Shelter Island Reporter Letters to the Editor, Nov. 10, 2022

A contentious issue

To the Editor:

In the October 20 Reporter cover story, “Affordable housing forum at school,” Bob Kohn is quoted as saying at the forum, “There are rumors going around town that the supervisor has talked to people who I don’t even know, like someone named Calabro … and potentially some like George Soros. Are those partners we’re looking at?”

As a Semitic person, I saw the name George Soros said in what, from my reading of the article, appeared to be a flippant manner with the express aim of opposing a proposed public policy, and alarm bells went off in my head.

Soros’ last name, not even his full name, has come to be an anti-Semitic trope, the representation of an elite global cabal dead set on taking over the world. His name has been used to inspire and justify violent and horrific anti-Semitic acts that could also be described as domestic terror attacks, like the 2018 slaughter of 11 people at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life Synagogue.

In the past month alone, a music mogul and an NBA star have promoted anti-Semitic tropes online and in interviews, and just this past week, the FBI reported it had, thankfully, headed off a planned attack on a New Jersey synagogue.

I have since learned that George Soros and the Soros family, through LLCs, own property on the Island. Had the Reporter mentioned this information in the article or placed Bob Kohn’s mention of George Soros’ name in a more meaningful context, I might have come away with an entirely different understanding of what took place during the public forum, and finished reading it feeling something other than rage.

JAKE WILLIAMS, Brooklyn, N.Y.

Unhinged

To the Editor:

What’s all this unwarranted rancor against anonymous letter-writing to voters? In a rant completely unhinged from reality, Supervisor Siller last week demanded these letter-writers should “identify yourself and let people know where you stand.”

The Reporter was equally unhinged, calling them “gutless individuals who are ashamed to put their names on messages sent to the community.”

Well, the writers of these letters, from both sides of the housing issue, clearly did let people know where they stood — though anonymously. It’s just that those on the “No” side of this issue were honest about it, saying at the bottom of one letter, “Paid for by Anonymous, because we don’t want to be vilified for speaking out.”

Indeed, former councilman Albert Dickson had previously chastised the Supervisor for — using Dickson’s word — “vilifying” those who had come forward against referendum.

On the “Yes” side, at least five slick mailers from a website called voteyescommunityhousing.org, also backed anonymously, were sent to every Island voter. One mailer depicted firefighters, hoping to convince us that the referendum was needed for “first responders.”

When these mailers hit, the Reporter stopped accepting letters to the editor on the issue. So, anonymous writers from the “No” side responded by letter: since housing would be doled out by lottery, no one could guarantee that any first responder or anyone living or working on the Island would win the lottery.

I am not suggesting the anonymous “Yes” ads should be publicly vilified or silenced. But I do charge the Reporter with blatant hypocrisy, as it seems “gutless” is reserved to label anonymity with which it disagrees.

I imagine if the Reporter were around in 1787, the editor might also vilify Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, those “gutless individuals” who were “ashamed” to put their names on the Federalist Papers.

BOB KOHN, Shelter Island

Editor’s note — Comparing a misinformed mailer about a small transfer tax with the Federalist Papers is one thing, but the writer knows full well the Reporter didn’t stop accepting letters because of any mailers. He was told individually, and the readers of the Reporter were informed on the Letters page of Oct. 20 and online on Oct. 18, that: “Letters endorsing a candidate or candidates for the Nov. 8 election, or commenting on ballot referendums, will not be accepted for the issues of Oct. 27 or Nov. 3. This is to ensure that those who disagree with a letter’s point of view will not be restricted from expressing a counter viewpoint.”