Datasets:
semran1
/
ffw_dclm

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
Community
1
content
stringlengths
130
641k
pred_label
stringclasses
2 values
pred_score_pos
float64
0.02
1
Abortion politics is an emotional business. So it's no wonder that the litigants in the complaint against the parental notification initiative fought the case to the Alaska Supreme Court. The court responded with a cool-headed ruling on Wednesday that upheld state precedent giving citizen initiatives a wide latitude before striking them from the ballot. The Parental Notification Initiative requires doctors to make determined efforts to give parents of minor girls at least 48 hours' notice before performing an abortion. Planned Parenthood and the Alaska Civil Liberties Union sought to have the measure removed from the Aug. 24 primary ballot because they said the state's summary of the initiative left out important elements. Most notable was that doctors who violated notification rules could be subject to felony prosecution, with fines and prison time. A Superior Court did find the summary that accompanied the signature petitions was misleading for its omissions, but also ruled that the summary could be corrected for both the official state election pamphlet and the primary ballot itself. The Supreme Court upheld that finding, reminding us that Alaska public policy, reinforced by court decisions, is that constitutional and statutory provisions for the initiative process should be "liberally construed." In other words, if there's a way to correct mistakes and keep an initiative on the ballot, that's what we do. In effect, the court ruled that the benefit of the doubt goes to the initiative. Certainly the summary was deficient in not spelling out the penalties a doctor who does not follow parental notification rules might face. As Justice Daniel Winfree wrote in a partial dissent, a summary of regulation that does not include the penalties for violating that regulation is incomplete and by omission, misleading. This wasn't a minor detail, but an important element of the law. The new summary should spell out the penalty. Lt. Gov. Craig Campbell, whose office is responsible for the summary, should make absolutely sure that the new summary conforms to the court's ruling. Still, the question of penalties is not the central issue. The central issue is parental notification itself. The court's decision reflects that reality. This issue will be thoroughly vetted before the voters by Aug. 24. Both supporters and foes will make use of every public and private forum available, from rallies to debates, to argue their causes and debate the issues. Those issues will include penalties, constitutional questions and most importantly, the effect of parental notification on young women and girls and their families as they deal with unintended pregnancies. One example is on this page, from Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards. You can be sure that the opposing side will find space here as well. The court rightly decided that 36,000 valid signatures trumped deficiencies in the summary, and that voters knew what they were doing when they signed the petition to put parental notification on the ballot. If there's any doubt about that, remember that a signature is not a vote. Voters will decide the issue in August, and all the information they need will be available. BOTTOM LINE: Court protects the initiative process, and in this case, there's time to correct the flaws.
__label__cc
0.0802
The rules went into effect on January 18th in an effort to rein in the spread of coronavirus infections, including those with the mutated strains, which have been on the increase in recent weeks. These measures include the closure of bars, restaurants, and all non-essential businesses. Also, there is a limit of up to five people for public and private meetings, along with the working from home order whenever possible. “Anyone contravening the measures to fight the epidemic will be committing an offence; persons who fail to comply with the rules may be fined between 50 and 200 francs, depending on the offence”, the government said. So what are the penalties for violating the above rules? - Organising a private event attended by more than five people: 200 francs - Gathering of more than five people in public space: 50 francs - Participating in an illegally organised event: 100 francs - Not wearing a mask on public transportation or in an airport: 100 francs - Not wearing a mask at public demonstration: 100 francs - Standing up while consuming in a bar or restaurant: 100 francs - Not complying with a quarantine requirement: up to 10,000 francs Hundreds of fines have already been handed out for breaking Covid-19 rules. For example, the police in the canton of Zurich imposed around 100 fines in the first week of February alone. Vaud handed 106 fines, while in Geneva, Valais and Thurgau, between 30 and 40 fines were issued in the first days of February. Most fines have been imposed for exceeding the limit of five people for both public and private gatherings, cantonal police departments report.
__label__cc
0.04737
As an organisation Liberty Victoria is deeply concerned about the gradual erosion of judicial discretion in sentencing and the move towards mandatory and/or more prescriptive models of sentencing. Part of that concern stems from the need for the legislature to carefully protect the separation of powers so that a strong and independent judiciary is able to ensure that justice is done in the individual case. The Attorney-General requested the Sentencing Advisory Council to advise him on the most effective legislative mechanism to provide sentencing guidance to the courts in a way that: (1) Promotes consistency of approach in sentencing offenders; and (2) Promotes public confidence in the criminal justice system. Liberty Victoria takes issue with what must be inferred as the foundation for the reference, which is that the Victorian criminal justice system has failed to promote consistency in sentencing, and therefore the public has lost confidence in it. The reforms potentially contemplated by the reference are too important for its foundation to rest on an incorrect premise that there is unacceptable inconsistency in sentencing. The dogmatic assertion from some in the media and the legislature that there are significant problems and therefore the system requires wide-ranging reform should be rejected. Liberty Victoria submits that the foundation of the reference is flawed – there is no evidentiary basis that there is unacceptable inconsistency in Victorian sentencing, or that members of the public, when fully informed of relevant facts, consider that judicial officers impose inadequate sentences. When individual sentences are inadequate the Crown can appeal. If there is a systemic issue and it appears that sentences are not meeting the intention of Parliament, then Parliament can increase the maximum penalty or the Crown can seek to have the Court of Appeal declare that current sentencing practices are inadequate, or seek a guideline judgment, the express purpose of which is to ensure consistency in sentencing and to promote public confidence. The executive has a wide range of options to ensure that there is consistency in sentencing and to ensure there is public confidence in the Victorian criminal justice system. What undermines public confidence in the criminal justice system is the enactment of rushed and fatally flawed legislation such as the Baseline Sentences Act. In that context, the legislature needs to accept a measure of responsibility for perpetuating a sense of crisis in the Victorian criminal justice system. Parliament should be proactive and take a lead in the public arena with regard to explaining the need for there to be a strong and independent judiciary, and to assist the public to understand that we all have a significant interest a criminal justice system that gives due weight to the rehabilitation of offenders. Read the full Liberty Victoria submission below.
__label__cc
0.070896
Acerca del curso EC-Council’s CHFI certifies individuals in the specific security discipline of computer forensics from a vendor-neutral perspective. Our digital forensics certification will fortify the application knowledge of law enforcement personnel, system administrators, security officers, defense and military personnel, legal professionals, bankers, security professionals, and anyone who is concerned about the integrity of the network infrastructure. Digital forensics is a key component in Cyber Security. Many people hear the term forensics, or computer forensics, or digital forensics and instantly think that’s just for law enforcement, but the truth is, digital forensics has a key place on every cyber security team. In fact, without it, chances are your organization’s security posture and maturity will fail to see its full potential. Computer forensics is an evolving field that is always moving to match the changes in devices and how they are used for identifying, preserving, analyzing, and recovering data from computers and various digital media storage. Digital data are subjected to legal practices and guidelines when intended to serve as evidence in civil proceedings. Computer Forensics in Today’s World Computer Forensics Investigation Process Understanding Hard Disks and File Systems Operating System Forensics Defeating Anti-Forensics Techniques Data Acquisition and Duplication Investigating Web Attacks Investigating E-mail Crimes
__label__cc
0.020652
Update: Rep. Pilkington says he won't motion to extract #SYG from committee and will instead meet with #arleg colleagues this afternoon (2/3/21) to discuss concerns they may have with the bill so they can "operate in an open manner." Yesterday the House Judiciary Committee heard the infamous Stand Your Ground Bill, SB 24, and after almost three hours of heartfelt testimony against the bill, the committee voted it down. So why are we still talking about it? Senator Bob Ballinger and Representative Pilkington are proving themselves to be sore losers, with plans of extracting it from the committee and sending it to the House for a floor vote today. This is something that hasn’t happened in the history of the House of Representatives, and only once in the Senate… and you guessed it, it was also an NRA bill. Among the twenty-five individuals who spoke against the bill, representatives from the Arkansas Gun Owners Association also pleaded with the committee to vote no. Later, in a Facebook post, they called out Ballinger and Pilkington. “We have attempted every way possible to correct this Bill in private just to have the middle finger shoved in our face…” the post said. That’s right, the middle finger, as if the Arkansas Legislature is a middle school playground. Our leaders and lawmakers should act with more decency and less child-like behavior. The organization did not go into more detail about which of the two legislators acted with such malice, but they went on to address the threatening language that Ballinger and Pilkington are using, as well as the NRA, to pass this harmful bill. This begs the question, are they really pushing this bill for their constituents, or is it for their own special interest?
__label__cc
0.123349
"Free trade" is a sacred mantra in Washington. If anything is labeled as being "free trade", then everyone in the Washington establishment is required to bow down and support it. Otherwise, they are excommunicated from the list of respectable people and exiled to the land of protectionist Neanderthals. This is essential background to understanding what is going on with the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), a pact that the United States is negotiating with Australia, Canada, Japan and eight other countries in the Pacific region. The agreement is packaged as a "free trade" agreement. This label will force all of the respectable types in Washington to support it. In reality, the deal has almost nothing to do with trade: actual trade barriers between these countries are already very low. The TPP is an effort to use the holy grail of free trade to impose conditions and override domestic laws in a way that would be almost impossible if the proposed measures had to go through the normal legislative process. The expectation is that by lining up powerful corporate interests, the governments will be able to ram this new "free trade" pact through legislatures on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. As with all these multilateral agreements, the intention is to spread its reach through time. That means that anything the original parties to the TPP accept is likely to be imposed later on other countries in the region, and quite likely, on the rest of the world. At this point, it's not really possible to discuss the merits of the TPP since the governments are keeping the proposed text a secret from the public. Only the negotiators themselves and a select group of corporate partners have access to the actual document. The top executives at General Electric, Goldman Sachs, and Pfizer probably all have drafts of the relevant sections of the TPP. However, the members of the relevant congressional committees have not yet been told what is being negotiated. A few items that have been leaked give us some insight as to the direction of this pact. One major focus is will be stronger protection for intellectual property. In the case of recorded music and movies, we might see provisions similar to those that were in the Stop Online Privacy Act (Sopa). This would make internet intermediaries like Google, Facebook and, indeed, anyone with a website into a copyright cop. Since these measures were hugely unpopular, Sopa could probably never pass as a standalone piece of legislation. But tied into a larger pact and blessed with "free trade" holy water, the entertainment industry may be able to get what it wants. The pharmaceutical industry is also likely to be a big gainer from this pact. It has decided that the stronger patent rules that it inserted in the 1995 WTO agreement don't go far enough. It wants stronger and longer patent protection and also increased use of "data exclusivity". This is a government-granted monopoly, often as long as 14 years, that prohibits generic competitors from entering a market based on another company's test results that show a drug to be safe and effective. Note that stronger copyright and patent protection, along with data exclusivity, is the opposite of free trade. They involve increased government intervention in the market; they restrict competition and lead to higher prices for consumers. In fact, the costs associated with copyright and patent protection dwarf the costs associated with the tariffs or quotas that usually concern free traders. While the latter rarely raise the price of a product by more than 20-30%, patent protection for prescription drugs can allow drugs to sell for hundreds, or even thousands, of dollars per prescription when they would sell for $5-10 as a generic in a free market. Patent protection increases what patients pay for drugs in the United States by close to $270bn a year (1.8% of GDP). In addition to making drugs unaffordable to people who need them, the economic costs implied by this market distortion are enormous. There are many other provisions in this pact that are likely to be similarly controversial. The rules it creates would override domestic laws on the environment, workplace safety, and investment. Of course, it's not really possible to talk about the details because there are no publicly available drafts. In principle, the TPP is exactly the sort of issue that should feature prominently in the fall elections. Voters should have a chance to decide if they want to vote for candidates who support raising the price of drugs for people in the United States and the rest of the world, or making us all into unpaid copyright cops. But there is no text and no discussion in the campaigns - and that is exactly how the corporations who stand to gain want it. There is one way to spoil their fun. Just Foreign Policy is offering a reward, now up to $21,100, to WikiLeaks if it publishes a draft copy of the pact. People could add to the reward fund, or if in a position to do so, make a copy of the draft agreement available to the world. Our political leaders will say that they are worried about the TPP text getting in the hands of terrorists, but we know the truth: they are afraid of a public debate. So if the free market works, we will get to see the draft of the agreement.
__label__cc
0.097669
Pennsylvania woman charged in fatal accident A woman is faced with multiple felony charges after an accident that occurred last month. The Pennsylvania woman has been charged with vehicular homicide and DUI in relation to the fatal accident. She has also been charged with speeding, reckless driving, failure to obey a traffic sign and not properly restraining the child in the vehicle. The accident reportedly occurred when the woman was speeding and ran through a stop sign. She crashed into a delivery van ,driven by a 72-year-old man while he was attempting to make a turn. After the impact, the van flipped over and rolled onto another street. The man ended up trapped underneath the van. When emergency crews arrived, he was pronounced dead at the scene. The woman also had her 2-year-old son in the car with her, and he was transported to the hospital for treatment. When authorities questioned the woman about the incident, they observed a cup inside the vehicle that had the scent of alcohol. They also observed her speech slurred as she spoke and her eyes had a glassy look. Her blood alcohol content was at 0.098 percent. The woman in this case is faced with multiple criminal charges and may have to spend years in prison if convicted. Her legal battles may not end with jail time, and she may end up back in a Pennsylvania courtroom for civil litigation initiated by surviving family members. The family may be entitled to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the woman for the fatal accident and the court may award monetary compensation if evidence deems the woman’s negligence a causal factor in the death. Source: mainlanemedianews.com, Bryn Mawr woman charged with DUI in fatal crash that killed Conshohocken man, Linda Stein, Aug. 29, 2013
__label__cc
0.028363
Challenging to conceive of a lawyer submitting appeal without even allowing client to see it, let alone rescue it from its... inelegance of understatement; against the client's specific statements & instructions Three years of promises and assurances since jury verdict. How many times was Thomas FX Dunn heard to say, "Next week! Next week! I'm just about done." Just as AmEx did with Mr. Safra, Reed Elsevier has invested enormous resources fair and foul to create this miscarriage of justice. Legal beagle? It's on your watch that the enclosed points were repeatedly ignored. If you are not in fact the worst attorney or worst lawyer in America, why did you repeatedly refuse to bring these points or any of the others on this web site to the attention of the federal appeals court? Is there a conflict somewhere therein? As with every human, what you do speaks so loudly we can't hear a word you're saying. That's why you have earned the titles "Worst Lawyer in America" and "Worst Attorney in America" Dirtiest trials of the 20th century. Worst attorneys lawyers in America. Reed Elsevier blows up the competition with cash and underhanded influence; Thomas FX Dunn merely blows. For those who list the dirtiest federal trials or the dirtiest trials of the twentieth century, let it be remarked and remembered that Crushing The Largest Excecutive Club In History definitely counts among the dirtiest trials of the 20th century. So too does Thomas FX Dunn rank as the lawyer best described as coprophile. Let the keywords and keyphrases "most unsuccessful lawyer in the U.S." "worst lawyer in America" along with "Thomas FX Dunn most unsuccessful lawyer in the U.S." and "Thomas FX Dunn worst lawyer in America" forever rank at the top of the major search engines, in order for the world to remember generations from now that "Thomas FX Dunn is or was the worst lawyer and most unsuccessful lawyer in the U.S.."
__label__cc
0.08733
USDA-APHIS is charged with several critical tasks relating to Imports and Exports, including: APHIS restricts some animals and animal products from entering the United States because of the animal health situation in the region of origin. In general, restrictions based on the APHIS-recognized animal health status of the region are issued through the regulatory process. A region can be (a) a national entity (country); (b) part of a national entity (zone, county, Province, State, etc.); (c) parts of several national entities combined into an area; or (d) a group of national entities (countries) combined into a single area. The following links provides a list of the USDA-recognized animal health status of particular countries and regions, organized by specific livestock or poultry diseases. Animal Health Statuses of Regions View a list of APHIS-recognized animal health statuses of regions regarding specific animal diseases or pests, or acceptable commodities.
__label__cc
0.061216
Police are searching for a person who called authorities claiming they would shoot themselves and others in Brisbane's Kelvin Grove. An emergency declaration was made at 3.42am this morning after a man called police saying he was going to shoot himself, some people he was with and any police officers that came near him. He provided a name and an address near the Queensland University of Technology. Police shut down four streets including Carraway, Ramsgate and Blarney streets as well as Musk Avenue and began waking residents of a unit complex searching for the caller. More than 20 officers, the dog squad and paramedics were at the scene. After an extensive search, police were unable to find the caller. They are now confident there is no threat in the area and believe the call may even have been made from a different location. The investigation continues.
__label__cc
0.04382
This past fall, two counties in Ohio filed suit against pharmacies and manufacturers for monies spent to treat the opioid crisis. The basis of the lawsuit, which now included over 2,000 plaintiffs, is that the defendants are responsible for the opioid crisis. They funneled millions of pain pills throughout the state and then did nothing to help people who became addicted to the drugs. Some of the major pharmacies named in the lawsuits were Walgreens, CVS, Rite Aid and Walmart. They believe it was unfair that they were even named in the lawsuit because they only filled legitimate prescriptions provided by doctors. It’s not the pharmacists’ job to question whether the prescriptions should’ve been filled. And, they don’t believe it’s fair that no doctors were named in the county’s lawsuits. Their response was to file their own lawsuit against more than 500 doctors in Ohio. While they haven’t named the 500 doctors, they are alleging that every doctor in Ohio that ever wrote a script for pain pills should be named in the county lawsuits as well. The pharmacies argue that the initial lawsuits filed by Summit and Cuyahoga counties were just an effort to seek deep pockets. They figure they can get more money from drug manufacturers and pharmacies than individual doctors. They argue that the plaintiffs can’t name a single script that was filled by any of the defendant pharmacies that should not have been filled. They could have a point. The trials for the Ohio cases are scheduled to start on October 13, 2020. If you believe you have a legitimate claim against any of the defendants in the opioid crisis, call our experienced lawyers right away.
__label__cc
0.089828
A video of an Indigenous man getting Tased by a park ranger at Petroglyph National Monument in New Mexico for going off the designated path sparked major online fury. Darrell House, who is Navajo and Oneida as well as a Marine veteran, told KRQE he was walking through the Petroglyphs at the Piedra Mercado trail with his sister and dog, Geronimo. They went off-trail to avoid a large group of hikers they spotted up ahead in order to maintain social distancing. A park ranger approached House from behind and advised him to get back on the trail, to which he complied. But when the park ranger asked for identification, House refused before eventually giving a false identity. He was consequently tased repeatedly by the ranger. The five-minute footage filmed by his horrified sister showed House being repeatedly tased while on the ground, crying for help and showing his hands as the park ranger demanded. Warning: contains violence The park ranger kept demanding for House to show his hands, even though both of his hands were already visibly out in front of him. "I don't have anything. I apologize for going off the trail," House said as his sister screamed and pleaded for the ranger to stop. With the taser still pointed at House, the ranger told him: "You're being detained because you refused to identify yourself. If you resist, I will tase you." The video ended showing a second officer handcuffing House. House grew up on his tribe's reservation. He experienced no prior issues as a frequent visitor to the park to pray for the land and his ancestors. He told NBC News: "I didn't see a reason to give my identification. I don't need to tell people why I'm coming there to pray and give things in honor to the land. I don't need permission or consent. And I don't think he liked that very much." According to KRQE, House and his dog Geronimo both got tased since he was holding the pet in his arms. "he felt everything. I ended up dropping him when I fell." After the incident, House could only come up with one reason for the stun gun attack. "He wanted to show power, dominance, keep me in order. That's what authority figures are trained to do, to keep people like me in order. To make the 'Indian' look crazy, to make them look insane." "Here, you will see a White man abuse his power," House wrote in his Instagram post with the video. "Both men pulled tasers on me after the first 1 couldn't keep me down. This could have been a civil interaction. The law doesn't work for the Indigenous. The government doesn't give a sh*t about us. This was uncalled for." "You see I'm clearly on the trail. I explained my reason for being off trail (which I shouldn't have too.) If anyone has the right to be off trail and wonder this land, it's the NATIVE INDIGENOUS COMMUNITY!" "What hurt me the most was when my baby Geronimo felt the shock. Officer Mr. Graden (Guy who tased me and Geronimo) and Mr. Wineland (f'k boi)." House said he felt it was not necessary to identify himself to the park ranger for doing "absolutely nothing wrong." He described his lingering shock and emotional state since the incident. "I'm traumatized. My left leg is numb and still bleeding. Geronimo is shaking and hasn't stopped. I'm shaking." "You would think with George Floyd and Breonna Taylor with the Black Lives Matter Movement authorities would try to avoid having to pull a weapon out. Imagine I disarm him from the taser then what I get charged with assault or worse he grabs for his gun and ends me." "These scenarios have been going through my head since this afternoon. I'm a son, I'm a brother, I'm a father. More importantly, I'm a human being." "I'm good people, The Marines I served with would agree. The many people I've crossed paths with, you know me. This was the [cherry] on top of my 2020." Of course the usual chorus of "if he just complied" was one reaction to the video. But House stepped off the trail and immediately complied with the ranger's request. The demand for identification was the first non-compliance, but since House and his sister were compliant in returning to the trail, the ID demand is questionable for many. Is every park goer who leaves the trail but returns to it once asked required to produce identification? Or is that demand reserved for only some park goers? People expressed outrage over how the ranger handled the situation that could have ended with House and his sister complying with his request to return to the trail. @davenewworld_2 That's traumatizing. I'm so sick of these power tripping, ego filled officers with weapons that do more harm than good.— Victoria’sNotSoSecret (@Victoria’sNotSoSecret) 1609248694.0 @vidadulcecc @davenewworld_2 They were probably bullies in school, too.— Randy Waltrip (@Randy Waltrip) 1609260382.0 @SuddenlySuzan @davenewworld_2 It's so sad that this is so unsurprising. Absolutely disgusting.— Victoria’sNotSoSecret (@Victoria’sNotSoSecret) 1609266708.0 @davenewworld_2 @bonecho5 This is infuriating! 😡— SW (@SW) 1609266663.0 @CSisto66 @davenewworld_2 The ranger needs to be arrested. What he did was a crime.— Steven Demarest (@Steven Demarest) 1609249153.0 @davenewworld_2 @rediornot49 Wtf? What's the penalty for being off trail, a ticket? They tassed & traumatized this… https://t.co/r3lDosPvf2— Allie S. 🇺🇸 #BoycottNRA #Resist (@Allie S. 🇺🇸 #BoycottNRA #Resist) 1609252699.0 House was given three citations by the federal park ranger—interfering with agency function and resisting; going off the designated trail; and for giving false identification. House also believed the park's rules asking visitors to remain on designated trails should not apply to Indigenous people when the purpose of the trail is to protect Indigenous sacred spaces. Freedom of religion in the 1st amendment and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 protects Indigenous people's rights to practice their spiritual traditions. While requesting House return to the trail, the ranger even stated the trails purpose was because the petroglyphs and surrounding area are sacred to Native Americans. "We don't have a set time, we don't have set places, we don't have buildings, and we don't have things built to worship." "Nature is what we've been worshiping ... and protecting it has always been our job." "I am Native, you know. I have rights to this land. I have rights off the trail." @davenewworld_2 Dumb ranger is so fearful for some reason. A couple walking their little poodle like dog, is not th… https://t.co/wF3K822qZD— Jen #GoodTrouble (@Jen #GoodTrouble) 1609248772.0 For many Indigenous the repeated tasing is a chilling reminder of the 2017 killing of Zachary Bear Heels by Omaha, Nebraska police officers. Bear Heels was tased 12 times while he lay on the ground. He was later declared dead at a hospital. Four of the officers involved in Bear Heels death were fired after an investigation, but the police union appealed and in 2020 three of the officers were reinstated with backpay. According to national crime statistics, Native Americans—men and women—are more likely to die during encounters with law enforcement than any other ethnic or minority group. Many of those deaths are the result of wellness checks—like Bear Heels—and not during the commission of any crime. Many of the remaining deaths occur during minor infractions like loitering or trespassing. For Indigenous people, violence at the hands of law enforcement is an all too common occurrence. According to Vanessa Lacayo—a spokesperson for the National Park Service—the agency is conducting an investigation into the ranger's decision to demand ID and repeatedly tase House. "We take any allegation of wrongdoing very seriously, and appreciate the public's patience as we gather the facts of this incident." The national park issued the following statement in response to the incident. "On December 27, a law enforcement park ranger contacted two visitors who were walking in a closed area off-trail, which is a violation of National Park Service regulations within Petroglyph National Monument." "A video capturing part of their interaction and posted to social media has generated question and interest from the public." "In accordance with National Park Service policy, this incident is under review and has been referred to the NPS Office of Professional Responsibility, our internal affairs unit, for a thorough investigation." "While we work to gather the facts of this specific situation, we cannot speculate on the events leading up to what was captured on video. We take any allegation of wrongdoing very seriously, and appreciate the public's patience as we gather the facts of this incident." "Full performance NPS law enforcement officers complete extensive law enforcement training programs along with many other Federal law enforcement agencies at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Georgia, as well as on-the-job training in the NPS Field Training and Evaluation Program." "Throughout their careers, officers complete required annual training to ensure skills proficiency and current knowledge of law enforcement issues." "Additionally, NPS officers are required to undergo initial and ongoing specialized training to carry an electronic control device, commonly known as Tasers."
__label__cc
0.076595
The state of Illinois has a thorough medical cannabis programme that makes medicinal cannabis available to those with specific medical conditions as a form of treatment. Patients must first get a registry identification card—also referred to as a medical cannabis card—in order to take part in the programme. Patients must meet one of the requirements set forth by the state of Illinois in order to be eligible for a medical cannabis card. These include, among other things, diseases like cancer, multiple sclerosis, HIV/AIDS, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). For a doctor to suggest medical cannabis in Illinois, a patient must also have a current certification from that doctor that is on file with the IDPH. In Illinois, there are numerous processes necessary to obtain a medical cannabis card. Patients first need to make an appointment with a licenced doctor who can qualify them for the programme. The patient must next provide an application to the IDPH along with the doctor’s certification, evidence of Illinois residency, and a valid ID. A medicinal cannabis card application costs $100 for residents and $50 for veterans and low-income people. The IDPH will award the applicant a three-year medicinal cannabis card after the application is accepted. The card can be used to buy medical marijuana products from the state’s authorised dispensaries. Each 14-day period, patients may buy up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana. In order to give patients safe, authorised access to medicinal cannabis as a method of treatment, the Illinois medical cannabis programme was created. Patients must be aware that using medicinal marijuana does not replace receiving conventional medical care, and they should always speak with their doctor before changing their treatment regimen. In general, patients seeking alternative treatments for specific medical ailments can benefit from the illinois medical cannabis card. Patients who have a medical cannabis card have access to safe and authorised medical cannabis products that can help them manage their symptoms and enhance their quality of life.
__label__cc
0.047275
In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court essentially declined to rule on Proposition 8, the gay-marriage ban in California. That leaves an earlier district court ruling overturning the ban in place. More specifically, the Court ruled 5-4 that those who appealed a decision throwing out Prop. 8 did not have legal standing to proceed. Here's SCOTUSBlog's Amy Howe's plain-English description* of the background of the case: After the two same-sex couples filed their challenge to Proposition 8 in federal court in California, the California government officials who would normally have defended the law in court, declined to do so. So the proponents of Proposition 8 stepped in to defend the law, and the California Supreme Court (in response to a request by the lower court) ruled that they could do so under state law. But today the Supreme Court held that the proponents do not have the legal right to defend the law in court. As a result, it held, the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the intermediate appellate court, has no legal force, and it sent the case back to that court with instructions for it to dismiss the case. “We have never before upheld the standing of a private party to defend the constitutionality of a state statute when state officials have chosen not to. We decline to do so for the first time here,” John Roberts wrote in his majority opinion. He was joined by Antonin Scalia, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan. *Update: My initial explanation of the back story here was wrong, so I've just turned it over to Amy Howe.
__label__cc
0.137674
Formula for Murder introduces Kat Everitt, a seasoned amateur sleuth, who uses handwriting analysis to narrow the field of suspects and unmask the killer in a campus murder. Scribbled notes become clues; a new twist to crime solving that reveals weaknesses and secrets through knowledge of handwriting and personalities. A tip at the beginning of each chapter provides readers insight into their own writing, and puzzle pieces to solve the crime. Kat zips through the investigation on stiletto heals, and shuffles clues of human failings to pinpoint the killer, seeking an end to increasingly dire threats to all. And then there’s the mysterious stranger thrust into the fray. Was his arrival the night of the murder coincidental? Or something more sinister?
__label__cc
0.083243
The military police must be secured against provocations by minors As one of the special security services, the Military Police usually operate quite discreetly. Only when some high-ranking foreign officials or a line of military vehicles are accompanied are the red-blue beacons turned on, forcing other drivers to stop at the roadside. The rest of the time, the Military Police operates in a military environment and performs its duties there. What the Military Police does The Military Police provide security at the places of military events; prevents and stops criminal offenses, administrative offenses and other offenses in military units or their places of deployment, guarded objects, places of residence of guarded persons and places of military events; investigates criminal offenses in military service; provides support to other security bodies. So, the main field of activity is various violations committed by the military and also crimes committed by civilians in military locations. However, when compared to the State Police and the State Security Service, the Military Police is like a kid, as in some cases it is not entitled to act independently and has to summon the State Police to the scene. So, time must be wasted and another institution must waste its work. There are two types of cases: if the offense is committed by a minor and if it is necessary to pursue the suspect. The right time to sort out the norms As Rihards Bunka, the head of the Latvian Lawyers Association, explains, the Military Police cannot actually detain minors. If, for example, a 17-year-old provocateur tries to enter a military base, the State Police must be called in to help. At the same time, the offender must not be pursued immediately outside the base area. For example, if a potential offender runs into some premises - the State Police is allowed to do that, but the Military cannot. Currently, several laws related to military service have been opened in the Saeima, but the necessary amendments to the Military Police have not been submitted by the Ministry of Defense. Therefore, the Latvian Lawyers Association has taken the initiative to address the Saeima members. Historically, such a restriction on the powers of the Military Police could have been introduced because military personnel cannot be minors themselves, while pursuing suspects is a rare necessity. However, these legal nuances need to be adjusted, because sooner or later the Military Police may have to act both in connection with juvenile offenses and act on it immediately. Lindermans' guest lesson The Ministry of Defense could see what happens if the regulatory enactments are not arranged well enough after the scandalous provocation at the Ādaži military base in 2015, when two Russian citizens Alexander Kurkin and Andrei Popko, armed with flyers and a flag in the colors of the ribbon of Saint George, climbed over the fence. Of course, they were caught quickly, but the further proceedings had a lot of difficulties. First, the accusation of terrorism and espionage had to be reclassified under the article on hooliganism. But in the further course of the proceedings, both guest provocateurs and their support person in Latvia - Vladimirs Lindermans - were acquitted in higher instances. And the Latvian Ministry of Justice, as the Kremlin media later chanted, even paid compensation to those Russian national Bolsheviks - one thousand euros each. And all just because legally their administrative violation was not properly recorded. It would be no wonder if, for their next provocations against the Latvian army, Lindermans and his company used minors or ran away after the provocation. Therefore, in the opinion of the Latvian Lawyers Association, the issue of the powers of the Military Police must be settled. Comment of the National Armed Forces: "The Military Police, while conducting administrative violation proceedings within the scope of their competence, have so far had three such cases, such as entering a NAF military facility (two persons, one of whom was a minor), as well as in another situation a juvenile flew a drone closer than the allowed distance from the military object. In the first case, the juvenile offender was accompanied by his legal representative (father), who further provided the necessary information about himself, the juvenile and the circumstances of the offense. In the second case, the offender did not provide information about his age (the new approach - anonymised personal ID code creation - prevents people from realising it immediately), so this aspect was not assessed in the initial questioning. Further procedural steps were taken in the presence of the parents. Please note that no complaints have been received about MP violations in activities with minors. According to the lawyers of the Joint Staff of the NAF, in the draft law "Amendments to the Law on the National Armed Forces" (1124/Lp13) soldiers and national guards watching over guarded objects are not limited to stopping only the offenses committed by adults, on the contrary - by analogy with the Security Guard Activities Law, soldiers and national guards who provide security for a guarded object may stop an offense committed by the juvenile and supervise the juvenile offender until the arrival of a specially trained police official (in accordance with the external regulatory framework in the field of protection of the rights of the child, upon establishing the person is a minor, the State Police must be notified immediately)."
__label__cc
0.115909
The alleged victim, named as John Doe #1, has released a statement exclusively to RadarOnline, which claims that he was in a room at the Beverly Hills Hotel when the pre-arranged massage turned sexually inappropriate for him. “I don’t think anyone should form any opinion about Mr. Travolta, his family, his council, myself, John Doe #2, and our counsel,” the statement reads. “Instead, I would urge everyone to understand that guilt or innocence in our Justice System is decided by our court system. Too often these matters are decided by swaying public opinion through elements that would never be considered in an actual court case.” By the way, yesterday TMZ published photographs and a restaurant receipt, which can serve as proof that the actor did stay in New York at the time the masseur allegedly was assaulted by him at the Beverly Hills Hotel in California. However, the victim explained that: “For instance, a photograph, a restaurant receipt, testimony, and other things that may or may not constitute proof have strict guidelines that must be followed.” He continued: “A fine example is the amazing number of guilty people that escape their crimes due to the mishandling of evidence. Is it disappointing, of course it is, but it is a price we must pay in order to have a justice system that runs in a constitutional manner.” Well, it seems like the 58-year-old actor had a very bad week. On Monday, John Doe #1 filed a lawsuit alleging that Travolta not only tried to have sex with him, but also suggested a threesome with “a Hollywood starlet” and told him that he “got where he is now due to sexual favors he had performed when he was in his ‘Welcome Back, Kotter’ days,” The Huff Post writes. Tuesday faced one more Travolta’s scandal, which rose one more ‘victim’, claiming that Travolta “would open his legs and spread his butt cheeks open and had a full erection and would maneuver in a way to try to force [the plaintiff] to touch his anus and around his anus,” according to RadarOnline. Wonder, but alleged victims have something in common: they are represented by the same lawyer. Which is more, they both seek $2 million in punitive damages. Travolta’s reps denied the allegations in a statement to E! Online, calling them “complete fiction and fabrication.” “This lawsuit is complete fiction and fabrication,” it reads. “None of the events claimed in the suit ever occurred. The plaintiff, who refuses to give their name, knows that the suit is a baseless lie…” “On that date when plaintiff claims John met him, John was not in California and it can be proved that he was on the East Coast. Plaintiff’s attorney has filed this suit to try and get his 15 minutes of fame. John intends to get this case thrown out and then he will sue the attorney and Plaintiff for malicious prosecution.” Travolta, who is married to actress Kelly Preston, has been dogged by rumors about his sexuality for years.
__label__cc
0.046684
VALLEY police who risked their lives to help a colleague who had been shot could be named the bravest in the country. Officers involved in the dramatic armed siege in Rawtenstall in July 2005 were due to attend the prestigious Police Bravery Awards ceremony yesterday (Thursday) to find out whether they had won the top accolade or one of eight regional awards. The officers involved are Sergeant Paul Leigh, Pc Lukmaan Mulla, Pc Kevin Jones, Sergeant Wendy Jacobs, Pc Peter Corser, Pc Phil Bayliss and Pc David Lomas. Pc Lomas was shot in the chest when he was called to the home of Stephen Hensby, 54, in Hardman Avenue. He was shot without warning and staggered outside where he collapsed and was unable to reach a place of safety. Sgt Leigh and Pc Mulla, pictured , then crossed the line of fire and dodged petrol bombs being thrown by Hensby from the windows to give their colleague first aid until help arrived. They were then helped by armed officers Sgt Jacobs, Pc Jones, Pc Bayliss and Pc Corser, to carry the injured officer, whose condition was getting worse, to safety. After a 17-hour siege, Hensby shot himself before he could be arrested. Speaking ahead of the awards ceremony, at the Dorchester Hotel in London, Pc Lomas said of his colleagues: 'It is my profound belief that the actions of Pc Mulla, Sgt Leigh and those of the armed officers who attended on that day saved my life, as my injuries were serious and life threatening in nature.' Praising the officers for their bravery, Steve Edwards, chairman of Lancashire Police Federation said: 'These officers courageous and selfless actions helped to save Pc Lomas's life. 'The team work and dedication shown by them in assisting a colleague is in the highest traditions of the Lancashire Constabulary and the public of Lancashire should be extremely proud of their actions. 'The Lancashire Police Federation are extremely proud of them all and I am extremely honoured to be escorting them to the award ceremony.'
__label__cc
0.028615
There are a variety of ways to acquire citizenship in the United States in order to legally work and live in Ward, Arkansas. For instance, you can become an U.S. citizen if your birth was correctly recorded in any U.S. state. Ward Citizenship Attorneys Know the Naturalization Procedure Everyone not born in Arkansas, or any other state within the U.S., must become naturalized before they are a citizen. Naturalization requires an applicant to fulfill a number of general requirements, including a period of lawful residence and physical presence in the U.S., good moral character, understanding of the English language, and familiarity of U.S. history and government. Ward Citizenship Attorneys Understand the Confusing Documentation Criminal convictions such as violent felonies or outstanding removal orders can be grounds for a denial of citizenship. Receiving your citizenship is too important to attempt without help. Ward, Arkansas Immigration Lawyers can help you to avoid delays in the citizenship application process and better ensure success.
__label__cc
0.041584
A 30-year-old man on Wednesday turned himself in to police after murdering his wife. The accused, Lakshman Gupta, strangled his wife Suman to death at their rented house in Northeast Delhi’s Khajuri Khas on Monday night, police said. Police said then Gupta decided to end his life by jumping in front of a train, but couldn’t muster courage to do so. He spent the night at a temple. The next day morning, walked into Khajuri Khas police station, and admitted to the murder, police said. - 11-year-old kidnapped, strangled in Narela, police arrest uncle - Delhi: 15-year-old killed by three teens, police say fight over water led to murder - Man calls daughter’s ‘rapist’ home, tortures and kills him, say police - Wife killed for selling taxi to clear debt - 3 yrs on,FIR registered after criminal confesses to murder - Man beaten to death in Khajoori Khas area He told police that he was unhappy with his wife, who he alleged would beat him. “A police team was sent to his house, where it found Suman’s body. On Monday night, he said they had a fight during which he killed her,” a police officer said. Lakshman worked at a welder’s workshop in Khajuri Khas. Police said the couple had married four years ago and had no children. He belongs to Aligarh, while Suman was from Varanasi. Police have registered a case of murder under Section 302 of the IPC and arrested Gupta. Suman’s body was sent for postmortem.
__label__cc
0.049966
LIBOR damages claims: counterparties and complex counterfactuals Following several parallel investigations into manipulation of the LIBOR (London interbank offered rate) and similar financial benchmarks, a number of the world’s largest financial institutions have, between them, received fines totalling billions of euros—the European Commission alone has so far imposed fines amounting to €1.7bn (see the case study below). However, since findings of wrongdoing, whether under competition law or other legislation, tend to be followed by damages claims, banks and the other institutions involved may face further financial pain. The question is how much, and what are the issues involved in quantifying the level of damages? LIBOR is designed to reflect the funding costs of major banks active in the London interbank market, and it has counterparts in other currencies, such as EURIBOR. It is used to determine payments made under interest-rate contracts by a wide range of counterparties, including small businesses, large financial institutions and public authorities. For example, an institution might agree to pay interest at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 100 basis points. Benchmark reference rates such as LIBOR also affect payments made under a wide range of other contracts, including some loans and mortgages. Regulatory and competition investigations LIBOR manipulation has recently been investigated by a number of financial regulators and competition authorities on both sides of the Atlantic. These investigations drew on evidence from ‘hot’ documents, including records of instant-messaging conversations between traders at different banks, and concluded that traders in different banks had worked together (in some cases with the assistance of broker firms) to manipulate the LIBOR rate in order to benefit their own positions in financial derivatives markets. The investigations and accompanying widespread publicity have generated debates and policy initiatives to improve the workings of interest-rate benchmarks. This article looks at damages claims arising from findings of past LIBOR manipulation. Where there’s an antitrust investigation, follow-on damages claims are never far behind With $506tn of financial derivatives said to be priced with reference to the LIBOR rate, damages claims against banks arising from infringements of market or competition rules with respect to LIBOR have, on the face of it, the potential to be extraordinarily large. However, getting a handle on the true scale of damages requires a detailed and complex assessment. What are the potential elements of that assessment, and the key issues that need to be established? To put this into context, the investigations in the USA and Europe fall into two distinct groups: financial regulators investigating potential manipulation of the LIBOR rate (breach of market conduct rules), where rates were allegedly falsified for two reasons: at an institutional level, to hide financial distress by understating the cost at which a bank could borrow in the interbank lending market; and at the level of individual traders, to make higher profits by seeking to manipulate the LIBOR rate on specific days when their positions would be fixed against that rate; competition authorities investigating potential collusion between banks to fix the LIBOR rate, where the alleged infringement is a breach of Article 101 TFEU or equivalent anti-cartel rules. Winners and losers In the case of LIBOR, where the issue was the manipulation of an interest rate, some external parties are harmed but others benefit—this is clearly different from an ordinary case of fraud or cartel behaviour. In simple terms, borrowers benefit from lower LIBOR rates, while savers suffer. Some potential claimants will face both harm and benefit, since they may be party to instruments (e.g. interest rate derivatives) either at different points in time or in different areas of a business, where they will have alternately benefited and suffered from the manipulated rates. It is unlikely that traders at financial institutions that manipulated LIBOR would have tried to push LIBOR in only one direction; rather, they would be likely to have desired a higher or lower rate depending on their net long or short position on any given day. On the other hand, the institutional motivation (disguising financial distress) would always be to keep LIBOR submissions low in order to suggest that the institution was not a high-risk borrower; the impact on LIBOR would not in itself have been of interest for this purpose, only the level of the institution’s own submission. This manipulation occurred in a context where widespread efforts were being made to avoid a catastrophic collapse of the financial system. Calculating the ‘net harm’ to claimants in these circumstances will be complex. A for effort, D for achievement? While the investigation by the UK Financial Services Authority (FSA, now split into the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority) into Barclays Bank found evidence of attempts to manipulate the LIBOR rate, in its decision the FSA did not establish that the LIBOR rate was actually affected: Barclays could have benefitted from this misconduct to the detriment of other market participants’ [emphasis added] The FSA decision of June 2012 imposed a £59.5m fine on Barclays for LIBOR-related breaches of market conduct rules. By contrast, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) investigation into Barclays, the results of which were also published in June 2012, did establish that attempts to move LIBOR had been successful. It concluded that: When Barclays swaps traders made requests of Barclays rate submitters in order to influence Barclays’s benchmark interest rate submissions, and when the submitters accommodated those requests, the manipulation of the submissions affected the fixed rates on some occasions. However, the DoJ’s report does not provide evidence about the number of occasions on which the manipulation of Barclays’ submissions affected the overall LIBOR fixing, nor how far the overall LIBOR level was raised or lowered as a result. Therefore, the extent to which efforts to manipulate were successful remains to be seen. In order to determine this, it would be necessary to carry out a detailed empirical analysis to construct the counterfactual, since whether a bank’s individual LIBOR submission affected the reference rate on a given day depended on whether it was included in the final sample. The results emerging from the economic literature are mixed, with some authors claiming to find evidence that the LIBOR price was moved, and others saying that attempted manipulation appears to have been ineffective. It is not surprising to see mixed results, given the difficulty of constructing the counterfactual LIBOR price (which can be attempted in various ways, but inevitably with a margin of error). In particular, as the calculation of LIBOR is not based on actual market transactions between banks, but rather a bank’s estimate of what its borrowing cost would be at a certain size, the counterfactual of banks’ LIBOR submissions and resulting LIBOR rates would require careful analysis. The issue of creating a realistic counterfactual is even more difficult when the period covered involves the height of the financial crisis, when banks virtually stopped lending to each other—leading to a lower number of actual transactions to observe for comparison purposes. Magnitude of the manipulation It would appear from the FSA decision that traders were typically looking for movement in the LIBOR in the order of one or two basis points (0.01–0.02%). Traders were also interested in the LIBOR rate only on certain dates—the settlement price for many of the relevant interest-rate futures contracts was linked to only four days each year (one per quarter). The order of magnitude will affect the pattern of any damages claims, since many potential claims could be relatively uneconomic to litigate for the sake of a movement of 1 basis point. Potentially, the manipulation of LIBOR in the interests of hiding financial distress could be at a more significant magnitude, but this appears to have occurred only at a time of illiquidity, when it would be more difficult to predict the counterfactual rate. In the context of follow-on claims relating to the competition decision, there could be a further question of whether and how direct claimants may have mitigated losses by passing on any LIBOR ‘overcharge’ to their own customers. Finally, the current discussion around ‘umbrella’ claims may be relevant in relation to LIBOR damages. An umbrella claim is one in which the claimant did not deal directly with the cartelists, but is nevertheless suing for damages because the prices it paid were inflated by the actions of the cartel. Further claims may therefore arise where LIBOR was used as a benchmark in a financial transaction between two third parties not involved in the manipulation. Claims for damages as a result of LIBOR manipulation may end up being large and numerous, but they are likely to be unusual in terms of the complexity of determining a reliable damages quantum. There will be an abundance of data on financial transactions, assuming that claimants are able to force banks to disclose it, and hence sophisticated economic analysis may turn out to be useful in modelling the counterfactual scenario that can then be compared with the factual (infringement) scenario. As such, the counterfactual and quantum are likely to become the focus of the debate in coming years. Drawing a parallel with cartel damages cases, thus far LIBOR has been mostly a matter of investigating an object (per se) infringement of the rules, without determination of the actual effect of the behaviour. The next stage of damages actions, which necessarily involves an effects-based analysis of harm, will be complex, but will also generate further insightful economic analysis into LIBOR manipulation. Contact: Reinder van Dijk In this article, ‘LIBOR’ can generally be read as a reference to any of the affected reference interest rates. A basis point is one-hundredth of 1%. Oxera advised a global financial institution during the European Commission’s investigation. For example, a number of recommendations were made in Wheatley, M. (2012), ‘The Wheatley Review of Libor’, September, including switching the administration of LIBOR from the British Bankers Association to another body. Guardian Care Homes is suing Barclays for up to £37m over the alleged mis-selling of interest rate swaps, and also the claim that Barclays acted in breach of Article 101 TFEU as a result of its involvement in EURIBOR manipulation. See Graiseley Properties Ltd & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors, Court of Appeal Judgment EWCA Civ 1372. Indeed, one could ask whether LIBOR manipulation should be treated as a form of cartel, since LIBOR itself is a financial benchmark and not in a market as such. There is no competition over the setting of LIBOR itself, and therefore any manipulation of LIBOR cannot logically be said to be a restriction of competition. The LIBOR rate affects settlement prices in interest-rate derivatives markets where those involved in the manipulation were also active, although any manipulations could be upwards or downwards. US Department of Justice (2012), ‘Statement of facts’ [agreed between the United States Department of Justice, Criminal Division, Fraud Section, and Barclays Bank PLC], para. 30. See, for example, Gyntelberg, J. and Wooldridge, P. (2008), ‘Interbank fixings during the recent turmoil’, BIS Quarterly Review, March, pp. 59–72; and Abrantes-Metz, R.M., Kraten, M. and Metz, A.D. (2008), ‘LIBOR Manipulation?’, mimeo, August. Ahead of the new regulatory period for the integrated water service, in December 2023, ARERA (Autorità di Regolazione per Energia Reti e Ambiente) published the decision setting the new regulatory framework for Italian water networks, the so-called MTI-4. According to the latest evidence, the regulation contributed to improve the outcomes… Read More Transport policy in the UK is at a critical juncture. The UK’s commitment to decarbonise transport will require adopting new technologies and changing behaviours, including a rapid uptake of electric vehicles, encouraging modal shift and active travel, adopting sustainable aviation fuels, improving aircraft efficiency and managing demand. Further, there are… Read More
__label__cc
0.100796
An ISO 9001:2008 Organization To be a quality service provider supporting global client base in their accounting, transaction, legal and taxation requirements. Why is Tax Audit Required? The objective of Tax Audit is to ensure that the books of accounts of the company have been maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. A proper audit for tax purposes would ensure that proper records are being maintained by the company and that the accounts properly reflect the income reported by the company in its tax returns. This audit effectively curbs tax evasion and ensures tax compliance. Who needs to get a Tax Audit done? Audit under section 44AB is applicable to four categories of assesses Any person who is covered by the above four categories is required to get his accounts audited by a Chartered Accountant before 30th September of each year. Apart from the Tax audit under Section 44AB, there are audit and certification requirement for various assesses under various provisions of Income Tax Act. All such audit and certification under Income Tax is done by a Chartered Accountant. What we can do for you? We are qualified to be appointed as auditors under the Income Tax Act. We possess the requisite knowledge and skill to conduct audit of a company to given an unbiased and independent opinion based on an objective assessment of facts.
__label__cc
0.037733
By Anne-Marie Slaughter and Alberto Rodríguez Alvarez Canada, Mexico, and the United States have a chance to forge a regional agenda to position North America as a global leader in digital government services. Having already established a solid foundation for cooperation, they must now build on it. In Ukraine today and in many other conflicts around the world, the digital domain has become a battleground for cyberattacks and information warfare. Even in normal daily life, digital platforms can endanger citizens and democracies by encroaching on individual privacy, manipulating consumer attention, fostering social isolation, and nurturing extremism. But, while not downplaying these harms, we should also remind ourselves of the many good things that today’s new technologies offer. El mundo está muy consciente de que la crisis climática es uno de los principales escollos para el desarrollo sostenible. Y, sin embargo, a pesar de las dramáticas pruebas sobre las consecuencias letales del cambio climático, y a pesar de poseer los conocimientos, las tecnologías y los recursos para dar solución al mismo, continuamos en el mismo camino de altas emisiones de carbono que amenaza nuestra supervivencia. Texas’s new abortion law subjects women to heightened surveillance and the whims of private parties. If the US Supreme Court upholds the law, it will set back gender relations to an era that precedes the living memory of most Americans. In 1984, the late US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg gave a lecture on why Roe v. Wade, the Court’s 1973 decision recognizing a constitutional right to abortion, was wrongly decided. The case, she explained, should never have been framed as a matter of privacy or reproductive choice alone: Abortion was at bottom a question of gender equality. Thirty-seven years later, Texas is proving Ginsburg’s point with its draconian and potentially transformative abortion law. If the Supreme Court upholds the law – it just heard oral arguments on whether to permit two legal challenges to proceed – it will set back gender relations to an era that precedes the living memory of most Americans. Los latinoamericanos tenemos muchos talentos. Uno de ellos es la notable aptitud para gobernarnos mal, como lo ha puesto de manifiesto la pandemia. Seis de los 20 países con más muertes per cápita del mundo a causa del Covid-19 se encuentran en América Latina. Perú encabeza la lista y Brasil ocupa el octavo lugar. Sin duda que la pobreza, la escasez de camas en los hospitales, y las hacinadas condiciones de vivienda, contribuyeron a la diseminación del virus, pero estos factores por sí solos no explican por qué la región lo ha hecho tan mal. Muchas naciones de Asia y de África padecen de los mismos problemas, pero sufrieron menos muertes per cápita. Incluso países que vacunaron a su población tempranamente, como Chile, –o que al principio de la pandemia parecían exitosos, como Uruguay– han terminado con un desempeño mediocre. Many aspects of cryptocurrencies are baffling, not least the success of a joke like Dogecoin. But El Salvador’s recent adoption of Bitcoin as legal tender alongside the US dollar is perhaps the strangest and potentially most worrying example of all. El Salvador this month [September 2021] became the first country to adopt a cryptocurrency – in this case, Bitcoin – as legal tender. I say the first, because others might follow. But they should think twice, because the idea is highly dubious – and likely to be economically dangerous for developing countries in particular. I will admit that I don’t understand the need for cryptocurrencies at all. Like manyeconomists, I fail to see what problem they solve. They aren’t well designed to fulfill any of the classic functions of money – a unit of account, store of value, or means of payment – because their prices are so extraordinarily volatile. This volatility is not surprising, because cryptocurrencies are backed neither by reserves nor by the reputation of a well-established institution, such as a government or even a private bank or other trusted corporation. Since the first days of Joe Biden’s presidency, his administration has insisted that the growing number of migrants being apprehended at the US-Mexico border is not a “crisis,” but rather a normal, seasonal spike. US officials have even argued that the controversy was concocted entirely by former President Donald Trump and other Republicans. While the Biden administration was not totally wrong about Trump, reality has since rebutted its claims. The situation on the border today is indeed a crisis, both for the United States and Mexico. As of late September, some 15,000 migrants and asylum seekers, most of them Haitian, are sheltering from the sun under the International Bridge in Del Rio, Texas. They have brought the migration issue roaring back to the fore. By Helen Clark, Olusegun Obasanjo, and Ricardo Lagos With his evidence-based, public-health approach to drug policy, US President Joe Biden is signaling that America’s longstanding strategies of repression and punishment have failed. The US should also champion a similar shift toward harm-reduction policies internationally. Fifty years ago this week, US President Richard Nixon declared that drug abuse was “public enemy number one” requiring a “tough on crime” approach in the United States and abroad. The “war on drugs,” which expanded in parallel with the global political, military, economic, and cultural hegemony of the US in the post-World War II decades, has delivered the exact opposite of its own stated aims. Today we have both plant-based and synthetic production; low-scale and high-level trafficking of illicit narcotics; disproportionate sentencing and over-incarceration; violence and rights violations; and money laundering and enrichment of organized crime – all strengthened, not weakened, by repressive responses to illegal drugs.
__label__cc
0.031474