What moral imperatives were implied?
If that's not the case, I think you're cool on not eating your brussel sprouts.
Others have shown they do not need to comply, to various ends. Snowden[1], Klein[2], Manning[3], Barrett[4], Levison[5]. This is a terribly narrow range of those who refused and resisted in recent history. From admin to technician to analyst to activist to owner, you can indeed not become complicit with the US government or others after learning knowledge of malfeasance.
Please leave the poor sprouts out of this.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Klein
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
Additionally there are great things that these companies do in spite of government intervention. If these services were abandoned, peoples lives can be put at risk.
Your arguments only make sense if the country is on the verge of revolution. Given the ratings on TV, and the velocity of posts on /r/advice animals, I don't think were there yet.
My position is those attempting to cause change from within have while at work helped give inertia and acceptance to what they think they want to fight against while at home watching the evening news.
Nothing stops them from finding other venues of employment, many excuses are made as to how they want to fight from within. We end up with users on forums attempting to defend their profiting from the entire ordeal. Complicit.
Essentially I am saying working from within is only a good choice for those who find themselves already in that position, like Snowden. Otherwise more harm is done.