Loyola law students are still at odds about events that occurred during a lecture given by Alison Weir, pro-Palestinian activist and journalist, on Oct. 6.

Several students reported that, during the question and answer section of Weir’s visit, Professor James Viator responded to an aggressive pro-Palestinian audience member with a physical threat. Viator explained the reports recently.

“He interrupted every critical questioner in the audience with shouted criticism or insults, usually more than once,” Viator said. “Someone needed to calm him down.”

The audience member, who is not a Loyola student or faculty member, then reportedly shouted at Viator as he attempted to ask Weir a question, repeatedly calling him a liar.

“I calmly told him that since I’m from down the bayou, if he wanted to insult me and call me a liar, he needed to invite me outside.”

Now students on either side of the issue are speaking up about both faculty members’ behavior and Weir’s credibility under academic scrutiny. Law student Dennis Hester criticized what he called Viator’s “outburst.”

“Being called a liar is not a reason to challenge some one to a fight, especially as a professor and a representative of the school,” Hester said. “It disappointed me that a professor would challenge someone to a fight in an intellectual discussion.”

Melissa Mendoza, another law student, left the lecture after Viator confronted the other audience member.

“I’m embarrassed to be at a school where a professor threatens to take someone outside,” Mendoza said.

Aside from the incident involving Viator, the debate over Weir’s integrity under academic scrutiny continues.

Ryan Delaney, second-year law student and member of the Federalist Club, which espouses conservative, libertarian ideals, shared College of Law Dean Brian Bromberger’s reservations about Weir’s credibility.

“The speech itself was nothing but a series of statistics that had been doctored up to fit Ms. Weir’s personal views,” Delaney said. “Most alarming was her complete failure to give the true story behind the numbers she presented.”

Some students felt that Weir’s lecture was insensitive to those of Jewish descent. Sarah Roy, law student and vice president of the Federalist Club, was offended by the ethnic implications of Weir’s speech.

“As a Jewish student, I was extremely hurt and offended by the presentation,” Roy said. “I would have felt that the university is allowing hate speech if the Dean had not stated that he did not condone the presentation.”

Mendoza, who isn’t affiliated with PILG or the Federalist Club, questioned Bromberger’s introduction to Weir’s speech in which he said he would not have given her permission to speak had he reviewed her work earlier.

“They (PILG) brought her to share a perspective. She was there to discuss one side of the story,” Mendoza said. “He doesn’t have to have respect for her opinions, but the way he talked down about the woman was unprofessional.”

Roy defends Bromberger’s right to preface Weir’s speech.

“Dean Bromberger has the right, as well as the responsibility, to regulate outside speakers,” Roy said. “In fact, I would classify Weir’s presentation as hate speech, which the university should not allow.”

Mendoza said she didn’t detect anti-Semitism in Weir’s lecture.

“I don’t think she said anything offensive about Jewish people,” Mendoza said. “People say she was saying hateful things when she was simply not saying the things they wanted to hear.”

Law students are working to host lectures by a pro-Israeli speaker as well as the president of the National Organization for Women in the near future.

Maggie Calmes can be reached at [email protected].