Friday, July 27, 2012

Paterno and the Cambridge Pols, An Exchange

1. Original Posting, follow up.
2. Friend, July 24, 2012.
3. Your editor, July 24, 2012.
4. Friend, July 24, 2012
5. Your editor, July 25, 2012.
6. Friend, July 25, 2012.
7. Your editor, July 25, 2012.
8. Your editor, July 25, 2012.
9. Editor Summation.

1. Original Posting, follow up.

I have posted a letter to the editor of the Cambridge (MA) Chronicle comparing the Paterno / Penn State situation to the outrageous situation in Cambridge, MA. My analysis concerned government environmental destruction, government heartless animal abuse and killings, and government attacks on women’s rights.

The original letter was posted on July 23, 2012 at

It was printed in the Cambridge Chronicle on July 27, 2012.

I had an exchange with a friend in Cambridge on the matter which is of interest.

I will not repeat yet again the letter. It is at the link, but the comments followed my notice of the letter on facebook, and really are read best by reading the letter first.

2. Friend, July 24, 2012.

and no Aurora...

3. Your editor, July 24, 2012.

Aurora exists but has been methodically suppressed by a ruthless organization.

4. Friend, July 24, 2012

we would all like a greener cambridge,


I would hope you might take a more persuasive approach...

4. Your editor, July 24, 2012.

[addressing the friend],

Your concern is strongly appreciated.

The trouble with the Cambridge Machine and those controlled by it is the total lack of connection with reality. And the very belligerent antagonism toward reality.

People are subjected to the equivalent of brainwashing. And it is a matter of denial to discuss reality with them.

What kind of discussion would you imagine you could have with a Penn State fan a few years back if you told them that Paterno was protecting and hiding a child abuser?

How would somebody be persuasive in such a discussion?

You cannot be. Cambridge’s destructiveness concerning the environment, their own heartless animal abuse, their massive animal killing, and their destructiveness toward women’s rights (Monteiro) are matters which are dictated to the victims on a theological basis. Talking reality with too many of these people is challenging their religion.

5. Your editor, July 25, 2012.

So all there really is available is to talk reality. You look for a weakness and you prod. Monteiro is a very major weakness. With a system imposed as this system is, the hope is to find that crack. Those judicial decisions are very hard, even with this totalitarian system, to ignore.

I had a situation with the fake neighborhood group where they were putting out lies about the impact of a referendum vote taken a few years ago. After a few non controlled people accurately tore the machine position apart, I went to the election committee records on line, and posted the record of the vote, strikingly different from the lie the machine was putting out. I suggested that it would be nice if the listserve stuck to reality.

I was pulled off the listserve, too strong, too accurate. I forwarded my communication to a friend who thinks independently whom the leader of the fake group is trying to con, with an explanation that I had seen nothing from the listserve in days. Very quickly I wound up back on the listserve.

There are weaknesses. The lies are so massive that they become unavoidable. It is a matter of keeping on and constantly standing up to the very constant pattern of fake realities which are indistinguishable from flat out lies.

6. Friend, July 25, 2012.

the key is harvard...

know the folks:

Drew Gilpin Faust et al...


7. Your editor, July 25, 2012.


That route is very clear. The Machine is very happy to let people declare victory, just as long as reality is the other way around. This is a major factor in the dirty tricks which are so normal with them.

As part of my environmental activities, I have changed more zoning than anybody else not employed by the City of Cambridge and, in contrast to the City of Cambridge, my changes do what I say they do.

Almost all my victories have been at the expense of the Machine. I have led or been involved in at least four significant victories over Harvard.

The most visible was the vote that forced Harvard to build the Inn at Harvard as it is instead of 42% larger, and out to the lot line, no grass. The Inn at Harvard is one of the few new buildings in Harvard Square that normal people consider nice. 7 favorable votes, 1 in the hospital, 1 opposed.

I was working the polls for the Election Commission at the time, second in charge of the precinct where the president of Harvard voted. He did not seem at all pleased with me when he came in to vote.

PS: Thank you for your excellent comments. I think it is ok to pass on this exchange to the blog?

[ed: Two of the four victories over Harvard were zoning victories, two otherwise.

[A fifth victory was borderline. I saved Guffey Park across from the Inn at Harvard through publicity. The City Manager unilaterally destroyed the park in that location after he lost the Inn at Harvard zoning vote to me and to 7 or 8 members of the Cambridge City Council.

[The City Manager did the destruction to allow the expansion of a business which could no longer expand because of the change in zoning. The change in zoning had passed the City Council about a week before the destruction. The displeasure he created resulted in him rebuilding the park in a much nicer configuration.]

8. Your editor, July 25, 2012.

Correction. Harvard wanted the Inn at Harvard 72% larger.

9. Editor Summation.

The weakness of the Cambridge Machine is the non stop lies.

The Cambridge Machine can be beaten and I have repeatedly beaten them by publicly standing up for what they claim to stand for.

The decent people far outnumber the rotten ones who control the Machine and the well intentioned people who are manipulated by the Machine.