Apple Hires Former Solicitor General, Who Lost Wife in 9/11, to Defend It Against FBIby Mike MasnickTechdirt Feb. 23, 2016 |
From Aid to Dependency: Israeli Agent Reveals the Real Goal of 'Merging' U.S. and Israeli Militaries
ADL, Jewish Groups Lobby California to Classify Jews as a Race, 'Not Just a Faith'
Trump Welcomes 'The Highly Respected' Alan Dershowitz Into The GOP, Shills His New Book
House Passes NDAA With Section 219 Aimed at 'Merging' U.S. and Israeli Militaries
U.S. Must Prep to 'Welcome Large Numbers of Jewish Refugees,' Pro-War Lobbyist Mark Dubowitz Says
![]() Two can play at the "pull on the heart strings about losses due to terror" game apparently. While the FBI has rolled out the "but the poor victims of San Bernardino" argument for why it wants to force Apple into hacking the security of its own customers, Apple has countered with a big gun of its own: it has hired former Solicitor General Ted Olson to defend the company against the FBI in this case. Olson is a mega-star in legal circles. He's argued tons of cases before the Supreme Court, and of course, was Solicitor General under George W. Bush (whose election he helped ensure in representing him in Bush v. Gore). But... he's also well known because his wife, Barbara Olson, was onboard American Airlines Flight 77 that was one of the four hijacked planes during 9/11 (it was the one that crashed into the Pentagon). I'm sure that Apple hired Olson because of his legal and litigation skills. He's obviously extremely qualified for the job. But the fact that he also presents a sympathetic narrative concerning victims of terrorist attacks seems like an added bonus in a bizarre fight that seems to focus almost as much on the public perception of parading victims around, as it does around the actual legal issues. Olson already has been out in public arguing on behalf of Apple. I'd embed the video from ABC but (irony alert) they don't use HTTPS encryption, so I can't... However, Olson does note: Apple has a responsibility to maintain the trust and faith of millions of people who have depended on Apple to produce a product that protects their privacy and their intimate personal lives. This is a Pandora's box. We're not just talking about one magistrate. There are hundreds of magistrates. There are hundreds of other courts. There's no limit to what the government could require Apple to do if it succeeds this way....He may be overstating the case, in that things like location information aren't at stake here, but a lot of the other stuff is -- and he's right that we shouldn't be compromising our civil liberties in response to terrorist attacks. |