A tribute *

2003-12-16 11:04 p.m.

Quotes from NJC’s debating society for the years 2002/2003

Disclaimer: The author tries his best to recollect the exact phrases and quotes used by members of NJC’s Debating Society during the course of the years 2002/2003. However, certain misquotations may arise and the author does sincerely apologise for any such errors. This collection of quotes is certainly not meant to ridicule any member of the Society, rather it is for a good laugh and some could be used in similar debate motions.

Opening Addresses:

Many a time, debaters would begin with the usual (and very mundane) “Good morning/afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen” or they would approach the topic directly without any formal greeting. However there are some peculiar (and rather comical) openings:

“Ladies and Gentlemen a very good morning…”—Ang Wee Jian, whose opening jolts everyone out of their seats and tune their ears to his voice.

“Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen, the motion for today is …”—Leong Chi Hoong, whose style has not differed from day one. (Interestingly enough, Chi Hoong’s opening is not commonly found in a 3rd speaker’s opening address, but what are idiosyncrasies for?)

“Members of this house..”—used by most members but rarely heard

“Honourable judges, worthy opponents, attentive audience..”—used by some ( if you want to be extra polite)

“ Ladies and Gentlemen, let us take a step back and examine the issues of both sides of the house today”—Lee Seng Woon. His soft-spoken tone really eases the tension( even when he’s trashing the other side). Sometimes, debaters actually move one step backwards.

Of course, in openings where you do not bother to give any salutations, the debate gets extremely humourous, nerve wracking, and sometimes enters a war zone:

“Consider yourselves screwed.”—Anchit Sood, ( 3rd speaker), on the motion of This house would legalise prostitution. Touché.

“People are dying!”—Ang Wee Jian ( on the motion This house would intervene in the Israeli Palestinian conflict)

“Let them die, Ladies and gentlemen, let them die, that’s exactly the case the opposition is putting forward today.”—Wee Jian again (2nd proposition speaker, on This house would welcome refugees)

“Ladies and Gentlemen, there are more than 30 million refugees crowding the earth, we simply got no space for them.”—Li Jie Sheng, (1st opposition speaker, on the same motion as the one above)

“Ladies and Gentlemen, the motion today is like a block of Swiss cheese.”—Chan Chih Hung, on This house would censor the media. You would wonder how it’s like smelly cheese.

“I would like to begin with a joke.”—Yeo Biyou, (2nd opposition speaker, yet again on This house would welcome refugees). Really, her joke did cause a ripple in both sides of the house.

“Is being desperate a crime?”—Sim Zhilin, as 1st Proposition speaker on This house would welcome refugees. Sorry, it seems like the motion is crowding this page, just like refugees are crowding in countries.

“We will not take such a myopic stand in our definition, Ladies and Gentlemen”—Zhilin, on This house believes that real power comes from the barrel of the gun.

“Good Morning, the motion today is This House would welcome terrorists!”—Leong Chi Hoong, opening sentence on the motion This House would welcome refugees. A slight slip of the tongue.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, the opposition must be hallucinating!”—Chan Chih Hung, coming up as 3rd Opposition on This house would legalise soft drugs. As borrowed from Li Shengwu from RJC.

“The Opposition must be smoking!”—Me, as 3rd Proposition, on This house would ban smoking.

“Now listen here!”—Wee Jian as Second Opposition, in This house would break the law for justice, simply because the 1st Proposition failed to understand the case on his side of the house.

“Resolution 1441 is in place, need there be war?”—Me, as 1st Proposition, on This house would never go to war with Iraq. Always the serious one.

“We’re talking about women in scantily dressed clothes!”—Cheo Jian Jia, as 2nd Proposition, on This House would ban beauty pageants.

Then again, there are times when we get so excited in our debate that we launch into terrible (well, not terrible but enlightening and sometimes hilarious) speeches.

“So, you are granting people the right to die?”—Me as 1st Opposition refuting the proposition’s claim on giving freedom and letting them consume what they want. The motion was This house would leaglise drugs.

“Would you rather have a surgeon to operate on you or an inexperienced man?”—Biyou, as 2nd Opposition, on This house would have trial by jury. I find this analogy disturbing, especially, if the judge is the surgeon.

“Therefore Ladies and Gentlemen, the proposition find the opposition guilty!”—Chih Hung, as 3rd Proposition, on This house would have trial by jury. That’s the way debates could be.

“The 2nd Proposition Speaker must be a stooge from the Bush Administration!” Mrs. Marianne Tan, our debate teacher for 2002, as 2nd Proposition, on This House would break the law for justice. Interestingly enough, the 2nd Proposition’s argument had to deal with US preemptive strikes. More insults I guess.

“We are not going for a total black out, we are just going to cover some areas!”—Me, as 1st Proposition again, on This house would censor the Media. No lights would mean no electricity and therefore no Internet right? (Oh, oops, people can still read the newspaper).

“It’s deterrence ladies and gentlemen, that’s was it is!”—Kenneth Chua, as 1st Opposition, on This house would reject the death penalty. Strong and effective rebuttal which was also part of his substansive.

“Two wrongs don’t make a right!”—Zhilin, as 2nd Opposition, on This house would legalise abortion. He was talking about how women should not just turn to abortion. This phrase has been echoed many times by Zhilin in many debates.

“It would drive them underground!”—Wee Jian, as his usual 2nd Opposition role, on This house would place speed breaks on the Information Superhighway. Imagine pedophiles running pornographic services under the earth.

“You’re taking the easy way out!”-- Zhilin again, as 1st speaker. He used this for almost every debate I can remember.

“The Proposition should go up in smoke!”-- Our dear Chih Hung again, as 3rd Opposition yet again on This House Would allow terrorists to debate. Terrorist would bomb anyone right?

“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink”—Mr Chan Chih Hung yet again, as 3rd speaker. He used this for two debates, This house would ban smoking and This house would allow terrorists to debate. This quote by the way is taken from Christina Rosetti.

Points of information are also another enlightening part of debates. There are two main types of POIs, the boring ones and the annoying ones:

Boring type:

“Point, sir/ma’am!”-- Used by almost everyone in debate. Boring, mundane. Does not have much of an effect, but the widely accepted one especially for Worlds Schools debating.

“Point of information sir/madam.”-- The type used by new debaters or those who really love to show respect to all members of the hose. Not recommended for those going for competitions.

“Sir!” or “Madam!”—Used by many, including me, to shock opponents and to make them lose control of their speech

“Information ma’am/sir!”—The less common type. Use to show how bored you are with the debate( well maybe not always).

“On that point sir/ma’am!”—borrowed from the Worlds team and Chan Yong Wei from ACJC. The classic way of killing your opponents, except that if accepted your POI better be really good.

“Regarding that sir/ma’am”—same as the above POI.

Then we have extremely annoying type where your idea is exposed even though the speaker may not have accepted it.

“On your definition sir!”—Used by our dear Chi Hoong, Wee Jian, Zhilin, sometimes Biyou, and others once in a while. Seen in almost every debate including This House would leaglise abortion.

“Is that true sir?”—another classic used mainly by our dear President, Wee Jian. Nothing is of course really true when we debate. Well, sometimes it could be.

“All, sir!”—Chi Hoong, in answer to the opposition’s question on which terrorist group they will welcome to the negotiation table. Interesting comment, Mr. Vice president.

“Exactly ma’am!”—Me, as 1st Opposition, on This House would solve the India-Pakistan conflict through big guns. This POI by the way has been used in many other debates.

“Who’s going to judge, God?”—Chi Hoong again in his flamboyant style, questioning me on who’s to judge what to censor in the motion This House would censor the media.

Some really hilarious ones:

“My foot sir!”—Wee Jian, as 1st Proposition (unusual but true) attacking the opposition in the debate This House believes that America foreign policy is evil. That’s what I call real humour in debate.

“You want to bet sir?”—Wee Jian again on the same motion above. After the debate, no money was lost though.

On the motion This House would ban cloning:

“How about Star Wars sir?”

“Regarding Darth Vader!”

“Have you seen Jar-Jar Blinks sir?”

“What about Saddam Hussein?”

Laugh, people, laugh. None of these were used in the actual debate though.

On to some more serious ones:

“When do they stop, sir?”—Wee Jian (as 3rd Proposition), questioning Joseph (3rd Opposition) on when governmental regulations on new drugs will be stopped. The motion was This house believes that Pharmaceutical Companies should have more say over medical issues.

“We’re all in a deadlock over here, just like the UN is with nations wielding veto power!”—Me, as 3rd Proposition, on This house would remove veto power.

“Albert Einstein once said that he could not predict what weapons would be used in WW3, but he knew what would be used in WW4—sticks and stones” Joseph as 3rd Opposition on This house believes that real power comes from the barrel of a gun. Can’t exactly remember why he said that.

previous - next