I'm pretty sure the plan is to kill T-Mobile's 1700/2100MHz AWS network, their 3G/"4G" network running HSPA, and replace it with a new 1700/2100MHz LTE network. Existing T-Mobile customers will be shifted to AT&T's 1900MHz GSM network. The new LTE network will be much faster.

This isn't really true. In the USA there are lots and lots of regional carriers that are compatible with the phones of other carriers because they use their networks. Sprint in particular is a big reseller so you can take their phones to Boost, Cellular South, Cricket, Liberty Wireless, Movida, U.S. Cellular, Virgin Wireless, and others, Verizon has MetroPCS, AT&T has Cellular One, and T-Mobile has Simple Mobile.

The solution AT&T has been working on is offloading as much of the data traffic as possible to their hotspot network. Traffic is typically worst in metro areas where AT&T typically has hotspots so it makes sense. For example: You can't actually disable the WiFi on an iPhone (4 at least), regardless of what the UI says. As you travel around, you are silently connected to any AT&T hotspot within range and your traffic is redirected to that. The iPhone will report its' still connected to 3G. I'm pretty sure it's the same with the iPads.

Mod the AC up.

Oracle clearly wanted the vertical stack due to support problems with Oracle on Linux. Remember "Oracle Linux"? Having a OS and application framework (Java) built for Oracle DB gives them a huge advantage. Imagine if they tie changes to J2EE to Oracle DB implementations (they own the 2 open source competitors), this will completely lock out competitors like DB2. This is already largely true. AIX+DB2, Windows+MSSQL, and Solaris+Oracle are the 2 big platforms.

It's extremely unlikely this group has any connections with Iran whatsoever, ad hoc or otherwise. Iran simply doesn't have a big hacker community. This is almost certainly an international group (maybe in China) that is using the recent Iranian cyber attacks as a "cover" for the typical hooliganism.

This is actually less likely than people seem to think. Courts (and more importantly, police) have tended to allow for the unsecured/cracked wifi defense because hackers/bad people tend to use them. For example, Downloading child porn. Botnets. etc. The innocent bystander defense usually works.

If someone has vacant rental home and meth heads break in and set up a secret lab to "cook" meth, the homeowner is not responsible for their actions. He's as much a victim as anyone else.

Your real question is:

Convincing Your Employer To Go With Plone?

The answer to this depends on how good your organization is with Zope/Python. If you have onsite developers with Zope knowledge (who can support Plone), Plone is a no-brainer. And if you have developers familiar with other OOS software like Java, you have plenty of other products to choose from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_source_content_management_systems
http://www.cmsmatrix.org/

If you don't have any onsite development staff, the value proposition of OSS/Plone goes down because you will presumably have to hire someone to run it.

Frankly, that's what I would stress. If this is a large enough project you're going to have to hire someone to run it anyway. You can save on software costs by hiring someone who knows Plone.

If you're not hiring new staff it boils down to who within your organization is running the CMS and what THEY want. Most other considerations are relatively trivial. The more "out of the box" they need the software to be, the more that leans towards a proprietary solution. They might also want to be able to have a vendor to complain to and to provide direct support, again, proprietary has an edge here.

Popularity also factors in. I don't really know how popular Plone is, but Confluence is really popular. That means there will be lots of online resources (forums, FAQs, etc.) for Confluence that you might not find for Plone.

You need to understand something about "momentum" in police investigations.

The police are already 100% convinced by their investigation (mostly guessing) that this guy is a child rapist. There is literally nothing he can do to change this opinion. So, for the police, this is now about "pinning" a charge on him.

Since they are already convinced of his guilt, any new evidence the police obtain will be used to pin SOMETHING on this guy, even if has nothing to do with the original charge. So it's possible that there is no child porn on the partition, but if there is pirate software or whatever they will charge him with theft, etc. all the while telling the judge he's really a child rapist. Or worse, they'll lie and claim they found child porn on the computer.

Not giving the password actually protects him from (likely) false evidence because his defense can show they haven't been able to encrypt the data. IOW, it limits their ability to plant evidence somewhat.

Even if you think the above scenario is paranoid and unlikely, it doesn't change the fact that it's probably his best strategy whether he's guilty or innocent of the specific charge.

Cost benefit analysis crops up here. If the drive contains child pornography or other material that would net the target a long prison sentence it would make logical sense for him to "forget" the password because the penalty for perjury is much lower. This doesn't protect against likely rubber-hose decryption (using violence or coercion to get the password) which is very likely in most scenarios. This is the one case where the weren't willing to torture a little kid.

A better solution is to have a self-destructing system that eats itself when you enter in the wrong password x number of times. Give the investigators a bad password and let the data eat itself. With the data gone, rubber hose decryption is defeated.