Cambridge City Council and other Monteiro items from the view of a City Manager opponent.

1. Analysis of Cambridge City Council before the fact for Monday, June 18, 2012.
2. The reality in Cambridge, MA.


1. Analysis of Cambridge City Council before the fact for Monday, June 18, 2012.

The following analysis of the Cambridge City Council agenda for Monday, June 18, 2012, is from the same Kelley supporter I quoted not that long ago.

*************

On the agenda are the city manager's after-the-fact requested appropriation of some $12M in surplus city funds to help pay for the $14M+ fiasco and a proposed order calling for a mild reprimand of the chief executive and a formal council apology for his behavior, plus a report on how to avoid similar problems in the future.

Some links:

Audio recording of Monday's Finance Committee meeting

Finance Committee's sloppy report on Monday's meeting (click on the agenda description for CR #4 to view the item and a link to City Manager Bob Healy's $12M funding request)

City clerk's sanitized agenda description of the proposed council order (click on the Policy Order #1 summary to view the actual item, which calls for a council reprimand of Healy and formal apology for his behavior)

Wicked Local / Cambridge Chronicle's wildly inaccurate account (June 15 "updated" version)

Cambridge Day's report (some errors)

[ed: very fancy linking. I hope and think I got it right.]

2. The reality in Cambridge, MA.

The reality is that Cambridge, MA, USA, has a belligerently corrupt city government and the writer is part of the corrupt situation.

The Cambridge City Manager leads the fake groups, which includes the writer, in lies of omission. The very existence of the fake groups is corruption.

The Cambridge City Manager for his belligerent lies of omission and his fake groups deserves to be fired, but the writer is an active part of the problem.

The outrage in the Monteiro case overwhelms the corruption which is the policy of lies of omission which extends to the fake groups.

Monteiro is a situation where

a. the Appeals Court has said the Cambridge City Manager is guilty of malfeasance in office, “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior”

b. following on the Superior Court Judge, “reprehensible: behavior; and

c. jury, $1.1 million real damages, $3.5 million penal damages.

The fact that even supposedly belligerent opponents of the Cambridge City Manager will not listen to the Courts’ clear calls for firing the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance says everything about the corrupt situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.

Only when the pious, indignant types admit they are part of the problem will Cambridge, MA, USA, stand a chance of cleaning up corrupt practices.

Harvard to resume empire building on Western Avenue in Allston

Boston.com reports that Harvard University intends to resume work on its planned science campus on the south side of Western Avenue in the Allston section of Boston, between North Harvard Street and Soldiers Field Road. North Harvard Street becomes the Anderson Bridge.

According to boston.com, construction on the science campus stopped in 2009 because of the Great Recession. Construction is to resume in 2014 on a state of the art health and life sciences laboratory containing between 500,000 and 600,000 square feet.

The report includes a good areal photo of construction to date, which resembles a wasteland from the area and from the ground.

Details of the boston.com report may be read at: http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/allston_brighton/2012/06/harvard_plans_to_resume_work_o.html.

A map of the area was included with our latest Charles River “Conservancy” report at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/more-destruction-on-charles-charles.html.

This Harvard campus in Allston is of major importance to the environment of the Charles River and its animals because the environmental destruction very clearly complements the proposal. In particular Harvard is moving its Medical School to the railroad yards and Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) complex which is north of Cambridge Street, Allston (River Street in Cambridge).

To make this property usable to it, Harvard and its friends are working to move the Massachusetts Turnpike exit serving Allston and Cambridge to the Grand Junction railroad bridge which runs through the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.

More destruction on the Charles? The Charles River “Conservancy” gets money to plan.

1. Some evaluations of a strikingly bad organization.
2. More “underpasses” proposed again, this time on the Boston side.
3. Caveat.


1. Some evaluations of a strikingly bad organization.

When we last visited the Charles River “Conservancy” on June 2, 2012, the poor dears were looking for money.

I provided five pages on their real record, the environment destruction and heartless animal abuse.

http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/charles-river-conservancy-solicits.html.

On May 2, the poor dears had had printed a letter in the Cambridge Chronicle crying that they were being unfairly mistreated. My response printed by the Cambridge Chronicle pointed out how they were lying about which side they are on and the treatment was highly fair, if you are pro environment.

http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/response-to-charles-river-conservancy.html.

Well, they are looking for more money.

A joint committee of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation condemned the CRC’s proposal for a new highway on and in the Cambridge side of the Charles River. They condemned the proposal as environmentally destructive.

The euphemism was “underpasses”. My response went into the massive tree destruction, general environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse involved. After a strikingly long list (in 400 words) I decided that “Conservancy” in their name is a lie.

2. More “underpasses” proposed again, this time on the Boston side.

Well, they are fighting for “underpasses” again, same three bridges, just the Boston side.

Let’s see, the bureaucrats responsibly condemned their proposal on the north end of these bridges. So they are fighting for environmental destruction on the south end of the same bridges?

The following is an unauthorized copy of their map, reproduced under the doctrine of fair use.










The Anderson (Harvard Square), Western Avenue and River Street Bridges are the subjects of this attack. The lower / southern side of the river is Boston, the other side Cambridge. Their “underpasses" proposed for the north side have been condemned. The south side is under attack this week.

The next bridge to the right / East, the BU Bridge, is the core of their most successful environmental destruction / heartless animal abuse to date, thanks to the “reprehensible” (quoting that civil rights judge) City of Cambridge with fake group support.

The CRC is getting money from the “Barr Foundation” for making plans on condition that others match the funds. The CRC is seeking the matching money to plan this environmental destruction.

3. Caveat.

My above links go into more detail about the destructiveness of this falsely named group. A couple of points here might help clarify my above comments.

My comment above concerning the BU Bridge is an understatement. Twice a year, on behalf of the DCR, the CRC destroys all bordering vegetation on the Charles River Basin except for the massive introduced wall of vegetation at Magazine Beach. Because of the starvation of the Charles River White Geese by that massive wall, letting it grow is much more environmentally destructive than chopping it down.

Additionally, last I heard, the CRC was annually poisoning the eggs of as much migratory waterfowl as they can get away with.

Report from the Destroyed Nesting Area: The Charles River White Geese travel a bit further

Last yesterday afternoon, June 14, 2012, the Charles River White Geese strayed into the introduced vegetation zone.

As with last time, the three adolescent goslings were in the lead. They look quite a bit larger now. They were followed by the parents and baby sitter, plus about the same number of members of the gaggle as last time. The identifiable goslings were still yellow. There were some limited other members of the group which may have fuzzy and white and a bit larger. These, if my identification is accurate, would be slightly older goslings.

Once again, the Charles River White Geese did not venture far into the introduced vegetation, just further than the last time I saw them there. Last time, they were in the area next to the eastern native bushes and only the goslings were pushing ahead, trying to feed.

This time they lined the eastern edge of the northern hillside, still keeping as close as they could to the destroyed area to which they have been confined during the BU Bridge construction. The gosling threesome walked up the hillside to the edge of the sidewalk, separated from it by the traditional metal fence and by the newer construction woven metal fence next to the sidewalk. All were feeding.

Most of the group stayed at the foot of the hill just north of the eastern beginning of a small vehicle highway.

This is the portion with the thickest of the introduced bushes / soon to be thicket.

A number of folks were admired the Charles River White Geese from the BU Bridge. Several came into the introduced zone, admiring and taking pictures.

These beautiful animals are and always have been highly popular with decent human beings. The problem is that tiny number of rotten individuals who are part of the corruption in the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The rotters recognize their popularity with their lies and lies of omission, with the fake group in the lead lying about their concern for the area and telling folks to look at everything else. After all, the Machine succeeded in massive, inexcusable destruction at Alewife using the same tactics. And the Machine insists reality, and the last twelve years, does not exist.

Eventually a couple of middle aged men with pots walked over the eastern highway branch to the edge of the gaggle. They stood there looking into the long time destroyed area. The geese suddenly gave the alarm and all rapidly retreated into the long time destroyed area.

The portion of the longtime destroyed area nearest to and just east of the soon to be impenetrable thicket is showing signs of grass growth, perhaps seed which blew there from the soon to be introduced thicket. Perhaps this is the end in this small area of the destruction of the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its environmental destroyer, the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”

Monteiro v. City of Cambridge: Some answers in Monday’s meeting

Yesterday, June 11, 2012, I printed advance information on a Cambridge City Council Finance Committee meeting concerning the case of Malvina Monteiro et al. v. City of Cambridge, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/cambridge-ma-usa-city-council-to.html.

Cambridge Day has given a report on the meeting, at http://www.cambridgeday.com/2012/06/11/councillor-gets-more-details-in-civil-rights-lawsuits-request-to-make-apology-waits/.

The short of the report is that the Kelley motion will be passed on to the full city council when the report of the finance committee is heard.

Some answers were provided to Kelley’s questions.

The Cambridge City Manager reported that $2,144,000 was paid in outside legal fees from the 1998 complaint to the 2008 trial which resulted in the very strong jury verdict against Cambridge and the Cambridge City Manager.

The outside legal costs for the appeal of the Superior Court verdict to the Appeals Court ran $488,409.

Further answers were promised by the Cambridge City Manager.

The Cambridge Day report is quite professional, quite detailed. I recommend it.

Residents of Charles River at Home in Spite of Corrupt destruction of environment and heartless animal abuse

I have had several reports on both sides of the situation on the Charles River.

It is an easier report to gripe at the outrages especially since Cambridge’s very belligerent corruption is so major a part of an outrageous situation.

Nevertheless, these beautiful beings continue to live as best they can in spite of a tiny minority of corruption entities who have a greatly disproportionate and bad impact on them.

The tradition of corrupt behavior is a very major part of the problem in Cambridge, MA, USA, and it would appear to be key in keeping corrupt behavior controlling the Charles River.

But there is beauty on the Charles in spite of really destructive people.

Here are a number of photos. Most are photos taken a month ago, on May 13, 2012.


12 05-13-12 Charles S of DNA, Geese















This is the view most people now see of the Charles River White Geese since they are barred from direct contact through a decade of outrages.

This is the Charles River south of the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.

Three geese, two near shore, one further out, are enjoying the beautiful water.

When you talk to the destructive people destroying the Charles, their idea of creating a swimmable Charles River altogether too often turns out to be a wall on introduced vegetation preventing access between the Charles River and Magazine Beach, a wall which the key state manager has bragged starves the Charles River White Geese.


14 05-13-12, Charles near BU Bridge S of Constr, Wh Ducks















These are two Charles River White Geese and two Charles River White Ducks.

The photo is of an area near the BU Bridge just south of the construction zone by the BU Bridge.

The Charles River White Ducks were dumped at Magazine Beach on July 22, 2006, the day before Friends of the White Geese conducted a five year memorial for Bumpy, the long time leader of the Charles White Geese who was assassinated by a repeat animal killer. The animal killer apparently progressed to rape and murder of a young woman at the location where he had been beating nesting Mother Geese to death.

These two beauties were so innocent when they were dropped off that they thought dogs were their friends, and they did not know what all that blue stuff was all about.

During our memorial for Bumpy, I saved the White Ducks from an attack by a dog sicced on them by a man passing by. I kicked the dog when he had the neck of one of the ducks in his mouth.

The leader of the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative, the feeders of the Charles River White Geese, taught the Charles River White Ducks what all that blue stuff was for by backing into the Charles River while feeding them. They loved the water once they got into it. CRUWI has been feeding waterfowl residents since Cambridge and the DCR starting their deliberate starvation attacks.

The first year they resided on the Charles, they lived in a native wild on the south side of the Charles in Boston. That native wild was apparently destroyed as part of the repeated environmental destruction by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”

The Charles River Conservancy twice a year starting in 2003 has destroyed native vegetation lining the Charles needed for protection by migratory waterfowl. They destroy everything on the Charles River Basin except for the bizarre wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.

They are consistent. They destroy as part of environmental destruction. They refrain from destroying the introduced thicket whose primary purposes is heartless animal abuse.

The Boston Conservation Commission has expressed shock at the destructiveness of this falsely named group.


SDC06246

















Courtesy of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority who did photos of the event, here is a photo of the dog on attack.


DSC06209

















And a more pleasant MWRA photo from the same day, before the attack. They were apparently dropped at the foot of this tree at the opening to the Magazine Beach parking lot. They stayed there waiting for their owner to return.

Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation are aberrations but very destructive aberrations with a massive, corrupt, group in Cambridge running around signing their false praises.


15 05-13-12 Charles S of const, barrier, geese





















This is another view of the pretty much the same location as the third above, although a little to the east.


18 05-13-12 3 babies and parents in wasteland.















Here are three goslings and their parents and babysitter (one of the threesome is to the left). They are in an area which was lush with ground vegetation until the Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the DCR.

Needless to say, the Charles River “Conservancy” is not friendly to the animal population of the Charles River.

I reported a few reports ago of the incursion of a large group of Charles River White Geese into the area where the DCR is growing yet another impenetrable thicket. At the lead of the group were three adolescent goslings with their parents and baby sitter in tow. This threesome could be the same guys a few weeks earlier.

Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council to consider Monteiro case again

1. Introduction.
2. City Manager Initiative.
3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule
4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.
5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.
6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.


1. Introduction.

I am informed by a supporter of Councilor Kelley that the Cambridge City Council sitting at its Finance Committee will be meeting this morning, June 11, 2012 at 9 am. They will be discussing the payments in the case of Malvina Monteiro and others v. City of Cambridge.

This is the case in which jury, judge and appeals court found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of department head (Cape Verdean, black, woman) Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

The Kelley supporter has provided a number of documents which I appreciate and will pass on to you.

I will comment at the end.

2. City Manager Initiative.

The following was included in the City Manager’s communications to the Cambridge City Council, the “City Manager Agenda” for Monday, April 23, 2012:

15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.

The action at that time was :

15. REFERRED TO FINANCE COMMITTEE ON MOTION OF COUNCILLOR KELLEY CMA 2012 #99.”

The City Manager’s Letter of explanation read:

April 23, 2012

To the Honorable, the City Council:

As I have informed the City Council previously, the disbursement of funds for the legal matters resulting from the 1998 Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination claim was paid from the Statutory Budget Category of "Travel and Training" (Judgment and Damages), and, that the City's Free Cash balance of over $102 million dollars would be the source of these funds. In order for that Statutory Budget Category to conclude Fiscal Year 2012 "in balance" it is necessary to appropriate the funds from Free Cash to Judgment and Damages.

Thus, I am hereby recommending the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.

Very truly yours,

Robert W. Healy
City Manager

3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule

CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING JUNE 11, 2012

Monday, June 11, 2012, 9:00 am

The Finance Committee will conduct a public meeting to discuss an appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account and to discuss changing the Traffic Regulations in Appendix D, Schedule 13 by striking out the penalty fee of $30.00 and substitute in place the fee of $5.00 as it relates to Section 16.7 entitled "Street Cleaning".

(Ackermann Room)


Ed: The Ackerman Room is much smaller than the Cambridge City Council’s chambers. The meeting is scheduled during the day. Both strongly discourage public participation.

4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.

From: Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley [mailto:craigkelley62@Verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 12:30 AM
To: Interim City Clerk Donna Lopez; pcrane@cambridgema.gov
Subject: Monday's Finance meeting

Ladies:

I cannot make Monday’s meeting of the finance committee and would appreciate this letter being read and entered into the record.

Many thanks.

Craig

Dear Committee Members:

Because of Cooper’s ‘moving on’ ceremony today at 9 AM, I cannot make this meeting. I continue to be amazed that the City can spend millions and millions and millions of dollars on what started as a discrimination complaint and wound up as a wrongful termination complaint and no one ever has to say he, or she, is sorry, no one has to explain what processes and procedures have been put in place to keep the sort of behavior that resulted in this judgement from happening again and no one has been censured. I am not surprised that the Manager has not expressed regret for his actions as I think that he truly believes he did nothing wrong and that the case was decided incorrectly. I disagree, but at least I can follow his logic and if he feels he did nothing wrong I see no sense in expecting him to apologize for it. That the Council, as a body, feels no need to apologize to everybody involved, though, troubles me. At the end of the day, the Manager is an employee of the Council and we are responsible for his actions, both the ones with happy outcomes and the ones that are problematic.

I also still wonder how much the various aspects of these cases cost us. I would like to know how much:

1. We paid for outside legal counsel before our appeal of Ms. Montiero’s judgement

2. We paid for such counsel on the appeal of Ms. Montiero’s case

3. We paid for such counsel to handle the Wong and Stamper cases [ed: final two plaintiffs].

4. How much in extra costs- opponents legal fees, interest and so forth- as a result of our appeal of the Montiero verdict.

5. How much, in total (not counting City staff time) these cases cost us

6. If there were similar cases that the City also settled in any department

7. If there are similar cases pending in any department

I propose the following Order:

Whereas: A combination of discrimination and wrongful termination complaints have resulted in many millions of dollars of costs and damages for the City of Cambridge; and

Whereas: The actions that led to these complaints, plus the filing of the complaints and subsequent law suits, caused much anguish for the City employees involved; and

Whereas: It is not clear the that City Manager has ever apologized to the City of Cambridge or anyone else involved for any role he may have played in creating this situation; and

Whereas: It is not clear what practices and policies the City has instituted to help ensure that similar situations do not arise in the future; now be it therefore

Ordered: That the Council extend its apologies to both the City employees who filed the complaints and to the taxpayers and residents of the City of Cambridge for both the angst created by its employee, the City Manager, and the cost to the City as a result of these cases; and be it further

Ordered: That the Council hereby lets the City Manager know of its disapproval of his judgement and actions regarding this situation; and be it further

Ordered: That the City Manager be, and hereby is, requested to report back to the City Council with an explanation of what processes and procedures have been instituted to help ensure that such a situation does not arise in the future.

5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.

Councilor Kelley is a firm member of the Cambridge Machine with regard to environmental destruction and zoning machinations commonly written by the Cambridge City Manager’s people. Their zoning initiatives very frequently achieve the opposite of what they claim to be doing.

Kelley practices, and brags of, environmentalism, Cambridge style: Save the world, but how dare you discuss Cambridge destroying Cambridge.

6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.

Kelley has frequently been a minority of one on the Cambridge City Council concerning Monteiro. Interestingly, however, he was the swing vote on keeping records on the matter secret.

In Cambridge, swing votes can be much more important than being a minority of one on the “right side”. Nevertheless, Kelley’s “extreme” position for Cambridge is, nevertheless, way out of touch, far less than would be called for with regard to reality in the real world.

The jury in the Monteiro case said $1.1 million real damages, $3.5 million penal damages.

The trial judge described the City Manager’s behavior as “reprehensible.”

The appeals court panel refused to dignify Cambridge’s appeal with a formal opinion. The panel referred to “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.”

The Cambridge City Council is very clearly being told something.

The Monteiro decision is ample grounds for the Cambridge City Council to very safely fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office. Firing could, without question, be done without his golden parachute. Firing could possibly be done without pension. Except for the pension issue any court action by the Cambridge City Manager would be a clear waste of time.

Cambridge Machine flaunts photo of picnic area it is destroying. Omits the destruction part.

The lack of ethics of the Cambridge Machine is so extreme that it is silly to call the situation anything other than corruption.

The Cambridge Machine is fighting to destroy the picnic area on Magazine Beach at the foot of Magazine Street by destroying its parking. The Cambridge Machine is fighting to accelerate the heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese by replacing the area where they have nested for most of the past thirty years with an impenetrable thicket comparable to the bizarre wall they have installed between Magazine Beach and the Charles River.

The Cambridge Machine is following its standard tactics: lie about which side they are on and rein in well meaning people. They tell the well intended people to look at everything except what counts, and they destroy what they claim to value.

I have repeatedly gone through the tactics both on the outrages on the Charles River and at Alewife.

The Machine has created a fake blog which they named after Magazine Beach, lying that they are concerned about Magazine Beach and want to improve it. Since they do not want to know about the biggest problems at Magazine Beach because their friends have created those problems, the claims of concern are flat out lies.

The below photo is copied without permission under the fair use doctrine from this fraudulent website. I have obscured the face to protect a very certainly well meaning person. He clearly loves the area. The person is just another victim of a Cambridge Machine without shame.


















I caught this picture on line at about 4:45 pm on Tuesday afternoon, June 5, 2012, working the Internet in Central Square, Cambridge, MA, USA. The machine has it posted at the top of its belligerently misleading “Magazine Beach” blog. By about 5:15 pm, I was sitting at the picnic table you see, making very certain the photo was of what I thought it was.

To the left of the picture is a tiny environmentally respectful parking lot covered by a magnificent canopy of trees. Little people use that parking lot to get to the picnic area. They clearly drive from underprivileged parts of the Boston area. If the Machine succeeds in destroying their parking, the Machine will have succeeded in destroying the picnic area.

The machine has been running around for months now, loudly proclaiming that they are fighting to improve a historical building to the right of the area in the photo. Their proclamations of concern for the historical building consistently lie about reality because they omit that they are destroying the parking lot needed for ready access to the historical building.

The ONLY time I have ever seen the Machine publicly state that it is fighting to destroying the parking lot was when the head of the falsely named Cambridgeport “Neighborhood Association” indignantly denied keeping it secret.

Use of this photo in this manner is a lie as big as using the name “Magazine Beach” on their blog, probably more so because they clearly are lying that they love this specific location and lying that they are friends to this specific location.

Destroying its parking is antithetical to flaunting this photo.

The corruption of these people in the use of this photograph to communicate exactly the opposite of their real intentions is corruption par excellence.

The corruption of these people in using this person who clearly loves this area to destroy this area is corruption par excellence.

Fake Neighborhood Association presents fake minutes on their latest meeting.

1. General.
2. Failure to mention the fake history of Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area which omitted the last 12 years.
3. Report omitted on the accelerating destruction at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
4. Report on moneys for the foot of Magazine Beach fails to mention the fought for destruction of the tiny parking lot so valuable to that part of Magazine Beach.
5. Stacked survey whose responses, even with the stacking, damned the destruction on the Charles River omitted.
6. On line honest report.
7. Cooing about the environmentally destructive Mayor Davis and the environmentally destructive Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8. Prediction.
9. Summary.


1. General.

Last evening, June 4, 2012, the fake neighborhood association submitted its fake report on the most recent “meeting” of the group.

As usual, when dealing with the Cambridge Machine, the most important stuff is the omissions. After all, the Cambridge Pols lie through omissions that Cambridge and its fake groups are worthy of the respect they insist they deserve.

2. Failure to mention the fake history of Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area which omitted the last 12 years.

Key in the lies of omission was the failure to report on their presentation of a fake history of Magazine Beach and area. This is the fake history which did not include the record of the last twelve years and the shouting down of me when I tried to go into the last twelve years.

3. Report omitted on the accelerating destruction at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

Another lie of omission was the praise of one of their key people for the infliction of a soon to be impenetrable thicket on the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, her cooing at it beauty, and the shouting down of me when I pointed out that they are inflicting on the nesting area the same outrage which currently walls off the Charles River.

4. Report on moneys for the foot of Magazine Beach fails to mention the fought for destruction of the tiny parking lot so valuable to that part of Magazine Beach.

A report was made on the obtaining of funds to destroy the parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street needed for public access to the picnic area there and to the historical building there. Naturally, the part about the destruction of the parking lot was omitted as usual. The code words for destruction were used. Since they constantly lie by omission it is impossible to tell if a miracle occurred and the parties involved became decent human beings.

5. Stacked survey whose responses, even with the stacking, damned the destruction on the Charles River omitted.

Another lie of omission was their report on a survey they took on Magazine Beach. The survey did not make it into the report.

The survey, of course, was stacked, at minimum by the non stop lies that the situation at Magazine Beach is one to be proud of. Magazine Beach is still beautiful. The lies come from the mention of the beauty without mentioning the irresponsible destruction of the past twelve years. The destruction only did harm. The relatively few things good done in the last 12 years could have been done without the destruction.

And all the destruction was accomplished through lies or lies of omission.

The responses to the stacked survey they made on Magazine Beach were made without mentioning the fact that it was stacked.

Even with the stacking of the survey, the responses included a lot of people objecting to the wall of introduced bushes which prevent access to and from the Charles River / Magazine Beach. That was censored since the entire report was censored.

There was also strong comment during the discussions that small boats should be allowed to dock off Magazine Beach. I commented that the destruction of the last twelve years renders a boat dock useless which had been used for the better part of a century.

6. On line honest report.

My report on many lies of omission and other outrages at that meeting is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/meeting-of-fake-neighborhood.html.

7. Cooing about the environmentally destructive Mayor Davis and the environmentally destructive Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The thing which really stands out is part of their report on a presentation put on by the most environmentally destructive member of the Cambridge City Council, Mayor Davis who very much non stop lies that she is an environmental saint.

The key part read:

**********

The Mayor is not only promoting sustainability efforts within Cambridge city properties but also working with Harvard and MIT to create and export best green practices and sustainability innovations.

**********

I cannot comment on the accuracy of comments on THIS PERSON’s presentation since I did not dignify her comments with my presence, however, with regard to the glowing report on MIT’s green practices, please see my report posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/mit-reaffirms-support-for-destruction.html, concerning MIT’s public meeting on May 24, 2012. During that meeting MIT clearly communicated that MIT supports the destruction of hundreds of excellent trees on Memorial Drive next to the Charles River. This is the fake group’s idea of positive green practices.

At that meeting, MIT also praised the fake neighborhood association’s fight to keep up and expand the heartless animal abuse and environmental destruction at Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. The form was the usual bit of knaves praising knaves and lying by omission.

8. Prediction.

I would anticipate that the lies of “concern” for Magazine Beach will stop abruptly after they have succeeded in destroying the parking at the foot of Magazine Street, after suppressing outrage on the introduction of the soon to be impenetrable thicket in place of thirty years of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

The fake group has suppressed objection to irresponsible behavior at Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area for almost all of its existence by ignoring it. They have nothing new to destroy, so they will return to support of irresponsible behavior by silence when they should be yelling.

This would parallel their part of the destruction at Alewife. They spent years helping it by telling people to talk with the fake group fighting for that destruction. Once destruction was in place, this fake group suddenly decided it had nothing to do with Alewife. That made any comments about the environmental destruction and mass animal killing out of order.

Afterthought: I said "lies of 'concern'". It is very hard to call an expression of concern a lie. However, when you combine the expression of concern with claims of wanting to make improvements, and combine that with suppression of the very real fact that the most important need for improvements is to undo the totally inexcusable destruction of the last twelve years, that is not concern in the minds of normal people.

9. Summary.

These controlled groups and their lies and lies of omission are a key reason Cambridge, MA, USA continues to be a corrupt world whose reality is strikingly different from what its many fake organizations present to the public. The report on the meeting fits the standard technique of lying to the public, presenting a world of saints whose relation to reality depends on whether or not you are interested in reality.

Nesting area temporarily less bad for Charles River White Geese

Passing by the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese yesterday, June 1, 2012, I was pleased to see some whites exploring the introduced bushes.

This afternoon, June 2, 2012, the situation was impressive. The middle portion of the introduced bushes abutting the native vegetation on the northern side of the destruction zone was filled with White Geese.

The adults were exploring in a very large group, hesitating to go far into the new area. They sought safety in numbers.

Three adolescent goslings were more adventuresome. They were wandering further into the introduced bushes looking for food. They were accompanied by the usual threesome: mother, father and babysitter.

The situation inflicted on the Charles River White Geese by the bureaucrats and the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” has been nothing less than outrageous. Starting in 2003, when the CRC started destroying the environment for the bureaucrats, all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse has been destroyed with very limited exception. Nothing grew back, so they would appear to have not only destroyed the ground vegetation but poisoned the ground. The entire area, formerly lush, was converted to an artificially created desert with no vegetation for protection or food.

The Charles River White Geese have been deliberately starved by the bureaucrats since September 2004 with the first of the many outrageous and bizarre projects at Magazine Beach. The introduced wall / impenetrable thicket has since then barred their access to their food for most of the last 30 years in the Magazine Beach playing fields.

The bizarre thicket / wall is the only bordering vegetation in the Charles River Basin which is not destroyed twice a year by the CRC. It has a purpose. The manager has bragged that it starves the Charles River White Geese.

The soon to be thicket, now, looks quite good but the branches of introduced bushes very clearly are growing rapidly and will soon intertwine. Grass has been sewn and is starting to grow. Grass is impossible in the rest of the area, given the outrages inflicted since the CRC started environmental destruction for the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

Right now, the situation is good, but right now is the time to prevent the next outrage.

It is the published goal of the DCR to kill off all animals living in the Charles River Basin. The euphemism is “parkland” and their secret definition of “parkland.” Pretty much all projects are used by the DCR to forward their reprehensible goal of animal killing.

Just last fall, they succeeded in killing off hundreds of valuable, beautiful animals as part of their bizarre destruction at Alewife.

They are assisted by the con games of the fake groups, telling folks to look at everything except the important stuff. The fake neighborhood association has shouted down objection to heartless animal abuse.

As I left, one of the workers for the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative came in with food.

The Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative has been feeding the Charles River White Geese since the inflicted starvation started in September 2004.

And the most visible cheerleader, the Charles River “Conservancy” is seeking money from decent people to continue their fights for these outrages, while bragging of helping out swimming which, in turn translates into that outrageous introduced wall starving the Charles River White Geese at Magazine Beach.

Charles River “Conservancy” solicits environmental contributions; omits most of its record

1. Solicitation for funds.
2. The CRC’s record on “swimming” at Magazine Beach.
A. Impenetrable thicket walls off Charles.
B. Destruction of boat ramp.
C. Claims of allowing only water related uses on the Charles.
D. Barriers to the tiny opening.
E. Poisons.
F. Reduction in size of playing fields.
G. Heartless animal abuse.
3. Poisoning of the Charles River by dumping of prohibited Chemical on the banks of the river next to Massachusetts General Hospital.
4. Annual poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.
5. Destruction of almost all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse.
6. Fight for a new small vehicle highway on the Cambridge side of the Charles River.
7. Replacement of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese with an impenetrable thicket.
8. Plans to kill off all animals in the Charles River Basin.
9. Destruction of the Charles River White Geese.
10. The reality? Fake groups.
11. Summary.



1. Solicitation for funds.

I have received a solicitation for contributions from the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”

It talks swimming in the Charles, swimming in the Charles, swimming in the Charles.

The following are but a sample of the omissions from this lovely solicitation of funds.

2. The CRC’s record on “swimming” at Magazine Beach.

In 2004 or 2005, this fake group conducted a “swim in” in the Charles River adjacent to the wasteland which had been the food of the Charles River White Geese at Magazine Beach.

The CRC bragged that this outrage would help swimming in the Charles River.

The following analysis will, for the most part, use “bureaucrats” to refer to the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The DCR does nothing near Cambridge without the overall blessing of Cambridge.

A. Impenetrable thicket walls off Charles.

This outrage has resulted in the walling off of Magazine Beach from the Charles River with an impenetrable thicket of introduced bushes, clearly invasive because they are so destructive to the native animal population. This impenetrable thicket starves the Charles River White Geese by blocking access from the Charles River to almost all of their 30 year food at Magazine Beach. The only opening has an obstacle course to prevent access from the river.

This outrage is the only bordering vegetation on the Charles which is not chopped down twice a year by the CRC. Nowhere in the solicitation for funds does the CRC mention that, twice a year, it destroys bordering vegetation needed for migratory waterfowl, all the bordering vegetation on the Charles River Basin.

The bureaucrats installed this outrage in direct conflict with their stated goals for the area, a lawn to the Charles. The bureaucrats, as is too common, proved themselves liars.

The key bureaucrat has bragged that this outrage starves the Charles River White Geese. The leader of the CRC has expressed her disgust for these beautiful creatures. Expression of contempt for their victims is normal among abusive people. This sort of language, among other things, is used by wife beaters against their victims.

The Boston Conservation Commission had at least one opportunity to comment on the CRC’s destruction of protective vegetation. Members of the Boston Conservation Commission were disgusted with the CRC’s harm to migratory waterfowl.

B. Destruction of boat ramp.

The CRC’s beloved project at Magazine Beach destroyed the boat ramp which was at Magazine Beach for most of the last century.

They physically left the boat ramp there. This is the only opening in the impenetrable thicket.

All they did was make it inaccessible. They put in a narrow bridge as the only access from the parking lot. Then they put up barriers to make access to the bridge that much more difficult.

C. Claims of allowing only water related uses on the Charles.

The bureaucrats have been very indignant on this stuff. Their actions at Magazine Beach, yet again, prove them liars, as do their attacks on water related animals.

D. Barriers to the tiny opening.

The bureaucrats have installed more bushes on the land side of the bridge. These also are permitted to grow and grow and grow while the CRC destroys bordering vegetation twice a year.

It seems the Charles River White Geese were getting through the opening and feeding there. So the bureaucrats installed barriers.

E. Poisons.

An excellent example of the CRC’s love for swimming in the Charles is the poisons being dumped at Magazine Beach.

Those poisons are being dumped to keep alive sickly grass introduced by the bureaucrats.

They planted the sickly stuff to replace healthy grass which survived the better part of a century without poisons. But the bureaucrats destroyed the healthy grass, introduced sickly stuff and proceeded to dump poisons to keep the sickly stuff alive.

F. Reduction in size of playing fields.

One of the key lies from the bureaucrats at Magazine Beach was that they were “improving” the athletic fields.

The area devoted to athletic fields has been drastically reduced.

The downsizing of the playing fields was accomplished to create fancy drainage systems to drain off the poisons “needed” to keep alive the sickly grass which replaced the healthy, responsible grass which did not need poisons.

G. Heartless animal abuse.

The Charles River White Geese have been starved ever since by having their food at Magazine Beach denied to them by projects which exactly contradict so many lies.

Note, however, at Alewife, as part of that bizarre project, hundreds of resident animals were casually killed as part of the strip mine type development of acres of virgin woodlands.

3. Poisoning of the Charles River by dumping of prohibited Chemical on the banks of the river next to Massachusetts General Hospital.

The name of this chemical is “Tartan”. It is labeled with a prohibition against use near water.

The bureaucrats were distressed that their beloved poisons were not working as well as they would like. So they dumped Tartan on Ebersol Fields near MGH.

The next day, the Charles River was dead with algae poisoning from the Mass. Ave. Bridge to the harbor.

That outbreak reoccurs annually.

The CRC has no problem with this poisoning of the Charles.

4. Annual poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.

In 2001 or so, there was a “public meeting” at one of the Charles River boat clubs to discuss what to do about the Canada Geese problem.

I was thrown out of it.

I did not and do not think there is a Canada Goose problem.

The meeting, I was told, was to discuss how to respond to the “problem.”

Any and discussion about whether a problem exists was censored and people talking reality were barred.

From then on, the CRC and the Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals have run around in the spring poisoning the eggs of all the migratory waterfowl they could get away with.

No mention in their solicitation of their poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.

5. Destruction of almost all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse.

This was done in segments starting when the CRC took over environmental destruction for the bureaucrats.

Now the undestroyed native vegetation is limited to two areas next to the former construction zone, soon to come new impenetrable thicket, in the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

6. Support for the destruction of hundreds of healthy, excellent trees on the Cambridge side of the Charles River between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge.

The leader of the CRC gushes with admiration at this proposed massive tree destruction.

The bureaucrats sought Obama moneys for the purpose. They flat out lied that all the trees to be destroyed were sickly.

The bureaucrats proved their lie a lie by their filing on the project with the City of Cambridge.

The filing was provided to the Governor.

The Obama moneys were not provided.

But they are still looking.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology abuts the destruction area. They recently affirmed their support for the massive destruction. Their explanation? The bureaucrats do not have the money for the project.

YET.

6. Fight for a new small vehicle highway on the Cambridge side of the Charles River.

This would be built in the Charles River and on its banks. The lie used is “underpasses”.

This project has been started as part of the latest outrage at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, the soon to come impenetrable thicket to replace what was nests.

A joint committee of the state Department of Transportation and the DCR condemned the project as environmentally destructive.

The project would devastate the beautiful 104 tree grove at the Memorial Drive split.

The project would duplicate a highway on the Boston side which bears signs warning people not to be out at night. Reports of sexual assaults and mugging are frequent.

7. Replacement of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese with an impenetrable thicket.

About two-thirds of the Nesting was destroyed as part of the BU Bridge renovations. About a third of the destruction was gratuitous.

The native vegetation there functioned to protect the nests of the Charles River White Geese. Two groupings were not destroyed.

A responsible protector of the environment would simply plant grass and let the native vegetation expand to where it was before.

The introduced bushes are already spreading to interlock and create the same mess that has walled off Magazine Beach.

This was accomplished through lies of omission. They violated their trust and installed this outrage with no public input whatsoever.

8. Plans to kill off all animals in the Charles River Basin.

The euphemism is “parkland”. The definition is: no animals need apply.

Reality is that nature does not look like a garden. The Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese is the last remaining animal habitat on the Charles River. It is being destroyed piece by piece.

9. Destruction of the Charles River White Geese.

The Charles River White Geese have been immensely popular.

When the attacks by the bureaucrats started, the state got multiple calls of objection.

Their response?

They simply lied.

“No intent to harm” the Charles River White Geese.

The lie was repeated in the Boston Globe article on the beginning of the outrage at Magazine Beach. A photo of a tiny White Goose overwhelmed by construction equipment was printed with this lie next to it.

10. The reality? Fake groups.

The Charles River “Conservancy” and the local fake neighborhood association.

They are now, as with this outrageous funding letter, using the technique which destroyed acres at Alewife.

Fake groups loudly proclaiming love for the targeted area lying that people should chase their tails fighting about minor matters and lying by omission about the outrages they are fighting for.

This is a company union tactic, a tactic by which controlled entities lie to the Cambridge voters that the Cambridge government is worthy of their respect.

11. Summary.

I could go on.

And the Charles River “Conservancy” brags of fighting for swimming while seeking money from people who love the environment and love the Charles River.

Fake neighborhood association praises “honoree” a week after paper comes out, an hour after we comment on the nonsense

A few hours ago, this blog debunked a report / printed press release in the Cambridge Chronicle which was an obvious piece of nonsense designed to con decent people into giving credibility to a fake group’s con game fighting to keep irresponsible destruction on the Charles River and to expand it.

Our report is at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/cambridge-chronicle-gives-good-location.html.

We are being listened to.

Our report concerned LAST WEEK's Cambridge Chronicle.

AFTER my posting, the fake neighborhood association trumpeted its praise for the “honoree” on their listserve. Were they too embarrassed by the obviousness of the game to publicly comment before I debunked the nonsense?

Cambridge Chronicle gives good location to Press Release

The Cambridge Chronicle, on page 8 of its May 24, 2012 edition, gave about a third of a page to a press release from the fake Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association.

The Chronicle gave the press release good coverage on line, apparently trying to sooth the powers that be about its very strong editorial and front page report on the Monteiro case.

The press release was in the form of an award for community activities. Close review indicates the “report” was a con to get people on the wrong side of the situation on the Charles River.

The basic form was that the state representative who has been fighting aggressively for environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse nominated the key person in the fake group’s con game on the Charles River for a community activist award. The state funded group she nominated her to kept the destructive state representative happy (and kept open their own funding).

Key in evaluating the report was that the only part of the activities which were specific was the con game in support of destruction at Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area. The report concluded with a plea to contact the fake group’s web page which supports the destruction on the Charles River and provided an email address.

The editor gave the report his byline. He apparently cleaned up the press release by creating a question and answer format.

The fake neighborhood association is implementing on the Charles River the fraudulent tactics which achieved mass animal killing as part of the totally unnecessary destruction of acres of irreplaceable virgin woodland at Alewife.

The game is to run around yelling concern until you have fooled people into thinking you are not only concerned but are the expert. You then tell concerned people to ignore the important stuff and look at their carefully sanitized version of reality.

All the yelling of concern very carefully omits the inexcusable destruction and heartless animal abuse achieved by city and state through the outright lies and lies of omission.

Fitting the company union motif, they call for assistance in improvements lying through omission about the destructiveness of the proposal which they support. The secret stuff, in turn, minimizes the value of the improvements they tout and, as usual, is inexcusable destruction.

So this press release on an apparently trumped up award. The reality is the press release seeks to legitimize the con game supporting environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse of the beautiful Charles River White Geese.

Outrageous, but business as usual in Cambridge, MA, USA.

For further details on the ongoing outrage, please see many recent posts.

PS: Reenforcing the outrage, the falsely named Charles River Conservancy heaped its own praise and linked the on line report in its monthly newsletter. The usual tactic: scoundrels praising scoundrels.

Good person praises Cambridge Chronicle’s records fight.

We have had many reports on Monteiro v. Cambridge.

The Cambridge Chronicle’s need to fight to obtain the settlement agreement with the last two plaintiffs is yet another example of the corrupt situation in Cambridge, MA, USA. We have reported on that fight a couple of times in the last week or so.

The May 24, 2011, edition, at page 10, has buried a letter from Roy Bercaw praising them for the fight.

He concludes the letter: “. . . but if you are one of the few citizens who watch what the councilors and the manager . . . do, it is clear they are a lawless bunch of self-serving politicians with no concern for ordinary citizens.”

You may or may not be aware that my environmental initiatives include the use of the Zoning Ordinance to make construction in Cambridge more environmentally responsible.

My biggest problem in my initiatives have not been the publicly declared developers but the Cambridge Machine.

I downzoned 85% of Massachusetts Avenue between Harvard and Central Squares, a very key part of Cambridge.

The further I got the proposals from The Machine, the better were my successes.

My most obvious victory is a building at the eastern edge of the core Harvard Square, the Inn at Harvard located at Harvard Street and Massachusetts Avenue.

This is probably the one relatively new building that most normal people are really happy with. In the downzoning that included this building, I achieved more than anybody else had even attempted.

But half of the victory was snatched away when the leader of the fake neighborhood association in Roy Bercaw’s neighborhood infiltrated my neighborhood group and inflicted a flat out lie on my people: “You have made your deal with the City Council. Now you must deal with the Planning Board.” He brought with him the usual group of robots.

Roy has been standing up to the same rotters.

Standing out in my mind is a project about two blocks north of the Inn at Harvard which was obviously irresponsible.

I looked at the package of people The Machine had assembled and realized that, after many victories over these people, I was outorganized. I backed off.

Roy fought them.

Friendships, geese to humans, and geese to geese

1. Lovely story on YouTube.
2. Our comparable experience — Toulouse geese at the nesting area, 2000 plus.
3. Summary.

We had a nice exchange on facebook which I would like to pass on to you.

1. Lovely story on YouTube.

Ellen was kind enought to post a link on facebook to a story about a Toulouse Goose who took a strong friendship to a man she met in the park. It is posted at: http://www.wimp.com/gooseman/. At one point, the report shows the goose flying along withr her friend as he drives away on a motor scooter.

2. Our comparable experience — Toulouse geese at the nesting area, 2000 plus.

Ellen and I had the following exchange based on my observations among the Charles River White Geese:

A. Your editor

We had two Toulouse Geese in residence starting in fall 2000. One mated with one of the whites. They tried to have babies for several years until they finally succeeded.

The behavior of the mate out of mating season was similar, but not as extensive, as that of Maria. During mating season the Toulouse stayed with her mate, but she went back to her sister when she did not have babies. When she went back with her sister, the mate, whom we called Lothario, made friends with a lady who was a regular visitor. He was very talkative with his human friend.

Eventually, they had a family and she stayed with her mate and the family. That was not good for her sister, or for the human friend of Lothario.

B. Ellen.

so it seems the best way to work with them is to not get too closely involved. but i have never figured out how to do that

C. Your editor.

I would not say that. I was just relating a situation which I considered similar.

The Toulouse stayed with her mate when mating was her dominant mentality. When she was with her mate, her sister guest sat on nests so that the mother who belonged to the eggs in the nest could do other things.

The mated Toulouse recognized her duties to her sister when the mating mentality declined but pretty much abandoned her mate at such times.

Her mate found substitutes in friendly humans particularly this one lady.

When they had their babies, the mated Toulouse was a dutiful mother and mate, to the disadvantage of her sister and her mate's friend.

The mated toulouse had conflicting duties which she fulfilled to the best of her ability.

Humans behave very similarly but they do not go back to the mate later. So, it seems reasonable to me to think that the mated Toulouse behaved more responsibly than do humans.

D. Ellen.

seems most animals behave better than humans

3. Summary.

The horror of the situation on the Charles River, at Alewife and too many other locations, involving the City of Cambridge, MA, USA, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, the fake groups, and too many non profits is the corrupt world in which people / organizations lie that they are decent entities or holier than thou and, in reality, behave as terribly as they do.

There are many really rotten people in our world. The situation on the Charles River, at Alewife, and related involves really rotten people who lie about which side they are on and rope good people into helping the rotters do terrible things. That is corruption.

Strong comments from Cambridge Chronicle in its report / editorial on release of final payments in Monteiro case

The case name is Malvina Monteiro v. City of Cambridge.

I have previously reported from the Boston Globe point of view concerning the order by the Secretary of State for release of the settlement in the final payments.

The Chronicle report / editorial goes into detail as to why the Cambridge, MA, USA position is, as usual, so much nonsense.

The short explanation is that Cambridge has a corrupt city government which will do pretty much whatever it wants because the voters are controlled by the fake advocacy groups which, in turn, very clearly are controlled by the corrupt city government.

Reality is irrelevant in Cambridge, MA. The fake groups strongly take care of that.

I have said too much on this topic already.

My prior report on the Secretary of State order is at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/boston-globe-bostoncom-reports-city-of.html.

The Chronicle report is at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x358794084/Cambridge-s-nearly-4-million-secret-exposed#axzz1w4jewGDb.

The Chronicle editorial is at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x358795630/Editorial-Secrecy-in-the-city-of-Cambridge#axzz1w4jewGDb.

Please read them at your convenience. It is nice to see them doing such a professional job of reporting the corrupt situation.

In no way should my use of the word “corrupt” with regard to the City of Cambridge and the fake groups be interpreted to infer exchange of money as part of the corruption. The situation is too corrupt to call for pay offs.

Excellent trees the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is fighting to destroy

2012, 03-20-12, Memorial Drive Grove

This is a photo of some of the smaller trees on Memorial Drive in Cambridge, MA, USA that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is fighting to have destroyed by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.

This is a magnificent 104 tree grove at the Memorial Drive split which would be decimated in the project. These trees are magnificent but are smaller than half of the trees that MIT wants destroyed. The Memorial Drive split is perhaps a half mile east of the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, another excellent example of corruption in the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

MIT repeated its determination to see destruction once again at the Thursday meeting on May 24, 2012, which I reported at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/mit-reaffirms-support-for-destruction.html.

The particular photo is taken from the facebook page of the falsely named Charles River Conservancy. The CRC, in compliance with the corruption which is politics on the Charles River and in Cambridge, MA, posted this photo giving the lying impression that the CRC is protecting and cherishes this magnificent grove. The CRC is fighting for its destruction.

The head of the fake neighborhood association fighting for destruction and animal abuse on the Charles River praised MIT for its tree policies at that meeting.

The corrupt DCR sought Obama moneys for the destruction lying that all of the trees to be destroyed were sickly. The papers DCR filed with Cambridge, MA, on the project proved the sickly comment a flat out lie. All the trees these people want destroyed are healthy. The papers filed by the DCR with Cambridge were provided to the governor. The money for destruction was not obtained.

This photo was previously published by us at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/charles-river-conservancy-glories-in.html.

Situation in Amory Park, Brookline, MA, USA, a few blocks from the Charles River

1. Friend request.
2. Report from a neighbor.

1. Friend request.

A friend of the Charles River White Geese sent the following message.

She has relocated to Los Angeles.

***********

Robert. Even though I'm not in Boston anymore, I still enjoy looking at your blog for updates on how the geese are doing. I miss the geese, and especially feeding the Canada geese at Amory park.

2. Report from a neighbor.

It seems that there is only one pair of Canada geese at the Amory Park this year. They tried to construct a nest in an unusual location, but the eggs were broken after the first night in what superficially looked like an animal attack.

Other than that, one willow was removed during the cold season without any due process or apparent reason in the Amory Park.

While the situation in Brookline is certainly better than the situation in Cambridge in this sense, this is yet another example of very poor "stewardship" by the office of town arborist and the parks and open space division with respect to preservation of existing large trees.

MIT Reaffirms support for destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive by the Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA

1. Outrageous position.
2. Techniques of Lying.
A. Telling the victim the destruction won’t happen for a few weeks and thus the victim should not be concerned.
B. Scoundrel praising scoundrel.

1. Outrageous position.

Last night, May 24, 2012, Massachusetts Institute of Technology conducted one of its irregular meetings with concerned citizens concerning MIT’s development plans.

The meeting was conducted in its 70 Pacific Street dormitory which, in turn, is part of the building banking being accomplished by MIT southeast of Cambridge’s Central Square and east of the Cambridgeport Neighborhood.

In response to my question, MIT reaffirmed its support for the intentions of the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation to destroy hundreds of excellent trees on Memorial Drive between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge.

This portion of Memorial Drive abuts MIT’s campus to the south.

The nearest thing to an explanation was a cynical technique of lying described below.

2. Techniques of Lying.

When you are dealing with really rotten people, they follow a script, and they commonly lie. Two of the popular techniques of lying are (A) telling the victim the destruction won’t happen for a few weeks and thus the victim should not be concerned, and (B) scoundrel praising scoundrel.

A. Telling the victim the destruction won’t happen for a few weeks and thus the victim should not be concerned.

This technique is so outrageous that the response, reflexively, is sort of comparable to the now politically incorrect reflex of averting the eyes when seeing a seriously deformed person.

It is impolite to recognize moral deformity.

The “excuse” was that the DCR does not have the money, YET.

My response was to repeat history. The DCR tried to get Obama money lying that those universally healthy trees were universally diseased. That particular lie was proven a lie by the papers filed on the project with the City of Cambridge. The papers were provided to the Governor. No money was obtained.

B. Scoundrel praising scoundrel.

The instigation for my question was a comment from the leader of the fake neighborhood association praising MIT for its tree policies.

MIT responded by praising him for his concern for Magazine Beach. For details of the fake neighborhood association’s “concern” for the Magazine Beach playing fields, and the parking lot next to it and the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese and, I could go on, please see my analysis entitled “The Dangers of Honest Evaluation of the Cambridge City Government”, http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/dangers-of-honest-evaluation-of.html.

Until this exchange, it had not been FULLY driven home to me just how rotten the fake neighborhood association is.

This is a standard lie and a very routine lie by which two rotters falsely praise each other and well intentioned bystanders are deliberately given the false impression that both rotters are commendable individuals. After all, don’t they think highly of each other?

The dangers of honest evaluation of the Cambridge City Government

1. Introduction.
2. Honest comment, honest response.
A. Well meaning individual, quoting.
B. My response.
C. The machine’s response.
3. The lies of omission on the Charles River.
4. Implementation in the fake group’s attack on Magazine Beach.
5. Application in the retaliation by the city government against those who live in reality.
6. Application as part of broadbased corruption.


1. Introduction.

The Cambridge Machine lives in a world of its own.

It is impossible to tell if this dishonest reality is corruption with regard to any particular individual.

What is possible to say is that, as a group, this dishonest reality has to be considered corruption on a large scale.

Corruption in government is a failure to serve based on dishonesty. Money / other payments are incidental.

Failure to serve based on dishonesty is the game.

Failure to serve based on manipulation of well intentioned people by fake groups with connection to the government is the game.

Blatant corruption.

2. Honest comment, honest response.

A. Well meaning individual, quoting.

Yesterday, I wrote:

> And why does one City Councilor think just asking about potential
> conflicts of interest (both Microsoft and Google are vendors
> to Cambridge) is "destructive"?

Since I called out Leland Cheung so provocatively above, I hope the moderator will permit me an extended clarification.

Having had a conversation with Councilor Cheung, I believe that his intent was miscommunicated when he told me my questions
were "destructive".

What Leland was trying to communicate was that the tone of those questions would be destructive to my relationship with the City. That turned out to be self evidently true given Deputy City Manager Rich Rossi's statement to me.

Leland has told me, and I believe him, that he considers these questions perfectly legitimate. He's also said,
and not just on this occasion, that he's advocated on my behalf in order to get the City to listen my
opinions.

Leland isn't the problem here. The problem is a City administration that believes it can set the terms of acceptable debate and
only respond to questions it wants to answer. Leland shouldn't have to spend any time advocating on my behalf. The City should be listening on its own.

As we head into what are going to be heated discussions about development in our neighborhood, we need to be cognizant of a City administration that's ready to tune us out and seems to be more respectful of corporate voices than it is of informed, engaged citizens.

Our elected representatives will have the opportunity to change this culture when they approve a new City Manager. I believe that they should insist on a manager whose core values include openness, transparency and inclusiveness, and who has a proven track record of management skills sufficient to make this cultural change happen.

I, for one, will be judging them on how they rise to this occasion.

B. My response.

[ ]'s comment / clarification reaffirms the grave failure of the Cambridge City Council in not firing the Cambridge City Manager a long time ago.

My analysis of the situation is considerably less kind. I agree with the civil rights judge, and the jury, and the Appeals Court panel. Monteiro v. Cambridge. I think the trial judge's word, "reprehensible", says plenty, and it is the very same mentality.

As far as Councilor Cheung goes, his honeymoon with me ended with the totally inexcuseable destruction and mass animal killings at Alewife. The current outrage at the Nesting Area and the impending destruction of the parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street achieved through the usual lies of omission just adds to the long standing, very bad situation.

C. The machine’s response.

The comment was on the Cambridgeport listserve.

The response was submitted to the Cambridgeport listserve.

The response was censored.

The machine commonly censors reality, either formally, as in this censorship, or informally by simply not listening.

Blatant corruption.

3. The lies of omission on the Charles River.

The fake neighborhood association which claims to be defending Magazine Beach / Cambridgeport is not at all unusual.

The fake neighborhood association which claims to be defending Magazine Beach / Cambridgeport contains people who very clearly are associated with individuals in other such groups.

The poor dears can get very indignant over almost anything. They are constantly indignant and almost as constantly fighting against the causes they claim to stand for.

It is impossible to say which is a knave or which is a fool.

And it is really irrelevant because the knaves and the fools are indistinguishable.

The nonsense, outright lies or lies of omission, coming out of these people is very much nonstop, and they are very indignant about it.

If they know the comment, whether outright or by omission, is a lie, they are liars.

If they make a comment and do not know what they are talking about, they are liars because implicit in the indignant statement is a statement that they know what they are talking about. And, if they do not know what they are talking about, they are lying.

Blatant corruption.

4. Implementation in the fake group’s attack on Magazine Beach.

They have for a few months now, run around lying that they are concerned about Magazine Beach.

The constant proclamations of indignant and concern by a large number of controlled people gives the lie of concern.

Constant claims of wanting to improve are part of the lies.

The fake group has prohibited negative comment in response to a presentation on Magazine Beach by the destructive Department of Conservation and Recreation.

Blatant corruption.

Dishonesty in fact by lying by omission, omitting reality by shouting it down.

This fake group has put on a history of Magazine Beach which omitted the last 12 years of destruction and heartless animal abuse.

Blatant corruption.

Dishonesty in fact by lying by omission, omitting reality by shouting reality down.

Since their world does not include the last 12 years, their world does not include the heartless animal abuse inflicted on the Charles River White Geese. In response to non stop lies of no intention to harm.

Since their world does not include the last 12 years, their world does not include the walling off of Magazine Beach, starving the Charles River White Geese, and preventing the possibility of swimming. In response to a lie from the DCR that promised a lawn to the river. In response to a lie from the falsely named Charles River Conservancy that walling off Magazine Beach would improve swimming. In response to non stop lying from the DCR that they are working to improve water related activities.

Since their world does not include the last 12 years, their world does not include the dumping of poisons on the banks of the Charles to keep alive sickly grass introduced to replace healthy grass that survived the better part of a century.

Since their world does not include the last 12 years, their world does not include the downsizing of the Magazine Beach playing fields, downsizing to install fancy drain systems to drain off poisons that should not be dumped on the banks of the Charles River.

Since their world does not include the last 12 years, their world does not include the destruction of the boat dock which existed for the better part of a century. It is still there, but access is walled off. In response to promises to do nothing but put in uses that use the Charles River.

The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern do not include concerns for reversing these outrages. The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern are just more lies.

The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern do not include remediations in the Nesting Area for the destruction associated with the BU Bridge project.

But they yell so loudly that they are lying that they are concerned and they keep people away from the very severe damage.

The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern include false praise for the outrage / new thicket being installed in place of the key nesting area of the Charles River White Geese. The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern including shouting down honest condemnation of this outrage.

The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern include praise for the historical building to the west of the playing fields.

The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern include praise for the picnic area west of the playing fields.

The nonstop pieties and proclamations of concern do not include any more than they can help mention of their fight to destroy the parking for the historical building and picnic area. Thus they lie by omission that they are fighting to destroy the picnic area. Thus they lie by omission that they are fighting to hurt access to the historical building.

Blatant corruption.

5. Application in the retaliation by the city government against those who live in reality.

The shouting down of reality includes shunning of those who have the nerve to notice reality.

The censoring of reality is part of the lies of omission.

The shouting down of reality exactly fits the destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

The shouting down of reality exactly fits total indifference to the destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro.

Blatant corruption.

6. Application as part of broadbased corruption.

This fake group is by no means an exception.

The fake groups have come into existence during the reign of the Sullivan / Healy administration with clear admiration of the Sullivan / Healy administration, and with very major connections to the Sullivan / Healy administration and to individual city council incumbents.

Blatant Corruption.

Boston Globe / Boston.com reports City of Cambridge, MA, USA paid $3.85 million to last two of the Monteiro plaintiffs

I have reported on the Cambridge Chronicle’s victory at the Secretary of State’s office by which it obtained an order requiring Cambridge to release its settlement agreement with the last of the Monteiro plaintiffs.

My most recent report is at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/secretary-of-state-cambridge-must-obey.html.

This employment discrimination case started with five plaintiffs. Two settled several years ago for payments rumored to be good.

Monteiro went to trial, lost on the actual complaint but won resoundingly on her being fired in retaliation for the filing the complaint. The award was $1.1 million for real damages and $3.5 million for penal damages. The final check paid by the city was $8.3 million.

The Globe reports that the final two plaintiffs, Mary Wong, formerly executive director of the Cambridge Kids Council, and Linda Stamper, a former city lawyer, received $3.85 million in settlement.

Details may be read on boston.com at: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/05/19/cambridge_paid_385_million_to_settle_discrimination_case/

Secretary of State: Cambridge must obey law in release of Monteiro Settlement Records

Yesterday, May 17, 2012, the Cambridge Chronicle reported in its feature headlines, the order of the Secretary of State’s office that Cambridge, MA, USA, must release its records on the settlement in the case of Monteiro v. Cambridge. Its report is posted on line at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/features/x1986334626/State-Cambridge-must-release-lawsuit-settlement-details#axzz1vDjJYQCa.

Monteiro v. Cambridge is yet another example of Cambridge certainly looking like it considers itself above the law.

Jury, Judge and Appeals Court found that Cambridge destroyed the life of department head Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

The trial judge’s use of the word “reprehensible” places the case squarely in the canon of way too much Cambridge behavior.

The Cambridge City Council / the Cambridge Pols, in their usual denial of reality, see no reason to fire the Cambridge City Manager. Reading the opinions, two words come to mind with regard to the Cambridge’s remaining in its own private world: arrogance and corruption. When you are dealing with judicially found deliberate violations of significant law or ethics by a municipality, it seems rather silly to avoid the word “corruption.”

The Secretary of State treated Cambridge in the Cambridge Chronicle case with more respect than the Appeals Court treated Cambridge in the Monteiro appeal. In Monteiro, the Appeals Court refused to grant Cambridge the respect of a formal opinion.

In the Secretary of State decision, Cambridge won a point, one point. So it is difficult to simply call Cambridge’s behavior in this matter as demonstrating lack of ethics, but there is too often an apparent mentality of: “You expect me to obey an inconvenient law, go to Court.”

The Chronicle has attached a PDF of the decision to its report.

Cambridge, MA, USA City Councilor continues environmental con gam

Last night, Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley gave a speech on environmentalism to a fake environmental group associated with the Cambridge Machine.

The continuing lie from the Machine including all city councilors, insofar as I am aware, on environmentalism is (1) they are saving the world and (2) how dare you expect them to refrain from destroying the environment in Cambridge, MA, i.e. to respect the world around us in Cambridge.

That, as is very common, is exactly the opposite of reality, how things are done in the real world.

As irresponsible as the fake Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association behaved in its last meeting, they did at least have a responsible guest, the gentleman who did the radar scan of Magazine Beach. This, of course, is part of the continuing lie of concern for Magazine Beach on the fake group side, but the gentleman was for real.

He is an advanced degree candidate in the environmental field and he, like all normal people, defines environmentalism as concern for the world around us.

In Cambridge the environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse on the Charles River combines with the mass animal killings and environmental destruction at Alewife and a lot of other outrages. The destruction is very commonly part of truly bizarre projects, bizarre projects which quite simply cannot be justified on their own merits. The Machine mouths the lies of the incumbents that they are environmental saints. By repeating the non stop lies, they all keep the environmental destruction going.

And they lie their way around their environmental destruction and animal killing and abuse with their secret definition of environmentalism, a definition that Kelley has always proclaimed.

I did not bother go into Kelley’s con game. I realize a miracle could have occurred and he could have suddenly discovered meaningful concern for the world around us. I do not believe in miracles, but I would love to be proven wrong, meaningfully proven wrong.

Universal Hub: Photo of Goose on Grand Junction Railroad Bridge

Universal Hub has posted an excellent photo of one of the offspring of, I believe, Brown Beauty, walking on the railroad bridge across the Charles River at http://www.universalhub.com/2012/geese-playing-chicken.

There are two Canadas behind her, less visible.

The railroaders are good people. I have seen geese standing in front of trains on the tracks and have the trainman stop for them.

Thank you Universal Hub.

The Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese: The ongoing destruction of the nests.

1. The photos.
A. The reality at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
B. Magazine Beach Playing Fields - walled off from the Charles River by an Impenetrable Thicket.
C. Fake boat ramp. Access point for highway?
D. Softball field. Look back.
2. A summary of a corrupt reality.
A. Corruption proven in Court on Civil Rights.
B. Corruption, the reality on heartless animal abuse and killing and on environmental destruction. Alewife.
C. The reality at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. Corruption in Cambridge, MA, USA.
3. How to contact the Governor of Massachusetts.
4. Addendum.

1. The photos.

A. The reality at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

I have printed photos of the top area with the near concrete small vehicle highways which have been started.

One, the larger, western one is scheduled to be extended under the BU Bridge in the Charles and to connect to Magazine Beach’s playing fields where it would meet with a highway a combined report of two state departments has called environmentally destructive.

The second, the eastern one, is scheduled to meet with a highway on the Grand Junction Railroad. A responsible City Government would end the highway north of Memorial Drive and connect to Memorial Drive by crossing with a traffic light.

07 04-14-12 DNA south, Whites, native bushes, cleared west with potted bushes.

The native bushes nearest and to the right are the nesting material for the Charles River White Geese. They lined the BU Bridge and filled the northern part of their nesting area toward the ramp to Memorial Drive. The 1999 destruction by Boston University open up the area and created a pathway. BU destroyed the bushes but they grew back. The plan this time to make certain they cannot grow back.

The Charles River can be seen if you look through the tree. The near concrete eastern highway is slated to be extended through that opening as part of the small vehicle highway which has been described as environmentally destructive by two state agencies. The dirt in the foreground and toward the Charles River was been created by the destruction of ground vegetation since the falsely named Charles River Conservancy started destroying the environment for the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

The black plastic creating a wall through the middle of this picture was installed as part of the BU Bridge repairs. In this spot, it created a 100 foot zone for access to the BU Bridge. That 100 foot zone was necessary. The eastern leg of the destruction was gratuitous, needlessly destructive and heartless animal abuse.

As part of their usual lying, the impenetrable thicket is being installed as lied amelioration. The DCR works closely with the City of Cambridge and does nothing which displeases the City of Cambridge. The supposed amelioration is designed to make the temporary destruction of the BU Bridge permanent.

The DCR uses whatever excuse the DCR can find to kill of resident animals living in the Charles River Basin. No animal need apply is a key part of the DCR’s secret definition of parkland.

B. Magazine Beach Playing Fields - walled off from the Charles River by an Impenetrable Thicket.

16 04-14-12 Path by impenetrable thicket.

18 04-14-12 Thicket, walk, bushes

Eyeballing the situation on Google Maps, satellite view, this impenetrable thicket runs two to three tenths of a mile. All other bordering vegetation on the Charles River Basin is destroyed twice a year by the falsely named Charles River Conservancy. This is simply allowed to grow. It is silly to think a miracle would occur and the DCR would do differently with their bushes introduced in place of nesting places of the Charles River White Geese.

On the left / South side of the wall is the Charles River. On the right / north side of the wall is Magazine Beach’s playing fields, the food for the Charles River White Geese for most of the past 30 plus years. There is a tiny break in the middle of the wall at about the spot where the Charles River White Geese have spent most of their lives, feeding, in the outfield of the ball fields. It would be very dangerous and foolhardy for the Charles River White Geese to use that break for access to food.

22 04-14-12 Bush, thicket.

To the right is the wall blocking access. To the left is vegetation introduced in phase 2. Neither has been trimmed since they were planted.

17 04-14-12 Thicket, walk, more dense bushes.

To the left is the wall blocking access. Bushes planed in phase 2 are to the right. Not that they create an additionally wall to access around the Magazine Beach playing fields. They have not been trimmed since planting.

C. Fake boat ramp. Access point for highway?

09 04-14-12 Boat Dock

This view is from the eastern end of the Magazine Beach playing field. The changes have rendered the eastern end of no value to the athletic uses. A number of outdoor type devices ancillary to running used to be in the eastern end. They were destroyed and placed in what had been playing fields slightly further west.

The two massive buildings are newly built Boston University dormitories. These dormitories were built on an historical armory. BU obtained the armory with major objections from historical types about the value of the armory. The armory was destroyed as part of this project which includes an athletic facility in its southern extreme, on Commonwealth Avenue in Boston.

10 04-14-12 Former Boat Dock, Bridge

Closer view. This is the southern end of the main parking lot for Magazine Beach. It used to extend quite close to the river. The wooden bridge was constructed in phase 1. The barrier and wooden bridge prevent access to the docking facility for launching boats. Any boats launched from this ramp can no longer be backed behind a vehicle and dropped into the Charles River. They all have to be physically carried through the obstacle path.

12 04-14-12 Former Boat Dock

This location would appear to be a boat dock not seriously changed from what it has been for most of the past century. And if you were not aware of the obstacle path, you might think it still is.

This opening is the only big opening in the two to three tenths of a mile walk.

The pathway seen was created in phase 1. It runs the length of the introduced wall and ends at the fake boat dock.

Reality is that the plans for the small vehicle highway call for the small vehicle highway to be built in the Charles River between the Nesting Area and the Magazine Beach playing fields. The area to the left (east) along the Charles River is pretty steep. Additionally the DCR does not own a very wide piece of land between a pollution control building which is between this point and the BU Bridge.

It is highly likely that the reason for keeping the “boat dock” here, after lying that they were keeping a boat dock, is to make this the grounding spot for the small vehicle highway. I would anticipate that the fairly innocuous path would be widened at that time and converted to the near concrete surface illegally built in the Nesting Area.

13 04-14-12 Impenetrable Thicket from former boat dock.

The former boat dock is the only location from which a meaningful view can be obtained of the extent of the outrage which is the impenetrable thicket. Notice the width of this outrage. Note that the thicket goes right to the Charles River. Those small bushes just planted will do this.

14 04-14-12 Former boat dock to Ball Field

The camera turns right from the prior photo.

Note the now massive bushes creating yeat another wall.

The wood bridge was constructed in phase 1 over an artificial pond built within a few feet of the Charles River. It was stupid, but the Charles River White Geese loved it.

The fake boat dock was their primary access point to their food of 30 plus years. They would swim in the water and walk through this area to get to additional food between the parking lot and the softball field.

The water was taken away in phase 2 and these obstacles placed in the way to keep them from feeding. The artificial wetlands which replaced the pond creates yet another barrier to access to food.

And the barrier is not trimmed and allowed to grow and grow and grow, creating yet another starvation wall, as will be done in the Nesting Area.

15 04-14-12 Bridge to Former Boatdock.

Both sides of the bridge were water in phase 1.

Photo 17 04-14-12 Thicket, walk, more dense bushes, abov, is the beginning of the phase 2 construction going west from the former boatdock and former artificial pond.

20 04-14-12 Bushes, walk, thicket, BU Bridge, plant.

This is the opposing view of the same bushes. Note that there is plenty of room to widen the walk to the same outrageous width as the eastern of the small vehicle highways started as part of the illegal construction in the Nesting Area.

The black structure to the left follows the third base line in the ball field. The red structure behind it is the pollution plant which was responsibly built with grass on its roof. The big building to the right is Boston University Law School on the south side of the Charles River. The whitish structure to its right and partially blocked by it is probably a dormitory on the South Side of Commonwealth Avenue. The dark structure to its right is probably the gop of the student union.

The arch in front of the student union building is the main span of the BU Bridge. To the left is the west side of supporting structure seen from the east side in the first photo above.

D. Softball field. Look back.

19 04-14-12 Walled off ball field

Before phase 1 a primary source of food was the infield of the softball field. The blue structure prevents that.

23 04-14-12 Playing field, thicket, bushes

Formerly food. This is a more distant view looking east. The pollution plant is very visible to the left. The law school stands out at right middle with the BU Bridge span to its right.

Nearer on the left is stands for the playing field and never trimmed bushes from phase 2.

24 04-12-12 wetlands, bridge, wall

The area near the bridge was water, swimmable and possible to be walked around. Notice the obstacles on the left.

The grey is the parking lot. In the background on the left is the Memorial Drive overpass. Top middle is the former Ford / Polaroid Plan. To the right is the pollution plant, with grass on its roof.

25 04-14-12 Bridge, thicket, former boat dock.

Reverse view.

2. A summary of a corrupt reality.

A. Corruption proven in Court on Civil Rights.

Corrupt is an excellent word to describe the political situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.

Cambridge has a city manager who has been condemned as “reprehensible” by jury and affirmed by judge and appeals court for destroying the life of a department head in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

This decision would readily back his being fired by the Cambridge City Council for cause, without golden parachute, and probably without pension.

The members of the Cambridge City Council call themselves saints on civil rights issues.

Reality is that they would not even dream of firing the Cambridge City Manager for cause, without golden parachute, and probably without pension.

The Cambridge voters are controlled by a massive machine with a lot of people who lie that they are liberals. The machine would not dream of the city council firing the Cambridge City Manager for cause, without golden parachute, and probably without pension.

Corrupt is an excellent word to describe the political situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.

B. Corruption, the reality on heartless animal abuse and killing and on environmental destruction. Alewife.

I have gone over this too many times.

Hundreds or thousands of excellent animals were killed as part of the bizarre and wasteful destruction at Alewife, destruction made possible by one of the usual fake groups.

The destruction and massive killings will be expanded because North Cambridge needs flood protection. That flood can be achieved across the street from Alewife under a massive parking lot which is about to see major construction.

The fake group is helping destruction of that parking lot by yelling at the developer to provide flood storage rather than yelling at the miscreants, the city of Cambridge which should be taking the parking lot by eminent domain.

The fake group in Cambridgeport helped the destruction out by telling people to listen to the fake “protector” pushing destruction.

When they achieved the destruction, all of a sudden, Alewife became not part of their interest and they thus CENSORED mention of the totally wasteful destruction and killing they helped achieve.

C. The reality at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. Corruption in Cambridge, MA, USA.

The Charles River White Geese have lived on the Charles River beloved by all normal people since 1981.

In 1996, the Cambridge City Manager working through the predecessor of the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” announced a plan to destroy their world.

Nobody could get interested.

“They would never stoop so low.”

In 1999, Boston University destroyed their nesting area the first time.

In 2000, the local state representative proposed their killing using the MSPCA’s kill shelter which they called a “happy farm.”

People were livid.

The state calmed thing down with the flat out lie that they had no intent to harm the Charles River White Geese.

In 2004, the state, in phase 1 at Magazine Beach, started to starve them by walling off their 30 year food at the Magazine Beach playing field with an impenetrable thicket. The state repeated its lie.

Phase 2 replaced their grass at Magazine Beach with poison requiring grass and worse. The state repeated its lie.

In the 2000's the usual fake group showed up in Cambridgeport calling itself a neighborhood association. With the creation of the thicket at the nesting area imminent, the fake group started getting interested in and expressing a love for Magazine Beach. Their “meetings” have been notorious for blatant censorship of the state’s record and shouting down of reality.

They are fighting to keep outrages which have been achieved through outright lies and lies of omission.

They are fighting to expand the outrage through shouting down mention of the outrage at the nesting area in response to glowing praise from one of their cheerleaders.

They are fighting to expand the outrage by destroying the parking lot west of the playing fields by praising the picnic area which needs the parking lot and avoiding mentioning that they are destroying the picnic area by destroying the parking lot. The brag of repair of picnic tables which they are rendering useless.

They are fighting to expand the outrage by destroying the parking lot west of the playing fields by praising the historical buildings which needs the parking lot and avoiding mentioning that they are destroying the picnic area by destroying the parking lot. They brag of moneys being spent on the buildings.

3. How to contact the Governor of Massachusetts.

The Governor of Massachusetts may have kept the DCR from obtaining Obama money for the destruction of hundreds of excellent trees between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge, the second bridge east of the BU Bridge.

He was provided with the DCR’s documentation with Cambridge concerning the quality of the trees being destroyed. The DCR official version exactly conflicted with the lie being put out by the DCR that 100% of the trees they were destroying were diseased.

Nobody below the Governor in the DCR chain of command is fit to talk to.

Those bizarre introduced bushes must be dug up, potted and removed. The near concrete new highways must be dug up and removed. They must be replaced with grass.

The native bushes used for nesting have not been totally destroyed in order to promote the lie that the DCR is worthy of respect. The native bushes, if allowed to, will propagate and recreate the nesting area used by the Charles River White Geese for most of the last 30 plus years and recreate this little slice of animal habitat which has been missed in DCR destruction along the Charles River Basin.

The governor was provided with the documents proving the lies to be lies. Somebody prevented the funds from going to the DCR.

The Governor’s email form link is: http://www.mass.gov/governor/utility/contact-us.html.

4. Addendum.

In no way should the preceding paragraph be interpreted as anything and everything that needs to be done.

This is just an emergency reaction to a corrupt situation getting more rotten.

A. The bizarre introduced thicket walling off the Magazine Beach playing fields from the Charles River must be chopped down twice a year exactly as is all other bordering vegetation on the Charles River.

B. The poisons being dumped on the Magazine Beach playing fields must be replaced with seeds for the healthy grass that survived for more than half a century without poisons.

C. The drainage system to drain off the poisons should be filled back in and returned to the playing fields that were destroyed to create the drainage systems.

D. The openings illegally cut into the fence surrounding the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese should be returned to the status they had before the Boston University illegalities of 1999. The structures including all ramps and stairs illegally built by BU at that time including but not limited to subsequent improvements must be removed.

E. Plans to destroy the parking lot west of the Magazine Beach playing fields must be scuttled.

F. The blue fences walling off the softball fields and preventing feeding must be scuttled.

G. All introduced bushes which prevent feeding now or in the future must be removed.

H. The boat dock must be returned to service.

I. The Charles River White Geese must be publicly cherished for the treasure they are.