Amazon.com Widgets

Should Snowden be protected by the Whistleblower Protection Act?

  • This just in. The most secretive, least transparent, most corrupt administration in U.S. History has SECRETLY charged Snowden with three felonies.

    Federal prosecutors secretly charged former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden last week with three felonies in connection with recent leaks of classified information about secret U.S. Surveillance programs, according to a court complaint unsealed Friday.

    Snowden was charged with conveying classified information to an unauthorized party, disclosing communications intelligence information, and theft of government property. The charges, each of which carry a potential 10-year prison term, were filed in federal court in Alexandria, Va., last Friday.

    The Justice Department is believed to be seeking Snowden's extradition from Hong Kong, although his precise whereabouts at the moment are not publicly known.

  • Qualifying for the Whistle bower protection act

    As stated by sec.Gov "A federal agency violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if it takes or fails to take (or threatens to take or fail to take) a personnel action with respect to any employee or applicant because of any disclosure of information by the employee or applicant that he or she reasonably believes evidences a violation of a law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety."

    The word applicant comes up this harks back to what the head of the senate intelligence committee said, stating "if snowden had been a true whistleblower, he could have reported his concerns to her committee privately." That being said snowden was correct when he said, "speaking the truth is not a crime" but this only applies when put through the proper channels. If he had blew the whistle privately instead of publicly (reporting it to news agencies) he would be under garunteed protection of the whistle blower protection act. Doing so pubicly spawned numerous problems.
    By cutting the head off of the hydra he grew many more. Rogers , R-Mitch states that when pertaining to blowing the whistle on government subterfuge, the NSA's spying, he "puts soldiers lives at risk in places like Afghanistan." Because it caused terrorist organizations to radically shift thier communication methods to those of lower key untraceable methods. After all of this though it comes to reason that maybe the proper channels were the wrong ones. If there was corruptions, like snowden believed, then this would never come to light. If that was true that would mean snowden would have to weigh the protection of the rights of the people and the potential harm his outcry could cause.
    Finally is the content of this outcry. John Cassidy argues that he is a hero because of this reason. Snowden's public execution of the NSA's plans did not contain any revealing information such as algorithms, targets, identities of agents, or conversations. Thus can one really supply evidence that he blew the whistle? Simply because he was a reputable source and supplied a statement that their was a conspiracy does not make it anymore harmful then if a citizen did the same.
    In conclusion Snowden could be a hero or villain based on point of view. If your looking from the point of view of a lawmaker, official or just a lawful citizen, then snowden should be reprimanded. If from the point of view of a patriot, then snowden is a hero. It all depends on if you support freedom or order.

  • Snowden should take responsibility for his actions.

    Snowed had given out private information that put soldiers' lives at risk in places like Afghanistan. He should have just descused his complaints privately with the government. Snowden's revelations had caused three terrorist organizations to change how they communicate. This is all vital information that we needed and it's all gone because of one man. Even the people we are allies with are starting to question our trust. What Snowden did was not the best desicion and he should come back to the U.S. and own up to what he did.

  • Edward Snowden has violated the U.S. law and shouldn't be protected by the Whistleblower Protection Act

    Because Snowden flew up to Moscow, Russia and never came back to the United States to suffer his consequences for committing a crime that would put soldiers' lives at risk in either Afghanistan or Iraq, while the soldiers are in war. Therefore, Edward Snowden should not be protected by the whistleblower protection act.

    For example, Ex-President Richard Nixon recorded tapes about the U.S. Oval Office conversations, then had to give up his time being president, and he was not protected by the Whistleblower Protection Act when he was in office.

    In conclusion, if ex-president Richard Nixon was not protected by the Whistleblower Protection Act, Edward Snowden should not be protected as well.

  • Does what he did fit the definition?

    OSHA's Whistleblower Protection Program enforces the whistleblower provisions of more than twenty whistleblower statutes protecting employees who report violations of various workplace safety, airline, commercial motor carrier, consumer product, environmental, financial reform, food safety, health insurance reform, motor vehicle safety, nuclear, pipeline, public transportation agency, railroad, maritime, and securities laws.

    Rights afforded by these whistleblower acts include, but are not limited to, worker participation in safety and health activities, reporting a work related injury, illness or fatality, or reporting a violation of the statutes.

    [Source: http://www.Whistleblowers.Gov/]


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.