haha777 pro

haha777 pro Puma Exploration Executes Definitive Agreements for McKenzie Gold ProjectBy WILL WEISSERT, JUAN ZAMORANO and GARY FIELDS PANAMA CITY (AP) — Teddy Roosevelt once declared the Panama Canal “one of the feats to which the people of this republic will look back with the highest pride.” More than a century later, Donald Trump is threatening to take back the waterway for the same republic. Related Articles National Politics | President-elect Trump wants to again rename North America’s tallest peak National Politics | Inside the Gaetz ethics report, a trove of new details alleging payments for sex and drug use National Politics | An analyst looks ahead to how the US economy might fare under Trump National Politics | Trump again calls to buy Greenland after eyeing Canada and the Panama Canal National Politics | House Ethics Committee accuses Gaetz of ‘regularly’ paying for sex, including with 17-year-old girl The president-elect is decrying increased fees Panama has imposed to use the waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. He says if things don’t change after he takes office next month, “We will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America, in full, quickly and without question.” Trump has long threatened allies with punitive action in hopes of winning concessions. But experts in both countries are clear: Unless he goes to war with Panama, Trump can’t reassert control over a canal the U.S. agreed to cede in the 1970s. Here’s a look at how we got here: What is the canal? It is a man-made waterway that uses a series of locks and reservoirs over 51 miles (82 kilometers) to cut through the middle of Panama and connect the Atlantic and Pacific. It spares ships having to go an additional roughly 7,000 miles (more than 11,000 kilometers) to sail around Cape Horn at South America’s southern tip. The U.S. International Trade Administration says the canal saves American business interests “considerable time and fuel costs” and enables faster delivery of goods, which is “particularly significant for time sensitive cargoes, perishable goods, and industries with just-in-time supply chains.” Who built it? An effort to establish a canal through Panama led by Ferdinand de Lesseps, who built Egypt’s Suez Canal, began in 1880 but progressed little over nine years before going bankrupt. Malaria, yellow fever and other tropical diseases devastated a workforce already struggling with especially dangerous terrain and harsh working conditions in the jungle, eventually costing more than 20,000 lives, by some estimates. Panama was then a province of Colombia, which refused to ratify a subsequent 1901 treaty licensing U.S. interests to build the canal. Roosevelt responded by dispatching U.S. warships to Panama’s Atlantic and Pacific coasts. The U.S. also prewrote a constitution that would be ready after Panamanian independence, giving American forces “the right to intervene in any part of Panama, to re-establish public peace and constitutional order.” In part because Colombian troops were unable to traverse harsh jungles, Panama declared an effectively bloodless independence within hours in November 1903. It soon signed a treaty allowing a U.S.-led team to begin construction . Some 5,600 workers died later during the U.S.-led construction project, according to one study. Why doesn’t the US control the canal anymore? The waterway opened in 1914, but almost immediately some Panamanians began questioning the validity of U.S. control, leading to what became known in the country as the “generational struggle” to take it over. The U.S. abrogated its right to intervene in Panama in the 1930s. By the 1970s, with its administrative costs sharply increasing, Washington spent years negotiating with Panama to cede control of the waterway. The Carter administration worked with the government of Omar Torrijos. The two sides eventually decided that their best chance for ratification was to submit two treaties to the U.S. Senate, the “Permanent Neutrality Treaty” and the “Panama Canal Treaty.” The first, which continues in perpetuity, gives the U.S. the right to act to ensure the canal remains open and secure. The second stated that the U.S. would turn over the canal to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999, and was terminated then. Both were signed in 1977 and ratified the following year. The agreements held even after 1989, when President George H.W. Bush invaded Panama to remove Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega. In the late 1970s, as the handover treaties were being discussed and ratified, polls found that about half of Americans opposed the decision to cede canal control to Panama. However, by the time ownership actually changed in 1999, public opinion had shifted, with about half of Americans in favor. What’s happened since then? Administration of the canal has been more efficient under Panama than during the U.S. era, with traffic increasing 17% between fiscal years 1999 and 2004 . Panama’s voters approved a 2006 referendum authorizing a major expansion of the canal to accommodate larger modern cargo ships. The expansion took until 2016 and cost more than $5.2 billion. Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino said in a video Sunday that “every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to.” He added that, while his country’s people are divided on some key issues, “when it comes to our canal, and our sovereignty, we will all unite under our Panamanian flag.” Shipping prices have increased because of droughts last year affecting the canal locks, forcing Panama to drastically cut shipping traffic through the canal and raise rates to use it. Though the rains have mostly returned, Panama says future fee increases might be necessary as it undertakes improvements to accommodate modern shipping needs. Mulino said fees to use the canal are “not set on a whim.” Jorge Luis Quijano, who served as the waterway’s administrator from 2014 to 2019, said all canal users are subject to the same fees, though they vary by ship size and other factors. “I can accept that the canal’s customers may complain about any price increase,” Quijano said. “But that does not give them reason to consider taking it back.” Why has Trump raised this? The president-elect says the U.S. is getting “ripped off” and “I’m not going to stand for it.” “It was given to Panama and to the people of Panama, but it has provisions — you’ve got to treat us fairly. And they haven’t treated us fairly,” Trump said of the 1977 treaty that he said “foolishly” gave the canal away. The neutrality treaty does give the U.S. the right to act if the canal’s operation is threatened due to military conflict — but not to reassert control. “There’s no clause of any kind in the neutrality agreement that allows for the taking back of the canal,” Quijano said. “Legally, there’s no way, under normal circumstances, to recover territory that was used previously.” Trump, meanwhile, hasn’t said how he might make good on his threat. “There’s very little wiggle room, absent a second U.S. invasion of Panama, to retake control of the Panama Canal in practical terms,” said Benjamin Gedan, director of the Latin America Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington. Gedan said Trump’s stance is especially baffling given that Mulino is a pro-business conservative who has “made lots of other overtures to show that he would prefer a special relationship with the United States.” He also noted that Panama in recent years has moved closer to China, meaning the U.S. has strategic reasons to keep its relationship with the Central American nation friendly. Panama is also a U.S. partner on stopping illegal immigration from South America — perhaps Trump’s biggest policy priority. “If you’re going to pick a fight with Panama on an issue,” Gedan said, “you could not find a worse one than the canal.” Weissert reported from West Palm Beach, Florida, and Fields from Washington. Amelia Thomson-Deveaux contributed to this report from Washington.

Major Drilling Appoints Chief Operating Officer to Support Continued Growth in Operations and TechnologiesWomen more likely to need walking aids but less likely to use them – study

Jets deliver payback to Leafs, claim NHL's top spot before Christmas break( MENAFN - EIN Presswire) Semiconductor Dry Etch System Market The growing demand for progressive technologies is driving market demand. Likhil G Polaris Market Research and Consulting +1 929-297-9727 email us here Visit us on social media: Facebook X LinkedIn Legal Disclaimer: EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above. MENAFN26122024003118003196ID1109033665 Legal Disclaimer: MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.KYIV, Ukraine — NATO and Ukraine will hold emergency talks Tuesday after Russia attacked a central city with an experimental, hypersonic ballistic missile. escalating the nearly 33-month-old war. The conflict is “entering a decisive phase,” Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Friday, and “taking on very dramatic dimensions.” Ukraine’s parliament canceled a session as security was tightened following Thursday’s Russian strike on a military facility in the city of Dnipro. In a stark warning to the West, President Vladimir Putin said in a nationally televised speech the attack with the intermediate-range Oreshnik missile was in retaliation for Kyiv’s use of U.S. and British longer-range missiles capable of striking deeper into Russian territory. Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks Friday during a meeting with the leadership of the Russian Ministry of Defense, representatives of the military-industrial complex and developers of missile systems at the Kremlin in Moscow. Vyacheslav Prokofyev, Sputnik Putin said Western air defense systems would be powerless to stop the new missile. People are also reading... Ukrainian military officials said the missile that hit Dnipro reached a speed of Mach 11 and carried six nonnuclear warheads, each releasing six submunitions. Speaking Friday to military and weapons industries officials, Putin said Russia will launch production of the Oreshnik. “No one in the world has such weapons,” he said. “Sooner or later, other leading countries will also get them. We are aware that they are under development. “We have this system now,” he added. “And this is important.” Putin said that while it isn’t an intercontinental missile, it’s so powerful that the use of several of them fitted with conventional warheads in one attack could be as devastating as a strike with strategic — or nuclear — weapons. Gen. Sergei Karakayev, head of Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces, said the Oreshnik could reach targets across Europe and be fitted with nuclear or conventional warheads, echoing Putin’s claim that even with conventional warheads, “the massive use of the weapon would be comparable in effect to the use of nuclear weapons.” In this photo taken from a video released Friday, a Russian serviceman operates at an undisclosed location in Ukraine. Russian Defense Ministry Press Service Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov kept up Russia's bellicose tone on Friday, blaming “the reckless decisions and actions of Western countries” in supplying weapons to Ukraine to strike Russia. Listen now and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS Feed | SoundStack | All Of Our Podcasts "The Russian side has clearly demonstrated its capabilities, and the contours of further retaliatory actions in the event that our concerns were not taken into account have also been quite clearly outlined," he said. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, widely seen as having the warmest relations with the Kremlin in the European Union, echoed Moscow’s talking points, suggesting the use of U.S.-supplied weapons in Ukraine likely requires direct American involvement. “These are rockets that are fired and then guided to a target via an electronic system, which requires the world’s most advanced technology and satellite communications capability,” Orbán said on state radio. “There is a strong assumption ... that these missiles cannot be guided without the assistance of American personnel.” Orbán cautioned against underestimating Russia’s responses, emphasizing that the country’s recent modifications to its nuclear deployment doctrine should not be dismissed as a “bluff.” “It’s not a trick ... there will be consequences,” he said. Czech Republic's Foreign Minister Jan Lipavsky speaks to journalists Friday during a joint news conference with Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andriiy Sybiha in Kyiv, Ukraine. Evgeniy Maloletka, Associated Press Separately in Kyiv, Czech Foreign Minister Jan Lipavský called Thursday’s missile strike an “escalatory step and an attempt of the Russian dictator to scare the population of Ukraine and to scare the population of Europe.” At a news conference with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, Lipavský also expressed his full support for delivering the necessary additional air defense systems to protect Ukrainian civilians from the “heinous attacks.” He said the Czech Republic will impose no limits on the use of its weapons and equipment given to Ukraine. Three lawmakers from Ukraine's parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, confirmed that Friday's previously scheduled session was called off due to the ongoing threat of Russian missiles targeting government buildings in central Kyiv. In addition, there also was a recommendation to limit the work of all commercial offices and nongovernmental organizations "in that perimeter, and local residents were warned of the increased threat,” said lawmaker Mykyta Poturaiev, who said it's not the first time such a threat has been received. Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate said the Oreshnik missile was fired from the Kapustin Yar 4th Missile Test Range in Russia’s Astrakhan region and flew 15 minutes before striking Dnipro. Test launches of a similar missile were conducted in October 2023 and June 2024, the directorate said. The Pentagon confirmed the missile was a new, experimental type of intermediate-range missile based on its RS-26 Rubezh intercontinental ballistic missile. Thursday's attack struck the Pivdenmash plant that built ICBMs when Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. The military facility is located about 4 miles southwest of the center of Dnipro, a city of about 1 million that is Ukraine’s fourth-largest and a key hub for military supplies and humanitarian aid, and is home to one of the country’s largest hospitals for treating wounded soldiers from the front before their transfer to Kyiv or abroad. From tuberculosis to heart disease: How the leading causes of death in America have changed From tuberculosis to heart disease: How the leading causes of death in America have changed We're all going to die someday. Still, how it happens—and when—can point to a historical moment defined by the scientific advancements and public health programs available at the time to contain disease and prevent accidents. In the early 1900s, America's efforts to improve sanitation, hygiene, and routine vaccinations were still in their infancy. Maternal and infant mortality rates were high, as were contagious diseases that spread between people and animals. Combined with the devastation of two World Wars—and the Spanish Flu pandemic in between—the leading causes of death changed significantly after this period. So, too, did the way we diagnose and control the spread of disease. Starting with reforms as part of Roosevelt's New Deal in the 1930s, massive-scale, federal interventions in the U.S. eventually helped stave off disease transmission. It took comprehensive government programs and the establishment of state and local health agencies to educate the public on preventing disease transmission. Seemingly simple behavioral shifts, such as handwashing, were critical in thwarting the spread of germs, much like discoveries in medicine, such as vaccines, and increased access to deliver them across geographies. Over the course of the 20th century, life expectancy increased by 56% and is estimated to keep increasing slightly, according to an annual summary of vital statistics published by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2000. Death Records examined data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to see how the leading causes of death in America have evolved over time and to pinpoint how some major mortality trends have dropped off. Smith Collection/Gado // Getty Images Infectious diseases lead causes of death in America According to a report published in the journal Annual Review of Public Health in 2000, pneumonia was the leading cause of death in the early 1900s, accounting for nearly 1 in 4 deaths. By the time World War I ended in 1918, during which people and animals were housed together for long periods, a new virus emerged: the Spanish Flu. Originating in a bird before spreading to humans, the virus killed 10 times as many Americans as the war. Many died of secondary pneumonia after the initial infection. Pneumonia deaths eventually plummeted throughout the century, partly prevented by increased flu vaccine uptake rates in high-risk groups, particularly older people. Per the CDC, tuberculosis was a close second leading cause of death, killing 194 of every 10,000 people in 1900, mainly concentrated in dense urban areas where the infection could more easily spread. Eventually, public health interventions led to drastic declines in mortality from the disease, such as public education, reducing crowded housing, quarantining people with active disease, improving hygiene, and using antibiotics. Once the death rates lagged, so did the public health infrastructure built to control the disease, leading to a resurgence in the mid-1980s. Diarrhea was the third leading cause of death in 1900, surging every summer among children before the impacts of the pathogen died out in 1930. Adopting water filtration, better nutrition, and improved refrigeration were all associated with its decline. In the 1940s and 1950s, polio outbreaks killed or paralyzed upward of half a million people worldwide every year. Even at its peak, polio wasn't a leading cause of death, it was a much-feared one, particularly among parents of young children, some of whom kept them from crowded public places and interacting with other children. By 1955, when Jonah Salk discovered the polio vaccine, the U.S. had ended the "golden age of medicine." During this period, the causes of mortality shifted dramatically as scientists worldwide began to collaborate on infectious disease control, surgical techniques, vaccines, and other drugs. Death Records Leading causes of death tip toward lifestyle-related disease From the 1950s onward, once quick-spreading deadly contagions weren't prematurely killing American residents en masse, scientists also began to understand better how to diagnose and treat these diseases. As a result, Americans were living longer lives and instead succumbing to noncommunicable diseases, or NCDs. The risk of chronic diseases increased with age and, in some cases, was exacerbated by unhealthy lifestyles. Cancer and heart disease shot up across the century, increasing 90-fold from 1900 to 1998, according to CDC data. Following the post-Spanish Flu years, heart disease killed more Americans than any other cause, peaking in the 1960s and contributing to 1 in 3 deaths. Cigarette smoking rates peaked at the same time, a major risk factor for heart disease. Obesity rates also rose, creating another risk factor for heart disease and many types of cancers. This coincides with the introduction of ultra-processed foods into diets, which plays a more significant role in larger waistlines than the increasing predominance of sedentary work and lifestyles. In the early 1970s, deaths from heart disease began to fall as more Americans prevented and managed their risk factors, like quitting smoking or taking blood pressure medicine. However, the disease remains the biggest killer of Americans. Cancer remains the second leading cause of death and rates still indicate an upward trajectory over time. Only a few types of cancer are detected early by screening, and some treatments for aggressive cancers like glioblastoma—the most common type of brain cancer—have also stalled, unable to improve prognosis much over time. In recent years, early-onset cancers, those diagnosed before age 50 or sometimes even earlier, have seen a drastic rise among younger Americans. While highly processed foods and sedentary lifestyles may contribute to rising rates, a spike in cancer rates among otherwise healthy young individuals has baffled some medical professionals. This follows the COVID-19 pandemic that began in 2020. At its peak, high transmission rates made the virus the third leading cause of death in America. It's often compared to the Spanish Flu of 1918, though COVID-19 had a far larger global impact, spurring international collaborations among scientists who developed a vaccine in an unprecedented time. Public policy around issues of safety and access also influences causes of death, particularly—and tragically—among young Americans. Gun control measures in the U.S. are far less stringent than in peer nations; compared to other nations, however, the U.S. leads in gun violence. Firearms are the leading cause of death for children and teens (around 2 in 3 are homicides, and 1 in 3 are suicides), and deaths from opioids remain a leading cause of death among younger people. Globally, the leading causes of death mirror differences in social and geographic factors. NCDs are primarily associated with socio-economic status and comprise 7 out of 10 leading causes of death, 85% of those occurring in low- and middle-income countries, according to the World Health Organization. However, one of the best health measures is life expectancy at birth. People in the U.S. have been living longer lives since 2000, except for a slight dip in longevity due to COVID-19. According to the most recent CDC estimates, Americans' life expectancy is 77.5 years on average and is expected to increase slightly in the coming decades. Story editing by Alizah Salario. Additional editing by Kelly Glass. Copy editing by Paris Close. Photo selection by Lacy Kerrick. This story originally appeared on Death Records and was produced and distributed in partnership with Stacker Studio. Canva Be the first to know

Israeli attorney general orders probe into report that alleged Netanyahu's wife harassed opponentsBy WILL WEISSERT, JUAN ZAMORANO and GARY FIELDS PANAMA CITY (AP) — Teddy Roosevelt once declared the Panama Canal “one of the feats to which the people of this republic will look back with the highest pride.” More than a century later, Donald Trump is threatening to take back the waterway for the same republic. Related Articles National Politics | President-elect Trump wants to again rename North America’s tallest peak National Politics | Inside the Gaetz ethics report, a trove of new details alleging payments for sex and drug use National Politics | An analyst looks ahead to how the US economy might fare under Trump National Politics | Trump again calls to buy Greenland after eyeing Canada and the Panama Canal National Politics | House Ethics Committee accuses Gaetz of ‘regularly’ paying for sex, including with 17-year-old girl The president-elect is decrying increased fees Panama has imposed to use the waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. He says if things don’t change after he takes office next month, “We will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America, in full, quickly and without question.” Trump has long threatened allies with punitive action in hopes of winning concessions. But experts in both countries are clear: Unless he goes to war with Panama, Trump can’t reassert control over a canal the U.S. agreed to cede in the 1970s. Here’s a look at how we got here: It is a man-made waterway that uses a series of locks and reservoirs over 51 miles (82 kilometers) to cut through the middle of Panama and connect the Atlantic and Pacific. It spares ships having to go an additional roughly 7,000 miles (more than 11,000 kilometers) to sail around Cape Horn at South America’s southern tip. The U.S. International Trade Administration says the canal saves American business interests “considerable time and fuel costs” and enables faster delivery of goods, which is “particularly significant for time sensitive cargoes, perishable goods, and industries with just-in-time supply chains.” An effort to establish a canal through Panama led by Ferdinand de Lesseps, who built Egypt’s Suez Canal, began in 1880 but progressed little over nine years before going bankrupt. Malaria, yellow fever and other tropical diseases devastated a workforce already struggling with especially dangerous terrain and harsh working conditions in the jungle, eventually costing more than 20,000 lives, by some estimates. Panama was then a province of Colombia, which refused to ratify a subsequent 1901 treaty licensing U.S. interests to build the canal. Roosevelt responded by dispatching U.S. warships to Panama’s Atlantic and Pacific coasts. The U.S. also prewrote a constitution that would be ready after Panamanian independence, giving American forces “the right to intervene in any part of Panama, to re-establish public peace and constitutional order.” In part because Colombian troops were unable to traverse harsh jungles, Panama declared an effectively bloodless independence within hours in November 1903. It soon signed a treaty allowing a U.S.-led team to begin construction . Some 5,600 workers died later during the U.S.-led construction project, according to one study. The waterway opened in 1914, but almost immediately some Panamanians began questioning the validity of U.S. control, leading to what became known in the country as the “generational struggle” to take it over. The U.S. abrogated its right to intervene in Panama in the 1930s. By the 1970s, with its administrative costs sharply increasing, Washington spent years negotiating with Panama to cede control of the waterway. The Carter administration worked with the government of Omar Torrijos. The two sides eventually decided that their best chance for ratification was to submit two treaties to the U.S. Senate, the “Permanent Neutrality Treaty” and the “Panama Canal Treaty.” The first, which continues in perpetuity, gives the U.S. the right to act to ensure the canal remains open and secure. The second stated that the U.S. would turn over the canal to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999, and was terminated then. Both were signed in 1977 and ratified the following year. The agreements held even after 1989, when President George H.W. Bush invaded Panama to remove Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega. In the late 1970s, as the handover treaties were being discussed and ratified, polls found that about half of Americans opposed the decision to cede canal control to Panama. However, by the time ownership actually changed in 1999, public opinion had shifted, with about half of Americans in favor. Administration of the canal has been more efficient under Panama than during the U.S. era, with traffic increasing 17% between fiscal years 1999 and 2004 . Panama’s voters approved a 2006 referendum authorizing a major expansion of the canal to accommodate larger modern cargo ships. The expansion took until 2016 and cost more than $5.2 billion. Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino said in a video Sunday that “every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to.” He added that, while his country’s people are divided on some key issues, “when it comes to our canal, and our sovereignty, we will all unite under our Panamanian flag.” Shipping prices have increased because of droughts last year affecting the canal locks, forcing Panama to drastically cut shipping traffic through the canal and raise rates to use it. Though the rains have mostly returned, Panama says future fee increases might be necessary as it undertakes improvements to accommodate modern shipping needs. Mulino said fees to use the canal are “not set on a whim.” Jorge Luis Quijano, who served as the waterway’s administrator from 2014 to 2019, said all canal users are subject to the same fees, though they vary by ship size and other factors. “I can accept that the canal’s customers may complain about any price increase,” Quijano said. “But that does not give them reason to consider taking it back.” The president-elect says the U.S. is getting “ripped off” and “I’m not going to stand for it.” “It was given to Panama and to the people of Panama, but it has provisions — you’ve got to treat us fairly. And they haven’t treated us fairly,” Trump said of the 1977 treaty that he said “foolishly” gave the canal away. The neutrality treaty does give the U.S. the right to act if the canal’s operation is threatened due to military conflict — but not to reassert control. “There’s no clause of any kind in the neutrality agreement that allows for the taking back of the canal,” Quijano said. “Legally, there’s no way, under normal circumstances, to recover territory that was used previously.” Trump, meanwhile, hasn’t said how he might make good on his threat. “There’s very little wiggle room, absent a second U.S. invasion of Panama, to retake control of the Panama Canal in practical terms,” said Benjamin Gedan, director of the Latin America Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington. Gedan said Trump’s stance is especially baffling given that Mulino is a pro-business conservative who has “made lots of other overtures to show that he would prefer a special relationship with the United States.” He also noted that Panama in recent years has moved closer to China, meaning the U.S. has strategic reasons to keep its relationship with the Central American nation friendly. Panama is also a U.S. partner on stopping illegal immigration from South America — perhaps Trump’s biggest policy priority. “If you’re going to pick a fight with Panama on an issue,” Gedan said, “you could not find a worse one than the canal.” Weissert reported from West Palm Beach, Florida, and Fields from Washington. Amelia Thomson-Deveaux contributed to this report from Washington.

Seahawks RB Kenneth Walker III to miss rest of regular season with injury

Former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, a pivotal figure in India's economic reform history, has died at the age of 92. Singh was instrumental in steering India through a critical financial crisis as Finance Minister in 1991, laying the groundwork for economic liberalisation. At the time, India faced dire economic challenges, including a fiscal deficit of 8.5% of GDP and meager foreign reserves. Singh's bold policy measures, presented in the Union Budget 1991-92, abolished the 'licence raj' and invited both domestic and foreign investment, resulting in a substantial shift towards a market-oriented economy. Singh's vision of liberalisation, globalisation, and privatisation led to monumental growth in sectors like IT and telecom. As Prime Minister, he continued these reforms while introducing social welfare programs to support millions of Indians. Singh's legacy lives on as a testament to transformative policy in the face of adversity. (With inputs from agencies.)There is no question that Pella makes some of the best windows on the market. They’re energy-efficient, eco-friendly, and stylish. The company has been around since 1925, and today is one of the leading manufacturers of new construction and replacement windows, available through the brand’s 200 affiliated “Pella Stores.” Pella Windows are also widely available through retailers throughout the country. One of those retailers is Lowe’s Home Improvement , the home improvement and building material giant, with a history that reaches back to 1946 and a network of stores that includes over 1,700 locations in the US. RELATED: How much does window replacement cost? Current pricing and what to expect So, the question is, if you’re going to buy Pella Windows, where should you get them? Through Pella or Lowe’s? Find out in this guide. What are Pella Windows? Pella Windows is a brand of high-quality, energy-efficient, and eco-friendly windows offered by Pella Corporation. The company was first formed in Pella, Iowa, and has been in business for almost 100 years. Pella has a history of innovation, developing highly efficient windows that offer energy efficiency, noise reduction, UV protection, and premium security. Several of the brand’s windows meet or exceed Energy Star standards and can be customized to the customer’s preferences. Pella offers eight product lines of windows. They include Reserve Traditional, Reserve Contemporary, Lifestyle Series, Impervia, 250 Series, Encompass, Hurricane Shield Series, and Defender Series. They’re available in double-hung, single-hung, casement, awning, picture, sliding, bay, bow, custom, and specialty designs. One aspect of Pella Windows that helps its products stand out from competitors is its eco-friendliness. Several models meet or exceed Energy Star standards, proving the company’s dedication to energy efficiency. Also, several of Pella’s windows are made from recycled materials, such as recycled sawdust, aluminum, and glass, reducing the carbon footprint associated with production and making it a great choice for eco-conscious homeowners. Pella Windows are available through Lowe’s or through one of its 200 other Pella Stores, which are independently operated businesses throughout the country. Despite the relatively small number of stores, they are available in all 50 states. Pella Windows warranties are relatively generous compared to other major window manufacturers. Pella offers a limited lifetime warranty on many of its products and up to two years on labor related to installation. Many other companies only offer 20-year limited warranties, and because most windows last 15 to 30 years, there will be several years during which the windows will not be under any warranty. What are the benefits of buying Pella Windows at Lowe’s vs. Pella Stores? Pella Windows are obviously excellent products, and most customers will be quite happy with their purchase regardless of where they buy them. However, there are a few benefits of purchasing Pella Windows at Lowe’s. For one, Lowe’s has over 1,700 locations across the U.S. In most cases, this means that a homeowner will be closer to their local Lowe’s than they would be to one of the 200 Pella Stores. They can speak with a product specialist at Lowe’s, get their questions answered, compare the multiple lines, and decide, all without the hassle of travel. Lowe’s can also help customers with the installation. One of its teams of contractors can install your windows, allowing you to shop for the windows you like and let someone else do the hard work for you. Some Pella Stores might have contractors or services that can handle installation, but it’s not a guarantee like it is with Lowe’s. The labor is then covered by Lowe’s Double Lifetime Window Warranty, which covers the labor to replace a window that Pella warranties. Also, Lowe’s will help customers finance their projects. Lowe’s can help set up a credit card or another third-party loan with fixed payments. Customers can then have their windows installed for an affordable price rather than coming up with the lump amount themselves. Again, some Pella Stores might offer financing, but there is no guarantee. Another major benefit to Lowe’s is convenience. Lowe’s can ship your windows directly to your house. Pella Stores can also deliver your windows, but we compared the delivery fees, and on average, Lowe’s is less than half the cost. If we had chosen to pick our windows up instead, we would’ve had to drive over an hour and a half to our closest Pella Store, while we have three Lowe’s within 30 minutes of us. Finally, it’s quite likely that you’ll receive the same access to the same product lines, styles, and materials from Lowe’s as you would any Pella Store. In fact, Lowe’s access to a large network of stores and warehouses could mean better access and faster delivery on in-stock items — something we’ve noticed while placing orders through both companies. Lowe’s Window Replacement and Installation for Pella Windows Before deciding if Lowe’s windows and window replacement services are the best for you, let’s take a deeper look into what the company offers. Price ranges and costs for window installation , replacement, or individual purchase are difficult to truly nail down because each window line, size, and style commands a different price. However, the least expensive Pella Windows model available at Lowe’s is a new white vinyl construction window featuring Low-E glass for $238. The most expensive window is the Lifestyle Wood double-hung window, which costs $1,116. As for double-hung windows, we found that customers could expect to pay an average of $525 per window. At the time of writing this comparison, over 1,900 Pella models are available at Lowe’s. Of these options, customers can choose double-hung, single-hung, casement, sliding, and bay or bow windows. There aren’t any awning windows or custom or specialty options available online, but the stores may be able to order them. Lowe’s does in-house consultations for its window installation services. A customer interested in having Pella windows installed will meet with a rep, discuss their options, and get questions answered. Within a few days, the customer will hear back with a quote, at which point they can decide if they’d like to move forward. Lowe’s has a handy breakdown available on its website to explain installation prices. Here’s the breakdown, which includes the cost of the window: Warranties with Lowe’s are excellent, but they’re a little confusing. First, Lowe’s warranties its labor for 1 year after installation. However, Pella covers labor for up to two years after installation. After the first year is up, Lowe’s Double Lifetime Warranty kicks in. This warranty covers the labor required to replace a window installed by Lowe’s installers if a manufacturer-covered repair needs to be performed. So, if there’s an issue with a Pella window that Lowe’s installed, Lowe’s Double Lifetime Warranty will cover the labor required to repair the window. Between Pella Windows’ warranty and Lowe’s, customers should feel confident that their windows will be covered. If you purchase your windows through Lowe’s, you’ll have access to Lowe’s customer service department. Having personally dealt with customer service, they’re quite helpful when it comes to answering the questions they can, but more often than not, they’ll connect you with the store from which you purchased your windows. But if you have issues with the windows themselves, you can contact Pella’s customer service for answers, as well. Depending on what you need, your local Lowe’s may have them in stock. If that’s the case, you can order them online and set them up for pickup. Lowe’s will receive the order, pick the windows out of the rack, and alert you that the order is ready. When you drive the story, they’ll bring them to the customer pick-up desk or, if available, curbside for easy loading. Final Verdict: Where To Buy Pella Windows Ultimately, we think Lowe’s is the best place to buy Pella windows. While Pella Stores might offer some of the same benefits, we think Lowe’s access to a large network of stores, lots of stock, help with financing, and installation crews make it a better fit for most folks. Lowe’s can help customers plan their entire window project with one-stop shopping (plus an in-home consultation). How We Tested We know that purchasing windows for your home is a big investment and that any home improvement project on that scale can be quite an undertaking. For that reason, we wanted to make sure we really dug into both Pella Stores and Lowe’s to find out which is the best place to buy Pella Windows. We compared both based on several factors: Considering those factors, we determined that Lowe’s is the best place to buy Pella Windows . For more information, contact your local Lowe’s store. Why Trust Post Wanted by the New York Post For over 200 years, the New York Post has been America’s go-to source for bold news, engaging stories, in-depth reporting, and now, insightful shopping guidance . We’re not just thorough reporters – we sift through mountains of information, test and compare products , and consult experts on any topics we aren’t already schooled specialists in to deliver useful, realistic product recommendations based on our extensive and hands-on analysis. Here at The Post, we’re known for being brutally honest – we clearly label partnership content, and whether we receive anything from affiliate links, so you always know where we stand. We routinely update content to reflect current research and expert advice, provide context (and wit) and ensure our links work. Please note that deals can expire, and all prices are subject to change.

Join this golf club and you’ll get 7 ‘home’ courses across the USTexans WR Nico Collins says he was fined for tossing TD ball to kid

By PETER SMITH A social-media tribute to Coptic Christians. A billboard in Amish country. A visit to a revered Jewish gravesite. While Donald Trump’s lock on the white evangelical vote is legendary, he and his campaign allies also wooed smaller religious groups, far from the mainstream. As it turned out, Trump won by decisive margins, but his campaign aggressively courted niche communities with the understanding that every vote could be critical, particularly in swing states. Voter surveys such as exit polls, which canvass broad swaths of the electorate, aren’t able to gauge the impact of such microtargeting, but some backers say the effort was worth it. Just one week before the election, Trump directed a post on the social-media platform X to Coptic Christians in the United States —- whose church has ancient roots in Egypt. He saluted their “Steadfast Faith in God, Perseverance through Centuries of Persecution and Love for this Great Country.” “This was the first time seeing a major U.S. presidential candidate address the community in this manner,” said Mariam Wahba, a Coptic Christian and research analyst with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based research institute. “It was really a profound moment.” She said many Copts share the conservative social views of other Christian groups in the Republican constituency, and they may already have been Trump supporters. But the posting reinforced those bonds. Coptic bishops sent the president-elect congratulations after his victory and cited their “shared social and family values.” Some Assyrian Christians — another faith group with Middle Eastern roots — similarly bonded with Trump, whose mispronunciation of “Assyrian” at a rally created a viral video moment and drew attention to their support. Sam Darmo, a Phoenix real estate agent and co-founder of Assyrians for Trump, said many community members cited the economy, illegal immigration and other prominent voter issues. They echoed other conservative Christians’ concerns, he said, on issues such as abortion, gender identity and religious expression in public. But he said Trump supported various Middle Eastern Christians recovering from the Islamic State group’s oppressive rule. Darmo also credited Massad Boulos, father-in-law to Trump’s daughter Tiffany, for mobilizing various Middle Eastern Christian groups, including Chaldean Catholics, and other voters, particularly in Michigan, such as Muslims. “He brought all these minority groups together,” he said. “We’re hoping to continue that relationship.” But members of Middle Eastern-rooted Christian groups, and their politics, are far from monolithic, said Marcus Zacharia, founder of Progressive Copts, a program of Informed Immigrants, an organization that promotes dialogue on sensitive topics among such groups in the United States and Canada. He said many younger community members question Trump’s stances on issues such as immigration, and sense that conservatives sometimes tokenize them by focusing on the plight of persecuted Christians in the Middle East while neglecting wider issues of repression in countries there that the U.S. supports. He said there needs to be more informed dialogue across the political divide in these communities. “There is no more high time than these next four years to have that way of conducting conversations,” he said. Courting the Amish Republicans also made an aggressive push for Amish voters , particularly in the swing state of Pennsylvania, where they are most numerous at about 92,000 (many below voting age). The GOP has made similar efforts in the past, even though researchers have found that less than 10% of them typically vote, due to their separatism from society. But Republicans used billboards, mailers, ads and door-to-door campaigner to drive turnout in Lancaster County, home base to the nation’s largest Amish settlement. On Election Day, Amish voters Samuel Stoltzfus and his wife Lillian Stoltzfus said they were supporting Trump, citing their anti-abortion beliefs. “We basically look at it as murder,” Stoltzfus, 31, said outside a polling center in the Lancaster County community of New Holland, where dozens of other members of the local Amish community voted. Trump has wavered on the issue, dismaying some abortion opponents, though many have said Republicans still align more closely to their views. Stolzfus added: “Make America great again and keep the moral values,” he said. “Let’s go back to the roots.” Steven Nolt, a history professor at Elizabethtown College in Lancaster College who studies the Amish and their voting patterns, said that while it’s too early to say definitively without further research, he doesn’t see evidence of a larger turnout this year. Lancaster County as a whole — most of which is not Amish — is a GOP stronghold that Trump won handily, though both parties’ votes edged up from 2020, according to unofficial results posted by the Pennsylvania Department of State. Trump’s biggest increases were in urban or suburban areas with few Amish, while some areas with larger Amish populations generally saw a modest increase in the Trump vote, said Nolt, director of the college’s Young Center for Anabaptist and Pietist Studies. “Bottom line, percentage-wise, not much change in the parts of Lancaster County where the Amish live,” he said. Paying respects at a Chabad grave Trump directly reached out to members of the Chabad Lubavitch movement, a prominent and highly observant branch of Orthodox Judaism. Related Articles National Politics | Trump convinced Republicans to overlook his misconduct. But can he do the same for his nominees? National Politics | Trump gave Interior nominee one directive for a half-billion acres of US land: ‘Drill.’ National Politics | Trump’s team is delaying transition agreements. What does it mean for security checks and governing? National Politics | Judge delays Trump hush money sentencing in order to decide where case should go now National Politics | Republicans scramble to fill JD Vance’s Ohio Senate seat On Oct. 7, the anniversary of the Hamas attack on Israel that triggered the Gaza war, Trump made a symbolically resonant visit to the “Ohel,” the burial site of the movement’s revered late leader, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson. Wearing a yarmulke, the traditional Jewish skullcap, Trump, who has Jewish family members, brought a written prayer to the Ohel and laid a small stone at the grave in keeping with tradition. The site in New York City, while particularly central to Chabad adherents, draws an array of Jewish and other visitors, including politicians. About two-thirds of Jewish voters overall supported Trump’s opponent, Democrat Kamala Harris, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of more than 120,000 voters. But the Trump campaign has made a particular outreach to Orthodox Jews, citing issues including his policies toward Israel in his first administration. Rabbi Yitzchok Minkowitz of Chabad Lubavitch of Southwest Florida said it was moving for him to see images of Trump’s visit. “The mere fact that he made a huge effort, obviously it was important to him,” he said. Associated Press journalist Luis Henao contributed.3 Million Tourists Visited J&K In 2024POCATELLO — Social media posts from Pocatello area residents and businesses were rife with excitement this month over a local visit from Grammy nominated and award-winning musical artist Post Malone. Austin Post, known best by his stage name Post Malone, lives in nearby Cottonwood Heights, Utah, and was reportedly in Southeast Idaho to spend some time in the great outdoors. Malone, whose hit singles “Sunflower”, “Rockstar”, “Circles” and “Congratulations” have been streamed on Spotify billions of times, was frequently seen this month in selfies posted on social media by local residents who encountered the music star in the Pocatello area. The 19th Hole, a south Pocatello convenience store, shared a selfie with Malone on its Facebook page and the post quickly received hundreds of likes. Other selfies were shared via social media by patrons and staff at local restaurants that were visited by Malone during his Southeast Idaho stay. Malone also visited Boise for the Boise State Broncos game in early December, where he shared news that he will be hosting a concert at Albertsons Stadium with featured guest artist Jelly Roll in June 2025. Malone spent time unwinding after the game in Boise’s downtown area, visiting a variety of restaurants and taking photos with fans.Options Corner: A Poor Performance By Micron May Signal An Incoming Rebound

Azerbaijan believes missile downed plane, Russia warns against 'hypotheses'The Samsung Galaxy S series has consistently pushed the boundaries of smartphone technology, and the upcoming Galaxy S25 Slim is poised to be no exception. Rumors suggest that Samsung is developing groundbreaking camera technology that will allow for a significantly thinner and sleeker design without compromising image quality. This article delves into the potential innovations behind the Galaxy S25 Slim’s camera, exploring how it could revolutionize smartphone photography and design. A New Era of Slim Smartphones For years, smartphone manufacturers have struggled to balance the demand for increasingly sophisticated camera systems with the desire for slimmer, more pocketable devices. The camera bump has become a ubiquitous feature on modern smartphones , often detracting from the overall aesthetics. However, the Galaxy S25 Slim aims to change that. By integrating innovative camera technology, Samsung is reportedly working to eliminate the camera bump altogether, paving the way for a truly slim and elegant design. This advancement could mark a new era in smartphone aesthetics, where cutting-edge technology seamlessly integrates with sleek design. Potential Camera Innovations While Samsung has remained tight-lipped about the specifics of the S25 Slim’s camera technology, several rumors and leaks provide tantalizing glimpses into what we might expect. One prominent rumor suggests that Samsung is developing a new type of periscope lens that can be folded and retracted within the phone’s body. This technology would allow for a high-quality zoom lens without the need for a protruding camera bump. Another possibility is the integration of sensor-shift stabilization technology, which moves the camera sensor instead of the lens to compensate for handshake and movement. This technology could potentially lead to significantly improved image stabilization, especially in low-light conditions. Furthermore, advancements in computational photography algorithms could play a crucial role in enhancing image quality and enabling new camera features, even with a smaller camera module. The Impact on Smartphone Design The Galaxy S25 Slim’s innovative camera technology could have a profound impact on smartphone design. By eliminating the camera bump, Samsung can create a truly slim and sleek device that is more comfortable to hold and carry. This could lead to a resurgence of slim smartphones, offering users a more elegant and pocketable alternative to the bulky devices that have become commonplace . Moreover, the S25 Slim’s design could inspire other manufacturers to explore new ways to integrate advanced camera technology without compromising on aesthetics. This could lead to a new wave of innovation in smartphone design, with a focus on seamless integration and minimalist aesthetics. My Thoughts and Expectations As a technology enthusiast and long-time user of Samsung smartphones, I’m incredibly excited about the prospect of the Galaxy S25 Slim. I’ve always preferred slim and elegant designs, and the idea of a smartphone with a truly flush camera is incredibly appealing. I believe that this innovation could be a game-changer for the smartphone industry, pushing the boundaries of both design and technology. I’m particularly interested in seeing how Samsung implements the rumored periscope lens technology. If they can achieve high-quality zoom capabilities without a protruding camera bump, it would be a significant achievement. I’m also eager to see how advancements in computational photography contribute to the S25 Slim’s camera performance. The Galaxy S25 Slim has the potential to be a truly revolutionary smartphone , combining cutting-edge camera technology with a sleek and elegant design. By eliminating the camera bump, Samsung could usher in a new era of slim smartphones, inspiring other manufacturers to follow suit. While we await official confirmation from Samsung, the rumors and leaks surrounding the S25 Slim paint a picture of a device that pushes the boundaries of what’s possible in smartphone design and technology.