Working

W
Working
ki to
t Extend
E t d Democracy
D
to
t All 

V
Volume
V l
Volume
4, N
4
Number
b 12
12

December

D
D
December
b 2015
2015

STRIKE IT UP
AROUSING THOUGHT WHILE BUILDING PUBLIC OPINION
“Without preparedness superiority is
not real superiority and there can be no
initiative either. Having grasped this point,
a force which is inferior but prepared can
often defeat a superior enemy by surprise
attack” (1)
By Jose H. Villarreal, Pelican Bay Prison
Introduction
t has been said that writing is an art
form. It can in certain instances be seen
as an art, but when it comes to power
struggles writing becomes necessary for
survival. The prison writer to be specific is
confined on many levels, where the prisoners is most free is in the theoretical realm.
Because prison struggles for human rights
is a protracted struggle, this means the prisoner needs to use everything accessible,
including the pen and paper.
Prison literature which is created by the
captive from our perspective is a weapon
because it can be empowering and liberating. When prisoners create articles, theory
or critiques it not just teaches other prison-

I

CONTENTS
Strike it Up ...............................1
Reflections on Crime & Class ..5
Another Word About Hugo .......8
Final Editorial ...........................9
Private Prison Divestment........9
The End ...................................10

ers and sparks deeper analysis within the
prison masses, but it also shines a light on
these concentration kamps and helps to
raise the awareness of these kamps. In this
sense prison lit. educates both sides of the
prison walls and draws more into the struggle for prisoner’s rights and human rights
more generally.
It is critical that Lumpen understand
what their political position is in this society. How can one change a situation without understanding it in the first place? The
fact that the U.S. has millions imprisoned
can’t be understood fully without knowing
what creates these conditions that necessitate so many to be entombed. The fact that
“crimes” were broken is not what this mass
imprisonment is about, as I will get into in
this writing, it goes far deeper than this.
Discovering our power will not just be
realized through the physical realm with
future strikes and prisoners’ worker’s
unions, but it will also surface through our
literature. Once harnessed prison writers
and theoreticians will be one of our biggest
g weapons in our quest for rights. Ending
i torture and solitary confinement will
be
b one step in our march toward liberation
on
o a grander scale. Our writers will play a
role
r in this reality to finally spring forth. All
great
movements and revolutions have alg
ways
had writers at the helm in the process
w
and
a the prison movement for human rights
will
w be no different.
There are many different approaches for
striking
up an assessment or theory of our
s
social
reality. Some may tie history into our
s
current
situation, others may raise rhetorical
c
questions
or create theory of our situation.
q

All of these efforts are important and add
to a growing collection of contemporary
prison thought. This is important because
thought leads to practice. No people or nation was ever liberated without thought and
practice. They feed off of each other and
propel a people forward through a painful
process of learning from ones mistakes, of
learning from history or to put it politically,
through historical materialism. Writers do,
and always have helped contribute to this
process.
When Words Sprout from Concrete
and Oppression
Writers in general are the translators of
truth, the bearers of truth. The writer at
once perceives the world in which they exist, captures it and delivers this reality to
the people. At times the writer wraps this
reality in flowery language, adds humor
to the message or nudges the reader along
in nuance. Either way the writer becomes
the conveyor of truth, whether it be a good
or bad truth. The writer thus enshrines a
phenomenon on to the printed page for the
writer’s peers to grapple with as well as future generations to learn from.
For the prison writer it is much more of
a consuming process because of the dire
situation and realities that prison writers
must contend with. Our literature is birthed
through a canal of brutality and at times
torture. For those in control units and especially in solitary confinement writing
becomes a struggle of survival. For many
their sanity dangles by a thread, and for
others the struggle for justice compels one
to use words as weaponized ideas which re-

sist what is occurring in U.S. prisons.
The state does not take too kindly to the
prison writer, or any writer for that matter.
Those who challenge the state and help
to highlight their dirty deeds are met with
more repression or complete isolation. At
times the prisoner will be prevented or hindered greatly from expressing oneself or
tackling a phenomenon. The ability to educate the public is almost always frowned
upon by the state. In Califas the state often
labels prison writings as “gang activity”.
This is done because the state understands
the power of words.
In history, prisons around the world have
always suppressed or attempted to suppress prison voices, especially those which
spoke on behalf of the voiceless. The oppressed and colonized have always faced
censorship from the oppressor nation, this
has always been a part of the colonization
process. But prisoners, and especially revolutionary prisoners are a resourceful bunch
and these writers have always found ways
to continue to write. Writing then is a form
of resistance.
Throughout history if we look at writers we find many who have been imprisoned for one reason or another. Cervantez,
Voltaire and Rousseau are but a few who
have been imprisoned and who continued
to write from within a cell. For the prison
writer, earmarking daily struggles against
oppression and forms of resistance for
future writing becomes second nature, as
fluid as the ink coloring the paper.
Prisoners are the fertilizer for repressive shoots. For most prisoners repression
comes with all the other state issued “fish
kit” right alongside your tooth brush and
blankets. But some of the people’s greatest thinkers have done their best theoretical works within the most extreme forms
of prison repression. The concrete cell in
which they were held seemed to only enhance their ability to see their reality more
clearly. Stripped of all bribes and illusion
of the society in which they lived they were
able to not just explain their concrete reality, but then envision a better way forward
not just for prisoners, but for society as
well. Their vision transcended the prison
walls and scaled the fences in order to pave
the theoretical way forward. In this way
the prison writer is freer than many outside
prison walls.
Lenin’s first major study was his first
book THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM IN RUSSIA which he wrote
while he was in prison. Because of Lenin’s
2

revolutionary activity, the Czarist state sent
Lenin to a Siberian prison which was a
torturous experience. The intention was to
break Lenin into subservience. His understanding of his social reality lead him not
to give up, but to continue to struggle even
from within his prison cell and continue
to write which culminated in his literary
work, This work would be a contribution to
the Russian people outside of prisons who
were struggling to understand the political
reality of Czarist Russia. In this sense Lenin added to building awareness, to building public opinion of what was occurring
in Russia. And he did this from within a
prison cell.
In Calitas George Jackson wrote his
book “Soledad Brother” from within a prison cell. This was a time when prisoners did
not have half the things that we have now.
Some things were better, but a lot of things
were worse. Repression was more present. Even though her may have been in the
hole George continued to write and agitate
through the pen. His writings also led to the
book “Blood In My Eye” which was also
written in prison. The prison walls do not
water down the effectiveness and power of
words, one only needs to look to how most
U.S prisons continue to ban the books of
George Jackson to see this.
As prisoners our observations and
thought may be even more powerful than
if we were outside spectators, because we
give an assessment of the contemporary
prison experience which is live and in
color. The oppression is not in the abstract
because we breathe it and live it daily so it
becomes clear to us and we can penetrate
its essence and hear its heartbeat.
Ricardo Flores Magon was another great
prison writer. He wrote consistently from
his federal prison cell at Leavenworth during the early part of the 20th century. His
writings can still be found on the internet
for those wanting to research Aztlan during
the early 20th century. His writings tackle
the national oppression that Raza were going through at that time. Both of the Magon
brothers were brilliant writers whether they
were inside or outside of prison walls. They
propagated resistance to oppression within
the United States. Being in prison stopped
nothing.
Many other contemporary prison writers can be found today scratching out ideas
from one concentration kamp or another.
Coping with the same repression or torture
as the other prisoners while at the same
time preserving the experience and thought

for the people. Most of these prison theoreticians can be found in the pages of publication like Prison Focus where theoretical
resistance emerges and finds comfort. The
prison writer must write as surely as one
must consume water.
Being a prison writer does not come
free from threat from the state. Two of the
above examples were silenced by the state
and never left prison alive. Both writers
delivering truth from within these bowels
of the enemy are not the only writers who
conflict and invite lethal repression from
the state apparatus. Those outside of prison
are not immune to threat.
For the Chican@ nation the most glaring example of this repression lies with the
assassination of Ruben Salazar, Salazar
was a gifted Chicano writer whose work
exposing the national oppression of Aztlan
helped build public opinion. After moving from his hometown of El Paso, Texas
to Northern Califas where he worked as
a Journalist, he settled at the L.A Times
Newspaper working first as a Foreign Correspondent travelling the world. This was
a time when the Chican@ Movement was
in full swing and this helped Salazar to become conscious.
Writing about the struggles the struggles
that Chican@s were going through was
what Salazar began to focus on. Despite his
earlier attempt at assimilation, the reality
was that assimilation was impossible. At
one point Salazar even said publicly about
Chican@s situation “We never will melt
into that mythical melting pot”. It was at
this point that Salazar began to write for the
people.
Salazar saw that what the Raza were going through at that time was going on unchecked. There was no voice addressing
the attacks on Aztlan and he knew that as
a Chicano he needed to do this part for his
people and he began to write.
Once he wrote about two Mexicanos
who were murdered by the pigs. The pigs
were indicted, but they warned him that his
writings were dangerous. They told him to
“stop stirring up the Mexicans” and that
“Mexicans are not ready” for his writing.
Not long afterwards, during the Chicano
Moratorium march against the U.S war on
Vietnam on August 29, 1970 Ruben Salazar was killed by the pig, shot with a tear
gas gun.
A courageous Brown voice distinguished
by the state. His crime being standing
up for his people and daring to struggle
against the oppressor nation through sharp
Rock!

words which cut deeper than he probably
knew. As uncomfortable as it must have
been the people always need our perspective explained. We need our press.
People’s Literature
In any social Movement throughout history the momentum, at some point when
facing an oppressor, there will be a need for
the people’s side to be told. This will mean
that a people’s literature will be needed and
a cadre of writers will need to be unleashed.
This works to educate the people who may
be bystanders to the particular struggles
while bringing more to understand that we
stand on the side of justice. Our version of
history will require our own writers.
In WHAT IS TO BE DONE Lenin describes the use of literature as a form of
war. He described this method of struggling via the pen as “exposure literature”
where in Russia in his day this literature
sought to expose working conditions of the
Proletariat and these writings were most
effective. The Russian proletariat were the
most revolutionary at the time in Russia. In
the same vein our people’s literature needs
to highlight the contradiction between prisoners and the state, shine a light on the
various forms of oppression that we face in
U.S. prisons.
Just as the state has propaganda, the
people need our propaganda arm as well.
This is possible via publishing no matter
what kind of concentration kamp we may
find ourselves in. Our writing should be
harvested from the people from the people
in the method of “from the masses, to the
masses”. Mao explains this process as follows”
“In all the practical work of our Party, all correct leadership is necessarily
“from the masses, to the masses”. This
means: take the ideas of the masses
(scattered and unsystematic ideas) and
concentrate them (through study turn
them into concentrated and systematic ideas), then go to the masses and
propagate and explain these ideas until
the masses embrace them as their own,
hold fast to them and translate them
into action, and test the correctness of
these ideas in such action. Then once
again concentrate ideas from the masses and once again go to the masses
so that the ideas are preserved in and
carried through. And so on, over and
over again in an endless spiral, with
the ideas becoming more correct, more
vital and richer each time. Such is the
Volume 4, Number 12

Marxist theory of knowledge”. (2)
From the masses to the masses is the process as Mao explained of taking the ideas
of the people and synthesize them in their
most advanced form and take them back
to the people. This method is repeated and
built on so that our ideas become more
advanced and closer to truth. Because our
social reality, along with all phenomenon
is constantly changing this process never
ends. We constantly need to assess and reassess the people’s thoughts and politicize
the most advanced theory.
It’s important that we arouse the Lumpen
to wield the power of the pen. Lit is a part
of culture and culture is an ideological
weapon, one we need to use in the class
struggle of the imprisoned Lumpen and
the state. Our target audience first and
foremost is prisoners. It is essential for the
prison mass to understand it is oppressed
and then to realize its power.
Political literature has a real role in the
building of true political power. An organ
in any mass movement is its scaffolding
which ensures a strong theoretical training
and guidance. This is important because in
any struggle, at some point it needs a definite political character. The prison struggle
for human rights is no different. If this is an
embryonic class struggle that we are facing
in prison than we cannot fall back on primitive modes of struggle, we need to ensure
we meet 21st century needs, this would include a strong propaganda arm.
Social media, the creation of pamphlets,
the production of solid articles and literature which deliver powerful portrayals of
prison oppression and our struggles to obtain justice should be pursued with as much
vigor as we can espouse.
A people’s literature should expose the
fallacy of the state while promoting independence of the oppressed internal nations
within the U.S. as well as the imprisoned
Lumpen. Such examples transform a people and ideologically unhitch the people
from the oppressor. As Lenin said it:
“From the moment all members of
society or even only the overwhelming
majority, have learned to administer
the state themselves have taken this
business into their own hands, have
“set up” control over the insignificant
minority of capitalists, over the gentry,
who wish to preserve their capitalist
habits, and over the workers who have
been completely demoralized by capitalism – from this moment the need for
government begins to disappear”(3)

A true people’s lit exposes the states errors at every turn. It also shows the people
ways in which to rely on our own efforts
and kicks state parameters and influence
to the curb. This is when as Lenin says the
need for the state becomes unnecessary in
the minds of the people.
There are dual struggles in constant battle within the people. These manifest in silence and speaking out. Through passivity
and activity and resistance and surrender.
These struggles will ultimately determine
the fate of our oppression. Paulo Freire
described ones perception as an “intervention” in an oppressive reality. One that is
not in the oppressor’s interest. The state
would rather prisoners not read of struggles
or revolutionary theory, of national liberation, nor of socialism because it weakens
its hold on our oppression. So, in this sense
it is a struggle in the realm of ideas.
Writing allows us to venture outside our
oppression and not only visualize a world
where our land is not is not occupied by the
oppressor nation, but identify steps which
overturn our oppression. The use of language is a rich medium full of a trove of
expression and lessons. The use of figurative language for example, is understood
in ways other than its literal meaning. Just
like the word Aztlan when used today in
discussing the Chican@ national territory,
we do not mean its HISTORICAL definition of the origin of the Mexica, rather of
what it implies to the Chicano@ nation
TODAY and is LAND.
The writer should understand words,
their power and the contradictions. Paulo
Freire defines the contradictions in words
as “reflection and action” where they are
fused together in a unity of opposites.
Words are at once reflective and active in
the consciousness of the reader, thus they
become transformative. It is then no surprise when we read history and how books
were targeted in oppressive societies, or
how the CDCR states that “gang leaders”
are held in the S.H.U’s. It is then no surprise why the state would want to prevent
leaders of the oppressed from advancing
their knowledge and keeping revolutionary
theory away from its S.H.U’s. Amplified
analysis of these concentration kamps are
needed more today. We know this because
the state is attempting to smother this analysis so it is a signal to unleash it as never
before.
Prison theoreticians can’t theorize without the prison masses. Lumpen theory
without the Lumpen ain’t shit. Lumpen
3

theory should be one with, and provide a
clear translation of the challenges within
prisons and define ways to combat the oppressive constructs. This should be written from the oppressed perspective. This
is the only way to locate a real remedy to
our situation. Theory is important and its
core theorizing is teaching and teaching
is liberating. The essential act then of the
theoretician is to help the people to liberate themselves, not in the physical sense
at this stage, but through their ideas. Their
thought should advance, grow and expand
in ways that benefit the oppressed and distinguish the oppressor.
The oppressor nation understands the
danger of a thinking Lumpen. This is because it will ultimately be the Lumpen and
Third World people who finally put this
baby to sleep. So prisoners have a major
role in the future of this society, being of
the Lumpen class, prisoners when politically conscious are amongst the state’s biggest
threats. Organized Lumpen are the states
enemy. The state fully grasps this, its why
so many are tortured in isolation concentration kamps. The prison writer when striking up theory, is almost like a translator
who delivers these truths to these control
units and beyond.
Oppressors Literature
As we begin to delve deeper into what
a people’s literature is, this analysis would
not be complete without studying its opposite which is the oppressor’s literature and
propaganda. One cannot fully understand
any phenomenon without also studying its
opposite because one cannot know what
propels the other to struggle.
First, it’s important to understand that as
prisoners our oppressor (the state) controls
the media as far as main stream news outlets etc. The bourgeois press is the states
mouthpiece so they support the states view
on its war on the poor. The poor are often
labeled as “criminals” and worse by the
press. Because of the oppressors grip on
power it has not just controlled the overall culture within U.S borders for hundreds
of years, but we were all mostly born and
raised with the oppressor’s view of history, of world events, of what is right and
wrong. The oppressor has framed what is
morally right for us and our ancestors. We
have all attended the oppressors “schools”
(brainwash kamps) and have learned to act
in self-destructing ways.
The oppressor has been so crafty that
many Third World peoples have been brain4

washed into believing they are a part of the
oppressor nation, even when they stand on
land stolen from their people by this same
oppressor. It’s incredible. At some point in
the process of consciousness the oppressed
will be faced with some critical junctures
in the path forward. Freire describes these
predicaments of the oppressed as:
“Their ideal is to be men, but for
them, to be men is to be oppressors.
This is their model of humanity, this
phenomenon derives from the fact that
the oppressed at a certain moment of
their existential experience adopt an
attitude of “adhesion” to the oppressor. Under these circumstances they
cannot “consider” him sufficiently
clearly to objectivize him to discover
him “outside” themselves”…..and
Freire here even goes so far as saying
“the one pole aspires not to liberation,
but to identification with its opposite
pole”. (4)
So, Freire reveals that the reality of oppression can end up blurring the lines of
oppressed vs oppressor to the point where
some model the oppressor and seek out
those same trinkets that lure the individualist out into the abyss. Rather than wanting to get free, the oppressed can end up
wanting to be oppressors. This is the real
danger that is at hand for any people who
suffer oppression. This process is nothing
new, it is no big shocker and is not being
discovered in this writing because we can
look back to history and see it re-appear
over and over, it should then not surprise us
if it arises in U.S. prisons.
When we are dealing with the oppressor’s literature or press we have an uphill
battle for sure. Writers are fighting a war
of words, with the people’s writers on one
side and our oppressor’s writers on the
other side. So we should understand that
one of their main weapons in these battles
is to label us as “criminals.” For most out in
society the term “criminal” frightens them.
Some prisoners may even become demoralized by this term, but we should understand this term since it is used against us
so much.
“Crime” in the U.S. is debatable, because
what is considered a crime in this society
may not be a crime if this were another
society. Crimes in the U.S. are political
because we live in a political society. Because we live under an occupation, where
the laws are the laws of the oppressor nation, the colonizers rules, it means its laws
are questionable to say the least. When we

liberate our land and rid it of the oppressor
we can install people’s courts to determine
what crime will be. Occupying another
people’s land will surely be seen as a crime.
One author described crime as follows:
“There can be no universal theory
for “crime”, because it is defined by
the shifting boundaries of the law and
law enforcement, and the objectives of
a given ruling class”. (5)
Here the author reveals how laws in any
given society are created by those in power. In the U.S. the ruling class has created
laws which in most cases reinforces the
oppressive nature of our reality. The poor
are criminalized in ways which secure the
states grip on power. The term “criminal”
is more if their propaganda which is used
to divide the people and ensure that those
on the bottom of the heap receive no support from anyone outside their class. So
that even within one’s particular nationality they are separated from the rest of their
respective nation and looked down upon as
a “criminal”.
Because the oppressor controls the press
and official documents as well as the laws
they can write falsehood and not only will
much of the public believe it but many prisoners may as well. Recently CDCR passed
out a new “Notice of Change to Regulations” dated 6-9-15 which states in part:
“There is no ‘solitary confinement’
in California prisons and the SHU is
not ‘solitary confinement’. Many SHU
inmates in fact have cellmates. The
conditions of confinement in CDCR
facilities, including the SHU have
been reviewed and monitored by external agencies, including the office of
the Inspector General”.
I read this notice, which is becoming the
rules to the prisons in Califas, and as I sat in
solitary confinement I read about how the
state is saying there is no solitary confinement. It made me think what our situation
would be like if no prison writers existed
and the only thing that people out in society
learned about prisons was from the oppressor. It would be a sad situation.
The oppressor’s press will continue to
write, as CDCR Director Beard did in his
op ed for the L.A. Times during our hunger
strike. By prisoners not engaging in creating literature which promotes our struggles
it will not make the oppressor stop its literary offensive, it will only give up this
battlefield to the oppressor.
Conclusion:
Rock!

Education is something that the state attempts to keep out of our reach if it in our
true interests. Their attempts to ban publications and writings from prisoners in
recent times reflects this. This is because
revolutionary education leads to CONSCIOUSNESS. Consciousness is the key
to one’s deliverance from oppression of
all types. Prison writers are the visionaries which take the prison experience and
translate it to others in prison and outside
of these concentration kamps. The prison
theoretician see’s those path’s which are
not yet cut and inject theory into our world
so that others can build on these thoughts.
One of our strength’s even as prisoners
is in our writing. This is one way that we
express what cannot be expressed in any
other way because of our location.
The prison writer captures history
and enshrines it in annals of the people’s
thought. Imprisoned writers should propagate Lumpen thought and keep it moving
toward complete liberation of the people.
There are many ways in which an oppressed people can struggle. Revolutionaries in Turkey for example had their armed
underground wing “Kurdistan Workers
Party” (PKK), which has an urban semiunderground wing called “Union of Communities in Kurdistan” (KCK) and an
above ground liberal wing called “Peace
Democracy Party” (BDP) which has seats
in the Turkish Parliament. They correctly
understand that there is a need for the oppressed to struggle on different levels. This
is because there are different spheres to the
oppressor.
Prison writers need to be unleashed and
work toward combatting the state propaganda. We need our own press and our own
cadre of powerful writers. ●

NOTES:
1. Mao Tse-Tung, “On Protracted War”
(May 1938)
2. Mao Tse-Tung, “Some Questions
Concerning Methods of Leadership” (June1. 1943). Selected Works,
Vol. 3, page 119
3. V.I. Lenin. THE ESSENTIAL WORKS
OF LENIN, “State and Revolution”,
Bantam Books, pages 348-349
4. “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”, By Paul
Freire, H&H paper books, page 30.
5. “Shackled and Chained : Mass Incarceration in Capitalist America “ By Eugene
Puryear, ( PSL Publications 2013) page
129
Volume 4, Number 12

REFLECTIONS ON CRIME AND CLASS
By Ed Mead
alk around town in any major
city in the U.S. and one can’t
help but notice the huge and
seemingly growing number of homeless
people living on the streets. This sight is
particularly unnerving to me, a modern day
Rip Van Winkle. I went into prison back in
the mid 1970s, and came out nearly twenty
years later to a very different world.
Before I went to prison a person could
hitchhike from place to place without a second thought. In one trip I hitched from Buffalo, New York to San Francisco, and then
on up to Seattle, and in the process met a
wonderful culture of people who traveled
around the country in this way. Back in
those days we could happily talk to people
we passed on the streets. We even had the
luxury to smile and speak to children we
didn’t know. In today’s era I can safely
speak to a dog passing me on the sidewalk,
but not to the person walking the animal.
I shudder to think about the possible consequences of speaking to some stranger’s
child. If this country’s fear has gotten this
bad since the mid-1970s, how bad it will
become in another twenty years?
Back in the day, as a youthful revolutionary, I was prepared to risk imprisonment or
worse in an effort to bring about a better
world. My peers and I felt the risks were
a better alternative than continuing to live
under the boot of capitalism’s culture of
death.
Today that culture is far worse. The system considerably more vicious, the nation’s
citizens more confused, and the level of
social atomization has never been greater.
One of the state’s primary mechanisms
for isolating us from each other is fear.
And there is no fear greater than the fear
of crime—no domestic segment bourgeois
society is more demonized than the criminal. The alleged offender is no longer a part
of “us” but rather suddenly becomes one of
“them” (the other upon whom any evil can
justly be visited). It is not enough that this
demonized person be politically disenfranchised and held behind bars under constitutionally sanctioned conditions of slavery,
the hapless offender must be also be subjected to endless forms of torture while in
prison as well.
The first step in getting a better grasp on
the crime/fear dynamic is to understand
the dialectical processes involved–not the

W

ongoing media-driven hysteria. What constitutes a crime is not some fixed set of proscribed behaviors, but rather changes with
time and the class nature of the then existing social order. Both ancient Greece and
Rome, for example, were societies based
upon the state-supported economic system
of slavery. A slave owner during that period
would be perfectly within his legal rights to
murder one or more of his slaves. He could
premeditatedly kill them for punishment or
for the mere pleasure of watching them die.
The law of the day protected his right to
dispose of his property in any way he saw
fit.
Today, getting rich from the surplus
value created by your employees is looked
upon as one of bourgeois society’s highest virtues. In tomorrow’s working class
social order, on the other hand, that sort
of behavior will be criminally repugnant.
Just as what we call first-degree premeditated murder was behavior protected by
the power of the state under the system of
slavery, so too in a future social order acts
seen as virtuous today will be looked upon
as criminal behavior tomorrow. Indeed, in
a future communist society it will rightfully be a crime for one person to materially
profit from the labor of another.
Just as the definitions of crime can
change with the class basis of the existing
social order, so too does it’s punishments.
Today’s capitalist system engenders myriad
schemes for separating the working class
from its hard-earned money, ranging from
telemarketing scams to the usury committed by banks and credit card companies.
Some of these are legal and some are not.
When such crimes are punished it is only
lightly, usually a fine of some sort. General
Motors just paid a fine to the government
for knowingly continuing to use a faulty ignition switch that has killed over a hundred
people. No prison for them, only a fine.
The same is true for punishments against
corporations and wealthy individuals. Indeed, a rich person has never been executed
in all of American history. Yet in all class
societies up until now, the crimes of the
poor are punished far more harshly. This
disparity in punishment is applied with a
vengeance during periods of social instability.
In feudal England it became a crime punishable by death to commit such petty offenses as killing a rabbit on private land,
5

chopping down a tree on a public lane, or
picking a pocket. These draconian punishments have never worked. History records
groups of pick pockets gleefully plying
their trade on crowds gathered to watch the
hanging of a fellow pick pocket.
When General Licinius Crassus impaled
the heads of Spartacus and thousands of
rebellious followers on spikes along the
road to Rome, his doing so did not save
the system of slavery or the Roman Empire
that lived off it. Nor did murdering hapless
pick pockets save the British monarchy
from the onslaught of capitalist productive
relations. Similarly, the adoption of harsh
three-strikes legislation, the gutting of constitutional protections, and the ongoing expansion of the death penalty etc., will not
save the moribund system of international
capitalism. Yet if history is any teacher, we
can expect ever harsher punishments and
still fewer legal safeguards for accused
criminals or others who seek to implement
a radical transformation of existing class
relations.
While the ruling class makes good use of
the existence of crime (by keeping people
isolated by fear from each other), they do
not want the presence of crime any more
than we do. Nobody wants crime. Still, in
a social order in which one-half of one percent own more than ninety percent of the
nation’s property, resources, and productive capacity (not to mention control of the
means of education and information), it
is understandable that those who have the
least will take some stumbling steps to restore a more natural balance of the wealth.
The rich fully understand that crime is a
force, not unlike that of electricity or running water, and as such it will follow the
path of least resistance. It even has a natural direction too–against property (ninety
percent of all crimes are against property).
Through the mechanism of increased resistance required to attack their property interests, the ruling class effectively channels
the force of crime back on to the poor. The
rich live in remote, gated communities;
their banks have armed guards, sophisticated alarm systems, and are protected by
the jurisdiction of the federal courts and the
investigative techniques of the F.B.I.
Since crime tends to follow the course
of least resistance, the social effect of these
and numerous other security measures is to
redirect the force of crime back on to the
poor. Hence the dramatic increase in both
the level and intensity of poor-on-poor
crime. And with the advent of ever less
6

expensive and more available surveillance
mechanisms and alarm systems, the force
of crime is being steadily pushed further
and further into our poorest minority communities. We can expect this trend to continue until every home (or car) that can afford it will be an electronic fortress.
How are progressives to respond to this
situation? A starting point would be to organize our communities so as to redirect
the force of crime back up against those elements responsible for its development—
the rich. We cannot today implement the
economically just society necessary for the
ultimate elimination of crime. Without that
foundation, without control of the means
of information and education, we can only
work to redirect the force of crime back up
against those who created the conditions
for its development.
The political consciousness of the underculture needs to be raised to a point that
makes preying on the poor not cool or even
dangerous for those confused victims of
capitalism who steal from or otherwise victimize their impoverished neighbors.
The message must be: “Rather than ripping off that old woman for her monthly
sustenance check, take your needs to those
who can better afford to pay.” Prisoners
should especially be involved in this process. Their lack of class-consciousness is
clearly reflected by the fact that there is
currently no stigma attached if you are in
prison for cannibalizing your own community, there is one for being a rapist or
child molester. But in fact there should
be no stigma on the basis of one's crime.
When you do that you are engaging in extra judicial punishment. We all know that
punishment is ineffective and wrong. It is
what the state advocates. By stigmatizing
or otherwise punishing your peers your are
unwittingly furthering the interests of the
state.
Instead, those who prey on their own
class should be made a part of study groups
so that they can become class conscious.
Rapists must organize other rapists so they
too can study feminist literature and become able to internalize class and gender
politics – so they too can become a part of
the solution.
On the outside we can start laying the
foundation for dual power by policing our
communities (without collaboration with
the state’s apparatus of repression). Taking
control of our neighborhoods is an important part of increasing the resistance that
will ultimately direct crime back up against

the rich. When the movement finally develops again, class-conscious ex-convicts
would take leadership in this community
protection process. And those still on the
inside would hold study groups for their
peers on issues of class, race, and the various manifestations of sexism. Although we
can’t yet eliminate crime, we can at least
start the process of making it more class
conscious.
Mayhaps one day I will be able to walk
down the street and be able to smile and
say hello to the person walking his dog, and
to give a warm greeting and a pat on the
head to those children who need a whole
community to love them. Maybe I can stick
out my thumb and meet many new friends
as I travel the land. While a revolution is
necessary, right now I would be happy to
get back to the place where society’s head
was at in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Of
course, back then I thought things were so
bad that I risked death and a life of imprisonment to try and overthrow the system. ●

ON THE ASHKER
SETTLEMENT
By Ed Mead
here is a small division within the
outside prisoner support community
with respect to the settlement agreement reached in Todd Ashker, et al. versus
Governor of California, et.al., Case Number 4:09-cv-05796-CW. Most of the community and all of the plaintiffs believe this
was a “great victory.” There is a small minority, on the other hand, who believe the
plaintiffs threw future SHU prisoners under the bus in order to get themselves out. I
am a member of this small minority.
This matter was certified as a class action law suit. The class primarily consists
of California prisoners who have been in
the Pelican Bay SHU for ten years or longer solely on the basis of their alleged gang
affiliation. According to the affidavit of
Jules Lobel, the lead counsel in the case,
“This settlement was reached “without any
admission or concession by Defendants
[CDCR] of any current and ongoing violations of a federal right.”
Readers should not use the following
criticisms to undermine the incredible
work the plaintiffs have done in mounting
three historic struggles. Nor should anyone
denigrate the importance of the Agreement
to End Hostilities. These were monumental
accomplishments. After decades of solitary

T

Rock!

confinement, for the victims of such long
term confinement it was indeed a great
victory. They are being released from the
SHU.
The first draft of this review was pulled
after speaking with Mr. Lobel for an hour
on the phone, and also with several members of the Bay Area’s Prisoner Hunger
Strike Solidarity (PHSS) coalition.
I pulled the original criticism because I
made a factual error in my review. The error was rooted in an incorrect assumption; I
assumed the original complaint was attacking indefinite SHU confinement for everyone, not only for gang types. It had never
occurred to me that they would challenge
only their own indefinite SHU placement
and leave indefinite SHU intact for everyone else (for the much wider net CDCR
now has under its STG farce).
You know how prison officials twist
things to make them sound better. Like
CDC becoming CDCR. Here is an example
from the “Important Notice” on the settlement [to be] posted in all SHU units. Read
the following two quoted sentences carefully. On the “Notice” they say “all SHU
or Step Down Program placements of validated CDCR prisoners shall be based solely
(my emphasis) on a conviction of a SHUeligible offense…” Sound good. Now here
is the same language as stated on page five
the actual settlement, it states that you can
be locked down “…for proven STG behavior, and not solely (emphasis mine) on the
inmate’s validation status or level of STG
affiliation.” Does this mean the state can
still use your validation status against you
if there is other evidence that you’re a bad
guy? The key word here in both instances
is “solely” and how it is used.
Behavior Modification is a crime. The
SHU, even imprisonment itself, is a sick
and unnatural existence. The purpose of
these adjustment oriented programs is to
trick you in to adjusting to that sickness.
Participating in such an alienating experience is damaging to your mental health,
wellbeing, and sense of identity. Prisoners who advocate support for the state’s
behavior modification programs should
be exposed for the collaborators they are.
Collaborators are exposed by posting little
news sheets criticizing their crimes against
prisoners. Violence should not be used.
On the one hand CDCR has their divide
and conquer strategy to suppress prisoners’ rights; they used this very effectively
against prisoners for decades by pitting
race against race. Then, on the other hand,
Volume 4, Number 12

they use the old carrot and the stick approach. In this case the carrot is that many
gang-identified SHU prisoners get out after
decades of confinement.
On page 8 of the agreement, section C,
paragraph 25: “Within twelve months of
the Court’s preliminary approval of the
Agreement, CDCR shall review the cases
of all validated inmates who are currently
in the SHU...” Those who have served the
longest will be reviewed first. “If an inmate has not been found guilty of a SHUeligible rule violation with a proven STG
nexus within the last 24 months, he shall be
released from the SHU and transferred to
a General Population level IV 180-design
facility, or other general population institution consistent with his case factors.”
What is a “SHU-related offense”? Attachment B to the settlement, the “SHU
Term Assessment Chart”, contains two and
a quarter pages of such offenses. Here are
some examples: creating a disturbance,
strike, leading a disturbance or strike, or
inciting conditions that might impact institutional security. In other words, any
meaningful step that might be taken help
to improve your conditions of existence is
a SHU-related offense.
That’s not fair of me as you can still beg
the courts, legislature or governor to treat
you like human beings. You can clearly see
how well that approach has worked out for
prisoners over the past 240 years of U.S.
history. Hell, why not try this same futile
approach for another 260 years, and make
it an even 500?
As Mumia Abu-Jamal pointed out, “…
jailhouse lawyers often unwittingly serve
the interests of the state by propagating the
illusion of ‘justice’ and ‘equity’ in a system
devoted to neither.” They create “illusions
of legal options as pathways to both individual and collective liberation.”
You've had the carrot, now here’s the
stick. Paragraph 29 starts out by saying
“An inmate may be retained in the SHU
and placed on Administrative SHU status
after serving a determinate SHU sentence if
it has been determined by the Departmental
Review Board that the inmate’s case factors
are such that…” blah, blah, blah, you are
the worst of the worst. The old Indefinite
SHU been changed to the new Administrative SHU, which is also indefinite. There
is a difference, however, as now the state
must have “compelling evidence” that you
are the worst of the worst before condemning you to indefinite SHU. But hey, only
for the worst of the worst, right?

Nothing significant has really changed.
One set of alleged gang related people are
released from SHU while a new group of
STG types come in (or maybe even some
of the same people).
At present all prisoners have are promises from CDCR—you know, like the promises they made to end the first two hunger
strikes. Yes, you say, but aren’t these promises enforceable by the courts? We’ll see
about that. How many times did the Castillo plaintiffs have to return to court in an
effort to enforce the agreement in that case,
before the courts finally said to hell with
the prisoners? Besides, other than the release of the plaintiff’s class, what is there
to be won by going back to court? The farm
(indefinite SHU) has already been sold for
a bag a magic beans.
As stated on the back page of every issue
of the Prison Focus newspaper, in addition
to eliminating human rights abuses, we
work “with the goal of ending long-term
isolation….” This agreement not only fails
to do that, it isn’t even a baby step in the
direction of ending long term solitary confinement. Our job is not to make the SHUs
more comfortable or replace one set of
SHU prisoners for another and call it good.
No! The SHUs must be shut down and converted into something like honor housing.
Only the unity and non-violent struggle of
prisoners can make this happen; not the
courts, the legislature, or the governor.
Remember, self-reliance in all things. It is
what has gotten you this far, and you’ve
come a long ways.
Indefinite SHU is still exists for the worse
of the worst. Today’s “worse of the worst”
have been or will soon be released to GP or
into some behavior modification program.
Their empty cells will be filled with tomorrow’s “worst of the worst.” Maybe in ten or
twenty years the new batch of the “worst”
will file yet another law suit around the issue of indefinite confinement in the SHU.
And the beat goes on, and on….
Only the gangs appear to have the authority to cause 33,000 prisoners to stop
eating for a day. How will that authority be
used now? Here is what I can tell you as a
fact: In the absence of class-based politics any leadership in this culture, black,
brown, or white, no matter how well
they talk that talk, will lead you to your
knees. What does that mean? It means the
most they can achieve will be some token
or cosmetic reforms (such as those in the
settlement agreement). This is true not only
for prisoners, but applies to folks out here
7

in minimum custody as well.
I see the settlement as a defeat for the
long term goals of California prisoners.
They agreed to settle for continued indefinite SHU and placed their blessing on the
state’s use of behavior modification programs against prisoners. While the current
generation of long-term SHU occupants
will be released to some level of GP, I find
myself wondering what future generations
of indefinite (worst of the worst) SHU prisoners will have to say about this agreement
and the inmates who signed their names to
that document.
I do not criticize the plaintiffs for failing
to take the case to trial, although I would
have liked to see that happen. It was totally
up to them to make that call. If this case had
gone to trial, however, the public education
potential would have been tremendous.
What jury would have held that keeping a human being locked up for decades in
a tiny, windowless box is okay, especially
since the evidence needed to do so was
in so many cases non-existent? Imagine a
courtroom packed with supporters.
There have been many recent studies pointing out the destructive nature of
long-term solitary confinement, even U.S.
Supreme Court Justice Kennedy and president Obama have come out opposed to its
use. As has the United Nations’ human
rights experts.
What might have happened had there
been a trial is mere speculation. What is
for sure, however, is that indefinite SHU
and behavior modification programs are
here to stay unless some intervening force
intercedes. At present I see no force inside
capable of making that happen.
So once again the question of where to
go from here raises its ugly head. Rightly
or wrongly, I believe the historic struggle
of California prisoners was a once-in-alifetime event, and that it is now, for all intents and purposes, dead.
To make matters worse, we out here
on the streets contributed to that defeat
through our uncritical support for some of
the most reactionary and backwards prisoners in the nation (some were progressive,
but were swayed by our uncritical support
for these backwards elements). This is not
only about the classless leadership on the
inside, but also the liberal approach to this
struggle by outside supporters in the Bay
Area who should have known better—the
apologists for prisoners who may have had
a hand in Hugo’s murder.
I have criticized both CPF and PHSS for
8

their reliance on these gang leaders to the
near total exclusion of progressive (Marxist) forces on the inside. My criticisms
were shrugged off, as if I’m some sort of
nut who does not understand the dynamics of the prison struggle. After a year or so
ago I gave up trying.
And for you who think I’m full of shit,
let me quote from a letter I received in today’s mail. The writer wants a statement
on how long he’d been receiving the Rock
newsletter. “You see,” he says, “I’ve been
issued a Rules Violation Report for possession of an edition of Rock that contained an
interview of George Jackson by Dr. Tolberi
Small; the specific charge is Possession
of Security Threat Group-I Material.” He
asked that I "assist him ASAP to keep me
out of the SHU." The gangs go out and the
STGs come in. A "great victory" for some.
For victims of the now prisoner-ratified
STG thing? I think not.
Much of the PHSS coalition and CPF is
made up of liberals who don't know any
better. They cannot be blamed. For them,
trailing after the prisoners is just fine. But
as Mao Zedong says, "It is to the advantage
of despots to keep people ignorant; it is to
our advantage to make them intelligent. We
must lead all of them gradually away from
ignorance." Instead, the outside support
community uncritically trailed after these
backwards prisoners.
I can understand why Marxists would
also trail after the prisoners, without any effort to raise their class consciousness in the
process. I'm not blameless here, as in the
beginning I also got caught up in it all. ●

ANOTHER WORD
ABOUT HUGO

G

eorge Monbiot once said: “If we
were to judge the U.S. by its penal policies we would perceive a
strange beast: a Christian society that believes in neither forgiveness nor redemption.” Evidently our gang leaders are even
worse than the state when it comes to extra-judicial punishments. You’d think the
victims of the state’s system of continuous
punishment (the prisoners) would be above
imitating their captors in this regard, but
then you’d be wrong.
Hugo’s history is of one who has transformed himself through politics.” Whether
Hugo was killed for his rape conviction or
because he associated with Black prisoners, in either case it’s bad. Prisoners taking

on the role of the pigs and adding extra-judicial punishment on their fellow prisoners
due to the nature of their crime? Please! Or
worse, killing someone because of the race
they choose to associate with? Give me
a fucking break! Not only are you dudes
some sick puppies, by dividing prisoners in
this manner you are serving the interests of
the pigs. A politically conscious California
prisoner wrote and says:
"In the California prison system,
Blacks (all the different sub-groups)
‘don’t clean up after themselves’, that
is, they tolerate child molesters, rapists, rats, etc., whereas every other race
and their respective sub-groups, will
put them on a ‘Hit’ list for life. They
usually get found out and are ‘stuck’ or
they go straight into protective custody
(or what’s called SNY). As for Hugo,
despite his Nicaraguan heritage, he
identified with Blacks.
"And here we go again. Had the
gang leaders who you, the support coalition, and the like, propped-up and
egged on with uncritical praises, had
spent these last several years truly developing consciousness, there’s a very
real chance that Hugo wouldn’t have
been stabbed. As for the hit on Hugo,
the fact is that individuals cannot, and
do not, hit another race (not even their
own race) without the “go-ahead”
from the leaders.
"Because of the total absence of
[class-based] political consciousness,
the leaders are truly incapable of distinguishing between objective reality,
i.e., truth and abstract notions divorced
from the concrete world. For example,
the gang leadership, and especially the
whites, believe they have achieved a
“monumental victory.”
"We are Marxists! It is our job not
only to speak for the people, but more
importantly, to guide them. If the
masses are politically ignorant and
you simply parrot and regurgitate that
ignorance, we in effect become agents
of the very status quo we are claiming
to change. Intentions are ‘subjective’,
and accurate measure requires us to be
as objective as possible.
"Those of us with a significantly
high degree of political consciousness
sat by quietly while our so-called leadership had their way with the pages of
the Rock and Prison Focus while we
cheered and egged them on from the
side lines. No one ever offered a conRock!

structive criticism.
As for your criticism of the Ashker settlement, it needs to be said. Although we’re a day late and a dollar
short. But I guess I would ask why?
What’s to be accomplished? It’s over.
This struggle was a once-in-a-lifetime
event, and that’s why it was so important for us to use every article written
as an opportunity to write our own in
an effort to raise consciousness. We
are in fact worse off now because the
STG allows the state to cast a much
wider net than previously.
Although we are so few in number,
nearly all of our politically conscious
comrades buckled under the weight
of the praises being sung in the name
of the vilest reaction. Even those who
know better, comrades who have spilt
blood in the name of transforming our
world, lost sight of our objective and
forgot their role in all of this. We started off so strong, yet we are responsible
for planting the seeds that were later
to be cultivated, harvested, and hijacked."
If the letter writer is correct, that Black
prisoners don't "clean up after themselves",
then my hearty congratulations go out to
those prisoners for not falling for the man's
game of promoting prisoner-on-prisoner
violence.
As for the rest of you knuckleheads, you
expose, isolate, and shun rats. You do not
attack other prisoners on the basis of their
alleged crimes. That's double jeopardy and
it's wrong. Those who advocate this wrongheadedness are objectively agents of the
state and should be treated accordingly. ●

FINAL EDITORIAL

D

ear reader, we are breaking up. No,
it’s not you. It’s me. That said, welcome to the last issue of Rock! As
I close out the fourth year of publication I
figured this would be a good time to stop
putting it out. The first year of Rock was
not difficult because I had lots of money
and didn’t especially care whether or not
prisoners sent me stamps or checks. As we
entered into years two and three financial
contributions kicked in, and for a period
of about a year prisoners completely supported the costs of printing and mailing the
newsletter each month.
At the end of last year, and more so
this year, contributions have significantVolume 4, Number 12

ly dropped off. For over a year now I’ve
been paying all of the costs for the printing, while prisoners have been donating
the stamps needed to mail the publication
out each month. Now those stamps have
also all but stopped coming in. I had to buy
stamps in order to mail out the last issue.
I would say the fault for the drop in donations was mine were it not for the fact that
I’ve not changed over the years—I’m still
the same cranky old commie I’ve always
been. Instead the absence of contributions
speaks volumes about the headset of prisoners in California.
In 1776 Adam Smith wrote An Inquiry
Into The Nature and Causes of the Wealth
of Nations. In that book he makes it clear
that the purpose of government is preserve
inequality: "Laws and governments may
be considered in this and indeed in every
case as a combination of the rich to oppress
the poor, and preserve to themselves the
inequality of the goods which would otherwise be soon destroyed by the attacks of the
poor, who if not hindered by government
would soon reduce the others to an equality
with themselves by open violence."
Outside folks who may wish to read back
issues can do so at rocknewsletter.com. I’ll
leave the site up for another three years
(the Web hosting is paid up for that long).
I’ll also have back issues of ¡Basta Ya! and
some early copies of the PHSS News (both
of which I edited before starting Rock). I
am planning to step down as the editor of
Prison Focus as well, once they find and
train a replacement. Back issues of Prison
Focus can be found at www.prisons.org/
publications.
I’ve always enjoyed doing this paper.
With that said, I am out of here. Remember,
self-reliance in all things. ●

BLACK STUDENTS
UNITED CALLS
FOR PRISON
DIVESTMENT
By Zachary Silver, November 10, 2015
welve students from Black Students
United—a student-run umbrella
organization representing the interests of black Cornellians—entered President Elizabeth Garrett’s office Tuesday to
submit a letter outlining demands for the
University to divest its endowment from
interests based in prisons and mass incar-

T

ceration. The letter launches the group’s
public campaign to fight Cornell’s involvement with organizations related to the “violence of the prison industry and mass incarceration,” according to BSU.
“Black students at Cornell and those on
campuses across the world have a history
of holding their universities accountable,”
said Amber Aspinall ’17, political action
chair of BSU. “We will continue that tradition.”
In their letter, BSU outlined four major
demands of the University. They insist that
the University cease investments in companies that include Corrections Corporation of America, GEO Group Inc. and G4S
USA Secure Solution; no longer use the
G4S security system in the Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art; issue an official University statement on Cornell’s involvement
with the private prison industry and grant
organizers a meeting with the University’s
Investment Committee.
“We very cordially invite President Garrett, as well as the rest of the administration
and any interested trustees to help build
this very important dialogue on campus
regarding the private prison industry and
the prison industrial complex,” said Robert
Johnson, a BSU political action member.
Highlighting Cornell’s prior involvement
with apartheid South Africa and JanSport,
the letter stated concerns that Cornell’s decision to invest in organizations related to
prisons and mass incarceration creates discomfort for students.
“What we want to know—and what many
students, faculty and community members
want to know—is where our policymakers stand on this issue and what common
ground we can find to ensure that Cornell’s
relationship with the criminal justice system is one that truly reflects the values and
spirit of this University,” Johnson said.
The BSU movement at Cornell was inspired by a similar movement at Columbia
University, where student activists successfully campaigned for the university to become the first college in the United States
to divest from private prison companies,
according to the letter.
“We hope you join us in extending our
sincerest congratulations to the student
activists at Columbia for their dedication,
passion and skilled organizing,” the letter
reads.
While Garrett was not on campus at the
time of the letter drop, BSU activists cite
Divestment .............Continued on page 10
9

Divestment ........... Continued from page 9
her inauguration address as a positive indication that she will be open to working
towards progress, according to the letter.
“Among your most salient words, however, was your call on Cornell to be ‘radical
and progressive,’” the letter says. “We are
prepared to answer that call. We hope that
you are as well.”
BSU is requesting a response from the
University by Nov. 23, and hopes that a
response will increase transparency on the
issue of private prison investments, according to Abraham Araya ’19, a BSU political
action member.
“Private prisons turn black lives into
commodities,” said Delmar Fears ’19, a
freshman representative. “I don’t want to
attend a university that says they support
and welcome black students, while reaping
the profits from a corrupt system that disproportionately disenfranchises the black
community. They can’t say and do both;
something has to change.”
http://cornellsun.com/2015/11/10/blackstudents-united-calls-for-prison-divestment

JUDGE GETS TIME
Prosecutor Sends Innocent
Man to Prison Who Served 25
years, Now a Judge, he gets
10 days in Jail

O

n October 27th in Texas, former
prosecutor and judge Ken Anderson pled guilty to intentionally
failing to disclose evidence in a case that
sent an innocent man, Michael Morton, to
prison for the murder of his wife. When
trying the case as a prosecutor, Anderson
possessed evidence that may have cleared
Morton, including statements from the
crime's only eyewitness that Morton wasn't
the culprit. Anderson sat on this evidence,
and then watched Morton get convicted.
While Morton remained in prison for the
next 25 years, Anderson's career flourished,
and he eventually became a judge. In today's deal, Anderson pled to criminal contempt and spend 10 days in jail. ●
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
mark-godsey/for-the-first-time-evera_b_4221000.html

Ed Mead, Publisher
Rock Newsletter
P.O. Box 47439
Seattle, WA 98146

FIRST CLASS MAIL