08-16-2013, 04:44 AM
Jon sat in silence as he watch his opponent barely keep his countenance while deivering his barely coherent response. Clearly Jon's last remarks had been serious blow and now was attempting to save face with figures and statistics hardly relevant to the conversation at hand, backtracking his "dictatorship is welcome" remark, and falling upon anti-Americanism in an attempt to save face. He clearly knew nothing about Jon's heritage or of the litigation he had been involved with against the United States government, but that was unsurprising.
Indeed, Professor Napoli was either confused about the topic or simply trying to get Jon to talk about something else. The invitation Jon had received had been quite clear, on sovereignty and international law. Of course Jon was much to blame for taking the debate where it went, but of course it had been by design:
-To ensure a fair and impartial trial in an international court, he had to question the ability of such a court to make a binding decision on the CCD.
-to ensure the CCD would abide by a ruling that went against the Dominance's stated position, he had to question whether the Ascendancy was bound by rule of law, and if in fact the Ascendancy did not consider himself bound by the court's ruling, Jon had to make such a system known for what it was.
-To make that matter to the people and keep the court and the CCD honest, Jon had to leave absolutely no doubt that accepting a governance unconstrained by the rule of law would lead to terrible consequences.
The threat was implicit: give his client a real opportunity or it would be known that the CCD did not consider itself constrained by rule of law. To do so, Jon had to force his opponent into a debate he didn't expect to have.
He almost felt sorry for Professor Napoli for allowing himself to be drawn into a debate where he was clearly not in control of the discourse. Well, the man shouldn't have made the mistakes he did. You won debates by getting your opponent to make your argument for you, and punishing him for doing so. Napoli had been forced into a position of defending the entire makeup of the CCD, and he was doing so on Jon's terms.
The moderator signaled Jon had two minutes for final rebuttal and closing remarks. There really wasn't much left he needed to say, though. His point had already been made to those who mattered.
Jon smiled, not a smirk or a grin but merely a contented uptick of the lips. He began softly: "Mr. Napoli, you seem confused about the subject of our debate. There are no terrorists here to discuss. Only how a group can be designated so without due process, forcing one to sue to clear his own name. Such a thing can only happen in a system Where it's leaders are not bound by rule of law. A system where a nation's leaders dictate the law.
He turned to the audience. "My opponent is confused about a number of other things, including claiming the CCD is not a dictatorship because the citizens and custody states elected to be part of the Dominance, as if this has never happened before. Many a dictator has risen to power democratically, and many a ruthless conquests have begun with peaceful, willing annexation of neighboring states happy to Sacrifice sovereignty for promises of safety, security or prosperity. Nazi Germany began with a democratically elected leader and the conquest of the Third Reich began with peaceful annexation."
He continued on in the same soft voice, as if he were tiptoeing with each phrase. Soft, yet determined. "My opponent seems confused about many, many things. It is not hate of your present that motivates me to speak out as I have against the structure of the Dominance, But of fear for its Future, and of yours beneath it. Where the rule of law does not constrain your leaders and provide a clear transfer of power, the authoritarian utopia welcomed Today will become the next totalitarian nightmare of tomorrow."
Jon shrugged. "History has taught us this. But this time, my opponent claims, it will be different. Why, he cannot say."
By the moderator's clock Jon had more than a minute remaining to speak, but he was done with his argument. This debate had accomplished everything he had hoped it would. There was just one more thing Left he wanted to say.
As Jon, stepped back from podium as to take his seat, He turned back to face Professor Napoli.
"Professor, you never did answer my question," Jon said. "Which one of the Patrons and Privileges is Trotsky and which one is Stalin?"
With that, he took his seat. It was time to return to other work.
Continued in A Lawsuit
Edited by Jon Little Bird, Aug 26 2013, 01:46 AM.
Indeed, Professor Napoli was either confused about the topic or simply trying to get Jon to talk about something else. The invitation Jon had received had been quite clear, on sovereignty and international law. Of course Jon was much to blame for taking the debate where it went, but of course it had been by design:
-To ensure a fair and impartial trial in an international court, he had to question the ability of such a court to make a binding decision on the CCD.
-to ensure the CCD would abide by a ruling that went against the Dominance's stated position, he had to question whether the Ascendancy was bound by rule of law, and if in fact the Ascendancy did not consider himself bound by the court's ruling, Jon had to make such a system known for what it was.
-To make that matter to the people and keep the court and the CCD honest, Jon had to leave absolutely no doubt that accepting a governance unconstrained by the rule of law would lead to terrible consequences.
The threat was implicit: give his client a real opportunity or it would be known that the CCD did not consider itself constrained by rule of law. To do so, Jon had to force his opponent into a debate he didn't expect to have.
He almost felt sorry for Professor Napoli for allowing himself to be drawn into a debate where he was clearly not in control of the discourse. Well, the man shouldn't have made the mistakes he did. You won debates by getting your opponent to make your argument for you, and punishing him for doing so. Napoli had been forced into a position of defending the entire makeup of the CCD, and he was doing so on Jon's terms.
The moderator signaled Jon had two minutes for final rebuttal and closing remarks. There really wasn't much left he needed to say, though. His point had already been made to those who mattered.
Jon smiled, not a smirk or a grin but merely a contented uptick of the lips. He began softly: "Mr. Napoli, you seem confused about the subject of our debate. There are no terrorists here to discuss. Only how a group can be designated so without due process, forcing one to sue to clear his own name. Such a thing can only happen in a system Where it's leaders are not bound by rule of law. A system where a nation's leaders dictate the law.
He turned to the audience. "My opponent is confused about a number of other things, including claiming the CCD is not a dictatorship because the citizens and custody states elected to be part of the Dominance, as if this has never happened before. Many a dictator has risen to power democratically, and many a ruthless conquests have begun with peaceful, willing annexation of neighboring states happy to Sacrifice sovereignty for promises of safety, security or prosperity. Nazi Germany began with a democratically elected leader and the conquest of the Third Reich began with peaceful annexation."
He continued on in the same soft voice, as if he were tiptoeing with each phrase. Soft, yet determined. "My opponent seems confused about many, many things. It is not hate of your present that motivates me to speak out as I have against the structure of the Dominance, But of fear for its Future, and of yours beneath it. Where the rule of law does not constrain your leaders and provide a clear transfer of power, the authoritarian utopia welcomed Today will become the next totalitarian nightmare of tomorrow."
Jon shrugged. "History has taught us this. But this time, my opponent claims, it will be different. Why, he cannot say."
By the moderator's clock Jon had more than a minute remaining to speak, but he was done with his argument. This debate had accomplished everything he had hoped it would. There was just one more thing Left he wanted to say.
As Jon, stepped back from podium as to take his seat, He turned back to face Professor Napoli.
"Professor, you never did answer my question," Jon said. "Which one of the Patrons and Privileges is Trotsky and which one is Stalin?"
With that, he took his seat. It was time to return to other work.
Continued in A Lawsuit
Edited by Jon Little Bird, Aug 26 2013, 01:46 AM.