Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace
WWW.BethlehemNeighborsforPeace.org
January 20, 2024
Bethlehem Public Library- Board of Trustees
451 Delaware Ave.
Delmar, NY 12054
Dear Members of the Library Board of Trustees,
Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace (BNP) is appealing to you to reverse our year- long suspension from hosting new speakers. You acted contrary to your own rules to favor certain viewpoints over others. You also failed to give us any due process or opportunity to refute the false facts that you created to justify our suspension, and you imposed discipline without even notifying us there was a concern. You treated us very unfairly, if not illegally.
BNP is group that promotes peace. For 20 years we have advocated for peace in Bethlehem by, among other things, bringing speakers to the Bethlehem Public Library who can talk about different points of view that we believe are necessary to be heard in order to achieve Peace. It was with that hope that we invited Miko Peled to speak at the Bethlehem Library, December 5, 2023, and it was because of that speech that you unfairly decided to ban BNP for a year.
Peled has spoken at the Bethlehem Library on earlier occasions and is a well known international speaker, with important insights into the history of the Arab Israeli conflicts. He is an Israeli citizen, the grandson of one of Israel’s founders, the son of a famous Israeli General, and someone with a passionate desire to see Israel live up to its obligation as a Jewish state to do justice. He cannot possibly be judged by objective standards to be antisemitic or the word antisemitic must lose all meaning. Critiquing Israel for its lack of justice is not antisemitism.
On December 4, the day before Miko Peled was to speak, the library abruptly called a special meeting, supposedly to hear concerns from the public about Peled’s speech. The meeting was flooded by dozens of people, expressing a Zionist viewpoint, and claiming that Peled’s speech would be hate speech that would endanger the local Jewish community with violence. The Zionists argued that criticism of Zionist Israel and its right to exist was antisemitic, and therefore hate speech, and the library, under its rules, had a duty to stop Peled from engaging in hate speech. Some of the Library Board members seemingly accepted this Zionist definition of antisemitism, even though in doing so it adopted a Zionist viewpoint in opposition to the anti-Zionist view of Miko Peled, which by the library’s own rules it was not permitted to do.
The Bethlehem Public Library has adopted The American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights as it’s policy for the use of its public meeting rooms. In its commentary on “Meeting Rooms: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights”, the ALA states as follows:
“Many libraries provide meeting rooms and other spaces designated for use by the public for meetings and other events as a service to their communities. Article VI of the Library Bill of Rights states, “Libraries which make…meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use”. Libraries do not advocate for or endorse the viewpoints express in meetings by meeting room users, just as they do not endorse the viewpoints of works in their collection. The presence and activities of some groups in public spaces, while constitutionally protected, can cause fear and discomfort in some library users and staff. Libraries should adopt and enforce user behavior policies that protect library users and staff from harassment while maintaining their historic support for the freedom of speech.”
If libraries chose to [make meeting room space to the public] such spaces are considered designated “public forums, and legal precedent hold that libraries may not exclude any group based on the subject matter to be discussed or the ideas for which the group advocates. However, if a group’s actions during a meeting disrupt or harass others in the library, library policies regarding acceptable behavior may apply. If libraries adopt policies that are perceived to restrict potentially controversial groups access to meeting rooms, they may face legal and financial consequences.
At the December 5 event, when Miko Peled spoke, the same Zionist voices on occasion, attempted to silence the speaker by disruption and shouts that Peled was engaged in hate speech, which violated the library’s Patron Policy for how members of an audience must refrain from such interruptions. For example, at one point, when Peled referred to the historical Palestine (rather than the present-day Palestinian state) as the land “from the river to the sea”, the Zionist voices objected that it was hate speech, and after a 5-minute discussion, the Director ruled that Peled could not discuss this phrase, but eventually he allowed the talk to continue. Simply by doing this the library took a side favoring one ideological viewpoint over another.
The Patron’s Conduct Policy says:
Individuals must refrain from language or behavior that threatens, harasses, abuses, or intimidates other patrons.
Individuals must refrain from language or behavior that threatens, harasses, abuses, or intimidates library staff or interferes with the conduct of library business and services.
Individuals may not engage in conduct that creates disturbances or impedes the use of library materials, resources or services by other patrons or the work of library staff.
During the speech, Zionist voices were engaged in loud provocative behavior, interrupting the speaker, using hate speech directed at Palestinians, (“They should all be killed”), insults to the speaker, other similar conduct, all of which violated the Library’s Paton’s Policy. At times there were so many interruptions of the Peled talk from the Zionists, that the non-Zionist audience began chanting, “Let him speak”. But the Director responded primarily to Zionist’s complaints of hate speech, rather than enforcing the library’s Patron’s policy which prohibited harassment of the Speaker. Had the Director enforced the library’s Patron’s code of conduct and removed Zionists who would not stop harassing the speaker, the library might have struck the proper balance of supporting free speech while prohibiting harassing speech. But instead, the Director was more focused on prohibiting Peled’s speech and ignored the provocation from the Zionists.
At one point a member of the audience appeared to be flaunting an Israeli Defense Force (IDF) T-Shirt, calling attention to herself, and Miko Peled said “There is somebody over there, standing with a shirt, with a symbol of one of the worst, most violent terrorist organizations, an organization that is probably the worst, most violent although the best trained, the best armed, and she is wearing a t-shirt of a terrorist organization. I am just pointing it out. She is wearing a t-shirt that is offensive. If I was wearing a swastika, you wouldn’t call me out? It’s like somebody standing here with a confederate flag. It’s unacceptable.” At the time, the library director who had been directed by the Board to decide what Peled was prohibited from saying, made NO objection to Mr. Peled’s remark.
Peled’s talk was generally well received, and the library received significantly more positive comments on his presentations than negative. There is a significant Muslim population in Bethlehem that attended the talk, and the Islamic community in particular was pleased to have presented at the library a program with a point of view similar to theirs, that is rarely heard in the mainstream media. Coming, as the talk did, soon after the October 7th HAMAS attack, and the Israeli response attack on Gaza, the topic was timely, relevant., and important.
On December 11, 2023, a week after the Peled talk, the Bethlehem library imposed on BNP a disciplinary sanction of a one-year suspension of facilities privileges – a sanction which was imposed without any opportunity for BNP to be heard or due process which is required by law. We were first notified of this suspension in a letter dated December 11, in which your director cited two reasons for the sanction:
- Books by Miko Peled were displayed at his December 5 talk, and
- Peled books were actually sold outside the library building on library property, in violation of a library policy that prohibits the marketing or sale of books inside or outside the library building.
BNP denies that there is any valid factual basis to impose this charge or suspension. As to the first claimed basis for the sanction, we have already explained that someone brought Peled books to the December 5 meeting and put them on the table – presumably someone associated with Miko Peled. We do not know who did it and BNP was not involved. When the problem was called to our attention the books were immediately put away and hidden. No solicitation about book purchases was ever made, and no books were sold in the building. As to these facts the Library Director apparently agrees.
As to the second basis, we have been told that Miko Peled may have sold some books in the parking lot after his December 5 event. (He had previously sold books at a Library event some years before, and was not aware that he was prohibited by library policy from selling books in the library parking lot.)
In any event, BNP had nothing to do with any book sales that Peled may have done in the parking lot. The Library Director has since apparently agreed that BNP was not involved in sales outside the building and is not claiming this as a basis for sanctioning BNP. At least that is what he has told us. Yet the sanction of a one-year suspension remains, apparently for the sole infraction that some Miko Peled books were brought into the Community room and placed on the table, without BNP’s knowledge.
This process is obviously unfair to BNP and points up the reason why a due process hearing is required to avoid the kind of arbitrary and capricious punishment that you seem determined to impose on BNP. How are we supposed to defend ourselves when the library imposed the punishment before BNP were even notified that there was a concern, before BNP were told what rule was supposedly violated, and before the facts have even been established. It appears that this suspension is simply a pretext charge to punish BNP because some of the Board members disagree with its sponsorship of Miko Peled and his speech on December 5, and because some the Board members are trying to suppress ant-Zionist speech in deference to a small very vocal group of individuals.
In addition, this letter is also intended to appeal and seek reconsideration of another punishment, levied at BNP on December 11 in retaliation for their sponsorship of Miko Peled’s talk on December 5. It is a measure of the hostility that the library is directing at BNP for Peled’s talk, that the library not only imposed this second sanction without due process, or even advanced notice, but the library has never communicated the fact of the discipline to BNP and refuses to even discuss it with BNP, as though hoping it could be hidden in secret to be used at some future time.
The facts on which this second sanction was imposed can be found ONLY in the minutes of the Board Meeting on December 11, which read in part as follows:
[M. Walsh said she] believed that the speaker violated the library’s Patron Conduct Policy by disregarding the library director’s requests and singling out and deriding an audience member who was wearing an Israeli Defense Force sweatshirt…. [M. Walsh] made a motion to bar Miko Peled from the library. [A vote was taken on the motion to ban Mr, Peled from the Library, and the motion did not pass]
- Brancatella made a motion that the board take disciplinary action against Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace including, but not limited to suspension, for hosting a speaker that violated the Library’s Patron Conduct Policy provision that prevents harassment. C. Wijeyesinghe said that she was aware the library had already taken action against the group for violating the policy prohibiting the sale of merchandise at an event. She asked the board whether there was a need for an additional action. C Brancatella said that her motion refers specifically to the behavior of the speaker. C. Wijeyesinghe said she wasn’t sure if the event organizers had prior knowledge of what was going to be said. C Brancatella said she believed they did have prior knowledge that people would be made uncomfortable by the talk. M Walsh said the library did its best by listening to the public and attempting to intervene during the event…S. Patterson said that the board’s energy is best spent focusing on the future and setting policy to prevent issues. M Kissinger said it was unfortunate what took place at the library, and it is not how he would like the library to be portrayed.
On a Motion by C. Brancatella with a second by S. Patterson, the board voted in favor of taking disciplinary action against Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace including, but not limited to suspension, for hosting a speaker that violated the library’s Patron Conduct Policy provision that prevents harassment. [The motion passed 5-1]
By taking this second disciplinary action, the library clearly took punitive action against BNP for the content of Miko Peled’s speech, in violation of their obligation to remain neutral. Even the director who was present at the Board’s direction to “intervene during the event” to stop inappropriate speech by Peled, saw no reason to criticize this comment by Peled. The Board supposedly found this comment to be “harassment” but did not sustain a vote to ban Peled from the library. Instead after one Board member said that she believed BNP had prior knowledge that people would be made “uncomfortable” by Peled’s talk (quoted above), the Board voted to take disciplinary action against BNP. It goes without saying that making people “comfortable” or “uncomfortable” is not the legal standard by which groups using the library’s meeting room are judged. The standard is complete neutrality. Unable to find any way to prevent presentation of points of view that clearly made the Board “uncomfortable”, the Board decided to create pretexts, and invent excuses with which to restrict BNP’s ability to bring future speakers to Bethlehem. Using an unspecified sanction to hang over BNP, the library is trying to threaten BNP into staying quiet or to at least invite only “comfortable” speakers. It is absurd to think that BNP could have anticipated that Peled would have made a comment about someone wearing a T-Shirt at the event. The sanction only speaks to the library’s bias and hostility toward BNP and to the Anti-Zionist speech of the sponsored speaker. This discipline should be rescinded, and the Board should apologize to BNP for its actions. We are willing to work with the library to comply with its rules, but we will not be bullied by you into stopping our advocacy for Peace. We want these undeserved sanctions withdrawn.
Sincerely,
Leslie Hudson
cats.hudson@gmail.com
Trudy Quaif
tquaif@yahoo.com
cc:
American Library Association
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
Stephen Downs
Taiymoor Naqi