The Pros And Cons Of Edward Snowden

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?

Is anyone’s private information contained in their cell phone actually private? Are appointments, bank information, conversations, the user’s location or other sensitive personal information truly confidential? Is there a Big Brother watching? There is no definitive answer to any of these questions. From the beginning of time to now, privacy has become more and more scarce. Through new developments in technology, it is hard to believe that someone is not watching your move at any given moment. The government’s job is to keep Americans safe, but where is the line drawn? Where is the difference between having a reasonable doubt and accessing information solely because these government officials have the power to do so? The government has infringed upon the rights of the American people when it comes to this topic.

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 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]

The NSA, or National Security Agency, is an American government intelligence agency responsible for collecting data on other countries and sometimes on American citizens in order to protect the country from outside risks. They can collect anything from the people’s phone data to their browser history and use it against them in the court of law. Since the catastrophes of September 11 attacks, the NSA’s surveillance capabilities have grown with the benefit of George W. Bush and the Executive Branch (Haugen 153). This decision has left a country divided for fifteen years, with people who agree that the NSA should be strengthened and others who think their powers should be limited or terminated. Although strengthening NSA surveillance may help the

The misuse of our personal information collected by private and public institutions has made privacy, or the lack of it, a major societal concern today. One of the biggest reasons privacy has become such an issue is the enactment of the “Patriot Act”, signed into law in reaction to the attacks on 9/11/2001. This act broadened the ability for the US government to collect surveillance on people in order to protect against terrorism inside the US. Critiques say it violates our civil liberties and undermines our democracy. One example of this is the collection and storage of phone data by the government under the Patriot Act. Is this an invasion of privacy? In order to keep society safe, a certain amount of private information has to be known by Law Enforcement. In order to collect taxes and for society to function, the government also needs some information. Collecting basic information isn’t an invasion of privacy, but the collection phone data is too intrusive. Can the public trust the government to not miss-use or lose the information they have on them?

In past law enforcers could pull phone information without probable cause which means telecommunications industry used to be more cooperative with law enforcement. But now there have been many changes. Knutson, Gryta, Barrett (2014) write on the article that AT&T Inc. said federal investigators might need a warrant to gather data about cellphone user’s location, challenging the more permissive legal framework the government has used for year. This means law enforcers will need probable cause to get warrant from a judge before pulling phone records from carriers like AT&T. Although phone records helps to locate suspects and gather evidences, pulling

However state and federal judges across the country have made conflicting rulings on what standards are required for the government to obtain tracking information from cell phone companies. Then there should a be law that the government should need a warrant to access your cellphones records and obtain data from the cell phone proproviders.The federal government's position is that it should be able to get most of this data if it decides it is relevant to an investigation, with no need for a search warrant. But then where does our privacy stops how would we know we're safe and our personal business is not out

The NSA program, uncovered by the former CIA agent and former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, is called Prism. Snowden, while working for the NSA disclosed this information by leaking this classified information to a web site called The Guardian. The fact that the information was classified means that the NSA had no intention of telling the citizens of the USA about its ability to monitor and record this great amount of data. This program while legally not able to record the conversation in the of a phone call can detect and record the number who is making the call, the number being called, the duration of the call, and, if necessary, the cellular tower used to send the call. This is intruding upon a huge portion of what most people consider personal, private data. (The Guardian)

In an article published by “Opposing Viewpoints,” Michael Reagan, son of former president Ronald Reagan, wrote that “If found guilty [Bradley Manning and Julian Assange] deserve nothing less than death sentences for their unspeakable crimes.” Bradley Manning, a private in the United States Army released classified information to Julian Assange, the editor of the controversial Wikileaks website. Reagan suggests that if America had a president stronger willed than president Obama, Julian Assange and Bradley Manning would be found guilty of treason and be “stood up before a firing squad.” The release of classified information by Pvt. Bradley Manning, Reagan argues, gave aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States. “By [Manning and Assange’s]

Every move you make on the Internet can be recorded step by step, website to website. While researching articles on internet surveillance one said how US government has been forcing American telecommunication companies to turn over the call records of every one of their customers to allow the NSA to search them with a reason.(Glenn Greenwald. NSA collecting phone…). However I find this completely wrong, the government shouldn’t be having our call records unless they have some sort of evidence that we are a suspect or threat to this country. It also mentioned how the “NSA believes this general monitoring of our electronic communications is justified because the entire process takes a small amount of seconds”.(Glenn Greenwald. NSA collecting phone…). Despite the general illusion that today’s surveillance technology is used for a good purpose, people should be aware of the consequences when it’s used in the wrong

Many of the NSA’s goals have been completely contradicted by the leaked files. Their first goal, to protect privacy rights, was a complete joke. The Fourth amendment states that there should be no unreasonable searches or seizures. Collecting people’s metadata that isn’t public violates this right, not achieving their first goal. Their second goal, protecting vital networks, is also ambiguous. Since the NSA uses the zero day exploits, and since the companies they get the exploits from sell them, The NSA is letting the hacks be used. Another problem with this statement is that it says “vital networks”. How would US citizens know what the NSA considers vital. Were Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state’s emails not vital enough to protect? There

Every day, the government believes it is acceptable to continue invading and searching our personal e-mails, messages, accounts, etc. Although they have the authority as a government, they do not have the right to invade our privacy as the 4th amendment states “The right of the people to be secure in

Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency (N.S.A) subcontractor turned whistle-blower is nothing short of a hero. His controversial decision to release information detailing the highly illegal ‘data mining’ practices of the N.S.A have caused shockwaves throughout the world and have raised important questions concerning how much the government actually monitors its people without their consent or knowledge. Comparable to Mark Felt in the Watergate scandals, Daniel Ellsberg with the Pentagon Papers, Edward Snowden joins the rank of infamous whistleblowers who gave up their jobs, livelihood, and forever will live under scrutiny of the public all in the service to the American people. Edward Snowden released information detailing the