This is the SF Productions podcast network Quincy the 10th or see the three that Darren Pamela Fertin not another bird disparate of show Land the show that shows trash culture of the 50s. No No, no, it's the show that gets into popular culture. That's not this trash culture Popular culture and anybody anybody that makes a comment like we're talking about trash culture of the 50s Obviously hasn't watched the show. That's right. So it's your fact straight. That's right I'm Mark Schmidbauer and I'm Wilbert Neil and tonight. We're gonna talk more about Marvel Comics Yeah, I bet you're saying hey, I thought this was gonna be one of the TV deals one of the TV shows Well, Marty was kind of under the weather and so he decided well We'll get the regular schedule back to normal real soon. Believe me. Yeah, any sure we will real soon So, let's see Well before we get into the big extravaganza want to tell you that we're on Tuesdays at six Wednesdays at ten and Thursdays at 3 p.m. Here on a CTV cable 21 and also if you want all right into into us and and Maybe you want to refute some more lies that we're told in that in that rag That's right. That's right. You want to write into box 1540 11 Well, I'm so high oh four three two one five. That's right when speaking I Want I don't want to say the name of it because the name of the publication because I don't want to publicize it That's right truth a certain periodical in This in the this fair city. Yeah did a story on a CTV as a whole and Let's see They don't really talk too much about our show but what they did talk about was incorrect They talked about the fact that we talked about the trash culture of the 50s. Yeah, as we told you it's popular culture Mostly 60s and 70s. We really don't talk about the 50s all that much That's because we just weren't really born yet I was born at the late late 50s and then I was and I was born in the in the mid 60s So really Marty was born in the early 60s. So there we are so really we have no frame of reference That's why we mostly don't talk about the 50s They just have nothing to say in that point and there was another there was another thing they said in there Oh, yeah about series Or about the fact you had to pay to use this station. This is a little plug for a CTV Actually, if you do a series on a CTV, you don't actually have to pay. You don't pay for studio time Let me make that very clear. You basically just have to pay for the tapes That's right, which is why you too should work or not work actually just come out here and do a show here on a CTV it's the public channel that anybody can do it. That's right even us. That's right And so that we just wanted to get that over at chess and there was another thing Yeah by galley another thing here. We're getting a lot of publicity. Unfortunately. It's all negative it seems that Somebody called the station and complained that I was acting drunk on one of the episodes on the the Columbus the forgotten Columbus episode well by galley Anybody that knows me knows good and well that I don't drink as far as acting drunk though now I act crazy sometimes but acting drunk. I just wouldn't know how to do that Perhaps the person that called might know a little bit more about that than me. That's right and But see now acting though is if I was acting drunk, then that's just a credit to my acting ability Yes to do something that I don't even know about so correct Thank you for recognizing my acting ability. Yes now with tonight's Heaped on abuse let's move on to the actual program Let's see. We so we're doing our third show on Marvel Comics. Yeah, see we've done we've done the humans We did humans. We did the aliens. We did aliens and All kinds of things there last time bad guys Um Now anybody that wasn't basically human and now we're going into the really the mainstay of As far as I'm concerned what has become pretty much the mainstay of the Marvel universe We're gonna be talking mutants today Mutants and more mutants, that's right basically The whole mutant thing probably started with the X-Men Yes, the X-Men back when they first started in the early 60s after they after Marvel God Oh, well, they got the fantastic four out there and pretty much some a lot of their well They're current main characters that are still around now. They they started with this X-Men thing and basically What you have here were um five teenagers who went to Charles Xavier school for exceptional Persons now, that's that's not exactly what it is Basically the school in upstate New York that um Charles, well, let me see if I can get a good picture of dr. Charles Xavier here for you This Charles Xavier is this the bald-headed guy in a wheelchair and his Main thing is well, let's see here's like a there's a good nice group shot nice group shot here I don't know how nice it'll show up, but it's a nice group shot and Charles Xavier is the guy here in the middle in the wheelchair so um He gets together these exceptional youths and by exceptional he has the ability to Detect mutants, which is basically what these X-Men are the X being the This X gene that they have in their makeup that um gives them their mutant abilities now. I have a question now I'll say this right in I've said this thing before when we've been doing Marvel Comics. I Don't read a lot of Marvel Comics, which is why Wilbur does a lot of the talking during these episodes I'm kind of playing kind of like the person who comes in and doesn't know a lot So I'm gonna ask you this um Is there is there a reason that like if all these people like gotten near radiation or what's the reason? Why I mean is is it just like stress brings out this is this X gene or they've ever explained? Why there are just so many darn mutants in the Marvel universe a good question Let's find out okay basically, I'm looking at it as being something that um Might have had might it could have had some good drawbacks to um. Oh, I don't know um Atomic testing and things like that, but it might have affected the parents and so When they had the offspring the offspring had this extra gene in there right it's which Develops into a mutant ability and it may have something to do with radiation They never really went back and said exactly what it is But that's kind of my feeling just from the time that the things were written that they started off I mean they're still going on now, but it's just the idea the first ones You know that um there might have been something to do with the radiation in there now There's probably some expert out there on Marvel comics right now that's watching this and they're gonna they're gonna write a letter and say no No, no, no, no, but anyway, that's that's kind of my theory just based on the the time that okay, they started off here anyway and as I guess I've said before um the mutant ability is something that these people were born with and Then as they get older It kind of comes to the fore kind of like if you have an allergy You're pretty much born with it, but as you get older it Makes itself known right and so that's pretty much how these mutant abilities do as they go grow older It develops and then it finally hits one point where it finally kicks in and so um That's it, but basically they started off with um five students that came to the school there was um Scott Summers who As well anybody that knows the mutants know is Cyclops he has the ability to shoot i-beams out through Playing along at home, but probably not There's i-beams coming out of here I Beams I mean anyway And he's pretty much the The team leader of the X. Oh, that's a nice one. Yeah, there you go Okay, he's kind of the team leader off and on of the X-Men at least of the early early X-Men the early incarnation of the X-Men Scott Summers there was Hank oh Well, well, let's just call him Hank because I can't remember what Hank's last name is and he became known as the beast kind of because of the well his mutant ability is the that he can cling to things and he's very athletic and Ain't just like clock crawl up a wall almost like spider-man yet He really uses on the cracks that are in the wall But any wall has enough cracks in it that he can okay gain a hold on and then he's very athletic And he can flip around his stuff. He was a gymnast really in school and so that's that There is Warren Warren well Warren Worthington the third or something like that And he's angel. He's called angel. He has these wings on his back that Come pop out and he can fly around Let's see go back to this picture or again Love well, there's there's like a Nice picture there and kind of shows his wings, of course, we're real far away. So I don't think you'll see him as well, but There's moving even close. Okay here. Here's Mr. Warren Worthington the third there and Now wasn't there another I'm thinking there was another character called the angel Like back in the 40s. I'm trying to find a reference to him, but it is quite possible there That is quite possible And he was well, he looks kind of like a snowman down here really but he's ice man and so he's Known now he can um There we go lower his body temperature immensely there And he was a 40s character Timely which became Marvel so I'm guessing okay that might be some there may well even be some sort of connection between this guy That's quite possible. They probably rehashed the name, you know And they like you say it it could be something could be like a grandfather or something.  Just don't get him around heat That's a problem then there's Jean Marvel girl and her ability she has Telekinetic abilities and she can also read minds and Things like that, but um, it's pretty much if you were a female Superhero back then you had to have some sort of telepathic powers because you didn't see the girls going out and punching out guys Right now super villains. You just didn't see it. I mean nobody did that then Exactly sue sue Richards had her invisible she turned invisible and she could create force field right and it was basically defensive type powers Yes, yeah, exactly And Jean can well she has these telekinetic abilities and she can also read minds. It's like she and Charles Xavier Well Charles can just read everybody's mind. He has just the greatest brain in the world That's his mutin ability a great brain ability and Then he has this computer that helps him to detect mutants but before he was kind of doing it himself and then he can Telepathically send messages this x-men I need you or something there's danger hurry and anyway, so um Back in the days he kind of had a thing for Jean but as time goes on Jean and and Scott got together and they're pretty much a Main couple in the the X world the X universe there, okay? And well they got to one point Where let's see Let's delve here a little delving into history History of the official handbook of the marvel this is the third Of the official handbooks the first being a paperback the second one being all in comic book form This one is loose leaf notebook form Now now this is something I want to mention just in the format of this now This is not at all a cut on marvel because both dc and marvel do this all the time. Yes, but I think I think that dc did the loose leaf who's who type thing just before marvel did this Yes, it's like they feed off each other all the time All right, somebody somebody came up with the idea and the other one said oh Hey, that's a good idea. Let's do it too. So let's do it too. But who who thought up the thing first, right? We don't know but marlton did marlton did punisher dc did lobo When we'll we'll compare and contrast these characters as as we go on but okay the first makeup was pretty much, um The five as I'd mentioned. Oh, this is glossy. So I don't know if that's the odds of this really picking up Oh, that's that's good. Okay. That does real good and there's mr. Great brain himself right up here and down here. We have mimic who kind of showed up one time and he had Everybody's powers all in one guy and but I think he died or something Too useful. Let's get rid of it. And so um, let's see here. We had There's several others who kind of show up and well, let's see as time went on they got more characters. Um Havoc who can Use sound waves to create earthquakes lorna dain. Well, I just don't know what she did Let's find out here lorna dain Don't know okay Changeling now changely is an interesting one. He can take on the form of anybody else Which is which is kind of useful powers. Um, no No, he just just tricks people into thinking they're them Yeah, james. He was a former adversary of the x-men actually and um He discovered he was dying of cancer. He shot the reform and so um He goes through all this stuff and well actually he did finally die. Anyway, so That was kind of their second lineup. They just got in these new characters their third lineup. Well, let's see We're introduced to Colossus who is like a he's a russian guy p pieter A lot of Ah, he's so powerful. He just throws those down or or he can just do a really good marlin brando Let's find out more about this colossus guy pieter nicolayovitch Resputing yes, that's him. Anyway, he um his mutant ability is to become um a metal guy at will Get a body of metal.  Well, havoc is still around havoc is actually, um alexander summers And that makes him scott summers is little brother So that's that's interesting and well, let's see here. Um nightcrawler. Oh, no, there's an interesting character kurt vagner Who is um Well german born he was the first recruit into the new team of x-men And well, there's a whole story behind that too. They had to go and rescue the original x-men from this living island And that was that's a that was quite a story there See banshee shon kassidy not related to david Or the other shon kassidy or the other shon kassidy because he just has a Uh piercing siren call that he does and by golly That's me. That's that's that's what he does Banshee's his name And as we know a banshee is a wailing kind of deal symbol of death or something for the irish Okay, sunfire who was a japanese guy probably kind of related dumbos directly to the um Dropping of the bomb on a roshimu. Yeah, just um Got his powers there I must say for what i've heard so far that x-men certainly seem to have done more marvels done a much better job of Of uh bringing uh foreign characters in and uh Because justice league and and all the stuff over dc has just recently started to bring in foreign heroes Yeah, yeah, I mean they actually they actually created a group called the global guardians Which was basically just like well heroes. We've mentioned like once Ever who happened to be from another country. We'll put them all in there. That's right And that's where they'll be yeah, okay never hear about them But those that was like a second well a third actual lineup of x-men there included all those guys Let's let's just go back and recap another one Okay, yeah, there's sunfire and thunderbird who was a native american um um Mutant right well something happened and he died but He's got a brother history Who came on later? Okay, that was one point where warren whirlington the third also known as um angel actually left the group And um, he went on to because he had all this money that he inherited. He just went away and went out Do his do his fortune thing right being Be just uh A rich guy But He ran afoul of a bad guy who we'll just mention later here nightcrawler also Let me let me go back to him his his not only he looks he looks evil He has the ability to teleport and when he does teleport it leaves this nasty um sulfur smell Really yes, oh yikes And it makes it sound like bam That's it sounds it makes bam You can just bam fall over the place and What a what a bizarre power Here's here's kind of a picture of nightcrawler bamfing up here in the corner Doing some bamfing Yes, bamfing with the best of him there he is right there in his little bamf cloud behind him Amazing On then there's the amazing rogue who has who's pretty much Pound for pound probably one of the strongest of the x-men at least as far as things go She can fly and what she does is she can take If she touches any Being she takes their power from them whether they have power or not If it's just a regular human she just takes their energy away and they just kind of fall asleep or fall into a coma or something But if it's somebody with a mutant power, she can take their mutant power and make it her own for a while Which is kind of and it kind of renders them helpless for a while Which is kind of neat.  There's Sprite who joined the x-men kind of came in and joined up with him She now has the name shadow cat and she's in Excalibur, which is a an english Mutant group, but we'll get into that Later a british mutant group is giving me that just english with british, right Oh, and of course There's storm. Let's see a storm come in here. Yeah. Yep storm. Um, what is well? Let me get her real name aroro prince. No That's the storm is not on there. That's odd. Well, let's go back to the last one storm. Okay aroro munro and she's from africa And she well, she was born in africa Well, she's born in united states. Excuse me grew up in africa and was kind of An orphan She was she was an orphan She kind of hung out on the streets and learned to take care of herself on the streets Um, she can pick any lock in the world and she's really kind of a formidable thief and her one great weakness Well, her mutant power is the ability to control Weather and create weather actually and she was kind of revered when she found her power as a god kind of by um Some tribal groups in africa But um and they found her charles xavier found her brothers from united states She has one weakness though. It's it's rare that you'll really find a weakness that is um Mentioned even she is claustrophobic Very very badly claustrophobic if she's in a closed in space. She just goes crazy. So That storm is she's also um, she became a leader of the x-men for a while when scott left To do some pursue other things She became a part-time leader of the x-men. All right Let's move along here. Um Okay, let's see Well by golly At one point old charles xavier miraculously got out of his wheelchair and he kind of became a A team leader there for a while too, which storm kind of well, she kind of didn't like the idea but well, she was happy that her former mentor was out and About and everything so she just kind of put up with it and magneto Well, we haven't mentioned any of the bad guys yet. I suppose we should If nobody else at least magneto magneto Is the master of magnetism Is a bad guy Right here All right golly if they ever did him, I guess leslie nielsen Somebody could play magneto Anyway, he's kind of a contemporary of xaviers charles xaviers except Charles xavier what basically what he wants to do is he wants Mutants to be able to exist alongside normal humans peacefully can't we all just get along exactly where magneto thinks Well, we're better. We're stronger. We should rule Yes, indeed That's what he says to the guys that don't like him Yikes, anyway Magneto was pretty much the first bad guy that the the x-men never came across And since then they've been crossing paths and at one point He reformed enough to think that charles might be right So he joined up with the x-men to help them in their requests for getting along with humans But along with that people always say well, wait a minute.  You're a bad guy So those x-men must be bad guys too And so they started thinking that the x-men is outlawed And that just started a whole big mess to do and mess and everything But um for a while there magneto was actually considered a good guy and He was kind of a leader of the x-men at a point Okay, now I'm moving right along here. We've got um Well a couple more joining in here Sylocke who has the ability to probe and sometimes destroy the minds of others Well at this point she was just simply able to probe their minds here. She is right over here and over here We have dazzler who is um Has the ability to transform light into power And she can also create amazing light shows which is something that a lot of mutants Since then have also the ability to do to transform light or sound Well, she transformed sound into light. I guess that's what it is. And so um She can use that to blind or to amaze because for a while there dazzler was um, she kind of came in in the mid 70s because They kind of did disco shows around dazzler and she became a star in her own right She was a she was a performer at that point. Yeah. Yeah a singer and all and she did her own light show So it was really probably um Good for her. I mean easy for her to do and people were just amazed and she didn't have to pay anybody So And that's kind of her view and then okay down here We have another guy Long shot who's uh who comes from another dimension and it's kind of wow kind of strange really he's from a dimension where um TV is reality kind of Wow, and so um kind of like this show It's just kind of an odd thing. Let's let's see if they Hey Nope, not at all. They don't they don't they don't go into that a bit Let's see here Okay, he's an artificial created humanoid from another dimension Or a long shot is one of the few x-men who was not earthborn an earthborn mutant He joined the team upon arriving there in an amnesiac state and let's see He teamed with the x-men and overthrowing the rule of mojo and his native dimension And as they go on with the stories you find out that it's a dimension and mojo Kind of creates shows and creates Androids to be in the shows, but the androids are kind of sentient beings after a while And they don't like being controlled and so they always try to escape and sometimes they do get out and other times they don't Okay Let's see here Who do we have left? Well, I know I know one we have left At least one okay, um Wolverine let's say he's he's gone through many changes In his time, um, when he first appeared he Fight in the Hulk and he was kind of like this guy. Yeah. Well, well, let's see actually kind of like this one this guy The many costumes of wolverine how many faces of wolverine And um, he was just kind of he was up there in the canadian outback. Wolverine is canadian or at least lots of them He's just done that and um Wolverine um, his name is Logan. That's the only name that we know him by By golly, you mean we're done already We have any hard to believe that's on the surface here.  I guess we will Okay, well, I guess we'll have to get into wolverine's amazing history later Uh next time we're going to be talking with the all three of us talking about the history of camp acolyte Yeah, at least as far as we know now as far as we know, but who knows what'll be hot next time It could end up just being another one of those columbus things Action drunkers on We'll see you next time


Welcome to CN Live's Daily Report on the Julian Assange expedition hearings at Old Bailey in London. This is Joe Laurier reporting for CN Live. Day 10, an interesting day in court, a bit different than the others. There were no technical breakdowns or coronavirus scares or anything like that. We just had some testimony that we're going to go through here. In the morning we heard from Christian Brothof, a professor of computer science at Berne University in Switzerland. What he did for the defense was lay out the chronology of the publication of the unredacted state department cables that are at the heart of this issue. Now we've gone over this territory before, and I suspect we'll hear about it again. We heard last week from John Getz, the German journalist. He spoke in detail about this, but Brothof was brought in by WikiLeaks to do an investigation by the defense, an investigation into the publication of these cables to set out this chronology. What he told the court was, of course, as Goetz had said and others, that the origin of the publication of the unredacted state department cables that had the names of informants. Remember, the government is harping on informants being endangered by having their names released by WikiLeaks. They're saying even that those are the only publication crimes that he's facing is when he published something with the names of informants, which they consider defense information and therefore protected by the Espionage Act. Oh, there's no separate statute against naming informants. While they focus on that, that's why the state department cables and how they were published and in what order is crucial. The government and their indictment is saying that Assange published these cables with the big impression, and that they've left about the first two weeks in court, that he was the first and the only one basically to publish these cables. And therefore he's liable for violating the Espionage Act because, again, those informants names are supposedly defense information. Whereas Brothof pointed again to the book by David Lee and recording of The Guardian. They published this book in February of 2011. One of the chapter titles was actually the password to this unredacted cable. If you recall, WikiLeaks had put the entire unredacted portions that were not yet had been redacted and published by media partners into this temporary website with the password. And the intention was to spend a year to roll these out with partners in various parts of the world dealing with cables that were related to their area of interest. And instead, David Lee, we learned actually pressured Julian Assange very much so to give him the password. And a passage from David Lee's book actually reads David Lee and Luke Hardy. They wrote in third person about themselves. And I'm quoting from the book that Assange was pressured by Lee to give him the password to the entire redacted file. Assange refused. After more pressure, he finally said he'd given 50% now. And Lee refused and quote, he said, all or nothing. And then this is a direct quote from David Lee, what happens if you end up in an orange jumpsuit and wrote to Guantanamo before you can release the full files. In return, he would give Assange a promise to help to keep the cables secure not to publish them until the time came. That allowed Lee to pressure Assange to the point where he relented. He gave in. He gave the password to David Lee. And he was under strict orders not to publish any of these documents until there was agreed upon time. Again, most of these cables were for newspapers other than The Guardian and the major media partners who had already published several articles before this. Well, in February 2011, David Lee and Harding published his password as a chapter title. It wasn't until August 25th that a newspaper in Germany, Freitag, and this is Guantanamo's testimony, published that they knew about this, that the password led to this website, temporary website that had the unredacted files encrypted. They did not actually provide the details how to do it, but they gave hints. And we then learned, and there's a lot of other smaller players in here, a BitTorrent that was put up a blogger here in Australia named Nigel Parry in the relation of Bob Parry, who also wrote that he was trying very hard to put the two together, the file and the password to try to open up encryption. And then finally, who succeeded was Cryptom.org, this New York-based website that's described by the prosecution as a rival to WikiLeaks. And it indeed is. It's older than WikiLeaks and they've been in the business of putting out dumps of classified material for a long time. So Cryptom published that and WikiLeaks learned of course of this and they held a vote online, a global vote. People could vote on Twitter and Facebook, whether WikiLeaks should now also publish. And one of the arguments during that debate over that vote was should WikiLeaks publish this so that the people, the informants who might be at risk inadvertently now by this leak by Cryptom could then get to safety. If the feeling was that only governments would perhaps know about Cryptom, a very few people would, and that they could also use the password and the password to try to unencrypt it themselves and that they would put these informants in danger. So it was ironically, and I'll tell you why, the strength and the breadth and the width and the reach of WikiLeaks, the many, many followers they had that WikiLeaks used to try to alert informants to get out. Now, at one point Gratov was under cross, so on a redirect examination from Mark Summers and Mark Summers asked him, have you seen these documents on Cryptom recently? And Gratov said, yes, I accessed them last week. These are the sorry, the State Department cables unredacted. He said he accessed them last week, and Summers then asked, was Cryptom ever prosecuted for this? Gratov said, no, the defense never provided me with this kind of information. It's an interesting question that hangs out there. Why is Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, why is Julian Assange, the one who's under prosecution right now and the threat of extradition, why was he arrested? Why was he guided for doing something that Cryptom did before him? And that was the result of this action by the two Guardian journals by putting the password out there. This is a question that hangs over the court. Why wasn't the New York Times and the Guardian and the Spiegel and Baiz prosecuted for publishing the same documents that WikiLeaks did at the beginning of this with the Afghan and Iraq cables as well, and some of the State Department cables? So clearly they're going after Assange, and we learned later why, from Joel Smith, the prosecutor, who clearly said that, and this is the most interesting thing of the whole day's testimony, in my opinion, that they admitted in their morning testimony, the prosecution, Joel Smith, the prosecutor, that the government was trying to establish that even if WikiLeaks was not the first to publish these unredacted State Department cables with the informant's names, that it may WikiLeaks liable, more liable than the others who published before them. Why? Because WikiLeaks had a larger reach on the internet and included a search engine with the files, while the ones like Krypton still does not have a search engine, as far as I know. So Krypton, the torrent site that published it, they didn't have a search engine. So WikiLeaks has a much larger audience and had a search engine. So the government is admitting now it doesn't matter who published first. We're not going after the others. We're going after WikiLeaks because of the influence that it has. This is really key here. It has the influence that the smaller websites did not have to publish really damaging information to the United States. Some of this damaging information has come out in open court over the first two weeks and now the first day here. That includes assassination programs, torture, the torture of some of a Lebanese German man who was completely taken by mistaken identity, admitted to by the CIA later on. This is all played out in the court and this is what WikiLeaks has revealed. Now the defense is trying to bring all this out to show what the value of WikiLeaks is, that it is unveiled these kinds of crimes. That's the very reason the government is now admitted in black and white for everyone to hear why they're going after WikiLeaks because they had more influence. Now the New York Times has even more influence than WikiLeaks, but they have nowhere near published the amount of material damaging to the US that WikiLeaks has. Of course the New York Times, one could say state managed to some extent. They are very much close to government and they could be counted on usually not to publish embarrassing information. I tweeted earlier today that the US government since the Second World War has been committing crimes, has been overthrowing governments, has been invading countries to pursue their economic, strategic and economic interests, although the corporate media covers it up by saying that this is spreading democracy. Here comes Julian Assange almost single-handedly removing that cover from what the US has really been up to. This is the key role of foreign policy reporting and that's true reporting in my view in the big corporate media, particularly in the US, which is never to really reveal what US motives are, to paint them as being benign, as trying to bring democracy to poor people around in the world, a rehash of white man's burden of colonial days. Here's Assange revealing that that's the target. That is why they're going after Julian Assange. They basically said it in court today because not that, but that they have too much of a reach. So the other players are going to let go, the establishment media, they still feel it's on their side, so they're going after Assange. And it's a very similar argument in a way, the way they've dropped the charge that's in Gordon Cromberg, the assistant US attorney in Alexandria, Virginia, who has said in his affidavit that Assange is not a journalist. Well, they've dropped that now. They are not saying he is a journalist, but they're saying nothing precludes them from prosecuting a journalist in the Espionage Act because subsection 93, we went through that 79 and 3e, we went through that yesterday at some length. So the government is admitting that they're going, that they can go after a journalist, hence Assange is a journalist. And now they're admitting that the journal, that Rick Leakes didn't publish these cables first, but it doesn't matter because they've got a lot of influence and reach. So we're going to go after them. It was stunning to see this again played out, and one wonders what impression this is making on Magistrate Vanessa. Vereza, I do have to say that as the prosecution has done with every witness, they tried to undermine the impartiality this time of Grotov. They didn't question his expertise as a computer scientist, but he was basically called, you are a biased and you are partial, they called him. Because why? Because in 2017, he'd signed a petition, like many of us signed, of a letter, an open letter actually, to go to President Donald Trump in 2017, asking that the grand jury be ended in the charges we dropped against Julian Assange because of the threat to press freedom. Grotov testified he didn't remember signing the letter. That didn't seem very strong, but that's what he said, and it's possible he didn't remember, but Smith, the prosecutor used that as a way to undermine his impartiality, so you're just a WikiLeaks reporter. So how can we believe anything you're telling us? Well, of course, what he was telling us was based on his expertise as a computer scientist in analyzing these documents to show when and the public record about when, who published first. And he did a study, not only of that, but also of which documents were classified or not. Because again, the prosecution brought up, which they had before, these 133,000 other state department cables that were published by WikiLeaks in August. Now, I think the government's trying to muddy the waters here by including those August releases, which dealt with documents from U.S. missions in many, many countries, Ukraine, Yemen, Israel, Russia, China, Syria. These were tables from the U.S. missions in these countries that Gotov studied and testified that none of them were classified, none of them were classified of the 133,000. The government's alleging some of them had a marking inside in the content, not in the metadata or above where you would see if it was classified or not, that these were marked strictly protected. In other words, there were performance names there. Now, I don't believe that the government's firmly established, although they may have or they might be right, that in some of those documents there were performance names, but nothing on the scale of what was released in the unredacted cables in the chronology, as we've been discussing first because of this password by David Lee and Luke Harding in their book, which led to all the events up to WikiLeaks deciding on September 2, 2011, the day after Krypton dumped the entire thing for the public to read, to also publish it. They did it in order to alert informants and after a vote, and this was something that the government just kind of passes over. This is an important reason why WikiLeaks published them is because they were already out and the point needs to be made that WikiLeaks would not have put out the unredacted cables on September 2, 2011 had it not been for Harding and Lee putting out the password on a February level, which led to the Freightag article and then the attempts by various people to crack it, which Krypton did and published before WikiLeaks. So without the Lee password as a chapter title, WikiLeaks would never have done it because as we heard, they were planning to roll it out over here. Now, the Guardian at the time on September 1st after WikiLeaks made a statement, blaming the Guardian for this catastrophe because they put the password out on there, they issued a statement saying, and I quote from the Guardian, this was from September 1, 2011, the day before WikiLeaks published, but the day of the publication by Krypton that quote, it's nonsense to suggest the Guardian's WikiLeaks book has compromised security in any way. Our book about WikiLeaks was published last February. It contained a password with no details of the location of the files. And we were told it was a temporary password, which would expire and be deleted in a matter of hours. It was a meaningless piece of information to anyone except the person who created the database. No concerns were expressed when the book was published. And if anyone at WikiLeaks had thought this compromised security, they had seven months to remove the files that they didn't do so clearly shows the problem was not caused by the Guardian's book. That's the Guardian's position. We move on to the afternoon. And I'm not making a judgment about whether that was true or not, whether they may very well have thought that it was a temporary password, but clearly it wasn't. So there was either miscommunication there or they're not telling the whole truth, but it was an active password that they published. So it could have been a big screw up that led to all of this and nothing to Ferris the intended by the Guardian. But indeed the publication of that password led to the sequence of events that we heard in the morning testimony in which led to the government admitting that yes, okay, WikiLeaks wasn't the first and they weren't the only one. The indictment only talks about them publishing it, but they had this reach and therefore we got to throw this guy in jail because he's dangerous. The afternoon saw quite an interesting reading of testimony by Cassandra Fairbanks. Cassandra Fairbanks is a writer for Gateway Pundit. She's openly a WikiLeaks supporter. Before her testimony was read and she was standing by to testify online. The government and the prosecution said that they agreed that she had stated that she's a WikiLeaks supporter. So that was an important contention. A point of contention was whether this was hearsay or not. She is going to testify about what she heard from a Trump insider about what was planned by the U.S. government against Julian Sange. Back in an October 2018 conversation, the defense made an interesting point where I was not aware of, I don't know if this is only in British law or also in U.S. law, but they said that hearsay doesn't apply to political testimony. So that's probably the reason why her testimony was read by Edward Fitzgerald, the lawyer for the defense, and Cassandra did not actually appear on the screen. But what she read was quite dramatic. Parts of this was known already because she's tweeted about this and spoken about this online. But she testified in the read testimony that Donald Trump, president of the United States, had personally ordered Julian Sange's arrest from the Ecuadorian embassy in London in April 2019. And she said she learned about this in October 2018 directly from a man named Arthur Schwartz, who's a Trump backer and she says a member of the president's inner circle and a close aide to Donald Trump Jr. And what he told her in 2018 was that the U.S. would have a Sange taken from the embassy, that he would only be charged with the Chelsea Manning leaks and not for Vault 7, the CIA Vault 7 leaks that came in the Trump administration in 2017 or for the DNC email releases in 2016, that the United States would again go after Chelsea Manning to get her to testify more, to get her to testify against the Sange. And that Richard Grinnell, who was at that time in 2018, the U.S. ambassador to Germany and later became the director of national intelligence, had worked out a deal with Ecuador to hand a Sange over. He also told her that the order to get a Sange had come directly from Trump. And he said that the U.S. would not seek the death penalty against the Sange, simply to make the, well, to make the extradition possible, since that would stop it from Britain. And Ecuador also had stated that President Alen and Moreno had stated that if they're going to kill them, and she acted both of the words in usual, we won't turn them over to the U.S. So that was one of the assurances that Moreno wanted that he wouldn't face the death penalty and Britain would not extradite him for that reason either. So that is what she learned from Schwartz in October 2018. And guess what? It all came true. Everything that she said exactly happened that way. Now, of course, before she knew that all came true, she went to London to see Julian Assange and went to the embassy. This would have been in January 2019. And she told Assange everything about what she'd heard from Schwartz, even though Schwartz had told her not to tell anyone. So she says in her testimony that Assange put a radio on to try to block their conversation because he was aware that he was being surveilled. When she returned to Washington from London, she was contacted by a furious Schwartz who said that he'd learned exactly what he had told Assange. And of course, she concluded that it was the only way he could know that was through surveillance of the embassy, U.S. surveillance of the embassy. And when she tweeted about all of this, Rick Rennell then contacted her employer at the gate where Pundit tried to get her fired. A panicked Schwartz informed her that there was an investigation into who leaked the information to her, namely him. I want to make an aside here. I know Richard Rennell. He was the spokesman for John Vulton at the UN. I was a UN-based correspondent for a quarter century. And I was there when Rennell was the spokesman. He was quite disliked by the press and by me, I said, he goes, he didn't like a question I asked at the room briefing once. And he rang me up to chew me out. So I could imagine him ringing up Cassandra Fairbats post to try to get her fired. I also know Cassandra met her in Washington. And she certainly is a WikiLeaks supporter. And she did assigned, one might say, a service by going to try to warn him. Not that it would help him very much, because everything that was laid out by Schwartz happened. He was dragged out of the embassy. He was only charged with demanding leaks. They're not seeking to death penalty. And now we did learn about Trump's direct role in that. Now, why is that important for the defense? Because they're trying to make an argument here in these hearings that this is a political prosecution. And if that can be made, that clearly violates the United States, United Kingdom extradition treaty, prohibits an extradition in a political case. Now, Queen Elizabeth II, that was petitioned to help Assange. And she responded, she doesn't intervene in political matters. So it was maybe a slip there by the queen that she admitted this was a political case. But here we have Cassandra Fairbats hearing from this Trump insider, saying that Trump ordered the arrest of Julian Assange and the prosecution we've heard from other witnesses, the prosecution of Julian Assange. And this came after he turned down the supposed deal that Dana Roebacker, the congressman came to the embassy. We heard about that yesterday in the testimony from Jennifer Robinson, that Roebacker came and made this offer. You give us the name of the source on the files, the DNC files, and we'll get you, we'll drop charges. Assange refused to release his source. And lo and behold, we have Donald Trump ordering Julian Assange's arrest. So a pretty interesting day in court, not as Phil and Graham Packers yesterday, but we have one more day of testimony, I think, from a witness who couldn't appear today. The whole issue of witnesses and their schedules became along the discussion court that we have privy to us in the media who have who have video link access. Normally in the US court, when these kinds of discussions take place, they're either in the judges chambers, or they come up to the bench and whisper one another. But in the British court, it's right out in the open. So we got to hear all this argument about witnesses and basically the coronavirus scare of last week, which cut out a day and a half of testimony, screwed up the defense's witness schedule, and they're trying to reschedule it. So they're going to try to, she's getting very impatient about this, Vanessa Barrezzo, and wants this thing done. She's really pushing this forward, moving this forward as much as she can. So after tomorrow's testimony, we're going to be hearing for, I think for three days, medical testimony about the state of Julian Assange's physical and I presume also mental health. So that was today, day 10. Again, the chronology of the leaks and the government essentially saying, well, it doesn't matter if Julian Assange didn't go first. They published the redacted files. Of course, it does matter because if you listen to the testimony that we heard today from the professor in Switzerland, and you hear other testimony that we heard earlier, it matters that weak leaks would not have ever published that redacted files, had this whole chain of events not happened. But government is trying to gloss over that. And secondly, we heard Cassandra Fairbac's dramatic testimony about Trump, about Grinnell, and Grinnell having worked out the deal. And so we got what turned out to be true, the exact strategy of the US government to get Julian Assange. Before I leave you, again, if you're stopping in the Starbucks to get a cafe latte, think about sending that $5 over to us at patreon.com. Backslash, CN Live so we can continue to bring you these daily video reports in detail about what goes on in that courtroom in London on the major, major extradition hearing of Julian Assange, the publisher and former editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks. So for CN Live, this is Joe Lauria, signing off until tomorrow.


Welcome to Fiji Symposium 2019 in Cairo, Egypt, where I'm very pleased to be joining the studio today by Patricia Aduse Poku, who is Commissioner and Executive Director of the Data Protection Commission in Ghana. Welcome to the studio. Thank you. Now I'd like to start off by talking a little bit about data privacy and it's a subject which is very much in people's minds and certainly has been discussed here as well. I wanted to ask you what are the main data privacy issues in digital financial services and how is Ghana addressing those issues? So the issues that face Ghana are also the global challenges that are being addressed so it's not unique to Ghana. I'd like to make that point. But the issues around transparency at the point of collecting the data, processing of the data in machine learning and artificial intelligence, there are implications around high volume data collection and processing beyond the borders of one country, which then takes out the whole privacy requirement for retention, which is another key area. We also have an area around the consent of the individual, how that is managed in the whole process of managing big data and profiling of the individual based on other areas of data collected on them and aggregated together. How do we enable the voice of the individual in that whole processing of their data and also give them that privacy which in Ghana as in several other jurisdictions is a fundamental human right. So we have a regulator's dilemma in being an enabler of the use of new technology and technological advancement and also having to protect the rights of the individual. Now I know that prior to this position you had another position as well obviously. You've got a good global perspective. I just wanted to find out in terms of regulations perhaps is enough being done to protect data privacy? So we touched on in just one of the sessions we've sat in today around the issues that are specific to Africa as a region as compared to the global north western states where the customers are more savvy, more assertive, very willing to exercise their rights as against the African culture of not wanting to complain, having a high language barrier, problem literacy issues and the unaddled population that is not technically quite active. And so there are specific issues that are African compared to the other areas of the world which we are battling with. Also another critical area of challenge is the skills deficit that is obviously a global problem but more acute here because the whole concept of data protection is new. And so having the skilled professionals with enough knowledge and experience to deliver and enforce the requirements of legislation which is not very existing in many African regions also is a big problem. And are governments doing enough to protect people's data privacy? So when we talk generally governments in Africa the percentage of governments that have actually taken that proactive step to pass the law are less than 20 of the 55 African countries and the African Union is leading, working with us, the established commissions in discussions as to how to improve the enactment of laws in Africa also to also standardize as the laws come up the requirements. And finally I mean you've taken the time to come here and I wanted to ask you what's the benefit of attending this event, this symposium and how do you think that it's going to make a difference? It's good because there's mutual learning between myself as a regulator listening to the concerns and the challenges faced by the service providers here as you give back as you give them knowledge of the regulators perspective and the expectations of the industry sectors. And then you take back the learnings based on their peculiar, you know, perceptions and understandings and the challenges it presents to them as service providers back. I've learned quite a lot listening to colleagues in the financial sector today and part of it is a pleasant understanding that there's a lot being done, a lot of proactive work around the choice of technology, the implementation of new technology, design of systems and the way the service providers are proactively trying to address the issue of privacy and also the other area where the whole doubt around whether this is really something that we should be enforcing and how it's limiting the ability to, you know, use new technology and aggregated data to deliver best service to consumers and whether the whole decision around protection of consumers should be left to service providers especially typically in the African region where there are so many challenges in managing the user expectations so it's great insights. Well these conversations I'm sure we'll be carrying on a lot into the future but thank you so much for joining us in the studio today and we hope to catch up with you again soon. Thank you.


You know, I'd really like to learn more about Ebola and how much of a threat it really poses to society. I know some doctors have written some very scholarly articles on the topic, but I tried reading one I got lost in all the medical terms But I don't think that what I hear on the news gives the full story. I'd really like to learn more I know what you mean about those articles written by experts unless you speak their specialized language It is hard to read what they write for others in the same field But there may be a way around those articles to find the authoritative information you need Really? What do you mean? Well, think about it. If someone is an expert, she might want to share her knowledge in different ways for different audiences For different audiences? Right. So a doctor will communicate one way with other doctors, but in a different way when trying to get information to people who aren't doctors And if you can tap into that information, it will be easier to understand and still be accurate This sounds great. Information from someone who knows what she's talking about yet directed at the general public But where would I find that kind of information? Let's think this through If a doctor is communicating with other doctors, the doctor will want to be precise and will use medical terms and will assume that the audience understands That would happen in a scholarly journal article or a presentation at a conference of experts But to reach out to others, maybe that would happen in a blog post Sure, some experts have their own blogs. This sounds good What about in a magazine article? A magazine that anyone might read That would be another place But if the magazine article is written by a journalist about an expert's work, you'd have to be careful that the information wasn't watered down or misinterpreted So let me see if I understand this A blog post by an expert would be more reliable because it was written by the expert But something written by a journalist or anybody other than the expert might get things wrong? Exactly. This happens sometimes, so you'd need to be careful to check the accuracy of the information as best you can We've talked about scholarly articles, magazine articles, and blog posts What other formats of information should we consider? There are always books. And with these, consider who wrote the book and who it is written for Then think about what we've talked about already A book could be scholarly, written for others in the field, or it could be written for a broader readership The same could apply to videos Remember, information creation is a process, and the format that information takes isn't set in stone An expert doesn't only write scholarly articles and books Try to find the information you need presented in formats that meet your needs You know, I never thought of it like this So this means that when I create information, I should be thinking about my purpose for creating it And who it is meant for, and how that will affect what the information looks like And how I distribute it You've got it. When I post on my personal blog, I need to keep in mind that its purpose is to teach people Who are new to sewing the basics and tips and tricks that will enhance their sense of accomplishment The videos are teaching tools, and are slow-paced to encourage learning But in my job, I write about trends in the fashion industry for designers of clothing patterns That is a very different audience, and if I made a mistake and added a video of how to read directions on a pattern I would be sure to hear from my disgruntled readers


Mae'r 1 o ddysgu golf clwps yng Nghymru 425 yma yn cyflawn i'r bach o'r cyflawn i ddoedau. Ac rwy'n credu yn gwybod yn ddwy. Felly mae gennym yn ei ddwy i'r clwps yng Nghymru, rydw i'n rhoi 6 o 8 sgol a'r ddwy'r ddwy ar y cyflawn i'r 425 yma. Rwy'n cyflawn i ddwy rwy'n rwy'n meddwl i'r ddadwch, ac rwy'n gwnaetho'n meddwl gael o'r 14 o ddwy yn ei ddwy a wahanol, Felly, ynddo gyfo'n gwneud yn ddwy wedi'u gweld sut mae'r fadail ar y cwrs. Mae'r gwneud i'n wych yn rhyw ddefnyddio'r golff clwrs i'n syniadau ar unrhyw ychydig i gyflawn i ddwy o'r cyflawn i'w ddwy i ddwy, a'n gwneud i ymwys y ddwy i'r cyflawn o'r cyflawn do i wneud i chi. gyda'r gael yma. OK, mae'n dweud yma yma yma. Yn ystod yma'r falch yma? Mae'r ddiweddol yn gyfrasilol. Mae'r llai. Mae'r llai yn grwydol o'r newydd yma. Ar y ddweud yr adrodd gyflym. Mae'r ddweud yn grwydol. Mae'r ddweud arall. Mae'r ddweud. Mae'r ddweud. ac mae ein cyfnod o'r flach ar ôl, ond rhaid allio'r adrwysedd i'ch ddechrau. Ac yw fy moddol yn rhan o hyn, rwy'n dechrau i ddweud â gweithio. Roedd eisiau gyda rhai ac iddo yn bwysig i ddechrau, rydw i mewn hreid, ac yn dweud, mae'r ddod o'r ymddangos arall yn gallu ddim yn ei siaradau. Rydw i'n ffordd y gwaith, rydw i'r llwyddo i'r ddweud, mae eich tym yn ei ddweud. Ac mae eich ddweud, felly rydw i'r ddweud, Ia'n ddod o'r gweithio y cwmhlynedd. Ond oes yn fwy i ddim yn ddysgu'r ddau. A gyd yn ei ddweud y cwmhlynedd. Felly efallai efallai eich ddau. Yn ymgyrch, ydych yn ei ddau o'r ddau. If you don't like what you see, then just hurl abuse in the comments section below. That seems to be, yeah, that's what I'd do. In fact it's not what I'd do, but it's what a lot of people do. Right, green is clear. Let's see how we get on. So like I said, giving me conference. Love the short clubbing hand. I just picked it up, look at that. Mi'n gweithio'r bobl. Mae'n gweithio'n gweithio eistedd. Yn rhodol. Yn ymdawod y ffordd o'r hyn ac rydyn ni'n gwneud hynny'n fedri ar y cwrs, ac mae'n gweithio'r gweithio'r bobl yw'r rhaglen. Felly, y dyfodol yn ymdannu, mae'n gweithio'r cyflau'r hynny'n credu allan ar gyfer y byd. Mae yma fel yma yn y ceisio'r gweithio, ac mae'n gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Dwi'n meddwl, mae'r extrall taithiau yn ymddindig yn maes yn ymddindig i'r ysgrifedau ei stymyn o'ch byw. Ond mae'r yma i'r berthynas yr holl o'r flwyddyn gwahanol hon yn ym tramwg. Felly, rydym ni i gwybod nhw'n rhywbeth gyda'i gweld am y G4 25. Mae hyn yn i'n bwysig. Ond mae y rynig sydd wedi'u le'n gwneud y gwybod. Mae gennym mewn y gwybod hon UFC 4 ar y rhan o'ch beth sydd y rhan o'r 195 carri. 5 ydydd cyflell yn cyfnifol ar y cyflell yma. Yna sy'n由ch yn cael ei wneud am ddechrau'r steith ymlaen, dwi'n panfforiai i ddiwylliant yn gweithio'r cysylltu a chyfodd yn ei mwynhau. Fe 4 cyflell ar y 195, mae'r cyflell hyd yn ymlaen, ac ond yw'n gwiriau hynny sy'n cysylltu'n gwybod i ddefnyddio'r llwy, So, ydych yn bwysig i'r tynnu'r ddweudio'r ddarlanio cyd-drawn yn argymau ac yn y ddweudio'r ddrygu. Rydyn sy'n meddwl i'n ddysgu. Felly mae'n gweithio'n gweithio'n gwybod yma wrth gwrs a'n gweithio'n gweithio'n gweithio. Mae'n ddweudio'n ddweudio'n gweithio'n gweithio. Felly mae'n ddweudio clybau. Felly mae'n ddweudio'n gweithio. One was the two crossover, the other was a four hybrid, the other was a seven wood and the other was a five iron.  From a confidence perspective, if each of those clubs performed in the same way in terms of a yardage distance, let's forget how they get there first of all, which would you choose to play in terms of confidence, which don't forget I think is a major factor in any golfer's overall performance. I'm going to need some data to help me with this explanation, so if you're data enthusiast, you will love this and for anybody who's not so keen on data, then bear with me because it's an interesting tale this tells.  What might be a good question is to ask you if you were to pause the video right now without knowing which data relates to which specific club, which would you choose in terms of performance? Well, let me say that the data for each of these clubs is phenomenal. It really is impressive and I think that's the massive tick in the box that I will give to Ping is unreal performance out of every product that I've tried in this range. Let's get that bit out the way, but what is the magic weapon? What is the secret weapon that outperforms anything? What this also does at the end of all this, you will see that once again confirms that for all those people that are loft obsessed, this dispels that myth once again that it's the balance between what the loft is and how the club is put together in terms of its CG placements and all those other factors that really impact on the overall performance. That two iron is that bottom number, clubhead speed 84.9. Slightly longer carry on this one than the others and maybe it's the three iron that would have been the fairer assessment in all this, but it's the two that I had in hand. Peak height of 73 feet, 132 ball speed 37.5 land angle and 11 degree launch and 38 spin. A fantastic number off this type of club, but there are some things there that you will notice that are not perhaps ideal for what most average golfers are looking for. You then move up next set of numbers up is the four hybrid. You start to see exactly the same clubhead speed, interestingly, carry 192, peak height jumps up considerably to 86, ball speed still very good, land angle improves at 42.2, spinning at 4 too. Fantastic numbers for our four hybrid, I hear you say, yet you'd be right. Five iron comes up next. I think this is probably a big surprise just how well the five iron did perform. I said that in the initial review. Again, clubhead speed remains fairly constant, 193 carry, 90 peak height, 129 ball speed, 43 land angle, 14.1 launch, 43 spin. Unreal numbers for any five iron in my opinion, let alone what is a game improvement iron. And on top of that tree is the seven wood. It is the secret weapon and let me explain as to why it is. The clubhead speed increases because we've got a longer shaft, so that makes sense. Not a longer shaft to a degree where it starts to become you're worrying about control, so still a lot shorter than what you would find in a five or a three wood. However, carry becomes 196, writing amongst it, writing that change over period, like I said in the video, if you're looking to blend your irons, then maybe I'd stop at a six iron and I would be straight in to this seven wood. And here's why. Here's why I'd have this as opposed to the five iron. Peak height, 117 feet, ball speeds 134, land angle 50 degrees. This thing is coming down at an angle. It is stopping. Apart from the number I'm going to tell you in a minute, 16.1 launch, it's getting up and out there, and then it's spinning at five too. Then numbers, so you're looking at the transition from your longest iron in the bag that perhaps, like I said in this instance, will be a six iron. I've got the option of a five iron, which has got some great numbers, but I've got the option of a seven wood. Which A goes back to that first question. Choice of confidence between a seven wood, the mass of a seven wood, or a five iron. Which would you prefer to hit? Well, for me, first of all, I don't think I can miss with the seven wood. So that's the first thing. It gives me much more confidence that I'm swinging a club, putting a club on ball or club head on ball with the mass that a seven wood has. So that's a massive thing for me first of all. Then I'm looking at how this ball launches. As an average golfer, and all of us who perhaps struggle with club head speed, we need help and assistance with launching a ball, getting it up in the air. 16.1 launch with this type of lofted club is incredible. Peak height, 117 feet. That is like literally going into orbit without sticking there, without hovering, it's going forward and it's going up. And then it's coming down an angle of 50 degrees. So again, compare that to everything else that's in that list. And then it's spinning at 5'2. So if you're playing that on into a green at whatever it is, 200 yard carry a real difficult distance. And again, don't forget this is all relative to your particular club head speed. So you might have this problem at 170 yards, at 180 yards, at 190 yards. And in my case, it's at that 200 yard. It's that transition from the longest iron in the bag to what you next put in. So I'm wanting to help. It's launching. It's coming in at a land angle. It's spinning. The ball speeds are incredible. I found this such a versatile club to use both off the tee on par fours, into long par threes, playing in as your possibly second shot into a long par five, perhaps. So it's got so many options as to where you can use it. Unreal performance. I can't speak highly enough. When I did all the testing, this club stuck out a mile for me. And as I said earlier on the video, it will be going in my bag for 21. There's no hesitation there whatsoever. I'm going to finish with one. Let's say I like that word caviar, and that is the only consideration you might give it's for people who are looking for a different ball flight. So this is extremely high, potentially down the links that come away with that wind gusting. Maybe the odd fewer, fewer of you wouldn't want this club in the bag, but we've got to consider who do I create these videos for, it's for average golfers, and for most of us, this will be a benefit to have it in the bag. Not many of us are looking to flight that ball down. More of us want help with launch, help with getting that ball up and out there. And this does it so well. It's incredible. So I know you have to sit through and listen to a fair bit of detail there. It's not a video for everybody, but for me, when I looked at this product range, I could have done one or two things. We could have just looked at individual videos of hybrids and fairways and crossover irons. And we will do that in time. I'll look a close look at it. But when I've seen how much this one stuck out, I thought I've just got to put something together where when I've seen the data as well, marry up with what I've seen on the course, I thought this is one I want to share with average golfers. And I think that if you're going to consider buying any new club this year, go and get yourself a seven wood. And perhaps the pink G4 25 seven wood is the one to put in the bag. It certainly is for me anyway. Right, that is it. Thank you for bearing with me. Thank you to sticking that one out. And as ever, thank you for watching. I've already asked I think in this video about subscribing and all those other things. So yeah, thank you. See you soon.


Welcome to Living Mosaic, a project of the Spark of Humanity Network. My name is Martha Holden. I am a member of the Spark of Humanity Network. Living Mosaic is conceived as an invitation to conversation and thought, pondering, about the possibility or understanding or conviction that there is a solution to the current horrors all over the world and in this country and the pain, the heartbreak, the causes of the heartbreak. That there is a solution and that it may be conceived of as a living mosaic in which each one of us has a unique and essential part. They were each invited to let go of what gets in their way of, grab onto what helps us hold on to, to become a part of this living, evolving, ever-developing, ever-breathing and morphing mosaic, which is the solution. And this is a conversation about that. You're welcome to Zoom or call in or send us an email and we'll respond to your comments or questions. This particular show is entitled Metaphors. Our first guest here on the show a month or so ago was having a hard time with the metaphor mosaic because to him it sounded too much like probably like, you know, white man with beard on throne up there plopping us into our niche in the mosaic. And that's not what I have in mind and maybe not you. So we're exploring other possible metaphors for this. We're going to continue being a living mosaic program. But there are other metaphors before I dive into dancing around the other possible metaphors. An experience from my way here this afternoon. Seeing things, understanding things, being willing to pay attention to things around us metaphorically. Seeing them as metaphors can be a very enriching experience I've discovered. There was a time a few years ago when I could perceive everything as metaphor. All physical reality is a metaphor. It's sort of platonic, isn't it? All this reality is a metaphor for something that's deeply and subtly true. And so do we read this in a way that helps us access and pay attention to what in reality and truth is going on underneath the physical interpersonal manifestations that we're seeing. I don't think we're going to go any deeper or more abstract on that today, but we'll find out. On my way here I thought I was late. I often think I'm late. So I was preparing to huff up the second steep hill in my walk over here. And there was a honk at a car that come down to a stop sign. It was a little quaint car, and I waved back. I had no idea who it was. And as I was heading up past the passenger's window, which was rolled down by the driver, I was already getting my excuses in my mind. You know, I'm in a hurry. I think I'm late. I'm on my way up to Orca Studio. Good to see you. Goodbye. And it was a woman who's been a friend of mine, not a close friend, but a close and consistent friend of mine for well over 30 years. And she said, looking at the passenger seat, would you like to say hello to my cat? And I said, well, no, I'm on my way up to Orca, and I think I'm late.  As I just, I didn't have to take many steps up the hill to realize from her expression and her tone of voice, she may very well have been going to have the cat put down. And I thought, looking at that, you know, I could have said, do you know what time it is? So I know that I really wasn't injured being late, but I'm so, you know, into my anxiety, my stuff. And could look at it, because that's where my mind was, well, it goes there anyway. But certainly today, with this topic for this show. Okay, how much is that interchange? How much is that encounter a metaphor for how I so often am in my life? I'm so wound up in my stuff, my idea about who I am, how I am, where I am. And of course, it's important, it's very important, it's totally crucial. And in fact, I do like to get here to the studio on time, or enough before the time, so they're not getting anxious. But how much of my time am I so wound up in my own story that I'm not accessible to an opportunity to connect with a friend, bring blessing to the cat, be part of the solution to get closer to my niche in the ever-living, ever-evolving mosaic. So that's a good question, and it's good for me to be aware of that sort of thing. I'm very fond of metaphors. When I was in grade school and we had to take tests, the ones that involved metaphors, there's standard form, I don't know, they may have been sent to every child in the United States in the 1950s. The ones that involved metaphors were very easy for me, so I tend to think that way. On my way over here, I thought, well, it could be because of all the trauma and the brain injuries that my brain doesn't tend to go in a linear fashion. That's very difficult for it. It sort of has to leap because it can't find the words. It doesn't think like, you know, sometimes standard textbooks and people are. Anyway, for whatever reason, metaphors work for me, so I tend to disseminate them through the Spark of Humanity Network and hope to apply them wherever the Spark of Humanity Network is operational. And certainly, Spark of Humanity is a metaphor to somebody saying, so what exactly is the Spark? Is it, you know, our soul? It's a metaphor. Let's me off the hook for trying to explain things. That's a little sermon, isn't it there? Anyway, so metaphors for what we're trying to convey in this living mosaic project, whatever you want to call it, you're welcome to translate the term, the phrase, living mosaic into whatever works for you. The idea is that there is a solution and that it's not complete. It may not even be visible or apparent unless you allow yourselves, you allow yourself, you invite yourself to be part of it. My experience in that, I've heard from others, is that once we are willing to hope enough, believe enough, we're willing to put some, have our rubber hit the road, however you want it, I don't have a metaphor, see, that there is a solution, there is a possible solution. And we're each, each, a unique, which means we each get to be ourselves. We don't have to try to be Cinderella's ugly stepsisters or always one of my favorite metaphors, who shaved off their toes and their heels in an attempt to fit into their sisters, stepsisters, glass slipper. There's a glass slipper for each one of us. There's a way in which we are called to be true to ourselves, to our essential selves. So there is a solution that involves us being who we truly are, unique. And that means letting go of some stuff that we're, at least in my case, I know, profoundly attached to, self-images. And we're each essential. So it doesn't happen in a sense without us. And we can hide from our calling to allow ourselves to be formed into the niche if we're still using the mosaic imagery. Or it's very easy to say, well, they're not, they're not doing their thing. They're not being their unique self. They're not letting go of what they need to do. You know, they're not doing it. So why should I do it? Nobody I see around me. There's nobody I know who's doing this. So I'm not going to do it. You know, that's a cop out if we choose to use it, you know? What I've discovered and what the people have talked to and listened to have discovered is that when we take a little action towards joining in, toward becoming part of the solution to being willing to become part of the solution, to consider being, you know, when we have a choice of action. Okay. What's, what is more like my being a part of the solution here? Or what is more of my, in my case, pandering to my ego? Or my belly? Or anything else? My inner voices of my parents and grandparents. What is, you know, what's more like the solution? So once we start moving into being willing to let go of our stories, our preconceptions, our understandings to allow ourselves to be drawn toward our niche in the mosaic. We're going to get to the other metaphors. Drawing toward our niche in the mosaic. And it's an amazing thing. We begin to start feeling hope. We begin to have a feeling of participation, a feeling of belonging, being part of something very big, larger than I can imagine. And that gives us a feeling of being included and belonging. And so we become less and less concerned about what they're doing and what they're not doing. And all the ways that, you know, before we started this process, we would have thought that they should be doing and not doing. We begin to just, oh, really all I want is to be gently nestled into my niche in the mosaic. Okay. Enough of the mosaic. Well, I can't leave it alone because I like it. I like it because I think to me the mosaic is alive. It's a living, evolving mosaic. So it's living so it inhales. It's sort of gently drawing us into where we belong in it. Okay. On to another couple of metaphors. And I invite you to develop more and I invite you to let us know them so that we can start expanding our language, expanding our receptivity really to the concept because that's the point, is to get a sense somewhere, I mean, I'm kinesiological or whatever, however we best get concepts to open it up. So another one that we've used a lot in the spark of humanity network, we were using this one before the mosaic one came up, is that we are each members or creatures, whichever we prefer, of an ever-evolving multi or perhaps omnidimensional dance that we are each a unique energy event within this dance that is maybe all dimensions possible. I don't know, but it's many more dimensions than I can tap into or I'm aware of. So we'll just say multidimensional so we don't have to try to figure out on me. Multidimensional, ever-evolving dance and we're each a unique energy event within it. So that metaphor for me has some advantages. It keeps me loose because the mosaic, even though I'm saying it's living and evolving, can sort of feel stable and two-dimensional, three-dimensional, two-and-a-half-dimensional. And it doesn't allow us, it doesn't invite or talking about considering the fact that as we get close to our niche or perhaps for those people who get into their niche in the mosaic, oh, it seems like it has great potential depth. It may be potentially infinitely deep, our niche. So it's not like we get to be static and stay there and say, oh, isn't that great? I found my niche in the mosaic. Even if we're saying, yes, it's alive and it's evolving, so I need to be alive, I need to be here and I need to be paying attention and evolving. I need to be evolving. It's also, oh, we're being called ever more deeply into our niche, ever more deeply into our unique and essential selves. There's no graduation here. It's a process that's ongoing. So that, but mosaic doesn't call that fourth in mind unless you have Martha telling you all about it. So the dancing, the dance is three-dimensional, four-dimensional, five-dimensional, but the dance that we're unique energy events within is multi-dimensional. And so talking about dance makes me feel a little looser, particularly when it's omnidimensional. So who knows how many dimensions we're dancing in as we're engaged here at this moment. So I like dancing. It's very, yeah, it's ever evolving. I know I'm not in charge. There's the singer, I can think of the singer of the dance, which is much better than the idea there's somebody putting pieces into a mosaic. Some thing, some non-thing, the dance is being sung. I don't think it's choreographed as such. Maybe it is, I don't know. But anyway, there's a, you know, the dance emerges, the dance evolves, the dance lives, and the dance includes all dimensions. I like that metaphor, obviously. Then the third option that I think of at the moment, and I'm hoping that you'll come up with some and communicate them to us. So that, and our email address, I'm sure those these nice people at Oracle put it on there. It's Living Mosaic at, I don't know what it is, Oh, Living Mosaic 2024 at gmail.com because this show is for 2024. Who knows what will happen in 2025? So you can send us an email and give us your suggestions about metaphors. The other metaphor that comes to mind is very familiar to some people and in some traditions it's a body. We can think of human bodies because we're most closely acquainted with them. It's a body where each part is unique. No two cells are alike, arguably, I'm not sure, but I suspect they're unique in their own way. And they're essential. Remember my big sister who's ten years older than I was, and she was very smart. And she came home from college, freshman, sophomore year. I would have been like eight, seven, eight, nine. And I, of course, knew everything because I was the youngest in the family and so I wasn't in that sort of tumble of closely choreographed siblings. So she came home and told us about how every part of the body was essential.  And she didn't have to think long. And she said, yes, you do, you need it for balance. Oh, okay, you know, maybe she's right. Never being humbled wasn't comfortable at that age or any other age. So the idea that a body as a metaphor is handy because the eye cannot say to the foot, I have no need of you. You know, the elbow cannot say to the ear lobe, I don't need you. We all need each other. And we're each unique and we're each essential. It's a useful metaphor for many of us. There have been times and situations where I said, I think I must sell in the pancreas. And I may be if we want to think in terms of the body imagery. Anyway, so that's, I don't really know where to go further with that or with all three of these. We've got a few moments left. I don't see anybody lurking to call in or to or to zoom. So I'm going to be silent for a couple of minutes. And maybe you can telepathically because this is omnidimensional. Maybe you can telepathically give a question or a comment that I can respond to. For me, the source of this solution, the mosaic, the dance, the body is entirely non-essential. There are so many innumerable rabbit holes. We can go down or woodchuck burrows. We can go down as we are working with these concepts. And I'm sure that there are, I know because many of them are friends of mine. You know, whoever really hard time. But I need to know, you know, I want to know what the sources of this. I can say never mind. My father and I back in the 80s went to a thing about computers or learning about computers. And he just because he did not understand, the instructor couldn't tell us how computers work. My dad just couldn't, you know, couldn't get it, couldn't go from there. He needed to know how it worked before he was willing to engage in it. Fine for him. For this, to realize that questions like that, issues like that, draw us away, draw our attention away from being what we need to be being in the mosaic. Yes, there's some things that need to be questioned that we don't need to drop that unique part of us. To realize that there are distractions on the journey. Well, how about this? How about that? But maybe what's needed is for us just to let go of our felt need to understand that. And instead become willing to allow ourselves to be brought toward our niche or to find our unique place in the dance. To be our unique energy event in the dance. Or to just let ourselves sort of move around the body until we find ourselves where we are comfortable and where we are essential. So there's a whole bunch of stuff you can practice. All the things you don't need to think about, all the things you don't need to concentrate on. All the things you do not need to understand. In order to come into participation in becoming a part of the solution. And the more deeply I've found that we allow ourselves to do that the less we care. Because we are where we need to be doing the things we need to do, which is our greatest joy. Thank you, Orca. Thank you for showing up and thank you for Orca for hosting us.


Now, hold on. Before we get into anything, you may be asking yourselves, wow, we're in the same clothes as the last video. You're right. That is because it is the same day, and this is the video we were supposed to be doing because the last video, Janice, obviously, had no idea about. But this is the video that was supposed to be going on today. What's going on, Infinite Fam? Welcome back to another video. If you guys are new to the channel, make sure you guys hit that subscribe button. Turn on your post notification bell. Leave a positive comment down below for a chance to get a what? A chance to win the shout out in the next video. That is right, guys. So as you guys can tell by the title and thumbnail of the video, we are basically going to be putting me in the hot seat. Today, we are going to be asking Isaiah a whole bunch of questions of the celebrities that he would smash or pass, and he has to answer this completely honestly. I'm going to be honest. And I did this on Isaiah, and I actually did a prank on him a couple of months ago. Yeah, she smashed every single guy. And I smashed every single guy, which is so funny, but we're not doing that today, obviously. So, you ready? You don't know what tricks I got up my sleeve. I'm going to answer all of these completely honest. And if I would smash, I'm going to say smash, and if I would pass, I'm going to pass. How many do we got? We got 10. We got 10? All right. That's a lot of girls. All right, go ahead. Let's start it off. Number one is Ariana Grande. Ariana, come on now. Come on. That's smash. Ew, why are you making up noises? Because you know, you've known, you've known since high school that I like, Ariana Grande was always like one of my celebrity crushes. Ariana, Ariana, Ariana, Ariana, Ariana, Ariana Grande, smash, smash. Next one, Halsey. Halsey? I'm going to pass on that one. I'm going to pass on that one only because it's not her looks. She's very pretty. I don't know. I just feel like her personality. I feel like she might be a little weird. Anyway, she might be like just, I don't know. I don't know how to explain it, but I'm a pass. And it's not because of her looks. Halsey, you beautiful girl. Kim Kardashian. What? What do you think I'm going to say to Kim Kardashian? Oh, I can't stand men. They're disgusting. They only think about one thing and one thing only. You put me in this position. You're asking me a question. I'm giving you the honest answer. Kim Kardashian, smash. Wow. Smash. Dude, you said the name, not me. Yeah, because I've never heard of a guy that would not smash Kim Kardashian. And what's so funny is we used to have conversations about this. He'd be like, I don't know. Kim Kardashian, man. Like, she's not all that. Now you're saying you're smashed. She still is not all that. She's not all that, in my opinion. But are you... I'm not smashed, but there's not all that to you. Because I don't care what they are or what they do or whatever. I'm going off of strictly like looks and like kind of like a personality kind of thing. So you're going to sit here. Kim Kardashian has a good personality. I don't know because she's really like, she really don't really do much in like the public eye. I feel, I don't know, it's hard. But either way, I'm smashing Kim Kardashian. Now listen, are we going to sit here and say Kim Kardashian is ugly? I don't think Kim Kardashian is ugly. I don't think she's, you know, I'm not even going to say anything about it. She's pretty. I'm smashing as it is. SZA. Can I see a picture of SZA? You don't even know what SZA looks like. I forgot what SZA looks like. I forgot. I might be mistaking her with someone else and I don't want to get that mixed up because that could be bad. Yeah. You smashed SZA. I smashed SZA, yeah.  I don't like her music. How do you not like SZA's music? It's not anything personal. I'm sure she's cool as hell. I just don't like her music. Her music's not for me. But I smashed. Every time I put SZA's music on, he's like, ta-da-da-da. I can't listen to SZA. I can't listen to Jenae Aiko. Who else? He thinks they're toxic. Summer Walker. I can't listen. I thought you were going to say Keanu Le Day. But you like that one song, so you just say it. I only like one of her songs, only one. But yeah, like nothing against them. I just can't listen to the music. That's just my taste. I can't. The next one is Vanessa Hudgens. Again, you're picking one of my celebrity crushes. Yeah, I know because every time I say, oh, this is SZA's celebrity crush, she tries to backpedal when we're in front of people. He's like, oh no, because Vanessa Hudgens kind of weird now. She's getting older. She is weird now. I feel like, I don't know if you guys follow her on social media, but the videos and like reels and stuff that she'd be posting on her Instagram, I'm like, yo, you're acting a little weird. Like, I don't know. She still looks like that. Maybe she's just showing it more on camera now. I don't know. But her looks. All right. Smash. Next one, Doja Cat. No, I can't. No, Doja Cat and Passon. And I'm gonna tell you why. Doja Cat to me seems like so cool and like so funny and weird. I feel like she could be like the perfect, like best friend that's a girl. I feel like she's like really, really funny. And I don't know, I just, like if I see her as like a homie, like a friend, I don't know, I can't really, I wouldn't be able to smash. She's pretty though.  Like I said, she's beautiful. She's pretty. Yes, she's really gorgeous. But how will you pass on Doja Cat with Smash Kim Kardashian and over it? I already justified myself. Camila Mendes. Camila Mendes. I wanna hear the answer to this one.  Cause I always say, oh, Camila Mendes is his girlfriend. And he's like, nah, nah, nah. So I wanna hear it. Smash. Yeah, exactly, exactly. Bruh, you're pointing out all the girls that you know I like.  I'm not changing up any answer. I've always said the same thing I said on and off camera. I swear I'm gonna ask her mom because the other day you were like, mm, I don't know. I don't think she's attractive. I did not say it. No, I did not say those words. I did not say those words. No, I did. You were like, mm, she looks different. She did look different in that picture. Whatever. Next one is Megan V Stallion. Megan, nope. Nope, pass. And I'm gonna tell you why I'm gonna pass. Just cause I don't even know if I should touch on this topic. Just though, just though. I feel like, you know what, I'm not, I got a reason why I'm passing but it's a hard pass. Kylie Jenner. Oh, smash. Kylie Jenner, Kylie Jenner. I get her confused with Kendall. I'm trying to think of the face. I'm trying to think of the face. Kylie, that's the one that's with Travis Scott, right? Are they still together? They are, right? Yeah, yeah. Smash.  You told me to answer these honestly, like I'm telling the truth. You literally smashed everybody on the list. No, I didn't. And this is the last one. That's it? Yes, that's it. Come on now, bro. Give me another solid three. A good solid three after this one. This is already 10. Give me a good solid three after this one. This is way too quick. This is a 10 for Chantel Jeffries. Chantel Jeff... No.  Like a lot of people say she's like pretty and all that. I'm not saying she's not. I don't know. I don't find her attractive enough to smash, I guess. If that makes sense. But some people make one be crazy but that's just how I feel. So you want three more? I want three solid mores off the top of the ad. But I don't even think too hard. All right, Lily Rangert. I think that's the first blonde one you said, right? I think that's the first blonde one you said. What about Lily Rangert? Smash her. Smash her. You can't take my celebrity crushes. I love Lily. You can't? What? I love Lily. Like genuinely, not like that. Like, oh my God, I can't wait to smash her kind of thing. Not like that, but like I feel like she's a very well-rounded girl, like she has it all. That's why she's my celebrity crush at night, you guys. Well, who's smashing? Me. This is off the top of my head. So I'm sorry. Tiana Taylor. Tiana Taylor? No. No? Tiana Taylor, no. Why? I feel like she's gonna boss me around. I'm being serious.  I feel like she's like that strong of a woman that she like, she, whatever she says goes. That's how I feel like she is. And I don't wanna feel like that. What? True. I feel like she's gonna scare me. Last one, Lana Del Rey. Lana Del Rey? Ooh, I gotta see a picture of her along. I think she's pretty. I haven't seen Lana Del Rey since like when I was in high school. She looks the same, I feel like. Lana Del Rey. Mmm. Like, I don't know. Like, I don't think I'd be able to smell like, to me, she's attractive, but not attractive to me. I know, I know, to me. That's it? That's all you got for me? Yes, that's all I have. I was a little shocked, honestly, because I always talk about Lily and how much I love her. You just sit there, you never say anything about it. Turns out you love her too, clearly. You just say, I love Lily. Yeah, I'm not gassing her like that, like it. You literally just said you love her. I like how she cares herself. She does what she does, and she does it well, and all that good stuff. Smash. Okay, we already know your answer. You don't have to keep on repeating it. Smash. All right.  Like, do you remember what you pulled on me in the last video when you were in the house seat? It was a prank. I didn't genuinely want to smash like. All right, well, now I'm just doing it just to get you upset. The only ones that I really thought were attractive were like two. You literally said smash to this whole list. Two out of like those 13 now. Yes. You thought two out of those 13, they were the only attractive ones. In my smash or pass, yes. Wow. You just said this whole list, everybody, you said you would smash, so. No, I passed on like. The joke's really on me. I passed on like three or four different girls, so thank you. That's it for today's video. Do you guys hear him? He just wants to keep on saying he wants to smash all these girls. Like, if you want to do that, just go. Just do that. Yeah, man, this was your idea and here we go. No, because you're sitting here like, that's it? Give me more girls. Just give me a list of girls that I want to smash.  If you guys enjoyed today's video and you guys want to see maybe a part two of me in the hot seat or you guys want to see her in the hot seat again, let us know down below. Also smash that thumbs up button. It's time for today's post notification shout out. Today's post notification shout out goes out to Kenny Ramos, shout out to you. Thank you so much for your love and support. If you guys want a post notification shout out, what you guys got to do is. Like, comment, share, subscribe, and turn your post notifications bells on, so you don't have to ever be posted a video. Also, Lili Reinhart, if you're watching this, I love you what he does. Baby, no, I love you. I swear, I love you what he does. You know, you know how to all of them. No, no, no, no, no. Come on, come on, come on, come on. For real, for real. I love you what he does. Come on, all right, that's fine.  I'm being 100% positive, although. Overkin Kardashian? Of course, I think you're overkin Kardashian. I smell a fib. I'm being that serious. Put me out to a lie detector test, man. I'm telling the truth.