slotvip 188

The Duke of York has said he “ceased all contact” with the businessman accused of being a Chinese spy when concerns were first raised about him. Andrew met the individual through “official channels” with “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”, a statement from his office said. The businessman – known only as H6 – lost an appeal over a decision to bar him from entering the UK on national security grounds. He brought a case to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) after then-home secretary Suella Braverman said he should be excluded from the UK in March 2023. H6 was described as a “close confidante” of The Duke. Judges were told that in a briefing for the home secretary in July 2023, officials claimed H6 had been in a position to generate relationships between prominent UK figures and senior Chinese officials “that could be leveraged for political interference purposes”. They also said that H6 had downplayed his relationship with the Chinese state, which combined with his relationship with Andrew, 64, represented a threat to national security. A statement from Andrew’s office said: “The Duke of York followed advice from His Majesty’s Government and ceased all contact with the individual after concerns were raised. “The Duke met the individual through official channels with nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed. “He is unable to comment further on matters relating to national security.” At a hearing in July, the specialist tribunal heard that the businessman was told by an adviser to Andrew that he could act on the duke’s behalf when dealing with potential investors in China, and that H6 had been invited to Andrew’s birthday party in 2020. A letter referencing the birthday party from the adviser, Dominic Hampshire, was discovered on H6’s devices when he was stopped at a port in November 2021. In a ruling on Thursday, Mr Justice Bourne, Judge Stephen Smith and Sir Stewart Eldon, dismissed the challenge.slotvip 188 。

Waters Corp. stock underperforms Tuesday when compared to competitors

A majority of farmers voted for Donald Trump, even though the president-elect’s economic agenda is antithetical to the financial interests of American agriculture. Since the dawn of this century, the world has added 398 million acres of land for the production of food grains, feed grains and oil seeds. Much of that acreage has been in tropical regions. At the same time, population growth in China, a primary buyer of U.S. agricultural goods, has slowed, and its population is aging. Similar trends can be seen in other countries that have been traditional importers of U.S. goods. We also face major geopolitical events, such as the Ukraine-Russia war, and most resolutions of that war would likely adversely affect U.S. farmers. The world has changed. Competition among major producing nations has changed the ability of American agriculture to be a preferred and low-cost provider of grains to other nations. Against this backdrop, one must ponder the question of how an isolationist foreign policy and the use of heavy tariffs could possibly lead to anything other than serious adverse consequences for our U.S. agricultural sector. History teaches us lessons, and sadly we often forget them while drunk on the political cocktail of the moment. During the first Trump presidency, significant tariffs were imposed on China. This led to major negative impacts on U.S. farmers. What did the government do? The Trump administration created an ad hoc disaster relief program that paid billions to U.S. farmers. “Ad hoc” is just a shiny term for an administration not being able to get its act together to have a consistent and logical approach to setting policy. It is akin to government by chaos — going from one fire drill to another. Trump was elected based on many promises, one of which was to “drain the swamp.” There is a lot of chatter about reducing government outlays for all sorts of programs. Trump wants to put America “first.” Setting aside political differences, the reality is that America is not an island. It is an important part of the larger world. Withdrawal from engagement with other nations, whether in the context of trade or overall foreign relations, cannot lead to good consequences for America’s economic security, nor for our nation’s ability to play a strong role in maintaining a stable and peaceful world. My fellow farmers, it is time for a reality check. We face way more than a theoretical risk of losing a large share of the markets for our grains and livestock. Don’t count on that brown envelope from Uncle Sam in your mailbox to bail you out from hardship. From the extensive reading that I have done on the topic of the economic impact of Trump’s tariffs, no credible economist paints any picture other than one of significant detrimental consequences to our agricultural sector. The same is true for many other segments of the economy. America has to maintain a global perspective — rather than one that stops at our shores — to stay competitive and to remain in its role as a world leader. The proposed paths of Trump’s next presidency are antithetical to those roles. Palen is a Kansas native and a fifth-generation farmer and agriculture consultant in Colorado and Kansas. He wrote this for the Kansas Reflector , and it was distributed by the Kansas City Star and Tribune Content Agency. Get local news delivered to your inbox!

How ‘World of Warcraft’ Reinvented the Global Gaming Community

Duke of York ‘ceased all contact’ with spy-accused man after concerns raised