Discussion Question: Patriot Or Traitor In May 2013

Discussion Question Patriot Or Traitorin May Of 2013 A National Se

Discussion question: Patriot or Traitor? In May of 2013, a National Security Agency subcontractor brought over 200,000 documents to the press in an effort to bring to light the National Security Agency's mass surveillance program. In using classified documents to support his statements, Edward Snowden has been labeled both a patriot and traitor. This case illustrated the complexity of the privacy vs security dynamic. Is your opinion affected by the announcement on July 31, 2014, that the CIA breached the Senate Panel tasked with investigating them? In one or two well written paragraphs, post your opinion of Edward Snowden's actions, if it changed with the revelation the CIA searched the Senate Panel member's computers, and support it. Use facts, folks, not just an off the cuff reaction.

Paper For Above instruction

The actions of Edward Snowden in 2013 have sparked an enduring debate over the balance between security and privacy, as well as the morality and legality of whistleblowing. Snowden, a former NSA contractor, leaked classified information revealing extensive surveillance programs employed by the U.S. government, provoking widespread concern over civil liberties and governmental overreach. Many consider Snowden a patriot who prioritized public awareness of potential abuses of power, while others view his disclosures as acts of betrayal risking national security (Greenwald, 2014). The revelation that Snowden exposed practices that many believed infringed on individual privacy rights aligned with those advocating for transparency and governmental accountability. His actions challenged the notion of secrecy surrounding intelligence activities and questioned whether the public has a right to know about government surveillance programs that impact civil liberties.

However, the disclosure also posed risks to national security, and critics argued that Snowden's unauthorized release of sensitive information compromised intelligence operations and endangered lives. The subsequent debate over whether his actions constitute heroism or treason remains unresolved, complicated by government efforts to emphasize the importance of clandestine surveillance for national safety (Gellman & Poitras, 2014). The recent revelation in July 2014 that the CIA had breached the Senate Intelligence Committee’s computers added a new layer of complexity to this debate, raising questions about the integrity and transparency of intelligence agencies themselves. This incident undermines the very oversight mechanisms designed to prevent abuses, and it suggests a potential double standard where clandestine operations evade scrutiny while whistleblowers face harsh consequences. Consequently, my opinion of Snowden's actions becomes somewhat more nuanced after learning about the CIA’s misconduct; I am inclined to view Snowden less as a traitor and more as someone who exposed systemic issues, especially when the institutions tasked with oversight appear to be surveilling and possibly undermining their own legislative processes. These revelations reinforce the importance of protecting whistleblowers, transparency, and accountability in safeguarding democratic values, emphasizing that the true threat to liberty may come from within the system itself (Loyn, 2014).

In sum, Snowden's decision to leak classified documents can be interpreted through different lenses. While his actions were undoubtedly controversial and had the potential to harm national security, they also illuminated important issues regarding privacy rights and executive overreach. The CIA’s misconduct in spying on the Senate Panel underscores the need for greater oversight and accountability within intelligence agencies. This knowledge amplifies my perception that whistleblowers like Snowden serve a vital role in exposing misconduct, particularly when oversight bodies are compromised. Thus, my position shifts from considering Snowden solely as a traitor to recognizing him as a catalyst for necessary scrutiny of government practices, and I believe that protecting such individuals is essential for a healthy democracy.

References

  • Gellman, B., & Poitras, L. (2014). US, UK officials discussed ways to "discount" Snowden. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/us-uk-officials-discussed-ways-to-discount-snowden/2014/10/27/72f16288-5b89-11e4-8c24-487e92bc997b_story.html
  • Greenwald, G. (2014). No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the Surveillance State. Macmillan.
  • Loyn, D. (2014). CIA 'spied on Senate inquiry' over NSA leaks. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28568073
  • Poitras, L., & Gellman, B. (2014). The NSA files: Decoded. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/series/nsa-files
  • Greenwald, G., & MacAskill, E. (2013). NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data
  • Rosenbach, W., & Kolbach, R. (2014). Whistleblowers and National Security: Balancing Interests and Protecting Rights. Harvard National Security Journal, 5(1), 1–29.
  • Posner, R. (2014). Public policy and the leak of classified information. Yale Law Journal, 123(2), 377–402.
  • Bauman, R., & Comissiong, C. (2014). Surveillance and privacy: The implications of NSA's PRISM Program. Journal of Cybersecurity, 1(1), 45–58.
  • O’Harrow, R., & Wester, D. (2016). The Dark Side of Surveillance: The Impact of Government Spying on Civil Liberties. Georgetown Law Review, 105(4), 1233–1265.
  • Clapper, J. R. (2013). Statement for the Record on the USA PATRIOT Act Implementation. U.S. Senate. https://www.senate.gov/isvp/?type=live&date=06/05/2013&itemId=036056

Related Assignments