Why one Utah lawmaker is calling Edward Snowden a 'traitor'

At a security conference on Tuesday,  Rep. Chris Stewart, a Republican, argued that a $1.7 billion NSA data center near Salt Lake City doesn't focus on bulk data collection and had harsh words for the former NSA contractor.

Rick Bowmer/AP file
The NSA's massive data center, in Bluffdale, Utah, about 25 miles from Salt Lake City, is shown in June 2013. Rep. Chris Stewart (R) of Utah dismissed concerns that the facility was being used for bulk data collection at a security conference at the University of Utah on Tuesday.

The National Security Agency's massive data center in Utah isn't being used to store Americans' personal phone calls or social media activity, but plays a key role in protecting the country from cyber-attacks by hostile foreign governments, U.S. Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah said Tuesday.

Stewart's comments came during a national security conference he hosted on the University of Utah campus in Salt Lake City. NSA Utah director Dave Winberg was among the speakers, but didn't talk specifically what happens at a $1.7 billion data center south of Salt Lake City. He instead focused his remarks on the NSA's global purpose.

Stewart, a Republican, said the public shouldn't believe the misconceptions about what goes on at a facility that sits on a National Guard base about 25 miles south of Salt Lake City in the town of Bluffdale. The center became a target of scrutiny after revelations in 2013 that the NSA has been collecting millions of U.S. phone records and digital communications stored by major Internet providers.

Stewart said the center provides language translation, transcription, analysis and reporting as well as development services to several operations levels of the NSA.

"There's this narrative that every time you drive by Bluffdale, you think, 'They are collecting my Facebook, they are collecting my taxes, they are listening to my phone calls,'" Stewart said. "I promise you that is not the purpose."

Stewart, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told the audience that they would be proud of the work done there if they were privy to that information.

Stewart had strong words when asked about Edward Snowden, the exiled whistleblower who leaked classified documents about U.S. government surveillance. Stewart called him one of the "most destructive traitors America has ever seen" and said his supporters don't understand what he did to the country.

Herbert, who spoke during the daylong national security conference on the University of Utah campus, told reporters afterward he doesn't have specific concerns specifically about the NSA's facility in Utah but said he has concerns about whether Congress is sufficiently monitoring the NSA's practices around the country.

"The NSA, conceptually, has a significant role to play, particularly to make sure they protect us against outside, evil influences and know what the bad guys are up to," Herbert said: "Whether it's in Utah or in Virginia or Maryland or Pennsylvania or some other place does not matter to me. Whatever their function is, it should have significant oversight by Congress to make sure they are not violating our civil rights here in America."

Winberg, who oversees the Utah facility, said that the U.S. and its leaders have never been more vulnerable to cyber-attacks from enemies because everyone uses the same networks.

He said hundreds of government databases are attacked daily — not only by individuals, but by foreign governments and enemies. He said cellphones and wireless devices offer leaders' the ability to stay connected, but also become a risk.

"To overcome the very real threats to our country, national decision-makers need to know what adversaries are doing," said Winberg, reading from a pre-approved speech. "They must be able to outmaneuver those who would do us harm in cyberspace."

During a question and answer session, Winberg said he and other NSA officials are hamstrung by what they can say because they work for an intelligence agency. "Loose lips really do sink ships," he said. Afterward he said wasn't authorized to speak with reporters.

Winberg sounded the alarm about the threat of cyber-attacks impacting the nation's electricity and power grids, water systems and natural gas pipelines. He said hospitals and emergency services are also vulnerable. He highlighted recent hacks on the U.S. Post Office, Home Depot and Target as examples of the damage cyber-attacks can inflict.

He compared the country's attempts to establish a cyber-security plan to when the country was facing nuclear weapons threats in the 1940s-1950s.

"Cyber is in the infant stage of that same kind of realm. It's simply going to take us some time to develop the strategies and polices and the framework within the United States' government of how to collectively and efficiently deal with this very complex problem," Winberg said. But, he said, "We are not standing idly by."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why one Utah lawmaker is calling Edward Snowden a 'traitor'
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today