Jewish Student's character questioned based on her faith

[Cantousent]

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/02/23/ucla-students-jewish-background-questioned-during-vote-for-judicial-board/

 

Interesting local news for us Sunny SoCal folks.

 

“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]?”

 

Wow, I wonder how they feel about Catholics, gays, blacks, Muslims, or other people who might be activists for their community.  lol  Nuts.

 

"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.'”

 

Well, the student in question was voted down, but the vote was rescinded and she's now on the board apparently.  Weird stuff, man.

 

EDIT:  cleaned up second quote.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Cantousent

[Valsuelm]

Nothing to see here other than perhaps some of the insanity that one can find in many if not most student judicial boards at University X. Certainly not racism.

 

A student applying/running for a position on the judicial board, with an affiliation to some organizations, is being questioned in regards to how she'd handle a situation that arose where she might have to make a judgement that would involve those organizations. Pretty much a standard question for such a position. It so happens she's Jewish, and at least some of the organizations she's apart of are Jewish, so some are freaking out with the 'race card' (even though Jew isn't a race).

 

The correct answer of course is that she would recuse herself from judging a situation where there's a real of readily perceivable conflict of interest. However, from what I've personally seen on many campuses as well as read about on others, conflicts of interest are the norm on student judicial boards. Perhaps the one at UCLA is actually attempting to avoid such things (as any good judicial board anywhere would do). Unfortunate for them, some idiots are attempting to cry foul and play the race card. An all too common thing these days on campuses.

 

I imagine Abe Foxman is yumming this one up.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Valsuelm

[Hurlshort]

Well to go along with the theme, some dumb college kids voted against displaying the American flag in the campus lobby.

 

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/03/06/uc-irvine-students-vote-to-remove-american-flag-from-campus-lobby/

 

 

Glad I went to a state school instead of a UC.  

[Leferd]

Well to go along with the theme, some dumb college kids voted against displaying the American flag in the campus lobby.

 

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/03/06/uc-irvine-students-vote-to-remove-american-flag-from-campus-lobby/

 

 

Glad I went to a state school instead of a UC.  

Irvine huh? Well it's obvious nothing important is ever going to come out of that backwater of a town.

[Gorgon]

So they have an ounce of taste. What's wrong with that.,,

 

 

Americans and their flag obsession, honestly. 

[Leferd]

For the everlasting glory of The Republic!

 

[Cantousent]

Well, for my part, I never said that the board was racist.  I *do* believe that anti-Semitism is alive and well in the world and some people, both Jewish and non-Jewish, think of Jews as part of a distinct racial group.  However, while I don't think it's racist personally, I do think that the motives of the board members who grilled the Jewish student were political in nature and not tied to her quality or fitness for service on the board.  Apparently, the President of the board agreed at that time:

 

"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 [the CBS LA intervewier]."  As further evidence, the faculty advisor informed the students that the basis for the very question was inappropriate.  The original vote was to blackball the Jewish student and a subsequent revote allowed her onto the board.

 

Look, I thought this was mostly weird and just wrong on it's face.  You can even now come up with some pretext to use this same line questioning to deny membership on boards or councils to virtually anybody who's part of a specific religious or racial group and has associations within that community.  Christians, blacks, gays, Muslims just happened to be the examples above.  I think that's wrong, but I wasn't really mad about it.  I think it makes the people involved in the questioning look dumb, but I was mostly just posting it as some silly thing that went on in college today.

 

As for the flag thing, the idea that free speech should in and of itself be construed as hate speech sounds pretty idiotic to me, and I would be quite unhappy that the pretext not to fly the flag was because of our colonial and imperialist past... so called.  ...But I've never been much of a flag waver personally.  I've been more of a vote in every election, serve on juries (once as a foreman ugh), pay my taxes, and volunteer and serve my country rather than wave a flag sort of patriot.

[Orogun01]

I'm actually more bothered by the fact that there is that level of stupid at high places, the question wasn't particularly racist and it referred to a possible situation but the overreaction to it made it seem like they asked if she would support another Holocaust. 

[Volourn]

"Americans and their flag obsession, honestly."

 

Yeah. Only Amerikans. HAHAHAHA!

 

Go to any other country, burn their flag, and see what happens.

 

Also, if the flag was so unimportant there wouldn't be yahoos like you whining about the Confederate flag.

 

Also, Amerikans aren't the only ones who are obessess with their flag. lenty of non Amerikans go out obessessivelty and buy/make a bunch of them just sot hey can burn them. L0LZ

 

 

As for OT, it's bigotry. But that's not new for SJWs which liekly invest the school. Hateful. Hateful. hateful.

 

 

"Nothing to see here other than perhaps some of the insanity that one can find in many if not most student judicial boards at University X. Certainly not racism.

 

A student applying/running for a position on the judicial board, with an affiliation to some organizations, is being questioned in regards to how she'd handle a situation that arose where she might have to make a judgement that would involve those organizations. Pretty much a standard question for such a position. It so happens she's Jewish, and at least some of the organizations she's apart of are Jewish, so some are freaking out with the 'race card' (even though Jew isn't a race)."

 

I wonder what your reaction would be if they asked the same sort of question to a black person (a race0 or a Muslim (not a race)? I bet you wouldn't be simply shrugging your shoulders.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Volourn

[Gorgon]

You could probably burn the Danish flag all day and suffer no ills other than smoke inhalation. I'm quite serious. 

[Cantousent]

I believe people have the right to burn the flag.  They have that right because some people are willing to defend it.  Wanting to burn the flag simply as a matter of protest merely makes you boorish and contemptible.  What actually irks me more is people flying flags that are tattered, flying them in the rain and at night with no lighting, or letting them hit the ground irks me a lot more.  I actually went into our local post office and had words (respectfully and without raising my voice of course) about the state of the tattered flag on the flag pole.  The post office?!  Anyhow, the manager was embarrassed, but since the VA is in town also, she was clearly used to getting grief over it and said that the new flag was ordered and on the way.  I pointed out that having no flag on the pole was preferable to having what was there.  Nice lady, though.  ...And the flag was replaced the next time I drove by.

[Valsuelm]

I'm actually more bothered by the fact that there is that level of stupid at high places, the question wasn't particularly racist and it referred to a possible situation but the overreaction to it made it seem like they asked if she would support another Holocaust. 

 

One of my first great disappointments in life was realizing that the myth that people at universities are smarter is just that, a myth. In particular the ones that are supposed to be the best, like Harvard, MIT, et al.

 

That is not to say that there are not intelligent people at these places. There are. And due to the nature of these places being institutions of learning, you will generally find a higher ratio of intelligent people to morons than you will in most other places in the world. But that ratio isn't that much higher. There are oodles of morons on any given campus. Oodles. Idiots still make up the majority, even at places like Harvard, Cambridge, et al. And college campus or not, when you have a society that not only has come to tolerate doublespeak, doublethink, PC, and other crap that shackles the mind, but actually has a lot of people that have been duped into thinking it's a good idea, you all too often end up with the intellectually lowest common denominator ruling the dialogue. ie: the situation that spawned this thread.

[ShadySands]

So they have an ounce of taste. What's wrong with that

 

 

Americans and their flag obsession, honestly. 

 

What's wrong with displaying the flag?

 

Personally, I don't care what anyone does with the flag. Burn it if you want, display it if you want... I get how some people may be offended by burning or otherwise "disrespecting" it in their mind but I find it hard to follow who is upset by the flag just being visible

[licketysplit]

It's unsettling that these students have this mindset in a supposed higher place of learning. Shows how some universities let politics creep in where they shouldn't.

[Gorgon]

 

So they have an ounce of taste. What's wrong with that

 

 

Americans and their flag obsession, honestly. 

 

What's wrong with displaying the flag?

 

Personally, I don't care what anyone does with the flag. Burn it if you want, display it if you want... I get how some people may be offended by burning or otherwise "disrespecting" it in their mind but I find it hard to follow who is upset by the flag just being visible

 

What's wrong with not displaying the flag ?.

 

It's not a government institution, they don't have to. 

[Valsuelm]

Well, for my part, I never said that the board was racist.  I *do* believe that anti-Semitism is alive and well in the world and some people, both Jewish and non-Jewish, think of Jews as part of a distinct racial group.  However, while I don't think it's racist personally, I do think that the motives of the board members who grilled the Jewish student were political in nature and not tied to her quality or fitness for service on the board.  Apparently, the President of the board agreed at that time:

 

"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 [the CBS LA intervewier]."  As further evidence, the faculty advisor informed the students that the basis for the very question was inappropriate.  The original vote was to blackball the Jewish student and a subsequent revote allowed her onto the board.

 

Look, I thought this was mostly weird and just wrong on it's face.  You can even now come up with some pretext to use this same line questioning to deny membership on boards or councils to virtually anybody who's part of a specific religious or racial group and has associations within that community.  Christians, blacks, gays, Muslims just happened to be the examples above.  I think that's wrong, but I wasn't really mad about it.  I think it makes the people involved in the questioning look dumb, but I was mostly just posting it as some silly thing that went on in college today.

 

As for the flag thing, the idea that free speech should in and of itself be construed as hate speech sounds pretty idiotic to me, and I would be quite unhappy that the pretext not to fly the flag was because of our colonial and imperialist past... so called.  ...But I've never been much of a flag waver personally.  I've been more of a vote in every election, serve on juries (once as a foreman ugh), pay my taxes, and volunteer and serve my country rather than wave a flag sort of patriot.

 

Before I initially replied to this thread I took to youtube and watched the video of the student judicial meeting, as well as a couple of short news presentations and an interview with Mr. Baral. If you haven't already done so, I recommend doing so. Watching the actual footage is just about always superior to reading an article about that footage.

 

Baral is either a moron or very disingenuous (I'll wager a combination of both, as those are generally the qualifications of people who seek to be president of things like student judicial boards). And if you didn't know, the probability that he's Jewish himself is extremely high as both his first and last names are Jewish names. Chances are it's him that tried to make a mountain out of a molehill that wasn't really there to begin with.

[Volourn]

"What's wrong with not displaying the flag ?."|
 

For me, it's not the decision to not fly the flag irks me 9I don't care for flags myself). It's their reasoning not to do so. It's garbage and stupid and insane.

[Cantousent]

I did see the video, Val.  I still think the very question is loaded.  If you substituted any number of other groups for Jewish, there would be a much larger outcry than now.  I firmly believe that.  Because being active in a religious or ethnic community should not in and of itself should not be the sole basis for denying the opportunity to serve on a board or council.  ...And what issues are there that involve Judaism?  A student judiciary board shouldn't really have a major concern about Judaism other than political movements of the day, and that makes the whole thing seem rather pointed to me.

 

A gay student who is active in the LGBT community stands before the board and they not only question his abilities and motives due his activism, but also vote to blackball him.  I think the outcry would be far worse.  A Catholic student who is active in the pro-life movement?  Probably wouldn't even have the opportunity to speak before being blackballed.  No outcry.

 

The fact that the decision was reversed and the students apologized vindicates my position.  Either they felt they were wrong, in which case I'm vindicated.  ...Or they felt they were right but buckled for political reasons, which means they're unworthy of their places on the board in the first place.

 

You can be dismissive, and I'm okay with that, but I *did* see the video, bud.  I just disagree with the ramifications.  :Cant's smile and shrug icon:

[Gromnir]

gonna stick with the flag stuff for the nonce...

 

there is few people dumber than first and second year University students.  kids is exposed to new ideas and they is (hopefully) challenged to look at those ideas critically. is a new experience.  is also ok to be a dumb college student; being dumb in college might actually be a good thing. sure, you frequent don't know enough to realize that you is dumb, but University is one o' the few places you can be dumb without lasting long-term suffering for saying or believing something stoopid.  thinks flags is, by their very nature, an abrogation o' free speech?  *chuckle*  is funny.  nevertheless, is ok to stoopidly tilt windmills while in college.  the arrogant undergrad who thinks that he gots the Answers 'cause he read trotsky AND the federalist papers in a lower-division poli-sci class is amusing, but we wouldn't wanna discourage such silliness.  

 

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."-George Bernard Shaw

 

subvert the dominant paradigm... dude.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps am certain that if somebody had written down or otherwise recorded every silly ack-jass notion or theory we spouted off about in class or at local watering holes during our University student or teaching years, we would be mortified when confronted with some o' our own past nonsense... and we wouldn't have traded those years for anything.  

Edited March 7, 2015 by Gromnir

[Rostere]

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/02/23/ucla-students-jewish-background-questioned-during-vote-for-judicial-board/

 

Interesting local news for us Sunny SoCal folks.

 

“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]?”

 

Wow, I wonder how they feel about Catholics, gays, blacks, Muslims, or other people who might be activists for their community.  lol  Nuts.

 

"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.'”

 

Well, the student in question was voted down, but the vote was rescinded and she's now on the board apparently.  Weird stuff, man.

 

EDIT:  cleaned up second quote.

 

Have you ever been engaged in student politics? Sadly, I have been, far too much for my own good. Trust me, it is the worst kind of place, where the worst people go, the ones whose sole subconscious desire is to keep discussions going for ever and ever about the smallest trifle. Whoops, did I just implicate myself there?

 

Anyway, a 40-minute discussion seems about normal. And during this discussion (which BTW typically takes place without the candidate present in person from my experiences - but that might of course be completely different from place to place), you should expect people to dig up every single piece of dirt they can. Discussions range from "X sounds a bit angry when he speaks..." to "X has earlier been a Microsoft Student Brand Ambassador..." to whatever you can think of. I don't know exactly who participated in this discussion, but if it was public, then the only thing which bounds the stupidity of the questions asked is the people attending.

 

If you are engaged in ANY OTHER ACTIVITY WHATSOEVER, people will ask firstly if that leaves time to your commitment as (in this case) board member. Secondly, they will ask whether there are any conflicts of interest between these. But here it is important to know the background. Several universities have recently voted to divest from companies participating in ethnic cleansing and land theft in the West Bank. That is political question where a lot of campus pro-Israel organizations have very specific views. Typically, a board member is elected to represent a segment of the students, and is supposed to represent people who have different opinions. If you have already sold your soul to one side of the debate, you can't do that.

 

You can make pretty much an exact analogy with the current Iran negotiations. What if John Kerry also was a board member of the Iranian-American Islamic Friendship Group? A group which organizes free trips to Iran for Congress members, where the politicians are shown that totally no weaponization of radioactive isotopes is made, how just and fair Islamic law is, and so on. Furthermore, assume that John Kerry had an Iranian mother or father.

 

Surely, I mean, SURELY, wouldn't we expect inquiring members of Congress to ask something along the lines of “Given that you have Iranian heritage and very active in the Iranian 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]?”.

 

The part connecting bias with race or religion is definitely racism. But being a member of other political organizations is also definitely bias. But then again, during WW2 the US locked up Americans with Japanese heritage in camps (which arguably prevented espionage), Muslim Israeli citizens are given a special Muslim passport so that border security knows who to stop/detain (which arguably prevents terrorism), and on Fox News, an entire interview with Reza Aslan can focus on if he had a bias as a Muslim.

 

These are all instances of racism, frankly I'd like to see the person who is completely without guilt with regards to making decisions based on racism. The types of racism we like to highlight is very much based on our own biases and there are very, very few people who actually genuinely do not believe in any kind of racism at all. It's very sad that "Jewish" is conflated with pro-settlements, pro-war against everything in the ME, and parroting right-wing Israeli governments in general when in reality, some of the best intelligent and constructive criticism of Israel comes out of groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace, Open Hillel, Mondoweiss news blog, Richard Silverstein's blog, and more. Case in point when during Netanyahu's recent speech, he says that he "speaks for all Jews" when the demonstration outside is organized by JVP. Sadly he is reinforcing this conflation from the other side.

 

"Americans and their flag obsession, honestly."

 

Yeah. Only Amerikans. HAHAHAHA!

 

Go to any other country, burn their flag, and see what happens.

 

Burning the Swedish flag would be considered oddball, but probably preferable to displaying it too much (in which case you would be identified as a dirty inbred neo-Nazi from the countryside).

[Gromnir]

 

 

"Americans and their flag obsession, honestly."

 

Yeah. Only Amerikans. HAHAHAHA!

 

Go to any other country, burn their flag, and see what happens.

 

Burning the Swedish flag would be considered oddball, but probably preferable to displaying it too much (in which case you would be identified as a dirty inbred neo-Nazi from the countryside).

 

hate to burst your bubble, but fear o' offending folks with flags and speech is more a european issue than american.  don't let one article mislead you.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-11254419

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Cantousent]

Good points, Ros.  The extrapolations aren't (and weren't) lost on me, but it still seems awfully small and petty for a board at UCLA.  The example about Kerry is valid to set theoretical boundaries.  Fair enough, but she ain't Kerry and the board isn't the United States Congress and the association isn't with Iran.  There is generally, and should be, looser standards on someone on a student judicial board than someone defending our national interests.

[Agiel]

Studying at UCSB, every year during Palestine Awareness Week there's some Palestine solidarity display on the lawn in front of Storke Tower where some stakes with the colours of the Palestine flag are put up. That's usually vandalised in one form or another (the stakes knocked down, thrown in the trash, or the green, black and red stakes replaced with blue ones). A couple of times I saw some vilely anti-semitic graffiti on the inside of Pardall Tunnel, though it's occasionally balanced out by the odd anarcho anti-globalisation scrawling. In Isla Vista the Bear Flag is a very popular livery on the apartments there. I guess it's for this reason we're probably the "generic" college in the UC system (its party scene notwithstanding).

 

As far as political leanings, UC Irvine is probably the big GOP campus (being in Orange County), though there are a ton of Asian students there ("University of Chinese Immigrants") who are usually ambivalent to such matters. UC Berkeley is usually thought to be the big hotbed of "pinko commies," but honestly, UC Santa Cruz frightens me a lot more.

Edited March 8, 2015 by Agiel

[Hurlshort]

I wouldn't worry about UC Santa Cruz, they are too busy eating 'shrooms and running through the forests.  

[ManifestedISO]

Whatever, weirdos, UCSD has a whole library named after Dr. Seuss.