Or your enjoyment, Wrigley Spearman chewing gum presents from Hollywood, Edmund O'Brien as... Johnny Dalla. Good evening. Oh, sure. Hi. I was unable to reach Mr. Snell before he left for the West Coast. But he asked me to outline the case to you and hoped you'd follow him out there. What is it? Our company has been carrying the policies on a line of pleasure boats for a West Coast sales agency. The Aerocraft Cruisers. Within the past two weeks, three of them have sunk, with no survivors. Bad risks. Yes, for nearly a million dollars. Edmund O'Brien in another adventure of the man with the action-pact expense account. America's fabulous freelance insurance investigator. Yours truly, Johnny Dalla. To make every day more enjoyable, treat yourself often to refreshing, delicious, Wrigley Spearman chewing gum. Here's a taste treat you can enjoy indoors, outdoors, at work or at play. The cool, long-lasting mint flavor refreshes you. The smooth, steady chewing helps keep you fresh and alert, adds enjoyment to whatever you're doing. Wrigley Spearman chewing gum. Healthful, refreshing, delicious. Expense account submitted by special investigator Johnny Dalla to Home Office Grand East Life and Liability Insurance Company, Hartford, Connecticut. The following is an accounting of my expenditures during assignment to Millard Snell of your legal department on the investigation of the Arrowcraft matter. Expense account item one, $275 air travel Hartford to Los Angeles and rented car travel from Los Angeles to Newport Beach and the Heart of the Trouble. She's wet tonight. Hey, give me your arm. Come on. Didn't think you were going to make it. You talked to your secretary? Yes, but that was yesterday from Chicago. Well, I didn't know where you were until I called her from the Los Angeles airport a couple of hours ago. And when I got here, your hotel told me you just left to charter a boat. What's up? My eyes. How long would it be? Robert should be here any minute, Mr. Snell. Couldn't leave without him. All right, if you can hurry him up anyway, do it. Come on in the cabin, Dalla. Out of this foul night air. Out of this fog. I thought it was bad sometimes in Hartford. Another cruise has been reported, Dalla. An Arrowcraft? Yes. Reported by a private plane between here and Catelyn Island. That's 30 miles offshore. The Coast Guard been notified? Yes, but candidly, I hope we see it before they do. Find out what we insured. If we can find it in this fog. Find it? You mean this one is still afloat? Before dark, yes, barely afloat. Robert, hurry, get aboard. Ah, there it is, the navigator we've been waiting for. I hope he's sober. Tell me, what have you learned so far? What makes them sink? I don't know. The sales agent, Fred Crocker. You'll meet him. Swearers by Arrowcraft. Says they're one of the best hulls afloat. Ah, but the fact remains they've been sinking. Uh-huh, and a tragic fact too. The loss of life so far has been hard. Three 28 foot boats, 11 fatalities. No trace of the cruisers, even. But a life ringer too. Must have been deep water there. What about bodies? Seven have been recovered and four still missing. Ah, we're getting started. It was 10 p.m. when we left the quiet resort village. And it was dawn when we saw in the fog what we had been unable to find during a whole night of searching. The Arrowcraft, without sign of life, was almost entirely awash, bowed down in the channel swell. Close enough, Myers. Right. We don't want a nudger.  Yeah, but there's nothing we can do about her. How she stays up is beyond me. And a chance of touring it in? None of that shape. Give her any weight. She'll just take more water and go down. Can you put me aboard? If you want to go, I can put you there, but I don't know what your weight is going to do. She's ready to roll. What do you think, Roberts? Oh, we'll put him over the stern. That shouldn't upset her. We'd better get some of those clothes off, Della, while we swing around. All right. Do you think it's worth it? You're going aboard? Worth it? I'm not going for a night like that without having a look at it. Gives me the creeps. A thing of wash like that. Looks dead. Yeah, too dead. Why isn't there anyone aboard? Why isn't somebody hanging onto the side? Okay, darling. We'll move into it now. I'm ready. Get back down to Transom. That's it. Right there. I'll swing you right into it. Right. There you are. Go ahead. Okay.  I'll get you to the side. She'll roll. I'm all right. Anything there? Yeah. Yeah, there's something here. There's a girl in the cabin. Her body floated face down in the flooded cabin, held in there by the narrowness of the passageway. After an unpleasant and picklish 15 minutes, she was lifted aboard the other boat by three suddenly silent men. There was little else I could do on the derelict, but memorized the name and address on the certificate of ownership. So I left it and followed the girl. I didn't bargain for this, darling. It doesn't bother me to read about 11 of them, but this girl... Why, she can't be over 18. Yeah, I noticed. You know, if it was a guy, it wouldn't hit so hard. Beautiful. Myers, have you radioed in about this? I waited to find out whether you want to stand by the boat or not. No, we'll start right back. Get word to the police. Ask them to meet us. I think it's a case for them. The boat's registered to a Chester McNeil Newport Beach address. McNeil Newport Beach address. McNeil, yes, all right. You want to get us started, Robert? Right. What'd you find, darling? Come here, look at this. The... behind the rear. You see the bruise? I noticed it when I was getting her out of the cabin. She'd been slugged? She could have been. His long black hair, you see here. The water's ruined most of it, but there's still part of a braid. It could have been a hard blow, one that might have killed a man, but her braid might have softened it. I'm looking for an answer to why she was on that boat alone and dead. It was an answer I never did actually find and prove because in the final analysis, the death of this beautiful dark-haired girl was no more important than any of the rest of it. She was taken to the County Morgue and after making my formal statement to the police and giving them my informal theories, I followed her there. Now, I take it that the deceased is not a personal friend of yours. That's right, Dr. Sain. I'm an insurance investigator. I'm in Southern California because a number of people have died. And the sinkings of some insured pleasure boats. Oh, yes, the aircraft. Yes, and the death of this girl has become important to me. What's her name? Caruso Antonia Caruso. She was identified by her mother. Antonia? Are you planning an autopsy? Why do you ask? I wonder if you noticed a bruise behind her right ear. Yes, I reported it.  Dr. Sain, you must have examined some of the other bodies from these sinkings. Were there any indications of violence on them? If there were, I was unable to discover them. The period of immersion in other cases you must understand was much longer than in the Caruso case. Water makes it difficult. Why do you ask? Well, the rest of the sinkings, the boats themselves have been blamed. But after today, it seems to me there's a possibility that something else has caused them, at least this one. The contusions? Yes. There were two other people on that boat, the owner, Chester McNeil and his father. But the girl's body was the only one aboard. Why? I didn't know the particulars. I think the girl wore braids, Dr. If she did, could she have survived a blow that would have killed the two men? Protection? Well, location of the wound would bear you out behind the ear. Could she have been knocked unconscious, been thrown overboard, and then recovered enough to get back on? Could this have happened to the girl? Are you suggesting homicide, Mr. Dollar? I'm not sure. Then I'm not sure why perfectly good boats start sinking without survivors, either. They have to make autopsy examination to determine the degree of concussion. That's why I asked. Are you going to perform one? In the state of California, Mr. Dollar, except in cases of unquestionable criminal acts, autopsy is allowed upon only permission of the next of kin. This contusion, well, it could have been sustained so many ways. Yes, I know, I know. Matter of fact, arrangements have already been made to move the body to a private establishment. Oh. Um, could you give me her mother's address? Well, yes, I suppose so. But I'd be doing no more than saving you a search of the phone book.  Mrs. Caruso, I'm the man that found your daughter. Oh. Then why have you come here? You shouldn't know my grief. I do, Mrs. Caruso, but I'd like to talk with you if I could. What is there to say? I don't want to see you. There is no room for sympathy. I didn't know anything about your daughter, but I'd like to. I'd like to hear about her. Why do you do this? Because... because I don't think her death was accidental. Oh, go away. Why do you say this? My girlish never did a no wrong. I didn't mean that, Mrs. Caruso. Please, may I come in? All right. It's in my house. I'm sorry. It's not cared for. There have been so many things today. And I won't stay long. She was a good girl. She was going to marry Chester. His father was with them. She was going to marry Chester. Oh, we hope that there's so much Antonia and me that it would be a good marriage. Mrs. Caruso. We always had a dream. We were good people, only poor. We give everything so Antonia would be better. She was so beautiful. She was going to marry Chester. I'm sorry to bother you at a time like this. No. She's gone. I saw her. I saw her too. And I want to learn why she's gone. Now, Mrs. Caruso, is there any reason that you can think of why there should have been trouble on this trip in the McNeil boat? Oh, no. They go many times. They love the boat. They go many times. Always with his father, they care of them. He'll love her too. My daughter, he'd call her. She wasn't going to marry, he suggested. Be so happy. Please, Mrs. Caruso. Oh, my Antonia. Antonia. Please, go. You know my grief. Leave her my house. Leave her my house. I left her house and drove back to Millet-Snell's hotel. It was 7 p.m. and I hoped we could get to Crocker, the West Coast agent for Arrowcraft, before the night was out. But I found Snell white-faced when I opened the door and too anxious to show me the front page of the evening paper. I didn't know where to find you, Dollar. For what? Then you haven't heard. Fred Crocker, the Arrowcraft agent. He was killed this afternoon. How? It says traffic, hit-and-run victim. But I don't believe it. Look at this. Violence in another form preceded the tragedy, the story said. Crocker's sales office was entered earlier today in a bold daylight strike. The interior was wrecked, but whether or not the entry was for purposes of theft has not been ascertained. The writer didn't make any definite statements. The reading between the lines, he knew that he was exploring the possibility that revenge was at the bottom of both the violence and the tragedy. That those who had lost family or friends in the Arrowcraft sinkings had wrecked Crocker's office and then killed him. But remembering the bruise behind the Caruso girl's ear, I didn't believe that either. To make every day more enjoyable, treat yourself often to refreshing, delicious, wriggly, spearmint chewing gum.   So for real chewing enjoyment that's refreshing and long-lasting, always keep wriggly, spearmint chewing gum handy. Healthful, delicious, wriggly, spearmint gum will make every day more enjoyable. And now with our star, Edmund O'Brien, we return you to the second act of yours truly, Johnny Dollar. Snell and I drove out to what had been Crocker's sales office. A sheriff's deputy met us outside and took us in. Give me some light if the... Oh, there's a switch. Not as bad as it could be. At least the drawers aren't dumped. These are from a file cabinet we'll start here. What are you looking for? Crocker's sales records. Sales records? The names and addresses of all the people who bought arrow crafts from him. I don't think we'll find it. I don't get you. We've got a theory that those boats didn't just sink, that they were boarded, that the people who've been lost were slugged before they were drowned, and that the boats were scuttled. What do you think of it? Why would anybody sit out to wreck arrow crafts? That I don't know. Probably because they're linked to something important. Maybe something or somebody is on an arrow craft and somebody else doesn't know which one. Here's the sales folder, Dollar. It's empty, all right. Sure it is. That gives them the location of every arrow craft between here and San Diego. Sheriff, nobody has said where Crocker was when this place was entered. They don't know yet. You've got a theory? Yeah. That he was here. Yeah, that after the list of names and addresses was taken, he was dragged out of here and killed with a car for the same reason the others have been killed. Because alive, they might have been identifying witnesses. Well, they say everybody's got a right to his own opinion, but that's too crazy for me. Well, I don't blame you. It's too crazy for anybody.  Expense account item two, $112 cost of entertainment that same night for as many members of the press as I could get hold of. They listened to my theory, agreed that it was unbelievable but worth printing on the grounds of sensationalism. The story made the morning additions. Most of the papers slanting it towards warning the arrow craft owners listed in Crocker's stolen records. But it didn't look so unbelievable because it had a companion piece. A night watchman at one of the yacht clubs lay near death from gunshot wounds after apprehending a prowler aboard an arrow craft. The prowler was being held at the county jail. Who is this guy, Sergeant? Jerry LaBarber is the name he uses. We put a search on him last night. He's one of those things you call a known hoodlum because nobody's been able to pin much on him. Known to the police in Las Vegas, L.A. and San Diego, and I name a few of them. Here he is. I hope you had better luck with him than we did. If you meant that, you leave me alone with him for the rest of the day. Sorry. Off the bunk, LaBarber. You got a visitor. On your feet. Stand up. Okay, hero. You got me up. What's the matter with you? What's missing, LaBarber? What? What's lost? What were you looking for on the arrow craft? Come on, who you're working for? I'm out of work.  How many of the other killings were you mixed up in? What are the killings? I get into a scrape with an eager night watchman and now you're talking about pinning other killings on me. What is this? Who you're working for? I'm out of work. You could do yourself some good, you know. I'm not complaining, am I? You're off to a pretty good start. Even if that watchman lives, you're going to be tried for assault with intent to kill. That's a long wrap. You might make it shorter by using your head. Is that a promise? Don't make me laugh.  But this is a promise. I'm going to see you charged for Crocker's murder. Who's Crocker? And I'm going into the business of searching arrow crafts myself. Don't be stingy.  Why not put the blame where it belongs? Blame for what? Okay, Sergeant, I've had enough. So have I. I wonder how long it takes to get that way. For what? I could buy and sell you a cheap tin star. Now, what do you think? He's covering for somebody, isn't he? I think you're right. You shouldn't have tipped your hands so much about searching the boats. Word's going to get out. Out of a jail cell? He called for a lawyer, one of the hot men from LA. We can refuse him visitors, but not a private session with a criminal who happens to be his lawyer. Oh, I'd like to hear that one. You should. You're going to put a bigger bull's eye on your back in that newspaper store he did. There was no trouble that day and no progress. We had time to contact two arrow craft owners that afternoon and went aboard their boats. Nothing came of it, but a feeling of frustration because we didn't know what we were looking for, how large or small it was, whether to empty fire extinguishers or break and open batteries. That night the news broke that the night watchman had died of his wounds. Snell and I made an attempt at eating dinner and took a bottle of cognac to my room to see what it could do. The phone call came at 9.30. Hello? Hello? Well, this is Dallas speaking. Who's this? What about it? Where do I meet you? I'll find it. I will be. Some girl says she wants to talk about the arrow craft. Wants me to meet her in Long Beach.  You're not going. Somebody has to do something. Nothing as foolhardy as this. You've been expecting them to make a move. Here it is. You do it for a minute. I think she's telling the truth. I won't find out sitting here swilling brandy with you. I wasted 10 minutes in Newport circling through alleys and side streets to shake any tail that might have been put on me.  At exactly 1045, I was ordering a drink in Leeds Bar. It arrived simultaneously with a metallic nudge in the ribs from a man who had taken the stool on my right. Drink it, darling. We've got to go. I was supposed to get a message from a girl. You've had it.  All right? I'll leave. I'll meet you outside the door. Do I get to talk with this girl? She's outside. Okay.  I'll get them back. Where to now? Just a little way. You weren't followed? I made it a point not to be. All right? You wanted to talk? Yeah, I do. I don't know what's going to happen to me, but I don't think I care anymore. It's been like I killed all those people who've died. Take it easy, honey. You mean their deaths are your fault? Sort of, yeah. I mean, I could have stopped it, but I was afraid to because one of his men would have killed me. And I thought he'd stop before this. Hey, who do you mean? Hey, watch what you're going. Yeah, let us stop for him. This is as good a place as any. Yeah. I didn't go to the police because I have a record. And he's so powerful, he could have made it look like black mail-in had wouldn't have gone any farther. Who is so powerful? George Masterson. George Masterson? Who's he? He seems like a businessman. He owns a line of furniture stores. I've known him for three years. It was one of those things where, oh, every once in a while I'd learned something about him until I finally understood what he really was, and he knew I did. What kind of payment do you expect for what you're telling me, darling? I hadn't thought of money. I swear I hadn't. All right. Go ahead. Masterson is far outside the lodge you can get narcotics, jewels, and furs, aliens, and Mexican gold, anything. He runs the West Coast for a combination that has headquarters in Italy. Who knows this? I do. And I wrote it all down. We used to prove it. But the names he uses for all his bank accounts to evade income tax, all of it. That's what he's been looking for on those boats. Well, then he was afraid. He was running it down was the only way I could think of to protect myself. He was afraid of me because I knew so much about him. He was going to have me killed. We were in Mexico when I told him. Ensenada. When he didn't believe me, I shot him a copy. I told him I'd hidden the original on a boat I'd visited and that if he killed me, I had a way of letting the police know which one. Which one is it? I was lying to him. I didn't put it on a boat. I was lying. Arrowcraft was only a name I remembered. When he asked me, I said Arrowcraft. You mean there's nothing on those boats and 16 people have died? I know. I know I was wrong. I should have. But when you're scared, you only think of yourself. Don't, Gwen, honey. You'll be all right. This paper you say you wrote. Where is it? I have it here. I want you to take it. Now, get out of here. I want to take her home. I didn't fully believe her until I had finished reading her denunciation of George Masterson after they'd left me. But by the end of it, I knew that in my hands was the hottest document in California. I knew that hundreds of rotten lives could be crumbled, and millions of dollars in criminal traffic could be stopped. And it did away with the possibility of any suit against Arrowcraft or your company. But it wasn't enough. I should have gone to the authorities with it then. Instead, I took a room for the night and mailed it to the FBI in the morning. Then I went after Masterson. I found him in a plush office in one of his furniture stores. Here, just a moment, sir. You can't go in there. This is Masterson. What's the meaning of this? You're announced the boy you get in here. Not this morning, Masterson. I'm sorry, sir. Get somebody to throw this man out. What's the matter with you? Who are you? Johnny Dollar, working on the Arrowcraft sinkings. Gwen Thomas. I've read her statement. I don't know what you're talking about. About 16 debts. The FBI can have you for the rest. I want you for those 16 debts. Get away from me. Get away from you.  Listen to me. As far as I was concerned, that was it. The girl was placed under protective custody by the FBI and the district attorney who had worked out 75 counts on Masterson's indictment before I left. It's too bad that all of the next of kin out of 16 dead can't sit in the jury box. Expense account item three, same as item one. Expense account total, $940.20. Yours truly, Johnny Dollar. Remember, friends, to make every day more enjoyable, treat yourself often to refreshing, delicious Wrigley Spearmint chewing gum. There's lots of cooling real mint flavor in every stick. And chewing Wrigley Spearmint helps keep you feeling fresh and alert. You feel better, work better, get more fun out of doing things. So indoors, outdoors, wherever you go, keep some healthful, refreshing Wrigley Spearmint chewing gum handy. To make every day more enjoyable, treat yourself often to delicious Wrigley Spearmint chewing gum. Yours truly, Johnny Dollar, stars Edmund O'Brien in the title role and is written by Gildowd and David Ellis with music composed and conducted by Leith Stevens. Edmund O'Brien can soon be seen starring in Columbia Pictures' production, 7-Eleven Ocean Drive. Featured in tonight's cast were Gene Bates, Howard McNeer, Clayton Post, Harry Bartel, Hi-Averback, John McIntyre, and Jeanette Nolan. Yours truly, Johnny Dollar, is produced and directed by Jaime Del Valle. Here's a Wrigley Spearmint chewing gum. Invite you to join us next week at this same time when, from Hollywood, Edmund O'Brien returns in another adventure of your truly, Johnny Dollar. And speaking, this is CBS, the Columbia Broadcasting System.


So guys, today I am back with another Dying Light 2 video and today I want to talk about some rather interesting things coming to this game very soon indeed. We have fog removal, more DLC gear sets, a new game plus more than more. How's it going guys, my name is DPJ and if you do enjoy the video leaving a like really helps out and if you like what you see and want to see more Dying Light be sure to subscribe. So first let's start with the current DLC The Authority Pack Gear. This gear set for 99% of us isn't anything we would ever use due to the fact it's seemingly locked at a lower level than most of us need. Yes we appreciate the gesture of through gear, yes it's welcomed but at the end of the day it isn't anything special. We had part 2 yesterday and when part 3 lands which will be tomorrow and be the weapon there's actually confirmed guys to be a set bonus for wearing this entire set. Now at the moment we don't know what this set bonus is but it seems as though there will be one. Will it make this gear set a more viable option for in-game players to take into consideration? I don't think it will but I'm still semi excited to see what the set bonus does. There's also another gear set coming as through DLC also, seen on the road map here. This should arrive pretty soon too, I'd probably say next week or the week after. But guys there's also more gear coming. Now me doing the usual stalking of those devs on social media platforms I can confirm it's been stated that this gear we see Aiden wearing in multiple gameplay trailers is also coming to the game. This gear which has been speculated about for a while now some people believe it to be in the base game hidden somewhere but it ain't. But it is coming but right now we just don't know when or how but Techland have confirmed this to be planned for a future release. Another amazing addition which is believed to be coming for the next major patch for PC and then console to follow is the option to remove the annoying fog or smoke you will find in certain parts of the map. For me it's very apparent around the VNC tower where you guys are planning on allowing us to remove this fog which would be an amazing feature for sure. Another feature of Techland are planning for this game is a new game mode plus. A mode where end game players can continue on playing with more features. That's been talked about for a while now whether or not Dying Light 2 will have a new game plus well it will and it's a feature I do believe is still in the works so I wouldn't expect anything soon at all. But yes it's being made and as far as I'm aware they are still looking for ideas on the best way to incorporate this mode. Now later this week we will have further patches for console introducing the Deathloop fixes the further fixes they've already applied to PC which are seemingly working over there so yeah anybody still experiencing any kind of Deathloop bug hopefully by the end of this week you'll have your issues solved but yeah guys if any more news drops on Dying Light 2 I will have you covered right here on my channel. If you enjoyed the video leaving a like really helps out if you're new around here and want to see more Dying Light be sure to subscribe and hopefully people I will see you on that next one


Welcome to CN Live, episode 12 of season four, John Young and Dite Me Too. I'm Joe Lauria, editor-in-chief of Consortium News. And I'm Elizabeth Boss. The founder of a US-based website that earlier published the same unredacted documents that WikiLeaks publisher, Julian Assange, was later indicted for. This week, invited the US Department of Justice to make him a co-defendant with Assange. Well, Krypton published the decrypted unredacted state department cables on September 1, 2011. Prior to publication of the cables by WikiLeaks, John Young wrote in a Justice Department submission form, which Young posted on Twitter Tuesday. Quote, no US official has contacted me about publishing the unredacted cables since Krypton published them, he wrote. I respectfully request that the Department of Justice add me as a co-defendant in the prosecution of Mr. Assange under the Espionage Act. Assange has been charged with possession and dissemination of classified or defense information, some of the same material that Young possesses and disseminated. And yet Assange was indicted and Young was not. Young founded Krypton, which he calls a free public library in 1996. It was a precursor of WikiLeaks in publishing raw classified and unclassified government documents on the internet. Young testified to Assange's extradition hearing in London in September, 2020. His sworn statement says, quote, I published on krypton.org unredacted diplomatic cables on September 1, 2011 under the URL krypton.org, et cetera. And that publication remains available at the present since my publication on krypton.org of the unredacted diplomatic cables, no US law enforcement authority has notified me that this publication of the cables is illegal, consists or contributes to a crime in any way, nor have they asked for them to be removed. The cornerstone of the Justice Department's case against Assange is that he allegedly recklessly published state department cables leaked to him by army intelligence analyst, Chelsea Manning, which the US says endangered the lives of named US informants. Young is asking the Justice Department why he too hasn't been prosecuted for publishing these names before Assange did. At Manning's court marshal, Brigadier General Robert Carr testified under oath that no one was actually harmed by the WikiLeaks releases. Then Defense Secretary Robert Gates occulted the leaks, quote, awkward, and quote, embarrassing, but said they did only, quote, fairly modest damage to US foreign interests. Reuters reported in January, 2011, quote, internal US government reviews have determined that a mass leak of diplomatic cables caused only limited damage to US interests abroad, despite the Obama administration's public statements to the contrary, a congressional official briefed on the reviews, said the administration felt compelled to say publicly that the revelations had seriously damaged American interests in order to bolster legal efforts to shut down the WikiLeaks website and bring charges against the leakers. Assange was actually more concerned about redactions than the editors of his mainstream media partners who worked with him on publishing the releases. Mark Davis, an Australian television journalist who documented Assange's activities during the weekend in London before publication of the cables, said that while the other editors went home, Assange pulled all-nighters to redact informants' names. What's happening in the bunker? In the bunker, we have our team from Guardian, US, Spiegel, and New York Times. And it was here that they were taking what Julian had, which was a chemical weapon that went way through the material. If there was any cavity or attitude going on from my observations, it was the Guardian journalists. The Guardian journalists had this disdain for the impact of that material. The Guardian journalists, at best, had a type of gallows humor as to what would happen to anyone revealed in these documents.  We're drawn in and said, well, if they die, they die. Now, that is the only event that I wasn't at. I remember the dinner, I didn't go to the dinner. But I can then contribute every other account they talk about from that room where anyone expressed any concern whatsoever about the lives of people except for Julian Assange. Except for Julian Assange. Two days before publication, Assange wrote to the U.S. Ambassador in London seeking help from, quote, United States government to privately nominate any specific instances, record names or numbers, where it considers the publication of information that would put individual persons at significant risk of harm that has not already been addressed. The U.S. responded by demanding that WikiLeaks stop publication of the cables and return those in its possession. In the end, only a redacted version of the state development cables was published in November, 2010 by WikiLeaks and its mainstream partners, The New York Times, The Guardian, El País, Le Monde and Der Spiegel. This remained the case until a book was published by two Guardian journalists in February, 2011 in which the password to the unredacted files mysteriously appears as part of a chapter heading. This went unnoticed as WikiLeaks tried to keep it quiet until a German publication named Freitag said it had the password in August, 2011. When Assange learned this, he contacted the State Department to try to warn them about the impending publication of informant's names. He was rebuffed, and this is shown in a scene in the Laura Fortress' film, Risk. All of the U.S. Department of State Cables we have intelligence that they are about to be put on the web unredacted, not by us. Pirate Bay published the unredacted files first and then Kryptome did on September 1st, 2011. It was the next day that Assange decided to publish the unredacted files so that informants could then search for their names and try to get to safety. This was before it was known that no one was harmed. Quote, the notion that Mr. Assange knowingly put lives at risk by dumping unredacted cables is knowingly inaccurate. That was a quote from Assange lawyer Mark Summers at the extradition hearing in February of 2020. The publishers and editors of WikiLeaks partners opposed Assange's Espionage Act indictment, and on Monday this week wrote an open letter to the Biden administration urging the case be dropped. Having published WikiLeaks classified documents, are these newspapers too ready to take the same step as Young, a U.S. citizen who is daring the Department of Justice to indict him too under the Espionage Act for doing the exact thing Assange and Australian did only earlier? With us now to discuss this is John Young, the founder and publisher of krypton.org. John, thank you very much for joining us. Good. So tell me, why did you do it? Why have you asked the Justice Department to indict you? Well, because I think that it's wrong to blame Assange for publishing an unredacted version. We did it on purpose and that it's unfair to blame him for that. We did it. The other party did it because it was available. He tried hard to not publish an unredacted version so he shouldn't be charged with that. Our version has been downloaded thousands of times since then and there have been any attempt to keep us from publishing this. So I think it's a double standard being used here. And why do you think that the authorities have never gone after you? Never questioned you even about this. I think they're afraid of us. They don't know what we're gonna do next. We're not as disciplined as WikiLeaks is. In fact, we go looking for trouble. We've been increasingly concerned that WikiLeaks has curtailed some of its stuff by working with journalists, outlets who censor information. We have to be a side that does not believe in any kind of censorship at all and no reduction of official secrets. So why do you think they went after WikiLeaks then because they are more careful? I think they're looking at WikiLeaks for more serious issues. I think that they want to take the side down and that's why we like to come to their defense. Why won't they want to take down krypton.org? Because we're not as well known and not as prominent as WikiLeaks. In the extradition hearing, the prosecutor for the U.S. James Lewis basically said that WikiLeaks had greater reach and influence and that was essentially why one reason the U.S. was going after them. So that's what you're saying here too, that their partnership example with these major newspapers gave them that prominence and that's why it damaged the U.S. more than anything you've put out. That's correct. Most governments want to control the media and they offer threats in cities to do. So we're less susceptible to that because we have less to lose. We actually think that journalism is a buying around the world by governments and they offer both threats and continues to obey that. You published many things including exact documents that WikiLeaks did which were classified. So both you and WikiLeaks have published classified materials. Do you think another reason they did not go after you the police or the authorities and why they shouldn't go after Sange is because neither of you have hacked or stolen that information. You were simply the recipients as publishers and traditionally the U.S. government is not prosecuted journalists or publishers. They go after the person who did the theft of the documents and the leak. There was an attempt by FDR in the Second World War but a grand jury stopped the indictment of the Chicago Tribune and Richard Nixon tried to go after the New York Times in the espionage case. He actually impaneled a grand jury in Boston but when it became known that the government had tapped the phone, the FBI had tapped Ellsberg's phone and broke into his psychiatrist office that the case collapsed. But here we see the Obama administration that had an opportunity to indict Sange. In fact, Joe Biden as vice president in December of 2010 on Meet the Press was asked point blank are you going to indict Julian Sange? And he said only if we could prove that Sange took part in the theft of these documents. If it was just handed to him on his lap and he's a journalist, we can't do it. And guess what? The Obama administration did not indict Sange and they cited what they called the New York Times problem. I.e. if they indict a Sange for publishing these documents they have to indict the New York Times for publishing the exact same documents. And I'm asking you now, now Trump was the one of course who did indict a publisher. So are you also saying that Sange shouldn't be indicted because he didn't steal the documents? He like you only received them? Correct. As I think what they're going after WikiLeaks is to threaten the media because he's becoming increasingly embedded with the media and we're not. I think that this is a way to get at the media and intimidate them by going after him. Are you surprised that Biden has kept the charges going? He was part of an administration that refused to indict a Sange. There's been no real additional evidence against a Sange since then and Trump is the one who indicted him. And Biden who wants to undo everything Trump ever did is not undoing this indictment. Is that surprising or trouble you? No, I think this is what governments do. And I think they are in cahoots with the media to exclude the public. I think that they have a common interest and that I think one of the things that both the media and the government agree on is to exclude the public from classified information. We think that's unfair to the public. Why do you think Biden is not dropping the case when he was part of Obama administration? They never started it. It's commonplace for democratic countries to do that. They talk one way and act another. They're in cahoots of course with national security interests. And I think this is a monetary interest on all the way around. I think it's profitable for governments and media to cooperate. Why did you come forward with this now, with this request? I mean, the prosecution, the attempt to extradite sound has been going on for a while now. What was the timing for you? What it has to do with the five major readers coming out and defending publishing rather than journalism. We're a publisher, we're not a journalist outfit. In fact, we've applied to be a journalist and we've always been turned down because we, as they say, don't have regular commercial outlets. And so I think that when they use the term publishing I say, click, that's us. So we'd like to see them on up to being publishers rather than journalists. There's a very big difference. I think that the publishers control journalists by privilege and salaries and prestige. And so I think that it's gonna be an interesting situation to see how you get publishers to own up to their responsibility to the public. Notice it's publishing, not journalism. And so I think they've got a big struggle on their hands between their commercial interests and their public interests. And I expect that you don't expect anybody else who's published these documents to come forward with a similar offer or similar statement. Well, I don't know who else has published a full on redacted version other than just one other party that you mentioned. Certainly none of these five papers have published a full on redacted version. They've only published excerpts of the redacted version. And redaction, of course, to us is a grave public sin. Our motto is no redaction of officials in this period. Sure. Maybe they're more of a bad publishing, but they kept quiet. That's true. However, the New York Times and the other four newspapers published classified material and that's what a soldier is being charged for. In fact, I can't find, although our producer, Kathy Wogan, did find some mention in the statute that harming informants is a crime and revealing the names of an informant is a crime. Certainly it's a crime to reveal the name of an undercover U.S. agent, as we know from the Valerie Plum case very well. As far as informants being revealed, that does not appear in the indictment. All the statutes that Assange allegedly has violated are all listed at the top of the indictment. There's nothing listed there about revealing informants. So while the Times and the Guardian and LeMond, et cetera, never published the names of the unredacted files, they did publish classified material. Why isn't the government going after them? Because they're highly selective in what they publish. They do not publish full documents. They always carefully craft documents and they admit consulting with governments about what they're gonna publish before they publish. And so I think that Assange's attempt to coordinate what he's gonna publish with the State Department and hooked him into the trap. But if you read the language of the Espionage Act, anyone, even consortium news, or I would say thousands of people watching this right now who have emailed a WikiLeaks document to someone else or quoted from it in a tweet, they have essentially violated the Espionage Act because the government still considers that material classified, even if the whole world has read them now for years. So you said selective publication, but this is selective prosecution by the government, isn't it? Yes, it is. And they're using WikiLeaks notoriety to advance their message. They don't go after small fraud. They actually go after big fraud because they want to leverage. And it usually works, by the way. And so the question is what, you know, I'll be kind of paranoid and say, well, I wonder what these five publishers get out of this from governments by doing it this way. I think the fact that they're using the term publishing rather than journalism is to give away. I think that needs to be looked at more carefully. I think there are a lot of journalists out there who are now wondering, you notice that the Times has admitted that newsroom was not involved in this decision to make this revelation. I think the journalists now are gonna be in some interesting discussion between publishers and journalists as to who's getting the benefit of this. You know, journalists are on a great risk around the world, publishers less so. But the isolated journalist is the one who actually takes the hit using publishers, go to the same clubs as government officials do. So I think it's a troublesome, if you start looking to journalism to advance your own interest, to publicize what you're doing, you're starting to get very close to a fast end deal. Speaking of that letter now, they specifically point out that they don't agree with the Espionage Act indictment, but they kind of agree with the conspiracy to commit computer intrusion charge. So they are still, they are trying to say there that they think that Assange is possibly guilty or is guilty of having hacked a government computer to get these files. Now, if you read the indictment itself, it states clearly that Chelsea Manning had security clearance for every document that she gave to WikiLeaks. Number two, it was clear that she had already given most of this material to Assange before this conversation that Chelsea Manning had with someone at WikiLeaks has never been positively identified as Assange about getting more materials sent to her. And we know that the Trump administration tried to trump up the indictment on the computer intrusion charge by saying that Assange made speeches calling on hackers to get material and give it to him. Now, the founder of our website, the late Robert Parry wrote in December 2010 right at the beginning of all of this that he, as an investigative reporter, and of course he's very well known for the Iran Contra stories that he broke, including revealing the name of Oliver North, that he encouraged his sources to break a law, which is to release classified material in order to prevent a larger crime from being committed. In other words, commit a crime to stop a larger crime from being committed. I want to know what do you think about that part of the letter of the newspapers where they are still saying that they're not defending him or asking that the charges, the computer charges be dropped? And this is really the linchpin of the government's attack on Julian Assange. Because without that, as Biden said in that Meet the Press interview, without proving that he hadn't got involved in stealing the documents, they don't really have a case against him because even though the Espionage Act would allow that, it's a clear conflict with the First Amendment. What did you make of that when the newspapers basically said that, well, did not call for the computer charges to be dropped? I think that this has come out of the negotiation between these publishers and their governments, I think they've got a deal in the works. Some reporters have admitted that they knew that kind of thing goes on between publishers, attorneys and the government. They don't get into details. They say, yeah, actually we're finding our advice by our attorney, we can do this, but we can't do that. So there's deal making. And I think that is what Assange was going on. It's a real making going on and he was trying to get a deal made with the State Department, but he just didn't have the kind of clouds these five newspapers had. So I think that that is an interesting question to pursue is that what were they trying to do? In fact, I don't know what these five publishers are trying to accomplish by their late coming to the game. What is it they want to get out of this? Because it's very late and I think that they are trying to get something going on their own behalf, not because of Julian Assange, but for their own purposes. For example, Martin Gelman has talked about the long discussions opposed and their attorney had with him about what the publisher of the Snowden material and says it's very contorted discussion is going on. And that usually it's the editor in the publisher and the attorney who makes to find the decision and in cooperation with government. So they are deal making. So I think that Biden, Trump, all of them are our deal makers. So I think this question needs to be asked is what's going on here now? That's one of the reasons we'd like to get involved.  Thing is, is that we have no leverage, but except for public exposure. But we certainly know that there are a number of unknown, unnamed people who are actually out there that don't have the kind of public for some of it Assange does. I'm afraid he got into a very fast deal with the publishing machine that he geared up on. He's also gotten pretty wealthy in the process. But that's why we split company back in the startup with Felix and he made a statement about wanting to make money out of linkage. We pulled out a 10 point. So I'm sorry to say that the commercial interests are very powerful here. I think you referenced something important and that was the early association between yourself and Wikileaks. Can you talk a little bit more about that? Well, as you may know that Assange asked me to be the registrar of the domain name. Yeah. Without identifying who he was. So I agree because I've done that for several other people. We've never tried to hide who we are what our identity is. So we did and a private email list was set up for the early participants. You may know I published all that later on after we had a falling out. But the falling out was over his desire to raise a million dollars as soon as possible. So I think that his interest actually was commercial from the beginning. And because we are, me and my partner are practicing architects. We don't do this with the income. A lot of these people who are involved in the leak industry, journalism industry it's their source of income as well. So it was a separate event. So it's an open question. It's how do you do it if your whole livelihood is being put at risk? And I think that's a hard question to answer. We encourage people to not ever reveal to us who they are unless they want to. Now you know his manning was burned by a friend of his. He was also trying to remain anonymous. So we caution people about how you can submit material to us without identifying who you are because all these sites like ours are watched all the time. WikiLeaks has turned into a gigantic honey pot. We warned early in our days that we would be a honey pot whether we know it or not. You know the vast industry who can watch whatever we're doing particularly those who are dealing with leaks. So all the major media are watched as well. These various secure drops and other programs to protect submissions don't work. We learned that on the cyber function is how to help porous everything that's going over the internet is to these folks who set it up. So anonymity is very hard to come by. Yeah, when you say they don't work what do you mean by that? How is it that they don't work? I mean without getting too technical. Well, it's that the internet has a technology that makes everything get fast over it accessible to those who have hands on the strings of the operation of the internet. You can't do anything over there that can't be tracked and traced. Encryption really puts some lipstick on it but it doesn't keep people from following what you're doing. And it's hard to get people to believe because they enjoy the internet so much which is very seductive apparatus and so that they tend to be unguarded and really don't want to hear about this. They think it's just fear mongering. So we have a fairly long list on one of our trials that describes what you might do to avoid ever being tracked. It's a mini test and it's a multi-level steps but it's not the kind of thing that WikiLeaks does when they promise anonymity. It's a tough one because of course it's copying of the phone system, telegraph system, radio system but none of these technologies are free of surveillance. What we're doing right now is, if you give a damn, it's being watched. Now you mentioned being practicing architect too. What prompted you initially to found crypto? We were on the cyber-functionist and it was interesting that discussion when the first mailness we were on there's a whole new world for us as architects who we actually just leapt into because we saw an magazine article and wired and just took part and it turned out we had equipment to scan hard copy. So we started scanning hard copy and posting articles, things like that. And the more we did that, the more we got sent hard copy of classified and unclassified material which we scanned and put up. Because we're not scanners, we're not common at the time. We use it in our architectural practice for drawings and so we had the equipment on hand and we still got tons of stuff that we were never able to get around the scanning. So a lot of the material is still in hard copy form. That was one of the ways it was secured was in hard copy form. But once it gets digitized, it's out there.  But there's still some hopes on me there's some good stuff going on out there but I think that in the end I think that more members of the public like us can and there are dozens of people doing what Cripton sorted out doing. We're now putting stuff up on our own and not using journalism as an outlet to set up websites to do their own stuff. So there's people doing stuff now like one site that publishes nothing but CIA also names. For as I know, that person's never been indicted. One of the most sacred things are the names of spies and he's got hundreds of them up. So there's some latitude that's going on. So right now I think that one of the interesting things that USG would like as well as others they'd love to make a special out of WikiLeaks. I think they'd like to be as much interested as they can, will help a matter if we can. As I think that they'd like to be like showpiece and I think they'd see WikiLeaks and like a number of these, WikiLeaks sucked in dozens of journalists outlets who also want that attention. So I think that the USG would love to have a trial with the Sange. They got a pretty good head of steam up in Britain but I think they'd like more. So I think they're gonna, I think that's probably what D.O. has been co-produced with the five publishers. I think they want a public scene about this. Great, bring it on. I will probably get dumped at some point because I'm a small fry. But as I sent to Joe and his colleague this morning or yesterday, well, we've also sent letter to the judge in a case asking for, let us come in, we'll see what happens. So right now we'll use your public forum rather than hire a lawyer to do this. We'll see if he'll let us in or not. What judge was that that you contacted, Joe? The judge in charge of the Wicke-Leaks prosecution, Hilton, this is his name, Virginia Eastern. You mean the US Attorney Gordon Cromberg you're talking about, right? Who? Gordon Cromberg, he's the US Attorney that is leading. There's no judge he had assigned to this case. He hasn't been extradited. Well, it's the judge in charge of the charges against the Sange in the US. Hilton, H-I-L-T-O-N. Okay, and you want to do what?  I want to come to the court and be a participant. I see, if he gets extradited. I'd like to be a defendant. You want to be defended in the trial in Alexandria, Virginia if he gets extradited here because you have also possessed classified material. You disseminated it. You even published your unredacted files and they're only going after the Sange. And by the way, it's a very highly principled thing you've done. Another thing that you said that you, or at least the Forbes interview that they conducted with you some time ago, mentioned that you released the names of CIA agents. Is that true? Some, not nearly as many as a site called Crypto-Com-C-O-M-B which does nothing but publish CIA agents names. So we've used some of that material we publish a lot of British spies. We publish a lot of Japanese spies names. Those that come our way, we publish, we love to publish spies names. By the way, they don't seem to mind. They don't seem to mind. Why don't they seem to mind? They don't like being undercover. They get bored stiff.  Other bosses, the bosses love publicity.  But I mean, it could expose these people to risk. So speaking about exposing people to risk, if you name a undercover agent. The names are well known by their opponents. Yeah. They swap names. They share names. Spies are in cahoots around the world. Well, the fact they didn't do anything to you, maybe that proves what you just said to be true. Now you earlier said that WikiLeaks was trying to make a deal with the State Department was unable to. Can you elaborate a little bit on that? Well, I'm just quoting what I've read. And he said, Sons claims he was trying to set up a discussion with State Department one about how to redact names. But then after he heard that the unredacted version was out there, he tried to warn them that it was out there and they should be prepared for it. But I believe that they were trying to set up a way to agree on what names to redact before the full unredacted version was out there. Now that's my best recollection. Well, then you have no problem with that to you or you do. You don't believe in redaction you said earlier, right? Well, I think WikiLeaks has had such wonderful effect on the public discourse that I don't want to nitpick this, but yeah, I'm concerned about their dealing with authorities.  Usually under pressure they are. So they say it's under pressure. I don't know if they're under pressure. I guess it's just part of how things work. Okay, now. But I also think that many of their journalist partners insisted that they do this. I think 40 or 60 people that they list as their journalist parties, I think wanted them to consult with the US government. So they will not be put at risk by publishing this material. And yet something you won't do, okay. Now, you earlier said that, if I heard correctly, that do you believe WikiLeaks is motivated by money or commercial interests, not transparency? Is that what you said? Well, it's a big thing that Saan just talked about, yeah. And it can be lucrative, apparently. They've had an enormous success in raising funds. The more trouble they're in, the more funds they raise. Now, this is just stuff I get off the internet. I don't know, they're actually pretty guarded about their funds. But at least there's some pretty large numbers that are kicked around. Right, but if someone was setting out to make money at one point in their lives, it's kind of risky to put out classified material and maybe risk indictment and extradition exactly as Julian Assange is risking right now. Why would the, certainly transparency was part of their motivation, if not the main one, isn't it? Well, classified material is very valuable. And so that Assange said it's gold and diamonds to some people, even if they're fake. And you can still fill, sell fake classified information. And as you know, all the spies overclassify on purpose in order to, it's like baiting for fish to classify something as top secret. So the money, but weakly access raise is not a byproduct of their work to try to reveal government secrets and uncover crimes, et cetera. You're saying it was really their prime motive. Well, it was a point that Assange made in these private mail lists, yeah. He used the term a million dollars. Do you think that that also would have gone to something like legal fees that are necessary when you do get the level of publicity and pushback that they were getting at that time? It's possible, but at the time he was trying to recruit people to his cause. And it worked.  Money is still a powerful perfume to all of us. I mean, we make our money through in the practice of architecture. And so we're familiar with commercial activities. You make your own journalism. I assume which of you are journalists and which are publishers? How about the one we're speaking to now? We're journalists and our publisher is a nonprofit foundation to consortium for independent journalism. Yeah. And so you raise money for your consortium. I don't want to get diverted, but that it's a factor that we all have to fix. Yeah, but it's only funded by readers and we have no advertising whatsoever. We take no money from governments, corporations, et cetera. But I'll motive is publishing journalism and we hope that the public likes it enough to give us money to continue doing it. And so far they have. But our motive isn't making money. I would have gone into banking. I'm not journalism, believe me. If I wanted to make money. Or dentistry or something like that. It's not what I chose to do. So if you get rewarded for good work, especially by the public and not having to compromise at all, because we have our readers span the entire political spectrum. We have right, left, center, all kinds of people read us and donate to us. So that shows us we're not catering to any particular political camp, by the way. Godspeed and good luck. I appreciate that. Tell me, why did you decide to testify at the subject tradition hearing? And were you initially trying to do that by video or they only asked for written statement? I was curious about that. In Britain, they asked for a written statement. I did not go to London. They asked me to send this over. They coached me and how to write it and what to say. And so I did that and sent it over and they really read it in the court. I was hoping to get a shot at going to London, but I didn't get it. Yeah. No, no, I was going to London because it was the pandemic then, but they did video testimony. Like Dan Ellsberg did testimony from California. Yeah. To the courtroom live, which we saw on the hookup. But there were several people who only did written statements. And that was impressive. And what you've done is impressive. No, there's that scene. I put it at the end of the article I wrote about you. That's seen from Spartacus when. They're all captured and saying the commander demands to, who is Spartacus, please stand up. And of course they all stand up. I was reminded of what you're doing here. You're basically saying, I'm Julian Assange. And you think that the New York Times should stand up and say that. Yeah. You're going to be part of this party and then there's Spiegel and anybody else who has done exactly what Assange did. Publish. I sort of don't want to call myself Assange. We're still competitors. He's got better hair than me. And then a generation younger. So, but I'm surprised at the outpouring of support for what we're doing. get about three retweets of our stuff. So the Spartacus thing is interesting, but you know that the hoard of people who are assigned supporters, we're not one of them. We're supporters of WikiLeaks, but we're not a fan of assigned. I think he's harmed WikiLeaks, but I don't want to get into that. They say, I will speak my own say, but I do think that if we can give him a hand from this jam, he's gotten himself in. He is pretty good at getting himself in jams fine, but I'm in the U.S., I'm ready to go to Washington. I want to reach out and Washington, New York is boring. Nothing happens in New York City. I mean, politically, but right. So basically it's the principle.  And clearly, as you said, they want to make an example of him and they want the trial. Some people believe they don't want the trial on Alexandria would be a media circus, but you think the government does want this trial to send a message. How do you expect the major newspapers to cover this? After the letter they put out, but as you pointed out, that was from the publishers, not the newsroom. So they're not going to... I've been watching a journalist comment on one of these publisher statements. They're kind of like a quiet critique going on because even the major bosses let them make some of these statements and they're wondering, well, where does that leave us? So we'll see what comes up when the journalist will bite the hand that treats them. But no, let me just say more than one important thing. Assange should not be in jail. That's cruel and unfair treatment. There's no need for him to be in jail.   I'm just happy to say. Except for a couple of hours once on the Paris train station, but everyone go into that. So I think this is a water body. I think it's cruel in your main treatment. So yeah, they should let him out and do whatever they're going to do to him, but not keep him in jail. But I think he's going to be interested to see if what... I've not heard from DOJ. I don't expect to hear from them any time soon, but I'm pretty persistent. We'll see what other people do. Send them a letter. Anyone can send a letter. But there's a form on the DOJ website. You can send your message.  I'm ready to come to DC. Do you want to be live? I don't know what they do with them. Maybe they don't read them. Well, that's an interesting call because, as I said, anyone who's ever shared a WikiLeaks document online or with their friends or printed it out is possessing and disseminating classified information. So we could all stand forward and say, and died us, too. Yeah. Welcome. Thank you very much, John Young, for joining us on CN Live today to discuss this issue. And we look forward to perhaps talking to you again. OK, thank you. That's your note book. If you are a consumer of independent news, then the first place you should be going to is Consortium News. And please do try to support them when you can. It doesn't have its articles behind a paywall. It's free for everyone. It's one of the best news sites out there and it's been in the business of independent journalism and adversarial independent journalism for over two decades. I hope that with the public's continuing support of Consortium News, it will continue for a very long time to come. Thank you so much.


I am actually excited to talk about because it's a topic that I think is very insightful. It's just for those type of people who actually look at learning from a very meticulous perspective, meaning they take it very serious. It's not just like, oh yeah, I would like to learn Arabic. Let me learn. I'd say shukran, I'd say salamu alaykum here and there. Now, it's actually for someone who actually wants to take his studies to another level. These are very insightful subjects to talk about. So for that reason, I'm very excited to talk about and I am here joined by my brother and a beloved friend, Abu Adam, who is the founder of the Islamic, the Spanish Islamic Institute. Right? Is that correct? The Islamic Institute of Spain. Yeah, Islamic Institute of Spain. So yeah, we want to talk about this particular topic. So I introduce you at the same time, guys, to Abu Adam, in case you guys don't know him. We are very similar in many aspects from the fact that we grew up in the same city, Barcelona, Spain. We have an African West, a West African father and a Spanish mother. Our mother tongue is Spanish. We have learned English. We have learned Arabic. So we have a lot of similarities even when it comes to what we are about to talk about right now, which is personality in general. We have a lot of similarities as well. Welcome to, I guess, welcome here. Thank you for having me. It's actually my pleasure. I also wanted to say that actually our mother tongue, we have two mother tongues, Spanish and Catalan in both cases because both our mothers are Catalan and we grew up, you know, actually being bilingual at our own homes. So we have very similar experiences when it comes to language learning and language teaching. Yes, just as you said, I think we actually do even have some similarities when it comes to our personality type and our experiences learning the Arabic language. And one of the reasons why I became so interested in this topic is because just as you said, actually I am very like a solution or, yeah, the solution oriented and I like to find solutions and systems. So one of the things that I learned by learning the Arabic language and actually by teaching the Arabic language as well is that different people need like different methods and different systems, you know, and you know, the question that I used to have in my mind is, you know, how could I develop a system that would work for someone who needs more freedom when it comes to studying. And at the same time, it would work for someone who needs, you know, like a very structured environment, you know, with very clear set rules and dates, you know, because these are two different types of personalities and they need like different methods, you know. So one of the things I realized is that a lot of environments, teaching environments are only created for one type of person. And I myself had some experience studying the Arabic languages I studied the Arabic languages, the Arabic language sorry, quite a number of ways, I studied in the Arabic language, how does it call the the official language class in Barcelona. Yeah, I went to class and I also studied in another. I actually tried to study in these places. I tried to study in another academy very famous Academy in Barcelona. And I quickly realized that the way people are studying in that classroom setting was because they were studying very slowly and the approach was not resonating with me like I need a more hands on approach I need to see the learning of the language as a problem that needs to be solved I need to see it as a system that I can break down you know, and so I became very interested in the idea of how different personality types require different personality. I'm sorry different teaching and learning methods you know that's partly because of my own story, you know. So out of experience basically. That's very interesting because I think, advices that comes from from experience are better advices, and it's interesting as well because because of what you mentioned in terms of having grown up in a house with being bilingual with two different languages. It's very interesting that considering the two main or the most known curriculums to learn the Arabic language I would say is the Medina books in and I have met both authors of the book and I asked them. The same question do you think that a teacher who has gone through the process of learning the language from zero to to fluency is more qualified and is more you know it's going to be easier for him to teach the language to someone who is coming from his same background and they both said yes I actually think it is so so so he's you know going back to what I said, advices that come from experience are sincere advices and, and proven methods and advices that that someone can trust. So, so yeah. It's interesting that you mentioned that because the curriculum that I use in the Islamic Institute of Spain is the Medina books. And if actually the author of the books is not is not Arab, is that right. I mean he's from Indian origin. He had to learn the Arabic language and then he developed this curriculum that has helped my thousands of people. I mean, around the world so that he is the living proof that that actually when you learn a language you're able to teach it. And by the way, I've also taught the Spanish the English language here to Spanish speakers I taught to a group of kids in school and and also and I've come to realize that, like every single question they have or every single, you know, stone that they find, you know, in the middle of their path is something that I found myself in my path, you know, so I do believe that learning languages is actually and this is proven. It expands your mind to some degree it makes you more intelligent, you know, if you systematically learn languages. And more and for a Muslim, it takes a whole, you know, other level and a whole meaning. I mean, it takes a new meaning by itself because you're now becoming able to access the words of Allah Subh'anaHu Wa Ta'ala.  So I would I would really suggest and I would really, you know, advise people to get to know what their personality type is and find the best way, you know, had to learn the Arabic language for them and try to find a system that matches the way they're trying to to learn. I think I think it's very interesting what you mentioned in terms of it sounds very cliche like somebody who learns different languages or knows different languages is intelligence is more developed. It sounds very cliche, but when you think about it the other day I came across a video of someone that was talking about how he respects someone who presents himself as a person in shape, because he says that if this person is in shape, in order for you to get in shape, you have to go through so many things, so many obstacles that I know for sure you have mastered discipline, you have mastered the art of delaying gratification, you have mastered the art of, you know, learning a particular system and actually applying it like there's so many skills you achieve and develop as you achieve a particular goal. So in this case, you know, learning language could be one of those goals. So I think somehow like that actually definitely makes you and develops your mind to a different to a different extent, even Sheikh Al-Islami, even Utamia, he says in the meaning of his words that learning the Arabic language it makes you more intelligent. So yeah, very interesting. I actually remember that as a quote from Ormab bin Al-Khattah probably is also but he said that that it increases you in intelligence, which is very interesting that they said that because you know what, I feel that learning, you know, I myself what I feel after I learned the Arabic language is that I became more capable of thinking outside of my box. And this is something very hard for me to explain because when you learn another language, you learn every language comes from a different culture that has a different worldview, a different way of viewing the world and seeing things. So when you learn a different language, it's like you are expanding your brain to another way of looking at things, which is people who have learned more than one language, they will understand what I'm saying. Yeah, it's very interesting. Yeah, to summarize it with the language comes the culture. When you learn the language, you learn the culture of the people. Yeah, very interesting. Oh, sorry, one of my teachers said that if you want to understand the Quran, you don't learn the Arabic through the Quran, like many people do, you learn the Arabic language, how the Arabs spoke Arabic, and then you can understand how the Quran, you know, you know, revolutionize the worldview, you know, so I think that's that's very important to keep in mind. Yeah, yeah, I get what you mean. Yeah, so, yes, there's no doubt that that first you got to learn the language of the people in order for you to understand and then is when you understand why the Quran is linguistically a miracle because of the culture and, you know, the difficulty of the language and everything that comes with it. But yeah, I appreciate your input and sharing all of those tips. Now let's talk about the matter at Hen, when it comes to personality, why did you come up with these, you know, with these method or system for students to first be aware of what works best for them in terms of systems according to their personality? How did that come about? Well, it may sound strange to you. One of my inspirations was the Seerah, you know, when you study the lab of the Prophet Muhammad, you realize that he was a genius when it comes to strategy, when it comes to, you know, managing people and getting the best of people and he was not, you know, someone who imposed his view, but he was a true leader if you want to use that word. And one of the things that you learn is that he actually he was like very respectful and he learned how to get the best of very different people with different personalities, you know. So for example, when you look at Abu Bakr and Umar, just the two closest companions, they were quite different when it comes to their personality. And the Prophet was in some way he was like very merciful, you know, kind of like Abu Bakr. Umar was like more stern, but you will find that very interesting, very interestingly, oftentimes the Quran approved Umar's view, you know. So it is, it's like Islam is not only balanced, but it is also like embracing all these differences. And, you know, the Seerah really inspired me to understand that there is not, there is not only one way to do things. And actually you have all this hadith in which someone comes to the Prophet and he says to Salam and asks, you know, the Prophet tells him best. The person asked for advice and the Prophet gives him one advice and then someone else comes and the Prophet gives him a completely different advice, not contradictory, but different, you know. And the explanation of the Ulema when it comes to these differences is that, you know, different, these different people needed different advice, you know. So it's actually the true teacher knows how to deal with all these differences. So that's one of the first things that really inspired me.  And then you study the Khulafa and they are actually so different and so similar, you know. So there must be something in this.  And obviously there are like many typologies and none of them is perfect. None of them is revealed by Allah, you know. But, you know, these are like tools that we use and they are useful, you know. And I came across this, this Myers-Briggs personality, you know, typology. And I actually took the test and I told other people to do it. And we were all like very interested because it was so accurate. So the first thing I thought of is developing like a test that when people take the personality test, then they get results which actually provide them advice from the Quran and the Sunnah based on their specific strengths and weaknesses, you know. That's the first time the idea came to my mind. It would be very useful to have from Muslims, you know, advice which is tailored to their strengths and weaknesses. And then I realized that the same can be led to language learning and to the learning of the Arabic language because I myself teach the Arabic language and I want to make sure that I try to help different people, you know, from their perspective, not imposing what works for me because that's what oftentimes we do. Whatever worked for me, I want to, you know, I want to impose it on everyone else and if it doesn't work for them, then I tell them, well, it worked for me. Well, but you having a personality type that maybe they don't have, you know. So that's actually when I became really interested in my teaching, for example, of the Arabic and Islamic Institute of Spain. Like I tried to create systems that work for different people. So different people can use it in different ways. So I really, that's actually when I became very interested in learning all these differences. And one of the reasons is also as I told you before, my experience, I realized that I'm so different to most of people when it comes to learning that there must be some system that works for me better than what I find out there, you know. So it's personal experience and learning about the Sira that really made me interested into this whole different personalities, different approaches, you know. Yeah. I'm actually looking at the, of what you sent me and I'm looking at my personality test because when I did my personality test as well, it came out as ISTJ and it's so accurate. And I keep sometimes every six months, every year, I try and do it again. And I do it multiple times. It always comes out with the same thing. And it's very accurate. And I'm seeing as well now on, you know, the hypothetical system that would work for me. And it says create a structured study plan with clear goals and milestones and focus on learning grammar and vocabulary systematically. This is of course in regards of the language, but I'm thinking about my Quran right now. That's literally how I do it as well. And I think one of the main traits of ISTJ is alone time and like enjoying alone time. And me, I rather read to my teacher on the phone and he's only focusing on me then going somewhere, going to a school, having to wait, having to rely on other students attendance for me to read or I feel like they restrain me from progress. So, and I'm looking at other, you know, individuals in my family, which I know their, their personality results. And he says use creative and intuitive methods such as reading books or watching movies in the target language to engage with the language on a deeper level and gain greater understanding of its nuances, nuances or how he pronounced this. But thinking about this is so true. This person in my family, they they do things to memorize vocabulary that I would never do. Me for to memorize, I need to sit down and repeat 500 times that thing until it's done. That's it. I move on. I'm very straightforward. And I don't, you know, sugar coat the system. But for certain person, for certain people in my family, they need, you know, they asked me to, to record myself repeating the word and then the, the pronunciation and then the meaning and then, and do a whole audio. And I'm thinking, you don't need that to sit down and, and repeated, you know, multiple times and fair enough, both systems work, but, but one is going to work best for someone or someone else. So, so yeah, what, what personality tests are you? Well, according to this typology, I have an INTJ, which is, you know, very like systematic approach to things. Sometimes people may even feel that is a little bit obsessive. And, you know, the interesting thing is that I used to think of myself that I'm a very weird, different person. And sometimes I wouldn't even understand why. Like, for example, whenever I want to do something, I would, I would write it down on a paper and put it on the wall.    But that's how it is. That's exactly. And when I, when I took the test and I realized what my typology is, you know, which these are only names and labels that people came up. It's not like it's revealed by Allah. I just want to, you know, be very clear about that, you know, but because it's also a little bit dangerous when people put themselves into a box, you know, every human being is different. But in general terms, it helps you understand how your mind works. And actually my personality type needs logic and analysis to break down the language, you know, and, and I really like to approach the, the learning of the language. And now the teaching of the language as a problem that needs to be solved through experience. So whenever my students tell me, I would like to have the system here. This would work for me.  So that's INTJ. And I really feel that when I, when I want to study, I like to attend classes, study with teachers, but, you know, I actually like to take my nose and whatever I, I study and spend a lot of hours by myself, you know, just as you said, alone. And sometimes one of the weird things that I would do is I would take my notes, just record it into a five minute audio and then go take a walk, go take the train, travel somewhere and listening the same thing, you know, as a loop. And I would just memorize it effortlessly. So I started researching, do other people, does this work for other people? And it works for a lot of people, but other people need to sit down with the paper, you know, different things work for different people. And, and, you know, there is a way to gather all of these methods into one big machine that works for different people. I know it is possible because, you know, I've done it and I've seen it and, and I'm a little bit sad that, you know, there are no more, no more people. I mean, no more. There are not a lot of institutions that, that take this into account, you know, even public school, you know, they have like this rigid things and everyone has to do exactly the same thing. And it's a little bit frustrating to me, you know, but that's how it is. Yeah, I think that when it comes to learning, when I look, I was thinking about the traditional method, which is, you know, you go to the sheikh and, well, the traditional method could be different because thinking about Mauritania, for example, Mauritania is like you read, if you don't understand something, you stop and ask me. Once you have read this, go ahead and memorize it.  And, and then, you know, and then the class and then the actual learning starts us out of the class. I'm just giving you, you know, the I'm, I'm teasing you with what you should learn or like giving you the structure, the skeleton, and then you go home and do it. And I feel like I feel that way as well. Many times I will speak to, there was a student that I know that was studying in Yemen. His method was, for example, he would attend the class. He will go, he will take his, his notes by hand. And then he will go and, and put the audio of another teacher. So he can understand the, the whole subject in different, with different examples, basically. And I think what works for me personally is, as you said, I rather listen to the class, like trying to understand instead of wasting time taking notes and record. Because when we, you know, 2023, you can just record the lesson and, and listen to it at your own pace. I rather do that. And first listen to the teacher, like actually engage with them, listen, pay attention, record the class. Then once the class is done, put the audio and with myself, I can stop it. I can replay. I can play it back. I can, if I didn't understand something, I can, you know, write it down, but it's very, it's rare that I don't understand something. Because if I'm paying attention in the class, if I don't understand something, I'll ask the teacher and I will try and, and extract of him as much information as possible. So then I can go to my audio and, and listen to it again. And very rarely I will have questions from the audio because I would have paid attention and actually try to understand and engage with the teacher to where at this point it's just about like actually writing down my clear notes about, about that class. So, so yeah, I guess traditional me personally, I think that the lesson you always have to have your own personal learning, like your teacher can only do so much. Your teacher is just like, he just guides you through the process, but the learning comes from yourself. It's very interesting and traditional teaching Islamic teaching that, you know, obviously not, not all my dad is all the same. Not cultures are the same, but, you know, there's this concept that some people actually, they spend a lot of time with the teachers, other people they just, you know, they're, it's like interesting when you say there are like many different types of each other. You know, and some of them you have to read to the teacher, others you read and the teacher listens to you and he corrects you. And sometimes you only, he only examines you and he tests that you have the knowledge and you get the jazz and I think that flexibility is something that I love. And it is like very meticulous and systematic. But at the same time, you know, it's learning is something that you can do in different ways. And how's going, I was going to tell you something about how he's learning. I don't remember, but anyhow, what I was going to say is that when you study the, the, the, the different efficacy, for example, different facilities or didn't expect, you know, explanations of Hadid, you quickly come to realize that these people had different ways of approaching things, you know, and it reflects on the testing, you know. So some people are more systems inclined or other and they have a very like example, even one of the things that I'm, when I started reading more, I used to read also and I clearly noticed a very different thing when it comes to their way of organizing information. And actually, in my view, even 10 years, a genius, when it comes to synthesis, because if he has to write a text, he will write, he will write a short text straight to the point. And that text will become very readable for the masses.  And there are people who need that, you know, but it's interesting that, you know, scholars have been very different and that enriches the tradition and the whole teaching and learning system. I think it's very rich precisely because people have these systems. And actually, I'm going to tell you something. I completely changed the way I write because I write articles and sometimes I write books after, by the influence of Ibn Taymiah. So now when I write a paragraph, I just reread it three or four times and I said, okay, is this all, all this information and words, is it necessary? What is it? You know, I try to just trim it and trim it and trim it until you get like a very eloquent explanation of what really needs to be said, you know, so, you know, but it's very interesting to find all these differences in different scholars and how they respected each other and no one said, you know, this one talks too much, you know, obviously there are differences, but there's a lot of respect among true scholars and that's very inspiring. Yeah. Yes. So what I would suggest, what I would suggest to the viewers is that they, they take the test, they go to iaispane.com slash test and they take the personality test because they will take the personality test, it's just a couple of minutes and once they're done, they will get the personality type with advice straight from the Quran and the sunnah according to what things they can work on to improve and, you know, what virtues they have because it's also a matter of knowing what your strengths are and then knowing what your weaknesses are so you can work on them and then at the same time they will get advice on what's the best way to learn Arabic according to their personality type and I'm very sure people will find that very interesting. Nishanda, what I would like to see is in the comments if people who didn't do the Meyer Briggs test to actually, if they go to your website, can that's the Meyer Briggs test show? No, they just go to iaispane.com slash test, they do the test and then they will get the results so they don't need to go anywhere else. Alright, I would like to see in the comments how accurate that comes for them in how helpful it is so I highly encourage you to all the viewers to go ahead and pick the link in the description do the test and then come back and let me know how accurate it was, how helpful was the tip so that way we can use it actually for us for example who run institutes that teaches the Arabic language and we can help other people and see out of percentages how many people actually find this beneficial and through that way spread and maintain the Arabic language alive and available for all Muslims since the dean is being preserved with this language so that's a sort of that what you are doing and directly by doing so so I hope you guys enjoyed anything else to add Yaqarami? I would just say to people that I'm not an Arab and I'm not Chinese I'm not Japanese so Chinese is not my language Japanese is not my language Arabic is my language Arabic is your language not because you are an Arab because it's the language of the Quran and it's God's final revelation so just take it as don't say Arabic is not my language if you're a Muslim start thinking that Arabic is my language even if I don't know it yet so go ahead do the test and try to find what's the best way for you tell us in the comments because I'm very interested in those types of research and you should be thinking of moving on going ahead and trying to learn the Arabic language insha'Allah and don't forget don't forget that some of the most important scholars of our tradition were non-Arabs actually if I can recall Siba who synthesized the Arabic grammar he was not an Arab a lot of these scholars these people were not they were not the Arabs so this is living proof that this is our language and it doesn't matter where you come from alright guys hope you guys enjoyed let us know in the comments and whatever constructive criticism or input or feedback that you guys have and we see you guys in the next one