When Jeff and I decided to write something together, we really had no idea what we were wanting to express. We had vague notions of wanting to convey the difficulties and rewards at both ends of a political prisoner support relationship, but we didn't know what that translated into. So we just started writing bits and pieces, and this zine is what we've come up with.

Jeff is a natural writer, and he undoubtably has some pretty intense experiences to provide inspiration for his prison dispatches. He has been writing about his experiences and beliefs ever since he was sent down and he has inspired and moved many people all over the world with his words. While I have written a few bits and pieces before, I have struggled with trying to produce material for this zine. I kept on feeling that my experiences and knowledge in this field are incredibly limited, and that there were others who would be able to write about supporting political prisoners so much more competantly. It's been a bit of a process of acknowledging that I have something to share, no matter how (in)experienced I am.

It is strange to write about the rewards of supporting political prisoners through their time inside. Rewards are not something one usually associates with unjust incarceration and State persecution, but every cloud has its silver lining...right? I think one of the most rewarding things I've ever experienced was when Jeff told me that he felt like I was there with him, enduring everything he has to go through, even with the Pacific Ocean between us. To be able to help a prisoner not feel alone, in one of the loneliest experiences anyone could ever have, is an incredible feeling. But one of the hardships is that I do feel like I'm there with him and that is not always the easiest thing to be feeling on a daily basis.

Engaging in political prisoner support has also helped me have more respect and appreciation for humanity. The other people that I have worked with in this field are some of the most wonderful, selfless people I have ever met or communicated with. It is exciting to be involved in a very important area of activism that actually makes you feel good about the inspirational potential of our species.

One of the coolest things about writing to Jeff is that I get to read his letters. He is such a good writer! So, I hope you enjoy some of Jeff's more recent writings, and the extra bits and pieces I've written or acquired and thrown in the mix. I can only hope, in these times of increased State persecution against eco and animal rights activists, that this zine can help reveal how important political prisoner support is, how we need to stick together, take care of each other, and let those in prison know how important they still are to us. Incarcerated activists are people who have rightfully acknowledged that a prison cell is a lot less frightening than the future our world faces, and they deserve our undying respect and support for the stand they have taken to highlight the plight of this beautiful planet we live on. Lilia Letsch (March '09) We all do what we can So we can do just one more thing We won't have a thing So we've got nothing to lose We can all be free Maybe not with words Maybe not with a look But with your mind ­ Cat Power Life as a Political Prisoner No one in their right mind wants to go to prison, not even for a good cause. I certainly don't want to be here, locked away from life and family. No amount of words can express the daily heartache prison life brings. Yet, despite the unyielding desire for freedom, I do not fret being here. As of this writing I have been locked up 8 ½ years, 6 of those spent in a maximum security prison. I have witnessed great acts of brutality. I have also, however witnessed great acts of and love and seen first hand the human spirit's ability to overcome and endure.

The experience of being a political prisoner is greatly different than that of a social prisoner. While I do not claim to speak for other political prisoners I know that I am not alone in experiencing this difference. My comrade Craig “Critter” Marshall and I were the first eco­arsonists caught in the U.S, during the still clandestine days of the government's green scare. Beginning as early as 1998 the federal government began a task force headquartered in Eugene, Oregon, focused solely on the activities of radical environmentalists.

By early 2000, unbeknownst to me, I had been targeted for surveillance due to my activism. In court records and documents that are still unclear, no law enforcement agency has ever claimed responsibility for ordering the surveillance. Of the detectives involved in my case not one could “recall” during testimony what person or what agency had requested that they put me under surveillance.

As late as 2005 the FBI and Department of Homeland Security denied having any records or files of my existance. Despite the fact that the year previous the FBI released a national security alert to every law enforcement agency in the country warning of “potential terrorist attacks done in solidarity with the convicted eco­terrorist Jeffrey Luers.” The alert was leaked to the media where it made national headlines for two weeks.

While continuing harassment from law enforcement has severely impacted my prison life, my interactions with other prisoners has been markedly different. For many I am simply a rare breed of prisoner, one convicted of crimes that were committed for selfless and altruistic reasons. Among some, this alone has elevated my status within the prison population. Many fellow prisoners, knowing of my case, have taken the time to introduce themselves to me and shake my hand.

Nevertheless, being in a logging state there has also been some animosity from those who dislike treehuggers. However, after one particular encounter with an individual who confused me for a pacifist the animosity quickly grew into grudging respect. Even the fascists and I got along, despite the fact that anarchists and nazis are natural born enemies. This event, too, stemmed from near violence.

In fact, over time I developed relationships with several of the various prison gangs. Which not only helped me to better understand “prison politics”, it allowed me to continue doing what I did on the streets: organize resistance. My ability to move within the various factions proved extremely beneficial when it came to bringing them together in a common cause. The most rewarding relationships, however, came from those formed by true friendship. It comes as no surprise that most people doing time have done some bad things, yet there are a few with hearts of gold. I am honored to be able to call some of these individuals my friends and brothers.

From the beginning I knew my time was going to be hard. I spent my first year awaiting trial on 22 hour a day lock down. My cell was searched near daily as I was considered one of the most dangerous inmates housed at the county jail. The day I was sentenced, rather than be transported to court, the jail was placed on lock down and I was sentenced there. Originally, no witnesses were allowed to be present until my lawyer threatened to walk out and go straight to the media. Immediately upon sentencing I was rushed by plainclothes officers, in an unmarked car, maintaining radio silence at 80 mph to the Department of Corrections intake center.

Despite claims by the Oregon DOC that they had not singled me out for special treatment, I was assigned security threat group status for my known political affiliations. My security classification score (until just recently) was higher than those individuals doing life without parole for murder. Almost immediately my mail ceased and I began to receive it by the stack every 2­3 weeks. Ostensibly, my mail was being reviewed by Security Threat Group staff, which was true, but I would later learn that it was also being reviewed by the FBI. Some such letters would years later turn up in the discovery of the Operation Backfire case, where proof of friendship with me became reasonable suspicion of terrorist acts.

At this same time my support was beginning to come fully on line. No longer restricted by awaiting for trial I was now able to freely share my thoughts and opinions in both my own writings and numerous interviews.

Initially, prison officials were amused by the media requests for contact with me. No doubt, they thought the media in its 9/11 hysteria would portray me as the evil domestic terrorist I so obviously am. That may have been the original intent of some journalists. However, it is hard to argue against the facts: climate change is perhaps the single largest threat to humankind at present and requires immediate action. As such, the articles and news stories came out increasingly sympathetic and in some cases down right supportive, condemning the state for my draconian sentence of 22 years.

By 2003, supposedly on orders from an outside agency, Oregon DOC was determined to shut me up. On June 13th, one day before the first “day of solidarity with Jeffrey Luers” my cell was rushed by six guards. Just before the 10:30 am count our cell door slid open and in rushed the guards screaming “don't fucking move! Don't you fucking move!” At a complete loss my then cell mate and I froze. I was then ordered to get down on the ground and place my hands behind my back. As I was being led to segregation I asked what all this was about. My question was met with naked hostility. “Oh you know,” when in fact I did not.

I would not learn what I was placed in segregation for for nearly a week. When I finally received my copy of the disciplnary report (DR) I learned that I was being accused of gang activity for my writing, in particular a letter I had written to the editor of the Earth First! Journal. At my hearing I argued that I had been published in several publications including Oregon's largest newspaper The Oregonian. I further argued tha I was entitled to my political opinions and the free expression there of. My argument held sway and the hearing was postponed for five days. After the recess I was found guilty. I was ordered to not discuss, endorse or share my political opinions or views. I was ordered to not discuss my crimes or how I committed them. I was told that if I did I would found in violation of the rule against unauthorized organization. I was sanctioned to 120 days in segregation, a $200 fine, and the loss of 100 days of earned time. I contacted my lawyer and immediately began defying the order.

Within three months DOC settled out of court over the incident. I was released from solitary confinment and returned to general population, complete with a letter of apology. Once I was returned to General Population the same STG officer who had placed me in segregation pulled me aside. He informed me that orders had come from above him and outside of DOC to write the DR. He went on to say that STG were not the only ones keeping an eye on me.

The harrasment continued in different ways. DR's began coming from the headquarters of DOC itself. My mail began being delivered to the wrong cell, in the wrong unit. My legal mail would be frequently “misplaced”. I was no longer allowed to meet with the media. It had been determined to be a security risk and detrimental to my rehabilitation. DOC had to rewrite Oregon's Administrative Rules in order to accomplish this legally.

By 2006, they finally got a DR to stick. In the period of a month I was UA'd seven times. One UA came back negative dilute – which means there was no presence of drugs but my urine was overly hydrated from drinking too many fluids. Again I found myself sitting in segregation. The DR claimed that a phone call had been intercepted in which I had claimed to be using drugs.

At the hearing I requested and was granted an investigation, asking in particular for a tape of the said phone call to be provided. By the time the investigation was completed I had served the maximum sanction in segregation for the offense. The investigation turned up no evidence to support the claim that I had been using drugs. No such phone conversation could be found. The hearings officer went on record saying he believed I had not ingested any illicit substance, nor admitted to using any drug.

He then found me in violation of using drugs and apologized, saying he had no choice.

My visits were taken, I lost my job. I had to pay a fine. It took a few months but my attorney got my visits back. It took another twenty months for DOC to dismiss the DR as fraudulent, and for them to clean my record.

An officer once told me “They are afraid of you because of your crime. You challenge the very thing these people believe in. Rather than listen or try to understand they will fear and hate. If you would just shut your mouth and do your time your life would be a lot easier. But you won't do that will you?” “If you knew you were right would you stop sharing the truth?” I asked him in turn. He paused for a moment and then said softly, “No, I suppose I wouldn't.” “Me either.” Jeff Luers (October 2008)

IF you expect nonsense, you will find it stacked wall to wall. All I can say is that the people running this place are people. Some of them suck. Some play very high quality head games. I think that the goal of the captains of this ship is to make this place resemble a little America (the flag can be seen from anywhere in the compound): the machine may be slow and say goshucks, but it is very well oiled and running smoothly, thank you. The people resemble robots or any other non-human label you might apply, but I find it very difficult to use labels anymore. I've learned that performing superficial robot games keeps my keepers satisfied. I don't argue about who is right. MAN, I KNOW who is right and who is crazy, but I also know where I am. I threw my pride out the window of the marshal's car somewhere along the turnpike....

...I've heard people describe this place as a college, pententiary, kid's joint, and a joke. Lately, I've seen it as an English garden because of the flowers that grow in abundance along the walks, and because the grounds are super-neatly manicured by the overly supervised inside maintenance crew. Flowers are flowers. Walls and fences have no real power over them. Excerpt from 'The Prison Trip' by Busby Crockett (1968) Letters etc. Perhaps one of the most unique aspects of being a political prisoner is the sheer volume of mail. Prior to asking people to focus on other prisoners, after I had won my appeal, it was not uncommon for me to receive twenty letters a week. In fact my first few years down, when my case was in the media spotlight, it was not uncommon for me to receive twenty letters a day!

Mail call comes around 4.30pm in every prison I've been in, and it is without a doubt the best part of the day. When the guard comes to the door delivering mail and is astounded by the overwhelming amount of mail I receive I get to see that confused and sometimes impressed look in their eyes that no doubt questions “why does he get so much mail?”. Letters remind me that I am not alone and that I am not forgotten.

My interactions through the mail have been as varied and as intense as my personal interactions with people. I have written to school children and classes, corresponded with teachers who have used my letters as teaching tools. I have debated with people who completely disagree with my actions and were moved enough to write me and engage in dialogue. I have even exchanged letters with the target of an Earth Liberation Front arson!

By far, though, the most rewarding letters have come from dedicated and inspiring activists from around the world. I have received mail from every continent except Antarctica, something I never would have expected to occur.

Developing a relationship by mail is a lost art. It is unique in that the conversations tend to be more uninhibited and free flowing, if not continuous. Several people I correspond with have become life long friends. My bond with them is as strong as those I know personally and see regularly.

But, does any of this really explain the importance mail plays in the lives of political prisoners? Many of us have been subjected to the harshest treatment possible, spending time in isolation, subjected to abuse, restricted in our communications.

Often mail becomes our only form of escape.

Anyone who enjoys reading books can understand how colourful and descriptive written language can be. Humans are unique in that through the use of symbols we are able to convey thoughts, ideas, emotions, images and such a varying array of sensory experience. Words are powerful.

Prison walls are cold and grey. My cell at OSP was 6' x 9' feet with solid concrete walls and steel bars. It was dark, musty, and the temperature varied from outside only by a few degrees. I was never alone. It was never quiet. I never saw anything that wasn't prison except for the sky. My surroundings were designed to trap, disempower and humiliate. Minimum security has not proven much different, only now I live in a dorm and the walls are chain link and razor wire.

Letters are my escape to your world, and not just reading them, but in writing them as well.

Ironically, while letters are my escape, many friends have expressed frustration at being trapped by them. Often they tell me that they feel disempowered because they can offer me nothing more than letters. I have difficulty understanding this. I try and put myself in the position of being free and having someone I love and care about locked away, and being powerless to get them out. I recognise the hopelessness that must come with that, in fact, it must be really really difficult for my friends and family.

Yet, from this side of the walls it is the polar opposite. I greatly appreciate the mail, monetary and political support I have received. I believe it is responsible for my greatly reduced sentence. Not just that, the mail has been responsible for my well being, physically and emotionally. The dialogue, debate, and even romance has kept me sane, kept me human and connected me to the living world.

I believe that mail to a political prisoner serves to remind both the prisoner and the prison staff that this person is not forgotten. It helps maintain a level of accountability from the staff that might not otherwise exist.

The importance of supporting political prisoners and POW by writing to them can not be overstated. Many may not always be in a position to respond, but the letters are hugely appreciated. It is the simplest and one of the most effective actions you can take to keep a prisoner's hope alive. Jeff Luers (January 2009) When I was thirteen I started writing letters for Amnesty International. The letters were mostly to third­world governments that were incarcerating activists, rebellious women, political prisoners at imminent risk of falling under the firing squad, innocent civilians in the wrong place at the wrong time. At no point did I ever connect with any of those prisoners, no personal addresses were ever shared through the organisation, and I never thought to ask. It was grim enough reading about their conditions, and the injustice of their situations, there was little chance I could have managed the heartbreak of writing personally to someone who was likely to die, or disappear.

I remember my friends seemed to think it was a very noble, but extremely taxing, spare time activity, and they would ask how and why I did it. I had a little spiel, infused with youthful idealism... "If we want to look after this planet, we need to start with ourselves. If we can't be good to each other, how can we possibly be good to the Earth?" My mother was proud, and it seemed to be a good enough answer for my friends.

After a few years of writing for Amnesty the sheer number of horrendous cases I read about started crushing my idealism. The stark reality of the injustices of the world, and the immense difficulties in fighting it, made me bitter and cynical about humankind and our ability to really be good to each other. By this point I was in Tasmania, in my late teens, and was tremendously moved by the land, enraged by the destruction of the ancient forests, and inspired by the activists who had been fighting for decades (and even occasionally winning ground). Unlike humankind, it seemed, the forests gave so much to me. I felt indebted, the land called to me to fight for it, and I did.

For the first time I met people who knew exactly how I felt, other people who found solace from the world's horrors in the forests. We shared the energy we acquired from these places with each other, sitting yarning around campfires at blockades, and giving each other the strength and respect we needed to face the cops and Forestry nobs on a regular basis. But we knew very little about really looking after each other, and developing solidarity was not something we talked about, it was just assumed that we were all in it together, and we'd just keep fighting. They are the most beautiful and inspiring people I'll ever meet in my life, and I felt so honoured to be welcomed into their community.

While many of us have been arrested at blockades, dragged through the courts, sued by logging corporations and vilified as extreme and dangerous eco­terrorists by the government, Tasmania is not known for its harsh punishment of activists. The usual result of a tree­sit or lock­on arrest is an 18 month good behaviour bond, or a few hundred dollars in fines. Good behaviour bonds have been broken many times, but on average the longest anyone has spent incarcerated is a night in lock­up before a morning court appearance. I had heard about activists being locked up for much longer in other countries, but being so consumed by the local campaign and the forests, it wasn't something I was driven to action by. I was still in the head space of caring more for the trees than even for my comrades. Something I now admit with much shame.

My bubble was truly burst when I discovered that a friend from Aotearoa/New Zealand who had visited Tasmania to support our campaign had been arrested and thrown in solitary in the Operation 8 "terrorism raids" on October 15, 2007. She was one of the many arrestees in a massive nation­wide crack down on radical Maori, anarchist and environmental activists, which included a government sanctioned media smear campaign that accused activists of all kinds of over­the­top acts, like planning the assassination of the then NZ conservative opposition leader and G.W. Bush. Seventeen people were charged under the draconian "Terrorism Suppresion Act", which allows for detainees to be sent to Guantanamo Bay. Ironically, the TSA was the subject of a book my friend had just had published through an anarchist media collective. Mercifully the judge decided there was not enough evidence to lay charges under the Act, which resulted in defendants being immediately released. But the judge unfortunately maintained that there was still enough evidence to charge the defendants with arms possession, and many close friends and activists were barred from associating with each other before their cases went to trial. In a place like Aotearoa, where most people have some kind of connection, for activists to not be able to associate with each other was going to have a big impact on their effectiveness, and their morale. More recently a number of the defendants have also been charged with extra offences relating to being members of a criminal 'gang'. Not to mention that the broader public still believed the case was all about terrorism.

Suddenly I could empathise, it was personal, and I was maddened by what I was hearing. My friend was someone who had made quite an impact on me, she represented things I strive for, and admire; determined passion, commitment to radical ideals, and unwavering dedication. She had written an incredible zine while in solitary, and it moved me to tears to think of her experiencing such extreme injustice. Suddenly I was looking on the internet at other political prisoner's zines, and educating myself about activists that were being locked­up in waves of politically motivated arrests and incarcerations all over the world. The more I looked, the more I realised that most of them were just like my friend in Aotearoa, just like my friends in Tasmania, even just like me. And when I thought about how I would deal with being locked up, I somewhat selfishly hoped that my comrades, locally and around the world, would support me. Of course this meant that I had to give the same in return. Solidarity suddenly became the most powerful word I knew.

It became clear to me, from reading a number of prisoner support pieces online, that writing letters was the most powerful thing I could do to improve the lives of those imprisoned. But this time the letters weren't going to governments, or judiciaries, they needed to go directly to the prisoners. I still can't fathom how important a friendly letter must be when you are locked up, but I now know that letters can provide hope, companionship, feelings of solidarity, respect and understanding, and so much more.

My concerns about not knowing what to write to prisoners about made me realise that I needed to write to people who I had something in common with, ie. forest activism. The first prisoner support website I found along those lines was that of Jeff 'Free' Luers, forest activist and SUV arsonist. Having lived at the bottom of the world for so long, I only had a faint memory of hearing about Jeff's case back in 2001. I didn't really have any idea how well known or notorious his case was until I got to know him better. When I first wrote to Jeff he was sitting in County, awaiting resentencing after finally winning his appeal in 2007. In my letter I talked about Tasmania, the landscapes, the animals, the forests I am still so in love with. I think I was definitely trying to impress him with how awesome Tassie is, including pictures of native animals such as the world's largest freshwater cray, Australia's largest raptor, and my favourite animal ­ the Eastern Quoll, bragging about how Tassie has the tallest hardwood trees in the world, etc. It was fun to write about the things I loved, and I wanted to share the awe­inspiring feelings that these things invoked in me, hoping that he would be able to feel that too. Jeff wrote back rather quickly, I'm guessing because he enjoyed my letter. From then on we wrote to each other about once a month, and realising how much I enjoyed writing and receiving letters encouraged me to write to other prisoners.

It's easy to want to write to everyone, as all political prisoners deserve our support and solidarity, but it quickly became clear to me that it is important not too over­stretch yourself. You will either end up spending most of your time writing letters, or having to drop a connection you have made with someone, which for a prisoner is a frequent occurance, but never easy to deal with. Long lasting connections go so much further to making prison life easier than writing one or two letters, and then dropping off the radar. Of course sometimes a prisoner won't write back to you, or the connection just might not be there. There's nothing wrong with recognising that a letter writing relationship isn't going to go anywhere either, or that a one­off letter is still shitloads better than no letter at all. But maybe you might know someone else who would make a better pen pal, or you could provide other support such as running a website, putting on fundraisers, movie nights, making patches, badges, writing articles for zines, etc.

My friendship with Jeff has grown into something I can't easily fathom. We talk on the phone occasionally, and realising how much it cost him to make an international phone call (prisoners can't receive calls) made it really hit home how much our connection means to him. We write more than once a month now, sending diary­like letters to each other, sharing stories from our present and past, letting each other know how important we are to each other. It is hard for me to write about what Jeff's friendship means to me. While I am obviously not locked up, and have a world of people and things to distract me and consume my life, Jeff's letters and phone calls completely light up my life. It is such a joy to hear from him, to share life with him, even from so far away.

Some people seem to think that writing letters to prisoners isn't 'real' activism, or don't want to be seen as being involved in hero worshipping. But after years of being involved in forest activism, and struggling so hard for so few results, I find it incredibly inspiring and motivating to know that I can make a difference in someone's life on a personal level. As I get older I'm realising that it is these interactions, the personal, one­on­one connections we can develop with others that are the most powerful sites of radical change. If we can inspire an individual to keep fighting, to have hope, to treasure beauty and simplicity, we are taking action which bears real fruit that we can taste, that we can use as impetus, inspiration and motivation. We can give each other hope. Lilia Letsch (December 2008)

Further info... Aotearoa/NZ: Tasmania: www.october15thsolidarity.info www.huon.org www.rebelpress.org.nz www.stillwildstillthreatened.org Writing to Prisoners So you want to write to a political prisoner? You rock! This could change your life, and the prisoner's. There's a few things to consider though. This is not expert advice, and I highly recommend you check out some of the websites at the end of this piece before you go ahead and start letter writing, but here are a few thoughts & ideas...

First and foremost the biggest reason I hear people use for not writing to political prisoners is that they don't know what to write about. It can be really hard sometimes to make that first step and actually start writing a letter to someone you do not know. Of course, if you do have friends in prison, you should definitely be writing to them! Keep them informed on what has been going on in your mutual community and the issues that you know they are interested in. Keep them feeling connected. It is the same for prisoners you don't know too – it's important for most activists in prison to feel like they remain connected to the campaigns they were involved in and the issues they take an interest in. Alternative media access is usually pretty limited in prisons, so writing about current happenings, or sending them copies of news articles, newsletters etc. can make a huge difference to an incarcerated activists' days. But writing about what you are involved in or passionate about is also really important. If you work in women's liberation you might want to write to a woman in prison, share your thoughts and experiences. If you are an animal rights activist, write to an animal rights activist in prison and let them know about your campaign and how it works. You might be able to share (legal!) strategies.

• Follow the prison mail regulations! Check out the Department of Corrections website for the state or country the prisoner resides in, and follow them strictly until you're told otherwise by the prisoner.

• The simple stuff – always put your full name and return address, and the prisoner's name, number and address at the top of your letter, and number the pages so they know if anything is missing.

• Believe that anyone could be reading your letter, and that it could get used in a court case. Be careful about what you say, don't incriminate yourself or the prisoner in ANYTHING.

• Send photos – of yourself, of your favourite places, of interesting things you've seen. Nearly anything would be more interesting than grey walls and razor wire.

• Ask the prisoner what they like to read before you decide to order books for them.

• Get in touch with the prisoner's support crew (if they have one) to find out if there's any help or support required in any department (distributing fliers, running websites, fundraising, etc.).

• If a prisoner you are writing to doesn't have a support network, start one! Tell your friends to write to them, start up a website asking for support, write articles about their situation for local papers, zines and websites. • Don't overwhelm yourself by writing to too many prisoners. Take it slowly, write to a couple of prisoners to start with, and add to that if you find you have the time and energy.

• Consider how prepared you are to commit to a long term prisoner support relationship. This isn't something you have to commit to, but it would be good to think about it before you find yourself in the deep end.

Check out these sites for more prisoner support info...

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network ­ www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk Green Scare ­ www.greenscare.org Anarchist Black Cross ­ www.abcf.net Green Is The New Red – www.greenisthenewred.com Zine Library – www.zinelibrary.net

Have you ever been in jail waking up in the morning to the sound of a steel door knocking against a steel wall waiting for a meal that you wouldn't feed your enemy the dingy grey, the dirty brown the pissed up matress where your ass and your head lay trying to forget what they could do together while your sun hungry eyes gaze through the bars searching for a visitor, a friend, a pardon anything that will set you free but you know the outside you know the slaves that sing the monotonous song calling you a criminal running from you in the street and you're wearing hand cuffs being escorted by a 3030 There's no where to go outside now you're inside a four walled cell 60 ft by 40 ft and the memories of the outside world are Fantastic all the pretty little girls big girls a living garden walking through the streets of the city clothes teasing, eyes leading smile deceiving and then there's your baby sweet as sugar cane they chopped down on the road camps bright as the sun you see once and a while as beautiful as life is bad, your baby gone after you've had the powerdered eggs mixed with spoiled ham grits and liver gravy you take your tin cup and tray up to the steel door rinse your aged mouth out and sing the blues silently thinking about today is the moment and how forever is right now.

By Abiodun Oyewole

(One of the founding members of The Last Poets, Abiodun received a four year sentence in North Carolina prison for larceny ­ he robbed the KKK to assist fellow revolutionaries) Climate Change Note: it would be nice to think that things have changed a bit since Jeff wrote the below article in 2007. But not surprisingly we currently find ourselves in a much worse predicament than anyone really expected. The Arctic is disapearing, massive ice sheets are breaking off and drifting away in Antarctica, weather patterns all over the world are becoming increasingly disturbed, and islands, plant and animal species are dissapearing. In Australia we had our first “climate change election”, where our new Prime Minister finally pledged to sign the Kyoto Protocol, but all they have promised to deliver is a laughable target of 5% reduction of carbon emissions by 2020, and at the time of writing this we haven't seen the Obama Administration engage in even vague rhetoric about actually doing something about this potentially terrifying situation we find ourselves in. If you don't already understand why Jeff ended up in prison, this is what he was trying to get across back in 2001 when he set fire to those SUV's. ­ Lilia

Governments of the world were first warned about the dangers of global warming in the late 1980s. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published its first report on climate change in 1990. In 1995, the United Nations summarized "the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernable human influence on global climate." [1] The evidence provided by scientists was so overwhelming that it lead to the Kyoto Protocol, a worldwide treaty to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels. Though ratified by all other member countries of the United Nations, the US and Australia refused to participate. While global warming and climate change issues have been the center of increased public debate and media attention throughout Western Europe and Canada since the turn of the century, American awareness of the risks posed by global warming has lagged far behind. This is due in large part to an insidious strategy by the Bush Administration to censor documents on global warming and sow skepticism among the American media and public. It is one thing to dispute a scientific finding with peer reviewed analysis. It is quite another to censor or alter findings in order to further strengthen one's political or economic position.

In September 2006 a report in the journal Nature exposed the censorship occurring at the hand of Bush appointees, prompting a group of democratic senators to call for an investigation. Researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) accused Bush appointees to the NOAA of dismissing possible connections between the intensity and frequency of hurricanes and global warming. The researchers also accused the NOAA of censoring scientists who believe there is such a link. Bush appointees at the NOAA prevented noted NOAA scientist Tom Knutson from talking to reporters, in 2005, because he had published studies linking global warming and hurricane strength. The department of commerce requested that Knutson share his views on global warming in an interview with CNBC.[2] The request was denied and a NOAA scientist who disputed the hurricane­warming connection was chosen to conduct the interview in Knutson's place. Scientists at the NOAA are not the only ones who have cried foul. James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies also said that he had been censored by the Bush Administration for speaking out about global warming and climate change. In 2006, The Independent (UK) reported that the Bush Administration was trying to censor Hansen's call for immediate cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. Hansen said, "Communicating with the public is essential because public concern is possibly the only thing capable of overcoming the special interests that have obfuscated the topic."[3]

Following an investigation into the matter of political interference by the Bush Administration, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held hearings in March, 2007. As part of the hearing the White House Council on Environmental Quality was made to produce more than eight boxes of papers that Democrats said showed strong indications of political interference. Democrats themselves produced hundreds of pages of legal depositions, exhibits, and email exchanges between administration officials. The evidence was overwhelming, and disturbing. Officials with no scientific training were editing and often rewriting reports on global warming in order to align them with administration policy.

One flagrant example was demonstrated in a report by the US National Research Council who had concluded that "greenhouse gases are accumulating in the atmosphere as a result of human activities causing surface air temperatures to rise and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise."[4] Philip Cooney, Chief of Staff at the Council on Environmental Quality, rewrote that statement to read, "some activities emit greenhouse gases that directly or indirectly may affect the balance of incoming and outgoing radiation, thereby potentially affecting climate on regional and global scales." [ibid] Cooney, a former oil lobbyist came to the White House in 2001. Before joining the Bush Administration Cooney spent more than 15 years with the American Petroleum Institute as their "climate team leader". During the hearing, Cooney denied that he had any loyalty to the oil industry or that he attempted to create doubt about climate change. Cooney, who resigned from the White House in 2005, now works for Exxon Mobil Corporation (the company that has offered grants to scientists who will dispute global warming).

Through writing research reports and controlling what scientists could say about their work, the Bush Administration purposely misled the public about global warming and climate change. These manipulations of public trust only serve corporate interests. By ensuring that the public only heard distorted messages about climate change that emphasized or exaggerated doubt around the dangers of global warming, the White House was able to defuse calls for action to limit greenhouse emissions.

The federal government [Bush Administration] isn't the only institution colluding to allow corporations to profit at a cost to the public. Several states have undercharged their major pollutors by up to $50 million, according to a March 2007 report by the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that states pay nearly $40 per ton of noxious emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and smog forming volatile organic compounds. These emissions are byproducts of power plants, refineries, chemical plants and incinerators. While states do bear the majority burden of enforcing the law, monitoring emissions, inspecting facilities, and collecting fees, the EPA oversees the process and has a duty to ensure these responsibilities are met. The environmental group said at least 18 states collected fees below the federal minimum. More than a dozen states collected millions less than they should have. Among them were states with heavy oil or coal interests; Florida, which collected $4.5 million below the minimum standard, North Carolina, with $5.4 million less, Texas, at $5.6 million below the mark and Louisiana, topping the chart, at $9.8 million below the federal minimum.[5]

Under guidance from the Bush Administration the EPA has also refused to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from cars or power plants. Bush has maintained that the EPA lacks the authority to do so. The Administration, agreeing with automakers, and apparently standing by its policy of not recognizing global warming, has claimed that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant as defined by the Clean Air Act. In April, 2007, the US Supreme Court disagreed, ruling in one of its most important environmental decisions in years, that the EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse emissions from automobiles. The decision, a strong rebuke to Bush's climate policy, sets the stage for other regulatory lawsuits to move forward, including a challenge to the EPA's failure to regulate carbon emissions from powerplants. In a statement the day after the Court's decision, Bush said that he took the ruling very seriously. However, he affixed conditions to any EPA regulation of carbon dioxide that would markedly reduce the regulation's effectiveness. Bush said that no regulatory program should limit economic growth, nor should any benefit to the atmosphere be offset by emissions from China, India, or other developing countries.

Bush appears to believe that while the US has contributed more greenhouse emissions than any other country, we are not obligated to reduce our emissions. And true to form, Bush continues to ignore any evidence that contradicts his position on climate change. The Stern Review, one of the most comprehensive assessments of the economic impacts of climate change, published in 2006, strongly presented a case for limiting greenhouse gases now in order to mitigate severe impacts on the world economy in the future. The 700 page report, compiled by Sir Nicholas Stern, chief of the UK Government Economic Service and former chief economist of the World Bank, evaluated a body of scientific studies on global warming and climate change from an economic perspective. The report first examined the evidence in terms of the economic impacts of climate change itself. Then it explored the economics of stabilizing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The report concluded that "the benefits of strong early action considerably outweigh the costs."[6] The evidence confirms that taking action now to cap greenhouse emissions must be viewed as an investment made to avoid the serious risks of major disruption to economic and social activity later in this century. The White House Council on Environmental Quality ­ the same council that censored global warming reports ­ dismissed the report when it was published as just "another contribution" to "an abundance of economic analyses" on climate change.[7] Which translates as "our policies don't recognize the existence or threat of global warming."

In yet another calculated move to install business­friendly conservatives in powerful government positions, Bush, with the Senate on its spring break, appointed Susan Dudley as director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the White House Office of Management and Budget. By using a recess appointment Bush enables Dudley to serve without Senate confirmation until the 110th Congress adjourns in late 2008 or early 2009. Bush has utilized recess appointments more than 100 times in his six years in office, often to avoid Senate opposition to his appointments. Dudley's office will wield control over all regulations proposed by government agencies, with the power to alter or block any regulation proposed, including the EPA's regulation of greenhouse emissions. Dudley, who has gone on record as opposing government regulation in favor of market regulation, opposed the EPA's proposal for stricter limits on arsenic in drinking water. She argues that the EPA's cost/benefit analysis overvalued some human lives, particularly those of the elderly. In congressional testimony, Dudley has argued that it would be more cost­effective for the government to initiate a pollution warning system, so sensitive individuals can stay indoors on smoggy days, rather than for the government to order polluters to clean up emissions. [8]

Bush's own proposals for cleaner fuels also reveal his bias toward oil and coal industries. Among them he has proposed liquefying coal as a fuel for automobiles, a process that would actually result in greater emissions of greenhouse gases. Despite recent lip service about recognizing the serious problem of global warming, the Bush Administration cut funding for climate change budgets by 20% in 2006. Bush's proposed budget for 2008 would further cut funding for the EPA by 10%. Far from limiting greenhouse emissions, the current administration's policy is on track to increase US emissions by 19% by 2020, an increase of nearly one­fifth of 2000 levels, despite urgent calls from leading scientists at home and abroad to drastically and immediately curb all greenhouse emissions. Jeff Luers (2007) References

[1] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change www.ipcc.ch [2] Evans, B., "NOAA accused of blocking climate report", Asheville Global Report 403, (2006) [3] Buncombe, A., "Bush tried to gag environmental expert", Independent UK, reprinted in AGR 368 (2006) [4] Gaouette, N., "Congressional hearing heats up over changes to climate report", LATimes.com (March 20, 2007) [5] Reuters, "States undercharge polluters", AGR 426 (2007) [5] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency www.epa.gov [6] Stern, N., "Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change", (2006) [7] Evans, B., "Failure to manage global warming would cripple world economy", AGR 408 (2006) [8] Havemann, J., "Bush bypasses Senate with three appointments", LA Times, reprinted in Register Guard (April 5, 2007) The innocence of youth dies in the teacher's smile brainwashed children repeat multiplication tables and recite history as told by those who don't want us to remember That schools are like factories in that they churn out workers who'll slave away their lives working for someone else. From nine to five age eighteen to sixty five Trading half their lives for a piece of paper Q so they can afford to buy goods from the people they work for.

Taught from the beginning to submit to authority to replenish the ranks of the working class folly after all there are limits to upward mobility when one percent of the population already owns half of everything and middle class America just keeps on working with their heads buried in the sand never questioning the lies they are told to keep them placated insulated from the truth their minds become vacant.

Confused and distracted luxury becomes necessity R want becomes need, the new capitalist ideology addicted to oil addicted to technology like an addict our society fails to act responsibly corporations run amok marketing the theory of consuming finite resources infinitely. America flourishes on ignorance and apathy but there's a price to be paid for the illusion of prosperity.

Pollution causes cancer a by product of industry that destroys our planet while poisoning our bodies Q The climate is changing the water is polluted when everything goes extinct will you still call it progress? Where is the buzz of the bees, the fluttering of the monarchs wings where are the giant trees and exotic animals that once breathed? So many signs no one knows how to read. Out of tune, out of step, out of place, we fall from grace.

Freedom we leave behind deceived by our own lies passed down for generations disguised as the truth. Capitalism will make you rich it only costs your soul. Bow down before your god of material wealth. You're not free you're a machine R another manufactured commodity No, you're not free just another capitalist casualty. ­ Jeff Luers

noun 1 a disease caused by an uncontrolled division of abnormal cells in a part of the body. 2 a malignant growth or tumour resulting from such a division of cells. Cancer 3 something evil or destructive that is hard to contain or eradicate.

New research suggests that cancer will soon be the leading cause of death around the globe. More deadly than AIDS, malaria and famine combined. While cancerous cell mutations have been a natural cause of death sine the dawn of time, the prevelance of cancer now far surpasses any natural occurance. Some cancers, including those likely to cause death such as lung cancer, are caused in most instances by individual behaviour such as smoking or poor diet. The role of poor health decisions can not be over looked. But it is important to recognise that more and more people are being exposed to carcinogenns through industrial sources involuntarily.

Prior to the Industrial Revolution the manufacturing of goods was achieved through the use of all natural products and procedures. While some natural materials, including certain plants, are known carcinogens, these can easily be avoided. However, the onset of modern industrial processes has put forth a stew of synthetic materials and chemicals into the Earth. It is no coincidence that the cancer rate has risen proportionate to increased chemical use in both industry and agriculture. Most man made chemicals and synthetics have incredibly long half­lives, some over a hundred years. These compounds, such as PCB's, bio­accumulate flowing up the food chain as they pass from one species to the next.

Every child born on Earth, from one end to the other, comes into life with trace elements of chemicals already in their blood. Our babies are being born with poisons already contaminating their bodies. Every breast feeding mother's milk contains traces of dioxin, a known carcinogen, that is an industrial bi­product of most manufacturing. The more human kind seeks progress through industry, the more poisoned our bodies become. In the search for bigger profits, and in the continual struggle to improve or defeat nature, we are creating an epidemic of disease.

When industrial development causes sickness and terminal illness it can not be called progress. When companies pollute the environment with chemicals that do not not naturally break down, in order to provide goods, it is not commerce but a public disservice. This is just plain common sense. Yet, we continuously find new arguments to justify our industrial dependency, from the consumer level to the government agency. We live in a disposable culture, without thought or care to where products come from or where they go when we are done with them. This disconnection from the manufacturing and disposal process only serves to reinforce the common acceptance that pollution is a necessary evil associated with industry.

The process by which most goods are manufactured causes irrepairable harm to the environment and to our bodies, through the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, carcinogens and other pollutants into the air, soil and water. The majority of these products and their packaging is not recycleable or biodegradeable, further clogging up landfills or producing more toxins if they are incinerated by waste management companies. Trash that doesn't make its way to the landfill or incinerator ends up in rivers, oceans, or other natural environments where they can leach toxins into their surroundings.

We must move away from these consumption practices and into practices that support local, recycleable, reusable, sustainable goods. It is easy to blame the companies for the mess they've made of our environment. However, consumers must also share the responsibility. Our purchases enable them by making their poisoning of our environment and our own bodies profitable. Through our consumer practices we are supporting the proliferation of cancer (as well as global warming). (Image: diving cancer cell)

The problems are difficult to address in a society where instant gratification is the norm. No one wants the finger pointed in their direction when it comes to liability, but it isn't difficult to find eco­friendly products or simply do without.

Of course it is easy for me to say “you don't need something”. It is easy to say if only we didn't buy this, use that, or create these things the world would get better. I know that these words will have little impact. Nevertheless, it does not change the truth of them. We have created the problems that envelope us, and those that we did not create we have perpetuated. The only way we can stop them, fix them, is by changing our behaviours. Is one person going to make a difference in this, no. But one person can have the power to influence another and yet another, yes.

We can't choose not to be exposed to the pollution that surrounds us. That decision has been made for us by those with the money and resources to consider our lives and environment expendable. Environmental and public health is part of a corporate math equation where liability is only calculated in dollars, not human cost. At the end of the day as long as products make more money than the cost to produce them, including the cost of law suits and fines, then business will continue to profit despite the health and environmental concerns associated with business as usual. That makes it up to the average person to make the cost of business too high for companies to profit from business as usual. Industries and businesses that release carcinogens and pollutants into our environment, into our bodies, must be punished and not supported by consumers or their tax dollars. Jeff Luers (December 2008) The Tasmanian Devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) is a carnivorous marsupial now found in the wild only in the Australian island state of Tasmania. The Tasmanian Devil is the only extant member of the genus Sarcophilus. The size of a small dog, but stocky and muscular, the Tasmanian Devil is now the largest carnivorous marsupial in the world after the extinction of the Thylacine in 1936. It is characterised by its black fur, offensive odor when stressed, extremely loud and disturbing screech, and ferocity when feeding...

In 2008 the Tasmanian Government announced that it is the average citizen's fault that the iconic Tasmanian Devil was going to be extinct within twenty years. It is our fault because nearly every lifestyle product we buy is coated in brominated flame retardant ­ polybrominated biphenyl ethers (PBDE) – which a recent scientific report found in very high levels in Devil's suffering from the Facial Tumour Disease that is causing the rapid demise of the Tasmanian Devil population.

Dr Bob Symons, who worked on the research project said that they hadn’t expected the findings in the devils to be so high. “It was a complete surprise to us. We always thought Tasmania was a pretty pristine place, but a result like this shows how far these chemicals can reach and how quickly they can build up in the environment.” Testing of salmon in Tasmania also showed double the highest PBDE residue levels detected in a recent study of Great Lakes salmon in North America. Tasmania is a huge producer of farmed salmon, largely in estuaries with large amounts of logging and plantations upstream.

There have been suggestions made that flame retardant may be being sprayed to protect plantations from bushfires, and also that PBDE's are used as a mixing agent in many different forestry and agricultural chemicals. Not surprisingly, the Tasmanian Devil has suffered the most in the North East of the island, an area of intensive agriculture and massive forestry plantations. They are currently disease free on the West Coast, most of which is protected as a wilderness World Heritage Area.

The Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD) is particularly strange and nasty. It is a terminal contagious cancer, something previously unheard of. It is thought to be spread through facial wounds from their regular fights over food, and rapidly turns gruesomely ulcerous and renders the animal incapable of eating, thus starving to death. In some parts of the island there are no longer any adult Devils, the only breeding is being conducted by adolescents, most of them diseased already. The Tasmanian Devil has been given no chance of survival in it's natural habitat, and now efforts are being made to create insurance populations on small islands and interstate and overseas zoos. But what does it mean to have an insurance population when there is no habitat safe enough to put them back into?

The Tasmanian Government would rather pretend that it's not an issue they can tackle. It's got nothing to do with chemical contaminants being sprayed by large industry into our environment. No, it's a lifestyle issue, more easily blamed on our televisions, our furniture, electrical appliances, clothing, and building materials, all soaked in PBDE's at the time of manufacturing. It is our fault, that's undeniable; we unquestioningly buy these things, we surround ourselves with new chemical infused products on a regular basis, and throw them away into other animal's habitats. Of course we should be taking responsibility, and questioning the things that we bring into our (and every other animal's) environment. But our governments also need to take responsibility for allowing corporations to pollute our environment on a massive scale, very much knowingly and wittingly, and for failing to warn people about the dangers of these chemicals. In Tasmania, forestry and big farming interests are unchallengeable. It seems the Government would rather see the island's most iconic animal, and peak predator, disappear than take action to stop big industry polluting the land with some of the most toxic chemicals ever known.

Animals all over the world are suffering from unknown and / or untreatable diseases on a large scale, and that includes us. Cancer rates are skyrocketing every single year, all over the world. Many of the cancer causing chemicals have been created as agents of war by large corporations. We are waging war on our environment, and as beings inseparable from our environment, we are waging war on ourselves. (Lilia Letsch – December 2008) Ignorance feeding aggression nurturing hate breeding suspicion Freedom sacrificed to protect the free Liberty lost to homeland security Voices of sanity become the enemy Control through fear Does anyone even remember Nazi Germany? Land of the free home of the brave an entire nation turned into slaves. Dead souless eyes staring blankly mindless numb and sick. Americans follow obediently. Power held by the people abandoned to apathy never mind responsibility Americans stand by proudly in patriotic conformity unquestioning non­threatening a nation of blind ruled by a one eyed king

Like a wave crashing down darkness floods over me I try to stay afloat but the darkness consumes me overwhelmed by the current I'm pulled out to sea. Lost in the open water of conformity another victim drowned in apathy I embrace my death succumbing to the deepest depth. Where no hope rests, I close my eyes and drift. Until I hear a whispered breath an urging to resist I feel a stirring an unyielding yearning to rise against and seek unlaboured breath riding the black tide's crest back from living death no longer a victim I raise a clenched fist.

Jeffrey Luers About

Written by Jeff “Free” Luers and Lilia Letsch, this zine is the result of a letter writing friendship struck up between two forest activists on opposite sides of the Pacific Ocean – one from Tasmania, the other a Californian serving time in an Oregon Prison.

In June 2001, 23 year­old forest defense activist Jeffrey "Free" Luers was sentenced to 22 years and 8 months in prison for the burning of three Sport Utility Vehicles (SUV's) in Eugene, Oregon. To make a statement about global warming, Jeff and his codefendent, Craig 'Critter' Marshall, set fire to 3 Sport Utility Vehicles at a Eugene car dealership. Their stated purpose was to raise awareness about global warming and the role that SUVs play in that process. No one was hurt in this action nor was that the intent. An arson specialist at trial confirmed that the action did not pose any threat to people based on its size and distance from any fuel source. Despite the fact that this action hurt no one, caused only $40,000 in damages and the cars were later resold, Jeff was sent to prison for a sentence considerably longer than those convicted of murder, kidnapping and rape in Oregon state. Jeff is a political prisoner and he continued to write and agitate for his release while imprisoned at Oregon State Penitentiary (a maximum security prison). His appeal was filed in January 2002 and oral arguments before the Oregon Court of Appeals were heard on November 30, 2005. Over a year later, on February 14, 2007 the Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that Jeff's case would be reversed and remanded back to the Circuit Court for resentencing. A year after their decision, a resentencing hearing finally took place on February 28, 2008 in Lane County Circuit Court which reduced Jeff's sentence to 10 years. He is serving the final part of his sentence in a minimum security prison. He will be released in December 2009!

Please make a donation towards Jeff's release and education fund through the website address below, or send a money order / cheque made out to “Free's Defense Fund” to PO Box 3, Eugene, OR. 97440 USA.

You can also help out by checking out the REI Gift Registry that has been established to help Jeff get set up once he's free. You can find it at: http://www.rei.com/GiftRegistryDetails/GR1875492 or just visit the REI site and search for Luers in the registry section.

Write to Jeff! Jeffrey Luers 13797671 CRCI, 9111 NE Sunderland Ave Portland, OR. 97211, USA www.freejeffluers.org www.myspace.com/freefreenow

Disclaimer: Lilia makes no apologies for the no doubt confusing mix of UK and US Enligsh, but her current abhorance for US cultural imperialism inhibits her from using 'z' where there should be an 's' or dropping the 'u' numerous words. an elk & elder production 2009