Suggested Answers to the Second Short Quiz

.
By the end of the first week of the monthly cycle (which is the deadline for obtaining six positive RSVP’s for the next meeting as our minimum quorum), Yours Truly has prepared The Short Quiz (or Two Short Quizzes if we are facing the once-per-quarter five-week gap between meetings).

And by that time, Yours Truly has also prepared The Suggested Answers (or has a good idea of what they will say).

This section contains, inter alia --

The First Short Quiz (entitled “A Special Place In Hell For” Thomas Friedman)

The Suggested Answers to the First Short Quiz

The Second Short Quiz (entitled “Thomas Friedman, Godfather of the 1%”)

The Suggested Answers to the Second Short Quiz

John Karls - 18 March 2017 2:30 am MDT

Suggested Answers to the Second Short Quiz

Postby johnkarls » Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:34 am

.
Suggested Answers to the Second Short Quiz
Thomas Friedman, Godfather of the 1%


****************************************************************
Our two carryover questions from the First Short Quiz for which it was said -- Questions 20 and 21 will be addressed in detail in The Second Short Quiz which will be entitled “Thomas Friedman, Godfather of the 1%.”

They will be answered at the end of this quiz.

Question 20

Was Thomas Friedman personally responsible for refusing to permit $84 billion of private funds to be used to provide a program of tutoring/mentoring for 10 million inner-city children as they progressed from third grade through high school graduation, with a guarantee of college tuition?

Question 21

So isn’t Thomas Friedman personally responsible for perpetuating what we have often observed is America’s 30% Permanent “Untouchable” Under-Caste?

****************************************************************


Question 1

What are “identical-twin” studies?

Answer 1

Please see Q&A-2.

Question 2

Since “identical-twin” studies focus on randomly-selected “identical twins” where each set of twins was orphaned before their first birthday and where each twin was raised in a radically-different environment, are Identical-Twin Studies viewed by scientists as THE GOLD STANDARD for determining what is genetic and what is environmental?

Answer 2

Absolutely!!!

Question 3

Over the decades, have Identical-Twin Studies consistently demonstrated that when inner-city identical twins are orphaned before their first birthday and one twin in each set of twins is adopted by a suburban family while the identical twin is adopted by another inner-city family -- (A) the identical twins adopted by suburban families develop by adulthood measured IQ’s equal to average suburban measured IQ’s, and (B) the identical twins adopted by inner-city families develop by adulthood measured IQ’s equal to average inner-city measured IQ’s?

Answer 3

Yes.

Showing that inner-city children have the same IQ potential as suburban children, and it is only their inner-city environment that prevents them from achieving their potential.

Question 4

So why is there any great mystery that so much depends on TWO factors = (A) loving and nurturing adoptive parents, and (B) an environment (BOTH home AND school) in which learning is revered rather than ridiculed?

Answer 4

God only knows!!!

Question 5

The many times that we have focused on America’s 30% Permanent “Untouchable” Under-Caste occupying our inner-cities, have we recognized that the typical conditions facing the 178 “I Have A Dream”® Programs in 51 American cities during the 1990’s when Yours Truly was the volunteer Treasurer of IHAD-National were –

• SINGLE-DIGIT high-school graduation rates for the class immediately preceding, and the class immediately following, the Dreamer class.
• 99% of all Dreamers living in single-adult households.
• 95% of all Dreamers living in single-adult households headed by a druggie.
• 75%-80% of all Dreamers living in a single-adult household headed by a druggie who hands over all receipts to the pusher so that the kids have to steal just in order to eat.
• Virtually-universal recognition by inner-city 5-year-olds that their only realistic career objectives are pusher or pimp, or girl friend of a pusher or pimp graduating to whore.

Answer 5

Yes.

Question 6

So why do academics and policy makers LIKE TO PRETEND that the typical SINGLE-DIGIT high-school graduation rates in our inner-city ghettos are an EDUCATION problem rather than a SOCIOLOGY problem?

Answer 6

God only knows!!!

Question 7

After all, does any among us who has raised children believe for a moment that an inner-city teacher can (quoting from Q-4) -- (A) be a “loving and nurturing adoptive parent” AND (b) “provide an environment (BOTH home AND school) in which learning is revered rather than ridiculed” -- when faced with a huge number of students, 75%-80% of whom (quoting from Q-5) “have to steal just in order to eat”?

Answer 7

Well, does anyone believe that for a moment???

Question 8

HOWEVER, AS A PRELIMINARY MATTER, should the “I Have A Dream”® Program of the 1990’s which had 178 projects in 51 American inner-cities be confused with the post-1990’s IHAD Program which appears to have concentrated on suburbs and appears to have lost all of the institutional knowledge about inner-cities that was accumulated by the 178 inner-cities projects of the 1990’s?

Answer 8

No, the 1990’s IHAD Program should NOT be confused with the post-2000 IHAD Program.

Although they shared sequentially the same legal entity and the same name, the post-2000 IHAD Program focused on suburbs rather than inner-cities and appears to have lost all the institutional knowledge about inner-cities accumulated by the 178 inner-cities projects of the 1990’s.

Question 9

Did each of the original 178 IHAD projects, virtually all of which were sponsored by a CEO of a major corporation, adopt ALL CHILDREN in the third grade of an inner-city school (no exceptions!!!) or ALL CHILDREN in the third-grade cohort of an inner-city public-housing project (no exceptions!!!) -- and provide each of them with a tutor AND mentor through high school graduation with a GUARANTEE of college tuition?

Answer 9

Yes.

Question 10

Did many, if not most, of the IHAD tutors and mentors become LOVING/NURTURING SURROGATE PARENTS?

Answer 10

Yes.

Question 11

Did adopting ALL CHILDREN (no exceptions!!!) in an inner-city school class or in an inner-city public-housing project create AN ENVIRONMENT in which learning was revered rather than ridiculed?

Answer 11

Yes.

Question 12

Did the first few IHAD projects have typically 60%-65% of their ORIGINAL NUMBER of Dreamers graduate from high school and proceed to college?

Answer 12

Yes.

Question 13

When Yours Truly, as the volunteer IHAD-National treasurer, ascertained that approximately 50% of the female Dreamers in those projects had become pregnant as a result of which they did not continue their education, did he ask the sponsors of those projects to find out why they had become pregnant?

Answer 13

Yes.

Question 14

Was the almost-invariable answer that the female Dreamer felt that there had NEVER been anyone in her life who cared about her and, by God, she was going to CREATE someone who would have no choice but to love her?

Answer 14

Yes.

Question 15

Did that information prompt Yours Truly to request those sponsors to go back and ask the 50% of the female Dreamers who had NOT become pregnant, why they hadn’t?

Answer 15

Yes.

Question 16

Was the almost-invariable answer that the female Dreamers who had NOT become pregnant had a person in their lives, typically one of our mentors or tutors, who had become a SURROGATE PARENT and who, more importantly, had told the Dreamer that she could make something out of herself with the IHAD program and it would “break the heart” of the Surrogate Parent if she didn’t?

Answer 16

Yes.

Question 17

When Yours Truly shared that information with the sponsors of all of the remainder of the 178 projects with the recommendation that they stress with EVERY tutor and mentor that EACH OF THEM should tell her/his Dreamer that it would “break the heart” of the tutor/mentor if the Dreamer did not take advantage of the IHAD program, did the rate of Dreamers graduating from high school and continuing on to college shoot up to over 90%?

Answer 17

Yes.


----------------
PART II: THOMAS FRIEDMAN AND 42 OTHER NEWS-MEDIA SUPERSTARS + PRESIDENT OBAMA AND 20 OTHER U.S. AND CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENTAL OFFICIALS
----------------
NB: The information in this Part II is documented by hundreds if not thousands of documents posted in the Third and Fourth Sections of http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org under the Section Headings of “Inner-City Holocaust and America’s Apartheid ‘Justice’ System (In Honor of Jonathan Kozol and In Memory of John Howard Griffin).”
----------------

Question 18

When Yours Truly took early retirement in 1997 from Ernst & Young to become an investment banker, did he inform his Ernst & Young partners and did he inform the other 177 Sponsors of “I Have A Dream” projects in 51 American inner-cities (most of whom were CEO’s of major corporations) that he was doing so in order to devote every penny that he might earn as an investment banker to funding IHAD or IHAD-style programs?

Answer 18

Yes.

Question 19

Since quite a few of my Ernst & Young partners and since virtually all of the 177 Sponsors of other IHAD projects made THEREAFTER contributions to IHAD, do courts routinely treat such SUBSEQUENT contributions as the “quid pro quo” that makes a promise such as that of Yours Truly to donate every penny he might earn as an investment banker AS A LEGALLY-ENFORCEABLE CONTRACT?

Answer 19

Yes.

Question 20

Did Yours Truly learn from a front-page article in the 6/30/2006 Wall Street Journal that one of his financial products had been stolen by Barclays Capital which had used it to save billions for some of the world’s largest financial institutions?

Answer 20

Yes.

Question 21

Did the Wall Street Journal article say that the financial institutions involved had refused to answer any questions on the grounds that the financial product was a “Trade Secret” and did the WSJ article say that the WSJ had been unable to find any experts who were not privy to the “Trade Secret” who were able to “reverse engineer” the “Trade Secret” to figure out how it worked?

Answer 21

Yes.

Question 22

Is “conversion” the civil-law name for the crime of “theft”?

Answer 22

Yes.

Question 23

Is “conversion” regularly applied, for example, in the case of fine art stolen by the Nazis to return it (or its then fair market value at the option of the plaintiffs) to the heirs of the Holocaust victims who owned it?

Answer 23

Yes.

BTW, if the heirs of the Holocaust victims who owned the fine art opt to be paid the fair market value of the fine art (rather than to have it returned), the fair market value is NOT based on the value of a piece of canvas and a few cans of paint BUT INSTEAD includes the value of the intangible concept of the artist in creating the work.

Question 24

Were there in fact 15 of the world’s largest financial institutions who acquired Yours Truly’s “Trade Secret” from Barclays Capital and who were able to save an estimated $21 billion courtesy of the “Trade Secret”?

Answer 24

Yes.

Question 25

Did Yours Truly sue 15 financial institutions who were “in receipt of stolen property” for “conversion” for $84 billion, which included treble damages for a reckless failure to ascertain who owned the “Trade Secret” because they hadn’t even asked Barclays Capital for a standard warranty that Barclays Capital owned the “Trade Secret”?

Answer 25

Yes.

Question 26

Did the California courts rule on a preliminary basis that no lawsuit could be permitted in California for “conversion” of “property” even though (A) the same trial court that so ruled had recently permitted a lawsuit for “conversion” of “property”, and (B) two California appellate courts were simultaneously permitting lawsuits for “conversion” of “property”?

Answer 26

Yes.

Question 27

Did all of the courts involved in Yours Truly’s lawsuits rule that their decisions could NOT be published? And rule further that their decisions could NOT be cited as precedent?

Answer 27

Yes.

Question 28

Was the “Question Presented For Review” in our Petition For Certiorari (i.e., Request To Accept An Appeal) to the U.S. Supreme Court --

“Can state court judges order their decisions which they know are diametrically-opposed to well-settled law, not to be published or cited (a strategy labeled ‘the segregated toilet’ in correspondence with 51 inner-city clergy who represent the 10 million inner-city children who have been disclosed from the outset as the ‘real parties at interest’ in this law suit) in order to flush away the rights of the 10 million inner-city children without disturbing the rights of first-class American citizens -- without violating the ‘Equal Protection of the Law’ requirement of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?”

Answer 28

Yes.

Question 29

Had numerous letters been sent over several years to President Obama and 20 other U.S. and California Governmental Officials imploring them to file Amicus Curiae Briefs?

Answer 29

Yes.

Question 30

Had numerous letters been sent over several years to Thomas Friedman and 42 other news-media superstars imploring them to shine a light on what the California courts were doing?

Answer 30

Yes.

Question 31

Did Thomas Friedman and the 42 other news-media superstars, and President Obama and the 20 other governmental officials, ALL REFUSE TO LIFT A FINGER even though each of them knew that any one of them lifting a single finger might have been sufficient to enable THE 10 MILLION INNER-CITY CHILDREN TO AVOID “A FATE WORSE THAN DEATH”?

Answer 31

Yes.

BTW, all of the Members of Congress representing the inner-cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Oakland PRETENDED that my letters were a request from a non-constituent -- when each of the letters EXPLAINED UP-FRONT that they were being requested to act on behalf of the 10 million inner-city children WHO WERE INDEED THEIR CONSTITUENTS!!!

In addition, Senator Barbara Boxer, Senator Dianne Feinstein, and Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi -- NONE OF WHOM could claim that I was not one of their tax-paying constituents -- PRETENDED that there was nothing they could do even though each of my letters EXPLAINED UP-FRONT that they were being asked to use their influence to have Amicus Curiae briefs (together with the citation of the U.S. Supreme Court Rule that permits such briefs) filed by (A) the Obama Administration, (B) the Governor of California, and (B) the Mayors of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Oakland -- ALL OF WHOM FILE SUCH AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS AS A ROUTINE MATTER!!!

Question 32

Had Yours Truly been corresponding during the entire imbroglio with 51 inner-city clergy from Los Angeles, San Francisco and Oakland, NEVER ASKING FOR A PENNY but only for THEIR PRAYERS and the prayers of their congregants?

Answer 32

Yes.

Question 33

Was one of the reasons for corresponding with the 51 inner-city clergy to be able to create quickly IHAD and IHAD-style programs with their congregants as tutors and mentors?

Answer 33

Yes.

Question 34

Was the final letter to the 51 inner-city clergy sent on 10/5/2011 to (A) inform them that the US Supreme Court on 10/4/2011 refused to hear our appeal, (B) thank them for their efforts with the solace that each of us would be able to say at The Pearly Gates with St. Paul (II Timothy 4:7): “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith” and (C) request them and their congregants to pray for the souls of the 43 news-media superstars, the 21 governmental officials, the California judges and the U.S. Supreme Court Justices?

Answer 34

Yes.


----------------
PART III: THE TWO CARRYOVER QUESTIONS FROM THE FIRST SHORT QUIZ
----------------

First Short Quiz Question 20

Was Thomas Friedman personally responsible for refusing to permit $84 billion of private funds to be used to provide a program of tutoring/mentoring for 10 million inner-city children as they progressed from third grade through high school graduation, with a guarantee of college tuition?

First Short Quiz Answer 20

ABSOLUTELY!!! MAY HE ROT IN HELL!!!


First Short Quiz Question 21

So isn’t Thomas Friedman personally responsible for perpetuating what we have often observed is America’s 30% Permanent “Untouchable” Under-Caste?

First Short Quiz Answer 21

ABSOLUTELY!!! MAY HE ROT IN HELL!!!
johnkarls
 
Posts: 1352
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:43 pm

Return to Participant Comments - Thank You For Being Late: An Optimist’s Guide To Thriving in an Age of Accelerations – For April 12th

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron