Obama admin calls tech and entertainment firms to terrorism meeting

“Obama administration officials will meet with executives of major technology and entertainment firms in Washington on Wednesday for a conference aimed at combating the activities of violent extremists online, according to industry and government officials,” Cecilia Kang and Matt Apuzzo report for The New York Times. “The meeting was called by the White House, according to a person who was invited and who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The afternoon meeting at the Justice Department will include speeches by John P. Carlin, the assistant attorney general for national security; Megan Smith, the national chief technology officer; and Jen Easterly, the senior director for counterterrorism.”

“The event is another step toward coordinating government and private sector efforts on national security. After the mass shootings in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif., last year, the White House and presidential candidates pushed for greater accountability by Internet firms to clamp down on extremists who use social media to recruit new members, organize and broadcast their demands to the world,” Kang and Apuzzo report. “Last month, the White House and tech chief executives held a security meeting in San Jose to discuss the use of social media by terrorist groups and encryption practices by tech firms to keep consumer data private. Secretary of State John Kerry also met with Hollywood studio executives earlier this month, and entertainment firms have been asked by government officials to help create ‘counternarratives’ to those of terrorists on social media networks.”

“The afternoon gathering on Wednesday, which will be held at the Justice Department, brings together tech companies in Washington at a time of heightened tension between the administration and Silicon Valley over the contentious battle between Apple and the United States government over access to the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino shooters. Some of the tech firms have expressed cautious support of Apple,” Kang and Apuzzo report. “The subject of encryption and Apple’s resistance to being ordered to break through its encrypted software for law enforcement is not on the agenda.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Pfft.

Apple vs. FBI: Who’s really winning in the court of public opinion? – – February 24, 2016
How Apple could be punished for defying the U.S. government demand to hack iPhone – February 24, 2016
Smattering of protesters gather to support Apple in iPhone fight against U.S. government – February 24, 2016
Apple is losing the PR war with the U.S. government – February 24, 2016
Pew survey: More than half of Americans think Apple should comply with FBI – February 22, 2016
U.S. Representative Darrell Issa on Apple vs. FBI: Very scary when your government wants to know more about you – February 24, 2016
Apple: The U.S. Congress, not the courts, must decide iPhone access fight – February 24, 2016
Apple’s fight with U.S. could speed development of devices impervious to government intrusion – February 24, 2016
Apple to argue that FBI court order violates its free-speech rights – February 24, 2016
Apple, the U.S. government, and security – February 24, 2016
Congressman Ted Lieu asks FBI to drop demand that Apple hack iPhones – February 23, 2016
In the fight to hack iPhones, the U.S. government has more to lose than Apple – February 23, 2016
Here are the 12 other cases where the U.S. government has demanded Apple help it hack into iPhones – February 23, 2016
John McAfee blasts FBI for ‘illiterate’ order to create Apple iPhone backdoor – February 23, 2016
Some family members of San Bernardino victims back U.S. government – February 23, 2016
Apple supporters to rally worldwide today against U.S. government demand to unlock iPhone – February 23, 2016
U.S. government seeks to force Apple to extract data from a dozen more iPhones – February 23, 2016
Apple CEO Cook: They’d have to cart us out in a box before we’d create a backdoor – February 22, 2016
Tim Cook’s memo to Apple employees: ‘This case is about more than a single phone’ – February 22, 2016
Obama administration: We’re only demanding Apple hack just one iPhone – February 17, 2016


    1. Yeah, those AI drones killing innocent people, or DARPA’s position that ALL Christians and veterans are terrorists doesn’t exactly help their morale causes.

  1. Tech companies companies have enough to do already, upholding the people’s civil rights after the US Government abandoned that job. Now the Government is asking tech companies to give national defense a try?

    I know things have rough for the federal government lately, with the Legislative branch refusing to do its job of passing laws of behalf of its electorate to go full time obstructing the Executive branch, and now obstructing the Judicial branch by refusing to let anyone fill the Supreme Court’s vacancy. But this is ridiculous. At this rate, people are going notice that their governments gone and multinational corporations are running everything.

    1. This seems almost inevitable. With the governmental budget tied up with entitlements, those capable of discretionary spending will be the corporations. The recurring revenue idea is effectively a tax model (based on product delivery), so the corporations simply need to be big enough, or organized enough, to withstand the only stick the government has (you know, the one where they make you where orange jump suits).

        1. He doesn’t.

          Naming specific entitlements to cut does not work, because of the all the public outrage it creates, and all the entitlements nobody cares enough to fight for were cut long ago.

          One of the biggest chunks of entitlement spending goes to veterans. Is he going take a stand against our war heroes, say they don’t deserve to be given food, healthcare, and shelter in exchange for all the sacrifices they made for our country? Even if that’s exactly what he’s thinking, he wouldn’t dare say it aloud.

          What about food programs for children and poor parents? Maybe he’ll go after that, but first he’ll have to imply the recipients are mostly lazy drug addicted criminals who take advantage of the programs. Not mentioning actual demographics of recipients, who often have to work multiple jobs to make ends meet even with assistance, or the safeguards in place to prevent abuse. Not to mention that even children born to parents so degenerate still deserve to eat food.

          What about retiree benefits? Besides the fact that these people literally worked their entire lives to earn these “entitlements”, no one wanting to win elections would date attack the elderly voting block this way.

          Nope, he wants to cut spending on “entitlements”, and that’s as far as his explanation will go.

          1. I made no implication explicitly, or implicitly, about wanting any cuts. My comment was simply based on the fact that the percentage of the budget that is hardwired for entitlement programs has increased significantly (they accounted for about 2/3 of the 2014 budget). In fact, your comments, and the tone, reenforces what I said. Namely, those currently receiving these entitlements get very angry if there is any hint of cuts (or, more precisely, any decrease in the increase they expect). There are also the problems several of the large entitlement programs have which will likely require even more funding (this includes the VA as well as medicare/medicaid). Consequently, it is almost certain that the percentage for entitlements in the budget will just get larger. Hence, there will be a corresponding decrease in discretionary spending.

    1. It doesn’t.

      The interview with General Hayden (former director of the NSA and CIA) on Charlie Rose (Tuesday night, PBS, USA) was fascinating as he agrees that what the FBI is asking of Apple is BAD for US security. I’m waiting for video clips of the interview to go online.

      Meanwhile, here’s a transcript of an interview with General Hayden from February 22nd:


      . . . My judgement, in this particular case is that universal backdoors, although ti may facilitate American law enforcement for very good purposes, on balance, on balance, actually are an overall negative for American security, not just American privacy.

      When someone this expert in the field says the FBI is wrong…

      1. Watched it and indeed it was fascinating.

        The lights are burning but there’s nobody home anymore, as the Daily News headline read afew weeks ago after Trump’s NH primary- “Dawn of the Brain Dead” …

        1. I wouldn’t call Trump ‘brain dead’. More specifically I’d call him a smart man LOST in games. He has very dim insight into actual reality. Everything he says is from the perspective of whatever game he is playing in his head at any moment of time. Imagine having a game addicted kid, albeit a smart kid, in charge of the USA, in the greatest position of power in the world. The result would be utter disaster. He’d sit there among the ruins of his creation wondering what went wrong. What went wrong was his ability to live in the REAL WORLD, IRL. Let’s hope he remains mere entertainment. Gawd help us if he’s elected to President. Pray he isn’t elected. Pray We The People as a whole have greater perspective on reality than he has, enough to throw him out of presidential contention.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.