January 1, 2013 brought a new year to the calendar. It also brought new harassers to my life. For the next two weeks a delightful group of homosexuals working for a crime family began brutal attacks using high tech weapons inflicting severe intense pain making me think I was having a kidney stone attack. I went to a hospital for treatment and tests which turned out negative. There were no stones. It was a waste of time and money caused by criminal abuses by a crime family which operates openly in Cambridge MA on property owned and operated by The President and Fellows of Harvard College. Here's my question. Do these criminals who are paid by criminals to conduct criminal acts pay taxes on their income?
For three days I visited New York City. The same group of criminal homosexuals were there to continue more harassment during the travel periods, disturbing my sleep in a New York Hilton Hotel, at restaurants and as I visited sights in the city. They tell me, "You can't go there." So they followed me to surround me with the same bozos from Cambridge. On or about January 15th a new man-hating feminist appeared in an adjacent apartment where the homosexuals worked before her.
She replaced the charming woman who went by the name of Lisa Wang, a Chinese American with United Nations affiliation. Wang revealed to me, "I own you," before she left. Did she sell me to the new man-hating woman harasser? This one goes by the name of Prachi Sanghavi, I don't know if she is Indian-American, Pakistani-American, or Bangladeshi-American. But Ms. Sanghavi does the same things that Ms. Wang did. She works easily with criminals who join her daily harassment, character assassination, stalking, and sleep deprivation every day. Her primary partner is also protected by those charming Harvard University campus cops.
She repeats all of the elements of character assassination making others shun me and target me for abuses. When I complain they warn me, "You'll be sorry." Sorry for complaining? Am I to enjoy the abuses and be grateful to my abusers?
On Monday, January 21, 2013 when I did grocery shopping a uniformed Somerville police officer followed me in the supermarket as I gathered my items. Did he expect me to steal? To attack a customer or an employee? I've been doing this for about 40 years and he looked to be about 35 years old. So he too was born years after the criminal harassment began in 1968. Yet he targeted me under direction of someone.
It was a couple of days after I posted complaints about two Cambridge politicians. So it may be one or both of them. Local police are notorious for abusing their power harassing and arresting critics of their associated candidates and elected criminals. I did not do anything to attract his attention or to make him watch me. It is simply more criminal abuse of power. I did notice three groups of young women who are usually used as bait. But I did not bite and ignored the groups of young women. Perhaps he expected me to molest one or all of them as I shopped. I would never do anything like that. I would never even think of doing something like that. It suggests how depraved these people are who harass me.
Perhaps he was told, "He's mentally ill." and expected me to act irrationally. Couple of the crime families and many politicians openly broadcast "He's mentally ill," for many years. It is accepted by almost all people who ever knew me and met me. Josef Goebbels knew what he was talking about.
Most police have negative opinions of persons with disabilities. Profiling is a violation of the many discrimination statutes. Treating me differently due to a perceived disability too. But those laws are seldom enforced to protect persons with real or perceived disabilities. Moreover laws are optional when they protect me. Every day these women and men who harass me violate at least four felony statutes. When I used to file complaints with the police they would ignore me and ridicule me.
The two politicians I wrote about are two perfect examples of how public officials openly ridicule persons they think have a disability. That is the reason I mentioned them. They exhibit the worst of the opinions of officials who say they support vulnerable persons, while they harass anyone who dares to criticize them. It is also a felony violation of the Massachusetts civil rights statute intimidating a person in the free exercise of a constitutionally guaranteed right. But again inconvenient laws are optional in Cambridge and on Harvard property.
No comments:
Post a Comment