Sunday, October 04, 2009

Day 385, Walz con game, suppressed responses.

Bob La Trémouille reports:

1. Day 385.
2. Walz con game.
A. Pitch by the City Manager’s Neighborhood Association.
B. Suppressed comment: Kathy Podgers.
C. Suppressed comment: Your editor.
D. Subsequent activities.
E. Roy Bercaw.
F. Kathy Podger’s Response.

1. Day 385.

On Friday, October 2, 2009, I did a visibility earlier than the rush hour. I figured I was doing this to get a different group, but I still said hello to people who have long supported the geese.

The geese were despondent in their tiny remnants of a habitat, simply sleeping on the cold ground out from the trees. The ground vegetation has been denuded in multiple attacks by the DCR since 2003. From the BU Bridge to the BU Boathouse, formerly lush areas have been denuded and have not grown back, clearly poisoned. The DCR in the Tab article pleaded incompetence. That type of incompetence deserves firing, not sympathy.

I had extended discussions with a number of really good people. The folks in the cars waive, toss thumbs up signs, and call support.

Almost immediately after I stopped work on the visibility, rain started. We avoid rain for fear of damage to the photos on the sign(s). Perfect timing.

2. Walz con game.

A. Pitch by the City Manager’s Neighborhood Association.

The “Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association” distributed a document from State Representative Walz giving the false impression that she is pro-environment.

She loudly proclaims her protection of the Charles. She brags with regard to buildings on the north side. To this regard, she is strikingly similar to the “Neighborhood Association.”

The “Neighborhood Association” distributed the comments under the title, “Protecting Magazine Beach Park.”

Kathy Podgers and I attempted to reply. We were censored and thus not distributed.

So I passed the comments on to a list I have established exactly because of the censorship on the Cambridgeport list.

The following are the suppressed comments:

B. Suppressed comment: Kathy Podgers.

I strongly support a balance between the natural and builtup environment. This bill is fine, as far as it goes. However, Magazine Beach, more acurately named, especially in light of our celebration of Cambridgeport History, is Captain's Island. It was one of 4 "fort" along the Charles River Estuary, upstream from Fort Washington. A magazine was located there, hense the name "Way to Captain's Island" now called Magazine St.

Cambridgeport was a penisula, with Captain's Island off the point, which looked out across the great Estuary, which lies on the International Atlantic Flyway.

One of our greatest challenges today is loss of habitit due to climate change and human activity. The wildlife that habitats along the Charles River Estuary are being removed by the clever and cynical removal of their habitat. We should work together to demand that the DCR obtain an Environmental Impact Study to end their destruction of wildlife habitat, and the subsequant removal of wildlife.

See the fate of the Great Blue Heron :

http://cipapa. blogspot. com/2009/ 09/great- blue-heron- clings-to- narrow.html

http://cipapa. blogspot. com/

take care

C. Suppressed comment: Your editor.

Let me see, Representative Walz and the Cambridge City Council are [ed: original numbering is 1,2,3, etc. Changed to fit this format]:

i. Dumping poisons as fertilizer on fields which previously were maintained green.

ii. Decreasing the size of the fields for a complicated drainage system to remove poisons they should not be dropping in the first place.

iii. Poisoning the Charles with their poisons because they cannot possibly protect against the worst storms.

iv. Poisoning kids rolling in the poisons.

v. Poisoning animals feeding on the poisons.

vi. Walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles with a wall of introduced vegetation that has no business on the Charles River.

vii. Starving the Charles River White Geese with their introduced wall and the poisons.

viii. Increasing the heartless animal abuse by continuing the Charles River White Geese' confinement in the goose meadow during the BU Bridge repairs including major needless destruction. Decent human beings would allow their return to Magazine Beach without the wall and without the poisons.

ix. Barring normal humans from the use of Magazine Beach during unscheduled hours with a requirement that ALL uses are prohibited without advance approval and a $90 scheduling fee.

Now what was all this about "protecting" Magazine Beach park by the people guilty for massive irresponsible destruction and heartless animal abuse.

The message is: Ignore reality. Walz and the Cambridge City Council are environmentalists. It is very irresponsible of reality to say otherwise.

D. Subsequent activities.

Kathy has been very vocal about the censorship. I am not certain if I understand all the permutations.

I do know that the Chronicle editor is involved in the communications and the head of the “Neighborhood Association.” I am substituting all references to the latter by name with the following: [ed: name omitted on general principles].

I got the communications and passed on to the list the discussion had been using the two CFL communications transmitting the above two items.

Included in the communications was the statement of [ed: name omitted on general principles] that his list is not censored.

[ed: name omitted on general principles] was one of the addressees of the suppressed communications. My transmittal of the second item had the following comment:


Second of two mailing by me during the last two days after you (or whoever is your representative) censored it.

I really getting fed up with being of the receiving end of flat out lies, deceptions, or whatever.

Holier than thou is useless when the lies can be proven this easily.


I got at least two responses to my transmittal of the suppressed items. The below attempts to pass on two items I consider relevant.

E. Roy Bercaw.

Roy was on the mailing list. He comments:


Don't forget me. [ed: name omitted on general principles] accused me of libel when I did not accuse him of anything. His sensitivity is telling when I said that he ignored my complaints about censorship on the C'port list. For many months none of my posts appeared. I opened a new email account in case it was my provider's fault. Yet after assurances from the list monitors my posts do not appear. Monitors and [ed: name omitted on general principles] the long-term president of C'port Nabe Ass'n ignored my several inquiries.

This appears to be a pattern among holier-than-thou Cambridge elitists many with PhDs. They are intolerant of unpopular and differing opinions on public issues, priorities, and how to solve them. Perhaps the City's motto should be "The People's Censorship Republic of Intolerance in the Name of Unity and Collegiality; You Must Submit to Superior Persons, Punk."

On another list when I reported a threat of bodily harm after posting pictures of a safety hazard one holier-than-thou politically connected resident accused me of hate speech for my complaint about being threatened.

It is true that all politics is local. As in national public discourse there is no rational discussion in Cambridge. It is all personal animosity to discredit persons who dare to disagree.

F. Kathy Podger’s Response.

Thank you Bob.

The issue here is some people do not want others to find out the factual information, and want to control what people are permitted to know, and when they are allowed to know it.

I testified at the Climate Emergancy hearing, in City Council, where I also submitted writen testimony and a copy of the letter that marilyn Wellons and I wrote to the City Manager, after his office ionformed me that the DCR had obtained all required permits, and were operating legally, and within the orders set forth by the Cambridge Conservation Commission. When I informed his staf that that was not true, they asked me to write a letter to the City manager.

The post I submitted to the list serve does not include these lurid details of nafarious behavior by our governing agencies. Instead it is a polite and reasoned apeal to the better instincts we were all born with, and an appeal to the rule of law.

Recently, my posts have been delayed, or not posted, and I appealed to [ed: name omitted on general principles], who brushed me off, and did not show any concern that members of the list serve were being denied important information. I will point out that some 300 residents, most in Cambridgeport have signed the petition opposing the development at magazine Beach. Therefore, [ed: name omitted on general principles] can hardly claim, and does not try to do so, that this issue is not a concern of the neighborhood, so for that reason it will not be posted.,

Although I did not ask Craig to put in the order re violations of the Wetlands protection Act, he aparently did hear my testimony, and did act on it in a responsible way. As for our other elected representatives, city councillors, etc, they have ignored my testimony that the DCR and Cambridge are violating the Wetlands protection Act. They have not even asked, "Why do you say that," which at least the City Manager's office asked.

[ed: "Craig" is City Councilor Craig Kelley, and I will not get into details on this. We are faced with omissions that say too much. Heartless animal abuse is apparently considered normal and acceptable, among other things.]

Again, I will point out the very mild nature of my submission to the list serve, in response to Marty Walz's post. I'll ask, how could any be offended by my comments?