A UCLA student this week declared in an op-ed in The Daily Bruin that members of the university’s student government should apologize for its recent discriminatory act.

Written by student Rachel Frenklak, it highlighted an Undergraduate Students Association meeting last week during which many of its council members opposed the confirmation of a student to a subcommittee – based on the fact that she is Jewish.

It was a clear and shocking example of anti-Semitism, and the incident has raced through social media outlets and prompted concern and outrage among many in the UCLA and Jewish communities.

At the Feb. 10 hearing, several members did not want to confirm Rachel Beyda to the association’s judicial board, the committee that determines if the student government’s actions comply with its bylaws. Essentially council members argued Beyda’s Jewish heritage is not compatible with the interests of the UCLA student government.

By Frenklak’s account, Beyda had been previously confirmed by the three-member council appointments review committee, and was thoroughly qualified for the position. However, after Beyda introduced herself and made the case for her confirmation, the subsequent question and deliberation period took a disturbing turn.

Student government member Fabienne Roth commenced the question period by asking Beyda: “Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community, given that recently…(inaudible)…has been surrounding cases of conflict of interest, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view in…(inaudible)…?”

At this point the Undergraduate Students Association president, Jewish student Avinoam Baral, interjected that “questioning a candidate’s ability to remain unbiased simply on the basis of her being a member of a particular community is an inappropriate question that we would not feel comfortable asking student members of other communities.”

The “case” marked by a “conflict of interest” that Roth referred to is likely the case brought before the judicial board last year by Students for Justice in Palestine against two Jewish members of the student government. It was brought in the aftermath of the USAC vote on the unsuccessful Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions affiliated “Resolution to Divest from Companies that Violate Palestinian Human Rights.”

SJP alleged that the two student council members in question, who are Jewish, were ineligible to vote on the matter, per student government bylaws, because they had taken prior trips to Israel funded by outside Jewish groups. SJP claimed these students’ affiliations with outside Jewish groups provided prima facie evidence of a “conflict of interest.”

Roth drove at the same principle when she questioned Beyda’s ability to remain unbiased merely because of her outside affiliations.

After Baral rejected the question, a second council member, Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed, posed the same question using less obvious terms. A third council member piggy-backed on the previous questions by asking Beyda what she thinks constitutes a conflict of interest.

“Rachel was asked to leave the room for council discussion,” Frenklak recounted. “What followed was a disgusting 40 minutes of what can only be described as unequivocal anti-Semitism during which some of our council members resorted to some of the oldest accusations against Jews, including divided loyalties and dishonesty.”

Half of the student council expressed at least some opposition to confirmation due to Beyda’s affiliations, and four councilmembers initially voted not to confirm based on such opposition.

“For some reason, I’m not 100 percent comfortable. I don’t know why,” council member Sadeghi-Movahed had said during the meeting. “I’ll go through her application again. I’ve been going through it constantly, but I definitely can see that she’s qualified for sure.”

Council member Roth said that she was opposed to confirmation, despite Beyda’s qualifications, because she is “part of a community [the Jewish community] that is very invested in USAC.”

After the initial vote failed to confirm Beyda, Frenklak writes that an attending faculty member stepped in to point out how USAC’s prohibition of conflict of interest, which includes “perceived conflict of interest,” is essentially impossible to comply with as it is subject to the perceptions of whoever happens to be a current council member. The faculty member stressed the importance of distinguishing between perceived and actual conflicts of interest.

After the faculty member’s emendation to the seemingly obstinate discussion of conflict of interest, the council members eventually unanimously approved Beyda for the position.

Nonetheless, Frenklak said she believes that the four members’ initial vote against Beyda constitutes a bold-faced act of anti-Semitism.

In addition to Frenklak’s op-ed, the Daily Bruin published an editorial admonishing council members.

“Religious affiliations and ethnic identity should not and do not disqualify someone from being an effective judge,” it stated. “And yet, at Tuesday night’s Undergraduate Students Association Council meeting, that’s exactly what council members were arguing.”

“Barring the dubious legality of not appointing someone based on his or her religious identity, the controversy over Beyda’s appointment makes little logical sense,” the editorial added. “The extent of Beyda’s involvement in Jewish community groups is irrelevant to her ability to execute her job on the Judicial Board. Suggesting otherwise implies that any person with any kind of community identity cannot make objective decisions on the board.”

The UCLA “Principles of Community” states:

We do not tolerate acts of discrimination, harassment, profiling or other conduct causing harm to individuals on the basis of expression of race, color, ethnicity, gender, age, disability, religious beliefs, political preference, sexual orientation, gender identity, citizenship or national origin among, other personal characteristics. Such conduct violates UCLA’s Principles of Community and may result in imposition of sanctions according to campus policies governing the conduct of students, staff and faculty.

It remains to be seen whether Undergraduate Students Association council members who assumed Beyda may vote a certain way based on her religious beliefs, and thus profiled and discriminated against her, will be subject to sanctions.

College Fix reporter Josh Hedtke is a student at UCLA.

Last week, I attended a council meeting to support my roommate, sorority sister and best friend, Rachel Beyda, as she went through the last step of being confirmed by the council as an appointed justice to the Judicial Board of the Undergraduate Students Association Council. I greatly admire Rachel’s academic success and the passion and determination she has demonstrated toward her goal of becoming a lawyer. I have seen her accrue immense leadership skills and experience in the legal field, both at UCLA, as the current law clerk for the Judicial Board and beyond. Therefore, as I ascended the stairs to Kerckhoff 417, I incorrectly assumed the confirmation of Rachel’s appointment would be quick and simple.

Rachel had been unanimously approved by the Appointments Review Committee consisting of three council members before she flawlessly introduced herself to the council. However, the first question directed at her by General Representative 3 Fabienne Roth was an attack on Rachel’s ability to be a justice based on her involvement in the Jewish community. At President Avinoam Baral’s insistence, the question was phrased slightly more considerately by Transfer Student Representative Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed, but this first question set the tone. Rachel finished the interview, making two important points: first, anyone qualified for the position would be a critical thinker who is knowledgeable about campus issues and therefore, has his or her own opinions and second, she has no significant political affiliations. Furthermore, she demonstrated an understanding of what actually having a conflict of interest means and acknowledged that a justice should remove herself from the decision-making process under those circumstances. Rachel was asked to leave the room for council discussion. What followed was a disgusting 40 minutes of what can only be described as unequivocal anti-Semitism during which some of our council members resorted to some of the oldest accusations against Jews, including divided loyalties and dishonesty.

All council members swiftly agreed Rachel was amply qualified for the position, but half of the council had strong reservations stemming from Rachel’s Jewish identity. “My issue is, I’m going to be upfront about it, I think she’s pretty great. She’s smart, she like knows her stuff, she’s like probably going to be a really great lawyer. But I’m like not going to pretend this isn’t about conflict of interest. … It’s not her fault … but she’s part of a community that’s very invested in USAC. … Even if she’s the right person for the job,” claimed Roth. Sadeghi-Movahed added, “For some reason, I’m not 100 percent comfortable. I don’t know why. I’ll go through her application again. I’ve been going through it constantly, but I definitely can see that she’s qualified for sure.” Throughout this discussion, Rachel anxiously paced outside, where, she later informed me, she could hear “conflict of interest” being yelled and concluded that it could only be about her being Jewish. Undoubtedly, the Israeli-Palestinan conflict is one of the most contentious issues on our campus. However, Israel was not mentioned during the discussion of Rachel’s appointment, only her affiliation with Jewish organizations, making the extensive deliberation a definitive act of discrimination.

The initial telling vote of 4-4-1 was dismissed when Cultural Affairs Commissioner Irmary Garcia said she was “not ready” for the vote. A faculty member in attendance eventually stepped in to point out the problems with the council’s reasons for denying Rachel the position. And in the end, the council unanimously approved her appointment. However, Rachel’s justified appointment to the Judicial Board is not enough to right the wrongs. I commend Sadeghi-Movahed for her necessary public apology on Facebook. I ask the four council members who initially questioned Rachel’s appointment on the basis of her Judaism to issue both public and personal apologies to the UCLA Jewish community and Rachel. Until they all admit wrongdoing and ask for forgiveness, it is difficult to trust their morality as decision-makers. Furthermore, I expect administrative condemnation of their words and actions as exactly what they were: undeniable anti-Semitism. I expect more of elected leaders and hope no one else will face being denied a deserved opportunity on the basis of identity. A recording of the meeting can be seen on the USAC Live! Youtube channel, and I encourage all students to watch some of it and become aware of who your representatives are. In a few months, we will hold elections for new USAC representatives. In light of this incident, I hope students take the time to learn about the issues and vote for representatives they believe will serve the student body with integrity.

Yup, it's looking like it's Israel 24 / 7 as if they're some kind of special people.
But that's the problem, isn't it?

What does this have to do with Israel? They are saying she has a conflict of interest because she's Jewish.

The problem are rag headed Nazis who remain in the Dark Ages.

Thank me.

“Rachel anxiously paced outside, where, she later informed me, she could hear “conflict of interest” being yelled and concluded that it could only be about her being Jewish. Undoubtedly, the Israeli-Palestinan[sp] conflict is one of the most contentious issues on our campus. However, Israel was not mentioned during the discussion of Rachel’s appointment, only her affiliation with Jewish organizations, making the extensive deliberation a definitive act of discrimination. “

what “ Jewish”organizations? Does the counsel know something not being told here?

There is a recording of the proceedings, where her religion is discussed in detail

WESTWOOD (CBSLA.com) — A Jewish student running for a seat on a judicial council at UCLA was questioned about how she would decide on a matter that dealt with Jewish students should she be elected, according to a video clip.

The incident occurred during an Undergraduate Students Association Council meeting.

As KCAL9’s Andrea Fujii reports, it was then sophomore Rachel Beyda’s Jewish background came under fire while up for a vote to be on the group’s judicial council.

According to a video clip posted on YouTube, an unidentified student posed the following question:

“Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community … given that recently … [inaudible] has been surrounding cases of conflict of interest, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view … [inaudible]?”

That’s when Avinoam Baral, president of the group, interrupted.

“The discussion was really discriminatory in nature. I had to step in and say my peace,” Baral told Fujii.

Baral says several members were questioning Beyda’s judgment if she were to decide on a matter that dealt with Jewish students.

A vote was taken and Beyda was denied the position.

After further discussion, though, the group voted her in but some students say the damage has been done.

“I was honestly just sickened at the way they questioned her,” said Heena Doshi, a UCLA student.

UCLA’s Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, Janina Montero, released a statement, which read in part: “I believe our community is more generous, thoughtful and inclusive than this particular incident would suggest.”

KCAL9 asked Beyda to be a part of the story but she declined as she is on the judicial board.

Meanwhile, Fujii has been told that student members, who originally voted against Beyda, have since apologized.

" Jewish organizations on campus."
It would certainly clear this squawking parade of offended outrage to know exactly which " Jewish organizations on campus." she was a member of.

Why is this not being reported? Something to hide, behind this megaphone outrage?
One does wonder.

If any other groups but Jews were targeted, these students would have been forced to resign

Ah someone who may know of the "Jewish Organization"[s] the poor widdle Israeli wanta-be [?] was an active member of.
Cat got yer tongue?
One wonders.

LOS ANGELES — It seemed like routine business for the student council at the University of California, Los Angeles: confirming the nomination of Rachel Beyda, a second-year economics major who wants to be a lawyer someday, to the council’s Judicial Board.

Until it came time for questions.

“Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community,” Fabienne Roth, a member of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, began, looking at Ms. Beyda at the other end of the room, “how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

For the next 40 minutes, after Ms. Beyda was dispatched from the room, the council tangled in a debate about whether her faith and affiliation with Jewish organizations, including her sorority and Hillel, a popular student group, meant she would be biased in dealing with sensitive governance questions that come before the board, which is the campus equivalent of the Supreme Court.

The discussion, recorded in written minutes and captured on video, seemed to echo the kind of questions, prejudices and tropes — particularly about divided loyalties — that have plagued Jews across the globe for centuries, students and Jewish leaders said.

The council, in a meeting that took place on Feb. 10, voted first to reject Ms. Beyda’s nomination, with four members against her. Then, at the prodding of a faculty adviser there who pointed out that belonging to Jewish organizations was not a conflict of interest, the students revisited the question and unanimously put her on the board.

But in the weeks since, that uncomfortable debate has upended this campus of 29,600 students that has long been central to the identity of Los Angeles. It has set off an anguished discussion of how Jews are treated, particularly in comparison with other groups that are more typically viewed as victims of discrimination, such as African-Americans and gays and lesbians.

The session — a complete recording of which has been removed from YouTube — has served to spotlight what appears to be a surge of hostile sentiment directed against Jews at many campuses in the country, often a byproduct of animosity toward the policies of Israel. This is one of many campuses where the student council passed, on a second try and after fierce debate, a resolution supporting the Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions movement aimed at punishing Israel.

“We don’t like to wave the flag of anti-Semitism, but this is different,” Rabbi Aaron Lerner, the incoming executive director of the Hillel chapter at U.C.L.A., said of the vote against Ms. Beyda. “This is bigotry. This is discriminating against someone because of their identity.”

Reports of anti-Israeli or anti-Jewish sentiment have been on the rise across the country in recent years, especially directed at younger Jews, researchers said. Barry A. Kosmin, a Trinity College researcher and a co-author of a study issued last month that found extensive examples of anti-Semitism directed at college students, said he had not come across anything as striking as what happened at U.C.L.A.

“It’s egregious and startling,” Mr. Kosmin said. “If they had used this with any other group — sexual, racial, any kind of identity group — they would have realized it was illegal.”

Ms. Beyda, 20, who is from Cupertino and is president-elect of the Jewish sorority Sigma Alpha Epsilon Pi, said she did not want to comment on her confirmation hearing because of her role on the Judicial Board, whose duties include hearing challenges to the constitutionality of actions of the council.

“As a member of the Judicial Board, I do not feel it is appropriate for me to comment on the actions of U.C.L.A.’s elected student government,” she said by email.

The four students who opposed her wrote a letter of apology to the campus newspaper, the Daily Bruin. “Our intentions were never to attack, insult or delegitimize the identity of an individual or people,” they wrote. “It is our responsibility as elected officials to maintain a position of fairness, exercise justness, and represent the Bruin community to the best of our abilities, and we are truly sorry for any words used during this meeting that suggested otherwise.”

Ms. Roth, in an email Thursday evening, expressed distress about the episode. “I have already apologized profusely for what happened during our council meeting and I deeply regret how I phrased my questions to Rachel,” she said.

The university’s chancellor, Gene D. Block, issued a statement denouncing the attacks on Ms. Beyda. “To assume that every member of a group can’t be impartial or is motivated by hatred is intellectually and morally unacceptable,” he said. “When hurtful stereotypes — of any group — are wielded to delegitimize others, we are all debased.”

In an interview on Thursday, Chancellor Block said he viewed this as “a teaching moment. These are students that are learning about governance. I think they all learned about what’s appropriate and what’s not appropriate. The campus has come together on this.”

Yet some Jewish leaders here questioned whether Mr. Block or the students appreciated the meaning of the event. John L. Rosove, the senior rabbi at Temple Israel of Hollywood, said the incident “reflects something deeper, more troubling, insidious, and pervasive not just at U.C.L.A. but on college campuses nationwide.”

“I am not one who sees anti-Semites lurking under every bed,” he wrote in his blog. “I am not a fear-monger. I do not believe that all criticism of Jews or the state of Israel is necessarily anti-Semitic.”

“Yet,” he said, “our inability to use the term anti-Semitism when it concerns Jews, when we don’t have a problem calling other forms of ethnic and religious bigotry what it is, raises disturbing questions about prevalent attitudes towards Jews, Judaism, Zionism, and the state of Israel.”

The president of the student council, Avinoam Baral, who had nominated Ms. Beyda, appeared stunned at the turn of questioning at the session and sought at first to rule Ms. Roth’s question out of order. “I don’t feel that’s an appropriate question,” he said.
Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story

In an interview, Mr. Baral, who is Jewish, said he “related personally to what Rachel was going through.”

“It’s very problematic to me that students would feel that it was appropriate to ask that kind of questions, especially given the long cultural history of Jews,” he said. “We’ve been questioned all of our history: Are Jews loyal citizens, don’t they have divided loyalties? All of these anti-Semitic tropes.”

He called Ms. Beyda a “stand-out applicant,” with strong grades, interest and experience in the law. The students who voted against her also praised her credentials, but kept returning to questions about whether she could set aside her religious affiliation when ruling on issues before the council.

Rachel Frenklak, who is Ms. Beyda’s roommate and president of the sorority, said she had gone to the meeting expecting an enjoyable night watching her “best friend” get approved, and was stunned at what she witnessed.

“I swear the word Israel was not said once,” she said Thursday. “It was all about Jewish affiliations. It didn’t leave any doubt that what this is is anti-Semitism. There has to be recognition that there is anti-Semitism on the campus, and it manifested itself first with the anti-Israel stuff.”

The boycott resolution, and the battle it set off here, was not explicitly mentioned but was described by her and others as setting the subtext for the episode.

“The overall culture of targeting Israel led to targeting Jewish students,” said Natalie Charney, student president of the U.C.L.A. chapter of Hillel. “People say that being anti-Israel is not the same as being anti-Semitic. The problem is the anti-Israel culture in which we are singling out only the Jewish state creates an environment where it’s O.K. to single out Jewish students.”

“Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community,” Fabienne Roth, a member of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, began, looking at Ms. Beyda at the other end of the room, “how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

Imagine if Fabienne Roth had said this about a Muslim student, or a black student, or a gay student?

Why was she not asked to resign?

This is just shocking

Fabienne Roth is so into herself, she be like. "I'm putting this on my resume. I'm in the New York times"

why has nobody reported on the various " Jewish Organizations" this Mossad bitch was a member of?

These Are the UCLA antisemites;
Sadeghi Movahed
Fabienne Roth
Sofia Moreno
Haq Manjot Singh

There must be a very good reason the " Jewish Organizations" this poor, poor little junior politician belonged to are a forbidden subject.

As individuals committed to social activism and advocating on behalf of underrepresented communities, we understand the importance and urgency of wearing our identities as a badge of honor. Integral to this is respecting and celebrating identities other than our own, and for this reason it is vital to hold ourselves accountable when we fail to respect this necessity.

Thus we ask the Jewish community to accept our sincerest apology for remarks made during the Feb. 10 Undergraduate Students Association Council meeting concerning the potential Judicial Board appointee. Our intentions were never to attack, insult or delegitimize the identity of an individual or people. It is our responsibility as elected officials to maintain a position of fairness, exercise justness, and represent the Bruin community to the best of our abilities, and we are truly sorry for any words used during this meeting that suggested otherwise.

As students of this university, we are in a unique position to learn from individuals from all backgrounds and identities; this education is a necessary and significant part of the True Bruin experience. Moreover, we look forward to engaging in cross-cultural exchange with the Jewish community and learning more about what we can do to better support the community.

With solidarity and respect,

General Representative 1 Manjot Singh, General Representative 2 Sofia Moreno Haq, General Representative 3 Fabienne Roth and Transfer Student Representative Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed

The Undergraduate Students Association Council at the University of California, Los Angeles, has taken down the video of a meeting where members asked what they've since acknowledged were inappropriate questions about a student's Jewish identity.

The university's USAC typically posts recordings of its meetings on YouTube. But the student government took down the footage of a Feb. 10 meeting where several students questioned whether Rachel Beyda, a Jewish candidate for the school's judicial board, could be "unbiased" given her religion.

Various news reports on the controversy this week prompted the hosts of MSNBC's "Morning Joe" to call on the university to put the video back online Friday. But the university told The Huffington Post that the decision to pull the video was made by the USAC's internal vice president's office.

USAC representatives did not respond to inquiries from HuffPost about why the video was taken down.

The group StandWithUs, a pro-Israel education and advocacy organization, is circulating a clipped video of the controversial meeting. Legal Insurrection, a conservative blog, has uploaded the full video of the meeting as it pertains to Beyda's nomination.

Avinoam Baral, USAC president, had nominated Beyda, 20, for a position on the university's Student Judicial Board. She appeared at a Feb. 10 council meeting to answer questions and make her case as a solid candidate.

But members of the council kept focusing on Beyda's Jewish identity, video from the meeting shows.

"Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community... how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?" asked Fabienne Roth, a USAC general representative.

Baral interjected, saying, "I don't think that's a question we'd feel comfortable asking other students."

But another person in the room asked Beyda if she had "any political affiliations that could cause a conflict of interest."

"If I ever felt that I had a vested interest or any bias, I would remove myself from the decision," Beyda responded. She stayed upbeat and collected throughout the questioning.

After Beyda left the room, USAC members continued to voice concerns, many of which appeared to be related to Beyda's being Jewish.

As heard in the video, several members said they believed Beyda was qualified, but wondered whether as a sophomore she was ready for the position, or if her "political affiliations" presented a conflict. One person said that Beyda belonged to "a community that is very invested in certain outcomes." Baral told them they were being "inappropriate."

"What I'm seeing right now is someone potentially being denied a position because they're Jewish," Baral told his colleagues, according to the video. "I see no other reason. She's a great candidate, obviously. And she’s fantastic."

Roth did not respond to a request for comment from HuffPost about why she brought up Beyda's religion.

Although it isn't explicitly mentioned during the discussion, the Feb. 10 meeting with Beyda took place amid a push by student activists at UCLA and elsewhere for their schools to join the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. The BDS movement was started in 2005 by Palestinian groups to increase pressure on Israel to end the occupation of certain territories.

In November, the USAC voted in favor of a resolution calling on UCLA to divest from all "American companies that some say profit from human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip," as the Daily Bruin, UCLA's student newspaper, reported.

The initial vote to confirm Beyda at the Feb. 10 meeting was split, 4-4. She was confirmed unanimously on a second vote after a faculty member stepped in to elaborate on the USAC's conflict of interest policy, according to a copy of the minutes.

Roth, Manjot Singh, Sofia Moreno Haq and Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed, USAC members who were all present at the Feb. 10 meeting, later apologized for focusing on Beyda's Jewish background during the confirmation process.

UCLA Chancellor Gene D. Block said in a campuswide email last week that "council members unfairly questioned the fitness of a USAC Judicial Board applicant" because she was Jewish.

"No student should feel threatened that they would be unable to participate in a university activity because of their religion," Block wrote.

When reached by HuffPost on Friday, Beyda declined to comment, saying, "As a member of the Judicial Board, I do not feel it is appropriate for me to comment on the actions of UCLA’s elected student government."

Yup it seems this poor 'victim' was a member of some extremist Jewish Organization.
Mossad?

Why don't you tell us, since you pretend to know. There are no organizations listed, because it didn't matter. Rachel was targeted by the Swiss Bitch because she was Jewish. Swiss bitch apologized, kinda sorta, because there was publicity. No other reason.

“because it didn't matter “
because you say so. Maybe it does matter, say, if these organizations are rabid anti-Palestinian or Pro-Israeli genocide policies.
You should inform the reader of these so far, hidden affiliations. Is it another occult subject?
One that cannot survive scrutiny?

What hate group celebrates "Diversity" with a long list of epithets for those who truly ARE different?

When ever the Zionist cult cannot answer a question, the resident Israeli psycho chimes in with nothing but squawks about brown shirts or Nazis.
What "Jewish Organizations" did this person belong to?
ADL, SPLC, Mossad?
answer the question.

No one mentioned her POLITICAL affiliations. They only mentioned her religious affiliations.
You are confalting politics and religion.

I believe a candid expose' would clear this up above the flummery about 'racism'.
What 'Jewish Organizations" was she involved with?
Maybe the dissenters had a valid point which is looking more likely each time the subject is avoided.

“Given that you are a woman and very active in the female community, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

“Given that you are black and very active in the black community, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

“Given that you are gay and very active in the gay community, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

It seems obvious that any of these questions would be repudiated on almost any college campus, or in any polite company. Yet somehow, a few UCLA students thought the following was an appropriate question for a nominee for the student Judicial Board: “Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

Ultimately, Rachel Beyda, a sophomore, was confirmed to the role. But the line of questioning has sparked a conversation about anti-Semitism at UCLA and on college campuses more broadly. (The story's path—from the student-run Daily Bruin to Jewish outlets, then on to conservative blogs and finally, on Friday, The New York Times, is an interesting case study in how a story becomes a national headline

Members were apparently concerned that Beyda, who is also a member of campus Hillel and a Jewish sorority, would not be able to rule impartially on issues before the board. Of course, there are many possible identities that could be involved in issues before the board, but Judaism was particularly close to members' minds because Beyda's nomination came not long after a bruising campus debate about "BDS," or Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions, a push to get universities to isolate Israel. UCLA's student government eventually approved a non-binding resolution calling on the university to divest from a list of companies it said was complicit in the occupation of the West Bank.

According to the Atlantic, she was a member of a Jewish sorority and the campus Hillel, where the Jewish students worship

I believe that someone may be omitting "Jewish Organizations" aside from her Synagog.

Oh well,denial and obfuscation are the hallmarks of the Israeli infiltration of political affairs.

Note- they didn't say "political affiliations". They said "Jewish affiliations" But the racists apologized, at least .

At the University of Oklahoma, students were expelled for overt racism. Fabienne Roth and friends got off easy