winph99 login
Chhattisgarh police recruitment drive irregularities: Suspect cop ends life, Cong seeks inquiryI have always been deeply interested in Sri Lanka’s socio-political landscape and its complex history for three main reasons. First, as an ethnic Tamil minority who endured the brutalities of war during childhood, this subject holds personal significance. Second, my father, the late Sundaram Divakalala—a renowned Tamil civil servant—dedicated his life to public service, inspiring my interest in governance and justice. Finally, my professional experience at CMG Capital Maharaja Group, Sri Lanka’s largest private conglomerate and media powerhouse, under the leadership of its late Chairman, Late Kili Rajamahendran, further deepened my understanding of the nation’s challenges and potential. For centuries, Sri Lanka and its people thrived, particularly in agriculture, irrigation, fisheries, and hospitality. However, following 443 years of colonisation, the country’s post-independence journey since 1948 has been marred by traumatic riots, a prolonged and devastating war, ineffective governments, a dysfunctional political system, corrupt politicians, and self-serving business interests. By 2022, Sri Lanka found itself burdened with massive debt, a crumbling system of governance, inept leadership, and a population grappling with widespread struggles. Today, of the 23 million Sri Lankans, nearly 19 million belong to the working class, earning modest incomes. These citizens labour tirelessly to support their families and provide for their children, enduring immense daily hardships with resilience and determination. The Parliamentary elections held on 14 November 2024, have ushered in a transformative chapter in Sri Lanka’s political history. With the National People’s Power (NPP) securing an unparalleled supermajority, the outcome represents a profound departure from the entrenched political order that has shaped the nation for decades. The NPP’s triumph is the culmination of widespread public dissatisfaction stemming from years of economic mismanagement, rampant corruption, and the political upheaval that followed the ousting of former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in 2022. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, recently elected to the presidency, has adeptly harnessed this wave of frustration to solidify his party’s dominance. Remarkably, the NPP shattered traditional strongholds, including the Jaffna District, a bastion historically controlled by Tamil political parties. Economic reform dominated the electoral discourse, reflecting the populace’s enduring struggle with the aftermath of Sri Lanka’s most severe financial crisis in recent memory. President Dissanayake has pledged sweeping anti-corruption initiatives and comprehensive political restructuring. However, critics caution that the concentration of power within a single political entity could inadvertently undermine the very principles of transparency and accountability that voters have demanded. The electoral campaigns were not without controversy. Misinformation played a significant role, with fabricated narratives about NPP policies—such as exaggerated claims of punitive taxation and widespread asset seizures—circulating widely. This disinformation fuelled anxiety among certain demographics, particularly older voters, underscoring the pervasive influence of misinformation in shaping Sri Lanka’s electoral landscape. While the NPP’s sweeping victory marks a decisive mandate for change, it also presents formidable challenges. The country’s fragile economic recovery hinges on successful debt restructuring and the restoration of international investor confidence. Sceptics question whether the NPP’s populist agenda can navigate the intricate dynamics of global economic relations without alienating critical international partners. Furthermore, the absence of a robust Opposition raises concerns about the erosion of democratic checks and balances, an essential safeguard in a nation emerging from political instability. I believe, the 2024 Parliamentary elections symbolise a pivotal moment of transition for Sri Lanka. While the results reflect the electorate’s demand for systemic change, they also herald an era of uncertainty. The newly elected Government faces the Herculean task of addressing deep-seated economic and social grievances while safeguarding democratic ideals in an increasingly polarised environment. Whether the NPP can transform its ambitious promises into substantive progress remains to be seen as Sri Lanka navigates this critical juncture in its post-crisis trajectory. It is crucial for all stakeholders in the nation to extend their support to the new President, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, and his Government to ensure a stable and prosperous future for Sri Lanka. A lack of collective backing could lead to serious consequences for the country.
Social media users are misrepresenting a report released Thursday by the Justice Department inspector general's office, falsely claiming that it's proof the FBI orchestrated the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. The watchdog report examined a number of areas, including whether major intelligence failures preceded the riot and whether the FBI in some way provoked the violence. Claims spreading online focus on the report's finding that 26 FBI informants were in Washington for election-related protests on Jan. 6, including three who had been tasked with traveling to the city to report on others who were potentially planning to attend the events. Although 17 of those informants either entered the Capitol or a restricted area around the building during the riot, none of the 26 total informants were authorized to do so by the bureau, according to the report. Nor were they authorized to otherwise break the law or encourage others to do so. Here's a closer look at the facts. CLAIM: A December 2024 report released by the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General is proof that the Jan. 6 Capitol riot was a setup by the FBI. THE FACTS: That's false. The report found that no undercover FBI employees were at the riot on Jan. 6 and that none of the bureau's informants were authorized to participate. Informants, also known as confidential human sources, work with the FBI to provide information, but are not on the bureau’s payroll. Undercover agents are employed by the FBI. According to the report, 26 informants were in Washington on Jan. 6 in connection with the day's events. FBI field offices only informed the Washington Field Office or FBI headquarters of five informants that were to be in the field on Jan. 6. Of the total 26 informants, four entered the Capitol during the riot and an additional 13 entered a restricted area around the Capitol. But none were authorized to do so by the FBI, nor were they given permission to break other laws or encourage others to do the same. The remaining nine informants did not engage in any illegal activities. None of the 17 informants who entered the Capitol or surrounding restricted area have been prosecuted, the report says. A footnote states that after reviewing a draft of the report, the U.S. attorney's office in Washington said that it “generally has not charged those individuals whose only crime on January 6, 2021 was to enter restricted grounds surrounding the Capitol, which has resulted in the Office declining to charge hundreds of individuals; and we have treated the CHSs consistent with this approach.” The assistant special agent in charge of the Washington Field Office's counterterrorism division told the inspector general's office that he “denied a request from an FBI office to have an undercover employee engage in investigative activity on January 6.” He, along with then-Washington Field Office Assistant Director in Charge Steven D'Antuono, said that FBI policy prohibits undercover employees at First Amendment-protected events without investigative authority. Many social media users drew false conclusions from the report's findings. “JANUARY 6th WAS A SETUP!" reads one X post that had received more than 11,400 likes and shares as of Friday. “New inspector general report shows that 26 FBI/DOJ confidential sources were in the crowd on January 6th, and some of them went into the Capitol and restricted areas. Is it a coincidence that Wray put in his resignation notice yesterday? TREASON!” The mention of Wray's resignation refers to FBI Director Christopher Wray's announcement Wednesday that he plans to resign at the end of President Joe Biden's term in January. Other users highlighted the fact that there were 26 FBI informants in Washington on Jan. 6, but omitted key information about the findings of the report. These claims echo a fringe conspiracy theory advanced by some Republicans in Congress that the FBI played a role in instigating the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when rioters determined to overturn Republican Donald Trump's 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden stormed the Capitol in a violent clash with police. The report knocks that theory down. Wray called such theories “ludicrous” at a congressional hearing last year. Asked for comment on the false claims spreading online, Stephanie Logan, a spokesperson for the inspector general’s office, pointed The Associated Press to a press release about the report. In addition to its findings about the the FBI's involvement on Jan. 6, the report said that the FBI, in an action its now-deputy director described as a “basic step that was missed,” failed to canvass informants across all 56 of its field offices for any relevant intelligence ahead of time. That was a step, the report concluded, “that could have helped the FBI and its law enforcement partners with their preparations in advance of January 6.” However, it did credit the bureau for preparing for the possibility of violence and for trying to identify known “domestic terrorism subjects” who planned to come to Washington that day. The FBI said in a letter responding to the report that it accepts the inspection general’s recommendation “regarding potential process improvements for future events.” — Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck .When President Joe Biden stopped by former President Jimmy Carter’s home in Plains, Georgia, in April 2021, it was more than just a show of respect from one commander in chief to another. It was the first time in the 40 years since Carter left the White House that any of his seven successors had visited him in his hometown. Carter had a hot-and-cold relationship with the fellow members of the exclusive club of presidents — more cold than hot, in fact. From his reelection defeat in 1980 until his death Sunday, he was the odd man out, distant from the Republicans and Democrats who followed him and often getting on their nerves because of his outspokenness. He did not join his fellow presidents on the high-dollar speaking circuit, nor did he team up for many joint humanitarian missions. He was rarely consulted by incumbents except when he forced his way into some issue and made himself hard to ignore. When all of the living presidents gathered to welcome Barack Obama to the White House in 2009, Carter was the one standing slightly off to the side, removed from his chummy peers physically and metaphorically. Jimmy Carter, the 39th US president, has died at 100 To many of his successors, he was a thorn in their side, always doing his own thing even if it conflicted with official foreign policy. What he considered principled, they considered sanctimonious. While other former presidents generally held their tongues out of deference to the current occupant of the Oval Office, Carter rarely stood on ceremony. “I feel that my role as a former president is probably superior to that of other presidents,” he said in 2010. He parachuted into trouble spots as an election observer, traveled to North Korea as a freelance negotiator and spoke out on Middle East politics. Often to the consternation of whoever happened to be in the White House at the time, he would meet with ostracized autocrats such as Syria’s Hafez Assad and Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega. When Carter earned the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, the award committee openly characterized it as a rebuke of President George W. Bush for planning to invade Iraq. “Jimmy Carter’s not real keen on clubs,” Douglas Brinkley, author of “The Unfinished Presidency: Jimmy Carter’s Journey Beyond the White House,” said in an interview before the former president’s death. “The idea that he needs to be in photo ops with these other presidents is not his MO. His heroes in politics were Anwar Sadat and Mahatma Gandhi, not Bill Clinton or George W. Bush.” Carter understood that he irritated the other presidents, but he evinced little concern about ruffling their feathers. “As he has aged, he was not constrained by political considerations,” said Jack Watson, who served as Carter’s White House chief of staff. “Carter has spoken with a frankness that has not always endeared him to others. But he calls it as he sees it.” Photos: Former President Jimmy Carter through the years The pattern was set as soon as he left office in 1981 after being defeated by Ronald Reagan. The relationship between the two was “strained,” Carter later said. He considered Reagan dim and dangerous, and the Republican reciprocated, never inviting his predecessor to the White House during his eight years there. Carter wrote in one of his books that when he traveled during the Reagan administration, he learned that “the U.S. ambassadors had been instructed not to give me any assistance or even to acknowledge my presence.” When his official portrait was ready to be hung in the White House in 1983 during Reagan’s first term, Carter asked that there be no ceremony so as not to have to stand next to the man he did not respect. To Reagan, Carter was a useful foil he could regularly blame for the nation’s troubles, while Carter just as frequently assailed his successor’s policies as heartless, unwise or ill considered. Carter forged closer ties with President George H.W. Bush, and the two teamed up with Secretary of State James Baker to help end the long-running Contra war in Nicaragua. “I had a better relationship as a former president with Bush and Baker than any other president,” Carter said in a 2015 interview. But even then, there was tension. When Bush and Baker sought United Nations authorization to use force to counter Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, Carter privately lobbied members of the Security Council to vote against the United States. Some top Bush officials, including Dick Cheney, then the defense secretary, considered that almost treason. Editorial: For Jimmy Carter, the presidency was prologue It was hardly better with his own party, though. Carter had a prickly relationship with Clinton even though both were moderate Democrats from the South — or perhaps because of it. They got off on the wrong foot when Carter as president sent 19,000 Cuban migrants to Fort Chaffee in Arkansas in 1980 over the objections of Clinton, then the state’s governor. A subsequent riot by the migrants politically damaged Clinton, who went down to defeat that November along with Carter, a loss the governor blamed on his fellow Democrat. Once Clinton reached the White House, relations hardly improved. Carter irritated Clinton by chiding the new president for sending his daughter, Chelsea, to a private school in Washington instead of to a public school as the older man had done with his own daughter, Amy. Clinton was so peeved that he snubbed Carter days later at the 1993 inaugural festivities. Clinton considered Carter a loose cannon but agreed to let him travel to North Korea in 1994 during a period of tension over the country’s nuclear program. The former president cut a deal, called the White House to let it know and then went on CNN without first talking with Clinton about it, boxing in the sitting president. Three months later, Clinton sent Carter to Haiti along with two other emissaries who together forced a military junta to surrender power and accept U.S. troops. But once again, when Carter returned to Washington, he went on CNN before meeting Clinton for breakfast and a planned joint news conference. Clinton was furious and shouted. Carter shouted back. Carter was critical of his fellow Democrat after revelations of Clinton’s extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky, which led to his impeachment in 1998 for perjury and obstruction of justice. But Clinton nonetheless swallowed any irritation and flew to Atlanta in 1999 to award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter. “To call Jimmy Carter the greatest former president in history, as many have, however, does not do justice either to him or to his work,” Clinton said. Carter was more critical of George W. Bush, particularly over the Iraq invasion in 2003. “I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history,” Carter declared in 2007. He softened somewhat when attending the opening of Bush’s presidential library in 2013, making no mention of their rift over Iraq and instead praising the Republican for helping end a war in Sudan and fighting poverty and the AIDS epidemic in Africa. “I’m filled with admiration for you and deep gratitude for you about the contributions you’ve made to the most needy people on Earth,” Carter told Bush. Jimmy Carter’s 1979 visit to Thornridge recalled as the former president turns 100 There was less overt tension between Carter and Obama, but little warmth, either. Carter was annoyed at being left off the program of live speakers at Obama’s nominating convention in 2008, but Carter supported the younger man’s efforts to expand health care for the indigent at home while criticizing the continued use of drone strikes to target terrorists overseas, even at the cost of civilian casualties. Oddly, Carter had more sympathy at first for President Donald Trump, telling Maureen Dowd of The New York Times in 2017 that “the media have been harder on Trump than any other president” and offering support for his efforts to make peace with North Korea while knocking both Clinton and Obama. But his feelings hardened by the second half of Trump’s term. After Carter sent Trump a letter about China policy, the sitting president called him on a Saturday night in April 2019 to discuss it, interrupting a dinner with friends in Georgia. Trump seemed delighted that the two agreed on China. But two months later, Carter publicly suggested that Trump had actually “lost the election and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf.” Trump fired back, dismissing Carter as a “terrible president” and a “forgotten president.” The only president Carter forged a genuine friendship with was the one he beat in 1976, Gerald Ford. The two could hardly have been more different — the stoic Midwesterner and the Southern peanut farmer — but after both had left office, they found themselves together on a long Air Force flight to Cairo along with Richard Nixon in 1981 to represent the United States at the funeral of Sadat, the assassinated Egyptian leader. With Nixon breaking the ice, Carter and Ford surprised themselves by discovering more in common than they had anticipated — including a shared antipathy for Reagan, who had run against both of them. In years to come, Carter and Ford teamed up repeatedly to monitor foreign elections, promote health programs and write joint opinion pieces on various issues. Dr. Donald R. Hopkins: Jimmy Carter worked tirelessly to eradicate a deadly parasite in Africa Before he died in 2006, Ford asked Carter to give one of the eulogies. “Jerry and I frequently agreed that one of the greatest blessings that we had after we left the White House during the last quarter-century was the intense personal friendship that bound us together,” Carter said at the service in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Perhaps their relationship was better than the others because Ford came before Carter and, therefore, never had to contend with him as a predecessor making life difficult. For those who followed him, Carter remained a hassle. Biden, who was the first senator to support Carter’s original White House bid in 1976, was largely spared this test as the former president headed into his latter 90s. “It was no secret that Carter was not a member in good standing of the ex-presidents’ club, in part because he never accepted their code,” Jonathan Alter wrote in “His Very Best: Jimmy Carter, a Life” (2000). Most of them recognized that Carter could be useful in the right circumstances, he added. “The challenge for them was managing their high-maintenance predecessor.” This article originally appeared in The New York Times.Jet crash disaster in South Korea marks another setback for Boeing
Trump picks former adviser Brooke Rollins for Agriculture Secretary
EMPOLI, Italy (AP) — Scotland international Che Adams scored from almost the halfway line as Torino ended a run of poor form to win at Empoli 1-0 in Serie A on Friday. Adams replaced Antonio Sanabria in the 64th minute and made his mark almost immediately. With 70 gone, he spotted the Empoli goalkeeper off his line and lobbed the ball over his head from inside the center circle. The goal ended his personal eight-game drought in spectacular fashion, and will ease pressure on coach Paolo Vanoli. The Turin club was unbeaten in its first five league games and topped the table for a time. But it has won only one of 10 games since, back in late October. Friday’s win lifted Torino into 12th place, two places and three points behind Empoli. ___ AP soccer: https://apnews.com/hub/soccerTrump nominates cryptocurrency advocate Paul Atkins as SEC chair“I feel like he will be the difference” – One player could give Arsenal huge boost this weekendNew LPGA rules will restrict some transgender golfers
Good food, beautiful lakes and bush hiking: Nine highlights of Mallacoota
To put it mildly, 2024 has been rough on the planet: it was the hottest year on record; catastrophic flooding wreaked havoc on four continents simultaneously; and challenged collaborative net-zero efforts. But despite all that gloom, there are glimmers of hope. are getting cheaper every year — and it’s very possible that there will be across Canada by 2035. Worldwide investment in clean energy exceeded last year. In Europe, the EU Parliament became the first international body to . The cleantech sector also continues to explode — it’s projected to grow to by 2030 — with thousands of startups targeting specific climate issues in surprising and successful ways. Here, five innovative solutions to some very thorny problems. In 2023, torched more than 15 million hectares of land, caused billions of dollars of property damage and displaced thousands of people. But their most catastrophic effect was on the climate: Those fires produced than almost every other country in the world (only the U.S., China and India had higher emissions). They’re also part of an increasingly familiar feedback loop: A warmer planet means bigger, more unpredictable fires; those fires release more carbon; that carbon heats up the planet, which sparks yet more fires. Our best hope may be to stop fires before they start. One solution draws on an age-old approach: sustainable , which involves proactive, strategic in ecosystems — something have been doing for millennia. California-based addresses poor forest management (a major contributor to forest fires) with its custom-built, remote-controlled vehicles that perform safe, precise prescribed burns. Another approach involves thinking on a higher level (literally) — using information collected from satellites and drones to flag wildfires well before they blaze out of control. , based in B.C., uses AI to analyze that data along with information gleaned from ground sensors and eyewitness reports to provide real-time detection. The company’s tools pick up on fires even before there’s smoke, thanks to sensors that can detect various gases that are emitted at a barely smouldering stage. Thwarting three megafires a year could reduce GHG emissions on par with the amount saved by electrifying Canada’s entire transportation sector, says founder and CEO Hamed Noori. “[The latter] isn’t going to happen within 20 years, but preventing a megafire now” would have immediate effects. SenseNet systems can already be found across hot spots in B.C., Alberta and California, and the firm is currently in discussions with utility and mining companies — as well as the government of Ontario, which is considering installing the systems in provincial parks. Capturing excess carbon dioxide is a crucial part of getting to net zero, but you need to something with those trapped emissions. There are currently two options: store the carbon (which is complicated and can be costly) or turn it into something else. Although repurposing carbon is also a complex process, it is becoming increasingly attractive — and achievable. The key is leveraging electrochemical processes to use the C from CO2 in new molecules, such as calcium carbonate (a mineral compound found in concrete and antacids) or ethylene (a hydrocarbon gas that is the base chemical in pharmaceuticals, textiles, solvents and countless other consumer products). You can now find captured carbon used to make everything from building materials to and . Much of this innovation has been driven by the , which has awarded more than $500 million to international teams developing new uses for converted carbon. In 2020, Toronto’s was named an XPrize finalist thanks to its unique method for turning CO2 into ethylene. Converting captured carbon can be energy-intensive, and it can inadvertently produce yet more CO2. “Currently the world produces around 200 megatonnes of ethylene,” says Christine Gabardo, CERT’s co-founder and CTO, “and for every tonne produced, one to two tonnes of CO2 is emitted.” As she points out, CERT’s proprietary low-energy electrochemical process has the potential to significantly mitigate emissions. Beyond ethylene, the company plans to apply its tech to create other chemicals, such as ethanol and syngas, which can be used in sustainable airline fuel. The construction industry and the buildings it creates are notoriously carbon intensive, accounting for a staggering of global GHG emissions. Even striving for something close to the climate targets established in the Paris Agreement means the industry must achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The good news is that there are many options to help get there. standards shrink a building’s carbon footprint by relying on maximum insulation, airtight building envelopes and triple-glazed windows that more efficiently absorb or reflect the sun’s heat. Other tools — like Toronto-based ’s AI-powered, — help tackle energy consumption. , meanwhile, has become the sustainable material of choice for new buildings — swapping in wood for concrete and steel can cut embodied emissions by as much as 25 per cent, while significantly reducing construction timelines. This past year, like so many other far too many places in the world, Toronto experienced devastating flooding that highlighted the imminent danger of climate change as well as the inadequacy of existing adaptive strategies. The relatively predictable weather patterns of the past are no longer a reliable basis for future planning. But what if those weather patterns were just one data point in a set that also included metrics about how quickly floods overtake specific roadways, commuting and work patterns and analyses of traffic congestion during an evacuation? That’s the sort of information that informs the AI-powered 3D digital models created by Edmonton-based . The company has built digital twins of more than 200 cities around the world, all designed to help communities envision how to handle a host of , including natural disasters, shifting energy technologies, new immigration policies and public health crises. Its models are updated with fresh data to reflect whatever is happening around the world (like, say, a global pandemic), which provides municipalities and organizations with “a brilliant sandbox for gaming their way out,” as CEO Myrna Bittner puts it. She has seen a range of reactions to that sandbox: some cities promptly make necessary investments, some receive confirmation of what they’ve known all along, others take a long time to process the information. Because planners haven’t had this kind of access to this kind of data before, she says, “we’ve been crap at planning for the future,” she says. But with the advent of models that provide “experimental glimpses” into what lies ahead, the question becomes: What actions will users take once they gaze into this crystal ball? It’s a cleantech conundrum: you need a ton of capital to commercialize a solution — but to land that capital, you must prove that your solution is scalable. For First of a Kind (FOAK) technologies, this chicken-and-the-egg situation can be especially tricky. Although a massive amount of capital is required, it’s ironically not massive enough for many traditional investors: often a FOAK project might be seeking $30 million, while cleantech ventures in established industries like wind and solar deal in sums of $500 million or $1 billion. Of course, it’s also understandably difficult to find backing for high-risk technologies that have only been proven at lab or pilot scale if you’re looking to scale by a factor of 10 or 20. “You need a layer that can absorb more of the risk than traditional private lenders,” says Leah Perry, senior manager of cleantech at MaRS, who recommends that FOAK ventures approach fundraising with the same creativity and flexibility they use to build out their tech. Traditional forms of project financing may not be as productive as options within the public sector, or non-profits like Prime Coalition that raise so-called catalytic capital (aka first-loss financing) through philanthropic sources. The most successful FOAK ventures, Perry adds, are those that can show a relatively quick ROI. “If your innovation is just solving a climate problem, it’s a very hard sell,” Perry says. “But most clean technologies are not just solving a climate problem, they’re also saving costs through energy or resources.”Gophers’ blowout of Morgan State underscores U’s weak nonconference slate
Emerging markets, caught between economic giants, face tough 2025, JPMorgan says
WALL, S.D. — Jim Boensch points out a number of switches and lights on a nearby electronic console. He gives a detailed rundown of what each does as well as gives a demonstration of an ear-piercing alarm. Everything seems to be operating just as it should. He nods and then turns to the others in the room and prepares to proceed. ADVERTISEMENT “OK,” he says with a stark calmness. “Let’s jump into World War III.” Thankfully, there is no danger of nuclear annihilation on the horizon. Boensch, a retired Air Force major, is in the underground Delta-1 Launch Control Facility at the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site just a short drive down Interstate 90 from Wall in western South Dakota. The equipment he is demonstrating is all era-accurate and authentic, though decommissioned, and was one of 15 such facilities in the state that once stood guard every second of every day in the event the president of the United States issued an order for a nuclear strike against a foreign enemy. With the late 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union, the chief nuclear rival of the United States, the need for the Delta-1 site and its South Dakota sister facilities became less crucial, and with the exception of the one near Wall, all were decommissioned and destroyed. “This is the last pair of this type in the world. There are no more,” Boensch told the Mitchell Republic during a tour of the grounds earlier this year, referring to the underground launch station and a deactivated missile silo just a few miles away. “They blew up the launch tubes and sold the land back. 149 of 150 missiles are gone.” Once part of the 44th Strategic Missile Wing at Ellsworth Air Force Base, the site now serves as a museum, open to tours to the public and dedicated to the history of the Cold War and the role South Dakota and the Great Plains states played in the conflict. It is a chance to see the last remnants of the state’s nuclear Minuteman Missile fields. In 1985, if South Dakota had been ranked apart from the United States based on the number of nuclear warheads located within its borders, the 150 warheads on the Minuteman Missiles would have ranked the state sixth in the world. That would place it right behind China with 243. It had more nuclear warheads than India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea and South Africa combined. ADVERTISEMENT When the United States dropped a pair of atomic bombs on Japan in 1944, it hastened the close of World War II. With Nazi Germany already defeated in Europe, the world breathed a sigh of relief as its armies, navies and air forces were recalled home and the conflict began to recede into the history books. Though the United States and Soviet Union were allies and on the same victorious side during World War II, a division in military aims and ideology soon began to widen between the superpowers. By 1949, the Soviet Union developed its own nuclear technology, and a decades-long arms race kicked off, with both countries building large nuclear arsenals that threatened to destroy the other side. Intercontinental ballistic nuclear missiles were part of those arsenals. Able to be launched at a moment’s notice and fly thousands of miles to deliver an atomic warhead payload on the enemy, the Minuteman Missiles were among the first developed by the United States as part of its “nuclear triad,” a series of nuclear warhead delivery methods that, along with the missiles, included missiles launched from submarines and bombs delivered by heavy bombers. When the United States was looking for a place to establish those nuclear missile launch sites, they turned to a region in the Great Plains that included South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming and Montana. “Most of them were in the middle part of the United States, up north. These missiles would go over the North Pole, and it shortened the distance to your targets without having to build bigger missiles that would be required if you put them down in Texas or Florida,” Boensch said. The United States struck deals with local landowners, and by 1963 the first silos in South Dakota were active. Over their service life those silos housed the Minuteman I and II series of missiles, the second iteration of which could carry a 1.2 megaton warhead capable of delivering the equivalent devastation of 1.2 million tons of TNT with a range of 7,500 miles. That allowed it to strike virtually any target on Earth. Each one carried 66 times the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, a bomb that killed 144,000 people. There were 150 such missiles within South Dakota’s borders. Always at the ready, the missiles were never used and were removed from active status in 1991 before being completely removed later in the early 1990s. Congress established the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site in 1999, the legislation for which was passed after a bill to establish the site was introduced in 1998 by Senators Tom Daschle and Tim Johnson. ADVERTISEMENT Though now more than a quarter century removed from service, the Delta-01 launch facility, and its nearby companion historic site, the Delta-9 Missile Silo, appears much as it did when it was active. During its service, access to the facility was strictly controlled, but the existence of the missiles and even their locations were not top secret. Local residents were aware of the nature of their neighbors, and even the Soviet Union were keen as to where they were located. That was by design, said Boensch, who works as an education technician at the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site. “We were a deterrent force. To have a good deterrent, you have to have a really great weapon, so from the other side they know you’ve got it and they know you can use it,” Boensch said. “It was no secret. All you had to do was follow the power line out to the middle of nowhere and you had a missile.” The launch facility appears as a relatively small, unremarkable low-slung building surrounded by a chain link fence and gate. A basketball hoop stands just inside the fencing. Entering the building takes one into a receiving area, where missile crews, which were swapped out after every 24 hour shift, would be vetted and checked in. Through one door in that area, toward the back of the building, is a living area that housed facility personnel, including security. Preserved much as it was during its most recent active period, it features a lounge area with a television, a small dining area, kitchen and sleeping quarters for those on-site. Space is limited, the accommodations simple but comfortable. For the most part, it does not resemble a military facility. ADVERTISEMENT It is through a second door in the receiving area that the perception changes. There, an elevator with highly controlled access leads to the underground bunker that housed the actual launch controls for the missiles at their command. A brief elevator ride descends approximately 30 feet to reveal a dark, concrete bunker area. A few meters ahead, a 16,000 pound blast door that sealed the missileers from the outside world is propped open. In a display of tongue-in-cheek humor, a mock Domino’s Pizza box has been painted on the front with the slogan “Worldwide delivery in 30 minutes or less or your next one is free.” Squeezing past the blast door brings visitors into a brightly-lit room full of vintage equipment that was crucial to launch operations. Low frequency and satellite communication systems line the walls, and a pair of chairs bolted to slide rails gave personnel a station from which to tend to it all while remaining strapped in securely. Simple sleeping bunks with a curtain grace the opposite wall. Staff in the bunker drilled regularly for a number of different scenarios, including launches. But even with constant training, there was a lot of downtime below ground. Boensch said many missileers would spend their time reading textbooks, preparing for exams. “We read. About half of us got our master’s degree. It was a great place to study. And I had two little girls back at the base. I wanted to play with them when I got off duty (and not study),” Boensch said. Studying aside, they were also prepared in the event of a nuclear emergency. There is no one button to launch the missiles. Once a confirmed launch order was received, each missileer turned a key from their stations, which were about 12 feet apart. Each key had to be turned within two seconds of each other, which prevented any one person from initiating a launch without the other. ADVERTISEMENT On one wall is a small red metal lock box with two combination padlocks. Like the two-person key launch system, the padlocks are another safeguard against any single person going rogue and attempting an unauthorized launch on their own. Both people had to be in agreement to open the box. “Why in the world would you need a safe up here inside this bank vault? With two locks on it, you did not know the combination of your partner’s locks. You were the only person in the world that knew your opening combination. Trust was a very hard thing to come by when you’re dealing with nuclear weapons. You’ve got to be absolutely sure,” Boensch said. The box contained materials for authenticating communications to make sure any such launch order received was authorized by the president of the United States or their successor. The content of those authenticators is still classified to this day. The actual launch keys were also inside the box. Things begin to move quickly once the lock box is opened. “We lay our keys down on this cabinet. We pick the right one. We do this independently of the other person,” Boensch said. “We go through whatever procedures we do to authenticate the message. Once we agree it is a valid and authentic message, we’re going to war. Nuclear war. And we don’t have a lot of time to do this.” The hours of practice and drills kick in. The pair are now almost on autopilot, having ceaselessly trained for this exact moment. Each missileer inserts their launch key into the receptacle at their station. They strap their seatbelts on. At the end of the countdown sequence, both turn their keys. At that point, missile silos like the Delta-9 site preserved a few miles down the road, move into action. The door at the top of the silo is flung off, revealing the weapon underneath. ADVERTISEMENT “An explosive squib fires, dragging that whole thing into a recess in that 12-foot diameter launch tube, getting it out of the way of the missile. About the same time, two Howitzer shell-like gas generators drive a piston tied to a pulley down, rolling that massive 180,000-pound door sideways to the south, rolling on 18-inch steel wheels,” Boensch said. “It clears that tube in less than three seconds.” Moments after the launch order is received, a Minuteman Missile is airborne and bound for its target. World War III has begun. Boensch and his fellow Air Force colleagues never had to take those fateful steps to actually launch a nuclear missile. Cool heads and world-saving diplomacy eventually won the day, and with the collapse of the Soviet Union, a nuclear deterrent on the Cold War scale was no longer needed. The missile fields in South Dakota were decommissioned and destroyed, with the exception of the facilities at which Boensch and his colleagues give tours to the public. Modern land-based missile facilities are still a part of the United States’ defense forces, with locations still maintained in North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming. The Cold War may be over, but the need for a nuclear deterrent remains, Boensch said. Geopolitical winds can shift, and leadership changes at the national level can alter defense priorities. Regardless of election results, the safety of America remains paramount, Boensch said. In addition to the current modern land-based missile silos and submarine-based nuclear weapons, the Air Force is expected to purchase 100 new B-21 Raider bombers, the first of which will be hosted at Ellsworth Air Force Base. The new bomber, which will complement the current fleet of B1 and B2 bombers, represents a generational leap as a dual nuclear and conventionally capable, stealth, penetrating, long-range strike platform, according to a release from the Air Force. “I think regardless of what political party is in charge, I think everybody realizes it’s a necessity,” Boensch said. Once a domain strictly off-limits to the general public, the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site now welcomes them with open arms to share the story of the sentinels on the prairie that assured America’s enemies any attack would be met by an equal, if not greater, force in return. Nearly 100,000 people visited the site in 2020. Some of those are fellow veterans that Boensch gets to interact with, sharing his stories and listening to theirs. It also offers him a chance to reflect on his own service and the service of his fellow missileers, most of which were no older than their mid-20s when they were stationed here. The technology and procedures are indeed fascinating, but in the end, the life or death actions came at the hand of missileers with a pair of small brass keys. There was no glory in the role, just a call to serve their country and to be at the forefront of protecting it should it come under attack. “I had to do some heavy thinking on what I really valued in life, what I really considered important. And I think service is the real reason why we’re here. I really do,” Boensch said. “But it’s just so rewarding to shake the hands of these people. And the folks who never served, too.” The Minuteman Missile National Historic Site is open to tours to the public. More information on the facilities and tours can be found at www.nps.gov/mimi/index.htm or by calling 605-433-5552.
Cricket-ECB suspends Bangladesh’s Shakib for ‘illegal bowling’Chamber opens 5th technology hub in Cross
Jet crash disaster in South Korea marks another setback for Boeing2024 Election: Mt. SAC declares victory in $750 million bond measure, to complete major projects
World News | Trump Wants to Turn the Clock on Daylight Saving Time
KV-Waltair celebrates 44th annual dayPep Guardiola’s side avoided the indignity of a sixth successive defeat in all competitions and looked on course for a welcome victory thanks to a double from Erling Haaland – the first from the penalty spot – and a deflected effort from Ilkay Gundogan. Yet Guardiola was left with his head in hands as Feyenoord roared back in the last 15 minutes with goals from Anis Hadj Moussa, Sergio Gimenez and David Hancko, two of them after Josko Gvardiol errors. FULL-TIME | A point apiece. 🩵 3-3 ⚫️ #ManCity | #UCL pic.twitter.com/6oj1nEOIwm — Manchester City (@ManCity) November 26, 2024 Arsenal delivered the statement Champions League win Mikel Arteta had demanded as they swept aside Sporting Lisbon 5-1. Arteta wanted his team to prove their European credentials, and goals from Gabriel Martinelli, Kai Havertz, Gabriel, Bukayo Saka and Leandro Trossard got their continental campaign back on track in style following the 1-0 defeat at Inter Milan last time out. A memorable victory also ended Sporting’s unbeaten start to the season, a streak of 17 wins and one draw, the vast majority of which prompted Manchester United to prise away head coach Ruben Amorim. Putting on a show at Sporting 🌟 pic.twitter.com/Yi9MgRZEkl — Arsenal (@Arsenal) November 26, 2024 Paris St Germain were left in serious of danger of failing to progress in the Champions League as they fell to a 1-0 defeat to Bayern Munich at the Allianz Arena. Kim Min-jae’s header late in the first half was enough to send PSG to a third defeat in the competition this season, leaving them six points off the automatic qualification places for the last 16 with three games to play. Luis Enrique’s side, who had Ousmane Dembele sent off, were deservedly beaten by Bayern who dominated chances and possession. 🔔 FULL TIME – Victory at home! +3 in the #UCL 👏❤️ #FCBayern #MiaSanMia | #FCBPSG #UCL pic.twitter.com/BYE23dXXih — FC Bayern (@FCBayernEN) November 26, 2024 Elsewhere, Atletico Madrid were 6-0 winners away to Sparta Prague, Julian Alvarez and Angel Correa each scoring twice whilst there were also goals from Marcos Llorente and Antoine Griezmann. Barcelona ended tournament debutants Brest’s unbeaten start with a 3-0 victory courtesy of two goals from Robert Lewandowski – one a penalty – and Dani Olmo. Lewandowski’s first was his 100th Champions League goal, only the third man to reach the mark after Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi. A Castello Lukeba own goal saw Inter Milan go top of the standings with a narrow 1-0 win over RB Leipzig at San Siro, whilst Bayer Leverkusen were emphatic victors against Red Bull Salzburg, Florian Wirtz scoring twice to move Xabi Alonso’s side into the automatic qualification places. Atalanta continued their strong start, albeit whilst conceding a first goal in Europe this season in a 6-1 win away to Young Boys, whilst Tammy Abraham scored the decisive goal as AC Milan beat Slovan Bratislava 3-2.Cameron Haffner helps Evansville end five-game skid with 57-40 victory over Missouri State
Veteran forward Jae Crowder reportedly nearing deal to join KingsRecently, I helped a friend move into a brand-new house. Moving is an exciting and stressful time, and I will admit having a little house envy. A new build is a blank slate, with all the latest building technology and appliances. New homes also provide an opportunity that way too many builders miss. My friend is of a certain age and has some physical limitations. Yet neither of the two bathrooms in her new, built-for-her home is fully accessible. A walk-in shower would be a major improvement over the traditional tub. After watching both my great-grandmother and grandmother forced to move out of their lovely Victorian home because of lack of accessibility, my parents bit the bullet and did a major remodel and addition designed to age with them. But a remodel is hugely expensive and out of reach for most homeowners. This brings me to my main question – why aren’t we building our new homes to be accessible? The Americans with Disabilities Act does not include any requirements for private homes, so this isn’t about applications of the law. However, the practicalities of designing homes in which we can easily age (or recover from injury) seem like they would outweigh the lack of regulatory inducement. Many of the features that make a home functional for people with disabilities and older adults are useful to everyone. No-step, covered entryways make it easier to bring in the groceries, push a stroller or use that cute little foldable wagon to haul camping gear out to the car. Lever handles on doors are a necessity for someone with arthritis but are also handy when your hands are full or if you’ve just put on lotion. Designing appliances and surfaces that are usable from either a sitting or standing position can encourage children to be safer and more independent. Walk-in showers with a seat and hand-held shower head are a huge benefit for anyone who is recovering from illness, injury or surgery, in addition to feeling luxurious. And even if the initial homeowner doesn’t need accessibility features, the resale value of a fully accessible home shouldn’t be ignored. Of course, I am a stalwart advocate for inclusion and ensuring that people with disabilities or other limitations can live successfully in our neighborhoods and communities. But I am also a huge fan of doing what makes sense. Building new homes with an eye on accessibility just makes sense from a practical, social and economic perspective. Even the modest increase in the initial cost of materials is more than recuperated by the increased resale value and the possibility of staying in your own home for years longer than you would be without a few accessibility tweaks. Most of us aren’t in a position to build a new home. In fact, our homes, whether rented or owned, are reliant on the decisions of developers, contractors and owner builders before us. For that reason, this is an important community conversation as we look to our futures and living conditions. Tara Kiene is president/CEO of Community Connections.Figuring out who’s creditworthy is getting more complicated, and millions of Americans are stuck with “thin files” or are considered credit invisible. That means they’re struggling to borrow or access credit, while lenders miss out on potential customers. To tackle this, credit-scoring companies are stepping up and evolving. Recently, for example, last year, FICO launched a new program to help expand the use of alternative data for credit scoring. But years before that, Experian fired an opening salvo when it introduced Experian Boost , which helps consumers improve their credit scores by tapping into their payment histories for rent, insurance, and even streaming platforms. And now, the man behind Experian Boost, Jeff Softley, is helping transform Experian’s consumer business further, turning the company once known almost exclusively for credit reporting into what he describes as “every consumer’s financial copilot.” | Part of that strategy is the recent launch of Experian Smart Money, which, like Experian Boost, is a service devised to help consumers build their credit. But Smart Money allows them to do so without taking on debt. Instead, it works by having users pay their bills with a debit card that works in tandem with Boost, using eligible transactions to potentially increase a customer’s credit score. That’s really just the beginning, says Softley, who is on a mission to broaden Experian’s role in consumers’ financial lives. For some who have rightly grown skeptical of credit reporting bureaus, that may sound questionable, as those bureaus (Experian and its key cohorts, Equifax and TransUnion) have had their share of issues in the past . Experian, however, believes it has worked out a model for creating new services that have put it on another level relative to its competitors. “It’s a data business” “We were a very narrow business, delivering credit reports and scores to consumers,” Softley says of Experian’s former iteration. “We were the front end of a credit bureau. And today, it’s a totally different business. It’s a data business.” Reams of data are allowing Experian to step into its new skin. Softley notes that a decade-and-a-half ago, when fintech companies were popping up left and right, making it obvious that one-dimensional financial firms were going to need to innovate or get left behind, Experian found itself in no-man’s-land. The company had experienced 16 straight quarters of decline, and leadership was antsy to find new ways to expand or evolve. So Softley says they “took a small team, put them in a different office, and had them build a different platform. That’s the platform we use today.” That new platform involved moving away from a focus on supplying credit reports through FreeCreditReport.com—you may remember the catchy FreeCreditReport.com commercials , which were countered by the FTC’s own commercials —and double-down on Experian as a brand. Softley says that meant building new products and services that were unique and relevant, and above all, actually served a purpose. That’s how Experian Boost came about. It was in its conceptual stage in the early 2000s, he says, “on a sticky note.” Spirit of ’08 The financial crisis and Great Recession gave Experian an opportunity to put its plans for evolution into action. During that time, “new needs emerged, and new opportunities emerge if you’re listening to the consumer,” says Softley. And Experian was listening. In focus groups and interviews, consumers were saying that they didn’t want to be punished for their past financial behavior via a bad credit score, but instead wanted to be rewarded for what they were doing now and in the future. It was an ideal time to get the ball rolling on Boost, which gave consumers a sense of agency and control over their credit scores and rewarded them for sharing their information related to their finances and expenses. Still, the backend tech and infrastructure also needed to be in place to be able to aggregate the data, crunch it, and spit out an updated credit score. Experian had the ability and manpower to do it, so it was off to the races. “It was a watershed moment,” Softley recalls. “It was one of the first products that all of Experian built because it drew from so many capabilities across the organization.” Experian tested it out, and it actually “became a business case, and the business case became the platform rebuild.” From there, the company started to zero in on developing and launching “products that allow you to leverage your data to open up financial opportunities—Boost helped create the blueprint to intertwine data and technology.” Industry experts agree that Boost did push the envelope for consumer-facing credit products. “Experian was the first to come out with plain-English credit reports back in the day,” says Gerri Detweiler, a credit expert and the former director of Bankcard Holders of America, a nonprofit consumer credit and advocacy organization. “So while Boost is an innovation, they’ve been at the forefront of the consumer market for some time.” Detweiler says that Boost is also notable because it raised the visibility of alternative data for consumers, or their ability to leverage it to their advantage. “It’s helped open up the ecosystem,” she says. “There are some criticisms and limitations,” she adds. That’s true—a WalletHub ranking of credit-builder products released in August 2024 ranked Boost 15 out of 20, and noted that it didn’t report negative information to creditors, which may be problematic. Detweiler says that consumers (and creditors) should take that into account, and realize that Boost or similar services are “not going to be a cure-all” for people with thin or bad credit. “But it will open the door to other products that can further help people rebuild their credit.” A new trajectory That process has landed Experian with its current development model: Finding a consumer need, determining the best way to help them, and then creating a product or service that acts as a solution. Some trouble spots that the company could be looking at wading into include finding ways to help people buy homes or cars, or even developing tools for small business owners. But there are also areas that the company likely won’t explore, or at least not right now. That could be because the technology simply hasn’t caught up to the moment yet, which was the case with Boost, which ultimately incubated for a decade or so before the technology existed to create a fast, effective product. In the meantime, Experian is working on new AI features, such as a new virtual assistant. That will play a bigger role in 2025, with the aim of becoming a full-blown “financial copilot” for customers. Softley says that everything the company is doing now, though, can be traced back to the shift of thinking of itself as a data company first and foremost. “Viewing ourselves as a data company put us on a different trajectory,” he says. “And this next chapter is all about providing financial power to all consumers.”
