Fresno RJCCC Debate on the U.N. with Drs. Bruce Thornton & Victor Davis Hanson

Stuart Weil

[Jim Robinson]

The Republican Jewish Coalition of Central California is pleased to sponsor the

6th GREAT OXFORD/FRESNO DEBATE

Wednesday, June 29th, 2005 7pm

Bullard High School Theater
5445 N. Palm Avenue
Fresno, CA

The motion before the House:

THE UNITED NATIONS HAS OUTLIVED ITS USEFULNESS

Distinguished panelists include:

PRO:
Victor Davis Hanson, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, Hoover Institute
Bruce Thornton, Ph.D., Professor of Classics, CSU Fresno
Stuart Weil, Chairman, Republican Jewish Coalition of Central California

CON:
Jim Bartram, Speech Instructor, Fresno City College
Howard Hendrix, Ph.D., Lecturer, English Literature, CSU Fresno
Richard Stone, Administrative Director, Fresno Center for Nonviolence

ANALYST:
Kevin Ayotte, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Communication, CSU Fresno

MODERATOR:
Vincent Lavery, Board of Directors, Fresno Center for Nonviolence

Please bring your cheers, jeers, applause and catcalls (within the bounds of decency, please) to support the RJCCC for this important and timely debate on the United Nations.

FREE ADMISSION!

[Jim Robinson]

Ping! Bruce Thornton & Victor Davis Hanson debate the liberals regarding the United Nations tomorrow night in Fresno!

[JustAmy]

Pinging you to what should prove to be an excellent evening.

Come out tomorrow to hear Bruce Thornton & Victor Davis Hanson.

[JustAmy]

Pinging you to what should prove to be an excellent evening.

Come out tomorrow to hear Bruce Thornton & Victor Davis Hanson.

[JustAmy]

Pinging you to what should prove to be an excellent evening.

Come out tomorrow to hear Bruce Thornton & Victor Davis Hanson.

[Awestruck]

The moderator is Vince Lavery? Oh yeah..that's gonna be fairly handled.../sarc

[tame]

Interesting!

[Tolik]

    Victor Davis Hanson Ping ! 

       Let me know if you want in or out

[Rummyfan]

Oh man would I love to attend this! Someone please report from Fresno on this debate.

[GSlob]

The question is stated so vaguely as to be meaningless. "Usefulness"- for whom? Where would Kofi Onan be if not for UN? For him it is useful. Ditto for all the diplomatic spies employed there and for tinpot dictators occasionally visiting the place to strike a pose, squeak a little, and do some shopping...

[Tolik]

Ditto for all the diplomatic spies employed there and for tinpot dictators occasionally visiting the place to strike a pose, squeak a little, and do some shopping

Right on money. If they want to have a debating place and one convenient hub for diplomats to save on travel, let them do it in a quiet place like Iceland, for example. I don't see them agree to relocate into the middle of Africa or South America, but Iceland: well developed to be an effective host, but far from distractions of NYC type.

I think US would be well served even to pick a tab for relocating them there (or anywhere). Just to get rid of them, would be my pleasure.

[GSlob]

Dump them in China. It could be presented as the recognition of its progress and importance. Besides it is the least we could send back in return for all the crap they are sending here (an eye for an eye, and crap for crap, too).

[FreedomPoster]

Dang. I wish this weren't a continent away. Bump!

[HKMk23]

Will the event be transcribed and/or recorded?

[backtothestreets]

I'm going to make a strong effort to be there.

Thanks for the heads-up!

[JustAmy]

If anyone can make this debate, please post a report here.

Thanks.

[Jim Robinson]

We had a great time at the debate. Must've been about 200 to 250 people there with both sides represented about equally. I think our side edged out the other in the final vote.

Freepers present were me, Gracie1, backtothestreets, Elena and her two youngsters, John and Sara, and Stuart Weil who was on the conservative panel. Doug and Linda Halderman were there and of course many of our friends from the RJCCC.

Bruce Thornton, Victor Davis Hanson and Stuart Weil were all great panelists. All served up great arguments as to why we believe the UN is useless and cited long lists of examples backing up their arguments. Everything from wanton abuse to anti-Semitism, rampant corruption, high cost, millions of deaths under their not so watchful eyes, the fact that the UN is utterly useless when it comes to tyrants and totalitarian regimes, etc, etc, etc. Things we all know and hate about the United Nations.

The other side argued that millions of people now enjoy clean air and water due to the UN and they harped and harped on what a great job the UN does in combating disease in countries that can't help themselves.

They went on and on about human rights and how the right wingers (using John Birchers as an example) foment nationalism and hatred. They went on and on about how war doesn't solve anything and if we'd only learn to tolerate and love the other side, we'd have worldwide peace and tranquility. LOL

They criticized America for killing off the Native Americans and for slavery and for all the bad things that happened during our early history and then questioned, what if we had given up on America and declared the American experiment useless because of our early failures? They stated that the UN is not perfect and has had many failures, but just like America, we should not throw it out because of its imperfections.

Our side pointed out that our learning experiences were something we lived through and it didn't take a United Nations to teach us or save us. All of mankind grew and learned to throw off slavery and injustice. The things that made a difference were capitalism, democracy, elected representatives and senators and a judiciary and respect for the rule of law, etc. Totalitarianism, fascism, Nazism, communism, etc, don't and cannot work. Yet the UN gives voting and veto powers to totalitarian regimes. If the UN really wants to solve the world's problems, they would have to convert all these totalitarian countries to democracies, and then perhaps there would be a chance. But, of course, if they were all peaceful democratic free countries, then we would not need a UN. The UN needs tyrannical countries in order to exist. You just can't get there from here. The UN is useless.

At the beginning of the program the moderator asked for the audience to participate. He said we could clap and cheer when we hear something we like and boo and stomp our feet when they said something we didn't like. Well, we didn't need any more prompting than that. We all had a great time booing or cheering or heckling whenever need be. Some of us may have gotten a bit rowdier than others. Ahem, cough, cough.

We were also asked to ask questions. After sitting there listening to the liberal morons running down our country all night and calling our side "haters" (which they did frequently) I finally got an opening to ask why they hated America. Wow, did I ever get booed down by the lib side. Didn't get an answer either. Then at one point it got kinda quiet so I called out to the lib panel, "I have a question. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?" More boos and no answer. Guess they didn't like my sincere questions.

Then, after the end of the debate, the "analyst" asked us all to keep an open mind while he stated his analysis of the debate. Of course, in his analysis, our side did not provide any evidence whatsoever that the UN was useless. Huh? I thought we were being railroaded and stated as much. Lots of people got up and walked out at this point.

Then there was a vote and I never heard the final tally, but I believe we edged them out. I saw many more hands raised on our side than on the lib side.


And finally, as the climaxing demonstration, the moderator gave each member of the panel a card and ask them each to write a number between zero and ten representing how much of our national sovereignty they are willing to give up for world peace. Our side of the audience immediately yelled out ZERO!! And each member of our panel wrote ZERO. The first lib indicated a fractional number something like .8061 (don't know if he was being cute or if it was meant to be percentage). I think the second lib wrote a three and the final lib panelist indicated five. These jackasses are willing to give up half of our sovereignty to the UN for peace! Hell no!! Shut it down!!

By the way, at one point Elena yelled out "Communist" to the lib panel to which one of them muttered half under his breath that he didn't think that was such a bad word.

Well, there you have it. There was a photographer present and it looked like he may have been a reporter as well, but I don't know. Don't know if the event was recorded or whether or not there will be a transcript available.

It was a real pleasure listening to our panelists rip into the libs. The libs were skinned and roasted, but they're so smug and arrogant that they don't even know it.

[JustAmy]

Excellent report, Jim. Sounds like you had fun. :)

Wish I could have been there.

[Enterprise]

Thanks for the great synopsis. I wish I could have been there but personal errands kept me hopping. It does sound like the good guys won though. (And we know who they are)

What the other will side will never admit is that had the people of this country given up and gone home, back to Europe, there would not now, nor ever, be a U.N.

I think someone hit the nail on the head too about U.N. tolerance of thug regimes. There MUST be thug regimes, or the U.N. would cease to exist.

[tame]

called out to the lib panel, "I have a question. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?"

ROTFLMAO! GREAT question. Although asking leftists if they've ever been a member of the communist party is like asking Michael Moore if he eats food, or asking Jimmah Cahtuh if he's an appeaser--it goes without saying.