The Jewish Daily Forward carried a story yesterday by Michael Kaminer that had partial quotes of Jack O'Dwyer that sound intemperate. I had sent Michael an email with my full sentiments on this issue and asked that those quotes be used and not any informal remarks.

Michael:

I'm glad you're doing this important story for the Forward. I want to make sure I am referred to correctly and that other major elements are covered. I don't want to be pictured as anti-Semitic or even answering such charges. No one in the Hamptons should have to answer such charges.

My basic view was expressed in the 2001 Tenafly decision of U.S Federal District Court Judge William G. Bassler (U.S. District Court D, New Jersey) ordering the eruv to be taken down. Here is the full decision: You should read it. Five borough trustees plus the mayor are quoted at length opposing the eruv and they all give good, common sense reasons.

Concluded Judge Bassler: "It is quite clear that there is no evidence to support the conclusion that the [Tenafly] Borough Council acted out of animosity to Judaism in general or to Orthodox Jews in particular…the fundamental reason animating the Council's decision was its concern that public property not be permanently allocated to a religious purpose."

Those are my sentiments exactly and the sentiments of people in the Hamptons who have been unjustly vilified and dragged through expensive courts for five years (and by a religious sect!).

The religious markings of an eruv do not belong on any public property in the Hamptons or anywhere in the U.S. Such designations are unconstitutional and un-American. Church and state must not mix up in this way. Comparing Christmas or other holiday decorations or directional signs or St. Patrick's Day signs to permanent eruv markings that claim public space as a "private domain" is an illogical and fatuous comparison.

"Speedy Trials" Were Promised in Early U.S.

There should have been a trial by jury shortly after the EEEA launched its suits against the three towns in 2011. We are witnessing the corrupt legal system that lets lawyers and judges enrich themselves via endless pre-trial maneuvering. Please open this analysis by the Anti-Lawyer Party.

The Constitution calls for a "speedy" and "public" trial by jury for anyone accused of wrongdoing. That is not happening here—or anywhere for that matter. The accused are dragged through the courts for years in pre-trial motions and hearings presided over by individual judges or small panels of judge. The accused can be bankrupted and left helpless. It's the new Inquisition.

A religious sect should not be doing this to anyone.

Individuals Were Initially Sued

You need to print out the Jan. 13, 2011, 27-page initial complaint of Weil that names 14 civic officials in their official capacity as well as personally. See all the charges being brought against them, all of them totally unfair in my view. The only people stopping the Orthodox from pushing wheelchairs to the synagogue, etc., are the Orthodox themselves.

Your article should focus on the initiator of this action—Rabbi Mark Schneier of the Hampton Synagogue who proposed the WHB eruv in 2008.

The tabletmag.com did a 5,822-word profile of him estimating his annual income at $500,000. He is the "Rabbi to the Stars," among them being Stephen Spielberg, the movie producer worth $3.5 billion. Spielberg was one of the earliest and probably the biggest supporter of the Hampton Synagogue in 1990.

Schneier, according to the Nov. 29, 2013 Forward.com, was about to get married for the fifth time. The Rabbinical Council of America in 2010 said it was investigating charges that Schneier, an RCA member, had "committed adultery" with Gitty Leiner, said to be "longtime girlfriend." The charges were not pursued because court records were sealed.

Media Coverage Has Been Sparse

Forward.com or the paper itself have not done much coverage of the multi-million dollar Hamptons eruvim dispute. Completely ignoring it so far is thetabletmag.com, a Jewish-oriented website that did two sizable articles on a disputed eruv in Pinetree Park in Miami.

Almost inexplicably, the New York Times has not written about this since Feb. 4, 2013 when Sharon Otterman did a long piece. The obvious explanation is politics. Nicholas Confessore, an NYT political reporter, is the son of Quogue library president Lynda Confessore. Quogue is battling the eruv with everything it has, including laws against signs on telephone poles.

Robert Sugarman, lead attorney for Weil on the EEEA, warned 50 residents of Quogue at a meeting in March 2012 that they had better allow the eruv.

27east.com and its companion newspaper the Southampton Press have done the best job of any local paper. (Mr.) Kyle Campbell is the reporter. He had written about the $1 million+ in legal cost so far with lots more to come.

The O'Dwyer Co. should get praise for covering this major story that could invalidate eruvim across America.

Your story should also note that U.S. and Israeli citizen Ariela Aharon, an Orthodox Jew, wrote an op-ed piece for us Feb. 11 in which she said no eruv is possible without the consent of the local community. Any sizable opposition invalidates an eruv, she wrote. Please read her piece. Former Westhampton Beach Mayor Conrad Teller said "90-95% of citizens are against the eruv."

Also notable is that officials of WHB, where an eruv was announced as having been erected last summer although residents can find no sign of lechis on the streets shown on the synagogue website, have never had a town hall meeting on the eruv and frequently duck questions from 27east.com and me.

You should visit www.whbqt.info which is a local blog by former village official Dean Speir who has numerous details of the eruv battle.

Cross Was Taken Down in Greenwich

A relevant story is the fact that a court in Greenwich in 1985 made a firehouse take down lights in the sign of the cross that had been used at Christmas time for 40 years. I agree that the cross had no business being on public property.

Then how can lechis be on utility poles that are on public property 365 days a year and that claim public property as a "private domain?" Is there one set of laws for the Jewish Orthodox and another set for Christians?!

Some of my personal information is relevant. Our family has owned a house in Westhampton Beach since 1987 and have paid more than $150,000 in taxes in that time mostly to Southampton. All the towns and village such a WHB, Quogue and Hampton Bays are part of Southampton.

Obviously we know a lot of the residents of WHB and our personal money is at stake here since EEEA president Marvin Tenzer said in 2011 that the settlement to EEEA could be in the "multi-millions."

Because we own a house in WHB and have a personal stake in this battle is not improper motivation nor should our motives be impugned. My motive is that I detest unfairness and injustice and fight against it. That's what journalists are supposed to do.