Apple vs. FBI: Spin City

The current ruckus over Apple refusing to give the FBI access to a phone is a pretty absurd farce, rooted in non-reality and spun for big, big bucks by Apple.

Here is the nonsense on the government’s side.

-They are asking for information that has minimal value.  We already know a whole lot about the dead terrorists.  The phone might – or might not – add some info as to who they talked to on their way to getting murderous, but it won’t bring anyone back to life or materially change the story line.  To make such a big ruckus over small potatoes is nuts.

-The government has failed massively to protect us with the information they already had.  It is abundantly clear that their systems failed when there was information already available through other means.  They don’t need more information.  They need to fix the systems they have in place so that they work, rather than demanding more access to private parties’ information.

-The government has a monumental problem with silos.  There is so much information they already have, but different security departments are loathe to cooperate with each other and share info because of the competition and distrust among the organizations.  The government should fix the security culture internally instead of compensating for their dysfunctional culture by invading the end users’ lives, again.

-The cell phone in question belonged to a government agency that the terrorist worked for.  There was a standard procedure there that allowed the government to have access to the critical information on the phone.  That procedure was not followed for him or many others in that agency.  Blatant failure to follow procedure is at the root of this problem, but again, the Feds want to solve the problem on the back of the citizens, not the government employees who botched it, inexcusably.

-The claim that the government can be trusted with a back door into the phones and would never use it in any inappropriate way is laughable after the abuses of the last ten years.

-The claim that the back door would be safe with the FBI and would never fall in the hands of the bad guys is simply laughable.  Some of the most critical files of the federal government have been hacked with impunity by the bad guys, putting lives of our people in grave danger.  There are few places less safe for critical information than on a federal government computer.

So the government is trying to take the high moral ground by saying that Apple is compromising the security of the nation by not giving them access to iPhones.

And that high moral ground for the FBI is beyond absurd.

And Apple is also reaching for the high moral ground with their claim to be the last bastion of protection for citizens who have put their trust in Apple.

I can’t believe they can say that with a straight face.  Snowden has shown that the Feds came to Apple years ago and demanded massive amounts of information and access, given secretly without Apple telling the public.

And, Apple has already given that to the Feds long ago, and on an ongoing basis.  So their posturing now, is simply that.  Posturing.  They are no guardians of our privacy.  They rolled over and sacrificed all their customers long ago.

So their claim to the high moral ground is equally absurd.

Here is my view of the game.  It will go to court.  Apple will milk the process, filling the press with their “protectors of American privacy” story line.

In the end, they will lose.  And with great pretense of grief they will hand over the info.

THEN, they will build a new phone that THEY CAN’T HACK (supposedly) and they will sell it to the public as the “must have” only secure phone of the 21st century.

The scam will work.

They will sell monstrous numbers of the phone no one in the world can hack (supposedly) and Apple will turn a profit one more time – on the back of the American citizens they are devotedly trying to protect from the invasive government.

Meanwhile, every high-moral-ground press release Apple sends out is nothing but advertising for the super secure product they will fortuitously have ready for market about the time they lose the final court case.

I know.  I am beyond cynical.  About both sides in this case.

Copyright February 2016 by Arthur Burk  Justice in Marketplace Noble Subject blog

From home

This entry was posted in Perspectives, The Culture. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Apple vs. FBI: Spin City

  1. SLG says:

    On March 15th, this article appeared in Yahoo.

    The final paragraph — in case the link doesn’t work for long — is this.

    “This isn’t the first time we’ve seen reports that the FBI’s fight is pushing companies to strengthen security. In fact, Apple is reportedly in the process of building an unhackable iPhone and we have the FBI to thank.”

    So there we are!

  2. Janis Leal says:

    Yes. Totally agree.

  3. viviennehines says:

    Arthur, I am beyond cynical as well. I totally agree!

  4. valynda says:

    Well said Arthur, well said.

  5. Nathan Noble says:

    OK, one more thought on this. Apple is headquartered close to San Francisco, a mercy city. I (think) I am a mercy, so I make this comment about myself also, but I think there is a large capacity for self-delusion among mercies and those under the influence of mercies. It’s not enough for Apple (or Google) to be businesses…they have to be more, to shape culture, to be a (or “the”) positive force for good in the world; a ministry of their own making. These companies have become drunk on their own Kool-aid to some extent and on some level I think they believe the propaganda they are communicating to the rest us. I guess it’s the nature of deception…when you are deceived you don’t believe you are deceived…surely others, but me? No.

    • Maggie says:

      I agree with what Nathan has said about mercies beings self deceived. ( I know my biggest struggle has been with self- deception as a mercy). I also live in mercy country ( I think) and these issues of big business politics are very real right now. The reality we must face is that Big Brother is far more convoluted , complex and constricting than the skeleton ideas put forth over 70 years ago by Orwell in his “1984” novel. Gradualism of Fabien Socialist polity is a very sneaky snake, silently pacifying the masses. In the end, the mark of the beast will be enforced because it’s so very, very “cool” to have the latest I- phone and only the rich will be able to afford it, while the youth generation will continue to be mesmerised and go forward like lemmings into a sea of financial ruin and enforced slavery, having only this self -delusion to blame really. Yes be very, very angry I say!

  6. johndough says:

    And you are right.

    It is why I have always hated Apple. And their lying advertising. They have built their entire company on lying advertising.

    I just wish they’d have a massive fall at one point and just go bust.

    I hate it when the exhorter does that. It’s what California is all about, isn’t it? Lying advertising.

    Just look at churches, and how they “market” and “advertise” their stuff.

  7. Traci says:

    One of the enemy’s greatest tactics is to create the appearance of a battle over “issues” like privacy or marriage or something else.. why? Because in getting people on the ship (of arguing the issue)… is getting both parties to step on the enemy’s deck of false secuirty or as Nathan points out, false goodness in political correctness…. to be carried where he (the enemy) wants them to go. We should be looking at the ground one gets in by engaging. Arthur is putting his finger on the issue, saying both sides’ argument is ludicrous, which they are. Let’s go a bit further and see, what, long term ground is yielded when one takes the bait to step on either side. We are always in the battle of our legitimate authority in Christ (attempting) to be stolen. It’s not so much whether Greg gets to “marry” Brian. The moment the internet started and you and I started putting things out on it, we give our privacy away. The fact that people make promises or wars or big statements of false security of privacy is like false legitimacy crutches. We have to realize that God sees and knows everything, and there is no privacy. Again, Arthur, you put your finger on the point… our trust should not be in informational privacy or organizations, but just like legitimacy… our trust and protection and safety are in God. He can change the king’s heart like the course of a river, why can’t He protect you and I? One of the best things God has done over this stuff lately is to give insight into when we are being baited into squandering our resources with dissipation… and when they can be used as blessing and life for eternity. That discernment is priceless.

  8. Nathan Noble says:

    It’s funny this blog was posted today…I just wrote on this same topic last night…I posted some of it on facebook then deleted my post (I avoid facebook arguments where possible) …but I’ll share it here…

    While I agree with Apple’s push-back on the FBI requesting/requiring them to unlock iPhones that have been used by terrorists (I think that the government is going too far here in invading privacy)…I find this sweetly ironic also. Apple CEO Tim Cook came out as a big supporter of the Supreme Court decision to change the traditional definition of marriage (in thinking about this, the arrogance of such an act is almost inconceivable. It is one thing to believe a thing, it is another matter to change laws that have existed a certain way for thousands of years. It is one thing to be tempted with homosexuality, it is another thing practice it – either with or without remorse. It is another matter to declare it equal with marriage. It just makes no sense, even apart from any moral argument. It seems madness to me).

    Tim Cook, and Apple by extension, support the government’s redefinition of an institution that has existed for millennia, but claim the government has over-reached when it requests Apple to write code to unlock some iPhones? I love the sweet irony on so many levels. Apparently not all hypocrites are in the church. There are a few others out there.

Comments are closed.