Last Monday, I came across a link on a news site that intrigued me. The headline read, "Students For Justice in Palestine at Boston University Need Your Help!" Being a helpful person, I looked into the story, and found a blog post belonging to the Students for Justice in Palestine at Boston University, which detailed an e-mail exchange between their organization and a group they described as "campus Zionists." "Below," read the post, "is a threatening e-mail that BU SJP received and its response." "To Whom It May Concern," began the supposedly threatening letter, "It has come to the attention of the Boston University Students for Israel (BUSI) that next week is Israeli Apartheid Week and that in recognition of this Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) will be constructing a mock 'wall' on campus. It is our concern that such a demonstration will only serve to sensationalize and simplify a most complex, nuanced, and profoundly serious situation. This will only inflame emotions, and incite hatred."

So far, I didn't feel particularly threatened. I wondered what BUSI had in mind, if not the construction of a mock wall, to bring the conflict between Israel and Palestine to the attention of Boston University students. My question was answered soon enough: "It is our suggestion that SJP refrain from constructing such a structure and from sensationalizing the Arab-Israeli conflict. In place of this mock wall BUSI suggests that members of SJP and BUSI stand side-by-side next week to promote an organized forum for discourse between all parties!"

The suggestion put forth by BUSI seemed more than reasonable to me. After all, while demonstrations certainly have their place in any social movement, I believe that debate and discussion are far more constructive and have a perfect place in an academic setting. Yet, the BU SJP did not agree with BUSI or their perspective on the construction of the mock wall. In fact, they responded a little less graciously.

"To BU Students For Israel," their response began, "Our original plan for Israel Apartheid Week did not include building a replica of the Apartheid Wall. But after receiving an email threat and hearing that members of BUSI complained to [the Student Activities Office] about a wall we had not discussed, we decided to construct one." I recalled, upon reading that, the realization that Isaac Babel had upon witnessing a pogrom in Czarist Russia: "My world is small and ugly."

It disturbs me deeply that the conflict between Israel and Palestine has been reduced to a war of spite here in the United States, especially on college campuses, which should be hotbeds for intellectual discussion and debate. What SJP decided to do was disappointing, but not unprecedented-Anna Wintour, the editor in chief of Vogue, once sent roast beef sandwiches to members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals who protested the practice of wearing fur, for example. Yet, having reduced what should be a very involved consideration of a multifaceted issue to a hateful, spiteful competition is to reduce the import of the issue to that of a catfight between animal lovers and fashion designers. The sheer volume of lost human life and prolonged human suffering due to the conflict between Israel and Palestine should be evidence enough that it deserves well thought out discussion.

A remaining point of concern is the fact that SJP felt comfortable categorizing the profoundly polite and sensible correspondence from BUSI as "threatening," despite the inclusion of this line in the original BUSI letter: "We would like to emphasize that we are not demanding that SJP refrain from expressing the substance of your opinions. In fact, we are demanding nothing! We recognize your right to freedom of speech, and to express your beliefs by any peaceful means that you determine to be appropriate." Calling them "campus Zionists" is perhaps the kindest action SJP took toward BUSI-though it can be expected that pointing this out will only result in false accusations of "crying anti-Semitism."

If the discourse surrounding Israel and Palestine has degenerated into immaturity and spite in the academic institutions of the United States, I shudder to think of what the situation must be in states nearer to the conflict. It seems that any disagreement can now be branded a threat, and any objections to various methods of protesting labeled as attacks. Rarely do I maintain optimism when it comes to the affairs of states, but in this circumstance-here, in this country, in this region, in the world of academia-I really did think we could do better.