Updates on the bill can be found here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-1959
Click on "full text" to read it.

A PETITION to sign if this bothers you as much as it does me:
http://www.petitiononline.com/19551959/petition-sign.html

http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/20/homegrown_terrorism_prevention_act_raises_fears

JESSICA LEE: "When you look at the activism going on today, is there planned use of force or coercion going on? When you look at what is going on in Olympia, with individuals sitting down and blocking war shipments. When you look at Code Pink going into Congress and disrupting activities. Could this be included in this definition?"

JESSICA LEE: "Twice, Brian Michael Jenkins, who is an expert on terrorism, gave testimony in the House on this bill.
AMY GOODMAN: He is from the Rand Corporation.
JESSICA LEE: He is from the Rand, yes. They largely tried to push this bill through on this idea there are these extreme political Islamists in our country and they did not do a very good job stating the actual threat. But when you look through the Rand Corporation's other reports in 2005, they had a report called "Trends in Terrorism". And they had one chapter called "Homegrown Terrorism Threats". When you look in that chapter, there's nothing about political Islamists. In fact, its all about anti- globalization people on the right and left side of the spectrum. The animal rights and the environmental movements; and anarchists. And to me I found that very interesting that that testimony was not mentioned at all when this bill was passed. That this legislation is not just gonna look at so-called violent, religious people, but also people who have been very strong opinions against this administration."

"JESSICA LEE: It was actually passed under what is called the "Suspension of the Rules", which is a provision the House uses to pass bills very quickly and these are usually bills deemed uncontroversial and do not need more debate."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7439

"The bill's purpose goes beyond academic inquiry, however. In a press release dated Nov. 6, Harman [Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), who co-authored the bill] stated: 'the National Commission [will] propose to both Congress and [Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael] Chertoff initiatives to intercede before radicalized individuals turn violent.'"

"According to the Congressional Quarterly website, Jenkins said, "[Homegrown terrorism] is the principal threat that we face as a country and it will likely be the principal threat that we face for decades." The website stated, "Unless a way of intervening in the radicalization process can be found, 'we are condemned to stepping on cockroaches one at a time,' he added." At the end of his second round of testimony, Jenkins undercut the claims that there is any real danger requiring the creation of the National Commission and Center for Excellence. He said, "Judging by the terrorist conspiracies uncovered since 9/11, violent radicalization has yielded very few recruits. Indeed, the level of terrorist activities in the United States was much higher in the 1970s that it is today."

"Chip Berlet, senior analyst at the Boston-based Political Research Associates, argues the government is trying to establish a Center to get around legal prohibitions on gathering data specifically based on race and religion. He explains that there is already extensive research being done on the roots of political violence by scores of academics around the country but many of their findings do not fit into the government's agenda. To Berlet, the proposed Center is nothing more than 'a slush fund for politically connected hacks.'"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/philip-giraldi/the-violent-radicalizatio_b_74091.html

"Harman's bill does not spell out terrorist behavior and leaves it up to the Commission itself to identify what is terrorism and what isn't. Language inserted in the act does partially define "homegrown terrorism" as "planning" or "threatening" to use force to promote a political objective, meaning that just thinking about doing something could be enough to merit the terrorist label."

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/2939/81/

"The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers strongly oppose this legislation because it will likely lead to the criminalization of beliefs, dissent and protest, and invite more draconian surveillance of Internet communications."

And...
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/32886prs20071128.html
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1107/112907cdpm2.htm
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/11/24/18463194.php
http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=1185
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112907J.shtml
http://blogs.positiveuniverse.com/archives/1651

Updates on the bill can be found here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-1959
Click on "full text" to read it.

A PETITION to sign if this bothers you as much as it does me:
http://www.petitiononline.com/19551959/petition-sign.html

http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/20/homegrown_terrorism_prevention_act_raises_fears

JESSICA LEE: "When you look at the activism going on today, is there planned use of force or coercion going on? When you look at what is going on in Olympia, with individuals sitting down and blocking war shipments. When you look at Code Pink going into Congress and disrupting activities. Could this be included in this definition?"

JESSICA LEE: "Twice, Brian Michael Jenkins, who is an expert on terrorism, gave testimony in the House on this bill.
AMY GOODMAN: He is from the Rand Corporation.
JESSICA LEE: He is from the Rand, yes. They largely tried to push this bill through on this idea there are these extreme political Islamists in our country and they did not do a very good job stating the actual threat. But when you look through the Rand Corporation's other reports in 2005, they had a report called "Trends in Terrorism". And they had one chapter called "Homegrown Terrorism Threats". When you look in that chapter, there's nothing about political Islamists. In fact, its all about anti- globalization people on the right and left side of the spectrum. The animal rights and the environmental movements; and anarchists. And to me I found that very interesting that that testimony was not mentioned at all when this bill was passed. That this legislation is not just gonna look at so-called violent, religious people, but also people who have been very strong opinions against this administration."

"JESSICA LEE: It was actually passed under what is called the "Suspension of the Rules", which is a provision the House uses to pass bills very quickly and these are usually bills deemed uncontroversial and do not need more debate."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7439

"The bill's purpose goes beyond academic inquiry, however. In a press release dated Nov. 6, Harman [Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), who co-authored the bill] stated: 'the National Commission [will] propose to both Congress and [Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael] Chertoff initiatives to intercede before radicalized individuals turn violent.'"

"According to the Congressional Quarterly website, Jenkins said, "[Homegrown terrorism] is the principal threat that we face as a country and it will likely be the principal threat that we face for decades." The website stated, "Unless a way of intervening in the radicalization process can be found, 'we are condemned to stepping on cockroaches one at a time,' he added." At the end of his second round of testimony, Jenkins undercut the claims that there is any real danger requiring the creation of the National Commission and Center for Excellence. He said, "Judging by the terrorist conspiracies uncovered since 9/11, violent radicalization has yielded very few recruits. Indeed, the level of terrorist activities in the United States was much higher in the 1970s that it is today."

"Chip Berlet, senior analyst at the Boston-based Political Research Associates, argues the government is trying to establish a Center to get around legal prohibitions on gathering data specifically based on race and religion. He explains that there is already extensive research being done on the roots of political violence by scores of academics around the country but many of their findings do not fit into the government's agenda. To Berlet, the proposed Center is nothing more than 'a slush fund for politically connected hacks.'"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/philip-giraldi/the-violent-radicalizatio_b_74091.html

"Harman's bill does not spell out terrorist behavior and leaves it up to the Commission itself to identify what is terrorism and what isn't. Language inserted in the act does partially define "homegrown terrorism" as "planning" or "threatening" to use force to promote a political objective, meaning that just thinking about doing something could be enough to merit the terrorist label."

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/2939/81/

"The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers strongly oppose this legislation because it will likely lead to the criminalization of beliefs, dissent and protest, and invite more draconian surveillance of Internet communications."

And...
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/32886prs20071128.html
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1107/112907cdpm2.htm
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/11/24/18463194.php
http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=1185
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112907J.shtml
http://blogs.positiveuniverse.com/archives/1651

I would also add that in Japan the toilets I talk about are the much more modern models. They're most often found in private homes. Traditional toilets, which you still see frequently in train stations, airports and the like, are simply porcelain basins in the floor that flush. Whether male or female, you squat to use them. While I'm sure it's more sanitary since you're not touching the rim, I do prefer Western-style sit down toilets.

 (My own response will be in text form as a follow-up "idea" post.)

In the same way, I think another character, a nobly motivated and highly relatable reporter who seeks out war and catastrophes around the globe, could bring us immediate and compelling  news around the world by anchoring a television drama. Already shows like Law and Order and Boston Legal pull headlines and current events into their plots; why not expand that scope overseas and make the protagonist a conflicted news worker rather than the police or a law firm?

Of course, I realize with the writer's strike going it's presumptious to suggest a brand new TV show, and I DO fully support the striking writers; but *after* the strike is over, do you think this idea would fly? Would people enjoy the show? Would they watch it? How much would such a thing really impact how we perceive the rest of the world?