The Apple/FBI case: Another blatant attempt to destroy individual liberty
By Patrick Vermeister
4 April 2016
The U.S. government is now inside everyone’s iPhone — at least it can get into any iPhone it wants at any time. And that’s bad news for anyone who owns the Apple device.
Apple touted its product as one of the safest and most private personal devices in the world. Back in November 2015, the Cupertino, Calif.-based corporation shipped its one-billionth iOS device, over half of which were iPhones.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation had been trying to convince Apple to provide its secure encryption so that the FBI could get into the iPhone 5C of Syed Farook, the radical Islamic terrorist involved in the shootings in San Bernardino, Calif., back in December 2015. The FBI seized the phone and tried unsuccessfully to enter the passcode. After 10 unsuccessful attempts, the phone is locked down and the data in it is inaccessible, permanently.
Newer iPhones went from a 4-digit passcode to a 6-digit passcode, making it virtually impossible for even the best hacker to guess it in 100 attempts. Even with an unlimited number of tries under the allowable 12.5 guesses per second, it would take a computer over 22 hours to run through all the 6-digit combinations.
The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Apple to acquire the information needed to access the phone. But last week, it dropped the case and said it had already successfully gotten into the phone.
The DOJ reportedly employed the services of Israeli company Cellebrite and now apparently has ways into every iPhone on the planet. The court case, had it been adjudicated, may have made it to the Supreme Court and set widespread policy on privacy laws as it may conflict with law-enforcement investigations.
Now, it’s up to Apple to revamp its security measures.
More so, it’s up to everyday consumers to decide how important their privacy is.
“Personal privacy is a hallmark of our individual freedom,” said Adele Weiss, founder of Weiss+Associates, a European-based consultancy firm. “If the government can get away with circumventing privacy measures without a judge-issued warrant, what’s next?”
Although providing security is a function of government, the Founding Fathers understood that maintaining individual freedom and respecting privacy are most important. Benjamin Franklin famously said: “Any society that will give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
This issue has long been on the mind of John McAfee, the developer of the McAfee antivirus software who is now running on the Libertarian ticket for President of the United States.
“I have offered to the FBI for free to take my team — take that one phone; take it apart; see what’s in it and give it to the FBI,” he told RT back in February. “This violates no one. It gives them no backdoors, and it cannot be applied to any other iPhone user.”
McAfee added that his estimate to retrieve the data would have been inside of three weeks’ time. He lauded Apple CEO Tim Cook, who steadfastly refused to reveal Apple’s code. It appears the FBI refused McAfee’s help and presumably possesses access to every iPhone in the world.
Just as the case with this particular iPhone comes to an end, it was revealed that the FBI may share the Apple backdoor with state and local law-enforcement agencies. If that is the case, it won’t take long for that information to be in the hands of sophisticated hackers.
Say goodbye, at least for the time being, to the security of your banking app, iPay and any account stored in your iPhone that may authorize purchases of movies, music and more. For now, how can there be any guarantee that the purchaser is the rightful owner of the funds?
“This is yet another example of how the National Government sees We The People as targets for its own purposes,” added Weiss. “It’s vital for Americans to push back against these repeated invasions into our private lives.”
Weiss pointed out that the National Government has made huge strides toward demolishing personal privacy, an important tenet of individual liberty that doesn’t exist in many countries today. In addition to the Federal Income Tax, other more recent invasions include the Patriot Act and Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare.
“None of these appear in the Federal Register, so by design, they aren’t targeting people in the 50 states of the Union,” remarked Weiss, whose firm specializes in removing people from the U.S. tax system. “But if people don’t know that there are two entities called the ‘United States,’ and that those in the 50 states have unalienable rights but those in the District of Columbia and federal territories don’t, then hundreds of millions of people will unwittingly surrender those precious individual liberties.
“It’s paramount for We The People to stand our ground, and part of that is to unplug from the matrix. There is a technocracy going on, where technology is used as a weapon against individual sovereignty.”
Weiss’ firm has helped over 2,000 clients remove themselves from the U.S. Tax Club in a process called the Revocation of Election, an option provided by the U.S. Congress that revokes the voluntary election people made when they joined the tax club.
“When you submit a Form 1040 or any Tax Class 5 information return for the first time — like a Form W-4 — that is the voluntary election that you joined the ‘country club,’ ” Weiss observed. “Then, submitting a tax return in subsequent years becomes an obligation, unless and until you expressly quit your membership. This is a lawful process, but it must be done precisely. You can imagine, the National Government doesn't want to lose your revenue.”
This process has helped open clients’ eyes as to the game of wordplay the National Government uses to dominate those it is supposed to serve underneath.
“We have a very conscientious clientele who value their privacy and the fruits of their labor,” Weiss proudly declared. “They have become increasingly aware of the entrapments that unsuspecting people can fall into, and they try to stay out of them.”
To find out more information about the Revocation of Election process, interested parties can email Weiss’ firm at email@example.com.