I believe the conclusion of the article is the most important takeaway: (so, points for good writing, I guess :) )<p>&gt; Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell said he suspects the Paris attacks will weigh heavily on the encryption fight ongoing.<p>&gt; “I think what we’re going to learn is that these guys are communicating via these encrypted apps, the commercial encryption, which is very difficult, if not impossible, for governments to break, and the producers of which don’t produce the keys necessary for law enforcement to read the encrypted messages,” Morell said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday.<p>&gt; “We need to have a public debate about this,” he continued. “We have in a sense had a public debate — that debate was defined by Edward Snowden, and the concern about privacy. I think we’re now going to have another debate about that — it’s going to be defined by what happened in Paris.”<p>So, &quot;They&quot; want to misuse the attacks on Paris as an excuse to attract mind and screen-time for an alternative counter-debate about privacy and encryption. But Snowden got to &quot;define the debate&quot; because of the new information (as well as evidence for old information) he brought to the public, it&#x27;s an entirely different thing if you&#x27;re a politician grabbing screen-time and &quot;define the debate&quot; to a shocked audience over a terror-attack--which is exactly what the terrorists&#x27; want. Any freedoms or security taken away from us as a response to a terror-attack, is a win for the terrorists.