(1)	 Assume the following scenario. You are employed as a Human Rights Lawyer to represent a man charged with destroying a U.S. Government Research Facility that produces a new line of neural weapons.  When deployed in the field, these new weapons effectively incapacitate enemy combatants. The combatant is immediately rendered unconscious, after which all his/her memories are deleted and replaced by an new less threatening “identity narrative”; the installed “identity narratives”developed by a team of Behvorialist Psychologist, effectively reboots the combatant’s behavioral traits, memories, personality and identity, replacing each with an “identity narrative” which approximates the psychological traits of a well adjusted, highly educated, upper middle class Professional who resides in the leafy confines of a sedate Midwestern college town. To date, ample evidence has indicated the effectiveness of the weapon, not least of which is the large number of converted domestic terrorist now living peacefully in various Midwestern College towns. As a former Philosophy graduate student, with a keen interest in Socratic Reasoning and Argument, you will construct your defense by enlisting some of the arguments issued by Socrates in the Crito dialogue. You will assert that your client’s actions should not be labelled as terroism; rather, his actions should be regarded as being solely motivated by his love for Justice, further, the preservation of a Just State; in other words, his actions should be regarded as warranted insofar as they were motivated by a love of instead of a disdain for the USA.  In your answer, generate at least three (3)philosophical defenses in support of your client. In addition, state at least two (2)  charges issued by the Judges in support of prosecuting your client, along with the philosophical claims issued in support. Finally, respond in kind, to each of these charges within a philosophical context.