In my last letter I informed you of current difficulties in obtaining MIM Notes because of the systematic manner the prison mailroom staff is treating MIM. Twice during this month of May (3rd and 16th) MIM's mail was rejected.
Also I informed you that I received the 2001 Nov. and Dec. issues after your letter of objection to the unfounded censorship of MIM's newsletter addressed to the warden and mailroom staff. Because of such minor triumph at that time, I am requesting that you write another letter but only this time to the Director of Prisons. Make sure you ask him why, after I was allowed to receive MIM Notes for nearly eight months (May - Dec. 2001), that now for some peculiar reason it is deemed a threat to security? Also, I will write him a letter.
In addition, I am forwarding a duplicate letter I appealed to the Director's Publication Review Committee on 5-21-02 pertaining to the rejection of MIM's mail on May 16, 2002. If I decide to pursue legal action in violation of my First Amendment rights, can MIM assist me any at all? How about the ACLU?
-a North Carolina prisoner, 28 May 2002
Letter from prisoner to Publication Review Committee in protest of MIM Censorship
I object to the refusal to allow me to read this material (MIM Notes) and urge you to reconsider the censored mail sent from MIM Distributors. Beginning in May 2001, I began receiving MIM's newspaper. For eight months I was allowed this publication at this very facility. MIM Distributors does not advocate the violation of any federal or state laws and does not advocate the violation of any rules within the correctional institution. MIM is a political newspaper covering events in this country and throughout the world. Just because you may not agree with the content of the reading material analysis, does not give you legal justification for censoring it. And since MIM does not promote racially inflammatory accusation or advocate violence or any other violation under section D.0109 in the Division of Prison policy, there can be nothing to infer it as being detrimental to the safety and security of the institution. This is again supported by the fact that for eight months I was allowed MIM mail at this facility. So how come all of a sudden it is now deemed a threat to security? What specific reasons are you able to justify? Unless this facility is opposed to the rehabilitation and self-education of prisoners, there can be no legitimate indication that MIM Notes and Theory pose a danger or have caused disruption within the prisons. Therefore, it is my request that you reconsider censoring MIM mail and allow me to receive the mail in question as well as all future MIM correspondence. Thank you. -A North Carolina prisoner, 16 May 2002
Express your opposition by writing to:
Mr. Boyd Bennett
Director of Prisons
POB 29540
Raleigh, NC 27626
RAIL adds: Neither RAIL nor MIM has the resources at this time to assist in individual legal cases. We do appeal the censorship to institutional authorities, explaining why they have no legal basis for censoring MIM Notes. And we can help by publicizing the censorship and rallying support to let the pigs know that they cannot suspend prisoners' basic Constitutional rights without at the very least opposition from both inside and outside the prison. In addition we send prisoners a guide to fighting censorship, which recommends the basic steps to follow. We would also recommend contacting your local ACLU or any other legal aid organization in your area for more specific legal assistance.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |