text:
On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.
Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.
On April 23, 2006, CBS's "60 Minutes" interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. "We continued to validate him the whole way through," said Drumheller. "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy."
Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller's account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it. They described what Tenet said to Bush about the lack of WMD, and how Bush responded, and noted that Tenet never shared Sabri's intelligence with then Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to the former officers, the intelligence was also never shared with the senior military planning the invasion, which required U.S. soldiers to receive medical shots against the ill effects of WMD and to wear protective uniforms in the desert.
Instead, said the former officials, the information was distorted in a report written to fit the preconception that Saddam did have WMD programs. That false and restructured report was passed to Richard Dearlove, chief of the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), who briefed Prime Minister Tony Blair on it as validation of the cause for war.
Secretary of State Powell, in preparation for his presentation of evidence of Saddam's WMD to the United Nations Security Council on Feb. 5, 2003, spent days at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., and had Tenet sit directly behind him as a sign of credibility. But Tenet, according to the sources, never told Powell about existing intelligence that there were no WMD, and Powell's speech was later revealed to be a series of falsehoods.
Both the French intelligence service and the CIA paid Sabri hundreds of thousands of dollars (at least $200,000 in the case of the CIA) to give them documents on Saddam's WMD programs. "The information detailed that Saddam may have wished to have a program, that his engineers had told him they could build a nuclear weapon within two years if they had fissile material, which they didn't, and that they had no chemical or biological weapons," one of the former CIA officers told me.
On the eve of Sabri's appearance at the United Nations in September 2002 to present Saddam's case, the officer in charge of this operation met in New York with a "cutout" who had debriefed Sabri for the CIA. Then the officer flew to Washington, where he met with CIA deputy director John McLaughlin, who was "excited" about the report. Nonetheless, McLaughlin expressed his reservations. He said that Sabri's information was at odds with "our best source." That source was code-named "Curveball," later exposed as a fabricator, con man and former Iraqi taxi driver posing as a chemical engineer.
The next day, Sept. 18, Tenet briefed Bush on Sabri. "Tenet told me he briefed the president personally," said one of the former CIA officers. According to Tenet, Bush's response was to call the information "the same old thing." Bush insisted it was simply what Saddam wanted him to think. "The president had no interest in the intelligence," said the CIA officer. The other officer said, "Bush didn't give a fuck about the intelligence. He had his mind made up."
But the CIA officers working on the Sabri case kept collecting information. "We checked on everything he told us." French intelligence eavesdropped on his telephone conversations and shared them with the CIA. These taps "validated" Sabri's claims, according to one of the CIA officers. The officers brought this material to the attention of the newly formed Iraqi Operations Group within the CIA. But those in charge of the IOG were on a mission to prove that Saddam did have WMD and would not give credit to anything that came from the French. "They kept saying the French were trying to undermine the war," said one of the CIA officers.
The officers continued to insist on the significance of Sabri's information, but one of Tenet's deputies told them, "You haven't figured this out yet. This isn't about intelligence. It's about regime change."
The CIA officers on the case awaited the report they had submitted on Sabri to be circulated back to them, but they never received it. They learned later that a new report had been written. "It was written by someone in the agency, but unclear who or where, it was so tightly controlled. They knew what would please the White House. They knew what the king wanted," one of the officers told me.
That report contained a false preamble stating that Saddam was "aggressively and covertly developing" nuclear weapons and that he already possessed chemical and biological weapons. "Totally out of whack," said one of the CIA officers. "The first [para]graph of an intelligence report is the most important and most read and colors the rest of the report." He pointed out that the case officer who wrote the initial report had not written the preamble and the new memo. "That's not what the original memo said."
The report with the misleading introduction was given to Dearlove of MI6, who briefed the prime minister. "They were given a scaled-down version of the report," said one of the CIA officers. "It was a summary given for liaison, with the sourcing taken out. They showed the British the statement Saddam was pursuing an aggressive program, and rewrote the report to attempt to support that statement. It was insidious. Blair bought it." "Blair was duped," said the other CIA officer. "He was shown the altered report."
The information provided by Sabri was considered so sensitive that it was never shown to those who assembled the NIE on Iraqi WMD. Later revealed to be utterly wrong, the NIE read: "We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade."
In the congressional debate over the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, even those voting against it gave credence to the notion that Saddam possessed WMD. Even a leading opponent such as Sen. Bob Graham, then the Democratic chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who had instigated the production of the NIE, declared in his floor speech on Oct. 12, 2002, "Saddam Hussein's regime has chemical and biological weapons and is trying to get nuclear capacity." Not a single senator contested otherwise. None of them had an inkling of the Sabri intelligence.
The CIA officers assigned to Sabri still argued within the agency that his information must be taken seriously, but instead the administration preferred to rely on Curveball. Drumheller learned from the German intelligence service that held Curveball that it considered him and his claims about WMD to be highly unreliable. But the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and Arms Control Center (WINPAC) insisted that Curveball was credible because what he said was supposedly congruent with available public information.
For two months, Drumheller fought against the use of Curveball, raising the red flag that he was likely a fraud, as he turned out to be. "Oh, my! I hope that's not true," said Deputy Director McLaughlin, according to Drumheller's book "On the Brink," published in 2006. When Curveball's information was put into Bush's Jan. 28, 2003, State of the Union address, McLaughlin and Tenet allowed it to pass into the speech. "From three Iraqi defectors," Bush declared, "we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs ... Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them." In fact, there was only one Iraqi source -- Curveball -- and there were no labs.
When the mobile weapons labs were inserted into the draft of Powell's United Nations speech, Drumheller strongly objected again and believed that the error had been removed. He was shocked watching Powell's speech. "We have firsthand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails," Powell announced. Without the reference to the mobile weapons labs, there was no image of a threat.
Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff, and Powell himself later lamented that they had not been warned about Curveball. And McLaughlin told the Washington Post in 2006, "If someone had made these doubts clear to me, I would not have permitted the reporting to be used in Secretary Powell's speech." But, in fact, Drumheller's caution was ignored.
As war appeared imminent, the CIA officers on the Sabri case tried to arrange his defection in order to demonstrate that he stood by his information. But he would not leave without bringing out his entire family. "He dithered," said one former CIA officer. And the war came before his escape could be handled.
Tellingly, Sabri's picture was never put on the deck of playing cards of former Saddam officials to be hunted down, a tacit acknowledgment of his covert relationship with the CIA. Today, Sabri lives in Qatar.
In 2005, the Silberman-Robb commission investigating intelligence in the Iraq war failed to interview the case officer directly involved with Sabri; instead its report blamed the entire WMD fiasco on "groupthink" at the CIA. "They didn't want to trace this back to the White House," said the officer.
On Feb. 5, 2004, Tenet delivered a speech at Georgetown University that alluded to Sabri and defended his position on the existence of WMD, which, even then, he contended would still be found. "Several sensitive reports crossed my desk from two sources characterized by our foreign partners as established and reliable," he said. "The first from a source who had direct access to Saddam and his inner circle" -- Naji Sabri -- "said Iraq was not in the possession of a nuclear weapon. However, Iraq was aggressively and covertly developing such a weapon."
Then Tenet claimed with assurance, "The same source said that Iraq was stockpiling chemical weapons." He explained that this intelligence had been central to his belief in the reason for war. "As this information and other sensitive information came across my desk, it solidified and reinforced the judgments that we had reached in my own view of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein and I conveyed this view to our nation's leaders." (Tenet doesn't mention Sabri in his recently published memoir, "At the Center of the Storm.")
But where were the WMD? "Now, I'm sure you're all asking, 'Why haven't we found the weapons?' I've told you the search must continue and it will be difficult."
On Sept. 8, 2006, three Republican senators on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence -- Orrin Hatch, Saxby Chambliss and Pat Roberts -- signed a letter attempting to counter Drumheller's revelation about Sabri on "60 Minutes": "All of the information about this case so far indicates that the information from this source was that Iraq did have WMD programs." The Republicans also quoted Tenet, who had testified before the committee in July 2006 that Drumheller had "mischaracterized" the intelligence. Still, Drumheller stuck to his guns, telling Reuters, "We have differing interpretations, and I think mine's right."
One of the former senior CIA officers told me that despite the certitude of the three Republican senators, the Senate committee never had the original memo on Sabri. "The committee never got that report," he said. "The material was hidden or lost, and because it was a restricted case, a lot of it was done in hard copy. The whole thing was fogged up, like Curveball."
While one Iraqi source told the CIA that there were no WMD, information that was true but distorted to prove the opposite, another Iraqi source was a fabricator whose lies were eagerly embraced. "The real tragedy is that they had a good source that they misused," said one of the former CIA officers. "The fact is there was nothing there, no threat. But Bush wanted to hear what he wanted to hear."


text:
Irene Morales
Irene Morales is a comedian living in New York City, originally from Miami, Florida. Her stories and shortcomings combined with sarcasm and a little bit of sass make for a memorable set that audiences enjoy because they can relate. She has opened for Hannibal Buress, Ron Funches, Nikki Glaser, Gilbert Gottfried, Julio Escallon and many other comedians whom you probably haven't heard of yet but are seriously funny. She placed top three in Comedy Central's South Beach Comedy Festival Contest in 2014. She has written for Yahoo Mujer, Fusion, GQ and currently is one of the producers of Murder Crush Kill, a weekly comedy show in Brooklyn. When Irene is not writing, performing, or selling her soul day-by-day at the crummy retail job that she hates, she is running around New York City with some of the funniest people on the planet trying to make it on time to another stand-up show.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Mad About Us
- Gary J. Oliver, Ph.D. & Carrie Oliver, M.A. Authors
- Updated Nov 13, 2007
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is an excerpt from Mad About Us (Bethany House) by Gary J. Oliver, Ph.D., and Carrie Oliver, M.A.
When I pick up a book I wonder, What qualifies this author to write on this subject? Does he or she have some understanding as to the plight of my life? Will this book be relevant to me? You might be asking similar questions about Mad About Us, yet another book on marriage. Who are these people, where did they
come from, and what do they have to offer me?
Who We Are
As we write this book Gary and I have been married for twenty-six years, raised three sons, changed jobs and moved four times, acquired several degrees and a daughter-in-law along the way, walked through cancer, and lost one of our sons.
Over the past thirty years Gary has conducted over one hundred weddings, and we've provided premarital counseling for more than one thousand couples and marriage counseling for well over five thousand couples. We have taught marriage seminars and healthy relationship classes and written articles for various magazines. We have studied communication, conflict resolution, the differences between men and women, emotions and godly ways to express them.
We come to you with this book straight from our hearts and experience. You see, we are a real couple that, like you, has conflicts and differences that continue to catch us by surprise! Both Gary and I are still amazed and puzzled by the way we think, act, feel or don't feel, communicate, and generally do life very differently from each other. Sometimes we like the differences and sometimes we get mad—frustrated, lonely, hurt, distant—when differences and conflict surface.
Why We Wrote the Book
Aside from our differences and ongoing frustrations, we have grown an intimate marriage and believe you can do the same. We cannot imagine life without each other. Sometimes we can imagine a day without the other, but life—no way! We want that for your marriage too.
Without exception every couple we have worked with began their marriage with a proclamation of their love and a commitment to stay together until "death do us part." That's how we started ours. We all talked about our dreams for a lifetime
of love, trust, safety, security, and deep levels of intimacy.
In many cases the couples we have worked with talked about being madly in love or mad about each other. Unfortunately the reality is that once a couple gets married the "mad" that was a synonym for passionate love often becomes a synonym for unhealthy frustration. That frustration can easily turn to an unhealthy anger that discourages hearts, divides couples, and often destroys relationships.
The tragedy is that it doesn't take long for the "mad about each other" to turn into mad at each other and for the relationship to go into a downhill slide. There are a gazillion reasons why some marriages fall apart while others survive but are characterized by mediocrity. However, the vast majority of those failed or mediocre marriages have at their core the inability to understand differences, deal with the emotion of anger in healthy ways, and engage in healthy and constructive conflict.
What's in the Book for You
This is a book about intimacy. It's a book about restoring the positive passion that we all had at the beginning of our marriage journey. Our hope is that this book will help you to enjoy a long-lasting and mutually satisfying marriage relationship characterized by intimacy. Our goal is that after reading this book you will better understand how dealing with anger and conflict can lead you to that intimacy. Over the years the many couples we've worked with have taught us that if we don't understand how to deal with unhealthy anger and engage in constructive conflict, we will never experience the deep levels of intimacy that led us into marriage in the first place.
Mad About Us seeks to offer hope. If we had to put into one word what has brought us through a marriage that has lasted twenty-six years it is hope. We have never lost hope for a better tomorrow and a better marriage. The hope comes from a belief system that says God can change my heart and my perspective and I can learn new ways of understanding God's Word, myself, and my spouse. The good news is that we can always learn something new, or even better, recommit to that which we already know.
We have never lost hope, even as we've both walked through cancer, and even after we lost our son Matt. We have both had tremendous pain, confronted fear, and wondered about tomorrow, but we have never given up hope. I received an article on hope early on in my diagnosis, and I have clung to the words of that article. Hope is what sustains us to live on this earth whether we are struggling through difficulty or things are going well. I have come to love my God deeply as He has walked this road of cancer and grief with me. Writing this book is a blessing and privilege for me and one that I treasure as I share with you the hope God has for you in any area of struggle in your life, even in your marriage. Won't you cling to hope as well?
Reading this book you will contemplate what God had in mind when He created us in His image. He designed us to experience intimacy. Have you been afraid of anger? Are you easily frustrated? Do emotions seem to be a foreign concept? Or are you a person who can't seem to round up all the emotions you feel, overwhelming yourself and those around you? Does the word conflict make you run in the opposite direction? You can learn new ways of understanding anger and expressing emotions that can be helpful both to your spouse and to you.
Would you like a deeper experience of intimacy in your marriage? We would like to show you how to move through conflict and anger to that intimacy, a safe place to be both real and vulnerable, a place to discover more about yourself and your spouse.
We pray that from a renewed hope you will be changed and that your intimacy with your spouse will be greater and deeper than you have ever experienced. As you begin to read this book, and better yet apply what you read, our hope is that you will be inspired, challenged, and even changed with time.
—Carrie Oliver
And They Lived Happily Ever After
On a beautiful December day in Nebraska, in a gorgeous church setting, Gary and I stood before a crowd of people and said our marriage vows to one another. Lovely things like, "I will love you unconditionally. I will honor and respect you and be with you in sickness and in health." We had beautiful praise and worship music, took Communion, and lit our unity candle, symbolizing becoming one. It was a magical, dreamy, one-in-a-million day. I don't think Ken and Barbie could have done it better!
Like many couples, by the second day of marriage we began to discover that we were very different from each other. During our engagement we saw each other only on the weekends, giving a glimpse of the best of who we were. On the second day of our marriage we began to feel emotions that we had not felt yet with each other. I noticed that Gary could get distracted, it seemed, very easily. I felt rejected because he was not paying attention like I thought he did when we were dating and engaged. He noticed that I had more opinions than before, and the opinions seemed to be the opposite of his own, leaving him feeling disrespected and unheard. The result? We felt insecure and misunderstood. The "mad about each other" became just "mad."
We have dreams when we commit to marriage. We have expectations that we have found our soul mate, our prince or princess. We dream of making a safe haven where we can be vulnerable, accepted, understood, and loved. We desire friendship, companionship, and sometimes partnership. But real-life marriage doesn't always measure up to our dreams, and we often become disappointed and angry.
God's Design
Miraculously, God created man and woman in His image (Genesis 1:27). Isn't this wonderful to contemplate, that each and every one of us is walking around with the image of God? Oh to grasp this truth and live it out rather than live as the fallen, sinful beings we became when wrong choices were made.
God had something good in mind when He brought man and woman together. He said that it was not a good thing for the man to be alone. He brought forth the woman from the man and gave them to each other (Genesis 2:18–22). Marriage is a place where we have the opportunity to feel close to someone else, so close that loneliness does not overwhelm us. God created the sexual experience for a man and woman in marriage to enjoy with delight and freedom. Pure pleasure. Another place to feel safe, vulnerable, and not alone.
God also designed the marriage relationship to reflect who He is. Because we are made in His image, because we are in relationship, we now can show the world what intimate relationship looks like. Marriage is both a reflection and a microcosm of a personal relationship with God. Marriage is a place to become more holy and to demonstrate holiness to a fallen world.
God's design for marriage is that we would experience intimacy with Him and then with each other. Do not be discouraged if you are reading along and find that this does not ring true in your marriage! Remember that thing called hope? If everyone had cooperated in the garden of Eden and followed God's rules, there would be no need for any marriage book on the market! But we all know that is not what happened. Sin entered the world and sin entered marriage. When this took place, the man and woman began to hide from each other. They hid their bodies, their hearts, and their minds. If they did it right there with God so close to them, even to His calling out in an audible voice, "Where are you?" (Genesis 3:9), then it is not surprising that we do the same in our world today, not exactly the garden of Eden.
Ever After, But Not Always Happily!
In our fallen world, we continue to experience the effects of what took place that day sin entered into the picture. We began to hide from God and from one another. Intimacy was invaded, and we were left with two ways of coping. We have found as we work with couples, and in our own marriage, that these two ways are hiding and blaming. Pretty close to what Adam and Eve experienced that day! They hid from God, and lots of blaming took place. "She did it, God, and you were the one who gave her to me," Adam proclaimed (see Genesis 3:12). The snake got a bad rap, and everyone started hiding themselves with those fig leaves.
A couple sat across from me in a recent session and I listened to the same story that I hear over and over again. Jason resists coming home at night because he feels Melissa does not meet his needs and blames him for much of her emotional turmoil. She says that he doesn't pay enough attention to her, all he cares about is himself, and he only plays with the baby because he is supposed to. Meanwhile he feels that she is only in touch with her own feelings, completely misunderstands him, and does not encourage him as a husband, father, and provider. They argue, then retreat. Nothing is resolved and intimacy is hindered. The "happily ever after" us becomes the "mad at each other" us.
Oddly, this same scenario has been going on for centuries, and we are not doing anything much differently to change it. We continue to deal with conflict and differences in the same ways that Adam and Eve did back in the garden.
Blaming is a very large part of how we function as human beings in most of our relationships. (If you are parents, you see it happen all the time with the kids. One sibling is constantly pointing the finger at the other sibling.) We simply do not want to take responsibility for our behavior, and it rarely occurs to us to sit back and try to understand the heart of our spouse. We are not intentional about how we listen to them even in their emotional experience of hurt or anger or fear. If we are completely honest, once we start to feel the emotions, we begin to focus on our need at the moment and how our spouse should be meeting it or at least listening to us.
We can become good at hiding when we find that blaming doesn't get the results we wanted, so now we just don't share at all. Trouble is, we are still experiencing emotions at some level and we sacrifice intimacy with our spouse when we hide our heart from their heart.
But "happily" is still God's plan for us! He desires for us to experience love, friendship, and deep intimacy, but we must come to grips with what is going on in the ever after that is not so happy, and the sooner the better. If we don't, we become disillusioned and defeated and feel as if our expectations were all for naught! This can set us up for a lifetime of marital defeat rather than marital bliss.
Differently Ever After
What is it that we just don't get? God created us male and female from the beginning. Our differences are part of His design. But it seems when sin entered the world, the differences that were once helpful to intimacy became hindrances to intimacy. We can see that our body structures are very different on the outside. That is a good thing! What we react to are the major differences on the inside. We may even blame each other for being different.
The female brain is constructed very differently than the male brain. Females live in the relational and emotional hemispheres of the brain fairly consistently.1 This is due to more connectors between the right and left hemispheres. A female secretes higher levels of oxytocin, sometimes called the "bonding" chemical.2 This chemical is secreted at greater levels during childbirth to aid in the bonding process between the mother and the child. Females reach out to bond in their relationships due to higher oxytocin levels.
Men, on the other hand, secrete very little of this chemical; it is most likely to be at higher levels right after having sexual intercourse. While testosterone drives the male in their sexual desire, they do feel very bonded after sex due to the rise in the oxytocin level. A woman wants to bond before sexual intercourse, while a man feels bonding afterward. We would become less mad about this whole sexual dilemma if we just understood these simple differences as male and female and sought to meet each other's needs. Husbands, bond a little with your wife, and wives, have sex with your husband, and you will both get an oxytocin high! We know it is not that simple—we live in the real world like you do. But if we recognize and appreciate our differences, we can avoid doing the same thing that does not work over and over again.
Entire books have been dedicated to teaching on the male and female brain and chemical differences. Our "happily ever after" is affected when we don't understand that men are more compartmentalized in their approach to life and relationships and emotions, while most women are constantly working out of a relational- and emotional-thinking process. This is why men do not remember emotional experiences as well as women do. They may remember facts about sports events or what is happening on Wall Street, but what our tears were about two weeks ago may elude them.
A woman's brain has been shown not to rest at all, while a man's brain will need mental naps. Beware, ladies, to watch for the stare on his face. He may be taking a mental nap, giving you the signal that a deep emotional connection and conversation is not going to happen! If you don't want to get mad and frustrated or hurt, then wait until that brain of his is awake and alert and trying to make the switch to the relational compartment.
Testosterone is a major player in the male. A man has thirty times more testosterone than a woman has. Testosterone drives the sexual desire and may increase competitiveness and aggression. As we mentioned, women secrete oxytocin, which drives them to bond. In conflict a woman may try to bond with her husband. She does this by trying to talk, relate, get her emotions out, and often because she does not understand the differences, she may expect him to function in similar ways. He has to actively work at going to the compartment in his brain that is relational, emotional. He often does not understand this about himself and perceives her advances as pressure to perform. Often this scenario results in misunderstanding, sometimes leading to anger and frustration.
Personality Differences
There are gender differences, but we are also different in the ways we see or approach our world because of our personalities. We know we have different personalities; we may even say, "My spouse has a lot of personality!" What we liked about our spouse and his or her personality can become a frustration after the marriage vows when we try to make everyday life work.
I like details and the experience of the here and now, while Gary likes vision and dreams and planning for the future. I remember in the first year of our marriage Gary started talking about taking a trip to Europe. We had absolutely no money. I had been on a plane only one time, and that was to California for our honeymoon. Now he was talking about flying to England, spending two weeks there and then another two weeks on the continent of Europe, for a total of a month. I felt fear from the tip of my head to the bottom of my toes. Where were we going to get the money? Would we have jobs when we got back? How would we drive around? And where would we stay? Who is this man? I did not join him in this crazy dream. Every detail of why we could not possibly do this came to my mind and out of my mouth.
We experienced several of these scenarios in our first year of marriage. It was a blessing to us that Gary was in his doctoral program. During his program he became familiar with different personality types in a personality assessment class. This helped us tremendously as we discovered that neither of us was out to destroy the other's dreams or security or privacy. We came to our world with different personalities, and what we needed to do was understand this about each other, affirm our differences, and work through them.
It is so easy to get mad when we don't see eye to eye. Personality is a huge area of difference that most couples simply do not understand. When our spouse reacts and thinks differently than we do, we may take it personally. I was very guilty of doing this early on in our marriage. I am a feeling person, which means I make decisions based on my feelings. When Gary did not always feel the same as I did, or even worse, had some rational, logical solution to offer, I felt misunderstood. I felt as if my feelings were not being heard. He felt very similar when I did not listen to and utilize his well-thought-out, very rational solutions to my problems or our problems. We ended up blaming each other for not understanding and learned fast what not to talk about, eventually hiding from the issues. (Not happily ever after.)
Jesus Brings the Happy into the Ever After
After about fifteen years of marriage (hopefully you will get this faster than we did), we began to really see what Jesus could do in this marriage of ours. You see, having tools and skills, listening and communicating, resolving conflict, and expressing emotions are all very helpful when trying to grow a marriage. But even when we try to implement these skills, we must remember what God had in mind when He created marriage. Most Christians would say that Christ makes a difference in their marriage, but most do not function in this manner. We don't wake up in the morning saying to ourselves, "Today I will be Christ to my spouse." But we are very aware of how our spouse is not being Christ to us.
We suggest starting each day with a prayer that goes something like this: Jesus, look at me. Show me my weaknesses and strengths. How am I doing loving my partner? Jesus, if I were kinder and gentler, what would that look like? I think I might speak more softly. I would listen to my spouse today. I would say "I love you," and I would touch this person you gave me. I would say I was sorry. Because you love me, Jesus, I might even be willing to face conflict with my spouse or take responsibility for something I said or did. I might let my spouse see my heart as I am doing with you now. Thank you for this mate you have given me. Help me to see what I need to change in order to love well. I know that you love me well in spite of myself. I believe that as I do these things and as I pray this prayer consistently I can work through my emotions better. I can look at not only how I feel but at how we both feel in our marriage, and that gives me hope for a deeper intimacy.
What God desires for us is that we be transformed in the marriage relationship—that we, with each day, would look just a little bit more like Him because we spent the day with our spouse. Wow! I know for us many days did not exactly end with this type of result. The exciting news is that when we are functioning out of what God planned for us, we experience deeper and deeper levels of intimacy both with Him and each other. This is a great motivator to change and do things differently, especially when we grasp what intimacy is. Genuine intimacy goes beyond the soul mate idea. Our culture, Christian culture included, promotes the idea that we "find" our soul mate, when in fact what God had in mind is that we "become" a soul mate.
Do you want that in your marriage? Do you want to know more about God's idea of intimacy and what it means to be transformed and have a transformed relationship? That is our heart for you and your marriage. In the next chapter we'll see that God created us for intimacy, and we'll look at the components of intimacy.
You may think that "happily ever after" can't happen or that "content ever after" is the best you can hope for, but we know that God wants great joy for us in marriage, more than mere contentment. He desires for us to be vibrant, Jesus-emulating human beings in love with each other. He wants us to demonstrate to the world that marriage works, and it works because Jesus died on a cross for us so that we might have life, and life more abundantly! Jesus does bring the happy into the "ever after."
Small Beginnings
- Identify the disappointments of the "ever after" in your marriage. What were your expectations when you got married?
- What are some differences that seem to plague your relationship? Are there differences that you enjoy?
- What are some of the issues in your marriage that you hide from or have decided not to address?
- Do you tend to blame your spouse for the problems in your marriage?
- How much is Jesus allowed into your relationship? How can you begin to change the level at which He makes a difference?
- How can you become a better soul mate?
Excerpted from: Mad About Us by Gary J. Oliver, Ph.D., and Carrie Oliver, M.A. Copyright © 2007; ISBN 9780764203619; Published by Bethany House Publishers. Used by permission. Unauthorized duplication prohibited.


text:
You hate living in debt and might even wonder if God is punishing you. Why aren't things getting better?
We live in a fallen, sin-scarred world, and, because of that, life isn't always the way we wish it were. At the same time, God often has lessons to teach us when we face problems and adversity. He can use life's hard experiences to knock the rough edges off our lives and change us into the people He wants us to be. Have you stopped to ask God what He wants to do in your life through this experience? The Bible says, "Show me your ways, Lord, teach me your paths" (Psalm 25:4).
Everything we have, including money, comes from God. Money isn't a bad thing, but can be if it's misused. Sometimes it leads to greed, pride or materialism, and it can be easy to give it top priority in our lives. Sometimes unexpected losses or unplanned expenses can result in money problems, tempting us to worry. But we must remember to keep God first in our hearts and lives.
If you're struggling with debt, here are some helpful tips:
— Seek God's will for you with a humble heart and open mind. The Bible says, "If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you" (James 1:5). Regardless of how you got into debt, maybe He wants to change your attitude or give you new priorities or goals in life. Whatever it is, begin with a renewed focus on your relationship with Christ and give special attention to what the Holy Spirit "speaks" to you through the Scriptures.
— Ask God to help you trust Him and not let this debt crush your spirit or dominate your thinking. The Apostle Paul, who was isolated, imprisoned and lost all possessions, said, "I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances" (Philippians 4:11). Anchor your hope in the promises of God's Word. The Bible says, "'For I know the plans I have for you,' declares the Lord, 'plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future'" (Jeremiah 29:11). Assuring your heart of God's unfailing power, goodness and love will make all the difference.
— Consult a wise, trustworthy businessperson (perhaps in your church if you attend one), someone who has been trained in financial planning or a nonprofit financial counseling agency in your community, then act on the advice given. It will likely include making a realistic budget; make one and stick to it. God often answers our prayers by bringing people into our lives who can help us.
— Find ways to weed out any unnecessary spending, such as money spent on entertainment or luxury items. It might not be fun, but it will help you save money and get on track to financial peace. You can also brainstorm ways to have fun for little to no money at all.
Hebrews 13:5 says, "Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have." Anything we have ultimately comes from God, and He will always provide for us. We are to be good stewards of what He gives us, meaning we should be responsible for the money and possessions that come our way and be careful not to overspend or be greedy. As Jesus warned, "you cannot serve both God and money" (Luke 16:13). Make Him the priority in your life today and ask Him for guidance concerning your finances.


text:
Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup (PDQ®): Integrative, alternative, and complementary therapies – Patient Information [NCI]
This information is produced and provided by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The information in this topic may have changed since it was written. For the most current information, contact the National Cancer Institute via the Internet web site at http://cancer.gov or call 1-800-4-CANCER.
NOTE: The information in this summary is no longer being updated and is provided for reference purposes only.
- "Selected Vegetables" and "Sun's Soup " are different mixtures of vegetables and herbs that are being studied as treatments for people with cancer (see Question 1).
- Dried and frozen forms of Selected Vegetables are sold in the United States as dietary supplements (see Question 1).
- The vegetables and herbs in Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup may contain substances that block the growth of cancer cells and/or help the body's immune system kill cancer cells (see Question 2).
- Researchers reported that the growth of tumors was slower in the mice that were fed ingredients in Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup, compared to the mice that ate standard food (see Question 5).
- Researchers reported that some cancer patients lived longer and had better quality of life when they received Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup along with other treatments. Randomized controlled trials, enrolling larger numbers of people, are needed to confirm the results (see Question 6).
- No mixture of Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup has been approved by the U. S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of cancer or any other medical condition (see Question 8).
Questions and Answers About Selected Vegetables / Sun's Soup
"Selected Vegetables" and "Sun's Soup " are names given to several different mixtures of vegetables and herbs that are being studied as treatments for cancer and other medical conditions, including acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). The following versions have been used:
- Original Mixture
- Shiitake mushroom.
- Mung beans.
- Hedyotis diffusa.
- Scutellaria barbata (barbat skullcap).
This mixture is not sold in the United States.
- Freeze-dried Selected Vegetables (DSV), a freeze-dried mixture of vegetables and herbs sold in the United States as a dietary supplement. DSV is reported to contain the following ingredients:
- Soybean.
- Shiitake mushroom.
- Mung bean.
- Red date.
- Scallion.
- Garlic.
- Leek.
- Lentils.
- Hawthorn fruit.
- Onion.
- Ginseng.
- Angelica root.
- Licorice.
- Dandelion root.
- Senega root.
- Ginger.
- Olive.
- Sesame seed.
- Parsley.
- Frozen Selected Vegetables (FSV), a frozen mixture of fresh vegetables and herbs, sold in the United States as a dietary supplement. It contains the same vegetables and herbs as in DSV.
What is the history of the discovery and use of Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup as a complementary and alternative treatment for cancer?
The vegetable and herb mixture now called Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup was developed to treat cancer.
- In the mid-1980's, the developer created the mixture to treat a relative who was diagnosed with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer and not helped by standard treatment. The mixture contained shiitake mushroom, mung bean, and the herbs Hedyotis diffusa and barbat skullcap. The developer believed these ingredients contain substances that may block the growth of cancer cells and/or help the body's immune system attack cancer cells. The relative was reported to be alive and free of cancer more than 13 years later. Three more patients with advanced cancer were treated with a combination of shiitake mushroom and mung bean. These patients were also reported to benefit from the treatment.
- In 1992, the developer applied for a patent for Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup as an herbal treatment of cancer. The developer reported on animal studies done in mice (see Question 5). The developer then began doing clinical trials (see Question 6) to test Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup in cancer patients.
- In 1995, the developer was awarded a patent for Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup.
Many of the vegetables and herbs in Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup were chosen because previous research and traditional Chinese medicine suggest they contain anticancer phytochemicals (substances found in plants that may have effects on the body). These include substances such as protease inhibitors, plant sterols, and isoflavones. These ingredients may block the growth of cancer cells and/or improve the way the body's immune system attacks cancer cells.
What is the theory behind the claim that Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup is useful in treating cancer?
The theory is that certain ingredients in Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup may contain phytochemicals that have significant anticancer effects in humans. One of these ingredients is shiitake mushroom. Lentinan, which is taken from shiitake mushroom, has been used in Japan to treat stomach and colon cancer after surgery. Treatment with lentinan is reported to help patients with stomach cancer live longer and have a better quality of life. Lentinan may not be easily absorbed by the body from food, so it is usually given by injection. Other substances in shiitake mushroom that are more easily used by the body from food have shown anticancer activity in animal tests.
How is Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup administered?
Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup is eaten as part of the diet. Daily doses of either 1 ounce of the DSV (mixed with water or other soup) or 10 ounces of the FSV were used in clinical trials.
Have any preclinical (laboratory or animal) studies been conducted using Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup?
Few preclinical studies have been done with Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup. Research in a laboratory or using animals is done to find out if a drug, procedure, or treatment is likely to be useful in humans. Preclinical studies are done before clinical trials (in humans) are begun.
A small number of mice were injected with tumor cells and fed either standard food or food mixed with one or more ingredients from Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup. The researchers reported that the growth of tumors was slower in the mice that were fed the Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup ingredients, compared to the mice that ate standard food. The tumor growth was slowest when the mice were fed both mung bean and shiitake mushroom.
Have any clinical trials (research studies with people) of Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup been conducted?
Clinical trials using Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup to treat cancer have been done with small numbers of patients. These patients received other types of treatment, either before or during treatment with Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup, and different vegetable mixtures were used in the different studies.
The results of these trials were compared with published information on similar patients who did not receive Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup. Most patients receiving the vegetable mixtures lived longer, were better able to carry out their daily activities, and either gained weight or did not lose weight. In some patients who ate Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup, tumor growth slowed or the tumor completely went away. Because patients in these trials received other treatments, it is not known if their responses were caused by Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup, the other treatments, or both. None of the trials were randomized or controlled. Randomized clinical trials give the highest level of evidence. In randomized trials, volunteers are put randomly (by chance) into one of 2 or more groups that compare different treatments. In a controlled trial, one group (called the control group) does not receive the new treatment being studied. The control group is then compared to the groups that receive the new treatment, to see if the new treatment works. Randomized controlled trials, enrolling larger numbers of people, are needed to confirm the results of studies done so far on Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup.
One randomized clinical trial (NCT00246727) of patients with stage IIIB or stage IV non-small cell lung cancer was conducted. The trial compared the survival of patients receiving Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup with patients receiving a placebo (inactive substance). Both groups received treatment with supportive care, such as radiation therapy, surgery, or palliative care.
Have any side effects or risks been reported from Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup?
No harmful side effects or risks have been reported in the use of Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup. Some patients felt full or bloated after eating the dry form, but patients who ate the frozen mixture did not report this.
Is Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use as a cancer treatment in the United States?
The FDA has not approved any form of Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup for the treatment of cancer or any other medical condition. Well-designed clinical trials that test identical mixtures of vegetables and herbs are needed to prove whether Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup is useful in treating cancer.
About This PDQ Summary
About PDQ
Physician Data Query (PDQ) is the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) comprehensive cancer information database. The PDQ database contains summaries of the latest published information on cancer prevention, detection, genetics, treatment, supportive care, and complementary and alternative medicine. Most summaries come in two versions. The health professional versions have detailed information written in technical language. The patient versions are written in easy-to-understand, nontechnical language. Both versions have cancer information that is accurate and up to date and most versions are also available in Spanish.
PDQ is a service of the NCI. The NCI is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). NIH is the federal government's center of biomedical research. The PDQ summaries are based on an independent review of the medical literature. They are not policy statements of the NCI or the NIH.
Purpose of This Summary
This PDQ cancer information summary has current information about the use of selected vegetables/Sun's soup in the treatment of people with cancer. It is meant to inform and help patients, families, and caregivers. It does not give formal guidelines or recommendations for making decisions about health care.
Reviewers and Updates
Editorial Boards write the PDQ cancer information summaries and keep them up to date. These Boards are made up of experts in cancer treatment and other specialties related to cancer. The summaries are reviewed regularly and changes are made when there is new information. The date on each summary ("Updated") is the date of the most recent change.
The information in this patient summary was taken from the health professional version, which is reviewed regularly and updated as needed, by the PDQ Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board.
Clinical Trial Information
A clinical trial is a study to answer a scientific question, such as whether one treatment is better than another. Trials are based on past studies and what has been learned in the laboratory. Each trial answers certain scientific questions in order to find new and better ways to help cancer patients. During treatment clinical trials, information is collected about the effects of a new treatment and how well it works. If a clinical trial shows that a new treatment is better than one currently being used, the new treatment may become "standard." Patients may want to think about taking part in a clinical trial. Some clinical trials are open only to patients who have not started treatment.
Clinical trials can be found online at NCI's website. For more information, call the Cancer Information Service (CIS), NCI's contact center, at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237).
Permission to Use This Summary
PDQ is a registered trademark. The content of PDQ documents can be used freely as text. It cannot be identified as an NCI PDQ cancer information summary unless the whole summary is shown and it is updated regularly. However, a user would be allowed to write a sentence such as "NCI's PDQ cancer information summary about breast cancer prevention states the risks in the following way: [include excerpt from the summary]."
The best way to cite this PDQ summary is:
PDQ® Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board. PDQ Selected Vegetables/Sun's Soup. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Updated <MM/DD/YYYY>. Available at: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/cam/patient/suns-soup-pdq. Accessed <MM/DD/YYYY>. [PMID: 26389411]
Images in this summary are used with permission of the author(s), artist, and/or publisher for use in the PDQ summaries only. If you want to use an image from a PDQ summary and you are not using the whole summary, you must get permission from the owner. It cannot be given by the National Cancer Institute. Information about using the images in this summary, along with many other images related to cancer can be found in Visuals Online. Visuals Online is a collection of more than 3,000 scientific images.
The information in these summaries should not be used to make decisions about insurance reimbursement. More information on insurance coverage is available on Cancer.gov on the Managing Cancer Care page.
Contact Us
More information about contacting us or receiving help with the Cancer.gov website can be found on our Contact Us for Help page. Questions can also be submitted to Cancer.gov through the website's E-mail Us.
General CAM Information
Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)—also called integrative medicine—includes a broad range of healing philosophies, approaches, and therapies. A therapy is generally called complementary when it is used in addition to conventional treatments; it is often called alternative when it is used instead of conventional treatment. (Conventional treatments are those that are widely accepted and practiced by the mainstream medical community.) Depending on how they are used, some therapies can be considered either complementary or alternative. Complementary and alternative therapies are used in an effort to prevent illness, reduce stress, prevent or reduce side effects and symptoms, or control or cure disease.
Unlike conventional treatments for cancer, complementary and alternative therapies are often not covered by insurance companies. Patients should check with their insurance provider to find out about coverage for complementary and alternative therapies.
Cancer patients considering complementary and alternative therapies should discuss this decision with their doctor, nurse, or pharmacist as they would any type of treatment. Some complementary and alternative therapies may affect their standard treatment or may be harmful when used with conventional treatment.
Evaluation of CAM Therapies
It is important that the same scientific methods used to test conventional therapies are used to test CAM therapies. The National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) are sponsoring a number of clinical trials (research studies) at medical centers to test CAM therapies for use in cancer.
Conventional approaches to cancer treatment have generally been studied for safety and effectiveness through a scientific process that includes clinical trials with large numbers of patients. Less is known about the safety and effectiveness of complementary and alternative methods. Few CAM therapies have been tested using demanding scientific methods. A small number of CAM therapies that were thought to be purely alternative approaches are now being used in cancer treatment—not as cures, but as complementary therapies that may help patients feel better and recover faster. One example is acupuncture. According to a panel of experts at a National Institutes of Health (NIH) meeting in November 1997, acupuncture has been found to help control nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy and pain related to surgery. However, some approaches, such as the use of laetrile, have been studied and found not to work and to possibly cause harm.
The NCI Best Case Series Program which was started in 1991, is one way CAM approaches that are being used in practice are being studied. The program is overseen by the NCI's Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine (OCCAM). Health care professionals who offer alternative cancer therapies submit their patients' medical records and related materials to OCCAM. OCCAM carefully reviews these materials to see if any seem worth further research.
Questions to Ask Your Health Care Provider About CAM
When considering complementary and alternative therapies, patients should ask their health care provider the following questions:
- What side effects can be expected?
- What are the risks related to this therapy?
- What benefits can be expected from this therapy?
- Do the known benefits outweigh the risks?
- Will the therapy affect conventional treatment?
- Is this therapy part of a clinical trial?
- If so, who is the sponsor of the trial?
- Will the therapy be covered by health insurance?
To Learn More About CAM
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) facilitates research and evaluation of complementary and alternative practices, and provides information about a variety of approaches to health professionals and the public.
NCCIH Clearinghouse |
Post Office Box 7923 Gaithersburg, MD 20898–7923 |
Telephone: 1-888-644-6226 (toll free) |
TTY (for deaf and hard of hearing callers): 1-866-464-3615 |
E-mail: email@example.com |
Website: https://nccih.nih.gov |
CAM on PubMed
NCCIH and the NIH National Library of Medicine (NLM) jointly developed CAM on PubMed, a free and easy-to-use search tool for finding CAM-related journal citations. As a subset of the NLM's PubMed bibliographic database, CAM on PubMed features more than 230,000 references and abstracts for CAM-related articles from scientific journals. This database also provides links to the websites of over 1,800 journals, allowing users to view full-text articles. (A subscription or other fee may be required to access full-text articles.)
Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine
The NCI Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine (OCCAM) coordinates the activities of the NCI in the area of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). OCCAM supports CAM cancer research and provides information about cancer-related CAM to health providers and the general public via the NCI website.
National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Information Service
U.S. residents may call the Cancer Information Service (CIS), NCI's contact center, toll free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237) Monday through Friday from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm. A trained Cancer Information Specialist is available to answer your questions.
Food and Drug Administration
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates drugs and medical devices to ensure that they are safe and effective.
Food and Drug Administration |
10903 New Hampshire Avenue |
Silver Spring, MD 20993 |
Telephone: 1-888-463-6332 (toll free) |
Website: http://www.fda.gov |
Federal Trade Commission
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces consumer protection laws. Publications available from the FTC include:
- Who Cares: Sources of Information About Health Care Products and Services
- Fraudulent Health Claims: Don't Be Fooled
Consumer Response Center |
Federal Trade Commission |
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW |
Washington, DC 20580 |
Telephone: 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357) (toll free) |
TTY (for deaf and hard of hearing callers): 202-326-2502 |
Website: http://www.ftc.gov |
Last Revised: 2016-07-20
If you want to know more about cancer and how it is treated, or if you wish to know about clinical trials for your type of cancer, you can call the NCI's Cancer Information Service at 1-800-422-6237, toll free. A trained information specialist can talk with you and answer your questions.
This information does not replace the advice of a doctor. Healthwise, Incorporated, disclaims any warranty or liability for your use of this information. Your use of this information means that you agree to the Terms of Use. Learn how we develop our content.


text:
If the definition of insanity is making the same mistakes over and over, then many cities have taken a certifiable approach to securing their water supplies — and they need some radical therapy before taking the big economic, ecological, and human hits that come with a permanent state of thirst.
That's the conclusion from a new study in the journal Water Policy, whose authors compared the water supply histories of four cities — San Diego, Phoenix, San Antonio, and Adelaide, Australia. Among the lessons learned? Urban water conservation, recycling, and desalination aren't silver bullets. In fact, the best solution may lie upstream with farmers — saving just 5-10 percent of agricultural irrigation in upstream watersheds could satisfy a city's entire water needs.
But the time to act is now, argues Brian Richter, a senior freshwater scientist at The Nature Conservancy and the study's lead author — he says a global urban water crisis is already here. Below, Richter tells us more about what cities need to do to say on the right side of dry.
Q. Many cities take a similar pattern of water development, according to your research — going from exhausting local surface and groundwater supplies to importing water to implementing water conservation to finally recycling water or desalination. Why is this pattern unsustainable?
A. When we overuse a freshwater source, we set ourselves up for disaster. Each of the cities we reviewed in our study has contributed to the drying of a major river or important groundwater spring. That has obvious ecological impacts and social consequences — it affects livelihoods and human health by compromising fish production, concentrating pollution, or curtailing recreational activities.
Our research is revealing that water scarcity also causes severe economic losses by limiting or disrupting agricultural, industrial, and energy production. Texas lost nearly $8 billion in agriculture last year due to water shortages; electricity generation from hydropower dams on the Colorado River in 2010 dropped by 20 percent due to water shortages. Some estimates suggest that China may be losing $39 billion each year due to crop damage and lessened industrial production, and hundreds of thousands of people around the globe are being forced to move due to water shortages.
Because these impacts are so pervasive and damaging, we need to begin investing in water supply approaches that don't just minimize these adverse impacts but instead begin to reverse them.
Q. Are we looking at a crisis in securing urban water supplies in the near future, either for U.S. cities or globally?
A. That crisis is already upon us. Our study revealed that half of all cities — both in the United States and globally — are located in watersheds where more than 50 percent of the renewable supply of water to our rivers and aquifers is being consumed, at least seasonally. Now, that's not a problem as long as we're receiving plentiful precipitation. But if you're using that much water on an average, ongoing basis and you go into a severe drought, there isn't enough water to meet all needs.
Q. Phoenix, another one of your case studies, has lowered its per capita water use by 25 percent since 1990 through various water conservation measures — and yet Phoenix is water scarce. Why?
A. Water scarcity results when we heavily deplete a freshwater source. It doesn't necessarily mean that you're experiencing regular water shortages in your home or business. But it does mean that you're at considerable risk if the water supplies continue to be increasingly depleted by other users, or you get into a drought situation.
Phoenix's water conservation efforts are admirable, but they need to do much more. They are heavily dependent on the Colorado River, which is so thoroughly overused that it dries up before reaching its delta in the Gulf of California. During a severe, prolonged drought, the reliability of that water source will be in jeopardy.
Q. So storm- and wastewater recycling aren't enough?
A. Contrary to popular belief, water conservation and recycling may not result in a net improvement in the affected water source. If the water that's conserved is simply used to supply additional urban growth, then the water source is no better off.
The vast majority (80-90 percent) of water used in cities is returned to the freshwater source after use. So only 10-20 percent of the water is "lost" or "depleted" — most of that goes to outdoor landscaping or golf courses. Water recycling shuts off the return of water to the freshwater source — instead of discharging the used water back to a river, the water is used for domestic, commercial, industrial, or agricultural purposes.
So water recycling will "save" water — and reduce water scarcity in the freshwater source — only if it reduces the fraction of water that was previously being lost from the freshwater system.
Q. What about desalination if you're a city on the coast? It's expensive — but Adelaide's desal plant is supposed to provide more than 25 percent of that city's water supply by 2013.
A. Desalination could be a wonderful solution to our water challenges — more than one in every two people on Earth lives near a coast. But removing salts from ocean water requires a tremendous amount of energy, and the expense of that energy makes desalination the most costly way by far to supply fresh water to cities.
And there's a wicked climate change feedback loop for desalination: using it to create fresh water produces carbon emissions that change our climate, which in turn affects the precipitation that supplies fresh water. Without a radical breakthrough in energy production, desalination will continue to supply only a tiny fraction of the world's freshwater needs. (Note that Adelaide is using 100 percent renewable energy to power its desalination plant.)
Q. You cite San Antonio as a leader in integrating water conservation into its planning. What's San Antonio getting right that other cities aren't?
A. Few cities in the world have pushed urban water conservation as far as San Antonio. Their community outreach program is outstanding. … San Antonio is also investing in agricultural water conservation to reduce overall use of the Edwards Aquifer, the city's primary water source. That's the way of the future: Cities leading efforts to help everyone that uses the same water source to do so in the most conservative and sustainable manner possible.
Q. You argue that cities should help upstream farmers implement irrigation conservation that will leave more water for urbanites downstream. It sounds good in theory — but since agriculture accounts for 90 percent of all freshwater depletions, why should cities foot the bill?
A. Because most farmers won't implement water-saving measures unless it saves them money — or at the very least, until it doesn't cost them anything. Many farmers are already implementing water conservation measures because they reduce electricity costs. But sometimes the cost savings aren't sufficient to motivate a farmer to go through the time, trouble, and change in farming practices.
That's why cities need to step in to help. As we point out in our paper, saving just 5-10 percent of the water being consumed in irrigated agriculture can usually free up enough water to meet a city's needs. It can also free up water to restore river health.
Q. So how do we do this? Do these partnerships exist already?
A. One great way is to create a water market, such as exists in the Murray-Darling basin in Australia or in the Edwards Aquifer of Texas, where farmers can sell any "saved" water to other farmers, cities, or environmental interests as long as it does not harm other water users or the environment. There are few better things that governments could do to improve water management.
Another urban-rural water partnership that can work is a bilateral agreement between a farmer, or an entire irrigation district, and a city. The deal between San Diego and the Imperial Irrigation District in southern California is a great example. That arrangement will provide 37 percent of San Diego's water supply by the year 2020, it's very cost-effective, and it provides a new source of income and security for the farmers. Our analysis suggests that one in every two medium- to large-sized cities could — or should — pursue partnerships of this nature.
Q. What should urbanites do to prepare for the coming urban water crisis — pressure their lawmakers? Take personal water conservation measures? Other steps?
A. In my Water Sustainability course at the University of Virginia, I teach that everyone needs to take responsibility. Figure out how much water you use, and what impacts you might be causing. Almost everything you do requires water — not just the water you use directly in the kitchen, bathroom or laundry room, but also the water required to produce your electricity, food, clothing, gasoline, and other consumer goods. Regardless of your political party, be conservative in water use.
And to the point of our study: Ask your city manager or water supplier why they aren't working with local farmers to help them save water and restore health to our rivers, lakes, and aquifers.


text:
At my annual check-up, my doctor handed me a sheet explaining the reasons for office fee increases for Medicare Patients. It is worth reporting at length.
Medicare fixes the prices for Medicare patients' health care. All office charges for Medicare, including office visit charges, have been set by the Federal government since 1984. In real terms (adjusted for inflation), these fixed prices are less today than they were three decades ago.
During the last four years, there have been large decreases in Medicare reimbursements for laboratory services provided in-house by private physicians. Payments for in-office blood work, for example, have been cut 35 to 47 percent. Yet, a physician's overhead continues to increase as a result of uncontrollable costs, such as property taxes, building insurance, electricity, maintenance, malpractice and workers compensation insurance.
As one result, my doctor had to close both the x-ray unit and the state and federally licensed medical laboratory on his premises. Now patients are inconvenienced by having to go to other locations for services that formerly were provided by the doctor at lower cost. A one day medical check-up is now a multiple day event and more expensive.
While Medicare payments to doctors have been cut, regulations have been increasing: "Almost every outside diagnostic procedure (CT, MRI scan, sonogram) ordered by this office now has to be pre-approved by some outside agency. Many medications are now requiring pre-approval or step therapy. Each requires filling out 1-2 pages of forms and/or two or more phone calls. This requires personnel time and therefore more cost. Consultant referrals are requiring more paperwork and time to schedule."
My doctor has more people employed doing paperwork than he does delivering health care.
While Medicare payments for in-office services to private doctors, including those for blood work and x-ray units, were drastically cut, payments to outside corporate facilities for the same services were increased. It is obvious what is afoot. Corporate lobbies are using their whores in Congress to shift income from physician offices to corporate labs, corporate medical service providers, and hospitals that are owned by national corporations.
Legislation that cuts payments to private physicians and increases the payments to large corporate entities is intended to destroy private practice and to create in its place corporate bureaucracies in which doctors are wage slaves. The physician's income is diverted to shareholders, CEO bonuses, and Wall Street. Health care is being replaced with health business.
As a result of the way American medicine is being reconstructed, patients will cease to have a doctor whom they know and who knows them. Important information is lost in a system of bureaucratized "health care" in which a patient sees whatever face happens to be on duty at the corporate provider. Impersonal health care thus brings a cost of its own, and its quality can be low compared to private practice. Indeed, the U.S. is creating a "health care" system that is more costly and less efficient than single-payer national health systems. But it will enrich corporations and provide play for Wall Street.
It turns one's stomach to watch libertarians and "free market economists" defend bureaucratized impersonal health care as "free market medicine." There is no free market present. Corporate lobbies and campaign contributions use government power to create bureaucratized monopolies that destroy medicine for the practitioner and the patient. Wall Street pushes for greater shareholder earnings, which are achieved by denying care.
Just as independent businesses have been destroyed by corporate chains from Wal-Mart to auto parts to fast food, medicine is being destroyed by monopoly capital. The risks of starting a private business today are many times higher than they were a half century ago. Chains have turned Americans who once were independent business men and women into employees.
The fate of the health care bill demonstrates the power of private lobbies. What was to be health care for Americans was instantly transformed into 30 million new patients for the private health insurance industry. The "solution" to tens of millions of Americans being unable to afford health care is a law that requires them to purchase a private health care policy or be annually fined. As most of these uninsured Americans cannot afford to purchase a private policy, the plan is for the federal government to use taxpayers' money to subsidize their purchase of a policy from private companies.
In other words, tax money is being diverted to the pockets of private businesses. This is par for the course in "capitalist" America.
In today's America, Karl Marx's criticisms of capitalism are understated. Wherever one looks, the scene is one of the government using taxpayers' money to enrich private interests. Taxes are collected from people who can barely make it, and the revenues are transferred to multi-millionaires and billionaires. The federal government piles debt on the backs of heavily-burdened and dispossessed Americans in order that investment banksters can pay annual bonuses that exceed the lifetime earnings of most Americans.
Every aspect of the US military has been mined for private profit. Supply and other functions for the military, such as those provided by Halliburton and Blackwater, services once provided by the military itself at low cost, have been privatized. These services now cost many multiples of the cost to taxpayers of in-house military provision.
The "war on terror" enriches the armaments/security industry and enables Israeli territorial expansion. The Israel Lobby and the munitions industry are major sources of funding for U.S. political campaigns.
Prisons have been privatized in order to create profits for private corporations. The prisons require high incarceration rates in order to be profitable. Consequently, "freedom and democracy" America not only has the highest incarceration rate and the highest absolute number of prisoners in the world, but also a prison population comparable in size to the prison population of Stalin's Gulag Archipelago.
Congress allows private companies run by hardline Republicans to count electronically without paper trails the votes in elections. It has been proved over and over that the electronic voting machines, with proprietary undisclosed codes, can rig any election, especially if there are no exit polls or the captured media can find a way to discredit the exit polls.
And now we have private health care destroyed by the greed for profit. There are many reports of health care corporations, but not private doctors, rationing and even denying health care to policy holders in order to maximize profits. There are reports of people with treatable forms of cancer who were not told by their corporate health care providers in order to avoid the cost of their treatment. These reports are in compliance with capitalist America's emphasis on profits uber alles, to hell with people, the environment, honor and integrity.
Wall Street is romanticized by libertarians and "free market economists." They believe, entirely on the basis of their ideology, that Wall Street finances venture capitalists who bring economic progress and higher living standards. Wall Street does no such thing, especially since financial deregulation turned Wall Street into a speculative hedge fund.
Wall Street is concerned with annual bonuses. It will do anything to get them.
Today the interests of American capitalists are as far removed from the interests of the population as the bureaucrats of state owned firms under socialism. Neither can fail, no matter how incompetent or inefficient, as they have the public purse as their backup.
The Wall Street investment banks, which created with the compliance of the regulatory authorities and the credit rating agencies, "toxic" instruments that were sold world wide, thus destroying the prospects of people in many countries, are devoid of integrity and honor. Their only god is greed. And they control the US government, which is too dependent on campaign contributions to restore regulation.
The lobbies of greed rule America. The White House, Congress, even the federal judiciary are impotent in the face of capitalist greed.
There is no government of the people, for the people, by the people, only the rule of private interests.
Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan's first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow's Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.


text:
Pony Pals: A Pony in Trouble
Pam's father is a vet, so she's used to being around sick animals. But when her pony Lightning is taken ill, nobody seems to know what's wrong. Time is running out for Lightning. Can the Pony Pals work out what's making her sick… before it's too late?


text:
Before being elected to Congress, Rep. Jeff Miller was a real estate broker. His background in sales will come in handy as the Florida Republican tries to a sell a $17 billion deal to improve veterans health care to a GOP caucus that includes tea party members and other conservatives dead set against raising the deficit.
Miller, chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, announced a compromise bill Monday to help veterans avoid long waits for health care, hire more doctors and nurses to treat them, and make it easier to fire executives at the Veterans Affairs Department.
The bill includes $10 billion in emergency spending to help veterans who can't get prompt appointments with VA doctors to obtain outside care; $5 billion to hire doctors, nurses and other medical staff; and about $1.5 billion to lease 27 new clinics across the country, according to Miller and his Senate counterpart, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.
Miller and Sanders say the bill will require about $12 billion in new spending after accounting for about $5 billion in unspecified spending cuts from the VA's budget.
Despite the steep cost, Miller said he is confident he can sell the bill to fellow Republicans, including tea party members.
"Taking care of our veterans is not an inexpensive proposition, and our members understand that," Miller said at a news conference Monday. "The VA has caused this problem and one of the ways that we can help solve it is to give veterans a choice, a choice to stay in the system or a choice to go out of the system" to get government-paid health care from a private doctor.
Pressed on the point by reporters, Miller said there will be "an educational process that will have to take place" before the House votes on the compromise plan later this week. "Obviously some of our members will need a little more educating than others."
Rep. Tim Huelskamp., R-Kan., a tea party favorite and a member of the House veterans panel, said "throwing money at the VA won't solve their problem," adding that "a fundamental change in culture and real leadership from the president on down is the only way to provide the quality, timely care our veterans deserve."
Sanders, for his part, said funding for veterans should be considered as a cost of war, paid for through emergency spending.
"Planes and tanks and guns are a cost of war. So is taking care of the men and women who fight our battles," he said.
The deal requires a vote by a conference committee of House and Senate negotiators, and votes in the full House and Senate. Miller and Sanders both predicted passage of the bill by the end of the week, when Congress is set to leave town for a five-week recess.
If approved by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama, the veterans' bill would be one of the few significant bills signed into law this year.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Obama welcomes the bipartisan deal. "There are much-needed reforms that need to be implemented" at the VA, Earnest said Monday.
The White House is especially pleased that the bill includes emergency spending "to provide VA the additional resources necessary to deliver timely, high-quality care to veterans through a strengthened VA system," Earnest said.
The VA has been rocked by reports of patients dying while awaiting treatment and mounting evidence that workers falsified or omitted appointment schedules to mask frequent, long delays. The resulting election-year firestorm forced VA Secretary Eric Shinseki to resign in late May.
The Senate was expected to vote as soon as Tuesday to confirm former Procter & Gamble CEO Robert McDonald as the new VA secretary, replacing acting Secretary Sloan Gibson.
Sanders and Miller reached agreement on a plan to overhaul the VA over the weekend after more than six weeks of sometimes testy talks.
The compromise measure would require the VA to pay private doctors to treat qualifying veterans who can't get prompt appointments at the VA's nearly 1,000 hospitals and outpatient clinics, or those who live at least 40 miles from one of them. Only veterans who are enrolled in VA care as of Aug. 1 or live at least 40 miles away would be eligible to get outside care.
The proposed restrictions are important in controlling costs for the program. Congressional budget analysts had projected that tens of thousands of veterans who currently are not treated by the VA would likely seek VA care if they could see a private doctor paid for by the government.
Follow Matthew Daly on Twitter: httpss://twitter.com/MatthewDalyWDC
Copyright © 2014 Capitol Hill Blue
Copyright © 2014 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved


text:
- Headline
- Sub-Headline
- Flag of Republic Discarded; Imperial Black Unfurled
- Publication Date
- Monday, March 13, 1933
- Historical Event
American Citizens Attacked
This database includes 1,002 articles about this event - Article Type
- Location
- Page Section and Number
- 1
- Author/Byline
- History Unfolded Contributor
- Mindy G.
- Location of Research
- Find Newspaper Archive (https://newspaperarchive.com/)
Learn More about this Historical Event: American Citizens Attacked
Dodd, William E., Jr. and Martha Dodd. Ambassador Dodd's diary, 1933-1938. New York: Harcourt, Brace, c1941.
Larsen, Erik. In the Garden of Beasts: Love, Terror, and an American Family in Hitler's Berlin. New York: Crown, c2011.
Metcalfe, Philip. 1933. New York: Perennial Library, 1989.
Nagorski, Andrew. Hitlerland: American Eyewitnesses to the Nazis Rise to Power. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2012.
All articles about this event


text:
Showing Collections: 1 - 1 of 1
Documents of Rollin Reuben Keim, Lehigh Class of 1919
Identifier: SC MS 0224
A collection of ephemera of a Lehigh alumnus, Rollin Reuben Keim, concerning his personal interests, his career as a City of Bethlehem businessman and contributions to his Lehigh Class as Class correspondent for Lehigh Alumni Bulletin. Major portion of the collection is data and visual material related to the Hill-to-Hill Bridge, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
1792-1923, 1969; Majority of material found within 1792-1923, 1969
Found in:
Lehigh University Special Collections


text:
Loading your saved dashboards...
Recommended bets that also have performed well historically. The list updates in real time. To meet the criteria, an upcoming game must display:
1. 3 to 5 star best bet rating to indicate strong value right now
2. Trends must have a 55% profitable win rate over at least 10 games
Popular events based on current user activity. The list updates in real time, with recent activity more heavily weighted.


text:
I'm aware that I can use (* ... *)
to comment out stuff in a notebook. Many languages have a syntax for single-line comments, such as
in C, C++, Java, C#, ...#
in shell, Python, ...
For example, in C++ you can write
int x = 5;
// std::cout << "debug: x = " << x << std::endl;
return x;
in which the second line is commented out.
Is there a way to quickly comment out just one line in Mathematica, without having to type paired comment characters?


text:
Win this pretty fashion necklace and US$20 Amazon gift card!
The heart is made from Zamak, Hypoallergenic Jewellery made from an alloy of zinc aluminium magnesium and copper that is dipped in silver. It also doesn't tarnish!
What do you have to do?
Help get word out about His Laughing Girl and His Competent Woman by reviewing and posting.
You also gain an entry by joining the newsletter.
His Laughing Girl A BBW- Billionaire Romance
by Ellen Whyte
30,000 words
Self Standing and Complete
"To being wicked." His grey eyes were laughing at me. "Together."
The pleasant thumping in my knickers became a vigorous pounding. Richard Cummings was gorgeous. I could feel his charm wrapping around me like a warm blanket.
Irresistible, right? I heard myself quip, "Are you Cumming onto me?"
He bounced right back, "Absolutely."
Oh well, I told myself. It's just a flirt fest. I have those all the time, and it hardly ever comes to anything. Because of the curves, probably. Men like me, but after we've had a laugh, they go to bed with someone skinny.
This was no different. I'd have a giggle with Richard, enjoy the charm and the good looks, lust after him a little bit, and know it was purely a game. Because tech billionaires with a penchant for A-list models don't fall for curvy caterers.
Curvy chef Sophie Weston has given up on love. But when she is hired to cater for a very exclusive house party, she falls instantly for handsome tech tycoon Richard Cummings. However, she quickly discovers that Richard has a shady past. Should she trust him or should she walk away before her heart is broken again? A fun uplifting romance with a big beautiful woman and a yummy billionaire.
Where Can You Find The Books?
His Laughing Girl is available only on Amazon and on Kindle Unlimited.
His Laughing Girl on Amazon US
His Laughing Girl on Amazon UK
His Laughing Girl on Goodreads
His Competent Woman is available internationally, click here to find your favourite shop.
His Competent Woman on Goodreads
Good Luck! The winner will be notified on Friday 4th August 2017
Rafflecopter giveaway


text:
Department of Health – Abu Dhabi, Etihad Cargo, Abu Dhabi Ports Group, Rafed and SkyCell collaboration to handle more than six billion vaccine doses
Five million vaccines have been transported in November on behalf of the Department of Health – Abu Dhabi
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: Amid an anticipated surge in vaccine logistics demand, Abu Dhabi is poised to cement its position as the global logistics hub to facilitate COVID-19 vaccine distribution across the world, after spearheading the launch of the Hope Consortium.
Comprising leading Abu Dhabi and global entities, the Hope Consortium represents a complete supply chain solution to address vaccine transport, demand planning, sourcing, training, and digital technology infrastructure, and facilitate vaccine availability across the world.
The news follows Hope Consortium member Etihad Cargo and the consortium transporting five million vaccines in November on behalf of the Department of Health – Abu Dhabi, which is spearheading the consortium and will oversee regulatory compliance, full chain expertise and scientific insight. The consortium also includes Abu Dhabi Ports Group, Rafed, the healthcare purchasing arm of Abu Dhabi-based ADQ, and Switzerland's award-winning SkyCell, which develops next-generation, temperature-controlled logistics containers for the pharmaceutical industry. As part of the Hope Consortium, SkyCell will establish a regional service and manufacturing centre in Abu Dhabi.
The Hope Consortium has pooled its collective expertise to garner a multi-faceted capability to provide logistics services to handle over six billion doses from the vaccines being developed and manufactured around the world – whether in single or multi doses – in cold and ultra-cold conditions in 2021, rising to over three times more doses by the end of next year – the largest capacity and logistics capability regionally and one of the largest globally.
"The Hope Consortium is a prime example of how Abu Dhabi is leading in providing solutions, capabilities and capacities to help the world get through this global pandemic. It is a
continuation of all players' collaboration of a UAE-based public-private partnership that spans the globe. While assuring vaccine supply to the domestic market, the Hope Consortium will offer international governments, non-governmental organisations, and vaccine suppliers a cohesive solution across every supply chain step – from air freight, regional storage and temperature monitoring, to inventory management, cold and ultra-cold container solution, regulatory clearance, and healthcare and pharma quality assurance," explained HE Sheikh Abdullah bin Mohammed Al Hamed, Chairman of the Department of Health – Abu Dhabi.
"Developing a vaccine is only the first step in getting to a solution, getting that vaccine to the whole globe, while maintaining a robust integrity of temperature is an equal challenge by itself, the Hope Consortium will provide that solution on the highest level of quality.
"Consortium partners already have extensive expertise in the global delivery of millions of COVID-19 related items, such as personal protective equipment, diagnostics consumables, vaccines and pharmaceuticals. As we progress talks with vaccine manufacturers to apprise them of our global distribution capabilities, the Hope Consortium will harness the united expertise of various Abu Dhabi and UAE stakeholders to provide a fully-fledged, end-to-end solution specifically for COVID vaccine distribution needs."
Distribution of the vaccines, which will be stored in Abu Dhabi Ports Company facilities, will be carried out by Etihad Cargo, the first Middle Eastern carrier to gain IATA's Centre of Excellence for Independent Validators (CEIV) certification for pharmaceutical logistics. The UAE's national carrier will leverage its extensive intercontinental network, fleet and charter flights to supply vaccines globally.
"With two thirds of the world's human footprint within a four-hour flight of Abu Dhabi, the UAE capital's investment in technological expertise and world-class infrastructure facilities means we can serve as a global logistical hub to, and for, the world," explained Tony Douglas, Group Chief Executive Officer, Etihad Aviation Group. "Etihad Cargo's role in the consortium will leverage our outstanding pharmaceutical logistics expertise and specialised pharma and healthcare service, PharmaLife, the IATA CEIV Pharma certified product capable of facilitating temperature-sensitive cargo between +25⁰C and -80⁰C. Our network reach across key destinations will be supported by the utilisation of our charter operations to meet global demand for swift and secure COVID-19 vaccine shipments.
"We are already managing all anticipated shipment elements through our dedicated COVID-19 vaccines workforce," Douglas added. "A dedicated pharmaceutical handling facility to accommodate increased capacity at our Abu Dhabi hub is also currently under review, as well as additional thermal covers and enhanced capabilities at origin stations based on established pharma trade lanes and specific requests."
As part of the Hope Consortium, Abu Dhabi Ports, which has the Middle East's largest capacities for cold chain and ultra-cold storage, will leverage its capabilities as an innovation epicentre serving the Middle East and wider world through Abu Dhabi as a supply chain gateway connecting East and West.
"This collaboration is in line with our ethos of creating innovative ideas, concepts, solutions and opportunities," said Captain Mohamed Juma Al Shamisi, Group CEO of Abu Dhabi Ports. "Abu Dhabi Ports plays a key role in supporting the Abu Dhabi vision in advancing logistic services in the emirate and leading the post-COVID-19 revival and economic recovery through robust partnerships. Our expansive operations at KIZAD are among the largest cold chain and ultra-cold storing in the region and enable us to support the emirate's drive to spearhead global immunisation efforts that will positively impact millions of lives.
"In addition to leveraging our world-class trade facilitation expertise, our efforts also rest on our Maqta Gateway subsidiary, which is playing a leading role in the development of integrated, digital, global commerce."
Dr. Noura Al Dhaheri, Head of Digital Cluster – Abu Dhabi Ports, CEO of Maqta Gateway, said: "Supporting the uninterrupted flow of critical cargo, such as medical and food supplies have been crucial in Abu Dhabi Ports' story during 2020, but the distribution of vaccines will form the most significant success to date. Maqta Gateway is committed towards creating innovative digital solutions to boost the transparency and integrity of the region's supply chain."
Rashed Al Qubaisi, Chief Executive Officer, Rafed, which has already managed large volume products before and during the pandemic for the UAE and humanitarian initiatives, added: "Our expertise in centralised procurement services will provide vital support to the consortium. Through our collaboration we will better consolidate our efforts for the benefit of our global partners in the public and healthcare sectors."
The Hope Consortium intends to transport the vaccines using SkyCell's hybrid containers. The storage and transportation containers are secured through an IoT monitoring service which tracks temperature conditions to ensure sensitive vaccines are protected even under extreme conditions. With efficient insulation and cutting-edge cooling technology, the containers maintain steady temperatures for an average of 202 hours (8.4 days) and self-recharge automatically in a cooling chamber or reefer truck.
"Our hybrid containers will safeguard the full efficacy of vaccines that are vital to defeat the pandemic, all while reducing long-term business and environmental costs," explained Richard Ettl, Chief Executive Officer of SkyCell. "The Hope Consortium has the right partners, infrastructure and service ecosystem to ensure time and temperature sensitive transportation in a seamless cool chain operation."
The consortium will also be looking to partner with players and stakeholders to improve its offering and innovative solution for the benefit of humanity.