CreateDebate


Debate Info

42
27
Whistle Blower Informant
Debate Score:69
Arguments:41
Total Votes:91
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Whistle Blower (23)
 
 Informant (14)

Debate Creator

addltd(5109) pic



Is Edward Snowden a Whistle Blower or an Informant?

Edward Snowden has been accused of and admitted to revealing highly classified surveillance programs of the United States.  Some call him a whistle blower while others call him an informant.

 

Do you think he is a whistle blower? an informant? a protector of freedom?  a pawn?  an idiot?

 

Here is a little backgound on him from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden

Whistle Blower

Side Score: 42
VS.

Informant

Side Score: 27
6 points

It is a clear breach of Human Rights for the government to collect information on innocent people. What I'm concerned with is whether data on British citizens has been obtained by the same systems and handed to the US Government, such information can obviously be used for blackmail and leverage against political activists.

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

Here is one of the articles, but its not the one I was looking for, anyways, based off the article, it should tell you that (and I could be completely wrong but it makes a lot of sense) your country infiltrated the people who founded America

http://news.yahoo.com/british-spy-agency-taps-cables-shares-nsa-guardian-181011320.html

Side: Informant
Axmeister(4317) Disputed
1 point

Well, I hope your country doesn't mind pissing off the European Union with this little espionage fiasco of yours.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23116517

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

Sorry to dispute you so many times but it really pisses me off that Europeans (mainly) for the most part out of all other countries look down upon americans as the scum of the earth, is it really wrong that we wanted to break away from tyranny and oppression? Because we didn't want to live under a monarchy? Yeah your nation is better than what America currently has become, but at Americas zenith you have to admit our ideology was and is the best, even though most of our country is brainwashed, it is not their faults, it is the leaders of the world who are ruining everyone, America just happens to be a backbone of the world economy

Side: Informant
Axmeister(4317) Disputed
2 points

"Sorry to dispute you so many times but it really pisses me off that Europeans (mainly) for the most part out of all other countries look down upon americans as the scum of the earth, is it really wrong that we wanted to break away from tyranny and oppression?"

What tyranny and oppression?

"Because we didn't want to live under a monarchy?"

Who's "we"? The 1/3 minority of American colonists who actually wanted to rebel?

"Yeah your nation is better than what America currently has become, but at Americas zenith you have to admit our ideology was and is the best, even though most of our country is brainwashed, it is not their faults, it is the leaders of the world who are ruining everyone, America just happens to be a backbone of the world economy"

This is the most idiotic, nationalist rubbish that I've seen for a long while, please explain how America is apparently the "backbone" of world economy? Or how you're ideology of freedom, equality and democracy actually means your country has freedom, equality or democracy?

Side: Whistle Blower
1 point

I hope you know that the british spy agency has collected almost most of the information surveilled on innocent people? I am looking for the link now, but you do know right americans came from your country to get away from what your country/nation of europe stands/stood for?

I'll find the article

Side: Informant

Edward Snowden is a clear hero whistling blowing at least telling how badly the government is fucking us over.

Side: Whistle Blower
Sitara(11088) Clarified
1 point

Fuck yes! You rock! :)

Side: Whistle Blower
LibertyLife(197) Disputed
0 points

He is a traitor and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.-----------

Side: Informant
3 points

How is a man a traitor who is only trying to tell Americans the lies and betrayal of the United States of America?

Side: Whistle Blower
Sitara(11088) Disputed
2 points

Prosecuted for protecting people"s rights? Now THAT is tyranny!

Side: Whistle Blower
3 points

"When truth is treason, tyranny is present." Ron Paul

This guy has set quite some things in motion, but I think change is needed.

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

He gave up such a high paying job and his safety to do this, so he must have cared a lot about his cause.

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

The definition of whistle blower is "an informant who exposes wrongdoing within an organization in the hope of stopping it", which makes this whole argument a little pointless, depending on your definition of "informant".

However, I would say that Snowden is more a whistle blower because he brought the information to the attention of the American people rather than covertly delivering it to another nation or party. Whistle blowers are supposed to expose government overreach, and I think that is exactly what Snowden did.

Side: Whistle Blower
1 point

He had every right to do what he did. .

Side: Whistle Blower

The law in which the survalance tactics were justified was serverly stretched to fit it. A number of politicains tried to warn us, but could not say anything because of its classified nature. While it may have been meant for the greater good, I believe the American public has the right to know what it's govement it doing in term of their privacy.

Side: Whistle Blower
1 point

I would say patriot but whistle blower works. I think if he were a little smarter he would have turned the info over to the press anonymously because they are legally protected. However, a good point that has been made is that it isn't just the government spying on you now, it is the thousands of employees working for them, most of them contractors. That was how those generals got busted having affairs, they were listing in and reading their emails. It's bad enough the government is doing it but I do not trust every single one of their employees. For those who make the argument that our government is just protecting us, just because this government may be trustworthy (a real stretch) who is to say we can trust the one 10-20-30yrs from now?

Side: Whistle Blower
0 points

Whistle blower. I could care less if China knows what I have been talking about. China will never attack us due to us being their nurturing mother.

Side: Whistle Blower
0 points

Snowden has done almost irreparable harm to this nation's safety and security...he is a stone-cold 100% TRAITOR who is guilty of TREASON.

Consider this, for example:

On November 16, 2006 we learned that China has installed a ground station for intercepting signals transmitted through the U.S. and Russian communication satellite systems. The Chinese government spent $big bucks$ (billions) for this ground station in order to decode our previously encrypted (protected) data.

There are more than 1200 satellites in orbit from the European Space Agency and the following nations: United States, France, Japan, China, United Kingdom, India, Israel, Ukraine, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and South Korea, and each one of these satellites is capable of eavesdropping on anyone anytime anywhere. But unauthorized listening-in by other nations is possible because the military and civilian systems radiate signals in all directions and these signals can be picked up by any ground station over nearly one-third of the Earth's surface from which the satellite can be seen.

Prior to Snowden's TREASON, the U.S. had countermeasures set up to block or otherwise follow and foil cyber-spying---the very countermeasures that Snowden took it upon his undereducated arrogant criminal self to spew to the world. He deserves the death penalty, especially because he betrayed his country and obliterated its intervention strategies during a time when the nation is AT WAR on foreign soil.

If a professional football coach gave away all team defense and offense strategies to the opposing teams, would that coach's team ever be able to win?

The databank of phone numbers and e-mail accounts is NOT "spying"---it is simply organizing available data that makes use of the public airwaves. The sheer volume of data would maintain anonymity, but this is nothing new. The FBI has always (in my 68 years) been able to "red flag" phone numbers if callers used triggering "buzz" words like "bomb" or "assassination" and these red-flagged numbers would then be channeled into a smaller databank for closer scrutiny. The electronic signals is what is sought---not the private conversations.

Side: Whistle Blower
AverageJoe2(1) Clarified
0 points

This is a pro-informant argument, and should be on the other side of the debate.

(it's just adding points to the contra-informant side here...)

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

While I hate being surveilled just like anybody would, I would really hate to know we have technology we could use to prevent terror attacks and not be using it. I think he is an informant, not a whistle blower!

Side: Informant
Sitara(11088) Disputed
0 points

You are making me mad. He did the right thing. He exposed the government violation of civil rights.

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

Why are you mad? Andy is just upholding his opinion. Some people dont care about being watched and some do. There is no need for you to be angry.

Side: Informant
AverageJoe2(1) Disputed
0 points

We did not know the US government was using this kind of surveillance, and there has not been an open debate with the US citizens on whether or not they wanted this kind of surveillance. Whether or not you think this kind of surveillance is a good thing is not relevant. He is a whistle blower because he made something known to the public that deserves an open debate. If there had been a law permitting this kind of surveillance system, and the US citizens where aware of this, than he would be an informant for bringing out this information.

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

Originally I thought he was doing the right thing. Now I'm not so sure. I think his original intentions were probably good, but I'm afraid he might have just created more problems. The fact that he mentioned maybe going to Iceland but went to China first, is a little fishy to me. Now I hear he might move to Russia, Cuba, or Venezuela. Doesn't sound good.

Side: Informant
Maverick(1) Disputed
2 points

Given the treatment of past whistle blowers by the current administration (See J. Kirk Wiebe, William Binney, Ed Loomis, and Diane Roark), I don't blame him for running to these countries.

And as I understand it, he's already given what most, if not all, of what he knows to the Guardian, and they are just choosing to slowly release the information.

Side: Whistle Blower
AverageJoe2(1) Disputed
0 points

What do you mean with "he just created more problems?"

Also, in an interview with him he made a good point, that, if he was an informant to china, why would he have been hiding there in some small hotel room? He would be given a luxury home by the Chinese government.

Side: Whistle Blower
2 points

He's an idiot looking for attention.

Side: Informant
DevinSeay(1120) Disputed
1 point

I have to say if he is an idiot then he has to be the World Idiot. Who would trade a life on the run from the US Government then in a high paying job working for the Government?

Side: Whistle Blower

I know he shouldn't have done what he did but I feel like he still did the right thing. He basically wanted us to know what our Government is up to. He wanted to show us just how intrusive the government is and I feel as if he truly wants to help liberty prosper.

Side: Informant
AverageJoe2(1) Clarified
0 points

This should not be on the informant side of the debate. It is a contra-informant statement!

Side: Whistle Blower
1 point

No he is selling what he knows to Russians ... lovely guy :D

Side: Informant
DevinSeay(1120) Disputed
2 points

What are the Russians going to do with that information? They can't do much as the NSA is suppose to keep an eye on the US itself.

And if he was an informant to the Russians he wouldn't have run. He would have stayed here spying on the US for the Russians instead of running to them.

Side: Whistle Blower
1 point

Well first of all I am back, this is the real owner of this account. Secondly I heard he is in Moscow so maybe I might see him. Thirdly I just got to say that you guys should get used to this due to the fact that the government will ever increasingly watch you as the technology allows 'Big Brother' to be at every location such as your home, office, everywhere. NO WHERE IS SAFE.

Side: Informant
1 point

Edward Snowden broke laws and exposed information that made the nation more vulnerable.

I think there's a place for whistleblowers, but exposing corruption or illegal activity does not legally permit someone to break laws. Much of what he exposed, by the way, is legally permitted by the Patriot Act, such as roving wiretaps, the searching of business records, and law enforcement surveillance on potential terrorist threats ( the definition of which has been expanded ).

Add to this the fact that Snowden is looking for asylum in nations with poor human rights records and it becomes obvious he truly doesn't stand for what he claims he does. His personal philosophy conflicted with his contractual obligations as an NSA agent and he decided to turn on the government that hired him ( and trusted him ) to keep this country safe. He broke the law and failed to uphold his job description.

Crime: espionage; leaking information to foreign governments.

As a side note, I understand that information has been leaked that reveals that the U.S. has been spying on foreign governments. Though I understand many nations do this, I do believe it's important for the U.S. to communicate to other countries that we intend to be committed, helpful partners in the world.

Side: Informant
0 points

Snowden has done almost irreparable harm to this nation's safety and security...he is a stone-cold 100% TRAITOR who is guilty of TREASON.

Consider this, for example:

On November 16, 2006 we learned that China has installed a ground station for intercepting signals transmitted through the U.S. and Russian communication satellite systems. The Chinese government spent $big bucks$ (billions) for this ground station in order to decode our previously encrypted (protected) data.

There are more than 1200 satellites in orbit from the European Space Agency and the following nations: United States, France, Japan, China, United Kingdom, India, Israel, Ukraine, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and South Korea, and each one of these satellites is capable of eavesdropping on anyone anytime anywhere. But unauthorized listening-in by other nations is possible because the military and civilian systems radiate signals in all directions and these signals can be picked up by any ground station over nearly one-third of the Earth's surface from which the satellite can be seen.

Prior to Snowden's TREASON, the U.S. had countermeasures set up to block or otherwise follow and foil cyber-spying---the very countermeasures that Snowden took it upon his undereducated arrogant criminal self to spew to the world. He deserves the death penalty, especially because he betrayed his country and obliterated its intervention strategies during a time when the nation is AT WAR on foreign soil.

If a professional football coach gave away all team defense and offense strategies to the opposing teams, would that coach's team ever be able to win?

The databank of phone numbers and e-mail accounts is NOT "spying"---it is simply organizing available data that makes use of the public airwaves. The sheer volume of data would maintain anonymity, but this is nothing new. The FBI has always (in my 68 years) been able to "red flag" phone numbers if callers used triggering "buzz" words like "bomb" or "assassination" and these red-flagged numbers would then be channeled into a smaller databank for closer scrutiny. The electronic signals is what is sought---not the private conversations.

Side: Informant
AverageJoe2(1) Disputed
0 points

This debate is not about whether or not "spying" is OK or not, if it was, i would upvote your comment.

This debate is about whether Snowden showed something to the public that the government was doing unlawfully (whistle blower), or whether he is showing information to the public, that the public, by law, did not have a right to know about (informant).

We did not know the US government was using this kind of surveillance, and there has not been an open debate with the US citizens on whether or not they wanted this kind of surveillance. Whether or not you think this kind of surveillance is a good thing is not relevant. He is a whistle blower because he made something known to the public that deserves an open debate. If there had been a law permitting this kind of surveillance system, and the US citizens where aware of this, than he would be an informant for bringing out this information.

Side: Whistle Blower