The Debate

[sheizus]

Foreword
This a little experiment. Have fun and please participate in an orderly fashion, unless you feel that it will benefit the thread to participate otherwise, and also feel that I will agree with you.
The debate is not about a serious issue, nor is it to be conducted in a serious manner. Make things up, be creative etc. However, creative uses of language in the forms of objectionable or incomprehensible manners will not be tolerated. Try to guess if what you are going to say will be deleted. Abuse of anyone (including myself) will be tolerated if it is conducted in an acceptable way, however.

Teams will be assigned on a first-in-first-served basis, in the order of normal debating. If memory serves me correctly, this is: First Affirmative; First Negative; Second Affirmative; Second Negative; Third Affirmative; Third Negative; First Negative; First Affirmative. The final two are traditionally shorter addresses summing up the cases of the team's case and does not introduce new information.
Debating terminology is not necessary by any means.

No interjections. That wouldn't work, and there will be no arguing outside of the arguing phases. If anyone wants to call spaces on either team they can do that here, and give themselves time to prepare a response. Please make it evident that such posts are not part of the debating process. If you wish to organise rebuttal you can do that someplace else.

Finally, please note that this is a little more sophisticated than the Flame Thread. Posts in first person, references to all characters use character names. Hostboard tools are not out of bounds, and the moot, rules and lots of other stuff should be fairly dynamic.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Moot: "That the west should congratulate the coalition of the willing"

A1
Ladies and Gentlemen, today we are faced with an issue. The issue, apparently, is that the West should congratulate the coalition of the willing. Of course I'm not particularly sure what they meant by that, but because I'm the person talking and you're supposed to be on my side (as well as the fact that you are intelligent, rational individuals, of course), you inherently know that this is the truth. It's just common sense.
However, for those people that don't know what all that stuff means (our opposition, no doubt), you can use the tools available at Dictionary.com and Babelfish to figure it all out. Using them in conjunction is even better, but if pain persists, please see your doctor.

Now that you all know that we're all talking about how "West must celebrate combination and Sowon", I'll get into the middle bit of my argument.

I'm Gerald Blake, the first speaker, and I'm not going to get into the middle bit at the moment because I haven't introduced anyone yet. I'm Gerald Blake, the person speaking first. I don't know where anyone else is, so thats about it. Our first affirmative speaker is going to utterly convince you that he can. Convince you, that is. He's actually very good.

Now that all of that is sussed out, I want to rebut some of the absolute trash the negative team has told you already. To put it simply, your opposition, ladies and gentlemen, have not yet told you a single piece of decent, hard information so far this debate. Not a single thing. As David Houston so cleverly put it, "One could drive a prairie schooner through any part of this argument and never
scrape against a fact".
And, as plainly as I can put it, ladies and gentlemen, that is why we must pass legislation preventing inexperienced cowboy wannabes operating such complicated transportation as the praire schooner. The murderous risk-takers on your, nay, our opposition would play down the risks involved with such complicated wagonry, but you have only to look to this web page to see what can happen when people without proper training are allowed to operate them. About a third of the way down the page is a picture of Sally about to be run down by two speeding oxen in the front of a praire schooner.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we must do something to halt the rising incompetence of wagon drivers in our country, so that more children like Sarah aren't killed on our roads like lambs that are killed on our roads like Sarah.

With this in mind, I propose the Government of New Zealand implement a five year step by step program to introduce licenses similar to those held by car drivers. In the first year, a license will be introduced with which wagon drivers will be able to learn how to drive their wagons from experienced people who already have their full wagons licence that hasn't been introduced yet. To make this easier to understand, the acronym LWWWDWBATLHTDTWFEPWAHTFWLTHBIY will be put into use, and advertisements will be created showing people how to pronounce that as a word.
In the third year, people will be able to sit a test to get their Restricted License, with which they will be able to drive on the proviso that they promise not to run over Sandra. However, a new name will be needed for the license, as the currently planned one does not appear as though it will be as popular with the children, who are our future. And, of course, by not allowing such licenses in the first place, the opposition are not allowing trendy names like that to be applied at all, and stunting the growth of the wagonry industry in this country by alienating our youth.
In the fifth year, after writing a post for far too long, Gerald will step aside to let another person try to rebut an argument that doesn't make too much sense.

So to conclude, everything the negative team said amounts to absolutely nothing when faced with the absolute facts of the matter of the necessity of things happening, like oxen.

OOC: It's late, and I'm tired from all the stuff, and the things. That's my excuse. 1N, do a better job please.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

[captainankh]

Tiberius watched Gerald sit back down, and felt a tad baffled. He looked at his team, and was not inspired. With a little luck someone would turn up to help them. With a lot of luck, actually.
Of course, he had already broken a rule by posting in third-person, but decided to get around that issue by claiming that all of this part here is really just ooc comments.
With that, he stood up, ready to deliver his unprepared speech. Tiberius cleared his throat. He considered doing this with a wire brush but decided against it. Tiberius cleared his throat.

"[[Ladies, Gentlemen, and people] who frequent incident], of which there are too few, though the calibre of which is still at an acceptable level. You already know me, thus I shall not introduce myself as there is no audience outside of our closed circle, since there are none foolish enough to listen to such garbage from anyone other than themselves.
Instead I will use my time wisely to deliver an argument so poorly prepared that you will wonder why I bothered at all.

"So I will tell you! (why I bothered). The answer is simple: Because nobody else would. Yes, that's right. I felt it was I or nothing. But enough idle chatter, on to the argument.

"What you have heard from the so-called Affirmative team is utter dribble. Why? Simple, Ladies, Gentlemen, people, and foolish mortals who dare oppose me. Because there are no prairies in New Zealand. There you have it. An argument that cannot be argued with.

"The Negative team, as we are all pessimists, will now define what we believe to be the moot that we are attempting to argue today.

"We recognize the moot to be:
"That the west should congratulate the coalition of the willing".
We, the negative team, have come to the following conclusions:
The New Penguin Compact English Dictionary defines "THE WEST" as "the western part of the world", which basically means ourselves, US, UK, and various other first-world countries, "SHOULD" as "the past tense of shall", and thus "SHALL" as "used in the first person to express an action or state in the future", "CONGRATULATE" as "to express one's pleasure at success or good fortune", "THE" is actually a typo and should be "TEH", "COALITION" as "a temporary alliance, of political parties, for joint action such as forming a government", "OF THE" isn't in the dictionary, I define it personally as a description of some sort, and "WILLING" as "ready".

"Thus we define the moot as "THAT THE WESTERN WORLD SHALL ONE DAY IN THE DISTANT FUTURE EXPRESS PLEASURE AT THE SUCCESS OR GOOD FORTUNE OF A TEMPORARY ALLIANCE OF POLITICAL PARTIES READY TO FORM A GOVERNMENT."

"And we certainly don't think that this should happen. In fact, we know that this shouldn't happen! And you all know it too. Why would, or indeed should, anyone, let alone the Western World, congratulate politicians? And when will politicians ever enjoy any sucess or good fortune? The entire idea is absurd! But enough from me, I'm out of time. I'll let the rest of my team sum up this heavily one-sided argument for me. Ladies, Gentlemen, and people, All Your Base Are Belong To Us."

<font color="#f7f7f7" size="1">[ January 09, 2004 05:22 PM: Message edited by: Tiberius Frost. ]</font>

[Chris Wesley]

A2
Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen. We are here today to prove that the three people sitting at the desks to my right are, in fact, wrong. Dead wrong. Everything that they say contradicts our beliefs, and we believe that their existence alone contradicts ours. Ladies and Gentlemen, one of our teams should die to put an end to this. Gerald has spoken about Acronyms, and possibly governments. The west may have featured as well, but I'm not a fan of John Wayne movies. I shall talk about the word "willing" at great length, and how it applies to sluts, and sex. But first, some rebuttal of the First Negative's Argument.

First of all, the definition brought forwards is dead wrong. For a start, Teh should only be used if the rest of the phrase is also pronounced similarly. As he did not use any form of Netspeak other than Teh, I award him one "you're wrong" point. Said points may or may not be added to the subject's signature.

Also, he said that politicians should not be congratulated. Ladies and Gentlemen, what about when they resign? surely then we should celebrate? Another point for N1.

Now for my case. As keen readers of Minority Report will know, a Slut is a person, usually Female or possibly Mechanical, who has no morals regarding sex. They are Willing to provide sexual favours. In large groups, such girls could be called "Coalitions". So, in fact, the Coalition of the willing is the slappa community as a whole. They are the ones who the west is being asked to congratulate.

Ladies and Gentlemen, who are we to NOT Congratulate sluts? They are what makes this country great. Sluts, Slappas, Hos, call them what you will. They each provide much-needed recreational activities to an otherwise under-sexed society. Stand up. And give the Sluts a round of Applause.

However, on a completely unrelated note, do not turn around. Keep your eyes fixed upon me. Only on me, ignore the blurs in your peripheral vision. Something is behind you. Something is moving up behind you. Can you feel it, ladies and gentlemen? It is a beast, and it is hungry. It is stalking you. Keep your eyes focused on me, do not turn around, for it is still there. It's claws are sharp, and it hungers for the taste of flesh. It is creeping closer, you can almost feel its breath on your neck. It is the feeling of Paranoia, Ladies and Gentlemen, which consumes so many people. It is the essence of Horror movies, it is the fear that makes you turn around to see if the creature was really there. But of course, it is gone. Retreated back into the shadows, into your mind. But it will be back. It is still hungry.

Oh yeah, and the Negative are still dead wrong. We will have to kill them, for we are right, and they are our opposite. Our third speaker has been told to prove that they are in fact, composed of antimatter, and will explode if they come into contact with us. But, as is the case with many third speakers, they prepare absolutely nothing and talk utter crap for 10 minutes, before sitting down and grinning smugly, while the rest of us shake our heads.

<font color="#f7f7f7" size="1">[ December 29, 2003 04:34 AM: Message edited by: Chris Wesley ]</font>

[captainankh]

The leader of the negative was faced with a dilemma. His problem was simple: He wasn't really sure how to spell "dilemma". He had a feeling that he'd gotten it right, but still had a nagging itch that it was wrong somewhere. Fortunately, he hadn't said this aloud, he'd just posted it for everyone to read.
The Affirmative speaker had cleverly rebutted his argument, and he was annoyed at himself for not noticing simple cracks in his argument, like the bit about politicians resigning. No matter, he had a secret weapon.

The Negative's Secret Weapon approached the podium, and quietly arranged some cue cards and other such useful items. The audience watched on in stunned silence, because they knew that if they said anything they'd be kicked out. The speaker looked up, smiled suggestively and batted her eyelids at the onlookers. She addressed the crowd:

N2
"Good afternoon, Ladies and Gentlemen. I will be the second speaker of the Negative team. My name is Portia Fraser."

Portia stood almost six inches above her natural height, propped up on stiletto heels which looked sharp enough to punch through a steel plate. Her toenails were painted a deep, glittering blue. Long, pale legs were visible almost to her thighs, where the most tempting bits were hidden behind strategically placed black fabric, which was technically a skirt but looked more like half a handkerchief. It was bound tightly around her buttocks, with a purple belt that was draped down on one side.
A diamond piercing adorned her navel, in the centre of her smooth, flat stomach. Her hips curved distinctly up into her tight waist, then expanded again as her upper body began to enlarge in the chest region.
Portia wore a flimsy, short sleeved pink blouse, several of the top and bottom buttons not done up, which was pulled tight across her heaving bosom. A generous amount of cleavage was easily visible. She stood with her hips tilted to one side, hands clasped firmly on her waist.

Portia inhaled deeply, and ran long, slender fingers, painted to match her toes and lips through her long, blonde hair. She untied the ponytail, and shook her head. She ran her hands down her body, starting at her breasts with perky nipples showing through her shirt, down over her exposed midriff and thighs.
Slowly, twisting her shoulders, she began to undo the buttons on her blouse, until it lay open, revealing a candy pink lace bra. She pulled her top back off of her shoulders and down her arms. It hung in her right hand for a moment before she tossed it casually onto the floor. She breathed deeply again, her bra straining under the effort.

Portia then set to work on her skirt, loosening the belt and undoing the zips. Hooking her thumbs in, she turned around and pulled her skirt down to her ankles, bending over all the way and exposing the matching bright pink underwear. Stepping out of her skirt, she flicked it off the toe of her right foot, sending it across the floor. Portia stood up again, looking pleased with herself.
She rubbed her midsection with her fingers, stroking her leg with her left hand. She rubbed inside her thigh a little, and up onto her panties. She stopped and reached behind her back, unclipping her bra. She held it on for a little while, and then pulled it off her shoulders and dropped it onto the floor.

Her prized breasts were now available for all to see. She touched one gently, massaging her nipple, smiling a little and closing her eyes. She slowly lifted it up to her blue lips, and licked it with a wet, pink tongue.

Portia slid her fingers into her underwear, a smile forming on her lips. Suddenly, a bell rang. "Time!" somebody called. "Shutup, this is good", mumbled someone else. Portia looked up. "Thank-you." she said, and went and sat back down in her chair, wrapping herself in a pink silk dressing gown. The audience clapped.

"Well spoken", Tiberius commended her.

<font color="#f7f7f7" size="1">[ January 08, 2004 01:22 AM: Message edited by: Tiberius Frost. ]</font>

[arcticgal]

A3
"Good afternoon, Chairperson, ladies and gentlemen. I am Nora Fraser, third speaker for the affirmative team.
"Before I begin, on behalf of the west, I believe that we should congratulate the second speaker of the negative team. As an obvious member of the " Coalition of the Willing", it is for recognition of the people like her we fight for. Please convey our satisfaction to the
fellow members of your willing coalition, and know that we encourage your continued existence.
"As previously mentioned by A2, later on in my argument I will cunningly convice you, the esteemable audience, that the negative is composed of anti-matter and will explode if they come into contact with us. However, before dazzling you all with my logic, I too would like to add a few words in defense of the moot and my team members.
"The first speaker of the negative team would have us believe that simply because there are no prairies in New Zealand it is not our problem.
My friends! Everything is our problem! As citizens of the world, we should not ask what the Americans can do for us, but what together we can do for the freedom of man. Because this is the root of our argument- it all comes back to one thing, and that is freedom. Everyone in the world should be free from the threat of unlisenced prarie schooner drivers. How can we look away? How can we allow evil to prosper in front of our eyes? For any threat to the freedom of man is evil. In arguing that the argument of prarie-schooner lisencing is irrelevant, and negative team is blatantly challenging the individual's right to freedom the world over, thus campaigning on the side of slavery. It would hardly be surprising to discover that the members of
the negative team are members of the KKK for Kids.
Frankly, I find this blatant immorality offensive. I do not understand how the debate
could have progressed thus far without some intervention on the side of decency, which
is, obviously, on the side of the affirmative.
"Continuing on the vein of freedom, we believe that " sluts" ought to be applauded, not
necessarily because of their behavior, but because of their total freedom from external
pressures. No external morality has influenced their behaviour. We believe that they should be congratulated for this display of personal freedom that few possess, and that any who condemn them are merely jealous ."
"And now on to my conclusion. Let me begin by saying that the negative team are completely wrong. And now, if you will all bear with me, I shall proceed to convince you that the negative team is composed of anti-matter and will explode if they come into contact with us.
"Matter and anti-matter are equal and opposite. When one takes this statement into context it takes on a whole new meaning. Each of these teams are equal and opposite. Each contains the same amount of people and the same resources. The only difference is that that the negative team is arguing against us- they oppose us. 'Oppose' is a word related to the word 'opposite', given that they mean the same thing, except in different forms of the stem. Therefore, the two teams in this debate are equal and opposite. However, the fact that all teams are still remaining whole would suggest that people are a different kind of anti-matter, of a variety that only reacts with this same type of matter. I therefore rename this new type of matter as 'positive matter', which is the normal variety, and 'negative matter' which is the anti-matter of 'positive matter'. Positive is a synonym of Affirmative, and we are the
Affirmative team. Therefore, I would suggest that the Negative Team is the antimatter of positive matter.
"The meeting of these two types of matter would couse an enormous explosion, so I would suggest that no one with normal matter goes near the Negative team for the duration of time, as it could be fatal to everyone within a 500 kilometer radius.
"And so, I shall conclude with a simple statement. The west should congratulate the coalition of the willing."

[dragonflynz]

3N

Well...
We've heard some interesting stories today. We've travelled from prairie schooners and Sowon to politics to sluts and hos. We've looked at paranoia, anti-matter, and Portia's prized breasts.

The Affirmative opened by telling us that the Government of New Zealand should introduce laws to halt halt the rising incompetence of wagon drivers in our country.

We were told about Sarah, who would run herself over on the road. And the mystical LWWWDWBATLHTDTWFEPWAHTFWLTHBIY that would halt all this.

Let me tell you: LWWWDWBATLHTDTWFEPWAHTFWLTHBIY will not help anyone! It's a myth, perpetuated by those who would gain from another clunky licensing system designed to stop young people having fun and damaging their developing bodies.

But the Affirmative will cry, "With LWWWDWBATLHTDTWFEPWAHTFWLTHBIY, little Sarah will never run herself over!".

This is a sinister twisting of the facts - Sarah already can't run herself over. We are not an independent republic: The laws of Physics still govern over us. It is impossible under those laws for Sarah to run herself over, with or without the Prairie license.

The first speaker's case is therefore grounded in defying those governing laws. This is treason. I shall see to it that he hang for these words.


The facts are that politicians are the willing, not prairie schooners. And politicians should not be congradulated. The affirmative second speaker asked about when they resign, but he ignored our definition entirely.

"THAT THE WESTERN WORLD SHALL ONE DAY IN THE DISTANT FUTURE EXPRESS PLEASURE AT THE SUCCESS OR GOOD FORTUNE OF A TEMPORARY ALLIANCE OF POLITICAL PARTIES READY TO FORM A GOVERNMENT."

Those politicians resigning are leaving a government, not forming one. Politicians forming a government are in fact Anti-Resigning, which by the Affirmatives' own logic are the least congradulatable of all politicians.

Besides, if the politicans resigned, there would be no-one working in the Beehive and no more Honey.

The second affirmative went on to say that Sluts are what make this country great. But, friends, Sluts are Honey!

I quote:

I heard four light foot scuffs, followed by a thud, as someone climbed down from the loft and skipped the last step on the ladder. Probably one of the women headed for the backhouse. But a moment later I heard Honey's voice whisper, "Cob?"
"What is it?" I asked unwillingly.
She turned towards my voice, and I heard her approach in the darkness. Some little moonlight leaked in at a badly-shuttered window. I picked out her shape in the darkness. "Over here," I told her when she hesitated, and saw her startle at how close my voice was. She groped her way to my corner, and then hesitantly sat down in the straw beside me.
"I daren't go back to sleep," she explained. "Nightmares."
"I know how that is," I told her, surprised at how much sympathy I felt. "When if you close your eyes, you tumble right back into them."
"Exactly," she said, and fell silent, waiting.
But I had nothing more to say, and so sat silent in the darkness.
"What kind of nightmares do you have?" she asked me quietly.
"Bad ones." I said drily. I had no wish to summon them by speaking of them.
"I dream Forged ones are chasing me, but my legs have turned to water and I cannot run. But I keep trying and trying as they come closer and closer."
"Uhm." I agreed. Better than dreaming of being beaten and beaten and beaten... I reined my mind away from that.
"It's a lonely thing, to wake up in the night and be afraid."
I think she wants to mate with you. Will they accept you so easily?
"What?" I asked, startled, but it was the girl who replied, not Nighteyes.
"I said, it's lonely to awake at night and be afraid. One longs for a way to feel safe. Protected."
"I know of nothing that can stand between a person and the dreams that come at night," I said stiffly. Abruptly I wanted her to go away.
"Sometimes a little gentleness can," she said softly. She reached over and patted my hand. Without intending to, I snatched it away.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">There you have it. Politicians should never be congradulated, whether forming a goverment (as we proved) or even when resigning and destroying the flow of Honey. Much as slapping her hand away does.

Moreover, that book doesn't need to make the writing go upside down to hold your interest.


Finally, in response to the third Affirmative, I must tell you that no member of my team has ever exploded. Not once. Moreover, we have all touched people, not just each other but normal people like you. You know this.

I've seen half of you with Portia over the past month, unless each time I just saw a different part of Frost. You've even seen me touching people - I hear you gossip about it behind my back.

But if that isn't proof, remember that after this debate the Affirmative are bound by magical contract to walk past and shake each of our hands. That they haven't run away proves that they don't believe the lies they are perpetuating. Or, that they are really stupid.

Either way, you can't trust them. The truth is obvious. Wild Wild West is not a good movie.

<font color="#f7f7f7" size="1">[ January 10, 2004 01:11 AM: Message edited by: Martin Scripts ]</font>

[captainankh]

Frost stood up, rather chuffed at his inventive pre-cleared throat.

"Ladies, Gentlemen, and anybody else who's still listening to this. You have heard the argument that the Affirmative team has presented to you, assuming that you were listening to their rubbish simply for the sake of completion. And you know that it is false. You have also heard the argument that the Negative team has presented, because we were speaking sanely, and because we are the sorts of people that you would listen to. Especially Portia. I am going to proceed through the list of things that the Affirmative team has forgotten, left out, overlooked, discounted, covered up, and generally ignored by our rivals over there.

"Their first speaker failed to define the moot beyond its face value, and told you that to believe it would be common sense. In the spirit of this debate, I see no reason for anyone to believe what they perceive to be common sense. Without real evidence, hard or soft, a statement of any sort should be ignored. If I tell you that I am not from earth, you will not believe me unless perhaps I prove to you that this is really my natural hair colour. I could tell you that Portia isn't a real person, but again you probably wouldn't, or at least shouldn't, until I have her bang her head against her desk against her will using only a thought.

"Onto the piece involving this wagonry business. Gerald has cleverly said that:
"One could drive a prairie schooner through any part of this argument and never scrape against a fact".
"Well, to be quite honest, any-and-everybody, this is a favourable situation. In the above scenario, "One" has not scraped against anything. In fact, it would appear that "One" is a fairly decent operator of the hypothetical "Prairie Schooner". And since "One" refers, not to a character from The Matrix, or to Jet Li, but simply to all of us, (Including Mr. Li and Neo), I feel that we can all operate this device with or without implementing a license. Anyway, a vehicle without an engine would be simply unpopular among today's youth. There is no problem there.

"As for poor Suzie, I think that she's already gone. But enough of that, Martin has already exlained to you all beyond doubt how this is simply not a possibility.

"To the Second speaker: How can we congratulate sluts? What do they amount to at all? They provide sex to stoners, dropouts, general losers, and never to the people that really deserve, the hard-working people that really should be congratulated, since they're going to end up running the country. Sluts make idiots feel good about themselves, and nerds feel bad. This is why People with a future end up becoming nothing: they trade it in for sex. Eliminate sluts, and people no longer have reasons to leave school. So they stay, and they work, and the mean IQ of the entire country goes up. And dumb girls stay in school, so the Government stops telling everyone that "Girls are smarter". And everybody wins. Except of course, the sluts, who by now have been eliminated.

"Onto the next part of the second argument, I have not yet turned around, as I am not afraid. I cannot fear such a fool as you who thinks that paranoia has breath. Certainly, paranoia in inside you, inside us all, it does not breathe, and certainly not on your neack. And it has little to do with the West, coalitions, or congratulating anybody.

"And to the third speaker: If everything is our problem, what are you doing to prevent world hunger? What are you doing to save the citizens of Iraq? What are you doing to stop terrorism? If all of these are your problem as well as ours, what do you intend to do about these things? If nothing then how can you justify instituting a New Zealand prairie schooner license to drive in a place that only exists elsewhere?

"And I am a member of the KKK, not the kids version, thank-you-very-much.

"A few words on antimatter: Firstly, matter is made up of charged particles. The most well known of these are Protons, Neutrons and Electrons. These are made up of other particles, but for the sake of simplicity, and because we do't want to confuse the Affirmatives, I'll stick to these three. Neutrons have no charge, Electrons have a negative charge, and Protons have a positive charge. Anyone who took 5th form science should know this. When particles of the same configuration, yet opposite charge come into contact with each other, they are "annihilated". Explode, put simply. There is no way to get different varieties of antimatter, there are only the two types.

"Were the Negative team composed of antimatter, we would have been destroyed long ago, since we are existing here in the matter universe. We are all composed of basic sub-atomic particles, and so as we sat down on our chairs, we would have exploded. The same would have been achieved just from breathing the air around us.

"We are not the equals or opposites of the Affirmative, we are their superiors, as we have proven here today. They are wrong and we are right.

"And thus the Affirmative team is out of options other than to concede to us. They are utterly mistaken, and should not have opposed us, as we are superior to them in every way. They stand no chance, as you can see. I believe that one of them may be about to cry. They certainly deserve nothing more than their imposing defeat. I laugh in their faces, Ha."

<font color="#f7f7f7" size="1">[ January 10, 2004 06:43 PM: Message edited by: Tiberius Frost. ]</font>

[sheizus]

Ladies and Gentlemen, and everything in between, what an utter load of codswallop. The "leader" of that ragtag team of delinquents trying to hold the name of negative team is trying vainly to confuse your obviously superior intellect with a leaders' reply longer than either of their actual arguments.

As you already know, ladies and gentlemen, your and our opposition's argument lies wholly on the erroneous assumption that a praire is needed to have a praire schooner. We all know that's rubbish. You don't need ninety horses to have a ninety horsepower motor. Those cretins don't have a clue what they're talking about.
Even on that slimmest of possibilities that praire schooners haven't broken fully into our market yet, that is no reason at all to forgo passing legislation about it. As is often said, "Prevention is better than cure", and if there is a chance of people like Samantha being run over by reckless wagoneers it is obviously better to bring in the licenses.

The negative point to us ignoring their definitions, when they have done just the same from when we so eloquently concreted the intricacies of the moot with our tools from the internet.

Sluts, too, have found their way into things. Again. As pointed out by the people's second speaker, sluts are best shown as proponets of free thought, advocates of acting for actual gain, even when it goes against what could be taken as ridiculous moral rules from a hypocritical society. Indeed, we must congratulate these people, for the sluts will thus obviously be among the greatest suporters of the actions necessary to implement restrictions on the driving of schooners.

And finally, the politicians. Of course we must congratulate them. Ladies and gentlemen, you know this. We all know this as a certainty. After all, who else has the ability to bring these laws into effect?

We, as Western citizens MUST congratulate the coalition of politicians willing to do what we all know is _right_ to prevent any more harm being done to the children, the future of our world.