If there was ever an incident where ambiguity blurred the distinction between heroism and treason, the case of Edward Snowden is it.
As a former employee of the CIA and NSA, Snowden has made recent headlines for being responsible for one of the biggest intelligence leaks in our nation’s history. Now said to have gone underground in Hong Kong, the rogue spy fears the U.S. government will charge him under the Espionage Act for disclosing highly classified information to a British newspaper.
The volatile content of the top secret information details how the government practices national security at the expense of its citizens’ privacy. The government defends these operations as necessary measures of national security and will accuse Snowden of putting that security at risk. Snowden, on the other hand, hopes the American people will give him the white hat and hold the government accountable for violating their right to privacy.
Deciding what side of the fence we are on in this issue really comes down to the extent to which the NSA actually spied on innocent citizens. Would anybody really feel safer if our intelligence agencies didn’t even have the technology and ability to tap into email and phone records, especially in a day where international cyber-warfare is becoming the norm?
That’s not to say intelligence agencies should have unwarranted access to any private calls and emails they please, but at the same time I really don’t think the NSA is sifting through all the annoying spam in my Gmail account anyways. In Snowden’s defense, however, it is important that the government is held accountable for these practices; turning a blind eye sets a precedent for the further probing of our privacy in the future.
Whether these intelligence leaks are treasonous or heroic, they certainly call into question the fragile line between security and privacy.
Travis Offield is a chemical engineering major from Horn Lake. Follow him on Twitter @travisoffield.
