Edward Snowden A Gallant Whistle Blower Or Traitor

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?

Edward Snowden is considered by many to be a criminal, but there are others who firmly believe that Edward Snowden is a patriot, and rightfully so Edward Snowden is a hero to the American people and many abroad. The United States government has the responsibility to serve, protect and aid the American people, but sometimes the government and some of its classified documents every now and then get published and criticized. Edward Snowden had worked for multiple government agencies such as the CIA, NSA and prior to that an American contractor as a computer professional, and during his tenure at the NSA he had realized the grotesque and unprofessional ethics and violations of privacy against the American people, and so many innocent citizens

The general public gives an problem with the government surveillance as a media for invading others privacy. With the government monitoring, collecting, and retaining people's personal data, one side would claim that it is an infringement of their freedom to the rights to privacy. While the National security associations justifies the reason for monitoring would be to maintain order. Their ways to maintain order would be to monitor criminal and terrorist activity and to detect incoming threats, terrorists, or problems that would harm their country. This issue shows that freedom cannot exist without order. Although the general public wants their freedom of their privacy, they can not achieve their most of their desires because it puts their lives at risk without protection. Order is necessary in order to have freedom. It is impossible to attain entire freedom for a cause, however, it is possible to attain freedom to a certain

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.

Another issue in this case is the “theft” that Snowden partook in. Theft is the “act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny” ("Theft | Define Theft at Dictionary.com." xx). This aspect of the case is important because Snowden’s actions reject the cultural norms of what is expected of individuals in respect to the term. These expectations within our culture is for individuals to not commit acts of theft.

Edward Snowden is a whistleblower from the 21st century. Snowden was a man who had outstanding IT skills and eventually landed a job at the NSA. He gained access to numerous files that showed the crimes the NSA was committing against its own people and against other countries as well. They were spying on people’s privacy and claimed that it was for the national security that would benefit all people. Snowden said that he could not let this

It has been more than seventy years since the release of George Orwell’s 1984, a novel that imparts a lesson on the consequences of government overreach. However, today that novel reads like an exposé of government surveillance. Privacy and national security are two ideas competing for value on a balance; if one is more highly valued, the other carries less weight. Government desire to bolster national security by spying on its own citizens-- even the law abiding ones-- is what leads to the inverse relationship between civil liberties and security. In times of a perceived threat to the nation, national security becomes highly prized and people lose privacy. One case is terrorist attacks. 9/11 caused an understandable kneejerk reaction in Americans to bolster protection. Some of the the measures taken were observable, like greater security at airports, but others attempted to increase national security in a more intrusive way. Privacy should be more highly valued than national security, and America has reached a point where that is no longer true.

I am not too familiar with Snowden, besides the headlines he made a few years back, which state that he released information about the NSA domestic surveillance activities. I don’t think he is a traitor to the country, because he released the truth, that we are being monitored.

Therefore, Snowden’s true intentions are evident by his rash decision to trade significant information to other countries in return for his financial and personal safety. This is not surprising of “A grandiose narcissist,” who saw an opportunity for fame under the excuse of “serving his country” (Toobin 1). Moreover, any educated individual knows that “the entire mission of the agency is to intercept electronic communications” (Toobin 1). Therefore, Snowden can be characterized as a villain because he not only disrupted a legal process because of his ignorance but also sabotaged his own homeland. As can be seen, Snowden is, above all, a traitor; he deserves to be punished for his irresponsible, illegal, and rash action. If his idea was doing what is morally right, then he could have achieved it legally inside his own country, even if it took twice as long. That is what heroes do; they don’t inflict damage on their nation and simply run away from reality. If the

Ever since the American public was made aware of the United States government’s surveillance policies, it has been a hotly debated issue across the nation. In 2013, it was revealed that the NSA had, for some time, been collecting data on American citizens, in terms of everything from their Internet history to their phone records. When the story broke, it was a huge talking point, not only across the country, but also throughout the world. The man who introduced Americans to this idea was Edward Snowden.

In light to all the controversy over the Edward Snowden NSA leaks, people are in conflict when deciding on the issue of Edward Snowden being a whistleblower and hero, or just a traitor to the United States. I feel that Edward Snowden should be known as an American hero because he brought to light government secret programs, acted courageously, and caused government law reforms to take effect as a result of his actions. Snowden was a former CIA technical assistant, and more recently worked for the NSA as a defense contractor under an outside contracting company Booz Allen Hamilton. As a result of his position at these various government agencies, he had access to a vast plain of information regarding intelligence gathering and data collection.

4). Edward Snowden to many is considered a whistle blower which is a person who informs people of organization or people doing illicit acts. One of the many results that Edwards Snowden acts caused some country’s to lose trust in the United States and are cautious of the United States spying on them.

On December 2012, who was an ordinary NSA contractor later committed one of the biggest leaks in government history. Afterwards, Edward Snowden officially became known to the public as a “whistleblower.” In reality, rather than being identified as a traitor who has damaged American security, wouldn’t Edward Snowden be viewed as a patriot for defending civil liberties? Nonetheless, I personally view Snowden as a patriot for being truthful to the people of this country. This is because many Americans had already been skeptical of the role the government in the involvement of their technology. Snowden’s actions had only verified their suspicions. Snowden disclosed the information to the public that the U.S government has been invading the privacy

Critics of Edward Snowden label him a traitor and a coward. They condemn him for irreparably harming government security operations and setting of a worldwide chain of events that weakened the American position on the world stage. While America now has blight on its records due to the leaks, the topic that should be addressed is should the whistle-blower, the man who uncovered and exposed the questionable and wrong activities, be blamed or should those who allowed the illegal and immoral activities be held accountable for what they started. Edward Snowden had the justification and conviction to do the correct thing and present the incriminating evidence straight to the public. When one takes in consideration everything that Snowden has lost because of his decision, there was little gain for him to make the immoral activities public. Snowden’s crime is breaching the trust of his government contract to expose egregious monitoring by the government on the American public. In an interview conducted by the Washington Post, Snowden speaks out about his goal in releasing the files: “All I wanted was for the public to be able to have a say in how they are governed,”

Privacy has endured throughout human history as the pillar upon which our authentic nature rests. Yet, in an age darkened by the looming shadow of terrorism, another force threatens to dominate the skyline and obscure the light of liberty behind promises of safety and security: government surveillance. As an employee of the NSA, Edward Snowden broke his vow of secrecy to inform the public of our government’s furtive surveillance acts, but does this render him traitorous? To answer this, we must first ask ourselves, traitorous to whom? When the very institution established to protect our fundamental liberties intrudes on our privacy from behind a veil of secrecy, should such informed individuals resign from judicious autonomy and