Posted on 02/17/2016 6:13:36 PM PST by AlienCrossfirePlayer
An Open Memo To Lou Dobbs
As CEO, Tim Cooks obligation is to execute the corporate mission. Briefly stated, a corporation must deliver product to customers and return on investment to shareholders. It is not his job to make the nation secure from geo-political terrorism. Your suggestion that Mr. Cook will be culpable when another attack occurs was a stinking cheap shot. Obama has the job of making us secure and is failing us. Today on the sister network Fox News Channel, Obama was heard calling for improved cyber security. Do you see an irony?
By resisting encroachment by the courts, Mr. Cook is executing the corporate mission. Apples customers dont want their data to be made less secure. Apples investors dont want their research dollars to be wasted. In short courts are demanding that Apple degrade its very excellent product. Leave Apple alone. American citizens want their private data to remain secure.
Ben Franklin: He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.
“Which law?”
Complying with a legal warrant. Try to keep up, will you? If they do not have the technology to undo it, they are stupider than stupid, they are dangerous. No one with a basic understanding of law and business would build such a thing for mass consumer markets. Only a child would believe otherwise. A stupid child. A technical oversight is one thing, something that can thwart the Constitution is quite another. Something that would give the gift of unbreakable communications would be on a par with the enigma machine that the Germans unleashed on us. Try to think how that impacted the war and hastened the death of MILLIONS.
” concept of recovering information of a mass murderer “
If that’s all the warrant resulted in, I would have no problem with it.
“I don’t want to be picking on you, but you seem to be missing the point that what the warrant will provide is the ability to “tap†everyone’s phone.”
But you are not picking on me, you are picking on our safety and the Constitution. I don’t care if you “pick on me” because there has yet to be a measurement invented that could measure the minute amount of indifference I have towards your opinion of me.
No one with a basic understanding of law and business would build such a thing for mass consumer markets. Only a child would believe otherwise. A stupid child. A technical oversight is one thing, something that can thwart the Constitution is quite another. Something that would give the gift of unbreakable communications would be on a par with the enigma machine that the Germans unleashed on us. Try to think how that impacted the war and hastened the death of MILLIONS.
“Complying with a legal warrant.”
And the whole idea behind warrants is to protect the people from the government, not the other way around.
“No one with a basic understanding of law and business would build such a thing for mass consumer markets.”
You mean, like...guns?
iOS allows you to use a 4 or 6 digit numeric password or an alphanumeric password of up to 37 characters. The “Touch-ID” fingerprint reader on the iPhone 5s or newer lets you use a very long alphanumeric password because you don’t have the inconvenience of entering it in every time, just use the fingerprint reader. Fortunately for the FBI the terrorist was using a government provided iPhone 5c without the fingerprint reader, so he might have been using a short numeric password.
Why can’t a copy of the memory (disk equivalent) be made and then various instances of same be interrogated over and over?
“And the whole idea behind warrants is to protect the people from the government, not the other way around.”
Actually, it is for the protection of both. The Constitution is pretty clear about that, I think.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You can point out what is being violated here?
The AWA empowers the courts to issue writs in furtherance of their efforts.
For instance to compel a manufacturer of safes to provide ‘safe-cracking’ information to the police. IE: the combination if they know it, or the details needed to effectively open the safe physically.
The most notorious use was compelling St Louis to raise it’s taxes to integrate it’s schools.
“You mean, like...guns?”
They have nothing to do with warrants executed properly. Are you responding to the right person? You seem confused.
I love your accent when you yell at me.
“Are you responding to the right person?”
My point is that we have the right to bear arms, but NOT the right to private communication?
We obviously don’t agree on much.
I love it that I’m not the most ignernt boob on the thread. LOL!
“You can point out what is being violated here?”
Papers and effects.
If I understand you, you are asking, why can’t the phone be somehow cloned, try ten pass codes, keep using clone copies until you unlock a clone by brute force. Don’t have an answer for that, but if that route were possible, I think the phone would have been long cracked.
“My point is that we have the right to bear arms, but NOT the right to private communication?”
Well, I have the right to private communications. Right up until I become a mass murderer or an ISIS soldier. Are you saying that should not be covered here?
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
We have the right to bear arms unless we murder a dozen or so people, probably. What are arguing, that our enemies around the world should be able to plot and plan even if we have PROBABLE CAUSE, like, ohhhhh...mass murder......to investigate?
Bless your heart....
But it must do so in a manner agreeable to the law.
For instance to compel a manufacturer of safes to provide ‘safe-cracking’ information to the police. IE: the combination if they know it, or the details needed to effectively open the safe physically.
Do you think the Writ Act could be used to order the safe company to build a device that could crack their safe?
The most notorious use was compelling St Louis to raise it’s taxes to integrate it’s schools.
Sounds like they forgot the requirement that it be agreeable to the law.
Both. The camel under the tent is the former. The latter is the end game.
Problem is: I don’t think Apple can do it. Not that they wouldn’t for just cause, just that they can’t. They took themselves out of the equation.
They can’t crack your own phone if you forget your passcode. You’re SOL.
“Papers and effects.”
Papers and effects of mass murderers should be protected, or exempt, from Probable Cause Statues? Is that your stance?
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaha
oh, please, stop it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.