Sunday, January 19

Submission: USAC members should apologize for discriminatory act

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.

Frenklak is a third-year physiological sciences student, president of Sigma Alpha Epsilon Pi and member of Hillel at UCLA.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Share on Reddit

Comments are supposed to create a forum for thoughtful, respectful community discussion. Please be nice. View our full comments policy here.

  • howlongcanmyusernamebewow

    USAC should apologize? Why not recall the people who expressed inflammatory remarks?

  • hypocrisy

    Questioning Rachel Beyda’s affiliation with the Hillel is not anti-semitic. The Hillel is a political organization masquerading as a religious organization that attempts to discredit / demonize anyone who questions Israeli treatment of Palestinians.

    There are many unanswered questions regarding the Milstein affair and the Hillel’s role in it. The Senate was right to question Rachel’s affiliation with such organization.

    Your “anti-semitism” claims are just the usual bogus claims. Give it a rest.

    • David

      I don’t know who you think you’re fooling. Watching this was like watching a scene from “Gentleman’s Agreement”. People like you disgust me.

    • Just A Student

      Careful, your anti-Semitism is showing

    • Just A Student

      Not to mention,
      1. Hillel is a multi-faceted organization that provides various ways for Jewish students to engage in student life. It is a Jewish religious and cultural center. Involvement in Hillel is not a political statement.
      2. Beyda’s primary affiliation is with Sigma AEPi, the Jewish sorority.
      So yes, questioning her personal affiliations as a Jewish student were absolutely anti-Semitic.

    • walt kovacs

      you give it a rest

      you are nothing more than an anti semite masquerading as an anti zionist

    • roccolore

      What would happen if someone questioned a Muslim student in a similar fashion? You fascist Democrats would be running to Hamas-linked CAIR and the school would disband the council!

      • Jonathan Seidman


      • Bonnetierre

        They would be made to resign, at the very least. Expulsion would be on the table.

      • hypocrisy

        “The Simon Wiesenthal Center, StandWithUs, conservative commentator David Horowitz and others have called on the board to reject Saifuddin’s appointment, alleging that some of her political activities as a student senator and member of the Muslim Students Association at Berkeley make her unqualified to represent the University of California system’s more than 222,000 students.”

        Thank You. Thank You.

        • roccolore

          So hypocrite, are any schools planning to divest from Muslim countries where gays are thrown off buildings or hanged from gallows?

        • postsocratic

          That sounds Islamophobic and wrong, but I don’t see how that would justify the antisemitic treatment Rachel faced. Both Islamophobia and anti-semitism are wrong.

          • Johnathan Swift Jr.

            Please, pray tell, what is “Islamaphobia?” Is opposing ISIS, the Islamic State, which murders people for being gay, chops heads off of people they declare are apostates, burns people alive, traffics in child brides, rapes women, Islamaphobic?

          • Bonnetierre

            There is no such thing as Islamophia. A phobia is an irrational fear. Given the current events, and history of Islam, a fear of it would not be irrational. It’s an Islamo-reality.

        • Bonnetierre

          You’re joking right? MSA is well-known to be connected to terrorism. Simply searching for the phrase “MSA terrorism” yields many, many articles on the subject. Maybe you should stop trying to cover up for them.

          “Terrorism expert Patrick Poole, however, told CBN
          News his investigation of the organization shows it’s being used for
          another purpose.

          “The Muslim Students Association has been a virtual
          terror factory,” said Poole. “Time after time after time again, we see
          these terrorists — and not just fringe members: these are MSA leaders,
          MSA presidents, MSA national presidents — who’ve been implicated,
          charged and convicted in terrorist plots.”

          The roll call includes Anwar al-Awlaki, the al Qaeda cleric linked to terror plots from Fort Hood to Times Square and beyond. ” – Muslim Student Group a Gateway to Jihad?

          Quite a fitting screen name for you, hypocrit.
          As far as I’m concerned, MSA should be BANNED from all college campuses immediately.

        • Merkava

          She’s associated with a terrorist organization. In addition, she supports a group that throws Gay Men from the tops of buildings and then kicks at their bodies on the ground. Of course, you support that practice, too. “Hypocrisy” fits you well.

        • Fathom40

          No, no, thank YOU!

          For showing us what a complete moron you are.

        • Johnathan Swift Jr.

          She was not opposed for being a Muslim but for belonging to a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. The MB is a font for terrorism all over the world.

          A number of these organizations are simply organized to enable terrorism, to apologize for it, to intimidate opponents, so that it is more rather than less likely.

          Take a gander at the Atlantic Magazine article on ISIS or the poll this morning that stated at 27% of British Muslims expressed support for the Paris attackers. These organizations exist in order to further radicalize a population that is already being radicalized through the export of Wahhabism, a particularly radical vision of “back to the 7th Century” Islam.

          This young woman was opposed, for one thing, being ethnically Jewish, which in the minds of these young people disqualified her.

    • Cromulent

      Germany called. Do you know how to operate an oven?

    • Ryan Bellerose

      actually your name is pretty apt, Hillels are both “open” and also the normal, more moral ones, as usual you guys got busted being racist and try to justify it. how many on the senate are members of sphr?, a group that openly calls for the destruction of Israel. hypocrisy indeed

    • jerseydave

      Would this mean that a Black student who joined a Black Fraternity or an Iranian-American student who joined an Iranian-American group should be excluded, too? To bar any ethnicity from confirmation on the basis of ethnicity is to hang a “This race need not apply” sign on the door. Not something any American University should be associated with in 2015.

      It is also worth noting that one student on the board advocated equal opportunities as her platform when she stood for her office herself.

      • hypocrisy
        • suz

          Am I correct that the young woman we are discussing here was criticized simply because she’s a member of Hillel and not because of any anti-Islamic views she’s expressed? Am I correct that Israel and Palestine were never mentioned in the Council’s discussion, and only her Hillel affiliation? (If that is true: How DARE they?) Do you really not see the difference between the person you keep bringing up and the woman in this case? I am not justifying or not justifying what may or may not have happened in that situation but I see an enormous difference between a person who speaks out politically and a person who is simply an active member of a RELIGIOUS organization.

    • postsocratic

      Even if what you’re saying is true, they didn’t mention the Hillel or any of the claims you mention at all. The first question literally asked that since she was Jewish and involved in “Jewish organizations” could she be unbiased. The named source of their questioning what her Jewish identity and involvement in a Jewish sorority, not the Hillel.

    • Bill Pearlman

      Shouldn’t you be over in Syria cutting off someone’s head and buying a sex slave

      • Scott Weber

        No. That d-bag would never leave it’s dorm/mom’s basement.

      • Johnathan Swift Jr.

        Most of the apologists don’t do anything except for sound off there in the states, because they know they are spouting drivel, that the head choppers would be glad to chop theirs too. I would love for them to venture to Iraq and Syria to express “solidarity” with the oppressed, but it seldom happens. Already many of the western converts who decided that the 7th century lifestyle wasn’t too nifty have been axed, and when I say axed, I don’t mean fired, but having their heads chopped off with a dull knife, for being insufficiently zealous. These people revel in bloodshed and cruelty, but have widespread support from many of the modern day Stalinists on the campus, go figure!

    • Shmuel

      Complete and utter rubbish. I am familiar with Hillel, and am a former UCLA student. It is a religious organization.


    • Raydonn

      As long as the A/S™ card holds its power, they’ll continue to use it……

    • Merkava

      Like I said, 99.95% of anti-Israel people are anti-semitic. The compaint of being antisemiticstings you for some reason. Why? You want to see 6 million Jews killed. Why would that accusation sting you? Is it because it is the truth?

    • Johnathan Swift Jr.

      So then, everyone elected or appointed to a position at UCLA must be on the “correct” side of the Israel/Palestine debate, is that what you are saying, that a test of political correctness exists?

      If so, why not simply codify that, state in the open which opinions everyone in a political body must hold. Of course, that would seem, at least from a lay person’s point of view, someone not so well read, traveled and educated as yourself at what, 19, 20, 22, to obviate the entire concept of democracy or representative government? In fact, it reminds me much more of what I experienced in the old GDR when I traveled and was detained there when I was a little older than you are likely to be.

      You see, the problem is that when someone on high decides what the proper, approved views are, they are subject to change, sometimes on a whim, or when the dictator who usually takes over such schemes, the Stalin, the Honecker, the Jaruzelski, decides they should, then everyone who holds the politically incorrect views ends up in a cell or a grave.

      There was an old Soviet saying that a friend of mine who was in one of the Soviet agencies used to tell me: “The future we know, its the past that keeps changing.” Another favorite in the worker’s paradise was “We pretend to work, you pretend to pay us.”:

      Every one of you who support these litmus tests should immigrate to Cuba or North Korea for year or two and see what living in a state where only approved views are allowed is really like. Take a look at The Real Cuba web site, one not approved by Danny Glover or Shawn Penn. What you are advocating is but a hop, skip and a jump away from the totalitarian mindset, a type of Stalin-lite.

      As someone who grew up surrounded by those who survived Hitler, Stalin and Castro, I appreciate a place where we can have different opinions and air them without repercussion, but on the college campus, our own little GDRs in waiting, with “trigger warnings” and “free speech zones” and all the pablum for the precious little hothouse flowers that attend college today, that is rapidly becoming a thing of the past!

    • CountyRat

      Ruth’s application for board membership was not challenged because of her Hillel membership; it was challenged because, “she is Jewish, and that creates a conflict of interest”. That statement speaks for itself.

    • yossarion

      I wonder if those muslim students have been involved with the Muslim Student Union and in light of their recent activities if they have been questioned as vigorously as Ms. Beyda was.

  • Hchernin

    An apology is simply not enough. These so-called “leaders” should resign as well. They have harmed the integrity of the student body government and embarrassed the entire student body.

    • holygoat

      Bingo. They have proven their inability to act in an unbiased manner. They need to go.

    • Gremlin1974

      Actually they should be removed in disgrace by the administration, however since the administration at UCLA is probably more bigoted than they are I doubt that will happen.

    • AchillesAchillesAchilles

      Absolutely. One gathers the four made comments consistent with the notion that lining up Jews & executing them in the US would benefit the world. Such persons have no business sitting in judgment on anyone else at a university.

      Of course, the words themselves are not available to the public for some reason. The UCLA Live! you tube channel removed the meeting, preventing anyone from actually seeing what these persons said.

    • drakejr

      They have humiliated UCLA with this hateful behavior. As an alumnus, I’ll be sure it is mentioned the next time the school hits me up for money. I’ll remind my wife to do the same.

    • DogOfDooM

      Please sign the petition for removal at nnnnn

  • Bruin

    This is sickening… UCLA campus climate has gone down the drain ever since BDS was introduced. There is no doubt that this hateful act of antisemitism is a direct result of the BDS propaganda that has been spewed on campus over the past several years. And unfortunately, things are only going to get worse until there is a major change on campus, starting with the student leadership. Those student “leaders” listed in the above article should respectfully resign

  • roccolore

    Liberals = fascism

    • Zippitydont

      Nice job of generalizing just like those in the article did.

      Also, learn what fascism is.

    • Jim

      That’s idiotic.

      • roccolore

        Well, ask Ayaan Hirsi Ali about being disinvited from Brandeis.

  • Cromulent

    Proves once again that America’s home for Jew hatred is on the Left.

    • Shootist
      • Cromulent


      • Moshe Ben Avram

        I don’t so what’s your point?

        • Shootist

          You were complaining about the left and 76% of Jews vote leftist. The explanation is enlightening.

          • Moshe Ben Avram

            I already know the explanation. I wanted you to explain that 30% don’t vote liberal which you did, and should have in the first place. Thanks for playing.

          • Shootist

            I don’t see what you’re getting at. The post is self-explanatory.

          • Moshe Ben Avram

            No it’s not, but then your too dense to see it and I’m not spelling it out for you.

          • Dont Ask

            Speaking of spelling……”your” or “you’re”?

          • Moshe Ben Avram

            So sue me for being lazy.

          • Dont Ask

            Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones…..just saying.

          • Moshe Ben Avram

            I like my glass house, don’t you know.

      • Dont Ask

        I guess that makes most American Jews JINO’s (Jews In Name Only). That’s sad.

        • Shootist

          Neither religious, nor attached to Israel. Yes, 50 years of progressive control of American education has just about destroyed all that is good about America.

    • Raydonn

      Actually, the resurgence is gaining traction on both sides…….as it has throughout recorded history. Why is that?

      • Cromulent

        Um, no. In the US the home for Jew hatred is firmly on the Left.

        • Shootist

          Boy, ain’t it the truth? Stalwart allies, treated like chopped liver. And by whom? Not by the “reactionary” Conservatives but by the “enlightened” Progressives. It’s shameful.

          • Piltdown Ghost

            It proves we have principles (if we libertarian-conservatives are the same “we” as other Conservatives). We reject anti-Semitism because it is wrong, not because we expect any thanks or political payback from the people we stand up for.

            It is the same with protecting Asian-Americans from Affirmative Action. It doesn’t matter whether yesterday’s majority was Republican or today’s Democrat. Principled Conservatives don’t do identity politics; we do what is right.

      • Piltdown Ghost

        Anti-Semitism on the Right was stamped out in the 1960’s almost entirely by the efforts of one highly influential political pundit named William F. Buckley. To this day no respectable Conservative will associate with anti-Semites, let alone hold anti-Semitic views.

        Anti-Semitism on the Left came from many sources but if I had to name the most influential I’d go with Edward Said. Ironically though 9/11 discredited much of his work his influence had already spread throughout a mainstream Left desperate to find a “root cause” for terrorism.

        • AchillesAchillesAchilles

          The “root cause” for terrorism among Islamic communities are the persons Mr. Qutb, Mr. al Banna, & Mr. al Husseini. These individuals, & groups who support them, are responsible for the terrorism that we face from Islamist Terrorists. I know dozens of Muslims; none would bomb the Boston Marathon, fly planes into buildings, or kill to get six dozen virgins. The reason this is so is because none of these persons follows Mr. Qutb, Mr. al Banna, or Mr. al Husseini or their ilk. By contrast, Hamas, ISIS, & the Muslim brotherhood, among others, do follow those fascists.

          • Piltdown Ghost

            The anti-Semitic Left is not satisfied with that answer, nor of course was Mr. Said. When the Left goes looking for root causes they won’t stop until they find a colonialist scapegoat, and Mr. Said gave them one. Said’s influence was such that those whose goal was to “drive the Jews into the sea” became victims of colonialism rather than perpetrators of a failed genocide; likewise the indigenous Jewish people were stripped of “indigenous” status and named colonial oppressors. The anti-Semitic Left lapped it up because it played to their biases.

            Incidentally of the dozens of Muslims you say you know how many are anti-Semites? My experience so far is “all”. I hope you’ve had better luck.

      • Jim

        Traction among insecure sociopaths, who are all over the spectrum.

    • Jim

      KKK? Country club set?

      • Piltdown Ghost

        William F. Buckley? Times have changed, both on the Right and the Left.

  • Ryan Bellerose

    If I was a student at UCLA I would be calling for those racist bigots to resign immediately. how can anyone trust them to make impartial decisions when they are clearly bigots.

  • Jonathan Seidman


    they should be given the boot…immediately.

    clearly they are partial and have conflicts of interest…they are also clearly prejudiced and racist.

    those who tolerate intolerance have nobody to blame but themselves for the results.

  • wjre

    In bastion of political correctness California Universities unabashed anti-Semitism is totally OK.

    • Zippitydont

      Seriously? Have you seen the reaction? Even on this thread, the reaction is pretty universal: disgust. And most are calling for dismissal. That doesn’t seem like it’s “totally Ok” to me.

      • wjre

        Yes, people like me, not part of academia, can rail. Let’s see if there are consequences. 2 giggling UC Davis girls in headscarves held up a picture of Benjamin Netanyahu with horns (medieval antisemitic trope if you aren’t aware) comparing him to Hitler. There have been no sanctions against them. Frats that have dressed like rappers have been shut down.

        • holygoat

          This is important to note. If these people are allowed to continue to hold their positions with the USAC, then blatant Anti-Semitism IS okay at UCLA.

          Imagine the apoplectic outrage — entirely justified — had a Council member questioned the “conflict of interest” of a black, gay, transgender or Muslim candidate? You’ll not convince me that said Council members would be allowed to continue to hold their positions on the Council, nor should they.

          • putthehammerdown

            A **Double Bingo**, to you, and for good reasons, all well-explained.

    • Jim

      Actually the opposite turned out to be true in this case.

  • bruce44

    The appointment and the apology are irrelevant compared to the need for deep soul searching on the part of every UCLA student and staff member. California of all places has always been the home of equal rights, of civil liberties, of anti-discrimination. How can someone’s religion be used against them by a UCLA organization without every UCLA student being in shock? Something very wrong is in the air out there.

  • miss_msry

    Sounds like Sadeghi-Movahed is the one with “conflicts of interest”.

    • Bonnetierre


      Someone that holds such an opinion as Sadeghi-Movahed need not be in a position of power.

  • eagle

    guess people just don’t know what freedom of speech is anymore you can swing it all the way the opposite direction, at the same time everybody’s going to be afraid to speak their mind regardless what its about, this is what freedom of speech means you get the right to say whatever you want regardless of who likes it or not, otherwise somebody somewhere along the lines is not going to like anything you have to say , firing people because of what they say and because of what they think, is this how we are now controlling the population to fall in line to be what we want them to be, and who is the we peoples, it’s all the people who are not tolerant of anyone else’s view except for their own.

    • suz

      Freedom of speech is not absolute. I’m sure you already realize that you can’t blithely yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater. What you may not be seeing here is that speech in the capacity of this Council position is also limited. You don’t get to discriminate against people based on their race or religion or gender and as a result your discussion doesn’t get to go in that direction. You want to sit in the privacy of your own home and spew racism? Go for it. You want to stand on public property with a banner that decries the rights of Jews? You won’t be the first. But if you want to serve on this Council, you don’t get to bring those views in with you.

      • eagle

        Personally I am for the Jews and the land of Israel, but what I have found in these last few generation is anyone who speaks out about anything they will be attack, even to the point of losing there job or business. I will defend your right to your opinion or right to express your opinion ,even if I do not like what you are saying, this it what we call freedom of Speech, yelling fire in a movie theater has nothing to do with freedom of speech. The word racism is used very fast, is it the magic word for shut up. . I wonder

        • suz

          This is probably a lost cause but I’m going to try once more. Yes, you have the freedom to say and think whatever the heck you want in your own personal life. You are free to march in public and say whatever you want.

          Your lose some of that freedom when you enter other arenas. The fire in the movie theater is the obvious example usually cited as a limitation on free speech. I wasn’t analogizing to this situation. I was simply trying to underscore that “freedom of speech” is not an absolute right. But yes, yelling fire in a movie theater has everything to do with freedom of speech and when speech becomes less free.

          Does it help to think of it a different way? You can’t enter a workplace and threaten your co-workers. You can’t tell a supervisor that you won’t work with African Americans. And in this case, where you are serving as a member of a University Council, a public university mind you, you do not get to express a reservation about a person based on that person’s religious affiliation.

          • eagle

            Nothing is a lost cause if we both agree to work at it, this is where I disagree with you, if you passed a law where no one can yell fire in a movie theater, and everyone is happy with it, except for the group of people who burned to death because everyone was obeying the law. It may sound stupid to you, but its how it works, you changed from freedom of speech to violence in the work place, or to someone who will not do there job because they don’t like someone else’s skin color, under both of these, they get fired or put in jail, the business has a right to fire you, ( because it’s there business ) No other reason is necessary, violence get everyone thrown in jail. But I do understand where you are coming from , you should be careful of who is on your University Council, if everyone is in agreement, makes it so much easier getting things done. I thought public university was the place where freedom of Speech was suppose to be screamed the loudest, I know in my day it was, and we changed the world, to the good or bad, I do not know, only history will tell after we are long gone.

          • Bonnetierre

            eagle, it comes down to the fact that you CANNOT discriminate against a person based on their religion, no matter how you suger coat it.

            Everything else your wrote is dancing around the issue. I think you know better, but are playing dumb.

    • Merkava

      Eagle: I don’t have the right to discriminate against you if you are a Wiccan Black Person, right? Pick that up and go with it. This lady was being discriminated against for being a Jew. PERIOD.

      • eagle

        Lets stick with freedom of Speech shall we, not the list you gave, they all have there points to ponder. Do not think you have the same meaning behind the words freedom of Speech as the past generations did. So I will wrap this up, you can not delegate laws on people’s thoughts, emotions, feelings, what standards they hold, you can only give the allusion you are by passing discriminatory laws.

        • Merkava

          I agree. One cannot change the way scum think. But one CAN say that it is not socially acceptable.

        • Bonnetierre

          You fail to grasp that this was a board at a STATE UNIVERSITY.

          These are not a bunch of friends meeting in the street. You cannot discriminate against anyone based on religion, especially at a STATE UNIVERSITY, whether YOU like it or not.

          • suz

            Bonnetierre, I tried to put in simple terms for this person. He or she doesn’t want to get it or based on the level of writing, probably isn’t able to get it. I hope you made an impact. Free speech doesn’t extend into hate speech. I can’t say it any more simply than that. You don’t have the right to discriminate against another person based on his race or religion at a state university.

          • Bonnetierre

            The more I debate with these ignoramuses, the more I am convinced they know better, but choose to refute logic.

  • Me10

    I’ll go one further. If they do not apologize, they should be asked to step down from their positions on the grounds of their discriminatory positions.

    • holygoat

      I’ll go another step further. They should be immediately removed from their positions on the grounds of their discriminatory positions. They’ve already shown they are bigots who allow their bigotries to guide their judgement. In short, their “concerns” about Jewish candidates are pure projection.

  • David M Epstein

    After reading Rachel Frenklak’s article to the Bruin and some other accounts, I am astounded and disgusted by the blatant anti-Semitism of some
    students on the board of the UCLA Undergraduate Students Association
    Council (USAC). I got my B.A. degree at UCLA, and this kind of
    politico-religious bigotry would have been unthinkable then. The four
    students who initially voted against appointing a student to the
    Judicial Council because her “being Jewish” was a “conflict of
    interest”–and the fifth student who abstained–should be reprimanded
    and required to apologize publicly and resign from the USAC board–or
    else be dismissed from the board. The fact that they had to be reprimanded by a faculty member for violating UCLA–and American–ethical values before changing their votes only underscores their prejudice and ethical failings. Unfortunately, this kind of fake
    “liberal” anti-Semitism has become all too common at many US and
    European universities. No matter what your views on the
    Israel-Palestinian issues, this is wrong and morally dishonest.

  • twf2sal

    Disgusting display of anti-Semitism. Jew Hate has spread like a virus throughout the CA University system. UC Davis, UCLA, it’s time for the donors to these universities to cease any financial aid until this Jew hate is addressed!

    • Raydonn

      Somewhat of a display of the so-called ‘stereotypes’…………akin to making the research of some ‘historical events’ punishable by prison time.

    • mcjenny

      I would venture to say that it appears in more than just CA systems.

  • Roger Cotton

    When I attended UCLA in the late 80s, political correctness was in full steam. Since then, open political bigotry by Progressives/Leftists is so toxic and prevalent, that I refuse to donate any money to the school.

    My daughters talk of attending, but, unless someone reins in the lunatics on campus and at the lectern, there is no way my daughters will be subjected to the indoctrination and Antisemitism.

    • Merkava

      And it’s a shame. The psychology department is excellent, with great rigor, and my very bright Mayan Indian kid would be a shoo-in, particularly with a dad who did a residency there.
      But, no, I wouldn’t send my kid there. Mixed religion marriage—i might send the kid to Biola.

    • Johnathan Swift Jr.

      I would recommend that you send them to a school with a Jewish tradition, but unfortunately, the moonbats have taken them over as well. If you haven’t checked out the latest example of extreme anti-Israel behavior, take a look at Professor Rubin’s statement at Vanderbilt today. He is ethnically Jewish, the son of a survivor and yet wants to prevent a demonstration in support of Israel. Not organize a debate, a counter-demonstration on behalf (“Head choppers of the World, Baby Rapers of the World Unite!) of those who would destroy Israel and kill every jew on the planet if they could, but simply shut down ideas he disagrees with. And the kicker is that he teaches constitutional law!

      The problem is that radical leftism, not liberalism has replaced Judaism as the religion for many people who were born Jewish. However, if their religion was of the celebrate Passover variety like the Easter Only version for Christians, than then are just ripe for recruitment by the far left. It seems that people need to have something to believe in and if it isn’t a healthy, good religion like Judaism, it will be radical environmentalism or communism or something else they can use as a framework.

      And, I have to believe that the President has helped this fester. There is a reason that he has not visited the State of Israel, that he opposes it and hinders it at every turn and that is because one must suspect that he hates Israel. After all, he sat in the pews of one of the most noxious anti-Semites in the nation for twenty years, where you or I wound stomp out in the middle of his first jew-hating diatribe. Remaining in the pew was agreement. Yes, he has advisors who are ethically Jewish, but no matter, leftists first, jews a very, very, very distant second. And of course he is absolutely dedicated to seeing that Iran gets the bomb, then of course, its game over for Israel and every jew in the Middle East.

      • surfer_dad

        “The problem is that radical leftism, not liberalism has replaced Judaism as the religion for many people who were born Jewish.”

        You hit the nail on the head as well as bringing up an important issue.
        Most diaspora Jews are moderate liberals. Liberalism is a VALUE. Leftism is a POLITICAL stance loosely based on those values.

        True, to many on the slightly left end of the political spectrum (and American Democrats are NOT very left on the International scale) end up getting swayed by some of the rhetoric, and this is something we need to fight. But I think you overstate the case of Obama’s supposed anti-semitic leftism.

        • Johnathan Swift Jr.

          Well, as far as the President, none of us can know what is in someone’s heart of course, especially a politician.

          However, I cannot believe that anyone would attend the church of a notorious anti-American and anti-Semitic pastor for twenty years and not be in sympathy with his views.

          Imagine just for a second, that a legislator on the other side of the aisle had attended such a church for a decade or two, or one where the pastor preached against blacks for example, the media would assume that the person was a racist or an anti-semite. There is just no getting around it. The entire circle there, Wright,

    • AchillesAchillesAchilles

      Or the smog.

    • DogOfDooM

      Please sign the petition for removal at moveon .org nnnnnbbb

  • ATTILA727

    Sue the bastards

  • Ponyrunner

    And these are future “leaders”? Isn’t there a law about not discriminating because of race, CREED, color etc, etc, etc.? The 4 nay voters should resign they are a disgrace.

  • Moshe Ben Avram

    As usual, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was used as a smokescreen for generally anti-Jewish behavior. The only thing that would right this is a civil lawsuit hitting the pocketbook of UCLA so that they don’t allow this type of nonsense to occur on the campus.

  • ecinrva

    “You know, like, wowosie. Like, I just don’t want to, like, say okay for Rachel, cause like…” Nice valley girl rhetoric from someone on the board, saying the reason is her religion why she is struggling with a vote. Just speaks volumes for UCLA doesn’t it?

    • Scott Weber

      Like, her like dad must be the inventor of like Toaster Strudel.

  • Merkava

    I am a graduate of an UCLA School of Medicine Residency Program. It should be pointed out that FronPage Magazine has named UCLA one of the ten Worst Universities in the United States for antisemitic activities.
    Remember this the next time one of these people states that they are “anti-Israel” not “anti-semitic.” 99.95% of the time, the two overlap. I am proud of my education and its rigor, I am ashamed of the school.

  • Scott Weber

    Not only the anti-Semitism, but this:

    “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.

    You are at an institution of higher learning…LIKE, quit using LIKE where it is LIKE not appropriate, LIKE, ok?

  • Fathom40

    Is it wrong to wonder about the ethnicity and/or religious backgrounds of the four anti-Semites?

    Actually, strike that, I don’t care if it is.

  • JJStryder

    “But I’m like….”.. stupid is as stupid does. Who talks “like” that and expects to be taken seriously? As soon as I read that sentence fragment “I’m like” ready to throw up! You ignorant, robo- liberal, knee jerk anti-Semitic, muslim appeasing coward!

    • Bonnetierre

      Libs are taught to throw in cultural references or mannerisms to make their fascist views seem “cool.”

      • Dont Ask

        Ahhh…why does that conjure up an image of Obama with his selfie stick?

  • Deserttrek

    the anti Semites are public and voracious .. no publicly funded institution should allow this and the administrators and those who stand by are guilty also .. disgusting

  • mcjenny

    According to the students on the council, being Jewish is a “conflict of interest”? Antisemitism is alive and thriving.

  • Jackie

    Absolutely appalling. Stunningly ignorant.

  • Jen

    I commend you for blowing this whistle on this outrage and coming to your friend’s defense. People like Ms. Roth and those who followed her repulsive line of questioning need to be held accountable, especially when they hold positions of influence. Bravo to Ms. Beyda for maintaining her composure and to Ms. Frenklak for your well-written and much needed letter.

  • glpage

    If anyone has any doubts history is repeating itself, one needs to only compare the actions of the so-called leaders to those of the brownshirts in Germany.

  • Benyamin Ben-Ari

    I went to the USAC Live! to see that session and it has “mysteriously” disappeared

  • Benyamin Ben-Ari

    I went to the USAC Live! YouTube channel and that session of Feb 10th has “Mysteriously” disappeared

  • David Parker

    Rachel was finally voted onto the board. Rachel accepted. Poor Rachel. I wouldn’t want to play in that sand box. She must be suffering either be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, or she doesn’t care about those Jews who will suffer a similar fate in the future. Good luck with your career Rachel. I hope the USAC Judicial Board looks good on your resume.

  • Dont Ask

    Surprised? Not me. They are simply parroting the behavior of our POTUS and his administration.

  • BPatMann

    Do they plan on treating blacks and lesbians the same way?

    • David Parker

      No. Just Jews and possibly Christians. If your Muslim, your golden!

  • David A. West

    To suggest that a capable and qualified candidate should not be selected simply because he or she is Jewish is an unconscionable act of bigotry. One who would propose such a thing is prejudiced and incapable of the impartiality required to be on the council. The two who openly displayed such disgusting and ignorant anti-semitism should be removed from their positions. I also encourage all prospective employers to make note of their names and guard against future lawsuits that would arise if these idiots found their way onto the payroll. Apologies simply aren’t enough.

  • j238

    “She’s active in the _______ community….which creates a conflict of interest” Fill in the blank with any of the following: African-American, Latino, Asian, Feminist, LGBT, Native American, Pro-Choice…
    Any of those in the preceding statement would result in the speaker being removed from all positions of authority immediately.
    But the speaker said “Jewish” and is still in place.
    Get a clue, UCLA

  • D D

    Federal charges , a crime has been committed , it doesn’t matter if they were oblivious or ignorant. This was not a class exercise of an academic training. But was in fact an EOE violation.

  • Z3TA2

    I’m a little confused about why someone named Fabienne ROTH would be hostile to a Jewish person.

  • Bill Catz

    The problem with liberals is they say “I’m Sorry” which, is a blatant lie, and everybody says OK. They are NOT sorry. This was a deliberate and intentional act. Sorry, apologies are not going to cut it. The staff that approved this needs to be terminated.

  • Christopher Field

    This is a very disheartening view of our future leaders. The article has the feel that the voters were under social pressure to ensure that the candidate had no association with Judaism or Israel rather than the higher value of their ability. This point of view is both frightening and shameful.

    • Piltdown Ghost

      I’m as disgusted by you at the anti-Semites, yet despite the “social pressure” — something anti-Semites are quite skilled at applying — the four who voted in favor weren’t the ones who changed their votes. In another post I compared the Student Council to the HJ, but upon reflection that was extremely unfair to The Four who wouldn’t surrender to the anti-Semites.

      The vote was TIED, and it wasn’t the good guys who changed their votes. I suspect even threat of Fatwah wouldn’t have changed their votes. If those Four are our future leaders I will be proud to have them. Without them it would be the other four singing “The Future Belongs to Me”. This time, at least, it doesn’t, and there are four brave souls to thank for it.

      • Christopher Field

        Thank you for clarifying the voting. I apologise if I was unclear in my condemnation of all religiously based decisions of any kind. Anti-Semitism is a particularly virulent aspect of Religiously fueled hatred. In my opinion Religiously based decisions have no place in any proclaimed secular learning institution.

        • Piltdown Ghost

          No apologies necessary. Four brave students stood against Islamic anti-Semitism, and that’s what’s important.

  • AchillesAchillesAchilles

    Yes. A better word is Jew baiting. That’s what these four were doing was Jew baiting. One can only imagine being baited as this woman was by people who were not asking about her qualifications, but were instead complaining about the fact she had parents not to their liking.

  • George Blair

    For Miss Frenlak and Miss Beyda, please check out F.I.R.E. ( and Mr. Jay Sekulow ( Either or might be interested in this story, and who knows, you might get on Fox and be able to tell your story to a much larger audience. (Although I did pick this up from FB).

  • Tom Reuss

    The silver lining here is that when Fabienne Roth and Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed apply to graduate school, their biases will be quickly revealed simply by entering their
    names into a search engine. They will be forever linked to Leftist bigotry.

  • kervick

    Fight back. Oppose social justice initiatives.

  • David M Epstein

    Please explain the distinction you are making between “anti-Semitism” and “Jew hatred”?

  • MuslimUCLAstudent

    As a Muslim UCLA student, I believe these four USAC members are very much in the wrong. Using religion as a justification for “conflict of interest” in an a-religious institution, USAC, is morally abhorrent. Further, I agree that if the same thing happened to a Muslim UCLA student, there would be similar outrage. Beyda would, without a doubt, have been against any divestment related issues. My personal opinion holds that divestment should occur, but allowing this belief to come in the way of electing officials is wrong. Voting against students who have differing view points is not what I as a Muslim student stand for, nor should it be what USAC stands for. As an aside, making this a “Muslim” issue because two of the voters were Muslim is wrong as well. As a Muslim student, I do not stand for what occurred during this meeting and appreciate that my faith not be tainted with bigotry displayed by a number of believers. Clearly, UCLA is not going to do much about this issue, and clearly the apologies were insufficient (apologizing for words isn’t the point!). I believe that something that CAN be done is to open a discussion forum. By creating a, mandatory, space to discuss why using religion in USAC is wrong, I hope that a tolerant religious community can be formed at UCLA. Once again, this is unacceptable. Hopefully it will not occur again.

  • Darren Kameya

    With all due respect to the current USAC members, this incident demonstrates to me that normative objective training on conflicts and bias is needed for the Council.
    As former USAC vice president (1990) and ASUCLA board member (2002), I know that everyone in the governance community is very careful about imposing their judgments upon others, and that this “norm” leads to a vacuum of common expectations and standards for student government. Often, it results in a “winner-takes-all, majority rules” philosophy for USAC, and the minority interests can be completely shut out of the system. As an elected member of a “progressive slate,” I have seen this happen on “both” sides.
    I don’t believe that this is what UCLA and its students intend by having a representative student government, and I hope that USAC recognizes this incident as a teachable moment. Whether from JSA, APC, TSA, or OCHC, any applicant’s affiliations with a student group (and especially a religious, ethnic, or racial group) should not be the basis for denying an appointment, unless the appointee is supposed to have minima experience in student groups. (And wouldn’t that make the appointee less able to understand the issues?)
    If an applicant had previously made statements or engaged in actions showing that she cannot be objective and unbiased, there may be a basis on those specific facts to determine that she is unqualified due to potential bias. This could also come from active membership in an extremist group. But I didn’t hear those specific facts discussed by USAC in the online recording.
    Presently, I serve as legal counsel to educational institutions and, in my perspective, USAC needs to realize that a councilmember should be able to articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for taking an adverse action against an applicant and, if he/she cannot, there is a good chance that the decision was made on the wrong metrics.
    Darren Kameya ’92

  • yossarion

    This was a valuable lesson for these UCLA and other UC students. Do not be so blatant with your Anti-semitism. Hide it behind progressive politics, moral relativism, and keep it hidden much like other Progressives.

  • DogOfDooM

    Please sign the petition for removal at zzzz

  • Honey Badger

    Thankfully, this anti-Semitic episode will come up whenever future employers google any of these four “campus leaders.” Shame on UCLA.

  • Sanych

    Irmary Garcia should also apologize.

  • astargazer

    Couldn’t you substitute innumerable other persons and substitute questioning Blacks people aren’t you going to be biased, or Gays aren’t you going to be biased, or Muslim aren’t you going to be biased, or Christians , Catholics, etc? This would never fly except for the issue that this type of volley of discriminatory questioned was asked to a Jewish student. The board members who tolerated or agreed with that line of questioning should immediately be asked to step down and should not only apologize but be taught why what they were asking is so wrong. This is who our future leaders are? God help us.

  • DogOfDooM

    Please sign the petition for removal at moveon .org nnnnnbbb

  • Lindy88

    The UCLA Undergraduate Students Association Council practiced discrimination in their initial action to reject Rachel Beyda’s nomination to the Judicial Board.

    The board was ready to reject Beyda before meeting her based on the fact that she’s active in many Jewish activities and had to be prodded to reconsider to interview Beyda.

    Sadeghi-Movahed wasn’t 100% comfortable with Beyda and didn’t know why. Guess what? I’m not 100% comfortable Sadeghi-Movahed should be on the board and I don’t know why. Please resign.

    Fabienne Roth’s inappropriate question about Beyda being an active Jew and whether or not she can maintain an unbiased view. Roth certainly isn’t acting unbiased. Please resign.

    My opinion is those who were willing to reject Beyda before meeting with her should all resign because they themselves have not demonstrated fairness. Does this mean being an active Jew allows others to discriminate against you? The board’s action is definitely demonstrating discrimination.

    UCLA is a Liberal college. Does this mean these type of colleges should be allowed to discriminate? Unfortunately, many do discriminate based on what the current trend is and is being passed onto the students.

    All in all, not just college students, but everyone needs to be informed and educate themselves before relying on social media, regular media and politicians who are just as ignorant.

  • mystilettolife

    This is an absolutely phenomenal article–such confidence and great diction. It is truly appalling that this subject was allowed to be discussed for as long as it was and that others on the council have not issued public apologies. I am currently writing a piece on this for The Good Men Project and would love to interview any UCLA students or recent grads who have opinion on that matter.

  • Lindy88

    UCLA Chancellor Block should resign if he refuses to do anything. As someone posted below, if the committee had stated – African, Latino, Gay, etc – they would have been removed. Why are Jews any different?

  • Mitsy

    I think it’s interesting the names of the candidates on this so called “board”. And, BTW, isn’t the name “Roth” Jewish?

  • wpm327

    I teach high school. This sort of ‘thinking’ is only getting worse. Most of my students are offended if I disagree with them on any topic-not intellectually offended-morally offended. What I find frightening is that those who go against the narrative are bullied, shamed and hounded as if they are horrible criminals. I am reminded of William Buckley when he said, “In the hands of a skillful indoctrinator, the average student not only thinks what the indoctrinator wants him to think . . . but is altogether positive that he has arrived at his position by independent intellectual exertion. This man is outraged by the suggestion that he is the flesh-and-blood tribute to the success of his indoctrinators.”