmly left the room to consult with his retinue and decide what to do next.

Proving two things: 1) Travis' comment is in fact nothing but bare assertion and 2) You favor partisan hackery above all else.

 

[RedIbis]

Ah yes. But, nonetheless, there was not much Bush could do right there. There was not much he could do later either.

Well.....

Enlighten us, oh mighty one. Or else, you can go into hiding and avoid revealing your typical truther wisdom.

As you can see from my previous post, Dave already answered that question.

 

[Dave Rogers]

As you can see from my previous post, Dave already answered that question.

As you can see from reading the thread, RedIbis is lying as usual. I said what I thought Bush should have done. Travis pointed out that there wasn't much that he could have done. Apparently, in RedIbis world, calmly leaving the room comes under the heading of "much".

Then again, relative to the achievements of the truth movement, I suppose not looking like a complete moron would be quite a victory.

Dave

 

[Reheat]

As you can see from my previous post, Dave already answered that question.

I didn't ask what someone else said. I asked you (in essence) to specify what GWB should have done. Going into a hallway to consult is essentially doing nothing except to talk. What should have been done that wasn't? In other words, what could GWB (or his entourage) have done that wasn't done? This is what Travis meant by his comment.

 

[RedIbis]

As you can see from reading the thread, RedIbis is lying as usual. I said what I thought Bush should have done. Travis pointed out that there wasn't much that he could have done. Apparently, in RedIbis world, calmly leaving the room comes under the heading of "much".

Then again, relative to the achievements of the truth movement, I suppose not looking like a complete moron would be quite a victory.

Dave

I've never actually seen someone cherrypick his own quote. Semantics aside after Bush should have left the room you suggested this:

to consult with his retinue and decide what to do next.

 

[Reheat]

Then again, relative to the achievements of the truth movement, I suppose not looking like a complete moron would be quite a victory.

Dave

You have just described RedIbis to a "T". He will avoid giving an answer and eventually go into hiding for awhile until the next time he can pretend to be a "Big Boy" with the truther answer..... A process repeated over and over again ad nauseum.

 

[000063]

He should then have calmly left the room to consult with his retinue and decide what to do next.

You're openly quote-mining sentence fragments now, Red. This isn't semantics. This is actual context.

Instead, he acted like a rabbit in the headlights, and although it's unlikely he could have done anything useful in the eight minutes it took him to figure out how to react, it made him look extremely stupid, unprepared and easily derailed.

There. A clear distinction between "should" and "could", with both those exact words used.

 

[RedIbis]

You have just described RedIbis to a "T". He will avoid giving an answer and eventually go into hiding for awhile until the next time he can pretend to be a "Big Boy" with the truther answer..... A process repeated over and over again ad nauseum.

Supposedly, in this forum, you're supposed to attack the argument not the arguer. Your comments tend toward a personal nature, which is not only against the rules but belies a kind of desperation.

It doesn't have to be a death struggle, Dave and Travis are at odds over what Bush should have done. I tend to agree with Dave, although I think he's diminishing what Bush coulda woulda shoulda done.

 

[000063]

You quote-mined a sentence-fragment, Red. Please acknowledge. To me, that bespeaks--not belies--a kind of desperation.

 

[sylvan8798]

Maybe the scriptwriters were on top of it and scripted him to stand up, rip his suit off exposing a Superman costume, and fly up through the roof, but GWB is just a bad actor?

I would have had him stand up, grab a toy sword conveniently placed in the classroom in advance, brandish it wildly and shout "Men, man your battle stations!" before dashing from the room sword on high. Once outside he would jump on a waiting horse and charge across the school parking lot.

 

[NoahFence]

Supposedly, in this forum, you're supposed to attack the argument not the arguer.

Start quoting entire passages, and not just bits and pieces and maybe you'll be treated better.

Just a hunch.

 

[Bell]

Inside job doesn't represent the will of the U.S government.

Then what the hell does Bush' reaction (or lack thereof) has to do with an inside job?