吉林治疗前列腺的费用是多少(吉林龟头上长了好多的小红点) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO (AP) -- The Navy says it will decommission a warship docked off San Diego after suspected arson caused extensive damage, making it too expensive to restore.Officials said Monday that fully repairing the USS Bonhomme Richard to warfighting capabilities would cost .5 billion to billion and take five to seven years.The amphibious assault ship burned for more than four days in July and was the Navy's worst U.S. warship fire outside of combat in recent memory.In a statement, Navy Secretary Kenneth J. Braithwaite said, “We did not come to this decision lightly. Following an extensive material assessment in which various courses of action were considered and evaluated, we came to the conclusion that it is not fiscally responsible to restore her. Although it saddens me that it is not cost effective to bring her back, I know this ship’s legacy will continue to live on through the brave men and women who fought so hard to save her, as well as the Sailors and Marines who served aboard her during her 22-year history."A senior defense official said in August that arson is suspected as the cause of fire and that a sailor was being questioned as a potential suspect.RELATED COVERAGE:-- Sources: Sailor under investigation for arson in USS Bonhomme Richard ship fire-- Arson expert: Investigation of USS Bonhomme Richard fire may take more than a year-- Regulators say smoke from ship fire not a health risk-- Navy Admiral meets, thanks sailors who put out ship fire-- Navy ship fire causing air quality problems in San Diego-- Two sailors who battled ship fire test positive for coronavirus-- Navy officials say all known fires aboard USS Bonhomme Richard are out-- PHOTOS: Fire erupts aboard Navy ship 1728

SAN DIEGO – U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers intercepted almost 450 pounds of narcotics and captured 17 fugitives with outstanding felony warrants over the weekend. The drugs were valued at over .9 million. The officers were working at the ports of entry along the California border with Mexico from Friday, September 15 through Sunday, September 17 when they intercepted the drugs and captured the fugitives. Drugs confiscated:  470

SAN DIEGO (AP) — Scheduling glitches led an immigration judge to deny the Trump administration's request to order four Central American migrants deported because they failed to show for initial hearings Wednesday in the U.S. while being forced to wait in Mexico.The judge's refusal was a setback for the administration's highly touted initiative to make asylum seekers wait in Mexico while their cases wind through U.S. immigration courts.One migrant came to court with a notice to appear on Saturday, March 30 and said he later learned that he was supposed to show up Wednesday. He reported in the morning to U.S. authorities at the main crossing between San Diego and Tijuana."I almost didn't make it because I had two dates," he said.Similar snafus marred the first hearings last week when migrants who were initially told to show up Tuesday had their dates bumped up several days.Judge Scott Simpson told administration lawyers to file a brief by April 10 that explains how it can assure migrants are properly notified of appointments. The judge postponed initial appearances for the four no-shows to April 22, which raised more questions about how they would learn about the new date.Government documents had no street address for the four men in Tijuana and indicated that correspondence was to be sent to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Simpson asked how the administration would alert them."I don't have a response to that," said Robert Wities, an attorney for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.At least two others were given notices to appear Tuesday but, when they showed up at the border, were told by U.S. authorities that they were not on the schedule that day. Their attorneys quickly got new dates for Wednesday but Mexico refused to take them back, forcing them to stay overnight in U.S. custody.Laura Sanchez, an attorney for one of the men, said she called a court toll-free number to confirm her client's initial hearing Tuesday but his name didn't appear anywhere in the system. Later, she learned that it was Wednesday.Sanchez said after Wednesday's hearing that she didn't know if Mexico would take her client back. Mexican officials didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.Homeland Security Department representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Wednesday.The snafus came two days before a federal judge in San Francisco hears oral arguments to halt enforcement of the "Migration Protection Protocols" policy in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Southern Poverty Law Center and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies.The policy shift, which followed months of high-level talks between the U.S. and Mexico, was launched in San Diego on Jan. 29 amid growing numbers of asylum-seeking families from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Mexicans and children traveling alone are exempt.Families are typically released in the U.S. with notices to appear in court and stay until their cases are resolved, which can take years. The new policy aims to change that by making people wait in Mexico, though it is off to a modest start with 240 migrants being sent back to Tijuana from San Diego in the first six weeks. U.S. officials say they plan to sharply expand the policy across the entire border.Mexican officials have expressed concern about what both governments say is a unilateral move by the Trump administration but has allowed asylum seekers to wait in Mexico with humanitarian visas.U.S. officials call the new policy an unprecedented effort that aims to discourage weak asylum claims and reduce a court backlog of more than 800,000 cases.Several migrants who appeared Wednesday said they fear that waiting in Mexico for their next hearings would jeopardize their personal safety. The government attorney said they would be interviewed by an asylum officer to determine if their concerns justified staying in the U.S.Some told the judge they struggled to find attorneys and were granted more time to find one. Asylum seekers are entitled to legal representation but not at government expense.U.S. authorities give migrants who are returned to Mexico a list of no-cost legal providers in the U.S. but some migrants told the judge that calls went unanswered or they were told that services were unavailable from Mexico.A 48-year-old man said under the judge's questioning that he had headaches and throat ailments. The judge noted that migrants with medical issues are exempt from waiting in Mexico and ordered a medical exam.___Associated Press writer Maria Verza in Mexico City contributed to this report. 4614

SAN DIEGO — The main stretch of Avenida de la Playa in the La Jolla Shores area is closing to vehicles through September so restaurants can set up tables out on the asphalt.Restaurants began setting up Wednesday for the outdoor service, which will run through Sept. 27. The change comes in response to a new round of Coronavirus related restrictions that make it illegal for restaurant to serve food indoors. Avenida de la Playa will close to cars from El Paseo Grande to Calle de la Plata. Restaurants will be setting up in the part of the street that was reserved for parking spaces. There will be a 20-foot wide walkway down the center of the road for pedestrians to pass. The move will allow restaurants that lost capacity due to restrictions a chance to add tables. Piatti, for instance, will get 16 additional tables by moving outside, creating 35 new shifts for its workers."I've been here 29 years and I've been able to tell people I'll have something in an hour, I'll be able to seat you in 90 minutes. Those are extreme wait times. and now I'm actually saying for the first time ever, I don't have anything tonight," said Piatti General Manager Tom Spano. The lunch and dinner service will run from 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. 1236

SALEM, Mass. (AP) — A lawsuit filed by the Satanic Temple alleges an advertising company unfairly refused to display billboards promoting a ritual offered by the group to help people bypass abortion rules in some states. The group, based in Salem, Massachusetts, announced Wednesday that it sued Lamar Advertising in Arkansas state court for alleged religious discrimination. The Louisiana-based company did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Satanic Temple says Lamar refused to display eight billboards in Arkansas and Indiana promoting what the group calls its “religious abortion ritual.” The Satanic Temple describes the ritual as a “sacramental act that confirms the right of bodily autonomy.”By performing the ritual, the group says, people can claim a religious exemption from mandatory waiting periods, counseling, ultrasounds and other measures that some states require before an abortion can be performed.The group says it submitted five designs to Lamar to be displayed near crisis pregnancy centers. In one of the images, a bowl of cake batter is shown with the text, “not a cake,” next to an image of a sperm and egg with the text “not a baby.” It’s accompanied by text saying, “Our religious abortion ritual averts many state restrictions.”Lamar rejected the billboards and said their content was “misleading and offensive,” according to the suit. The Satanic Temple alleges that the rejection was based on religious discrimination. 1474

来源：资阳报