Dore Gold, Noam Chomsky, Avi Dichter: ambassador, scholar, member of Parliament. Each came to Brandeis to share a new perspective on some element of Israeli politics or the Arab-Israeli conflict. However, none of these prominent figures left our campus unaffected by the spirit of several impassioned, opinionated members of the Brandeis student body. In the middle of all three of these lectures, we stood up. We were provocative. We carried signs. We dressed identically. We shouted.

We?

I'd certainly be curious to see the results if someone took the time to gather statistics of how many people actually attended these lectures and of that group, how many people actually chose to stand up and interrupt and how many people who did not choose to stand up actually felt affected by the protest.

But, in reality, college campus protests serve another purpose. At Brandeis, where students and professors alike have torn the issue to pieces in classrooms, dorm rooms and public spaces, everyone knows that nobody will ever entirely agree. Nobody will give any "side" full credence; nobody will give up his or her personal attachments to any particular narrative, no matter how intense the dispute.

So what is the point, then, if no one seems to be changing his or her mind?

Making noise, of course. You knew that already. If you've been reading the pages of this newspaper over the past two years, you certainly know just how much disorder as few as 10 students can create. A semester can hardly pass without some group exploding on behalf of some larger cause. So why make a big deal now?

Heard the news coming out of University of California lately?

Just over a week ago, 10 students—seven from UC Irvine, three from UC Riverside—were found guilty of two misdemeanors, one for conspiring to interrupt Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren's speech at UC Irvine in February 2010, and one for actually doing it. In my opinion, the fact that this case got the District Attorney's attention merits some congratulations. These guys really did it. Forget the UC system, let's talk about getting some national visibility.

In this case, the Orange County D.A. found reasonable cause to criminally prosecute 10 students with more or less the same thought processes as every student at Brandeis who has ever risen in opposition to one or more of the prominent figures our university has agreed to host.

Somehow, formal discipline and the temporary suspension of the Muslim Student Union didn't seem like punishment enough to the California Supreme Court.

These students were deemed to need more punishment and in turn, more visibility in the public realm. And now everybody knows about their outburst, because taking this case to the state level was the best possible thing to happen in this saga. The students' affiliation with the MSU no longer matters. Now, the nation has zeroed in on the action itself, not the action's affiliation. Individuals all over the country, on college campuses or not, are debating whether the right to free speech should side with Oren or with his dissenters.

This seems like a much more worthful and less risky discussion than whether all Muslims in the UC system have an active vendetta against Israel. A significant group within the MSU may have organized and overseen the protest against Oren's presentation, but the D.A. ensured that the specific students—and not the organization—received punishment, which helped everyone hold the proper individuals accountable.

But Brandeis does not have the luxury of a solution to the problem of whom to hold accountable. All those planning future uprisings against Arab-, Palestine- or Israel-related speakers, small or large, must bear this in mind. Inevitably, a significant popular outside Brandeis will hear about your protest, large or small, radical or silent—they will associate it with Brandeis as an institution, as they have in the past, because Brandeis has been handed a difficult legacy.

While criticizing Israel is easy on the inside, the outside will always perceive even the slightest critical demonstration as a threat to some extent. At UC Irvine, the administration could blame the MSU; at Brandeis, however, with such a large Jewish student body already known to embrace controversy, the individual groups won't matter. The reputation of Brandeis as a whole will sway with each protest.

The difference is accountability. At Brandeis, if six students make enough noise, it is "we" who must understand the issues being contested. Unlike UC Irvine, and probably every other school in this country, we at Brandeis will come under scrutiny every time a divisive speaker arrives to present a perspective on Israel. And we need to handle this properly. Much of that responsibility will fall on those who intend to protest, but it also wouldn't hurt the average student to read a little and learn about our legacy and why Israel often surfaces as such a big part of it. We may not have asked for it, but this controversy follows us as long as we call this campus home.

Let's face it. The California trial won't deter active Brandeis students. And that's a good thing—college is the place to exude passion and fight (within reasonable limits) for an issue. But Brandeis is unique.

To those who protest, keep your demonstrations civil and informative. And to those who watch, don't simply cast aside the ideas your peers set forth. Remember, no one intends to change your mind; they are simply making noise.