Washington Business and Technology Institute

For a search of "US Senator John Ensign, US Congressmen James Gobbons and Jon Porter, and Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn honor" by Google!
071305-3687
[071305-3687]
*****This is a draft for final editing and modification. The complete article will be post in the morning before or on July 16, 2005.
US Senator John Ensign, US Congressmen James Gobbons and Jon Porter, and Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn honor Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and Wendy Yu-ping Wu
By Michael Douglas, Jessie Walsh, Valerie Weber, Cheryl Moss, and Tiffany Chang*1
"Under the recommendation of President Dr. Tony Tung-tien Lei, Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and Ms. Wendy Yu-ping Wu have received Greeting Letters from U. S. Senator John Ensign and U. S. Congressman James Gobbons and Certificates of Recognition from Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn and U. S. Congressman Jon Porter. She was appointed Assistant Fellow of Public Administration Institution (PAI) and Chairperson of Interstate Business Cooperation and Development Council by Washington Business and Technology Institute (WBTI) on May 11, 2005." The announcement was made on Thursday, July 14, 2005, by Dr. John Wang, Spokesperson for WBTI in Las Vegas, Nevada, U. S. A.*2
The following are the statements of the Greeting Letter and Certificates of Recognition:
[[[[[JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
United States Senate
Washington,DC 20510-2805
July 29, 2005
Dear Friends:
It gives me great pleasure to welcome you to Las Vegas for the 28th Annual Convention of the Taiwan Benevolent Association of America. I hope that, during your time here, you will be able to experience some of the many attractions that our beautiful city has to offer.
As you focus your attention on this year's theme, the Future Development of TBAA, I commend you on your dedication to promoting understanding between the people of Taiwan and the United States through educational, cultural, economic, and scientific programs. Your contributions to the betterment of the communities in which you live have had a significant positive impact on the quality of life for the families who reside in those communities. I especially congratulate Wendy Wu*2 on the knowledge, expertise, and professionalism that she has exemplified during her tenure as TBAA Chairperson.
Enjoy your time in southern Nevada, and please accept my best wishes for a successful and memorable conference.]]]]]*3
[[[[[Congress of the
United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515-2802
July 29, 2005
Taiwan Benevolent Association of America
Paris Hotel
Las Vegas, Nevada
Dear Friends:
It is a pleasure and privilege to welcome the Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and its international convention to Las Vegas and the Paris Hotel.
I hope that this is an extremely successful meeting in which you are representing the thousands of Nevada citizens who are of Taiwan descent and the more than 300,000 active members of your organization nationalwide.
The Taiwanese people and their descendants have help to uphold the traditions and spirit of democracy and in so doing have help to shape our national character. You have also helped to provide a greater understanding between the people of Taiwan and the American people, fostering greater cultural, educational, economic and scientific relations.
Las Vegas, with its growing Taiwanese community, is an ideal site for your convention, and I trust that it will be productive and fruitful. While you are here, I hope that you will avail yourselves of the numerous cultural and recreational opportunities Nevada has to offer.
Please let us know if there is anything we can do to help make your visit a more pleasant and productive experience.
Sincerely,
Jim Gibbons
Member of Congress]]]]]*4
[[[[[Office of the Governor
Certificate of Recognition
Awarded to
Wendy Yu-Ping Wu
Chairperson of the
Taiwan Benevolent Association of America
The State of Nevada congratulates you on your extensive assistance to the Taiwan Benevolent Association of America, and commends you for your dedicated service to the citizens of our Silver State.
May 23, 2005 (Date)
Kenny C. Guinn, Governor]]]]]*5
[[[[ Congressman Jon C. Porter
United States Congress
Washington, DC 20515-2803
July 30, 2005
United States Congressman
Jon C. Porter
Recognizes and Honors
Wendy Wu
FOR YOUR DEDICATED SERVICE AND PROFOUND COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO THE TAIWAN BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
July 30, 2005
Jon C. Porter
United States Congressman ]]]]]*6
"On behalf of Taiwan Benevolent Association of America, it's my great honor to receive the Certificate of Recognition from U. S. Congressman Jon Porter. As a faculty member of Public Administration Institution and Chairperson of the Interstate Business Cooperation and Development Council of Washington Business and Technology Institute,*7 it's my pleasure to put some of my effort and wisdom to the community service and humane spirit of the Institute for the people and communities of Nevada," said Ms. Wendy Yu-ping Wu in San Jose, California after she was informed by President Dr. Tony Tung-tien Lei about the greetings letter through the phone call and WBTI website at http://communitylink.reviewjournal.com/lvrj/wbti by Las Vegas Review-Journal.
Very soon, Ms. Wendy Wu is going to complete her term as President of the Taiwan Benevolent Association of America (TBAA) on July 30, 2005. Out of the excellent experience, knowledge, enthusiasm, and professionalism of Ms. Wu, she has elevated the TBAA to a new height in terms of its fame, quality and significance among many American Chinese and Asian American institutions in this country.
Now, TBAA is scheduled to hold its profound 28th Annual Conference throughout the July 29-31, 2005 in Las Vegas, Nevada. In light of Ms. Wendy Wu's efforts and unselfish spirit in promoting cross-culture understanding and mutual respect for diversified interests rising from a variety of the communities, she has already become a real dynamic force and role model in the common pursuit of improving quality of life for our society.
As the largest civic organization representing U.S. immigrants from Taiwan, the TBAA currently has approximately 15 chapters and 30,000 active members nationwide. Their members are concerned about the new developments in Cross-Strait Relations, the U. S. China Relationship and the Asian Economy. They are increasingly focused on working with mainstream American society on these and other issues. Your participation would greatly inspire them as they move forward to achieve their goal.*8
"It's our honor to have Greeting Letter from U. S. Senator John Ensign and Certificates of Recognition from Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn and U. S. Congressman Joh Porter to Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and Ms. Wendy Yu-ping Wu in welcomimg the people from all around the world to Las Vegas to participate the 28th Annual Convention of the Taiwan Benevolent Association of America on July 29-31, 2005 in Las Vegas, Nevada. We're also pleased to have Ms. Wendy Yu-ping Wu's interest in offering her caliber whose integrity, knowledge, and experience may bring to Washington Business and Technology Institute an interstate perspective," points out President Dr. Tony Lei of WBTI. "Throughout Ms. Wendy Wu's distinguished endeavor, she has accomplished a great deal of business and community service practices and earned a good reputation as a conscientious and dedicated professional. Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and Wendy deserve the significant Greeting Letters from U. S. Senator John Ensign and U. S. Congressman James Gibbons and Certificates of Recognition from Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn and U. S. Congressman Jon Porter."*9
The following is an example of our invitation letter that we sent to U. S. Senator John Ensign, Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn, U. S. Congressmen James Gibbons and Jon Porter.
> Dear U. S. Senator Honorable John Ensign,*10
> Dr. Tony T. Lei, Advisor of Taiwan Benevolent Association of Las Vegas [President of Washington Business and Technology Institute (WBTI)], Mrs. Wendy Wu, Chairperson of Taiwan Benevolent Association of America (TBAA), Miss Sue Phelps, President of Taiwan Benevolent Association of Las Vegas, Mr. Lo-Yu Sun, Board Advisor of TBAA, and Ms. Hui-Ching Chen, Director of Secretary Division of TBAA request the honor of your presence as a Kenote Speaker (for short speech) and/or as a grantor of Greetings Letter at the Opening Ceremony of 28th Annual Convention of Taiwan Benevolent Association of America (TBAA)
> on Saturday, the Thirty of July, 2005
> at the Paris Hotel and Casino
> 3655, Las Vegas Blvd., Las Vegas, Nevada 89109
> from 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 a.m.
>
> Participants: About 500 people.
> Attire: Business
>
> RSVP: Please e-mail Dr. Tony Lei at tojulei@yahoo.com. Or please call Judy for RSVP at 255-9058 on or before
> Friday, May 20, 2005.
>
---------------------------------------------
References
*1. Michael Douglas is a distingueshed Justice of the Supreme Court of Nevada, while Jessie Walsh is an achieved District Judge of Nevada. Valerie Weber is a known Assemblywoman of Nevada, while Cheryl Moss is the first Asian American elected in Nevada history as a District Court Judge.
*2. Douglas, Michael; Weber, Valerie; Moss, Cheryl; Chang, Tiffany. 'Wendy Wu has been appointed Assistant Fellow of Public Administration Institution of WBTI,' "A search of 'wendy yu-ping wu' on the Google.com," ( June 27, 2005), U. S. A.: Google.com.
3. Ensign, John. 'Greeting from Office of Senator John Ensign,' "The 'Letter of Greeting to Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and Wendy Yu-ping Wu' sent by U. S. Senator John Ensign to President Dr. Tony Tung-tien Lei of Washington Business and Technology Institute (WBTI)," (May 27, 2005), Las Vegas, Nevada: Office of Senator John Ensign.
*4. Gibbons, James. 'Greeting from Office of Congressman James Gibbons,' "The 'Letter of Greeting to Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and Wendy Yu-ping Wu' sent by U. S. Congressman James Gibbons to President Dr. Tony Tung-tien Lei of Washington Business and Technology Institute (WBTI)," (July 10, 2005), Washington, D. C.: Office of Congressman James Gibbons.
*5. Guinn, Kenny. 'Certificate of Recognition from Office of the Governor,' "The 'Certificate of Recognition to Wendy Yu-Ping Wu' sent by Nevada Governor Kenny C. Guinn to President Dr. Tony Tung-tien Lei of Washington Business and Technology Institute (WBTI)," (May 24, 2005), Las Vegas, Nevada: Office of the Governor.
*6. Porter, Jon. 'Certificate of Recognition from Office of Congressman Jon Porter,' "The 'Certificate of Recognition to Taiwan Benevolent Association of America and Wendy Yu-ping Wu' sent by U. S. Congressman Jon C. Porter to President Dr. Tony Tung-tien Lei of Washington Business and Technology Institute (WBTI)," (June 29, 2005), Las Vegas, Nevada: Office of Congressman Jon Porter.
*7. Douglas. Ibid.
*8. Denton, Mark; Walsh, Jessie; Moss, Cheryl; and Chang, Tiffany. 'Our mutual cooperation and development between the officials and people will bring us a peaceful, happy, and healthy community,' "Newsbrief of WBTI," (February 7, 2004), Las Vegas, Nevada: WBTI.
*9. Chang, Tiffany. 'Nancy Becker has been appointed Fellow of Public Administration Institution of Washington Business and Technology Institute,' "A search of 'Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Nevada Nancy Becker' on the Google.com," (June 28, 2005), U. S. A.: Google.com.
*10. PAI of WBTI, 'An invitation e-mail to U. S. Senator John Ensign,' "A search of 'U. S. Senator John Ensign' on Google.com," (July 4, 2005), U. S. A.: Google.com.

--------------------------------------------
********************************************

Tue, February 15, 2011 1:05:52 PM
Secretary's Remarks: Remarks on Internet Rights and Wrongs: Choices & Challenges in a Networked World
by Hillary R. Clinton
From: U.S. Department of State [usstatebpa@subscriptions.fcg.gov]View Contact
To: tojulei@yahoo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secretary's Remarks: Remarks on Internet Rights and Wrongs: Choices & Challenges in a Networked World
Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:45:59 -0600
Remarks on Internet Rights and Wrongs: Choices & Challenges in a Networked World
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
George Washington University
Washington, DC
February 15, 2011
Thank you all very much and good afternoon. It is a pleasure, once again, to be back on the campus of the George Washington University, a place that I have spent quite a bit of time in all different settings over the last now nearly 20 years. I d like especially to thank President Knapp and Provost Lerman, because this is a great opportunity for me to address such a significant issue, and one which deserves the attention of citizens, governments, and I know is drawing that attention. And perhaps today in my remarks, we can begin a much more vigorous debate that will respond to the needs that we have been watching in real time on our television sets.
A few minutes after midnight on January 28th, the internet went dark across Egypt. During the previous four days, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians had marched to demand a new government. And the world, on TVs, laptops, cell phones, and smart phones, had followed every single step. Pictures and videos from Egypt flooded the web. On Facebook and Twitter, journalists posted on-the-spot reports. Protestors coordinated their next moves. And citizens of all stripes shared their hopes and fears about this pivotal moment in the history of their country.
Millions worldwide answered in real time, You are not alone and we are with you.?Then the government pulled the plug. Cell phone service was cut off, TV satellite signals were jammed, and internet access was blocked for nearly the entire population. The government did not want the people to communicate with each other and it did not want the press to communicate with the public. It certainly did not want the world to watch.
The events in Egypt recalled another protest movement 18 months earlier in Iran, when thousands marched after disputed elections. Their protestors also used websites to organize. A video taken by cell phone showed a young woman named Neda killed by a member of the paramilitary forces, and within hours, that video was being watched by people everywhere.
The Iranian authorities used technology as well. The Revolutionary Guard stalked members of the Green Movement by tracking their online profiles. And like Egypt, for a time, the government shut down the internet and mobile networks altogether. After the authorities raided homes, attacked university dorms, made mass arrests, tortured and fired shots into crowds, the protests ended.
In Egypt, however, the story ended differently. The protests continued despite the internet shutdown. People organized marches through flyers and word of mouth and used dial-up modems and fax machines to communicate with the world. After five days, the government relented and Egypt came back online. The authorities then sought to use the internet to control the protests by ordering mobile companies to send out pro-government text messages, and by arresting bloggers and those who organized the protests online. But 18 days after the protests began, the government failed and the president resigned.
What happened in Egypt and what happened in Iran, which this week is once again using violence against protestors seeking basic freedoms, was about a great deal more than the internet. In each case, people protested because of deep frustrations with the political and economic conditions of their lives. They stood and marched and chanted and the authorities tracked and blocked and arrested them. The internet did not do any of those things; people did. In both of these countries, the ways that citizens and the authorities used the internet reflected the power of connection technologies on the one hand as an accelerant of political, social, and economic change, and on the other hand as a means to stifle or extinguish that change.
There is a debate currently underway in some circles about whether the internet is a force for liberation or repression. But I think that debate is largely beside the point. Egypt isn t inspiring people because they communicated using Twitter. It is inspiring because people came together and persisted in demanding a better future. Iran isn t awful because the authorities used Facebook to shadow and capture members of the opposition. Iran is awful because it is a government that routinely violates the rights of its people.
So it is our values that cause these actions to inspire or outrage us, our sense of human dignity, the rights that flow from it, and the principles that ground it. And it is these values that ought to drive us to think about the road ahead. Two billion people are now online, nearly a third of humankind. We hail from every corner of the world, live under every form of government, and subscribe to every system of beliefs. And increasingly, we are turning to the internet to conduct important aspects of our lives.
The internet has become the public space of the 21st century ?the world s town square, classroom, marketplace, coffeehouse, and nightclub. We all shape and are shaped by what happens there, all 2 billion of us and counting. And that presents a challenge. To maintain an internet that delivers the greatest possible benefits to the world, we need to have a serious conversation about the principles that will guide us, what rules exist and should not exist and why, what behaviors should be encouraged or discouraged and how.
The goal is not to tell people how to use the internet any more than we ought to tell people how to use any public square, whether it s Tahrir Square or Times Square. The value of these spaces derives from the variety of activities people can pursue in them, from holding a rally to selling their vegetables, to having a private conversation. These spaces provide an open platform, and so does the internet. It does not serve any particular agenda, and it never should. But if people around the world are going come together every day online and have a safe and productive experience, we need a shared vision to guide us.
One year ago, I offered a starting point for that vision by calling for a global commitment to internet freedom, to protect human rights online as we do offline. The rights of individuals to express their views freely, petition their leaders, worship according to their beliefs ?these rights are universal, whether they are exercised in a public square or on an individual blog. The freedoms to assemble and associate also apply in cyberspace. In our time, people are as likely to come together to pursue common interests online as in a church or a labor hall.
Together, the freedoms of expression, assembly, and association online comprise what I ve called the freedom to connect. The United States supports this freedom for people everywhere, and we have called on other nations to do the same. Because we want people to have the chance to exercise this freedom. We also support expanding the number of people who have access to the internet. And because the internet must work evenly and reliably for it to have value, we support the multi-stakeholder system that governs the internet today, which has consistently kept it up and running through all manner of interruptions across networks, borders, and regions.
In the year since my speech, people worldwide have continued to use the internet to solve shared problems and expose public corruption, from the people in Russia who tracked wildfires online and organized a volunteer firefighting squad, to the children in Syria who used Facebook to reveal abuse by their teachers, to the internet campaign in China that helps parents find their missing children.
At the same time, the internet continues to be restrained in a myriad of ways. In China, the government censors content and redirects search requests to error pages. In Burma, independent news sites have been taken down with distributed denial of service attacks. In Cuba, the government is trying to create a national intranet, while not allowing their citizens to access the global internet. In Vietnam, bloggers who criticize the government are arrested and abused. In Iran, the authorities block opposition and media websites, target social media, and steal identifying information about their own people in order to hunt them down.
These actions reflect a landscape that is complex and combustible, and sure to become more so in the coming years as billions of more people connect to the internet. The choices we make today will determine what the internet looks like in the future. Businesses have to choose whether and how to enter markets where internet freedom is limited. People have to choose how to act online, what information to share and with whom, which ideas to voice and how to voice them. Governments have to choose to live up to their commitments to protect free expression, assembly, and association.
For the United States, the choice is clear. On the spectrum of internet freedom, we place ourselves on the side of openness. Now, we recognize that an open internet comes with challenges. It calls for ground rules to protect against wrongdoing and harm. And internet freedom raises tensions, like all freedoms do. But we believe the benefits far exceed the costs.
And today, I d like to discuss several of the challenges we must confront as we seek to protect and defend a free and open internet. Now, I m the first to say that neither I nor the United States Government has all the answers. We re not sure we have all the questions. But we are committed to asking the questions, to helping lead a conversation, and to defending not just universal principles but the interests of our people and our partners.
The first challenge is achieving both liberty and security. Liberty and security are often presented as equal and opposite; the more you have of one, the less you have of the other. In fact, I believe they make it each other possible. Without security, liberty is fragile. Without liberty, security is oppressive. The challenge is finding the proper measure: enough security to enable our freedoms, but not so much or so little as to endanger them.
Finding this proper measure for the internet is critical because the qualities that make the internet a force for unprecedented progress ?its openness, its leveling effect, its reach and speed ?also enable wrongdoing on an unprecedented scale. Terrorists and extremist groups use the internet to recruit members, and plot and carry out attacks. Human traffickers use the internet to find and lure new victims into modern-day slavery. Child pornographers use the internet to exploit children. Hackers break into financial institutions, cell phone networks, and personal email accounts.
So we need successful strategies for combating these threats and more without constricting the openness that is the internet s greatest attribute. The United States is aggressively tracking and deterring criminals and terrorists online. We are investing in our nation s cyber-security, both to prevent cyber-incidents and to lessen their impact. We are cooperating with other countries to fight transnational crime in cyber-space. The United States Government invests in helping other nations build their own law enforcement capacity. We have also ratified the Budapest Cybercrime Convention, which sets out the steps countries must take to ensure that the internet is not misused by criminals and terrorists while still protecting the liberties of our own citizens.
In our vigorous effort to prevent attacks or apprehend criminals, we retain a commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms. The United States is determined to stop terrorism and criminal activity online and offline, and in both spheres we are committed to pursuing these goals in accordance with our laws and values.
Now, others have taken a different approach. Security is often invoked as a justification for harsh crackdowns on freedom. Now, this tactic is not new to the digital age, but it has new resonance as the internet has given governments new capacities for tracking and punishing human rights advocates and political dissidents. Governments that arrest bloggers, pry into the peaceful activities of their citizens, and limit their access to the internet may claim to be seeking security. In fact, they may even mean it as they define it. But they are taking the wrong path. Those who clamp down on internet freedom may be able to hold back the full expression of their people s yearnings for a while, but not forever.
The second challenge is protecting both transparency and confidentiality. The internet s strong culture of transparency derives from its power to make information of all kinds available instantly. But in addition to being a public space, the internet is also a channel for private communications. And for that to continue, there must be protection for confidential communication online. Think of all the ways in which people and organizations rely on confidential communications to do their jobs. Businesses hold confidential conversations when they re developing new products to stay ahead of their competitors. Journalists keep the details of some sources confidential to protect them from exposure or retribution. And governments also rely on confidential communication online as well as offline. The existence of connection technologies may make it harder to maintain confidentiality, but it does not alter the need for it.
Now, I know that government confidentiality has been a topic of debate during the past few months because of WikiLeaks, but it s been a false debate in many ways. Fundamentally, the WikiLeaks incident began with an act of theft. Government documents were stolen, just the same as if they had been smuggled out in a briefcase. Some have suggested that this theft was justified because governments have a responsibility to conduct all of our work out in the open in the full view of our citizens. I respectfully disagree. The United States could neither provide for our citizens?security nor promote the cause of human rights and democracy around the world if we had to make public every step of our efforts. Confidential communication gives our government the opportunity to do work that could not be done otherwise.
Consider our work with former Soviet states to secure loose nuclear material. By keeping the details confidential, we make it less likely that terrorists or criminals will find the nuclear material and steal it for their own purposes. Or consider the content of the documents that WikiLeaks made public. Without commenting on the authenticity of any particular documents, we can observe that many of the cables released by WikiLeaks relate to human rights work carried on around the world. Our diplomats closely collaborate with activists, journalists, and citizens to challenge the misdeeds of oppressive governments. It is dangerous work. By publishing diplomatic cables, WikiLeaks exposed people to even greater risk.
For operations like these, confidentiality is essential, especially in the internet age when dangerous information can be sent around the world with the click of a keystroke. But of course, governments also have a duty to be transparent. We govern with the consent of the people, and that consent must be informed to be meaningful. So we must be judicious about when we close off our work to the public, and we must review our standards frequently to make sure they are rigorous. In the United States, we have laws designed to ensure that the government makes its work open to the people, and the Obama Administration has also launched an unprecedented initiative to put government data online, to encourage citizen participation, and to generally increase the openness of government.
The U.S. Government s ability to protect America, to secure the liberties of our people, and to support the rights and freedoms of others around the world depends on maintaining a balance between what s public and what should and must remain out of the public domain. The scale should and will always be tipped in favor of openness, but tipping the scale over completely serves no one s interests. Let me be clear. I said that the WikiLeaks incident began with a theft, just as if it had been executed by smuggling papers in a briefcase. The fact that WikiLeaks used the internet is not the reason we criticized its actions. WikiLeaks does not challenge our commitment to internet freedom.
And one final word on this matter: There were reports in the days following these leaks that the United States Government intervened to coerce private companies to deny service to WikiLeaks. That is not the case. Now, some politicians and pundits publicly called for companies to disassociate from WikiLeaks, while others criticized them for doing so. Public officials are part of our country s public debates, but there is a line between expressing views and coercing conduct. Business decisions that private companies may have taken to enforce their own values or policies regarding WikiLeaks were not at the direction of the Obama Administration.
A third challenge is protecting free expression while fostering tolerance and civility. I don t need to tell this audience that the internet is home to every kind of speech ?false, offensive, incendiary, innovative, truthful, and beautiful.
The multitude of opinions and ideas that crowd the internet is both a result of its openness and a reflection of our human diversity. Online, everyone has a voice. And the Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects the freedom of expression for all. But what we say has consequences. Hateful or defamatory words can inflame hostilities, deepen divisions, and provoke violence. On the internet, this power is heightened. Intolerant speech is often amplified and impossible to retract. Of course, the internet also provides a unique space for people to bridge their differences and build trust and understanding.
Some take the view that, to encourage tolerance, some hateful ideas must be silenced by governments. We believe that efforts to curb the content of speech rarely succeed and often become an excuse to violate freedom of expression. Instead, as it has historically been proven time and time again, the better answer to offensive speech is more speech. People can and should speak out against intolerance and hatred. By exposing ideas to debate, those with merit tend to be strengthened, while weak and false ideas tend to fade away; perhaps not instantly, but eventually.
Now, this approach does not immediately discredit every hateful idea or convince every bigot to reverse his thinking. But we have determined as a society that it is far more effective than any other alternative approach. Deleting writing, blocking content, arresting speakers ?these actions suppress words, but they do not touch the underlying ideas. They simply drive people with those ideas to the fringes, where their convictions can deepen, unchallenged.
Last summer, Hannah Rosenthal, the U.S. Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, made a trip to ...
.....
.......

--------------------------------------------
********************************************