<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>

      <rss version="2.0">		
        <channel>
          <title>WashingtonWatch.com - S. 735, The Terrorist Hoax Improvements Act of 2007</title>
          <link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills</link>
          <description></description>
          <managingEditor>info@washingtonwatch.com</managingEditor>
          <generator>http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1</generator>
          
<item>
<title>Status as of August 3, 2007</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html</link>
<description>8/3/2007: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">26966@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by ClueBy4 (May 11, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html#15579</link>
<description>So, Is the president and his administration going to charged with this law if it does come into affect?
Since they didn't hoax the congress into the Iraq war....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15579@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Tim (May 9, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html#15483</link>
<description>The bill is a bit silly, but it could open up discussion to a more progressive bill that could give a bit more power to prosecutors for genuine hoaxes.  At the same time though, the same bill should at least have a provision to allow the government to be held responsible when it irresponsibly jumps to conclusions like Boston did....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15483@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Shiloh (May 9, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html#15498</link>
<description>This is another example of legislation that does nothing to clarify anything.  The elected reprehensibles can wave the bill around saying how they have stepped forward to protect the community....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15498@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Reason (May 8, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html#15415</link>
<description>Boston police apparently also thought that a traffic monitoring device was a bomb.  Does this bill count that as a Terrorist Hoax?

http://wbztv.com/local/local_story_059122735.html...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15415@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Mr Bill (May 7, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html#15335</link>
<description>Just because Boston has incompetent responders whom are incapable of telling a neon or led sign apart from a bomb.  Does not mean we need to make an advertiser a criminal.  

How about training the responders to look at the object and see what it is.   Leave the dogs and military stuff behind, get out and observe, ask the kids in the neighborhood, they are likely more knowledgeable anyway....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15335@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Wil Melendez (May 6, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html#15317</link>
<description>The legal definition of a 'hoax' should be revised in order for this bill to be accepted by the public. When we think of a hoax--we think of a bad joke. What about persons who are incorrectly suspected of being affiliated with terrorism? They are abjectly subject to this law without any kind of immunity. What a clever bill... a bill justifying the act of hoaxing a hoax....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15317@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Status as of May 4, 2007</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_735.html</link>
<description>5/4/2007: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 134.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">20944@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
        </channel>
      </rss>
  		