Monday, December 11, 2017

Charles River: Piety and Reality when it comes to Bees

Charles River: Piety and Reality when it comes to Bees

I delivered the following letter on December 7, 2017 to the Cambridge City Clerk for the City Council and City Manager.  It was received by the City Council at the December 11, 2017 meeting.

The City Council is considering various regulatory matters supposedly to help out the bee population.

The letter responds to the City Manager's input to the City Council on the bee initiatives.

* * * *

RE: City Manager Agenda Item 6, December 4, 2017, government impact on bees and other resident animals in Cambridge

Gentlemen / Ladies:

Please remember, once again, that two of the most irresponsibly destructive entities in Cambridge with regard to bees and other living beings are the Department of Conservation and Recreation and the City of Cambridge, with open support of the Cambridge City Council as stated in Order 1 of April 24, 2017, plus earlier outrages.

The Charles River has an annual infestation of algae that dates back to the love of the DCR for use of poisons on the banks of the Charles River.  Just prior to the first annual Charles River swim in, managers of the DCR determined that their beloved poisons were not functioning as well as they would like at Ebersol Fields next to the Massachusetts General Hospital.  So they dumped on Ebersol Fields poisons (Round-up sounds right) marked “Do not use near water.”  The next day, the Charles River was dead from the harbor to the Mass. Ave. Bridge with the first of these annual blights.  It is not a confusing matter, just another example of the lack of fitness of the DCR to manage the environment.

During the government destruction at Magazine Beach during the 2000's, managed by Mr. Rossi before he assumed the City Manager position, Cambridge and the DCR instituted the use of poisons on the formerly clean banks of the Charles River in the Charles River playing fields.  Playing fields were decreased in size to accommodate a poison drainage system.

* * * * *

Photo labeled:

The poison drainage system created at Magazine Beach by Cambridge and the DCR in the 2000's.  Area where government robots are destroying resident animal protecting ground vegetation.



* * * * *

This year, bees have been seen on Magazine Beach suffering from what we understand looks like Round-up poisoning.

Activities of government and related robots on this matter are, of course, in the wrong direction.

Order 1 of April 24, 2017, blessed the outrageously irresponsible plans of the DCR for Magazine Beach.

* * * * *

Photo inserted, labeled:

Top of the hill at Magazine Beach, proposed expansion area of poison use, along with one of the largest portions of the MASSIVE AND OUTRAGEOUS TREE DESTRUCTION supported by the Cambridge City Council in Order 1 of 4/24/17.



* * * * * *

In addition to massive destruction of excellent trees and continued heartless abuse of resident animals, the items blessed by the City Council include

1. Destruction of the poison fed and failed playing field grass and replacement with further poison fed grass instead of returning to the environmentally responsible playing fields which existed at Magazine Beach during the 20th Century.

2. Expansion of destruction of responsible grasses and replacement with poison feeding grasses at the top of the hill and in the area behind the swimming pool.

* * * * * *

Photo inserted, with label:

The little guys’ parking lot on the Hill at Magazine Beach.  Order 1 of April 24, 2017, supported destruction of this environmentally responsible gem.  Among other “achievements” is gentrification by driving away the lower income folks who use this place for access to picnicing.  Additionally, this is part of the rearrangement of driveways to speed up traffic coming off the new Inner Belt / private exit for MIT from the Mass. Pike (I90)


* * * * * *

3. Continued destruction of animal habitat which habitat is a side benefit of the poison drainage system.

Destruction is by robots of the City of Cambridge and the DCR.

The robots regularly and proudly destroy valuable ground vegetation needed by resident animals.

For an analysis of the value of such vegetation, please see the following article published in the Magazine of Harvard University’s Arnold Arboretum, http://arnoldia.arboretum.harvard.edu/pdf/articles/2017-75-1-other-order-sound-walk-for-an-urban-wild.pdf.  Arnold Arboretum devotes 25 acres to such vegetation.


4. Continued existence of the truly bizarre starvation wall which prevents access between the playing fields and the Charles River and which

a. turns the playing fields into a facility which might as well be ten miles from the Charles River.

b. implements the goal of the DCR with Cambridge support to kill off resident animals, a goal which is broad enough to include resident bees.

* * * * *

Photo inserted, labeled

Failure of the DCR and Cambridge’s beloved poisons on the playing fields.  Supposed remedy:  the poison drinking grass will be replaced with more poison drinking grass rather than by bringing back the responsible grasses of the 20th Century which were destroyed by the 2000's outrage, and which are targeted for further destruction instead.


* * * * *

Yelling at / regulating the other guy as is the subject of bee keeping regulations is nice, but is no excuse for continued environmental destructiveness by the City of Cambridge, the DCR and their robots.

Please practice what you preach.

Among other things end the outrage on the Charles River.

End the plans for further destruction on the Charles River hidden in the fine print of the Grand Junction plans.

Use the responsible alternatives for the Grand Junction which we have proposed.

Reverse Order 1 of April 24, 2017.

* * * * *

Photo inserted, labeled:

The starvation wall at Magazine Beach, viewed from the Boston side of the Charles River.  The opening viewed is the only opening.  It is the public boat dock destroyed by the 2000's outrages.


Second photo inserted, labeled:

Adult woman in destroyed boat dock, overwhelmed by size of Starvation Wall.


* * * * *

Replace the DCR with a responsible, although not perfect, entity, the Department of Transportation.

While MassDOT is not perfect, the DCR approaches perfection from the wrong direction, and MassDOT has stood up to outrages originating in the government of the City of Cambridge and in the DCR.

Lovely words primarily aimed at the other guy is a terrible substitute by a government which does not comply with its own lovely words.

Sincerely,



Robert J. La Trémouille, individually as as
Chair, Friends of the White Geese

* * * * *

Photo inserted with label:

Early photo of bridge over created wetlands.  It prevents access by boat users to historical boat dock.  Bridge was introduced in the 2000's outrages.



Final photo inserted with label:

Vegetation introduced in 2000's outrage north of the bizarre bridge.  After the first phase of the 2000's outrage, the Charles River White Geese entered their home of most of the last 37 years through the destroyed boat dock to feed.  These bizarre plantings implement the goal of killing / driving away resident animals.  Implementation of goal is by deliberately starving them, through this and other tactics.


* * * * *

Sunday, December 10, 2017

Charles River: Destruction on Magazine Beach gets Worse

1. Introduction.
2. The Poison Drainage System.
A. Prior situation in the part which saw the recent destruction.
B. Situation on December 7, 2017.
3. The Playing Fields.
A. Prior situation.
B. Situation on December 7, 2017.
4. Apparent waste of recyclable materials.
5. Open support by the City of Cambridge.
6. Miscellaneous.  More Wild life threatened, tree identification, vegetation destruction.
A. Wasp nest.
B. Next vegetation to destroy.
C. Make work for contractors.
D. Censorship, another fake group “created.”
E. Support on tree identification could be helpful.
F. Other Tree Losses, and strengths.
G. City Council / City Manager contact after the fact.
H. Other means of contact.


1. Introduction.

A few days ago, we reported on destruction at the Magazine Beach playing fields by robots of the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

On December 9, we wandered the area taking photographs.  Further work has been done, probably by the DCR or its contractors.  They love make work for contractors.

The outrages done through their contractors was one reason given for the destruction of the DCR’s predecessor, the Metropolitan District Commission.  Unfortunately, the “planners” guilty of the prior outrages simply moved over to the DCR and, with the support of Cambridge, are proceeding with the outrages so visibly condemned by the state legislature.

We have also reported on the outrageous plans.  Some of the reports are in the final section of this report.

The photos taken on December 7, indicate matters of interest or concern in the poison drainage system, the actual playing fields, apparent waste of recyclable materials and actual support by the City of Cambridge.

Then again, part of the reality of work done admits the bankruptcy of the “improvements” to date.


2. The Poison Drainage System.

A. Prior situation in the part which saw the recent destruction.



The vegetation nearer the camera in the above picture is the next part of the poison drainage system to the west.  This is the vegetation visible in the second prior photo of the Playing Fields.  Stretching left and right straight ahead in this picture is an excellent view of the western side of the largest portion of the poison drainage system.  The attack on this portion of the poison drainage system is the subject of this report.


This October 2016 photo is from the southern extremity of the playing fields, not far from the starvation wall.  The low vegetation running from left to right is the poison drainage system under attack as reported here.  Flowers which are part of the system show to the right.  The tree slightly right of the middle is one of the tiny number of dead trees upon which the fraudulent term “dead or dying” is based, giving the impression that all 56 doomed trees are “dead or dying,” as opposed to the tiny minority which is the honest count.

The trees way back probably include the magnificent grove hanging over the playing fields and doomed by the DCR and by the Cambridge City Council motion 1 of April 24, 2017.


The above photo is taken from directly south of the poison drainage area under attack.  It is the area to the right, with the flowers nearer.  Taken in October 2016, the photo gives a different view of the soccer goal showing in below photos taken December 6, 2017.  Whether it has been moved or not, I do not know.  The big shadow is the result of the massive starvation wall being behind, south, of the camera, and blocking sun.


The above photo, from October 2016, was taken from west of the poison drainage area under attack, the largest of the poison drainage areas.  To the right is the starvation wall, to the left is the southernmost end of this poison drainage area.  Sorry about the lighting.  The sun is to the south, right, and that massive starvation wall really messes things up.

Below pictures, in section 3, show closer photos of the poison drainage area just attacked.  The preceding photos were part of general, massive photos of the entire Magazine Beach recreation area mostly done specifically for the June 6, 2017, 51 page report on the outrage voted for by the Cambridge City Council on April 24, 2016.  The photos below emphasize the poison drainage area.  It, always, is impossible to predict in advance what outrage will happen next.

Just another proof of the statement which has been altogether too true of the DCR and Cambridge since the commencement of these outrages on the Charles River started.

* * *

“Never say they will never stoop so low.”

* * *

B. Situation on December 7, 2017.

Here are photos of the denuded area created by Robots of the DCR and Cambridge at the beginning of December.

This area, the largest area of the poison drainage system, is now completely covered with black tarps in order to smother the remaining phragmite roots (same stuff you put around tomato plants to discourage weeds). Denuded of natural vegetation the whole area was largely under water again after a recent rain.  It is pretty lousy to flood the field mice out of their burrows at the start of cold weather. We have seen their delicate little tunnels just under the snow cover there every winter since the reeds grew in.

An excellent report in the magazine of Harvard’s living nature museum, the Arnold Arboretum analyzes the 25 acre portion of the museum where Harvard is displaying phragmite and other valuable naturally occurring vegetation.

The current lie is “non-native” but they very clearly are as valuable in the ecosystem AS THE STUFF THE CONTRACTORS ARE SELLING, unless you understand the lying definitions for usual lovely terms.  Inasmuch as this is all filled land, “native” is blatant nonsense, unless you are selling things.  The article is on line at http://arnoldia.arboretum.harvard.edu/pdf/articles/2017-75-1-other-order-sound-walk-for-an-urban-wild.pdf

The goal of the DCR with Cambridge City Council support in order 1 of April 24, 2017 and prior actions is to kill or drive away all resident animals.  Bees have been seen in very sick condition.  Clearly the result of the DCR’s beloved poisons.  The addition of those poisons to the clean environment at Magazine Beach was one of the “accomplishments” of the DCR and Cambridge in the outrages of the 2000's.

The drainage system was claimed to make up for the poisons.  Of course, they neglected to mention the impact of the poisons on resident animals, including animals residing in the created poison drainage system.

Naturally growing animals and vegetation have “no value” to the contractors.  They cannot make money on beauty which comes for free, NO MATTER HOW EXCELLENT.  So destroy it and make money for them by replacing it because money is their only thing of value.






3. The Playing Fields.

A. Prior situation.

Please note that the first photo of the prior poison drainage system situation shows brown spots which could have been repaired by the work we report in section B of this section.


The massive grove of trees straight ahead dominates the Playing Fields.  The DCR and Cambridge City Council (order 1, April 24, 2017) want to destroy it, although the DCR plays games.  MAYBE they MIGHT NOT destroy 2 or 3 of the 10.  We agree that a tiny minority are beyond saving, but only a tiny minority are beyond saving.

The DCR also plays games on the count.  What they are destroying, normal people would call 10 trees.  The DCR counts 3 and has a lovely technical “explanation.”

Part or all of the damage in the foreground could have been damage repaired as shown below.  The vegetation shown in the middle is to the west of the poison drainage system reported on above and is a portion of the poison drainage system to the west of the area whose attack is reported here.



The low trees to the left of middle are on the far side of Memorial Drive.  Part of the grove to the left, in front of the pedestrian overpass, is slated for destruction.


The structure barely visible behind the trees in the background is the pedestrian overpass over Memorial Drive.  The whitish portion visible toward the left under the trees is the lower part of the overpass.  The green portion barely visible behind the excellent trees and above the small stands is over Memorial Drive.  A number of trees in this picture are being destroyed by the DCR and by the Cambridge City Council Order 1 of April 24, 2017.

B. Situation on December 7, 2017.

This work has been done north of the principal poison drainage area, between it and Memorial Drive.

With regard to the brown, little landfills, the low boggy spots in the grassy area have been filled in with new topsoil. The massive "reconstruction" of Magazine Beach a few years ago was about improved drainage of the playing fields but here's evidence that it's failed dramatically. We have noted for several years now that most of the lawn is sodden after a rain. There were many puddle-holes in the turf when we were there recently as well. When teams play on the wet grass they tear it up and make mudholes that grow and grow




4. Apparent waste of recyclable materials.

This is a Cambridge Department of Public Works garbage truck picking up the vegetation torn from the ground the previous weekend.  Photo taken on December 7, 2017.

Why is the Cambridge DPW working on DCR turf? Can the reeds not be composted?




5. Open support by the City of Cambridge / Robots.

To the best of our knowledge, Cambridge workers are not supposed to be working on DCR properties, the photographic evidence in section 4 notwithstanding.

Cambridge, through the state budgeting process, pays for DCR operations, which, supposedly, include maintenance of DCR properties.  The long standing failure of DCR to maintain its properties and use of allocated funds for destruction is part of the ongoing outrage.

The fraud by the robots argues that free work by private citizens is helpful to the environment.

The reality is that, through whatever technique used, getting private citizens or the City of Cambridge to do DCR maintenance allows use of corresponding money for destruction, whether outright or by planning for destruction including but very much not limited to work by supervisors when the supervisors should be supervising maintenance.

After the Cambridge DPW workers picked up the remnants from the destruction robots’ work the prior weekend, the truck backed into the area at the southern end of the parking lot.  This is the area with the massive vegetation which blocks the tiny opening in the starvation wall.  The 36 year resident Charles River White Geese had the nerve to go through the opening to feed.

The green structure in the photo below is a solar trash can.  It can be viewed between the first and second introduced obstacle from the left.  Cambridge workers on the garbage truck could have been backing up to the solar trash can to unload it for the DCR.

This is a file photo.


6. Miscellaneous.  More Wild life threatened, tree identification, vegetation destruction.

A. Wasp nest.

A wasp nest was recently spotted on one of the cottonwoods on the 7th.  Here is a photo of it.


B. Next vegetation to destroy.

These people are so destructive, the next question is will they go after the Scotch thistles (which were abundant for the first time this year) have to go, or the evening primroses. They seem to have destroyed a lovely stand of tall flowering perennials which escaped from someone's garden as well as the impressive Joe Pye Weed interspersed with it.

C. Make work for contractors.

One key in the destruction is make work for contractors.  Vegetation and animals which do not cost the government money “has no value.”  This is another mentality in the obvious “reasons” for destroying the truly magnificent trees which are a day past their peak beauty.

The destroyers have found another way to lie about the destruction as having “value.”  Even if the trees they are destroying are excellent, and have 50 years to live, the lie is that they are “in decline.”

So contractors get paid to destroy, and contractors get paid to “replace” five story high magnificent trees with saplings.  The key Robot destroyer recently admitted that they are getting paid to destroy all this vegetation.  Money, money, money.  NOT BEAUTY, MONEY.

The most important thing to these people is make work for contractors.  That was also one of the reasons why the predecessor entity was destroyed by the legislature, too much waste destruction.

Needless to say, there are a slew of bad “reasons” for destruction.

Mentioning this one, of course, does not mean that destruction is not being done to rearrange driveways on Memorial Drive to speed up traffic coming to Memorial Drive off MIT’s new Inner Belt highway, its personal exit from the Massachusetts Turnpike (I90) by way of the Grand Junction railroad bridge over the Charles River.  Ramps to Memorial Drive are in the plans.

D. Censorship, another fake group “created.”

At the same time, the destroyers who lie that they are a neighborhood association are getting even more blatant about their recognition that their own lies cannot stand the test of meaningful responses.  This level of corruption is outrageous.

The “neighborhood association” used to pre censor their ListServ to prevent exposure of participants to responsible positions.  That corrupt situation could not stand exposure to reality.

After I pointed out to City Council and City Manager that advance censorship proves the group meaningless for its claimed function as a “neighborhood association,” the destroyers stopped pre-censorship.

Now they summarily expel from the ListServ those who make comments the string-pullers  disagree with outrageous “explanations,” of course.  Then the string-pullers lie that they are not censoring.  Similar situation, more dishonest, and probably worse because they are hand picking the most vulnerable people to get their corrupt fabrications.

The string pullers have also created another fake group recently, same control, supposedly “independent,” independence yet another lie, of course.

The Cambridge Machine and friends are very skillful at creating lovely sounding “independent” group after “independent” group, as in “look at all the independent groups we have supporting us!  How dare you stand up to all these independent groups.”

The reality is that the interconnections among the string-pullers is so strong that it is silly to consider all these “independent” groups as anything other than just part of the fraud to fool well meaning voters.

A tiny number of robots lying that they are larger than they are in reality.

And an even tinier number PUBLICLY admits going to the Cambridge Development Department or worse to find out what is “correct” thinking.

E. Support on tree identification could be helpful.

We are not positive if we have all these trees ID'd properly. The leaf shape on what we call “cottonwoods” is definitely eastern cottonwood but the trunk distribution is more typical of white poplar, but its leaves look entirely different. We don't recall seeing any of the cottony seeds coming off these trees as the cottonwoods at Alewife, which have identical leaves as far as we can tell.

F. Other Tree Losses, and strengths.

Introduced plane trees at Magazine Beach have died, but red-twig dogwoods are flourishing.

G. City Council / City Manager contact after the fact.

This report will be a change from our recent pattern of posting communications to the City of Cambridge here after submitting them.  We will likely put a shorter version of this analysis into such a city communication after posting this analysis here.

H. Other means of contact.

As of this writing, the Cambridge City Council has one meeting left before three new city councilors take office.  The  outrages distressingly keep coming, and they have major impact to the region.  We will likely have new items to report upon the taking of office of the three replacements.  In any case, all of the new members have been receiving condensed versions of these reports for months as part of a larger email condensation mailing which also goes to the Charles River White Geese Facebook page.

If you would like to friend the Charles River White Geese on Facebook, please do so.  It is a nice form of a petition.

Sunday, December 03, 2017

Charles River: Fake “protectors” destroy more, a Harvard analysis of vegetation.

I. Fake group destroys more ground vegetation.
1. More Destruction.
2. Bragging.
3. Current victims.
4. Past Achievements of Robots, the Destroyed Nesting Area.
5. Pending destruction.
6. The outrage of January 2016 ‒ Videos.
7. Summary.
II. Comments.
1. Public.
2. Harvard.
A. General.
B. Quote.
C. Beautiful photo - label.
III. Achievements of the fake protectors.

IV. Censorship.


I. Fake group destroys more ground vegetation.

1. More Destruction, analysis.

We are reporting in parallel.  One thread is spinning off on letters to the Cambridge City Council.  The other thread tries to be up to date.

We have previously reported on the fake neighborhood association destroying ground vegetation at Magazine Beach.  On December 2, they are at it again.

These “achievements” serve several purposes.

a. They distract people from the massive destruction that the fake group is fighting for on the Charles River, hundreds of trees destroyed already with more coming, dumping of poisons on the banks of the Charles River, walling off of the banks of the Charles River from the river to starve resident animals, etc.  They then lie to well intentioned people that these environmental destroyers are anything but.

b. They give folks perhaps a false impression of the area they are “improving.” :Here is a photo of the area being subject to destruction of ground vegetation.


c. Objectively, this area was created to drain off poisons which have no business being dumped on the Charles River.  Thus the “improvements” that these frauds lie about to folks is that the poison drainage system has value.  Draining off poisons which should not be there should be resolved by stopping the poisons, but responsible behavior of this sort is rather unacceptable to the Cambridge Machine.  So they will just brag of their “good deeds” and keep secret the vile part.

d. The most important achievement is that they are keeping in office incompetents who are not fit to manage the environment.

e. More in the spirit of the Cambridge Machine, there is a truly vile part.  The poison drainage system has created a positive value in that free animals, including rabbits have made their homes here.

        Ground vegetation being destroyed protects resident animals.

        So the destruction of ground vegetation fits the mantra of this reprehensible organization.  They are abusing free animals.

2. Bragging.

They have bragged of this blatantly sick mentality in their propaganda show in City Hall Annex, photo attached.



3. Current victims.

Here is a photo of some of their victims wandering the streets of Cambridge after the same frauds helped Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation destroy hundred of trees and related animal habitat on the banks of the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.


4. Past Achievements of Robots, the Destroyed Nesting Area.




There are two stages of destruction in this photo, first the robots destroyed the ground vegetation, then Railroad workers with the very clear after the fact blessing of the DCR, dumped crushed stone to make it worse.

The next three photos below are looking into the area to the right.  The fourth is at the Charles River.  The final photo is taken from the on ramp to Memorial Drive.  The first, third and fifth shots have the Grand Junction at the top of the hill.





The above photo is probably taken with back to the Grand Junction and to the right of the area below.




The structure at the top is the Grand Junction Bridge.



The stairwell in the foreground in the last photo was part of much illegally accomplished by Boston University who lied that they did not do this destruction and a lot of other destruction.

When Boston University was condemned by the Cambridge Conservation Commission, the bureaucrats blamed months of lies on their president’s secretary and started bragging.  There is no knowledge of discipline of the secretary..

These areas were formerly heavily vegetated.  The robots and bureaucrats have created dirt.

The reality is that you have bureaucrats who have contempt for the environment, and you have frauds propagating the incompetence of these reprehensible people as something to be proud of by walking around destroying things to help out the incompetents.

5. Pending destruction.

I have done many reports.

The detailed summary of the coming outrage at Magazine Beach which was presented to the Cambridge City Council and City Manager on June 6, 2017.

The official city record is at http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=1815&Inline=True, pages 198 to 249.

This is a long download.  I am pleased to provide 5 email sized PDF’s of it.  Just contact me at boblat@yahoo.com.

It has been heavily supplemented.

6. The outrage of January 2016 ‒ Videos.

Memorial Drive Destruction, Final Cut:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

Nature and Beauty Ripped out along the Charles River:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

7. Summary.

The result is the aggressive participation of these people in humanity’s destruction of our earth, made worse by the non stop fraud of claims of superiority.

II. Comments.

1. Public.

I see the idiots are going to be tearing up more roots Saturday.  Guess the rabbits' habitat means nothing to them.

I also notice the cottonwoods did not fare well through the summer. They look less healthy to me than last year. There's a lot of blight and fungal infections around now that the winters are no longer cold enough to kill them.

2. Harvard.

A. General.

The following is quoted, citations omitted, from “Other Order: Sound Walk for an Urban Wild”, Peter Del Tredici and Teri Rueb, Arnoldia 75/1, August 2017, pp. 14 to 25.  Arnoldia is a publication the Harvard University entity, the Arnold Arboretum, a large museum of nature in the southern part of Boston, MA which is maintained and displayed to the public as part of Harvard positive work in our world..  The display includes large areas displaying excellent vegetation such as the fake protectors are destroying on the Charles River.

The quotation attempts below attempts to communicate without being massive plagiarism.

The report includes some decidedly lovely photographs of the area  in the Arnold Arboretum which the Cambridge destroyers lie is offensive.  The report is on line at http://arnoldia.arboretum.harvard.edu/pdf/articles/2017-75-1-other-order-sound-walk-for-an-urban-wild.pdf.

B. Quote.

* * * *

In the United States, the idea that unmanaged “open space” in cities could perform valuable ecological services was foreshadowed by a movement . . . that categorized such sites as “urban wilds” . . .

* * * *

Boston Urban Wilds, a 1976 report from the Boston Redevelopment Authority, identified 143 land parcels in Boston with potential value as preserved natural areas.

* * *

In 1988, the Boston Parks Department officially took over management of the Urban Wilds program which, as of 2014, listed 39 properties in its inventory.

* * *

The original 1976 BRA report described 143 sites that contained some significant “natural resource value,” including geological features (68 sites), coastal or fresh water wetlands (20 sites), shorelines (27 sites), or important vegetation (28 sites).   . . . In the 1970's, urban wilds, regardless of their biological content or cultural history, were viewed as valuable antidotes to blighted, barren cityscapes. . . .  Reconceptualization of urban nature [by the late-1990's] ‒ essentailly attempting to affix a “native” label on it ‒ represented a dramatic reversal of fortune for the non-native organisms that found themselves reclassified as invasive species.  Older, less value-driven terms to describe these plants . . . fell by the wayside and with them an appreciation of their historic connection with the past land use of the site.

In 1996, . . .Eugenie Beal and John Blackwell and . . .the Boston Natujral Areas Fund and the Arboretum Park Conservancy . . . achieved] permanent protection for the entire 25-acre site [of urban wilds, Bussey Brook Meadow].

. . . a dynamic organize ecological system that reflect[s] cultural values, past land-use history and future ecological trajectories . . .

* * *

C. Beautiful photo - label.

Non-native wetland plants growing in Bussey Brook Meadow: common reed (Phragmites australis) in the background, . . .

III. Achievements of the fake protectors.

Robots controlled by the Department of Conservation and Recreation have a very clear record.

Above are photos and videos of some their achievements: destroy, destroy, destroy, and lie.

That is what the DCR, the Cambridge Development Department and their Robots stand for and which they fight for with non stop propaganda, censorship and bullying.

IV. Censorship.

The fake group doing this destruction even had an extended discussion on their ListServ on whether the ListServ would be openly censored.

I communicated to the City Manager and City Council, among other things that this supposedly open “neighborhood association” practiced censorship on their ListServ as a means of lying that they represent a neighborhood rather than being cheerleaders for an irresponsible city government.

Not long after that, with great fanfare, the fake group loudly proclaimed an end to censorship.

The usual fraud.

Honest censorship has been replaced with expulsion from their list of those who have the nerve to talk reality on their list as opposed to supporting the repeated fraud coming from the string pullers.

But they do love to lie that they do not censor.

The terrible things these people are fighting for AND HAVE ACHIEVED will not stand the light of day, so censorship, bullying and multiple corrupt tactics combine with non stop hypocricial nonsense.

The censorship IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF CLAIMS OF OPENNESS and other outrageous tactics prove the bankruptcy of the cause for which they fight.

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

Charles River: Cambridge Machine Fraud Analyzed, Massachusetts Avenue v. Charles River, very basic reality presented.

00 General Introduction.
I. General Analysis
II. City Manager / City Council Letter.
0. Introduction.
2. “Dead or dying” and reality on the Charles River.
III. Analysis ‒ Cambridge Politics, key duplicity, the lay of the land, Company unions and robots,.
A. General.
B. Very basic reality.
(1) Cambridge politics.
(2) Activist victory 45 years ago is being targeted by duplicity.
(3) The lay of the land.
(A) South / East of the BU Bridge.
(B) West / North of the BU Bridge.
C. Company Unions.
D. Robots.
IV. To be continued.

00 General Introduction.

This is the second presentation on this Blog of deeper meanings in a letter pending delivered on November 14, 2017, for receipt by the Cambridge, MA, USA City Council and City Manager.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the letter to the City has condensed a vast amount of information.  I am not writing a book on this blog.  I am just trying to communicate the reality of the outrage in Cambridge politics which is being reflected in the ongoing and increasing outrages on the Charles River.  The analysis includes my background and my experiences with this outrage.

I am taking portions of the City letter, one at a time, and analyzing those portions, one at a time.  If a portion of the City letter REALLY gets into a lot, the blog posts analyzing that section will be multiple.

This report starts with a general analysis, followed by the relevant section of the city council letter being analyzed.

Following that is the in depth section going into key overall concepts.

I will start with the basic working of politics in Cambridge, MA.

I will then go into perhaps the most crucial  concept, an Interstate highway through Cambridge that was defeated 45 years ago and is being unpdated and resurrected.  That resurrected highway, of course, impacts massive destruction on the banks of the Charles River.

Then I will go into detail as to the portions of the Charles River which are relevant to the fight and to understanding the fight, both in Boston and Cambridge, with maps.  The parts of the Charles River in play run miles, and the relationship can be subtle.

Finally, I will define key terms which I use to explain the corrupt management of the voter in Cambridge, MA, by the government of the city.  The terms are “company union” and “robot.”

I. General Analysis

The ongoing and increasing outrage on the Charles River is impossible to distinguish from the outrage which is the city council, key bureaucrats and their robots in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.  The prior three City Managers were leaders of the outrage working through the Cambridge Development Department.  The outrage has continued after the departure of the last of the three bad City Managers.

There are three new city councilors coming to office in January.  It is uncertain if they, or the continuing incumbents will continue the established bad ways.  The three manager City Manager Machine is very powerful because of the existence of all those fake groups which have accumulated over the 42 year reign of te Machine.  The groups’ string pullers look to the city government and lie that they are defenders of the voters, rather than the reality that they very clearly look like be defenders of the City Manager Machine.

But the City Manager Machine was created under the aegis of the three prior City Managers, and the current City Manager has shown the potential for responsible behavior, plus his background is separate from his three predecessors.

He has been in Cambridge city government as long as the City Manager Machine, and he gives the impression that he wants to serve the people of the City of Cambridge of which he is a lifetime resident.  He is not declared opposed to the tiny number of people who control the machine and who control voters through a lot of corrupt tactics, but the incumbent city manager very clearly has shown independence.  He can possibly clean the mess up.  He has shown skill in key actions.

I have also been active in city government throughout the City Manager machine, with a lot of victories.  This City Council / City Manager letter is the first letter going into my real record, putting reality on the record, both in my experience and in outrages of the Cambridge City Manager Machine.  I have been pushed to communicate my real record by ongoing personal attacks, and outright censorship on the ListServe of the latest fake group in retaliation for OFFERING to communicate one limited item of reality on the ListServ.

A good feel for the outrage which is the government of the City of Cambridge, as stated, can be noted through the first two sections of the letter which was submitted to the Cambridge City Council and City Manager on November 14.  It has not yet been presented to the City Council.  I anticipate they will receive it at their next regular Monday meeting.

The first presentation addressed blatant fraud by the Cambridge Development Department in Harvard Square in response to a pending question by the Cambridge City Council.  It is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2017/11/charles-river-sample-of-how-bad.html.

Section 2 of the letter is directly relevant to the Charles River, but, on looking at it, splitting it for Blog presentation makes better sense because of its emphasis on more general issues and the record of the Cambridge Machine.

The beginning of section 2 reflects more into the general dirty tricks of the Cambridge Machine.  The latter part concentrates on the Charles River outrages.  The latter part will follow.  I can only make these reports so long.

The first part of Section 2 has considerable overlap with Section 1, and there really are a vast number of issues.

This report will focus on some of the general issues raised, and subsequent report will go further into the multiple issues.

It is becoming increasingly clear that I cannot further avoid the nuttiness which is politics in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.  The complexity of the situation is one reason why I have avoided this.  Another problem is that I really would prefer to discuss the Charles River.

But, here we go.

This series of communications is to give the reader a better understanding of the corrupt practices in Cambridge, MA, which have morphed into the outrages which dominate this reprehensible organization’s fight to destroy on the Charles River.

First the beginning of section 2 of the City Council letter.  Then my first analysis of issues in it.

As with my report passing on section 1, I am quoting section 0 of the City Council letter followed by the relevant part of Section 2 in Section II of this report.

This time, Section III will analyze in detail the communication to the City Council.  Section III analyzes two terms I use extensively with regard to the outrage which is the politics of Cambridge, MA, USA and which come together in the ongoing destruction of the Charles River.

The analysis explains what I mean by “Company Unions” and “Robots.”

II. City Manager / City Council Letter.

0. Introduction.

In what is normal behavior from the Cambridge Machine, situations which should be professionally handled have substituted personal attack, and the personal attacks have become extreme.  This letter and subsequent letters will include response to the personal attacks.  Trying to distinguish between response to personal attacks and normal business issues is impractical.  So these responses will be solely in my name, as opposed to as Chair, Friends of the White Geese.

2. “Dead or dying” and reality on the Charles River.

The situation on the Charles River reflects Robots of the Development Department run rampant.  The C2B areas of Massachusetts Avenue were achieved in spite of manipulation by Development Department Robots.  The current situation is one of years of censorship concerning the Charles River by the Robots (which censorship has been renewed) and fraud originating clearly in the Department of Conservation and Recreation at the most basic and, in the “Dead or Dying”  terminology, probably in the Development Department.

The level of dishonesty in the current situation exceeds what was done in the Massachusetts Avenue area probably because of the much more technical issues at foot and the lack of direct abutters, plus the level of dishonesty has greatly ramped up.  On Massachusetts Avenue, they bragged of their plans.  On the Charles River, they have censored those plans, and gone to extreme measures by which they have kept those plans VERY secret.

Development Department Robots were active on the Massachusetts Avenue changes.  They lost for the most part, although, over the years, they did achieve two clear outrages.  The Massachusetts Avenue area is also a special case in that the Robots functioned as a rogue steering committee to a neighborhood association in an earlier change. That change was initiated by a neighborhood association committee chaired by me.  The rogue steering committee collectively and individually achieved some very terrible things.

In the prior change, the actual neighborhood association forced an organization vote of the neighborhood association and rejected the rogue steering committee’s actions after it was too late.  The rogue steering committee had forced the zoning that created the irresponsible construction in the Bay Street area.  General voter antipathy to that construction was helpful in the subsequent two major zoning changes, in East Harvard Square and Dana / Hancock to City Hall.

That Bay Street area construction was generally hated by constituents throughout the city.  The City Council responded to the demands of their constituents.  I say two major zoning changes because there were several smaller changes as well, refining the zoning in parts of the Massachusetts Avenue corridor.  The minor changes increased zoning modifications to a total of 6 to 10 changes including changes partially or wholly independent of me.

This Massachusetts Avenue area has been carefully worked on.  The City Council was so involved that, in crunch time of the latest major change, the petitioners achieved more than we really asked for.  We suggested a compromise to respond to the complaint of an affected landowner.  Our compromise was rejected by the City Council.

The Robots on the Charles River are very effectively functioning as a Company Union in a situation where the “neighborhood association” has driven away concerned people by constantly telling folks not to look at the destruction they are fighting for, by the lack of direct abutters, by one key corrupt action, by bullying, by outrageous agenda manipulation, and by belligerent censorship.  Their big pitch for the better part of a decade now has been:

* * * *

Don’t look at what we are destroying.  Look at what we tell you to look at.

* * * *

Bushes are bragged about.  Destroying ground vegetation is bragged about.  True outrages are kept secret.  Massive tree destruction, use of poisons on the banks of the Charles River, walling off of the Charles River and heartless animal abuse are kept secret INCLUDING OUTRIGHT CENSORSHIP which OUTRIGHT CENSORSHIP has resumed in recent weeks.  The real neighboring residents are the free animals, some of whom are walking the streets of Cambridge because of habitat destruction, living proof of reprehensible behavior.

Outright censorship of their Listserv has been a major tool of the Robots.  The censorship was stopped after I pointed it out to the City Manager and City Council.  The censorship was just resumed selectively, with a vengeance.   Accurate mention of city council / DCR / related plans for the Charles River is simply not allowed.

III. Analysis ‒ Cambridge Politics, key duplicity, the lay of the land, Company unions and robots,.

A. General.

I keep using the terms, “company union” and “robots.”  Below is what I mean by them.

B. Very basic reality.

(1) Cambridge politics.

The first of the three related Cambridge City Managers who led the Cambridge City Manager Machine was James Leo Sullivan.  The second City Manager was Sullivan’s #2 when in office, Robert Healy.  The third was Robert Healy’s #2, Richard Rossi.  The current City Manager, Louis A. DiPasquale, was in city employment throughout this outrage but he worked in the financial side of government.  He was not directly involved in the nonsense stemming from the heart of the situation.

The current city manager resided for most of this period in a relatively small density neighborhood of Cambridge at its western extreme, adjacent to Belmont, MA.  His neighborhood was also adjacent to the formerly mostly untouched Silver Maple Forest which has been partially destroyed by his predecessors and by the corresponding City Councilors.  The current City Manager moved, prior to entering office as City Manager, to one of the large scale complexes which have been built in the eastern part of Cambridge.

James Leo Sullivan commuted to Cambridge from Lowell, MA throughout his tenure.  Lowell is, much further north in MA, as distances are measured in MA, in which people do not think in terms of traveling long distances.  Cambridge, in particular, is very much self focused.  The mental separation from Somerville to the north, for example, is massive, but the only real difference is lines drawn on the map.  I am pretty certain that Robert Healy did the same.

Sullivan and Healy were rehired in 1974 after the two (I believe the two) lost leadership positions in Cambridge in the mid 60's.  I have no real knowledge of the circumstances of the separation.  My gut feel is that it was related to the very real and powerful activist activities in Cambridge during that period.

Shortly before the rehiring, the activist victories peaked with the defeat of an Interstate highway which was slated to devastate the area about a block east of the Grand Junction Railroad in the area of concern to this blog and to continue destruction through the eastern part of Cambridge to connect with what is now Interstate 93 running north from Downtown Boston.  In the Boston mentality, the connection was to an extension of what Bostonians call the Southeast Expressway, or simply now, “The Expressway.”  The defeated project was called the “Inner Belt.”

The Southeast Expressway is also now part of Interstate 93.  The I93 / Southeast Expressway combination provides north - south connection to Downtown Boston, including Cambridge.  Cambridge is physically a northern part of Boston, but is separately governed and is proudly and meaningfully independent.  I93 / Southeast Expressway combines with Interstate 95 to form a beltway with downtown connection by the Southeast Expressway / Interstate 93.

(2) Activist victory 45 years ago is being targeted by duplicity.

Here is a marked up state plan showing the Grand Junction railroad, which is targeted for an updated Inner Belt to give the Massachusetts Institute of Technology a personal exit from Interstate 90 (Massachusetts Turnpike).  I90 is the east -,  west connector to Downtown Boston.

The Inner Belt defeat was a major milestone in Boston area government.  The fight for a new Inner Belt is thus being done with maximum secrecy in recognition of the strong, proud history of victory over destruction by highway.

This secrecy combined with the fight for an updated and partial Inner Belt highway is at the core of so many of the outrages on the Charles River.


On this plan, the Grand Junction railroad is marked by the black arrows which indicate major street crossings.  The Inner Belt proposal followed the Grand Junction Railroad below and to its right.  The arrow to the left is at Massachusetts Avenue, the heart of MIT.  The next arrow is at Main Street, near Kendall Square, currently the northern edge of MIT.

MIT is closely related to very major development in both areas.  Much if not most of the development amounts to land-banking with buildings rented to tenants closely related to MIT and the possibility of later conversion to formal parts of the MIT campus.

The area west / south of Mass. Ave. to its bend is rather clearly admitted to be land-banking for campus expansion.

The crossing of the Charles River by the Grand Junction Railroad to the left goes to I90 which shows as the dark yellow line rising to the left.  That is the area where the off ramp for the updated and limited Inner Belt will go.

On this map, areas formally part of Boston are below the Charles River and to the right.  The large green area to the far right toward the bottom is the Boston Common and Public Gardens, very important parts of the City of Boston.  The dark yellow line roughly forming a triangle with the upper corner of the map is I93.

The squiggly black line which runs from the upper left corner to I93 and than turns around and follows the Charles river approximates the municipal boundaries of the City of Cambridge, with as the most obvious exception the fact that the city line runs in the middle of the Charles River.

(3) The lay of the land.

(A) South / East of the BU Bridge.

Here is a Department of Conservation and Recreation map of the Charles River Basin, the area which was so viciously destroyed in January 2016, with more destruction slated to come.


Magazine Beach is to the left, off the map.  Boston’s Public Gardens are at the right toward the bottom.

Directly on the opposite side of the Charles River from Cambridge and next to the BU Bridge is the main part of the campus of Boston University.  On the Cambridge side of the Charles River in this map, running most of the area between the BU Bridge and the second bridge to the east, the Longfellow Bridge, is the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The Green Area abutting the Charles River on the south / bottom is the Charles River Esplanade a formal garden managed by the DCR.

The reddish line which starts at the right about a quarter of the way from the top is one of the primary subways in the Boston subway system, known at the MBTA (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority).  This subway line is the Red Line, a heavy rail system, i.e. its cars are very similar in size to train passenger cars.  The Red Line runs from the western-most part of Cambridge, Alewife, to two terminals in the south, one in the Dorchester neighborhood of Boston and, much further south, to the Town of Braintree.

Looking at the map, you will see that the Red Line suddenly turns as it goes to the left.  This turn is at the beginning of Central Square, Cambridge.  The Red Line proceeds off the map at the top left, going to Harvard Square and, eventually, to Alewife.

On the south side of the Charles on this map east of Boston University is the dense, heavily historic, exclusive and core Back Bay neighborhood of Boston.  To the right of where the river turns is the Foot of the Hill, the lower part of the historic and exclusive Beacon Hill neighborhood of Boston.  After the Longfellow Bridge is the Massachusetts General Hospital.

(B) West / North of the BU Bridge.

Here is a map to which I was directed by the Boston planners, and which I have marked up for related purposes.  I think the map is from Google, fair use.  The main area of interest runs from the BU Bridge at the bottom right to the third bridge to its west / north, called the Anderson Bridge, better known as the bridge to Harvard University.


At the bottom right of this map is the BU Bridge.  connection to Commonwealth Avenue, a major boulevard of Boston.  Commonwealth Avenue comes from the bottom right, indicated by the yellow line.  About 2/3 of the way to the left margin is a fork.  Commonwealth Avenue goes left at the fork.

Up to that fork, Boston University owns most of the land between Commonwealth Avenue and the Charles River.  As you get closer to the Charles River, where the added blue line gets complicated, you get into land purchased not that long ago by Harvard University.

That land, for the last 50 years of so was occupied by a major railroad yard and by I90, the Mass. Pike, with ramps to Cambridge and to the Brighton and Allston neighborhoods of Boston.

The dark orange line following the Charles River is the Soldiers Field Road boulevard.  The balance of these markings are I90.  The lighter colored roads in the very middle are the current ramps to and from I90 at this point.

Above and to the right of the river is Cambridge.

The large green area to the left of the BU Bridge in Cambridge is the Magazine Beach recreation area, slated for the next phase of outrageous destruction, except that the area closest to the BU Bridge is a sensitively designed sewerage treatment plant.  To the right of the BU Bridge above the Charles River is the ghetto to which the Charles River White geese have been forced.

Most of the habitat of the Charles River White Geese during their 36 years of residence has been destroyed to them.  That habitat, to the left / west extended far along Magazine Beach.  To the east, in the prior graphic, the habitat extended almost to the green area above the highway on the Cambridge side.  That highway shows on both maps next to the Charles River.  The highway is Memorial Drive.  Memorial Drive saw outrageous destruction in January 2016 with more to come, according to the plans.

This map gives a closer view of the area where the new Urban Ring highway would come, but does not show the Grand Junction railroad.  The off ramp from I90 (Mass. Pike) would be connected to I90 left / west of the BU Bridge.  It would cross over Soldiers Field Road and cross the Charles River under the BU Bridge.  The right portion of the Goose Meadow to the right of the BU Bridge currently holds the Grand Junction.  That is where the highway would go.  Early maps from the MBTA, which proved the highway feasible, showed an off ramp through the narrow area to the right.  That narrow area, the Wild Area is also part of the remaining habitat of the Charles River White Geese.  They nest in the Goose Meadow and in the Wild Area.

Following the above map, the next bridge to the west / up from the BU Bridge is the River Street Bridge.  It is followed by the Western Avenue Bridge, and then the Anderson Bridge / bridge to Harvard.  To make the bridges more confusing, the middle bridge in the prior map, connecting Mass. Ave. in Cambridge and Boston, is officially known as the Harvard Bridge.

Harvard purchased much of the land across from Magazine Beach which is not owned by Boston University.  Their holdings are shown on the map bounded on the south by a greyish / blue line which connects the straighter legs of I90 / the Mass. Pike.  The holdings generally form a triangle with the extension of the River Street Bridge in Boston / Allston, Cambridge Street, being the top left side of the triangle, and Soldiers Field Road being the other boundary.  There are some non-Harvard holdings in that triangle, at its extreme upper point.

The land is very clearly intended by Harvard to be the next home of the Harvard Medical School and related educational, university housing and parking facilities.

Harvard owns most of the land between Cambridge Street and the next street up, Western Avenue.  Then the holdings get big.  Harvard is currently building next to Western Avenue  The left boundary before Western Avenue is NOT QUITE to the drawn dark blue line.  Above Western Avenue, Smith Playground forms the western / left boundary and Harvard owns everything else between there and Soldiers Field Road.  The Harvard holdings go beyond the fourth bridge west of the BU Bridge.

On the north side of the Charles River, Harvard’s holdings start at Western Avenue.  They widen on occasion to Putnam Avenue, the Cambridge major street generally parallel to the Charles River.  The western extremity is a couple of blocks west of the extension of the Anderson Bridge, John F. Kennedy Street, varying back and forth.

The forking road at the top of the Map is the eastern end of Harvard Square.  The upper side of the fork is Massachusetts Avenue.  The lower part of the fork is Mt. Auburn Street.  Portions of this area were downzoned by a group which I advised, as reported in my last report.  My activities in the area are MUCH LARGER than that particular effort.

This area gets into the core Harvard campus.  The holdings by Harvard and related extend to and beyond Mt. Auburn Street, although the further north toward Mt. Auburn Street and Mass. Ave., the greater the non Harvard holdings.  The most extensive non Harvard holdings start south of Mt. Auburn Street and include property in Harvard Square proper which extends to Mass. Ave.  The green area at the top middle is Harvard Yard.

The markings on the map are my idea for a street car subway to service
Boston University,
Harvard Medical School,
the Allston neighborhood of Boston, a very vibrant neighborhood, located below Western Avenue and to the left,
Harvard Business School which is well established and which totally occupyies the area above Western Avenue and to the right of my blue pen and ink line, and
the Harvard Stadium athletic complex which occupies most of the green area above Western Avenue and to the left of my dark blue line.

The subway would commence as a branch of the Green Line streetcar line on Commonwealth Avenue just west of the BU Bridge and would connect to Harvard Station on the Red Line through tunnels which formerly connected the Red Line to a subway yard at JFK Street and Memorial Drive.  The solid blue line is the main proposal, with a proposed yard for train storage.  The broken red lines are alternate suggestions.

An alternative subway route  mentioned by Harvard would be much more expensive and of negligible value to the Boston residents.  It would be a Red Line, heavy rail, spur from Harvard Station constructed way underground and only connecting to the Harvard Medical School area.  From there, Harvard’s Red Line spur would approach the Harvard Hospital area known as the Longwood Medical Area.  The area it is approaching has another major transportation project under consideration which the Red Line spur would connect to.  That area currently includes the Harvard Medical School.

The Harvard / Longwood Medical Area is one of the bigger cash cows in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.  The hospitals are expanding rapidly.  The Medical School and related are much easier to relocate than the hospitals.

My Green Line spur suggestion would connect the Harvard Medical School to the Harvard Medical area by existing Green Line / streetcar service.  It would connect to the proposed transportation construction at Kenmore Square.  Kenmore Square is a third of the way from the left in the first map.

Harvard thinks in centuries.  The relocation of the Harvard Medical School could be a century from now, or it could be a decade from now.

The state is rearranging I90 to simplify its structure and correct age related problems.  If the state does no allow for less expensive meaningful public transportation, the project could prevent responsible alternatives such as the street car subway concept I have presented.  That could stick the state, a few decades hence, the much more expensive Red Line spur proposed by Harvard which would resemble a private transportation entity for Harvard, as opposed to the much more generally valuable and less expensive option I have pointed out.

The Harvard construction south of Western Avenue is for uses which would relate to a moved Harvard Medical School.

C. Company Unions.

One of James Leo Sullivan’s declared goals in 1974 was to create a system of “Neighborhood Associations.”  The system appeared piece by piece over the next 30 years, supposedly spontaneously.

Pieces with which I am familiar had a tendency to be created at the same time as city planners were working for destructive goals.  The pieces with which I am familiar have been notable for core groups which function to control the larger organization.  The core groups, in turn, are controlled by much tinier groups.  The much tinier groups in the various parts of the structure clearly work together. I have witnessed a member bragging about going to the Cambridge Development Department to learn what he thinks on development issues.  The lockstep with the CDD is inconceivable without talking to the CDD.

The pieces of the Cambridge Machine I am familiar with reflect heavy emphasis on supporting city development policies or worse.   Mention of particular such entities in these reports by no means should be interpreted as total communication of all such entities or any claim that all of their activities are destructive.  After all, positive actions by the “protective” groups set up the victims for the really important stuff, and makes the “protective” groups look meaningful.  On the Charles River, the pitch, very blatantly is to look at what they tell you to look at, not at what they are trying to destroy.

“Company Unions,” historically are “unions” created by companies to fill a void.  Company Unions function to control workers instead of the other way around, but they function in such a manner as to hide the real control.  Dealing with these entities always represents a bunch of fog and mirrors as who is what.  The reality, however, is that, whether or not strings are obviously pulled from City Government, it is highly silly to assume that the entities are other than cheerleaders for the City Government.

However, these overall groups are not directly controlled.  They are controlled by skillful, frequently corrupt, tactics.  These entities can be defeated internally.  The level of internal control varies from group to group, just as the level of destructiveness probably varies from group to group.  I do not have personal knowledge of more than just some of the worst., but the stench and the interrelationship is clear.  I have won with quite major successes by out-organizing string pullers.

D. Robots.

The leadership, the core group of the core groups, constantly is very much indistinguishable in its policies from city government as far as meaningful matters go, or worse.  The lockstep mentality, or worse, is so close that it is silly not to use the word “robot.”

Additionally, however, the leaders exert great control on participants in the entities with which I am familiar so as to dominate the thinking of a very significant percentage of the group.  Once again, lockstep.  It is silly and counterproductive to consider a very significant portion of people visible in company unions as other than “robots.”  And the tiny cores use a whole bunch of techniques, including corrupt techniques, to create this situation.

I have given up trying to figure out which of the robots are bad guys and which are well intentioned victims.  They cannot be distinguished from each other, and people who come into the groups are strongly pushed to become further robots.

At minimum, it can be safely said that a lot of people who try to participate in such entities are driven away by the lockstep unanimity forced on the groups by the core groups.  People who think for themselves can be very much driven away by the extreme pressures.  Tactics include outrageous manipulation of agendas in meetings, censorship, bullying, personal attacks and other techniques that work.

So, in Cambridge, the smart way to organize to get responsible things done is to keep as far away as possible from robots or likely robots.  I have done that with great success.

The fake group which is fighting for massive destruction on the Charles River has used a whole bunch of corrupt practices.

Until I went public, the fake group on the Charles openly censored their ListServ to prevent comments negative to the City of Cambridge and its friends.  Now they have just thrown a member off the ListServ for having the nerve to offer to express a negative opinion.  NOT FOR EXPRESSING AN OPINION, BUT FOR OFFERING TO EXPRESS A NEGATIVE OPINION.

Independent interpretations of reality are not acceptable to the Cambridge Machine.

IV. To be continued.