BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Is Hamas Evil? You decide!

There are multiple definitions of evil, 1 of which I believe fits Hamas perfectly. a : causing harm : pernicious Also, there are more reasons why as well. All evil groups and people, whether in fiction or in real life, believed their actions were justified and right, even if they were the exact opposite. Also, Sharia Law is a very fluid concept. What could be considered part of it in 1 place could be considered too extreme in another. Saudi Arabia has radically different laws than other Arab countries in the Middle East, and that includes what Sharia Law is. What Hamas believes is right is considered to be morally wrong to most, me included. Therefore, since only Hamas and its supporters believe their actions are morally right and no one else, their actions are not. Before my opponent tries to refute that with other arguments, lets look at another debate, Democrats vs Republicans. Both sides disagree with each other, but they mostly agree that the policies they support wouldn't cross the line. But, with Hamas, every sane person would agree their actions cross the line. Only those who are either in it or support it believe what they do is morally right. Since no one else believes so, they can be defined as Evil. Finally, I will reiterate and rephrase a statement to end this debate: All of evil believes they are right even though they are not. And that concludes my role in this debate.
Is Hamas Evil? You decide!

I will now refute his arguments once again. It seems my opponent, while certainly accurate in his portrayal of Hamas' activities, has missed the point of my main and crucial argument. Hamas is cruel. Hamas is unfair. Hamas is unethical. Hamas is violent. Hamas is repulsive and revolting. Hamas is NOT, by definition, evil. My definition of the word "evil" has gone unscathed through round 2. I will assume this means my opponent has accepted it. I believe the best course of action is this: I agree that Hamas has done awful things. However, in a debate, we argue and discuss the resolution. The resolution is this: Hamas is evil. I provided a definition of evil. This definition was:"Morally bad or wrong; wicked" Sharia law, as believed by Hamas, is morality itself. Therefore, hamas is NOT "morally bad or wrong; wicked. " In fact, they believe they are just the opposite! If my opponent can refute this in the third and final round, I encourage him to do so. If all my opponent can do is provide more evidence of Hamas' admittedly CRUEL and INHUMANE (but not, by definition, evil) actions, then I believe he will have lost the debate. Back to you, my (extremely well learned) opponent.
Is Hamas Evil? You decide!

My opponent has made very compelling arguments, and I applaud him for it. But I can do the same as well. It's time for me to bring out the big guns in my argument. Hamas has quoted a known fake of a book, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and have used it as justification for Anti-Semitic actions. As said in Artcle 32 of the Hamas charter: Article 32: "...Hamas is calling upon the Arab and Islamic peoples to act seriously and tirelessly in order to frustrate that dreadful scheme ... Today it is Palestine and tomorrow it may be another country or other countries. For Zionist scheming has no end, and after Palestine they will covet expansion from the Nile to the Euphrates... Their scheme has been laid out in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and their present [conduct] is the best proof of what is said there." What is shown is how to destroy a political group's credibility in 1 second. This forgery is itself was used as justification for the actions of the most evil group in history, The Nazis, who used it to justify their attacks on Jews. As a result, anyone who uses this farce as a justification is probably up to no good. Next, there is an inevitable part in this debate where the Arab-Israeli Conflict is mentioned. That time is now. Where do I begin? Ah yes, let's begin with Hamas's use of HUMAN SHIELDS. Often, it has been reported that IAF pilots were forced to call off airstrikes at rocket launch sites due to non-combatants being in the area. Why are there civilians in those areas? Because Hamas fighters are cowards. This quote, taken from the Jerusalem Post website, explains: "Such tactics are not new for Hamas and Islamic Jihad. In recent years, Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya declared that "the Palestinians are a nation of jihad and martyrdom," while Hamas MP Fathi Hamed, addressing Israel, said, "We desire death more than you desire life."" Yes, that's right. They say the Palestinians are a people of killing themselves for their politicians. Then again, they secretly want that, because more dead civilians=More sympathy for their messed-up cause. A group is definitely evil when they begin doing this. Then there's the issue of the rockets themselves. Hamas launches them indiscriminately at any target they can find. The result is the needless slaughter of Israelis, provoking IAF airstrikes, which result in needless Palestinian deaths. It's a vicious cycle, and Hamas is the motor behind it. Source: http://www.jpost.com... Source: http://www.palwatch.org... Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...
Is Hamas Evil? You decide!

First off let me provide a disclaimer stating that I do not claim to personally support HAMAS or anything it stands for. I am merely doing this for the purpose of competition, the learning of debating skills, and the "trial by fire" method of discovering truth which is debate. Hi. I'm Justin. In this debate, I will be assuming the role of the Negative team. (Con) I will be negating the resolution, and arguing that HAMAS isn't evil. I will start by summarizing my opponent's arguments as I understand them. (Feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken) 1. Hamas has a terrible HR record. (several examples cited) 2. Hamas is imposing sharia law on the inhabitants of Palestine, even equipping a secret police force to do so. 3. Hamas didn't defend the people from a terrorist group who threatened to kill Palestinians TV broadcasters who did not align with sharia law. In response, I will not be arguing over whether or not Hamas is "justified" in their actions. But, more specifically, if they are inherently EVIL. (As the resolution states) If I can prove that HAMAS isn't "evil", then I believe that the negative team has warranted your vote at the end of this debate round. I will first begin by defining evil, since the affirmative team has not done so. Evil (according to thefreedictionary.com) - "Morally bad or wrong; wicked" http://www.thefreedictionary.com... According to HAMAS' views, unless I'm mistaken, sharia law is divinely inspired and it is, therefore, moral to enforce it. If this is the case, then HAMAS isn't acting immorally, but instead actually acting according to what they believe is right! I am not saying that HAMAS' actions are justified, but by the definition of evil (as is stated in the resolution) HAMAS can't be considered evil. They are trying to do what their beliefs say is "right". Secondly, not to doubt your evidence standard, but... Wikipedia isn't exactly the most reputable source. Anyone may edit wikipedia articles, making it a website people typically avoid when looking for reliable information. However, I do have a an article (even though I've already proven HAMAS isn't "evil" by definition) which shows that HAMAS is doing some "good" things, too. http://www.kabobfest.com... This article points out that some things in Gaza are actually doing better under HAMAS' direction. Things such as decreased traffic congestion, organized markets, lower gang activity, technological advancements, and even more equality among civilians. So, in conclusion, is HAMAS good or bad? That's for you to decide. There are certainly things that could suggest either answer. However, by definition, by it's TRUE definition, is HAMAS evil? No. It is for these reasons that I would strongly urge a negative ballot. Thank you.
Is Hamas Evil? You decide!

I would like to lay out the following ground rules for this debate: 1. Swearing is allowed. 2. Do NOT attack the other debater's race, religion, sex, creed, disability, or anything else like that. Same goes for everyone else that may be mentioned in this debate. 3. Nyeh. 4. There are no other rules. Go crazy. ARGUMENT: I will hereby lay out my argument on why Hamas is evil and therefore is not the true face of the Palestinian movement at all. Let me start out with Hamas's terrible human rights record. It is well known that Hamas is imposing its own messed up form of Islam upon the population of Gaza. They are the reason why the Christian population of Gaza has been cut in half. Meanwhile, they closed down a water park in the area for allowing mixed bathing. Later, terrorists set fire to the park. Though Hamas said they would investigate it, I have every reason to suspect they were the ones behind it. Also, they have banned a collection of Pakestinian folk tales called Speak Bird Speak Again. And this is supposed to be a group that advocates Palestinian nationalism. What hypocrites. They have a secret police that deals with this called The Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. They impose their own screwed up form of sharia law and they dedicate themselves to "fight those who are being corrupted by Satan, and do not observe sharia law." I am not making this up. I swear to god. I am not! Hamas has taken this to very stupid extremes already, but this is too much. To end this portion of my argument, they, along with every other terrorist group in the Middle East, claim that Music is immoral along with Dance. For example, they broke up a hip-hop concert in Gaza, saying it was "immoral." Then, they banned women from riding behind men on motorcycles and forbade them from dancing. They have also enforced a dress code for women. Now you see, I for one oppose the bans on headscarves by France. But I also oppose efforts by countries to force women to wear them, regardless of their wishes. I believe anyone should have the right to wear what they want, as long as its within reasonable bounds. Hamas, however, decided "screw that" and imposed this stupid law. Oh but it gets worse! The Swords of Truth, a terrorist group, threatened to BEHEAD female TV broadcasters if they didn't wear proper dress. Hamas has done absolutely nothing in response like the cowards they are. And worse, the female broadcasters now fear for their lives. And that ends my argument for Round 1. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org... Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...(Gaza_Strip)
343 Industries have ruined the Halo franchise

Rebuttal to Anniversary; It was a HD remake. The fans would have been annoyed if the game was changed, because they're paying for Halo Combat Evolved with improved graphics, not a game with its story. If a mission uses the same place twice, that's the laziness of Bungie, not 343 studios. Characters are not often met in the game, and we see little development because they are part of a larger story, not limited to the Halo 4 game. No rushed character development is required. The Didact is fully explored in the Cryptium series, where you discover why he is such a simple character; he's not the original Didact; he's a genetic imitation by another forerunner. Regardless, The Prometheans are a new challenge as you must change tactics to deal with them. No longer the "kill the elites first" mentality, you must deal with enemies that overcome your position and can be resurrected by other units. As if Halo 3 was any better making the Prophet of Truth a cutscene. Your picture forgets the new vehicles available in game through the story mode; the Super Elephant was based on the idea of having moving forts, and the pelican became more than just a hidden vehicle in Halo Reach. Earth was spared from more destruction because enough of the games already dealt with Earth under attack. In terms of multiplayer, the leveling was due to the offline of Reach having separate points for Campaign. Most Halo Reach maps were simply cut from the Campaign or the Forge World (which was a fun concept). Spartan Ops was a second story to the game, being updated constantly as well. The Spartan Ops remains free, and provides missions with more focus on how teams can cooperate to overcome more difficult challenges. Most of the issues you have seem to be personal ones, and I believe you have greatly exaggerated the drop in quality. You see, you set the motion as 343 Industries have ruined the Halo franchise. Ruined is a strong word. You have to mean that the rest of the Halo series is now tarnished by its presence. I'll give you a proper example you'll understand. Sonic 06 ruined the Sonic Franchise. Even as Generations brought back the quality, most still remember the sting of that game. You can't say Halo 4 was as bad as 06. See you next round. Duncan.
Tarzan Should Have A Beard

We have only seen video and pictures of Tarzan's face, therefore you have no evidence of what the true consistency of Tarzan's skin is. Yes, I am familiar with the theory, but that is only on the Tarzan's dad's side of the family and there is no proof of what facial hair the men on his wife's side of the family has been able to produce. Also, just because Tarzan's dad has the ability to produce facial hair does not prove that Tarzan has the same ability for, like I stated earlier in the debate, it is a genetic mutation. With this being said, the mutation may not occur in everyone from his bloodline.
Tarzan Should Have A Beard

He prefers to be unamed, but he said that the consistency of the skin determines what sort of beard will grow. Either way, all men are able to produce some sort of fuzz, but Tarzan doesn't even have that. There is a conspiracy theory that the king and queen from Frozen were actually Tarzan's parents. If this is true, we see that his father could not only grow a fantastic beard, but he used to have a mustache as well. Also, it it believed that Anna and Elsa are Rapunzel's cousins. Since the theory states that Tarzan is Anna and Elsa's brother, he would be Rapunzel's cousin as well. We see that the king, his uncle, also has a large beard. With all of that being said, it is a necessity for Tarzan to have a beard in his movie.
Tarzan Should Have A Beard

What is this expert you speak of? It is simply a genetic mutation within Tarzan's blood. As we have seen, his father was able to grow a mustache in the one picture we have seen. But, other than Tarzan's parents, we have no knowledge of what his genetic bloodline consists of and therefore, there may be several others related to Tarzan that are unable to grow a beard. Also, his skin has nothing to do with the matter. It is whether or not Tarzan has the ability to produce hair follicles on his face.
Tarzan Should Have A Beard

Indeed, he should have one, but have you ever considered that Tarzan is unable to grow a beard as many males are. There is a possibility that Tarzan, being raised in the jungle, is unable to produce facial hair, much to his despair. I'm sure, growing up in a community of apes, that Tarzan would have grown a beard to simply blend in with his "family", yet his genetics do not allow him to do such.
Tarzan Should Have A Beard

Tarzan should most definitely have a beard. In the Disney movie, we never see him with any sort of razor, since there was no way that he would be able to obtain one. He was alone on the island, except for the animals, so he would not physically be able to shave his face. Also, statistics show that boys start growing hair on their face at the age on 15 (on average). Tarzan is much older than 15 when Jane finds him, so he should have grown a beard by then. As my last point, he was raised by apes, and it was not socially acceptable for apes to shave their faces. With all that being said, Tarzan should have a beard.
Are America's days as a republic numbered numbered

So you are saying due to bad mangment that the USA will soon fall apart. Now there are a lot a reasons why that simply is not true. We still have some good politicians, and our management will get better over time. Also you are saying that most Americans are to lazy to get involved in politics. That is correct to some extent, but it is not as bad as you are making it out to be. Also you are also saying Americans are starting to hate our nation. Now some people hate us we will still not fall because if that. Most Americans love the USA, I mean why woundn't we. The USA has been though hard times before, but we always live to tell the story. Also debt is not as big of a problem as people make it out to be. Most USA debt is not owned to other nations but to it's own people. I can tell you know the only way the USA will fall is if a massive war breaks out in our own country, and that simply will not happen. Now yes most Americans make fun of our own country but we love it all the same. When the time comes we can do anything. Things will only get better from here on out. The only reasons most Americans started to hate on the government has because of Obama, and he is leavening soon. Trust me no one wants us to fall if we fall then the world would take a hurting as a result. This country is now prefect we have problems but so dose every country. No government is perfect no matter how hard you try.
Are America's days as a republic numbered numbered

Lookimgattheissues response to Con... stargate on DEBATE.org under Misc. ...on June 7Th.2015 Con posted,"America will not fall apart any time soon. Now yes in the recent years we have had bad leader after bad leader but dose that mean we are doomed? I can answer that question and I think no..." Lookingattheissues response: What is one of the major reasons a business fails and has to close its doors, it is because of bad management making bad decisions relating to the running of that business, a country under a series of bad management decisions will experience the same disastrous results. Like any malignancy, bad presidents and bad representatives leads to the death of a nation. The prognosis for the nation can only be that it will only be a matter of time before the patient succumbs to the the lack of good management and treatment of the malady effecting the body. America's malignancy which can only lead to its demise as a republic is that the citizens have been too complacent and too excepting of those who they elected and were, in all too many cases, too busy running their own lives to involve themselves in the affairs of government. Oh, the American citizens may have complained amongst themselves at different times about the way government officials were managing the countries business but were willing to accept some minor attacks on their lives/ freedoms, figuring that they, as individuals, were too insignificant to effect any changes in the way the country was going and resigned themselves with the thoughts, "well, tomorrow, things will correct themselves when we elect new leaders to run the government and all will be well in the end. But those new leaders chosen by the people have only built upon the progressive failed policies put in place by past leaders only hastening the countries inevitable collapse. America's elite who are ensconced in positions of power in this country, such as America;s media, Education, its courts, and in Hollywood, have indoctrinated its citizens from the cradle to the grave with their leftist propagandizing to the point that the citizens now exhibit a hatred for their own country and this " learned," indoctrination has led to hatred of America's flag, its traditions, religion,and its history. A distinguished French writer, Jean Fraancois Revel wrote this about a countries citizens who loathed their country, he said this, " Clearly, a civilization that feels guilty for everything it is and does will lacjk the energy and conviction to defend itself." How long can a country survive when its citizens don't respect nor love their own country but instead loath it, and they long for the day when the government will be subverted and the Camelot, that comunists promised, will become a reality right here in America.
Are America's days as a republic numbered numbered

America will not fall apart any time soon. Now yes in the recent years we have had bad leader after bad leader but dose that mean we are doomed? I can answer that question and I think no. We have had great presidents before like Roland Reagan. Also you might think that we are slowly losing our freedoms. Which is somewhat true, but for now we will always have the Constitution and the bill of rights. So your main augment is that USA will fall because of a few bad presidents. I am sorry I just do not see that happening, at least not with out riots and fighting breaking out. Now yes we have lost some freedoms but that was for the greater good and, and we are starting to get them back. The USA has been though some rough patches bbut it can only get bet from here. Now t answer your final question will we be like Babylon. Well I do not know what will happen in the future but for now no.
Are America's days as a republic numbered numbered

Are America's days as a republic numbered ...." The very fact that this question is on the minds of many Americans today validates the thoughts expressed. The citizens look around them at the conditions that prevail in this county and wonder if we are running out of time to govern ourselves or if America even has citizens of such a moral character as to be worthy of being placed in leadership positions. The country has long been running on the foundations of principles laid down by our founding fathers but America's citizens have chosen their leaders without paying proper attention to what these leaders actually did in representing the people in the past,not what they claimed to be doing. In the end, haven't the citizens of this country sank to such a level of turpitude that the leaders selected by them to represent them actually does represent the character of the citizens and they can't expect nor deserve any better than those they elect to office. " "We have met the enemy and he is us." Author unknown. H.L. Mencken in his " NOTES on DEMOCRACY,"wrote this about the peoples representatives," Out of the muck of their swinishness the typical American law-maker emerges. he is a man who has lied and dissembled, and a man who has crawled. He knows the taste of boot-polish. He has suffered kicks in the tonneau of his pantaloons. He has taken orders from his superiors in knavery and he has wooed and flattered his inferiors in sense. His public life is an endless series of evasions and false pretences. He is willing to embrace any issue, however idiotic, that will get him votes and he is willing to sacrifice any principle, however sound, that will lose them for him....." Isn't this why""America's days as a republic....are.... numbered. Is America going to be like Babylon in the Bible...... Are we there now?
Are America's days as a republic numbered numbered

Subject...Are America's days as a republic numbered... America has been under attack since the days of Franklin D. Roosevelt's election to the presidency and his "New Deal." Communists in Americas government, its educational institutions, even its religious organizations. The United Nations has only sped up America's demise. Immigrants flooding America, diluting the voices of the countries citizens. America has become a nation which borrows money from other nations and can no longer be independent because of its servitude to foreign nations. America's youth are being taught to loath America and its history, everything about America, its founders and even the countries flag are held in contempt along with the American soldiers who fought in defense of America. Abraham Lincoln once said this about the end on America," If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." Is America bent on committing "suicide," "Are America's days as a republic "