Can someone explain to me why we should trust Apple's declaration about Section 215?
It seems to me that, were they given a Section 215 order, said order would also additionally compel them to lie publicly about the receipt of the order itself, by having Apple explicitly say that they had not received any such order.
Frankly, the existence of courts that secretly compel citizens or companies to actively conceal and/or lie about the State's behavior seems to make every declaration of innocence by any person or business that can reasonably be expected to have been used by the State in that capacity suspect. Trust simply is not there no matter what they say or don't say, and I don't see how it can be given the actors involved and the legality of the situation.
I'd like to be wrong. Are there flaws in my reasoning here?
It seems to me that, were they given a Section 215 order, said order would also additionally compel them to lie publicly about the receipt of the order itself, by having Apple explicitly say that they had not received any such order.
Frankly, the existence of courts that secretly compel citizens or companies to actively conceal and/or lie about the State's behavior seems to make every declaration of innocence by any person or business that can reasonably be expected to have been used by the State in that capacity suspect. Trust simply is not there no matter what they say or don't say, and I don't see how it can be given the actors involved and the legality of the situation.
I'd like to be wrong. Are there flaws in my reasoning here?
reply