Enough said, May 23, 2013 edition.
The Cambridge Chronicle, in recent months, has had problems publicizing reality when it comes to the ongoing environmental destructiveness of the Cambridge Machine and its cynical con games. I think the editor took offense against me when I referred to the leader of the fake group fighting for destruction of Alewife as fighting for destruction of Alewife.
The following is the response I submitted to their favorably front paging the con game at Magazine Beach.
**********
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
Your article on the Machine’s activities at Magazine Beach was illustrative of the problems which really exist in Cambridge politics.
You emphasized the former beach, now playing fields. This is where the real problems are, and the real problems all stem from irresponsible activities of Cambridge and the State over the last 13 years. All the real problems were kept secret until they were done.
Cambridge and the state have walled off the former beach with a bizarre wall of introduced bushes and destroyed the former boat dock.
They have destroyed much of the playing fields for drainage to drain off the poisons. They are dumping poisons on the banks of the Charles River to keep alive sickly grass which they introduced after they destroyed the responsible grass which was there for the better part of a century. They installed part of a bike highway which is targeted at destroying hundreds of trees. They have been starving the 32 year resident Charles River White Geese.
You have done a prohibited act. The Machine calls it anti - Charles River to mention the real problems at Magazine Beach.
The Machine in its January meeting tried to help the state expand the real problems at Magazine Beach to the top of the hill which contains the historical building and expand the problems to the wetlands behind the swimming pool. The Machine spent all of their January meeting on the issue. It looked like they could lose the vote. So they postponed the vote to their February meeting.
They conducted their February meeting on April 23, driving away the folks who showed up for the January meeting. They restricted discussion to the last ten minutes of the meeting and then presented a horribly complicated motion which also would destroy the little parking lot next to the historical building.
After keeping the "meeting" from knowing what they were doing, and having a "meeting" of safe votes and folks who could care less, the Machine took a "vote."
The simple questions are: Why does the Cambridge Machine call it anti - Charles River to discuss the real problems. Why did they sneak through an expansion of the real problems? Why are they telling people to look only at this building and ignore the hundreds of trees they are fighting to destroy, plus ignore the real local problems which they are attempting to expand?
Why the corrupt behavior?
*********
Of course, the machine would not be so honest as to use the term “anti - Charles River.” That, however, is very clearly what they communicate.
For a discussion of the fraudulent meeting, please see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/magazine-beach-bad-faith-flaunted-by.html.
