Snowden's Argumentative Essay

In 2011, he was awarded Ridenhour Prize for TruthTelling and was co-recipient of Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) award. As we progress into this paper, we will discuss various stages of this crime such as what were his actions in NSA, NSA inquiry and acknowledgement, Inevitable Whistleblowing, FBI raids, Indictment, Court proceedings, Government arguments, final disposition, what happened since 2012. In this paper we will also discuss the Espionage act and Whistleblowing, what is a part of the McCarran Internal Security Act and what was the Nation Defense information, classified information which was mishandled by Thomas Andrew Drake.

Snowden and Senator Rand Paul oppose the Patriot Act because they both feel that it violates our 4th Amendment. The Patriot Act entitles allows inferior agencies to unreasonable searches and seizures of a person’s house and papers. The 4th Amendment protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant from a judge. The Patriot act allow the Federal Government to violate this amendment. In fact, when the Patriot Act enables violation of the 4th Amendment of the Bill of Rights, Amendments 1 and 2 are also violated. It infringes on our right to bear arms and the freedom of speech. Our government makes shallow promises to protect us during times of crisis, such as terrorist attacks, but what do we give up? They offer us freedom

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.

The subsequent analyses of this case study can be categorised as such: the use of the Espionage Act in the case of Chelsea Manning, and the use of Wikileaks and how that impacts the development in the means of releasing information. This case study is significant in the assessment of both the Espionage Act and the evolution of whistle blowers. This section will support this in consideration of the argument of this dissertation which is that with the evolution of what is understood to be a political whistle blower and with changes in the means to do so, the outdated Espionage Act of 1917 must be adapted in response to these changes. Despite still being used to prosecute, it is too broad to be effective. Debates about using Espionage Act

Edward Snowden “is the world’s most famous spy, whistleblower, and fugitive, responsible for the biggest intelligence breach in recent US History” (MacAskill 2013). Snowden leaked documents to journalist that exposed the partners of the United States, it’s spy agencies, and domestic surveillance of citizens out of the country. He leaked the information because he believed the public people should be the voice on whether or not the policies were moral or immoral. Just like Henry Thoreau, Snowden believed that the people should do what they believe is right for themselves and not follow the orders of the government if they believe the laws and policies are unjust.

In my Own Belief Peaceful resistance to laws That are meant to Discriminate. Against a group of people or promote Advantages Among the people in charge. Are meant to happen because They Help us Promote an even Fairer and Better Society for Everyone. All Civil Disobedience Leaders From Martin Luther King Jr, To Nelson Mandela, To Rosa Parks, and Mahatma Gandhi. All worked For the Betterment of society as a whole

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

Edward Snowden worked Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), he copied NSA’s surveillance confidential material in May 2013 and planned to leak the information. He knows if he leaked in the U.S. will be arrested, so he gets an excuse leaving the U.S and leaked out the information of NSA in Hong Kong. He leaked out the surveillance of NSA is a traitor for the U.S government because he betrayed the NSA and he has the respond keep secret. The information of surveillance he revealed cause the NSA in hard time deal with terrorist and the country has crisis in position of world. In the opposite, he is a hero for the civics because he revealed the facts of the NSA surveillance, people’s privacy surveillance through phone and internet all the time.

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,”

In 2013, it was revealed by Edward Snowden that the National Security Agency (NSA) was spying on the public through tapping phones and internet records. Snowden encountered an ethical dilemma when he had to choose between being loyal to his employer and informing the public about the mass surveillance. While the intentions of the NSA were to keep the American public safe, their method of mass surveillance is a violation of people’s privacy and ineffective at stopping crime. This can be explained by examining who Edward Snowden is, why he exposed the mass surveillance scandal, and what exactly the mass surveillance scandal was. Edward Snowden worked as a system administrator for the NSA, where he was exposed to a lot of the NSA’s secrets and documents (Greenwald 2015:

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.

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?

The ethical issues involving Edward Snowden’s case encompass key issues of morality. Snowden’s actions are to be interpreted as right or wrong based on the circumstances and personal reasoning. The preceding interpretation is this case in every ethical quandary. Once these issues are assimilated to the affected parties we begin to understand the larger picture of morality and ethical reasoning in Snowden’s case.

One of the major reasons why whistleblowing is no longer applicable is the fact that it does not fairly cover enough number of people. Taking into consideration the case of Edward Snowden who was a contractor of the National Security Agency and revealed a huge amount of information of the different surveillance programs of the government to the press. He presented the extensive phone and internet surveillance of the American intelligence for an estimated of tens of millions Americans (National Security n.p.). In Snowden’s case, the public is focusing on the whistleblower rather than the massive information he revealed. There are two opposing opinions about the case of Snowden wherein one side considers him as a hero while the other considers him as a traitor. For this reason, the supporters of Snowden argue that the Whistleblowing Act does not fairly evaluate the case of each individual since Snowden was charged as a criminal who violates Espionage Act of 1917 and a theft of the government

In this paper, I will argue against government surveillance advocates. In recent years, many whistleblowers have come forward with information concerning government surveillance activities. These activities appear to be putting citizens’ right to privacy at risk, because of that, many have been trying to figure out the intent of such acts.