Federal Prisons

After having the pleasure of reading ULK 20, I would like to opine concerning some of its contents. While I found numerous articles to be informative and inspiring. I really want to focus on the letter entitled SMU Used to Prevent Activism and the subsequent response from MIM(Prisons).

The letter was written by a federal prisoner, and, among other things, he expressed discontent with the fact that many gang members in the BOP who have been subjected to the SMU program have been broken by it and failed to carry out strategies to thwart the oppressive system. Furthermore, most of these gang members are quick to engage one another in physical combat; however, reluctant to attack the real enemy with similar ferociousness. The prisoner then gave a call for "hard-core, guerilla, strategic revolutionary action" aimed at the "pigs."

MIM(Prisons) responded by expressing a disapprobation of the call for "hard-core, guerilla, strategic revolutionary action," saying that, at this time in imperialist countries the conditions are not ripe for armed struggle. This opinion was based on an analysis of history and current conditions.

Though I concede that overall the masses in america may not be ready for armed struggle, I don't believe the class of people that the prisoner pointed out (i.e. gang members in prison) should be discouraged from physically assailing those holding them in captivity. In prison, the oppression that one experiences is a lot more cruel than what people in society endure. And many of the gang members have the potential to formulate the vanguard needed to lead to coup. They already know how to unite, possess warrior spirits, and have displayed defiance toward the government, even if just through criminal behavior.

Keep in mind, we're not talking about the Boy Scouts here. We're talking about some of the most murderous and gladiatorial individuals america has ever created. One way or another, these gang members are going to fight violently. Not only because of their natures, but because the harsh conditions of prison life will cause them to. And I think it best that, rather than continue exterminating each other, they federate and become america's Frankenstein.

MIM(Prisons) responds: We disagree with this writer's assumption that members of lumpen organizations are violent by "nature." It is the imperialist system that forces the oppressed into organizations for self-defense and preservation. People's "nature" is not innate, it is created by their environment. And even imperialists can sometimes be retrained and become useful servants of the revolution. So we should not assume that members of lumpen organizations will always have to be violent and must channel this violence somewhere. We should give these comrades more credit and instead help them learn how to channel violent inclinations into productive avenues to fight their real enemies in the criminal injustice system and the imperialist government.

Even in a country where there is no proletariat, we should uphold the principles of People's War. Spurts of anger leading to violence against the pigs does nothing more to liberate humynity than killing another thug. We need to build understanding and support for proletarian struggle in the broadest ways that we can. If we do not win the hearts and minds of these "gladiators" then they will just as quickly be used by the state against us.

I am currently fighting censorship by the Wisconsin Department of Corruption. I have many outside contacts who are willing to do legal internet searches, type up legal briefs and make copies of legal documents for comrades here in prison. Due to this, the WDOC has found themselves trying to restrict the flow of free legal help coming in to the prison. This help jeopardizes their industrial prison complex and jeopardizes the identity of their snitches. The WDOC is now using a "security concern" excuse to deny me any correspondence that "pertains to the personal legal information of another inmate." This violates the law and their own established policies and procedures. The WDOC believes they are above the law. The WDOC is more concerned about keeping the identity of their snitches private, although they will never admit this. I will continue to fight against this and all censorship in this injustice system.

MIM(Prisons) adds: Illegal denials of mail are just one of the tactics used by the criminal injustice system to make our struggle more difficult. Persistence from comrades like this one is key to the few victories we do win. And this persistence will be necessary over the long haul as we build a movement to take on the larger imperialist enemy to put an end to the oppression and exploitation of capitalism once and for all.

To acknowledge your struggle which coincides with mine and many other prisoners around the globe, I would like to state some facts concerning the prison (Connally Unit) I am housed at here in Texas. The prison population is 2,812 prisoners, very understaffed due to better service at the oil fields popping up all round this prison complex.

This unit is split A and B side and then we have the dorms which are set apart for those non-gang affiliated and those who pose no threat to the establishment of the institution. Just recently we've been given Johnny's (paper sack lunches) on the weekends for the past month or so and this is due to cuts in the budget. This also constrains a lot of movement to and from the chow hall. B-side is even split two times. On B-side you have 7 building and 8 building. 7 building gets to go to chow with general population but 8 building is restricted. The new major Daniels in town has built a mini chow hall for such sections of the prison population which to them is best. They usually house those prisoner who they feel are the worst such as wine makers, tattoo artists, etc.

These institutions are set up for failure. This is why I congratulate those organizations whether they be lumpen or otherwise who have taken up the banner of rehabilitation and have started or engaged in the process of revolutionizing the minds of the masses. Revolutionizing the knowledge needed in order to free our thinkers from this blind deceptive demagogue. If we ain't the solution then we surely are the problem because until the wheels stop turning it is my duty to struggle and awaken those inactive participants into being a part of this mass movement of prisoners inside and out.

This unit (Connally) is getting worse by the minute and as one good comrade (Blaze) from New York stated, "They're taking every liberty away." Until we acknowledge collectively that there is a problem we will continue to be deceived. Just recently we have been restricted from attending religious services. Before the process of this denial, we could attend church freely without restrictions. Now we must submit an I-60 requesting to attend and if approved we can attend. Ain't that a violation of our 1st Amendment Constitutional right?

I will continue to do my investigative and organizational work for this is what I live for. When my heart and mind stop I will live in the spirits of those true to our cause, but until then I will pump out the revolutionary spirit needed in order to encourage and empower those most in need of such: Lumpen!

MIM(Prisons) adds: The need for struggle against these institutions set up for failure is a primary reason behind the launching of the United Front for Peace in Prisons which stresses the need to stand together in unity with those who share our common interests.

Por Soso de MIM(Prisiones)
diciembre 2010

En el 28 de noviembre, Wikileaks empezó a hacer público cables diplomáticos estadounidenses que han sido radicalmente avergonzados para el gobierno de los E.E.U.U. y sus aliados. Esto resultó en un aumento de la persecución del sitio de Wikileaks y sus funcionarios, y un debate internacional acerca de los sitios del web como Wikileaks. Esta relato subraya el fracaso de la media en el corriente principal en hacer algo más que servir como un portavoz para los imperialistas, pero también revela las distancias que los gobiernos imperialistas irán para perseguir a los activistas y ellos que causa daño al imperialismo.

La humanidad beneficia del aumento de la información disponible acerca del imperialismo. Como revolucionarios, damos la bienvenida a la oportunidad de revelar a las atrocidades apoyadas por los E.E.U.U. y por los imperialistas y los tratos acordado en cuartos de atrás. Mientras tanto, los ataques a Wikileaks y sus funcionarios presentan la oportunidad para revelar más el mito que el capitalismo iguala a la democracia. Los temas básicas de la democracia incluyen la transparencia del gobierno y el discurso libre. Mientras el gobierno comunista en China bajo Mao animaba a la población a criticar a sus líderes durante la revolución cultural y fue tan lejos hasta proveer papel gratuito y espacio para colocar carteles grandes de personajes para propagar el discurso libre, el gobierno americano está haciendo todo lo posible (en colaboración con otros gobiernos y corporaciones capitalistas) para cerrar el discurso de los que sólo están revelando hechos.

Wikileaks lanzó en 2007 para publicar documentos de fuentes anónimas que generalmente revelan las acciones de los gobiernos imperialistas y sus lacayos. Wikileaks declara que "una de nuestras actividades más importantes es publicar material de origen original junto al lado de nuestras noticias para que lectores e historiadores al igual puedan mirar evidencia de la verdad." En su página del web Wikileaks resume las historias mayores que han roto; una lista de corrupción impresionante del gobierno y de la corporación, la brutalidad y la guerra(1). Ha sido particularmente valiosa en revelar a las atrocidades de los E.E.U.U. en Afganistán e Iraq.

Como un resultado de su trabajo en exponer a gobiernos, a corporaciones, y a iglesias alrededor del mundo, Wikileaks ha enfrentado persecución significante. Conforme a su página del web "desde formar en 2007, Wikileaks ha sido victorioso sobre todo ataque legal (e ilegal), incluyendo los del Pentágono, la división pública de seguridad de China, el previo presidente de Kenia, el primer ministro de Bermuda, la cienciología, la iglesia católica y la iglesia mormona, el banco privado lo más largo de Suiza, y compañías Rusas."(1) Julian Assange ha tomado el papel de portavoz público y como lo cual ha enfrentado la persecución personal dramática, particularmente después de hacer público los cables diplomáticos de los E.E.U.U.

¿Cuál es el problema con los cables diplomáticos de los E.E.U.U.?

Antes de que emprendamos a los temas de la censura y la persecución política, vamos a examinar a lo que estos cables diplomáticos contienen de verdad. El gobierno de los E.E.U.U. emplea a miles de funcionarios de servicio extranjero empleados en embajadas y consulados alrededor del mundo. Conforme a la página del web del Departamento de Estado estadounidense, esta gente generalmente trabaja en uno de cinco trabajos:

Consular: Oficiales consulares protegen a estadounidenses en el extranjero y fortalecen la seguridad en la frontera de los Estados Unidos.
Económico: Oficiales económicos trabajan en asociaciones económicas y el desarrollo, apoyan el comercio estadounidense en el extranjero, y en cubrir temas del ambiente, la ciencia, la tecnología, y la salud.
Manejo: oficiales de manejo hacen correr nuestras embajadas y aseguran que la diplomacia estadounidense trabaje.
Política: Oficiales políticos analizan eventos políticos.
Diplomacia pública: Oficiales de diplomacia pública explican los valores y las políticas estadounidenses.

En otras palabras, muchas de estas personas trabajan en países extranjeros actuando como espías. Pero no como espías que trabajan en secreto, son espías evidentes lo cual su trabajo es encontrarse con personas de varias niveles en otros gobiernos y después escribir reportajes acerca de sus reuniones y la situación en esos países. Esto es cómo el gobierno estadounidense colecciona mucha de su información sobre lo que está pasando alrededor del mundo. Los funcionarios del servicio extranjero no tratan de esconder lo que hacen. Es un juego político en lo cual los diplomáticos extranjeros a veces usan para enviar mensajes al gobierno estadounidense sin que hacer declaraciones públicas. Hay muchos tratos que se hacen en cuartos de atrás en esta manera, sin hacer público la información.

Entonces cuando la gente comenta que los cables diplomáticos que Wikileaks reveló eran avergonzados, lo que en verdad significa es que el gobierno imperialista y sus lacayos no quieren que la verdad se publique. Como Wikileaks hizo un resumen, "los cables enseñan a cuál grado el US espía en sus aliados y a la ONU, volteando un ojo ciego hacia la corrupción y a los abusos de derechos humanos en 'estados clientes', tratos del cuarto atrás con países supuestamente neutrales, influyendo por las corporaciones estadounidenses, y las medidas que los diplomáticos de los Estados Unidos toman para avanzar los que tienen acceso a ellos."(1) Así que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos no quiere que la gente se entere de estas cosas. Probablemente no se preocupe del público estadounidense cuya respuesta a este relato se ha divido con mucha gente tomando el lado de su gobierno imperialista, sino se preocupa más de lo que la gente de otros países aprenda, especialmente la del tercer mundo que se están fastidiando por los imperialistas y los tratos que hacen con sus gobiernos lacayos.

Los imperialistas y la censura en un grado global

Había un ataque rápido y coordinado contra Wikileaks por el gobierno estadounidense y sus aliados en la comunidad internacional y corporativa. Esto incluyó un ataque coordinado en el 2 de diciembre cerrando su dominio a través de la compañía basada en New Hampshire EveryDNS y Amazon.com cortando la infraestructura de servicios que estaban proveyendo a Wikileaks. Obligados a trasladarse a la compañía de internet francesa CVH, Wikileaks nuevamente enfrentó ataques hechos por el gobierno francés buscando maneras para prohibir el alojar del sitio.

Los capitalistas financieros también entraron en el juego rápidamente. En el 3 de diciembre Pay Pal cerró la cuenta que estaba colectando donativos por Wikileaks, reclamando que la cuenta violaba su "política de uso aceptable" ocupándose en "actividades que animan, promueve, o da instrucciones a otros que se comprometen en actividades ilegales." El 6 de diciembre Mastercard anunció su plan de cancelar a Wikileaks de aceptar pagos por Mastercard porque "los reglamentos de Mastercard prohíben a sus clientes directamente o indirectamente ocupar o facilitar en cualquier acción que es ilegal." Visa tomó acciones similares en el 7 de diciembre. En el 8 de diciembre Wikileaks hizo publicó papeles diplomáticos que revelaban calbideo por la administración de Obama de parte de Mastercard y Visa.(2) Y finalmente, el Banco Sueco PostFinance congeló la cuenta personal de Julian Assange en el 6 de diciembre, usando la escusa débil que el estipuló una dirección equivocado en su cuenta.

En el 23 de diciembre Apple dejó caer la app (programa por iPhones) de Wikileaks de su tienda de apps, sólo diez días después de que fue aprobada por venta. La app dio a los usuarios acceso de Wikileaks a la fuente de Twitter y la capacidad de acceder a documentos filtrados. Un portavoz de Apple dió la escusa oficial: "Apps tiene que cumplir con todas las leyes locales y tiene que no poner a ningún individuo o grupo en peligro"(3) Estos ejemplos de la censura corporativa ayuda a demostrar la complicidad entre los gobiernos imperialistas y las corporaciones grandes. El imperialista hace tratos diplomáticos en el cuarto de atrás para darle al capitalista ventajas financieras, y estas mismas corporaciones se encargan de los intereses del gobierno al negar acceso al antiimperialista a los recursos necesarios para ejercitar su discurso libre.

Mientras desvían los recursos de Wikileaks misión primaria, estos ataques también han servido para exponer al imperialista, lo cual nada más le da servicio de labios al discurso libre cuando le sirve su interés, y esto ha provocado un contra-ataque por los defensores de Wikileaks. Esta contraofensiva de Wikileaks incluye a escritores mercenarios lo cual han lanzado ataques negando el servicio para cerrar páginas del web que han cortado a Wikileaks, dirigido a EveryDNS, Amazon, Mastercard, y Visa entre otros.

En los Estados Unidos, los imperialista corren en círculos con los pantalones en los tobillos, no están seguros cómo controlar la información que ya se hizo pública. El 3 de diciembre la Casa Blanca dió un directivo que prohíbe a los empleados federales no autorizados al acceso de los documentos clasificados que ya son disponibles en Wikileaks. Cargando esta orden, la Biblioteca del Congreso bloqueó el acceso a Wikileaks desde sus computadoras. Los empleados del gobierno, el personal militar y los empleados de algunas corporaciones privadas están prohibidos de leer los documentos, aun desde sus casas. Mientras, estudiantes universitarios se están amenazados que si coloquen información de Wikileaks en línea no serán eligibles para puestos en el gobierno después de la graduación.(8)

La opinión pública estadounidense está dividida entre los que piensan que está bien que se investigue a los en poder y los que quieren ver a Assange perseguido. Puede ser sorprendente que tantos estadounidenses les importa el discurso libre cuando los imperialistas claramente lo oponen. Esto es prometedor para los activistas que buscan maneras para ganarse a la gente que tienen un interés material en el imperialismo, aun si solo por batallas especificas contra el imperialista.

La persecución política de activistas

Julian Assange y otros se han quejado de la vigilancia y el acoso en varios países en el pasado, pero después de revelar los cables diplomáticos esto ha escalado a un nivel que puede resultar en la muerte o encarcelamiento permanente de los asociados con el sitio. Mientras arrojan acusaciones del "terrorismo" sin fundación contra Assange, los políticos americanos han llamado abiertamente que sea asesinado ilegalmente, la definición de terrorismo.

El Departamento de Justicia de los E.E.U.U. han explorado detenidamente los libros en busca de algo con que enjuiciar a Assange, alguna manera de castigarlo y parar su trabajo, y están negociando con Suecia para extraditarlo para los E.E.U.U. Assange fue tomado en custodia en Britania después de una orden de arresto fue levantado por Suecia para interrogarle por las denuncias de delitos sexuales, y desde entonces fue liberado bajo fianza.

En los Estados Unidos, había empujones fuertes para hacer ilegal el conducir del periodismo investigativo que no ha sido aprobado por el Estado. La senador Dianne Feinstein, presidente de la Comité de Inteligencia del Senado, discute que las acciones de Assange violan el Acto de Espionaje, una ley de la era de la Guerra Mundial I, diseñada para castigar a individuos que espiaban en el país durante tiempos de guerra. Esto es a pesar del hecho que Wikileaks no ha revelado documentos de alto secreto y hasta se ha ofrecido para trabajar con el gobierno de los E.E.U.U. para redactar cualquier hecho que pondría en peligro a individuos en el campo (lo cual los E.E.U.U. no aceptó) . Se hizo una audiencia inicial acerca de Wikileaks y el Acto de Espionaje en el 16 de diciembre por la Comité Judicial de la Cámara de Representativos. Hasta el momento no se ha decidido si va a proseguir o no. El senador Joseph Lieberman promueve y urge a la administración que considere cargos contra los medios de la comunicación que producen artículos de noticias basados en documentos filtrados. Estas organizaciones, según Lieberman, han "cometido por lo menos, un acto de mala ciudadanía, pero si han cometido un crimen - pienso que eso justifica una indagación intensa por el Departamento de Justicia.

En los 1970s un ataque muy similar contra Daniel Ellsberg fue tomado después que hizo público los papeles del Pentágono a los Times de Nueva York, exponiendo las mentiras del gobierno americano acerca de la guerra de Vietnam. El gobierno US atacó a Ellsberg encubiertamente y abiertamente en la corte en donde lo pusieron en juicio por el robo y la conspiración bajo el Acto de Espionaje. Ellsberg explica: "La verdad es de que cada ataque que se le hace ahora a Wikileaks y Julian Assange se me fue hecho a mí en el tiempo que se hicieron público los papeles del Pentágono."

Si, el resultado es más frío esta vez, será con la media principal aclamando por la represión de sus propios derechos de informar los hechos. Prefieren hablar de sexo y de personalidades de todos modos.

Hablamos de sexo para parar de hablar de sexo

Las pseudofeministas se han formado en dos lados del debate de violación de Julian Assange. Uno reconoce la obvia verdad que esto es un enredo político por el imperialista para distraer de los hechos y atacar a Wikileaks. El otro lado dice que tenemos que apoyar el lado de toda mujer que reclama que han sido violadas. El último es un sueño hecho realidad para el FBI. El primero está en buen camino, pero vacila en su atento en definir una violación "real." Esta situación era dolorosamente clara en una serie de debates en Democracia Ya! esta semana que degeneró a una discusión pornográfica de los detalles de varios encuentros sexuales.(6) Para hacer los dos, a defender a Assange y mantener que algún sexo no es violación, Naomi Wolf terminó en hacer unas denuncias vergonzosas y equivocadas.

Si sólo podemos admitir que todo el sexo es una violación, entonces podemos mover con la discusión de cienes de miles de mujeres (y hombres por supuesto) muriendo a las manos del militar estadounidense como fue expuesto por documentos de Wikileaks. El feminista real aquí es el hombre blanco Julian Assange quien contestó la pregunta del anfitrión de las noticias de TV Larry King acerca de los cargos de sexo con: "No está bien en traer sensacional, y de hecho, cargos falsos, un asunto relativamente trivio comparado a las muertes de 109,000 personas…CNN debería de estar avergonzado por hacer eso." Assange se refería a un portazo de muerte hecho público en Wikileaks que fue grabado por el militar estadounidense en Iraq quien reclamó previamente de no llevar la cuenta de muertes Iraquíes.

Para asegurar a lectores que estas tácticas no son nada nuevo, un relato paralelo se dio dentro de nuestro propio gobierno hace apenas dos años. El sitio de décadas de vejez de MIM a etext.org fue cerrado por gente afuera de MIM en el 9 de enero, 2009. Esto ocurrió mientras el editor primario de la pagina de web hacía informes de amenazas de muerte y la circulación de cargos de violación por múltiple mujeres blancas. El se ha referido a esto como un "linchamiento," porque cargos de violaciones siempre han sido una herramienta de control social de hombres de naciones opresas bajo el reglamento de poder blanco. Mientras MIM (prisiones), y por lo menos una otra célula, hizo esfuerzos para restaurar el contenido del sitio, el daño fue hecho ya que todos los enlaces entrantes fueron difunto. El tráfico hacia esos documentos se queda a una fracción de lo que era antes.

El editor del text.org sitio MIM explicó más tarde que no restoró el sitio de inmediato porque se podría haber derramado así de pronto. Wikileaks es único en sus recursos y su status de alto contorno, así que de gran parte se ha mantenido largamente quedar en línea, con su misión recibiendo un beneficio neto de la cobertura de la prensa. Pero cuando décadas de materiales son separados de su nombre de dominio como lo pasó a MIM, al igual que sobre 80 sitios de web hip hop cerrados por la seguridad interna el mes pasado,(7) su acceso al resto del mundo es desafiado seriamente. Como hemos mencionado en el pasado, instituciones independiente de los oprimidos en línea son muy frágiles. Alguna combinación de la tecnología, las tácticas de seguridad y las alianzas con la burguesía nacional en los países anti-imperialistas tendrán que proporcionar soluciones a este problema mientras los imperialistas aumentan su represión de la internet.

La necesidad por fuentes de la prensa antiimperialistas

Un estudio de la Universidad de Maryland titulado "La desinformación y la elección del 2010" descubrió que la gente expuesto a fuentes de la prensa del corriente principal está bastantemente mal informadas en respeto a los hechos. Por ejemplo, el 42% de la personas examinadas no sabían que Obama era nacido en el US. La encuesta miró a los periódicos y revistas de actualidad, noticias de la red de TV, la radio- y tele-difusión pública (NPR o PBS), noticias FOX, MSNBC y CNN. Los investigadores encontraron "Mirando a la frecuencia de información mala entre los consumidores de varios fuentes de noticias, una característica notable es que un nivel de desinformación sustancial estaba presente en los consumidores diarios de todas fuentes de noticias. Aun los consumidores diarias de noticias con los niveles más bajos de fuentes de desinformación todavía incluyeron números sustanciales de desinformación."(9)

Esto no significa que todos debemos dejar de seguir las noticias; las personas con niveles más elevados de exposición a fuentes de noticias tenía niveles más bajos de desinformación. Este último hecho tenía algunas excepciones sorprendentes, por ejemplo, el noticiero Fox encabezó la lista de desinformación con los televidentes más mal informados y una tendencia que muestra que el cuanto más que una persona mira a Fox la más mal informada se convierte en. Por lo tanto, los consumidores de otras fuentes de la prensa del corriente principal fueron al igual engañados en hechos claves, incluye los consumidores de NPR y PBS y televidentes de otros noticieros diarios en TV.(9) Sin una fuente efectiva de noticias anti-imperialistas, los revolucionarios todavía necesitan usar una fuente de la prensa del corriente principal, pero necesitamos mirarlo con un ojo crítico y usar tantas fuentes internacionales que podamos encontrar.

La desinformación clara siendo repartida por la prensa del corriente principal, combinado con la cobertura constante de aun los hechos más mundanos por los gobiernos imperialistas y sus aliados, significa que el valor de fuentes alternativas de la prensa no se puede exagerar. Wikileaks proviene un servicio claro para el anti-imperialista sin ningún análisis político significante en su página de web. Las políticas son claras en el contexto del contenido que viene a través de Wikileaks diariamente exponiendo el imperialismo como un sistema de la corrupción, la brutalidad y la explotación. Fuentes de noticias como esta son cruciales para revolucionarios y tenemos que defender su existencia.

Es nuestro deber de ir más adelante y proveer contexto para los hechos y ayudar a personas a hacer conexiones entre todos los actos terroristas cometidos por el US y otros países imperialistas y los esfuerzos revolucionarios justos de las personas opresas alrededor del mundo.

I am writing this article in response to the article in ULK 20 entitled "We must fight ULK denials."

Brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, grandfathers and grandmothers of ULK, we have to take a stand against the oppressors. Not by rioting, physically fighting, or boycotting but by means of communication. The same way the officers banned together we should put our differences to the side and unite as one!

I have 17 years in the special housing unit (SHU) mostly for fighting the oppressors physically and with my pen's ink. I've caught two new bids for going at it with the oppressors. One bid was a 2.5 to 5 years and the second bid was a 7 year flat 5 year post.

What I did is not important, but why I did it is, I did it because too many comrades were being violated. We have the right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment.

Also I don't know about the rules in the Texas DOCS, but here in New York state when we're locked down (which I am right now) we're given 1 hour out of cell recreation everyday of the week. So what should happen is whether everybody gets along or not, whoever is in this "close custody" should grieve the issue. The oppressor might fuck with five of those grievances but they won't fuck with everybody's grievance. It will be too suspicious.

Every ULK I get the mailroom got something to say about it. With ULK 20 they said the articles on pages 3, 10, and 13 (continued from 3) posed a threat to the safety and security of the facility. Those articles were entitled "Light of Liberation" and "NJ Avalon Crip signs on to UF Statement." So once again they've taken our right of freedom of speech, the 1st Amendment and swept it under the "security risk" rug, just like the other comrade stated. So let's stand together as one and "take" our rights back.

So remember comrades, yes we're imprisoned but we still have rights!

MIM(Prisons) adds: Unity in the fight against oppression is a key element of this fight. As this comrade says, we need to put aside our differences to join forces against a common enemy. Filing grievances is a good way to get this fight going, and we have initiated a grievance campaign to help prisoners fight grievance denials. Write to us for a copy of the letter and petition.

I'm writing to you to report about the food kitchen meals now being given to us prisoners here in Texas at the Barry S. Telford Unit, even here in Ad-Seg. It is beyond cruelty, and passed unusual. This is punishment with the intent to kill. There are many of us here of both level 3 and level 2 who cannot read or write successfully, who have raised the most hell by protesting the meals on each trays. The grievance department workers state they are doing all they can to get the trays to their proper balanced-diet meals. I have yet to see a balanced meal. This started in 2010! And now on the weekend, the trays are so poor that many have said they can barely stand to eat it. The Johnnies are worst, but they are only cold, not hot meals. Sadder still, the ranking officials, and the on-pod security rovers on the floor refuse to correct meals.

We have been told it's the budget cut passed for Texas prisons. There has been a cut of all carton milk, and powdered milk is now given as a substitute. Coffee has been cut off, given only seven days per month. We hear rumors now that other units are suffering worse still than ours. The rumor is they are receiving a breakfast meal, one lunch, and one johnny sack on last chow meals.

Those who get put on food loaf and think they like it better than the trays have changed their tunes all the way around. The food loaves are the size of a slice of bread, and only as large as a honey bun. And get this, there's nothing but bread in them; no vegetables, no beans, no meat, not even any fruits!!! At breakfast they might put cheerios on top of them, and the guards laugh and joke about it. But it's sad a thing to endure for 7, or sometimes 14 days.

I have been helping many write up each meal, but the only time we get a decent meal is when a holiday comes along, or when an outside prison or government agent is here visiting, and trays are heaped up so high there's extra everything. Then even the snacks get a slice of bologna and cheese, or peanut butter with jelly.

Here on Ad-Seg the prisoners are not even up during the daytime or to go out to recreation due to weaknesses and waves of nausea.

MIM(Prisons) adds: We've been hearing a lot lately about budget cuts at prisons leading to cuts in the already insufficient food that prisoners receive. This is a serious matter as prisoners become weak and sick, while staff continue to bring home fat paychecks. Grieving the inadequate food is a good first step to get organized around this battle. For those in Texas whose grievances are ignored, contact us for a copy of our grievance petition demanding that our grievances be heard.

This is a follow-up article to the We Must Fight ULK Denials article I wrote, published in ULK 20. For my comrades who follow the news published in ]ULK, you will recall that I was denied my right to receive ULK issue 18. I am now sitting here writing this article with issues 19 and 20 in front of me.

After being denied ULK issue 18, I sent the publication and denial form to the Directors Review Committee (DRC) for an appeal of the denial of the publication. As I said in my last writing, if you do not do this, at least in the Texas prison system you will enable the mailroom staff to keep denying the publication. It gets placed on a ban list and is no longer allowed. Sure if you choose to appeal, you may lose then the publication will still be denied to our comrades. But what if you win? If you win you not only win an appeal against the system, you also win for all our comrades united in this movement.

I was never given a response from the DRC on my appeal, and I still did not receive the issue of ULK that I appealed in the first place. However, since the appeal I have received two other issues of ULK along with other correspondence from MIM(Prisons). It may not seem like much and maybe some who read this will say to themselves, "if you didn't get an answer from the DRC and you didn't receive issue 18, then how did you win?" That is the kind of thinking these people in control want us to have. They don't want us to win or even think that it's possible for us to win in our struggle. This victory is just a stepping stone for future victories. It has provided the necessary paper trail for future action.

I know that my fellow comrades see the point I am making. I also understand that not all prisoners understand or even want to understand the importance of fighting for a cause. But to my brothers and sisters united in struggle let this be a stepping stone and encourage us to keep punching back. Remember, you cannot win if you don't fight.

I am writing this on behalf of S.A.M.A.E.L, aka "The Ministry". We are a small autonomous revolutionary organization devoted to engaging in, and fomenting, resistance via individual, tribal, direct, and guerilla action in the cultural, social and political milieu. Our ideology is within the ambit of class consciousness and holistic resistance, "each according to will and ability."

We feel the Statement of Principles of the United Front for Peace in Prisons is, in spirit, consistent with our own charter, oaths, and declarations which stress the need for unity in the face of a common enemy and resisting any "doctrines which divide us."

This being said, we accept this unilateral invitation and ratify the Statement of Principles of the United Front for Peace in Prisons in the spirit of solidarity and the advancement of our common goals.

"Amerika the beautiful." This is the image of the perfect killing machine that is instilled in Us from youth, even as the Amerikans oppress, exploit and super-exploit our people in the Third World. This is what we're taught. It's bad enough that we have to deal with great Amerikan chauvinism coming straight from the oppressors but now we have to deal with it from within the oppressed as well.

Just the other day as the Dallas Mavericks and Miami Heat squared off for supremacy in the basketball world and the "national anthem" took center stage, blood-boiling hoops and hollers of "that's right!" and "U$A baby!" could be heard throughout the building. And I'm sitting here thinking, really?! That's right what?! "That's right" that these fucken pigs got us locked up? Or "that's right" that these motherfuckers are out there reeking oppression, death, destruction and exploitation throughout the Third World? Cause that's all I can think of whenever I hear that oppressive and repulsive war-mongering song.

Actually, I also think of how our anti-imperialist comrades in the Islamic Third World put it down on these sorry ass pigs showing them that, no, Amerika isn't all it's cracked up to be. For if that were true then these sorry ass pigs wouldn't be getting their asses blown to smithereens on a daily basis.

Serio, these fools in here really got shit twisted, but I suppose it's no surprise that the bourgeoisified lumpen picks up and holds tight to the ideology of the parasitic coupon-clippers, as they themselves clip coupons. Therefore, it's no surprise that the lumpen tend to cheerlead when the oppressor's military trots the globe seeking to extend its sphere of influence. They are better defenders of the Amerikan way of life than the Amerikans themselves, and surprisingly reactionary.

Instead of cheerleading for these punk-ass Amerikans, wishing, wanting and thinking that we are Amerikkkans too, we should start recognizing the fact that these Amerikkkans want us locked in their prisons for life while slowly fading out of existence. Instead we should realize the devastating toll which our being imprisoned takes on our collective nations.

Instead of doing the oppressor's bidding the world over, we need to realize the crucial role which we in the barrios/ghettos in the internal semi-colonies can play in bringing down U.$. imperialism from within. We need to start recognizing the fact that we too are the hope of the oppressed.

So until all that happens, the only time you'll ever get a "that's right!" from me will be when I see that Amerikan death toll count rise in the middle east.

MIM(Prisons) responds: Those who cheer for the U.$. military are a small minority in this world. The oppressed nations in this country, who have historically been the subjects of Amerikan violence, would be smart to return to (or stay on, as the case may be) the winning side of history. It is alienating to live in a country that celebrates domination and exploitation through violence. But as the Third World unites in cheering for the armed defenders of Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, India and elsewhere, we become closer to the end of imperialist oppression, a time when unnecessary deaths of all peoples can be prevented.

In a May 23, 2011 decision by the United States Supreme Court in Brown v. Plata (2011) 563 U.S., the court held that a population limit of 146,000 prisoners was necessary to remedy unconstitutional medical and mental health conditions in California prisons. Although the Court recognized that there were other factors which contributed to inadequate medical and mental health care, the court nevertheless found that the primary cause of those deficiencies was overcrowding. There are just not enough qualified medical and mental health staff to effectively treat 175,000 prisoners in a system designed to house only 80,000 prisoners. These overcrowded conditions are leading to the spread of many diseases and delaying other medical conditions that are going untreated and resulting in unnecessary pain and death. Overcrowding is also affecting staff's ability to properly treat prisoner's mental health conditions. California prisons have a prison suicide rate 80% higher than the national average. 72% of suicides in California prisons involved some measure of inadequate assessment, treatment, or intervention, and were therefore most probably foreseeable and/or preventable had mental health staff not been overburdened with so many prisoners.

Because there was a concern with the consequences of releasing 46,000 prisoners into the community, the court ordered California to immediately start identifying those prisoners who pose the least risk of reoffending and offer them an expansion of good-time credits towards early release. Based on these concerns, it is most likely that those convicted of violence will not be afforded early release. The Court was concerned with the consequences of a previous Court ordered population cap on Pennsylvania prisons in which, during an 18-month period after their release, police rearrested 9,732 prisoners for committing new crimes. Those new crimes included 79 murders, 90 rapes, 1,113 assaults, 959 robberies, 701 burglaries, 2,748 thefts and thousands of drug related offenses. Based on that prior experience, which the Court did not want to repeat, the Court recommended that besides releasing those most likely not to reoffend, California could find other alternatives like diverting low-risk offenders to community based programs such as drug treatment, day reporting centers, and electronic monitoring, instead of releasing violent prisoners.

The California legislature was already working on such a proposal in Assembly Bill 109 which was recently passed and signed by the Governor. AB-109 includes 640 amendments to various California statutes, not all concerning prisoners. As for those that do address overcrowding, only two are worth noting.

The first is an amendment to California Penal Code (PC) 1170(h) which now allows certain persons sentenced up to 3 years to serve that entire sentence in a county jail. Before, only a sentence of 1 year or less was required to be served in the county jail. Those who will not be required to serve a sentence of 3 years or less in a county jail are: anyone who has a prior or current felony conviction for a serious felony as described in PC 1192.7(c ), a violent felony as described in PC 667.5(c ), anyone required to register as a sex offender, and anyone who received a sentence enhancement pursuant to PC 186.11.

The second change worth noting is the promulgation of "The Postrelease Community Supervision Act of 2011." This Act added sections 3000.09; and 3450 through 3458 to the California Penal Code. The Act states that all those released on and after July 1, 2011 who have not been convicted of a serious felony pursuant to PC 1192.7(c ); a violent felony as described in PC 667.5(c ); sentenced pursuant to PC 667(c )(2); PC 1170.12(c )(2); or any person classified as a High Risk Sex Offender, will no longer be on parole nor under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Instead, those persons not convicted of violent or serious felonies as described above will now be released on what will be known as "Postrelease Supervision" and will fall under the jurisdiction of the Sheriff or Director of the County Correctional department for the County that person is released to.

Those persons who qualify for postrelease supervision will be on this new form of supervision for no longer than three years at which time they will be discharged from all supervision. Those on Postrelease Supervision will not be returned to prison for violations of their postrelease supervision conditions. Instead, they will be subject to a variety of other alternatives which will be known as "Community Based Punishment." Such punishment could include what will be called "Short-Term Flash Incarceration" which means that a technical violation could subject the offender to County Jail time of no more than seven days. Other forms of community-based punishment include: intensive community supervision; additional monetary restitution; work, training, or education in a furlough program; placement in a substance abuse treatment program, community service; random drug testing; or home detention with Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) monitoring.

Those who are released on and after July 1, 2011 and do not qualify for Postrelease supervision because they were convicted of violent or serious felonies as described above will remain under the jurisdiction of the CDCR and will not see any significant change in their parole conditions and parole revocation procedures.

Those who were already paroled prior to July 1, 2011 will remain under the jurisdiction of the CDCR because they were paroled before the new law took effect. Except that those who were not convicted of violent or serious felonies will have a chance to have their parole reviewed so long as they complete six months of continuous parole without any violations. If the person has not violated parole within six months, he or she will be recommended for Postrelease Supervision and subject to Postrelease Supervision as described in PC3450 through 3458. Those persons also paroled prior to July 1, 2001 but were convicted of serious and violent felonies as described above will remain on parole under the jurisdiction of the CDCR because they would not have qualified for Postrelease Supervision even if they had been paroled after the new law took effect.

California has until May 23, 2013 to comply with the release of 46,000 prisoners unless it requests a five year extension. The extension may be granted only if California satisfies necessary and appropriate preconditions designed to ensure that measures are taken to implement the release without delay. Because California has already relieved its prisons of 9,000 prisoners through out-of-state-transfers, it now has 37,000 more prisoners to address. After the United States Supreme Court had finished hearing oral arguments and was getting ready to issue its decision, California informed the Court that it was working on AB-109. California did not give the Court a specific number of prisoners that would be affected by AB-109. California only said that "thousands" would qualify under AB-109 to serve 3-years or less in a county jail and be released on Postrelease Supervision. California will eventually have to give a specific number of persons who will not end up in prison as a result of AB-109. Once California gives a specific number of persons affected by AB-109, it will then have to introduce more legislation in order to release more prisoners or prevent them from coming to prison. As of right now, no prisoner has been released, they have just been transferred to another state or prevented from ending up in prison.

This is just a brief outline of what has recently taken place to address overcrowding in California. It is up to those of you who might be affected to do your own research into the information provided above. Because of space limitations, not every detail of the Court's order or Assembly Bill 109 could be described in detail. So if you did not qualify under AB-109, you might qualify for release under another change in the law in the near future. If you will not qualify for early release in the future, you should at least see some improvement in medical and mental health care which was the whole purpose of the population cap in the first place. So everyone should be affected one way or another. Good luck with your struggles.

MIM(Prisons) comments: This is a good overview of the new court ruling about health care and overcrowding in California prisons. While we hope that the net effect of this ruling is the release of some prisoners and prevention of locking up others, we're not optimistic that this will lead to any substantive changes. We have seen court rulings in the past about prison conditions, and as the pages of Under Lock and Key have documented, the Criminal Injustice System is very creative about worming their way out of restrictions to find new ways to oppress. The size of the California prison population represents job security and high wages for staff, and they will not give this up without a fight. It is a condemnation of the imperialist system that it enables people to profit off the torture and destruction of humyns. Only by ending imperialism overall will we be able to truly change the criminal injustice system. Until that time, we hope our comrades behind bars will find creative ways to use this court ruling to their advantage.