winner 777 casino
AP Trending SummaryBrief at 5:32 p.m. EST
FSK Completes Public Offering of $100 million 6.125% Unsecured Notes Due 2030Alaraby TV Network has won the Audience Honour Award at the 9th annual Shorty Impact Awards for its pioneering programme Fi Al Hadara (About Civilisation). The award specifically recognised the episode titled Illusions of Happiness , which addresses the dangers of addiction. The episode’s script was written by Kareem Mansi, with dramatic adaptation and comic sketch written by Abdelrahman Jawish, and directed by Waleed El-Geneidy. Illusions of Happiness highlights the hidden and destructive effects of addiction, taking viewers on an exploratory journey that blends painful realism with satirical presentation. This unique balance has contributed to About Civilisation 's notable success since its launch, helping it build a loyal and wide-ranging audience. This success has enabled the programme to boldly tackle sensitive issues and foster societal discussions that inspire positive change and enhance public awareness. Regarding this achievement, Amira Hamza, the head of Digital at Alaraby TV Network, said:"Alaraby Tube team is delighted with this accomplishment, especially since the nominated episode addresses an important issue affecting both Arab and global communities.” “This audience recognition reflects the popularity of Fi Al Hadara and reaffirms our commitment to delivering meaningful cultural and social content that raises awareness and positively impacts society,” he said. Alaraby Tube is a digital platform affiliated with Alaraby TV Network. It specialises in producing innovative digital content that presents social and cultural issues in a modern and engaging manner. The platform aims to empower and inspire Arab audiences through programmes that resonate with their interests and aspirations. Related Story Alaraby TV launches programme on situation in Gaza and Lebanon Alaraby TV Network nominated for Shorty Awards
NoneMINNEAPOLIS — A DFL state representative-elect said Friday he will not appeal a judge's ruling that he is ineligible to hold the office because he did not meet residency requirements for the district. In a letter to Gov. Tim Walz, Curtis Johnson said he has "made the difficult decision not to accept my seat in the Minnesota House of Representatives and to resign from the Office of State Representative effective immediately and irrevocably." "While I disagree with the conclusion reached by the District Court, I recognize that whatever the decision on appeal, the ultimate decision belongs to the Legislature, where it appears there is no viable pathway for me being allowed to retain my seat," he added. Johnson's decision means a special election will be held to fill the seat. Earlier this month, a Ramsey County judge ruled Johnson did not live in District 40B for six months before the election as required by the state constitution. Johnson's GOP challenger, Paul Wikstrom, filed the election contest alleging Johnson did not live in the Roseville apartment he claimed as his residence and instead lived in a house in Little Canada. That city is now part of another district thanks to redistricting following the most recent Census. Johnson said his family considered purchasing a new home in the new district, but decided to rent while they continued their search, which proved harder than expected. Johnson's refusal to appeal also means the balance of power in the state House will go from a 67-67 tie among Republicans and Democrats to a one-seat GOP majority, at least until the special election is held. "I am pleased that Mr. Johnson has accepted the court's clear decision that there should be a special election to ensure that residents of 40B are represented by someone from their own district," GOP House Speaker-designate Lisa Demuth said. "This confirms that Republicans will have an organizational majority on day one, and we look forward to ensuring that a valid candidate represents District 40B in the upcoming legislative session." The GOP's slim majority is not enough to pass legislation without DFL buy-in — 68 votes are required to approve bills on the floor — but it will allow Republicans to pick a speaker and make other decisions about how the chamber operates. When the court made its ruling, DFL House Speaker-designate Melissa Hortman said Johnson would appeal, and that she expected the Minnesota Supreme Court to dismiss the case. District 40B includes Shoreview and Roseville. Anthony Bettin is a web producer at CBS Minnesota. He primarily covers breaking news and sports, with a focus on the Minnesota Vikings.
Passive investing has boomed in recent years, allowing mutual funds and ETFs to scale rapidly and investors to buy and hold for long periods. At the same time, its popularity could be exacerbating the market's volatile swings and the rising concentration in a handful of key stocks, Apollo's chief economist Torsten Sløk says. Passive investing has been a hit partly because it is lower risk than active investing. By putting assets into externally managed funds like ETFs or retirement savings plans like 401(k)s, investors get returns that match the market's trajectory. Active investors, meanwhile, have to react quickly to market developments, switching strategies when economic conditions change. This can lead to greater short-term gains as well as losses. tends to yield higher net returns in the long run in comparison, making it relatively safer and more popular amongst risk-averse traders, but in the process, it's made active investing riskier, Sløk says. "Higher passive ownership can increase volatility, lower market liquidity, and increase market concentration in large cap names such as the so-called 'Magnificent Seven,'" Sløk wrote in a recent paper. He said that the massive shift toward passive investing has resulted in greater price spikes and dips as investor demand has become less reactive to stock prices. It's also resulted in a less actively traded market, where mispricing can be greater and last for longer. Those two factors drive greater , which has been on the rise recently. The Cboe volatility index up almost 30% in the last six months. With more active investors turning passive, there are also fewer investors shorting stocks, Sløk said. If the trend continues, shorts will be "squeezed out" more easily, which will boost volatility in large-cap shares and put upward pressure on their prices. He said that makes it riskier to short large-caps, which will only fuel a greater shift to passive flows. "In short, when active investors turn passive, large-cap stocks will benefit disproportionately. This dynamic can be observed in the price-to-earnings (P/E) ratios of large- and mega-cap stocks, which have been consistently high and growing," he wrote. Passive investing has rocketed in popularity in the past three decades, accounting for 50% of total equity investing in and globally, almost double what it was in 2012, Sløk said. Read the original article on
NoneRuling on Monday after an emergency hearing at Belfast High Court, judge Mr Justice McAlinden rejected loyalist activist Jamie Bryson’s application for leave for a full judicial review hearing against Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn. The judge said Mr Bryson, who represented himself as a personal litigant, had “very ably argued” his case with “perseverance and cogency”, and had raised some issues of law that caused him “some concern”. However, he found against him on the three grounds of challenge against Mr Benn. Mr Bryson had initially asked the court to grant interim relief in his challenge to prevent Tuesday’s democratic consent motion being heard in the Assembly, pending the hearing of a full judicial review. However, he abandoned that element of his leave application during proceedings on Monday, after the judge made clear he would be “very reluctant” to do anything that would be “trespassing into the realms” of a democratically elected Assembly. Mr Bryson had challenged Mr Benn’s move to initiate the democratic consent process that is required under the UK and EU’s Windsor Framework deal to extend the trading arrangements that apply to Northern Ireland. The previously stated voting intentions of the main parties suggest that Stormont MLAs will vote to continue the measures for another four years when they convene to debate the motion on Tuesday. After the ruling, Mr Bryson told the court he intended to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Any hearing was not expected to come later on Monday. In applying for leave, the activist’s argument was founded on three key grounds. The first was the assertion that Mr Benn failed to make sufficient efforts to ensure Stormont’s leaders undertook a public consultation exercise in Northern Ireland before the consent vote. The second was that the Secretary of State allegedly failed to demonstrate he had paid special regard to protecting Northern Ireland’s place in the UK customs territory in triggering the vote. The third ground centred on law changes introduced by the previous UK government earlier this year, as part of its Safeguarding the Union deal to restore powersharing at Stormont. He claimed that if the amendments achieved their purpose, namely, to safeguard Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom, then it would be unlawful to renew and extend post-Brexit trading arrangements that have created economic barriers between the region and the rest of the UK. In 2023, the UK Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the trading arrangements for Northern Ireland are lawful. The appellants in the case argued that legislation passed at Westminster to give effect to the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement conflicted with the 1800 Acts of Union that formed the United Kingdom, particularly article six of that statute guaranteeing unfettered trade within the UK. The Supreme Court found that while article six of the Acts of Union has been “modified” by the arrangements, that was done with the express will of a sovereign parliament, and so therefore was lawful. Mr Bryson contended that amendments made to the Withdrawal Agreement earlier this year, as part of the Safeguarding the Union measures proposed by the Government to convince the DUP to return to powersharing, purport to reassert and reinforce Northern Ireland’s constitutional status in light of the Supreme Court judgment. He told the court that it was “quite clear” there was “inconsistency” between the different legal provisions. “That inconsistency has to be resolved – there is an arguable case,” he told the judge. However, Dr Tony McGleenan KC, representing the Government, described Mr Bryson’s argument as “hopeless” and “not even arguable”. He said all three limbs of the case had “no prospect of success and serve no utility”. He added: “This is a political argument masquerading as a point of constitutional law and the court should see that for what it is.” After rising to consider the arguments, Justice McAlinden delivered his ruling shortly after 7pm. The judge dismissed the application on the first ground around the lack consultation, noting that such an exercise was not a “mandatory” obligation on Mr Benn. On the second ground, he said there were “very clear” indications that the Secretary of State had paid special regard to the customs territory issues. On the final ground, Justice McAlinden found there was no inconsistency with the recent legislative amendments and the position stated in the Supreme Court judgment. “I don’t think any such inconsistency exists,” he said. He said the amendments were simply a “restatement” of the position as set out by the Supreme Court judgment, and only served to confirm that replacing the Northern Ireland Protocol with the Windsor Framework had not changed the constitutional fact that Article Six of the Acts of Union had been lawfully “modified” by post-Brexit trading arrangements. “It does no more than that,” he said. The framework, and its predecessor the NI Protocol, require checks and customs paperwork on goods moving from Great Britain into Northern Ireland. Under the arrangements, which were designed to ensure no hardening of the Irish land border post-Brexit, Northern Ireland continues to follow many EU trade and customs rules. This has proved highly controversial, with unionists arguing the system threatens Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom. Advocates of the arrangements say they help insulate the region from negative economic consequences of Brexit. A dispute over the so-called Irish Sea border led to the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2022, when the DUP withdrew then-first minister Paul Givan from the coalition executive. The impasse lasted two years and ended in January when the Government published its Safeguarding the Union measures. Under the terms of the framework, a Stormont vote must be held on articles five to 10 of the Windsor Framework, which underpin the EU trade laws in force in Northern Ireland, before they expire. The vote must take place before December 17. Based on the numbers in the Assembly, MLAs are expected to back the continuation of the measures for another four years, even though unionists are likely to oppose the move. DUP leader Gavin Robinson has already made clear his party will be voting against continuing the operation of the Windsor Framework. Unlike other votes on contentious issues at Stormont, the motion does not require cross-community support to pass. If it is voted through with a simple majority, the arrangements are extended for four years. In that event, the Government is obliged to hold an independent review of how the framework is working. If it wins cross-community support, which is a majority of unionists and a majority of nationalists, then it is extended for eight years. The chances of it securing such cross-community backing are highly unlikely.
Conor McGregor lashes out in vile online rant after losing civil rape caseHimachal Pradesh Waqf Board on Friday presented in the district court an 18-year-old document that identified Latif Mohammad as the nominated president of the committee for the under-contention Sanjauli mosque here. This submission has been made as a result of a court order requiring clarification on Mohammad’s jurisdiction regarding his offer to demolish three unauthorized floors of the mosque, which is a contentious issue amongst members of the society. The court had on Monday directed the Waqf Board to file an affidavit stating in what capacity Latif Mohammad offered to demolish the three unauthorised floors of the disputed mosque. In its response, the Waqf Board submitted a letter from 2006 by which Latif Mohammad was holding the position of president in the mosque committee. Subsequently, Vishva Bhushan as counsel for the All Himachal Muslim Organisation (AHMO), said that this document is important because of points out the continuity of leadership by Mohammad, although its legitimacy of continuing beyond the statutory five years stipulated by the Waqf Act is ambiguous. According to the Waqf Act, the tenure of committee members is five years, he said. Latif told reporters, “The Waqf Board in its reply said I have been the president of the Sanjauli Mosque committee since 2006 and the Municipal Commissioners Court had also given notice to me in the capacity of president in September.” There have been calls from a section of locals for the demolition of the Sanjauli mosque. On September 11, ten people were injured during a protest against an allegedly illegal portion of the mosque. A day later, Latif Mohammad, and others, offered to demolish the mosque’s three “unauthorised” floors and sought the permission of the Municipal Commissioner. The legal battle escalated when after a protest by the Muslim community group led by Latif and other members of the mosque committee agreed to remove the “unauthorized structure” of the mosque and sought permission from the Municipal Corporation. This demolition was later permitted by the Municipal Commissioner’s Court on the 5th of October and was to be accomplished within two months. However, AHMO challenged this order hoping that the court would vacate it during the next hearing session, leaving the future of the mosque uncertain in doubt due to ongoing tensions between the communities. The next hearing on the matter has been fixed for November 30. ( With inputs from PTI)WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — An online spat between factions of Donald Trump’s supporters over immigration and the tech industry threw internal divisions in his political movement into public display. The rift laid bare the tensions between the newest flank of Trump’s movement — wealthy members of the tech world including billionaire Elon Musk and fellow entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and their call for more highly skilled workers in their industry — and people in Trump’s Make America Great Again base who championed his hard-line immigration policies. The debate touched off this week when Laura Loomer, a right-wing provocateur with a history of racist and conspiratorial comments, criticized Trump’s selection of Sriram Krishnan as an adviser on artificial intelligence policy in his coming administration. Krishnan favors the ability to bring more skilled immigrants into the U.S. Loomer declared the stance to be “not America First policy” and said the tech executives who aligned themselves with Trump did so to enrich themselves. Much of the debate played out on the social media network X, which Musk owns. Loomer’s comments sparked a back-and-forth with venture capitalist and former PayPal executive David Sacks, whom Trump tapped to be the “White House A.I. & Crypto Czar.” Musk and Ramaswamy, whom Trump tasked with finding ways to cut the federal government, weighed in, defending the tech industry’s need to bring in foreign workers. It bloomed into a larger debate with more figures from the hard-right weighing in about the need to hire U.S. workers, whether values in American culture can produce the best engineers, free speech on the internet, the newfound influence tech figures have in Trump’s world and what his political movement stands for. Trump had not yet weighed in on the rift. His presidential transition team did not respond to questions about positions on visas for highly skilled workers or the debate between his supporters online. Instead, his team instead sent a link to a post on X by longtime adviser and immigration hard-liner Stephen Miller that was a transcript of a speech Trump gave in 2020 at Mount Rushmore in which he praised figures and moments from American history. Musk, the world’s richest man who has grown close to the president-elect, was a central figure in the debate, not only for his stature in Trump’s movement but his stance on the tech industry’s hiring of foreign workers. Technology companies say H-1B visas for skilled workers, used by software engineers and others in the tech industry, are critical for hard-to-fill positions. Critics say they undercut U.S. citizens who could take those jobs. Some on the right called for the program to be eliminated, not expanded. Born in South Africa, Musk was once on an a H-1B visa himself and defended the industry’s need to bring in foreign workers. “There is a permanent shortage of excellent engineering talent,” he said in a post. “It is the fundamental limiting factor in Silicon Valley.” Trump’s own positions over the years reflected the divide in his movement. His tough immigration policies, including his pledge for a mass deportation, were central to his winning presidential campaign. He focused on immigrants who come into the U.S. illegally but he also sought curbs on legal immigration, including family-based visas. As a presidential candidate in 2016, Trump called the H-1B visa program “very bad” and “unfair” for U.S. workers. After he became president, Trump in 2017 issued a “Buy American and Hire American” executive order, which directed Cabinet members to suggest changes to ensure H-1B visas were awarded to the highest-paid or most-skilled applicants to protect American workers. Trump’s businesses, however, hired foreign workers, including waiters and cooks at his Mar-a-Lago club, and his social media company behind his Truth Social app used the the H-1B program for highly skilled workers. During his 2024 campaign for president, Trump said immigrants in the country illegally are “poisoning the blood of our country” and promised to carry out the largest deportation operation in U.S. history. However, Trump told a podcast this year that he wants to give automatic green cards to foreign students who graduate from U.S. colleges. “I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country,” he told the “All-In” podcast with people from the venture capital and technology world. Those comments came on the cusp of Trump’s budding alliance with tech industry figures, but he did not make the idea a regular part of his campaign message or detail any plans to pursue such changes. Get local news delivered to your inbox!
FSK Completes Public Offering of $100 million 6.125% Unsecured Notes Due 2030No. 25 Illinois rebounds in big way, blasts UMES 87-40
Trudeau's comments on Kamala Harris 'not helpful,' premiers say, as Musk blasts PMITV The 1% Club fans fume 'What's the point' as Lee Mack show makes major change
Microsoft flags $0.8M writedown on stake in GM-backed CruiseJuan Soto gets free luxury suite and up to 4 premium tickets for home games in $765M Mets deal