Articles

Friday, February 26, 2016

Immigration or an iPhone

The public argument between Apple and the FBI over cracking the encryption on an iPhone used by the San Bernardino Muslim terrorists is one of those ongoing civil liberties debates that negotiate the terms on which we are asked to sacrifice our civil liberties for the sake of Muslim immigration.

We have already made a thousand accommodations and we will make a thousand more. There will be more databases, naked scanners, eavesdropping, vans that can see through walls, backdoors to every server, registrations, warrantless searches, interceptions and regulations. There will be heavily armed police on the streets. And then curfews and soldiers. These things exist in Europe. They'll come here.

Some libertarians will argue that we should have none of this and no restrictions on immigration. That we should just shrug off each terror attack and move on with our lives.

Eventually though there will be a terror attack that we can't shrug off and that can't be minimized by using the cheap statistical trick of comparing Terror Attack X to the number of people who die every year from cancer. Or there will just be an endless parade of daily attacks, bombings, stabbings or shootings, as in Israel, which create a constant climate of terror that will preclude any hollow rhetoric about the number of people falling off ladders each year or getting struck by lightning. Some hawks will cheer every terror fighting measure short of closing the door on the root cause of the problem. They would rather see every American wiretapped, strip searched and monitored every hour of the day then just stop the flow of Muslim terrorists into this country.

The encryption methods of an iPhone, like the question of how many ounces there are in your tiny bottle of mouthwash, would not be much of an issue, if Muslim migration did not make it one.

Terrorists adapt to the terrain. They use the native population as protective coloration. They can find a way to transform a shoe, a tube of toothpaste or instant messaging on a game console into a terror tool. Just as the left can 'politicize' everything, Muslim terrorists can 'terrorize' everything. When everything is a potential terrorist tool, then there can be no such thing as privacy or civil rights.

Muslim immigration is forcing us to constantly choose between our lives and our civil liberties. It's a Catch 22 decision with no good choices. Terrorists push governments toward totalitarianism so that their own alternative totalitarian state starts to seem like a less terrible alternative. But the refusal to fight terrorism also makes the totalitarian state of the terrorists more viable.

With every Muslim terror attack, successful or only attempted, they win and we lose. The pressure of terror attacks discredit Western ideologies and worldviews, both on the right and the left. Each attack helps generate new converts for Islam and more political influence for Islamist organizations.

Vociferous debates over the choice between civil liberties and security make it seem as if we have to choose between our worldviews because something in our society is the problem. It isn't.

We do not have an American terror network problem. The Amish aren't using iPhones or obscure apps to coordinate terror attacks. We have a Muslim terror network problem. It's not because of the Methodists that we have to weigh our mouthwash or take our shoes off and put them in a greasy plastic tray at the airport. It's because 19 Muslims entered this country, hijacked our airplanes and murdered thousands of Americans. Guantanamo Bay is not an issue because Buddhists are at war with America. It's an issue because Muslim terrorists are at war with America.

We do not have an iPhone encryption problem or a shoe problem or a mouthwash problem. We have a Muslim terror problem. Whatever decision is made about iPhone encryption will not be the last word. The simple reality is that privacy carries too high a price as long as we have large numbers of people in this country who want to kill us in equally large numbers. If we want our privacy back, it's not the FBI that is standing in our way. It's the religious organizations that are paid to bring Muslim "refugees" to this country. It's the liberal, libertarian and even conservative voices that think there is something wrong with pausing the mass migration of the group that is disproportionately responsible for our terror problem. It’s the media that would rather discuss anything and everything than discuss the problem we are really dealing with.

The source of this problem is not whether the FBI handled the iPhone correctly or whether Apple should be obligated to build a way for law enforcement to access its devices. These arguments would exist even without Muslim terrorism, but they would lack the same level of life and death urgency.

This is not an iOS problem. It's an immigration problem.

The San Bernardino massacre by Muslim terrorists would not have happened without Muslim immigration. The security flaw here was not in the work of FBI agents or of Apple programmers, but of our immigration laws. Just as we cannot and will not intercept every single Muslim terrorist who finds a way to hide explosives in his underwear, shoes, soda or laptop, we will not ever be able to crack every single encrypted Muslim terrorist device. And their underwear bombs and encrypted iPhones would not be an issue if we did not have Muslim terrorists in America in the first place.

Instead of discussing the Islamic root cause, we put stress on our own competing institutions, technology providers face off with law enforcement, hawks and civil libertarians berate each other as if they were each part of the threat. But we are not the problem here. They are the problem.

The only backdoor that should be at issue here is the one that Muslim terrorists use to enter America. We don't need to violate everyone's rights to close it. We just need the political will to do the common sense thing and shut down the source of the threat. Either that or give up on our privacy.

Our choice is very simple. We can have external security or an internal police state. But neither of the above is not an option. We can have open borders that fill our country with criminals, but that means that eventually any livable middle class neighborhood will have a cop on every corner. We can have airport security for the people coming into this country. Or we can have airport security for everyone.

Ongoing Muslim migration makes a police state inevitable. But to avoid the perils of profiling and the appearance of discrimination, it will be a universal police state that will strip away rights from everyone without regard to guilt or innocence in the hopes of averting the next Muslim terror attack.

The only way to protect our lives and our freedoms from Muslim terrorism and its consequences is by shutting down Muslim immigration. If we fail to do this, then we will lose our lives and our liberties.

22 comments:

Sonoboy said...

I can't think of ONE word to change in this. Amen. And may GOD give guidance to the jurists who will rule on Apples legal procedure as it winds its way through the courts.

Anonymous said...

I'm so happy that you get it. I've seen the pundits all taking the side of 'right thing to do' instead of using the smallest amount of logic and realizing that the truly right thing to do is to stop the terrorists from getting in. They had more than enough warning about the Boston bombers didn't they? What did they do? Nothing. Prevention is way better than scrambling to repair after the damage is done.

Anonymous said...

The best explanation for the problem

Nancy Assaf said...

Great article. This explains why when Donald Trump says he will build a wall, people flock to him. The American people want what he wants. They just don't trust the rest of the politicians to really do what should be done. Nevermind that Trump probably can't do it either. I am sad that we are becoming Europe. It's a wonderful place to visit, but I'd never want to live there.

Algorithms said...

Thanks, very insightful and enlightening article.

Unknown said...

Awesome again Daniel

LetsPlay said...

Again, you foil the popular logic with common sense. Nothing quite like going after the root cause of the problem rather than just attacking another symptom. Diagnosis is spot on. Thank you for clear thought in a sea of crap.

Anonymous said...

of course i have to add my appreciation for your gift of delivering truth in such an eloquent way. except for Trump each of the other candidates on both sides have a speech prepared for why they can't secure the border or control immigration because of the multi million dollar donors who will benefit. thank you for your clarity and focus

Al Maurer said...

Spot on. I echo what LetsPlay said. As long as the federal government refuses to even name the threat, we won't stand a chance of defeating it.

TM Lutas said...

Unfortunately, you are wrong about the nature of the threat coming from Islam and that is a problem that is foundational. With a bad foundation what you build on top will never work well.

Terror is a tactic to enforce a judgment of what is right or wrong. The problem with Islamic terror is that it is unamerican and incompatible with what we think of as universal concepts of justice. Remove the terror and the judgment is just as unamerican and just as incompatible and just as much of a problem. Remove the judgement and the tactic stops being used, problem solved.

Islamic jurists are issuing religious judgments that they call fatwas that call on all muslims to commit violence. So far as I know, we do not target these jurists, do not have a global collection of their judgments, and do not educate people to take these courts seriously, both when they are non-state and when they have a state character.

It is a symptom of truly unclear thinking that far less pernicious examples of this dynamic are taken more seriously. A fraternity can't paddle a member without the whole organization running afoul of the law but muslim street attacks to enforce female modesty are treated as isolated street crime.

Immigration brings us into more intimate contact with muslims making the frequency with which we run into the problem greater. Expelling the muslims or not letting in more of them simply reduces the frequency of incidents. It doesn't actually solve the problem. To adopt this solution is to imagine that we will not be outraged at muslim treatment of our citizens abroad when they are beaten, scarred, or killed when they act as americans and are punished for it in accordance with a sharia judgment.

Don't get me wrong. It's a worthwhile thing to reduce the frequency of injustice, but only as part of a broader strategy that recognizes the root of the problem and also seeks to fix it for the long haul.

GT Kona said...

Once again Daniel exposes a false dichotomy !

Anonymous said...

TM, the late 15th Century expulsion of the Moors seemed to settle the Islamic problem in Spain for centuries until recent EU open borders policy allowed them to surge back in.

Anonymous said...

I can't count the number of times I've read/heard/seen islamic apologists lay the blame for islamic terrorism/persecution/supremacy/fascism at the feet of ALL religions. But if their retarded assertion is true, then why don't they move to any islamic state? Because by their retarded reasoning muslim states shouldn't be any worse than any other country.

Edward Cline said...

Yes, the only way to diminish the threat of another Islamic attack is to stop the Obama-inspired and encouraged invasion of this country by Muslims. Muslims hark to an ideology, or, if you prefer to call it, a politicized theology, that is utterly alien to this country's founding premises. Never the twain will meet between individual freedom and individualism versus submitting to the status of being a cipher in strange garb dedicated to settling in this country and making it Allah's stomping grounds. Over my dead body.

Algorithms said...

One point is that in Europe some of the worst war criminals, trained killers, terrorists, as well as ordinary street criminals, have come in disguised as "refugees". When one thinks about it, it is really strange that the Europeans didn't see it coming, thinking only "good" refugees would come. Same problem here to some extent.

fsy said...

To TM Lutas:

If you are a regular reader of this blog, you would know that Daniel states your point often, that without understanding that the West is at war with Islam itself, it can get nowhere. He probably is assuming that awareness here when he focuses on immigration as the immediate issue.

Anonymous said...

Good Morning, David.

I have read your posts on this exact subject many times. And each time that I read the new iteration, I ask myself, "Why isn't everyone listening to him?"

There is no flaw in your logic. None whatsoever. The proponents of moslem immigration do not rely on logic. Just hope and good wishes. With their heads stuck in the sand.

"None are as blind as he who will not see."

SpeakSoftly999 on Twitter

Brian Keene said...

just what I try to explain to everyone

this PC crap, along with libs/progs, will get us all killed

the Muslim issue is yet another irrefutable argument why responsible citizens need to arm themselves

nobody can protect you, better and more surely, than yourself

Anonymous said...

people are listening, reading, and you give us courage with your eloquence. obvious each of the candidates for pres, except for Trump are being paid by big money to continue insanity of open borders, un vetted immigrants, for cheap labor and votes.

Anonymous said...

Since we are talking about rotten apple, it would have been enough for the FBI to hint that the muslim terrorists wanted to target also a gay club and set some gays on fire and bingo, Tim Cooked would have agreed to open the phone... we have already seen how much he cares about ordinary people's rights when on the other side of the scale there are the most important ghey rites.

Bo said...

The ugliest fact of the matter is that the SB terrorists should have been locked up on the weight of a great deal of UN-encrypted communications long before they shot those people.

So, they're both DEAD and yet for some reason it's still imperative that the FBI opens up their iPhone!

What's truly ugly is that I suspect intelligence agencies that got their hands on everyone's data were shocked to find that they had good cause to lock up hundreds of thousands of muslims throughout the west, and knowing that was not a politically viable option determined that they had to fall back on "last second" intervention.

Camille Jones said...

Thanks for cracking down the problem, it is sad to say that we're facing this horrible problem.

Post a Comment