“Edward Snowden should be pardoned for leaking classified information.”
It is my opinion that Edward Snowden should be pardoned for leaking classified information. Snowden found himself in a unique position to confirm and provide proof of pre-existing suspicions by the American citizens towards their Government. Snowden was not the first whistle blower. He just happened to have top secret “privileged” access to classified information and documents as an infrastructure analyst working for the NSA. Some of his titles in his career over time included System Administrator, System Engineer, System Officer, and he had held positions in the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency. He obtained documents that confirmed that for the cost of “security” American citizens unknowingly lost they rights to liberty and freedom over time. Snowden felt a sense of responsibility to inform American citizens of the existence of programs and policies that have been developed under
…show more content…
Similarly, it can not be proved that the top secret programs and policies have ever served their intended purpose – to protect the United States against international threats both foreign and domestic and against terrorist attacks. The government protects itself by claiming that because information was collected on everyone, no one person was discriminated against so they can not be charged for invasion of privacy. Glen Greenwald stated that “people are thinking differently about the extent to which they are willing to trust the United States Government to operate under this extreme cloak of secrecy behind which they have operated, for a long time but certainly since 9/11 when it intensified greatly. I agree that a presidential pardon would help “resolve a glaring contradiction in how the White House has dealt with the alleged crimes by national security
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
Recently in global news, the name Edward Snowden has became quite popular as he snatched millions of people’s attention along with breaking news headlines. Snowden released numerous documents via internet that were private to the NSA; these leaks revealed the dirty work the NSA and government have ...
After September 11th, Americans looked to the government for protection and reassurance. However, they did not expect to find out thirteen years later that the government did this by using technology to spy on Americans, as well as other countries. George W. Bush began the policy shortly after the terrorist attack and Barack Obama continued it. There have been many confrontations over the years about the extent of the N.S.A.’s spying; however, the most recent whistle-blower, Edward Snowden, leaked information that caused much upset throughout America (EFF). It has also brought many people to question: is he a hero or a traitor?
With the introduction of the internet being a relatively new phenomenon, the act of cyber espionage is not something that has been properly acknowledged by society. The American Government has done a stand up job of keeping its methods in the shadows and away from the eyes of its people since its documented domestic surveillance began on October 4th, 2001; Twenty three days after the Twin Towers fell President George Bush signed an order to begin a secret domestic eavesdropping operation, an operation which was so sensitive that even many of the country's senior national security officials with the...
Yes, legally Edward Snowden did break a law however, when the law he broke is looked at it makes people a little uneasy. Legally Edward Snowden broke the U.S Espionage act however, when looked at this law it seems a little unsettling to people. Under this act, no person shall let the American people know of any kind of government affair (PoliticalUSA). No matter what it is, no matter what it could mean for the American people, or no matter who horrible it is, if that organization of government doesn’t want people to know than legally then no person no matter who it is shall tell. This law is extremely dangerous in the hands of people who will abuse its power, which has already been proven is the U.S government. This allows them to be able to get away with anything they please no matter what. They can go about the horrible things that they are doing in secrecy but, this law allows them to be able to get away with it. They are doing things that the American people need to know however, under this act it allows them to do it. A lot of people think that this is okay because, they don’t want people telling important American military strategies to the wrong people. However, this act and those wishes are two very different things that they are trying to cover up. Military strategies do need to be able to kept secret because, our troops do need to be able to keep safe overseas fighting for our country. This however, is having whatever they do become such an important thing. Things like the NSA spying on its own citizens are being throw under the rug. This act, which was passed during 1917 during the first world war, goes against the first amendment (OWS). The first amendment states that no law should be passed that diminishes a person’s right to free speech, right to free religion, and freedom of speech. However, the espionage act is somehow in affect in todays world and
...ary of 2013 demonstrated that the government's claims that over fifty terrorist threats had been averted (Bruce, 2013) were misleading and that it was standard investigative procedures, such as informants, tip offs and targeted operations that yielded positive results in nearly all cases. The NSA input was minimal and that only 1.8% of cases where initiated by its mass data collection programs. (Bergen et al., 2014)These inefficiencies are what Matthew Duffin; assistant professor at Utah Valley University believes are unethical. (Archner, 2014)
In early June 2013, Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former defense contractor who had access to NSA database while working for an intelligence consulting company, leaked classified documents reports that the National Security Agency (NSA) is recording phone calls of millions of Americans along with gathering private data and spying foreign Internet activity. The Washington Post later broke the news disclosed PRISM, a program can collect data on Internet users. The leaked documents publicly stated a vast objection. Many people were shocked by the scale of the programs, even elected representatives were unaware of the surveillance range. A nationwide debate over privacy rights have been sparked. Although supporters claim that the NSA only does its best to protect the United States from terrorists as well as respecting Americans' rights and privacy, many civil rights advocates feel that the government failed to be clear about the limit of the surveillance programs, threatening Americans' civil...
In short, Edward Snowden released information that the United States government was keeping secret. His most recent job, where he compiled most of the information for his breach, included working for Booz Allen Hamilton at the National Security Agency in Hawaii (the biggest security establishment in the world). Snowden, as reason for his security breach said “I don’t want to live in a society that does these sorts of things.” In this statement he refers to the immense secrets that the U.S. government is keeping from its people. So, the debate still goes on: Yes Edward Snowden broke the law, but was it for a good reason?
Rather than allow the numerous repercussions Snowden now faces stop him, Snowden chose to make the public aware of wrongs committed against them, even if it meant going against the government. The American people and their right to their privacy drove Edward Snowden to make a personal decision, and the result was not that of a traitor, but that of a hero and a man undeserving of the hatred and rejection made by the country he was striving to support.
Many people have mixed feelings about how they should differentiate Edward Snowden as a hero or a traitor. It is true what he had done was unjust and could have been handled another way without all the drama and getting nicknamed traitor by many and hero by few. His act on the NSA forced him into making a deal with Russia to stay at an asylum for a year, because some people in Russia believed in what he had done and did not doubt him unlike some people who thought of Snowden as a traitor to the government. There has been many polls, articles and interviews on Edward Snowden and how people thinks about his act of “exposing” the NSA for spying into the citizens personal life. Some may differ with Snowden by saying, what the NSA is doing is to protect the pe...
Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of what the ‘law is”, causing a lack of circulated rule. The actual leaders with political purposes jeopardize our individual privacy rights, liberties, and freedoms.
The American government used to be able to keep the people in happy ignorance to the fact that they watch every move they make. After certain revelations of people like Edward Snowden, the public knows the extent of the government spying. On June 5, 2013 Edward Snowden leaked documents of the NSA to the Guardian (The Guardian 2). The whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed to the world how the American government collects information like cell phone metadata, Internet history, emails, location from phones, and more. President Obama labeled the man a traitor because he showed the world the illegal acts the NSA performs on US citizens (Service of Snowden 1). The government breached the people’s security, and now the people are afraid because everyone is aware of how the US disapproves of people who do not agree with their programs. Obama said that these programs find information about terrorists living in the US, but he has lit...
Edward Snowden. This is a name that will be in the history books for ages. He will be branded a traitor or a whistleblower depending on where you look. Many Americans feel that Edward Snowden is a traitor who sold the United States’ secrets aiming to harm the nation. Others believe that he was simply a citizen of the United States who exercised his right to expose the government for their unconstitutional actions. It is important to not only know the two sides to the argument of friend or foe, but to also know the facts as well. My goal in this paper is to present the facts without bias and to adequately portray the two sides of the argument.
In conclusion, Edward Snowden was justified in leaking the unlawful actions conducted by the NSA because he wanted to uphold the constitutional rights of privacy, which Americans are entitled to. While few may view Edward Snowden as a traitor for sharing sensitive information to the public, many commend him for his courageousness. Snowden broke the law in order to expose the unlawful practices conducted by governments officials. It is unfortunate to live in a society where the people elected to protect the rights of the people are the ones violating them.. It takes a lot of strength and courage for one man to stand up against the government, to protect the rights of an entire nation. Edward Snowden will go down in history as one of the most notorious whistle blowers