The Pros And Cons Of Bradley Manning

Bradley Manning had access to confidential files and record as an Army intelligence analyst in Iraq. In the year 2010, Manning revealed confidential information to the website called WikiLeaks. The material contained various sensitive information such as videos of the July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike, and the 2009 Granai airstrike in Afghanistan; 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables; and 500,000 Army reports that came to be known as the Iraq War logs and Afghan War logs. The majority of this information was published by the website WikiLeaks or the like. Bradley Manning’s case was somewhat complex because he didn’t initially express his reasoning for doing this and he appeared to have indiscriminately released numerous amounts of government records. Manning’s defense lawyer claimed that WikiLeaks is a valid media outlet, while the opposition claims that Manning was not a whistleblower leaking to a news outlet, but just a fame-seeker who released the information indiscriminately for his own purposes. ("What Bradley Manning Leaked.") Whether WikiLeaks is a valid reporting and journalistic media outlet or not, the case unfolded as the United States’ government began to scrutinize all media and information disclosures to the public.

Furthermore, Edward Snowden had done more than disclose the governments illegals acts, but also inform the world about programs and secret government agendas about how much freedom and privacy is being taken away in the name of security. Samuel Adams also once said, “The truth is, all might be free if they valued freedom, and defended it as they ought.” In this sense, Edward Snowden had valued freedom more so over anything against it, and had acted as he did fighting and defending his individual freedom. Edward Snowden had also fought for the truth, and not only exposed the government, but also to the American people what was happening to their rights and freedoms. The many stories and historical freedom fighters had even put their lives on the line for truth and liberty, and Edward Snowden had also done the same and succeeding in continuing the fight for freedom. Many who also who perceive Edward Snowden as a hero inspire them to do the same as he had, and exposing the government of their false truths and secrecy.

The question of whether WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, whose organization can be credited with releasing thousands of classified documents from various countries, is a hero or a villain depends entirely on one’s political opinions. Those who believe in transparent government and freedom of speech/publishing would call Assange a hero. Those who believe governments must have some secrecy from citizens would call him a villain. As a believer in the ideals America was founded on it is clear that Assange’s actions are heroic. He is fighting to keep the average citizen informed of any corruption within their government, fighting for the mainstream press to stop supporting the government’s views on

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.

I do agree that Tom Brady is unethical if indeed he did deflate these balls. However in this situation even if he is proven to be innocent then his charter will still be questioned as he was brought into this situation. For a leader to break the rules it defiantly questions his ethics in his career and in his life. With this it brings so many questions. Has he ever cheated on a game, how long has this been going on and if he did this then what else did he do to win? Since he was accused of this I feel that his charter will always be in question. I feel that he has no courage is in question as it now seems that he feels that he has to cheat to win. I also feel that he has lost his honor by doing this even if he didn’t do it he is still a suspect

It was a freezing night, with snow glazing over the three-hundred and sixty foot field. The previously undefeated Patriots stood like goliath, immune to death glares and “boos” echoing around the Denver stadium. The swirl of the snow made it difficult to see exactly where the ball was, but near the end of the night, it was clear that the Broncos would soon defeat their giant, all the while being lead by an intrepid, young quarterback. This astonishing win wasn’t just a victory for the Broncos, but for Brock Osweiler as well.

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.

Today, electronic surveillance remains one of the most effective tools the United States has to protect against foreign powers and groups seeking to inflict harm on the nation, but it does not go without a few possessing a few negative aspects either. Electronic surveillance of foreign intelligence has likely saved the lives of many innocent people through prevention of potential acts of aggression towards the United States. There are many pros to the actions authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) pertaining to electronic surveillance, but there are also cons. Looking at both the pros and cons of electronic surveillance is important in understanding the overall effectiveness of FISA. [1]

In this essay I will discuss the pros and the cons of the Patriot Act, how it affected the lives of US citizens and the world, and whether or not it fits within our democratic form of government. The Patriot Act was a rapidly drafted and approved Act of Congress which was intended to increase the security of US citizens by combatting terrorism. Although granting increased security to an extent, the Act was and still is extremely controversial due to certain parts of the Act limiting the freedoms of American citizens. The Patriot Act enhanced the government’s ability to spy on their own people, and with far fewer restrictions, so many people were and still are disgusted, but many others completely agree with it. Millions of people, billions across the world have a historical trend of being happy to sacrifice their freedoms for increased security. The controversy lies with how more safe are you in comparison to how much of your freedom you have to give up, and that compromise is weighed vastly different for individuals across the world. Did the Patriot Act save enough lives to warrant what it cost, or did it inhibit the lives of too many people to be allowed to continue. The answer will always be disputed and weighing each side will be a very difficult task.

Growing up, Snowden’s principles were deeply influenced by his father. An active member of the U.S. military through his work in the Coast Guard, he was trained to dutifully uphold the Constitution, and instilled this same ideal in his son (Harding, 2014).

The Internet is one of the most widespread ways to exchange data, and a website called WikiLeaks has received a great amount of attention from the knowledge it releases. The details they give are known to be confidential and provide society with an inside view on what is really happening behind of the closed doors of the federal government. The site is based on the “belief that a more transparent government will bring better consequences for all, and that leaking information has an inherent tendency toward greater justice” (Singer 465). WikiLeaks gives its readers a way to honestly know all the significant facts and records that are purposefully kept away from

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,”

While working for the NSA, Snowden became aware of their extensive trespasses against the privacy of U.S. and international citizens alike. Upon considering the extent of these trespasses, Snowden felt that it was his moral duty, as he stated, “to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them”. His provided information showed the use of Internet surveillance programs, and the evaluation of phone records in the form of “metadata”. Many argue that Snowden’s leaking of information has hindered our government’s ability to intercept terrorist plots, by informing the world of the NSA’s capabilities, and therefore allowing terrorist groups to plot attacks beyond the reach of U.S. surveillance. In light of this, Snowden’s leak has indeed made us more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, but does this justify the NSA’s chosen use of power? Since Snowden’s revelations, it has become evident that the NSA consistently uses their surveillance abilities to unjustified ends. One function of the NSA’s electronic data analysis is to find targets for the military’s Joint Special Operations Command to strike with lethal drone attacks. Many innocent civilians in middle-eastern countries have lost their lives as a result of this military sect’s reliance on the NSA’s data, rather than human correspondence. According to an anonymous former drone-operator, the victims of these attacks “might have been terrorists, or they could have been

In early 2013 a man by the name of Edward Joseph Snowden began leaking classified National Security Agency (NSA) documents to media outlets, which in turn ended up in public ears. These documents, mainly involving intelligence Snowden acquired while working as an NSA contractor, are mostly related to global surveillance programs run by the NSA. This has raised multiple ethical issues ranging from national security, information privacy and the ethics behind whistleblowing in general. The reach and impact of these leaks have gone global and have put in question the very government that protects us as well as the extent of the public’s rights on privacy. Various foreign

“You can't have 100% security and then also have 100% privacy and zero inconvenience. Society had to make choices” said President Obama. It has become a given in society that it is on the government’s agenda to procure its nation’s safety in exchange of the privacy or freedom of the people. Edward Snowden, a paladin of social justice, has now come to light with outstanding facts as for what specifically it is that the National Security Agency (NSA) is able and willing to do for the country’s sake. Snowden, a 29-year-old NSA ex-employee, worked from Hawaii on his computer support for the recollection of data in bulk from the whole nation . Under the name of Verax, which means truth teller in Latin, he