axiebet88 free 200 no deposit
For years, Black Africans with European or American connections have decried the discrimination they face solely because of their skin color. The story of Chidimma Adetshina, a South African-born Nigerian model, reveals a troubling reality: racism’s ugly presence isn’t confined to the West. If such incidents occur within Africa itself, it prompts a deeper question—is racism truly just about skin color? It all started when Chidimman became a strong contender for Miss South Africa, contending for the crown to represent the country in the Miss Universe in Mexico. A statement from South Africa’s Department of Home Affairs claimed that preliminary evidence suggested Chidimma’s mother committed identity fraud. Following this revelation, the department traced Chidimma’s roots to Nigeria and Mozambique, thrusting her into the center of South Africa’s ongoing xenophobic debates. The controversy intensified as some South Africans called for her disqualification from the Miss South Africa pageant. In August, the 23-year-old model made the difficult decision to withdraw from the competition, raising questions about the timing and motivations behind the investigations into her identity. Why did it take her rising prominence on such a platform for these claims to surface? This scenario points to a deeper issue: racism is not confined to any particular race or ethnic group. Instead, it is a pervasive human failing—a disease that transcends borders. Many Africans perceive racism primarily as a conflict between Black and White, rooted in skin color. However, Chidimma’s case reveals a bitter truth. Racism is often about power and control—one group asserting its perceived superiority over another to maintain privilege, whether for economic or political gain. Skin color may be the most visible marker, but it is merely the tool, not the essence, of racism. The fear and discontent surrounding the possibility of a Nigerian-born woman winning the Miss South Africa title unmask the discriminatory attitudes lurking beneath the surface. Despite being naturalised as a South African, Chidimma’s legitimacy as “one of their own” was vehemently questioned. This rejection of her identity reveals a troubling reality: racism, in this instance, was wielded not by outsiders but by South Africans themselves. In their inability to embrace Chidimma, they displayed the very prejudice they often decry. The Second Chance Chidimma later accepted an invitation to compete in Nigeria’s Miss Universe pageant, where she triumphed, earning the chance to represent Nigeria on the global stage at the 2024 Miss Universe competition. Subsequently in November, she made history as the first Nigerian to finish as the 1st runner-up, right behind Denmark’s Victoria Theilvig, who claimed the crown. Her achievement also secured her the title of Miss Universe Africa and Oceania, marking a groundbreaking moment for Nigeria and the continent. In a recent interview with Business Insider, Chidimma reflected on the struggles she faced leading up to this milestone. She shared how some South Africans believed she wasn’t “South African enough” because of her name “Chidimma”—a distinctly Nigerian one. For her, this was where racism in her story took root. Though Chidimma’s racism journey has pushed her to her heights, her story is a powerful reminder that racism isn’t always as overt as systemic discrimination or blatant xenophobia. Sometimes, it is subtle and cloaked in cultural exclusion, challenging individuals like Chidimma to defend their place in spaces they rightfully belong to. Racism, as Chidimma’s journey reveals, transcends the simplistic narrative of black versus white. Her story shines a spotlight on an often overlooked reality—that racism is not inherently tied to skin color but rooted in humanity’s darker impulses. It encompasses the need to dominate, exclude, and control. The aphorism, “the rejected stone became the chief cornerstone,” encapsulates Ms Adetshina’s journey. Once vilified and pushed to the sidelines, she now stands as a symbol of triumph and resilience. Ironically, even South Africans, who once sought her disqualification from Miss Universe, joined in celebrating her success, as the world glorified her name. This duality reflects how quickly public opinion can shift when success becomes undeniable. According to Daniel Abusuamepeh , a race and social problems researcher, tribalism operates as a form of racism within African societies, often mirroring the systemic discrimination seen globally. It underscores a painful truth: racism adapts to its environment. In Africa, he noted, it morphs into tribalism; in Europe and America, it often aligns with systemic racial structures. But the intent remains the same—division and control under the guise of difference. The transformational story of Chidimma, from a rejected beauty in South Africa to becoming the Queen of Africa and Oceania, teaches lessons of tolerance and the ability to push beyond limits. It challenges Africans to look inward and address the prejudices of racism and tribalism that hinder unity. Chidimma’s journey from rejection to global recognition serves as a reminder to African children—and indeed to the world—that racism isn’t about color. It’s about a group’s obsession to dominate and control those it sees as outsiders, eventually hurting itself. About the author Esther Kalu is a Journalism for Liberty Fellow, freelance journalist and screenwriter, who is passionate about art and culture, lifestyle and politics. Her works have appeared in reputable and emerging platforms like The Nation (as an intern), Premium Times, Naija News and The Radar. She finds passion in using her writing as a tool to address topical issues in Nigeria.Nephew only wants to play video games on vacation
Canada’s Jonathan David scores milestone goal in Lille win over Brest in FranceEarlier today, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision upholding the TikTok divest-or-ban law, more formally known as the Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACAA). That means on January 19, Apple and Google will be required to remove TikTok from their app stores, unless a sale happens (causing an internal scramble as the giants confront their roles as enforcers of the law). Though President-elect Donald Trump has expressed interest in “saving” the app from a ban, he has no power to stop the law from going into effect. Apple and Google, which could face fines in the hundreds of billions of dollars if they don’t remove TikTok from their app stores, are expected to comply with the law. In a statement, TikTok spokesperson Mike Hughes said: “The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans' right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue. Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people. The TikTok ban, unless stopped, will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.” Below are some passages from the ruling that reveal why the court dismissed TikTok’s claims that the government’s law violates freedom of speech — and what that means for TikTok now. A Novel Reading Of The First Amendment The court suggested that some restrictions on U.S. speech may actually in the end make speech freer, because it could save people from secret manipulation of speech by foreign governments. Nodding to the role that social media companies play in shaping our systems of discourse, they wrote: “At the heart of the First Amendment lies the principle that each person should decide for himself or herself the ideas and beliefs deserving of expression, consideration, and adherence. Our political system and cultural life rest upon this ideal. When a government — domestic or foreign — stifles speech on account of its message . . . [it] contravenes this essential right and may manipulate the public debate through coercion rather than persuasion.” This is a new idea, one that acknowledges the extent to which private companies (and the governments that influence them) control our digital information ecosystem. The court continued: “[T]he First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States. Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.” Levels of Scrutiny The court decided that TikTok, and the creators who sued to stop the ban, had real speech arguments — ones important enough to trigger what the courts call “heightened scrutiny” under the First Amendment. When a court determines that heightened scrutiny applies to a claim, it raises the bar for what the government must show to refute it. To survive heightened scrutiny, laws cannot discriminate based on the viewpoint or content of someone’s speech. Lamakers could not, for example, have banned TikTok because they believed it privileged pro-Palestine speech over pro-Israel speech, or even pro-China speech over pro-United States speech. To survive heightened scrutiny, laws also have to be narrowly tailored to solve the problem the government is trying to solve. When laws trigger heightened scrutiny, they are far less likely to survive on appeal because the bar is raised to make sure they don’t impinge on freedom of speech. But in this instance, the court ruled that the government’s reasons for passing the law were compelling enough, and that the law itself was narrow enough, to outweigh TikTok’s and the creators’ concerns. They found that the law was viewpoint- and content-neutral, because it focused on who owns a platform, rather than what the platform says. “The Act was the culmination of extensive, bipartisan action by the Congress and by successive presidents. It was carefully crafted to deal only with control by a foreign adversary, and it was part of a broader effort to counter a well substantiated national security threat posed by the PRC. Under these circumstances, the provisions of the Act that are before us withstand the most searching review.” The Death Of “Project Texas” Both TikTok and the government pointed to years of negotiation between them as evidence to support their side of the case. TikTok created an initiative known as Project Texas, which would restrict data flows between the U.S. and China, and limit ByteDance’s oversight of TikTok’s U.S. operations. It then proposed that project in a draft National Security Agreement to the Biden Administration. TikTok argued that Project Texas was meticulous and robust, and that the government should’ve accepted it as a way to solve its national security concerns without resorting to a full ban. But the government argued that the yearslong negotiation just showed just why TikTok’s plan was insufficient. Here, the court deferred heavily to the government: “For us to conclude the proposed [National Security Agreement] is an equally or almost equally effective but less restrictive alternative, we would have to reject the Government’s risk assessment and override its ultimate judgment. That would be wholly inappropriate after Executive Branch officials conducted dozens of meetings, considered scores of drafts of proposed mitigation terms, and engaged with TikTok as well as Oracle for more than two years in an effort to work out an acceptable agreement. Here respect for the Government’s conclusions is appropriate.” It also said that, at the end of the day, the government just believed it couldn’t trust ByteDance: “At bottom, acceptance of the Final Proposed NSA would ultimately have relied on the Executive Branch trusting ByteDance to comply with the agreement, which the Government understandably judged it could not do.” Don’t Blame Congress, Blame The CCP In its conclusion, the court acknowledged that its decision would have “significant implications for TikTok and its users.” But it urged those users not to blame the U.S. government for the loss of their favorite social media app. Assuming no divestment happens before January 19, the court said: “TikTok’s millions of users will need to find alternative media of communication. That burden is attributable to the PRC’s hybrid commercial threat to U.S. national security, not to the U.S. Government, which engaged with TikTok through a multi-year process in an effort to find an alternative solution.” What Happens Now? TikTok will likely argue that it should be allowed to stay online while it appeals this case to the Supreme Court. That, ultimately, will be a decision for the Supreme Court to make — but the D.C. Circuit today suggested that the courts would not allow the app to keep functioning during appeal. Unless TikTok sells by January 19, or gets an extension from President Biden, it “will be unavailable in the United States, at least for a time,” the court wrote. But it suggested that even if it went offline, the app would be eligible to come back under the control of a new owner. “270 days is a substantial amount of time. If TikTok (or any company subject to the Act) is unable to divest within 270 days, it can do so later and thereby lift the prohibitions.” MORE FROM FORBESMusk’s foundation $421 million short its required donations in 2023Barclays PLC raised its stake in Orion S.A. ( NYSE:OEC – Free Report ) by 320.4% in the third quarter, according to the company in its most recent disclosure with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The institutional investor owned 95,512 shares of the specialty chemicals company’s stock after purchasing an additional 72,793 shares during the quarter. Barclays PLC owned approximately 0.17% of Orion worth $1,700,000 at the end of the most recent reporting period. Other institutional investors have also recently made changes to their positions in the company. Pzena Investment Management LLC grew its stake in shares of Orion by 35.4% in the third quarter. Pzena Investment Management LLC now owns 3,647,985 shares of the specialty chemicals company’s stock valued at $64,971,000 after buying an additional 954,398 shares in the last quarter. Foundry Partners LLC bought a new stake in shares of Orion during the third quarter worth approximately $4,620,000. American Century Companies Inc. lifted its holdings in Orion by 18.6% during the 2nd quarter. American Century Companies Inc. now owns 1,347,138 shares of the specialty chemicals company’s stock worth $29,556,000 after purchasing an additional 210,990 shares during the last quarter. Victory Capital Management Inc. boosted its holdings in Orion by 20.2% in the 3rd quarter. Victory Capital Management Inc. now owns 1,179,181 shares of the specialty chemicals company’s stock valued at $21,001,000 after purchasing an additional 198,182 shares during the period. Finally, SIR Capital Management L.P. acquired a new position in Orion in the 2nd quarter valued at $3,992,000. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 94.33% of the company’s stock. Wall Street Analysts Forecast Growth OEC has been the topic of several recent analyst reports. StockNews.com lowered Orion from a “buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a research note on Tuesday, October 15th. JPMorgan Chase & Co. raised Orion from a “neutral” rating to an “overweight” rating and boosted their price objective for the company from $20.00 to $21.00 in a research note on Monday, November 11th. Orion Price Performance Shares of OEC opened at $15.67 on Friday. The company has a quick ratio of 0.71, a current ratio of 1.24 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.42. The business’s fifty day moving average is $16.91 and its 200 day moving average is $18.59. The stock has a market cap of $904.47 million, a P/E ratio of 29.57 and a beta of 1.51. Orion S.A. has a 12-month low of $14.94 and a 12-month high of $28.35. Orion ( NYSE:OEC – Get Free Report ) last released its earnings results on Thursday, November 7th. The specialty chemicals company reported $0.47 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, missing the consensus estimate of $0.53 by ($0.06). The business had revenue of $463.40 million during the quarter, compared to the consensus estimate of $489.01 million. Orion had a net margin of 1.67% and a return on equity of 18.97%. Sell-side analysts anticipate that Orion S.A. will post 1.68 earnings per share for the current fiscal year. Orion Company Profile ( Free Report ) Orion SA, together with its subsidiaries, engages in the manufacture and sale of carbon black products. It operates in two segments, Specialty Carbon Black and Rubber Carbon Black. The company offers post-treated specialty carbon black grades for coatings and printing applications; high purity carbon black grades for the fiber industry; and conductive carbon black grades for batteries, polymers, and coatings. Featured Stories Five stocks we like better than Orion Utilities Stocks Explained – How and Why to Invest in Utilities S&P 500 ETFs: Expense Ratios That Can Boost Your Long-Term Gains Investing in the High PE Growth Stocks How AI Implementation Could Help MongoDB Roar Back in 2025 Trading Stocks: RSI and Why it’s Useful Hedge Funds Boost Oil Positions: Is a Major Rally on the Horizon? Receive News & Ratings for Orion Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Orion and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .
'We need new leadership': Atlantic Liberal caucus calls for Trudeau's resignationFor the third year in a row, Elon Musk’s charitable foundation did not give away enough of its money. And it did not miss the mark by a small amount. New tax filings show that the Musk Foundation fell $421 million short of the amount it was required to give away in 2023. Now, Musk has until the end of the year to distribute that money, or he will be required to pay a sizable penalty to the IRS. Musk, in his new role as a leader of what President-elect Donald Trump is calling the Department of Government Efficiency, is promising to downsize and rearrange the entire federal government — including the IRS. But the tax records show he has struggled to meet a basic IRS rule that is required of all charity leaders, no matter how small or big their foundations. Musk’s is one of the biggest. His foundation has more than $9 billion in assets, including millions of shares in Tesla, his electric vehicle company. By law, all private foundations must give away 5% of those assets every year. The aim is to ensure that wealthy donors like Musk use these organizations to help the public instead of simply benefiting from the tax deductions they are afforded. Musk’s group has fallen further and further behind. In 2021, his foundation was $41 million short, then $234 million the following year. Now, the hole is deeper still. Private foundations do have a way to solve the problem if they do not give away enough money. They can distribute more the following year as a make-good. Musk could choose to do so in 2024. Musk did not respond to requests for comment. His foundation, which is required to make its tax filings public, provided the 2023 document to The New York Times. The IRS appears to be among Musk’s early targets as a leader of Trump’s government efficiency initiative. The tax agency serves as the federal government’s charity regulator and thus oversees Musk’s foundation. Last month, Musk used X, his social media platform, to ask users if the IRS’ budget should be increased, kept the same, decreased or “deleted.” His followers chose “deleted.” Musk, who on Wednesday became the first person with a net worth of over $400 billion, has been an unusual philanthropist. He has been critical of the effectiveness of large charitable gifts, and his foundation maintains a minimal, plain-text website that offers very little about its overarching philosophy. That is different from some other large foundations that seek to have national or even worldwide impact by making large gifts to causes like public health, education or the arts. The Musk Foundation’s largesse primarily stays closer to home. The tax filings show that last year the group gave at least $7 million combined to charities near a launch site in South Texas used by Musk’s company SpaceX. Other large charitable foundations have also failed to distribute the IRS’ minimum required amount in recent years, sometimes by more than $100 million, according to tax filings compiled by the company CauseIQ, which analyzes charity data. But Musk’s foundation is unusual even among those, both for the amount of its shortfall and the speed at which it is increasing. In 2022, the last year for which full data is available, the Musk Foundation had the fourth-largest gap of any private foundation in the country, according to CauseIQ data. Musk’s charity, which he founded in 2002, has never hired paid employees, according to tax filings. Its three directors — Musk and two people who work for his family office — all work for free. The filings show they did not spend very much time on the foundation: just two hours and six minutes per week for the past three years. But the board’s task grew enormously in 2021 and 2022, when Musk tripled the foundation’s assets by giving it billions of dollars’ worth of Tesla stock. Tax experts said if he claimed those donations on his personal taxes in the year given, those gifts would have been very beneficial to him. Because of the deductions allowed for charitable gifts, they potentially saved Musk as much as $2 billion on his tax bills. Because of the skyrocketing growth in assets, the three-person board had to give away hundreds of millions of dollars per year just to meet the minimum. That group entered 2023 needing to pay off the previous year’s $234 million shortfall, or it would have to pay a penalty tax of 30% on whatever was left at the end of the year. The foundation met that, giving away a total of $236 million and avoiding the penalty. But it also had to give away an additional $424 million to meet its obligation for 2023. The filings show it did not come close, leaving an even bigger deficit to make up this year. “The distributions made by the foundation are meeting the bare minimum to avoid penalties,” said Brian Mittendorf, an accounting professor at the Ohio State University who studies nonprofits. “It is clear that the organization is not in a hurry to spend its money.” In 2023, as in other years, many of the foundation’s gifts went to organizations that were closely tied to Musk or his businesses. In 2023, for instance, he gave $25 million to a donor-advised fund, a separate charitable account over which Musk retains effective control. Musk began donating to schools in the Brownsville, Texas, area just after his company’s reputation took a major hit: One of its rockets exploded, showering the area with twisted metal. The foundation’s largest gift for the year — $137 million in cash and stock — went to a nonprofit called The Foundation. That charity, run by Musk’s close associates, has set up a private elementary school in Bastrop, Texas. The school is a short distance from large campuses operated by Musk’s businesses and a 110-home subdivision planned for his employees. Related Articles Business | Australian Senate debates social media ban for under-16s Business | California commission that approves rocket launches is anti-Elon Musk, claims SpaceX lawsuit Business | SpaceX blasts past 100 launches in 2024 with 101st from California Business | Tesla Optimus bots were remotely operated at Cybercab event in Burbank Business | In engineering feat, SpaceX ‘arms’ catch Starship rocket booster back at launch pad Mittendorf noted that Musk gave that school $102 million on Dec. 28 — days before the deadline to give away the unspent millions from the year before. The Musk Foundation’s gifts for 2023 gave little hint of the political transformation that would follow this year, as he spent hundreds of millions of dollars to support Trump’s presidential campaign. Throughout 2023, Musk became increasingly right-wing in his public statements, especially on issues like crime and immigration. But his foundation’s only gift with an apparent political tilt was a small one: The Musk Foundation gave $100,000 to a libertarian think tank in Utah. This article originally appeared in The New York Times .
The Latest: Police believe gunman who killed UnitedHealthcare CEO has left New York City
HIGH POINT, N.C. (AP) — Brian Moore Jr. scored 33 points as Norfolk State beat High Point 77-74 on Sunday. Moore added five rebounds and six assists for the Spartans (9-6). Christian Ings scored 12 points, shooting 5 of 6 from the field and 2 for 4 from the line. Jalen Myers had seven points and shot 1 of 3 from the field and 4 of 5 from the free-throw line. The Panthers (12-3) were led in scoring by Chase Johnston, who finished with 24 points. Kimani Hamilton added 18 points, 15 rebounds, five assists and two blocks for High Point. Kezza Giffa also put up 12 points. Up next for Norfolk State is a matchup Tuesday with Tennessee on the road. High Point hosts Radford on Thursday. The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar .Global Markerless Motion Capture Software Market Size, Share and Forecast By Key Players-Simi,Theia Markerless,iPi Soft,Vicon Motion Systems,Captury
B.C. prosecutors proceed with motor vehicle charges, not criminal, after fatal crash
The S&P 500 rose 0.3%. The benchmark index's 1.7% gain for the week erased most of its loss from last week. The Dow rose 1% as it nudged past its most recent high set last week, and the Nasdaq composite rose 0.2%. Markets have been volatile over the last few weeks, losing ground in the runup to elections in November, then surging following Donald Trump's victory, before falling again. The S&P 500 has been steadily rising throughout this week to within close range of its record. It's now within about 0.5% of its all-time high set last week. "Overall, market behavior has normalized following an intense few weeks," said Mark Hackett, chief of investment research at Nationwide, in a statement. Several retailers jumped after giving Wall Street encouraging financial updates. Gap soared 12.8% after handily beating analysts' third-quarter earnings and revenue expectations, while raising its own revenue forecast for the year. Discount retailer Ross Stores rose 2.2% after raising its earnings forecast for the year. EchoStar fell 2.8% after DirecTV called off its purchase of that company's Dish Network unit. Smaller company stocks had some of the biggest gains. The Russell 2000 index rose 1.8%. A majority of stocks in the S&P 500 gained ground, but those gains were kept in check by slumps for several big technology companies. Nvidia fell 3.2%. Its pricey valuation makes it among the heaviest influences on whether the broader market gains or loses ground. The company has grown into a nearly $3.6 trillion behemoth because of demand for its chips used in artificial-intelligence technology. Intuit, which makes TurboTax and other accounting software, fell 5.7%. It gave investors a quarterly earnings forecast that fell short of analysts' expectations. Facebook owner Meta Platforms fell 0.7% following a decision by the Supreme Court to allow a multibillion-dollar class action investors' lawsuit to proceed against the company. It stems from the privacy scandal involving the Cambridge Analytica political consulting firm. All told, the S&P 500 rose 20.63 points to 5,969.34. The Dow climbed 426.16 points to 44,296.51, and the Nasdaq picked up 42.65 points to close at 2,406.67. European markets closed mostly higher and Asian markets ended mixed. Crude oil prices rose. Treasury yields held relatively steady in the bond market. The yield on the 10-year Treasury fell to 4.41% from 4.42% late Thursday. In the crypto market, bitcoin hovered around $99,000, according to CoinDesk. It has more than doubled this year and first surpassed the $99,000 level on Thursday. Retailers remained a big focus for investors this week amid close scrutiny on consumer spending habits headed into the holiday shopping season. Walmart, the nation's largest retailer, reported a quarter of strong sales and gave investors an encouraging financial forecast. Target, though, reported weaker earnings than analysts' expected and its forecast disappointed Wall Street. Consumer spending has fueled economic growth, despite a persistent squeeze from inflation and high borrowing costs. Inflation has been easing and the Federal Reserve has started trimming its benchmark interest rates. That is likely to help relieve pressure on consumers, but any major shift in spending could prompt the Fed to reassess its path ahead on interest rates. Also, any big reversals on the rate of inflation could curtail spending. Consumer sentiment remains strong, according to the University of Michigan's consumer sentiment index. It revised its latest figure for November to 71.8 from an initial reading of 73 earlier this month, though economists expected a slight increase. It's still up from 70.5 in October. The survey also showed that consumers' inflation expectations for the year ahead fell slightly to 2.6%, which is the lowest reading since December of 2020. Wall Street will get another update on how consumers feel when the business group The Conference Board releases its monthly consumer confidence survey on Tuesday. A key inflation update will come on Wednesday when the U.S. releases its October personal consumption expenditures index. The PCE is the Fed's preferred measure of inflation and this will be the last PCE reading prior to the central bank's meeting in December.
Here’s how much Taylor Swift’s Toronto concerts cost police for security, planning and to escort her motorcadeTimberwolves push back start time vs. Spurs because of issue with game court
Won’t use tractors, will march to Delhi on foot: Farm leaders
Too early to celebrate – Arne Slot keeps leaders Liverpool focusedThe Bill Belichick era at the University of North Carolina is officially underway. On Thursday, the football icon, known for his renowned straight-to-the-point candor, was unveiled as the Tar Heels’ head coach. Belichick, the second-most winningest head coach in NFL history, said it was a “dream” to be the new coach at UNC. “I always wanted to coach in college football and it just never really worked out. I had some good years in the NFL so that was okay but this is really kind of a dream come true,” Belichick said during the press conference at Chapel Hill. Belichick has ties to the university through his father, Steve, who was an assistant football coach for the Tar Heels from 1953 to 1955. He touched on some of these memories. The famed coach recounted a story about his childhood in the Belichick household, where his first words were, “Beat Duke!” - the university’s bitter in-state rival. The coach described his return to Chapel Hill as a homecoming. Belichick also unveiled his dad’s old UNC sweatshirt, which he has kept from when his father coached at the college. This is the first coaching job for Belichick, who has won eight Super Bowls as a coach (six as the New England Patriots head coach and two as a New York Giants assistant), since he and the Patriots parted ways in January. In addition to 24 seasons as the Patriots head coach, Belichick was head coach of the Cleveland Browns for the 1991-1995 seasons. When asked why he wants to carry on coaching, the veteran’s response was simple. “Beats working,” Belichick quipped. “My dad told me this ... when you love what you do, it’s not work. I love what I do, I love coaching, I love the interaction with the players, I love building a team, working with assistants, game planning, the game itself.” Belichick, whose five-year deal runs through December 2029, also made it clear that he is here to stay in North Carolina and said he “didn’t come here to leave,” when asked about potential future NFL vacancies. While Belichick admitted there were parallels between the NFL and college football, the long-time coach also noted the many differences. But Belichick maintained that the game is still football. The coach made it clear that he is no stranger to developing young players, referencing Patriots stars Tom Brady, Rob Gronkowski, and Julian Edelman as players he helped become successful NFL stars. Coach Belichick’s excitement at joining the University of North Carolina program was shared by the school’s athletic director. “We are embarking on an entirely new football operation, and we can’t wait to have coach Belichick leading the charge for us,” Bubba Cunningham said. “We are known as the University of National Champions and we have a Super Bowl champion coach who is here to lead the program.” In honor of his new coach, Cunningham even wore a custom jacket with the sleeves ripped off — a famed look of Belichick’s while roaming the NFL sidelines. For now, Belichick will focus on improving a middling college program. The Tar Heels finished the regular season with a 6-6 record and will face Connecticut in the Fenway Bowl on December 28. The Tar Heels’ new head coach said he wants to return the program to its heyday of 1980 – the last time the football team won a conference title. “There’s a lot of pride in this program and I want to do everything I can here to help take it to the highest level.” CNN’s Jill Martin contributed to reporting.SAN FRANCISCO , Dec. 26, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- AusperBio Therapeutics, Inc . and Ausper Biopharma Co., Ltd . (collectively AusperBio ), a privately held clinical-stage biotechnology company dedicated to advancing targeted oligonucleotide therapies to achieve a functional cure for chronic hepatitis B ( CHB ), today announced the successful completion of a USD 73 million Series B financing. The round was led by HanKang Capital , with participation from Sherpa Capital , CDH Investments , and a strategic investor, as well as continued participation from existing investors Qiming Venture Partners , InnoPinnacle Fund , and YuanBio Venture Capital . This financing followed the company's Series A round completed in July this year, demonstrating continued investor confidence in its proprietary platform and strategic direction. The proceeds will fund the continued Phase 2 development of AHB-137 , AusperBio's lead investigational therapy, supporting both clinical studies in China and global trials, as well as the development of commercial-scale manufacturing processes. The funding will also facilitate the expansion of the company's therapeutic pipeline and operational capabilities to drive sustained growth. Dr. Guofeng Cheng , co-founder and CEO of AusperBio, stated, " We are honored by our investors' confidence and support. This milestone financing recognizes our scientific and clinical accomplishments to date and enables us to accelerate our clinical programs and move closer to delivering a functional cure for CHB patients in need." Dr. Chris Yang , co-founder and CSO, added, "AHB-137 continues to attract attention from the scientific and clinical communities, particularly after the late-breaking oral presentation at the recent AASLD conference. The promising clinical data further validates our Med-OligoTM platform, strengthening our development of groundbreaking targeted oligonucleotide therapies for CHB and other serious chronic diseases." AusperBio is committed to delivering patient-centered innovations, aiming to alleviate the global health burden of CHB and transform treatment paradigms for this serious chronic disease. About AHB-137 AHB-137, a novel unconjugated antisense oligonucleotide ( ASO ) developed within AusperBio's proprietary Med-OligoTM ASO technology platform, was designed to treat chronic hepatitis B for a functional cure. Its compelling preclinical and Phase 1 clinical data were highlighted at the 2023 EASL conference and the 2024 EASL conference, respectively. Interim Phase 2a data was presented in a late-breaking oral session at the 2024 AASLD. This novel dual-mechanism ASO has completed its global Phase 1b trial and is now undergoing multiple Phase 2 trials in China . With its global development strategy, AHB-137 is advancing rapidly toward the goal of an HBV cure. About AusperBio. AusperBio is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with operations in the USA and China , dedicated to advancing oligonucleotide and targeted delivery technologies for transformative therapies, with an initial focus on curing chronic hepatitis B infection. The company has developed a proprietary Med-OligoTM ASO platform which has been shown to substantially enhance the current ASO therapeutics, through novel insights into ASO design. Combining with efficient targeted delivery conjugation technologies, the modular Med-OligoTM Platform empowers ASO therapeutics to treat a broad range of diseases, including viral infections, metabolic conditions, genetic disorders, and immune diseases. For further information, please contact: Media Contact Email: info@ausperbio.com Investor Relations Contact: Tel: 650-888-1756 (US) Email: growth@ausperbio.com View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ausperbio-secures-73-million-in-series-b-financing-to-advance-functional-cure-for-chronic-hepatitis-b-302339451.html SOURCE AusperBio Therapeutics Inc.
Barclays PLC Purchases 107,107 Shares of Select Water Solutions, Inc. (NYSE:WTTR)Friend of Quebec man killed in Florida boat explosion says his sister also injured
Timberwolves push back start time vs. Spurs because of issue with game court