> I'm not aware of a single case where Apple on-the-record promised to customers anything so abstract.

Then it would seem that my original statement is correct, no?

"cannot" and "has not" have different meanings.

Apple cannot promise human rights to all of their customers. They can believe in certain things (eg. "gay marriage" or "privacy is a human right") but they will forsake these values when enough money is put on the table. This is because (as the parent originally said) Apple's foremost priority is money; we can smile and pretend these things don't butt-up against each other, but then you have to justify things like Apple's Chinese Mainland policy. They do not co-exist peacefully, greed has consistently cannibalized them without a second thought.

Did you intend to reply to a different comment?

This doesn't seem relevant to my last 2 comments.