BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Operation Northwoods Proves That The US May Be Capable Of Endorsing Or Committing Terrorism

Quite as stated. I believe that Operation Northwoods proves that our military intelligence agencies and our executive branch may be capable of endorsing or even committing terrorism on US soil against US citizens. "Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation against the Cuban government, that originated within the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other US government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The proposals were rejected by the Kennedy administration." https://en.wikipedia.org... Operation Northwoods shows precedent of malevolent intent, and shows an expectation of cooperation in carrying out such intents between agencies, military, and the federal branch of the government as early as the 1960's. Despite the blatant treason, no charges were laid against any of the conspirators and no significant changes have been made to prevent this type of occurrence from happening again. Quite to the contrary, our entire government including the involved "defense" agencies now levy more power than ever against our populace and abroad. I look forward to responding to my opponent.
Raising minimum wage will help the current status of the US' economy

Ah, a nice, relatively short debate.MW = minimum wage There are major issues with bringing Keynes into this debate: First, the economy is heating up to the point that there is talk of the federal reserve raising interest rates very soon. Keynesians advocate stimulus when the economy is poor, not when it's picking up steam. Second, neither fiscal policy nor monetary policy (the two "levers" of Keynesianism) directly targets minimum wage jobs. Fiscal policy typically bails out Wall street and failing U.S. businesses while monetary policy tends to help the rich at the expense of the poor. Third, Keynesian economics itself is flawed. It was refuted by Jean-Baptiste Say in 1803 before Keynes was even born. Recessions are not caused by demand shocks, they are caused by supply shocks: "A man who applies his labour to the investing of objects with value by the creation of utility of some sort, can not expect such a value to be appreciated and paid for, unless where other men have the means of purchasing it. Now, of what do these means consist? Of other values of other products, likewise the fruits of industry, capital, and land. Which leads us to a conclusion that may at first sight appear paradoxical, namely, that it is production which opens a demand for products." "Should a tradesman say, "I do not want other products for my woollens, I want money," there could be little difficulty in convincing him that his customers could not pay him in money, without having first procured it by the sale of some other commodities of their own" http://www.econlib.org... Fiscal policy simply transfers wealth from one person to another, giving person X the ability to spend the production of person Y. Monetary policy creates money out of thin air, allowing some lucky individuals to spend the general increase in productivity of everyone else. Even if a MW increase somehow magically did increase spending, and J.B. Say was wrong while Keynes was right, where would the additional money come from to pay for the MW increase? Raising the MW only shifts money around, it does not create wealth. Of those workers who get paid more after the MW is raised, some may see reduced benefits or work hours. Other workers will lose their jobs either because they are replaced by machines or the business is forced to close, while still others simply will not be hired due to positions that would have been created without the MW increase. In other cases, the business owner will eat the cost and his/her spending will decrease. And lastly, how does increasing government revenue help the economy? If it does, then shouldn't we just raise all tax rates to 100% and have government provide for us all? Note: I concede that the MW increase will have zero affect on inflation. Inflation is caused by increasing the supply of money (Federal Reserve) faster than increases in productivity. It has nothing to do with the MW.
Raising minimum wage will help the current status of the US' economy

Meaning I believe that raising the minimum wage will help the Economy. According to the Keynesian economics if the consumers spirits are low it is the responsibility of the government to start spending money in order for consumers to trust the market again. So in order to improve the economy we need to be putting more money into play, with out effecting deflation or inflation of the American dollar. If this were to be accomplished people would have more money they could spend on their wants not just their needs. This makes it so the market is fed more money thus making the status of the Us economy better which then keeps consumer spirits trusting the economy not making them weary of it plummeting. Raising the minimum wage also means that there will be more money going in to taxes from the work forces' pay checks. For example take Colorado’s minimum wage of $8.23 if I were to get a 40-hour Pacheco for a week of work I would roughly make $219.47 with about a third of the pay check going to taxes, the government taking about $109.73. Now if the Minimum wage was $15 and hour the consumer would make about $400 and the government would make $200 off a two week pay check. The opposing side may say that raising the minimum wage will raise prices and jobs meaning small business will be on the decline. But like I mentioned earlier is that is if there is no inflation or deflation of the American dollar the prices don’t raise. Thus making it competitive even for small businesses’.
is there an item without a destination or function

I do not understand what your 1st point is but not knowing the purpose does not mean it has no purpose. An object has a purpose regardless of whether you know it or not. On your 2nd point, not necessarily. Waste is still useful for the ground (nutrients) and it can be reused. I already told you your burden of proof was to name one object with no purpose (which you did not contest) but you haven't successfully done this. Alljudges should remember this when voting and prefer a con ballot.
is there an item without a destination or function

To clarify, you are arguing that not every object has a purpose and I am arguing that every object has a purpose. Well your argument is flawed because you are implying that if a person doesn't know what the object is, it therefore has no purpose. This is incorrect. An iPhone will always have a purpose (calling, texting, games), Leonardo just doesn't know what that purpose is. Your burden as Pro is to name an object (at least one) with no purpose and therefore prove your point.
Judaism Is The Best Religion

My opponent"s first point is that Jews are smarter because 20% of the nobel prize winners are Jewish. But the problem with this is that someone could be smarter than the nobel prize winners, but be too lazy to strive for a nobel peace prize. Therefore nobel peace prize winning is not a good indicator of whether someone is smart or not. Someone for example could be really hard working to the point that by chance they achieve something, while someone else could have gotten it on his second try, but didn"t have the motive to do it. Hardworking and intelligent is not the same thing. To the point about the iq"s, it"s pretty much an axiom that iqs also don"t mean really anything, since iq"s only test for certain knowledge. And it may so happen that the certain knowledge in iq tests are most likely known by Jews. "Everybody is a Genius. But If You Judge a Fish by Its Ability to Climb a Tree, It Will Live Its Whole Life Believing that It is Stupid". Now my opponent claims that a religion is better than another because it has committed less genocides, but pro makes a contradiction. The reason my opponent chooses not to count genocides caused by members of a religion, is because they are inputting something that really isn"t from the fundamentals of the religion. But then pro says that he counts the genocides that were consented by religious leaders and religious hierarchy, in other words people of the church. Just because someone high up on the ladder in a religion says something, doesn"t mean it"s part of the fundamentals of a religion. Religious leaders aren"t infallible, and in fact they may even say heresy because they are corrupt. Therefore my opponent"s point about the genocides is refuted. Christianity, unlike Islam and Judaism, believe in the idea of original sin which makes the most sense because without sin, we are born perfect, and in that case how would we sin if we were perfect. Therefore Christianity is better due to the fact that it makes more sense and has a valid idea about our birth. Sources- http://christianityinview.com...
Judaism Is The Best Religion

"Judaism is older" "Although Hinduism is touted the world's oldest religion, there are others that have been around a long time as well. Judaism, Taoism Buddhism, and Jainism are religions that are still being practiced today. A few older style religions are Zorastrianism, Confucianism, and Pantheism." By pro's logic, Hinduism is actually better than Judaism based on the fact that it's older. http://www.enkivillage.com... Then he says Judaism is better by saying that it's better. Which is begging the question. Later he also says that Judaism is better because it's better overall, which is also begging the question. Then he says Judaism is wiser without bringing up anything to support it. Then my opponent says " Jews on average are smarter than others, this likely has a link to religion." Yet the fact that members of a religion are smarter, does not make the religion itself better than others. My opponent has no evidence for every single one of these assertions.
Judaism Is The Best Religion

I would like to say good job to my opponent for winning. It was a really stupid joke that got out of hand, lel. My opponent won as I was arguing something that was not true. To my opponnant: What I mean't about Christian funtamentals was that you were saying Jews think babies are born sinless therefore perfect therefore they cannot commit sin. That was the flawed idea of yours. To clarify Jews think babies are born sinless yes, but they DO NOT beleive that sinless is perfect therefore your idea is flawed, the christian idea (I think, or you just have that idea form somewhere else) you were using was the idea that sinless is perfect. Like I have said you are simply wrong about the Jewish beleif of babies, they do not beleive that they are perfect.
Judaism Is The Best Religion

My opponent first starts off by saying Judaism is the best religion because the other religions stem off it, but what exactly of that makes it better? The fact that it started off the same? The point that they started in the same place is irrelevant, but instead what the fundamentals have become now. These religions have different ideas, therefore whether they started at the same place is irrelevant. For example, twins came out of the mother, but one can be a murderer and the other a hero. The problem with my opponent"s second paragraph is that he says I"m bringing Christian fundamentals into Jewish fundamentals, but that"s not what I"m saying. I"m not saying that Judaism believes this or that because this is what Christians believe. I"m criticizing Judaism by talking about its nonsense, since that is one way to determine whether something is better. What I"m saying is separated from all religions. This is purely me saying what things mean, and since my opponent has conceded that Jews don"t believe that, their belief is nonsensical. I"m not trying to implement anything into Judaism, but simply saying this part doesn"t make sense. So this basically means that pro has misinterpreted my whole point, and therefore his second paragraph is meaningless. It doesn"t matter what Jews believe, but what makes logical sense. My opponent then says that Rabbis have debated over when people can submit sin, and I"m asking why can"t babies commit sins earlier? I"m questioning why they chose that number. I"m trying to find the logic behind saying the it"s safe to say 1 month olds can commit sin, but someone a day before 1 month old can"t. If they wanted to be safe I would question their decision as to why not pick 2 months old. This baby idea is again, another nonsensical idea since it"s rather safer to judge the babies for themselves to say if they are able to sin or not, rather than just pick a number. My opponent has forfeited, and I will accept it. I also hope my opponent understands where his logic was flawed and also where he misinterpreted.
Idiot Democrat vs Idiot Republican political debate parody :D

1) Taxing the richThe rich can exploit loopholes because they actualy read contracts before they sign on the dotted line for Uncle Sam. The reason that they can hire other people is because they are hard workers and that they deserve to keep the money they earn so since they are very tired after a long day of work they don't have time to clean up the mansion or cook dinner so they hire someone to do this. The reason that Congress can't agree on a budget is because they are to bussy fighting over a control bill and that Congress is argueing about our Constitutional rights. The only way to fix our deficet is that if we stop spending money on dumb stuff like how we're like over spending on food stamps since over like 50% isn't being claimed. You know why it's because the rich folks are helping out the poor people so that their isn't too many people relying on food stamps.2) Gun ControlThe NRA is great buisness because they give people jobs and if you want to make them go out of buisness you want people to be poor and lose jobs thus making you a dirty evil Satanic Commy. So what you're saying is that when Lincoln wanted free the slaves that he was wrong and the slaves shouldn't have been freed?Sharks kill people to so do you want to kill all the sharks. Medcine kills people people so are you going to ban medicine and reject all the people the rights to cure their AIDS and HIV and Herpes? So it's obvious you can't ban guns because of a few crazy people.3) AbortionThe differance between kids and chickens is that we eat chickens. Do we eat our babies? NO WE DON'T! As you can see we don't eat babies so it is wrong to have abortions.4) Funding for schoolNo, Democrats want to make kids stupid, because we are giving them funding and making them spend it on things we don't need. Even what we teach kids in schools is making them stupid. We're not teaching them about patriotism instead we're teaching them about the Big Bang which is like sex ed which is even worse because it makes people gay.5) End WarsWe had every rigtht to be there because they were harboring terrorists like Obama Bin Ladin and he's caused 9-11 and that is something we must not tollerate. You are suggesting that we should have laid down like dogs, but if we had a Democratic president during 9-11 we would have just laid down and then other nations that trusted us wouldn't any more and the US would be in the dark worse then Angola.6) ImmigrationNo it was the Spainish who gave the Indians diseased blankets and they now live in Latin America and Mexico and we don't need those evil freaks in the US were we did things fair. Kansas is the most haunted state in America, it was key for the transcontinental railroad, it was the begining of the Civil War, It houses Boweing.(THis includes my half of this 'stupidity debate)
Idiot Democrat vs Idiot Republican political debate parody :D

1) Taxing the rich Rich people arent what makes this country run, youve been brain-washed by Fox News if you believe that. If you knew the truth and watched MSNBC, then you would know that the rich hoarding all of their wealth and using loopholes to not pay taxes is the reason every recession happens.... 2) Gun Control Guns are the leading cause of gun related deaths in America, so naturally if there was more gun control and even a gun ban then there would be less crime because then the criminals wont have anything else to use! Criminals who cant get a gun will have to go back to their normal lives and be productive people again, maybe even get a job or start a business. If we ban guns then there might be less unemployment in America 3) Abortion Just because something has a heartbeat and can pee it doesnt make it a person or human... You have to be human and be outside of the womb to be human, thats just science. A fetus isnt human until it is born and anybody who disagrees has been brainwashed by Fox News, seriously watch MSNBC more often, they tell the truth. 4) Education When America was number 1 in the 1950's, we were number 1 because it was 5 years after World War 2, all of Europe and Asia was in ruins. The reason we were number one was because we were the only ones still alive at that point. Then though the Republicans said 'oh, we're number one, we can scale back funding for education and spend it on stuff we dont need like nukes' and that lead to where we are now. America needs to fund schools more and Republicans need to stop taking orders from Fox News. 5) End the Wars The Democrats didnt put us in World War 1 and Word War 2, we were dragged into that... We entered World War 2 Because the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and we entered World War 1 because the Germans attacked a cruise ship that had Americans on it... I think it was called the Titanic but im only 90% sure. Had we had Republicans in office during those times they would have gotten us into those wars as soon as possible by saying "Oh they have weapons of mass destruction" or some other BS. Plus I bet Republicans wouldnt even have cared about the Holocaust that was going on since Republicans dont like Jews, just like they dont like Muslims or black people... These wars though arent being fought to keep us safe... These wars are being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan because we wanted their oil, thats the real truth. We gain nothing from these wars and we might as well end them now since we dont even have the funds to pay for it. 6) Immigration White people also snuck into this country and stole American Indians' land and jobs, but you dont think that White people should be thrown out now do you... EXACTLY, because youre a republican, and you only like White People. Why punish Mexicans for doing the same thing that White people did to the Indians like 100 years ago? Its just hypocritical.
Idiot Democrat vs Idiot Republican political debate parody :D

1) Taxes on rich.The rich people is what makes this country run! If it wasn't for them big wigs then we would not have gotten' out of that recession. You see these rich people get money and then they use money to make a buisness and that buisness makes jobs which gives the average Joe a source of income and some money. Did you know that the rich already pays like 2,000 times more then the average Joe! No wounder we hit that recession! It's because of the government is restricting our job makers and entrapanuers thus killing our economy. Flatt Tax where it's at. 2) Gun ControlDemocrats are crazy if they have their way even butter knives will be illegal. You see guns don't kill people, people kill people. If guns killed people then how the Heck do people make it out of gun shows. You see an armed society is a happy society. People say if you take away guns then we'd be fine but look I think I see a bat that can kill people, an alligator, a snake, a plane, a car... are we going to ban them? Do you honnestly believe that criminals will fallow gun control laws? Then you must be a special brand of stupid. Stop them with your vote for the Republicans.3) AbortionMany people think that abortion should be legal cause "it's her body and the government shouldn't have any control over it." But I believe that our great president Ronald Ragen stated, "How come everyone for abortion has already been born?" Americans have the right to live no matter how small. Now what many people charicterise living creature is if it creates waste, needs air, and needs food. Well the feste's heart starts to beat after a week and a half or so, it pees inside it's mother *ewwwww*, and it comsums netruants through the mother blood flow thingy. 4) Funding Education Back in the 50's Americu was number 1 in education. Best in the world! But since then the government has given schools money and America has dropped since then. It seems like the government wants our educational system to fail! We need to stop giving so much money to education inorder for our schools to suceed again. It's like schools were healthy and then we given the schools money to fund education. It's like we gave crack to schools.5) End the Wars The democrats just like to point the blame at the GOP when we try to keep our people safe! We were attacked on September 11th, 2001, so as Americans we said, "Hey **** you man, you attacked us we are going to beat the **** out of your little Islamist ***** *** group." Al-Qaeda hasn't died yet, because A) you can't kill an idea, and B)Al-Qaeda is in Syria and Mali so this war isn't over yet. Then the Democrats had put America into the two biggest wars in history, WW1 with Wilson and WW2 with F. Roosevelt. 6) ImmigrationDemocrats are just way to friendly to them Camachos. Those Mexicans "sneak across" our borders and steel our American jobs. They take our "oppertunities" and leave us Americans behind with less jobs. Heck them Camachos don't even pay taxes, so they are like criminals and should be thrown out of this nation.
Idiot Democrat vs Idiot Republican political debate parody :D

Heres how this will work, you know how when you go on youtube and click on videos of people explaining who they are going to vote for and why such as the one to the right, and you end up losing almost all faith in humanity? This debate is going to parody the (lack of) logic that people use when they explain on who they are voting for and why.... Whoever accepts this debate will choose to mimic either an idiot Democrat or an idiot Republican, and I will be the one that isnt chosen. Then both sides will present arguments over political issues based on how a typical idiot from whichever party they have chosen to represent would normally argue. Basically.... This is a stupidity debate :D If youre still confused, here's how this debate will work: (Example topic: Obama) Republican: "Nobama is a Kenyan secret Muslim who hates America and thats why you shouldnt vote for him" Democrat: "Obama is black which means if hes president then racism will become illegal, which is why you should vote for him" Whoever presents the stupidest arguments which sound like something an idiot from that respective party would make, then that person wins the debate. Its as simple as that :D First round is NOT acceptance only, you can start arguing if you want or you can wait until round 2. Just EXPLICITLY STATE which party youre going to be parodying. http://www.youtube.com...
I support rape

i have been raped by a woman, What is there to lie about. Why would someone lie about rape? I bet if a girl told you that she got raped by a man, You'd automatically believe her. So by that, I think you are being sexist here. "Pro seems to think that rape toward women is indeed rape, Whereas rape toward men is not rape. " i understand your point here it can be both for both but its more common for women to get raped by men than vice versa No, I am not a woman i am a noble man.