| They are going straight into "think of the children mode" ... apparently "what about the terrorists?" isn't as effective anymore. "They" in this case is the chief of a metro police department, whose forensic and surveillance resources are more often spent on pedophiles and drug dealers than terrorism. What else would they say? If the article's authors wanted a "what about the terrorists?" quote they would have gone to a counter-terrorism official, just like they rang someone at the DEA for a "but drug organizations!" quote. You're reading a paint-by-numbers article about government impotence and corporate supremacy like it's finely crafted pro-government propaganda. Let's hope the public will see through their manipulative talking points. You (and most HN commenters) didn't. Why should they? e.g.: a) "Beyond lobbying the companies, there is little law enforcement can do without congressional action." b) "A half-dozen police and federal officials interviewed said that Apple, in particular, was taking an aggressive posture on the issue." When you take away the outrage-kindling, the gist of the article is that the stodgy old Washington government is incompetent and hip California tech companies are glorious. Not exactly a controversial opinion among the commentariat. |
You're saying "pedophiles and drug dealers" as if it wasn't 99% drug dealers.