Proof?
> Moreover, this particular point of view is from a radical organization
Define "radical."
> you can't really have intellectual discourse with people who refuse to see any other position than theirs.
How does one tell if this is the case? How does one tell _which_ party refuses to see things from another position? How does one tell if it is in fact miscommunication, or lack of a shared understanding? How does one tell if in fact one of the parties is not discussing in good faith?