A key and urgent NSA-related issue at this moment seems to me to be the
number,
profiles,
diversity,
access, &
powers
of the appointees to the planned NSA review group, along with the
speed with which they begin investigating and reporting.
Perhaps it would be helpful for Kossacks and others to get out ahead of the Administration in publicly discussing potential appointees. A numerous and diverse enough group of appointees might be able not only to improve NSA-related policies but even to have broader benefits.
My preliminary thoughts on potential appointees are:
Russ Feingold for his track record reflecting commitment to certain non-partisan principles relating to transparency, civil liberties and the buying of political influence.
Larry Lessig, for his expertise and non-partisan focus on corruption (including in its institutional form) and on the interaction of new technologies with public and private interests.
Could appointing Ron Paul reduce the long-deepening feeling of hair-trigger panic (about black helicopters, etc.) among some of his supporters?
Having in mind that surveillance of foreigners is widely and deeply resented by many of them, would it be useful to appoint any non-Americans?
Who do you think would be useful appointees?
Our discussion may be most effective if we distinguish clearly between purely rhetorical recommendations (such as Greenwald, Assange, Chomsky, etc.) and those whom Obama might possibly be persuaded to consider in response to public demands.
Such demands might result at least in some triangulation-based drift of appointee profiles in the direction of credible independence.