If you want to know how the Hacienda Canaria raises the IGIC and AIEM, If you want to know what the tax burden on these taxes and more, see tomorrow's conference in San Cristobal de La Laguna in Royal Economic Society of Friends of the Country.
This is the painful state of degradation has been reduced Mesa Mota by uncontrolled action Motorcycle "SUV", desmadre whose circulation and has been tolerated by the authorities (the incompetent) during years. The council wants to "recover" the area (the link can access plans), what it seems good, although it's late.
They have already installed a booth works, you can see in the accompanying photo, and a temporary fence, what, Of course, and they have broken.
Post photos during the works to compare what is and what will be.
We applaud the action of the Cabildo.
This language is becoming very complicated, and I finish not understand. Let's see one thing, to see if I can understand this. I know it's not the same, although they seem, abide to attack, which it is not the same Alfonso Guerra “war on Alfonso”… Not the same tissues and developments in the floor above, You fuck you and you see nothing and, above, te very. It's more, I know that: Bombín is a bonbon as a cushion is Equis, Tres Equis and I do not care what he says Puigdemont. But… What about our judges, supreme in the?
First things first. One of the meanings that gives the dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy (RAE) for attack Its the: Act against something to destroy. For abide The dictionary says it is: Submissive pay homage and respect. As well, It is a very curious thing happening. It is now said to be left free, or are you going to release, political prisoners Catalan government dissolved because "abide" article 155 of the Constitution. This is not well understood. Article 155 It is effective from 1978, o no? So what you have to abide by? Must comply and point. But is that, Besides, It is false that comply, because they do not pay him “homage of submission and respect”, but, putting a lambskin above, They say they "abide" reluctantly then, act against the article in order to "destroy" at rallies, meetings and activities agitprop. That is to say, what it does is give false excuses.
Until now I thought that in the Constitution we were faced with a peremptory norm of mandatory, or at least this was what I studied in college.
That is to say, we find a rule of law it has a content that legal subjects can not do without, so that the normative regulation is made of matter will have full validity regardless of the individual's will.
The concept of peremptory norm is opposed to the standard operative, because in the latter case, the standard and its content are subject to the principle of voluntariness, and its application is limited to cases in which the subjects did not regulate their relations in the different sense dictated by the standard operative.
Is the predominant standard especially in public law. It added that most of the rules of the various legal systems are mandatory, although there is greater scope for autonomy in private law. (This is what says Wikipedia).
Having said that, and with the aim to clarify, let's put a familiar example, that is to say, the trial is being held in the Court of Navarre against the Pack (although I think these guys were wrong with the language, as it is happening now with abide Y attack, and put the name of herd, changed the m by a n. (If "click" is done here, It looks like SAR defines pack with "m"). Suppose the prosecution of “the pack”, they had been brought before investigating judge and had been told that abided Article 179 the Penal Code, where crimes are punishable crimes against sexual freedom and rape, and that, even, Article abided 180 where penalties are raised such criminal activities when certain circumstances concur. ¿Spipelining credible to think that the instructor had let go until the trial be held? It seems hard to believe such a thing.
The rule governing pre-trial detention is Article 503 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and not the “if it abides by this or that”, the article states, among other things, what:
1. The provisional detention may only be ordered when the following requirements:
1.º the record in the case the existence of one or several facts which have characteristics of a crime punishable with a maximum equal to or greater than two years in prison, or with imprisonment lasting less investigated whether the defendant has a criminal record or not canceled or subject to cancellation, felony conviction arising from culpable.
2.º appear in sufficient grounds to believe criminally responsible for the crime against the person who has to issue the arrest warrant.
It seems that this, and in particular the 2nd, It is fulfilled in the case of political prisoners. Let's see what his lordship told the Supreme Court judge, Case instructor.
I said, is not the same, “abide” what “attack” he Article 155 of the Constitution.
In recent months, actually more than a year since the presidential elections USA, It has been discussing the Russian intervention in Western elections, including the Catalan referendum 1 Last October. The spanish government, somewhat intimidated by the Russian diplomatic pressure, distinguished between government intervention and intervention from the Russian territory, the object of the dispute decaffeinated something. Nevertheless, most intelligence services of Western countries openly acknowledge that the Russian government intervention is behind cyberattacks. But what Russia has reasons for it?, well reasons for this are not lacking (See newsletter Elcano Royal Institute 7 November 2017, cited below) . Among others, the following:
Getting to the economic sanctions imposed on Moscow for the annexation of Crimea and economic and military support to pro-Russian rebels in southeastern Ukraine, causing, A) Yes, the internal division of the EU.
Present the model of liberal democracy as failed and without credibility to give moral lessons to Moscow, as well as highly undesirable for Russia, because it creates chaos and disorder.
Encouraging “Occidentalism”, one of the pillars of support of the Russian regime, It is maintaining a deeply rooted attitude of resentment and grievances towards the West. Russia is a country not only proud but also very resentful and alienated. Much of this alienation is based on a fundamental difference between Russian and Western points of view on Europe, US and NATO.
Today we read in press that the Spanish Government is concerned about interference in electoral processes by "foreign agents" and tries to shield cyberspace facing the Catalan elections. A total shielding of the vote count, for control of servers where data is stored it is possible, but eliminate the 100% that possibility on the Internet is almost impossible, worth the contradiction, or its cost would be so high that it almost impossible.
If the server control is easier, Moreover fits illegal entry systems of polling stations. But the problem will not be in it is controlled or not, but that the test is accessed and proceed manually recount the votes, the procedure will be discredited in the eyes of any observer and the decline of the votes separatists justify as interference by the Spanish Government
But the influence on the election campaign and / or the will of the voters is impossible to control. In the newsletter of the Elcano Royal Institute 7 November 2017, (ARI 86/2017), researcher Mira Milosevich-Juaristi associate professor of the Institute of History of International Relations of Instituto de Empresa (@ MiraMilosevíchl), He signed an interesting article on the subject entitled: "The “combination”, instrument of information warfare Russia in Catalonia ", in which states that:
“Westerners confuse “disinformation” with “Information Warfare”, and distinguish between “cyberwar” Y “strategic communication”, while the Kremlin disinformation used as one of the instruments “combination”, and demonstrate in practice that cyber warfare and information warfare, although we are synonymous terms, They are interdependent.
Russian military doctrine defines as its main aims not to destroy the enemy but to influence the extinction-not opponents but their decline and internally it uses to transfer the war from conventional battlefields to information, psychological warfare and distortion of perceptions. So, it is clear that the war with Russia is not primarily a physical conflict but one among consciences, why, ultimately, the goal is always the same: winning the war in the minds and hearts of the enemy. "
So one thing is misinformation and other cyberwarfare, while we, The spanish government, difference between the two, the Russians. In this climate, in the coming days, Russian news agencies, dependent or non-government, but let's see who are believed to be independent of the government of Putin, will launch the "machinery of trolls and fake news" Putin and that can not be controlled as a means of influence on the will of the voters.
The American power forward is not an NBA player very high. There is talk of "power forward" to turn that gave US foreign policy in the year 2011, under President Barack Obama, although such a policy had been building from previous presidencies. With such rotation in order to consolidate USA as a key player in the region and play a leadership role she sought for a long time (Rudd, 2013). That bet will be implemented in known as "power forward or shift to Asia ', -later renamed Rebalancing, probably in an attempt to reduce the fears generated in the People's Republic of China (Xiang, 2012)- to which he referred Hillary Clinton to remember: «[w]e have said the 21st Century will be “America’s Pacific Century».
Unlike what happens in the case of the European Union and, especially, some states like Spain, it is undeniable that the United States has maintained interest (and presence) in the Asia-Pacific region at least since World War II. In this sense, not inappropriate to state that the United States already have a number of 'traditional' interests in the region.
In American strategic thinking it has been imposed in recent 20 years the idea that a large military confrontation would only be feasible in the Pacific Ocean, leaving Europe and the Atlantic Ocean as a backyard in such a confrontation, patio, on the other hand, should be looked after by the united Europeans in NATO, at the same time, should play a role of containment of any attempt to Russian expansion westward.
To this decision of great power they have contributed changes in East Asia, changes among which should be mentioned specially, the rise of the People's Republic of China, the rise of India, reaffirming and increasing firmness of Japan and the growing activism of Russia in international affairs. In the same way, the economic health of the region, at least compared to others-, in the context of the global economic crisis, the ability of most states to take advantage of economic globalization and, in short, economic growth of this area of the world. These are all elements that have helped to explain the US approach and not just the fact that China has increased by 200% in the last ten years, the military budget and the República Popular China count on anti-ship ballistic missiles or missile attack that can reach US territory.
The continuo line el President Trump started his trip to the Far East, is a firm commitment to strengthening the US presence in Asia and this is not new. Quite the contrary, It goes back at least to the administration of George H. W. Bush and new approaches to foreign policy that seemed reasonable to articulate in the context of the emergence of a "new world order". A) Yes, and in April 1990 the United States launched an "Initiative to East Asia Strategy" and, in the same line, between 1990 Y 1998, the Pentagon would clear his intention to turn the focus to Asia. With the change of president Bush to Clinton produced no alteration in this issue and, A) Yes, the administration headed by President Clinton would try to boost the Pacific Community -heir of the Trans Community, Transatlantic image of the previous century, He had advised Henry Kissinger Just a few years before thinking about the inevitability of the US confrontation with China.
The pívot, now ratified by Donald Trump It will force a change in the structure of United States Armed Forces, as well as its capabilities, because its mission will not be longer just fighting the insurgency in Asia, as it seemed to be happening in recent years. In this sense, León Panetta, argued that, for 2020, the restructuring of US forces should have been such that the United States will have the 60% of its forces in the Pacific and only 40% in the Atlantic, unlike what happens today, in which the ratio is 50/50. At the same time, the United States will continue to develop new operational concepts that can respond to the challenges it faces in Asia-Pacific, different from those previously found.
Donald Trump has to ratify the growing US military presence in Asia-Pacific is welcomed by many states in the region, as recognized by Japan, Vietnam and Singapore-all traditional or recent partners of the United States in the area that concerns us, because they see in this presence a way to offset China's power in the area and, in consecuense, a means to not only be in the hands of this.