He was the Libertarian Party candidate for President of the United States in 1988, and Dr. Paul is a practicing physician, and he previously served from 1976 to 1984 as a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives and was a continual thorn in their side at that time. And we'll obviously have things to say about the influence he was able to have while in the House. He's a strong advocate of hard money, and he was instrumental in persuading the U.S. Treasury to issue, to resume the minting of gold coins. He was responsible indeed. And he is founder of the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education Free, an acronym that's free, in Houston, Texas, and it gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce Dr. Ron Paul. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. I'll quit while I'm ahead. Thanks a lot. It's real nice to be here, and I appreciate the invitation to come. Jim Perrin extended the invitation personally, and I'm delighted to be here. Before I get started in my remarks, I would like to recognize some good work by Tony Nathan, who has been working with the public relations. She heard the other day that I was going to Washington to do a little bit of filming for my television program at the end of the month, and did get me on to C-SPAN for a 45-minute call-in program on libertarian ideas. So you might look for that, and that's going to be helpful. C-SPAN, you know, has been very fair to the libertarians. They were very fair, certainly during the campaign. Somebody once told me that if only the viewers of C-SPAN voted, I would have done a lot better in 1988. But unfortunately, a lot of people listen to the three majors still, and that makes it a little more difficult for us to get our views out. But certainly it is important learning from our mistakes and learning from what we do right, and learning from those who have been involved in the political arena on how to sell political ideas, the libertarian message, to get average America to endorse what we believe in. It's great to be philosophic and academic and precise and right all the time. And yet, if we don't do more to present our views in a way that it's palatable to the American public, where it's not offensive, really the views won't amount to much because it will be held by a narrow group. So I've dedicated a lot of my time and energy over the last couple of decades to trying to take libertarian views and making them so that the average person accepts them without thinking that they're accepting anything unusual. But that at times can be quite a challenge. During the campaign of 1988, there was one episode that certainly encouraged me. There were a lot of events that were exciting. But the time that we met at Faneuil Hall in Boston was certainly one that I remember very clearly. The part that I generally don't want to remember is the precise number of votes that we got. But if you analyze it carefully, there's no reason to be totally negative about that either because James Buchanan quoted me as saying that we took all the people who endorsed the libertarian party view and all those who rejected the Republicans and Democrats were in the large majority. So there are a lot of people who have now rejected the conventional politics and the conventional wisdom of Washington and Republicans and Democrats. And we certainly have to build on that because we have an answer. It's just that we have not been successful in delivering this message to the American people in a broad manner. But the time when we had our meeting in Washington thanks to the wonderful activity of a libertarian friend, Gene Burns, on the radio station in Boston, we were able to fill Faneuil Hall. Now Faneuil Hall is not gigantic but it's big enough to hold hundreds of people. And the hall was filled and there was a balcony it was filled and there was standing room only and there was a lot of television but the significance to me was what was important. Because Faneuil Hall of course was the place where many before the Declaration of Independence met and talked about the problems the colonists were facing and it was led by Samuel Adams who was not meek in what he believed and what he advocated. But it was a great night because there were no holds barred even when we would say things like ban the IRS and ban the income tax and ban the Federal Reserve system and a lot of other things this crowd went wild so it was very very encouraging. But the most interesting thing occurred afterwards because as we were going out one of my staff people was talking to the administrator or the caretaker of the building and he had taken care of this building for a long time and he said boy he says this was great. He says it was about time we had somebody in this building sound like Sam Adams. I was first introduced to the ideas of libertarianism in the 1960s. I believe very sincerely I was born a natural libertarian then I went to public schools and something happened. But by the 1960s I had to reeducate myself, cancel out many of the ideas pumped into my head by the media and by the schools and finally I again arrived at a position which is called libertarianism and as the 60s passed through with the influence of the war in Vietnam and some of the economic conditions building it was by the end of the 60s that it was clear to me what the philosophy ought to be to offer an alternative to what we had and have in this country. In 1974 I first ran for Congress that was my first race for Congress I was first elected in 76. I left Congress at the end of 1984 so there was a span there of approximately 10 years of running regularly for office. During those campaigns I did endorse entirely the libertarian philosophy. Of course even within this room there may be some disagreements on the preciseness of that definition but nevertheless for general purposes I endorsed the philosophy and was capable of winning elections and not having opponents even the last time by taking the positions that I take now including that on drugs in a Bible Belt area but they actually became non-events as the people got to know me realizing that my drug position was a very sincere position that as a physician and as a parent I was very unconcerned personally about promoting drugs since they were very much aware of my criticism of drug usage but nevertheless I was able to take that and present these views and I was able to be elected. Now in Washington it was interesting to see the transition that went on in 1976 when I was first elected I was elected in a special election that the Republican Party and a lot of the supporters and certainly the members of Congress saw me coming in as a conservative Republican and of course the first week or so there was a B-1 bomber vote that came up and a few other civil liberties votes and all of a sudden they looked at me and they said what and thunder is going on here and they were really disturbed and provoked and annoyed and they just couldn't understand how I could be voting for some of these measures. It got easier as time went on. The Congress itself as the nation became more aware of the Libertarian Party and the Libertarian Message I think my identity was more strongly associated with the Libertarian Party after I put the 1980 Party Principles in the Congressional Record and that then sort of opened up more dialogue and more debate with the other members of Congress. Some people would say well wasn't it awful lonely? Were you the only one there? The only one that endorsed these views it must have been total chaos and a real problem. Well to some degree that is but if you look out in the other way you have something you can agree with everybody there you can agree with the liberals on some issues and the conservatives on some issues and for that reason rather than it being a negative I thought it turned out to be a positive. It also afforded some benefits too. There were sometimes when Republicans and Democrats couldn't even find an endorsement of anything that we were saying and then the vote would turn out to be 430 to 1. Now you would think that if you're voting by yourself and there's one vote it makes no difference. Who cares?  But you know your vote as an individual as one person was much more valuable because the media would say hey why did you do this? I mean it narrowed it down they had to ask me why I did it. So there were some benefits and it also allowed in a way I saw it as some fun because you got to play this game realizing that if you recognize you're not going to change the world and you're in that situation then it's not so bad. If you go as a libertarian to Washington and think you're going to make Congress libertarian you might as well forget it. You won't sleep at night very well because you'll be very frustrated and not much will happen. If anything more happened than I thought would because there were some pieces of legislation that nobody cared about but by a little bit of effort I was able to point some things out and bring people together and impose certain legislation. Certainly the bill that eventually evolved into the gold coin was something that I would have never dreamed of in 1974 or 76 that we could convene a gold conference. Of course the headline in the Washington Post after the conference was the gold commission has rejected the gold standard. Well I didn't think that was so much news as much as the fact that we had a discussion which was something that we haven't had for a good many years. So there were a lot of positives. During the campaign in 1980 the media frequently would come and say well fine you're running as a libertarian there are no libertarians in Congress what would happen if you became president wouldn't this be total disaster because there would be no help and assistance and you would be opposed by everybody and yet my answer was the same. You know a libertarian president might do quite well even under today's circumstances if you go to the liberals and get their support on civil liberties and go to the liberals and maybe get some more reasonable approach to foreign policy this you could build a coalition and you certainly could build a coalition with conservatives to cut back on some of the welfare spending. So even though this is very unlikely you won't have a libertarian president till you have not only a libertarian congress but a libertarian consensus among the people. So ultimately it's the changing of people's views points that really count so that the congress reflects those viewpoints and then of course endorse the president. But even theoretically under today's circumstances a libertarian president could do a lot better job than those guys are doing up there right now. And talking about jobs by our administration I want to very briefly make a comment because we had a press conference this morning. We had a television station show up thanks to Tony and we talked about the Persian Gulf in Iraq. And I see this as very dangerous. I made a comment in my weekly or my monthly report this coming month that actually events are moving more rapidly than I had once thought and I'm considered one who's waving flags and warning and saying that we're on a course of financial disaster and we're on a course of political chaos in this country unless we change our ways. But when I saw reports on the weekend that 250,000 troops may end up in Saudi Arabia that we are imposing illegal boycotts or on the Iraq nation when we still have 3,000 Americans behind those lines. I mean we're looking for a lot of trouble and then seeing the large hospital ship with 1,000 beds out of them moving out to the Persian Gulf. I think things are moving rather rapidly when just a few months ago we were concentrating on the breaking up of the Soviet Empire and the need to cut way back on the military. But now we see an orchestrated effort to build up the military again and several major programs including Ted Koppel's program to justify the need for more CIA activity around the world rather than the opposite of saying we need less of that. So we do live in perilous time. We live in exciting times and we see things changing behind the iron curtain or in the decenneration of the iron curtain. But until man becomes perfect we are going to have many of these problems and we're certainly going to face them. And unless we clean our own house here at home we are hardly going to be able to be good examples for around the world. But the obvious activity that we're pursuing in Saudi Arabia right now I think no matter what kind of justifications by the President for national security interests, whatever that is, I say that for national security interests we ought to bring all those troops home. I jotted down a few points I'd like to make on those things that I think are important that might help us in promoting libertarian ideas. The positive side of the libertarian message that the average American should respond to us. And then I want to talk a little bit about why we have problems because obviously we're having problems. I mean the country is not libertarian and we still have a long way to go and the message is right, we all know that, so maybe there's something wrong with our delivery. First point I want to make is that I think it's important that we emphasize to non-libertarians that our philosophy is based on a moral principle. A lot of people say well libertarians are too philosophic, they have too much concern about a principle. Well everybody has a principle. It's just whether it's a good principle or a bad principle. Interventionism and inflationism and socialism, they're all principles. They happen to be principles we don't believe in. But we have a moral principle. We believe it's the correct moral principle. It's certainly a moral principle that the American people have been comfortable with. It has to do with the individual. It's the emphasis that the individual is important and this is compatible with most religious beliefs in this country. That the individual is key, that the individual has rights, has natural rights or God-given rights and the individual is very important. I believe if we can convince people that we start there, it'll be very helpful in presenting the other program because those words aren't antagonistic, they're not threatening. They're views that the American people generally endorse anyway. They believe in God-given rights. They believe that the Creator gave us our rights. It's written into our Declaration of Independence and people are very comfortable and feel that the individual should be important. They do get confused when it comes to making people better and making the economy better. But that basic principle, if we accept that where we start, we can lead into the others. Another principle that we're all familiar with I think should be emphasized to non-libertarians and that is that we're not aggressive. We have sometimes an aggressive nature about what we believe in which at times can come across negative. But we as individuals do not promote and we condemn aggression. We believe people shouldn't initiate force, that people shouldn't be hurting other people and they shouldn't be stealing and hurting and killing. And this, of course, is something, how can anybody reject this? This is a wonderful idea that people are non-aggressive. And I think that one way I've turned this around a little bit with some liberals when it comes to the issue of guns. Liberals, you know, say that you do not have the right to own a weapon to defend yourself. And conservatives say, obviously you do. You do have a right to it. And the conservatives are so good, they don't even want your gun registered. They just want to register your kids. But the liberal, although she is absolutely opposed to you owning a gun, they are very generous with the use of the gun by the government. Everything they talk about is with the assumption that the government's gun is going to enforce what they think is the best for society. So whether it's a regulation or a tax or a war or whatever, the gun of the IRS or some agency. And we're even at a point now, one time before I left Washington, I left all the agencies that were permitted to carry guns. And it includes the IRS and ocean inspectors and EPA inspectors and certainly Secret Service and CIA and FBI. I mean, there's a lot of agencies of government that are permitted the use of the gun. And of course, if they're doing things immoral and unconstitutional, the liberal really is the individual who promotes the idea that you can't own the gun, but the government can, I think, is a very dangerous idea. Another approach to presenting libertarian ideas is to present it in the context of our history, American traditions and the Constitution. Now, we know the Constitution certainly had many shortcomings, but it happens to have been, although now ignored, a relatively good document when you compare it to the rest of the documents around the world. And therefore, if we pursue this from the original intent and the way the Constitution was written and what was intended by government, we're on pretty safe grounds. Now, many of you will recall the name Larry MacDonald. Larry MacDonald was not a libertarian. Matter of fact, he had some negative things to say about libertarians, but he was a constitutionalist and it was not unusual while we were there that he and I would vote together. But he was a principled person and he approached it from the Constitution and if there came up a project something like voting federally for the treatment and the cure of diabetes, how can you be opposed to that? Then every once in a while, Dr. MacDonald and Dr. Paul was voting up there with the superficial appearance that they don't even care, but obviously he was coming at it from a different viewpoint. So there's no reason in the world why we can't utilize that and say that, yes, our viewpoints aren't new and strange and bizarre and radical, ours are very conventional, they're constitutional, they're part of the American tradition. We're not the radicals. The radicals are the ones who are in charge in Washington today. Another point is emphasizing and presidents in recent years have used this, emphasize volunteerism. Kennedy did it, Reagan did it, Bush did it, they all do. That's the idea, of course they don't want to depend on volunteerism, they want to use it, but the lingo, the rhetoric was very libertarian, certainly Ronald Reagan was able to pick up a lot of our rhetoric and use it and even become associated with some libertarians, although he certainly did not follow through with any libertarian views. But volunteerism is important. People like volunteerism, they like to be kind and considerate and help out and along with this is tolerance, tolerance of other people's views. I don't think if you took a poll among the American people and say, do you think the American people should be tolerant or intolerant of their neighbors? Well, most people say, well, we should be tolerant. Well, when they accept that as a fact, then we have to push them a little bit further and saying, well, tolerance means that you accept them even when they do things or say things or read things that you might not like or do or we do yourselves. So tolerance is a little bit more than just something that you give lip service to. And I believe this is the way to capture the idea of goodwill. I think if we don't portray ourselves as having concern and want to portray goodwill, then it would be more difficult and is more difficult for us to sell the ideas. Libertarian philosophy and libertarian positions have influenced me a whole lot. And in one area in particular, of course, I started off mainly with the economic issues, moved in studying economics and Mises and the other Austrian economists. But then the next step was really in foreign policy. There was certainly a time when I wondered why we were doing all these things around the world, but then, as I said before, I was taught in public school why we had to do these things. And then it was later on that I realized that we didn't need to be doing these things around the world. And not only is it a better position, not only is it a constitutional position, but if we would do a lot less sooner, we would have a better chance for peace. The American people want peace. Yes, 80% right now are cheering Ronald Reagan on, but they don't know there might be somebody get killed and they might not know there's going to be a war and maybe they will have a second thought later on, but they have nothing else to offer than nobody else is offering another opinion. I was flying over on the airplane yesterday from Houston and the gentleman next to him, he struck up a conversation because he saw my name on an envelope. And he, thanks to Jim Perry, and he says, oh, yeah, he says, I know Ron Paul for president because I see that signed down in San Francisco. And so he, we got to talking and I asked, I wanted his opinion. I wanted to see what he was thinking about the mid-east. He says, well, I can see both sides. You know, he says, I see that there's some risk, but I see the necessity of going in, you know. But then he immediately followed up and he says, what do you think? And he was really looking for information. I mean, he was more or less starved for it. And it was all acknowledgement. You know, he said, yeah, that's right, that's right, that's right. But has he heard our view on television? No, our view doesn't get on television very often. And yet it makes a whole lot of sense. And the American people, they realize that long-term peace is better achieved with our policy than with the policy pursued by all the administration this century. They will come to us. And they're convinced that it's in American national interest and for world peace, for us to send a quarter of million men halfway around the world to jeopardize the lives of American citizens and soldiers and, of course, everything else that might follow. But the emphasis on peace, I think, should be something we should not forget about. The libertarian principle accepts two traditional principles that have been known for thousands of years. And they're basic. They're fundamental. They're in civilization. They're in our major religions. And yet they're key to the libertarian philosophy. And that is the recognition that life and property are important. We know that we as libertarians cannot initiate force. We can't hurt people and we can't steal from them. And their property is very important. And along with that is if you have the market process working, you ought to have a strong respect for voluntary contract, contractual arrangements. And if you agree to do something, you do it. And if there is a role for government, it would be in this very narrow sense to making sure that people do fulfill their obligations and not cheat and steal and defraud. Now these sounds so basic and yet they're so important if they're carried through to the ultimate end. But these are not new ideas.   And obviously they're embedded. And the idea that you do what you say is part of the libertarian philosophy and something really, if put in the proper context, people cannot deny. And yet today we have government interfering with voluntary contracts on a daily basis. There's really no such thing in this country that really can be construed as a voluntary contract because they're telling us everything that we have to do in our economic and our social lives. Another area that I think where we come down on the short end and probably the most difficult for libertarians and where we get the most grief on and we get the most negative publicity and that is the social acceptability. The people that I know who are non-libertarians who just know a little bit about libertarians, I'm not saying the criticism is justified, but it's there. You can't deny it, it's there. They will come and say, oh yeah, libertarians. They're the ones who like pornography, prostitution, gambling and drugs and you're associating with them. But if that's the selling point, let me tell you that you can't sell it. Obviously you can't sell it because even if 90% of the American people endorse that, they don't want to be known to endorse it.  So 90% of the American people are very, very cautious on what they publicly endorse. So if you're in the arena of politics, then you have to be careful not to be construed that you're endorsing any of these things that we certainly tolerate. And I think that is one of the major problems that we have if I had to judge from the many, many conservative and liberal friends that I have outside of the libertarian movement. Libertarian philosophy also should be sold for another very, very important reason. A lot of what I said here, a lot of people would write off and say, well this is theoretical and it's not all that practical and it sounds fine, but we're in the nitty-gritty real world and we want to do something. I mean we have to take care of the people. But we as libertarians have to be convinced just as Bob Smith earlier and others have talked about the environment. We have to come up with programs as libertarians to do something about it. We have to be the most practical party and we have to have the most practical ideas. We have to convince the American people that it's impractical. The world is coming to recognize that socialism is very impractical. At one time they thought forced redistribution of wealth was a good idea and it was very practical and it took away a little from the wealthy and gave more to the poor and everybody was going to be happy. Well that's very impractical and we're seeing the results. It's too bad they didn't listen to Mises in 1920 and they wouldn't have wasted so much time and energy and suffering to recognize this. But we have to be convinced that it is practical. It's practical both in the social-moral sense as well as in the foreign policy sense of more peace and certainly in the economic sense. If we want prosperity we have to have a free market and therefore we as a group have to ask ourselves what have we been doing if we have such a wonderful philosophy and it's based on American tradition. It's based on some of the good elements of many religions and it's practical and it's the philosophy that provides peace and prosperity. Why aren't we doing better? Why don't we have more people in office? Why don't we have more influence in the media? Why don't we have more influence in Congress? Well I think we're getting more and I think we're making progress but I still think we come up short in coming across in a positive way. But I think there's also some other reasons too. I think the opposition has had some advantages especially if we or they or us we live in a country that is rather prosperous and the prosperity has been accumulated at a time when we were more libertarian and great prosperity it may take a while to ruin prosperity it may take a while to destroy capital but we've been doing a pretty good job at it for these last 40 or 50 years and we are now facing a crisis in this country the capital has been consumed the value of the dollar has been undermined the basis of our freedoms have been undermined as well privacy is a major issue if I had to pick one issue that my subscribers are most interested in it's privacy and they're not all libertarians they're probably half aren't libertarians but they're interested in privacy it's financial privacy and other type of privacy but privacy ought to be the same and ought to be synonymous with liberty but the opposition has certainly some advantages the one advantage they have with this prosperous society is the advantage of playing the role of Santa Claus or Robin Hood and the American people sort of succumb to the temptation there is always a temptation among men to receive goods and services with less than full effort a temptation will exist throughout the history of man has and will but the demagogue the redistributionist is very prone to jump on this and grab the wealth and redistribute it play Santa Claus and say I care I really care about the people they care about their power but when they're selling their message they get up and they say I care about you Ron Paul over there wouldn't even have food stamps he doesn't care about poor people he wants them to starve in the street not realizing that there are more poor people more homeless and more starving people so ever since they've been doing all this wonderful redistribution of wealth but that has yet been proven the Duke Gooder is still riding the high moral ground of saying he's compassionate and he cares the conservative does it in the same way on the social issue the conservative says do you want to live in a society where they gamble and drink and there's prostitution and all these horrible things oh no we're going to make the people better and we have this high moral code that we're going to impose on the people so they grab the moral high ground and for that reason most people in this country are conservatives and liberals and yet we have to dispel that missed myth obviously and convert many of them to believing that it is better to accept another philosophy we have to deliver the message in a concerned, compassionate way if we do this and the people get interested it doesn't have to be and it shouldn't be in a self-sacrificial way yes we want to be compassionate, we want to be concerned we want to believe in free choices and tolerance because we think it will make a better world we think people will be better because they make their own choices rather than coerced by government we believe there will be more prosperity and therefore the individual, the American citizen who's making the decision has to make the decision based on self-interest it doesn't have to be on self-sacrifice and say well I'm going to make a lot of money but I realize that I have to give so much of the money away to the poor in order for a libertarian society to work no we don't have to concentrate on that that can be the role of the minister if they believe that tithing is good and that you should help your fellow man that's a personal decision and it should not be a political decision because even if nobody donated anything and everybody was a self-serving, narrow libertarian that consumed and used it only for themselves the world would still be a lot better off the world would certainly be a lot better off under those circumstances but politically we're better off if we can come across as being compassionate and concerned, I personally endorse a philosophy that says that I do have obligations and I believe in family care, community care and I believe that we should do it I think the libertarian philosophy has a greater chance if more of us do have voluntary compassion and are willing enough to contribute in a voluntary way but I think this is very important obviously Eisenhower made a statement once I think it's interesting and I'll go ahead and conclude I think there may be a few minutes left for questions Eisenhower made a statement, he said, you know he got a lot of criticism for not standing up and being an ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal and he admitted he walked down the straight and narrow middle road he says that takes courage he says because I'm getting knocked down by both sides and he says it's not easy to walk down the middle of the road and when you think about this, Eisenhower was seen as a moderate there are many moderates around but what is a moderate? a moderate is the opposite of a libertarian a moderate cries to coalesce and bring people together by saying, well, yes, I'm going to accept military interventionism and I'm going to accept social interventionism and welfare and they kind of bring them together and of course they get criticized by both and yet that's generally the way the world has marched on by accepting both sides of government intervention and we become more of a statist totalitarian society my suggestion is this obviously for us to have the appearance of bringing people together to coming together not to be off in some strange hinterland where people think we're strange and different and they don't understand this but to say, yes, we're working in the middle but we're going to bring people together for the right reasons we're going to bring the conservatives over here because they believe in free enterprise and we're going to bring the liberal over here because they believe in civil liberties bring them together and think about how this can be a positive move instead of a negative move I think if we can do this and we continue our efforts we will be successful education really is number one on the list we must educate ourselves and our youngsters and our people so that eventually we have influence in the media and in the government and then of course second then we go into political action the political action is a consequence of a consensus of the people I myself like to think that I participate in both by both being involved in political action for the sense of arousing interest and alerting people to other ideas as well as pursuing the educational efforts that so many have been doing for so many years and I think if we continue in this line that we will have a successful libertarian revolution in this country thank you very much I would endorse that concept I think it is the malpractice problem in medicine is a major problem and it's also in many other areas of litigation but it should be done with the least amount of legislation by the acceptance of the principle of voluntary contracts today if I contract with my patient that we will settle the dispute in such and such manner whether they would go as far as that and say they won't sue they might accept an arbitration panel they're thrown out of court they're not allowed to sign those and it's considered that they've signed away their inalienable rights and therefore they're not legal but I would accept your notion I think the filler would be insurance I think in malpractice if the patient came around to finding which physician they can get the best contract with and then if they don't have complete coverage if there's a major catastrophe then there should be flight insurance or surgical insurance that would cover this the project will you be running for office again and either way how can we assist you? 1988 was a long, long year and I'm still recovering and I'm not thinking right now at all about running for anything my current project of course is trying to put together 13 cable type libertarian programs we have seven, we've been on the air we will get back on the air again in the fall and hopefully we'll have all 13 because that's a season and each time we move we get a better station so I'm going to work real hard in trying to reach more people I have a strong belief that if we don't get into the electronic media we're not going to reach more than the smaller groups that we have at meetings like this so you could help me by encouraging my television but someday maybe down the road I might consider but not right now Lord? Me? Okay, he asked me if I would talk about Nancy Lord Nancy Lord is running for mayor in Washington DC she was very grateful that she raised a decent sum of money with a letter that I signed for a mayor's race she did quite well and I don't know, I don't keep up with the you know the race in Washington on a day-to-day basis but everything I hear has been very encouraging last week or yeah I think it was last week they had you know a grand opening of the campaign and I notified her that I would be going up there next week so let's hope that she does real well and that would give us a good boost The mercenary army will take this interest to sign a raid will you get? No Did everybody hear the question? He asked would I object to Exxon sending their army to the Persian Gulf to protect their property interest and I have no objection just so they don't use my kids or my money we'll take one more and I think we'll have to quit is that it Vince? Well, you indicated that over the last 50 years you think that we've been living off or reducing our capital stock but most economic data would seem to indicate the contrary personal income adjusted for inflation is up widely perhaps four times personal wealth is up capital stock is up could you tell us why you believe that we can to make sure capital stock? I think our standard of living is down I think we are less capable of producing steel and other things in this country than we have ever been certainly one source of soundness to an economy would be the soundness of a currency and we have a very weak currency there's really no true savings in this country savings represents capital not the Federal Reserve and what they do with the printing press so I see that we have been drifting into an anti-capitalistic system where we aren't producing and saving we are consuming and borrowing so I think what some of these figures that the government may report is a reflection of the fact that we were able for now borrow money at a cheap rate and took a little pressure off the Federal Reserve and therefore it looks like income has gone up but I don't think the American people as a whole are a lot better off I believe the liberal statistics that show that there are more people in the poor category and more people in the streets than there were 10, 15 years ago so I see our nation as poor and less capable of producing and have a dangerous amount of debt Was it libertarians in the U.S. Congress and you don't know what's up with that? That's a good question are there any closet libertarians in the Congress? Not in the true sense of the word but one thing I meant to mention at the opening and I didn't mention was that the congressman came to be very respectful of the message and they would frequently come to me and say what is the libertarian message and many of them had a guilt complex and would come and sit down Mickey Edwards being one in particular would sit down and say you know if they had been introduced to the ideas they know it's a good thing and they'll say you know I'm really a libertarian I'd like to vote with you but the heat's too strong for me at home so they got around to the point where it was always a positive to say you were a libertarian but they would like to be libertarians but they're politically they don't have the courage to be if there happened to be one of these statistical analysis of voting record if an individual who would not generally be associated with a so-called conservative republican would all of a sudden rank high which was a more libertarian analysis they would be very delighted to come and say hey look at this you know I'm right with you like you know I'm really a good guy but I just can't quite do this because my people they don't they don't they feel obligated that they cannot come with an opinion their job is to reflect you know the majority vote in their district and they say that I have to suppress these urges to be a principled person and what they're really arguing though is that whoever's given the most money they better reflect their views because they never really take a vote of the people thank you very much


Greetings. In 1995, hundred and eighty-nine governments from around the world signed the Beijing platform for action, a groundbreaking blueprint for gender equality and female empowerment. Twenty years on, we have a lot to be proud of, but our work is unfinished. Around the world, gender bias continues to be a problem. The bias is also visible in the ICT field, where women and girls are acutely underrepresented. Technology is increasingly being used to deliver essential social services like education and healthcare. It can only be a vehicle for political participation, social mobilization and a vehicle for challenging stereotype. With technology poised to unbutton so much of our world, 90% of future jobs will require ICT skills. So women need to be at the forefront of ICT development and development of application. Technology must be available to female students, entrepreneurs and policymakers, and we need to make ICT careers more accessible and appealing to women and girls. Right now, fewer than 70% of computer science degrees go to female students. Women create only 9% of the apps in Europe. Globally, women only make up at the upper end 15% of top decision makers in the technology sector. Let's flip the stats. Let's achieve gender parity and locate more women in leadership positions and put women at the vanguard of developing an inclusive digital society. This, your generation can achieve. Girls in ICT day is all about changing perceptions and opening girls' minds to the many varied opportunities out there. You and women is delighted to work alongside ITU to promote girls in ICT day 2015. I personally encourage governments, ICT companies and educators around the world to get together and collaborate to showcase the exciting world of ICT. Let us empower the girls to shape their future.


You left out Tom Brady. I imagine you've played golf with him though, right? I actually played at Gusta National with him. It came down to the last hole and I happened to make a birdie and I don't think he talked to me for like an hour after that.  And obviously that's gotten him to the level that he's at, but that's kind of a story that can always take with me. It was one of the cooler golf stories I've ever had.


I remember I was going through something difficult in a relationship situation and kind of feeling this kind of broken heart kind of scenario that now I realize my mind created more so than anything. And I had this epiphany where it's like, well, if I ever have a situation in a relationship that doesn't go well, or I lose a job or something happens to my health, or some like, do I have to go to therapy for the rest of my life? You know, I just have to go and talk about it. And that led me on to this whole kind of other search and different spiritual teachers came on into my life. A popular one was Don Miguel Ruiz, he's popular for a book called The Four Agreements. And one, and I like his other book more, it's called The Voice of Knowledge. And what I learned through his work was kind of fundamental truth that I had no idea is how we human beings experience life and function is that when we as human beings look out through our lives, we don't necessarily see the world as it is. We see our story about it. And when I use the word story, it's equivalent to thought or belief about it. So if I say, hey, Johnny A.J., you guys are the most loving, nice people in the world, well, that's my story about you.  And that originates in here. And one of the things that I learned through his work in particular is that a lot of what goes through the stories that I believe are lies, but they feel real. They feel truthful. That really served me in that realization. And the more and more I realized it, I was like, OK, I feel my suffering is getting lighter, but I would still react in the world.  I didn't know what to do with that. And then eventually a process called the work of Byron Cady came along in my life. Byron Cady, I think, is in her late 70s now and she's been spreading her particular meditative work where you can learn to give your emotions a right to life on paper. And when you're able to do that, you identify the stressful thoughts that you're believing and thinking behind the emotion. Because we're much more aware, as human beings, like, oh, I feel this fear, I feel this anger, I feel this anxiety, I feel this disappointment, but we're not necessarily conscious of the beliefs that are behind it or that the beliefs are the primary influence of those feelings that you're having in the first place. That was very foreign to me. I had to go learn that because quite naturally go, I feel the way I feel because of my mom or dad or friend or lover or I lost my job or I have this thing going out my health. That external thing is causing me to feel the way I feel. And it feels very logical when you when you're in it. But when you kind of take an inward journey, you begin to realize, well, how is it possible that some other human being could be in the same situation, yet they don't experience it that way? And what I learned is that the stories and beliefs that I have that are conscious, some most not conscious, are running the show and that we can actively learn as a skill to take power back from our mind, step back from it. And the more and more I did that in my journey, the more literally the more clarity, freedom and inner peace I had.  I have an autoimmune condition where I live with chronic pain and, you know, have a skin condition too because of it. And I've been crippled at the age of 28, walking with a cane, you know, it was 125 pounds. And so I've been in these really difficult scenarios where because I had these skills to question my mind or step back from it and take my power back from it that I experienced, even in those difficult circumstances, a bit more clarity, freedom, inner peace and a deeper sense of wholeness that didn't rely on the external, because especially with my health issues is like, well, I might not be able to walk out of bed today. And so there goes the idea of getting the girl, so to speak, or a career, or at least previously, or something on the extra to validate me or make me feel a whole. And so I was kind of forced to by life to touch into a D word sense of who and what I am beyond that. Now, I'm OK today and I'm on to medication. It's help helps and don't know how long it will. But because of this inner journey, now the expression of whether it's relationships, work or other avenues in my life can come from a more heart centered, authentic, discovering who I am, placed on a deeper, deeper level. Rather than I need to feel a hole by getting that that thing because I learned a long time ago that doesn't work.


And what I encourage women to do is to become more empowered, let go of this masculine and feminine expectation and rhetoric and become empowered within yourself. This is why lately I've been reading the book. So there's this misconception that men are not interested in relationships and that they're emotionally incapable of even being in a relationship, that they have issues with emotional intimacy and such. And I just wanna say out loud, that is bunk, okay? Now, while that might be true for a lot of men, that isn't all men. So I wanna lean into this conversation today because the reality is, is human beings are rather dysfunctional? I'm gonna repeat that, human beings are rather dysfunctional. And this is true of men and women alike. This isn't singular to men. And yet, what I think is shifted in certainly in the last couple of decades, but certainly in the last 50 plus years, the need for commitment isn't as prevalent as it once was. I'm gonna repeat that, the need for commitment isn't as prevalent as it once was because of the ease of getting sex. I'm gonna repeat that, the ease of getting sex. And it used to be that, and I jokingly say this, but if a man wanted to get laid, he had to get married, he had to make the ultimate commitment, okay? Now, I'm not making this about men, but this was a choice that couples did because before birth control, there were consequences if there wasn't a union of two people. And certainly back 50, 60 years ago, before we lived in this disjointed society that we are in, at least here in the United States, more so than other parts of the world, there was tribe accountability that helped raise children and created a container for couples to be in a committed relationship. And that has certainly changed dramatically in the last 50 years and more so in the last 20 years because of the ease of getting sex.  Now, here's the thing, everybody, you're free to do what you want. I'm just giving you my perception on this. I by no means suggest this is the truth. This is, you know, I'm a bit of a contrarian, so my advice is contrary to public opinion, but I'm here to say that if you want to really shift the narrative, then it starts by shifting the narrative within yourself. And here's the challenge for most women in particular, and I'm a dating relationship coach for women. I specialize in helping women learn how to vet for emotional maturity and how to ask the right questions in the early stage of dating to determine are you with that guy who genuinely wants a serious relationship or the guy that's gonna either be a user or someone who's gonna be a time waster and just spend time with you and not really commit. So if you need some support and help on that, check out the link below to a free discovery call with me to see if working with a coach is right for you because that's my, I teach you how to ask the right questions based on your personality. So coming back to this empowerment piece, I believe women tend to operate in the dating realm or in the relationship realm I should say from a dependency, an energy of dependency. And I think this is literally bred into women, both biologically and instinctually because literally for 200,000 years, I want you to think about Neanderthals are 200,000 years old, okay? And literally for 200,000 less the last 50 years, women were predominantly dependent upon men for survival. And I also want you to think for 200,000 years up until 100 years ago, we didn't even have electricity. So our society has evolved in rapid ways that didn't exist for 200,000 years. And so think about this. If biologically speaking or instinctually speaking, a woman is dependent upon a man, even though she may not be anymore, I think it's just bred into you that way. And this is just, again, my speculation. I'm not suggesting this is the truth. This is why oftentimes women give their power away to men in relationship. And then it's hard to determine which are the guys who are serious about a relationship because there are really good men out there. There are good men, just a lot of bad daters. And what I encourage women to do is to become more empowered. Let go of this masculine and feminine expectation and rhetoric and become empowered within yourself. This is why lately I've been reading the book Why Men Love Bitches. And that stands for Babe in Total Control of Herself. Yes, okay. By the way, there's a link below to get all the books I recommend. When a woman's empowered, she can now sift through the dysfunctional men much easier. And if you're not familiar with my chart on emotional maturity and relationship skills chart, and this is not a fact, this is an opinion, and this is true for men and women alike, there's roughly 20% of the population that has clinical issues. And if you've been watching the Johnny Depp Amber Heard trial, you can see clinical issues being played out in court. And while I say over here, 20% of men and women are emotionally healthy and have good skills, I'm being rather generous here. Most humans are dysfunctional. And they're either moving towards one of these or moving towards, or they're coming from one of these to here, coming to one of these to here, or they might be reverting. So can you see how it is a clusterfuck out there? What a mess it is out there. And it's partially because many of you have been indoctrinated into the fantasy way relationships should be instead of a real understanding of the mechanics to a healthy happy relationship. And I say said before, the barrier to entry to sex is so easy that it requires no effort from men. This is why a lot of times guys are trying to invite you over to their home on the second date, which I'm guilty of folks, I'm guilty of this, because I'd like to have sex with a woman, I'm just gonna be candid with you. I am driven biologically to want sex. I can't help when I'm feeling in a state of lust or limerence to get out of my egoic lower chakra energy and actually sift to rise into the higher chakra energy of real love. This is why I recommend ladies before the penis goes inside the vagina, you read the book eight dates and you buy a copy for the guy and you read this before or at least start reading this before you begin a sexual relationship. And this is why I've indoctrinated what I call the dating vow, the dating vow. And if you haven't heard my dating vow, let me put it up here. The dating vow is basically, there's a saying, women are the gatekeepers of sex and men are the gatekeepers of commitment. So you create a vow because we no longer have the marriage vow, I'm here to offer a new solution to this called the dating vow. And in the dating vow, it's, look at here's the notes. It says the following, I agreed, and this is you both are saying this together. I agree to explore the process of getting to know you with the intent to declare something serious within the next three to six months. I agree to be monogamous sexually while we're having regular sex together. I agree to not actively seek and meet and date others while we're in the process of getting to know one another which includes I'll take down my dating profile. I agree to speak up if this isn't working for me versus pulling back ghosting or disappearing. And lastly, I agree to invest regular time in this process of getting to know you which looks like the following. We do social activities, hobbies, mutual interests, spend time with family and friends. Because ladies, if you don't know what type, if you're not familiar with the three different types of people actively dating today, you should check this chart out I created. Again, not a fact and opinion. There are either the users, the spenders or the growers and roughly 20% of the population of the users, those are the love bombers and players and the gold diggers and the entitled people. And then there's the spenders, they want connection, they want companionship, they want coupling with no direction uncertainty and they're fearful. And lastly, the 20% category of the grower and builders and that's what we're gonna talk about today are the grower and builders. Those are the ones that seek fully, they're seeking fully, oh, I gotta retype that.  I gotta fix this typo. Oh well, so what?  How is he gonna show up? What's it gonna look like? How does he show he cares? Well, that's what we have today. Our seven ways men show they care when you're the one. So, and I want you to know ladies, these men do exist. Most men are good guys, most men are good guys. They're not as bad, even the dysfunctional men, even the spenders, they're not bad guys. And by the way, these percentages are equal for you women as well. Just because you have a propensity to want commitment doesn't mean you're any better at relationships. I know a lot of women that are absolutely dysfunctional and just because they want commitment doesn't make them better at being in a relationship. But when two relatively emotionally grown up people show up together, this is what it's gonna look like and I hope you like this. So number one, when a guy, here's some signs and he shows that he cares and he looks at you as the one. First off, he's protective. He's protective of you physically, but more importantly, he's protective of you emotionally. He is actually being mindful of your feelings. True care from a true, you know, ladies, I know you love the idea that men are the providers and protectors. Well, that used to be hunting the buffalo and protecting against neighboring tribes. Now, since women are capable of paying their own way, a true protector is a man who can emotionally protect your heart. This is why I highly recommend checking out this book, Emotional Intimacy by Robert Masters.  Now listen, I recognize that many of you might settle for casual relationships. I get it, maybe a casual relationship is better than no relationship at all. I get it, and that's okay. I'm speaking to those who want to go deeper, that want something more from themselves.  And if you're not familiar with my book, What the Heck Is Self-Love Anyway, a Journey of Personal Development, Self-Up in Spiritual Work, highly recommend checking this out, by the way, link below to all my books that I recommend. Why I'm recommending this is when you show up from an empowered place and a non-dependency place, you can actually be able to sift through the needles in the haystack or find that needle in the haystack much easier because you become the pin cushion. Okay, so number one, man shows he cares, he's not protective of you physically, he's also protective of you emotionally. Number two, he remembers things that you say, he remembers things you say, whether it's about your family, whether it's about your friends, maybe it's about your pet. Maybe you shared something about your pet that was very sweet and he can remember it. And he actually shares it to you at a later date.  In fact, they're thinking sometimes ahead, which I'm going to talk about that in a second, could be your work life, could be your children, whatever it is, they're actually actively listening and paying attention. Now, I can tell you that I'm a person that actively listens and pays attention, but sometimes my memory faults me. So this isn't an absolute that he's perfect at it, but he's actually paying attention and he'll come back to you later and share something that you said and you'll go, wow, he was really paying attention. Okay, number three, I love this one. He smiles when he sees you after a few days apart. He smiles when he sees you. So in other words, if you've been apart for a few days and you see each other, he actually shows up with a big gigantic smile. That's a great sign that a man genuinely cares about you and he sees you as something more than someone to get laid. There's just a sense of enthusiasm when he sees you. I remember in my most significant relationship, even after years of us being together and we would usually be apart from Monday. We would see each other. We'd be apart like Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and we'd get together Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday and I'd come back home Monday. That was our usual routine, but when I got to our house on Thursday or Friday night, I just had a big gigantic smile. I was excited to see her. That's someone who genuinely cares about you when there's enthusiasm when you see each other, when you've been apart for a few days. Number four, he ditches time with his guy friends to be with you. I know, listen, ladies, when I really like someone, I have no problem ditching my friends to be with the person I care about. Partially because I'm gonna get some nookie, which I'm always happy to have some nookie, but also when you genuinely care for someone, your friends know that, and by the way, ladies, you know it with your girlfriends, you do the same thing. When you genuinely care about someone, you kind of, now I'm not suggesting you make this a habitual practice, but it's certainly a good sign when he ditches his friends to wanna be with you. Number five, he doesn't get mad or angry even if there's a fight between you. He stays relatively calm. People that genuinely care recognize that there's going to be differences in relationship and those that are actually calm on the inside when there's a disagreement, it's because he really care, it's not about being right, it's about being happy. And really healthy relationships, no good conflict resolution skills. This is one of the reasons why I highly recommend this book, Eight Dates, because I want you to see something right here. One of the chapters, the second chapter in the book is called Agree to Disagree, Addressing Conflict. Do you see that there? Addressing Conflict, the book Eight, oops, the book Eight Dates. Folks, the reality is, is relationships are gonna have conflicts. There's gonna be differences of opinion. If you can't resolve them in a healthy, happy way, your relationship will turn into a Johnny Depp, Amber Heard type of scenario. So this is why I recommend these books over and over and over and over again. And ladies, just because you have a propensity to vomit your feelings doesn't mean you're necessarily good at communication skills. I highly recommend everybody reading the book, Nonviolent Communication by Marshall Rosenberg, so you can learn better effective communication skills because when you're good at it, the guy will end up mirroring it. Ladies, I know you don't like the idea that you might have to train men, but I'm here to say you lead by example.  She leads by example. Number six, he thinks ahead if he knows you need help. And I was sharing this before, but coming back to pets, I remember my ex-girlfriend had two big dogs and the dog food she would get weighed like 40 or 50 pounds each bag. And so I knew this was heavy for her, so I used to go to the store and buy it for the dogs. So I could actually help. So just to help her, so she didn't have to carry it in the house, I'd go physically go buy it and then bring it back and bring it in the house. That's what a guy shows when he cares. And I know some of you might be thinking, what happened in that relationship? Look at relationships come into your life sometimes to teach you lessons. I had to learn a lot of lessons in that relationship. I wasn't fully ready and capable of being in a relationship back then. I mean a fully committed partnership relationship, but we each other, we healed each other's wounds. And this is why we remain pretty decent friends with one another. And number seven, he demonstrates his level of commitment with words and actions. So it's not just words, his actions demonstrate commitment. That is a man who genuinely shows he cares, not just saying we all the time, but he does it by showing up on a regular basis, calling you on a regular basis, planning vacations together, introducing you to family and friends, working on stuff together, and actually expressing the desire from a heart centered place of wanting something more than just something on the surface. And these are the seven ways men show they care when you're the one. Now, as I said before, there's a good chance you might end up with a user spender. I guess that happens a lot. That's because ladies, most of you operate from this dependency placed energy. This is why the women who work with me have such great success. I just got another phone call the other day from a client who said I met a great guy and they know the difference because they come at it from an empowered place. And listen, not all men are bad. Only a small percentage are true users and players. But there's a lot of spenders out there, a lot of dysfunctional human beings. So if you wanna sift through the weeds and I suggest reaching out to me to work with me to help you in that capacity. Otherwise I hope you got some value on the seven ways men show they care that you're the one. This is now since this is a live broadcast, we're gonna take questions from our audience here, our listeners and followers and such. And really quickly, if you know my format, if you have a question, post the word question, write the question there after or purchase a super sticker, super chat. All the monies from the super or super thanks if you're watching the replay, all the monies from the super sticker, super chat goes to a scholarship fund in the name of my son Connor Asley. That's him right there. That's my son who passed away a few years ago. Shit, it's coming up on four years now. And in his honor, I've started a scholarship fund to donate to causes like the Hoffman process, insight seminars and also to help folks defray the cost of personal development. So post, you can post a question or purchase a super sticker, super chat. While I'm waiting for questions, I want to address something that came up the other day from one of our followers here. And that has to do with masculine and feminine energy and polarity. Now folks, I know I beg on feminine energy coaches because all they do is tell you to lean back in your feminine and be claimed by a guy. That's my perception of it. I know I make a silly joke of it. Listen, a healthy human being has a good balance between masculine and feminine energy. Masculine means doing and feminine means receiving, or being. So when you're sleeping, you're in your feminine, you're just being there. You're not doing anything. When you go to work, you're doing something. When you're brushing your teeth, when you're doing something, when you're driving a car, you're doing something. Now there's this expectation that men are the doers and the women are the receivers. I have a real issue with that because a healthy human being is a yin-yang sign of healthy combination of both and you don't need this.  There's no way to judge the energy. Listen, and if it's talking about sexual polarity in the bedroom, if two people want to fuck, and I know you all would like me to say make love, but listen, this is just my way of saying things, just I use expletives to enhance a sentence. But if two people want to make love with each other, you don't need to figure out, well, am I a 72% of my masculine? Is she 28% of her family? No, I'm 82% masculine. She's 18% feminine. No, she's 19% feminine, but I'm only 50% masculine.   And if a man has to be a certain way for you to surrender to it, look it. Most men are shitty lovers to begin with, but most women aren't necessarily picnics in this category either. Very few people have truly studied Kamasutra, Tantra is just breathing, but all the different forms of variety of love making is most people just fuck. That's just my opinion, okay? But that's my opinion about masculine feminine energy and that's why I beg on it so much because you don't need to learn that. What you need to learn more is human behavior. What you need to learn more is healing childhood wounds and traumas and adult traumas that cause negative patterns and limiting beliefs in your life that cause you to choose dysfunctional people. And you need to start encouraging your partner to do this work.  And by the way, if you read the book, if the Buddha dated, if the Buddha dated throws out all the gender rhetoric and says, how can we show up as healthy human beings in the process instead of setting us up for failure because the bigger problem in relationship has nothing to do with masculine feminine energy. The biggest problem in relationships is terrible communication skills and trust. This is why I recommend these two books, Couples Communication Guide and How to Build Trust in a Relationship. Folks, if you want to improve your relationship overnight buy all the books I recommend and it will change your life like that. That's my rant and I'm sticking to it. All right, I think this will be a great place to wrap up today. I hope you found value in this. If you did, please hit that like button. Please share this with your friends. Please subscribe if you stayed this long and not a follower. Also, if you want to work with me check out the link to a free discovery call to see if working with a coach is right for you. And by the way, check out all the other links by Instagram, my podcast. And if you wanna join my private group if you can't afford coaching check out Midlife Love Mastery. Okay, I think this will be a great place to wrap up today.  I'm gonna reach into the camera and give you a hug of love if that's okay. I'm asking you to turn to someone, Pet, Teddy Barrett Pillow and give it to them a hug of love because hugs are a great source of love. And let's face it, we could all use more love in our lives.


So in this part of the tutorial, we want to explain you how to contribute tools for Galaxy. So ultimately, all tools end up in the toolshed, so where they are categorized in different categories. And then I'm just picking a random tool and then they end up here with a description, a link, potentially a link to the original repository and also revision history. So this is all managed with Macorial, maybe a remnant of the past. So most tools nowadays are sit in GitHub repositories, like for instance, the IOC repository. And from there, they are pushed by a sub command of Planimu to the toolshed. So basically, everything contribution should go through repositories like the IOC repository. So there are many repositories. So there are repositories like the dev teams repository. I can show you also lives in the Galaxy project dev team tools dev team. Then we have for instance, which is linked to you the repository of Björn Gröning, then you have for Myra Blast and so on special reports, then there is a Galaxy proteomics repo, and so on and so forth. And if you look at those, they all look quite the same. So they have a really similar setup. And maybe I should explain it to you for the IOC repo, which is maybe one of the biggest ones. So the main directory is maybe the tools directory, which contains sub folders for each tool, or maybe a set of tools. So and there is just as usual, as you know it already, the tool XML files. Then there is the test data directory. And then there is a special file, which describes the tool. So it's a short description, a link to this repository, a link to the original source of the tool owner name, and so on and so forth. So then there is a tool collections directory, which contains, let's take this for instance, sort of connected tools. If you take for instance, the sum tools repository, they all wrap the sum tools command, which has many sub commands and each of these sub commands is represented by one tool. And they live here. So also test data directory, tool XML, and so on and so forth. There is no clear distinction between tools and tool collections, also in tools, they are often found larger collections of tools. So it's not that strict. Then there is deprecated, which contains deprecated tools and packages, tool collections and also data managers. And then there is maybe the heart of everything, the .github workflows directory, which contains GitHub workflows that automatize testing and everything for this repository. The pull request workflow is responsible or will run for each pull request that you open to this repository and also if you commit new changes to a feature or the master branch. The continuous integration workflow runs the tool tests each once a week. So our tools are regularly tested in order to see if anything goes wrong. So maybe the conda package breaks or container breaks and then we are doing, then we at least will find this out and can have good quality tools. So the pull request workflow does not only test the tools. It also lends the tools. It will lend Python scripts that are contained in your tool directories and then also rscripts. And if they are merged, they will also be taken care of the deployment to the tool shed. So creating pull requests that add new tools or improve existing tools is one of the things that you can do. And we will see how this works just in a minute. And the other way, which is maybe even easier is issues. So if you find something that is not working or not working as expected, or if you see room for improvement, then just open an issue here. And then maybe somebody was experienced with the tool or just time can take this over in the future. This is also really helpful. Okay, how about pull requests. So for the tutorial, we have created a sandbox tutorial where we can play around. And this is basically a bear repository without any tools. So there's one example tool, but this doesn't do anything useful. And we can add whatever we want here. I forgot there is two more files. There is the TT skip file, which is just a text file, which should contain or can contain past to two repositories that should be ignored by the workflows and the bio container skip works the same way. But tools listed here are not tested with containers as usual, but they are tested with conda as requirement resolver. Okay, how does this work. So everything that I explained here will work the same way for IUC repository and all other repositories mentioned here. And just to remove this. So the first thing that we need to do is we need to create a fork. So a fork is complete copy of the tool repository in your GitHub name space. So just press the fork button here.  So usually this should be your namespace. Of course, you will need to create a GitHub account first. But this should be really easy. And then this is forked. So it's exactly the same content as your repository or as the original repository and now we can get a local clone of this repository. So basically download this thing. So this is done with git clone. And then we just copy paste this link to the command line and just execute this. Then we change the directory in the galaxy tools directory and we see that it is the same repository. So the next thing that we want to do. So I just go back in history here is we want to add the original repository as an additional remote. So git remote at upstream and then copy paste this link here. And then git remote minus three to verify. So we now have two remotes. So the origin remote is your fork. And the upstream remote is the original repository. And now we can create a tool here. I will just copy the telephone tool to the tools directory and add this to a new branch. So git check out speed to create a new branch. So it's nice to use branch names that are somehow speaking.   Save it and then we push this. Okay, we need to push to a new upstream branch and the output already contains the link that you need to open in order to create a full request. So what I did now is I basically added the tool to my local repository and then I pushed this to the origin repository. So this means to my fork. And now I can create a pull request from my fork to the original repository using this URL. So this opens now the open pull request page. We can add the description of the tool, then description of the pull request, add more text to the description and then we can create the pull request. So as soon as this is done, the pull request workflow is starting. So this is a series of jobs. So the first one is the setup job, which sets up some caches and determines which tools changed and then only those tools will be checked tested lint and so on and so forth. So this will need quite a bit. You can also get always get the details by clicking on the details job. So currently this yellow dot means this is currently running. And then if you click on the details, you will see the output of the tool. So what is currently happening is just that we start a fake plan anymore run on an empty tool in order to set up the caches. This can need a wire. Then we will find out the tools that are changed. We will show them here. So if you want to, you can check over here. And then we will do a so called chunking. So let's go to the overview page which you find over here, which shows you a nice representation of the complete workflow. The first one is setup job. And then we run in parallel the linting, pattern linting tool linting, our linting and the testing. And so the testing is a little bit special. So testing can run in parallel. There are many tools. So if you open a large pull request, let's say with 10 tools, many tests, and the tests might need quite a while. So we allow to split this in four so called chunks which can run in parallel. And this will just test everything a little bit faster. So the downside of this is that we need to combine the results later on, which happens then here in this combined step. So one thing to take care of is that the test tool jobs will never fail, at least not for tool testing failures. The failure will only be determined in this job here. So if tool tests failed and the combined step will fail. So and finally, there are two more jobs. There is one boilerplate job, which checks if there was any hour in the workflow. So we need one job to determine if anything was, everything was successful, if there was a failure. And this is this one. And the last one is the deployment step. Sorry for that. The deployment step, which only runs once the pull request is merged. So we can always skip back to the separate jobs. And yeah, maybe while this is running, I show you a little bit more. So what's happening in the background could also be interesting. So the workflow lives here and let's just have a look on the pull request workflow. So what's happening here is just basically, okay, we have a set of jobs defined in this YAML file. So we have to set up job here, which goes down to here, then there's the linting stop and so on and so forth. So each job consists of a set of steps. So there are simple ones, which just do basically shell scripts. Then there are special jobs which use pre-existing GitHub actions. For instance, set up Python, then we have this caching step. And then we have special job, which runs the Planimus CI action which we created, which basically wraps Planimus and this runs the discover step essentially. And this is used quite often. So it's also used in the linting. So the GitHub CI action was the lint in lint mode. And then we run this again in the test job in test mode. So this is this step here and the last one is the combine and also the deploy step use this action. So actually the heart of the workflows is the Planimus CI action, which is basically defined here, which is just a shell script that is called in the end by the GitHub action. So this for the background, for the ones that are interested in what's going on here. So this seems to be running. Then let me show you the IUC repo. So how does such a workflow pull request is then handed in the community? So let's pick a random one, a recent one. So you see that there is already some discussion. So someone, let's see, I guess this is an addition of new tools. Actually, it's changed. So some update to some tools so you can see here what was changed. So some lines were replaced. So here we added a single quotes were added and then some parameters were added tests were added. It looks quite nice. There's a new Python script. And then there is some discussion going on. So what can be done is that you ask questions to specific specific parts of the code or the change. Just for a moment. And again, sorry for this. And then you are supposed to answer to this to respond maybe somebody request changes. So let me show you how this works. So if you go to the fights change tab, then you just can click here and leave comments. Start a review at single comments. If you start a review, you can submit you need to press this button to basically finish the review and submit it. And but you can also just join the conversation by adding new comments on the bottom of the conversation page. And then the end one of the maintainers of the repository will approve the changes, which is for some repositories necessary like the IOC report that we have at least one approval by a maintainer. And of course, all checks need to pass. And then a maintainer can merge this to the main repository. So please definitely feel free to ask questions and contribute to tool repositories like this. So you can add issues, you can pull requests, you join the discussion. So usually, no, I would have to say always the community is really nice. So they are helpful. So if you have questions, for instance, regarding Git, which might be a new world to some of you, then just feel free to ask. I'm sure you will find it. So then here we have failure. So the tool linting. Failed. And if we click on the failing job, we will immediately get to the failing step. And the output says, okay, the one tool is not in the changed repositories list, which is probably because the shed yaml file is missing, which is actually the case. So what I will do is I will just copy from a pre existing shed yaml file from another tool. So I will see just take a random one. For instance, that shed yaml to the better phone repository. And then I can edit this for the phone shed yaml. So categories, you should need to choose one of the existing categories in the toolshed, or maybe sequence analysis is fine. So the description. I'm lazy. I will just copy paste from the below phone package. Let's take it from the content package filter. It's that's bad. The description. The description form. Oh, now will be IOC. Then this should be adapted to the final link to the repository, which will be in this case, like this. So here you should insert the final, the link to the original source of the software.  And now if we check our pull request, we see that the commit has been added to the pull request. So we can just continue to add changes to the branch living in our fork and they will immediately appear also in the pull request. And this will trigger again the pull request workflow. So let me just pause the video here for a moment. So since all the tests are running, and of course you can just make a break yourself, get a coffee, whatever you like, do a walk. See you in the moment. So the pull request workflow did now run completely. So we see that most of the jobs were successful, but the combined test results job failed, which we see with the red X here. So the test tool jobs in essence, failed. So now let's go for the details. And this will just output that there was an unsuccessful test and we should inspect the old tool test results artifact for the details. So what are artifacts? So the GitHub actions workflow produces some files, which are called artifacts, which are then can be downloaded by the user. So from this page, the easiest is to just click on the top here artifacts. And then you see the old tool test results. The other one is to go the other way is to go to the overview page and scroll down and also here all the artifacts are listed. So it's completely the same. So you can access it both ways. So the artifacts are always zip files for technical reason, even if they contain just text files or single files, it will always be a zip file for the moment. So and this is basically the old tool test results will contain HTML file and JSON output of planning more tests. So as usual, so we can just click this here and see the test summary and can check the failed test and we see that's the same problem with the difference in the bomb output. And you can easily fix this by adding the number of allowed differences in the test definition. So maybe that's up to you. Just fix the test and commit to the branch. Okay. Yeah, that's basically it for how to contribute changes to the tools in the tool repository or how to add a new tool. And basically for this tutorial, but we would suggest to you either to practice it with the below phone tool that we provide. Or of course, if you already are developing a tool, feel free to open pull requests at this sandbox tutorial, or if you feel like it to one of the public repositories, then you can tell us during the tutorial. And we can have a look on your pull requests. Okay, so maybe one last thing is so of course you can use the public repositories and I think it's a good thing to use the public repositories but sometimes them maybe reasons to create a new public repository. And maybe if you want to contribute tools from a category that is not yet existing, maybe a complete new domain. So currently it's the mostly bioinformatics mass spectrometry climate data is coming. And so on and so forth, or you are a working group, and you want to maintain the tools on your own. Then that's completely fine. And you have a little bit more control over the tools, then you might have in the public repositories, but usually the community is really open to contributions also from groups and anyway. So it's really easy to set up such a repository, because we have created a so called template repository, which currently lives still in my GitHub namespace but I'm quite sure that this will be moved to the galaxy namespace quite soon. So galaxy to repository template. And it's really as the name says the template and it's really easy to use in the read me we describe how to set this up it's only a few steps necessary. All you will need to click use this template. And it will ask you where to put the repository as for repository name maybe description you can decide if it's private or public, and then just click create and everything will be done. And then you need to do those adaptions here. So there are a few places where the workflows need adaptions because they have hard coded the namespace in them and also the repository name. Then there are badges here, and also there are links which are hard coded which need to be changed. And you need to set up the two secrets for the RP keys for the toolshed and test toolshed, which are needed for the deployment a step and then you may want to remove the example to So the secrets are basically set if you go to settings. And then secrets. And then you can add a new repository secrets. So toolshed RP key and test which are the key and just add the value here. And then we don't need to set the RP key in the in the repository which would be a really bad idea.  Okay, then thanks for your attention. Looking forward to questions during the tutorial. And, yeah, have a good time.