Tile of our sermon this morning those who perish we're in part two our text Romans chapter two particularly verses 12 through 16 We're in this section of text that runs from verse one Really all the way through the end of chapter two this argument that Paul is making and as I was thinking about getting into our Text this morning that the the the section of text that we're in really is a difficult section of text Not always easy to understand how the components and parts fit together But Paul is weaving here a tightly woven argument that argument against the sin of mankind supporting or Proving the righteous judgment of God and as Paul is making his case Paul is removed removing loopholes He is taking away Objections and we find in this section of text this very tightly woven argument that can sometimes be difficult to understand So what I thought I would do this morning is begin in this second part dealing with this text particularly verses 12 through 16 Would be to begin with a brief overview of Paul's argument and then show you how that particular argument ties in To the verses under our consideration verses 12 through 16 So Paul's train of thought in our text this morning really is connected all the way back to chapter 2 verse 1 The inexcusable man of chapter 2 verse 1 the one who condemns sin and others while condoning sin in himself Will not escape the judgment of God Case closed right period end of story the inexcusable man will not escape the judgment of God But rather verse 5 he is Treasuring up for himself a wrath in the day of wrath a day in which the righteous judgment of God will be revealed Verse 5 a day in which God will render to each one according to his deeds verse 6 for verse 11 there is no Partiality with God right so Paul is speaking to men of all types Generally in this text, but he has in the back of his mind the Jewish man Specifically the Jew would have thought to himself Certainly God will be partial partial to me and Paul says there is no partiality with God The Jewish man would have said I'm with a covenant people of God Certainly God will show me partiality and Paul says there is no partiality with God The Jewish man would have said I've been in the synagogue every Sabbath hearing the word of God proclaimed I've had the law of Moses taught to me since I was a child and God says Paul says there is no partiality with God Paul then further clarifies his statement to remove any Possible loophole to remove any possible excuse for the inexcusable man And he says verse 11 there is no partiality with God for because verse 12 as many as have sinned without law speaking of the Gentiles will also Parish without law and as many as have sinned in the law Jews will be judged or will perish by the law verse 16 In the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ According to my gospel in other words in that day the great day of his wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God that particular That singular day in which God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ According to all that has been revealed in Paul's preaching of the gospel So notice now. I want you to notice how verse 12 is directly connected to verse 16 verse 12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law And as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law Verse 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel those two phrases Connected and I believe the new king James has it right here in putting a parenthesis Around verses 13 to 15 some of you will notice in your translation. No parenthesis I believe that verses 13 to 15 really do represent a parenthesis statement on the on the part of the apostle Paul What lies within that parenthesis verses 13 to 15 will be the subject of our sermon this morning, okay? Paul has introduced to us in this text two groups of unbelievers in verse 12 He's introduced those who have sinned without law and those who have sinned in the law Do you see that from verse 12? Okay, those who have sinned without law those who have sinned in the law at that time Paul would have had certainly been thinking of primarily of Gentiles who have sinned without law and Jews particularly who have sinned in the law, okay? And Paul wants the Jewish man in his day the religious hypocrite in our own day Paul wants them to take no comfort no consolation from the fact that he knows about God from the Bible That he knows the law so to speak knows the word of God so to speak Understands the word of God unlike those those pagan idolaters from chapter one I've been in church all my life right the Jew might say I've been at the synagogue every Sabbath I know the word of God. I've been given the word of God Certainly God will be partial to me For he says there's gonna be no comfort no consolation given for Gentiles who have sinned without the law of God verse 12 and Jews who have sinned in the law so to speak of God Both will likewise perish at the judgment verse 12 In the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ verse 16 Right now wait just a minute Paul What are you trying to say? Shouts the inexcusable man. Are you trying to say that I'm gonna be judged with those pagans?  Is that what you're saying Paul? You're out of your mind Paul Certainly, you can't be saying that I give you parenthetical statement number one verse 13 It's not the hearers of the law That are just in the sight of God But the doers of the law will be justified Paul would say to that religious hypocrite Paul would say to the Jew in his own day You're so religious quote unquote, right?  You will perish with the pagans Paul would say later in Galatians chapter 3 verse 10 for as many as are of the works of the law Paul says are under the curse For it is written cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things Which are written in the book of the law to hear them Is that what he says? No Paul says to do them cursed cursed Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things cursed is everyone Jew and Gentile alike Who does not continue in all things every thought word deed action, right? motive desire affection imagination dream Who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them Not merely hearers of the law but doers you see It's not the hearers of the law that are just in the sight of God Paul says But the doers of the law will be justified. Oh wait a minute Paul Give me a break here. I you're saying that I'm gonna share hell with the pagans But those those pagan Gentiles didn't even have your law How can you say that God is impartial in the judgment when certainly he must show partiality to that? Pagan that has no law has no knowledge of his word Certainly God must be partial to them. I give you parenthetical statement number two verse 14 For when those Gentiles who do not have a law By nature do the things in the law these Gentiles although not having the law are a law to themselves how Verse 15 they show the work of the law written in their hearts their conscience also bearing witness and Between themselves and their thoughts accusing or else excusing them and Paul would remind us again To refer back to verse 11. There is no partiality with God You see how Paul comes at it from two different perspectives right both positively and negatively There is no partiality with God to the one who's been given This blessing of special revelation and there is no partiality to the one who sins without this blessing of special revelation They all alike are condemned as mere hearers of a law There is no partiality with God for verse 12 as many as have sinned without law We'll also perish without law and as many as have sinned in the law These will be judged by the law in that day verse 16 when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel in that day the judgment of God will be upheld as Righteous righteous because God is an impartial judge who judges according to a perfect and Holy standard that standard of his law reflecting his own perfect character Paul is beginning here in this section of text beginning to close his case He's been again beginning to close his case Against sinful mankind for his universal sin and for his Condemnation under the law and when Paul closes this case he intends to do so by Pulling into the dragnet of bad fish so to speak at the judgment all Those Jews all Those religious hypocrites who thought they could earn favor with God through their religious works or who thought they had earned favor with God Through their heritage or their religious exercise or their ethnicity or are there being descendants from Abraham or any other Reason when there is no partiality with God God will render to each one according to his deeds There is no partiality with The special revelation of God in his word or without The special revelation of God in his word in the law or without the law All men deserve to perish. Do you see Paul's case right? Why why? Because no one is a doer of the law No one is a doer of the law verse chapter 3 verse 10.  Whatever the law says It says to those who are under the law that every mouth jew and gentile alike Every mouth may be stopped religious hypocrite or Unknowing pagan atheist right every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God That's case closed right that's that's where paul is driving at that's where paul is getting to and paul is masterfully weaving this case of a prosecuting attorney to get there leaving no stone unturned leaving no loophole for wicked men All the world may become guilty before god The law of god will be the instrument of condemnation to those who have sinned under it Therefore by the deeds of the law paul says No flesh will be justified. No flesh will be found to be just No flesh will found to be righteous declared to be righteous in his site It is an open and shut case. You see open and shut It is the end of Judaism The jews seeking to establish their own righteousness under the law Do not submit to the righteousness of god romans chapter 10 verse 3. It's the end of judaism It's the end of catholicism No amount of penance will ever justify a single sin No amount of purgatory could ever justify a single sin against god Confessing your sins all day long will not forgive a single one.  There's no amount of desire That can save a sinner. No work of yours can justify a single sin If it's anything that you did Then it's nothing that can save you. Do you see if it's any if you think about that if it is anything that you did Then it is nothing that can save you What's the one thing that we need? What is the one thing that we need to be just in the sight of god? We need righteousness righteousness Perfect obedience to the law of god and we simply do not have it nowhere close And there is nothing absolutely nothing that you or I can do to get it We need righteousness and we can't get it. We don't have it The only hope we have is the righteousness of god himself That given as a gift Through faith and listen that faith. We can't do anything to get that righteousness from god to earn that righteousness from god That means the the faith itself is a gift from him must be given to us It's not a work of your own lest you should boast boy. You look at my faith, right? I've earned that salvation by faith. No, that's absurd No, not even the faith is a work of your own lest you should boast. It is a gift of god And that god gifted faith having as its object the perfect person and perfect work of the lord Jesus christ alone Who has become for us wisdom from god and righteousness and sanctification and redemption That as it is written that him who glories glory in the lord. Amen Incidentally What's the difference? What's the difference between that so-called faith that is a human work? And the saving faith that is the gift of god, which justifies the center. What's the difference? That saving faith, which is the gift of god produces fruit Produces good works produces the fruits of faith done from the heart in the power of the spirit through faith in Jesus christ And it's those works of faith those works in the power of his spirit done by that person in union with the lord jesus christ that Give evidence that his faith is genuine in that day. We talked about that in verse 13 The day when god will judge the secrets of men by jesus christ according to the gospel Now that's the basic flow if you will of paul's argument from chapter two verse one down through the end of the chapter but particularly To our section of text in verses 12 to 16 It can be difficult sometimes to trace the connections from one statement to another and so i hope that overview helps put that together To understand paul's argument really important here as paul begins to close his case So having introduced us now to these two groups of unbelievers paul's introduced us to those who who have sinned without law And those who have sinned in the law now having introduced those two groups of unbelievers paul is going to further explain Why it is that they perish In relationship to the law. Why do they perish those? Who perish without law and those who perish in the law? Why is it that they perish in relationship to the law? So in point three on your outline paul deals first with those who perish without law In verses 14 and 15 that's going to occupy our attention this morning Point four on your outline paul will then turn his attention to those who perish in the law We'll see that in verses 17 to 29. Okay. So in the remainder of our time together this morning Let's consider point three on your outline and those who perish without law beginning in verse 14 Now if you've been preaching the gospel evangelizing witnessing for any length of time You have been at some point confronted with a question. Maybe you've had the question yourself What about the person who's never even heard of the lord jesus christ? What about the person in the remote? Some lost tribe in the remote jungles of the amazon who have not even been in contact with the outside world Certainly, they've never heard the word of god. They've never heard the gospel They've never even heard the name of the lord jesus christ. What happens to them? Surely god can't be justified in holding their sin against them, can he? They've never been given opportunity to hear the gospel. They've never been given opportunity to respond in faith Well paul explains in this text that those people those without law Those who've had no access to this special Written in scripturated word of god no access to special revelation, right?  Also bearing witness and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them So how is it how is it that men can sin without the law? paul's going to make the point in chapter 4 verse 15 if you want to glance there That where there is no law there is no transgression So how can men sin without law you might say chapter 5 verse 13? Sin is not imputed when there is no law So how can men men as paul says asserts in verse 14 here? How can men sin without law so you see the objection right see the objection If they have no law telling them what is right and wrong How can they be held accountable for their sin? How could god's judgment be upheld as righteous in that day? If they have no law under which they are accountable or convicted for how is it just for them to perish Well paul is going to make his case. He's going to answer that question under two headings first the existence of natural law Secondly the witness of conscience The existence of natural law and the witness of conscience consider first paul's point and answer to the question the existence of natural law verse 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the law don't have that special revelation Listen by nature by nature do the things in the law These although not having the law are a law to themselves Right notice how paul first notice how paul describes them First they are Gentiles as opposed to jews who have the law. These are Gentiles who are described as without law Here the whole world The whole world is divided up into these two groups according to verse 14 They were the jews and everybody else in paul's day today It's those who have access to special revelation Those who have had the bible preached to them the gospel preached to them and those who have not right? Some in verse 14 believe these Gentiles to be specifically Gentile christians And they would say that those who without law do the things in the law are Gentile christians As several commentators if you've worked through this text or read any of the commentaries on this text Several commentator commentators hold to this view right and that's largely due to 15 verse 15 They show the work of the law written in their hearts And the commentator will take that verse And from it infer that these must be Gentile christians who have the work of the law written on their hearts They see a statement they see a reference In that statement to the promises of the new covenant Jeremiah chapter 31 And we won't turn there, but I want you to listen Jeremiah chapter 31 in verse 33 The lord is giving promises associated with the new covenant And he says this is the covenant that I will make with the house of israel after those days says the lord This is the covenant that has been inaugurated At the the the covenant that has been established by jesus christ in his blood for the forgiveness of sinners For the salvation of god's elect. This is the covenant under which they are redeemed And the lord says this is the covenant that I will make with the house of israel after those days says the lord I will put my law in their minds I will write it on their hearts. I will be their god and they shall be my people So commentator takes a look at verse 15 and he assumes that we must be talking about Gentile christians in verse 14 So these cannot be Gentiles then in some generic sense These must be Gentiles who have the new covenant promises of god given to them through faith in jesus christ These must be Gentile christians. They're doing good works. It says verse 14 and these doers of the law They say will be justified by their works on the day of judgment. Thank you roman catholicism Paul would say not so fast Not so fast notice second Second these Gentiles are described as those who do not have present active do not have the law They don't have special revelation These Gentiles verse 12 have sinned Without law without special revelation and paul is specifically explaining why they perish Without law verse 12 these Gentiles who do not have the law are among those Nations outside of israel who are not given special revelation from god the special revelation contained in the scriptures and listen you can't be saved without special revelation General revelation will not save you it's sufficient to condemn you But general revelation is not sufficient to save you you must have special revelation or you perish these specifically Do not have special revelation. You can see that contrast again just in our immediate context here chapter 3 verse 1 What advantage advantage then has the jew or what is the prophet of circumcision much in every way chiefly Chief benefit because to them to the jews have been given special revelation, right? We're committed the oracles of god these Gentiles don't have special revelation. So no no These are unsaved Gentiles who are not in possession of special revelation, right? They are without the word of god as paul would say here in verse 14. They are without law without law. Do you see? now yet although not having the law Paul very carefully and precisely describes these lost Gentiles as third By nature doing the things in the law So listen how paul describes them one they're Gentiles Two these are Gentiles who do not have the law But three they are by nature doing things in the law Four he describes them as being a law unto themselves And five as manifesting the work of the law written in their hearts By giving evidence of the work of the law written in their hearts But what is paul referring to in this description of these lost unbelieving Gentiles? paul is referring to something that theologians call natural law He's referring to natural law The promise Of the new covenant for those who are a new creation in christ Is that the law of god will be put within their minds and written upon their hearts? That's the promise of the new covenant No more shall every man teach his neighbor and every man his brother saying no the lord Says the prophet for they shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest of them says the lord For I will forgive their iniquity and their sin. I will remember no more It's a promise of the new covenant What paul is speaking of here is completely different is something entirely different the language paul's language here Very careful and very precise. He does not say that the law is written in their hearts. What does paul specifically say? Rather that they show the work of the law written in their hearts. Do you see that? There's a distinction being made This is not the spirit wrought delight And obedience that is the promise of the new covenant. This is something different paul is making his case on the basis of natural law The work that the law does in the heart of every person made in the image of god even in Gentiles who do not have the bible There is a work of the law a work that the law does In the heart of every single human being made in the image of god Even in pagans Gentiles lost people unbelieving people who do not have the bible Even without that law so to speak the law is still brought to bear upon them Confronting them in their sin Confronting them in their unrighteousness. So back to chapter one. They're without excuse in the day of judgment right they are without excuse Listen to robert shaw robert shaw speaking of the law of god, which was written on the heart of adam Made in god's image listen god Having formed man an intelligent creature and a subject of moral government He gave him a law for the rule of his conduct This law was founded in the infinitely righteous nature of god and the moral relations Necessarily subsisting between him and man Because god is perfect morally there is of necessity A moral relationship between god and his creature man right of necessity It was originally written on the heart of man on the heart of adam And he was endowed with such a perfect knowledge of his maker's will as was sufficient to inform him concerning the whole extent of his duty You could say that adam by nature understood his obligations to god as his creator the work of the law is Woven into the very fabric of their being by the god who made them It's a part of their dna so to speak right It's in this sense that although they do not have the law special revelation written in the scriptures It's in this sense that they are a law to themselves. Do you see? The gentiles sin against that law they sin against natural law and gentiles are judged They are held accountable to natural law. They're held accountable to that law Which is written upon their heart at creation right and gentiles are judged against that law. Dr. Murray says this Although gentiles are without the law and have not the law in the sense of specially revealed law Nevertheless, they are not entirely without law The law is made known to them and is brought to bear upon them in another way And that through natural law. Do you see that concept of natural law very important for us to understand all Men their culpability before god for having violated his law Divine obligation is pressed upon the heart and mind of all men and they are without excuse Well, how can you say that paul right? How can you make such a a bold assertion? How do you know? Point number two on your notes The witness of conscience How do you know the witness of conscience? Verse 15 they show the work of the law written in their hearts Their conscience also bearing witness and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them There's something within man Something with it within all men That recognizes and acknowledges the moral nature of his conduct before god Something within man that acknowledges The moral nature of his actions This is what robert martin referred to as a tribunal of sorts a tribunal There are those who have written about conscience in terms of a tribunal where it's made up of the person who is committing the action The law against which it is judged natural law And a third alter ego of sorts that judges the action says within the heart of man There is a sort of tribunal as it were It's one of the faculties conscience is one of the faculties that separates men from beasts Separates men from animals animals don't have a faculty that judges their actions as morally right or morally wrong There's not a capacity of conscience within them to accuse or else excuse their actions conscience Is the foundation on which even unbelieving gentiles without the written law of god Conscience is the foundation on which they make moral judgments. Do you see it's that faculty By which they make moral judgments and we all have that we all do all of us have a conscience We've been given a conscience. I was using this example in uh during the sunny school hour I was witnessing to uh An agnostic college student not very long ago And uh didn't believe in objective morality you find that on a regular basis on our relativistic college campuses They don't believe in objective morality. There is no such thing as objective morality morality is what we make it It's by nurture whatever the case may be experience community experience together you come out with some morality That's a load of bunk Doesn't believe in objective morality and essentially Anyone who says that is essentially lying to themselves right justifying their own actions justifying their own sense I simply asked him. I said have you ever done anything? done anything that Gave you a guilty conscience, right? Have you ever done something that afterward you felt bad about it because it was wrong And he said yes, of course, right There's your objective morality That's it right that that's the testimony of god within your own breast Right written upon your heart the testimony that god has given us a law That we are accountable to that proves to us our accountability before god whereby our conscience accuses us when we violate it It's an example of natural law Witness to by our consciences all pointing to the fact that we have an accountability to god for how we live He's been judged By an objective standard His conscience bears witness to that fact how many today Attempt to silence that they do a good job of silencing that it's it's from scripture We know that your conscience can be seared Your conscience can be entirely uninformed and act in uninformed ways In other words, your your conscience is not the final arbiter of truth The word of god is the final arbiter of truth But your conscience can act in all kinds of uninformed ways Your conscience can be seared your conscience can be suppressed your conscience can be silenced I think a large part of that Is the basis behind the shout your abortion movement in this country Where people who have had abortions they just you know, they they say you need to Claim that right and shout your abortion Well part of shouting your abortion is silencing and accusing conscience that is telling you that abortion is murder And you're going to be held to account for that sin in the day of judgment, right? So just shout over the top of it and silence your conscience. Do you see Right people silence their conscience. They suppress their conscience on a regular basis You cannot silence god's law You were made in the image of god With the obligation to obey god in keeping your in keeping with your relationship To god as creature to creator And you were made then accountable to god for your actions We're all accountable to god for the way that we live our lives and to assist us In the the discharge of our moral obligations to god to remind us of our moral accountability To god god has given to all people created in his image the capacity to judge our own Actions not on the basis of our whims on the basis of our own personal desires But on the basis of his objective law the remnants of the work of that law Written upon the heart of man and the capacity to judge to excuse or accuse is called conscience. Do you see conscience it is by natural law through the faculty or the capacity of conscience The Gentiles who do not have the law Are a law to themselves and will be found guilty on the day of judgment Paul's already referenced this as we were working through chapter one He referenced this point in chapter one verse 32 do the same But also approve of those who practice them right He's speaking of that very thing in chapter one verse 30 32 excuse me These are Gentiles who don't have a bible They are without law so to speak they And yet they know the righteous judgment of god that those who practice such things deserve death They know that the wages of sin is death Where does that knowledge come from if they don't have the scriptures natural law and the witness of their conscience As for the inexcusable man chapter two verse one His conscience works great When it comes to the sins of others But if after two verse one therefore you are inexcusable, oh man Whoever you are who judge for in whatever you judge another You condemn yourself. Why because the sin that he condemns in others Is the same kind of sin that he condones in himself, right? For you who judge practice the same kinds of things His conscience alive and well when it comes to judging the sins of others Dead and dysfunctional when it comes to judging his own sinful heart The lost man Lost people often have absolutely no problem whatsoever judging the hypocrisy of others Lying the cheating the stealing the sin of others easy for a hypocrite husband to judge all the specs in his wife's eye And completely ignore the massive boat-sized planks in his own eye, right? He silenced his own conscience when it comes to his own actions very easy easy for men and women to watch the news And rail against all the idiocy that we see displayed there And yet fail to consider our own sins against God doing the same kinds of things However, when they actually when Sinful Gentiles unbelieving Gentiles Actually do The things written in the law verse 14 Those Gentiles are showing by nature by very the nature of their being right By the work of God in creation having created them in his own image They show by nature the work of the law written in their hearts and they are accountable They're going to perish without law Because although not having a law they are a law to themselves Showing the work of the law written in their hearts Natural law the existence of natural law Their conscience also bearing witness and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them the witness of conscience, right? So on what basis then will the Gentiles who do not have a law be judged? They're not going to be judged according to the scriptures given to Israel But they will be judged According to what law according to the work of the law written in their heart Their conscience either accusing or else excusing them Hand in hand with the inexcusable pagan From chapter one hand in hand with the inexcusable man from chapter two You say that God Will not be partial to us you Jewish man you inexcusable man you say that God will not be partial to us because we have the law You may think That God Should be partial to us because we come to church every Sunday. We have a law But certainly certainly God must be partial then to the Gentiles because they don't have the law I remember one person in particular telling me that he could never never worship the kind of God Who would judge that person in?  He's left you without excuse Paul hedges them in with his argument on both sides There is no partiality with God verse 12 for as many as have sinned without law will also perish Without law and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law In the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel That day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God In the day when God will judge the secrets of men Hebrews chapter 4 verse 13 describes that day As one where there is no creature hidden from his sight All things are naked and open to the eyes of him to whom we must give account There's nothing that is hidden There may they may be secrets of men. There are no secret from God Can you see how this The work of the law written upon his heart How that statement described here by paul is entirely different From the promises of God in the language of the new covenant Right it's entirely different. We're not talking about the same thing. We're talking about two entirely different things There's no hope in these words only condemnation Whatever you don't know of the bible is no excuse You didn't understand that text no excuse. You sat under false teaching no excuse You believe the lies of a false teacher no excuse You misunderstood the gospel no excuse No promise no hope Only condemnation paul says romans chapter 8 verse 7 the carnal mind is enmity against god It's not subject to the law of god nor indeed can be The carnal man Does not rejoice in the law of god that it is holy just and good The carnal man does not delight In the law of god according to the inward man As a consequence the carnal man does not obey it. In fact paul says he cannot obey it He is a slave of unrighteousness But listen to the language of the new covenant Listen to the promises of god ezekiel 36 verse 26 god says i will give you a new heart I will give you a new spirit within you. I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh I will give you a heart of flesh I will put my spirit within you and i will cause you To walk in my statutes and you will keep my judgments and do them Well, i'm a christian and i don't keep his judgments No, you're not Why because that's a promise a promise of god in the new covenant. I'm a christian. I've never been made a new creation No, you're not a christian I will give you a new heart. I will put a new spirit within you I will cause you by my spirit. I will cause you to walk in my statutes. What awesome promises, right? I will so transform your heart. I will do a work such a radical Miraculous work upon your heart that the enmity that exists between us is gone forever I will put my own spirit within you god says and you will delight in my law And I will cause you to obey it. What a glorious work of grace He is raised from the dead as it were from the dead from being dead in trespasses and sins To life in the lord jesus christ by the spirit He has a new creation in christ the law of god impressed upon his heart anew There's a sense in which in the new creation god is renewing That which has been defaced at the fall He writes his laws upon their heart in their minds. I will put them and I will write them upon their hearts I will be their god. They will be my people That one who's been created anew in jesus christ He delights in the law of god not as an as an external imposition upon his will that forces a burdensome obedience But according to the inward disposition of his heart as one who loves holiness as one who hungers and thirsts for righteousness First time of the chapter one verse five now the purpose of the commandment is love From a pure heart from a good conscience and from sincere faith That's the transformation that takes place in the heart of one who's been renewed by the lord jesus christ with david Who's I think quoting the lord jesus christ in a messianic psalm with david we can proclaim I delight to do your will oh god and your law is within my heart psalm 40 verse 8 paul would say second chrithians chapter one verse 12 for our boasting is this The testimony of our conscience that we conducted ourselves in the world in simplicity And godly sincerity not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of god You want that kind of conscience before god? You want to have a clear conscience I think in reading the new testament There's so many references to that so many references to The disciples in particular the apostles living before god In maintaining a clear conscience. It was it was a precious thing to them paul saying I have always strived to maintain a clear conscience before god and men It was of paramount importance to him. Why because that's been hard won by the lord jesus christ It's a precious gift of salvation to know In jesus christ that your sins against god or are forgiven They've been paid for at the cross and there is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in christ jesus You can have a free clear clean conscience before god and when you sin You have an advocate with the father jesus christ the righteous who if we confess our sins to him He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all our unrighteousness Praise god For a clear clean conscience before him brothers and sisters Let's strive before god to maintain a clear clean testimony If you're here this morning and you have a guilty accusing conscience as you should if you're in your sin against god Turn from sin put faith and trust in jesus christ jesus christ went to calvary His blood avails for the sin of his own and he can forgive you of your iniquity If you'll put your faith and trust in him you can be forgiven Given right standing with god justified in the sight of god what we need Is a righteousness and it doesn't come from us it comes from the lord jesus christ alone and his righteousness perfect Beautiful and that can be your righteousness through faith in him god has been so gracious to us hasn't he let's pray let's pray Father in heaven lord we rejoice That you have made provision for our sin and the person in work of your own dear son our lord jesus christ Thank you our heavenly father that you have provided a way that we might have a clear conscience before you that we might Be forgiven of all our sin and live before you in sincerity and in truth And thank you lord for the power that your spirit gives for us to Delight in your law For us to walk according to your statutes We know that's not perfect on this side of eternity lord But we delight in your law that it is holy just and good We delight to do your will we hunger and thirst for righteousness lord and we pray for Extra measures of grace lord and mercy upon us to crave that hunger for that more To abound in that grace and help us lord to Walk in a way that is worthy of our calling and walk in a way that is pleasing in your sight Obedience to your commands as trophies of your grace We love you. We thank you lord. Thank you for This word I pray lord that will help us as we seek to be faithful to you and preaching the gospel to the lost That it will be helpful to us as we Consider our the state of our own soul before you The state of our own hearts before you and that we might flee to the cross flee to the lord Jesus christ for all our hope and stay and that in him you would sustain us and preserve us and maintain cultivate Expand our hope We love you and thank you for these things that are all blessings all promises of the new covenant By which we've been redeemed. We give you thanks for them in Jesus name. Amen


out his life. There are going to be distractions. There are going to be things that draw his attention and there's going to be moments where I've got to take that attention that he's got elsewhere and bring it to me and on the task at hand. It's essential that we think about what are the good qualities that I see in my horse and I try to bring those out more and more and more. But now when I'm brushing him, I'm going to think about the same sorts of ideas. The idea of him keeping his feet still and maybe as I brush, I don't like to tie my horses initially, especially when I haven't done a lot with them. I like to do things where they're just in hand, but when I brush, I'm watching his face. I can see his nose is soft here. I can see that he's enjoying it. I can see that there's going to be spots that he's going to really like and really appreciate. And when he does, I might spend a little time right in that area. And then I might just do a little something. I'm going to put my hand here. I'm going to stay focused on him being grounded and relaxed. And I'm going to ask him to bend around good and bring his head good all the way my way. And that's so nice. I came up with the idea in my head and he was right there with it. So there's that idea of thinking about what you would like your horse to do, having a clear picture at the front of your mind of what it is you'd like them to do. And then when they do it, you know that that came right from you, right from your thoughts, which is a really cool feeling. And that's the neat part about horses, is they can feel your ideas and thoughts and they can shape themselves to that when you're thinking these things. This is why it's important that if you have any negative things or behaviors that you see in your horse that you don't want to have happen, you don't focus on those things and you don't picture those things because unfortunately you're going to get more and more of that. Good. Very nice. This particular horse, he's been ridden twice in his life. One was probably, oh, maybe six years ago. And the other time was maybe four years ago. So he's had a couple short little rides. But I want to get him used to me being in this position. And I want him to be comfortable with me just kind of leaning on him. So I'm going to tell him, put your head on straight. So get your head up that way. Good.  And I'm going to put my arm over him and get him comfortable with that. Now he did take a couple steps back. So let's see if he can walk forward with me in this zone. Good. Good. And then I might stretch tall. That's my cue in my body for when I want my horses to halt. It comes through from my core here. So when I stretch tall, I am asking him to slow down. I'm in the position that I'll be in when I'm riding him. So he's used to being aware of my body feel and responding to me when I'm in a position that's not right up by his head. So that was real nice. And then I'm going to add another piece in. So we've got bending him around. That's looking good. The next thing I'm going to do is I'm going to bend him around.  Good. Where my leg would be. And ask him to move his hind quarters. I do want to make sure I've got a clear differentiation between bending and staying put and bending and moving. So we're going to bend and stay put here. Good. Very nice. I'm going to give him a little scratch on the neck. I released my rope so he knows he's doing a good job. And then bending and moving is going to be where I bend him. And I bring my life up. He already felt that.  That clear differentiation is going to be important because there might be some situations where life gets kind of exciting where he gets a little bit emotional. And therefore I need to be able to bend him to a halt and have him relax and let down. And that's another thing I build into my sessions is I want him to know that he should bring his energy down, bring his life down and just relax during the session. So that's something that I'm asking him to do. So now he needs to move a little. I can see that he's got some ideas here about moving around. And I need to be respectful of that. I'm going to need him to move anyway at some point. Bring him up to a trot again. And then I'm going to bring him in. And it's not quite there. That's fine. Back him up. Good. And we'll try it again.  So we step back first, get your weight on your hind quarters, shift and step over. That looks nice. That was better. Him moving off there was much better. And then I'm going to see if he can follow me and good. And then a quick stop and we'll see if we can back up. So these are some things I'd like to start seeing out of him is I want him to come to me with some pizzazz. I'm supporting my idea with the line and with getting his life up initially. But then I want him when he comes to me to be able to stop, not invade my space and take his energy backwards with still some life. I want I want to see that life. And then I might again reward him a little bit. I'm asking him to stay put with my hand with my brush here. And I'm going to let him know he did a nice job. This particular horse is definitely one that's very oral. He likes to explore the world with his mouth. And when I'm working with my horses, I'm aware of their tendencies. So he's definitely one that I'm feeding out of a pan versus my hand, because I don't want him to get even more oral around me. We're staying there area. So I might move him over here back up again. And I can see he's looking a little beyond me. He sees things going on over there. And what I want him to do is focus on me. So I'm going to reach my hand down. I'm going to see if he can drop his head and relax good. And at least have me in his mind. He's maybe still going to be focusing on whatever is going on over there. That's okay. But I need to be able to bring him back. I need to reach down. I need to say, Hey, relax a little, pay attention. And I'll give him a pat. And then we'll come back to work. But if he looks up ahead again, not a big deal. It's just an opportunity for me to bring his mind back to me to bring his attention back to me throughout his life. There are going to be distractions. There are going to be things that draw his attention. And there's going to be moments where I've got to take that attention that he's got elsewhere and bring it to me and on the task at hand. And therefore, I'm not seeing this as a, Hey, don't look over there situation. I'm thinking about what are the things that I can build in that are going to be beneficial? What do I like about the situation? Well, I like that I'm able to direct him back to me to teach him how to focus, to relax a little, drop your head down a little and be okay and present with me.


Thank you very much, Kenneth. Good afternoon, everyone from Luxembourg. We are very pleased to have been invited to share our experience and our plans at this sixth EasyBuild user meeting. So please allow me to introduce myself. I am Valentin Plugaru. I'm the Chief Technology Officer of Lux Provide, Luxembourg's HPC Center. And joining me today and will present part of this talk is Robert Mjaković, HPC Systems Software Architect at Lux Provide. Hi, guys. So to give a bit of hint of who we are and our context, so Lux Provide has been recently created for to take care of HPC, HPTA, and AI services in Luxembourg. We are hosting entity for the HPC joint undertaking. We're building up the Meluxina supercomputer as we speak, actually. And we're also part of the Euro-HCC project, which is joining the National Competence Centers for also HPC, HPTA, and AI across Europe. So to give a bit of hint of the Meluxina supercomputer, the building blocks for Meluxina have always been to serve a wide variety of user workloads to have a design that corresponds to the needs that we have seen that were on the horizon. Well, at the time, they were on the horizon, and now they're pretty much confirmed. And all the centers are doing things to take care of this big convergence of different workloads. Some of them being truly data-driven, but some of them are still pure HPC heavy-duty computing in nature. And to build up a system that is resilient, secure, very capable, of course, and highly efficient. You may have seen this in some different presentations before. The architecture of Meluxina is done as a modular system. So the modular approach joins together what are different type of computing systems. So in our case, there's a cluster module, which contains, I would say, traditional HPC computing nodes with quite a good size of memory on top of them. So they can be considered the fact nodes by traditional standards. An accelerator module which has GPGPU accelerators, AI accelerators, but also a smaller section with FPGA accelerators for highly specialized workloads. There's also a large memory module with the fact nodes in terms of memory that are allowing in-memory computing. So for different kind of data sets that can help accelerate some type of workloads. And underlying all of this is, of course, a storage module with different tiers, with different performance and sizing characteristics. Most of the storage is actually on our last-door file system and with a different bandwidth and IOPS characteristics depending on the tier. Joining all the modules together is an infinite-band fabric, HDR200. It's now well-established in the HPC community. And actually, this is in a Dragonfly Plus topology and on the Lucina. There is one module I didn't speak about. So this is our cloud module, which is meant to host persistent services, data portals, different kind of orchestration mechanisms, APIs, things that can drive computation on the heavy-duty compute or storage modules. And all of this is well-connected to both internally and to the outside world. A few numbers of my Lucina. So in total, we're supposed to be around a bit above 18 petaflops aggregated performance around all the modules. Of course, the heavy-duty ones are the cluster module. Above two petaflops is supposed to be the measured HPL performance and 10 petaflops on the accelerator GPU part. The data tiers are both disk-based spinning rust, but also all flash for very highly intensive IO operations. Different kind of data sets will be hosted there for machine learning, for deep learning, and other kind of workloads. There are also data tiers that are for redundancy, for data backup, and finally for long-term storage with a TAPE archive solution. Again, we are linking internally with very high bandwidth. So HDR, everything is on the HDR200 interconnect. But there are also high Ethernet. It's a high-performance Ethernet solution deployed internally. And to connect to outside, we'll have very good links with Jean through the Restina and Ren in Luxembourg. And this will link us, of course, to all the URHPC sites, but also in Luxembourg with Public Sector Research Academia. A few words about the technologies.  So the systems, the heavy-duty compute ones, the CPU nodes, GPU nodes are delivered in DLC packaging. So liquid cooled. Of course, all of this is delivered by ATOS in our case. So we are counting on high-performance AMD Epic CPUs, the ones that are at 280 watt. So the systems that we are having is CPUs with the nodes are 128 cores, around 4 gigabyte of RAM per core on that. While on the GPUs, the amount of RAM is the same. They have a bit less cores, but this is also coupled with NVIDIA Ampere generation of GPUs. There's four GPUs between the link and 40 gigabyte of high bandwidth memory there. On the GPU nodes, we also have local storage, which is a differentiating factor for the other ones. And they are linked with dual rail on the fabric. Large memory nodes, the differentiating factor here is that they have 4 terabytes of RAM. So there's 80 terabytes across this module for in-memory computing. FPGA nodes, they're similar to the CPU nodes, except that they have two Intel Stratix accelerators. And then there's also some cloud nodes, which are rumored for the persistent services. But today's talk is supposed to be about the software stack. So let's get to it. To talk about the software stack, we have to talk a bit about the workloads that we're going to see. So Luxembourg's key sectors are, as you're seeing, for example, health tech, logistics, space, financial services. And those will translate in the use cases on Meluxina. So it's, again, a coupling of HPC modeling, HPC simulation, but also data-driven workloads, data analytics, and also predictive AI workloads. What we are doing to handle that infrastructure on those use cases is what we're calling the MUSE in a gentle way. So the Meluxina user software environment. Our goals have always been to enable the kind of applications people would expect on HPC platform, and also to be prepared for the future. So the reach of the environment is supposed to be provisioned on the system. This will be with free open source tools, community applications, but also commercial packages for simulation modeling analytics. Of course, we plan to keep this close to recent versions. Otherwise, people will complain. And to maintain it for, this is supposed to be a production system. So the software sets need to be also maintained for a good amount of time. So we can talk about what the good means. The idea is that all of those goals come with some challenges. So it's a reach of the environment, so it's complex. We already have different kind of architectures on the CPUs and to the ampere and GPUs, the Stratix FPGAs. If you plan to update the software quite a lot, then you have to also validate the functionality and the performance. And if you maintain the production set for some time, then you have interaction, of course, with operating system packages that need to be upgraded and other things. So now to talk a bit more in-depth about the software environment, I will give the token to my colleague. Thank you, Valentin. So let's continue with the Meloxina user software environment. So deploying software is done a bit easy build, but also with spec. And we keep a close eye on the easy project and want to learn lessons from its experience. For the module system, we have selected the ELMOD module system with a hierarchical naming scheme from easy build. We take what is already available from the community and plan to adapt it, upgrade and contribute back to the community as much as possible. So that basically goes into the area of easy conflicts, easy blocks and spec packages. The first production environment is already available on our tests cluster, Goupi, with tool chains from FOS and IMD. The initial set of common HPC compilers, libraries, frameworks and real applications is already available and these extensions are gonna be based on the user's needs. Yeah, to follow the vision of looks provided, we plan to optimize our software stack as much as possible for all Meloxina segments available. To select the compilers that support the instruction set of roam micro architecture and compilers that allow us to run optimally on all segments of our systems, including our accelerators. Therefore we use the newest AOCC compiler and GCC that both supports Zen architecture, micro architectures version two with a CUDA toolkit and Intel FPGA OpenCL SDK. So to provide our users always with the newest software stack, we plan to have a stable production releases. As you can see at the bottom of the slide, there is a release timeline. Before each of the releases, we have the staging release to make the software stack as stable as possible. But also this software stack is used for our internal testing and it's provided to our users as a preview release and then our most adventurous users can give it a try. The software stack is released, sorry, can you go back just one slide? The software stack is released at least once per year. It is not upgrade but maintain for two years. After two years, the stack is available but we no longer plan to maintain it, actively maintain it and we consider it deprecated. So users that haven't migrated yet to the new software stack are suggested to do so. And we can of course as a center help them to do so as our additional value. So in the fourth year, the software stack will be hidden from the users and they're not supposed to use it any longer except in the extreme cases. Yeah, so then about the available software groups at Meluxina, here I only mentioned few groups of mostly widely used software from the compiler's perspective that is those are compilers starting with AOCC. As I mentioned, this one is the most optimized for our micro architectures. Then comes the GCC, Intel, which might be a good solution to some extent but it's known to not favor optimizing for architectures that it doesn't understand. Then NVIDIA HPCSDK, which includes PGI. Then there are several MPI suits such as OpenMPI, Intel MPI, and our partner, Parastation MPI. So wide range of numerical and data libraries, frameworks such as SpyTorch, TensorFlow, Corvod, Keras, Apache Spark, et cetera. There are also groups of software packages for visualization build, performance and debugging and of course applications. We plan to have approximately 100 application packages without their dependencies and different specifications for each of them to satisfy the needs of different Meluxina segments. At the moment, there are more than 50 packages on our test cluster. And as I mentioned, all these packages are delivered with both easy build and spec. Yeah, so as we know, there are certain software stack challenges. We try to be ready for them. But yeah, so we are gonna face some additional stuff. So the software stack of every data center is big. It's complex and it's very sensitive to changes. So even sometimes when you have an innocent change, it might introduce big troubles for software packages that are installed on the system. So those changes can be, for instance, system configurations, OS level changes, for instance, drivers and libraries. So therefore, testing will be essential for us to keep most of the things working as expected. So of course, it's not possible to catch every corner case that can go wrong. So therefore, we will try to test our software stack in a consistent, maintained and automated way. The testing will be periodic and on demand depending on our changes in the software stack. And we will monitor not only functionality but also performance for that stuff we are gonna use a reframe. We will do regression tests on new versions of software installations. To better understand the needs of our customers, we also plan to monitor software usage. And with that, knowing that we can adapt our effort much quicker and easier to rapidly evolving users' needs. Yeah, so one alternative to the software stack that we provide will be possibility for users to bring their own software stack in a container. In such a way, users can control the complete software stack which is also beneficial for reproducibility. For achieving it, of course, we are gonna face some challenges that needs to be solved such as integration with MPI suits, integration with outer software stack and host device drivers for optimal performance. And of course, it's a matter of security. For the moment, we plan to use singularity as our concretization technology. Thank you very much for your attention and please tell us what you are interested in and we are gonna answer it. Okay, thank you very much, Robert and Valentin. Thank you, Kenneth. If there are any questions, please raise your hand in Zoom and we will let you unmute your microphone or ask the question in Slack and we will pass it through. I don't see any questions right now so let me maybe ask a question that you may be expecting. You're using both EasyBuild and SPAC you mentioned. I haven't seen many sites doing that. They either go one or the other usually. Can you say a little bit more about why you're using both? Is it for different use cases, for different applications? So here I can say a few, so thank you for the question. A few hints and insights on that is as follows. So some users are used to EasyBuild, some users are also used to SPAC. We plan to divert most of our effort into EasyBuild. However, there are things that we can make at least as a transition step for users of SPAC to help them bootstrap, for example, on the MPI suite, which will be highly tuned for Medoxina or some of the compilers that are highly tuned. So if somebody wants to build with SPAC, we will definitely help them by allowing them to and enabling them to use the EasyBuild modules that are already there. And that means that some of the effort in optimization for Medoxina, they will not need to redo. We do hope, of course, to see many users on Medoxina with EasyBuild, but we will not say at this point that people with SPAC will not be helped. Yes, so. Robert has a very big experience on SPAC as well. I will let him say a few words. Yes, so I mean, so both tools have their advantages and disadvantages, of course. So and I mean, it's not bad to have both tools and support packages, which are maybe to some extent better supported on one of the two also. And yeah. So as Valentin mentioned, the main distribution tool would be EasyBuild. Yeah, so EasyBuild would mainly be used for centrally installed stuff and you would help users if they prefer SPAC or if they need the flexibility that SPAC gives them to reuse what was installed with EasyBuild and then install the missing parts with SPAC in whatever way they want to. Is that sort of? That's exactly right, I can. Correct, okay. That's the plan. Yeah, that sounds very reasonable, yeah. But as I also mentioned that on Monday, and it's pretty clear in the surveys, if you look at both tools, that SPAC is more geared towards developers who need lots of flexibility and EasyBuild is maybe more geared towards people who maintain the system and the central software stack. And there's definitely a case for using one on top of the other or combining the tools. This makes a lot of sense. There's a play between the two sets. Yeah. Okay, let's see if we have any more questions. I don't see any other questions popping up.


The story you are about to hear is true. The names have been changed to protect the innocent. Fatima Cigarettes. Best of all, king-size cigarettes brings you dragnet on both radio and television.  You're assigned a homicide detail. A 38-year-old woman disappears. She leaves her sister and her four children behind. There's evidence of foul play. Your job? Find her. In Fatima, the difference is quality. Yes, in Fatima, the difference is quality. Prove it yourself today. Compare Fatima with any other king-size cigarette. One, Fatima's length filters the smoke 85 millimeters for your protection. Two, Fatima's length cools the smoke for your protection. Three, Fatima's length gives you those extra puffs, 21% longer than standard cigarette size. And in Fatima, you get an extra mild and soothing smoke, plus the added protection of Fatima quality. Definitely the best quality in its class, but the same price as the cigarette you're now smoking. Buy Fatima in the bright sunny yellow pack. Best of all, king-size cigarettes. The documented drama of an actual crime. For the next 30 minutes in cooperation with the Los Angeles Police Department, you will travel step-by-step on the side of the law through an actual case transcribed from official police files. From beginning to end, from crime to punishment, Dragnet is the story of your police force in action. It was Monday, June 3rd, it was overcast in Los Angeles. We were working the day watch out of homicide detail. My partner is Ed Jacobs, the boss is Thad Brown, chief of detectives. My name is Friday. I was on the way back from communications and it was 8.15 a.m. when I got to room 42. Homicide. Joe, what's doing? Hi, Brian. You seen Ed? He went down the hall a minute said he'd be right back. Oh, thank you. I don't see anything in the book, nothing new, huh? Not much, pretty slow. Why's your mother, Joe, heard she wasn't feeling too well? No, she's not, as a matter of fact. The doctor says it's anemia. It's gonna take a little time to get over it, I guess. Oh, sorry to hear it. I gotta do some checking down at the auto desk. If I get any calls, I'll have them switch it down there with you. Yeah, sure will, Brian. Thanks. You betcha. Oh, excuse me, Ed. Pardon me, Tom. Hi, Ed. What'd they give you? Missing report, woman. How about the mail? No, it's nothing. Not the missing report there. Yeah, it's all here. Some woman out on 64th Street, named Rose Baker, has been gone about a week. Mm-hmm. Last seen Tuesday, May 27th, 10 p.m. Who's this that made the report? Carl Sheldon? Who's he? It's her boyfriend. Miss Baker's husband died about five years ago. She's been running around quite a bit since then. Had a lot of man trouble. She disappeared before then, huh? Yeah, a half dozen times. Never been gone this long, though. Holmes took this report from Sheldon. He gathered Miss Baker's not too stable. She's known to drink quite a bit. Doesn't seem to care anything for her home or kids. I see it here. She has four children. They're living with her aunt, Mrs. Baker's sister. It's kind of a funny arrangement, isn't it? Yeah, Baker woman packed her bags and walked out of the house about a year ago. Her sister's been taking care of the kids ever since. Mother comes back for a visit once in a while. This address we've got on Mrs. Baker. It's the same address as her boyfriend, Carl Sheldon. Yeah, that's right. They both have apartments in the same building. Is this a recent picture, Miss Baker? It's supposed to be a nice-looking woman, huh? Sister's listed here as the last person who saw her. Well, how's that? Baker woman still wasn't living at home, was she? According to the sister, Mrs. Baker came over to the house to see her. The night she disappeared, sometime around eight o'clock, two of them had some business to talk over. Seems the sister had a check for $400 she got from selling some furniture. Claimed the kids had been sick. She had doctor bills to pay. You mean Mrs. Baker's sister took care of things to that extent? Apparently. Anyway, after the sister got the check for selling the furniture, Mrs. Baker wanted half the money. Sister said that's why she came to see her that night. Two of them got in the car and went out to find somebody to cash the check. You want a drink of water? No, no thanks, then. Where do you get a $400 check cash at eight o'clock at night, would you know? Sister said Mrs. Baker knew somebody who'd cash it for her. It turned out the person couldn't cash it. Sister stopped at a bar for a glass of beer. Mrs. Baker took the car and went to look up somebody else she thought could cash it. That was it. Mrs. Baker hadn't been seen since. Who was this somebody else? No idea. Sister claimed she doesn't know. Mrs. Baker didn't tell her. Sounds like Mrs. Baker wanted the whole check, wouldn't you say? That's what the sister figured when Mrs. Baker didn't come back. She finished the glass of beer left. The barn started walking home. Two blocks from the house she found her car parked. No sign of Mrs. Baker. Car keys were in the glove compartment, so it's a sister's share of the money. $200 in cash. Well, how about the firm that issued the check? They get it back canceled? Yeah, a couple of days ago. Mrs. Baker's endorsement on the back. Sounds pretty wild, doesn't it? The whole thing does. Talked to half a dozen people who saw Mrs. Baker that night. None of their stories jibed. What do you mean? Her boyfriend, Carl Shelton, he claims Mrs. Baker told him she was going out of town for a few days with a girlfriend. They check it out? Yeah. A girlfriend didn't know anything about it. Then they talked to a woman who works with Mrs. Baker. She said, yeah, the Baker woman was planning a trip. Mrs. Baker mentioned anything about it to her sister? No, sister says Mrs. Baker told her just the opposite. She said she was getting out of her apartment into a new place. She was going to spend the next couple of days moving. They checked the boyfriend, Shelton. She said if Mrs. Baker was moving, it was new to him.  It's all about it stuff. No two stories anywhere in their life. What do they figure for a motive? They got a line on anybody who might have wandered her out of the way? Big field to pick from. She fought with Carl Shelton. She fought with her sister, some of the people she worked with. She had three or four other men around town on the string too. Any one of them could have wandered her out of the way. Her relative's been checked out and all her friends, places she'd be most likely to go. I'll check. Not a trace of her. Nothing. I guess we better start moving on it and a lot of ground to cover. See if we can't straighten out some of those stories. One thing's sure. Somebody's lying. 8.35 a.m. Before we left the city hall, we checked with Sergeant Holmes and missing persons who'd taken the report on Rose Baker's disappearance. He had nothing to add to what was in the report and what he'd already told Ed. First on the interview list was the sister of the missing woman, Bernice Marin. She was employed as a saleswoman for a grocery supply firm. We called at the home where Miss Marin lived with her four nieces and nephews, but there was no answer. The next door neighbor told us that Miss Marin was working that she usually didn't get home until 4.15 or 4.30 in the afternoon. In the meantime, we figured we might as well check the next name on the list, Mrs. Baker's boyfriend, Carl Shelton. We'd already checked him through R and I and he had no record. We drove out to his address, a three-story apartment house on 64th Street. Shelton's apartment was on the main floor rear. He answered the door in his bathrobe and slippers. He told us that he was employed at one of the local oil refineries and that this particular week he was working the graveyard shift, 11 at night until 7 in the morning. He showed us back to a small kitchen at the rear of the apartment. While we questioned him, he fixed a percolator of coffee and put it on the stove. You're sure about Miss Baker's plans, are you? She never mentioned anything to you about moving out of the apartment house here? No, never. Somebody's handing you a line there. If Rosie was gonna move, she'd tell me about it. Just a minute. I gotta get that coffee. I'm about to dump it. You call us once in Java? Got a whole pot full in. No, no, thank you. How long'd you say you've known Miss Baker? About a year, a year and a half. We got along pretty good. She'd write from the start. Sure don't understand her taking off like this. Miss Baker ever talked to you much about the family? Her sister, four children? I mean, did she see them regularly? She even get along with them all right to you? I don't think I'd know that. Rosie never had much to say about them.  Keeping up a house, doing the wash, mopping, dusting, taking care of four kids. She just checked out. That's all that her sister Bernice take over. If you asked me, she never should have had a family to begin with. Rosie isn't the kind. She's a party girl. Like, it's a good time. You know what I mean? One thing I don't understand, Shelton. You said a minute ago you couldn't figure out Miss Baker's going off like this. When you filed a missing report on her, you said she was planning a trip out of town. Yeah, that's right. Well, isn't it possible she might have taken off without telling you? No, I don't think so. She'd have told me. She's planning a trip right, but she wasn't going to leave till the next night, Wednesday night. She's going to pick up this girlfriend of hers, Iris, and the two of them were going to take the bus down to Laguna for a couple of days. Well, it's our understanding this girlfriend, Iris, didn't know anything about the trip. Can you explain that? No, I guess Rosie forgot to tell her. Can't figure these women some time. Maybe she was going to phone her Wednesday morning. She knew Iris could get away almost any time. You think it's possible she might have gone down to Laguna by herself? No, that's not like Rosie. Besides, before I went in to report a missing, I called a couple of places down to Laguna where Rosie usually stops at. They hadn't seen her. Possible she might have gone some other place? No, without telling me, no. Besides, she wouldn't go alone. I know that. Sheldon, we understand Mrs. Baker was friendly with two or three other men around town. You think it's possible she might have gone someplace with one of them? Sheldon? No. No, I can't buy that. If it was eight months ago, I'd say maybe, but not now. Why not? Well, we had it out. That's all. It was all settled. She wouldn't do anything like that again. You're pretty sure about that, aren't you? Yeah, positive. I don't get it at all. She wouldn't do that to me. Taking it off, just packing up and leaving. Rosie wouldn't do that to me. Well, she's got four children. She did it to them. We questioned Carl Sheldon for another half hour, but he failed to come up with anything in the way of a definite lead. 10.40 a.m., we drove to the home of the missing woman's girlfriend, an Iris Kirby. Two things she was pretty definite about. She knew nothing about an out-of-town trip Mrs. Baker was supposed to have planned for the two of them, and secondly, she had no use for Carl Sheldon. She told us that Sheldon was her ex-boyfriend and that she had introduced him to Rose Baker and that shortly after that he dropped her. A few weeks later, Sheldon began to keep steady company with Mrs. Baker. Outside of her personal grievance against Sheldon, Iris Kirby had nothing to offer in the way of a lead to the whereabouts of her friend. 11.30 a.m., we got in the car and headed for the factory in the south end of town where Rose Baker was employed. We stopped off in the way for lunch, soup and a sandwich.  Before we left, we checked the office to see if there were any calls. Nothing. The place where Mrs. Baker worked was on Santa Fe Avenue, a one-story building covering almost half a block. They manufactured men's work clothes, shirts and overalls. We checked with a personnel office. We asked if Rose Baker had any friends that she worked with. We were told that there was a Mildred Dunn who was a fairly close friend of the Baker woman. Ed and I waited in the office while they sent down to the plant for Mildred Dunn. Ms. Dunn? That's right. Police officers, my name's Jacob. This is my partner, Sergeant Friday. How do you do? I'd like to ask you a few questions about Rose Baker, Mrs. Dunn. I understand you're a pretty close friend of hers. Yes, that's right. I've known Rose ever since she came here. She worked on the machine next to me. She come home yet? No, not yet. You remember Ms. Baker saying anything to you about taking a trip, Ms. Dunn? I mean, just before she disappeared? Yes, she did. She'd been looking forward to it. That's probably where she is.  Well, we don't know, ma'am. Did she mention anything definite about the trip to you, where she was going, when she was leaving? Well, I think she was going to Laguna Beach. It's hard to tell. She's always kidding around, Rose is. Once she said she was going to fly to Switzerland for a vacation, Sam Ritz. She's always kidding around like that. Oh, that's so? Like once when she had a date with Fred. She said she was going to the pump room in Chicago. You know, just being funny. I see. Who is this Fred, Mrs. Dunn? Fell in the shipping department, Fred Lyons. Nice fellow. He and Mrs. Baker see much of each other? They used to, yes, quite a bit. I don't know if they were serious about each other. I thought they were till the last month or so. Maybe they had a tiff or something. Maybe Rose got tired of him. I don't know. But you did think the two of them were serious at one time? Oh, yes. It wasn't more than a month ago. And all of a sudden, they weren't sweet on each other. At least Rose wasn't about him. She told me that. Well, I guess we better check on that, ma'am. Is this Fred Lyons working today, do you know, ma'am? Oh, no. He quit last Tuesday. 1.15 p.m., we finished questioning Mildred Dunn, and we went back to the personnel office to get Fred Lyons' description and the last known address. We checked out the address, but Lyons had moved out the previous Tuesday and left no forwarding address. We questioned the landlady, looked over his rooms, checked through the neighborhood, and talked to everybody he knew. We found nothing to indicate that Lyons had anything directly to do with Rose Baker's disappearance. But we did find out that he knew Mrs. Baker and that he thought quite a bit of her. We went back to the office, got out of broadcast and an APB on Lyons. Want to check the book, Joe? See if we got any late calls, eh? Yeah, sure. I'll get it. Right. Armistice, Jacobs. That's right. Mm-hmm. Are they sure? What was that? All right, thank you. Got something. Yeah? Hollywood division. Woman's purse found in the vacant lot out there. High school kid found it. A lot of identification inside. Yeah. Rose Baker. 3.15 p.m., the purse was brought downtown to the crime lab for detailed examination. Brian and Barrett from Homicide went out to interview the boy who found the purse and to check the neighborhood where it was discovered. Meantime, Ed and I drove out to talk to the missing woman's sister, 36 years old, Bernice Marin. She and her sister's four children lived in a five-room stucco house just off Exposition Boulevard. We got there shortly after Ms. Marin returned home from her job. Her two older nephews were out in front cutting the lawn. She showed us into a neatly kept living room where we interviewed her. She was a plain-looking woman, brown hair, gray eyes. She showed little concern about her sister's disappearance. I gave up trying to keep track of her a long time ago, Sergeant. I haven't any idea where she's gone. I used to worry about her. I don't anymore. How about that purse of hers that was found this afternoon, Ms. Marin? Wouldn't you say that makes it a little unusual this time? No, I don't think so. She loses things all the time. I don't know what she does when she goes off in those things. I don't want to know. She gets drunk and does a lot of fooling around, I suppose. She's lost two or three purses the same way. What about last Tuesday, the night she disappeared? You notice if she'd been drinking then? Yeah. I got the idea. She'd had a couple of high balls before she came over. She wasn't drunk, but she wasn't feeling any pain. I'll say, would you excuse me? I want to yell at the kids out there. Yes, ma'am. Frank! Frank, that's enough of that playing around out there. Let's get started pushing that lawnmower, huh? Okay, just try not to lose system. Almost half done now. You better hurry it up. You still got the backyard to do, remember? Yeah, okay. Tell me a good thing that came out of that married sergeant. Those kids out there. Yes, ma'am. There's two more besides Frank and Bobby. The girls, my nieces. One's nine, one's seven. Marvelous kids. Girls are just as pretty as pictures. I'm glad I have a chance to take care of them. I guess I just like kids. I can understand it when people don't appreciate them. I don't have a family of my own. Oh, I see. Miss Marin, when you were with your sister last Tuesday night, you say she didn't mention anything at all about taking that trip out of town? No, just the opposite. Like I told you. She said she was moving out of her apartment into a new place. That's why she needed the money. Well, what's the story about this money your sister came to pick up, Miss Marin? I don't think I quite got that clear. Well, we had this baby grand piano that my mother gave Rose and me just before she died. Kids have been sick the last couple of months, one thing and another. I needed a little money to catch up on some doctor bills, so I sold the piano. I needed to do it, but the bills had to be paid. Well, Rose found out about it somehow, and she wanted half the money I got for the piano. She wanted the money for herself. Can you imagine that? She wasn't even willing to pay for her own kids' doctor bills. It'd be different if I was charging her to take care of the kids. I just do it because I like them. Well, anyway, she found out about it, and I had to split the check with her. The whole thing was for $400. I understand your sister got the check cashed that night, that correct? Yeah, that's right. It was eight o'clock at night, but Rose said she knew somebody who'd cash it. She wanted the money that night. We'd save an argument. We got in the car and went to see this friend of hers, some bartender. He couldn't cash the thing, so Rose took the car and went out to look up another friend she thought would cash it. I didn't want to go chasing all over town with her, so I stayed at this bar and had a beer. And that's the last time you saw your sister, isn't it? Yes, I waited a couple of hours, and then I walked home. Two blocks from the house, I saw my car code up the curb, right on Exposition Boulevard. Car keys were in the glove compartment. $200 in cash, right under him. No sign of Rose, though. What time was it when he got back to the house? You remember? It was after 11. Close to 11.30, I think. I went right to bed. And since that time, you've had no indication where your sister might have gone. No phone calls, no letters, no word from one of her friends who might have seen her. No, not a thing. She's in trouble. You can understand why. She's been coming for a long time. Last five years, going downhill all the time. She's no good, Sergeant. I don't know how it happened. She's just no good at all. Thank you very much, Miss Marin. Thank you, ma'am. Oh, not at all. No trouble. I guess I'd better get dinner started for the kids. Well, if you hear anything about your sister, we'd appreciate it if you'd give us a call. Yes, all right. It's going to be the same old story. Same thing all over again. You can bet on it. Ma'am. She'll come back when the money's gone. 5.15 p.m., Ed and I drove back downtown and went directly to the crime lab. The missing woman's purse, which had been found in the vacant lot out in Hollywood, had been examined thoroughly. They'd found nothing that had provided us with a new lead. We checked communications, but there was still no answer to the APB. We'd gotten out on Fred Lyons, the man who'd worked with Rose Baker and who'd dropped from site the same day she did. 5.30 p.m., we got back to the squad room. Hiya. Hi, Brian. You just get back? Yeah. You get the word? No, what's that? Mrs. Baker, they just found her body. You are listening to Dragnet, authentic stories of your police force in action. Comparison proves Fatima quality. Prove Fatima quality yourself today. Compare Fatima with any other king-sized cigarette. 1. Fatima's length filters the smoke 85 mm for your protection. 2. Fatima's length cools the smoke for your protection. 3. Fatima's length gives you those extra puffs, 21% longer than standard cigarette size. And in Fatima, you get an extra mild and soothing smoke plus the added protection of Fatima quality. Friends, to show our confidence in Fatima, we make this money-back guarantee. Buy a pack of Fatimas. Enjoy Fatima quality, extra mildness and superbly blended tobaccos. If you're not convinced Fatima is better than the king-sized cigarette you're now smoking, just return the pack and the unsmoked Fatimas by August 1st, 1952 for your money-back plus postage. Fatima, box 37, New York 1. Remember, because of its quality, its extra mildness, its better flavor and aroma, more smokers now insist on Fatima than ever before. Insist on the best. Fatima. Extra mild and soothing. Plus the added protection of Fatima quality. Smoke Fatima. Best of all, king-sized cigarettes. June 3rd, Monday, 6 p.m. The body of 38-year-old Rose Baker had been discovered in the Hollywood Hills area. Approximately 3 fourths of a mile from the intersection of Mulholland Drive and Oak Norl Terrace, a dirt road branched off to the left of Mulholland and wound about 300 yards down the hill to a dead-end stop. Just below the guardrail, which circled the edge of the road, there were two eucalyptus trees. They overlooked a deep ravine covered with scrub oak and patches of laurel. Halfway down one slope of the ravine, they found the body of the missing woman. There were two bullet holes in the left side of the skull. There was another one at the base of the throat. In their clenched right hand, there was a 50-cent piece. The immediate area surrounding the body had been roped off, and Lieutenant Lee Jones and the crime lab crew were making their preliminary investigation. There was no sign of the murder weapon. The coroner arrived, and when the preliminary investigation was completed, the body was taken downtown to the county morgue. All clothing and personal effects were removed from the body and sent to the crime lab for detailed examination. Rose Baker's sister, Bernice Merron, was brought to the county morgue and identified the body. A few minutes after 10 o'clock that night, Ed and I got back to the office. I got it. Homicide Friday. Is this Sergeant Friday? Yes, sir, that's right. This is Carl Shelton, Sergeant. You were out to talk to me this morning. You remember? Oh, yeah, Shelton. I heard about Rosie just a couple minutes ago. I got to talk to you, Sergeant. There's something I got to tell you. Was that so? Do you want to tell me now? I don't want to tell you on the phone. I'll drive in to see you. I'll leave right now. Well, yeah, all right. You mind telling me what it's about? Yeah, I know who killed Rosie. 11.08 p.m., Carl Shelton arrived at the office. Ed and I took him down the hall to the interrogation room where he gave us his story. He told us, first of all, that he was well acquainted with most of the regular customers at the tavern where Rose Baker and her sister had first stopped to cash the $400 check. He told us one of these people, a Leroy Hansen, had contacted him after he read in the morning paper about Mrs. Baker's murder. I've known Leroy at least four or five years. He used to work with him. He wouldn't lie to me. And where did this fellow tell you, Shelton? That's Leroy Hansen. He said he got to the bar a little after midnight. He had to be at least that, because Leroy doesn't get off work until 11.30. He said he saw Rosie sitting in a car park to couple doors down from the bar. There was a woman in the car with her. He described her just like Rosie's sister. They were having a beef. Does this friend of yours hear what Mrs. Baker and this woman were talking about? No, but he's smart enough to know a big argument when he sees one. He says they were really going to it. Is he sure about the time? He's got to be. Leroy works at a sheet metal plant south of town. He gets off at 11.30. Takes him more than a half hour to get in. Why should he lie about it? He wasn't even going to mention it until he found out she was dead. This woman he says Mrs. Baker was with, she fits her sister's description that close? Exactly. And there was a guy with Leroy. He'll back it up.  Well, she is, if you can prove your story. Here's the phone. You ask Leroy. 11.22 p.m. We put in calls to both of the men who were supposed to have seen Rose Baker and her sister Bernice sitting in a parked car outside the tavern six nights before. Both of them corroborated Carl Shelton's story down to the last detail. They were especially certain about the time. Bernice Marin told us that on the night her sister Rose disappeared, she hadn't seen her after 9.15 p.m. and that she had walked home and was in bed by 11.30. Both Leroy Hanson and his friend told us that they had seen Rose Baker and a woman answering her sister's description sitting together in a car parked outside the tavern. They were both certain at the time that it was well past midnight. We made a check on Leroy Hanson and his friend. As far as we were able to find out, there was no logical reason why they should lie about what they told us. Ed and I got in the car and drove out to the home of Bernice Marin just off Exposition Boulevard. It was 20 minutes past midnight. We rang the front doorbell and got her out of bed. Oh, officers. And who it was. Come in. Thank you, ma'am. Oh, you have to wait long before I answered. I sleep pretty sound. Fred will have to ask you to get dressed, Miss Marin. I'd like to talk to you down time. Why? What's the matter? Well, some more questions we have to ask you, ma'am. A few more things we have to clear up about your sister. It's pretty important. Well, I've told you everything I know. I don't like to go out and leave the kids alone at night. What is it you want to ask me about? Well, you told us the last time you saw your sister was about 9.15 last Tuesday night, Miss Marin. Yes, that's right. We've got a couple of people who claim they saw you with your sister after midnight Tuesday. You were sitting with her in your car parked outside a tavern. You're having an argument with her. At least two people saw you and they'll swear to that. No, that couldn't be right. They claim it is? They say it was after midnight and they saw me with Rose. Yes, ma'am. That's what they say. And you believe it? You believe it was me? Yes, ma'am. We do. You think I killed Rose? Is that it? Yes, ma'am. We think so. How about it, Miss Marin? It'll take me a minute to get my clothes on. I want to talk to the oldest boy, man, if you Frank. Would it be all right? I'll have to go along with you. All right. This way down the hall. All right. In here. I don't want to wake the other kids if I can help. All right. Frank, wake up, Frank. Frankie. What do you want happening?  I'm going to have to go down town tonight. I'm leaving now. In case I'm not here when you and the kids get up, I want you to take care of everything, all right, honey? Yeah, okay. What do you have to go down town for? Well, it's something about your mother, Frank. It might take a little time. You see, the girls get off to school on time in the morning, won't you? Bobby too. The sandwiches are all made. They're in the ice box. All you have to do is put them in a paper sack, all right? Yeah, okay. Why do you have to go now? Can't you wait until tomorrow? No, I'm afraid not, honey. You take care of everything, huh? Make sure all the doors are locked. And don't forget to feed the dog. No, I won't forget. What's the matter? Is there anything wrong? No, of course not. Now, if something happens, so I can't get back tomorrow, I'll call you on the phone, all right? Yeah, okay. You'll be sure and call, huh? I'll call you, honey.  It'll be all right. You get some sleep. Good night, Frankie. Yeah, okay. Good night. I'm sorry to keep you waiting. I had to tell Frank what to do. The kids wouldn't understand. I mean, if they woke up and didn't find me here. Yes, ma'am. What'd you do with the murder gun, Miss Marion? Out in the garage, I'll show you. I had her four kids to raise. It's not easy. You know what it cost to feed them, put clothes on their back? It's not the kids I minded. They're wonderful. I love every one of them. I'm glad to get the chance to raise them. I never married myself, never had any of my own. It hasn't been easy at all, working all day, coming home and cooking for them, doing the wash, trying to keep the house clean. Rose never gave me a dime to pay a bill for her own kids, too. She gave us nothing and she tried to take everything, tried to bleed me for my last dollar. She cashed the check that night and said she was going to keep all the money. I couldn't stand anymore. We argued and I killed her. Yeah, well, I'm sorry, ma'am. We'll have to go. Yes, all right. What'll I do, Sergeant? What'll I say? I advise you to tell the truth. You'll get a fair trial. I know that. It's not what I mean. What do you mean? Inside there. What am I going to say? How'll I explain it? Ma'am. The kids.  The story you have just heard was true. The names were changed to protect the innocent. On October 3rd, trial was held in Superior Court, Department 92, City and County of Los Angeles, State of California. In a moment, the results of that trial. Now, here is our star, Jack Webb. Thank you, George Veneman. Friends, I may get a habit to carry two packs of Fatimas around with me. One's for my smoking and the second one's for smokers I see with other king-sized cigarettes. All I have to say is, here, compare Fatima. I know they're going to be sold on Fatimas the next time we meet. How about comparing Fatima yourself? You'll find Fatima's length filters the smoke, 85 millimeters. Cools the smoke. All for your protection. You get those extra puffs because Fatima is 21% longer than standard cigarette size. And Fatima gives you an extra mild and soothing smoke, plus the added protection of Fatima quality. Prove it today. Bye, Fatima. When their Aunt Bernice Alberta Marin was apprehended on suspicion of 187 PC, the four Baker children were taken into protective custody by juvenile authorities. Bernice Marin was indicted for murder and entered a plea of self-defense. She claimed that at the time of the murder, her sister attacked her with a knife, while they argued over the division of the $400 check. Bernice Marin was tried in Superior Court by a jury composed of nine men and three women. She was found not guilty. You have just heard Dragnet, a series of authentic cases from official files. Technical advice comes from the Office of Chief of Police, W.H. Parker, Los Angeles Police Department. Technical Advisors, Captain Jack Donahoe, Sergeant Marty Wynn, Sergeant Vance Brasher. Heard tonight were Barney Phillips, Virginia Greg, Vic Perrin. Script by Jim Moser. Music by Walter Schumann. Hal Gibney speaking. Fatima cigarettes. Best of all, king-size cigarettes has brought you Dragnet. Transcribed from Los Angeles. Next, it's Counter Spy on NBC.


Madam President, ladies, gentlemen, and colleagues, it is an honor and a great pleasure to present to you Punzok Wangyo. Punzok Wangyo is the chairman of the Tibet Foundation, a U.K. charity that has made a significant contribution towards the education, healthcare, material well-being, and cultural vibrancy of Tibetan communities across Asia. Mr. Wangyo has a remarkable biography during the entire course of which he has served his country and its people with tireless perspicacity. Born in Tibet in 1944, Punzok became a monk and studied Buddhism during his youth. At the age of 16, he became caught up in the widespread rebellion against Tibet's annexation to China, and in 1959 he escaped Tibet for India via an arduous overland journey. He graduated from Delhi and Jawaharlal universities with an MA and M. Phil in politics and international relations, after which he became the assistant director of the Tibetan Library of Works and Archives in Dharmsala. In 1973 Punzok Wangyo came to London where he earned an M. Phil in 1976 at SOAS under the supervision of Professor David L. Snellgrove. Following the reforms in China under Deng Xiaoping, in 1980 Punzok Wangyo returned to Tibet as a member of a pivotal fact-finding mission sent at the request of the 14th Dalai Lama. The following year he was appointed the U.K. representative of the Dalai Lama establishing the Office of Tibet. However, feeling that the political controversies surrounding the status of the PRC's annexation of Tibet were stymying his efforts to simultaneously promote the welfare of the Tibetan people and the preservation of their cultural heritage, Punzok Wangyo resigned from involvement in politics to found the Tibet Foundation in 1985. As chairman of the Tibet Foundation, Punzok Wangyo is probably the most effective, energetic and beneficial person working in the charity sector on Tibet-related issues. For nearly 30 years, the Tibet Foundation has worked in the areas of education, healthcare, economic development, and cultural revitalization. The Foundation has funded the education of Tibetans both within the PRC and abroad, supported the creation of small businesses, provided disaster relief as well as medical training and treatment. In addition to these humanitarian efforts, the Foundation has brought dance and music troops from Tibet, India, and Mongolia to the U.K., promoted the preservation of traditional Tibetan architecture, and funded and overseen the cataloging of all Tibetan Buddhist paintings in Mongolian collections, has also sponsored hundreds of Mongolian students to study Tibetan Buddhism in monasteries in India. In recognition of these accomplishments, in 2009 Punzok Wangyo received the Friendship Medal from the President of Mongolia. All of the Tibet Foundation's efforts are carried out with the explicit blessing of its patron, the Dalai Lama, and with the full consent and participation of relevant governmental authorities, including those of the PRC. In the atmosphere of increased tensions following the 2008 Tibetan uprising, the Tibet Foundation is one of very few charities to operate with its activities uncartailed. This rare circumstance is credible to the tact and diplomacy of Punzok Wangyo and the years of effort he has invested on the ground. Madam President, it is my privilege now to present Punzok Wangyo for the award of an honorary fellowship of the school and to invite him to address this assembly. Madam President, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, I am deeply honored that the school should grant me this award, and it is with considerable delight and a profound gratitude that I receive it. I believe this is in recognition of my humble contribution towards the welfare of the Tibetan people and the preservation of their culture. And such recognition reflects the communal nature of academia and charitable work rather than one single individual. I would like to pay tribute to all those who have inspired and supported me for many years to be able to work for the benefit of those needing the help most. In particular, I would like to take this opportunity to pay special tribute to Mr. Hu Richardson and Professor Snegrove who guided me through my studies at SOAS. Mr. Patrick Gaffney, who helped me to establish the BED Foundation and other trustees, staff members and sponsors who have always been very supportive of my work. Finally, I would like to thank my wife Riga for unshakable support to me. With their cooperation and the dedication Tibetan...without their cooperation and dedication, the BED Foundation could not have achieved what it has in making a real difference to the life of so many people. For a very long time now, SOAS has played a symbolic role as a global platform seeking to represent and create dialogue across culture and pursuing the fair and accurate representation of some of the most marginalized and precious communities on earth. Notably, the institution had a long and engaging discourse with Tibetans and it is with great honor that I feel recognized as part of its journey. Not only can we look back at the colorful and gracious history at the university, but also to its future as a key player in fostering cross-cultural understanding, tolerance and awareness. I would like to make a special mention here of Professor Tadev Skorovsky, Mr. Philip Danwood and Dr. Nathan Hill who have taken special active interest in promoting Tibetan studies at SOAS over many years. In conclusion, I pay homage to His Holiness Dalai Lama for his blessing and express my heartfelt gratitude to all those who have given full cooperation and generous support to the work of the foundation. It is my sincere hope that with this dialogue, learning and understanding, we can continue into the future and foster knowledge, education for generations to come. Madam President, thank you once again for honoring me with this award. Thank you.