Under Lock & Key

For our Agreement to End Hostilities we reach out to all colors, all genders, all ethnicities. In this struggle, if we can satisfy the interests of the other parties while meeting our own, that is best. Yet a blind following of fixed views of one’s identity can undermine any assurance that either party will honor an agreement. It’s hard, but we must learn to understand how to see our thoughts with thinking. Identity can prove more a liability than an asset if we drive with our eyes closed.

Internationalism is Needed to End Hostility

We must liberate the oppressed from identity politics first. We may be unaware of the political landscape, which leaves us vulnerable to being exploited. A leader may impose a narrative on us, and create feelings of division between us and others. Second we may cling to a negative identity, defining who we are as against the other side and rejecting anything they propose. In an extreme situation, we lose all semblance of our own identity, identifying ourselves only in terms of opposition to the other side. Third, we may feel excluded from the decision-making process, further dividing us from others. Finally, we may feel like a pawn trapped within an unfair political system.

Currently at New Folsom, staff are creating divisions leading to dangerous situations. When they read letters agreeing to help us, they may withhold this mail, or give it to another prisoner whom they believe will help them carry out their own personal perverted agenda. These inmates are called snitches, liars or PSU/SHU collaborators who speak against human rights. These inmates are encouraged to write to our families, women and supporters with the intent to disconnect them from us. These actions create very dangerous situations, creating the desire to punish these men for working with the administration. These games are being played throughout the state of California, targeting prisoners who have taken conscious steps to resist being casualties of this low intensity psychological warfare. Warfare that is rarely seen or recognized by the everyday citizen. We must find ways to monitor our incoming and outgoing mail. If we ever want to truly stand for the UFPP principle of Independence, we must have resources independent of the enemy.

A couple weeks ago I had an incident at work with an “Uncle Tom”, and some of it was due to his “kiss ass” attitude at work. Although I had this issue, I had to check myself from further incident with him by remembering MIM’s position that we do not promote violence, and in fact are a peaceful movement. To do what I had in mind would have contradicted that. Reading many responses on our study group discussion, including mine, helped me stop and check myself.

MIM(Prisons) adds: We like to highlight examples like this because, while anecdotal, they indicate that our work does reduce violence between prisoners of the United $tates. We note this as our recent issue of Under Lock & Key was rejected for everyone in Fresno County Jail for “tending to incite or promote racism, violence or any other prohibited conduct.” And a comrade in California State Prison - Sacramento just had eir study group material censored for the second time ey tried to enroll; even though ey receives all other mail from us without incident. It’s just some essays on the economics of the U.$. prison system, yet many prisoncrats fear it, while they promote ignorance and infighting.

I just received your 50th issue of Under Lock & Key, and I can tell you that I haven’t seen an issue like yours. An issue that isn’t afraid to speak its mind about the real issues in our Chicano and Black communities.

There was a section from a prisoner in California talking about a book called Chican@ Power and the Struggle for Aztlán where he brought up a good point about prisoners on the SNY yards. I have been on this side for about a year and I came over here on my own, not for security reasons, but simply because the “leaders” of the struggle I believed in weren’t leaders. They were selfish and one mistake and they would turn on you. We are not only oppressed by the system, sadly we are also oppressed by our own Raza.

Now to the Agreement to End Hostilities. In my point of view it contradicts every aspect that they preach. Now everybody who died, who caught a life sentence for the struggle they believed in was all for nothing. Take a second and think about that. There are people who are in prison serving a life sentence for killing an individual who opposed his views and beliefs. Now they expect him to be the best of friends with these same people? How does that make sense?

Now you guys reading this might say “He is only saying that because he’s SNY.” Well, for 4 years I was active and I have seen both sides of the fence. Not everybody over here is a snitch. There is more unity here than there is on the mainline. You see raza from North and South united where it doesn’t matter what part of the state you’re from.

If you want to end oppression it needs to start in the streets and not in prison. It needs to start by teaching our youngsters about our culture. Educating them so they can move beyond the ghettos. If you can prevent one from getting into a gang that’s one less individual in prison. I think that is the only way to unite and fight against the oppression that exists in this country.

MIM(Prisons) responds: Saying that the Agreement to End Hostilities (AEH) is hypocritcal based on the past goes against the United Front for Peace Principle (UFPP) of Growth. We must allow for growth and evolution of individuals and organizations if we want to see unity among the oppressed, because the old way didn’t work. There are major contradictions between LOs still, and between different housing units in California. But we see these as contradictions among the people. Which is why we stand behind the AEH, and think those old wounds can heal. It’s been four years, and there’s still a long way to go. But people are putting in the work, and in some locations we’ve seen real progress.

We understand the lack of trust that some have for those calling for the AEH in California. But we say to those people, the ones who truly want to end oppression as this comrade does, isn’t the AEH a step towards what you want? Even if you don’t trust certain individuals, the more we do to promote the spirit of the AEH, as well as the principles of the UFPP, the closer we get to replacing the old order with a new order based on unity of the oppressed.

Well comrades, I must stop and apologize to all. I fell back into the street life, I had no place to live, I could not get a job, so I went back to the old habits. I have no family support. I came back with 12 years to do. These things are very important in the post release: a place to live, there’s a lot of people that come back because of this. We also need to help find comrades jobs already lined up so they can touch down running. Also if there’s anyone like me, x-gang members, felon, tattooed up, it’s very hard.

Please put me back on the list for ULK. I’m no longer an active Crip, I’m going to college in prison. I am now on the SNY yard because of dropping out. It’s hard to have a political life. It’s easy in here because we have a place to stay, but when comrades touch the streets, life moves very fast and I was too slow to keep pace. So I’m starting over. I want to get right. One thing I do know is the imperialists must not win.

In Struggle.

MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade echoes the theme of most submissions to this issue of the Re-lease on Life newsletter: life on the streets is hard after prison! We agree with this writer that we need to set up serve the people programs to help our comrades hitting the streets. Jobs and housing are a priority. We don’t have the resources to do this right now, but these programs are part of our longer term goals for the MIM(Prisons) Re-lease on Life program. And this is a way that people on the outside can get involved. Help us seek out existing resources that new releasees can tap into, and build the groundwork for programs we can set up independently. As a first step, if you know about resources in your area, send us information so we can share that information with others. Anything that you find useful will probably be useful to others: how to get food stamps, where to find temporary housing, places that help finding jobs, etc. Until we are able to build our own resources we can at least offer our newly released comrades some help with finding some of the existing services that might help them get along on the streets.

This is a question which all communists must ask themselves at one point or another of their revolutionary careers. Furthermore, it is a question which has essentially dominated the International Communist Movement (ICM) ever since that movement became a real contender on the world stage. Suffice to say that there has never in essence been a more important question to ask and correctly answer within the ICM itself other than patriotism or internationalism? That said, the concepts of patriotism and internationalism are not mutually exclusive phenomena forever separated by the same great impassable divide of ideological difference, rather, patriotism and internationalism as properly understood by communists are dialectically interconnected concepts that we must struggle to unite.

Sometimes general, sometimes particular, but always of universal importance, the concepts of patriotism and internationalism represent different aspects of the subjective forces whose task it is to carry out revolution both at home and abroad. Focus too much on one and you run the danger of making an ultra-left mistake. Focus too much on the other and you will not only be committing a tactical mistake, but will be guilty of committing a right opportunist error. What comrades must understand however is that pushing the revolutionary vehicle towards a bright communist future isn’t necessarily about making the decision of patriotism or internationalism. It’s about both. This is the topic which the following essay will attempt to explain. Thus in wars of national liberation patriotism is applied internationalism – but are there other ways for us to apply internationalism within nation-specific projects?

Contrary to how this quote has been narrowed down by some comrades, applied internationalism isn’t only about each nation fighting their own battles and hoping that anti-imperialists from other nations will be astute enough to recognize the tactical opportunities of our fight and hence get in where they fit in. Internationalism is about extending our hands and providing assistance to our comrades whenever we can and offering lesser but equally important means of support when other avenues of help have been closed off to us.

Point in fact, MIM(Prisons) can’t physically and persynally reach out to every prisoner on a one-on-one level. But it has a bi-monthly newsletter that goes out to the prison masses as well as a Free Books to Prisoner Program, a website created in part to help facilitate the needs of prisoners across the United $tates and document abuse. It runs study groups and most recently help put out Chican@ Power and the Struggle for Aztlán, a book that will help to build public opinion for revolution in North America by agitating in favor of the Chican@ masses. Not to mention the other nation-specific and internationalist projects which it has been responsible for spawning.

Another excellent but largely forgotten and ignored example of applied internationalism being practiced outside of a nation’s own borders is how the Cuban masses under the leadership of Fidel Castro volunteered to cross the Atlantic to fight alongside the Angolan people in their struggle of national liberation against Portuguese and Amerikan imperialism. This act took place for a variety of reasons, but perhaps none more important than the sheer anger, disgust and solidarity which Cubans felt at the sight of imperialist bombs falling on Angolan heads. It could then be said that this sacrifice on behalf of the Cuban people marked a development as well as a leap in the revolutionary consciousness of the Cuban nation, both because they were willing to give up their lives in the service of another oppressed nation and because with their sacrifice they helped land such a strong and decisive blow against colonialism, while simultaneously helping to detach Angola from the imperialist framework. It could therefore be said that this action on behalf of the Cuban masses was equally, if not more significant than the Cuban revolution itself. This is just another reason why Cuba holds such a special place in the revolutionary hearts of oppressed people everywhere.

This now brings us to a recent debate initiated within the California Council concerning USW’s potential contribution to a certain nationalist project, and a certain comrade’s apprehensions/objections about the role of USW vis-a-vis the national liberation struggles of the oppressed internal nations, as well as the exertion of influence on USW by revolutionary nationalists operating within that organization. In eir argument the comrade in question took the position that no one nation should be forced to take part in another nation’s struggles, citing that this would be tantamount to one nation co-opting others to do its job for them. That said, no nation should be allowed to control another nation’s destiny or make decisions for other nations that are integral to the liberation of the latter as this would in effect mark the beginnings of a neo-colonial relation on a certain level. Furthermore, the comrade also made the statement that “USW is not one nation united, it’s multi-national.” Now this may be true, but the correct definition for USW is the following:

“USW is explicitly anti-imperialist in leading campaigns on behalf of prisoners in alliance with national liberation struggles in the United $tates and around the world. USW won’t champion struggles which are not in the interests of the international proletariat. USW will also not choose one nation’s struggles over other oppressed nations struggles.”

And from the pamphlet The Fundamental Political Line of the Maoist Internationalist Ministry of Prisons:

“Rebuilding the anti-imperialist prison movement means uniting all who can be united around the common interests of the U.$. prison population in solidarity with the oppressed people of the Third World…”

So while we should definitely be in agreement that no nation should be forced to participate in another nation’s struggles and that no one nation should be allowed to come up at the expense of another, this does not in any way mean that USW, or the California Council in particular, should be disallowed from initiating proposals and passing resolutions that will support and lend assistance to nations or nation-specific organizations represented within or outside of USW. The nation in question can either accept the assistance or not. This method of action and participation will ensure that USW retains its United Front mass organization character by preserving the unity and independence of all USW comrades and affiliated organizations. Indeed, USW, like all other organizations, has a dual character. Unlike most other organizations however USW’s duality is complementary and it is not an antagonistic contradiction. While it is true that USW is a mass organization created to represent and fight for the common interests of all prisoners as a distinct social group, it is also a launch pad for the national liberation struggles of the oppressed internal nations in which comrades can cut their teeth thru revolutionary organizing, and from where they can then go on to initiate and lead national liberation struggles on behalf of their own respective nations.

This is what USW, as an anti-imperialist prisoner organization, should be about: the internationalism of prisoners breeding revolutionary nationalism, and revolutionary nationalist projects breeding internationalism amongst the prison masses. This requires more than each nation blindly going its own separate way. It requires unity of action and unity of discipline. As such, it would seem then that what we have here with the comrade in question may be a problem of perspective. What some might see as internationalism others might perceive as a contradiction. What some regard as mutual assistance others will call co-optation. For those of us having this problem of “perception” however, we would be wise to be cautious not to let our own love for our nations blind us to the plight of others, as sometimes what this fear of “co-optation” really translates to is our own fear or refusal to participate in another nation’s struggles. Thus, we should be aware of how our own nation’s struggles, as well as our failure to act on behalf of other nations, can affect the ICM, lest we degenerate to the level of narrow nationalism.

Since this question of whether or not USW should participate in a variety of nation-specific struggles seems to be one rooted in perception, let us take a closer look at the supposed pimping of nations that would take place if USW were to decide to work in the interests of a distinct national project. As has been the current practice thus far, nowhere at all has this resulted in one nation’s struggle being taken up to the detriment of another. But let’s just suppose that this is the case, then maybe ULK should just stop featuring articles that promote the struggle of one nation or another so that we may ensure that no comrades from any nation feel as if they’re being pushed into the background, or that their nation-specific article is forced to share space on the pages of an internationalist forum that also represents one nation or another, lest these comrades begin to feel “co-opted.”

Just because Mao Zedong said that in wars of national liberation the nationalism of the oppressed nations is applied internationalism, it does not justify our lack of adherence to other internationalist principles. This is a guiding line of real communism and should likewise be seen as a line of demarcation for all revolutionary nationalists claiming the mantles of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao. Applied internationalism is about more than just fighting your own nation’s struggles and we should never forget that. To give an additional hystorical example, when Amerikan imperialism attacked Vietnam the People’s Republic of China aided the Vietnamese by providing all types of supplies including food, money and intelligence. Most activists of the time believed this was not enough and that the Chinese should’ve provided troops as well. We wonder what the previously mentioned comrade would think about this? Perhaps ey would say it was too much and that the Chinese were already guilty of co-opting Vietnam’s national liberation struggle and how dare anyone suggest that the Chinese become more involved? Of course, in a possible revolutionary future we can even envision a myriad of situations in which the internal semi-colonies will be forced to coordinate and work shoulder-to-shoulder to oust Amerikan imperialism from their territories. Or would this too be a case of one semi-colony co-opting the struggle of another?

The Palestinian campaign initiated by USW last year is yet another internationalist project that is now shadowed by question marks, at least according to that one comrade’s perspective. Perhaps this was simply incorrect practice and “a waste of USW’s time”? As previously stated, while we agree that no nation should be forced to contribute to another nation’s struggles, we also believe that no comrade should feel as if they’re being “forced” to participate in another nation’s struggles. As such, maybe these type of people aren’t so much for internationalism as they sometimes claim to be? Because Mao accomplished and wrote so much on the national liberation struggle of China many have erroneously come to believe that ey was a nationalist first and a Marxist-Leninist second; but this view is wrong. Mao loved eir nation but ey was a Marxist-Leninist first and foremost who recognized the liberation of China as only a small component in the global struggle for communism.

Choosing and deciding what internationalist struggles one can participate in besides those that are explicitly national liberationist exclusive to one’s own is both a tactical and strategical question that is dictated by the struggles and conditions of the time. Lacking a clear and coherent reason why not to participate is indicative of a national chauvinist political line in command. The USW Palestine campaign was a fairly easy campaign to initiate due to the current stage of the struggle and most USW comrades’ material conditions. Other struggles will take more time and consideration to implement, while some might be outright out of the question. Excluding the labor aristocracy, there is a reason why revolutionaries from Marx to Mao championed the slogan: “workers of all countries unite!”

We struggle for the liberation of all oppressed people or we don’t struggle at all.

– California Councilmembers, March 2016

I received my copy of the book that you sent entitled Chican@ Power and the Struggle for Aztlán. I found it quite interesting because of its historical reflections, but it also produced a storm of negative thoughts to disrupt my normal tranquility and this is why. In regards to inclusion of the Agreement to End Hostilities in the Chican@ Power book, for the most part those individuals who reside on a Special Needs Yard (SNY) are not the enemy, but merely opponents with opposite points of view and I believe that to disrespect us merely because we refuse to conform to the ideology of those who believe themselves to be demigods is to go against the five principles of the United Front for Peace in Prisons. Because not everybody on an SNY are snitches who work for the pigs. Contrary to the propaganda that is preached not everyone has gone through the debriefing process. To be real it’s only about 10% who actually had to debrief because they were validated.

I don’t understand why you would choose to destroy such an educational book with the propaganda that has been professed to be against “the establishment”, but has utilized the worn out but effective tactic of divide and conquer for all these years. If they have learned anything from the treatment that they’ve been subjected to, for all those years, I would think that they would have learned that when you’ve got your hands full, that the only way that you will be able to grab on to anything new, is to let go of the past.

Ehecatl responds:

Struggle to Unite!

All unity with no struggle is the hallmark of opportunism which leads even those claiming to fight for the oppressed to take up the mantle of oppression as they continuously gloss over contradictions within the broader movement for democratic rights. This is why we must not only unite in order to struggle, but struggle to unite, as only then will the struggle for democratic rights behind prison walls develop to the point that the old prison movement fades away and enters a new stage in its development. This will be the stage in the prison movement in which the prisoner masses finally realize that their oppression is unresolvable under the current system. This will be the stage of the prison movement in which prisoners will give up their illusions of the current system. This will be the revolutionary stage in which millions of prisoners will demand national liberation for the nations oppressed under imperialism.

As dialectical materialists, Maoists are aware that all phenomena develop within the process of stages. The prison movement is no exception. The prison movement is currently in its early, embryonic stage and not yet pregnant with revolution. The Agreement to End Hostilities (AEH) and the Pelican Bay Short Corridor Collective (PBSCC) are still a long way from advocating for the revolutionary nationalist stage of the prison movement. More importantly neither the objective conditions nor the subjective forces of the revolution have been sufficiently prepared for the prison movement to have entered this stage. This is not so much a judgment of the PBSCC as it is a statement of facts. However, as stated earlier, unity without struggle is the hallmark of opportunism and while we support the AEH, because we recognize and uphold the progressive nature of that document in our present stage, this should in no way mean that we won’t criticize where it fails to represent the true interest of the prisoner masses. Before going into this topic further however, some background on the Chican@ Power book is needed in order to clarify any misconceptions people have have about who was behind the book project.

To be clear, Chican@ Power and the Struggle for Aztlán was a collaborative effort between revolutionary nationalists from the Chican@ nation and MIM(Prisons). It was written primarily for the imprisoned Chican@ masses in an attempt to not only educate Chican@s on our hystory, but our reality. It was an attempt to produce a comprehensive but concise work that fuses Chican@ liberation with Maoist ideology. The authors of the AEH did not take part in the production of this book. In addition, both Chican@ Power and the Struggle for Aztlán and the AEH were mutually exclusive projects carried out by two mutually exclusive groups around roughly the same period. This point is extremely important to grasp because of the scope and significance of these projects, as well as their correlation, because it speaks to the leaps in consciousness amongst both these groups. This goes to show that the revolutionary current has once again begun to surge in both the lumpen class in general and the Chican@ lumpen in particular. Both the AEH and Chican@ Power represent positive steps in the right direction.

So, while we most certainly believe that there is much room for improvement in the AEH and have said so since day one, we also believe in such a thing as United Front organizing. United Front organizing involves the unification of various groups, organizations and individuals around a common program capable of bringing together as many progressive forces in order to defeat the common, stronger enemy. The result is an alliance which, while not always easy or without difficulties, gets the job done. Therefore, what is required during this particular stage of struggle is strategic and not ideological unity. To make ideological unity a pre-requisite for U.F. organizing will undoubtedly amount to defeat after defeat for the prison movement because not everyone is at the same place politically, or of the same mind. Some people participating in the AEH are New Afrikan revolutionaries, some are for Aztlán liberation, while more are still stuck in old gang mentality; Norteño, Sureño, Blood, Crip. Some are even SNY! And while there are many things that these groups don’t have in common there is still one thing that binds them together – their common oppression at the hands of a common enemy.

More to the point, our decision to take part in this United Front comes from the Maoist conception of the principal contradiction. The principal contradiction is the highest, most influential contradiction whose existence and development determines the existence and development of other contradictions. Therefore, it is imperative that all California lumpen organizations and individuals unite and uphold the correct aspects of the AEH, all the while building newer, stronger and more correct foundations based upon the revolutionary aspects of the AEH while rejecting its reactionary aspects. Doing this will ensure that the progressive nature of the document will continue to push the movement forward, lest it retrogress, stagnate and die.

The growing phenomenon of Sensitive Needs Yards in California prisons is itself a manifestation of the principal contradiction within the prison movement; and the principal contradiction is itself dialectically related to the dismantling of the old prison movement and the temporary demise of national liberation struggles within U.$. borders. Many have forgotten that it was the revolutionary impetus of groups like the Black Panther Party, the Brown Berets and many others that originally sparked the revolutionary fire within California prisons nearly 50 years ago. And just as the creation of the SNY was dialectically related to the contradictions within the old prison movement, so should the contradictions that led to the need for SNYs be resolved with the success of the new prison movement. If the new prison movement is to live up to its full potential it is essential that the prison masses learn from the mistakes of the past. This requires that the revolutionary masses behind prison walls begin organizing in opposition to the status quo, as only then will the prison movement truly become a movement of the masses and not one of individuals. This requires that the revolutionary masses begin taking the initiative in revolutionary organizing and that the leadership sponsor and provide safe avenues for the prison masses to organize. If the PBSCC is sincere in its fervor then the masses will see this and work hard for the struggle. Likewise, if the PBSCC and other prison leaders are not sincere in their fervor, then the prison masses will also see this.(1)

The present principal contradiction within the prison movement was identified by United Struggle from Within (USW) and MIM(Prisons) comrades as the parasitic/individualist versus self-sufficient/collective material interests of prisoners. Within this contradiction it is the parasitic/individualist aspect that is currently dominant, although the self-sufficient/collective material interest aspect, while currently subordinated, has been steadily gaining prominence. How this contradiction will turn out is wholly dependent on how the prison movement continues to develop. Will it continue to move forward or will it retrogress?

It is true that the AEH does not conform to the United Front for Peace in Prisons. Furthermore, if one reads this document carefully ey will note that the first point clearly states that they are only interested in bringing about substantive meaningful changes to the CDCR system in a manner beneficial to all “solid” individuals, who have never been “broken” by “CDCR’s torture tactics intended to coerce one to become a state informant via debriefing…” Indeed, if the PBSCC is being honest then they should acknowledge that it is the powerful lumpen chiefs who bear the brunt of the responsibility in pushing prisoners into becoming state informants in the first place, and not CDCR. [We can look to examples like the siege of Wounded Knee when the FBI and military terrorized and interrogated the whole Oglala Sioux population and no one gave up information to the pigs. - MIM(Prisons)] Admittedly enough, the principal writers who have been contributing to Under Lock & Key since this document came out should be blamed for not practicing one divides into two politics (myself included). If the writers regularly featured in Under Lock & Key and the MIM(Prison) website are supposed to be representing the proletarian pole then it’s time we begin pushing the leaders of the PBSCC and their supporters in a more revolutionary direction. If the PBSCC is serious about lessening oppression behind prison walls then they should recognize that they will need the help of SNY prisoners who make up over 30% of the CDCR prison population.(2)

Our group’s name is FFU, or Frantz Fanon University. Our statement of unity is to actively educate “the people”, radicalize gang members in aims of putting an end to ALL OPPRESSION.

We believe in having peace amongst the oppressed in working together arm-in-arm. We know that it takes unity to rise up against the power structure that holds us down. Growth is tantamount in the struggle. Internationalism needs to be reached. Independence is what we’re striving for.

[signed by the members of FFU]

Title: “Welcome to Ad-Seg/SHU” or “Fuck Your Sleep!”
Artist: CDCR staff
Producer: Jeffrey Beard - Secretary of CDCR

Lyrics:
“Whack!” Beep (12am) 
“Whack!” Beep (12:30am)   
“Whack!” Beep (1am)    
“Whack!” Beep (1:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (2am)    
“Whack!” Beep (2:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (3am)    
“Whack!” Beep (3:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (4am)    
“Whack!” Beep (4:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (5am)    
“Whack!” Beep (5:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (6am)    
“Whack!” Beep (6:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (7am)    
“Whack!” Beep (7:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (8am)    
“Whack!” Beep (8:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (9am)    
“Whack!” Beep (9:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (10am)    
“Whack!” Beep (10:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (11am)    
“Whack!” Beep (11:30am)    
“Whack!” Beep (12pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (12:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (1pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (1:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (2pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (2:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (3pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (3:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (4pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (4:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (5pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (5:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (6pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (6:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (7pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (7:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (8pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (8:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (9pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (9:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (10pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (10:30pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (11pm)    
“Whack!” Beep (11:30pm)    

Repeat… Repeat… Repeat

The new hit single across California.
Available now @ Pelican Bay State Prison,
California Correctional Institution,
San Quentin State Prison,
Corcoran State Prison,
& Old/New Folsom State Prison.
Stand up for your rights now to get your free tickets!

No doubt even throughout the global community many have heard of the infamous “3 Strikes Law.” In California if someone gets 3 felony convictions they face a sentence of LIFE in prison. The law has created quite a bit of controversy and there’s been a few token reforms to it that mean about as much as calling San Quentin (SQ) a “Correctional Center” instead of a prison.

SQ’s Adjustment Center (AC) is also in the midst of controversy and in the process of implementing reactionary token reforms in much the same way. They also implemented what could be called “The 2 Strikes Law.” The SQ oligarchy calls their oppressive tool of retaliation Operational Procedure (OP) 608 Section 825 A.4. Here’s how it gets implemented:

On 25 December 2015 while en route to group yard Sergeant Rodrigues waved a piece of paper in a prisoner’s face, after asking him if he remembered refusing to show his asshole to officer C. Burrise the other day. Rodrigues tells the prisoner he is going to the AC for receiving two serious Rules Violations Reports (RVRs) within 180 days of each other. A death row prisoner receives an indeterminate SHU term for that.

The two RVRs involve the prisoner’s refusal to submit to unclothed body search procedures either prohibited by OP 608 Section 765(2) (local prison rules) and state law, or not applicable to East Block (EB) prisoners. In fact, before either of these RVRs were fabricated the prisoner had filed several staff complaints citing the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) and alleged “sexual harassment under the guise of security.” The prisoner also wrote an informal letter to Specialized Housing Division Facility Captain J. Arnold asking him to abolish his “Perversion Enforcement Team Training Project” (PETT Project). That got the prisoner a punitive cell search response resulting in the confiscation of a loaner TV and theft of art supplies valued at $48. So now you know the motive. But let’s see what else this means for ALL death row prisoners thinking Seigle & Yee are to the rescue.

Seigel & Yee are the attorneys currently representing the “AC class” regarding the long-term/indeterminate SHU program conditions experienced by death row prisoners in the AC. One prisoner who corresponded with Seigle & Yee attorney Emily Rose Johns in early 2014 from his recently acquired EB (SHUII) cell reports advising her a wave of prisoners formerly doing indeterminate SHU terms in the AC was flowing into EB and being assigned to the “Sun Deprivation Program.”(1) This prisoner came over to EB just ahead of that wave. Johns’s response to our dilemma was, “We intentionally kept the scope of the case narrow for many reasons, including out of respect for the experience prisoners in the AC had with the Thompson case.”

So now it’s about time that someone points out that experience prisoners in the AC had with the Thompson case, including not rescinding the 2 Strikes Law, and that OP 608 Sec. 825 A.4. is still being used as a revolving door into the abyss of indeterminate SHU terms. How leaving that door wide open could be hailed as a reform or “respect for the experience of prisoners in the AC had with the [SQ/Seigel & Yee] case” remains to be seen by a lot of prisoners literally LEFT IN THE DARK for years.

This unfolding experience brings to mind an article from a recent issue of Under Lock & Key.(2) It sets the record straight, explaining in detail the “reforms” hailed in the media regarding indeterminate SHU terms with respect to prisoners subject to the cruel and unusual conditions in the Pelican Bay gulag. Just as the so-called reform left the doors wide open to every other SHU in California’s gulag system, merely limiting the time spent doing an indeterminate term at Pelican Bay to 2 years. It’s nothing, NOTHING different than SQ’s 2 Strikes Law being intentionally contested. Torture cannot be reformed. So the practice of long-term isolation must be ABOLISHED. The construction of more SHUs at SQ must stop because it is torture.

[This comment was submitted by a California death row prisoner to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in response to a “written public comment period” (closing 22 February 2016) on the topic of instituting death penalty by lethal injection in California. Any response to this letter will be posted here.]

No matter how it’s accomplished legalized murder is still murder. Making it seem less cruel so it’s not that unusual needs a lot of premeditation. And unfortunately the United $tates keeps drooling to kill people under the guise of “justice” around the globe.

The most sickening thing about the state governments still promoting legal murder within their borders is the warehousing of all those bodies awaiting the genocidal intention of their oppressor. These beast-like governments are scurrying to stack living bodies high in newly designed torture units based on the Pennsylvania model, which was ironically outlawed back in the 1890s then brought back in 1983 starting in Marion (in Illinois) and continues unchecked, merely shrouded in token reform despite the Convention Against Torture ratified by the United $tates in 1994 or the hunger strikes of 2011 and 2013. So who are the real psychopaths?

The general public’s ability to research these facts is greater than a prisoner’s, and of course this is by design as well. The oppressor is real, and just as it intentionally deprived its slaves from an education to keep them neutralized, submissive, unable to use the most powerful weapon to free themselves - their minds - because knowledge is power; it is still the mind our oppressor is aiming to destroy. Our bodies provide their sustenance. So it’s no sign of relief simply because their methods of execution change.

Obama once went on TV saying Assad needs to be ousted for gassing to death his own people. He even talks down to the UN Assembly basically accusing it of having no balls and suggested threats, drones and missiles be launched at Syria as if that would promote mass peace in the region.

Several states, including California have a history of gassing to death their own people too. Some prosecutors rallied to bring back the gas chamber since suppliers of chemicals used by the state to “legally” murder its citizens are not wanting to sell them drugs meant for peaceful purposes – for extending and saving life rather than making a weapon of mass corruption to use against the minority nations.

If it’s Obama’s solution to oust the Assad regime/government than reason dictates that the Obama regime/government should be ousted for the same. What you are seeing is a chiseling away at human rights which is starting to expose the features of the beast within, not some random shape perceived in a passing cloud of one’s overactive imagination. And the current government don’t seem to have the balls to admit.