"...A Stand Against S1959" -- Thought Crime

(Update: Another newspaper has printed in their Opinion section today, 12/03/07, a variation of a different letter I sent the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin they titled "Thought Police.")

I'm pleased to share with you that my local news media has provided a forum to inform citizens about "Thought Crime Bill" S1959 concerns. I hope even more media outlets across our country will respond to efforts others are initiating for that same purpose. Perhaps my experience described below will provide encouragement letter writing efforts can be productive.

The "Thought Crime Bill" S1959 is being brought to the attention of our local residents by my local newspaper, the Claremont Courier. This community has been extremely fortunate that this award-winning California publication has a long-standing history of presenting pertinent local, national and international issues, including controversial ones, to the attention of readers.

The Claremont Courier Opinion Section of the Saturday, December 1st bi-weekly edition headlined a letter I sent to the Editor, "Take a stand against S1959," giving me a byline. This issue does not yet appear on their website as I write this, so I'll print it here as suggested by Ronni Bennett at
"Time Goes By."

Thank you to Ronni for so effectively researching and writing about the "thought crime bill" concerns, then providing organized informative timely links to the most current information about the bill. We clearly need to continue our efforts to bring this bill to the attention of our fellow citizens through all the means at our disposal.

One individual can make a difference in our democracy/republic – especially when we are many, is my belief.

Letter to Claremont Courier:

"I strongly urge voters to contact our Senators Feinstein and Boxer to VOTE AGAINST S1959 The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism and Prevention Act of 2007.
"This bill's wording is couched in terms that can take away our First Amendment rights. The "thought crime" potential of this bill in the name of so-called security does as much to destroy our democracy as anything the terrorists are doing. My letter to this newspaper could be regarded as suspect should this amendment be passed. There is no reason to believe our President would veto the bill.

"I am not willing to give up any of my rights which have already been undermined by legislation. We should also ask our House Representative, David Drier, why he voted for the House Bill version 1955. In fact, only 6 Representatives from both political parties had the insight and courage to vote against the House Bill, or maybe they were the only ones who actually read it.

"I recommend you read this bill with a direct link at: http://www.timegoesby.net/ and additional posts catalogued under this "thought crime bill." The blog writer was the first Managing Editor of one of the major television network Internet news organizations. She brings the highest journalism standards to her writing. Current media has failed to bring this pertinent issue to the attention of the American public.

"I am strongly opposed also to any sort of legislation that would limit and curtail my right to express my and others views and opinions on my blog and the Internet. This Senate bill's current wording creates that possibility, too. I embrace Jay Rosen's statement that 'Blogs are Little First Amendment Machines.' "(Bold Print Added.)

(My apologies to all Readers who are unable to leave a comment on my blog because they don't have a Google Blogger Account. You can only send me an email, then I will have to reprint each one on my blog. This makes our having a dialogue incredibly complicated and serves only to stifle communication.)