Ignore the crypto approach for a minute. The issue is responsibility. If we aren't responsible directly for the crimes our government commits, who is. People look at the scale of the problem, the difficulty of the solution, and decide because it's too difficult, it's not worth doing. Why? Because they haven't really accepted responsibly. Our government is invading other nations on false pretense... what have you or I done in return? Shouldn't the wheels screech to a halt at this point? Why didn't they? Because no one is responsible to inact a solution we actually believe in, because all of the solutions require too much damn work.
There was a comment below to the effect of "If only terrorist targeted the real problem instead of innocent civilians...", I don't think the comment was meant as sarcastic, which just depresses me further.
You don't plant a tree underneath a power line then blame the tree for doing what's expected, known, and in their nature.
#edit, I shall elaborate as I know I sound crazy.
Think about software, the employees complain for more time to refactor, the boss continues driving forward with feature creep and reactionary programming/patching/hotfixing. The developers are just as responsible for the quality for the software and will have to support the decisions. Instead of putting their job on the line to stop this behavior before it's too late, they grunt, complain, and meet their silly deadlines. Fast forward a few years, the company cannot keep talented developers, simple new features take years, now the developers are ready to either quit or put their foot down, but now it's way too late, bad choices in data partitioning, scheme design, etc, now you need a complete rewrite. See how the solution scales with the problem?
To me, the problem is out of hand, so naturally people will start trying to start doing what should have been done a long time ago, except it's too late, and the actual solution is still met with "well, no, but I'll do the easier version now".