NYC Parents Furious After Teacher Accused Of Praising Hamas Leader Returns To School
Parents at a Brooklyn public school are demanding answers after a teacher accused of praising a Hamas leader reportedly returned to the classroom while still under investigation.
Because apparently the modern public school system has now reached the point where parents are expected to debate whether “expressed admiration for a terrorist mastermind” should be a disqualifying trait in someone assigned to educate children.
The controversy centers on Damien Neva, a teacher at P.S. 77 in Brooklyn, who is under investigation after comments surfaced in which he allegedly expressed support for Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader widely described as one of the architects of the Oct. 7 terror attacks against Israel.
The comments reportedly came from a group chat connected to a separate legal dispute involving the Park Slope Food Co-op, where Neva had been involved in efforts to boycott Israeli goods. The remarks resurfaced publicly through court filings, igniting outrage among parents and community members who say the issue is not politics, but basic judgment.
Neva was reportedly seen returning to school while covering his face as reporters and angry parents gathered outside. That image alone did not exactly calm the situation.
Parents say someone who praises or excuses terrorism has no business standing in front of a classroom full of children. A number of community members are now calling for him to be removed from the school entirely, arguing that the city’s Department of Education should not need a lengthy philosophical retreat to decide whether this is appropriate.
Supporters of firing Neva say the issue goes far beyond one teacher’s private opinion. Teachers are entrusted with children. They shape classroom discussions, influence young minds and are expected to exercise sound judgment. If a teacher publicly praises a man connected to mass murder, parents are going to wonder what else that teacher considers acceptable.
That seems less like hysteria and more like the bare minimum of parental concern.
State Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz was among those who condemned the comments, saying there is no place in public schools for anyone who justifies terrorism. Parent advocates also criticized the slow response, asking why the system so often appears more concerned with process than with common sense.
The Department of Education has reportedly not offered a public explanation satisfactory to parents demanding action.
And that is usually how these stories go. A parent says, “Why is this person around children?” A bureaucracy says, “We are reviewing the matter.” Parents ask again. The bureaucracy releases something carefully worded enough to avoid saying anything. Meanwhile, the teacher is back in the building and everyone is supposed to act as though this is all very complicated.
It is not complicated.
Teachers do not have to agree with every parent’s politics. They do not have to be bland or silent citizens. But praising a terrorist leader is not a quirky classroom management style. It is not edgy activism. It is not a minor misunderstanding about tax policy or zoning laws.
It is praising a terrorist leader.
The fact that parents now have to protest this at all says plenty about where public education stands in some cities. The old assumption was that schools and parents were on the same side: educate the children, keep them safe, teach right from wrong, and don’t put lunatics in positions of authority.
Now parents are forced to ask whether that last part still needs to be written into the employee handbook.
For now, Neva remains a flashpoint in a larger argument over schools, ideology and parental trust. But to the parents outside P.S. 77, the issue is much simpler.
They send their children to school to learn reading, math and basic citizenship.
Not to be supervised by someone who allegedly found something admirable in a Hamas butcher.
About Post Author
You must be logged in to post a comment.