2005-11-18 / Letters

Letters

More On PS/IS 43

Dear Editor,

I’ve just come across your article in the Feb. 5, 2005 edition regarding

PS/MS 43Q. You can count me among the many victims of “Mr. Q.” 

I, too, was a para who worked my way up to the position of teacher.  Ten long years of fast food and babysitters to care for my children, while I worked for my degree.  I graduated from York College with a 3.9 average, and Queensboro Community with a 3.8.  However, I gave up teaching because of the nonsense (not a strong enough word, but this a public newspaper that children may read) of our beloved leader.  I cannot believe that no one has removed him yet from this school.  While I was there, children had to eat with trays on their laps because the roach infestation was so bad they could not keep food on the tables.  Teachers were instructed to allow students who refused to conform to the uniform dress code only cold lunches, no hot food.  I was found “unfit” because I walked with a cane and lost time because of illness.

The stress level was so high I wound up hospitalized for two weeks, and could not finish out the school year.  One of my students threatened to get his father’s gun and shoot me in the head; when I inquired what was being done, I was told to mind my business and go back into the classroom. 

As a para, I taught my special ed class for half the year because they hired a hearing impaired teacher who sat in the back of the classroom and wrote love letters to the young female teachers.  I was one of the few employees who worked at 43 since the day it opened.  I don’t know how it is now — I’ve been out for several years — but I can tell you that while I was there, children did not fit into the business of PS 43Q.  I cannot believe that, knowing all this, no one in the District has seen fit to oust this person. 

I’m sorry for the children who go to school there, because they have lost some mighty fine teachers because of administration — or lack thereof.

JUDY ZETTERHOLM

More On Weiss’ Restaurant

Dear Editor,

I just received an email from a reader who alerted me to your August 18 editorial in which you made some very kind comments about my family’s restaurant, which was owned by my uncles, Meyer and Leo, and my father, Morris Weiss.

I remember Sy the waiter very well. I thought you might enjoy seeing the section of the menu featuring “Thumb Bits.”

Again, thank you for your kind words. It’s nice to know that people have fond memories of the restaurant.

ANTON M. WEISS

Questions For

The Editor’s Desk

To the Editor,

  Your provocative column, “From The Editor’s Desk,” of 11/11 raises the following questions:

Why does the shared Catholicism of the Supreme Court Justices cause you to assume that five honorable men would join in a cabal to betray their oaths to the Constitution?

Regarding your references to Guy Fawkes and Papist plots, would it be reasonable and fair to analyze Justices Ginsberg and Breyer in the light of the (rightly despised) Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

The Establishment Clause is just that. No establishment of a state religion. The Constitution prohibits use of religious qualifications for office. How is their Catholicism constitutionally relevant?.

Do you believe that historic religious wars have killed more than the 100 million victims of the Nazis and Soviet and Asian Communists in the twentieth century?

BOB ISRAEL

                            

Thanks For The Memories!

Dear Editor,

A little bit late, but I just received a copy of your editorial from my sister, who lives in Rockaway Beach.

I worked for Weiss’ Restaurant for five summers (1955-59) while in high school and college, so I really enjoyed your paragraph on the restaurant. I worked the hot dogs/hamburgers and open clams when it was slow. I knew Sy very well -a great gentleman- and loved Thumb Bits.

Thanks for the memories!

ANDY LOHR

 

 Catholic Bashing

Once Again

Dear Editor,

I read with interest your editorial on “faith-based terrorism” in last week’s Wave. You spoke of the “neo-conservatism” of the Christian religious right, specifically Catholic Supreme Court nominees/members who “will hold sway and (as a result) our schools will PROBABLY be teaching a thinly-veiled version of Creationism called “Intelligent Design’”.

That’s a pretty big assumption, isn’t it Mr. Schwach? Is the Catholic Church really spearheading the Intelligent Design issue? I think most moderate and a good amount of conservative Catholics would agree that Creationism/Intelligent Design should be interpreted as a metaphor for evolution in the context of our teachings.

The Vatican Pontifical Council for Culture recently stated that “the faithful should listen to what secular modern science has to offer, and warned that religion risks turning into ‘fundamentalism’ if it ignores scientific reason”. What right-wing kooks we Catholics are, right Howie?

The “neo-conservatism” you refer to is primarily rooted in politically-organized, fundamentalist Protestant groups in the “bible belt”. Politicians representing these regions pander to these extremist groups because of hefty campaign donations and/or organized voter loyalty. Will “neo-conservative” politicians appeal to the Supreme Court to make Intelligent Design a part of the public education agenda? It is possible. Will conservative Catholic members of the Court vote in favor of it? Again, it’s possible. However, I think you would have the same (perhaps even greater) chance of that occurring if the Supreme Court were comprised of members of one of the fundamentalist “bible-belt” religious groups.

Again, most Catholics would agree that religion does not belong in the public schools (Neither does a liberally-biased agenda, but, I digress). Parochial schools function specifically as an alternative to public schools and there are many to choose from nationwide for all denominations.

I have accused you of being anti-Catholic in the past, not for your defense of public schools or your criticisms of Catholic leaders, but specifically for your editorials and comments made against both local Catholic organizations and the church in general. As an example, the following was written in the Beachcomber on May 27, 2005 in defense of building a separate 9/11 and Flight 587 memorials. “The memorial at St. Francis de Sales is not truly dedicated to all of those who died in either 9/11 or 11/12. It names only those parishioners who died those days. What about the other 260 people who died in the crash and the other 65 locals who died in the terrorist attack. (Sic) Should their names be forgotten simply because the church, a private institution at best, chose to honor only those who attended that institution? Should we forget about Tribute Park, an honor to all the Rockaway residents who died that day simply because St. Francis chose to honor five of them?” Gee Howie, I didn’t realize that St. Francis owed that to the entire Rockaway community. Doesn’t that blur the line between church and state? Can you name another private institution in the Rockaways that built a memorial which includes all of the names of 9/11 & Fight 587 victims?

So, once again, Catholics are to blame...either for your personal suffering or for the problems plaguing our community and/or country. You use the Wave to fire your personal vilifications against Catholics every chance you get…talk about “faith-based terrorism”! When are local Catholics going to realize that the Wave, specifically you, Mr. Schwach, is no friend of ours? It may be time for a boycott of the paper among Catholics and non-Catholics alike that recognize the Wave’s bias. I’ve said it before…the Wave can be an invaluable tool for bringing the peninsula’s two largest religious communities together. It’s truly a shame that Mr. Schwach chooses to intentionally alienate one of them.

MATTHEW E. MCLEAN

  

Bring It On, John!

Dear Editor,

“Oh! How I hate to write, Dear John. I must let you know tonight, that the facts you have are wrong, you are making up a song, for today you get your druthers…Dear John!!!”

A regular title search is not the same as a historical title search. And today an abstract title search costs upwards of five hundred smackers. For a complete historical title search, back to the year one, if you will, the cost is rather high.

I performed such for a local group some time ago, pro bono, and their pro bono legal team talked of a saving of $7500!

Not that I am bragging, John, but my final report had the City of New York on it’s knees, crying uncle! At present the same kind of report costs much, much more.

If you wish to have someone do it for you, hire a good researcher, and then bring it on! Yours truly can, with extreme confidence, torpedo and sink your launch…so to speak!

I would do it for a lark, but at this stage of the game, I haven’t the time or the patience to deal with the city administration, various city and state record divisions, and various staff members involved, who are at times very uncooperative to a historic researcher. If you are a real estate person the story is difference, and I know that from experience!

My personal file on Rockaway Park is about a cubit long, and has all that I need to know about Beach 116 Street. And, if you remember, some time ago I inquired of you to find out if you were related to the Baxter person who owned and operated hotels and the old ocean pier in Seaside, and politically correct lower Rockaway Park. You answer was...no!!

So, bring it on John! And let all of Rockaway see what you have, that is not on file in the official city register or any other place. I did show you an early map of the block, which was blank! How do you explain that recorded fact?

EMIL R. LUCEV SR.

Republican Crocodile Tears

To the Editor,

Last week, my paper arrived soaking wet, but the weather was clear for a week. Then I noticed the problem. It was Stu Mirsky’s “crocodile tears.”

This fellow is funny and never more so then when acting as Rockaway’s chief Bush apologist.

Let’s see now. The Republicans control the presidency, the senate and the house. Most of the living Supreme Court justices were Republican appointees. Republicans now get to write any legislation they want, appoint whomever they wish, and ignore any obstacles they disdain. Basically they have one party rule of the country. They sort of won the lottery. Yet even with this historic grip on power, Mirsky is upset by a late night comedian taking pot shots at his hero.  Mirsky says, “Watching Maher...this has long since ceased to be about ideas and facts.” He speaks of Maher’s “outrageous claims” delivered in an “orgy of self-congratulatory cleverness.”

He hates it when Maher calls Bush a “clod” and he detests the unflattering photos.

Time for a reality check. This administration sent America’s sons and

daughters off to war based on faulty intelligence and outright lies. Yet,

how many of those children were related to Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld? The old English kings used to send their sons to fight in the wars they declared as a signal that those wars were worth fighting. Think this group will take a page from that book? Not likely.

This president gives an unprecedented tax cut to the richest group of people ever to NOT need one, forgets the poorest and the middle class because they don’t “create jobs” and then cries “class-warfare” anytime anyone speaks of fairness and justice. Class-warfare? Isn’t class warfare stealing from the poor to pay the rich? C’mon Stu, describe class warfare. Enlighten us.

Mirsky likes to sprinkle his columns with references to Marx and Lenin and Bolsheviks. Stu, why did you leave out Stalin? Stalin was the originator of those same Soviet prisons we now appear to have taken over; the ones no one knew anything about, discovered last week, and now run by Americans. Is this the new American Gulag? What are we doing?

Under this president you can be declared a terrorist, thrown in jail, and

lose all the rights our patriot forefathers were willing to die for? Didn’t

our president swear to uphold this constitution; the one he has now torn

apart? Stu, describe how you admire and respect the constitution now, now

that it really counts?

“We don’t torture”, says our president, yet the ONLY BILL he has EVER threatened to veto is the current one signed by 90 senators that expressly forbids torture. This is either bizarre or very revealing. This cannot be what American veterans died for over the years. Stu, say something. Your silence is puzzling.

Somebody in the administration “outed” a C.I.A. espionage agent. My 5th grade teacher taught me this kind of action was ‘treason’ and then described why this country had to execute Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. If outing an agent is not treason, then what is? Stu, I would have thought as an American patriot you would have been the first to call for a firing squad, or is this merely one of those Bill Maher ‘tirades’ you rail against.

The corruption engendered by this administration is stunning. Martha Stewart went to jail for insider trading, yet Bill Frist who seems to have incurred a similar problem is defended by the administration. Tom DeLay is accused of laundering money. Haliburton gets no bid contracts that make your eyes bulge. Money is lost and stolen in Iraq on a scale that is hair-raising. Can everyone in this administration be had, simply for the right price? Has the president, our moral and righteous leader, the man to whom god speaks(?), commented on any of this?  Have you, Stu?

And then you wonder why second-rate comedians disrespect our president?

IRA FELDMAN

Return to top


Email Us
Contact Us

Copyright 1999 - 2014 Wave Publishing Co. All Rights Reserved

Neighborhoods | History