On this same topic, what do you think about the effort to repeal the
> 25th Amendment (the one limiting the president to two terms in office)
> in order to allow Bush to run again in 2008,
At this point, I would think the Bush gang needs to worry more about
2006 than 2008. With current trends, it's beginning to look possible to have enough turnover in Congress this year to make impeachment likely.
And, to get this back on the telecom topic, here's a UPI article someone sent me yesterday that doesn't seem to be getting much notice:
Whistleblower Says NSA Violations Bigger UPI
Tuesday 14 February 2006
Washington - A former NSA employee said Tuesday there is another ongoing top-secret surveillance program that might have violated millions of Americans' Constitutional rights.
Russell D. Tice told the House Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations he has concerns about a "special access" electronic surveillance program that he characterized as far more wide-ranging than the warrentless wiretapping recently exposed by the New York Times but he is forbidden from discussing the program with Congress.
Tice said he believes it violates the Constitution's protection against unlawful search and seizures but has no way of sharing the information without breaking classification laws. He is not even allowed to tell the congressional intelligence committees -- members or their staff -- because they lack high enough clearance.
Neither could he brief the inspector general of the NSA because that office is not cleared to hear the information, he said.
Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., and Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, said they believe a few members of the Armed Services Committee are cleared for the information, but they said believe their committee and the intelligence committees have jurisdiction to hear the allegations.
"Congressman Kucinich wants Congressman Shays to hold a hearing (on the program)," said Doug Gordon, Kucinich's spokesman. "Obviously it would have to take place in some kind of a closed hearing. But Congress has a role to play in oversight. The (Bush) administration does not get to decide what Congress can and can not hear."
Tice was testifying because he was a National Security Agency intelligence officer who was stripped of his security clearance after he reported his suspicions that a former colleague at the Defense Intelligence Agency was a spy. The matter was dismissed by the DIA, but Tice pressed it later and was subsequently ordered to take a psychological examination, during which he was declared paranoid. He is now unemployed.
Tice was one of the New York Times sources for its wiretapping story, but he told the committee the information he provided was not secret and could have been provided by an private sector electronic communications professional.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I believe there is a provision to tell certain select details to members of the committee 'en camera', just as certain secrets can be told to judges in courts only for the purpose of providing proper context to the topic. 'En camera' means that _whatever_ the details are which are being revealed, those same details cannot be shared with the general public, for example newspaper reporters, etc. The judges in those few cases are under considerable restraint to _not_ discuss nor even acknowledge the 'en camera' proceedings. This happens occassionally when a patent lawyer for example has a dispute and the court has to review the details. PAT]