Suggested Answers To The Short Quiz

.
This section contains a succinct summary of San Bernardino and The F.B.I. vs. Apple immediately following The Short Quiz.
Post Reply
johnkarls
Posts: 1597
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:43 pm

Suggested Answers To The Short Quiz

Post by johnkarls »

.
Question 1

Did Osama bin Laden issue: (A) a fatwā in 1996 entitled “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places” (i.e., Saudi Arabia and Mecca/Medina); (B) a fatwā in 1998 entitled “The Nuclear Bomb of Islam” and (C) a fatwā in 2002 (revised in 2005) requiring all of his followers to nuke 10 million Americans -- about which the Founding Dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government wrote a famous book but whose recommendations have NOT been followed despite the endorsement and exhaustive supportive efforts of former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman 1987-1995), U.S. Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN and then-current Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman) and Messrs. Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton (Chair and Co-Chair of The 9/11 Commission)?

Answer 1

Yes, Osama bin Laden issued a 30-page fatwā in 1996 entitled “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places” (i.e., Saudi Arabia and Mecca/Medina).

Yes, Osama bin Laden issued a fatwā in 1998 entitled “The Nuclear Bomb of Islam.”

And yes, Osama bin Laden issued a fatwā in 2002 (revised in 2005) requiring all of his followers to nuke 10 million Americans.

Graham Allison, the Founding Dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, wrote a famous book about ObL’s fatwā to nuke millions of Americans (Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe - Henry Holt & Co. 2004) which recommended that the world’s nuclear powers (1) lock down every iota of enriched uranium and plutonium (similar, Dean Allison said, to the way America used to account for every iota of gold at Fort Knox) and (2) NOT PERMIT ANY NON-NUCLEAR POWERS, SUCH AS IRAN, TO ENRICH ANY URANIUM OR PLUTONIUM.

The Nuclear-Threat-Initiative Foundation of Former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman 1987-1995) formed a posse comprising Sam Nunn, U.S. Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN and then-current Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman) and Messrs. Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton (Chair and Co-Chair of The 9/11 Commission) which made heroic efforts to have Dean Allison’s recommendations adopted.

Indeed, Tim Russert interviewed them (together with Fred Thompson) on Meet the Press 5/29/2005.

And on 10/17/2005, Former Sen. Sam Nunn’s Nuclear-Threat-Initiative Foundation released a 45-minute docu-drama (Last Best Chance) to illustrate the possible implications of a failure to implement Dean Allison’s recommendations.

Last Best Chance featured as fictitious U.S. President Charles Ross, a famous Hollywood actor Fred Thompson who played such iconic roles as Admiral Painter in The Hunt For Red October, and who interrupted his illustrious Hollywood career to serve as a U.S. Sen. for Tennessee 1994-2003, during the last year of which he moon-lighted as Law and Order’s iconic District Attorney Arthur Branch whom he continued to play 2002-2006 before returning to making iconic movies.

Last Best Chance also featured, playing themselves, Tom Brokaw, Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar.

Despite the heroic efforts of Messrs. Nunn, Lugar, Kean, Hamilton and Thompson, the recommendations of Harvard’s Dean Graham Allison were ignored by everyone except Tim Russert and Tom Brokaw.

Question 2

Is Osama’s requirement to nuke 10 million Americans binding on EVERY MEMBER OF Al Qaeda (which brought us 9/11); EVERY MEMBER OF Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (i.e., Yemen) which brought us, among other things, the Underwear Bomber on Northwest Airlines 253 approaching Detroit; and EVERY MEMBER OF the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (also known by its acronym ISIS and originally known as Al Qaeda in Iraq), etc., etc.?

Answer 2

It is the solemn religious duty of every Muslim to do her/his best to implement every fatwā of her/his leader.

Question 3

Is it true that Osama bin Laden’s fatwā to nuke 10 million Americans can NOT be revoked now that he is dead?

Answer 3

Yes.

This principle was on prominent display when the Brits negotiated to restore diplomatic relations with Iran following the death in 1989 of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini who had issued a famous fatwā to assassinate Salmon Rushdie in the wake of his fourth novel, The Satanic Verses -- the Brits were told by new Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that the fatwā could NOT be revoked because Ayatollah Khomeini was dead.

Question 4

Have nuclear weapons and fissile material been readily available to terrorists from, inter alia, the break-up of the Old Soviet Union?

Answer 4

Yes.

It has been widely reported that 132 suitcase-sized nuclear bombs (among other weapons) went missing from the old Soviet Union following its 1989 implosion and that 84 of the 132 suitcase nukes have never been located.

The Russian Government has denied that any Soviet nuclear weapons have gone missing.

But how would the Russian Government know, even if it were inclined to tell the truth???

After all, the Soviet nuclear weapons were located in several different Soviet Republics before the break-up of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).

Indeed, we have studied many times how 1,900 Soviet multiple-warhead nuclear missiles were located in the Ukraine Soviet Socialist Republic at the time of the breakup and the Ukrainians were stupid enough to surrender them pursuant to the 12/5/1994 agreement of Bill Clinton (as U.S. President), John Major (as U.K. Prime Minister), and Boris Yeltsin (as President of Russia) TO GUARANTEE THE INDEPENDENCE AND INTEGRITY OF UKRAINE!!!

[NB: President Barack Obama and the Russian Federation re-affirmed on 12/4/2009 the 1994 obligations!!!]

For movie buffs, the illicit sale of nuclear weapons by starving Soviet troops following the 1989 implosion of the old Soviet Union was a staple of Hollywood movies.

Question 5

Did an M.I.T. student in just 5 weeks in 1975 at the request of a TV producer of a documentary that aired on PBS’ Nova Science Series on 3/9/1975, design and construct a nuclear weapon from information and materials that were readily available publicly?

Answer 5

Yes, the M.I.T. student did design a nuclear weapon which experts opined would be fully functional.

Indeed, the PBS Nova Science Series Producer was simply trying to ascertain how easy it would be for "any reasonably-bright student" to design and construct a nuclear weapon so he asked a friend on the M.I.T. faculty to put him in touch with a student.

And the student was NOT even a physics major!!! [He was a chemistry major!!!]

HOWEVER, the 3/9/1975 PBS Nova Program created such an uproar that very few viewers focused on the fact that the student had only designed a nuclear weapon, but had NOT constructed it.

This is probably due to the fact that the construction (vs. the design) is child’s play.

For example, a British Royal Commission reported in September 1976 in the wake of the 3/9/1975 Nova Program --

“The equipment required [to actually construct the nuclear weapon] would not be significantly more elaborate than that already used by criminal groups in the illicit manufacture of heroin.”

[The British Royal Commission was concerned at that time that nuclear weapons could be so easily designed and constructed by the Irish Republican Army.]

*****
NB: The fact that “any reasonably-bright student” can design an atomic bomb and the fact that it is then “child’s play” to construct the atomic bomb are the reasons why Harvard’s Dean Graham Allison recommended locking down every iota of fissile material (please see A-1 above) -- THERE IS NO OTHER CHOKE POINT!!!

Question 6

Did the top responsible U.S. Governmental Officials not only regularly ADMIT 2001-2005 that it is only a matter of time until an American city is nuked -- indeed, did they ARGUE that it is only a matter of time until an American city is nuked?

Answer 6

Yes, as described above, U.S. Senators Sam Nunn, Richard Lugar and Fred Thompson together with 9/11 Commission Co-Chairs Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton ARGUED that it was only a matter of time until an American city is nuked.

And in addition to the “Last Best Chance” Docu-Drama described above, quite a few very-popular Hollywood movies of that era showed American cities being nuked by terrorists.

Question 7

Do our top U.S. Governmental Intelligence Officials currently admit that it is only a matter of time until 10 million Americans are nuked?

Answer 7

Yes and no.

They seem to have adopted a mantra that the government has to be successful 100% of the time in preventing terrorism, while a terrorist only has to be successful 1% of the time.

But for the last decade, they have been steadfastly refusing to tell the American people what success, as defined by Osama bin Laden’s fatwā to nuke 10 million Americans, actually means!!!

Question 8

Does our author claim that the U.S. government’s surveillance has not been effective?

Answer 8

Yes.

Question 9

How can any of the outside studies of the effectiveness of the U.S. government’s surveillance be believed if the U.S. government cannot disclose all of its successes without disclosing to the Radical Islamic Terrorists its sources and methods?

Answer 9

Obviously such studies are NOT credible.

Question 10

Isn’t it true that if an American citizen is law-abiding, s/he has nothing to fear from surveillance of Radical Islamic Terrorists?

Answer 10

Yes.

Unless the American citizen has been mis-identified or a Radical Islamic Terrorist has attempted to frame an American citizen for personal reasons that have nothing to do with Radical Islamic Terrorism.

Question 11

And isn’t the old maxim “Honesty Is The Best Policy” true even if one has no religious scruples or ethical principles, because the truth is much easier to remember than a lie?

Answer 11

Of course.

Question 12

Did U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) defame his constituents in the recent Republican Presidential Debates by trying to explain his Libertarian philosophy with an example that began with the assumption that everyone is doing something illegal -- strongly implying that every Kentucky resident still has an illegal Moonshine Still in her/his basement?

Answer 12

Yes.

Even he seemed to become embarrassed in the middle his argument over the silliness of assuming that every American is doing something illegal.

Question 13

Does our author Julia Angwin seem naïve about the ability of governmental and independent organizations, both domestic and foreign, to conduct surveillance/espionage?

Answer 13

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 14

Who was the U.S. Navy’s Senior Chief (E-8) Arthur Severa?

Answer 14

Please read on.

Question 15

When Yours Truly served as an Unrestricted Line Officer in the U.S. Navy for 3 years during the late 1960’s, did Senior Chief Severa who served under him, visit whenever possible his family which was living in Navy housing at the Newport RI Naval Base?

Answer 15

Yes.

Question 16

Did Senior Chief Severa return from one of his visits with a clipping from the civilian Newport newspaper that reported the recent defection of a top Soviet scientist who had been working on a weapon that would kill U.S. nuclear subs by disabling all electrical systems within a radius of several miles? And who claimed that it had been tested by killing the U.S. nuclear sub Thresher in 1963 and the U.S. nuclear sub Scorpion in 1968?

Answer 16

Yes - Yes.

Question 17

Did Yours Truly show the clipping to the Skipper of one of the aircraft squadrons assigned to our command, who was serving on the official Navy Board of Inquiry into the sinking of the Scorpion?

Answer 17

Yes.

Question 18

Did that officer exhibit shock for which it took more than 60 seconds to regain his composure, following which he claimed that there was nothing to the report THOUGH HE INSISTED ON RETAINING THE CLIPPING?

Answer 18

Yes.

Question 19

Did the BBC’s extremely-popular 2002-2011 TV series entitled “MI-5” about Britain’s domestic intelligence service coping with foreign threats to the U.K. homeland include an episode about this weapon being smuggled up the Thames River in a Russian submarine to disable all of London’s electrical systems?

Answer 19

Yes.

Question 20

Did that MI-5 episode indicate whether MI-5 rated the death of all the Londoners who would die of heart attacks due to the disabling of their pace makers as more important than the destruction of all of the digital records of corporate headquarters in London and of the U.K. government?

Answer 20

The BBC’s MI-5 episode featuring that weapon posited that the attack was aimed at destroying all digital records of the U.K. government and of all the corporate headquarters in London.

However, it also mentioned that thousands of Londoners would die of heart attacks because their pace makers would be disabled.

I do not recall whether the BBC script writers had MI-5 operatives opining on which consequence was more important.

Question 21

Did Yours Truly have a Top Secret Security Clearance with Cryptographic Access in order to stand OOD watches while our skipper was asleep, etc., because of the necessity to read instantaneously incoming messages for a command with nuclear weapons?

Answer 21

Yes.

Question 22

Would it be a breach of his security clearance for Yours Truly to disclose that back in the 1960’s our spy satellites were capable of distinguishing the grain in railroad ties?

Answer 22

No.

The capability of our spy satellites was “common knowledge” at that time in the military.

However, I was never privy to any classified information about their capability because, of course, I did not have a “need to know.”

Question 23

Should it be child’s play for any government that had the ability half a century ago to disable electrical systems at a range of several miles and, from space, to distinguish the grain in railroad ties, to replicate everything on YOUR computer WITHOUT CONNECTING to your computer? For example, by taking an infra-red picture from long-range of your hard drive which can then be used to replicate all of your files?

Answer 23

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 24

When Yours Truly was suing the world’s 15 largest financial institutions for the $84 billion that they owed him and that had long-since been pledged in legally-binding fashion to benefit the education of 10 million inner-city children (please see the third and fourth sections of this Bulletin Board), was he concerned that the law firms representing the financial institutions would follow standard procedure enabling them to view every computer key stroke that Yours Truly was making?

Answer 24

Very concerned.

Question 25

Did Yours Truly try to thwart the law firms of the world’s 15 largest financial institutions by doing all of his work on an old laptop that had no connection to the internet? And that during the years involved in the litigation, Yours Truly only connected to the internet even for personal matters by using public computers (hotel business centers, public libraries, FedEx stores, etc.)? And that the only things he downloaded from the internet using those public computers were put on one-use-only thumb drives that were buried in a safe in his basement after their single use?

Answer 25

Yes - Yes - Yes.

Was Yours Truly successful in this effort???

Who knows???

Question 26

Does the prohibition against “unreasonable searches and seizures” of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution apply only to the U.S. Government and to the 50 state governments?

Answer 26

Yes.

Question 27

Does the prohibition against “unreasonable searches and seizures” apply in situations where the citizen has no expectation of privacy (e.g., the citizen’s own postings on social media)?

Answer 27

No.

Question 28

Even when a government is involved and the citizen has an expectation of privacy, is a search and/or seizure (e.g., the old Hollywood wiretap of a Mafioso) deemed REASONABLE if it is conducted pursuant to a Search Warrant issued by a Judge?

Answer 28

Yes.

Question 29

Where should the line be drawn between protecting 10 million Americans from being nuked and guarding against the possibility that future unscrupulous pols will impose a totalitarian dictatorship a la George Orwell?

Answer 29

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 30

Does Apple have a legitimate interest in making its users think that Apple’s encryption is effective so that Apple’s foreign competitors don’t bankrupt Apple with encryption that appears to be effective?

Answer 30

Of course.

Question 31

Was F.B.I. Director James Comey smart to challenge Apple publicly? From the viewpoint of Apple’s survivability? From the viewpoint of advertising the deficiencies of the F.B.I.? From the viewpoint of the F.B.I. being able to “mouse trap” Radical Islamic Terrorists who erroneously think the F.B.I. is incapable of de-encrypting their messages -- the same way Allied Intelligence de-encrypted both the Nazi and Imperial Japanese codes without permitting either the Nazis or the Japanese to imagine that their codes had been broken?

Answer 31

Comey was STUPID from every angle!!!

Apple can easily become the answer to a trivia Q (what WAS Apple) if it loses its competitive edge vis-à-vis foreign competitors over whom Comey’s F.B.I. has no jurisdiction.

And the F.B.I. looked stupid for its inability to de-encrypt everything under the sun.

And the F.B.I. looked GROSSLY NEGLIGENT for waiting so long to ascertain whether there were other IMMINENT THREATS from associates of the San Bernardino terrorists.

And yes, the F.B.I. looks stupid for its ostentatious acquisition of an ability to de-encrypt Apple iPhones – because it can no longer mouse trap Radical Islamic Terrorists who theretofore might have assumed that their communications could not be read by the F.B.I.

Question 32

What could Comey have been thinking if one wanted to be charitable???

Answer 32

It would appear that the only thing Comey could possibly have been thinking is the typical law-enforcement mindset that all of the considerations discussed in Q&A-31 plus 10 million dead Americans must be sacrificed on the altar of being able to prosecute successfully a Radical Islamic Terrorist after s/he has committed her/his act of terrorism!!!

As a slave to the notion that criminals can only be deterred by the fear of prosecution!!!

Without bothering to consider that Radical Islamic Terrorists CANNOT POSSIBLY be deterred by the fear of prosecution!!!

How many times have we studied that the objective of a Radical Islamic Terrorist is TO BECOME A MARTYR???

BECAUSE ISLAMIC MARTYRS AND 70 CLOSE RELATIVES BY-PASS A TRULY-FEARSOME JUDGMENT DAY AND, INSTEAD, PROCEED IMMEDIATELY TO PARADISE!!!

See, for example, Osama bin Laden’s 1996 fatwa entitled “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places” which spans roughly 30 Microsoft Word pages and which states about two thirds of the way through --

“A martyr’s privileges are guaranteed by Allah: forgiveness with the first gush of his blood, he will be shown his seat in paradise, he will be decorated with the jewels of belief (Imaan), married off to the beautiful ones, protected from the test in the grave, assured security in the day of judgement, crowned with the crown of dignity, a ruby of which is better than this whole world (Duniah) and its entire content, wedded to seventy two of the pure Houries (beautiful ones of Paradise) and his intercession on the behalf of seventy of his relatives will be accepted.”

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has also echoed these views!!!

[Editorial Note: the translation of Osama’s fatwā was courtesy of the PBS Newshour which, however, AFTER 18 YEARS, suddenly pulled the translation (which had been posted at pbs.org/newshour/updates/military-july-dec96-fatwa_1996) after we first quoted it in a posting on this bulletin board entitled “Islamic Martyrs & 70 Close Relatives - Free Pass To Paradise” in the Participants Comments section for our 9/3/2014 meeting. The PBS translation of the entire fatwā will be provided upon request.]

But back to Comey.

Why does Comey want to sacrifice all of the considerations discussed in Q&A-31 plus 10 million dead Americans on the altar of prosecuting Radical Islamic Terrorists if the objective of the Radical Islamic Terrorist is to kill as many people as possible BEFORE ACHIEVING MARTYRDOM BY DYING HER/HIM-SELF???

Doesn’t Comey “get it” that there is NOBODY TO PROSECUTE???

Moreover, Comey already had a court order to compel Apple to de-encrypt the iPhone of the San Bernardino Radical Islamic Terrorists, so there obviously was no Fourth Amendment issue of whether the de-encryption would be a REASONABLE search and seizure.

We should discuss whether Comey should be impeached!!!

And what can be done to compel our pols to re-assign terrorism investigations from the F.B.I. and its ridiculous law-enforcement mentality to an agency (which may have to be specially created) which will actually try to prevent terrorism by wannabe martyrs!!!

After all, why should the objective of the U.S. Government be to permit Al Qaeda or ISIS (formerly Al Qaeda in Iraq), or Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula or any of the other many followers of Osama bin Laden to exercise their solemn religious duty to obey Osama’s fatwā to nuke 10 million Americans -- so that we can prosecute them if they fail to achieve martyrdom in the process???

Why shouldn’t the objective of the U.S. Government be to protect the 10 million Americans???

Question 33

Who de-encrypted the cell phone of the Radical Islamic Terrorist in San Bernardino for the F.B.I.? Has the “smart money” been bet on the N.S.A. tutoring Comey? Or if the N.S.A. is just as clueless as the F.B.I., has the “smart money” been bet on the probability that from among all of the world’s governmental agencies which can de-encrypt Apple’s cell phones, Britain’s MI-5 and/or MI-6 tutored Comey because of the British-American Special Relationship?

Answer 33

My money says that the “smart money” has been bet that Britain’s MI-5 and/or MI-6 tutored Comey because of the British-American Special Relationship. Any takers???

Question 34

Even though European countries typically have no restrictions against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” our author states that most of them have legal safeguards permitting citizens access to their records and the ability to correct such records -- would such legislation be desirable in the U.S., particularly in the example cited in our focus book of the Massachusetts law revoking a citizen’s drivers license based on facial-recognition software that often produces mistakes? Or, for example, for the U.S. Government’s no-fly list?

Answer 34

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 35

Is it sufficient in these instances, since the victim is aware of the mistake almost immediately (e.g., the next time a police-person checks the validity of her/his drivers license or the next time s/he tries to board a plane), to saddle the victim with the expense of hiring a lawyer who might or might not be able to force the governmental agency to disclose the basis of its action and, if erroneous, to rectify the situation?

Answer 35

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Post Reply

Return to “Participant Comments – San Bernardino and The F.B.I. vs. Apple – Aug 10”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest