Eyem Three dead dozens feared buried in Cambodia building collapse
CHICAGO:The US-China trade war resulted in billions of dollars of losses for both sides in 2018, hitting industries including autos, technology - and above all, agriculture.Broad pain from trade tariffs outlined by several economists shows that, while spe
nike air force cialized industries including US soybean crushing benefited from the dispute, it had an overall detrimental impact on both of the world s two largest economies.The losses may give US President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, motivation to resolve their trade differences be
air max tn fore a March 2 deadline, alt
nike air hough talks between the economic superpowers could still devolve.The US and Chinese economies each lose about $2.9 billion annually due to Beijing s tariffs on soybeans, corn, wheat and sorghum alone, said Purdue University agricultural economist Wally Tyner.Disrupted agricultural trade hurt both sides particularly hard because China is the world s biggest soybean importer and last year relied on the United States for Sywa Dengue campaign resumes in Pindi
LAHORE:The Lahore High
jordan schuhe Court (LHC) on Monday referred a petition seeking to declare the sedition law null and void to Justice Shahid Karim, saying that he was hearing a similar case.Justice Shujaat Ali Khan heard the request of a local lawyer, Shahid Rana, who took the position that the sedition law was a relic of British colonialism, which was used to enslave the people.The petitioner submitted that sections 124-A, 153-A and 505 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) were inconsistent with the fundamental r
adidas originals ultraboost ights as citizens were being exploited through the said law for political interests.He stated that the Indian Supreme Court had also stopped the implementation of the sedition law, calling it a product of the British era, while also staying sedition cases and trials by granting interim relief.Under the Constitution of Pakistan, citizens could not be subjected to state oppr
af1 ession by depriving them of their fundamental rights, the petitioner submitted, asking the court to annul the British-
