Yes. It Was Ethical For Mander To Expose Both The Fbi And

Throughout its more than hundred year history, the Federal Bureau of Investigations has been a very important agency to the United States. As a threat-based and intelligence-driven national security organization, the mission of the FBI is to protect and defend the United States against terrorist and foreign intelligence threats, to enforce the criminal laws of the United States, and to provide leadership to federal, state, and international agencies (“A Brief History of the FBI”). The Bureau’s success has always depended on its agility, its willingness to adapt, and the ongoing dedication of its personnel. But in the years since

Edward Snowden isn’t the only person who believes what the U.S. had done was wrong, but also many American leaders, and other nations around the world. The United States had not only been collecting data on their own citizens, but also of other countries leaders and citizens. The release of these documents had strained political relationships between the U.S. and other allied nations. The knowledge and truth other leaders and nations had gained

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.

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.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has the reputation as the world’s premier law enforcement agency with a vision to stay ahead of the threat through leadership, agility, and integration. (FBI's Strategy, 2017). As an intelligence-driven and threat-focused national security organization, the mission of the FBI is to protect the American people by upholding the Constitution of the United States, defend the US against terrorist and foreign intelligence threats; uphold and enforce the criminal laws of the US; and provide leadership and guidance of criminal justice services to federal, state, municipal, international agencies and partners. (Today's FBI Facts & Figures, 2014).

In the 21st century, the world as we know it suffers from psychotic, demented, treacherous and, sophisticated crimes. This world would be corrupt without a tunnel of light if it was not for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, also known as the FBI, is a corporation that seeks fidelity, bravery and, integrity for the United States of America. The FBI researches shocking and concerning crimes the news reports about politics, war and, safety that we hear on the television about issues that are being reported to the people. These cases of transgression are missions the FBI analyzes, such as hacking information from double spies, locating terrorists, seeking pedophiles, cracking down unknown mobsters,

Someone who is abusing the power that is given to him or her defines corruption, however, the word in its self is more than a simple idea; it is an intricate network. Since people’s views about ethical and moral behavior affect the way corruption is examined, the word has a slightly different meaning to each person. Additionally, misconduct across various societies is viewed differently due to social and cultural borders. The criminal justice system has had many instances where corruption had affected the outcome of a case and has inserted itself into the legal process.

Through his bold dissent from the majority, which - in the face of the national security needs - only reluctantly brings up the issues surrounding growing government surveillance, Senator Wyden ensures that those individuals in the intelligence agencies who make mistakes are held accountable for their actions. It is no easy feat to argue for what is right in a room full of people who had rather the Senator be less vocal about such a controversial topic. Ron Wyden is one of very few people who possesses the courage that it takes to stand up to his opponents and his colleagues alike. And no matter what effect this will have on his political career, Senator Wyden may one day find that “the very effort he made was the reason why somebody else took it up and succeeded” (qtd. in Kennedy

After reading the article, "Why Edward Snowden is a Hero," by John Cassidy, it brings a new

Based on the allegations about Knash, Reardon needs to adopt the concept known as watchful eye because the allegations about Knash were brought to her by an acquaintance outside the government. Watchful eye “emphasizes fairness through openness, transparency and access” (Berman 24). Even though Reardon is afraid of the situation going public, it is a necessary risk because letting the people know about this situation is important. Her department affect people’s

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).

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

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

The fact Snowden chose to leak only information he and his media connections felt would not be detrimental to the public or government, yet would provide enough information that the public as to start an open debate on “big brother” oversight and privacy laws, shows that Snowden was in good faith and conscious leaking information for good and not for personal gains.

Ethical decision making will have the propensity to suffer with positive results garnered by acts of noble cause corruption. Getting a sense of accomplishment through corrupt means will make an individual more likely to take shortcuts during future events. Law enforcement professionals will be more likely to go to greater extents to get the bad guy off the street. This can be dangerous to all individuals involved. It can leave the officer open to administrative, civil, and criminal proceedings. It can also increase levels of stress, sleepless nights, and create alienation from coworkers.