HondurasAmericas News Receive email alerts Organisation RSF_en The lawyer Ricardo Rosales was murdered two days ago, three days after he was quoted in the newspaper Diario Tiempo as accusing police officers in the northern town of Tela of serious human rights violations. Rosales (on the right of the picture) was leaving home, where he also has his office, to attend a court hearing when he was shot dead by three hooded gunmen. He had recently defended Marco Joel Alvarez, nicknamed “el Unicornio”, who was charged, and later acquitted, of the murder of the journalist David Meza Montesinos on 11 March 2010. RSF’s 2020 Round-up: 50 journalists killed, two-thirds in countries “at peace” News “Lawyers, alongside journalists, academics human rights activists, trade unionists, community representatives and ordinary citizens, are equal pillars of freedom of information and too often pay for this with their lives,” Reporters Without Borders said.“According to the Honduras College of Lawyers, 74 have been killed in the past three years with total impunity. This toll once again illustrates the total failure of the rule of law in Honduras – already classified as one of the most dangerous countries in the world – since the coup of June 2009.“We hail the courage of Ricardo Rosales and urge that justice is done on his behalf and on behalf him of the others,” said the press freedom organization, recalling that 17 Honduran journalists had been murdered since 2010. Follow the news on Honduras January 19, 2012 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Lawyer gunned down after reporting police abuses to the media HondurasAmericas Rosales learned of the police officers’ behaviour from statements made by victims’ parents and from an eyewitness account by a young girl who was unwilling to press charges for the time being. April 27, 2021 Find out more Reports to go further May 13, 2021 Find out more News RSF begins research into mechanisms for protecting journalists in Latin America 2011-2020: A study of journalist murders in Latin America confirms the importance of strengthening protection policies According to the lawyer, police recently assigned to Tela as part of a rotation scheme were reported to have carried out acts of torture and other forms of humiliation against detainees, including sexual abuse of young women, some of them minors. The rotation scheme was part of “Operation Lightning”, launched by the security ministry in November and officially aimed at combating violence and crime. “Is it really a question of fighting crime, or of deflecting attention from the worst human rights abuses by playing a transfer game?” Reporters Without Borders asked.“The murder of Ricardo Rosales makes one wonder. Meanwhile, crackdowns and terror continue.” Help by sharing this information December 28, 2020 Find out more
Facebook Twitter Google+ Published on November 5, 2019 at 6:10 pm Contact Danny: [email protected] | @DannyEmerman Riding a four-game winning streak that includes wins over No. 3 Connecticut, No. 5 Louisville and No. 20 Wake Forest, Syracuse has moved up two spots to No. 12 in the weekly NFHCA/Penn Monto Division I Coaches Poll.SU (12-5, 3-3 Atlantic Coast) trails five ACC teams as it enters the conference tournament. The Orange’s postseason begins on Nov. 7 with a quarterfinals matchup against Louisville. Syracuse is coming off a 2-1 overtime win over Louisville. In that win, junior midfielder Carolin Hoffmann scored both goals for SU, which earned her the ACC offensive player of the week award. Hoffmann has three goals and two assists on the season. This marks the third consecutive week a Syracuse player has taken home a weekly conference honor, as Sarah Luby and Sarah Sinck previously won offensive player of the week and defensive player of the week, respectively.The winner of Thursday’s Syracuse-Louisville rematch will play No. 1 overall seed North Carolina. The undefeated Tar Heels beat SU, 3-1, on Oct. 12 in J.S. Coyne Stadium. UNC sophomore Erin Matson leads the nation in goals (1.57) and assists (.93) per game.AdvertisementThis is placeholder textWhile SU is ranked No. 12 in the nation, the Orange have the eighth best RPI, which is one factor that determines NCAA tournament seeding. Sixteen teams make the tournament, which begins on Nov. 22 in Winston Salem, NC. Comments
Dr. Steven Goldman (Lehigh University) has produced a series of lectures for The Teaching Company entitled Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It. CEH highly recommends this series for its wealth of historical background applied to an intriguing question: what is the nature of truth claims in science? To what extent do scientific hypotheses and theories, built out of the particulars of our experience, apply to reality as it is, beyond our experience? Goldman explains that many books on this history of science talk about what scientists know, but almost none talk about how they know what they know. In this second of his lecture series for The Teaching Company, after the equally-informative Science in the 20th Century, Goldman does a superb job of developing this fascinating and important problem. For 12 hours divided into 24 lectures, he brings in many important philosophers, thinkers and scientists from Socrates to the present to show the diversity of opinions on this controversy within science – a dispute that remains unresolved to this day. Anyone afflicted with logical positivism, objectivism or naive realism will get a reality check from this series that shows how difficult it is to say with certainty that scientific theories are true to an external reality beyond our experience. They may work; they may predict things; they may give us some control over nature, but to ask if a scientific theory is true with a capital T; i.e., whether it represents a reality beyond experience that is the cause of our experience, yielding knowledge that is timeless, universal, necessary and certain, is an entirely different question. A colleague of Michael Behe, Goldman ends by discussing whether intelligent design is a scientific hypothesis. Though he takes a strong position against it, he refrains from emotional arguments and does try to defend his position with arguments from history and logic. Our analysis follows.Let’s see if any of the pillars of his argument are left standing after our critique of his critique.Intelligent Design is a second-generation version of creationism that has already lost several court rulings. Actually, the controversy goes much further back, to the ancient Greeks at least. Later, Goldman acknowledges that design arguments are ancient and that asking the question is an intelligent hypothesis (though, he says, not a scientific one) worth discussing, but then defends theistic evolution as a compromise: i.e., God as the ultimate designer, but evolution as the process. These are incompatible positions (see David Klinghoffer op-ed) despite the ability of many schizophrenics to claim they can have it both ways. We doubt, also, that Goldman seriously believes that politically-appointed judges should be the arbiters of what constitutes science.Who decides if a hypothesis is scientific, if not the community of scientists who deal in science? Somebody has to decide, he argues, and who else but the very people doing the research in question? This ignores the possibility that the entire community can become entrenched in a habit that excludes new ways of thinking and discourages asking new questions. It also downplays the role of the maverick in science who bucks the establishment and turns out to be right. Further, it fails to distinguish between the science communities of the past, who were often theologians working independently out of their own resources, and the Big Science establishments of today, whose motives are tainted by the need to keep government funds flowing. (Elsewhere in the series, Goldman shows he is keenly aware of these issues. He has a good treatment of Kuhn’s argument that science has a paradigmatic character. He concludes that, with all its flaws, Kuhn’s critique cannot be entirely dismissed.)I.D. fails the minimum criteria of a scientific hypothesis. Goldman hastens to explain that there are no ironclad formulas, or methodological rules to decide if a hypothesis is scientific, but argues that, at a minimum, it should include the following:Explanatory power: He claims that a legacy of science from the earliest medieval philosophers is that scientific explanations for natural phenomena can only appeal to natural causes. He argues that I.D. necessarily invokes a supranatural agent, and that this breaks the rules of the game (and only the scientific community can make the rules). Further, he argues that without access to the Designer to interview, or without the blueprints of the design, pursuing a design explanation is vacuous. What instruments do we build to detect the signals? he asks. Radio telescopes? he asks in an offhand way (though catching himself to remember that radio waves were discovered accidentally). In answer, what if intelligent design is true? What if there really is a Designer, a Creator, or God, that intentionally made the universe, the world and life? A science committed to natural causes will never find the truth. We believe that science should at least be a search for the truth about the world. This cannot exclude a cause from the toolkit of science just because of a philosophical dislike for it. A science restricted to natural causes when intelligent causes were responsible will degenerate into a false religion or cult, and that is what many in the ID movement believe has happened. Goldman should recall his own sermon that science is not just a game, but that it has huge sociological implications: nuclear weapons, stem cells, health and safety, matters of life and death. Science is much more serious in the 21st century than just making up a game as they go along. In fact, Goldman’s whole series struggles with the truth claims of science and how they should be understood. Why, he asks, is Darwinian evolution so threatening if it is just about method? “Because the evolutionary explanation claims to be true.” If evolutionists deny they are searching for at least a semblance of truth, and believe instead they are just playing a game, let them set up their own game clubs, like bingo or lotto, and not expect the citizens to pay for it and have it force-taught to their children. The most serious flaw in this argument is that it does not address the capacity for Darwinists to trade in just-so stories in order to keep their pet paradigm going. Busy-ness with all kinds of ecological, geological and biological storytelling does not justify evolutionary theory’s continuance, with its insatiable demand for public funding, when the facts keep stacking up against it (e.g., the Cambrian explosion, the fine-tuning of the universe, the molecular machinery in the cell). Goldman also fails to recognize the sciences that already invest huge amounts of money on design-theoretic assumptions, such as SETI, cryptography, forensics, archaeology and information theory. It’s ironic that he mentioned radio waves. ID supporters have long pointed out that SETI proceeds on the assumption of intelligent design. SETI presupposes that intelligence is detectable by the methods of science.Predictive success: while not necessary for a scientific hypothesis, this is at least valuable, Goldman argues; a good hypothesis predicts novel phenomena and makes startling predictions that at least give us confidence in the hypothesis. Yet throughout the series, Goldman repeatedly pointed out the “fallacy of affirming the consequent” – i.e., just because a prediction comes true, this does not prove a hypothesis. ID predicts that we will find large amounts of functional information in DNA and proteins, even if we don’t understand the function. This prediction continues to bear fruit.Control over nature: Though there are exceptions to this rule, like black hole theory and the big bang, a scientific hypothesis should produce a research program that gives us some degree of control over nature. Without access to the design blueprints, Goldman claims, ID does not specify the kind of research a scientist would do, so what good is it? Since the design scientist would end up doing the same kind of research as the evolutionist, ID is operationally vacuous, he claims. Tell this to SETI, then. Tell it to the FBI searching for patterns in noise. They are spending an awful lot of money building elaborate detectors and computers on the assumption that intelligent design leaves footprints. None of these and the other design sciences have the blueprints either, but they know that intelligently-caused patterns are detectable. ID does have a criterion. It is complex specified information (CSI), any effect that, as William Dembski argued exhaustively in The Design Inference and No Free Lunch allows us rule out chance as a cause, and infer intelligence as the cause. As for control over nature, biomimetics (see below) is the most promising avenue today for such control.Testability and verifiability: Goldman knows that these are sufficient criteria, but not necessary ones, for scientific hypotheses. He fails to recognize that Darwinian evolution is so malleable that it bends itself to every anomaly, and therefore fails this test. ID, by contrast, has an ironclad criterion: CSI. Dembski granted an extremely generous universal probability bound of 10-150 before excluding chance and natural law and making a design inference. ID can have false negatives – there may be cases where a designer hid his design from us, as in some modern art – but it does not generate false positives. When CSI exists, it came from an intelligent cause. That’s testability.Suggestive of a research program: What experiments will a scientist do to research intelligent design? Goldman asks. He repeats the common canard that ID brings explanation to a halt: “God did it–end of story.” He says this should at least make us deeply suspicious about the ability of ID to satisfy the rules of scientific hypotheses. Apply this rule to the Darwinists, then. When they say “evolution did it,” or disguise that simplistic answer in phrases like “This represents a remarkable case of convergent evolution,” the playing field is level. Darwinists brought the study of interesting biological phenomena to a halt by explaining away unknown biological phenomena as junk DNA or vestigial organs. Goldman recalled Francis Bacon’s measure of good scientific hypotheses, “By their fruits ye shall know them” (three guesses where Bacon got that idea from). So here is the fruit: design thinking is actually producing some of the most vibrant and cutting-edge research in the world today: biomimetics. Whole multidisciplinary labs are springing up to mimic nature’s designs. To do so, these designs must be understood – and science marches along. Irreducible complexity is an argument from ignorance. Goldman claims that ID cannot merely argue that Darwinian evolution is inadequate because it cannot explain the spontaneous emergence of complex biochemical systems (e.g., Behe’s mousetrap). Debunking Theory A does not establish Theory B. This is the “argument from ignorance,” he says, a logical fallacy. Granted, but it does not follow that Darwinism must be taught as fact without debate, either: that would be the best-in-field fallacy. Darwinists have an endless capacity to rationalize and tiptoe around the problems. Refusing to let serious challenges be heard is not healthy for any scientific explanation. That being understood, irreducible complexity is not merely an argument against Darwinian evolution, anyway. It is a marker for CSI that allows one to discriminate intelligent causes from non-intelligent causes.Scientists are not convinced irreducible complexity is a challenge to evolutionary theory. Maybe evolution cannot explain complex systems yet, he says, but the community of biologists does not seem worried about it. This is a very weak response. Maybe they should be worried about it. Geologists weren’t worried about plate tectonics and catastrophic floods for decades, either, till they were forced to follow the evidence. How the community of scientists feel about something is no measure of its validity or importance. They’ve had 146 years to explain complex systems by unguided processes and are in worse shape now than in Darwin’s time. How much longer do they get to filibuster?Self-organizing systems show promise for explaining irreducible complexity. The new study of self-organizing systems shows that complex systems can emerge spontaneously, Goldman argues; ID needs to make sure self-organization is incapable of producing complex systems before reaching outside of nature to explain them. Been there, done that. Why is this a requirement? Why is it better to follow blind alleys? For how long should we take a wrong road before giving up? We already know that intelligent causes are adequate to explain CSI. The kind of complexity that self-organizing systems exhibit is very different from information, the hallmark of intelligent design. Spilled ink might produce wave patterns if shaken or subjected to the wind, but it does not produce meaningful text.By analogy, technological systems do form spontaneously without planning. Goldman argues that nobody followed a master plan that resulted in all the complex systems built around the automobile: the internal combustion engine, gasoline as fuel, highways, carburetors, filling stations–these were all co-opted after the fact without any top-down design. The system emerged from the bottom-up emergence for self-interested reasons, so why not consider this as a model for how the biochemical world emerged? (“I’m not saying it’s true,” he adds). My dear Dr. Goldman, do you fail to realize that your analogy is irrelevant, because human beings are intelligent agents?Criticizing gaps in evolutionary theory misunderstands the nature of scientific theories. ID focuses its criticisms on “Darwinian” evolution, but a lot has happened since Darwin. Theories evolve. Evolution is now woven into a web of correlated theories, which is a key test of a scientific theory. Geology, ecology, molecular biology, and genetics have all incorporated Darwinism or some variation of evolution, though there is still a controversy whether natural selection is the only force acting. These are lively controversies, he argues, but none of the combatants have raised intelligent design as the missing ingredient that stymies their progress. Again, science is not just a game, and you cannot trust Big Science to set the rules of their game fairly when they have a great deal of self-interest to perpetuate their ideologies and exclude alternatives from consideration. In the history of science, proponents of one view have failed to see the significance of gaps in their explanations even when face to face with contradictory evidence. Sometimes they died maintaining their flawed theories. No historian of science can claim that evolutionary theory is immune from a massive paradigm shift. Its critics feel it is a monstrous house of cards on a shaky foundation and that the pressures of new discoveries are making it vulnerable to a collapse of historic proportions. Goldman had argued forcefully in the earlier lectures that scientists cannot entirely dismiss the sociological and historical nature of their theories. He illustrated this not only by quotes from the most eminent philosophers of science, but also with specific instances. Our concepts of the universe, the earth, life and atoms have changed dramatically since 1900. We have no guarantee there will not be similar radical transformations in the future. That being understood, he cannot rule out that science is evolving again in the current controversy. Biology of the future will include intelligent causes in its toolkit, while evolutionary theory may be on the way out.ID may be a legitimate support for believing in a Designer behind nature, but design is not a scientific hypothesis. Goldman recognizes that the design argument has a long and venerable history. Everyone knows that nature looks designed, he acknowledges. So are we to throw out the evidence of our senses, and our common sense, and be forced to invoke uncaused, undesigned forces to explain the most elegant machinery we know? Who decides? Calling something a scientific hypothesis does not make it so, nor does the converse make it not so. Since evolutionary theory fails all of Goldman’s own minimum criteria for scientific hypotheses, and ID does not, he cannot simply dismiss ID as a scientific hypothesis by a flat-out statement of his opinion.Attacking a theory because it threatens one’s religious convictions is not a scientific posture. OK, so ID threatens materialism and atheism. Let the Darwinists admit that, and let’s talk about the evidence. Evolutionists continually attack ID and creation as being religiously motivated. This rule cuts both ways; Dawkins said that evolution allows one to be an intellectually-fulfilled atheist. Attacking one’s motives instead of his argument is the ad hominem strategy. So evolutionists, stop attacking the motives of creationists, and focus on the evidence.Goldman noted that he only wished only to critique ID, not malign it. We leave it to the reader to judge if any of the pillars of Goldman’s critique are left standing. Though cogently argued, none of his points are new. William Dembski has answered them all, and many more, in his book The Design Revolution, to which the interested reader is referred for more detail. At the end of the lecture, Goldman acknowledged that “Imperial Science” misconstrues the debate as much as “Imperial Religion.” He says that the defensiveness of the scientific community over the attacks by sociology, philosophy and religion “obscures the fundamental fact that we have learned in this course, namely, that no theory – no theory – can have the status of an empirical fact.” It is a category error to claim that evolutionary theory or any other scientific theory is a fact, “contrary to the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times and various op-ed pieces opposing intelligent design,” he remarks. Sounds like we have a legitimate controversy here. Good; let’s teach it.(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Incentives that have played a major role in the rapid increase of photovoltaic (PV) installations in Massachusetts are nearing their limits, cutting the financial return on solar projects while state legislators contemplate their next move, The Boston Globe reports.One of the subsidies, solar renewable energy certificates, hit the cap of 1,600 megawatts of PV through a combination of installed projects plus those in the planning stage. Utilities buy renewable energy certificates, called RECs, to help them meet renewable energy requirements. They can be more valuable to the owners of PV systems than net metering.The brisk pace of new solar installations in Massachusetts also pushed one utility, National Grid, to its net-metering cap last spring. That hasn’t stopped new PV projects from being developed, but it has lowered reimbursements under the program for larger solar installations from the retail rate for electricity to something closer to the wholesale rate, according to Mary-Leah Assed, a National Grid spokeswoman.Retail-sized projects, those under a rated capacity of 10 kilowatts, are not affected.Even so, John DeVillars, managing principal at BlueWave Capital, a solar developer in Boston, told The Globe, “The industry’s on hold, basically. Until there’s clarity on the next incentive program, very little activity will take place.”Massachusetts has one of the more active PV records in the country. The Solar Energy Industries Association, a trade group, says that the state installed 308 MW of PV capacity in 2014, the fourth highest amount in the U.S. Its 944 MW total makes it sixth overall in the country. Vermont asks for higher limits from regulatorsVermont’s Green Mountain Power (GMP) said last fall that it had reached the net-metering cap set by lawmakers, but added it would ask the Public Service Board to extend the program. In the meantime, the utility said that it would continue to accept new PV systems from homes and businesses as long as the systems are rated at 15 kilowatts or less.Community projects between 15 kW and 150 kW with a total rated capacity of 7.5 megawatts also would be allowed when they serve homes or businesses that can’t place PV arrays on their own properties.GMP said that the Public Service Board is studying a new net-metering plan that would go into effect next year.The utility has created a solar map that shows the location of solar installations around the state, and where new projects have been proposed. Different colors mark where there’s plenty of remaining capacity for new projects, and where the grid is approaching capacity.Net-metering and interconnection rules are set by individual states. In a 2014 report, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory said that about half of all states with net-metering policies include limits on the amount of renewable energy that can be installed. Of the 44 jurisdictions with net-metering, 57% have some type of restriction on total capacity, and 37% have no restrictions. Caps generally range from 0.2% to 9% of peak demand, although two jurisdictions have much higher limits, NREL said. EQ Research publishes an online summary of net-metering policies around the country. It includes a state-by-state listing showing which states have caps, which do not, and how much of an individual state’s cap has been reached. Net metering caps are also an issue elsewhereIn neighboring New Hampshire, the state House of Representatives is discussing a bill that would raise the state’s cap on net metering by 25 MW to a total of 75 MW of installed PV capacity. According to a report, the New Hampshire Sustainable Energy Association (NHSEA) says that most of the state’s utilities have reached their allotted amounts of energy under the existing net-metering cap. One solar installer, SunRay Solar, said last month that it would lay off one-third of its employees because Eversource had reached its cap.The New Hampshire Senate already has passed a bill that would increase the cap by 25 MW.While welcoming the increase, NHSEA said it would be “insufficient over the course of the year to keep businesses and consumers able to continue to choose on-site, renewable self-generation with transparency and market stability.”Kim Quirk, the owner of a solar company in Enfield, N.H., complained that the current plan would not allow any business forecasts beyond this summer, and would prevent the company from hiring more people. Extensions need approval from lawmakersMassachusetts lawmakers are bogged down in negotiations on raising the net-metering limits, with the House supporting a plan that’s more favorable to utilities and the Senate backing a plan endorsed by solar advocates.Senator Benjamin Downing, co-chairman of the state legislature’s energy committee, said that the issue could be resolved soon, or get tangled in debate over energy policy that would put off a decision until summer, The Globe said.Peter Lorenz, a spokesman in the Department of Energy Resources, said that Governor Charlie Baker was committed to working with legislators and to develop an alternative to the solar certificate program.As in other parts of the country, the debate over incentives in Massachusetts have pitted electric utilities against solar advocates. Utilities say that the incentives unfairly increase the cost of electricity for non-solar customers, while solar energy advocates say that solar installations improve the grid’s reliability and reduce the need to operate fossil-fuel burning plants.
Mississippi players kneel during anthem in response to rally ‘We are too hospitable,’ says Sotto amid SEA Games woes Barcelona had drawn four of its previous five matches and its only goal in three games had been a penalty by Messi. A setback in Seville would have given Atletico Madrid and Real Madrid the chance to spark up the title race when they play on Sunday.Instead, Messi almost singlehandedly ensured Barcelona opened a 10-point gap over Atletico and a 12-point advantage over Madrid.Barcelona also rediscovered its scoring form in time for a critical week of back-to-back clashes with Madrid. The fierce rivals meet in the second leg of their Copa del Rey semifinal on Wednesday after a 1-1 draw at Camp Nou, before clashing again in the league next weekend.“We went through a patch when we weren’t playing our best and that makes everything more difficult. We were having trouble converting our chances,” Messi said. “When everything flows, things go well for us, as we saw today. Today we were back to playing like we know how. We played a great match.”Sevilla outplayed Barcelona through much of the first half and was twice ahead thanks to Jesus Navas and Gabriel Mercado.ADVERTISEMENT Oil plant explodes in Pampanga town Sevilla went ahead twice, but Messi hit back each time before he netted a third goal with five minutes remaining.After taking his league-leading tally to 25 goals, Messi added an assist for Luis Suarez to round off the win before the whistle.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSPrivate companies step in to help SEA Games hostingSPORTSUrgent reply from Philippine football chiefSPORTSPalace wants Cayetano’s PHISGOC Foundation probed over corruption chargesIt was Messi’s 44th hat trick for Barcelona, to go with another six for Argentina, according to the club.“This doesn’t mean the league is ours yet. There is a long way to go, but it was very important to win here to protect the advantage we have over our rivals,” Messi said. “The game turned against us but we knew how to pull it out.” Sports Related Videospowered by AdSparcRead Next PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games PLAY LIST 02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games01:44Philippines marks anniversary of massacre with calls for justice01:19Fire erupts in Barangay Tatalon in Quezon City01:07Trump talks impeachment while meeting NCAA athletes02:49World-class track facilities installed at NCC for SEA Games02:11Trump awards medals to Jon Voight, Alison Krauss Grace Poe files bill to protect govt teachers from malicious accusations SEA Games hosting troubles anger Duterte Urgent reply from Philippine football chief Sixth-place Alaves drew 0-0 with relegation-threatened Celta Vigo, while Athletic Bilbao won 1-0 against Eibar. Raul Garcia scored a first-minute goal for Athletic, which is up to eighth. But Messi responded both times with strikes that produced the same result: goalkeeper Tomas Vaclik helplessly pawing thin air as the ball sailed over his head.Messi cancelled out Navas’ 22nd-minute opener four minutes later with an exquisite volley, as the Argentine blasted Ivan Rakitic’s cross into the top corner of the net.Messi equalized a second time in the 67th after Rakitic recovered the ball, laid off for Ousmane Dembele, who found Barcelona’s all-time top scorer alone on the edge of the area and he curled the ball into the corner.Messi finally put Barcelona in charge when he nonchalantly chipped the ball over Vaclik.“Not only did Messi score three great goals, it was how he scored them,” said Barcelona coach Ernesto Valverde. “There was a lot at stake in this match. We weren’t playing well and then he appeared. That is Messi.”Sevilla fell into fifth place, with Getafe moving up into the Champions League spots after beating Rayo Vallecano 2-1.UMTITI RETURNSDefender Samuel Umtiti played his first match for Barcelona after being sidelined since late November with a left knee problem that has plagued him since helping France win the 2018 World Cup.Umtiti, who played the full 90 minutes, has only made nine appearances for Barcelona this campaign.OTHER RESULTS LATEST STORIES PDEA chief backs Robredo in revealing ‘discoveries’ on drug war Private companies step in to help SEA Games hosting Barcelona forward Lionel Messi celebrates after scoring his side’s second goal during La Liga soccer match between Sevilla and Barcelona at the Ramon Sanchez Pizjuan stadium in Seville, Spain. Saturday, February 23, 2019. (AP Photo/Miguel Morenatti)BARCELONA, Spain — Just when Barcelona was at its worst, Lionel Messi gave one of his best performances of the season.Messi scored his 50th hat trick for club and country on Saturday in a 4-2 victory at Sevilla, helping Barcelona to take a big step toward retaining the Spanish league title.ADVERTISEMENT MOST READ US judge bars Trump’s health insurance rule for immigrants Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. View comments
Virat Kohli has been an inspirational leader and enjoys the love and support of his teammates and fans alike.Kohli has often been spotted clicking selfies and chatting with children and his fans. He has earned plethora of fans by his work ethics be it on or off the field.He loves interacting with his fans and it was witnessed once again when he brought a smile to a little girl’s face at Delhi’s IGI Airport before leaving for England.In a picture posted by the BCCI on Twitter, Kohli can be seen standing besides the girl, who has a plaster on her right hand.”Little Radha wanted a picture with #TeamIndia captain @imVkohli and the smile on her face tells the story,” BCCI tweeted.Little Radha wanted a picture with #TeamIndia captain @imVkohli and the smile on her face tells the story. pic.twitter.com/FTOPrNFu27BCCI (@BCCI) 23 June 2018The Indian cricket team on Friday departed for their marathon tour of Ireland and England starting next week.India start their tour with a two-match Twenty20 International series against Ireland on June 27 and June 29 before they play a limited-overs series and Tests against England. India and England will face-off in three T20I and as many ODIs before switching to the traditional format.The two cricketing giants play a five-match Test series from August 1 and India will be keen to come back home with the trophy after their disastrous last two campaigns in England.#TeamIndia enroute England pic.twitter.com/srLbctd81SadvertisementBCCI (@BCCI) 23 June 2018World No.1 India do not have pleasant memories in England as far as Test cricket is concerned. In 2011, they lost 4-0 before going down 3-1 in 2014.Looking forward to some difficult cricket in England, says Virat KohliHowever, Kohli said the South African tour has given his team the confidence to do well abroad.”After what happened in South Africa, we are actually looking forward to some tough cricket,” Kohli told the media in New Delhi on Friday.”When we were playing the Test series in South Africa and lost the first two matches, people thought we were outplayed. Then we won the third Test and won the two series after that. Then they realised how well we played. We are looking forward to going to other countries and playing well. We are looking forward to playing difficult cricket,” Kohli said.WATCH FULL VIDEOKohli had a horrid time in England in 2014. He scored only 114 runs from five Tests and was all at sea against James Anderson and Stuart Broad. But he is now a completely different batsman and has since scored six double centuries including four in successive series.Immediately after the England tour four years ago, Kohli went to Australia and hammered four hundreds in four Tests. Against England at home, he smashed 655 runs from five Tests.India have world’s best spinners, can win in England: KumbleOn the tour of South Africa, Kohli hammered 871 runs across formats and was the leading run-scorer in the Test and ODI series.He was scheduled to play for Surrey to get used to English conditions before the Test series gets underway in August but the 29-year-old had to pull out after he sustained a neck injury during the IPL.India to play over 200 international cricket matches from 2018 to 2023It would be fair to say Kohli is not overtly worried about his chances against the swinging red leather this English summer.Meanwhile, India coach Ravi Shastri said every series is a home series for India. His logic can sometimes be tricky to understand for the casual follower but he offered an explanation.”Every series is important. Every game is a home game for us. We do not play the opposition – we play the pitch. The 22-yards.. that is what we have to try and conquer. The boys know they will be rated if they can adapt to different conditions.”We are looking forward to playing in other countries.. I am not sure too many teams want to come to India,” he said.
The Economic Programme Oversight Committee (EPOC) is supporting the proposed reintegration of public bodies generating significant financial surpluses into central Government.The move, which is slated to commence in July with three entities, is among nine new public sector transformation structural benchmarks contained in the revised Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies underpinning the administration’s precautionary Stand By Agreement (SBA) with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).The initial shortlisted entities are the Tourism Enhancement Fund (TEF); Culture, Health, Arts, Sports and Education (CHASE) Fund; and Jamaica Civil Aviation Authority (JCAA).Co-Chairman of EPOC, Keith Duncan, says it “makes a lot of sense” to reintegrate the entities, reroute their revenues into the Consolidated Fund and provide them with budgeted allocations for their operations.“It makes no sense for us to be carrying cash surpluses in so many entities and the Government (has to be) borrowing funds (from) other entities. So the move to integrate these public bodies where applicable or suitable is welcomed by the EPOC,” he added.He was speaking at EPOC’s quarterly media briefing at the Jamaica Money Market Brokers (JMMB) Group’s head office in New Kingston on Friday, May 19.Meanwhile, Mr. Duncan advised that two of the new benchmarks will be monitored by EPOC.These, he said, are Cabinet submissions for a proposed crisis resolution framework, based on the outcomes of discussions contained in a Consultation Paper, by July 31, 2017; and proposed revision of the Bank of Jamaica (BoJ) Act, in line with IMF recommendations, by August 31, 2017.Mr. Duncan also reiterated the importance of public sector transformation in supporting the Government’s growth agenda.“The drive to (attaining) an efficient public sector is of primary importance. Getting that wage to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) number down to nine per cent is very important to ensure that we have an efficient allocation of resources,” Mr. Duncan underscored.Meanwhile the EPOC Co-Chairman advised that another benchmark is on course for implementation this month.This, he indicated, is the institution of mechanisms to ensure full compliance with the provisions of the Securities Retail Repurchase Agreement.“These regulations require that retail repos be governed by a master retail repurchase agreement that is signed by both the dealer and the client. This is to be completed by May 31 and the Financial Services Commission has indicated that we are on track,” Mr. Duncan stated. The Economic Programme Oversight Committee (EPOC) is supporting the proposed reintegration of public bodies generating significant financial surpluses into central Government. The move, which is slated to commence in July with three entities, is among nine new public sector transformation structural benchmarks contained in the revised Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies underpinning the administration’s precautionary Stand By Agreement (SBA) with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Story Highlights The initial shortlisted entities are the Tourism Enhancement Fund (TEF); Culture, Health, Arts, Sports and Education (CHASE) Fund; and Jamaica Civil Aviation Authority (JCAA).
VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – Ottawa has upgraded its travel advisory and is telling Canadians to avoid non-essential travel to Sri Lanka following the deadly bombings in that country on Easter SundayThe government notes the decision to travel is your own choice, and adds your personal safety is also your responsibility.More than 350 people were killed on April 21st when three churches and three luxury hotels were attacked in the greater Colombo area. The Islamic State group has claimed responsibility for the attacks, but authorities have said they remain unsure of its involvement.The Canadian government says the situation remains volatile, and warns other attacks could take place.For those living in or currently visiting Sri Lanka, the Government of Canada is urging people to avoid the areas impacted by the recent attacks, to remain extremely cautious, and to limit their movements as much as they can.Ottawa is posting travel advisories about the safety and security of Canadians travelling or living in #SriLanka, adding they “may be compromised.” @NEWS1130 @BT_Vancouver https://t.co/CBCBCbavPW— Sonia Aslam (@SoniaSAslam) April 24, 2019Canadians are also being told to give themselves extra time at airports for increased security measures, as well as to be aware of their surroundings at all times.Sri Lankan authorities have declared a state of emergency, and a curfew had been imposed. Dozens of people have been arrested so far in connection with the attacks.Meantime, Sri Lanka’s president has asked the defense secretary and national police chief to step down. This marks a dramatic internal shake-up after security forces shrugged off intelligence reports warning of possible attacks before the bombings, the president’s office said.The president announced on Wednesday that he planned to change the head of the defense forces within 24 hours.The scale of the bloodshed recalled the worst days of Sri Lanka’s 26-year civil war, in which the Tamil Tigers, a rebel group from the ethnic Tamil minority, sought independence from the Buddhist-majority country. During the war, the Tigers and other rebels carried out a multitude of bombings. The Tamils are Hindu, Muslim and Christian.
LONDON – The British government has referred Twenty-First Century Fox’s bid for satellite broadcaster Sky to competition authorities on public interest grounds, a move that sets up a six-month investigation into Rupert Murdoch’s takeover plans.The Competition and Markets Authority said Wednesday it “will now examine how the deal would impact media plurality and broadcasting standards in the U.K.”The move was widely expected after Culture Secretary Karen Bradley told lawmakers last week she planned to refer the deal to regulators.With Murdoch already owning the Sun and The Times newspapers, there are concerns about too much power concentrated in one company.Murdoch’s media group wants to buy the 61 per cent of Sky it doesn’t already own. The takeover values Sky, which broadcasts Premier League soccer, at 18.5 billion pounds ($25 billion).