About the Topic: As fiscal year 2001 came to an end, the Hart-Rudman Commission and its recommendations for a post-Cold War national security structure were still on the agenda of Washington decision-makers. After the attacks of September 11, the comprehensive approach envisioned in Hart-Rudman was abandoned in favor of a piecemeal approach, resulting in such legislation as the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Act, and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. As we enter what could be described as a "post-post-9/11 environment," it is worth asking whether the U.S. needs to consider a more comprehensive review, with Hart-Rudman as a starting point.

About the Speaker: William Nolte is research professor and director, Center for Intelligence Research and Education, at the School of Public Policy, University of Maryland.  He retired from federal service in 2006 as the chancellor of the National Intelligence University system within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. A career National Security Agency officer, he served in a range of positions as senior intelligence authority, director of education and training, and chief of legislative affairs at NSA; as deputy national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia and later director of strategic planning at the National Intelligence Council; and as assistant deputy DCI for analysis. He holds a Ph.D. in history from the University of Maryland, and has taught at Georgetown and George Washington universities.

We offer the first large scale, multiple source analysis of the outcome of what may be the most extensive effort to selectively censor human expression ever implemented. To do this, we have devised a system to locate, download, and analyze the content of millions of social media posts originating from nearly 1,400 different social media services all over China before the Chinese government is able to find, evaluate, and censor (i.e., remove from the Internet) the large subset they deem objectionable. Using modern computer-assisted text analytic methods that we adapt and validate in the Chinese language, we compare the substantive content of posts censored to those not censored over time in each of 95 issue areas. Contrary to previous understandings, posts with negative, even vitriolic, criticism of the state, its leaders, and its policies are not more likely to be censored. Instead, we show that the censorship program is aimed at curtailing collective action by silencing comments that represent, reinforce, or spur social mobilization, regardless of content. Censorship is oriented toward attempting to forestall collective activities that are occurring now or may occur in the future -- and, as such, seem to clearly expose government intent, such as examples we offer where sharp increases in censorship presage government action outside the Internet. This is joint work with Jennifer Pan and Molly Roberts.

Gary King is the Albert J. Weatherhead III University Professor at Harvard University -- one of 24 with the title of University Professor, Harvard's most distinguished faculty position. He is based in the Department of Government (in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences) and serves as director of the Institute for Quantitative Social Science. King develops and applies empirical methods in many areas of social science research, focusing on innovations that span the range from statistical theory to practical application.

King received a B.A. from SUNY New Paltz (1980) and a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison (1984). His research has been supported by the National Science Foundation, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, the National Institute of Aging, the Global Forum for Health Research, and centers, corporations, foundations, and other federal agencies.

A day-long symposium to discuss, share, and learn about teaching human rights education in a wide range of world areas, disciplines, and classroom settings. Emphasis will be on methods of incorporating human rights education into the community college classroom. Sample lesson plans, pedagogic resources and materials, and strategies for reaching diverse student populations will be shared.

Human Rights Educator Fellowships
This symposium, organized by the Stanford Human Rights Education Initiative (SHREI), is the second event in a four-year collaborative effort to encourage the teaching of human rights in California community colleges. Participants are eligible to apply for year-long Human Rights Educator fellowships. Details about the 2012-13 fellowship and other
opportunities at Stanford will be available at the symposium.Attendance is free, but rsvp is required as space is limited.

This technology focus group will learn about Traffick Junction an online platform for anti-trafficking advocates that let them connect, collaborate, and share anti-trafficking information and experiences. It is currently in beta phase -- and is looking for more input into how it should be developed to serve anti-trafficking practitioners. During this session, we will ask attendees about how technology could improve their work against trafficking, help them build partnerships + coordinate action, and make international work more effectual.  Traffick Junction will show their beta network + gather feedback and preferences.

Traffick Junction grew out of the international course Law Without Walls. Its founders are three law students, Ashley Mathews at the University of Miami, Iqra Musaddaq at University College London, and Margaret Hagan at Stanford University. Currently it is being worked on by a team of Stanford Social Entrepreneurship students. You can find more information about it at http://www.traffickjunction.com .

Margaret Hagan will run the session. She is a 2nd year law student who focuses on the intersection of law, design, and technology.

KEY QUESTIONS to be addressed

With the early phases of technologies, products and services now deployed, it is important to take stock. What is working (and what is not)? Why? How can feedback from designers, vendors, and—importantly—users be leveraged for future improvement in design and strategy? In the meantime, what new developments are coming on stream now that are ready to demo or be commercialized that may also significant impact for the next generation of smart green cities?

Topics for Focus: During the “Innovations for Smart Green City” Roundtable, speakers and discussions will focus on an array of questions, such as:

• In the key application areas of buildings and transportation, what lessons have been learned through implementation of smart green products and services deployed to date?
• What are critical bottlenecks for the development of smart green cities? How to overcome challenges, such as facilitating rapid learning, proving financial viability, or integrating innovations into complex systems?
• What frameworks and tools can be used to better analyze and improve smart green cities?
• Which cities around the globe have demonstrated effective smart and green innovations? Which are leading case studies that illustrate lessons on what is effective and scalable?
• What government roles and policies have been effective? More specifically, what role do city representatives have in smart green innovation? What policies have been effective to support Smart and Green industries? What benefits does the government provide to different stakeholders such as developers, investors, entrepreneurs and citizens?
• How is the landscape for smart and green shifting globally -- where are the hotspots or centers of knowledge and excellence?Who are some of the key innovators, labs, firms, and organizations pioneering the way?How can government, venture finance and other crucial parts of the ecosystem help accelerate the development and deployment of high impact innovations?
• And what emerging Smart Green Innovations, firms, and entrepreneurs look promising for leading the next wave of change and even paradigm shift?