--- "Frederick [FN] Noron ha * ??????????????? ????????? ??? ??????????????????" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ? > Dinesh D'Souza is talking through his hat > ...Christopher HItchins scores in this debate, IMO > http://tinyurl.com/3detdy (... inspite of > the organisers of the debate trying to skew things > by overstating the case Hitchins has to defend) FN > Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:15:57 -0800 (PST) From: Santosh Helekar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > As I have said before, the problem with this debate was that there was no clear resolution to be for or against. So both debaters could erect their own straw men and flog them to death with stock phrases and well worn arguments. In my opinion, Dinesh D'Souza proved that he could do this better than Hitchens in front of an audience that was overwhelmingly sympathetic to his chauvinistic point of view. > This would have been a genuine debate, and much more interesting and worthwhile, if, for example, these political pundits were asked to debate any of the following resolutions: > Mario adds: > In contrast with Frederick's generalities, IMNHO, highlighted by numerous question marks to try and impress us, but which tell us NOTHING about what he thinks about any of the specifics of the debate between D'Souza and Hitchens, Santosh has been very specific as well as perceptive. > Except for the obligatory cheap shot about D'Souza's chauvinism, showing disapproval with his point of view. As if Hitchens was any LESS chauvinistic. But, I digress. > I think the only way to sort all this out is to hold a head-to-head debate between Santosh and Dinesh, using Santosh's detailed format. > I hereby nominate George Pinto, who lives fairly close to Dinesh D'Souza, assisted by Goanet's pot-stirrer extraordinaire, Victor Rangel-Ribeiro, who does not, to arrange such a debate, which will then be broadcast across the diaspora. > The rest of us may even learn something. > As for me, I think we will all find out who was right soon enough - without wasting a single breath or unit of energy:-)) >