9/29/2017 0 Comments Reading 06: Edward SnowdenFrom the readings and in your opinion, is Edward Snowden a hero or a traitor? Should the US government pardon him for any possible crimes or should they pursue extradition and prosecution for treason?
My opinion is that Snowden is a traitor to the United States. On the surface, you see a government contractor steal and leak a bunch of documents and then proceed to bounce around Hong Kong, Russia, Cuba, and more, talking to people about whatever information he’s privy to. If it looks like something, smells like something, and feels like something, I’d naturally be inclined to call it something. I don’t believe that the US should pardon him for what he’s done, and I do believe it’s important to at least make it clear that if they have the opportunity to prosecute him appropriately, that they will. By pardoning Snowden and/or failing to prosecute him if possible, a dangerous precedent is set to suggest that it’s acceptable to steal top secret documents essential to the protection of national (and possibly international) security. The setting of such a precedent would give any person with some (even possibly unrelated) inclination against their respective section of the government motivation to steal and recklessly release the contents of documents that are classified for a particularly serious reasonMy opinion is that Snowden is a traitor to the United States. On the surface, you see a government contractor steal and leak a bunch of documents and then proceed to bounce around Hong Kong, Russia, Cuba, and more, talking to people about whatever information he’s privy to. If it looks like something, smells like something, and feels like something, I’d naturally be inclined to call it something. I don’t believe that the US should pardon him for what he’s done, and I do believe it’s important to at least make it clear that if they have the opportunity to prosecute him appropriately, that they will. By pardoning Snowden and/or failing to prosecute him if possible, a dangerous precedent is set to suggest that it’s acceptable to steal top secret documents essential to the protection of national (and possibly international) security. The setting of such a precedent would give any person with some (even possibly unrelated) inclination against their respective section of the government motivation to steal and recklessly release the contents of documents that are classified for a particularly serious reason. What exactly did he leak and how did he expose that information? Snowden released the contents of a variety of classified documents that detail NSA tools and data collection methods, the scope of their world-wide operations, and more. He exposed this information through coordination with reporters in different parts of the globe. Regardless of the legality of his actions, is what he did ethical and moral? I think that there’s a moral obligation to speak out against injustice, and that includes the systemic corruption he felt he was privy to. That being said, I also think that there are better ways (practically and morally) to take action against such things than others. I think he could have approached it in a different manner and still seen reasonable action taken against what would be found to require modification. Ultimately, is what Snowden did beneficial to the public or did he harm the security of the United States and its allies? Personally, how have these revelations impacted you (or not) and your views on government, national security, encryption, and technology in general? I strongly feel that, at worst, he severely harmed the country from a national security perspective. At best, I feel he accomplished little. To expound on the former, he disclosed documents containing top secret information. Information that is classified in such a manner because its release may potentially cause “exceptionally grave danger” to our country (the same country he was to work to protect, under oath). He also did this while in close conjunction with a number of foreign nationals, rather than operating with reporters or other contacts strictly within the country. To explain the latter, I’d point to the high-level view of what he’s tried to express to A.) US Citizens and B.) Foreign Nationals. What people take away from the part of the leaks pertaining to the US are “Oh, the government is spying on US citizens!’ and they believe that the government is weeding through all of their actions individually, looking for things to be concerned about. To believe that a government agency has the focus or resources to do that for every person in the US is ridiculous. The other, more accurate view is concerning whether the NSA should be collecting data en masse on the internet with no discernment as to if the bare data on their servers belong to Americans or foreign nationals. The NSA did admit to their data collection tools collecting information pertaining to US citizens and foreign nationals alike. I don’t see that this is a reasonable point to be contentious against being that the NSA (as a member of the Department of Defense) isn’t allowed to act or dig deeper on that data if it is found to belong to a citizen of the US, as that is out of their jurisdiction. It is the FBI’s jurisdiction, but because of the tendency of the media to blow things out of accurate proportions (and the population’s tendency to take reports from popular media outlets at the value of their headlines), we don’t see people feel the same animosity towards the FBI as with the NSA. I feel that those who complain about the lack of privacy because of large scale data collection don’t have much ground to stand on being that they don’t generally also seem to point towards private organizations (who sell user data to the highest bidder), but only towards government agencies focused on protecting our country. Snowden also spoke to reporters and foreign powers to tell them that the NSA is spying on them. The NSA is an agency in the Department of Defense, a group of government agencies literally dedicated to operations that extend far outside the physical boundaries of our country. This shouldn’t be a surprise to them, nor to us. It’s an obvious thing that everyone is spying on everyone else, and I feel that, at best, Snowden was just pointing out the obvious. I wasn't personally surprised by anything that I've heard come up as part of the leaks, so it hasn't affected my views on any of the above much. The only tangible impact I think I can point to is that the leaks revealed a number of useful tools that the US has been able to use to protect our freedom, thereby reducing our ability to continue to use them to do that and harming the security of our country.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorNikolas Dean Brooks is a current Senior at Notre Dame. This blog is for the "Ethics and Professional Issues" course under Dr. Peter Bui. Archives |