After 9/11 the Nation's mantra was "Never Forget". But apparently we have because now were supposed to believe that a terrorists right to not have their text messages to the other members of their Terrorist Cell read by the CIA and FBI is more important than the rights of the other 319,999,999 million Americans have to life and safety and that includes you as well as me.
Now I know a lot of people bring up Ben Franklins now infamous quote about Liberty and Safety and I know how people talk about the Constitution and the Founding Fathers and the right to liberty and so forth an so on etc... But as someone who has extensively studied the Founding Fathers and the Constitutional Convention I can emphatically tell you that I believe if Ben or George Washington or James Madison or John Jay or John Adams or Alexander Hamilton or the other founders knew about Nuclear Bombs he wouldn't have been too upset if some terrorist got roughed up with methods much more aggressive than waterboarding if it could save the lives of a few million citizens. In the 1780s one man didn't have the capability of eradicating an entire city like now but if they did the Founders would certainly have made exceptions to the Constitution.
As a matter of fact, this widely misinterpreted Franklin quote doesn't even have anything to do with the Constitution. The Brookings Institute’s Benjamin Wittes correctly describes it. “Very few people who quote these words, however, have any idea where they come from or what Franklin was really saying when he wrote them.”
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
According to Wittes, the words appear in a letter widely presumed to be written by Franklin in 1755 on behalf of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Colonial Governor. “The letter was a salvo in a power struggle between the governor and the assembly over funding for security on the frontier, one in which the assembly wished to tax the lands of the Penn family,” he explains.
The letter wasn’t about liberty but about taxes and the ability to “raise money for defense against French and Indian attacks. The Governor kept vetoing the assembly’s efforts at the behest of the family, which had appointed him.” Indeed, if you look at the text surrounding the famous quote, it’s pretty clearly about money: “Our assemblies have of late had so many supply bill, and of such different kinds, rejected, on various pretenses,” wrote Franklin. There’s not much on liberty, as we understand the concept, in the entire letter.
So today I would like to talk about why I think these guys at Apple are ###@@@&& ***@@#$$!!!s with regards to the recent controversy about the FBI wanting to Hack the phone of one the San Bernardino terrorists. They are making the argument apparently the greatest and most sacred self-evident right that has been bestowed upon us by our Creator and our Government is the right to have our inane irrelevant stupid text exchanges with our friends and family be off limits to the Government. That obviously and clearly outweighs our right to not be killed or tortured by terrorists.
But guess what? The Feds could search your house with a Warrant. That's legal. They can tap your phone or put a bug in your car. (Watch GoodFellas). That's legal. The can even give you a freaking body cavity search if they arrest you. That's legal. So why is Apple different? They want to make it so the Phones are inaccessible even with a warrant...and that is my biggest problem with this issue. Their recent success has created enormous Hubris.
So anyway I'd like to ask Scum Bag Jack Ass CEO of Apple Tim Cook and all the brain dead drone Sheeple Millennials who support him to answer the following questions:
- If 9/11 could have been stopped would it have been OK for the FBI to look at Mohamad Attas private text messages?
- If the Newtown school massacre could have been prevented would it have been OK for the police to look at Adam Lanzas private messages?
- If ISIS has a Nuclear Bomb in an American City and they are going to set if off it 10 minutes would it be OK for the FBI to look at the private messages of a terrorist that they have in custody if it could save the lives of millions of people?
- If your parents or children or other loved ones were being tortured by terrorists would you give the Feds permission to look at your messages if it could end their agony and impending deaths?
- Why are warrants good enough for American citizens and other companies but not good enough for Apple?
- If there is a massive terrorist attack somewhere tomorrow that kills thousands of people will you still stick to your argument?
- Is your right to having your text messages and contacts be private really more important than yours and your families right to life and safety? Really?