Emory Advocates for Justice in Palestine (EAJP) hosted a lecture series on Tuesday to discuss the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the beginning of the 19th century until the present.

The event, entitled “Palestine in Perspective: From Colonization to the Present,” featured three speakers: Ziyaad Lunat, who has done social work in the West Bank and is seeking a job with the United Nations, activist Vanessa Saraj from the Atlanta Palestine Solidarity Movement and Navyu Gill, founding member of the Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid.

“The purpose of the event was to have an influential presentation about the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to view it from a different lens than what has been promoted in the American media,” EAJP Vice President Karim Tabbaa said. Tabbaa said he thinks the media portrays Israel as a victim of Palestinian terrorism without offering much of an alternative viewpoint in which the Palestinians are the oppressed.

Tabbaa said that of the hundred or so students who attended, several raised relevant and thoughtful questions in the question-and-answer session that followed.

Tabbaa said he felt the “scholarly and civilized” event was an open forum where students from both groups contributed “emphatic questions” that were very probing and serious.

“The reason I thought it was extremely successful was because it was very civil. It did get heated at times, but it always remained civil,” he said. “The questions were ... very concerned and probing questions, but there was no disturbance or disrespect or yelling.”

But Jessica Fraidlin, vice president of Israel awareness on the Hillel board, wrote in an e-mail to the Wheel that she felt there was little academic discourse.

“During the question-and-answer session, several pro-Israel students posed some very pertinent questions, but they were immediately shot down and not given a chance for a rebuttal; in addition their microphones were taken away, and they were laughed at,” she wrote.

Fraidlin later said in interview that she felt the series was very one-sided. Lunat’s speech contained many inaccuracies, and Gill’s presentation, which referred to the conflict as an apartheid, was unjustified and off-topic, she said. She said she felt like the event should have addressed both viewpoints and should have touched on the issue of Palestinian terrorism.

“I understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a rough subject and multi-faceted, but this does not warrant brushing over the other side’s viewpoints,” she wrote.

Contact Tiffany Han.