 After the bombings on September 11, 2001, there was a big back lash on the intelligence community. The United States government called for the allowance for more surveillance to insure civilians safety, and civilians responded positively to this idea. In theory this was supposed to be used to stop another terrorist attack, however with this new found power the NSA also began surveilling citizens here. The NSA had access to many things, most importantly phone records, and internet records. This is when the question began of if what they were doing was over stepping civil liberties. The question is if Snowden should be praised or punished for his actions. My belief is that Edward Snowden should not be punished for releasing the information that he did. 

 Edward Snowden was a systems administrator working with the NSA when he discovered the power that the NSA held, and what they were doing with that power. When he discovered this, he did not believe what they were doing should be within the power of the government to do, and he believed the public deserved to know about it. However, under contract he was not at liberty to disclose this information. This did not stop him though, as he decided to steal hundreds of thousands of documents in order to share what the NSA was doing. Because of this, Snowden was breaking the law and would have been arrested had he not fled the country. He originally fled to Hong Kong while the information was first being leaked, and today he resides in Russia, where he is being protected by Putin. In order to reveal this information to the public, Snowden went to the press. However, he could not simply just tell them about these things, he had to give them evidence. This is why Snowden revealed the documents to reports, causing many intelligence reports to get out which never should have. The public had a very split opinion on this issue, and Edward Snowden himself. Due to the fact that these documents should not have been leaked because of their importance, many believe Snowden is a traitor, who betrayed the government. Others view him as a hero who simply felt that the government was over stepping their powers, and the public had a right to know about it. 

In order to understand the debate, it is important to have some background on what exactly Snowden released. As a systems administrator, Snowden had access to 1.7 million documents. Of these documents it is reported that 200,000 were released to reporters he was working with. (NPR) Of these documents there were four main categories. The first category is documents that show the NSA’s surveilling powers, primarily telephone and internet communication records. The data collected from phone records included all Americans, not just the targets. The internet records were a bit more regulated, as if they needed to get a court order in order to investigate Americans internet records. (NPR) This is important because at the time the public had no knowledge that the government had these capabilities, and were using them at times when didn’t seem necessary. A reporter on the matter described the other three categories well, saying, “The second category are the documents that include the actual intelligence reports that NSA analysts write about what's going on in the world” (NPR) essentially this is what they hear is going on in other countries, such as threats and other things.  “The third category are documents that talk about the NSA's partnerships with other intelligence agencies, obviously a very sensitive one as well.” (NPR) Fairly simply discusses inter agency relations, how they are collaborating together, and specifically who they are doing this against.  “The fourth category - and this is the most critical one - is basically all the documents that have the assignments, the to-do lists that the NSA gets from other departments in the government. What are the questions that the government wants the NSA to answer?” (NPR) The fourth category is what worries people most, as it gets into specifics and tells the public information that can get back to those who are being spied on and allows them to get a step ahead. 

Many people question what Snowmen’s motives were for leaking what he did. Many believe that he was a nobody who just wanted to be famous. Others view him as a hero, who just wanted to do the right thing. In an interview with the Guardian before the leaks had even officially been released, Snowden said "I'm just another guy who sits there day to day in the office, watching what's happening, and goes, 'This is something that's not our place to decide.' The public needs to decide whether these programs or policies are right or wrong," (Starr) Snowden is claiming that he had no alternative motive Later in that same interview he said “I can't in good conscience allow the U.S. government to destroy privacy, Internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they're secretly building.” (Starr) This goes along with every interview that Snowden has had since he leaked the information. Every time he is asked why he did it he says that he needed to for the good of the people, and in order to feel alright with himself morally.  Kimberley Brownlee discusses her reaction to Snowden being an example of civil disobedience. This subject could be discussed for an entire essay itself, but to keep it short, Brownlee claims that he was both civilly disobedient as well as morally justified. He was aware of the consequences for is actions, but decided that his moral reasoning was greater than those consequences. He put his moral responsibility before himself, even though that meant breaking the law. (Brownlee) Questioning if Snowden fits under civil disobedience is important. If he truly did have the intensions that he is believed to, he most certainly falls under this category, and therefore should be praised for his actions, not disrespected. It is clear to many that Snowden’s intensions were pure, and he had the good of the nation in mind. 

Others however, do not feel this way. Their reasons may vary, but one article with a very strong opinion stated his main issues were the way it was released, and his lack of accepting responsibility for his actions (Aka being arrested). (Keck) Keck (along with many others) believes that what Snowden did was not done with good intensions, and he should be held responsible. My main counter arguments for this is that what he did may have revealed some information that should not have been. There is no doubting that. However, there wasn’t really a way around this that would have been successful. Had he just made this claim without showing any supporting evidence many would have immediately shut him down, and his life would have been at risk. Had Snowden taken a different route, and gone to the media without any evidence, the government would have most likely been able to cover their tracks and call Snowden’s allegations unwarranted. Anyone who denies the governments abilities to do this does not understand the true power that the government holds. And in response to the fact that Snowden has not taken full responsibility; He has clearly sacrificed a great amount as he was a wealthy man living in Hawaii, while now he is forced to live in exile in Russia. More importantly, he would not be granted a fair trial, as his trial would be held behind closed doors by the FBI and the NSA, who would clearly condemn him as his actions did make them look bad. Snowden’s lawyer stated Edwards openness to a fair and public trial in which he could plead his case. However, due to the current espionage law this is not possible. (Macaskill)

Four years after everything happened, there is a lot of discussion of what should be done with Edward Snowden. Today he resides within Russia, as he has since July of 2013. He works as an IT specialist at a company within Russia. The question remains as to if he plans to stay there forever, or if he will ever come back to finish that battle he has begun. He still advocates strongly for his beliefs, and believes he was in the right. Although time has gone on it is impossible for Snowden to come back without immediately facing a jail cell, and then an unfair trial. The solution is simple. Grant Snowden a fair and public trial to decide once and for all whether he was a hero, or a traitor.  
