text:
Typhoon Haiyan: Is aid being distributed fast enough?
| Tacloban, Philippines
Mobs overran a rice warehouse on the island worst hit by the Philippine typhoon, setting off a wall collapse that killed eight people and carting off thousands of sacks of the grain, while security forces Wednesday exchanged gunfire with an armed gang.
The incidents in or close to the storm-ravaged city hosting international relief efforts add to concerns about the slow pace of aid distribution and that parts of the disaster zone are descending into chaos.
Five long days after Typhoon Haiyan wasted the eastern seaboard of the Philippines, the cogs of what promises to be a massive international aid effort are beginning to turn, but not quickly enough for the some 600,000 people displaced, many of them homeless, hungry and thirsty.
"There's a bit of a logjam to be absolutely honest getting stuff in here," said U.N. staffer Sebastian Rhodes Stampa against the roar of a C-130 transport plane landing behind him at the airstrip in Tacloban, one of the hardest-hit cities.
"It's almost all in country — either in Manila or in Cebu, but it's not here. We're going to have a real challenge with logistics in terms of getting things out of here, into town, out of town, into the other areas," he said. "The reason for that essentially is that there are no trucks, the roads are all closed."
Planes, ships and trucks were all on their way to the region, loaded with generators, water purifying kits and emergency lights — vital equipment needed to sustain a major relief mission. Airports were reopening in the region, and the U.S. military said it was installing equipment to allow the damaged Tacloban aiport to operate 24-7.
Tacloban's mayor, Alfred Romualdez, urged residents to flee the city because local authorities were having trouble providing food and water and maintaining order, The New York Times reported. He said the city was in desperate need of trucks to distribute relief shipments that were accumulating at the city's airport as well as equipment to pull decaying corpses from the rubble.
Eight people were crushed to death when the mob stormed a rice warehouse around 24 kilometers (15 miles) from Tacloban on Tuesday and carried off thousands of sacks of grain, according to National Food Authority spokesman Rex Estoperez.
On Wednesday, gunfire broke out close to the city's San Juanico bridge on Wednesday between security forces and armed men, but the circumstances were unclear, according to footage on local TV.
Since the storm, people have broken into homes, malls and garages, where they have stripped the shelves of food, water and other goods. Authorities have struggled to stop the looting. There have been unconfirmed reports of armed gangs of robbers operating in a systematic manner.
An 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew was in place across the region. Despite incidents, police said the situation was improving.
"We have restored order," said Carmelo Espina Valmoria, director of the Philippine National Police special action force. "There has been looting for the last three days, but the situation has stabilized."
The death toll rose to 2,275, according a national tally kept by the disaster agency. That figure is expected to rise, perhaps significantly, when accurate information is collected from the entirety of the disaster zone, which spreads over a wide swath of the eastern and central Philippines but appears to be concentrated on two main islands, Leyte and Samar.
The congressman for Eastern Samar province, a coastal region that bore the full force of the storm, said 211 had been killed there and 45 were missing. He said some villages have been wiped out, with practically no structures standing. In one town, bodies remain lying on the road because help has not come to retrieve or bury them. Other towns have conducted mass burials.
"The situation there was horrible," Ben Evardone told a local television station. "Some communities disappeared, entire villages were wiped out. They were shouting 'food, food, food!' when they saw me."
U.S. Brig Gen. Paul Kennedy promised a response akin to the widely praised U.S. military one after the 2004 Asian tsunami, when fleets of helicopters dropped water and food to hundreds of isolated communities along the coast.
"You are not just going to see Marines and a few planes and some helicopters," Kennedy said. "You will see the entire Pacific Command respond to this crisis."
A Norwegian ship carrying supplies left from Manila, while an Australian air force transport plane took off from Canberra carrying a medical team. British and American navy vessels are also en route to the region.
At the Tacloban airport, makeshift clinics have been set up and thousands of people were waiting for a flight out. A doctor said supplies of antibiotics and anesthetics arrived Tuesday for the first time.
"Until then, patients had to endure the pain," said Dr. Victoriano Sambale.
Relief officials said comparing the pace of this operation to those in past disasters was largely pointless because each posed unique challenges.
In Indonesia's Aceh, the worst-hit region by the 2004 tsunami, relief hubs were easier to set up than in Tacloban. The main airport there was functioning 24-7 within a couple of days of the disaster. While devastation in much of the city of Banda Aceh was total, large inland parts of the city were undamaged, providing a base for aid operations and temporary accommodation for the homeless.
AP writers Oliver Teves, Chris Brummitt and Teresa Cerojano in Manila, Kristen Gelineau in Cebu and Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations contributed to this report.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


text:
Diamond Illusion Band Set, Ladies sizes available 7 - 9. Mens Ring sizes available 10 - 12.
Stock No | : | 90007603 |
Metal Type | : | Sterling Silver |
Metal Kt | : | SS |
Ring Size | : | 4-12 |
Side Stone Carat Wt. | : | 0.05 ctw |
This product usually ships out in 5-7 Business Days (Mon thru Fri) after you order has been fully processed. Products are shipped subject to Credit Authorization and Availability
If you have already ordered, please click here to view your Order Status.
Once your order has been processed, it will be delivered to you according to the options below. If you have any questions concerning Shipping Methods or to upgrade your shipping method, please call 517-349-0101
No review for this product yet. Be the first to review.
If you are not satisfied for any reason with your purchase, you can return your purchase ...
You will receive your refund within 30 days from the date of receipt.
We offer free insured shipping on every order within the U.S.A.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Boeing Co. engineers and technical workers came to different conclusions about the company's contract offer, with engineers voting to accept a four-year deal and technical workers rejecting it.
The Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace announced results of the contract vote late Tuesday night at the union headquarters in Tukwila. The union said that 6,483 engineers voted to accept the contract, while 5,514 voted to reject it.
Technical workers, however, voted down Boeing's contract proposal 3,203 to 2,868. The technical workers also voted to give SPEEA negotiators the authority to call a strike, if necessary.
In all, 18,043 SPEEA members, or 79.2 percent of those eligible, voted.
The SPEEA vote spanned two weeks and added drama to an ongoing 787 crisis. Boeing is struggling to return the Dreamliner to passenger service after the Federal Aviation Administration grounded the company's newest jet more than a month ago, and SPEEA members are crucial to that effort.
Ray Goforth, SPEEA's executive director, said the union will ask Boeing to reconvene negotiations to come up with a contract proposal that technical workers will accept.
"It's time for the company to stop wasting resources and improve its offer to reflect the value and contributions technical workers bring to Boeing," Goforth said in a statement. "That way, we can avoid a strike and focus on fixing the problems of the 787 and restoring customer confidence in Boeing."
SPEEA's engineers also approved strike authorization, although that no longer matters because the engineers, who generally are higher paid, voted to accept the company's offer. However, the 15,550 engineers can provide "inside support" to technical workers if a strike is called, SPEEA said without elaborating.
The union's 22,950 engineers and technical workers at Everett, Renton and other locations in Western Washington design new aircraft, test and approve deliveries of existing models on behalf of the federal government and troubleshoot problems on assembly lines. About half work at the Boeing factory and offices at Paine Field.
Boeing said in a statement late Tuesday that it was pleased the engineers accepted the company's contract but "deeply disappointed" the technical workers did not. Ray Conner, president of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, reiterated the need to switch new employees to a 401(k) plan.
"The realities of the market require us to make changes so we can invest in new products and keep winning in this competitive environment, which will allow us to continue to provide a solid future for our team," Conner said.
Despite what union leader termed a "poison pill" — the pension change — union negotiators have said the company's four-year deal contains plenty of positives: no increase in employee contributions for medical insurance and 5 percent annual increases to wage pools. The average Boeing engineer makes $110,000 annually, while the average technical worker earns $79,300.
Goforth suggested Tuesday that members should celebrate the amount of concessions the union was able to get from Boeing over the course of negotiations. Boeing's initial offer included 2 percent to 3.5 percent annual wage increases and required workers to pay more for health care.
Boeing and SPEEA have been negotiating a new contract for some 10 months. Ninety-six percent of SPEEA members who voted in early October rejected the company's first offer. The two sides made little progress over the next few months, despite the help of federal observers. The union also in recent months has filed several unfair labor practice complaints with the National Labor Relations Board.
The pace of negotiations picked up in early January as the 787 ran into trouble and ultimately was grounded Jan. 16 by federal authorities. The company then agreed to SPEEA's previous request to roll over the existing contract, with one big exception: Boeing said that under its final offer new hires who become SPEEA members would be enrolled in a 401(k) retirement plan rather than the defined pension program that present SPEEA members have.
SPEEA negotiators had urged engineers and technical workers to reject Boeing's offer, saying the change in retirement would eventually divide the union.
Conner had appealed to SPEEA member loyalty to the company's products, including the 787, in a message sent early this month to workers.
"It was your innovation, talent and skill that brought the 787 Dreamliner to life," the Boeing executive wrote recently. "Now more than ever, we need to deliver on those promises by coming together as one team."
Michelle Dunlop: 425-339-3454; email@example.com.
Here's how members of the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace voted on a contract offer by Boeing and on authorization of a possible strike. In each case, a simple majority prevails.
Engineers contract vote: 6,483 in favor to 5,514 opposed
Technical workers contract vote: 3,203 opposed to 2,868 in favor
Engineers strike vote: 6,727 in favor to 5,249 opposed
Technical workers strike vote: 3,903 in favor to 2,165 opposed
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.


text:
All About Me Challenges
Whimsical Scraps & Bugs
SP Color Combos
Sewn Together/Sew Many Cards
The Chirper Challenge
Peachy Keen Stamps
Practical Scrappers
Just Buggin'
Creative Twist
The Crafting Pot
Scrapbooks n' Stuff
The guidelines set up for your entry are:
1. Sign up as a follower on all of the blogs listed
2. Leave a comment in this post
3. Make a card/LO with the PKS sketch (below), for your submission on OUR blog and link it to your post with Mr. Linky below.
(We have challenges once every two weeks. Most are fairly simple card sketches, but sometimes we throw a wrench in the works, just for fun. We give away a prize at the end of each challenge and the winner is announced at the start of the new challenge. We are a fairly new blog and we like to encourage beginners, so we use pickrandom.com to choose our winners).
We have a great group of talented designers that graciously extend their time to make cards for us. Vivienne Holden, Lorie Souther, Diane Markle and Sonia Kertznus (currently away). Welcome please, our two guest designers for the blog hop, Emma Aguilar and Lauri Ingram. Thank you so much to all of our designers for their quick thinking and their awesome samples!
Look at her adorable take on this sketch! She used our Monster's n More Faces and one of our Pumpkin Faces.
I know I will have to go and read on her post!
How amazing our PK-311 Snowmany Thanks looks when done up by this pro!!
These two look to be skating together in perfect rhythm!
2 pkgs of Doodlecharm 6 x 6 cardstock packs, 4 Peachy Keen Stamps packages & an acrylic block!


text:
Product liability insurance protects the manufacturer, distributor or seller of a product from legal liability resulting from a defective condition that caused personal injury or damage associated with the use of the product. Product recall insurance, a specialty product designed to cover the costs associated with recalls, is also available from some insurers.
According to a March 2020 report from the advocacy group Kids in Danger, recalls of children's products rose slightly to 58 compared with 52 in 2018, but well below the 93 recalls in 2017. In 2019 there were 776 incidents reported prior to recall of the 58 children's products, for an average of 13.4 incidents per recalled product. Both incidents reported prior to recall and average incidents per recalled product were both down from 2018 when 1,275 incidents were reported and the average number of incidents reported was 24.5.
Most lawsuits are settled out of court. Of those that are tried and proceed to verdict, Jury Verdict Research data from Thomson Reuters show that in 2018 (latest data available) the median award in personal injury cases was $100,000, down from $125,000 in 2017. The average award, $1,669,340, also fell in 2018 compared with $1,825,808 in 2017. Thomson Reuters notes that average awards can be skewed by a few very high awards and that medians are more representative. In cases of product liability, the highest median award from 2012 to 2018 was in medical products cases ($4,002,185).
Businesses address their liability concerns through many types of risk management, of which insurance is an important component. A Swiss Re study indicated that in 2014 the United States had the largest commercial liability insurance market in the world both in premium volume ($87 billion) and as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (0.52 percent). More than half of all global liability premiums were written in the United States.
Insurers are required to defend their policyholders against lawsuits. The costs of settling a claim are reported on insurers' financial statements as defense and cost containment expenses incurred. These expenses include defense, litigation and medical cost containment. Expenditures for surveillance, litigation management and fees for appraisers, private investigators, hearing representatives and fraud investigators are included. In addition, attorney legal fees may be incurred owing to a duty to defend, even when coverage does not exist, because attorneys must be hired to issue opinions about coverage. Insurers' defense costs as a percentage of incurred losses are relatively high in lines such as product liability and medical malpractice, reflecting the high cost of defending certain types of lawsuits, such as medical injury cases and class actions against pharmaceutical companies. For example, in 2020, in addition to $1.1 billion in product liability incurred losses, insurers spent $667 million on settlement expenses, which was equivalent to 60.9 percent of the losses
Let William G Mechling Insurance Agency, help you choose a policy that will fit your individual needs. Protecting your assets, whether personal, business, or both, is our goal. A well-chosen policy can lessen the impact of some of life's most common, yet unforeseen perils. We're here to help when you are considering purchasing Product Liability Insurance.


text:
When Michelle Obama wore a white, one-shoulder gown by Jason Wu to the Inaugural Ball in 2009, the then 26-year-old designer was, as the New York Times described him, "barely known outside the fashion beltway."
Four years later, Wu, whom the First Lady wore again to the Inaugural Ball Monday evening, has reached mass recognition, having launched a diffusion line with Target in early 2012. The young designer has also partnered with St. Regis hotels on a luggage line and with faucet company Brizo on a bathroom collection, in addition to dressing celebrities such as Diane Kruger, Zoe Saldana and Michelle Williams for red carpet appearances.
The red, chiffon and velvet dress he designed for Obama on Monday night will only raise Wu's growing profile. The sleeveless gown showed off Obama's famously toned arms, and she accessorized it with a handmade diamond embellished ring by jewelry designer Kimberly McDonald, and shoes by Jimmy Choo.
Obama's pick surprised many fashion critics, who thought she would give the honor to another designer this time around. But in one way, the First Lady's decision to repeat the designer was a perfectly fitting end to a campaign season defined by her recycled outfits, most notably the magenta Michael Kors dress she wore on Election Night.


text:
Journal Content
Ritchie Bros. AuctioneersLipton, SKLipton, SK, Canada S0G 3B0 Maps and Directions Maps and Directions |
Site Information
Maps and Directions
Buying at Ritchie Bros.
Top 3 reasons to buy at our auctions
- Huge selection of equipment and trucks
- No minimum bids or reserve prices—every item sells
- Clear title/free of liens or we'll offer you a refund
Get ready for the auction
Online bidding is always free
At Ritchie Bros., it's always free to register and bid online in any of our live auctions - we do not charge any fees in order to use this service, regardless of whether you bid via our website, our mobile app, or if you place a PriorityBid
Now accepting PriorityBids
Never miss a lot - Place a PriorityBid before the live auction starts.
Tell us how much you're willing to pay and we'll bid the lowest amount required for you to win!
Check the schedule and bid
Check the schedule before auction day so you know when and where to bid.


text:
Aramex Tracking package
We track 300+ couriers worldwide.
FindPare provides real-time shipping details about many courier services, including the Aramex. Our courier tracking service supports multiple languages and shows you the exact status of your package. If you are not sure what your estimated delivery time is, you can also calculate the delivery time and see when your order is going to arrive.
Based in: Global | Aramex support | Aramex official website | Custom declaration form


text:
Tony Parker and Eva Longoria got engaged? Here's the over-under of the day: What will come first -- the Spurs' next title or the TP-Eva divorce? I'll take the latter.
More on the top storylines of the day:
Bengals beat Ravens: I could imagine these Bengals playing the role of last year's Steelers in the playoffs: Get in as the 6-seed and make a run. The Bengals have an improving defense that stymied the "Billick Offensive Juggernaut" and an offense that always has the potential to put points up, but last night, against one of the league's best defenses, did just enough to win.
LSU to Rose Bowl?
This is IFFY on two levels:
Good "Iffy": If Florida loses to
Bad "Iffy": If Florida loses to
Forget the Rose Bowl talk (and, for that matter, the SEC championship game): The most important, must-see game of the weekend is Rutgers at West Virginia. A win for RU would put give them the Big East title, put them in the BCS (Orange Bowl) and complete a Cinderella season. (Honestly, if Rutgers wins, I'm not quite sure why the Rose Bowl wouldn't pick Rutgers to play against
Bama coaching search: Spurrier in or out? He says he's staying at
Wade can't lead Heat past Pistons: As long as Shaq is healthy for the playoffs, it's an empty win for
(If Joe Dumars was offered
MLB Hot Stove: Zito-palooza! It's gotten to the point where we simply add "palooza" to any premier free-agent pitcher's last name. (See "Pavanopalooza.") He met with the Rangers, who are like the "nouveau riche" version of the Yankees and Red Sox: They have the money to spend and interest in spending it, but can't seem to convert that into playoff appearances. I like the CW that has Zito joining the Mets.
I've got an unconventional (if predictable) choice: Theo Epstein. Give him a 30-year contract and watch the New Golden Era of baseball begin.
College Football: Rules to be Central Michigan, which won the MAC championship game over
College Hoops: Sucks to be Dan Monson, who resigned (read: was axed) from
Final thought: I guess Eva's rumored fling with Mario Lopez didn't take. Or TP didn't have a problem with it.


text:
ISLAMABAD — Pakistan's military paraded its wares for the second year running to commemorate Pakistan Day, during which the Chinese CAIC Z-10 helicopter gunship and the Shaheen III ballistic missile were notable participants.
The day marks the occasion both of the Lahore Resolution in 1940 that called for the formation of Pakistan, and the declaration of a republic in 1956.
Commenting on the parade, analyst, author and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad, Brian Cloughley, said there were "no equipment surprises, but the main thing about the parade is that it took place at all, which is a positive indicator concerning the never-ending fight against terrorism."
The parade had generally been an annual event, but the deterioration in the security situation led to a seven-year break from 2007 until last year. It has also been notable in the past for the public debut of new equipment.
The JF-17 Thunder made its debut in 2007, and last year the FM-90 SAM system was displayed for the first time. The Z-10 and Shaheen (Falcon) III made their debuts this year.
The Z-10 has been in the country undergoing an operational evaluation since last year. Official details of this have not been revealed, but what unofficial information is available indicates the army is impressed with the machine.
Pakistan has a requirement to replace the AH-1F Cobra helicopter gunship currently operated by the 31st, 33rd, and 35th Army Aviation Combat Squadrons, and is awaiting delivery of the AH-1Z, but is also pursuing up to 20 MI-35 Hind gunships from Russia.
The Hind appears to have been acquired to fulfill the requirement for an armed and armored helicopter also capable of carrying troops.
It was announced today that the Z-10 was in service with the 35th "Mustangs" Squadron of the Army Aviation Corps, which would paradoxically see Pakistan operating three types of helicopter gunships.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence Production, which also handles procurement, declined to provide confirmation of the purchase of the Z-10 and how many were to be obtained.
In spite of the other gunship purchases, Cloughley believes there is still room for the Z-10.
"It seems that Pakistan has firmed on 15 AH-1Zs and will probably get 20 Hinds. So there is certainly room for the Z-10, which does seem to be in squadron service," he said. "It's much cheaper than the [AH-1Z] Viper, of course, and the Hind, though cost-effective, is a big machine."
Though it would seem dated over today's battlefield, members of the Army Aviation Corps have acknowledged it is the best counterinsurgency gunship available. Cloughley says the Hind also has one other clear advantage.
"The main thing with the Hind is economy in maintenance — it's probably the best in the world from that aspect for its type," he said.
Nevertheless, he believes the Z-10 will be the mainstay of Pakistan's gunship capability. "My assessment is that the Z-10 will be acquired in larger numbers."
There has been speculation regarding the presence of the Chinese Harbin WZ-19 armed scout in Pakistan, but the spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence Production also declined to comment on this.
Cloughley says the presence of the medium range Shaheen III amounts to some predictable signaling that was aimed squarely at India, Pakistan's main security threat.
The solid-fueled, multi-stage Shaheen III was tested for the first time in March 2015 and is Pakistan's longest range missile with a stated delivery limit of 2,750 kilometers, though this is believed by many analysts to be an understatement.
Nevertheless, the range allows it to cover all parts of Indian territory with a worthwhile payload, even the Indian strategic military facilities in the Andaman and Nicobar island chain in the Bay of Bengal/Andaman Sea.
Mansoor Ahmed, a Stanton nuclear security junior faculty fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center and expert on Pakistan's nuclear deterrent and delivery systems, said that "the Shaheen III is in service, but more user trials or batch/training tests might take place as is the usual practice with other similar missile systems."
Usman Ansari is the Pakistan correspondent for Defense News.


text:
The Lord of the Rings (1981 radio series)
In 1981 BBC Radio 4 broadcast a dramatisation of J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings in 26 half-hour stereo instalments.
It followed a previous 12-part BBC Radio version from 1955 and 1956, of which no recordings are known to have survived.
Broadcast history
Each of the original 26 episodes received two broadcasts per week - standard practice for many BBC radio serials even today. The first broadcast of Episode 2 was blacked out across a large part of south east England because of a transmitter failure (a very rare occurrence even then).
The 26-part series was subsequently edited into 13 hour-long episodes, restoring some dialogue originally cut for timing (since each hour-long episode is actually around 57 minutes, as opposed to 54 minutes for two half-hour episodes), rearranging some scenes for dramatic impact and adding linking narration and music cues. It was broadcast in 13 episodes in 1982.
The re-edited version was released on both cassette tape and CD sets which also included the soundtrack album (noticeably taken from a vinyl copy).
A soundtrack album featuring a completely re-recorded and in some cases expanded, suite of Stephen Oliver's music was released in 1981.
1981 broadcast
- "The Long Awaited Party", March 8
- "The Shadow Of The Past", March 15
- "The Black Riders", March 22
- "Trouble At The Prancing Pony", March 29
- "The Knife In The Dark", April 5
- "The Council Of Elrond", April 12
- "The Fellowship Of The Ring", April 19
- "The Mines Of Moria", April 26
- "The Mirror Of Galadriel", May 3
- "The Breaking Of The Fellowship", May 10
- "The Riders Of Rohan", May 17
- "Treebeard Of Fangorn", "May 24
- "The King Of The Golden Hall", May 31
- "Helm's Deep", June 7
- "The Voice Of Saruman", June 14
- "The Black Gate Is Closed", June 21
- "The Window On The West", June 28
- "Minas Tirith", July 5
- "Shelob's Lair", July 12
- "The Siege Of Gondor", July 19
- "The Battle Of Pelennor Fields", July 26
- "The Houses Of Healing", August 2
- "Mount Doom", August 9
- "The Return Of The King", August 16
- "Homeward Bound", August 23
- "The Grey Havens", August 30
1982 broadcast
- "The Shadow Of The Past", July 17
- "The Black Riders", July 24
- "The Knife In The Dark", July 31
- "The Ring Goes South", August 7
- "The Mirror Of Galadriel", August 14
- "The Breaking Of The Fellowship", August 21
- "The King Of The Golden Hall", August 28
- "The Voice Of Saruman", September 4
- "The Two Towers", September 11
- "The Choices Of Master Samwise", September 18
- "The Battle Of Pelennor Fields", September 25
- "Mount Doom", October 2
- "The Grey Havens", October 9
Differences from the book
The script by Brian Sibley and Michael Bakewell attempts to be as faithful as possible to the original books, but there are some errors and alterations. They include:
- At one point, Minas Anor and Minas Tirith are referred to as though they were separate cities; these are merely alternate names for the same city.
- Part of the Battle of Pelennor Fields sequence is described in song by an opera-style vocalist rather than acted, which may distance some listeners from the action. Others may find the kinship between the sequence and Eddic style of storytelling interesting.
- The journey through Drúadan Forest and the subsequent alliance with Ghân-buri-Ghân's wild men, or "woses" is removed from the radio drama.
- Quickbeam the Ent does not appear in the story.
- Gildor Inglorion does not appear in the story.
- The radio serial omits the sequence in the book in which the hobbits visit with Tom Bombadil. However, in doing so, the Hobbits are never shown to receive their swords from the Barrow-downs, which are enchanted with spells that are proof against the Lord of the Nazgûl. Sibley acknowledges this later, when Merry stabs him during the Battle of the Pelennor Fields. Instead of being weakened as in the book, he merely says Merry stings like a gnat.
Re-release in 2002
In 2002, to coincide with the release of Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings (film series), the BBC reissued the series in three sets corresponding to the three original volumes (The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of the King).
This version omitted the original episode divisions, and included a new opening and closing narration for the first two sets, and an opening narration only for the last, recorded by Ian Holm in character as Frodo Baggins - Frodo's narrations deal with his efforts to write his historical account of the War of the Ring in the Red Book, as well as his own personal reflections and musings on the story's events.
The re-edited version also included some additional music cues, which had to be taken from the soundtrack album because the original master tapes for the series music had been lost.
The soundtrack, now digitally remastered, was also included with The Return of the King set, with a demo of John Le Mesurier singing Bilbo's Last Song included as a bonus track.
The 13-episode series was also rerun on Radio 4 in 2002.


text:
The St. Stephen's and St. Agnes Saints will settle for a fifth- or sixth-place finish in the annual Interstate Athletic Conference tournament after falling to Landon in the first round.
The Saints' seven-game losing streak carried over into the post season Tuesday, with a 58-45 loss to the Bears. St. Stephen's suffered the defeat despite double-digit offensive performances by seniors Justin Goldsborough and Phil Guglielmo.
Landon, 14-9, pummeled the Saints earlier this year in two regular season matchups. The Saints, 3-19, have not won a game since beating Haverford on January 28.
They face off with St. Albans on Saturday for the IAC tournament consolation game before taking a few days off to prepare for the annual Sleepy Thompson Tournament. Like the Bears, the Bulldogs have twice beaten St. Stephen's in regular season matchups.


text:
Green and pink- Mysore Silk Saree
Pretty Green Mysore Silk Saree enchants with plain body & bounded with contrast Pink zari border . The contrast pink zari striped pallu complements. The Pink plain blouse with Zari border is a beautiful finish.
Approximate Length - 5.5 mtrs + 0.8 to 0.9 mtrs (Attached blouse)
Height - 43 - 46""
Approximate weight - 500-650 gms
Note : The colours you see on your device may vary due to the varying colour reproduction, brightness, resolution and temperature of individual devices. If you'd like more clarity before your purchase, please contact our customer engagement team at +917604936565
Blouse Stitching/Embroidery & Falls/Peco : Please contact us on +917604936565
Choose options


text:
Please select a highlighted date from the calendar
Video Interview: https://www.youtube.com/netflixir
The following webcasts contain forward-looking statements relating to future events or future financial performance of the Company that involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these statements based on a number of factors, including those identified in the company's annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 26, 2024. These presentations may also contain references to non-GAAP financial measures. A presentation of and reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, where such can be done without unreasonable effort, can be found on our website at https://ir.netflix.com. The forward looking statements are made as of the date of broadcast and the Company undertakes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements, except as required by law.


text:
Lawmakers have spent much of this year struggling to reach a deal that could get budget deficits under control. But the problem has been developing for at least a decade.
Young voters might not be familiar with the government of the year 2000 — at least not by its balance sheet. The economy: booming. Tax revenue: rolling in. Expenses for war: none. And to top it off, there was a $200 billion surplus.
"We had Allen Greenspan, the chairman of the Fed, openly fretting that we would pay down all of our debt and that could lead to terrible economic consequences," said Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.
But a lot happened in the first two years of George W. Bush's presidency. He said his first order of business was giving back the surplus by cutting taxes. Then came the Sept. 11 attacks, the war in Afghanistan and a spike in government spending on domestic security.
In 2002, the economy slid into a recession, so President Bush and Congress supported another tax cut — this one to stimulate spending by businesses. By the end of that year, the surplus was gone and the government began running up the credit card.
In Bush's State of the Union address in early 2003, he warned of rising unemployment and outlined his plan to get people working: "Jobs are created when the economy grows, the economy grows when Americans have more money to spend and invest, and the best and fairest way to make sure Americans have that money is not to tax it away in the first place."
By this time, though, some lawmakers had begun to worry. The centerpiece of this tax cut was a reduction in capital gains taxes, and a lower rate for investment income — both targeting wealthier Americans.
Democrats, led by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, called it reckless.
"It is fiscally irresponsible, it does not create jobs, it is not fair, and the voters will know about that," Pelosi said.
Congress was already spending more money than it was taking in. Cutting taxes again would make that worse.
Ornstein says fiscal hawks didn't like it. "You had not just Democrats but a lot of independent observers saying, 'Hey, look, this is a huge drain on revenues.' And guess what? It was a huge drain on revenues."
The Bush administration appeared to be on the brink of invading Iraq — a second war to fund.
That made Republican Sen. John McCain uneasy: "Let us wait until we have succeeded in Iraq, and until we have some idea of what percentage of the cost of the aftermath of those hostilities we will have to bear."
Support for it in the Senate was so weak, Republican leaders had to use an arcane budget process to push it through. But that meant the cuts had to have a lower price tag, so the Bush administration made the cuts sunset — in other words, they would expire later in the decade. It appeared as though the cuts would cost the Treasury some $350 billion.
But if they were to be extended, says analyst Ornstein, "Every economic forecast from the Congressional Budget Office on down showed that it would lead to a bleeding of federal revenues, and immense deficits larger than anything we had ever seen."
And if there was any doubt about Republican plans for the cuts, President Bush made them clear in his next State of the Union address: "What Congress has given, the Congress should not take away — for the sake of job growth, the tax cuts you passed should be permanent."
Republicans are still working on that. In recent years, deep recession, stimulus spending and ongoing war have made America's budget outlook much, much worse. All the while, those tax cuts have been extended.
They have become the biggest stumbling block in lawmakers' attempt to fix the long-term budget problem. Republicans want to make them permanent, while Democrats want to finally let some, or all of them, sunset.
Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
The cost of subscription services can be pricey over time, especially if you have more than one or forget about them over time.
Ways to Save on Your Subscription Services
- Take advantage of free trials. They may be as short as one week or up to 30 days. But don't forget to cancel if the subscription doesn't retain it's value!
- Search for coupons. Many subscription services may offer coupons that reduce the cost. Visit the service's website for recurring deals.
- Negotiate. Let customer service know you love the service, but are looking to simplify your expenses. Often this will escalate your account to "client retention" where you may be offered amazing discounts.
Don't Subscribe – The fact is, that subscription services aren't a necessity for many Americans. It may seem difficult to go without your latest delivery but many of these services can be found for cheaper or free, if you're willing to go without the convenience of delivery.
It can be difficult to measure how these costs add up over time. If you have any questions about how to keep a better eye on your day-to-day finances talk to your financial professional for even more insight.
The content is developed from sources believed to be providing accurate information. The information in this material is not intended as tax or legal advice. It may not be used for the purpose of avoiding any federal tax penalties. Please consult legal or tax professionals for specific information regarding your individual situation. This material was developed and produced by FMG Suite to provide information on a topic that may be of interest. FMG Suite is not affiliated with the named broker-dealer, state- or SEC-registered investment advisory firm. The opinions expressed and material provided are for general information, and should not be considered a solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Copyright 2021 FMG Suite.


text:
Quarterly Call For Donations: This Is Your Site. Support it.
The Saker interviews Paul Craig Roberts
I had been wanting to interview Paul Craig Roberts for a long time already. For many years I have been following his writings and interviews and every time I read what he had to say I was hoping that one day I would have the privilege to interview him about the nature of the US deep state and the Empire. Recently, I emailed him and asked for such an interview, and he very kindly agreed. I am very grateful to him for this opportunity.
The Saker
The Saker: It has become rather obvious to many, if not most, people that the USA is not a democracy or a republic, but rather a plutocracy run by a small elite which some call "the 1%". Others speak of the "deep state". So my first question to you is the following. Could you please take the time to assess the influence and power of each of the following entities one by one. In particular, can you specify for each of the following whether it has a decision-making "top" position, or a decision-implementing "middle" position in the real structure of power (listed in no specific order)
Federal Reserve
Big Banking
Council on Foreign Relations
Skull & Bones
Goldman Sachs and top banks
"Top 100 families" (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Dutch Royal Family, British Royal Family, etc.)
Israel Lobby
Freemasons and their lodges
Big Business: Big Oil, Military Industrial Complex, etc.
Other people or organizations not listed above?
Who, which group, what entity would you consider is really at the apex of power in the current US polity?
Paul Craig Roberts: The US is ruled by private interest groups and by the neoconservative ideology that History has chosen the US as the "exceptional and indispensable" country with the right and responsibility to impose its will on the world.
In my opinion the most powerful of the private interest groups are:
The Military/security Complex
The 4 or 5 mega-sized "banks too big to fail" and Wall Street
The Israel Lobby
The Extractive industries (oil, mining, timber).
The interests of these interest groups coincide with those of the neoconservatives. The neoconservative ideology supports American financial and military-political imperialism or hegemony.
There is no independent American print or TV media. In the last years of the Clinton regime, 90% of the print and TV media was concentrated in 6 mega-companies. During the Bush regime, National Public Radio lost its independence. So the media functions as a Ministry of Propaganda.
Both political parties, Republicans and Democrats, are dependent on the same private interest groups for campaign funds, so both parties dance to the same masters. Jobs offshoring destroyed the manufacturing and industrial unions and deprived the Democrats of Labor Union political contributions. In those days, Democrats represented the working people and Republicans represented business.
The Federal Reserve is there for the banks, mainly the large ones.The Federal Reserve was created as lender of last resort to prevent banks from failing because of runs on the bank or withdrawal of deposits. The New York Fed, which conducts the financial interventions, has a board that consists of the executives of the big banks. The last three Federal Reserve chairmen have been Jews, and the current vice chairman is the former head of the Israeli central bank. Some believe that this reveals a Rothschild plot, but the reality is that Jews are prominent in the financial sector, for example, Goldman Sachs. In recent years, the US Treasury Secretaries and heads of the financial regulatory agencies have mainly been the bank executives responsible for the fraud and excessive debt leverage that set off the last financial crisis.
In the 21st century, the Federal Reserve and Treasury have served only the interests of the large banks. This has been at the expense of the economy and the population. For example, retired people have had no interest income for eight years in order that the financial institutions can borrow at zero costs and make money.
No matter how rich some families are, they cannot compete with powerful interest groups such as the military/security complex or Wall Street and the banks. Long established wealth can look after its interests, and some, such as the Rockefellers, have activist foundations that most likely work hand in hand with the National Endowment for Democracy to fund and encourage various pro-American non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in countries that the US wants to influence or overthrow, such as occurred in Ukraine. The NGOs are essentially US Fifth Columns and operate under such names as "human rights," "democracy," etc. A Chinese professor told me that the Rockefeller Foundation had created an American University in China and is used to organize various anti-regime Chinese. At one time, and perhaps still, there were hundreds of US and German financed NGOs in Russia, possibly as many as 1,000.
I don't know if the Bilderbergs do the same. Possibly they are just very rich people and have their proteges in governments who try to protect their interests. I have never seen any signs of Bilderbergs or Masons or Rothchilds affecting congressional or executive branch decisions.
On the other hand, the Council for Foreign Relations is influential. The council consists of former government policy officials and academics involved in foreign policy and international relations. The council's publication, Foreign Affairs, is the premier foreign policy forum. Some journalists are also members. When I was proposed for membership in the 1980s, I was blackballed.
Skull & Bones is a Yale University secret fraternity. A number of universities have such secret fraternities. For example, the University of Virginia has one, and the University of Georgia. These fraternities do not have secret governmental plots or ruling powers. Their influence would be limited to the personal influence of the members, who tend to be sons of elite families. In my opinion, these fraternities exist to convey elite status to members. They have no operational functions.
The Saker: What about individuals? Who are, in your opinion, the most powerful people in the USA today? Who takes the final, top level, strategic decision?
Paul Craig Roberts: There really are no people powerful in themselves. Powerful people are ones that powerful interest groups are behind. Ever since Secretary of Defense William Perry privatized so much of the military in 1991, the military/security complex has been extremely powerful, and its power is further amplified by its ability to finance political campaigns and by the fact that it is a source of employment in many states. Essentially Pentagon expenditures are controlled by defense contractors.
The Saker: I have always believed that in international terms, organizations such as NATO, the EU or all the others are only a front, and that the real alliance which controls the planet are the ECHELON countries: US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand aka "AUSCANNZUKUS" (they are also referred to as the "Anglosphere" or the "Five Eyes") with the US and the UK are the senior partners while Canada, Australia and New Zealand are the junior partners here. Is this model correct?
Paul Craig Roberts: NATO was a US creation allegedly to protect Europe from a Soviet invasion. Its purpose expired in 1991. Today NATO provides cover for US aggression and provides mercenary forces for the American Empire. Britain, Canada, Australia, are simply US vassal states just as are Germany, France, Italy, Japan and the rest. There are no partners; just vassals. It is Washington's empire, no one else's.
The US favors the EU, because it is easier to control than the individual countries.
The Saker: It is often said that Israel controls the USA. Chomsky, and others, say that it is the USA which controls Israel. How would you characterize the relationship between Israel and the USA – does the dog wag the tail or does the tail wag the dog? Would you say that the Israel Lobby is in total control of the USA or are there still other forces capable of saying "no" to the Israel Lobby and impose their own agenda?
Paul Craig Roberts: I have never seen any evidence that the US controls Israel. All the evidence is that Israel controls the US, but only its MidEast policy. In recent years, Israel or the Israel Lobby, has been able to control or block academic appointments in the US and tenure for professors considered to be critics of Israel. Israel has successfully reached into both Catholic and State universities to block tenure and appointments. Israel can also block some presidential appointments and has vast influence over the print and TV media. The Israel Lobby also has plenty of money for political campaign funds and never fails to unseat US Representatives and Senators considered critical of Israel. The Israel lobby was able to reach into the black congressional district of Cynthia McKinney, a black woman, and defeat her reelection. As Admiral Tom Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: "No American President can stand up to Israel." Adm. Moorer could not even get an official investigation of Israel's deadly attack on the USS Liberty in 1967.
Anyone who criticizes Israeli policies even in a helpful way is labeled an "anti-Semite."
In American politics, media, and universities, this is a death-dealing blow. You might as well get hit with a hellfire missile.
The Saker: Which of the 12 entities of power which I listed above have, in your opinion, played a key role in the planning and execution of the 9/11 "false flag" operation? After all, it is hard to imagine that this was planned and prepared between the inauguration of GW Bush and September 11th – it must have been prepared during the years of the Clinton Administration. Is it not true that the Oklahoma City bombing was a rehearsal for 9/11?
Paul Craig Roberts: In my opinion 9/11 was the product of the neoconservatives, many of whom are Jewish allied with Israel, Dick Cheney, and Israel. Its purpose was to provide "the new Pearl Harbor" that the neoconservatives said was necessary to launch their wars of conquest in the Middle East. I don't know how far back it was planned, but Silverstein was obviously part of it and he had not had the WTC for very long before 9/11.
As for the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, US Air Force General Partin, the Air Force's munitions expert, prepared an expert report proving beyond all doubt that the building blew up from the inside out and that the truck bomb was cover. Congress and the media ignored his report. The patsy, McVeigh, was already set up, and that was the only story allowed.
The Saker: Do you think that the people who run the USA today realize that they are on a collision course with Russia which could lead to thermonuclear war? If yes, why would they take such a risk? Do they really believe that at the last moment Russian will "blink" and back down, or do they actually believe that they can win a nuclear war? Are they not afraid that in a nuclear conflagration with Russia they will lose everything they have, including their power and even their lives?
Paul Craig Roberts: I am as puzzled as much as you. I think Washington is lost in hubris and arrogance and is more or less insane. Also, there is belief that the US can win a nuclear war with Russia. There was an article in Foreign Affairs around 2005 or 2006 in which this conclusion was reached. The belief in the winnability of nuclear war has been boosted by faith in ABM defenses. The argument is that the US can hit Russia so hard in a preemptive first strike that Russia would not retaliate in fear of a second blow.
The Saker: How do you assess the current health of the Empire? For many years we have seen clear signs of decline, but there is still not visible collapse. Do you believe that such a collapse is inevitable and, if not, how could it be prevented? Will we see the day when the US Dollar suddenly become worthless or will another mechanism precipitate the collapse of this Empire?
Paul Craig Roberts: The US economy is hollowed out. There has been no real median family income growth for decades. Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman used an expansion of consumer credit to take the place of the missing growth in consumer income, but the population is now too indebted to take on more. So there is nothing to drive the economy. So many manufacturing and tradable professional service jobs such as software engineering have been moved offshore that the middle class has shrunk. University graduates cannot get jobs that support an independent existence. So they can't form households, buy houses, appliances and home furnishings. The government produces low inflation measures by not measuring inflation and low unemployment rates by not measuring unemployment. The financial markets are rigged, and gold is driven down despite rising demand by selling uncovered shorts in the futures market. It is a house of cards that has stood longer than I thought possible. Apparently, the house of cards can stand until the rest of the world ceases to hold the US dollar as reserves.
Possibly the empire has put too much stress on Europe by involving Europe in a conflict with Russia. If Germany, for example, were to pull out of NATO, the empire would collapse, or if Russia can find the wits to finance Greece, Italy, and Spain in exchange for them leaving the Euro and EU, the empire would suffer a fatal blow.
Alternatively, Russia might tell Europe that Russia has no alternative but to target European capitals with nuclear weapons now that Europe has joined the US in conducting war against Russia.
The Saker: Russia and China have done something unique in history and they have gone beyond the traditional model of forming an alliance: they have agreed to become interdependent – one could say that they have agreed to a symbiotic relationship. Do you believe that those in charge of the Empire have understood the tectonic change which has just happen or are they simply going into deep denial because reality scares them too much?
Paul Craig Roberts: Stephen Cohen says that there is simply no foreign policy discussion. There is no debate. I think the empire thinks that it can destabilize Russia and China and that is one reason Washington has color revolutions working in Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. As Washington is determined to prevent the rise of other powers and is lost in hubris and arrogance, Washington probably believes that it will succeed. After all, History chose Washington.
The Saker: In your opinion, do presidential elections still matter and, if yes, what is your best hope for 2016? I am personally very afraid of Hillary Clinton whom I see as an exceptionally dangerous and outright evil person, but with the current Neocon influence inside the Republican, can we really hope for a non-Neocon candidate to win the GOP nomination?
Paul Craig Roberts: The only way a presidential election could matter would be if the elected president had behind him a strong movement. Without a movement, the president has no independent power and no one to appoint who will do his bidding. Presidents are captives. Reagan had something of a movement, just enough that we were able to cure stagflation despite Wall Street's opposition and we were able to end the cold war despite the opposition of the CIA and the military/security complex. Plus Reagan was very old and came from a long time ago. He assumed the office of the president was powerful and acted that way.
The Saker: What about the armed forces? Can you imagine a Chairman of the JCS saying "no, Mr President, that is crazy, we will not do this" or do you expect the generals to obey any order, including one starting a nuclear war against Russia? Do you have any hope that the US military could step in and stop the "crazies" currently in power in the White House and Congress?
Paul Craig Roberts: The US military is a creature of the armaments industries. The whole purpose of making general is to be qualified to be a consultant to the "defense" industry, or to become an executive or on the board of a "defense" contractor. The military serves as the source of retirement careers when the generals make the big money. The US military is totally corrupt. Read Andrew Cockburn's book, Kill Chain.
The Saker: If the USA is really deliberately going down the path towards war with Russia – what should Russia do? Should Russia back down and accept to be subjugated as a preferable option to a thermonuclear war, or should Russia resist and thereby accept the possibility of a thermonuclear war? Do you believe that a very deliberate and strong show of strength on the part of Russia could deter a US attack?
Paul Craig Roberts: I have often wondered about this. I can't say that I know. I think Putin is humane enough to surrender rather than to be part of the destruction of the world, but Putin has to answer to others inside Russia and I doubt the nationalists would stand for surrender.
In my opinion, I think Putin should focus on Europe and make Europe aware that Russia expects an American attack and will have no choice except to wipe out Europe in response. Putin should encourage Europe to break off from NATO in order to prevent World War 3.
Putin should also make sure China understands that China represents the same perceived threat to the US as Russia and that the two countries need to stand together. Perhaps if Russia and China were to maintain their forces on a nuclear alert, not the top one, but an elevated one that conveyed recognition of the American threat and conveyed this threat to the world, the US could be isolated.
Perhaps if the Indian press, the Japanese Press, the French and German press, the UK press, the Chinese and Russian press began reporting that Russia and China wonder if they will receive a pre-emptive nuclear attack from Washington the result would be to prevent the attack.
As far as I can tell from my many media interviews with the Russian media, there is no Russian awareness of the Wolfowitz Doctrine. Russians think that there is some kind of misunderstanding about Russian intentions. The Russian media does not understand that Russia is unacceptable, because Russia is not a US vassal. Russians believe all the Western bullshit about "freedom and democracy" and believe that they are short on both but making progress. In other words, Russians have no idea that they are targeted for destruction.
The Saker: What are, in your opinion, the roots of the hatred of so many members of the US elites for Russia? Is that just a leftover from the Cold War, or is there another reason for the almost universal russophobia amongst US elites? Even during the Cold War, it was unclear whether the US was anti-Communist or anti-Russian? Is there something in the Russian culture, nation or civilization which triggers that hostility and, if yes, what is it?
Paul Craig Roberts: The hostility toward Russia goes back to the Wolfowttz Doctrine:
"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."
While the US was focused on its MidEast wars, Putin restored Russia and blocked Washington's planned invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran. The "first objective" of the neocon doctrine was breached. Russia had to be brought into line. That is the origin of Washington's attack on Russia. The dependent and captive US and European media simply repeats "the Russian Threat" to the public, which is insouciant and otherwise uninformed.
The offense of Russian culture is also there–Christian morals, respect for law and humanity, diplomacy in place of coercion, traditional social mores–but these are in the background. Russia is hated because Russia (and China) is a check on Washington's unilateral uni-power. This check is what will lead to war.
If the Russians and Chinese do not expect a pre-emptive nuclear attack from Washington, they will be destroyed.


text:
We want to turn now from Ghana to Nigeria, where there is disturbing news. The mother of Nigeria's finance minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, was kidnapped this weekend. Police say they've launched a massive search to find her.
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is a name you might remember from her stint in the U.S. as managing director of the World Bank. She also made a high profile bid for the presidency of the World Bank. Although she did not succeed, that effort raised awareness both of her and her work in Nigeria and Africa's economic fatality, where growth rates in some countries outpaced the U.S. and Europe.
After the World Bank bid, she returned to Nigeria for another term as finance minister, where she's been advancing an agenda for reform in Africa's most populous country. Not only that, the country is one of Africa's economic giants, but it's also fair to say that for many people Nigeria stands more for corruption, kidnapping and Internet scams than for productive economic activity.
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala went so far as to say that Nigeria was broken, even hopeless, when she first took office. She now says that although the work continues, what Nigeria has accomplished so far may have lessons for reforming other countries the world deems unreformable.
She's set out her ideas in a new book. It's called "Reforming the Unreformable: Lessons From Nigeria." We caught up with her on a brief stop to Washington, D.C. when she was here to talk about the book just days before the kidnapping.
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, welcome. Thanks for joining us.
NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA: Thank you, Michel.
MARTIN: Now, when you were initially appointed as finance minister in 2003, people might remember that Nigeria was finding its feet again after decades of military rule, and you describe how you needed to reestablish credibility again with both Nigerians and with the international community, and a decade later do you think you've accomplished that?
OKONJO-IWEALA: Well, I would say that challenges still remain a decade later, but the book really is about sounding a note of optimism, that many of those who thought, oh, Nigeria is so problematic, it cannot possibly turn around, you know, when they read the book, they find that nobody - no country is ever reformable and that we were able to accomplish many things.
And I'd like to say off the bat that it wasn't just me. There was really a team. You know, no one person can change a country alone. We really had a team of dedicated reformers and a president who backed us at the time. That was during the second administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo.
MARTIN: One of the reasons that Nigeria, I think, stands out is that this is not a poor country in the sense that there is - there are sources of wealth. I mean Nigeria is Africa's largest crude oil exporter. It has one of the world's biggest gas reserves. But then, you know, there's the question of how these resources are managed, so I think, you know, one of the first things, you know, we'd ask you is, what was your first target when you took office?
OKONJO-IWEALA: I want to make two points. Many people look at Nigeria as a very wealthy country, but it's also a very large country. It's 167 million people and so, you know, the riches - the resources have to spread over a larger number of people, so it's not as wealthy as people think because of the large population.
Nevertheless, it does have the resources, and one of the first things we had to do is look at how can we manage that better? How do we just get the budget processes, the management of these resources right? How do we fight corruption, because that was there, and try to keep resources from leaking?
MARTIN: But one of the points that I think honest people will recognize is that people may want to point the finger internally into the country and say that this is just a lot of greedy people with their hands in the pie, but then in a lot of ways the multinationals have been complicit in this.
I mean, in October, Reuters reported that the country lost out on tens of billions of dollars in oil and gas revenues over the last decade from cut-price deals struck between multinational oil companies and government officials. So how does one address that, when sometimes the international community is complicit in this?
OKONJO-IWEALA: Well, you know, this is part of what we're saying. First of all, yes, on both sides. If you read the book, you see a tale of corruption, you know, is how a consortium actually tried to bribe their way to a contract, you know, for one of the oil and gas contracts, how they gave bribes of up to $180 million. So it's not just inside. It's also from outside. Companies have to stop offering these bribes.
You know, there's sort of a supply-and-demand factor, those demanding the bribes and those supplying, and, on both sides, you've got to act. Within ourselves, the issue is to show strongly that there will be no impunity, that people caught will be tried and go to jail. We are not completely there yet, but it's beginning to happen.
For instance, we've just cleaned up our oil subsidy scheme that had a lot of people with scams and malpractices, and we've identified and published the names of companies and individuals who were involved in this in the papers. We are making them pay back what they owe to government, and they're being prosecuted.
Could we do more? Certainly. You know, we could and should continue to do more. There's certainly a lot of fight against corruption that needs to keep happening in the country.
MARTIN: I mean, you can see where it becomes a vicious circle, right, that if there's a sense that the corruption is endemic and people start to believe that that's the only way they can get ahead, then they'll be more focused on how can they get their little piece of it. Because they'll feel like they're a fool if they don't get their little piece of it. But if everybody's getting their piece of it, then you can never build those institutions where people have more confidence in the institution and in the rules than they will feel the need to kind of cut their own deal. Right?
OKONJO-IWEALA: Yes.
MARTIN: So how do you build that so that people have confidence that, if they play by the rules, that they, too, will prosper?
OKONJO-IWEALA: Well, there - the book actually shows that. First, it shows a group of people who are doing reform, backed by a president at that time, and that these people were busy, that they - you can't have a group of dedicated people who are focusing on delivering for the country and convincing people that - look, if you play by the rules, you will get things done. And I think that's what we need. You need leadership in this. It doesn't just happen.
So you need leadership. You need to be able to demonstrate there are people who don't put their hands in the till, and you need to know that the majority of Nigerians, 99.9 percent, are ordinary, hardworking people, you know, who are not doing - they are not corrupt. They are normal people doing their job, and we must not let a small, tiny percentage of the people who are corrupt define this country. And this book talks about the fact that, yes, it is possible. It is possible to do those reforms.
You can fight the vested interest. You cannot allow them to overwhelm the country. They are in the tiny minority, and we will not let them define what Nigeria is.
MARTIN: If you're just joining us, I'm speaking with Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. She is the finance minister from Nigeria. She has a new book out. It's called "Reforming the Unreformable: Lessons from Nigeria."
Have you been able to figure out who's for real and who isn't? I mean, who really is dedicated to the best interests of people? Because, you know, really, I hate to say, some of the continent's worst dictators have come in claiming that they were the person who's going to improve people's lives, and then they've turned out to be either corrupt or vicious killers. And so how - have you figured out how to figure out who's real and who isn't?
OKONJO-IWEALA: Michel, I think the day we figure all that out - you know, you and me - I think we would have done very well. It's not so easy to figure out in real life. That's what this book says. Sometimes, you have the people who are trying to do something good drowned out by those who mean badly for the country. But I tell you, if you go directly to the population, sometimes, they can tell you. They know who is good and who is not good.
So a dictator or a bad leader may stay in place. That doesn't mean that they're really supported by their people.
MARTIN: The book is titled "Lessons from Nigeria," and I'm wondering what lessons you think might be particularly applicable to other countries and scenarios, particularly those that don't have Nigeria's natural resources, that don't have the sources of oil and gas. You know, I think part of the message of the book is just getting that right could go a long way toward improving the country's economic conditions. But what about countries that don't have that? Are there any lessons you particularly think are worth noting?
OKONJO-IWEALA: Yes. I think, you know, on the economic side of it, if you want to change the way the economy's being run in a country, there are certain lessons of dos and don'ts. The first is that, one, you need to identify reforms that are quick wins. Reforms are very difficult in any circumstance, but until you can do one or two that are wins, to be able to convince the population that this really will work for them, you'll be flaying around, because it's so difficult. That applies to any country, whether it is, you know, a resource-rich or non-resource rich.
The second is you need to have a playbook. You really can't just go in and do reforms in a scattered fashion, because each reform you do will meet resistance. In any country, there are entrenched interests. It doesn't have anything to do with being corrupt or not. Are people benefitting from a given system the way it works, even here in the U.S.? So you've got to know what your endgame is, and you've got to drive to that endgame.
And I think one other really important lesson is to learn that you're not going to succeed in all of it. Learn to acknowledge failure where you can't make headway, and then to try to step back and learn from that failure and to move on.
And, finally, you need a team, not one person - there's no one person who can do reform alone, not even their president, by themselves. They've got to build a team of reformers who are willing to go into different areas and avenues and push those reforms.
MARTIN: Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is an economist. She is Nigeria's coordinating minister for the economy and minister of finance. Her latest book is titled "Reforming the Unreformable: Lessons from Nigeria," and she was nice enough to stop by our Washington, D.C. studios on a brief visit to the United States.
Thank you so much for joining us.
OKONJO-IWEALA: Thank you, Michel. A pleasure.
MARTIN: We will continue to follow the efforts to locate Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala's mother, and we'll keep you up-to-date on events as we learn them. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.