Washington Post data writer, Dylan Matthews, in his article, No, Edward Snowden Probably Didn’t Commit Treason, asserts his belief that Edward Snowden did not commit treason by releasing that information, according to the law. Matthews’ purpose is to inform and persuade by explaining that according to what the law says and what actual cases of treason show, Snowden is not a traitor is to the general public. Matthews created an effective argument presenting his belief that Snowden is not a traitor through the use of Ethos, Logos, and strong diction. Matthews uses ethical appeals that establish credibility for the author’s argument, as rhetorical appeal also known as Ethos. By using this rhetorical strategy, Matthews effectively establishes a basis for his argument while establishing his credibility and involving other credible sources.…
Post 9/11 Privacy Rights: The Case Against Electronic Surveillance In response to concerns about terrorism after the attacks on September 11,2001, the government of the United States enacted new guidelines for conducting surveillance on the public. This paper will discuss the implementation of electronic surveillance as a tool to combat terrorism and will make the case against sweeping electronic surveillance of American citizens and others in this country. Various examples of increased surveillance along with decreasing privacy right will help the reader to conclude that these tactics have not reduced incidents of any type of crime, including terrorism. This paper will also discuss several types of electronic surveillance, including the collection of metadata from telephone records, which intruded on the private lives of citizens and did not increase their safety in any meaningful way.…
1. Greenwald, Glenn, Ewen MacAskill, and Laura Poitras. " Edward Snowden: The Whistleblower behind the NSA Surveillance Revelations. " N.p., 11 June 2013.…
The attacks on September 11, 2001 instilled great fear in the government as well as millions of Americans. In order to protect ourselves and prevent future terrorists attacks, President George W. Bush signed a bill called The USA Patriot Act which allowed government agencies such as The National Security Agency access to anything they needed to intercept acts of terrorism. The NSA then gained the power to wiretap individual’s phones,obtain their business records and spy on anyone they deemed could be suspected of terrorism. It was a time of panic for the United States, and these excessive searches without warrants weren’t given a second thought. However, it is now 2014 and citizen’s privacy is still being compromised more than ever without…
Having surveillance means that the government has the right to watch and record basically everything people do. The government put video cameras up in schools, buildings, stoplights, and satellites covering virtually everywhere. According to Alex Sinha (2013) NSA, the National Security Agency, started collecting as much information and data as possible from permanent residence in the United States in hopes of reducing the odds of another terrorist attack (p. 862). In 2013, Sinah also claimed in the early 1960s, NSA began keeping a “watch list” which was a list of American citizens who were traveling to Cuba and were questionable to pose a danger to the President (p.864). Sinha (2013) then goes on to state in 1967 the watch list turned into a systematic attempt to track those Americans who were questioned to be involved in a civil disturbance.…
Some of the scandals that have shown that executive powers in the fight against terrorism can be abused include secret prisons abroad, communication interception and detainee abuse. Public mistrust that the fight against terrorism may be costing their civil liberties is justifiable when the government eavesdrops on their private conversations. The fourth amendment of the constitution clearly stipulates explicitly that persons have the right to be secure in their persons, papers and effects, and their rights against unreasonable searches and seizures must not be violated. Any official surveillance of international calls or emails of Americans within the U.S required an approval from FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), but there have been reports of government eavesdropping despite the presence of legal…
An article titled, “Electronic Surveillance,” written by Cornell University states, “Obtaining a warrant for electronic surveillance requires showing probable cause, describing in particularity the conversation to be intercepted, providing a specific time period for the interception of the communications device, and noticing the property owner unless law enforcement can show exigent circumstances. As with ordinary searches and seizures, exigent circumstances may serve as grounds for law enforcement to dispense with first obtaining a warrant. If law enforcement encounters a situation threatening a person's life, a conspiracy threatening the national security, or a conspiracy suggesting organized crime, then law enforcement may proceed without first acquiring a warrant.” The U.S. has clearly been using surveillance technology unconstitutionally.…
We live in a society now that is more inter-connected than any other in history. There are cameras in every phone and on every street corner, microphones in all 'smart' devices and a seemingly infectious apathy towards these windows in to our private lives. Post 9/11 saw the world, primarily the United States, crack down on its security by instituting legislation like the Patriot Act, which was a law basically stripping away the basic rights granted to an American citizen if the government deemed you a threat. Now that the innate fear of terrorism has fallen since then, a massive discussion has arisen regarding what information the government can ethically obtain through digital means and what is really ‘too far’ and should not be breached…
The creation of the Department of Homeland Security and establishment of the US Patriot Act was a result of the understanding that in order to have freedom, certain aspects of daily life would have to change. One aspect of change has been law enforcement’s move towards militarization, evolving from basic military like organizational structure to changes in uniform colors, equipment and vehicles. Citizens see this evolution as a “police vs citizens” stance rather than community oriented policing. The other and more clandestine policing problem has been the National Security Agency (NSA) and its domestic surveillance. While domestic surveillance is said to provide valuable evidence to prevent terrorism, it has resulted in whistleblowers like Edward Snowden leaking classified information exposing the extent of the surveillance and the infringement on personal privacy.…
Dear Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio, It has been brought to my attention that the Government has access to surveillance systems that can monitor our phone calls, text messages, emails and etc if needed. I agree that the government should have this right, but I believe there must be some strict guidelines placed in order to ensure the personal privacy of citizens. While discussing this topic, it may seem scary to think as a citizen, that everything in our personal lives isn’t as private as we imagined it to be. But, the questions we all seem to ask ourselves about this issue is, “Why is all of our information so important to the government anyways?” or, “I haven’t done anything wrong, so why would they need to look at my texts or listen to my phone calls?”, and last but not least, “How is this legal?…
After September 11, 2001, many things changed in the United States. Because of the potential for additional attacks on Americans here and abroad, the government started monitoring conversations on the Internet and on cell /telephones of citizen of the United States. This monitoring of electronic devises was without the knowledge or consent of the owners. The National Security Agency or NSA was very good at keeping their surveillance a secret from the public but all things done in the dark come to the light sooner or later. The NSA has completed all three branches of the U.S. Government and the American people to reexamine their positions on surveillance as the threat of terrorism increases.…
In Steamboat Springs Colorado May 2017 police took a young man who threatened his parents into custody before he could act on his words because people were watching him through cameras and his phone. Sometimes the government spying could be down right creepy but in the end he security could help save more lives in the future. The government should spy on its citizens to keep the community…
Edward snowden is a computer professional that is famously known for leaking information on the U.S. National Security Agency in 2013. Snowden said in an interview that “ The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything that is uses telecommunications.”(www.cfr.org). This infrastructure collects data all around the United States. This is private information that is being collected without our consent or a warrant being present. The Obama Administration defended the surveillance program saying “ it 's legal, limited and effective with preventing terrorist acts” (www.cfr.org).…
The center on law and security (2007) states, “Critics of the NSA program do not necessarily object to the type of surveillance, but rather to the way in which it has been authorized, and to the absence of any oversight”…
Chapter 8 – Local vs. National Authority In Chapter 8 of Thirteen American Arguments, Fineman discusses the tensions between local and national authority. (a) List five issues that Fineman deals with directly in the book and briefly describe how each of those issues create tension between local and national authority. Hurricane Katrina revealed a fault in American politics. Although they had predicted the dangers, neither the federal government nor the state government was in command.…