Thomas
                         P.O. Box 27217
                     Washington, D.C.  20038

                        October 21, 1989

Donny,

     Thanks for the Justice Papers, Joe reads them even as I
sleeping.

     Agreed, there are likable words in the decisions.  Also
agreed, the words "are chipping away at (you).  the government gets
(you) more and more defined."  {erhaps there is some insight here
about the abrasiveness (chipping or wearing away) and the judicial
system itself.

     Assuming that "to control the forum, we should file the
initial complaint and make each of the individuals enter into it
with a motion to intervene," to my mind to questions present
themselves:

          1. To what extent can "we" really wrest "control of the 
    forum" from "them?"

          2.  In the event "we" actually do seize control, won't  
   "they" have defined "us" enen more clearly?

     On the other hand, assuming that a broad base of individuals,
each independantly motivated by personal devotion to the freedoms
of thought/belief, assembly and expression, were to spontaneously
and independantly file, across the lenght and bredth of the nation,
for judicial relief against regulatory strangulation of freedom of
thought/belief, assembly and expression wouldn't:

          1.  The base of the claim be broader that if were only  
   "us" making the claim?"

          2.  The forum itself be broadened to include more     
voices?

          3.  More voices command a wider audience of ears?

          4.  More ears pave a broader avenue to more hearts     
and/or minds?

     Keep me in touch with your work.