Sections

And from the mailbag...

The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:

To the editor,

While I respect and have read many articles both informative and just fun for years from Gersh Kuntzman, I think he and I need a little more time together to come to an understanding of what is seen as the “contradict­ions” he mentioned in his story on me (“GOPer, Green: We’ll beat Brad,” Sept. 18).

I’m inviting all of you to look deeply — or you may miss something very different going on right now. People saw me at the Transportation Alternatives debate in Park Slope last month, for example, and I appreciated the encouragement by more that 10 percent of the audience that stayed to introduce themselves as I walked off (all Democrats, and I was the last to leave). On the exact day, I’d learned the “Conservative” candidate [George Smith] did prison time and is presently out on bail for a slew of domestic abuse/violence and exposed the victim in a self-serving act.

You want a contradiction on the campaign trail? The candidate for the Democrats — whom Gersh’s article calls the “favorite” — made an issue of the school choice for a child by his loving parents, and was embroiled in a controversy over his translatio­n/advertor­ial in Borough Park.

Yet I showed restraint about an opponent that had court hearings in Nassau County during the entire race.

Now, there’s a contradiction.

The choice will be clear. You want more of the same, you can have it. You want something new — you have either Joe Nardiello or [Green Party candidate] Dave Pechefsky.

Would you want a Councilman in 2010 that’s independent? Honest? A listener? Able to work like no one else has and shut out anyone in the process? Someone that’s already solving resident’s issues at their doorsteps, whether or not they’ll vote for him? Someone that blends the best of what’s come from the GOP and the Democratic side? Someone that takes nobody’s BS and isn’t afraid to speak not only his mind, but relay the sentiments of the thousands of people he’s spoken with on the campaign trail?

You want a true Brooklyn resident to represent your neighborhoods — pick one that’s from here, and has a childhood that would make the ‘Wonder Years’ run home crying in comparison. Pick one that’s been places and done things in Brooklyn and for Brooklynites that will come out during this campaign.

You’re voting for a man now, not a party.

You REALLY have that choice.

I said many times that we’re out to wash away partisanship — and now, you have a local candidate that can actually DO THAT, and now everyone can actually vote for this campaign (instead of our smaller audience in the GOP primary). THIS is what not many people have heard about me.

Exhaling … exhaling. OK, I’ll be OK …Joe Nardiello, Carroll Gardens

The writer is the Republican candidate in the 39th Council District. Election Day is Nov. 3.

Dear Steve

To the editor,

Here’s an open letter to incoming Councilman Steve Levin (“Winners and Losers,” Sept. 18).

Dear Mr. Levin,

I did not vote for you on primary day. In fact, two-thirds of the voters in the 33rd District did not vote for you, many because of concerns about your ties to the Brooklyn Democratic Party leadership, which has been tarnished by charges of corruption and politics-as-usual deals.

You promised in your campaign to be an independent fighter for the needs of the district. I look forward to you now living up to that promise.

Chris Bastian, Brooklyn Heights

Insecurity

To the editor,

I attended the presentation of the new Atlantic Yards arena given by architects Bill Crockett of Ellerbe Becket and Gregg Pasquarelli of SHoP (“Rendered Useless,” Sept. 18).

While the new design is an improvement, once again security is little beyond assurances that all is well. During the question-and-answer session, Crockett said there would be bollards to keep vehicles from crashing over the curb. Afterwards, asked a more direct question, he said that bollards were being considered.

We all know that the arena’s 20-foot setback from the curb is inadequate under both federal and city guidelines. We were also told that the NYPD has already looked at the designs. Of course, these are the exact same assurances that the Empire State Development Corporation gave in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Since the designs are still being tweaked, it’s hard to believe a real security study has been done. That beautiful cantilevered mass hovering over the open plaza may not so safe. In an explosive event, it’s guaranteed to reflect any blast wave back down onto pedestrians and even into the new entrance that leads down to the Atlantic Avenue station.

And those floating, wrap around metal bands made up of hundreds of separate iron panels could quite easily beak away from the main structure to add to the flying glass and debris.

Alan Rosner, Prospect Heights

Bad hate story

To the editor,

I am disappointed by the poor judgment shown by your story about the hate literature (“Hate is in the air,” Sept. 18). Yes, I realize its news that someone threw anti-Obama fliers off a Downtown skyscraper, but the prominence you gave the story and the fact that you printed the hate speech verbatim was an extraordinary poor judgment.

Television learned along time ago not to show streakers. You have given this vile statement a voice that was unnecessary for a news article that should have been buried in a blotter item that said, “A hate-filled vulgar flier was thrown off a Downtown building, and the police are investigat­ing.”

So I again say, “Shame on you.”

Just as CNN was loudly criticized by showing over and over that demented woman who thinks our president is illegitimate because he wasn’t born in the US — he was — you have done a great disservice in giving this a prominence it doesn’t deserve.

Sid Meyer, Boerum Hill.

Crime seen

To the editor,

Thanks for carrying the story about my brush with the food police at the Regal Cinemas on Court Street (“Box office flop! Court St. cinema searched only ladies’ bags,” Aug. 31). The bigger issue — which the article doesn’t touch upon, possibly for legal reasons — is that Regal searches bags in Brooklyn but not in Manhattan. Having been to many movies at the Union Square Regal, I know that they don’t do bag searches there.

Perhaps the Brooklyn theater should spend more time on actual theft, as in people who pay for one movie and see two or three with no difficulty? And if the bag searches are a terrorism security measure, then why aren’t they at Union Square?

The response from the Regal headquarters was nonsensical at best. Clearly we have a new crime here: MVWB — Movie Viewing While Brooklynite.

Thanks for publishing this, hopefully unedited.

Mary Goodman,

Brooklyn Heights

Slurring words

To the editor,

In covering the Brooklyn Hajj tourism venture earlier this summer (“Make a ‘hajj’ to Brooklyn next weekend,” Aug. 14), you mention the origin of the word “hajj” and point out that the founder of the business wasn’t being politically provocative in naming the venture after the Islamic term for pilgrimage.

What could possibly be politically provocative about a religious term? Certainly one could possibly infer a religious angle, but a political one?

The answer, of course, is that anything that is remotely Islamic is considered by the under-informed to be political. Certainly, The Brooklyn Paper should not fall into the category of the under-informed.

Dave Hall, Boerum Hill

Editor’s note: Not under-informed, but aware of how others have twisted the meaning of the word “hajj.”

Repent, Paper!

To the editor,

So explain to me why a $20-million bailout for CityPoint benefiting “a team of private, for-profit developers who made a bad investment” is bad, but much more bailout money for Bruce Ratner, who made an even worse investment in a pro basketball team, is not (“Feds’ CityPoint bailout is a bad use of taxpayer dollars,” Aug. 21)?

I don’t disagree with you about CityPoint — it’s a waste of money for a bad project which could instead be used to help spur small-business growth Downtown.

But even you have to see that opposing stimulus funds for CityPoint while championing the same for Ratner’s white elephant of an arena (“Build the arena — with fed money,” Feb. 5) — a money-losing arena that would be a net fiscal loser for city taxpayers, according to the city’s Independent Budget Office — is just plain dopey.

C’mon, Brooklyn Paper, we’ll forgive you if you admit the utter misguidedness of your pro-arena ways. Eric McClure, Park Slope

Updated 5:14 pm, July 9, 2018
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:


Reasonable discourse

Comments closed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

Keep it local!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter: