Definition of antisemitism revoked

To the Editor of the Riverdale Press:

As the first act of the current NYC s Administration, its leader deliberately expunged the Executive Order that adopted the inclusive, generally accepted definition of antisemitism and attendant enforcement tools, thereby providing a measure of comfort to peddlers of antisemitism and implicit acceptance of their hateful and harmful speech and conduct. Ignored was an important chapter in the City’s history when the shoe was on the other foot and the proponents of this exercise in insensitive and harmful speech and conduct then vigorously railed against what they now support as the defining act of this Administration.

The period 2014-2015 was marked by the awakening of Islamic terrorism. ISIS, Boko Harem, the Charlie Hebdo shootings and the Paris attacks at the Bataclan provided dramatic evidence of barbarity, ostensibly in the name of Islam, a time- honored religion and the quixotic quest for a global Caliphate. The media was replete with photographs and graphic details of the gore, beheadings, butchery and worse by ISIS and its fellow terrorists. In the Middle East the slaughter by Hamas operatives of 3 Israeli teenagers and the subsequent revenge killing of a Palestinian youth sparked a 50-day war in Gaza (events which, of themselves, should have provided a foretaste of the future to the then US Administration, which naively viewed Hamas as “progressives” that could stay bought by piles of money and separatist powers and its barbarians tamed).

Simultaneously, New York City was treated to horrific advertisements on and in MTA buses, subways, and train stations publicly vilifying Muslims and depicting them as universally implicated in the context of that global display of beheadings, shootings and other savagery. Respected Jewish and other religious and community leaders joined Muslim leaders in vigorously protesting. The Courts, however, permitted the horrific advertisements to continue notwithstanding illustrations of attendant assaults on Muslims and the targeting of their institutions. Thus, in a legally defensible but realistically harmful decision, a New York Federal Court enjoined an attempt by the MTA to restrict the ghastly advertisements on public transit, including one portraying “…a menacing-looking man whose head and face are mostly covered by a head scarf. The ad included a quote from “Hamas MTV”: “Killing Jews is Worship that draws us close to Allah.” Underneath the quote, the ad stated: “That’s His Jihad. What’s yours? ” The Court concluded that Free Speech protections barred the MTA’s selective rejection of these advertisements while permitting other viewpoint ads.

Led by an MTA Board Member -- a Jewish Holocaust survivor whose family had been savagely slaughtered in Hitler’s concentration camps - and supported by the able then-MTA Chair, Thomas Prendergast, the MTA Board agreed that hateful speech was harmful and unacceptable speech, even if it meant a loss of revenue. It voted to bar essentially all viewpoint advertising from the system, thereby negating the predicate for the Federal Court’s determination.. That principled and sensitive prioritization of humanity over bigoted zealotry, though costly to the MTA, was supported by many Jewish and other religious organizations. Hypocritically, however, many of those that in 2015 had decried the challenged slurs and implored MTA action to stop them, flip flopped, supporting or studiously silent in the face of this Administration’s “defining” first act.

The MTA Ban passed Judicial review. The advertising campaign against New York’s Muslim community abated (while antisemitic slurs and violent assaults increased over the ensuing years, despite the New York Jewish community’s vigorous and consistent defense of other victims of bigotry).

Sadly, the foregoing historical lesson that bigotry, the refuge of fools and rogues, is unacceptable, was either lost on or the victim of insensitive political considerations by the current City leadership. It publicly proclaimed that its actions defined the Administration, including the abandonment of basic tools against mounting antisemitism. That definition is not a badge of honor or integrity; it is, instead, shameful and hurtful.

Hopefully, the Mayor will upon reflection reverse his stance. For, as it defines his Administration, it taints and erodes it.

Incidentally, the above-noted Holocaust survivor who opposed hurtful bias is the author of this letter-opinion.

Respectfully
Charles Moerdler