MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
request for rejection notices before we had them
Show Text
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,
07/27/2007
support for prisoner's appeal
Show Text
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,
08/11/2007
Central Office denied appeal- 2 pages cut out (ULK)
08/12/2007
Appeal to Central Office
Show Text
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.
request for rejection notices before we had paperwork
Show Text
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,
07/27/2007
support for prisoner's appeal
Show Text
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.
Letter to Central Office appealing decision
Show Text
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.
Item concerns an activity, which if completed would violate the laws of Wisconsin, the U.S. or DOC/Item poses a threat to security, orderly operation, discipline or seafety of the institution[Download Documentation]
Item concerns an activity, which if completed would violate the laws of Wisconsin, the U.S. or DOC/Item poses a threat to security, orderly operation, discipline or seafety of the institution[Download Documentation]
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,
Robert Schisler
Publication Review Officer
Hill Correctional Center
600 Linwood Rd
PO Box 1327
Galesburg, IL 61401
25 June 2007
Dear Mr. Schisler:
We have received another censorship notice from your office stating the same reasons as last time. This was for the The Party Bulletin Issue #3, sent to Mr. XXXXXX XXXXXX (#XXXXXX). We are enclosing the same arguments that we provided in our last letter in case you did not receive them. If we do not receive a letter from you reversing this decision then we will take that to mean that you will continue to openly violate our First Amendment rights to political beliefs and affiliations. We are in the process of further investigating the mailroom policies and legalities of such at your institution. We will be contacting you regarding those findings if we do not hear from you first.
The reasons given for this censorship include:
1) Depict, describe, or encourage activities that may lead to the use of physical violence or group disruption or it facilitates organizational activity without approval of the Chief Administrative Officer.
2) Advocate or encourage violence, hatred, or group disruption or it poses an intolerable risk of violence or disruption.
3) Encourage or instruct in the commission of criminal activity.
4) Be otherwise detrimental to security, good order, rehabilitation, or discipline or it might facilitate criminal activity or be detrimental to mental health.
5) Pamphlet advocates revolution.
Let me take this opportunity to dispute these 5 claims. The first part of point 1 is unfounded, in that the Party Bulletin never advocates violence or group disruption at Hill Correctional Center or any other prison. On the contrary, we explicitly work to discourage the tendencies to react violently to the prison environment among our prisoner readership. As far as facilitating unapproved organizational activity, we have made no efforts to help prisoners anywhere in Illinois form organizations. If we were to do so in the future, we would certainly advise such organizations to follow the relevant rules and regulations of the institutions in doing so.
Point 2 is completely unfounded. Nowhere does the Party Bulletin encourage violence. Our Party stands for an end to violence and oppression.
Point 3 is completely unfounded. Nowhere does the Party Bulletin instruct anyone to commit criminal activity. On page 13 of Issue 2 the Party Bulletin expressly criticizes New Afrikans for engaging in criminal activity. Our work is focused on getting people out of prison and keeping them out by putting their energy into building positive institutions within the community rather than engaging in activities that are destructive to the community.
Point 4 seems to be a catch all that is just reinforcing ideas I have addressed above. The Party Bulletin discourages criminal behavior, explicitly discourages prisoners from breaking the rules in prison and our Party spends a large amount of our resources helping to promote rehabilitation of current and former prisoners. The results of these efforts can be witnessed in prisoners that are affiliated with us who are consistently disciplined young men who avoid trouble with staff and prisoners and promote these ideals among fellow prisoners.
The Comments section seems to expose the real reasoning behind the decision to reject our publication, that it ?advocates revolution.? Fortunately for us, the First Amendment protects our human rights to believe in any political ideology that we choose and to advocate those beliefs. This includes our rights to affiliate with other people and organizations that share these ideas. In Procunier v. Martinez, the Supreme Court upheld the right of prisoners to receive mail from outside organizations regardless of the opinions of prison staff of those organizations or their ideas.
Upon further review you will find that we do not promote violence or criminal behavior in any of our publications. Therefore it is illegal to censor our communications with Mr. XXXXXX or any of our efforts to promote our beliefs among the prisoners at your institution.
In light of the above, we respectfully request that the Party Bulletin be released to Mr. XXXXXX and that the censorship of our materials at Hill CC ceases.
Functional Unit Manager
Oregon State Penitentiary
2605 State Street
Salem, OR 97310-0505
13 June 2007
Dear Sir/Madam,
This letter is in response to a Mail Violation Notice we received dated 05/24/07 (see enclosed) for a letter sent to Mr. XXX XXXXXX (XXXXXX). The written reason on the violation reads, ?recruiting inmates to create a threat to the security of facility.? I am writing to challenge this statement, since nowhere in the letter does MIM advocate any activity that would threaten security. We encourage prisoners to write articles, do translation work, join study groups, spread our literature around and we explicitly discourage prisoners from engaging in any activities that would break the rules at their facility.
Clearly the letter in question does not recruit for any ?security threatening? activities. On the contrary, those who are familiar with our work can attest to the fact that those who work with MIM seriously tend to be less likely to cause disruptions in prison. As we have been over repeatedly with staff at OSP, materials cannot be censored because staff disagrees with the political content. It is our hope that upon your review you will reverse this decision and further ensure that such incidents are avoided in the future by clarifying federal laws and facility rules around censorship.