Is there a better, more gratifying thing that you can think of than being a father? Without question, one of the greatest honors and privileges that God shares with men is the opportunity to see and to feel and understand what it's like to be a father. We are in no way like him to the degree that he is a father, but he at least shares with us. Just the honor to know what it is to have children and to be entrusted with guiding them and loving them and protecting them. Have you ever noticed how many times in the Bible that there are scriptures that call God our Father? We get to call him Abba, right? Father. In Psalms 103, 13 it says, as a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him.  And in the wilderness where you saw how the Lord your God carried you as a man, carries his son, and some verses would say as a father in all the way that you went until you came to this place. So God relates to us as a father. And unfortunately, we have this issue today where we don't see men stepping up to the degree that they used to as a father. It doesn't seem to be as important. Now, me, I'm blessed. I've got four daughters and a son-in-law. So I've got five children who I love dearly. The oldest being Brittany, who is 30. I sometimes forget their ages. The second oldest is Morgan. She's what, 25, 26, 20 something. I don't know. And her husband, Anthony, I adore them. The only problem with Anthony is two things. One, he could use a haircut. And then two, he's a cowboy fan, but still love him to death. My third child, Hannah, with whom I'm wearing this shirt because she just graduated college is 23. And then my baby is Bailey, who is 14, about to turn 15. And they all are special. And I'm proud of them in their own in their own way. Many of you heard my story about being in prison for for such a long time. And one of the most hurtful things about it isn't so much about being locked away as it is about being away from your family, being away from your children. You talk about what keeps a grown man up at night crying. And the fact that I missed my youngest daughter's most of her formative years, the bulk of her years, as a matter of fact. And so now we are in the process of kind of putting that back together, becoming more familiar with with each other every day. But there's nothing that I wouldn't do for my children. Similarly to God. The problem today is that we've got so many men, so many absent fathers be they black, white or Hispanic, but particularly in the in the black community. But anywhere fathers are important. We do some things sometimes that we may not know what we're doing, but we're going to do the best that we can. Why? Because we love our children. We would literally lay down our life for our children. The Bible says Jesus says that greater love has no man that he would lay down his life for a friend. Well, what would a father do for his children? Some of you are familiar with some of you are not familiar with with some of the stats associated with a father not being at home with his children. So let me just share some of these with you. Children who don't have a father at home represent 72% of all teenage murderers, 60% of all rapists, 70% of kids who are incarcerated, they're twice as likely to quit school 11 times more likely to be violent, three out of 14 suicides, 80% of all adolescents in psychiatric hospitals and 90% of runaways. There's a clip from Prager U where Larry Elder is going over some of these stats as well. We all know the statistics that children who grow up without a father or five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime nine times more likely to drop out of school and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. The Journal of Research on adolescence confirms that even after controlling for varying levels of household income, kids and father apps and homes are more likely to end up in jail and kids who never had a father in the house are the most likely to wind up behind bars. In 1960, 5% of America's children entered the world without a mother and father married to each other. By 1980, it was 18%. By 2000, it had risen to 33% and 15 years later, the number reached 41%. For blacks, even during slavery, when marriage for slaves was illegal, black children were more likely than today to be raised by both their mother and father. Economist Walter Williams has written that according to census data from 1890 to 1940, a black child was more likely to grow up with married parents than a white child. For blacks, out of wedlock births have gone from 25% in 1965 to 73% in 2015. For whites, from less than 5% to over 25% and for Hispanics out of wedlock births have risen to 53%. What happened to fathers? And so I'm probably going to get a little emotional on this because this is bothersome to me and it's personal to me because I know what it's like being locked away and kept away from your family. And when people act as though it's no big deal for a man not to be present in the home with his children, first of all, it's insulting to men who are at home.  And I know things happen and sometimes divorce happens and maybe the child is not the product of someone's marriage. But that's not the child's fault. And you need to understand how important this is to not have the father there. When I was in prison, one of the things that I had to grapple with and had to come to understanding was that me not being there was not their fault. It was my fault. In other words, I willfully chose to abandon them. And now that sounds harsh because I didn't just say, you know what? I'm leaving my children. No, but my actions, my selfish actions led me away. Similarly, there are some men whose selfish actions lead them away from their children. Maybe you're just tired of her and you want to get away.  And now you've got another child growing up or being born out of wedlock growing up without her father at home. In particularly in the black community, you've got this huge epidemic of black fathers not being at home. And that is the leading contributor to all the things that ailed the black community. I'm saying it definitively because that's a fact. The one thing that keeps showing up over and over again with these things that hurt and ailed the black community, the one thing that keeps popping up when you look at men who go to prison, when you look at young boys who are violent, who are committing crimes, when you look at kids who are struggling with their sexuality, who are likely to become homosexual, when you look at families that are at the poverty rate or below the poverty rate, the one thing that's always seems to be common is that the father was not home. Think about this for a second. When a father's at home, everything tends to even out if a black father's at home, that black family tends to be on par with a white family. If you look at the poverty rate among blacks, it was a 22% and among whites was 11%. But among black married couples, it was 7.5%. So it's not so they not only do better than blacks as a whole, they do better than whites as a whole. And black married couples have had a poverty rate in single digits every year since 1994. Now, when I'm talking about whether the father's a good father or not, we're talking about a father being at home because his presence means something.  But there's always somebody that wants to be an apologist for somebody's bad behavior. The concept of the absent black father is a myth. It's not real. When compared to wider Hispanic fathers, black fathers were actually more likely to be involved in their children's lives in almost every way. They were even more likely to have bathed, diapered or dress their kids, eaten a meal with them, played with them, helped them with homework and taken them to and from activities. And a lot of that held true even when black fathers didn't live with their children. This idea that black fathers aren't present in their kids lives is actually false. Some of these people are just too dismissive of these issues. Maybe guilt. I don't know what it is.  I'm using harsh language here because that's what you are.  And so to come back and say that if he's not married to the mother, then that doesn't mean that he can't be involved. Well, sure, he can be involved. But to what degree? Most of you can count. So let's count. Let's use simple math. There are 24 hours in a day. So let's say this man be black or white is not married. He still has the same 24 hours in a day that a married couple has, right? And so what does he do in his 24 hours? Eight hours of work. If he's working, hopefully he's working. He's got to sleep. So let's just take away 16 hours right there for for for going to work for going to sleep. He has to wake up. He has to eat somewhere sometimes got to bathe. He's got to take care of the place that he's staying in being an apartment or a house. Now he's got eight hours in the day to see his children. Unless his children are next door to him, he's got to spend some time to travel to go see them. He's got to spend and and let's just say it's only one child. If there's two children, now you got four hours in the day to be with those children. Now, are these fathers who are not at home with the children? Are they seeing their children every day? Not likely. I don't know of any father who's not in the home who got to go to see his child every day.  He's taking them out to a ball game or to the park or what have you. How often is he doing that? Come on, let's just be honest. You only got so many hours in the day and to say that the amount of time that he spends with that child is equivalent to the father being at home. Just his presence. Just the fact that my daughter knows that I'm in the next room or outside in the backyard. She knows that there's only so much she can do or get away with similar to your children. Daddy's at home, right? And so when daddy's at home, something happens, the household changes. And so it's just foolishness and then you want to rely on this survey. That's all it was as a survey. When black men have said that they spend this amount of time with their children. Well, it's a survey. There's no way to actually identify, but what we can figure out, what we can identify is this one fact. Children born out of a wedlock suffer greater than children who are born to a married couple. That's just a fact.  Don't let the world give you some excuse to not be there. If you are not there with your child, if for some reason it's over with the uh with the mother, well then obviously you have to do the best that you can. But going forward, you need to know how important it is to be there, that you make these sacrifices like God did, like our own father did for us. See, God is not someone who's going to send somebody to go see about his children. He'll go and see about them himself. That's the way that we ought to be. I think it's an awesome privilege to be the father of these children that God has given me. I think it's an awesome privilege to have these grandchildren that I have. So let's do away with this foolishness, this nonsense of saying that black fatherlessness is a myth or black father's being involved, not being involved, is a myth. By and large we're not, you don't have to rely on the study from the CDC or the Census Bureau or any father's initiative or anything like that. You don't have to worry about any group giving you the numbers. Just go to any low-income community.  Go to the hospitals and see what's happening there. Go to these schools and see what's happening. Go ask a teacher who's dealing with these children who are acting up, who are not graduating, who are not doing their homework. Ask them, do they know if that child has a father? I am grateful for what God has given me, for the honor of having these children that I have who just maybe inspired me, maybe because of me, maybe in spite of me they've turned out the way they have.  I'm glad that he's watched over my children even in my absence.  So what I'm saying this is to, though you can't be perfect as a father, though you can't always do the right thing and for some people though you can't be present as much as you would like, do the best you can. Maximum effort and if maximum effort still precludes you from being physically in the home, will be as present as you possibly can. Thankfully they've got they've got technology to where now you can zoom or FaceTime or whatever you call it. You can call, you can play video games with them in one destination so you can do things to be involved in your child's life. You can see about them but you can give them something to look forward to. You can teach them what it's like to be a godly man whether it's a girl or a boy that you have as a child. You can teach them what it's like to to see what a godly man, how a godly man behaves if she's a girl, how a godly man would treat her, if he's a boy, how a godly man would act, how to be responsible, respectful. We're not going to make up any excuses as to why we didn't do what we did in the first place, why we weren't there, why we didn't do this, why we didn't do that, not going to the game, not being present, why we why we divorced mommy, why we didn't, why we never married mommy, why we've gotten multiple siblings with different women. We can't, we can't go back and fix it, but we can do do better going forward. And so take the awesome privilege, honor and responsibility of being a father serious.


e who pointed out that we need to ask the question, why are we trying to incorporate women? And she gave a couple of answers, for example, trying to bring different perspectives and helping to change norms about women's role in society. And then Paulina talked to us a little bit about how, what types of programming strategies might be useful in trying to promote meaningful inclusion. And she talked about the importance of meaningful inclusion of women in transitional mechanisms, peace processes, constitutional drafting bodies. And she talked about the importance of not only including women, but giving them tools and space to succeed once they are incorporated into these processes. And she also talked about promoting women within the legal profession and the judiciary and using techniques such as mentoring and networking and promoting the use of those techniques. And then finally she talked about promoting the participation of users of justice systems and increasing access to justice and doing so by trying to reduce gender biases that exist within those systems. And then finally, of course, we heard from Kathleen who talked about the fact that many of the things that we discuss when we're doing work abroad, many of the issues that we find our host country counterparts struggling with, we can honestly say we have struggled with these same issues here in the United States. And I think that being able to say that makes our participation in those conversations stronger. And she gave us some specific examples such as the struggle with policies such as maternity leave and also with the question of removing barriers to entry to professions, particularly any barriers that are artificial and not related to operational effectiveness. So thank you very much. I think we had some very strong points raised by the panel. And before I open it for questions, I just want to see if any of our panelists would like to make any further comments on what they've heard. Great. Okay. So I see we already have some people ready to ask questions and I'd like to take a few questions and then we'll turn the questions over to our panelists. So please start. Hello, my name is Josh. And I just wanted to ask you about specifically the UCMGA. I was in the Navy for five years. And I found that the UCMGA, especially this was pre when it got amended in 2012 or 11. Okay. And the mixed legal system in the military, I found a lot of that really disenfranchised a lot of different people. There was a lot of problems with it. Implementation across the board had a lot of issues. So quite a lot of documented evidence, which they've since amended of having to turn in, you know, your your complaints to the people who and they're getting investigated by your authorities. So the people who basically are the bar, you know, you're complaining against the same people who are investigating. I just kind of wanted to get a read from you as to the, you know, how well that system was working for the military and how well it's working for our institutions. Great. Thanks, Josh. And we'll go ahead and take a couple of other questions before I turn over to the panelists. Back here, please. I'm a policy analyst. This is, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. The United States and perhaps goes more to what the captain was speaking about. The United States invites various countries to send Academy attendees to participate in our service academies, both at the graduate or undergraduate level and then in some of the more higher level classes. I'd like to thoughts on, is this something we might propose to our own government so as to encourage that countries send women to participate in these programs in our service academy schools, whether it's a national defense university or what have you, but I just like your thoughts on that. It may be one way of seeding the effort and growing more interest worldwide. Thank you. Any other questions? I'm Jonathan Dock. I work with Stephanie in the Office of Global Women's Issues and she and I took a trip to the DRC for part of December. The big takeaways for us from that trip was the struggle for the formal justice system, particularly the civilian side, in dealing with the judgment proof defendants. You had judges who were handing down multi-year verdicts, multi-million per multi-year sentences and multi-million dollar verdicts, who had no capacity to execute on those because you could walk in the front door of the prison now at the back and because if you had gotten to the point of being convicted in the court it meant that you didn't have enough money to bribe your way out of it, essentially. And so I'm curious for Paulina mostly about how ABA really thinks about ways of encouraging the plaintiffs that we need to approach the formal system in order to scale capacity of the rule of law to put up with the vaguerities of the system if they're not going to get anything out of it. And I'm curious for the captain, because one of the things that we saw in the DRC was that the military justice system was much more able to deal with these issues because they were in a better position to garnish the wages of security sector employees or to actually have the state indemnify the victims from their own treasuries or their ways to work with other countries on encouraging the military justice system to kickstart that. Great. Thank you for the questions. And now I'll invite our panelists to respond. And Kathleen, I'll start with you. Okay, first I'll start with the question about the UCMJ. I think it's very instructive to have people, obviously, who are serving in, make comments about the Uniform Code of Military Justice as well as the fact that obviously Congress is taking a great interest in it now, which I think it's healthy when people take an interest in a justice system, expose light on it and debate what's good and what's bad. I'm not going to comment about the working part or not working part. I'd like to think we make it work, of course. We're sitting in a different position right now.  And I think it's important to explain how the military justice system is different, why it's different, and how it got to be that way. So the reason we have the whole system of justice we have is pretty much we inherited it from Great Britain. We took it over wholesale, part and parcel when we started the Continental Army, and pretty much that was the system that had been used and it works. And it kind of ties into this gentleman's question about in the DRC it works, and the reason it works is because it's swift, because you're able to have jurisdiction over the individuals that are over you. And it's intended a little bit different now that you're not intended to have justice, right, but it's intended for good order and discipline. And that's really the importance of it. So it's more of a justice system now than it was when it started because, right, we're not flogging anybody anymore. And we actually, you know, we have a system where lawyers are involved. Everybody who's involved in the military justice system, when you get to a court martial and if the judge, the defense counsel, the prosecutor are all lawyers, trained lawyers and trained additionally in military justice. So, and that was a change that was only really instituted after the Vietnam War. Because of the fact that there was a great interest in the system and after civilians, civilian soldiers come home, there was discussion about is this a system of justice that we want to keep or do we want to improve upon it? So there's sweeping changes made after the Vietnam War. And I think what you're seeing now is that same sort of healthy investigation into the system after Iraq and Afghanistan. People coming home and saying, you know, it worked or it didn't work. The public looking at the system saying, does it work or doesn't it work? But I think if you look at the higher goals of what the system was intended to do and how it's evolved, there's always room for changes in evolution. You pointed out the 2012 changes. There'll probably be more. I have no doubt about it. And I think that's healthy for a country to do that. One last point I'd like to make about your question is that we took the system wholesale from Great Britain. But with the European Court of Human Rights and their addition of a layer of review on their system, their system is completely changed now. It's different. They've actually, the whole idea of the committing authority being in the command and it's the commander who decides whether to bring the cases forward has been turned on its head. They have defense counsel who are civilians who are appointed from legal aid. They have a number of different changes that they've instituted in response to questions and concerns and quite frankly case law that the European Court of Human Rights levied against the British military justice system about 15 years ago. So I think it's instructive to look at that when we're looking at ourselves and say, there are ways perhaps to improve. We'll see what happens. And certainly the reason the system of justice is in place is because of that good order and discipline element. So do we want to lose that? It's a balance. That's my comment here, your question. I'm to the gentleman's question about service academies. We do. We have many international students at the service academies. I'm most familiar with the fact that we have many each year at the Coast Guard Academy. And we actually send, as the United States military, on a much lesser scale, but we have sent individuals to other service academies. I only know because I have a friend who actually went to, I think, it was the French Military Institute in Paris and studied for three years. Part of our barrier to doing that is language ability. He happened to speak fluent French, so that works. But in a country where I don't think we value languages as much as other countries, it's hard if you don't have a country where the individual doesn't speak the language, it's not going to work as well. And so that's one of the things, I think, societally that would help us be able to send individuals to other countries. I'm sorry, sir, yes. Do you replace, do you ensure that there are quotas to make sure that women from these foreign countries are represented, though, have these opportunities? I know that women have, I mean, there's certainly equal opportunity there. Quotas are very difficult because then you're talking about, you know, are you going to balance that against qualifications? I think we're encouraged, and just like in recruiting now, right, we're encouraged to recruit from all of society. It's not just gender-based, right? You want to look at economics. You want to look at national background. You want to look at a whole host of issues to ensure that you are representing society in the best way. So I think to the extent that we do that in recruiting, we're doing the same thing when we exchange students at schools. The hard part, right, is that you have to start by, first of all, attracting the women in, and then you have to keep the women, and you have to train them to a point and have them grow long enough to be able to even qualify to do such an academy swap. I mean, if you look at the service statistics, and I don't have them off the top of my head, but I can give you a ballpark figure, about at the eight-year mark is when you have a huge drop-off, 68-year mark, huge drop-off in women's serving. Very few women make it to the point, I've been in 23 years. There aren't that many women that stay that long, and some of the barriers have to do more with career flexibility, moving around.  They're not necessarily legal barriers. They're cultural barriers, or they're societal barriers, or they're just personal choices that people make. And so I think when you look at that, you have to look at all of those factors and interplay and figure out, you want to train and attract and create an environment where women want to stay, and you also want to ensure that you're not artificially placing a reverse barrier, but a quota and just saying, oh, we need a woman, let's pick her. Because that's going to dilute the quality, I think, of the education and the people that you get in those positions. You want it based on merit. So you have to balance those two things. And yes, I think it should be consideration. You want a diverse pool of people to pick from. You want to ensure that you're not artificially excluding anyone. And to build upon your comment about, do we send women outside to other countries? And the answer is yes. I mean, based on the work that I did several African countries, it was very interesting to go to a place like Morocco, where the women who were serving in their Navy, and they have women in their Navy, but they were the women serving the food and the tea, right?  And I'm not speaking, it was a wonderful experience I had, but it was just different. It is different. We're at different levels. And we did that with our women in World War II, right? We had separate corps. We had the waves and the wax, and they did wonderful work at home, and it was great. And they paid the way for someone like me to be able to serve today in any type of career I want. So I thank them. But it's an evolutionary process. And as long as we keep talking about it and we keep chipping away and we keep making those opportunities available, I think we'll eventually get to the point where things seem more even. And I'll answer the last question because I want to turn it over to Paulina about the DRC. The military justice system, because it's more effective and it's local, and because there's control over those soldiers, like you said, docking the pay, it's more effective. And that's why I think that that's the importance of mixed legal systems, right? Some work better in some situations than others. There's been debate if we're talking about comparative military justice about why do we even need a military justice system in the United States anymore? I mean, there are some commentators that have asked that. And the interesting thing I think that came about because of Iraq and Afghanistan is that sometimes if you don't have a military justice system, you don't have jurisdiction. Because the U.S. system has worldwide jurisdiction. It's based on your status. It's not based on your location. Whereas if you bring that back to the United States, you're talking about witnesses from around the world and you're talking about a whole host of complex issues that those barriers are brought down when you have a military justice system, I think you can make arguments for the fact that even though the United States is in a different position than the DRC, that there's still some relevance. And so that even though there are systems different from the civilian system, that there still is relevance when you're talking about remoteness, location, good order and discipline issues in that area to be able to actually affect punishment that is meaningful. Thank you. Thank you for the question on the DRC and I certainly agree with a lot of points that Kathleen made. Our organization has been implementing programs to combat gender-based violence as a weapon of war in the DRC since 2008. And one of the main strategies is to bring military justice courts to the locations where the atrocities are committed. And yes, of course, one of the main reasons why we have those trials is to ensure that perpetrators are punished for the atrocities that they committed. And yes, there are problems with prisons and we have done programming to address the prison issues, but it's not the only purpose of those trials. There are many other purposes, even decreasing impunity in general in the country for these kinds of offenses. And because of those trials take place in front of the affective communities, it really brings the sense of resolution for many of the people affected. So I don't think that this is only about punishment. And I think part of your question was about encouraging women to access formal justice system versus informal justice systems. Is that right? I'm a lawyer, right? And if I were representing a plaintiff in the DRC, clearly it's good for the system and for recruiting governments to do a law to take those cases to the formal system, have them take place in an open court, but I would have an ethical boundary given my responsibility to be an individual client saying you're going to get a fairer shake in the formal system than you would if we pursued something in a more customary way, which is going to be faster, which is going to be more amicable, which is an unlikely result in you getting more damages than you might through the formal system. Right, and I think a lot of lawyers struggled with this, right? I think, you know, for us, it's not about actually encouraging individual litigants to choose. It's giving them information about what, you know, what system works in what way. So providing them legal awareness and legal education and providing them information about pros and cons about those two systems, but it's also about strengthening the provision and the delivery of justice, whether it's in the informal or formal justice courts. And I think, you know, a lot of times, you know, we operate on grants and, you know, sometimes we may receive, you know, a grant to do programming with the formal justice system and you may think that this is not affecting, you know, what's going on on the local level, but it's not necessarily true because in many countries, not in all, appeals from, for example, local courts go to the formal justice system. So even, you know, training magistrates that hear those appeals on issues that are very relevant to women at the very local level helps to make the justice system delivery more effective and as a result, build trust within the communities to access the justice systems. But I think, you know, I don't know, I think all sort of rule of law implementers and development practitioners struggle with this issue. You know, even when you have victims of domestic violence, you know, here you feel like, yes, you know, you must go to the court and the perpetrator must be punished and put into jail, but this doesn't always take into account the realities on the ground and, you know, for example, the issue of compensation for victims, the issue of their protection in the formal legal system and also the fact that often the perpetrators of domestic violence are the main sort of breadwinners for the family. So we need to also think about what systems are in place to ensure that the victims of domestic violence, you know, have livelihood after their abusers go to jail and, for example, that the families of the husband or of the spouse don't resort to property grabbing, basically leaving, you know, the woman and the children on the streets. So I think it's a much more complex issue than, you know, just saying, you know, having this very sort of legalistic approach to, you know, let's take this person to court and put him to jail. You know, I personally struggle with it. I don't know if others have sort of any comments on this on the panel. I'll just say a couple of quick things. I know we're getting close to running out of time. I think the interesting question and I know we've talked a lot about it since the trip we took to DRC and many of you I know have worked there, too. But I think the issue to me is how we ensure that we are educating people about the systems, but also I think ensuring that we're not ignoring the fact that, you know, if people feel they're not going to get a transparent, fair and, you know, accessible resolution of their dispute, right, the standards that we think people probably look to to resolve disputes, they're going to go to a system that gives them some part of that and I think our goal should be to ensure that we don't ignore that that happens. And then think about how to ensure that those systems are imbued with the standards that are, you know, the kind of standards that can make people feel like they're getting a good forum to resolve their dispute or at least the best forum possible because, you know, people are forum shopping, right, they're looking for how do I get this dispute resolved, they may choose to go to a less formal system because it's faster, but can we also help that system be more transparent, be more accountable, have clearer rules, be more attuned to the specific needs that particularly women have because I think that's obviously why we're here today to talk about how to ensure that we're looking to ensure that women have appropriate and equitable access to justice. So I think we need to be thinking about that when we're looking at the two sorts of systems that, or multiple types of systems, but two type, you know, sort of general types of systems that people might go to. Thank you. We've been given another 10 minutes by the organizers, so thank you, and I'm going to go ahead and take one or two more questions. I see we have a question in the back. Good afternoon. My name is Kelsey. I'm also a U.S. military veteran, and we'll be going to law school this fall. And yeah, I joined the military at a young age, and I guess never thought of myself as living in mixed legal system with the Constitution and the UCMJ. So my question is about how are legal renderings transferred between the two legal systems? So when veterans leave the service, they're back in the civilian court system, and so there was an article that came on a couple months ago about convicted rapists in the military that when they shifted to this back to civilian society that reputation didn't follow into their state. They weren't registered sex offenders, and so a girl became another victim of this individual. And when her mother found out that he had been a convicted rapist in the military, of course she was very upset because I guess it's on a volunteer basis for these individuals to register in the state. So there seems to be some gaps when people are transferring between the two systems. Thank you. And are there any other questions? Okay, I think we have one over on this side of the room. Thank you. Just to broaden out the discussion a little bit into looking at the roles of courts. So I think that question got to the informational role a little bit. And how does the mixed system need to balance those interests differently? So in a traditional formal system where you're publishing the decisions in some kind of written or official forum, as opposed to a traditional system where it might be an oral judgment, how do you try and harmonize those interests when you're working to reform or strengthen a mixed system, particularly in light of the kind of considerations that go into gender focused cases. I know there was a panel earlier where we discussed land rights where that's clearly an information heavier area, but gender-based violence might be an area where information is more sensitive and therefore there might be a greater interest in privacy. Any other questions? Okay, I'm going to turn the last two questions over to our panelists and invite them to first respond to one or both questions and then also to offer any closing remarks that they might have and so you each have about three minutes. Well, I'll take Kelsey's question about military justice system. First to clarify, the Constitution applies. Even when you wear uniform, the Constitution applies. Now where it gets more complicated is that there are limitations on your constitutional rights that don't exist for civilians who are not wearing the uniform. So that there are decisions that are made that say your freedom of speech is somewhat limited, more limited. Obviously, that's one example. When you're wearing uniform, then we're not. You know, as you're aware because you've served, the UCMJ limits words that you can say against the President because the President is the Commander-in-Chief, limits what you can say about Congress because, of course, they have oversight of the military. And so to ensure that we have civilian oversight of the military, it was determined that those constitutional rights are limited so that we keep our military from essentially taking over the government, having a military coup. So that's why those rights are balanced like that. So any limitation that's placed on your constitutional rights is under scrutiny. It's supposed to be directly related to military function, military mission. And that's always a balance that sometimes makes its way up to the Supreme Court. And those make for interesting cases for sure. To get to your comment about sex offenders, the military justice system does when you get a court-martial conviction, that's a conviction. And it can be entered into the sex offender registration system. What you pointed out is a process failure for sure. And it's something that I think a lot of the states have become aware of. It's a state-by-state process depending on where your conviction takes place. That's the issue, right, because the military justice system is a global system. So let's say your conviction was overseas. What state is going to be the one with responsibility for ensuring that that conviction gets entered into the system? There are cases that I'm aware of just from my time when I spent in Alaska where there were people pressing for having those systems more closely tied together, having a court-martial conviction entered into the sex registration system for that very reason. But you definitely point out something that I think needs work. It's a procedural gap. It's not that those court-martial convictions cannot get entered into the system. That's not the barrier. The barrier I think is more in trying to figure out in a large bureaucracy how people don't slip through the cracks and making it effective. You bring up a very valid point. But it is that interplay between how you have a conviction and what the consequences are. For instance, I think you have these cases that are in the news where that happens in the civilian system, where somebody gets let out on, say, probation or parole, commits another crime. And there's criticism about why that particular judge or why that particular court, why that particular defendant was granted freedom early in order to go out and commit another crime. So certainly you could look at both systems and say that there are issues, the similar issues, I think, between the civilian system as well as the military justice system. I did have one thing I wanted to add about the DRC. I think you would ask me about whether we send people over to work on military justice issues with the Congolese and the answer is yes for many years now. I mean, I know of people in the United States military at the behest of the Department of State. We work together. There's the Defense International Institute of Legal Studies that works on funding to bring people in that are qualified to send to the DRC. You know, the Canadian government is very active in providing people to be able to assist the Congolese in building the military justice system. So the answer is yes. There's kind of like a mentee relationship in bringing people and training people and bringing judges in and qualified prosecutors to ensure that that system continues to work. Thank you. So gender based violence and domestic violence. I mean, this is such a, you know, it's a very difficult topic when you know, when you talk about formal versus informal justice systems. Technically speaking in many countries that have mixed legal systems, criminal matter issues are not supposed to be adjudicated by at the, you know, local level by informal justice system. Technically they should go to the justice system. In practice, you know, this doesn't happen all the time and there are many different reasons why women would not report a crime to the police and why they would not want to engage in sort of formal prosecution. And there are issues with privacy and confidentiality in both systems. So I think, you know, it's important for organizations like ours and, you know, for other implementers as well to educate both formal justice actors and informal justice actors and promote victim-centric prosecution in the formal justice system and make sure that women who, you know, who approach the informal justice actors about those issues have some sort of help and representation. For example, by well-trained paralegal or paralegals and social advocates. I think it's also important to, you know, train justice system actors, judges and prosecutors on their use of discretion in terms of charging versus not charging certain individuals in some countries. I've heard that accusing women of witchcraft is one of the defenses that perpetrators use in cases of rape or domestic violence and witchcraft is a crime in a penal code. So technically, the, you know, women who are victims can be prosecuted for a crime. You know, in other countries, they may be prosecuted for adultery, for example. So the use of discretion about prosecuting those crimes is a big issue. And my final comment, you know, I think it's very important to mention the engagement of men and boys in promoting equality of women and engaging them in combating gender-based violence and domestic violence. I, you know, I heard, there was an excellent TED talk. I forgot who spoke, but he said that, you know, these are not women's issues. These are human rights issues and women and men have sort of equal responsibility of working together on resolving those issues. I think it's very important. And there are excellent organizations that work specifically on engaging men and boys. We partner with one of those organizations, Premundo, on our global gender-based violence response initiative with vital voices, also an IOM. And Premundo, you know, they are, they really specialize in engaging men and boys. There is also men-engaged network all over the world. So I highly encourage you to look into those sort of strategies and techniques. Thank you. I get to be the last one. Okay. Just responding to the question about harmonizing sort of in a mixed system, how do you harmonize and strengthen? I think the question to ask is, what can we learn? What can each system learn from each other? And are there things that are working in a formal system that if they can be utilized and sort of the more informal part of the legal of the justice system can learn from them? Are there things that we see that in an informal or tribal system, maybe around community norms and how those get used in law? Do those help in any way? Does it help sort of more of a community mediation approach in certain kinds of disputes? I don't know the answer, but I think the question is a very good one. And I think the ultimate thing we need to ask is how can we look at these systems and learn what is working to both ensure that everybody has the right to equal justice or to justice and that we're striving towards systems that do help us get to a place where disputes can be resolved in a timely, fair, accessible manner that's predictable, etc. In my view, those are the goals, should be our goals. So I think it's more about how do we learn as we're working in multiple systems in multiple countries, because I think that's a very specific question that can really get to a lot of very important outcomes and approaches to really designing systems that can be much more effective all around for everyone, because as we've talked about during the day, people are looking for that system that's going to get them where they want to be sooner rather than later perhaps, or at least in a way that they perceive is the place where they will do the best by whatever their equities are. So I want to close by saying thanks again to everybody who's been a part of putting this together and say that I think one of the most important things that this conference has been about is about really focusing us all on thinking about how women fare in various justice systems, and I think that's a part of a bigger discussion that's going on around the world and work that we all do, our office does, many, many people do, to think about how we make institutions much more fair in general, so that the rule of law is important, justice sector is important, but so is every other institution, and they're all interrelated. So if we can help women gain political rights, economic rights, and help them have a bigger place in those systems, not only do we see better outcomes in terms of economic growth or in terms of the quality, hopefully of the laws that get passed and the issues that get raised, but I think that has an impact on the type of justice that is also available to people in their countries and their communities. I want to end on one note. I feel I always say this when I speak to groups and I'm glad you mentioned the role of men and boys. I would say this a little differently, yes, engaging men and boys is important, but I also think we need to be mindful, and I know one speaker said this before, women are not all alike, we are not a homogeneous group, and men are not homogeneous, so there are, and not all women are victims, not all women are good, not all men are bad. We need to be mindful that this is a complex landscape of people and that we're engaging people to help us make these changes not only at every level of the system, not only in every country, but that we're looking for the people who really want to help us have systems that are more fair, that give everybody an equal shot at the justice they deserve, and that we don't make assumptions all the time about who can help us do that the best. So we hope that we can continue this discussion later, and thank you again for all the work to put this together. Thank you, Kathleen, as usual, for, I work with Kathleen on many things and I'm surprised she still talks to me half the time, but thank you. Thank you also to our participants who joined in the conversation today. Thank you to everyone. We're going to move right into the last session, so if you'll bear with us, we'll just take one minute to transition and then do that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right, I think we're going to get started, if we could, with our last session of the day. My name is Joel Samuels. I'm the director of the rule of law collaborative. In my 15 years as a law professor, I've never before moderated a panel of zero, but that was my role today. As Hamid mentioned this morning, for those of you who are here, Pyle Shaw, who was going to present a case study to us, gave birth on Wednesday night to a daughter, her second child, their daughter, Maya, and down in Columbia, wasn't able to make it. We were going to have her appear via Skype, but she's still in the hospital today. So mother and baby are fine, but what I wanted to do then was just take a few minutes and talk a little bit about Pyle's research, highlight that for you, talk a little bit about the work of JustTrack and the rule of law collaborative, and then I've asked to me to sit up here with me, A, so I didn't feel so lonely, and B, so that he could wrap up our day's proceedings. The first thing I want to ask you to do is if you look in your packets that we've given you, in addition to the agenda and bios, there's a two-page front and back longer description of the project that Pyle is engaged in. It's a very important project and very relevant to today's proceedings, and it focuses on a program in Gujarat region of India called the MS program, which focuses on women's and girls' education and specifically education through human rights training, and she has done and will through the JustTrack program grant this summer be doing additional follow-up research on that program, its effectiveness, its impact on rule of law, the communal aspects of the program and their power, and I think that I won't go further into it except to point you in the direction of her program. Talking about that does give me the opportunity to mention a couple of things about JustTrack. First, this symposium is the first of what will be over the course of five years, 15 symposia that will be put on by JustTrack, and we're very excited first of all to have had this as our first topic to have had the attendance and participation that we've had and we're excited for the future symposia. The next two for this year will be abroad, but next year two of the three symposia will be in Washington, and all of that information will be available on our website, which is also in your course materials, the Rolk website as well as a separate JustTrack website, giving you a lot of information about all of this, but what I'll also tell you is that by attending today you will have been added to a quarterly newsletter that we'll put out on JustTrack that will update you about going on not just related to our programming, but in general related to rule of law, and this will keep you clued into the other symposia that we have, and we hope that you'll come to those future events. Our JustTrack program with the State Department is a big part of what we do with the rule of law collaborative, and the symposia are one portion of that program. The program also includes training in rule of law, two-day trainings our next session will be in June, open to the US government at this stage, focused on interagency cooperation and collaboration in rule of law programming, the newsletter and website which I hope you'll visit, and most important for the panel that would have happened today is research support for two faculty at the University of South Carolina to do research that is both focused on rule of law and connected to the programming of JustTrack, and so you see the work that Pyle is doing, Pyle is a professor in our College of Education, and a part of who spoke earlier to you will be heading to Uganda to do research this summer as well, supported by that same grant. The results of their research will be produced in a white paper that they'll be producing by the end of September, and that information will be summarized and posted on the website and available to the newsletter, so you'll be able to see the fruits of their labors and hopefully connect with them if you have any questions or information that you want to learn. I want to join sort of before turning over to Hamid in the chorus of those thanking the partners in this event. USIP has been a wonderful partner. What wasn't said earlier is that Hamid as you know, as many of you will know was at USIP before coming, so I was glad to see that the hospitality was still there for all of us, having stolen him down to the rule of law as the new deputy director for us, and we're hopeful and this, I think, gives strong indication that this will solidify the relationship between the two organizations, and most important are partners at INL who are granting agency and with whom we have this collaborative agreement and with whom we work very closely in these activities and we look forward to working closely with going forward. You'll have known a lot about USIP and INL before you got here. You'll have known very little, if anything, about the rule of law collaborative, and so I wanted to spend one minute telling you a little bit about us and what we do. You have, again, some information on us in your materials, but we are one of the leading centers on academic centers on rule of law in the country. It's a dangerous term to use, by the way, because we're also one of the only academic centers focused on rule of law in the country, so it depends whether you start counting from the top or the bottom where you get when you get to us. But we have a robust program that includes workshops and conferences on our campus focused on issues related to rule of law. We held a major conference on corruption last year and that was an academic conference that, like many of our events, and I think I was very happy that when a partner was talking earlier the moderator of our panel commented when she was done about the policy focus of her work and one of the things that we really focus on is that although we are an academic center we're very policy-oriented, policy-driven. We are not interested in writing for an academic audience only and we support research and work being done by faculty on campus with that very much in mind. We do other programming too. We are developing a fellows program that will have different aspects, including a short-term fellows program that will be open to government officials and leaders in civil society to take three to six weeks sabbaticals come down to us and we will provide an environment and some financial support for them to produce an article or work on the kinds of things that you don't get time to do in your day-to-day job to sort of sit back and reflect and share lessons learned or experiences or questions raised by the work that you're doing on a day-to-day basis and we're also in the process of developing a peer-to-peer workshop process that will focus on rule of law development around the world. The last point I want to make about the work we do is that we and I want to pick up actually on the comment that Stephanie made before in her sort of closing remarks of the last panel we do not view rule of law as a question simply of laws and legal institutions and it's very important to us that we embrace a very broad approach to rule of law. We have more than 60 faculty affiliates on our campus in departments ranging from the ones that you might expect, law, political science history to social work, public health, anthropology, geography and really anything under the sun. When I took over as director last July as a law professor, most people assumed that on campus even that this would lead to an even more strong orientation towards laws and legal institutions and they were surprised to learn as I worked my way around campus in the fall that my orientation is as much focused on access to water, access to education as it is access to justice that it's all part of a larger picture and if we only focus on access to justice we're in a myopic world where we're not actually making the kinds of meaningful, sustainable change that we all care about and that's important to our work. I think it distinguishes us from the other centers, academic centers focused on rule of law. I think it's exciting and this has been enforced in our institution by a change in our reporting structure we now report to the provost of the university and again this really emphasizes our interdisciplinary nature and that's that's a feature that we're very proud of and that focuses not only our work on our campus but the work we're doing through JustTrack and I think everything you've seen today and the hard work that so many people have put in to have such an interdisciplinary and broad based group government civil society and beyond on the panels in the audience I think really reflects our focus and at the collaborative so I'll stop there I wanted to share that with you and I will now turn things over to Hamid. So I want to conclude our symposium today by first of all offering my thanks, my personal thanks to the folks here at USIP who have always been proven not only generous but always a natural place for the nexus that we always seek to have, policymakers, practitioners academics and the like so this has always been a welcome place and a necessary gateway for the work particularly to Nicoletta Barbera who has been a staunch and worthy soldier and all the requests that we've made and answering our emails at the dead of night and to Kathleen Kunis who has always been my long time supporter here at USIP and the director of the Gender and Peace Building Program here at the institute. I have to say that we have covered a gamut of different subjects they're important ones worthy of particular attention and hopefully you have drawn as much from it as I have in terms of the important lessons learned and finally to bid you all a very nice weekend as we enjoy the remaining winning hours of this Friday. Thank you very much.


This is Bobby Seagull. He studied maths education at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, and these are the home assistants, Alexa, HomePod, Google Home. Let's play. Who directed the film Artificial Intelligence? How many syllables make up a haiku? What is the capital of Kazakhstan? Who created the dance move The Floss? Russell Horn on the backpack here. When was the retail chain Argos founded? Argos formed in 1973. Vest picture in 2018. Six. Courtney Kardashian. Two hundred and eighty nine. Frank Sinatra. Six. Kay, The Arts. And the winner is The Home Assistants. Just ridiculous.


Good day fellow investors. I hope you're doing great today. Three topics today. How inflation is very important to look at from a lifecycle perspective, even if it seems that it doesn't matter now. Secondly, how I protected myself from inflation over time. And that's the key whenever investing. When you are accumulating wealth, it's important that you do it over the long period of time. And even important and picking the right stock is to make the right financial decisions that seem right at the right point in your life. You will have huge opportunities, maybe 10 huge opportunities in your lifespan. If you pick five of them, you will be rich after 20, 30 years. If you miss on those, but you pick the best stocks at the wrong time, you won't do that good. Back to inflation. Number three, what are the opportunities to hedge yourself now from inflation? Let's start. We first have to ask ourselves what's going on in the world today. The answer is simple. Central banks have pushed so much liquidity into the system, printed money that everything looks great. As technology developments plus huge investments, thanks to low interest rates, keep prices down and disable inflation does allow banks to print money and put even more money into the system. Central banks have quintupled their assets in the last 10 years. This is crazy and this shows what can happen in the future. Another quintupling, you will see huge inflation, possibly high interest rates, and you should be hedged against that potential that can happen. However, nobody knows what will happen. Perhaps we will have the same situation as we had in the last 20 years. The average inflation in the last 20 years in Europe was 1.72%. Doesn't seem high, but it accumulates over time because it is 40% over 20 years. Similarly, in the United States, inflation was a little bit higher, 55% over 20 years. This means that if you could buy something for $1 in 1997, now the same item costs 1.55. And this is just the reported inflation. There is one video that I did about inflation, how the actual inflation rate is much, much higher. So you should be protected against that. If we go further back in time, 50 years, one item purchased in 1967 for $1 now would cost $7.45. A 645% increase. Now, how to protect yourself from inflation? You can buy a 30 year long treasury with a 3% yield, but inflation goes up, you're not that protected. That's a huge risk. You can buy a short-term treasury bond with 2% for one year, and then you can be flexible next year if inflation is higher or lower. Or you can buy a treasury that offers you inflation protection, tips they are called. But that's just to protect yourself. That's not really an investment. So as we don't know what will happen, central banks target an inflation rate of 2%. So everything that we do has to be targeted, so that or we take advantage of that inflation rate of 2%, or we are protected by earning higher yields, because you don't want to lose your purchasing power over time. So what did I do? Three years ago, I decided to buy a house in the Netherlands where I live, take a mortgage, take a fixed interest rate mortgage, because inflation is there to enable governments to pay off their debt easier, because they get more and more revenue from taxes as the inflation is higher, but their obligations, their liabilities remain fixed. So I thought if I do the same, if I put myself in a position as a government with a lot of that, then the governments will help me pay off my mortgage over time. And if inflation stays at 2% over the next 20, 30 years that I have to pay off my mortgage, I will do well because my payments are fixed, because I took a fixed interest rate mortgage, but my income is supposed to grow at least 40%, 50% thanks to inflation. So that's one way I protected myself. One note here, I'm not telling people to rush into buying real estate here, because when I bought real estate in the Netherlands, nobody wanted to buy real estate, prices were declining, but rent prices were soaring. So there was really an inflection point and I really was there in a lifetime and took advantage of the opportunity presented there. So I know you always want actionable ideas now, but investing is more about taking action when it is the proper time to do so, perhaps once in five years, not constantly, constantly finding investment idea. Buffett is happy if he buys one or two companies per year. So why do we think that we can find good investments every few months? So think about that also when positioning yourself, protecting yourself from inflation. Just to show you when I bought the house 2015 in the Netherlands and you can see that the number of sold houses per year basis was really, really low. Then in the last three years, as prices exploded, even to 100%, the number of sold houses doubled, which means that people don't like to buy when prices go down. And now that prices are at multi-year high levels, everybody's rushing in to buy. And that's the rationality you have to take advantage when investing. As Benjamin Graham says, you have to buy from the pessimists and sell to the optimists. So if you want to head yourself by investing in real estate, it's the same as investing in stocks. You find an area that has positive demographics, you find a piece of real estate that has a mode, you look at 1000 similar pieces of real estate, you try to find the 10 interesting price value, mode, long-term value, renting out possibility, whatever. You make five offers much below the asking price and then you buy one, the only one that gets the offer accepted. That's very difficult to do now in this crazy market. But I want you to keep this in mind for when the next opportunity in your life comes. So if you didn't head yourself three, four years ago in the US or in Europe, or perhaps you live somewhere where it's still cheap to buy real estate, also possible. So think it from a long-term perspective.  Okay, I have now this tool in my investment skill set and I will take advantage of it when the opportunity comes. Other inflation hedges I have discussed silver in a recent video and how it is a good risk reward inflation hedge. A hedge means that if nothing happens, you will probably lose money or you will probably underperform the market. But that's what a hedge is. However, if there is huge inflation, you will outperform the market. Therefore, it's enough to have a small part of your portfolio, perhaps in silver or in silver or gold miners. And I have also that I have invested in some gold miners. And I'm looking now at silver miners for more diversification. There are other inflation hedges like owning commodities, real assets, hard assets, which few of the companies of the stocks now on the SAP500 have. So I wouldn't consider stocks now as an inflation hedge due to high valuations, extremely high price to book ratios and everything. Thank you for watching. See you in the next video.


Hey there, this is Karthik. I'm a performance engineer at PayPal India Basically, what I do is try and make the PayPal website and the pages load really really fast I deal with front-end optimizations back in optimizations So I'm going to be at meta refresh and be talking about simple things like you know How you can actually make your web app really fast stuff like image sprite CSS optimizations and so on and On a more advanced level talking about things like HTTP streaming or other words chunk responses You know asynchronous JavaScript loading You know, we've also a little bit of you know talking on Google speedy, which everyone thinks is the next big thing I mean after HTTP 1.1 So we'll be talking about a lot of different things on how you can actually improve the speed of your web application So if you're really interested in making your you know applications really really fast You know giving your users the best user experience you definitely want to be at this top


Good afternoon. First of all I would like to thank the organizer of this EAA session for giving me the opportunity to participate in the discussion about centuries in Ethiopia and its colonies. Another special thanks must go to the Foundation Theodore Lagonico that found my project. The main aim of my project is to provide insights into the cultural interaction and social transformation between Greeks and italic population during their early iron age. Today I will present the preliminary results of my study focused on the comparison between the production and cultic use of Benhotrian UBM pottery from the century of Franka Villa Maritima and the UBM geometric pottery from the century of Apollo in Eretria. I have conducted two study campaigns in the Archaeological Museum of Eretria and in the Archaeological Museum of the Sibaritidae in order to select the appropriate vessel for the implementation of the project. Subsequently I have analyzed by digital microscopy, micro traces and x-ray analysis the two pottery productions. I have registered parallels and differences in the ceramic assemblage. The cultural influence that Greek newcomers and on the local community of southern Italy during the early iron age recently been subject of intense discussion. Scholars interpreted these encounters either as a completewal interactions or a more complex and dynamic process. Both theories are based on formal stylistical and contextual features of the material culture and on the cultural behavior and transformation of the italic population. Research in the centuries of Eretria offer field of reflection about shared ritual practice and the relationship between Greeks and native people in a wider perspective. Like in the most of cult plays, ceramic artifacts are the most important source of information to understand the ritual acts performed while offering access to social practice within communities. For instance, locally produced vessel recently found in the site of Francavilla Maritima in the Sibaritidae exhibit a hybrid character between Ubean, well-thrown pottery and local Enotrian-Ubean shapes. The production of this so-called Enotrian-Ubean pottery will suggest peaceful contacts with Greeks prior to the foundation of the Greek colony of Sibaritidae. Most of the Enotrian-Ubean pottery was found during the excavation in the Sanctuary on the Timpone della Motta. The archaeological site of Timpone della Motta is located on an hill between the today's village of Francavilla Maritima and the Ragganello river nearby the Greek polis of Sibarit on the Ionian Sea. An important sanctuary was located on its top. The first structure of this hill is a middle Bronze Age house on top of which much later an obsidian-long house was constructed which was in use during the last during the free quarter of the 8th century BC. It was replaced by a tangular wooden building with Greek plan around the last quarter of the 8th century BC. However, in the second half of the 7th century BC the sanctuary was apparently a place where Sibaritese people celebrated large festivals. The repertoire of the Enotrian-Ubean production consists mostly on Greek-type Ski-foy and indigenous-type Scodelle bow. But during the second half of the 8th century BC the production expanded to include larger craters, lecanae, calatiscoe, inocoi, amphorae, and biconical jars decorated with typical Eubian motifs. In the sanctuary the largest proportion of Sibs identified in contests related to the sacred building 5B and 5C which were in use during the 8th century BC. At the same moment they were produced also other kinds of vessels like the gray ware, the impasto pottery, and the matte painted pottery. Why is it important to study how pottery was produced in the ancient society? The study of pottery production is correlated to the determination of how pottery was made and for whom it was made. These questions are related to the manufacturing technology, to the rule and status of producers, to the integration between test organization of production and relationship between producer and consumer. With the aim to reconstruct the production of the selected vessels, to distinguish the different sharp eratoires of local and foreign pottery practice, I perform microscopic, microscopic and x-ray analysis. Microscopic and microscopic analysis allow the technique that the superficial traces of manufacturing and finishing techniques. These marks can contribute to a reconstruction of the technological process involved in shaping of a vessel and its surface treatment. In the first image you see the throwing grooves inside a crater fragment. In the second one this is the external surface of a crater showing traces of the preparation sketch. The other images related to a groove on bottom foot were created when the potter cut vessel of wheel with a cord. Then we have the regular striations left by a brush to paint the internal surface of a skiffus. The striation made by fingers running over the back clay in the inner surface of a skiffus. And the last images is about an hole cast by lamp popping showing an internal rim of a skiffus. For the identification of the manufacturing technique itself I use the x-ray analysis. By studying the orientation of the pores it is possible to detect manufacturing technique. Oblique inclusions and pores indicate wheel throwing. Horizontal ones at the joint indicate coiling technique and the pores around them means that the vessel is probably made by pinching. Now I will discuss the results of the technological analysis performed on the select vessels. I will start with the production of a typical UBM vessel since it's a good example of the first stash of pottery specialization. The rim to body fragment of the cup has one vertical handle attached to the rim and to the belly. This kind of handle lying at the same height of the rim. The decoration is composed of vertical lines painted with the multiple brush which is a typical tool used for decoration of UBM model. The decoration is quite simple vertical lines starting from the lip go over the base of the cup sometimes coming across each other. This type of decoration is painted also in the handle. All the decoration in this kind of cups has been made with only a single instrument and we can suppose that it was decorated without the help of the potter's wheel. Through the metroscopic analysis it was possible to detect on the external surface a fingerprint left by the potter that you can see in the first image. Probably while she was decorating the inside of the vessel which is covered with black dune paint. The radiographic analysis reveals some horizontal voids, fissures in the lower part and incision that are at the bottom or part of the vessel. These results indicate that there were imperfections and sometimes probably related with the primary forming technique. Similar microscopic characteristics have been identified in other similar cups. In the first image she is a small fingerprint was detected on the internal surface and the similar incision placed on the lower part of the cup was identified showing that this kind of vessel were made by potters that were at the same stage of specialization. The large bowl decorated in UBM style wheel made in decorating glossy glaze is a very unique piece due to the combination of local shapes in Francavilla with borrowed technique. The native bowl is its stake based on sorry Italian shape and it seems not to have been produced in Greece. We need stative shape and produced with a Greek technique. This bowl with concentric circles and wavy bands is a typical hybrid product. It was produced already from the beginning of the 8th century BC. Here we have another example. In the first image to the left the rim to shoulder fragment of a ski fos decorated with two horizontal wavy lines. This kind of ski fos was produced in Francavilla Maritima. The paint is black matte very similar for what it was used to depict the local matte painted basis. Fuller influenced by the local enotria pottery production is the upright stately incurving lip and carries a thin pink slip which is similar to that on native enotria pottery. The radiographic analysis reveals purling and continuous distribution of inclusions and obliquely oriented pores and inclusions. I'm now presenting the different stage of specialization of pottery production according to the studies of the evolution of specialist production. I summarized the many characteristics of each kind of specialization here in this image. Concerning this topic Rue and Corbetta ethnographic and experimental work has demonstrated that progress in learning wheel throwing is expressed by an increase in pot size and the pottery becomes more and more competent. According to these scholars the first specialization includes vessel up to three centimeters with potters using holding simple thumb index finger pressure because they do not yet know how to center a lump of clay on the wheel. A good example of the first stage of pottery specialization in erythria is well represented by the cups production. These kind of cups produced scientifically in the late geometric and it was produced for more than one century without significant changes. As cups are easy to make and were used in one of drinking heavens they did not require advanced skills and any failures in the production were inconsequential. Therefore they made ideal learning object for beginners. All cups for example show heresies in clay preparation. Another important things concern the fact that the cups were not exported or reproduced in Frankarilla Maritima. The production of this keyfoil requires a second stage specialization by the potters. This keyfoil as you can see in the first image was part of the grave goods in one of the graves of Machiavata necropolis in Frankarilla Maritima. Unfortunately the decoration is not present anymore probably the external surface was original covered with a light flip before painting the decoration. The clay is well depurated only few mica inclusions have been detected by microscopic analysis. The second keyfoss from erythria is chronologically older than the one from Frankarilla. The whole surface on the keyfoss is covered with a red glossy paint except the rim and the handle area. The paint has been applied with a brush without taking much care. The clay is also well depurated. For producing this kind of vessel the potters must be competent centering on the clay. While progression from beginner to expert potter is primarily indicated by vessel A there is a far-reaching diversity among the most experienced potters reflecting in the repertoire of shapes they could produce. A good example of this third stage of specialization is the crater. The crater here in the first images we have a crater found in a tomb of Frankarilla Maritima. It was manufactured in two or more parts. The traces on the attachment of the different parts are still visible inside surface of the vessels. What is very important is these plastic knobs that are made on the external rib of both the vessels both in Frankarilla and in erythria. This is a characteristic applied decoration found on a bionic crater of this period and it can put together the two bases. For what concern the application of the decoration it has been observed two different levels of execution. This image compares the decorative motifs of two different vessels. The first is a rim to body fragments of Kifos from Frankarilla and the second one is a rim fragment of a cantaross from erythria. The one from Frankarilla and has a single cross-seged losanga with interspaced dots and encircled by dots. A brown bed is covering the upper part. On the band a light brown horizontal wavy line has been applied. For the decoration of the cantaross light paint was used and inside the losanga and this vastic are was used as a motif. In the second case that I want to show you we have the upper wall in the upper part the wall fragment of a closed vessel from Frankarilla that present the same kind of motif pattern of a fragment of a cantaross from erythria. It is possible to make a comparison of the level of execution between the central similar pattern. It is clear the way the potter paints the dots that before filling the dots with the paint in the in the case of erythria he has painted a scratch meaning that the potter want to be very precise in the decoration. This is not observed in the upper example of the vessel from Frankarilla which has been decorated with the black paint without the outline. In the last part of the presentation we focus on the positive views of this ubn pottery ubn anothrium pottery from different contextual context in Frankarilla erythria. So what is very important regarding the development of the cult in the century on the timpana de la mota and the late 8th century society are the sin painted on apixas. The body of the vessel show a line of boys and girls offering a cup of water to assist godness while on the lead a girl and a boy dance together. The girl also in Idriska a smaller version of the vessel that increased world always contained water. According to Klaybrink it seems possible to interpret this shan as coming to age rituals to prepare adolescence for marriage. Susan Langdon has identified some shans and others I thought they're sanctuaries mainly in Greece and interpreted them along similar lines. The apixas depict specific rites that reflect the association of young panniers and girls with a godness. A more direct interaction with the Greek word is a tested in a grave of an eye-ranking anothrium leader found in the Burial Heria de l'Eau in the necropolis of Machiavata. The grave can be dated to about the third quarter of the 8th century BC. However, in accordance with the anothrium tradition a set of vessels was deposited by the feet of the disease. However, these vessels differ considerably from the grave's gift of contemporary burials in the Machiavata for a presence of a will-made crater of the Anothrium Ubia pottery class. Next to the crater a locally produced kiffos and a small handmade chocolate were placed. Of particular importance to weather is the discovery of a bronze vessel a calderon that was deposited together with the crater. The two vessels serve similar purpose in the Greek word that contain around wine mixed with water unlike the crater. However, the calderon has had several additional functions and was used to boiling meat and eating water as well. Indeed, several small bones found at the bottom of the calderon clearly attest to its function in the grave. The arrangement of the grave goods in the grave de l'Eau differs from anothrium burial's traditions and point to a very far-reaching alienization of the man buried in this grave. The last images that I want to show you is an assemblage of materials found in the context from the temple 5c. These samples of the blotch include pottery from the Ubia style in the upper part and at the same time the matte painted pottery and impasto pottery. So this kind of vessel we know were used for ritual activities in the same moment in the last quarter of the 8th century BC. Even in the images I didn't put the numbers of vessels we found. The majority of the shirts we found in this context was from the local impasto pottery. So it's possible to draw some conclusion. So far, unique are the potters on workshop producing the so-called anothrium ubn pottery on the potter's wheel decorated in glossy glaze. This production contains indigenous cork like codical naked bases and large poles but also Greek type stands from large craters and the craters themselves as well as a variety of nice thin walled drinking cups like skifold. It is evident that this production originated in the wish to make use of sophisticated wine drinking sets. We cannot be sure that where a ubn potter sitting on the wheel because there is no enough evidence of genuine important ubn material from the sanctuary or from the tombs. Local potters might have learned to produce this pottery not necessary at Francavilla Maritima because other sites which come into view are Ponte Cagnano, Pitecusa and Canalei Ankina but as yet there is a little evidence of such schooling of local artisans. Thank you for your attention.