Dedication, we are armed and ready. We cannot give up. We will not give in. No more than ever before, we need your art to continue to be the wind beneath our wings. And, again, i congratulate you and thank you and salute you again for this welldever offse honor. [ applause ] this concludes our program. I would like you to join with me in one final applause and recognition for our t honoree a he helps the next generation of americans. Thank you. Youre watching American History tv. 48 hours of programming of American History every weekend on cspan 3. Follow us on twitter cspan history for information on our schedule and to keep up with the latest news. The next, the participants in Landmark Supreme Court cases talk about the legacies. Koramatsu versus United States. During world war ii, brown versus department of education and tinker versus des moines during the vietnam war. The National Constitution center in philadelphia hosted this hourlong event. My name is vince stango. Im the executive Vice President and chief operating officer here at the Constitution Center. Im he here at the National Constitutions center and i am so delighted to welcome you to this special event. A Panel Discussion on some of the Supreme Courts most significant landmark cases. When the stories of we the people become cases before the United StatesSupreme Court and when these cases result in the opinions of the court, history turns. The had the ways in which we think about and live under the constitution are reflected in the courts interpretations in both their Historical Context and their legacies. Some cases and the courts opinions in them so profoundly alter our constitutional understandings that they can only be rightly called landmark cases, markers of where we have traveled as a nation. As a part of an initiative begun in 2015, the National Constitution center partnered with cspan to create a 12part series illustrating the history, issues and people involved in monumental landmark cases. Through the resulting online videos and other classroom Resources Available at landmarkcases. Cspan. Org, students and educators can analyze some famous and infamous cases. Last year we continued this initiative through a series of town hall discussions. In depth articles on our constitution daily blog and the publication of our 2017 popular civic calendar which featured 12 beautifully designed mini posters highlighting 15 landmark cases. Todays event is the culmination of this initiative and we are thrilled that our three panelists have joined us to celebrate Constitution Day and to talk to you more about these historic cases. Without further adieu, please join me in welcoming todays panel. Karen koramatsu is the director of the institution of her father. The petitioner in the case kormatsu versus United States. Oliver brown was the lead petitioner in the case brown v board of education of topeka. John tinker along with his sister mary beth was a copetitioner of tinker v Des Moines Independent Community school district. In recent years john and mary beth have traveled the country on the tinker tour bus telling students their story. Joining our panelist is the director of education, mike adams, who will moderate todays discussion. Lets give our panelists and moderator a warm round of applause. [ applause ] good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the National Constitution center on Constitution Day, the best day of the year to be here. Joining me on stage as vince stengel are people closely related to three Landmark Supreme Court cases that all took place in the 20th century, so not that long ago. In todays program what well do is ill introduce each of our panelists. Theyll tell you a little bit of the background of the Supreme Court case in which their father or in johns case themselves were involved in the case. Theyll talk about what the court ruled, how it impacted our lives and why those cases are still relevant today. Our first speaker to my left is karen koramatsu. Shes the founder and director of the fred t. Koramatsu institute. Sfaeb established in 2009. Shes the daughter in the case of koramatsuv United States. Since her fathers passing in 2005, shes carried on her fathers legacy as shes a public speaker and public educator. She carries on at teacher conferences and organizations across the country. One of her most significant accomplishments was working to successfully establish in 2011 a perpetual Fred KoramatsuCivil Liberties day on january 30th. Fred is the first asianamerican in u. S. History to have been honored with a statewide day. Please welcome karen koramatsu. [ applause ] so if you would like to begin by kind of giving us some of the background of the case or tell us a little bit the most important things you think our audience should know about the case koramatsu v United States. Thank you. Its a pleasure to be with you all today on Constitution Day. Its very exciting to talk to the next generation about the importance of our constitution. My father, as was said, had the Landmark Supreme Court case of koramatsu v United States. As a result of the world war ii japaneseamerican incarceration. So after the bombing of pearl harbor on december 7th, 1941, president roosevelt issued executive order 9066 on february 19th, 1942, that gave the authority to the military to forcibly remove anyone of japanese ancestry from the west coast and send them to american concentration camps across this country. 120,000 people were incarcerated. 2 3 were american citizens. 1 3 were under the age of 18 and could be students like you. My father thought this was was wrong because all due process of law was denied. No one had been charged with a crime. No one had access to an attorney. No one had their day in court, and so my father thought why should he have to go to a prison camp when he had done nothing wrong. So he avoided the military orders, you know, just decided that it was wrong and eventually a month later after everyone had been sent off to the detention Assembly Centers along the west coast, he was arrested. And the director at that time of the Northern California affiliate of the american Civil Liberties union visited my father in jail and said, you know, would he be my father be willing to take his case if need be all the way to the Supreme Court and my father said yes because he believed in this country and he believed in the constitution. And so it took a couple of years through appeals. If you know about the judicial system, you know you have to you have to kind of lose at one level in order to go up. So eventually, you know, through the system he ended his case ended up in the Supreme Court. It took almost two years so on december 18th, 1944, the Supreme Court decision was issued but it was not unanimous. It was a 63 decision. So there were, you know, six justices that agreed that the military orders were constitutional and three did not and the three dissenting opinions are the most recognized in the city today. And really the most relevant. So Justice Jackson referred to my fathers Supreme Court case as this lies around like a loaded weapon ready for anyone to pick up and use with a probable cause. And actually after 9 11 in 2001 my fathers case was cited as a possible reason to round up arab and Muslim Americans and put them in american concentration camps. Justice murphy called it the ugly abyss of racism. Justice owen roberts said, this is unconstitutional. So clearly the court was not, you know, completely in agreement. And but my my father, even though he was totally disappointed, never gave up hope that some day his case could be reopened. It took almost 40 years for that to happen, and after the freedom of information act you could go to archives in washington, d. C. , and do the research in the files of the government and they found what was called the smoking gun, meaning they found the document that proved there was no military necessity at the time of my fathers arrest and when the japaneseamericans were incarcerated. There was never any evidence of any spying or espionage from the japaneseamericans. And actually at the time of my fathers Supreme Court hearing in 1944 the department of justice had withheld evidence, had destroyed evidence and had altered evidence. So on that basis theres a little unknown judicial or law term called corum novis. That means an error has been made before us. An error has been made before the court. And so on that basis they were able to reopen my fathers Supreme Court case, and it was proven that there was government misconduct at the time. And his his civil conviction was overruled or vacated. And that means he no longer had a federal prison record, but his case is still on the Supreme Court record. When you win at a federal court level, there was no basis to go up. You couldnt go up to the to, lets say, a court of appeals or back up to the Supreme Court. So it would take another precedent in order for it to be cited, but its been discredited but it still has been referred to, even to this day. So when the immigration was banned, my fathers case has been noted in reference to creating this possible Muslim Registry that we have heard about. So my father never gave up hope that some day he could reopen up his Supreme Court case. 40 years is a long time to never give up hope. But i didnt even find out about my fathers Supreme Court case until i was in high school. So i was 16 years old. No one had talked about my fathers case, and my friend was giving a book report about the japaneseamerican incarceration and my fathers case and she cited koramatsu verses the United States. I kind of flinched and thought, oh, thats my name. And i had 35 pairs of eyes turning around looking at me. Im shrugging my shoulders because she didnt say Fred Koramatsu. She only said koramatsu verses the United States. And i thought, oh, thats some black sheep of the family. Then i found out that was indeed my father. He was waiting until i got older to understand what happened at that time. Also the whole japaneseamerican Community Never spoke about it because they had been arrested. They had been put in prison, and they carried the shame around them all those years. It took my fathers case to be reopened to lift that shame and to regain their dignity. [ applause ] we do have time for one or two questions . Does any someone have any questions about the case or her father . We have a question down here in the fourth row. Stand up. Stand up. There you go. When you found out about your fathers case, did you cry or did you feel emotional about it . Thats a very good question. I didnt cry. I didnt really know or understand what it meant to have a federal prison record. I never you know, its not like today you see all these shows on television about, you know, people getting arrested and crimes and all of that. It was a long time ago. And but i didnt i just didnt know how to really digest the information. And so i just kept it to myself. My friends, my classmates the next day asked me was that about my father . I just said, yes. I just kind of shrugged it off. And so i really didnt start understanding about the impact of my fathers case until he until the case was reopened in 1983 and at that time i was 33 years old so it because i had a lot of i had a lot of prejudice and racism that was against me growing up so when i was in Elementary School and the teacher was talking about the bombing of pearl harbor and they would show the bombing of pearl harbor how many people have seen the bombing of pearl harbor picture . So the teacher would throw that up on the board but she wouldnt say how you treat people that have been really targeted that live in this country . How would you feel . There was never that kind of discussion. So the kids said it was my fault for the bombing of pearl harbor. They would call me racist names. It got to the point where i couldnt even ride the school bus. So i felt a bit, you know, kind of ashamed. My brother who was four years younger had the same kind of experience. We didnt even talk about it with each other until after we had graduated high school. One more question in the middle here. Did your father feel happy when he got out of prison . Well, yes. I mean, he well, i would say what happened was he was arrested and he had a bail hearing in San Francisco and even though he received bail, so, in other words, somebody paid the money so that he could be, you know, kind of free until his case was heard before the court again, the military police were standing outside the courtroom and because the executive orders and the Exclusion Orders had been issued where no one on the west coast of japanese ancestry could stay, he was taken over to the detention Assembly Center which was like a prison. It was basically just horse stalls. So they just whitewashed the horse stalls and put people in there and they were treated worse than, you know they were treated inhumane and worse than animals. And then he was sent over to one of the ten concentration camps in topaz, utah. It wasnt until after the end of the war that he was able to be free. Thank you. Karen koramatsu, everyone. [ applause ] the next case that well be looking at is a case you might be a little more familiar with, brown v board of education. Our next panelist is Cheryl Brown Henderson. Cheryl is one of three daughters of the late reverend oliver l. Brown who filed suit on behalf of their children against the local board of education. The case joined with cases from delaware, south carolina, washington and d. C. On appeal to the u. S. Supreme court and on may 17, 1954, became known as the landmark decision of brown v. Board of topeka, kansas. Brown died before knowing the impact of his case. Cheryl is the founding president of the Brown Foundation and owner of brown and Associates Educational Consulting firm. She has extensive education in education and business. She has two decades of experience in political advocacy, public policy, and federal legislative development. In 1990 under her leadership the foundation successfully worked with the United States congress to design the brown v Education National park. In topeka, which opened in may of 2004. Please welcome Cheryl Brown Henderson [ applause ] thank you. First of all, i want to thank the Constitution Center and thank all of you for your interest in being here and our fellow panelists, mr. Tinker. Basically Supreme Court decisions are very important. I cant overstate the importance because they affect your lives everyday. Brown versus the board of education in particular. How many of you are familiar with the 14th amendment of the constitution . Some of you are familiar. I would suggest you become familiar because what Supreme Court cases do is they interpret for us the meaning of certain part of the constitution, for example. Before brown versus department of education we were living under a system of states rights. I dont know if you know what that means. It means the Supreme Court has not definitively interpreted for the country the 14th amendment to the constitution. States were deciding here and there what you could and couldnt do. Everybody with blue shirts couldnt ride the bus to school, they had to walk. Everybody with brown hair had to go to a school with kids only with brown hair. Just all over the place. And especially for africanamerican people, a lot of you watch the news today and you see the protests against how africanamerican males in particular are treated. Well, brown versus the board of education and a lot of the early activities, activism, was all about similar issues. See, it took over 100 years, a century, for brown versus board of education to take place. First time parents, people like your parents took to court the issue of why couldnt my kids go to any school . Im paying taxes on every school but youre assigning my child a school based solely on the color of their skin. 1849 in boston, massachusetts, the first documented case. So 105 years later, 1954, brown versus the board of education we experienced a legal victory. Not a social victory but a legal victory. Ill explain what i mean by that in just a minute. Now kansas is my home state, and i imagine many of you have never been to kansas. Anybody ever been to kansas . Oh. Did you stop . Because we realize its not a place people go on vacation, but kansas has been a very important state to the civil rights history of this country. Even before brown v board of education in 1954, in my state of kansas there were 11 School Desegregation cases like no other state in the nation. Africanamerican American Parents were suing for the right for their children to attend any school. Not waiting to be assigned to a school based solely on the color of their skin. Now what i mean by a legal victory, first of all, brown was a collective action. It wasnt a single individual. A lot of the textbooks, a lot of the websites are absolutely wrong in how they talk about brown v board. Now my father didnt wake up one day and decide i had had enough. You know, im going to sue the school board. It didnt happen that way. Brown v. Board was a collective action. They led by the naacp, the National Association for the advancement of colored people, and their Legal Defense fund. They recruited people to be plaintiffs in these cases. As you heard in the intro, the locations in brown from delaware, kansas, virginia, south carolina, and washington, d. C. One of the cases was organized by teenagers led by 16yearold girl on her own who called for a strike at her segregated school for the right to have better facilities. The rest were parent driven cases. So my father got involved because one day just this simply history knocked on our door in the form of a childhood friend who was now an attorney. They went to grade school together. They went to junior high together. They went be to high school together. Charles went off to world war ii and came back and became an attorney. One sunday afternoon he knocked on our door and asked my father if he would be willing to join this case they were organizing to sue the school board so the children would no longer have to be assigned based on race the Public School. Now my dads first question was, and the girls in the room will appreciate this, because by the time they came to our home, everybody that had signed up, every parent was a mom. A married lady but a mom. Rather than take the risk of losing your job, because back then if you stood up for your rights, the larger community, the White Community in particular could fire you, could cut off your credit, end your mortgage. You know, all sorts of things would happen if you took that kind of public stand. So oftentimes it would be the moms who were home makers that didnt have that risk. So my dads obvious question was, will there be more men . Because at that point he was the only one. Long story short, they assured him they were going to continue asking people. By the fall of 1950 he ended up being the only man. And we think thats why the case ended up being named for him. It was not something my father did on his own. It was a collective action. He was asked to participate. Because when you look at the roster of litigants in the kansas case, they were 12 women and one man, my father, oliver brown. Alphabetically my father was not first. Another one of those myths but he was in fact the only man and at that time what we called gender politics, when men were the head of things. So we believe that he was his name was placed at the top of the list because he was number ten to sign on. This is the situation. You see, one of the things we do as a nation, we have these amazing documents. We have the declaration of independence, we have the bill of rights, we have the constitution, and they say wonderful things, but it takes an awful lot of work to make those words have meaning. So what you see, for example, now in the protests against the Police Killings and the cavalier murders of unarmed africanamerican men, the activism you see is necessary so brown v board of education on may 17th, 1954, 12 52 p. M. , earl warren who had been the governor of california, we have that connection. Presided over the internment of japanese. Warren announced to the country that brown unanimously had been decided. Surprising everybody that he would do what happened in california and turn around as a Supreme Court justice and work really hard to make sure every single justice voted yes in brown v board of education. He did that. But you see, when brown was decided and that was announced, a lot of people in the country, particularly in certain parts of the country in the south, they didnt want africanamericans to have the same rights as white americans. They were very unhappy about that. Thats why it took a Civil Rights Movement. Thats why it took legislation before this really became real. The words on the paper are meaningless unless they are enforced or unless theres some sort of action that makes them real. So brown v board did this for everybody in the room whether youre white, hispanic, latino, native, asian, disabled, doesnt matter. What brown did for all of you is it defined that the people of this country cannot have their sovereign rights arbitrarily restricted by state and local government. Brown did that for all of you. So it wasnt simply a matter of challenging the notion of segregated schools, it went much beyond that when you consider how our country was vacating ignoring, if you will, the constitution when it came to people of when it came to women. Some of you may be aware of the womens rights movement. So brown v board, i believe, is considered as one of the most important cases in the country because it was a beginning point. Brown made it possible for the march from selma to montgomery. One of the attorneys in brown, jack greenberg, argued the right for them to march lawfully across that bridge after the first march when john lewis was battered. So it takes more than simply legal pronouncements. So what i would encourage you to think about in your own lives, what is it you believe strongly about . Whats going on in your school . Whats going on in your church . Whats going on in your community that you can take a stand for, you can organize for . Because every single generation has a responsibility to pick up where we left off. I am proud of the fact that brown v board bears my fathers name. There were hundreds of people along with him that were part of this but i also know the work is not done. If i can turn on my television in the last three years and see what i have been seeing, its now your turn. Youre here now. We didnt create the challenges that were confronted with oftentimes, but its up to us to decide if they stop with us and what role were going to play. So i believe brown is a case of activism, its a case that was a catalyst for so much that came after, but its also a point of pride for me, much like miss karamatsu. I take that responsibility of maintaining the legacy very seriously. [ applause ] i think we have time for one question. A hand right here in the fourth row. Was your dad arrested when he joined the group . No. Thats a very good question. People always want to know what the repercussions were of brown v board. How many of you have heard of the little rock 9 . Okay. So you know there were some pretty unseemly things that happened when people tried to implement the courts decision in brown versus the board of education. So people want to know what happened to the parents that signed on the petition. In the topeka case there were no repercussions. Africanamericans and whites and all groups lived together. Our neighborhoods were integrated, but you could play together all summer, play together all weekend, but on monday morning when it was time to go to school, you had to go to the school that you were assigned to and the white children in the neighborhood went to the school they were assigned to. So we were already living, worshipping, working together. So it made it easier, i think. So in may when the court said legally you can no longer segregate on the basis of race, in the fall the schools in topeka integrated immediately, however, in other parts of the country, like little rock, it was a battle. Another civil war in many ways. One of the cases in brown, in virginia, Prince Edward county, Public Schools there closed Public Schools for five years. They didnt allow them to integrate rather than to comply. Now let me give you the example. If you are eight years old and youre in third grade, five years later school reopens, youre now 13, do you go back to third grade . No. No. So unless you had a way to get out of the county, unless you had access to some educators that came down from the north to set up little churchbased schools, unless you could go live with a family. A lot of students went to live with quaker families in different parts of the country, philadelphia or elsewhere. You didnt have any education whether you were black or white because people were so committed to a certain way of life that they would rather do without than allow you to have the opportunity to be educated. I think what were seeing now is a push back to brown v board of education 60 plus years later. Thank you, cheryl brown. [ applause ] this brings us last but certainly not least to john tinker. He was born in 1950 and raised by parents who believed in socially responsible activism. In 1965 he participated in a public display of protest of the vietnam war. He was a freshman at the university of iowa that he and his sister had won their precedent setting u. S. Supreme court case upholding the First Amendment rights of Public School students. Since that time 48 years ago john has led an interesting life. John has been a deck hand on a shrimp boat, driven a city bus, chief engineer in two radio stations, organized a relief progress in nicaragua. For the past four years john has been the chief engineer at kpip Community Radio station in fayette, missouri, where he lives with his wife and two children in a decommissioned Public School building. He is in the initial stages of creating an Educational Foundation supporting the First Amendment rights of students and teachers. Within Public Schools and to encouraging dialog across our difficult political and social boundaries. Please welcome john tinker. [ applause ] thank you, mike. Thank you to the Constitution Center for bringing us altogether. Its a real honor to be together with these two wonderful women who are doing very important work and i really appreciate it. Im happy to meet you both. I just wanted to start maybe and look at this wonderful audience. I really appreciate what youre interested, that all of you students are interested and the parents are interested in Constitutional Rights, and thats what were here for. I wanted to give you a little background to where our case came from. I was born in 1950 and you just heard that those were tough times for black people. In atlantic, iowa, which was a small town where my father was a methodist minister, there was one black family. They were not allowed to swim in the public swimming pool. My father as the minister took this issue to the city council and said, this has to be corrected. Instead, they said youre being divisive in the community to bring that up, so they asked him to leave. He lost his pulpit in atlantic, iowa, and we moved to des moines. My mother was grew up in south texas and had witnessed a lot of racism. She was very concerned that we as children have black friends, and she worked on that. And we did have black friends. And so we took our friends to church with us. Well, the same sort of thing happened in des moines, iowa, and my father was asked to leave because they didnt want the controversy. This was in 1962. And so my father worked for the quakers then, and the quakers as you may know were very instrumental in the Civil Rights Movement, the Antislavery Movement way back. The quakers just loved the fact that our father was interested in those issues. And so he became the Peace Education secretary for the American Friends Service committee, which is a quaker organization. And as Peace Education secretary his job was to organize lectures and symposia so that people could discuss the important issues of the day. Now the important issues in the mid 1960s, most important issues were the Civil Rights Movement and the antiwar movement. And so as children, myself and my brothers and sisters, there were six of us altogether, were involved in civil rights demonstrations, antiwar demonstrations and so on. It was a very rich childhood in a lot of ways. Not monetarily but in experiences. So in 1965 the war had really started the war in vietnam had really started to heat up. There was a Bombing Campaign called Rolling Thunder where they flew the big bombers, the big b52 bombers and bombed in north vietnam. A lot of people that i was associated with thought that was a horrible thing and they decided to have a protest in washington, d. C. And so i asked my parents if i could go to that protest with the two charter buses that went from iowa, and i was given permission to go on that bus trip and be part of that big national demonstration. On the bus ride back the people on the bus discussed what they might do to continue to protest the war, and it was decided that we would wear arm bands, black arm bands. Now black arm bands were a symbol of mourning so if of mourning when someone dies. So if one of your family members had died or Something Like that, you might put a black arm band on your arm just to let your friends and neighbors know that this sad event had happened in your life. So we decided to wear black arm bands, and when we did it was a group of High School Students that i was closely associated with. It was actually a unitarian youth group. Although i wasnt a unitarian exactly, i was a quaker by then, i also attended the Unitarian Church and a lot of my friends were a part of that group and we all decided to wear black arm bands. Well, one of our members wrote an article for the School Newspaper in des moines, the school that he attended. He wrote about what we were doing and why we were doing it, and for the reasons why he listed two things. To mourn the deaths on both sides of the conflict and to encourage the idea of Robert Kennedy, senator Robert Kennedy had proposed that there be a christmas truce. We thought that was really important because we thought if people could just stop fighting at some point, then maybe they would continue to not fight. So those were the two reasons we decided to wear the arm bands, but when that article for the Student Newspaper found it the faculty advisor for the journalism class saw that article, he took it to the principal of the school and the principal of the school got on the phone to the principals of other schools in des moines and said, do you know this is going to happen . We better have a meeting. They had a meeting and decided not to permit the wearing of the arm bands. Well, we went ahead and wore the arm bands anyway and got kicked out of school. After we were kicked out of school, we didnt quite know what to do about it, so we called a lawyer, a local lawyer who was involved with the iowa Civil Liberties union. He said, you know, you have a federal case here. They violated your Constitutional Rights. You should go back to school so theres not truancy involved also. So we did that. We went back to school and sued them in the federal court in des moines, and we testified and we told our stories and we lost. And it was pretty disappointing. But we decided to appeal to the Circuit Court, the 8th Circuit Court in st. Louis. I hope i got that right. And the Circuit Court had a strange situation. They were short one judge so they only had eight judges. The eight judges split 44. It was a tie and so we appealed. We asked the Supreme Court to hear our case and they agreed to hear our case. And the Supreme Court agreed with us, 72. So it was a pretty significant victory at the Supreme Court. And over the years this the case, tinker v des moines, has become perhaps the second case to brown v board of education of importance to Public School students because it said that im going to read the exact quote and get it right here. I have it written down. It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their Constitutional Rights to either speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. And so our case, tinker v des moines, is the case which gave all of you Public School students your constitutional right to freedom of expression. And the Public Schools are what they call a special environment so your rights to free speech are not the same in school as they would be out of school because the educational environment has to be there or nobody can learn anything, but the rule that they came up with and has now its called the tinker standard, and it is that in order for the School Authorities to tell you you cant express yourself, they have to have material and substantial reasons to believe that it will disrupt the educational environment. Now as you heard, the law is just the law and the way things turn out are not necessarily the way that the law says. They dont necessarily follow the rules and the decisions that the courts have made. And thats true today, too. I hear all the time about students who have to really stand up for their right and they have to inform perhaps their teachers or their principal about what their rights are. There was a case in dearborn, michigan, where a student wore a tshirt. It was back in it was ten years ago. It had a picture of the president on it. It said, war criminal. Now thats controversial. He wore it for half of the day and Nothing Happened at all. The teacher brought him in and said, you have to take that shirt off or go home. He said, tinker v des moines. I have a right to do this. She said, no. No. Look at this. She read to him from blacks dissenting opinion in our case and presented that to him as though that were the original law. Im just saying that because a lot of times or sometimes, i should say, School Authorities arent really sure what the law is themselves. Now a lot of them are, and i work frequently with a professor who teaches school law and i have appeared in his classes many, many times and so there are many teachers and administrators who do know what the law is and will be supportive of you if you let them know what is going on. I just want to encourage everybody to Pay Attention to whats going on, to think for yourself about it. What do you really think about whats going on . And if you have an opinion that conflicts with the way you think if you have an opinion about the way things should be that you dont think is being followed, i would really encourage you to raise your voice and let people know whats going on. And so, anyway, i want to thank you again for being here. I think its great