More MEALAC
The basic argument was vintage Massad: that Israel is a racist state and Jews are racist. In the question session after the speech, Schreiber challenged Massad's (demonstrably false) claim that the PLO was offered only 65% of the West Bank during the 2000 Camp David peace negotiations. Schreiber mentioned that he had personally discussed this issue with the chief negotiator at the 2000 conference, Dennis Ross, and that Ross had expressed his concern that"such contentions were regrettably becoming part of a false mythology increasingly prevalent in the Region."
"At that point,," recalled Schreiber,"someone in the audience shouted out, 'Dennis Ross is a JEW!' the purpose of which obviously was to undermine a flat contradiction of the speaker. Neither the moderator nor anyone in authority in the room said anything. I sat there stunned." In Schreiber's words,"It was apparent to me that Massad was using his position as a Columbia professor, entitled to the respect of students, to promote vile and insidious anti-Semitic hatred in the language of anti-Zionism. He was ostensibly using his scholarship in doing so, but what in fact it entailed was transparently flimsy and more importantly factually and demonstrably untrue."
There is some good news from all of this: Schreiber recently had a personal meeting with Bollinger; and the president, according to Schreiber,"understands the need to recruit to Columbia top scholars and subject the scholars to rigorous academic criteria that may not have been applied in the past."
The Schreiber letter offers two points of insight into the MEALAC controversy. First, a line exists between scholarly debate and outright factual inaccuracy; at least Massad (and, as this editorial in today's Sun argues, perhaps other MEALAC professors as well) seems to be so consumed by hatred of Israel that he makes basic factual errors when talking about Israel. Second, a professor, whether in class or in a public lecture, has a considerable ability to shape the atmosphere of the gathering, and Massad regularly seems intent on not creating a climate in which all legitimate points of view about his topic are welcomed.