Government Secrecy Versus National Security: A White Paper

Cate Sullivan

MGMT 302: The Stakeholders Organization

December 18, 2014

Sullivan

Table of Contents

Executive Summary………………………………………………………....3Big Name Government Whistleblowers…………………………………….4The NSA and Other Intelligence Agencies………………………………….5Security versus Privacy………….......……………………………………....7The Fight Against Governmental Authority………………….......………....8Edward Snowden- Legally not a Whistleblower…....……………………...10Democratic Accountability and Consent…………………………………...13A Combined Recommendation…………………………...………………..14Conclusion………………………………...……………………………….15Footnotes……………………..……………………………………………16

2

Sullivan

Executive Summary

Information released by “whistleblower” Edward Snowden in June 2013 has

drawn public attention and controversy to the question of whether national security is

more important than citizen privacy. There has been significant attention given to the

National Security Agency’s (NSA) system of collecting the communications of both

United States citizens and non- U.S. citizens. This paper will explain the purpose and

responsibilities of the NSA and other intelligence agencies, as well as PRISM, the

program through which the NSA collects the digital communications and information of

individuals. The laws and policies, such as The Patriot Act and The Foreign Intelligence

Surveillance Act, which authorize the government to perform such actions, will be

discussed in depth. Additionally, the laws and amendments that do or do not protect

government whistleblowers will be explained, as will the reason for which Mr. Edward

Snowden is not protected for his release of government documents. Finally, a

recommendation for how to approach the government surveillance versus citizen privacy

debate will be provided.

3

Sullivan

Big Name Government Whistleblowers

Is a government whistleblower a hero or traitor? Consider three famous cases of

Daniel Ellsberg, Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden. Some consider these

individuals to be whistleblowers based on their actions that revealed secret government

behavior to the public. During the 1970s, Ellsberg leaked top-secret Pentagon Papers

detailing the history of U.S. policy in Vietnam,1 and was sentenced to 105 years in prison

for theft and espionage, but was freed after a mistrial.2 In 2013 Manning was found guilty

of 20 of the 22 charges he faced, mostly for espionage, theft and fraud, as well as

violations of the U.S. Espionage Act, for releasing government documents to WikiLeaks

in 2010.3 Finally, former National Security Agency contractor, Edward Snowden, was

charged with theft of government property, as well as “unauthorized communication of

national defense information” and “willful communication of classified communications

intelligence information to an unauthorized person,” under the Espionage Act in 2013.

Snowden and his supporters argue that the NSA violated the United States Constitution

through engaging in mass surveillance of American citizens. 4

Such information released by whistleblowers, particularly Edward Snowden, has

drawn public attention and controversy to the NSA’s system of collecting data from

private communications of both non- U.S. and U.S. citizens without requiring individual

warrants and without probably cause. Those who support the massive powers of the U.S.

government view whistleblowers, such as Edward Snowden, as criminals, while those

who support citizen privacy and governmental honesty see the whistleblowers as heroes.5

The question becomes whether national security is more important than citizen privacy,

and where the limits, if any, should be drawn.

4

Sullivan

The NSA and Other Intelligence Agencies

The National Security Agency (NSA) is a government agency responsible for

collecting, intercepting, processing, and disseminating intelligence information from

electronic sources for national foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes. The

Agency is additionally responsible for preventing foreign attackers from gaining access

to imperative classified security information.6 The Agency distinguishes itself from other

government security and intelligence agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency

(CIA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) through primarily gathering

information through electronic sources. Meanwhile, the CIA is a U.S. spying agency that

collects, analyzes, and disseminates information regarding foreign nations that is gathered

through signals and human intelligence sources.7 On the other hand, the FBI is the

intelligence and law enforcement agency responsible for understanding threats to national

security and restricting actions intended to harm the United States.8 While the NSA is

officially a public agency, it has numerous overlapping partnerships with private sector

corporations, such as Northrop Grumman, as well as Booz Allen Hamilton, for whom

Edward Snowden worked. 9

The government’s surveillance programs have infiltrated most of the

communications technologies that our society relies on. Two laws largely enable such

actions by the government: The Patriot Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

(FISA) Amendments. While the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) oversees

the government’s surveillance activities, it operates in near-total secrecy through one-

sided procedures that heavily favor the government.10 Therefore, secret government

documents published by the media in 2013 confirm that the NSA and the government is

5

Sullivan

mass collecting phone “metadata of all U.S. customers” under the guide of the Patriot

Act.11

Government employees are protected by The Whistleblower Protection Act,

which affords “confidentiality and protection from retaliation to federal employees,

former employees, or applicants who report allegations of gross mismanagement, fraud,

abuse of authority.” Therefore, whistleblowers do have the right to be protected for

revealing information. 12 However, the Whistleblower Protection Act does not apply to

the intelligence community,13 which includes private contractors such as Edward

Snowden. Snowden claims that he made “‘tremendous efforts to report NSA abuses to

colleagues, but due to the limitation of the Whistleblower Protection Act- which does not

cover contractors- he had little choice but to go to the press.’”14 Legal experts told the

Washington Post about a separate law called the Intelligence Community Whistleblower

Protection Act. This law allows national-security whistleblowers to release classified

information to an inspector general or member of a congressional intelligence committee,

but does not actually protect whistleblowers from “retaliation.” 15

The technical means used to intercept communication include the NSA’s tapping

of Internet servers, satellites, underwater fiber-optic cables, local and foreign telephone

systems, and personal computers.16 The agency directly taps into fiber-optic lines used to

transmit international communications, redirects messages into NSA repositories when

they “traverse the U.S. system,” and makes Internet companies and telecommunication

companies pass on information to the NSA that they have previously collected on their

customers.17

6

Sullivan

Security versus Privacy

The attacks of September 11, 2001 provided an opportunity for the government to

pass both the Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security, which provide the

federal government with unprecedented, so-called “preventive” powers to block potential

threats to the nation and its citizens. 18 As a result, the nature of surveillance has changed

dramatically over the years. The original form required an evidence-based court order to

intercept the communications of an individual suspect. Surveillance was authorized if it

was necessary to capture potential terrorists, and the infringement on liberty was

proportionate to the nature of the crime at hand. Today, however, surveillance agencies

intercept massive quantities of communications from millions of people and then search

through this database for information related to terrorist suspects.19

When the NSA revelations were first released in the early summer of 2013 due to

Edward Snowden, the United States government tried to defend its actions by arguing

that, unlike foreign nationals, American citizens are protected from warrantless NSA

surveillance. President Obama and his top officials denied statements that the NSA

continuously intercepts the communications of American citizens without probable cause

or warrants justifying such surveillance. 20 Such revelations have caused citizens to

become more concerned about whether state surveillance policies implemented to counter

the threat of terrorism are actually interfering with their individual rights.

The system used by the NSA to gain access to private communications of users of

popular Internet services is called PRISM, and is governed by Section 702 of the Foreign

Intelligence Surveillance Act. Information leaked by Edward Snowden reveals that

PRISM continues to enable “collection directly from servers” such as Microsoft, Yahoo,

7

Sullivan

Google, Facebook and other online companies.21 The program facilitates extensive, in-

depth surveillance on live communications and stored information. The law allows for

the targeting of any customers of participating firms who live outside the United States,

or those Americans whose communications include people outside of the U.S without the

requirement of a search warrant for either party involved. While companies are legally

obliged to comply with requests for users’ communications under United States law,

controversy arises based on the fact that the PRISM program allows the intelligence

services direct access to companies’ servers. Ultimately, the program allows for the NSA,

the world’s largest surveillance organization, to obtain communication records without

having to first request them from the service providers, and without having to obtain

individual court orders. 22

The Fight Against Governmental Authority

There is much debate regarding the amount of government power and the

transparency of democracy- basically, whether citizens’ privacy is more or less important

than national security surveillance, and if the government has overstepped their power in

this area.23 Some, such as Dianne Feinstein, argue that the metadata collection of all

Americans’ telephone records is not surveillance because it does not collection the

content of any communication.24 Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union is a

non-profit, non-partisan public interest law firm that advocates and protects United States

the individual liberties and rights of the American people. The Union aims to make it

clear that they do not defend topics because they agree with them, but instead because

they believe in the “right to free expression and free assembly.” One advocacy topic that

8

Sullivan

they focus on is national security policies that are consistent with the Constitution, the

rule of law, and fundamental human rights. ACLU continues to push Congress to

examine U.S. surveillance laws and amend those that are found to be unconstitutional or

that have been abused, including changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.25

The Patriot Act grants government with the authority to collect a record of all

phone calls made by individual American citizens on an ongoing daily basis.

Additionally, section 215 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as interpreted by

the FISC, provides the NSA with authorization to collect records from telephone services

providers. ACLU argues that such activity exceeds the authority given to government, as

well as violates the right of privacy, which is protected by the Fourth Amendment, in

addition to the right to freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. ACLU filed

two motions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court asking it to release its

opinions on the collection of Americans’ data by the NSA to the public. In 2011, ACLU

filed a lawsuit demanding that the government release information about its use and

interpretation of citizen monitoring, as well as other unconstitutional provisions of the

Patriot Act. 26

The FISA Amendment Act gives the NSA almost unchecked power to monitor

Americans’ phone calls, text messages, and emails. The ACLU challenges that the FISA

Amendment Act violates both the Fourth Amendment and Article III of the Constitution

because it permits the government to intercept the international communications of U.S.

residents without warrant or individualized court review. 27

The ACLU continues to fight for greater transparency and public access to the

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)- the secretive court that oversees

9

Sullivan

government surveillance programs. The FISC’s initial purpose was to evaluate individual

surveillance applications to determine if there was probable cause to believe that a

specific individual was a threat. Since 1978, it is evident that this court’s responsibilities

have shifted to oversee surveillance programs and assess their constitutionality without

the public’s input. The ACLU petitions for access to the FISC, and argues that secret law

“has no place in democracy.” They argue that, under the First Amendment, the public

has a qualified right of access to FISC opinions concerning scope, meaning, or

constitutionality of surveillance laws. “We all have a right to know, at least in general

terms, what kinds of information the government is collecting about innocent Americans,

on what scale, and based on what legal theory.” 28

Edward Snowden- Legally not a Whistleblower

Those who believe that Edward Snowden has shed light on improper government

actions believe that he should be seen as a whistleblower. However, it is unlikely that he

will be able to receive whistle-blower protection. The general whistleblower laws apply

to government employees who expose wrongdoing, by protecting them from retaliatory

actions by their employer. Instead, the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection

Act law applies to people who hold positions similar to Snowden’s as a NSA contractor.

Legal experts say that the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act

offers Snowden little protection. First, he did not expose the kinds of actions covered by

whistle-blower protections- illegal conduct, fraud, waste or abuse. While there is

argument regarding whether or not he revealed illegal or unconstitutional facts, for now,

what he exposed is considered illegal conduct. Second, the Federal Whistleblower

10

Sullivan

Protection Act protects public disclosure of “a violation of any law, rule, or regulation

“only” if law does not specifically prohibit such disclosure.” Based on this, Snowden

would only be able to claim whistleblower protection if he had voiced his concerns to the

NSA’s inspector general or to a member of one of the congressional intelligence

committees. 29

The Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 strengthened

whistleblower protections for federal whistleblowers. To ensure that federal employees

come forward to disclose information that makes the government more efficient,

transparent, and accountable, this Act removes judicially- created loopholes that

narrowed the scope of protecting whistleblowers under the initial Whistleblower

Protection Act of 1989.30

President Barack Obama signed presidential Policy Directive 19, which revised

the 1989 Whistleblower Protection Act, on October 10, 2012. The Act is designed to

protect whistleblowers that have access to classified information. Section A of the PPD

specifically prohibits retaliation, while Section B prohibits retaliation by taking away an

employee’s access to classified information. However, PPD19 never exactly defines what

“employee” entails, so it is unclear whether this term includes “contractors,” such as

Edward Snowden. 31

It is quite complicated to determine whether Snowden is exempt or not under

PPD19. Dan Meyer, executive director for intelligence community whistleblowing and

source protection at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, stated,

“supervisors and managers need to understand that whistleblowing is a lawful mission in

the national security interest.” 32 Meyer, a former federal whistleblower himself, is the

11

Sullivan

individual responsible for coordinating policy regarding PPD19 in the intelligence

community. He spoke about his personal interpretation of PPD19: “Contractors are

covered under section B of PPB19…Under Section A, there is no executive order

referenced in there that would allow me to go to find a contractor provision. Under this

interpretation, Snowden is incorrect in stating that contractors are specifically exempt

under PPD19, since at least Section B is applicable to this group. However, Section A

does not appear to cover contractors. While Snowden cannot necessarily make the claim

that there are no protections for contractors, he may have been correct in arguing that

there appear to be no clear protections, especially from retaliation. 33

Since Snowden’s release of NSA secrets, the rules for whistleblowers have

changed. President Obama has issued a directive, which aims to give greater protection to

whistleblowers working for intelligence agencies since they do not have protections that

are provided to other federal employees. The directive allows individuals who try to blow

the whistle while still working at the NSA the chance to appeal to inspectors general at

other intelligence agencies. However, a hearing is not guaranteed, and the protections do

not extend to all individuals. Under this directive, Edward Snowden would not be

protected since he was an outside contractor of the NSA.34 Due to the NSA’s increasing

privatization of activities through contracting work out to private organizations, it seems

as though they are almost setting individuals up for failure should they chose to come

forward with secret information. While there are whistleblower laws in place, it seems as

though these laws do everything possible to prevent protecting those individuals who are

likely to come forward with information, but seem to be in place so that the government

cannot be criticized for not have protective measures in place.

12

Sullivan

Democratic Accountability and Consent

Glenn Greenwald’s book, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the

U.S. Surveillance State, uses reproduced secret documents to illustrate how far the NSA

has gone to collect the private information of citizens. Greenwald shows that the scope of

the NSA’s surveillance exceeds not only our imagination, but also the agency’s capacity

to store and analyze all the information that they have obtained. While Greenwald is one

of the few people that obtained information on the NSA’s unprecedented abuse of power

through documents from Snowden himself, it is unlikely that absolutely everything that

the author says about the government and about the NSA is true.

One argument that Greenwald strongly emphasizes is that government mass

surveillance limits citizens’ freedom. It is impossible that the NSA and other agencies are

able to vet each and every phone conversations made by individual Americans. However,

what makes the surveillance system effective in controlling human behavior is the

knowledge that one’s words and actions are capable of being monitored. The system

therefore anticipates that citizens will be compliant and obedient to their country through

fear of being watched and questioned. Basically, one must refrain from provoking the

authorities that wield surveillance power in order to be considered free of wrongdoing.

Greenwald additionally examines the purpose of the Fourth Amendment, which is

to prohibit certain police actions, even though they may reduce crime. The author

mentions that, while some of the documentation provided by Snowden was directly

connected to terrorism suspects, that the majority of the information “had nothing to do

with national security. The documents left no doubt that the NSA was equally involved in

economic espionage, diplomatic spying, and suspicion-less surveillance.”35

13

Sullivan

The author additionally provides an in-depth discussion of the methods used by

the NSA to obtain information from citizens. Regardless of the controversy around

Greenwald’s book, the author does make one incredibly valid point- “democracy requires

accountability and consent of the governed, which is only possible if citizens know what

is being done in their name. 36 Greenwald’s book helps readers understand why and how

the government and the NSA obtains information from citizens, and illustrates the

author’s biased against the government’s actions. 37

A Combined Recommendation

Considering the topics outlined, it clear that there is no single recommendation for

this issue. Instead, an appropriate recommendation includes a combination of the

previously discussed proposals. Greenwald’s most valid argument is that “democracy

requires accountability and consent of the governed, which is only possible if citizens

know what is being done in their name.” In order for the government and its citizens to be

on the same page, it is imperative that the government increases its transparency.

President Barack Obama’s directive aiming to give whistleblowers working for

intelligence agencies is a step in the right direction. However, there are limitations in this

directive, such as whistleblowers not being guaranteed a hearing. In order for this

directive to be more effective, individuals who blow the whistle while still working at the

NSA and similar government agencies should be guaranteed a hearing and that the

intentions of the whistleblowers should be taken in to consideration. Regardless of who is

to blame, the NSA and the government must be held accountable and should be expected

to take responsibility for their actions. Rather than trying to destroy a whistleblower that

14

Sullivan

comes forward with information that citizens have a right to know about, the government

must communicate the purpose for their actions with citizens in order to create the

strongest sense of trust and patriotism. Finally, the government should only be able to

collect the information of individuals who they adequately suspect pose a threat to our

nation only after following the proper procedures necessary to obtain a search warrant.

Conclusion

An investigation performed by The Washington Post using information provided

by Edward Snowden concluded that nine out of ten online account holders whose

information had been collected by the NSA’s surveillance program were not suspected of

terrorist activities. This investigation of roughly 160,000 individual accounts concluded

that the NSA’s foreign targets were far outnumbered by ordinary Web users whose

content was collected as a result of the NSA’s surveillance program.38 The NSA says that

it is vital to collect information on citizens in order to prevent another terrorist attack like

September 11th, however, based on the Washington Post’s investigation, is this possible if

it is mainly collecting non-threatening information? If the NSA had the magnitude of

information that it has today, would it have been able to sift through the volume of

collected information, identify the potential terrorists, and prevent their actions in time to

prevent the massive devastation of that day?

15

Sullivan

Footnotes

16

1 Thompson, Nicholas. "From Daniel Ellsberg to Edward Snowden." New Yorker, 10 June 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. < http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-daniel-ellsberg-to-edward-snowden>. 2 "Daniel Ellsberg Expected Life In Prison After Leaking Pentagon Papers." Radio Interview. All Things Considered, NPR. 13 June 2011. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. < http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/06/13/137156974/daniel-ellsberg-expected-life-in-prison-after-leaking-pentagon-papers>. 3 Smith, Matt, and Paul Courson. "WikiLeaks Source Manning Gets 35 Years, Will Seek Pardon." CNN U.S. Cable News Networks, 22 Aug. 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/21/us/bradley-manning-sentencing/>.4 Finn, Peter, and Sari Horwitz. "U.S. Charges Snowden with Espionage." The Washington Post 21 June 2013. The Washington Post. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-charges-snowden-with-espionage/2013/06/21/507497d8-dab1-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html>.5 O'Neill, Ben. "The Ethics of Whistleblowing." Mises Daily. Mises Institute, 8 July 2013. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://mises.org/library/ethics-whistleblowing>.6 "National Security Agency." Electronic Frontier Foundation. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. <https://www.eff.org/agency/national-security-agency>.7 Szoldra, Paul. "These 17 Agencies Make Up The Most Sophisticated Spy Network In The World." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 11 May 2013. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. < <http://www.businessinsider.com/17-agencies-of-the-us-intelligence-community-2013-5#the-central-intelligence-agency-spies-on-foreign-governments-and-organizes-covert-ops-1>.8 "Our Strength Lies in Who We Are." Intelligence.gov. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. <http://www.intelligence.gov/mission/member-agencies.html>.9 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Page 101. Print.10 “National Security.” American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU, Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <https://www.aclu.org/national-security>. 11 "NSA Spying on Americans." Electronic Frontier Foundation. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying>.12 Meyerson, Collier. “The Whistleblower Protection Act is not created equal.” MSNBC 13 Sept. 2013. MSNBC.Com. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/the-whistleblower-protection-act-not-creat>.13 Myerson, 2013. 14 Gabbatt, Adam. "'Not All Spying Is Bad': Snowden Calls for Whistleblower Protection in Q&A." The Guardian 23 Jan. 2014. Guardian News and Media Limited. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/23/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-courage-foundation>.15 Kessler, Glenn. "Edward Snowden's Claim That He Had 'no Proper Channels' for Protection as a Whistleblower." The Washington Post 12 Mar. 2014. The Washington Post. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/12/edward-snowdens-claim-that-as-a-contractor-he-had-no-proper-channels-for-protection-as-a-whistleblower/>.16 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Page 92. Print.17 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Page 101. Print.18 Marmura, Stephen. "Security vs Privacy." Surveillance, Privacy, and the Globalization of Personal Information: International Comparisons. Ed. Elia Zureik, L. Lynda Harling Stalker, Emily Smith, David Lyon, and Yolande E. Chan. Quebec, Canada: McGill-Queen's UP, 2010.

Pages 110-125. Print.19 Mascolo, George, and Ben Scott. "Wilson Center | Independent Research, Open Dialogue & Actionable Ideas." Wilson Center | Independent Research, Open Dialogue & Actionable Ideas. New American Foundation, 1 Oct. 2013. Web. 11 Dec. 2014. <http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/NAF-OTI-WC-SummerOfSnowdenPaper.pdf>.20 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Page 126. Print.21 Lee, Timothy B. "Here's Everything We Know About PRISM to Date." The Washington Post 12 June 2013. The Washington Post. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/12/heres-everything-we-know-about-prism-to-date/>.22 Greenwald, Glenn and Ewen MacAskill. "NSA Prism Program Taps in to Data of Apple, Google and Others." The Guardian. The Guardian and Media Limited, 7 June 2013. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data>.23 "About the ACLU." American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU, Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <https://www.aclu.org/about-aclu-0>24 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Page 133. Print.25 "About the ACLU." American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU, Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <https://www.aclu.org/about-aclu-0>26 "Surveillance Under the USA PATRIOT Act." American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU, 3 Apr. 2003. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <https://www.aclu.org/surveillance-under-patriot-act> 27 “Surveillance Under the FISA Amendment Act.” American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU, Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <https://www.aclu.org/surveillance-under-fisa-amendment-act> 28 “Bringing Transparency to the FISA Court.” American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU, Web. 7 Dec. 2014. <https://www.aclu.org/bringing-transparency-fisa-court> 29 Williams, Peter. "Analysis: Why Edward Snowden Isn't a Whistleblower, Legally Speaking." NBC News. NBC News, 18 June 2013. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/18/19024443-analysis-why-edward-snowden-isnt-a-whistle-blower-legally-speaking?lite>.30 "Congress Strengthens Whistleblower Protections for Federal Employees." American Bar Association. 1 Nov. 2012. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/groups/labor_law/ll_flash/1212_abalel_flash/lel_flash12_2012spec.html>. 31 Kessler, Glenn. "Edward Snowden's Claim That He Had 'no Proper Channels' for Protection as a Whistleblower." The Washington Post 12 Mar. 2014. The Washington Post. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/12/edward-snowdens-claim-that-as-a-contractor-he-had-no-proper-channels-for-protection-as-a-whistleblower/>.32 Welna, David. "Before Snowden: The Whistleblowers Who Tried To Lift The Veil." NPR. NPR, 20 July 2014. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. < http://www.npr.org/2014/07/22/333741495/before-snowden- the-whistleblowers-who-tried-to-lift-the-veil>.33 Kessler, Glenn. "Edward Snowden's Claim That He Had 'No Proper Channels' for Protection as a Whistleblower." The Washington Post 12 Mar. 2014. The Washington Post. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/12/edward-snowdens-claim-that-as-a-contractor-he-had-no-proper-channels-for-protection-as-a-whistleblower/>.34 Welna, David. "Before Snowden: The Whistleblowers Who Tried To Lift The Veil." NPR. NPR, 20 July 2014. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. < http://www.npr.org/2014/07/22/333741495/before-snowden- the-whistleblowers-who-tried-to-lift-the-veil>.35 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Page

95. Print.36 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Page 209. Print.37 Greenwald, Glen. "Collect It All." No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books- Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2014. Pages 90- 210 Print.38 Gellman, Barton, Julie Tate, and Ashkan Soltani. "Communication Breakdown." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 5 July 2014. Web. 18 Dec. 2014. <http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/world/communication-breakdown/1153/>.