1. Introductory.
2. Details.
A. Chronicle Front Page.
B. Marilyn’s Response, some background.
C. My response and the bad guys’ response, Chronicle handling.
3. Summary.
1. Introductory.
The April 7, 2011 Cambridge Chronicle printed three letters on the editorial page, page 10. The second and third concerned the Charles River.
In the second letter, a person who identified himself as a director of the Friends of Magazine Beach and The Charles River Conservancy disowned any connection between the Friends of Magazine Beach and The Charles River Conservancy.
In the third letter, I disowned any connection between the Charles River “Conservancy” and environmentalism. “Charles River Destroyers would be an honest name.”
2. Details.
A. Chronicle Front Page.
On March 17, 2011, the Cambridge Chronicle front paged an interview with the head of the Charles River “Conservancy.”
B. Marilyn’s Response, some background.
On March 24, 2011, the Cambridge Chronicle ran Marilyn Wellons’ response. They dominated the editorial page with the response. We have published her letter at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/marilyn-wellons-responds-to-article-of.html.
Marilyn went into great detail concerning the environmentally reprehensible record of this organization, which, for accuracy, should be called The Charles River Destroyers. Buried in the multiple statements of truth was a statement of its origin which very clearly is the truth.
In 2000, when the reprehensible local and regional governments started their attacks on the environment in the BU Bridge area, we took on the local fake environmental organization, which called itself “Friends of Magazine Beach.” That organization existed for only two apparent reasons:
(1). To fight for the destruction of the environment in the Magazine Beach area of the Charles River in Cambridge, MA, and
(2). To conduct an annual cleanup of Magazine Beach the weekend before Boston University used it for graduation ceremonies. They never told their volunteers that the volunteers were cleaning up for Boston University’s graduation ceremony.
One of the first activities of Friends of the White Geese was to discredit “Friends of Magazine Beach.”
Friends of the White Geese demonstrated and leafleted in front of the access to Magazine Beach on the morning of the cleanup publicizing the environmental destruction this group was fighting for and the real purpose of the cleanup.
The group has never conducted another activity.
A few months later the Charles River Destroyers announced its existence. It had overlapping membership to “Friends of Magazine Beach” and called themselves The Charles River “Conservancy.” The”new group” loudly proclaimed its intent to destroy the environment of Magazine Beach and much more.
We recognize the obvious.
C. My response, Chronicle handling.
I did not see a response from the bad guys in the March 31 edition. So I followed up with my letter, which I have published at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/charles-river-destroyers-details.html.
The second letter on the editorial page was from a person who identified himself as a director of “The Friends of Magazine Beach” and of The Charles River “Conservancy.” The third letter on the three letter editorial page was mine.
The Chronicle headlined the letter from the Director of the “Friends of Magazine Beach” and of the Charles River “Conservancy” with the title “Clarifying the Conservancy.” They headlined my letter with “Not a Conservancy.”
The bad guys’ letter ran the same length as Marilyn’s and mine. In those 400 words, the writer did nothing of substance except to deny the obvious, that “Friends of Magazine Beach” morphed into The Charles River “Conservancy.”
Look at Marilyn’s letter. THE ONLY THING THIS GUY RESPONDED TO WAS TO DISOWN THE OBVIOUS ASSOCIATION between “Friends of Magazine Beach” and the Charles River “Conservancy.”
And the Chronicle followed up this bizarre letter with my 400 word letter going into very broad and specific facts about the destruction inflicted, supported and proposed by Charles River "Conservancy." My letter condemned the latest fake group for calling itself a “Conservancy.”
This bad guys’ letter is published on line at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x675821694/Letter-Clarifying-the-Conservancy#axzz1J1EZ1R5N.
The response from the bad guys was posted Thursday. My letter was published on line yesterday, Friday.
3. Summary.
The reality is that these fake organizations are very much normal in Cambridge, MA. The bad guys who dominate these organizations are very loud in Cambridge politics. They warp politics in Cambridge to such an extent that reality of the world and the reality put out by these fake organizations which they force on Cambridge politics are strikingly different. But they force their bizarre version of reality onto Cambridge politics. And they are non stop holier than thou.
The Chronicle did not have to say a word. They simply printed the bizarre disassociation of “Friends of Magazine Beach” with The Charles River “Conservancy” which denied absolutely nothing else in Marilyn’s letter except for this obvious truth. The Chronicle then followed this bizarre letter with my further letter providing very substantive condemnation of the organization.
The Cambridge bad guys NEVER respond to us. NEVER.
They do that for a reason. They have no meaningful way to support themselves on the grounds they claim to stand for. They open their mouths. We respond. They destroy their false claims of environmental sainthood.
The situation in Cambridge, MA is very much offensive.
Thank you very much to the Cambridge Chronicle.
