Tracking Prison Censorship in the United States

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Sharon Benson-Perry, Media Review Chairperson
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

August 26, 2007

Dear Sharon Benson-Perry:

I am in receipt of your letter dated July 30, which we received here on August 9th. In it you state that there is no record of the censorship of 15 issues of issue 3 of the Party Bulletin. The newsletters were originally mailed out on June 12. They were all mailed back to us on June 27th in a large manila envelope. Each issue was individually stamped with a standard rejection stamp bearing multiple options, with the option ?Contents Prohibited (photo)? checked, and the ?(photo)? part crossed out. Since there was no record of this action by the Media Review Board at Clinton Correctional Facility you were unable to respond to my request for a review of the decision and a further explanation for it.

Enclosed is a copy of the publication in question per your request. We are confident that you will find that the contents of the publication are not prohibited according to the regulations at Clinton. Please notify us of your decision so that we can resend the newsletters to our subscribers at your facility.

Thank you for your time in this matter,

Media Review Committee
Auburn Correctional Facility
PO Box 618
Auburn, NY 13024

13 June 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

It has recently been brought to our attention that publications from MIM Distributors sent to XXXXXX XXXXX (XXXXXX) have been censored by your office. Mr. XXXXX reports that MIM Theory 13 and three issues of MIM Notes were rejected on the basis that they were ?racist.? We have not seen the official rejection notice, nor have we been notified of this censorship. I assume the materials have not been returned yet as the decision is still under review. But I am requesting a copy of the rejection notice, and any other rejection notices for our materials, so that we may effectively review and remedy this problem.

Thank you in advance for a timely response,

Media Review Committee
Auburn Correctional Facility
PO Box 618
Auburn, NY 13024

27 July 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

On June 13 I wrote you to request documentation supporting the decision to censor MIM Theory 13 and MIM Notes 332-4. To date I have not received a response from you, but I have received copies of the Media Review decisions from Mr. XXXXXX XXXXX. He has already filed appeals to these decisions, as well as the decision to censor the Party Bulletin #3 by the New Afrikan Maoist Party. The purpose of this letter is also to request a review of these decisions.

Let me start with the NAMP?s Party Bulletin, since that is the easiest. Your staff cited pages 12 and 14 of Issue 3 as the objectionable sections, with no further justification. I have read these pages and all they contain is decisions by the organization regarding publishing articles and organization. Neither of these documents directly address prisoners or promote any kind of activity, lawless or not. So I am quite confident that you will find no reason to continue to hold this publication from inmates at Auburn.

For the 3 issues of MIM Notes staff cited pages 10 + 11, which contain ?Under Lock + Key? and ?MIM on Prisons and Prisoners.? These pages contain critiques of the prison system by MIM and MIM?s readers behind bars. Nowhere in those pages does MIM advocate breaking any rules or laws. It is illegal to censor materials because you do not agree with their views, even if they are critical of your institution.

The most interesting decision was that to censor MIM Theory 13. It seems that all of the portions that were deemed unacceptable by the FMRC are critical of the very things that the FMRC claims to be opposed to. The first objection is to the article ?On Prison Leadership? for allegedly promoting lawlessness and disobedience among prisoners. Yet this article criticizes prisoners for assaulting Correctional Officers and claiming it is a political act. Elsewhere the author criticizes those who use force to keep others in their organizations. Exactly the kind of behavior that prison officials all over the country are also trying to prevent. While you may not agree with all of the author?s views on prisons, certainly you can unite on these issues, which are at the heart of the objections raised by the FMRC.

The next problem that the FMRC had with MT13 is alleged ?racist imagery.? This imagery is in two pieces of art. One uses a Klansman on the flag of the United States to criticize institutionalized racism and violence against Black people. The other uses a klansman again for the same purpose of criticizing white power among the police. In both pieces of art it is clear that the use of the klansman image is being used to oppose and not promote racism. The first even has a caption explaining the art in case readers are confused about the message behind it. To censor an anti-racist cartoon for being ?racist imagery? is contradictory to the goal of combating the problem of racism in the first place.

Lastly, the FMRC cites a review of Hitler?s Mein Kampf as objectionable. As if talking about a racist person is somehow promoting racist ideology. I am sure you would not censor other magazines that talk about Hitler as figure of history, and there is no justification for censoring MIM Theory for doing the same.

In light of these points, I hope you will find that there are no legal justifications for the refusal to allow Mr. XXXXX and others at Auburn Correctional Facility to receive MIM?s publications.

Once again I request your review of these matters and your response to my requests. We do not take these matters lightly and we will continue to ensure that our First Amendment rights to speech and affiliation are upheld.

Thank you for your time,

COMRC
Building 2, State Campus
Albany, NY 12222

11 August 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter comes in response to a letter we received from Mr. XXXXXX (XXXXXX) in which he enclosed notices from the COMRC upholding the decision of the Auburn Media Review Committee to censor pages 10 and 11, the Under Lock & Key section, of three issues of MIM Notes.

The reason given is Guideline E of Directive #4572, and the decisions claim that the issues of MIM Notes encourage ?armed organized resistence in the part [sic] of inmates and society in general.? Now, in over 2 decades of publishing I can tell you for a fact that MIM Notes has never once encouraged people in this society to take up arms, and we regularly discourage prisoners from getting into any physical confrontations, not to mention armed resistance.

To address these specific issues of MIM Notes, pages 10 and 11 consist of letter writing campaigns to protest censorship, statements encouraging the spread of literature and stories from prisoners about the conditions they face. Nowhere is armed resistance even mentioned as far as I found. If you disagree, please indicate exactly where armed resistance is mentioned and advocated on these pages.

Certainly, our campaigns against censorship and abuse are not what you are referring to as encouraging armed organized resistance. As this work is armed with nothing but pen and paper and the mere existence of your office and the review and appeal process indicates your recognition for the need of due process and the ability to challenge decisions around censorship and other restrictions of prisoners and their friends and families.

I have enclosed my previous correspondence with the Auburn Media Review Committee for your reference. I never received any response from them regarding these matters. If you cannot substantiate your claims regarding the encouraging of armed resistance, we expect these decisions to be reversed and our publication to be allowed to reach prisoners in full in the future.

We look forward to your response

Media Review Committee
Auburn Correctional Facility
PO Box 618
Auburn, NY 13024

13 June 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

It has recently been brought to our attention that publications from MIM Distributors sent to XXXXXX XXXXX (XXXXXX) have been censored by your office. Mr. XXXXX reports that MIM Theory 13 and three issues of MIM Notes were rejected on the basis that they were ?racist.? We have not seen the official rejection notice, nor have we been notified of this censorship. I assume the materials have not been returned yet as the decision is still under review. But I am requesting a copy of the rejection notice, and any other rejection notices for our materials, so that we may effectively review and remedy this problem.

Thank you in advance for a timely response,

Media Review Committee
Auburn Correctional Facility
PO Box 618
Auburn, NY 13024

27 July 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

On June 13 I wrote you to request documentation supporting the decision to censor MIM Theory 13 and MIM Notes 332-4. To date I have not received a response from you, but I have received copies of the Media Review decisions from Mr. XXXXXX XXXXX. He has already filed appeals to these decisions, as well as the decision to censor the Party Bulletin #3 by the New Afrikan Maoist Party. The purpose of this letter is also to request a review of these decisions.

Let me start with the NAMP?s Party Bulletin, since that is the easiest. Your staff cited pages 12 and 14 of Issue 3 as the objectionable sections, with no further justification. I have read these pages and all they contain is decisions by the organization regarding publishing articles and organization. Neither of these documents directly address prisoners or promote any kind of activity, lawless or not. So I am quite confident that you will find no reason to continue to hold this publication from inmates at Auburn.

For the 3 issues of MIM Notes staff cited pages 10 + 11, which contain ?Under Lock + Key? and ?MIM on Prisons and Prisoners.? These pages contain critiques of the prison system by MIM and MIM?s readers behind bars. Nowhere in those pages does MIM advocate breaking any rules or laws. It is illegal to censor materials because you do not agree with their views, even if they are critical of your institution.

The most interesting decision was that to censor MIM Theory 13. It seems that all of the portions that were deemed unacceptable by the FMRC are critical of the very things that the FMRC claims to be opposed to. The first objection is to the article ?On Prison Leadership? for allegedly promoting lawlessness and disobedience among prisoners. Yet this article criticizes prisoners for assaulting Correctional Officers and claiming it is a political act. Elsewhere the author criticizes those who use force to keep others in their organizations. Exactly the kind of behavior that prison officials all over the country are also trying to prevent. While you may not agree with all of the author?s views on prisons, certainly you can unite on these issues, which are at the heart of the objections raised by the FMRC.

The next problem that the FMRC had with MT13 is alleged ?racist imagery.? This imagery is in two pieces of art. One uses a Klansman on the flag of the United States to criticize institutionalized racism and violence against Black people. The other uses a klansman again for the same purpose of criticizing white power among the police. In both pieces of art it is clear that the use of the klansman image is being used to oppose and not promote racism. The first even has a caption explaining the art in case readers are confused about the message behind it. To censor an anti-racist cartoon for being ?racist imagery? is contradictory to the goal of combating the problem of racism in the first place.

Lastly, the FMRC cites a review of Hitler?s Mein Kampf as objectionable. As if talking about a racist person is somehow promoting racist ideology. I am sure you would not censor other magazines that talk about Hitler as figure of history, and there is no justification for censoring MIM Theory for doing the same.

In light of these points, I hope you will find that there are no legal justifications for the refusal to allow Mr. XXXXX and others at Auburn Correctional Facility to receive MIM?s publications.

Once again I request your review of these matters and your response to my requests. We do not take these matters lightly and we will continue to ensure that our First Amendment rights to speech and affiliation are upheld.

Thank you for your time,

COMRC
Building 2, State Campus
Albany, NY 12222

11 August 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter comes in response to a letter we received from Mr. XXXXXX (XXXXXX) in which he enclosed notices from the COMRC upholding the decision of the Auburn Media Review Committee to censor pages 10 and 11, the Under Lock & Key section, of three issues of MIM Notes.

The reason given is Guideline E of Directive #4572, and the decisions claim that the issues of MIM Notes encourage ?armed organized resistence in the part [sic] of inmates and society in general.? Now, in over 2 decades of publishing I can tell you for a fact that MIM Notes has never once encouraged people in this society to take up arms, and we regularly discourage prisoners from getting into any physical confrontations, not to mention armed resistance.

To address these specific issues of MIM Notes, pages 10 and 11 consist of letter writing campaigns to protest censorship, statements encouraging the spread of literature and stories from prisoners about the conditions they face. Nowhere is armed resistance even mentioned as far as I found. If you disagree, please indicate exactly where armed resistance is mentioned and advocated on these pages.

Certainly, our campaigns against censorship and abuse are not what you are referring to as encouraging armed organized resistance. As this work is armed with nothing but pen and paper and the mere existence of your office and the review and appeal process indicates your recognition for the need of due process and the ability to challenge decisions around censorship and other restrictions of prisoners and their friends and families.

I have enclosed my previous correspondence with the Auburn Media Review Committee for your reference. I never received any response from them regarding these matters. If you cannot substantiate your claims regarding the encouraging of armed resistance, we expect these decisions to be reversed and our publication to be allowed to reach prisoners in full in the future.

We look forward to your response

Media Review Committee
Auburn Correctional Facility
PO Box 618
Auburn, NY 13024

13 June 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

It has recently been brought to our attention that publications from MIM Distributors sent to XXXXXX XXXXX (XXXXXX) have been censored by your office. Mr. XXXXX reports that MIM Theory 13 and three issues of MIM Notes were rejected on the basis that they were ?racist.? We have not seen the official rejection notice, nor have we been notified of this censorship. I assume the materials have not been returned yet as the decision is still under review. But I am requesting a copy of the rejection notice, and any other rejection notices for our materials, so that we may effectively review and remedy this problem.

Thank you in advance for a timely response,

Media Review Committee
Auburn Correctional Facility
PO Box 618
Auburn, NY 13024

27 July 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

On June 13 I wrote you to request documentation supporting the decision to censor MIM Theory 13 and MIM Notes 332-4. To date I have not received a response from you, but I have received copies of the Media Review decisions from Mr. XXXXXX XXXXX. He has already filed appeals to these decisions, as well as the decision to censor the Party Bulletin #3 by the New Afrikan Maoist Party. The purpose of this letter is also to request a review of these decisions.

Let me start with the NAMP?s Party Bulletin, since that is the easiest. Your staff cited pages 12 and 14 of Issue 3 as the objectionable sections, with no further justification. I have read these pages and all they contain is decisions by the organization regarding publishing articles and organization. Neither of these documents directly address prisoners or promote any kind of activity, lawless or not. So I am quite confident that you will find no reason to continue to hold this publication from inmates at Auburn.

For the 3 issues of MIM Notes staff cited pages 10 + 11, which contain ?Under Lock + Key? and ?MIM on Prisons and Prisoners.? These pages contain critiques of the prison system by MIM and MIM?s readers behind bars. Nowhere in those pages does MIM advocate breaking any rules or laws. It is illegal to censor materials because you do not agree with their views, even if they are critical of your institution.

The most interesting decision was that to censor MIM Theory 13. It seems that all of the portions that were deemed unacceptable by the FMRC are critical of the very things that the FMRC claims to be opposed to. The first objection is to the article ?On Prison Leadership? for allegedly promoting lawlessness and disobedience among prisoners. Yet this article criticizes prisoners for assaulting Correctional Officers and claiming it is a political act. Elsewhere the author criticizes those who use force to keep others in their organizations. Exactly the kind of behavior that prison officials all over the country are also trying to prevent. While you may not agree with all of the author?s views on prisons, certainly you can unite on these issues, which are at the heart of the objections raised by the FMRC.

The next problem that the FMRC had with MT13 is alleged ?racist imagery.? This imagery is in two pieces of art. One uses a Klansman on the flag of the United States to criticize institutionalized racism and violence against Black people. The other uses a klansman again for the same purpose of criticizing white power among the police. In both pieces of art it is clear that the use of the klansman image is being used to oppose and not promote racism. The first even has a caption explaining the art in case readers are confused about the message behind it. To censor an anti-racist cartoon for being ?racist imagery? is contradictory to the goal of combating the problem of racism in the first place.

Lastly, the FMRC cites a review of Hitler?s Mein Kampf as objectionable. As if talking about a racist person is somehow promoting racist ideology. I am sure you would not censor other magazines that talk about Hitler as figure of history, and there is no justification for censoring MIM Theory for doing the same.

In light of these points, I hope you will find that there are no legal justifications for the refusal to allow Mr. XXXXX and others at Auburn Correctional Facility to receive MIM?s publications.

Once again I request your review of these matters and your response to my requests. We do not take these matters lightly and we will continue to ensure that our First Amendment rights to speech and affiliation are upheld.

Thank you for your time,

COMRC
Building 2, State Campus
Albany, NY 12222

11 August 2007

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter comes in response to a letter we received from Mr. XXXXXX (XXXXXX) in which he enclosed notices from the COMRC upholding the decision of the Auburn Media Review Committee to censor pages 10 and 11, the Under Lock & Key section, of three issues of MIM Notes.

The reason given is Guideline E of Directive #4572, and the decisions claim that the issues of MIM Notes encourage ?armed organized resistence in the part [sic] of inmates and society in general.? Now, in over 2 decades of publishing I can tell you for a fact that MIM Notes has never once encouraged people in this society to take up arms, and we regularly discourage prisoners from getting into any physical confrontations, not to mention armed resistance.

To address these specific issues of MIM Notes, pages 10 and 11 consist of letter writing campaigns to protest censorship, statements encouraging the spread of literature and stories from prisoners about the conditions they face. Nowhere is armed resistance even mentioned as far as I found. If you disagree, please indicate exactly where armed resistance is mentioned and advocated on these pages.

Certainly, our campaigns against censorship and abuse are not what you are referring to as encouraging armed organized resistance. As this work is armed with nothing but pen and paper and the mere existence of your office and the review and appeal process indicates your recognition for the need of due process and the ability to challenge decisions around censorship and other restrictions of prisoners and their friends and families.

I have enclosed my previous correspondence with the Auburn Media Review Committee for your reference. I never received any response from them regarding these matters. If you cannot substantiate your claims regarding the encouraging of armed resistance, we expect these decisions to be reversed and our publication to be allowed to reach prisoners in full in the future.

We look forward to your response

reason reported was the same:
promotes "lawlessness among prisoners & disobedience towards administrative authority"

No reasoning was provided, but the prisoner reported receiving the newspaper with one page cut out following the media review.

No reasoning was provided, but the prisoner reported receiving the newspaper with one page cut out following the media review.

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,

Media Review Committee
Clinton Correctional Facility
PO Box 2000
Dannemora, NY 12929-2000

July 15, 2007

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in response to the censorship of 15 copies of Issue 3 of the New Afrikan Maoist Party?s Party Bulletin. These were mailed back to NAMP on June 27, 2007 without a notice from your office. They were merely stamped ?RTS Contents Prohibited.? This letter is to request a review of this decision and to further inquire as to the reasoning behind the decision to prohibit the publication.

As you may be aware, a member of Our movement is currently engaged in a legal battle with staff at Clinton Correctional Facility for allegedly being involved in an unauthorized organization because of his affiliation with NAMP. And you may also be aware that according to the DOCS rules, an outside organization does not fall under the guise of the rule forbidding involvement in ?unauthorized organizations.? This, of course, would be a violation of Our First Amendment rights to association.

This recent bit of censorship indicates to Us that Clinton Correctional Facility is continuing with its practice of censoring and persecuting members of Our movement. We hope that upon your review of this matter you will see that there is no reason to justify such actions.

We respectfully request your timely response to this matter,