The Great Apple Debate: Series Part 2

Tim Cook claims Apple can't read your iMessages.

Naturally any corporation whose products has been abused for such atrocities would want to assist, but no, this has now been made public by Apple and its PR Department has come into full force and created what appears to be like a complete corporate spin.

Given the current events – the request for information from Apple in order for law enforcement to carry out its investigation into terrorism, Apple has reacted by publishing an open letter on its own website. The following is extracts from Apple’s letter.

Apple: 16 February 2016. ” The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers”.

Now let’s put this into context..

Sheri Pym, United States Magistrate Judge, 16 February 2016. “Requesting an order directing Apple Inc. (“Apple”) to assist law enforcement agents in enabling the search of a digital device seized in the course of a previously issued search warrant in the matter”


“Apple shall assist in enabling the search of a cellular telephone, Apple make: iPhone 5c, model: A1532, P/N: MGFG2LL/A, S/N: FFMNQ3MTG2DJ, IMEI:358820052301412, on the Verizon Network, (the SUBJECT DEVICE) “.

Notice how specific the Court Order makes its request, SUBJECT DEVICE. Personally, I think that’s as clear as it can be. It relates to a specific phone, owned by Farook, the subject of the terrorist allegations. One person and one cell phone, details provided right down to the phone’s IMEI number.

Apple has used such statements as “threatens the security of our customers”. This appears to play on the public’s emotions regarding government snooping, subject matter which has previously been written about, with the revelations about the NSA from Edward Snowden.

Let’s not forget it was one of Apple’s own customers that committed these terrible acts of alleged terrorism. What is not known is how may of the victims were also Apple customers?

How does Apple generalise a warrant relating to information on one iPhone to the threat of all of the security of all of its customers?

Like myself in the regulatory industry, there is no back door to any of the institutions customers, it’s accounts and any information related to these customers. Like ourselves, an institution has an obligation to respond to law enforcement agents. No institution is above the law, or should be regarded as being above the law.

Does Apple need to do the right thing?

To be continued…


Apple Website: 16 February 2016

Central District of California: 16 February 2016.

Observation Junkie

An average guy who loves his BlackBerry ™  and enjoyed everyone minute of it.

  • veeru789

    Great post pointing out the exact court order. Hope the general public sees through the smoke screen AAPL is trying to put up.

  • Observation Junkie

    Thanks Veeru, yes, have a look at the Court Order and put it into context with Apple’s own press release. It certainly makes it an interesting read.


    Apple will spin this for as long as they can, extracting the maximum benefit from the situation, until public opinion either changes or begins to turn. Until that time they will fight any attempt to ‘break’ that phone.

    Apple aids and encourages terrorists with their refusal to cooperate. I hope they inform the next apple user’s family, after that user has been killed by terrorists, that they were only protecting their right to privacy.

  • Observation Junkie

    Thanks TrueNorth, the public’s opinion is already changing, and the victims families are calling for Apple to do the right thing.

    The damage to the Apple brand has started and it’s being aired publicly.

  • Berry_Goooood

    If I’m not mistaken, the phone was owned by the State of California and was used by the terrorist for his job… which makes it even worse that Apple won’t crack this phone.

  • Observation Junkie

    Berry_Goooood, good shout, yes, absolutely correct, if was a county owned phone.

    This makes it more difficult now for Apple, because that same county, along with others could boycott their devices and switch to other manufacturers if Apple does not comply.

    Thanks for spotting that one. :)