To start this video off, let me start by asking you a very serious question. What is the point? What is the value of watching all of this YouTube drama if you're not taking a look at it and seeing what you can take from it to improve your own life? What is up everybody? This is Chris from the Rewired Soul where we talk about the problem but focus on the solution. And if you're new to my channel, sometimes what I do is take a look at the drama going on in the YouTube community and try to turn this mess into a message that may help us improve our own lives. So if you're into that stuff, make sure you subscribe and ring that notification bell. So yeah, I have just been getting flooded with videos and recommendations and all sorts of stuff because I've made some videos on James Charles and the YouTube algorithm knows what it's doing and there's some things going on with James and his quote unquote ex-boyfriend. I use quotes because I wouldn't consider that. If you want to know the full details of what's going on with those two and why it's so public, feel free to go check out some other channels and some videos on it and a bunch of text messages just got released and yeah, like I'm going to come back to this at the end but remember yesterday when I was like, so you want to be a YouTuber? Now what I'll say is, so you think you want to date a YouTuber or a celebrity? No man, no. So anyways, looking at this situation between these two and how it's very public, like let's see what we can take from this and learn from our own relationship. So I'm just going to touch on both sides of the story to give you some context but I can relate to both Gage as well as James in this situation. And I know a lot of you can too. A lot of you have struggled with relationships. Like we need to take a look at this. Like I am somebody who's been in a ton, a ton of messed up relationships before I found my beautiful girlfriend Tristan. We've been together for over two years now. But I made a lot of mistakes and I never understood why. And that's why I want to talk about this. I want you to take a look at this because so many of us are just in this autopilot just getting into bad situation after bad situation after bad situation and never understanding why it's happening. So let's talk about Gage first. So Gage is a young man. I believe he's like an Instagram model or something like that. He had a somewhat relationship with James Charles. He identifies as a straight male but it turns out he is more bi-curious. That's cool. That's cool. So from Gage's point of view, like I want to say this too.  You've both been wronged, right? Like that's just how it is. That's how our brain works. You know, we try to feel justified and we want people to understand our point of view and how we were wronged and all that kind of stuff. At the end of the day and many, many, many relationships aside from like when you get cheated on for like no real, like, no, there's not even like a really good reason. Like don't cheat. Don't cheat. Break up with the person. Go do your thing. That's the way to do it, okay? But anyways, like when you're cheated on and stuff, I can't always say or none of us can always say that, you know, both people were in the wrong. But in many relationships, like we are so blinded by the fact that we were doing something wrong as well. So in Gage's situation, he expressed to James where he feels, he feels that he expressed to James that he did not have those serious feelings, but he wanted to test it out. And in my opinion, there was so much that was not fair to James in that situation. And we need to look at ourselves with that. There's something called self-seeking, right? Self-seeking is doing something, expecting something in return, okay? And I know people hate when I say this, but we as human beings are selfish and self-centered by nature. It is our default. It is the way our brain works.  We are always trying to think about how we can benefit from a situation. And many times, many times, not all the time, but many times, we neglect to understand how it will affect the other person. And it takes a lot of work to get out of that mindset, right? Like this is something I've been working on for years and it's still a place where I sometimes trip up. But how often have we done the same thing where, you know, we are testing the waters of a relationship, we're testing things out. And how selfish is it of us to not think about how the other person will be affected by it? Like this is something that I used to do like for a long time in my single days. I was not a great dude. I was not a great dude at all. I would know. I would know for a fact that a woman had, you know, great, big feelings for me, liked me wanting to date and all these other things. And for me, I was like, okay, I'll just go with the flow and just kind of, you know, just see where things go, right? So I was allowing them to keep feeling those ways. And here's the thing, even after having that conversation, like later on, like, what did I still do? What did we still do to keep toying with their emotions? Like a lot of us have had our emotions played with. So we need to have empathy and think about how we're playing with another person's emotions as well, right? I didn't start getting better at relationships until I got to a place where I fully said upfront what my motives, what my intentions were, where I was at personally, mentally, emotionally, all those things. I said, listen, I am not ready to date. I am not ready to date anybody, okay? Like I had just got sober, you know, I was a single father and all these things. So I would have to tell a woman upfront, I am not ready to date. And by the way, for all of you out there, this is before you sleep with them. That's a major note. Before you sleep with them.   Don't do it. Okay?  And it was my responsibility. It's my responsibility. It's your responsibility to take a look at that situation and saying, oh, no, I'm stringing them along and this is not fair. A great example is there was one woman way back way back in the day. This was years ago where I said this to them and we hung out a few times and then like a few times within a week or two. And next thing you know, they're inviting me to like meet their family and all these other things. And I had to say, you know what? Sorry, I got to end whatever this relationship is because I saw that they were investing a lot more than I was willing to give. So even though they agreed to the terms of that relationship before him, I saw that it was not going to end well for the other person. So I backed away. So in this context of Gage and James Charles, he should have never gone to Coachella. Never ever ever gone to Coachella. Like knowing how James felt about him, he should have just not done that. Now from James point of view, like reading those text messages. Again, let's go back to self seeking. I mentioned this when I was talking about, you know, the lessons we can learn from the Tana situation with Brad. This is something that happens all the time. We give, give, give, give, give, give, give, right? We give, give, give, give, give. All these things we give to the other person, but it comes attached with an expectation and that is not fair. That is not fair to another person because we're not being selfless. Our brain likes to tell us that we're being selfless. We're being kind. We're being generous, but it came attached with expectations. And you can see that from what James was saying, but how often do we do that? Like when we are like a great example is if any of you have been stuck in the front zone, all the things you did for that other person, all the nice things you did, all the conversations you did, you had with them, how you were there for them emotionally, maybe you took them out, maybe you bought themself or whatever it is. Like we have to realize the other person does not owe you squat. And I want you all to remember that as well. Like you don't owe anybody squat. If somebody else makes a decision to invest in you, whether it's financially or emotionally or anything like that, that is not your fault. Now, if you continue to string them along, that is your fault. But if somebody just shows up and starts giving you things and everything like that, you really need to like not hold any guilt over that because what we see, what we see is that people like James or like you and I, we try to hold that over another person's head. And that is just not fair. That is not how healthy relationships work. That's not how they work at all. I am teaching this to my son and he's only 10 years old. My son is only 10 years old. Obviously he's not like a baller like James Charles. But Fortnite has a new gifting system. All right. My son saved up a lot of money for Christmas and his birthday is right after which kills me financially. But anyways, a lot of money plays Fortnite. They have a new gifting system and he's constantly giving his friends Fortnite skins and everything like that. And it's great. I don't want to deter my son from being a giving person, but I've had multiple conversations with him just to get ahead of it. And I said, listen, Dylan, if you're going to give things to other people, do not expect anything returned. Okay.  Oh, you need to buy me a Fortnite skin because I got you one. Because that's not how relationships work. This kind of tick for tat thing. When we are keeping a scorecard on other people, that is a way that we can tell that we are being self seeking and we are not being truly altruistic. So like if you want to give, go ahead and give, but do not attach expectations about how that other person needs to treat you because of it. All right. Like when I was working in the addiction treatment center, I gave and I gave and I gave and I gave and I poured my heart and soul into the groups that I did into the one on one talks. I was having with people and everything like that, but I could not attach an expectation to that. I just did my best. I gave freely of myself in the context of, you know, working at an addiction treatment center, but I did those things without expecting anything in return. And that has helped my mental state immensely. All right. The last thing I want to talk about is this whole clout thing. Oh my God. Clout, clout, clout. This is just the bane of my existence. All right. Like people are using this as currency and it's just so messed up. Like this can be a whole different video in and of itself, but like everybody is so paranoid. Nobody trusts anybody. You can't even have conversations or friendships with people without wondering what are they trying to get from me? What are they trying to get from me? And this came up multiple times between James and Gage and everything like that. But just think about that. Think about that for a second. Like we've gotten to a point where when people are even nice to you, we question them, right? Like we question them. Like what do you want from me? What are you trying to get from me? You know what I mean? And the reality, the sad reality is that a lot of people are trying to get something from us. You know? So like the solution to this is like building trust with people and like what I found is just my suggestion. Like what I found is not giving too much, not giving too much to kind of test the waters and everything like that. As I've grown as a YouTuber, I've had plenty of people like reach out to me. Hey, can you shout me out? Hey, I see you do guest videos with smaller creators. Can I do a guest video and all these other things? So like I try, but like I really look at the person to try to develop some kind of, you know, relationship and have conversations to see what their motives are. You know what I mean? But hey, at the end of the day, some people might use me and I don't really care because again, I'm not attaching expectations to those things anymore. And that's the thing. If you are afraid of being used, just remember this. Nobody can use you if you don't expect anything from them. Just think about that for a second. And it is way easier said than done. But just think about that. Whenever you get upset, whenever you get upset at another person, all right, try to think of what your expectations of that person were and how they screwed you because our expectations give us personal responsibility and give us accountability, all right. But anyways, again, like look at this whole situation. Like a lot of people want to date like people who are rich and famous and everything like that. Like imagine, imagine this. Imagine you're very private, you're very personal conversations, getting blasted to tens of thousands of people. Like why do you think I don't break up with Tristan? That was a joke, calm down, calm down, all right. But I'll end on that light note. Let me know your thoughts on this subject down below. Do you ever struggle with this?  Or have you been somebody who has given a lot to other people and then expected something in return? And how is that working out?  Let's have a conversation down in the comments below, all right. But anyways, that's all I got for this video. If you liked this video, please give it a thumbs up. If you're new, make sure you subscribe and ring that notification bell because I make a ton of videos. And a huge, huge thank you to everybody supporting the channel over on Patreon. You are all amazing and all of you beautiful patrons out there I am recording the April Q&A and it will be up over on Patreon very soon, all right. Thanks again so, so much for watching. I'll see you next time.


Hi, it's Jim. Hey, hello. How are you? I'm good. Looks like we're the only ones here today. Yes, I thought Erica had scheduled somebody on the agenda. Let me just quickly check. I seen the meeting notes that there was one item and then the person wrote that he's unable to attend so. Okay. And I don't have anything. All right. Yeah. So I think we can just reschedule then and wait on the, I didn't have anything to report either just for quick introductions. I don't know if you have met before in this meeting or in other forums. I'm Jim Baguardia from Nermata. Cool. I'm a Itai Shokuri. I work for Racco Security in the open source team. I actually have been listening to the policy walking group meetings for a while now. Okay. And I like ask some of my teammates, Liz and Daniel to join and I know that they have also presented here before. Yes. I'm following your work. I like it. And I just wanted to keep an eye on the progress. Got it. Okay. Yeah, so I think, you know, Liz and Daniel had presented a while back. I think on, was it Star Star Starboard? Okay, right. And we had talked about, you know, potentially leveraging the policy report as part of that. We're also very interested in, you know, there is some activity on taking, you know, output from like different scanners like Kubbench, etc. Perhaps even trivia and, you know, kind of converting it to policy reports. So it would be interesting to discuss that in more detail and see what would be the best approach, whether it's through Starboard or whether it's through some other adapter or other approach that we write. Yeah. So I think that right now the policy, this working group is working on just the spec for how the reports can look like, right? It's not any tooling related to the scanning itself, right? Am I getting it right? Exactly right. It's just a spec for the output. And the report is meant to be almost in some, a summary of all, you know, and that could be of course multiple instances of reports at different scopes but the idea is to have a summary for the cluster admin or the operators to see outputs from different tools. Yeah, so I think that maybe in the context of Starboard, maybe Starboard can offer, right now Starboard outputs the report in its own format that is more tailored to the actual tool that is being scanned. So for example, for a trivia report we look different from a Polaris report. But I mean I think that the policy spec that you're working on is very interesting. So maybe we can add another option. And by the way, I'm not speaking on behalf of Aqua or anything, I'm just brainstorming here on cloud. We can maybe add another option that people can choose to get the report as a, is there a name for the spec? I don't know. It's just policy report. Yeah, as this thing. And this is one option. The other one is going through an adapter, I don't know. I think we can, it's a good idea, we can consider it. This is why I'm trying to join these calls to see when is a good point to start looking at that seriously. Okay, sounds good. I see Jaya is on to, hi Jaya, how are you? I think Jaya is on mute. Hi Jim. I don't know if you're picturing your name. Is it Itte? It's Itte, yeah. Itte, Itte. Yeah, Itte is from Aqua Security. He works with Liz and Daniel who had presented before.  Yeah, in fact that that would be a good question, right, which is, is this the first time you're looking at the policy report proposal and is this something that will get integrated with Kubbench? It's not the first time, but I am looking for the right opportunity to look at it. I don't know, like, what's the plan to make this proposal something more official or is there anything, any milestone that we should be looking forward to? Yeah, so there is, you know, I think we have to try it out and it kind of, it's interesting, right, because I don't think there's any formal process to make it official. The idea would be if we show adoption and if we show how this is used in different tools, then we can go back to maybe Six Security and say, God, present this to them and see if we can get this promoted to its own repo out of this prototype's repo, right. So that would be kind of, I guess it's not really any official graduation. So this is not going to be, there's no formal way to make this part of Kubernetes per se, right, because it's a custom resource and we wanted it to be a custom resource. So, but what we can do is if this goes under in the Six, and if there's adoption of it, we can propose it either as a CNCF Sandbox project, which again, I don't know if it makes sense to do that, or just move it at least into its own repository with its own name space, where we maintain it, right, to say this is a policy report everybody can use. So I think that would be it right there's no other, there's no other sort of milestone or anything we're looking for and even of course from the in the current repo it's completely usable. So we have started using this for Kiverno, which is a policy engine project that I'm involved with from Nirmata. We also are using this for, you know, in the multi-tenancy working group for multi-tenancy reporting. So there's a, there's a tool called multi-tenancy benchmarks, which can scan a namespace and, you know, kind of recommend best practices for multi-tenancy. So we're using the same report format for that. So those are two examples and I know JS team is also, you know, kind of looking at integrating into a few things that Red Hat in Rackam and that product, right, Jay? Yes. Good to know. I think we're definitely, it's definitely interesting and we are going to look at it, how we are going to integrate with it. I can say if it's like right now or maybe next month or something, but definitely something that on our radar. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. And I think we should kind of, you know, the idea, the reason why we went down this path, is we are looking for what's the, you know, almost like the simplest thing we could standardize across policy tools, right? And I think there are more, there are other ideas we had discussed, but we decided to focus on this as the first, you know, kind of building block. And then we can go back and, so by the way, I don't know if all of you have been following like OPA is graduating or they've submitted a proposal for graduation. So there's some good discussions also over there on that thread for, you know, the pros and cons and the tradeoffs of using something like OPA and Rego versus other policy tools. And I think, you know, I'll follow up with those few folks who commented and invite them to come to our group and discuss, you know, other ideas for standardization, right? Because I think it's clear there'll be several tools doing different functions. So I think we probably, one of the things we can do is even, and I know Starboard has some classification of tools already, right? So perhaps we can use that framework or we can extend that or refine that as needed to say, hey, here are the types of different tools, whether it's image scanning to admission controls and configuration scanning or runtime, you know, runtime kind of security type of tools. So those are the categories and then these are some examples of tools which fall into each. And of course CICD like so out of cluster tools, right? So tools which can scan and manage YAMLs and report outside of a cluster itself. Yeah. Makes sense. So maybe go ahead, Jay. Yeah. So one thing is I wanted to just say here that RACM is integrated with the Gatekeeper OPA, right? So we are working on that. And the other thing is I posted a link in the chat for Oskal. One of the things I'm also trying to understand is how, what would be the integration between what Oskal, the work NIST is doing with the Pulse Report proposal? I don't know that you guys are, have you looked into Oskal? I have not. I'm not familiar with this. Yeah. Hi, this is Robert. I was able to join late, apologies. Hey Robert. Yeah. So I have looked at Oskal and I'm helping a couple of projects look at it. So I think the answer to your question is, you know, certainly that, I mean, Oskal is a definition of controls. So if you look at policy, policy is either a statement of controls or itself a control, as I see it, and kind of the conceptual model. So I think, and I'm not an Oskal expert. So if I misstate the model, please feel free to jump in and correct, but I think that there are definitions within the Oskal model for policy.  It doesn't have to be hardware. It could be a policy artifact. And so I guess the goal would be to map policy as we think of it in this workgroup as, you know, executable policy, machine executable policy. Policy would be itself an asset in Oskal, a component in Oskal, and the findings in the CR API, for example, would map to some control definition, both the originating policy and then also the contextual goal of that control, if that makes sense. So a control mapping to policy, a policy mapping to control. So that's how I would envision the interaction between policy and the CR output versus Oskal. Yeah, I think that makes sense, Robert. And what I was thinking was if the policy report schema includes at least some of the elements of Oskal, then management tool that is consuming the various policy reports can provide a view from a particular standard perspective, right, whether it is in the state in 153 or some of the other standards, is where I see the linkage between the two. Yeah, essentially there's two use cases. I mean, I'm sure there's many others, but kind of the two primary use cases, you know, one is kind of the DevOps perspective.  So by kind of top down mapping my policy implementation all the way down to my policy report output to a particular control, I can demonstrate, yes, I have accomplished that. I've mapped these policies and these outputs to a compliance statement tagged with these controls in Oskal. From the other direction, if you're an auditor, you want to, you know, you're going to collect evidence, so you're going to say, can I query the system for NIST 853 AC-3 query all the policy report outputs that are relevant to that control so that I can gather that into my evidence locker. The top down and bottom up use case. So that's why I think a bi-directional mapping is highly necessary. In terms of, I guess the other, the user, I don't know, maybe it overlaps these use cases, the first one maybe. If I'm an actual FedRAMP authorizing official, and I get someone drops an Oskal implemented FedRAMP package on my desk, and it's supposed to be machine verifiable that I meet FedRAMP, then there needs to be a detail, a tracing down to, you know, an actual policy artifact and machine readable code that says, yep, it's implementing this control by via this executable means and the data it's generating is going to map to this control, you know, policy report output. So how that would work, and I'm not, I don't know how the mechanics of that would actually work and how the validation tooling that FedRAMP folks actually have ready, but I think that's the grand vision. Yeah. Yeah, I think I wonder whether Jim, we should include in the, in the policy report the, at least a position set on how we would integrate, right? Yeah, I think that would make sense. Is there, you know, I know Robert, you seem to know this, but is there somebody we also perhaps want to invite from, you know, might be working on Oskal to do a deeper dive and sort of give a presentation in one of our working group meetings with that? Yeah, I can, I can certainly reach out. I don't have a special relationship with any of the folks and we're all monitoring the same Git repos and commenting on PRs and whatnot. Right. Let me reach out to them and see whether they would be interested in doing that. Okay. That'd be great. Yeah, we can do that. But I'm happy to, I'm happy to be the grunt worker to kind of put together some sort of an outline or just a strong man proposal. Yeah, that'll be great. That'll be great Robert. Yeah, we can start thinking about it. And then I will reach out to my next contacts and see whether they can come here. I have done a number of presentations, and then other peripheral groups, industry and federal groups have done this Oskal webinar. So I can, I probably can collect a bunch of links and drop it into the Google Doc sometime. It's not today, later this week. So if folks are interested in kind of the overview of what Oskal is. Yeah, I'll give some background material. Yeah, I'll be great. I think that's good. All right. Yeah, the other thing Robert we were just discussing and just thinking out loud and in terms of potential things we could produce in addition to the policy report and of course continuing to, you know, grow the adoption of that and maybe one thing that we could do I was thinking on that is that maybe once we have a few examples of these reports we can even create like a CNCF blog post or something to advertise that this report's available and, you know, see, just promote interest in it. So the other, you know, other potential deliverable or something we could, you know, output from the group, it would could be, you know, starting to, you know, have some classification of the different policy tools that are in scope right that we're talking about and you know, the Starboard has a good, you know, sort of grouping of these already and we had discussed some of that with Liz and Daniel, and it also from Aqua sec was just discussing that so perhaps that could be also a document or a Google doc we could publish somewhere to say, and of course that can will change and evolve over time as things change but at least right now we know that there's image scanners there's admission controllers there's configuration scanners and and runtime security type of tools that we're and those examples of each of these categories right. Yeah, that I make sense I know Howard and Erica are always putting together slides for for various cube gone presentation so and they're they're more dialed into that process but I would imagine that whatever we can produce as a white paper or more guidance here kind of bump it up to the we could present it to the higher SIG group on the on the later 10am calls 10am Pacific and then if that you know based on that reception I would imagine that Erica would would be happy to put a cube con presentation around that. Okay. All right. Yeah, I'll bring that up with her and let's let's see what we can do. There's a white paper that SIG security is offering at the moment I don't know if you've considered to Well actually yeah that I and when I unfortunately I put on the calendar item today the discussion about Oscar but then took it off because I have this unexpected conflict but now that I'm on there was a lot of back and forth chatter in that white paper review about compliance. It wasn't necessarily in the context of policy, but I think I think certainly everyone here on this call kind of sees that there's a nexus between compliance and policy. So I had said that yeah we would we would kind of champion that is a discussion point for this group. I think I still think now that we've had a little intro. I think it's probably beneficial to put that on the next meeting. I'll like I say right up a little bit of a summary of Oscar how that integrates with the CR and incorporate some of that chatter from the white paper review. But yeah you're right it I think the gist of the back and forth on the compliance section of that white paper was that it was kind of you know open ended would be nice if there was more substance to that that component. At least that was the takeaway that I had. I don't know if you had a different perspective that you take. No, it's fine just want to bring the topic for discussion. Don't have any opinions about it yet. I mean, I guess my trying to gather data versus project a particular solution. I guess the only bias I would have is that if the goal of the cloud native security white paper is to define compliance within a cloud native infrastructure and conceptual framework. I would think that that greatly overlaps with the notion of you know policy definition policy output definition and all within kind of the shift left you know infrastructures code policies code policy compliance as code metaphor. So that that's kind of where my brain is is anchored. Makes sense to me. Yep. Okay. Yeah, so maybe Robert is that something you want to do you said you could write up a summary but then should we put that on the agenda for next our next meeting or what do you propose. Yeah, that's that's what I'm suggesting is that I'll just expand on the agenda place that I had for two weeks from today. I'll add details around Oscar and. Okay. I other other resources that you would like me to explicitly review is part of how that connects to any of the projects you're involved. I'm happy to take a look at those. Yeah, I'm actually talking to some folks in the IBM research team later today about this very topic. So let me see you know whether they have published anything externally and I'm also planning to bring them in into this work group as well right because they're also looking at this this topic. So let me let me try and do that. So that's one and then like I said I have some contacts in this that I've been collaborating with also from a redhead point of view so I will bring them as well. And so we can bring them into the same forum right so we can talk about that here. Okay. Yeah, and I'll try to get you an advanced draft of again it's not going to be anything extravagant just a simple outline one page or. But if you if you want to circulate that around to this group in advance of that call then maybe we'll get some some good feedback on the next on the next session. That sounds awesome. Yeah. So you can just put a link into this into the into this work groups agenda meeting notes talk right. Correct, correct. I'll expand the place over that I have there. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you. All right, I don't think we had anything else on the agenda for today so unless anyone else has something to discuss we can, I guess, wrap up early today. Yep. Okay. Thanks everyone. Thanks. Take care. Bye bye.


A couple of weeks ago on this channel we talked about the traveling head of Oliver Cromwell. Now of course Oliver Cromwell is associated with the English Civil War that happened in the 1600s where the people were starting to stand up for their own rights and waged war against the royalists or the monarchy. Now if you watch that episode you know that King Charles I was executed by Beheading on the 30th of January in 1649. King Charles I execution not only put the ruling of the government into the hands of the Puritans but also formed a rather strange little cult. A cult that is still here to this day. But before we go any further you know what to do please leave us a like and give us a subscribe. Again thank you so much to all of our patrons. We have a few new patrons here on this channel and one new producer. Her information will hopefully be available for you guys next week. And as always thank you again to Tiffany Monroe, one of our producers here at Esoteric Atlanta who is a reiki master here in the city. If you would like to get into contact with Tiffany regarding her services her email address is listed down below. Welcome to Esoteric Atlanta my name is Bryce. Today we are going to talk about the cult of King Charles I the martyr. Today I posted on the community tab that we have been having some internet issues. I understand that this is happening all over the United States right now. We are experiencing rolling blackouts. I do personally believe that this has to do with Nisara that's going to start here in America first and then eventually branch its wings to the rest of the world becoming just Sara. So it's not necessarily a bad thing but I do know that it's caused some frustration for a lot of people. We at Esoteric Atlanta we're going to keep going bringing you three to four videos a week. Just keep pushing through. If the internet does get cut which that might happen there might be some blackouts happening where they do cut the internet and cut cable and cut the media don't panic it's all going to be okay there will be an emergency broadcast system but until then like I said we're just going to keep going. I am also working on getting my awesome friend Anna down in Brazil on this channel. There's a topic that I really want her to talk about that's happened in Brazil a current event that very much goes with what a lot of us are aware is happening right now. So I'm working on getting her on the channel doing like a zoom call with her so she can talk to you guys about what she knows she has an awesome Truth or Channel. Some of her videos are in English some of them are in Portuguese but if you want to check out her channel I will put a link down below as well. Alright so let's talk about this cult that is based on King Charles the first who yes again is one of my ancestors I think that's why it makes me laugh. So King Charles the first has come up in a couple of our videos like I said in the intro we talked about him with Oliver Cromwell's traveling head and Oliver Cromwell is one of the reasons why King Charles the first lost his head and we also talked about King Charles the first on our episode around Grey Friars. I'm going to put a link to both of those episodes down below in the description box if you want to refresher to look at those perspectives on this king but for us to truly understand how King Charles the first went from a tyrant king to a martyr to having a cult revolve around his life then we have to go back like way back to the Protestant Reformation. Once more I apologize if you can hear all the sounds going on outside again this has been a crazy year and I cannot control those sounds so I hope that they're not going to bother you too much. So around 500-ish years ago Europe went through the Protestant Reformation. Basically a lot of people were learning how to read and write and realized that the Catholic Church was tricking them and not really teaching them what was in the Bible. You had people like Martin Luther in Germany, John Calvin, you had the Huguenots in France and in England you had the Anglicans. The Anglicans were a little bit different than the other sects of the Protestant faith popping up all around continental Europe. This is because the Protestant Reformation took hold of the English government with King Henry VIII. I think we can safely say that King Henry VIII didn't care about Protestantism for its spirituality or its connectiveness to God. Instead King Henry VIII formed the Anglican Church of England to simply get rid of the Pope. You see King Henry VIII wanted to divorce Catherine of Argonne and Mary Ann Boylein, although the Pope wasn't going to let that happen. But seeing that King Henry VIII was a firm believer in the concept of divine right he established that the Pope had no control over his country of England. So basically the Church of England was like Catholic light. Basically the seven sacraments were still there, they were still very much practicing what would be a Catholic version of faith just without the Pope. Now the King, King Henry VIII, was not only the head of the government of England, but he was also head of the Church. On a side note, King Henry VIII's decision to do this would cause a domino effect of multiple events happening. It would cause Elizabeth I to have to cut off Mary, Queen of Scott's head, who by and by was King Charles I's grandmother. It would also cause controversy between his son Edward and his daughter Mary, Bloody Mary, because after Edward died he didn't want his sister Mary on the throne because she was a Catholic and so he left it to his cousin Jane who ended up getting her head chopped off by Bloody Mary who then tried to like burn all these Protestants rather at this stake. It just caused a whole bloody mess everywhere. But the whole point was that the Church of England ran very similar to the Catholic Church except the monarchy was the head of the Church. Even to this day we have the monarch of Queen Elizabeth II is technically the head of the Church of England. Again, I don't actually believe Elizabeth II is still alive, but that's just my opinion. All in all Anglicanism, a lot like divine right, is based off of the will of the King. Again, this goes back to our Gray Friars episode where the Presbyterians of Scotland did not want King Charles I to dictate their relationship with God. Again, the Presbyterians of Scotland were very much following the Protestant faith as well as like the Puritans, whereas the Anglican Church of England was more of a political church. Now King Charles I would not go on to be officially labeled a martyr until his son was restored to the throne after Oliver Cromwell died. Now to truly understand how he became a martyr, we have to just briefly review what happened in court. Now again, please refer back to our Oliver Cromwell episode if you want a more detailed analysis of the English Civil War. For this episode, we're just going to start with the trial. So the trial started on January 20th of 1649. King Charles I had been charged with treason, tyranny, and murder. Now the only problem with trying a king at this time was that there was no court, there was no authority that was higher than the king. Again, please remember the concept of divine right. So needless to say, as King Charles I was brought into the court, he had a sense of arrogance about him. Even though he had tried to escape twice and had been under house arrest for a while during the war, he was still very arrogant because after all, he was the king. Under what authority did these commoners have the right to try him? At this point, the House of Commons had decided that they had supremacy and that they could try the king for treason, tyranny, and murder. This might seem a little dodgy, as our British cousins might say, because it had never been done before. Now to understand the controversy of this trial, we have to look at John Bradshaw, who was the person who oversaw the trial like a judge. Now, John Bradshaw wore a bulletproof helmet because he feared he would be assassinating for trying or trying to try the king of England. Now, as I said, the House of Commons had decided that they had supreme power and could bring charges against King Charles I. Now, the House of Lords, on the other hand, had rejected this trial. We can understand that they were more royalist. They were more loyal to the monarchy. There was absolutely no precedence of this happening before. No king of England had ever been tried or executed by his own people, maybe by some of his cousins, but not his own people. Well, John Bradshaw decided that the House of Commons that represented the people of England held that authority over the ruling monarch. As you can probably see, as we spoke about with the English Civil War, this is beginning of a worldwide revolution where the people are starting to take their power. No longer are they subservient to this ruling group of people. This is the basis of the American constitution, a constitution that's heavily under attack right now. The ruling elite still want to control us and they want to take away our constitution when our constitution says that we the people are the bosses, that we should not fear our government, but rather our government should fear us. We see this in King Charles I trial. Now, for multiple days, the same circus happens over and over and over again. The king is brought into the courtroom and he says, by what authority do you have the right to charge me? And John Bradshaw says by the right of the people and then he claims he represents the people as the king and it's this constant going back and forth. After exhausting few days, they would always usher King Charles I out of court where half of the crowd would be chanting God save the king, while another half of the crowd would be shouting justice, justice, justice. This circus finally got to the point where John Bradshaw had to declare that King Charles I was in contempt of court. This is a term we still use in our court system did today. However, back then it meant that King Charles I was not going to be present for the rest of his trial. The trial would move on without him. And of course, we know the result. King Charles I was found guilty of treason, tyranny, murder and murder because of the English Civil War and all the people who lost their lives. They felt like he had started the English Civil War because of his blatant tyrannical practices against his own people. I can kind of agree, seeing what we're going through right now. And he was executed on January 30 1649. Again, his children and his wife went into exile and the Puritans ruled the country for a short time. Almost immediately after Charles's execution, we saw people viewing Charles as somewhat of a martyr. He wasn't labeled as a martyr quite yet. But people were already considering him to be so. For example, by February of 1649, a month later, it was written in the Common Book of Prayers that Charles was an innocent suffering King who was walking in the footsteps of his savior to his own Calvary at White Hall. The people who supported the monarchy believed that King Charles I was sent by God, again, this idea of divine right, to not only govern the people, but to govern God's church. And that these horrible commoners, these lay people, these Puritans had put to death a man who was sent by God to protect us. Yes, they were comparing him to Jesus. Now in my personal opinion, in my personal faith, I don't believe that any human being can stand in between you and God. I think that's probably the heart of the Protestant faith is that you don't need anybody. You don't even really need to go to church. You can just do your own thing because God is always with you anyway. So I am very much in disagreement of this King Charles I, who again is one of my ancestors, which is why I laugh, being any more special than any one of us. I totally am able to see that the Church of Inglis was established more as a political thing for King Henry VIII to take total control over his life than a religious one. But nonetheless, after King Charles I was executed, it was rumored that there were a bunch of handkerchiefs that had spotted up, picked up some of his blood, right?  Now apparently when you kind of head off the blood spews anyway, I know it's gross. I'm glad we don't kill people that way now, but that's what happens. And so there probably were quite a few numbers of these handkerchiefs with his blood on them. And apparently some of these handkerchiefs started to perform miracles. Wild, right? And I couldn't find that much information on them because this was quite a long time ago. But these handkerchiefs, people were taking them home and they were healing them. So this added a lot of folklore and legend to the idea that King Charles I was like a modern-day Jesus that had been, you know, crucified for trying to protect the Church of England. At least we remember though that this King Charles I was responsible for a lot of deaths up in Scotland because they were Presbyterians. I don't think a real Jesus would be responsible for that many deaths, do you? And it could just be a simple case of mind over matter. Some of these people could have been so obsessed with the idea that King Charles I was a martyr that they almost willed themselves to heal, thinking that it had everything to do with these bloody handkerchiefs. We can also look at the possibility that these handkerchiefs were mere propaganda started by the royalists. Like maybe they wanted to try to convince people that they needed to bring the royalty back because look, all these miracles are happening with handkerchiefs. We are not immune to propaganda. I mean, hello, our media is pretty much propaganda nowadays anyway. The job of the news is to hide the news. So there's that. Well, after Oliver Cromwell died and the government of England decided to bring back his son who became King Charles II, we know from our video on Oliver Cromwell that King Charles II went buck wild on all these people who had hurt his father. Again, that's why Oliver Cromwell was dug back up and his head ended up traveling around England for like 300 years. Again, video is listed below if you missed it. But after the monarchy was brought back, that is when his son made, legally in the Church of England, made his old dad a martyr, like a saint. He was canonized on the 19th of May 1660. So now it's not just King Charles I, but it's Saint King Charles I. So the high church Anglicans hold the 30th of January as King Charles, excuse me, Saint King Charles I's feast day. Now, we don't really have feast days in the Protestant Church, so I'm not really familiar with what happens on these particular days. But the days of his execution became like the day where the Anglican Church celebrated their martyr, Saint King Charles I. As we moved into more modern times in the year of 1859, the Church of England did remove a lot of these services revolved around Saint King Charles I from their common book of prayer. When this happened, a cult formed. There were people within the Church of England, especially within the Tory group, which from what I understand the Tories of England are like our Republicans. They're more the elite, the wealthier people in society, although the Republican Party here in America is changing and the Republican Party is turning out to be more the party for the people. But those were the people that were starting to form in this cult after it was taken out of their society. It makes sense, right? These are the the one percent. These are the people who would be loyal to the monarchy. They're probably some of them distant cousins to the monarchy. And so they are going to want to keep their King Charles canonized and celebrated as almost superhuman. This cult became so large that by 1894, they created a society. Society of Saint King Charles I, the martyr. And from what I understand, this cult is still alive and well. Now there is a legend that when King Charles I was being about to be executed, that the Puritans told him if he got rid of the higher ranking bishops within the Church of England, they would let him live. And King Charles I refused, so therefore he was executed. This to me is huge. This to me explains why there is still a cult based around this monarch. You see, the bishops were the ruling elite of the Church of England. They're the ruling elite of the Catholic Church as well. The Protestants, along with the revolution that would end up forming the American Revolution, wanted all humanity to be equal in God's eyes, because all of humans are equal in God's eyes. No human is more important than another human. And the elites who cling so tightly to this cult either have grown up in maybe a Luciferian family or a Satanistic family, where they do believe that there is divine right, where they do believe their bloodlines are special, or they're looking for more communistic ways of governing a church or government, which again would go back to the elite. Because in a Marxist society, it's only the elite who survive. One of the most famous members of this cult is Lord Nicholas Charles Edward Jonathan Windsor. He is a cousin of the ruling monarch that we have today. So basically, he's related to me as well. And if I could say anything to him, if I could say anything to any of my family members who are still in the royal family, get over yourself.  Nobody should have a king or queen. Nobody should have a pope. Nobody should have anybody telling them how they can connect with God because God is within all of us at our births. We are all anointed with consciousness by God and God alone. All right, guys, thank you so much for sitting through this video. Let me know your thoughts down in the comments below.  Let me know. Again, I would love to hear your stories. All right, if you would like to purchase our opening song, there's a link down in below. Thank you again to Josh McKay for doing our music. And thank you to Todd Roderick for helping me get this video up for you guys. I will talk to you soon. Bye.