online games 50 pesos minimum deposit
Stoke City player ratings vs Preston as late drama livens up result written in the starsAfter a far-right pro-Russia candidate secured a surprise lead in Romania's presidential election Monday, the eastern European NATO member is bracing for a high-stakes parliamentary vote on Sunday, amid fears it could bring about a strategic shift in the country. Calin Georgescu was in pole position with almost 23 percent after the first round of voting, a political earthquake in the country of 19 million people that has so far resisted nationalist appeals that have gained traction in Hungary and Slovakia. Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
Haitians massacred for practicing voodoo were abducted, hacked to death: UNWhat Met Office weather warnings REALLY mean: The differences between the three-tier system as forecasting agency faces backlash over Storm Bert floods READ MORE -- Storm Conall is named and will hit southern England tonight By MARK DUELL Published: 18:06, 26 November 2024 | Updated: 18:07, 26 November 2024 e-mail View comments Hours before the deadly Great Storm of 1987 devastated Britain, weatherman Michael Fish famously told viewers not to worry about a 'hurricane' on the way. But history's worst forecasting failure is also remembered for leading the Met Office to launch the National Severe Weather Warning Service (NSWWS) the following year. The system still exists today and has come back into focus this week after the Met Office was accused in Parliament yesterday of 'incompetence' that led to a 'clear underestimation' of the impact of Storm Bert which caused widespread flooding. While the Met Office has defended its forecasting after issuing 50 warnings last week, bosses said they were 'committed to learning the lessons' from the storm. And they will be under the microscope once again tonight after forecasters revealed Storm Conall will bring up to 2in (50mm) of rain to the South from 10pm. It comes after experts raised fears back in February that Britons could become complacent and ignore Met Office weather warnings due to a near-record number of named storms in that year amid increasing numbers of yellow and amber alerts. The warnings system has evolved into today's three-tier warnings service to forecast the expected impact of severe weather and the likelihood of this occurring. Yellow, amber or red warnings are issued for a range of impact levels and likelihoods for rain, thunderstorms, wind, snow, lightning, ice, extreme heat and fog. The alerts can have broad meanings given that a forecast with high impact but that is unlikely to happen will perhaps only get a yellow warning; and vice versa. Two people pour water out of the front garden of a flooded property in Pontypridd on Sunday Billing Aquadrome in Northamptonshire was badly flooded after heavy rain over the weekend The River Avon burst its banks and flooded nearby properties in Bradford-on-Avon yesterday A car drives through floodwater as water levels rise on the River Ouse in York yesterday Yellow warnings are the most common and normally mean people can continue with their daily routine but should be aware that some travel disruption could be caused. Yellow, amber or red? What each Met Office warning level means Here is the official Met Office guide on what each weather warning means: Yellow Warning Yellow warnings can be issued for a range of weather situations. Many are issued when it is likely that the weather will cause some low level impacts, including some disruption to travel in a few places. Many people may be able to continue with their daily routine, but there will be some that will be directly impacted and so it is important to assess if you could be affected. Other yellow warnings are issued when the weather could bring much more severe impacts to the majority of people but the certainty of those impacts occurring is much lower. It is important to read the content of yellow warnings to determine which weather situation is being covered by the yellow warning. Amber Warning There is an increased likelihood of impacts from severe weather, which could potentially disrupt your plans. This means there is the possibility of travel delays, road and rail closures, power cuts and the potential risk to life and property. You should think about changing your plans and taking action to protect yourself and your property. You may want to consider the impact of the weather on your family and your community and whether there is anything you need to do ahead of the severe weather to minimise the impact. Red Warning Dangerous weather is expected and, if you haven't already done so, you should take action now to keep yourself and others safe from the impact of the severe weather. It is very likely that there will be a risk to life, with substantial disruption to travel, energy supplies and possibly widespread damage to property and infrastructure. You should avoid travelling, where possible, and follow the advice of the emergency services and local authorities. Advertisement They can also be issued when the conditions could bring far more severe impacts to most people, but the certainty of these impacts happening is much lower. Amber warnings mean an increased possibility of severe weather with a higher chance of travel delays, road closures, power cuts, and risk to life and property. The top tier of red means dangerous weather is expected and people should take action to keep themselves safe, with substantial disruption and damage expected. Factors considered by forecasters include the time of day, week and year, the location, underlying wet or dry ground conditions and any local events taking place. While the Met Office can warn of flooding within a weather warning, flood alerts and warnings themselves are issued by flood agencies such as the Environment Agency for England or Natural Resources Wales. The current system has its roots in the development of better forecasting following the 1987 Great Storm on the night of October 15 which saw Britain hit by winds of up to 115mph - including 94mph in London. Some 18 people were killed, 15million trees were felled and billions of pounds worth of damage was caused in what was the worst storm for almost 300 years. Forecasters had been predicting severe weather for days before the storm - but thought it would pass to the South of England and failed to predict its severity, which later provoked ridicule. Fish famously said on the BBC lunchtime news before the storm struck: '...earlier on today apparently, a woman rang the BBC and said she'd heard there was a hurricane on the way. Well, if you are watching, don't worry, there isn't.....' The incident achieved such notoriety that it featured in the opening ceremony of the London 2012 Olympic Games. Fish, now 80, later revealed that the woman caller never existed and that it is one of a number of 'myths' surrounding the incident. But the devastation and lack of proper forecast of the worst storm since 1703 resulted in major investment and improvement in the science, technology and communication of forecasting, including the NSWWS starting in 1988. The Met Office wanted to provide a coordinated way of delivering warnings to government, industry, emergency responders and the public – and help people prepare for and take action to avoid the impacts of severe weather. In the years before widespread internet access, the warnings were faxed and emailed to emergency responders and media organisations. Yellow, amber or red warnings are now issued for a range of impact levels and likelihoods The Met Office issues a range of information to accompany weather warnings, as shown above The Met Office now issues weather warning maps on social media, such as this one for tonight The scheme initially worked as a threshold-based system, delivering warnings when wind or rain of sufficient intensity was predicted. Read More Met Office insists it will learn lessons from Storm Bert after criticism over 'incompetent' warnings But as the service evolved, the Met Office switched to an impact-based service in 2011 that took account of timing and environmental conditions to help people get a better idea of how conditions would affect them. The delivery of the alerts also changed as more people began to check weather forecasts and warnings online, including through apps and social media. In addition to the NSWWS, the Met Office launched the storm names project in 2015, giving titles to medium and high impact storms. The aim of the scheme brought in alongside the Irish meteorological service Met Éireann was to further improve the communication of incoming severe weather. The service has also now been extended to a seven-day lead-time rather than five, with the aim of giving the public more advance notice of bad weather. Damage caused by the 1987 Great Storm which saw Britain hit by winds of up to 115mph Some 18 people were killed and 15million trees were felled by the Great Storm of 1987 Michael Fish famously told BBC viewers not to worry about a 'hurricane' on the way in 1987 Today, the Met Office insisted it will learn lessons from Storm Bert after criticism over its 'incompetence' that led to a 'clear underestimation' of the devastating impact. Read More How storm warnings began in 1860s after 'Royal Charter Gale' hit Hundreds of homes were left underwater and roads turned into rivers after the UK was hit by up to seven inches of rain, heavy snow and 82mph winds at the weekend. Torrential downpours caused widespread flooding with nearly 300 warnings or alerts still in place across Britain this morning as major rail disruption continued. The Met Office was accused of 'letting down' the public with Labour MP for Cardiff West, Alex Barros-Curtis, saying warnings should have been 'amber or red'. But Met Office services director Simon Brown insisted 'observed rainfall totals were broadly in line with the forecast and the severe weather warnings issued in advance.' He said 50 weather warnings were issued last week, but added: 'I'm committed to learning the lessons from Storm Bert to support even greater preparedness.' Met Office BBC Share or comment on this article: What Met Office weather warnings REALLY mean: The differences between the three-tier system as forecasting agency faces backlash over Storm Bert floods e-mail Add comment
LAS VEGAS — Players Era Festival organizers have done what so many other have tried — bet their fortunes in this city that a big payoff is coming. Such bet are usually bad ones, which is why so many massive casino-resorts have been built on Las Vegas Boulevard. But it doesn't mean the organizers are wrong. They're counting on the minimum of $1 million in guaranteed name, image and likeness money that will go to each of the eight teams competing in the neutral-site tournament that begins Tuesday will create a precedent for other such events. EverWonder Studios CEO Ian Orefice, who co-founded Players with former AND1 CEO Seth Berger, compared this event to last year's inaugural NBA In-Season Tournament that played its semifinals and final in Las Vegas by saying it "did really well to reinvigorate the fan base at the beginning of the year." "We're excited that we're able to really change the paradigm in college basketball on the economics," Orefice said. "But for us, it's about the long term. How do we use the momentum that is launching with the 2024 Players Era Festival and be the catalyst not to change one event, but to change college basketball for the future." Orefice and Berger didn't disclose financial details, but said the event will come close to breaking even this year and that revenue is in eight figures. Orefice said the bulk of the revenue will come from relationships with MGM, TNT Sports and Publicis Sport & Entertainment as well as sponsors that will be announced later. Both organizers said they are so bullish on the tournament's prospects that they already are planning ahead. Money made from this year's event, Orefice said, goes right back into the company. "We're really in this for the long haul," Orefice said. "So we're not looking at it on a one-year basis." Rick Giles is president of the Gazelle Group, which also operates several similar events, including the College Basketball Invitational. He was skeptical the financial numbers would work. Giles said in addition to more than $8 million going to the players, there were other expenses such as the guarantees to the teams. He said he didn't know if the tournament would make up the difference with ticket sales, broadcast rights and sponsorship money. The top bowl of the MGM Grand Garden Arena will be curtained off. "The math is highly challenging," Giles said. "Attendance and ticket revenues are not going to come anywhere close to covering that. They haven't announced any sponsors that I'm aware of. So it all sort of rests with their media deal with Turner and how much capital they want to commit to it to get these players paid." David Carter, a University of Southern California adjunct professor who also runs the Sports Business Group consultancy, said even if the Players isn't a financial success this year, the question is whether there will be enough interest to move forward. "If there is bandwidth for another tournament and if the TV or the streaming ratings are going to be there and people are going to want to attend and companies are going to want to sponsor, then, yeah, it's probably going to work," Carter said. "But it may take them time to gain that traction." Both founders said they initially were met with skepticism about putting together such an event, especially from teams they were interested in inviting. Houston was the first school to commit, first offering an oral pledge early in the year and then signing a contract in April. That created momentum for others to join, and including the No. 6 Cougars, half the field is ranked. "We have the relationships to operate a great event," Berger said. "We had to get coaches over those hurdles, and once they knew that we were real, schools got on board really quickly." The founders worked with the NCAA to make sure the tournament abided by that organization's rules, so players must appear at ancillary events in order to receive NIL money. Strict pay for play is not allowed, though there are incentives for performance. The champion, for example, will receive $1.5 million in NIL money. Now the pressure is on to pull off the event and not create the kind of headlines that can dog it for years to come. "I think everybody in the marketplace is watching what's going to happen (this) week and, more importantly, what happens afterwards," Giles said. "Do the players get paid on a timely basis? And if they do, that means that Turner or somebody has paid way more than the market dictates? And the question will be: Can that continue?" CREIGHTON: P oint guard Steven Ashworth likely won’t play in the No. 21 Bluejays’ game against San Diego State in the Players Era Festival in Las Vegas. Ashworth sprained his right ankle late in a loss to Nebraska on Friday and coach Greg McDermott said afterward he didn’t know how long he would be out. Get local news delivered to your inbox!
(The Center Square) – Eleven states, led by Texas, have sued the three largest institutional investors in the world for allegedly conspiring to buy coal company stocks to control the market, reduce competition and violate federal and state antitrust laws. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Tyler Division and demands a trial by jury. It names as defendants BlackRock, Inc., State Street Corporation, and Vanguard Group, Inc., which combined manage more than $26 trillion in assets. The companies were sued for “acquiring substantial stockholdings in every significant publicly held coal producer in the United States” in order to gain “power to control the policies of the coal companies,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said. According to the 109-page brief , defendants own 30.43% of Peabody Energy, 34.19% of Arch Resources, 10.85% of NACCO Industries, 28.97% of CONSOL Energy, 29.7% of Alpha Metallurgical Resources, 24.94% of Vistra Energy, 8.3% of Hallador Energy, 31.62% of Warrior Met Coal and 32.87% of Black Hills Corporation. Under the Biden administration, in the past four years, “America’s coal producers have been responding not to the price signals of the free market, but to the commands of Larry Fink, BlackRock’s chairman and CEO, and his fellow asset managers,” the brief states. “As demand for the electricity Americans need to heat their homes and power their businesses has gone up, the supply of the coal used to generate that electricity has been artificially depressed – and the price has skyrocketed. Defendants have reaped the rewards of higher returns, higher fees, and higher profits, while American consumers have paid the price in higher utility bills and higher costs.” Consumer costs went up because the companies “weaponized” their shares to push through a so-called green energy agenda, including reducing coal output by more than half by 2030, the lawsuit alleges. In response, publicly traded coal producers reduced output and energy prices skyrocketed. The companies advanced their policies primarily through two programs, the Climate Action 100 and Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, signaling “their mutual intent to reduce the output of thermal coal, which predictably increased the cost of electricity for Americans” nationwide, Paxton said. The firms also allegedly deceived thousands of investors “who elected to invest in non-ESG funds to maximize their profits,” Paxton said. “Yet these funds pursued ESG strategies notwithstanding the defendants’ representations to the contrary.” While they allegedly directly restrained competition among the companies whose shares they acquired, “their war on competition has consequences for the entire industry,” the brief states. “Texas will not tolerate the illegal weaponization of the financial industry in service of a destructive, politicized ‘environmental’ agenda. BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street formed a cartel to rig the coal market, artificially reduce the energy supply, and raise prices,” Paxton said. “Their conspiracy has harmed American energy production and hurt consumers. This is a stunning violation of state and federal law.” The lawsuit alleges the companies’ actions violated the Clayton Act, which prohibits any acquisition of stock where “the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition;” and the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, 15 U.S.C. § 1 in a conspiracy to restrain trade. It also alleges the companies violated state antitrust laws of Texas, Montana and West Virginia; Blackrock also allegedly violated the Texas Business and Commerce Code by committing “false, deceptive, or misleading acts.” It asks the court to rule that the companies violated the federal and state statutes, provide injunctive and equitable relief and prohibit them from engaging in such acts. It requests that civil fines be paid, including requiring Blackrock to pay $10,000 per violation. Joining Paxton in the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, West Virginia and Wyoming. The Buzbee Law Firm and Cooper & Kirk are serving as outside counsel. The companies have yet to issue a statement on the lawsuit. The lawsuit follows one filed by 25 states led by Texas against the Biden administration asking the court to halt a federal ESG policy that could negatively impact the retirement savings of 152 million Americans. It also comes after Texas has listed hundreds of companies and publicly traded investment funds, including Blackrock, on its divestment list for advancing ESG and anti-oil and natural gas policies.Royal Caribbean director Arne Wilhelmsen sells $145.7 million in stockSpecial counsel moves to abandon election interference and classified documents cases against TrumpCOLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A fight broke out at midfield after Michigan stunned No. 2 Ohio State 13-10 on Saturday as Wolverines players attempted to plant their flag and were met by Buckeyes who confronted them. Police had to use pepper spray to break up the players, who threw punches and shoves in the melee that overshadowed the rivalry game. Ohio State police said in a statement “multiple officers representing Ohio and Michigan deployed pepper spray.” Ohio State police will investigate the fight, according to the statement. After the Ohio State players confronted their bitter rivals at midfield, defensive end Jack Sawyer grabbed the top of the Wolverines' flag and ripped it off the pole as the brawl moved toward the Michigan bench. Eventually, police officers rushed into the ugly scene. Ohio State coach Ryan Day said he understood the actions of his players. “There are some prideful guys on our team who weren't going to sit back and let that happen,” Day said. The two Ohio State players made available after the game brushed off questions about it. Michigan running back Kalel Mullings, who rushed for 116 yards and a touchdown, didn't like how the Buckeyes players involved themselves in the Wolverines' postgame celebration. He called it “classless.” “For such a great game, you hate to see stuff like that after the game," he said in an on-field interview with Fox Sports. “It’s just bad for the sport, bad for college football. But at the end of the day, you know some people got to — they got to learn how to lose, man. ... We had 60 minutes, we had four quarters, to do all that fighting.” Michigan coach Sherrone Moore said everybody needs to do better. “So much emotions on both sides," he said. "Rivalry games get heated, especially this one. It’s the biggest one in the country, so we got to handle that better.” Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football
With Trump’s victory, Ellen DeGeneres will never return to America: reportIs Outlook down? Thousands of Microsoft 365 users report outage issues
Katie Holmes has offered a rare comment regarding her teen daughter, Suri Cruise. Holmes has posted a screen grab of a Daily Mail article, which reported that her 18-year old daughter, whose father is Tom Cruise, is now a "millionaire" after receiving access to an alleged trust fund from Cruise. "Completely false," was written across the image posted on Holmes's verified social media. "Daily mail you can stop making stuff up." In the caption Holmes simply wrote, "Enough." CNN has reached out to the Daily Mail for comment. Holmes and Tom Cruise were married from 2006 to 2012. Their daughter, the only child they share, was born on April 18, 2006. The teen and Holmes have largely remained out of the spotlight, with the actress working to protect her daughter's privacy. A post shared by Katie Holmes (@katieholmes) Four years ago, the "Dawson’s Creek" star posted birthday wishes to her daughter. "Happy Birthday Sweetheart!!!!!!!," Holmes wrote in the caption. "I am so blessed to be your mom. May this year be incredible!" A post shared by Katie Holmes (@katieholmes) window.addEventListener('load', function() { (function(c, id, p, d, w){ var i = d.createElement('iframe'); i.height = '0'; i.width = '0'; i.style = { display: 'none', position: 'absolute', visibility: 'hidden' }; i.src = "https://newsource-embed-prd.ns.cnn.com/articles/cnnvan-stats.html?article_id="+id+"&category="+c+"&publisher="+p+"&url=" + encodeURI(w.location); d.body.appendChild(i); })("Entertainment", "L19jb21wb25lbnRzL2FydGljbGUvaW5zdGFuY2VzL2NtNGg0czZ6eTAwNHIyNnFkM3I0cWVwYWg%3D", "3244", document, window)})
(The Center Square) – Eleven states, led by Texas, have sued the three largest institutional investors in the world for allegedly conspiring to buy coal company stocks to control the market, reduce competition and violate federal and state antitrust laws. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Tyler Division and demands a trial by jury. It names as defendants BlackRock, Inc., State Street Corporation, and Vanguard Group, Inc., which combined manage more than $26 trillion in assets. The companies were sued for “acquiring substantial stockholdings in every significant publicly held coal producer in the United States” in order to gain “power to control the policies of the coal companies,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said. According to the 109-page brief , defendants own 30.43% of Peabody Energy, 34.19% of Arch Resources, 10.85% of NACCO Industries, 28.97% of CONSOL Energy, 29.7% of Alpha Metallurgical Resources, 24.94% of Vistra Energy, 8.3% of Hallador Energy, 31.62% of Warrior Met Coal and 32.87% of Black Hills Corporation. Under the Biden administration, in the past four years, “America’s coal producers have been responding not to the price signals of the free market, but to the commands of Larry Fink, BlackRock’s chairman and CEO, and his fellow asset managers,” the brief states. “As demand for the electricity Americans need to heat their homes and power their businesses has gone up, the supply of the coal used to generate that electricity has been artificially depressed – and the price has skyrocketed. Defendants have reaped the rewards of higher returns, higher fees, and higher profits, while American consumers have paid the price in higher utility bills and higher costs.” Consumer costs went up because the companies “weaponized” their shares to push through a so-called green energy agenda, including reducing coal output by more than half by 2030, the lawsuit alleges. In response, publicly traded coal producers reduced output and energy prices skyrocketed. The companies advanced their policies primarily through two programs, the Climate Action 100 and Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, signaling “their mutual intent to reduce the output of thermal coal, which predictably increased the cost of electricity for Americans” nationwide, Paxton said. The firms also allegedly deceived thousands of investors “who elected to invest in non-ESG funds to maximize their profits,” Paxton said. “Yet these funds pursued ESG strategies notwithstanding the defendants’ representations to the contrary.” While they allegedly directly restrained competition among the companies whose shares they acquired, “their war on competition has consequences for the entire industry,” the brief states. “Texas will not tolerate the illegal weaponization of the financial industry in service of a destructive, politicized ‘environmental’ agenda. BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street formed a cartel to rig the coal market, artificially reduce the energy supply, and raise prices,” Paxton said. “Their conspiracy has harmed American energy production and hurt consumers. This is a stunning violation of state and federal law.” The lawsuit alleges the companies’ actions violated the Clayton Act, which prohibits any acquisition of stock where “the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition;” and the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, 15 U.S.C. § 1 in a conspiracy to restrain trade. It also alleges the companies violated state antitrust laws of Texas, Montana and West Virginia; Blackrock also allegedly violated the Texas Business and Commerce Code by committing “false, deceptive, or misleading acts.” It asks the court to rule that the companies violated the federal and state statutes, provide injunctive and equitable relief and prohibit them from engaging in such acts. It requests that civil fines be paid, including requiring Blackrock to pay $10,000 per violation. Joining Paxton in the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, West Virginia and Wyoming. The Buzbee Law Firm and Cooper & Kirk are serving as outside counsel. The companies have yet to issue a statement on the lawsuit. The lawsuit follows one filed by 25 states led by Texas against the Biden administration asking the court to halt a federal ESG policy that could negatively impact the retirement savings of 152 million Americans. It also comes after Texas has listed hundreds of companies and publicly traded investment funds, including Blackrock, on its divestment list for advancing ESG and anti-oil and natural gas policies.Players Era Festival organizers betting big NIL is future of college tourneys
Amazon Black Friday is still live, and we found 160+ better-than-Prime Day deals
None
Haitians massacred for practicing voodoo were abducted, hacked to death: UNMichigan, Ohio State fight broken up with police pepper spray after Wolverines stun Buckeyes 13-10A stroke changed a teacher’s life. How a new electrical device is helping her move
In the absence of clear answers from federal authorities about the reported drones that have mysteriously appeared in the skies over much of New Jersey and other parts of the Northeast in recent weeks, officials have begun banding together to pool resources and information in the hopes of preparing for what they described as “potential drone threats.” On Friday, almost 50 law enforcement professionals from 19 state, local and federal agencies gathered at Rutgers University for the inaugural meeting of a so-called “drone working group,” according to the New Jersey State Police, which co-hosted the event. Among the other groups represented were state police agencies in Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia, as well as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Officials from two federal agencies — the Federal Aviation Administration and Naval Weapons Station Earle, a U.S. Navy base — also attended. A handful of non-law enforcement agencies, including the Network Contagion Research Institute, a nonprofit that assesses political threats and disinformation, were represented at the meeting. “The working group shared information, sifted fact from fiction, discussed drone and counter drone-technologies, addressed regulatory issues and the need for federal legislation, and explored online sentiment toward the sightings,” the state police reported in a news release. Officials also discussed the “potential drone threat to critical infrastructure and high-profile events,” including the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The tournament’s final will be held at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey that summer. The release suggested that the working group would continue to meet, with the goal of being able “to draft a collaborative action plan, develop an interagency communication protocol, and identify training needs and equipment priorities,” according to John Farmer, director of the Miller Center for Policing and Community Resilience. Since the first sightings were reported in Morris County on Nov. 18, authorities have repeatedly emphasized the lack of evidence that the drones pose any kind of national security or public safety threat. The White House has said that the majority of the 5,000 sightings so far reported to the FBI have actually been legal drones, manned aircraft, helicopters, and even distant stars. Approximately 100 of those reports were deemed worthy of further investigation, a joint statement from the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, FAA and Department of Defense said earlier this month. The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, neither of which was represented at the Rutgers meeting, continue to investigate the matter, as do state officials. Meanwhile, drone flights remain temporarily banned in 22 parts of New Jersey and 30 parts of New York through the middle of next month, an order imposed by the FAA at the request of federal security agencies. Authorities have also warned against pointing lasers at suspected drones, with accidental strikes on airplanes up 269% in New Jersey this month. Stories by AJ McDougall Thank you for relying on us to provide the local news you can trust. Please consider supporting NJ.com with a voluntary subscription. AJ McDougall may be reached at amcdougall@njadvancemedia.com . Follow her on X at @oldmcdougall.
Trump’s latest tariff plan aims at multiple countries. What does it mean for the US?I saw 'Wicked' opening weekend — here's my take on the box office smashFeds suspend ACA marketplace access to companies accused of falsely promising ‘cash cards’
After a far-right pro-Russia candidate secured a surprise lead in Romania's presidential election Monday, the eastern European NATO member is bracing for a high-stakes parliamentary vote on Sunday, amid fears it could bring about a strategic shift in the country. Calin Georgescu was in pole position with almost 23 percent after the first round of voting, a political earthquake in the country of 19 million people that has so far resisted nationalist appeals that have gained traction in Hungary and Slovakia. His victory ahead of centre-right mayor Elena Lasconi -- who scored 19.18 percent -- ended the hopes of Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu to compete for the presidency in the December runoff. After coming third at 19.15, Ciolacu said his Social Democratic Party (PSD) won't challenge the narrow result, and announced his resignation as party leader. Experts say the far right's surprise success could affect the parliamentary elections later this week, and even influence the chances of forming a future government. In the runoff ballot on December 8, Lasconi will face Georgescu, a NATO critic who in the past expressed his admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Georgescu's popularity surged ahead of the vote with a viral TikTok campaign calling for an end to aid for Ukraine, which shares a 650-kilometre (400-mile) border with Romania. In a first reaction on his YouTube channel, the 62-year-old independent candidate insisted "there is no East or West", stressing that neutrality was "absolutely necessary". "I am not an extremist, I am not a fascist -- I am a Romanian who loves his country," he said in reference to media reports that "tried to portray" him in a wrongful way. For his rival Lasconi, the upcoming runoff represents "an existential battle", "a historic confrontation" between those who wish to "preserve Romania's young democracy" and those who want to "return to the Russian sphere of influence". "We must not allow anger to throw us back into the past," she said to thunderous applause from her supporters, vowing to stand up for Europe and NATO. The political earthquake comes amid soaring inflation and mounting fears of Romania being potentially dragged into Russia's war in neighbouring Ukraine, as the country has emerged as a key player on the alliance's eastern flank. In Sunday's vote, another far-right contender, AUR party leader George Simion, secured nearly 14 percent. Already pounding the campaign trail for this week's parliamentary elections, Simion said Romania now has "the chance to have a sovereign government and a sovereign president". Overall, the far right won more than a third of all votes in Sunday's presidential ballot. "The far right is by far the big winner of this election," political scientist Cristian Pirvulescu told AFP, predicting a possible "contagion effect" in the parliamentary vote. Extremist forces and Lasconi's centre-right party now have "wind in their sails", sociologist Gelu Duminica said, though "it remains to be seen if they know how to capitalise" on it. The PSD, which has shaped the country's politics for more than three decades, has never before been eliminated in the first round of a presidential election. The National Liberal Party (PNL) party, with whom the PSD currently governs, also suffered a defeat. While many expressed their disbelief over the poll in the streets of the capital Bucharest, others were enthused. Maria Chis, 70, said she was surprised by Georgescu's lead in the first round but had been impressed after watching his TikTok videos. "He seems a man of integrity, serious and patriotic. He inspires seriousness. I think only someone like him can bring change," said the pensioner, who was planning to vote for him in the second round. Alex Tudose, the owner of a construction company, was gloomy. "There is sorrow, disappointment, that after so many years in Euro-Atlantic structures we voted for a pro-Russian by over 20 percent," the 42-year-old said. "There is clearly a strong fragmentation both in society and in the political class, and I think we saw that yesterday," he said. ani-anb-kym/sbk