I agree that Walt's work on Israel was flawed, but he presents his work on that in the context of political science. Dershowitz's most famous book on the issue, "The Case for Israel", is not presented as a legal work but rather as a political commentary. *shrugs* Honestly it doesn't matter much to me either way; I just think that giving them the benefit of the doubt is theoretically possible. Granted, I sincerely doubt that their refusal was as noble as I'm suggesting it might be, but I want to distinguish between what their likely reasons were, and whether there are any legitimate grounds for preferring Dershowitz talk about his legal (and scholarly) career and not his advocacy (and political) career.