"You better shut up!" FBI and Police Threats, Intimidation

It should be apparent that the FBI is unable to protect civilians from terrorists and mass murderers. Even if they are capable, the White House will stop them. With all of their technology and behaviorist psychologists they cannot distinguish between dangerous violent criminals and harmless government critics. White House restrictions make it impossible for accurate screening. Especially when the civilian also criticizes the FBI and police for criminal abuses of power, and attacking a person with a legal disability.

In previous posts on this blog I explained some of the 45 years of abuses by FBI criminal informants, police employees, crime families, and Communists in three states.

The FBI interviewed the Orlando Muslim terrorist mass murderer three times. There was a fourth report from a gun dealer about the same individual. Yet he was able to acquire an automatic rifle, and ammunition legally, and to walk into a crowded dance hall and slaughter 49 persons and wound 53 others. No one was watching this child of a Muslim immigrant from Afghanistan whose father hated the United States.


Some of the 49 victims of the Orlando Mass Terrorist Murder

http://nypost.com/2016/06/16/gun-shop-told-authorities-about-suspicious-mateen-before-slaughter/

Gun shop told FBI about ‘suspicious’ Mateen before slaughter
By Shawn Cohen and Sophia Rosenbaum
New York Post
June 16, 2016 | 12:58pm | Updated

As reported several times previously I am a 70-year-old white heterosexual male with a B.A. degree from Columbia University in The City of New York. I attended law school in Boston when the FBI began harassing me in 1970. This continued as a reaction to my lawful political activity protected by the U.S. and Massachusetts Constitutions.

In 1973 government psychiatrists drugged me for 80 consecutive days using hallucinogens, contrary to law. They believed I was a spy. Police scared me and used me for 15 years to fight organized crime. They did not pay me one cent. Instead they recruited a black homosexual who worked for the FBI and who was watching me in New York City 1968-1970, and his now wife, a white lesbian. I dated the woman for three months in law school without knowing she was a lesbian. The FBI paid them to pretend to be my friends.



They broadcast for 35 years, character assassination, "He's a retired drug dealer." and "He's crazy." That was added to slander by the California crime Syndicate, "He's a racist." and to more from Communists, "He's homeless, crazy and a high school dropout." There is more but it requires a lengthy book to include it all. This is all prologue to June, 2016 when Harvard University campus police, black and homosexual (victim status brings deniability), with a black, homosexual, FBI informant (redundant?) from New York, and one local self identifying psychiatrist, conducted more criminal abuse and harassment, slander and character assassination.

A Boston attorney who exposed the Boston FBI and crime boss, James Bulger's abuses in 1995, recommended that if you have a problem with FBI informants you should contact the state attorney general. When residents of South Boston reported to the FBI that Bulger was selling drugs in Southie, the complaints were referred to Bulger's handler John Connolly, Bulger's boyhood friend, now jailed for homicide in a Florida prison. Bulger killed those men who were exposed by the FBI in Boston. 

I did as the lawyer suggested. As I understand it the state attorney general would refer my complaints about police and crime family abuses to the above-mentioned couple pretending to be my friends. They would continue their slander, "He's crazy and a retired drug dealer." Thus nothing was done to stop the abuses.


John Connolly, Ex-Boston FBI Agent, handler of James Bulger, Boston crime boss

What makes this all so ludicrous, is that all I have left is this pitiful blog to express myself. My social, political and economic lives were destroyed in 1973, and never recovered due to relentless harassment and character assassination. There was non stop surveillance by one or another police agency. Harvard University lawyers repeatedly tell me, "No one reads your blog." Yet on June 16, 2016 the above mentioned black Harvard University campus police and FBI informant from New York threatened me, "You better shut up." That was a day after I entered some comments about public comments by Cambridge city officials and Harvard University officials about the Orlando massacre. It shows how fragile politicians and university officials are. It appears that Roger Morris was correct describing the preferred leader in recent history. In his book, Partners in Power, he said they are weak with relaxed rectitude. Look around you to see if it applies.



Once again it shows that law enforcement priorities are upside down. No one was watching violent criminals with a long record of arrests and convictions. They only target harmless citizens. See e.g.,

http://enoughroom.blogspot.com/2016/05/immigrant-suspect-with-lengthy-crime.html

No one was watching Muslim children of immigrants who kill by the dozen. But they continue to harass me, keep me under surveillance, and slander me after 45 years of character assassination. Disgraceful, disgusting and despicable describe these dolts.

The multi billion dollar taxpayer funded public heath industrial complex cannot keep people informed about threats to their health, or prevent spread of serious illnesses. See, e.g.,



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/health/zika-pregnancy-united-states-cdc.html?_r=0

C.D.C. Reports 234 Pregnant Women in U.S. With Zika
By SABRINA TAVERNISE

JUNE 16, 2016
The New York Times

Yet the misguided political leadership of the Democrats and the White House cannot understand and oppose the growing number of Americans civilians who are arming themselves. See, e.g.,

http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2016/06/15/gun-shop-owner-ar-15s-flying-off-shelves-at-500-pop.html

Gun Shop Owner: AR-15's Flying Off Shelves at $500 a Pop
By Nick Giampia 

Published June 15, 2016

Fox News

The state and federal governments are at best unable to protect law abiding civilians. It is likely they simply refuse to protect law abiding civilians, and target critics. Do self serving, deceptive officials expect us to lay down and allow government thugs and Muslim terrorists to slay us all? 

Women At Harvard University Object To Forcing Them To Admit Men To Their Clubs

Does "Title IX" trump the Right to Associate guaranteed by the US Constitution? And the Mass Civil Rights Statute Chapter 265, Sec. 37 "No person, whether or not acting under color of law, shall by force or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate or interfere with, or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with, or oppress or threaten any other person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the constitution or laws of the commonwealth or by the constitution or laws of the United States."



http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2016/5/9/female-clubs-sororities-response/

Sorority, Club Women Denounce New Policy on Facebook
By C. RAMSEY FAHS and DEREK G. XIAO

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
May 8, ,2016

* * *



http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2016/5/10/women-oppose-sanctions/

Hundreds of Women Protest Harvard Sanctions
By C. RAMSEY FAHS

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
May 9, 2016

Privileged Harvard Law School Students End Civil Rights Action, Resume Pursuit of Corporate Positions

How many of these dedicated, altruistic, morally superior civil rights activists will reject those high paying corporate associate positions, when they leave Belinda Hall and the racist, oppressive, sexist, homophobic and Islamophobic law school community behind? 

After posting the above comment on the Harvard Crimson site, one of the many thoughtful young people who harass me warned, "You better stop doing that. They want to kill you." Really? A group of privileged black students at Harvard Law School whine non stop about white oppression. They demand punishing white people who did them no harm, and demand special privileges, more money and more power as payment for harms they did not suffer. They want to kill a citizen for exercising a constitutionally guaranteed right, i.e. criticizing  misguided young lawyers. Does this indicate how flawed the current higher education system is? Do they really believe that all white people are wealthy and powerful? Do they really believe that all black people are poor and weak? Do they really believe they are the only group chosen to express their demands for better living? Do they believe they are granted special privileges to silence any differing opinions, by disrupting law abiding professors at their own law school who want to speak? Like the Republican Party, they probably do not understand why Donald Trump is so popular and will be the next President. 

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2016/5/4/reclaim-hls-holds-informal-commencement/

Closing a Year of Activism, Law Students Hold Informal Commencement
By CLAIRE E. PARKER

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
May 4, 2016

White House Orders Lawlessness Extended to State Courts, Selective Enforcement Of Laws Based On Race, Contrary To Repeated Supreme Court Rulings

More racial discrimination by the Civil Rights Division Of the Justice Department. See e.g., J. Christian Adams' book, Injustice; and John Fund and Hans van Spakovsky's Who's Counting?

[From article]
As New York moves to decriminalize low-level offenses, arguing enforcement is “rigged against communities of color,” other large cities are coming under pressure from the Justice Department to do the same thing.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch has issued a warning to municipal and state judges across the country that their courts could lose federal funding if they don’t ease up on fines and arrest warrants for minor crimes involving poor offenders, indigent minorities in particular.
In lieu of fines and jail time, Lynch urges the nation’s 6,500 municipal courts to provide an avenue for offenders to perform “community service” or take advantage of “amnesty days,” whereby outstanding arrest warrants are cleared for nominal fees.[. . .]
A strongly worded “guidance” letter, written by her civil-rights team, warns that a local court policy of enforcing warrants for failure to pay court fines and fees can have an adverse “disparate impact” on African-Americans, who are fined and/or arrested for outstanding warrants at “disproportionate” rates versus whites.
Federal data also show that blacks tend to break both felony and misdemeanor laws at a disproportionate rate. Even if applied evenly across all races and in neutral, color-blind fashion, such policies could be found by Justice to be discriminatory.
[. . .]
The Supreme Court has ruled that disparate impact doesn’t violate Title VI, only “intentional” discrimination does. “The administration is quite wrong to say that Title VI incorporates a ‘disparate impact’ standard,” Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity points out. “The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that it does not.”
This new court “reform” will only exacerbate the crime problem. Studies show ignoring low-level crimes like warrant violations only leads to bigger crimes.
Under Mayor de Blasio, the NYPD has scaled back its aggressive enforcement of low-level offenses only to see both minor and serious crime rebound. Already cops have backed off public urination and other public nuisance violations, while overlooking outstanding warrants for many other misdemeanor crimes.
Even a senior Justice Department official predicts the decriminalization-cum-deincarceration movement will backfire in higher crime nationwide. “In five years the crime rate is going to be crazy again,” he said.

http://nypost.com/2016/03/27/ag-loretta-lynch-wants-to-let-nation-break-law-without-consequences/

AG Loretta Lynch wants to let nation break law without consequences
By Paul Sperry
New York Post
March 27, 2016 | 6:00am

Cambridge, MA Disability Commission Discusses Congressional Mental Health Bill

As noted by Kate Thurman in the below essay, the focus of a proposed bill (link below) in the US Congress, is on police and crime, as if disability itself is a crime. It is important to distinguish between disability and crime. Police,  politicians and journalists do not do that. They like to believe that mental illness, a psychiatric diagnosis causes crime. It is nonsense. But seldom are politicians, police and journalists logical these days. Politicians are focused on getting re-elected. Journalists want to get published, and invited to dinner by politicians. The psychiatric industry has wealth and a lot of influence to help them. It is supported by the pharmaceutical industry. Police want to get home safe and do not like to have to make accommodations for people who have been diagnosed as crazy. The simplest solution is to arrest if not to kill a suspect. The counter argument is just as illogical, i.e., that if a person has a disability he or she should not be held accountable for their crime. 

Journalists, police, prosecutors, lawyers, judges, and politicians subscribe to the history of mental illness doctrine, whereby anyone with a history is guilty of violence because of the history. Again crime is equated to a psychiatric diagnosis. 

This essay argues that the bill is limited to addressing severe mental illness without defining it. That is true, but also there is no pathology for psychiatric illnesses. They are made up by consensus (see Boston University Psychology Professor, Margaret Hagan's book, Whores of the Court.) These illnesses are defined as speech and behavior, usually protected by the constitution, which psychiatrists do not like or do not understand. It is a system of social control with no due process protections. Personal opinion masquerading as science. 

Politically, liberals blame guns for violence. Conservatives blame psychiatric diagnoses. Neither makes sense. People are violent. It is extremely difficult to determine who will be violent, and when. Nonetheless psychiatrists with the encouragement of judges testify in court making predictions of people's future behavior. Politicians don't want to be bogged down. They have television interviews to do.  It takes up too much time and requires critical thought.  It is easier to blame a defenseless target. 

The bill weakens privacy protections for psychiatric diagnoses. One more instance of government bias, unequal protection of the laws for people with disabilities by the elected criminal class. Psychiatric treatment can be used against a person in a court of law. Lawyers and judges do not tell patients that downside of this business. 

The focus of this essay is on getting more taxpayer funded treatment by psychiatrists. But the psychiatrists do not cure their illnesses. They sell treatment. Once a patient always a patient. It is a good business model. But it is not science or medicine. 

In theory the protection and advocacy agencies (P&A) protect the rights of persons accused of mental illness. But there is little actual protection and advocacy. They refer petitioners elsewhere because it is too much trouble. There are so many people with physical  disabilities that they are prioritized over the crazy people. 

There are restrictions on what the P&A agencies can do. Unlike immigrants, illegal aliens who get free legal, health care, tuition and housing. Law abiding citizens with disabilities get bupkis.

This essay says  providing funds for police training and for research are good provisions. But police get billions and there are billions for research aside from this bill. The name of the bill suggests it is what NAMI is, i.e., a lobbyist for more taxpayer funded drug treatment. NAMI is a lobbyist for the drug companies. They allege they advocate for families. The individual with a disability has no advocate.  The bill does not protect persons with disabilities. It deprives them of rights enjoyed by others some who are not even citizens. The problem is that there is no strong disability lobby. There are academic research lobbyists. Harvard University has three full time lobbyists based in Washington DC. The police have hundreds of organizations actively lobbying state and federal legislatures. Disability advocates, not so much.  

[From the Cambridge, MA Disability Commission. January 27, 2016]



Mental Health Advocates Express Concerns over Murphy Bill

There is no doubt that our nation’s mental health system leaves much to be desired. Many people with psychiatric disabilities experience difficulty accessing treatment for a variety of reasons. These reasons include lack of funding and resources, low reimbursement rates for mental health services, a shortage of culturally competent care, and stigma perpetuated by inaccurate portrayals of mental illness in media, particularly following acts of violence, among other things.

To this end, it is admirable that the U.S. House Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations, led by Representative Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania, conducted a review of the system beginning in early 2013, just after – and in response to – the Newtown shooting tragedy. The Subcommittee indeed found many systemic problems in our mental health system and made numerous recommendations that culminated in the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R. 2646), more widely known as the Murphy Bill.

However, many advocates argue that from the get go, this bill was informed by and written from a public safety standpoint, and while our nation certainly has a lot of work to do to curb violence, our broken mental health care system is one of the foremost public health crises of our time, and it must be addressed as such.

Rather than overhaul the system from the ground up, this bill calls for diverting attention and funding away from prevention and health maintenance care to late-stage crisis intervention for individuals with the most severe psychiatric disabilities. Creating a system to address violence rather than healthcare needs inevitably removes the focus from the very people it purports to help – people with psychiatric disabilities – and creates concerns for civil rights.

If the Murphy Bill were to pass as it is currently written, many people with psychiatric disabilities could be turned away from help if their levels of illness are not determined to be severe enough; there is no clear standard as to what constitutes severity. Additionally, like many so-called physical illnesses, mental illnesses tend to operate on a spectrum; there are times when people are stabilized and doing well and there are other times when they may have more acute symptoms. In no other medical specialty would anyone consider cutting access to care at any point along the spectrum; think of medical centers removing resources for outpatient care and investing in just intensive care units.

Also, generally speaking, the earlier someone receives treatment, the better her or his outcome. This bill calls for cutting funding for community-based supports that have a proven record for being effective. Funding would be increased for assisted outpatient treatment (AOT), which is court-mandated treatment that patients must follow or face punitive action, and for long-term involuntary inpatient hospitalizations, also known as institutionalization.

“We already know what works,” said Jennifer Mathis, Deputy Legal Director of the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law. “Proven programs such as supportive housing, Assertive Community Treatment (ACT), peer support, mobile crisis services, and supported employment have extremely successful outcomes, including for people with the most significant mental health needs. The problem is that these services are not widely available to people who need them. This bill would make it even more difficult to take these services to scale, as it would invest mental health dollars elsewhere,” Mathis said.

The Murphy Bill also proposes changing portions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) by easing current privacy protection for patients with psychiatric disabilities, and allowing family members to access to portions of their mental health records. The protection of healthcare information is an important civil right currently afforded to all patients in the United States. This change would affect only those with mental health needs. This disparate treatment of one segment of the population is arguably discriminatory. Additionally, knowing that their families could access treatment information would likely deter many people from getting the help they need.

Each state has a federally funded protection and advocacy (P&A) agency that is charged with protecting the legal rights of individuals with disabilities (the Disability Law Center, a private non-profit in Boston, is the P&A for Massachusetts). The country’s Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI) program provides a vital resource for individuals who experience discrimination due to having a mental illness. The Murphy Bill proposes cutting PAIMI funding from its current annual level of $36.1 million to $5 million; this greater than 87% cut in funding would drastically reduce the ability of P&A legal service agencies to protect the rights of this population.

In addition, the bill significantly reduces the authority of P&A agencies. According to the Bazelon Center, “the bill would prohibit the PAIMI program from providing advocacy and legal representation to help people with mental illness with a host of important issues, including housing, employment, education, community living, Medicaid benefits. Advocacy concerning anything other than abuse and neglect would be barred.” 1

Some provisions of the Murphy Bill could result in positive change. For example, it would provide funding for mental health awareness training for first responders. It also calls for increasing funding for brain research. But, while this bill may be well intended and include some provisions that may result in some improvements, many advocates feel that this bill fails to actually reform the mental health system and instead makes treatment more difficult to access for many, infringes upon the civil rights of people with psychiatric disabilities and removes key protections of a vulnerable population.

The full bill can be found online at http://murphy.house.gov/helpingfamiliesinmentalhealthcrisisact

If you would like to express an opinion regarding the Murphy Bill, contact your district’s U.S. House Representative (www.house.gov/representatives/) and the U.S. Senators for Massachusetts: Edward Markey (www.markey.senate.gov/contact) and Elizabeth Warren (www.warren.senate.gov)

--by Kate Thurman

In The Name of Good Ignoring Rights Of Persons With Disabilities

Councilor and social worker, Marc McGovern knows the lingo of local politics, paying obeisance to the list of victim groups (zip code?). He omits the one group to which he ministers, i.e., those with disabilities. He promises efforts "increasing human services programs," the business of treating those he omits from the list deserving rights as victims. 
Most importantly he knows to say one thing and do the opposite. He says, "I hope that all of us [. . .] find a way to appreciate our different opinions." Yet when it comes to defending speech that he and the PC crowd hates, he remains silent. Not a surprise.

[From article]
increasing human services programs,
[. . .]
Cambridge must ensure that every resident, regardless of race, class, age, gender, sexual orientation or zip code, has the opportunity for a safe, supportive and sustainable future.
[. . .]
I hope that all of us [. . .] find a way to appreciate our different opinions

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20151124/NEWS/151127883

LETTER: Councilor McGovern thanks Cambridge voters
Posted Nov. 24, 2015 at 2:21 PM
CAMBRIDGE Chronicle
To the editor:
Marc McGovern, city councilor

Cambridge, MA Zoning Board Open Meetings Law Violation

Cambridge, MA City Hall

Here's an example of negligent training of a Cambridge, MA City official, chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals. It seems to be a clear violation of the MA Open Meetings Law, the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the MA Constitution. But also a felony under MA General Laws Chapter 265, Sec. 37, The Civil Rights Statute. It can be malfeasance, and abuse of power. Goes to show that freedom is not free and you must stand up for, and fight for your rights. Here's the video.
Thanks to Kim Courtney. 

https://youtu.be/ZfBfdRvDmEc

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleIII/Chapter30A/Section20

[Subsection (f) provides rule for video]
M.G.L. Chap. 30A, Sec. 18-25
Massachusetts Open Meeting Law

* * *

Mass Civil Rights Statute
MGL Ch. 265, Sec. 37

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter265/Section37


* * *

http://www.cambridgema.gov/boardsandcommissionsdirectory/boardsandcommissionsdirectory/boardofzoningappeal

Board of Zoning Appeal
Authority: Article 10, Section 10.10 of the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance, by authority of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A

Purpose:To hear and decide appeals, applications for special permits, and appeals and petitions for variances from the terms of the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance.

Membership: 5 Members, 7 Associates
Term: 5 years

Members: Constantine Alexander, Chair
Timothy Hughes, Vice Chairman
Brendan Sullivan
Janet O. Green
Thomas Scott

Associate Members:
Douglas Myers
Slater W. Anderson
Andrea A. Hickey
Alison Hammer
Jim Monteverde
George S. Best
Laura Wernick

Cambridge City Council Candidate's Past Expression Enrages Other Candidates

"'based on this information, that’s not something we want to be a part of,' said Councilor Marc McGovern," a social worker in diversity saturated, conformist Cambridge, MA. He says he works with the most vulnerable population. Who is more vulnerable in Cambridge, MA than a person who holds different views than the majority, 10-20 years ago or even at present? There is no support for offensive speech, called hate speech, which is protected by the US and the Massachusetts Constitutions, in this allegedly tolerant city. There is also no compassion from this politically motivated social worker who shows lack of support for the Constitution he swore to protect. Under the Civil Rights statute of Massachusetts MGL Ch. 265, Sec 37, intimidating a person in the free exercise of a constitutionally protected right is a felony. Stormfront promotes nationalism, not supremacy. Notice the Chronicle's neutral recognition of a black separatist organization, whose forum was attended by most of the city council and school committee candidates in Cambridge last week. Use of the word supremacism, may more properly be applied to the Cambridge chapter of black separatists and nationalists who ran that candidate forum.

[From article]
John Sanzone has withdrawn from the Cambridge City Council race after the Chronicle revealed he had participated as a teenager on a major white supremacy website.
The Chronicle learned that Sanzone, now 27, wrote more than 120 posts back in 2004 and 2005 under his own name on the racial hate forum, Stormfront, mostly on the subject of white nationalism.
[. . .]
[Sanzone] It’s very shameful that I would ever think or talk that way.
[. . .]
“I feel that every race and ethnicity should be pure, and have their own nations to themselves.”
[. . .]
the Chronicle revealed Sanzone’s former affiliation with the white supremacy forum,
[. . .]
based on this information, that’s not something we want to be a part of,” said Councilor Marc McGovern,
[. . .]
horrible things I said and posted online from my younger days
[. . .]
I am not a racist, nor homophobic, and am in fact firmly progressive and take these issues very personally and aim for a city government that takes them very politically. However, the revelations of these confused, misguided, nonsensical writings from my past---which I wholeheartedly own up to, and condemn---have made me untouchable.
[. . .]
the city I have come to love deeply and intimately.

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20151026/NEWS/151026521

BREAKING: Cambridge council candidate withdraws after past online hate speech revealed
By Amy Saltzman
asaltzman (at) wickedlocal.com
Posted Oct. 26, 2015 at 5:51 PM
Updated at 6:47 PM
CAMBRIDGE Chronicle

Civil Rights Lawyer At Harvard University Acts Like Humpty Dumpty

Has one race exclusive use of the word race? What is the definition of that word? The profiled lawyer does not say. Working with no definition allows any argument to succeed. 



Is that how lawyers argue out of court? Rahsaan D. Hall "defended Harvard’s consideration of race [undefined] as a factor in its admissions processes. [. . .] Hall maintained that Harvard [is] in compliance with the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court" but provides no citation. Perplexed at appeals to law when it suits the argument, but ignoring law as the White House and the Department of Justice do when that suits them. Curious that Hall argues as if progressive voters have difficulty obtaining voter IDs, but non progressive voters do not. Does that mean ability is based on ideology?



[From article]
defended Harvard’s consideration of race as a factor in its admissions processes,
[. . .]



Hall maintained that Harvard’s holistic admissions processes were in compliance with the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court.
[. . .]
Commenting on voter identification laws, Hall questioned whether statistical evidence supports the prevalence of voter fraud.
[. . .]



“The whole notion of the ‘voter integrity movement’ is a ruse to get to the real issue of denying people, most of whom are inclined to vote progressively, access to the polls.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/10/7/civil-rights-lawyer-admissions/

Civil Rights Lawyer Defends Use of Race in Harvard Admissions
By DAPHNE C. THOMPSON,

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
October 7, 2015

Contemporary Standards, Priorities

Martin J. Walsh, Mayor of Boston, MA. He don't need no stinkin' free speech.

What is an ordinary person to conclude? Boston Mayor Martin. J. Walsh says he is offended by comments made by New York businessman Donald Trump, a candidate for President.  Trump said Mexican immigrants are violating criminal laws in the United States. Driving without a license, without insurance, drunk driving, hit and run, negligent homicide. Assault, theft, homicide, rape. Possession of controlled substances, illegal gun possession, sale of drugs, importing drugs, money laundering, and more. There are many reports of these crimes across the United States. Mayor Walsh is not Mexican. He was born in the United States. Why is he offended? 

Maybe we should be more selective in who we invite to our house?

Even if what Mr. Trump said was untrue it is protected speech under the United States Constitution and the Massachusetts constitution. Mayor Walsh is a public official, sworn to uphold the laws and the constitution. Threatening Trump is a form of intimidation. Massachusetts state civil rights law, makes it a felony to intimidate a person who exercises a constitutionally protected right. It indicates that Mayor Walsh does not support free speech, a concept which protects speech you hate. Speech you love does not need protection. If Mayor Walsh supported the First Amendment he might counter what Trump said with more speech. Instead he made personal attacks, a form of propaganda. That is un-American. It shows the misguided standard for public discourse in the nation these days. Mayor Walsh is joined by corporate leaders of Macy's, NASCAR, Walmart, Amazon, and other misguided corporate and elected officials. They ignore the same laws which enable their profit making enterprises and protect their assets. 

Corporations are persons, with constitutional rights. Macy's don't need no stinkin' free speech for Donald Trump.

For about 45 years the FBI told everyone I knew, know and met, "He's a homosexual." I never was and never will be. It is one element of a multi year relentless campaign of character assassination. Where is the accountability, the outrage for all of those people who repeated that lie? Was there any accountability, any punishment for the harm done to me? It is what lawyers call false light, a tort. Has there been any effort to compensate me? Any apology? Any effort to restore my reputation? Any effort to compensate me for loss of social life for 45 years? Nothing of the sort. There is no accountability for abuses of the FBI. Even when they are successfully sued, taxpayers pay for their wrongdoing. They act as if it never happened. They just fade into the woodwork and I am left with no one who knows me. Clever. Where does one go to get one's reputation back? One's social, political and economic support systems?

Being a homosexual in 2015 is to be a member of a wealthy and powerful special interest group. The homosexual lobby is the most powerful special interest group in the nation. Who wouldn't want to be a member of that organization? They run the FBI, many state and federal courts and many local and state governments. They set standards and guidelines for journalists.  

People act as if I just arrived from Alpha Centauri. Who is this person? He's not a homosexual? If he was we would know him. We would know he was harmless and friendly. Maybe he is violent and dangerous. To check they employ psychiatrists, psychologists who test and provoke the stranger. They check to see if he is a racist,  a sexist, a homophobe. If he is not a homosexual he must be a homophobe. All breeders are. Maybe he is a Muslim, then he is safe, harmless and friendly. If he is a feminist, we know he is a good person and harmless. If not he is likely a rapist. All non homosexual men are rapists. Numerous taxpayer funded studies prove that. Better test to see if he rapes women in grocery stores or libraries. Most men do that. We better check. Test him to see if he will have sex with black men. If not he is surely a racist. Try using young women as bait. If that doesn't work try young men. If neither works try toddlers. If none of that works try provoking him when he tries to sleep. Keep him awake, and wake him up every hour or two hours. See what he does. 

But Donald Trump must apologize for telling the truth.

[From article]

If Donald Trump ever wants to build a hotel in Boston, he’ll need to apologize for his comments about Mexican immigrants first, the Hub's mayor said.
“I just don’t agree with him at all,” Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh told the Herald yesterday. “I think his comments are inappropriate. And if he wanted to build a hotel here, he’d have to make some apologies to people in this country.”
Last month in his campaign launch address, Trump said, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. ... They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”

http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2015/07/boston_mayor_donald_trump_unwelcome_without_apology

Boston mayor: Donald Trump unwelcome without apology
Tuesday, July 14, 2015
By: Marie Szaniszlo
Boston Herald

Anti Hate Group Protests Anti Israeli Propaganda Film

[From article]
Americans for Peace and Tolerance released an expose video April 23 that aims to prove “Whose Jerusalem?” fails “to meet the basic rules of evidence and logic and attempt[s] to indoctrinate students, especially Jewish students, against the state of Israel.”
The workshop teaches that Hamas – a U.S.-designated terrorist group – and Fatah are political parties that support “more peaceful means than intifada,” among other lessons. The group argues the lesson abandons “academic integrity” and enlists students as political activists for an ideological cause.
“Despite its bias and serious flaws, the … workshop is Common Core compliant,” APT president Charles Jacobs said.
The workshop’s curriculum, designed for students in middle and high schools, requires students play the parts of Arab, Israeli, or American leaders to negotiate a “BATNA” (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) for the division of Jerusalem using the materials provided by the workshop.
[. . .]
According to Americans for Peace and Tolerance’s video, the workshop also includes exercises that asks instructors to have Jewish students empathize with Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist group that calls for the death of all Jews in its founding charter.
Boston University Profesor Carl Hobert, who developed the workshop, has defined “Whose Jerusalem?” as “educational civil disobedience” guided by a hands-on approach. Included in APT’s video is a clip of Hobert speaking to an audience about the simulations done in his workshop on the Arab-Israeli conflict. When describing the roles students play in the simulation he says:
“When a student goes, I am devoutly Jewish and I’ve got family members in Israel. I would like to be a member of Likud Party. Guess what we make that student? A member of Hamas.”
[. . .]
The workshop also suggests an equivalence between the use of military drones by the United States and terrorist suicide bombing. APT’s video shows Hobert telling students that drones “kill people who are supposedly terrorists.” He asks, “Isn’t that a form of terrorism?”
[. . .]
Noam Chomsky of MIT and Denis Sullivan of Northeastern, both outspoken critics of Israel and America, assisted Hobert in the creation of the course, according to APT. Hobert even brought Chomsky, who is described in BU Today as his “friend and longtime inspiration,” to speak about the Middle East at Boston University in 2009.

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22507/

PROF’S ‘WHOSE JERUSALEM?’ COMMON CORE LESSON TEACHES STUDENTS TO SUPPORT HAMAS
by ALEXANDRA ZIMMERN - UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON
 MAY 18, 2015

How To Increase Voting Rights

One thing that should be done to increase voting rights is to clean up the Voting Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice. Under Tom Perez, (now US Labor Secretary) the division refused to enforce voting rights laws in a race neutral manner. When laws are selectively enforced no one's rights are safe. See e.g., J. Christian Adams' book, Injustice; and John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky's book, Who's Counting?

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/2/19/panelists-discuss-voting-rights/

IOP Panelists Express Frustration with State of Voting Rights
By HELLARY Y. ZHANG

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
February 18, 2015

Brief History of Al Sharpton

TOP: The Rev. Al Sharpton speaks at a news conference in 1989 with Tawana Brawley, who claimed to have been raped and tortured by six men — allegations that were eventually proven false. BOTTOM, FROM LEFT: Sharpton in 1983, 1995, 2006 and 2012.

Photos by Jahi Chikwendiu
[From article]
The group was composed of 25 pastors, organizers and community leaders from across the country, all of whom were members of Sharpton’s National Action Network, and all of whom had traveled to New York in early January at Sharpton’s request and expense.
[. . .]
Sharpton had spent most of his career railing against the American power establishment, but now he was a linchpin of it,
[. . .]
He had been so intent on finding a righteous cause during those early years that he had sometimes acted as the agitator, railing against “white interlopers” and Jewish “diamond merchants,” and spending months demanding justice for Tawana Brawley only to have her allegations of gang rape by a mob of white attackers turn out to be a hoax.
[. . .]
when Sharpton organized a “Justice for All” march in Washington that drew 10,000 people, a group of young activists had rushed the stage and tried to seize control of the microphone before Sharpton arrived. Why, they asked, did they need VIP passes to go backstage at a protest march for the people? Why should they trust Sharpton to be antiestablishment when he was a friend and loyal defender of the president?
[. . .]
“How come Sharpton’s leading the march? ’Cause I organized the march. I brought the crowd. I got the permit. Those Porta-Potties cost us $20,000. You want to run the march? Fine. Get your own damn Porta-Potties.”
[. . .]
Sharpton had been running through the terminal at the Newark airport late one night, trying to make a flight, when a woman stopped and asked him to shake hands with her 10-year-old son. “He’s too young to know much about Martin Luther King,” Sharpton remembered the woman saying. “He won’t know Jesse Jackson. All he’s got is you, so I hope you never let him down.”
[. . .]
Sharpton also believed that some of King’s work was being undone: schools resegregating, the Voting Rights Act being disassembled by the Supreme Court, income inequality at historic levels and a continued racial bias in policing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/02/07/the-public-life-and-private-doubts-of-al-sharpton/

The public life and private doubts of
Al Sharpton
Written by Eli Saslow
Photos by Jahi Chikwendiu
Published on February 7, 2015

Tufts University Disputes US Figures on Campus Violence

[From article]
The rapidly rising total poses challenges for the Obama administration as it seeks to lead a national campaign against sexual assault on college campuses. The students whose complaints sparked many of the cases are anxious for federal action, while colleges want to escape a list that puts an unflattering question mark next to their brand name.
[. . .]
Much of OCR’s power stems from its authority to halt federal funding to colleges found to be in violation of the law. But the agency has never taken that step.
Instead, OCR uses the financial threat as leverage to negotiate measures schools will take to improve their sexual violence policies whenever the agency finds shortcomings.
[. . .]
In April, Tufts University rebelled. The prestigious university in Massachusetts had reached an agreement for measures to resolve a long-running OCR investigation. Then, it abruptly revoked its approval, objecting to certain findings that the university failed to comply with the law in its handling of sexual assault and harassment complaints.
Federal officials warned the standoff could lead to an unprecedented cutoff of funding for Tufts. A few weeks later, the university relented and gave renewed approval to the resolution. The episode offered a rare public glimpse of the brinkmanship behind these investigations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/tally-of-federal-probes-of-colleges-on-sexual-violence-grows-50-percent-since-may/2014/10/19/b253f02e-54aa-11e4-809b-8cc0a295c773_story.html

Tally of federal probes of colleges on sexual violence grows 50 percent since May
By Nick Anderson
October 19 at 9:21 PM

NJ Civil Rights Lawyer Found Dead, Police Say It Was Suicide

William Buckman, 61, a nationally known figure, was found dead in a hotel room on Tuesday

[From article]
His death was discovered around 8:45 a.m. said Mount Laurel Police Lt. Stephen Riedener reports NJ.com.
He said officers had been asked to check on Buckman's well-being.
'The manner of death was suicide,' Riedener said.
Riedener said the 61-year-old was found in his room and pronounced dead at the scene.
He said no foul play was involved, and the investigation has been closed.
Buckman, who was married with two children, rose to prominence while defending Pedro Soto of Gloucester County in a drug case.
He successfully won a motion to suppress evidence seized during a State Police highway stop on the basis of racial profiling.
The judge ruled that troopers routinely stopped minority motorists in New Jersey based on the their skin color.
He found such stops to be illegal and threw out drug and weapons evidence against Soto and 16 others. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2795674/prominent-lawyer-famously-helped-expose-police-racial-profiling-dead-new-jersey-hotel-room.html

Prominent lawyer who famously helped expose police racial profiling commits suicide in New Jersey hotel room
William Buckman, 61, found dead at the hotel in Mount Laurel, New Jersey
Mount Laurel police ruled his death on Tuesday a suicide
Police said foul play was not suspected in his death
Buckman credited with helping to expose racial profiling by police
By Jill Reilly for MailOnline
Published: 12:24 EST, 16 October 2014 | Updated: 16:02 EST, 16 October 2014

Cambridge Voting System Illegal? Hillary Clinton: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

If what Mr. Snedeker says about the Voting Rights Act is true it appears that the PR system is a violation. Nonetheless the voting rights section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice is solely focused on harms done to black people. Violations by black persons are not prosecuted under the current Attorney General. See. e.g., J. Christian Adams book, Injustice, and John Fund and Hans van Spakovsky's book Who's Counting? Is Cambridge run by white racists? Thus it is unlikely that Justice will take any action. The purpose of elections is allegedly to elect the best possible candidates. Under that theory there is no perfect system. Often the worst candidates are elected contrary to efforts by the voters. See, e.g., Numbers Rule, by George G. Szpiro. Some election observers say, "If God wanted us to vote he would give us candidates."

[Cited in article]
the Voting Rights Act of 1965 spelled out (in section 14 (c) (1))

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20140619/NEWS/140615719
GUEST COMMENTARY: Not all votes are equal in Cambridge City Council elections
By Rick Snedeker
Posted Jun. 19, 2014 @ 1:03 pm

CAMBRIDGE Chronicle

CAIR Masquerades as Civil Rights Organization Censoring Speech

[From article]
CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood creation, conceived as the primo American public-relations firm for Islamic supremacists, particularly Hamas — a task CAIR pulls off by masquerading as a “civil rights” organization.
[. . .]
Hamas, as I recounted in The Grand Jihad, is a formally designated terrorist organization under federal law. It is also the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch. In the early Nineties, the Brotherhood established a “Palestine Committee” to promote Hamas in the United States,

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/375098/cairs-jihad-against-honor-diaries-andrew-c-mccarthy

APRIL 5, 2014 4:00 AM
CAIR’s Jihad against Honor Diaries
The “civil rights” group hides Islam’s denial of civil rights to Muslim women.
By Andrew C. McCarthy

Race Hustlers Prevent Civil Rights of Their Own People

[From article]
Many people — especially politicians and activists — want to take credit for the economic and other advancement of blacks, even though a larger proportion of blacks rose out of poverty in the 20 years before 1960 than in the 20 years afterwards.
But no one wants to take responsibility for the policies and ideologies that led to the breakup of the black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and generations of discrimination.
[. . .]
Race hustlers who blame all lags on the racism of others are among the obstacles to taking the fullest advantage of education and other opportunities. What does that say about the content of their character?
[. . .]
There are people today who talk "justice" when they really mean payback — including payback against people who were not even born when historic injustices were committed.
The nation has just been through a sensationalized murder trial in Florida, on which many people took fierce positions before a speck of evidence was introduced, basing themselves on nothing more than judging those involved by the color of their skin.
We have a long way to go to catch up to what Martin Luther King said 50 years ago. And we are moving in the opposite direction.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell082813.php3#.UiGLv900jDo

Jewish World Review August 28, 2013/ 22 Elul, 5773
A Poignant Anniversary
By Thomas Sowell

World Upside Down

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williamns080613.php3#.UgYWL900jDo

Jewish World Review
August 7, 2013/ 1 Elul, 5773
Would They Be Proud?
By Walter Williams

Harvard University Historians Protest Email Searches

Some persons suspect that email "scanning" ('text word searching,' Ahem!) is more widespread than this one incident. Have University lawyers and deans lost sight of the idea of expression free from intimidation? Massachusetts state law Ch. 265, Sec. 37 makes it a felony to intimidate a person in the free exercise of a constitutionally protected right.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/3/20/history-letter-email-search/

Letter Cosigned by 32 History Faculty Says Secret Searches Threaten 'Climate of Trust'
By NICHOLAS P. FANDOS,
Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
March 20, 2013