Suggested Answers to the First Short Quiz

[johnkarls]

.

It is respectfully suggested that you make a list of your own questions that are provoked by “The Protective State" – since all of us are unique and your questions are worth discussing also!!!



Question 1

Was the 8-page Forward (pp. xi – xviii) written by Stephen Breyer? With no bio included for Stephen Breyer, are we presumed to know who he was?

Answer 1

Yes and Yes.

Question 2

Was Stephen Breyer an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court 1994-2022?

Answer 2

Yes.

Question 3

Can we also presume that he and Alan Dershowitz are long-time good friends since –

• Although Alan Dershowitz graduated first in his Yale Law School class of 1962, did he clerk for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg while Stephen Breyer graduated from Harvard Law School in 1964 following which he also clerked for Arthur Goldberg? Do Supreme Court clerks for a particular Justice tend to have similar backgrounds and join a de facto “club” comprising that Justice’s clerks from over the years?

• Did Alan Dershowitz then teach at Harvard Law School 1964-2013 where he was joined by Stephen Breyer who taught at Harvard Law School 1967-1980?

• So is it any surprise that Stephen Breyer wrote the Forward for Alan Dershowitz’ newest book?

Answer 3

Yes – Yes – No.

Question 4

Does Stephen Breyer’s Forward appear to be a detailed summary of “The Preventive State”? Suggesting that the book is a wide-ranging analysis of zillions of different applications of the central issue of preventing future harm? While never mentioning that it has anything to do with Iran’s nuclear-weapons program?

Answer 4

Yes – Yes – Yes.

Question 5

How do we square this with Alan Dershowitz’ own description of the book –

“The thesis of the book is that you cannot wait for Iran to develop nuclear weapons and try to deter it. You don’t deter people who want to die…..Israel cannot depend on deterrence. It cannot deter or kind of control a nuclear enemy. It has to prevent the enemy from getting nuclear bombs.”

[Please see the third section of the Original Topic Proposal entitled “Author Prof. Dershowitz' Own Book Description In 4/27/2025 Interview With Mark Levin” at viewtopic.php?f=853&t=2652&sid=e9c7698a ... 65b786b34a.]

Answer 5

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 6

So yes, don’t Chapters 2-12 (just like Stephen Breyer said in the Forward) deal with 11 different areas in which The Preventive State attempts to avoid harm with preventive action???

Answer 6

Absolutely.

Question 7

But if Alan Dershowitz is correct that the thesis of his book is --

“…..you cannot wait for Iran to develop nuclear weapons and try to deter it. You don’t deter people who want to die…..Israel cannot depend on deterrence. It cannot deter or kind of control a nuclear enemy. It has to prevent the enemy from getting nuclear bombs.” --

then why confuse readers with all this analysis of situations that are irrelevant to his thesis???

Answer 7

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 8

After all, hasn’t Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei since succeeding Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989, relished frequently leading crowds in chants of “Death to Israel” AND EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY “DEATH TO THE GREAT SATAN” (i.e., the United States)???

Answer 8

Absolutely!!!

Question 9

And don’t Iran’s frequent tests of INTERCONTINENTAL-ballistic-missiles (which tests were OK’d by Obama’s 2015 Nuclear Agreement, aka JCPOA) feature ICBM’s with “DEATH TO THE GREAT SATAN” painted on their sides???

Answer 9

Absolutely!!!

Question 10

And aren’t INTERCONTINENTAL-ballistic-missiles INTENDED SOLELY FOR THE UNITED STATES since Israel is only 600 miles from Iran???

Answer 10

Absolutely!!!

Question 11

And doesn’t Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei regularly preach (as did Osama bin Laden and many other Islamic religious leaders) that Islamic martyrs and 72 close relatives by-pass a truly-fearsome Judgment Day when they would otherwise be prosecuted by Avenging Angels – and proceed on their deaths directly to Heaven???

Answer 11

Yes.

Question 12

And isn’t this why until the videos were apparently banned in the U.S. as being inflammatory, those videos typically showed that when Muslim children were killed by Israeli Defense Forces whom the children were attacking -- the relatives of those child martyrs would be seen rejoicing rather than mourning???

Answer 12

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 13

So why shouldn’t we believe Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that he wants INTERCONTINENTAL-ballistic-missiles in order to KILL THE GREAT SATAN???

Answer 13

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 14

And dis-believe all his nonsense about his massive nuclear-weapons program being designed to provide nuclear power for Iran – for which only a fraction of the nuclear fuel would be required, for which only a tiny fraction of the enrichment that Iran is endowing its nuclear material is needed, and for which every other non-nuclear nation wanting nuclear energy for domestic-power, obtains the small quantities of barely-enriched nuclear fuel from other countries???

Answer 14

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 15

Isn’t President Trump delusional in believing he can negotiate with Iran and talk them out of INTERCONTINENTAL-ballistic-missiles and talk them out of any enrichment of nuclear fuel???

Answer 15

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 16

Even if President Trump is trying to show “he walked the extra mile” with Iran before taking out their ICBM & nuclear programs militarily (or permitting Israel to do so), isn’t such a public-relations campaign itself delusional because Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will never permit the Iranian media to permit Iranian citizens to know that the United States “walked the extra mile”???

Answer 16

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

BTW, "walking the extra mile" comes from Matthew 5:41 of Christ's "Sermon on the Mount" when Christ commanded his followers to NOT ONLY make a truly-sincere attempt to meet the demands of adversaries, but to try doubly-hard to do so.

Question 17

And isn’t the same true vis-à-vis any other nations that are not friendly to the United States???

Answer 17

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 18

Wouldn’t it be tragic if President Trump’s public-relations campaign vis-à-vis Iran is really aimed at mollifying university professors and their easily-misled college students???

Answer 18

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 19

After all, aren’t such professors and students GUILTY of believing and preaching THE BIG PALESTINIAN LIE???

Answer 19

Absolutely!!!

Question 20

Doesn’t THE BIG PALESTINIAN LIE claim that United Nations Resolution 181 of 11/29/1947 “stole” Palestinian land and gave it to the survivors of Hitler’s Holocaust because European nations (most of the UN’s current 193 members were still European colonies in 1947) did not want their Jewish survivors to return to their European homes (the last Nazi concentration camps did NOT close until 1951 – same camps but new management which, at least, turned off the ovens)???

Answer 20

Absolutely!!!

Question 21

Isn’t the truth that prior to World War I, the Ottoman Empire (which owned Palestine and the rest of the Middle East for 600 years prior to WW-I) had a policy that EVERYONE, regardless of religion or ethnicity, was welcome to purchase land anywhere in the Ottoman Empire, including Palestine???

Answer 21

Absolutely!!!

Question 22

And didn’t many Jews purchase land in Palestine IAW the policy of the Ottoman Empire???

Answer 22

Yes.

Question 23

So isn’t the truth that when the United Nations decided in the wake of World War II to terminate Britain’s Palestine “Protectorate” (a sanitary name for their COLONY resulting from their defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War, courtesy of Lawrence of Arabia) it created on 5/15/1947 the United Nations Special Committee On Palestine (aka UNSCOP) whose marching orders were to tabulate who owned what??? And that no major powers were members of UNSCOP???

Answer 23

Yes and Yes.

Question 24

And based on UNSCOP’s report of land ownership, United Nations Resolution 181 of 11/29/1947 declared that Britan’s Palestine “Protectorate” would terminate at midnight on 5/14/1948 TO BE SUCCEEDED BY AN ARAB STATE AND A JEWISH STATE BASED ON LAND OWNERSHIP – EVEN THOUGH EACH OF THE TWO COUNTRIES WOULD RESEMBLE UNCONNECTED SQUARES OF A CHEKERBOARD???

Answer 24

Yes.

Question 25

BTW, didn’t UNSCOP ascertain that there were only 1,077,000 Muslims out of a total population of 1,846,000 – or 58.3%??? Which reflected virtually no Jewish immigration during the British occupation 1918-1947 since the Brits were more interested in Arab crude oil than the survivors of Hitler’s Holocaust???

Answer 25

Yes and Yes.

Question 26

Didn’t Israel accept Resolution 181 on the basis of which it declared its independence on 5/14/1948 – and was immediately invaded by Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon???

Answer 26

Yes.

Question 27

Wasn’t the 1947 War for Independence the first of 4-5 FAILED “Two State Solutions” over the last 78 years???

Answer 27

Yes!!!

Question 28

And when those university professors coach their students to chant “From the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea, Palestine Will Be ‘Free’” – aren’t they calling for the perennial goal of Palestinians to THROW ISREALIS INTO THE SEA WITHOUT EVEN REIMBURSING THE ISRAELIS FOR WHAT THEIR ANCESTORS PAID THE PALESTINIANS’ ANCESTORS FOR THE LAND???

Answer 28

Incredibly!!!

Question 29

Are the university professors and their students GUILTY of defamatory “HATE SPEECH”???

Answer 29

Absolutely!!!

Question 30

Should they be prosecuted???

Answer 30

Absolutely!!!

Criminal libel was a bedrock feature of English-American Common Law.

[Defamation is libel if it is written and slander if it is spoken.]

Which is no surprise because –

• England had only Ecclesiastical Courts dispensing Biblical Law until Henry VIII took the English church out from under The Vatican,

• When that happened, the Brits simply changed the signs on their court houses to read “Common Law Court” instead of “Ecclesiastical Court,” and

• The Ten Commandments say (Exodus 20:16 - KJV) – “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” without distinguishing between libel and slander.

BTW, Britain abolished criminal libel AFTER enacting The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 which created an offence of inciting hatred against a person on the grounds of their religion.

And a few states have abolished or modified criminal libel.

[NB: California never had English-American common law, but I have NOT “chased the rabbit” of ascertaining whether criminal libel is prohibited by the Napoleonic Code.]

But in every state that still has criminal libel, the university professors and their students should be prosecuted!!!

Question 31

Do “HATE CRIMES” such as “HATE SPEECH” comprise “Free Speech” or, as every first-year law student learns, are there numerous exceptions to “free speech” such as NOT being permitted to shout “fire” in a crowded theater??? Much less than “incitement to riot”???

Answer 31

Law School 101 teaches that there are beaucoup exceptions to “free speech.”

Hate crime in criminal law involves a standard offence (such as an assault, murder) with an added element of bias against a victim (individual or group of individuals) because of their physical appearance or perceived membership of a certain social group. Examples of such groups can include race, ethnicity, disability, language, nationality, physical appearance, political views, political affiliation, age, religion, sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation.

So in any state where criminal libel is still the law, the charge can be upgraded to a hate crime

*****
UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION

Virtually every country in the world (and every state in the United States) follows the ancient Law of Universal Jurisdiction pursuant to which the jurisdiction in which a culprit can be caught applies its own criminal law – rather than the criminal law of the jurisdiction of which the culprit is a citizen.

This was necessary because of pirates – whose piracy may not even violate the law of the pirate’s home country – or, alternatively, entail only a “slap on the wrist.”

Accordingly, even if a professor or student is usually located in a jurisdiction where criminal libel has been abolished --

prosecutors in jurisdictions where criminal libel has NOT been abolished should be on the lookout for visits by such a professor or student so they can be prosecuted under the law of universal jurisdiction!!!

Question 32

BTW, is Yours Truly NOT Jewish (four German Protestant grandparents who immigrated in the 1800’s) but is nevertheless appalled at what THE BIG PALESTINIAN LIE is doing – particularly in the hands of IGNORANT profs???!!!

Answer 32

Yes.