Bob La Trémouille reports:
1. Censorship by Cambridge with Cambridge and Harvard above the "law."
2. DCR Work at the Destroyed Nesting Area.
3. DCR / Cambridge Work at Magazine Beach.
4. Summary.
1. Censorship by Cambridge with Cambridge and Harvard above the "law."
The City of Cambridge recently started fining people for posting notices on lampposts.
The City of Cambridge and Harvard University are exempt from the fines.
2. DCR Work at the Destroyed Nesting Area.
Signs have gone up on the BU Bridge announcing "sidewalk improvements".
Typical Department of Conservation and Recreation lies.
The "sidewalk improvements" include major destruction in the last remaining habitat of the Charles River White Geese: their nesting area in which they are currently nesting.
These "improvements" were presented at meetings quite awhile ago. Efforts to find current plans have so far been unavailing.
My memory is that signficant work (in spite of the "sidewalk" claim) was proposed in the northern part of the goose meadow abutting the ramp to Memorial Drive.
The plans shown would rather clearly obstruct access for feeding to remedy the ongoing starvation attacks by the DCR/Cambridge.
Additionally, vehicles have been in the goose meadow which have damaged native vegetation. The initial investigation concerned the stability of the BU Bridge which supposedly is scheduled for work in several years.
Other vehicle use is shown in damage to vegetation in or near the area of construction.
Geese are nesting in this vegetation. This vegetation is crucial to the health of the goose meadow and to the lives of its residents.
Repeated destruction of ground vegetation by the DCR and its friends combined with poisoning of the ground has left a very significant part of the goose meadow bare, just as river banks are left essentially bare by these sick people and their contempt for nature.
3. DCR / Cambridge Work at Magazine Beach.
Nine heartless animal abusers on the Cambridge City Council and School Committee member McGovern are imminently destroying the food of the Charles River White Geese at Magazine Beach by digging up all seven acres, creating a wasteland in order to replace GREEN maintenance with CHEMICAL maintenance.
4. Summary.
Censorship of fliers is no coincidence.
The only thing that has been consistent on the Charles River has been lies and suppression of the truth.
These vile people will not behave in a manner consistent with their holier than thou pieties, so they are shutting people up.
The DCR, however, does have an eight year records of sweet lies promising good behavior followed by undisclosed disclaimors.
I.E. We have no intention to harm the Charles River White Geese - repeated ever since 2000, quoted by the Boston Globe next to the photo of the earth movers in fall 2004.
Starving the Charles River White Geese is not harming them - stated in public meeting of Cambridge pol organization, in front of 20 to 40 people.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Monday, April 07, 2008
CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL TO FURTHER RESTRICT PUBLIC COMMENT TO CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL? REACTION TO KATHY PODGERS?
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Introductory.
2. Kathy Podgers?
A. Probable Cause of Violation of Her Civil Rights.
B. Explanation of the Cambridge Pols.
C. Explanation of the Cambridge City Council.
D. Explanation of the City of Cambridge according to Kathy.
E. But Kathy Podgers talks about other abuses of the Cambridge City Council and Cambridge Government.
3. Your editor’s reaction.
1. Introductory.
The Cambridge City Council has voted to look into furthering restricting the information they allow the public to present to the Cambridge City Council in the meetings of the Cambridge City Council.
The vote was 8 to 1.
Public participation in Cambridge City Council meetings is dramatically reduced as it is. The public is prohibited from talking in the meetings about anything except things the Cambridge City Council wants to talk about. Then the public has a three minute limit on the amount of words the public can say. And the public can only comment before the matter is discussed by the Cambridge City Council.
The restrictions get so bad that the city staff is allowed to make false statements about the positions that particular members of the public may have. I was once prohibited from responding to a flat out lie made about my position. The chair ruled that it was my flat out duty to foresee the flat out lie and respond to the flat out lie before it was said.
Under such circumstances, it is not surprising that very few intrepid souls bother to comment in city council meetings.
The Cambridge City Council, however, seems to think that the Cambridge City Council is hearing too much public opinion.
Thus, the reasonable question is: what is going on?
2. Kathy Podgers?
A. Probable Cause of Violation of Her Civil Rights.
One possible explanation could be that Kathy Podgers is embarrassing the Cambridge City Council by exposing the Cambridge City Council to reality.
You see, the Cambridge City Council and its City Manager has an extremely active and visible group, the Cambridge Pols, who are the approved talkers about the Cambridge City Government. This well organized clique can be relied upon to say some of the most bizarre, favorable things about these people.
The Cambridge Pols have the nerve to call the Cambridge City Council pro-environment. The Cambridge Pols even have the nerve to call the Cambridge City Council pro-civil rights.
The latter is one aspect to where Kathy Podgers comes in. You see, Kathy Podgers has had two findings of probable cause to determine that her civil rights have been violated by the Cambridge City Council. You see, the City of Cambridge and the City Council has problems with Kathy using a guide dog. Things have gotten so bad that a group of rogue cops abused the guide dog in the lobby of the Cambridge Police Station and apparently have not been punished.
The Cambridge City Council, through its mayor, tried to throw Kathy Podgers out of a Cambridge City Council meeting because the Cambridge City Council objected to the presence of her guide dog. So the two findings of probable cause of violation of this handicapped woman’s civil rights.
B. Explanation of the Cambridge Pols.
The explanation of the Cambridge Pols is pretty predictable. This is one little person. How dare anybody object to the Cambridge City Council abusing the civil rights of one little person. This explanation is very similar to the Cambridge Pols explanation of some of the more irresponsible treatment of the environment. You listen to the Cambridge Pols talk about the Charles River White Geese, and you would be certain that you are listening to a wife abuser talk about his wife.
C. Explanation of the Cambridge City Council.
As is usual with the Cambridge City Council on the outrageous behavior by the Cambridge City Council, their explanation is silence.
And you can’t talk in the Cambridge City Council meetings about something on which the Cambridge City Council is silent.
D. Explanation of the City of Cambridge according to Kathy.
Kathy has had a number of incidents in which she has been evicted from public places because the public places object to the presence of her guide dog.
According to Kathy, the City of Cambridge sees nothing wrong with this behavior. Evicting Kathy because of her guide dog violated federal civil rights laws. Cambridge has its own civil rights laws. Cambridge is above obeying federal laws which grant more civil rights than do Cambridge laws.
E. But Kathy Podgers talks about other abuses of the Cambridge City Council and Cambridge Government.
Kathy actually has the nerve to think that the Cambridge should be respecting the laws of Massachusetts and the laws of the United States.
Kathy has the nerve to say these horrible things in public.
Kathy has the nerve to say things which contradict the propaganda put out by the Cambridge Pols as cheerleaders for the Cambridge City Council and Cambridge Government.
Behavior such as this is unacceptable in the City of Cambridge.
3. Your editor’s reaction.
There are various other really nasty explanations for this initiative toward further censorship. I will go into those explanations at a later date.
1. Introductory.
2. Kathy Podgers?
A. Probable Cause of Violation of Her Civil Rights.
B. Explanation of the Cambridge Pols.
C. Explanation of the Cambridge City Council.
D. Explanation of the City of Cambridge according to Kathy.
E. But Kathy Podgers talks about other abuses of the Cambridge City Council and Cambridge Government.
3. Your editor’s reaction.
1. Introductory.
The Cambridge City Council has voted to look into furthering restricting the information they allow the public to present to the Cambridge City Council in the meetings of the Cambridge City Council.
The vote was 8 to 1.
Public participation in Cambridge City Council meetings is dramatically reduced as it is. The public is prohibited from talking in the meetings about anything except things the Cambridge City Council wants to talk about. Then the public has a three minute limit on the amount of words the public can say. And the public can only comment before the matter is discussed by the Cambridge City Council.
The restrictions get so bad that the city staff is allowed to make false statements about the positions that particular members of the public may have. I was once prohibited from responding to a flat out lie made about my position. The chair ruled that it was my flat out duty to foresee the flat out lie and respond to the flat out lie before it was said.
Under such circumstances, it is not surprising that very few intrepid souls bother to comment in city council meetings.
The Cambridge City Council, however, seems to think that the Cambridge City Council is hearing too much public opinion.
Thus, the reasonable question is: what is going on?
2. Kathy Podgers?
A. Probable Cause of Violation of Her Civil Rights.
One possible explanation could be that Kathy Podgers is embarrassing the Cambridge City Council by exposing the Cambridge City Council to reality.
You see, the Cambridge City Council and its City Manager has an extremely active and visible group, the Cambridge Pols, who are the approved talkers about the Cambridge City Government. This well organized clique can be relied upon to say some of the most bizarre, favorable things about these people.
The Cambridge Pols have the nerve to call the Cambridge City Council pro-environment. The Cambridge Pols even have the nerve to call the Cambridge City Council pro-civil rights.
The latter is one aspect to where Kathy Podgers comes in. You see, Kathy Podgers has had two findings of probable cause to determine that her civil rights have been violated by the Cambridge City Council. You see, the City of Cambridge and the City Council has problems with Kathy using a guide dog. Things have gotten so bad that a group of rogue cops abused the guide dog in the lobby of the Cambridge Police Station and apparently have not been punished.
The Cambridge City Council, through its mayor, tried to throw Kathy Podgers out of a Cambridge City Council meeting because the Cambridge City Council objected to the presence of her guide dog. So the two findings of probable cause of violation of this handicapped woman’s civil rights.
B. Explanation of the Cambridge Pols.
The explanation of the Cambridge Pols is pretty predictable. This is one little person. How dare anybody object to the Cambridge City Council abusing the civil rights of one little person. This explanation is very similar to the Cambridge Pols explanation of some of the more irresponsible treatment of the environment. You listen to the Cambridge Pols talk about the Charles River White Geese, and you would be certain that you are listening to a wife abuser talk about his wife.
C. Explanation of the Cambridge City Council.
As is usual with the Cambridge City Council on the outrageous behavior by the Cambridge City Council, their explanation is silence.
And you can’t talk in the Cambridge City Council meetings about something on which the Cambridge City Council is silent.
D. Explanation of the City of Cambridge according to Kathy.
Kathy has had a number of incidents in which she has been evicted from public places because the public places object to the presence of her guide dog.
According to Kathy, the City of Cambridge sees nothing wrong with this behavior. Evicting Kathy because of her guide dog violated federal civil rights laws. Cambridge has its own civil rights laws. Cambridge is above obeying federal laws which grant more civil rights than do Cambridge laws.
E. But Kathy Podgers talks about other abuses of the Cambridge City Council and Cambridge Government.
Kathy actually has the nerve to think that the Cambridge should be respecting the laws of Massachusetts and the laws of the United States.
Kathy has the nerve to say these horrible things in public.
Kathy has the nerve to say things which contradict the propaganda put out by the Cambridge Pols as cheerleaders for the Cambridge City Council and Cambridge Government.
Behavior such as this is unacceptable in the City of Cambridge.
3. Your editor’s reaction.
There are various other really nasty explanations for this initiative toward further censorship. I will go into those explanations at a later date.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)