分类： 未分类

Abdul El-Sayed is a problem for Democrats. Republicans appear to have more problems

2026-08-18T10:00:29.129Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/18/politics/republican-senate-candidates-unpopularity

A new poll last week confirmed the Democratic establishment’s fears that Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed could hurt its hopes of winning the chamber’s majority.

The Fox News poll showed his personal image 13 points underwater among registered voters — 42% favorable to 55% unfavorable as he ran about even with his GOP opponent in a head-to-head matchup, trailing narrowly.

But while El-Sayed’s potential drag on the Democratic ticket has gotten lots of attention, he is very much the exception for the party.

In fact, it’s Republican candidates who have the popularity problem in a number of key races.

And of all the crucial Senate races, Michigan is the only one in which Democrats have the more unpopular candidate, according to averages of the quality polls available. In all the others, it’s the GOP.

In both Maine and Texas, the averages of recent polls show both Sen. Susan Collins and state Attorney General Ken Paxton 12 points underwater — i.e., with more people viewing those Republicans unfavorably than favorably. That’s similar to where El-Sayed was in the Fox poll.

All told, across the eight races that are most likely to determine the Senate majority, the GOP standard-bearer has a net-positive average image rating in just one race — Alaska — while every Democratic candidate except El-Sayed is in positive territory.

And in seven of those eight races, the Democratic nominee polls more popularly by between 8 and 24 points.

The biggest gaps come in Georgia and Iowa, where both the Democratic nominees — Sen. Jon Ossoff and state Sen. Josh Turek — poll well. Each of their favorable ratings is at least 20 points better than their unfavorable ratings, on average. (In Turek’s case, he’s less well-known, but very few people seem to dislike him.)

Their GOP opponents — Reps. Mike Collins and Ashley Hinson, respectively — have middling personal image ratings.

Democrats also have a big edge in Texas, where state Rep. James Talarico is 5 points above water, compared with Paxton’s 12 points — a gap of 17 points.

In Maine, Democratic former state Senate President Troy Jackson is plus-3, for a 15-point gap in personal image ratings. And Collins’ minus-12 net image rating would seem a significant problem, given she’s a Republican running in a blue-leaning state. (Usually, the politicians who win in states that are unfriendly for their side tend to be broadly popular.)

Notably, about as many registered voters in Maine were “extremely” or “very” concerned that Collins voted with President Donald Trump too often (55%) in a Fox poll in that state as were “extremely” or “very” concerned that El-Sayed’s issue positions are too extreme (54%) in the Michigan Fox poll.

In North Carolina, Democratic former Gov. Roy Cooper is 14 points positive to former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley’s minus-1, which is a 15-point gap.

In Ohio, Democratic former Sen. Sherrod Brown is above water by 4 points, while appointed GOP Sen. Jon Husted is 5 points underwater — a 9-point gap.

In Alaska, Democratic former Rep. Mary Peltola is plus-9 to GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan’s plus-1 image rating — an 8-point gap.

And even in Michigan, El-Sayed isn’t the only one who’s unpopular. Republican former Rep. Mike Rogers is too — just less so, at minus-6 in the Fox poll.

Across the eight states, the Democratic nominee’s image is 8 points positive on average, while the Republican’s is 5 points negative. And that includes Michigan.

A big question is how much that’s a reflection of the candidates themselves versus the national environment. Voters are clearly frustrated with Trump, and that could filter down to the Republicans (like Susan Collins) who are viewed as his enablers.

But that explains only so much. The Democratic Party is not exactly popular right now — indeed, it’s about as unpopular as the GOP — and yet its nominees in some key races appear likable to voters. That suggests some solid recruiting and, in the cases of Turek and Talarico, shepherding of their candidates through competitive primaries.

It’s possible that Democrats will need El-Sayed to win to have a shot at the Senate majority; that’s how tough this year’s map is for the party. And that’s a big reason there has been such consternation about nominating him.

But it’s certainly not the full picture of the battle for the Senate.

美资助菲国新海上监控中心 中国强调合作不应损害第三方利益

2026-08-18 17:03 / 联合早报

美国驻菲律宾大使馆称，美国已资助在菲国设立的新海上监控中心，这个中心将收集菲国渔民关于非法捕鱼和可疑船只活动的实时报告后，中国外交部强调美菲两国正常合作不应损害第三方的利益。

据《菲律宾星报》报道，美国驻菲使馆上星期四（8月13日）宣布上述信息。这个监控中心位于菲律宾巴拉望，名为社区非法、未报告和无管制捕鱼举报中心，并于上月30日在巴拉望可持续发展委员会的合作下成立。

美国驻菲使馆也在官网上说，使馆通过“渔业权利项目”（Fish Right Project），与巴拉望可持续发展委员会合作启动这个举报中心。

《菲律宾星报》也报道，“渔业权利”计划2018年启动，最初是美国国际开发署（USAID）的一项倡议，重点关注海洋生物多样性、可持续海鲜供应和社区渔业管理。

不过，在美国总统特朗普2025年1月发出冻结和审查所有对外援助的指示后，“渔业权利”计划从现已解散的美国国际开发署转移到美国国务院。

中国外交部发言人林剑星期二（18日）在例行记者会上回应相关提问时说，将密切关注有关情况。

林剑说，中国一贯认为，国与国之间开展交流合作，应当有助于增进地区国家间的相互理解与信任，有利于促进地区的和平稳定。中国不反对美菲开展正常合作，但有关合作不应针对第三方或损害第三方的利益。

Why states fought to present a united case against Meta over youth social media harms

2026-08-18T10:09:04.968Z / Reuters

Paul Schmidt, an attorney representing Meta, and Meta’s defense team leave the federal courthouse where a trial over allegations that Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to be addictive to children takes place, in Oakland, California, U.S., August 12, 2026. REUTERS/Manuel Orbegozo

[1/3]Paul Schmidt, an attorney representing Meta, and Meta’s defense team leave the federal courthouse where a trial over allegations that Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to be addictive to children takes place, in Oakland, California, U.S., August 12, 2026. REUTERS/Manuel Orbegozo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

Aug 18 (Reuters) – As opening statements get underway in a landmark trial over claims that Meta Platforms

META.O, opens new tab
misled the public about the safety of Instagram and Facebook for young users and violated child privacy laws, one of the biggest fights in the case has already been resolved: whether a bipartisan group of ​U.S. states could present their claims together.

The states pushed for a single trial covering state consumer protection and federal privacy claims brought ‌by 29 attorneys general, while Meta argued for a series of smaller trials grouping states that have similar laws.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

Report Ad!

The fight was about more than courtroom logistics. The states argued that the case centers on company-wide decisions affecting young users across the country and seeks nationwide changes to Meta’s platforms, and that jurors should hear a single story about Meta’s actions. Meta countered that ​jurors should evaluate states’ claims separately because the underlying laws differ and warned that a combined proceeding could blur important distinctions among the claims.

Ultimately, ​U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers adopted a hybrid approach for the multi-week trial, allowing Colorado, California, Kentucky and New ⁠Jersey to try their state law claims together, while also including the federal law claims brought by all of the states. Although Rogers will decide the case, ​she appointed an advisory jury whose findings may inform her final ruling.

The trial’s outcome could help guide how the remaining states’ claims are resolved, reshape how Facebook and Instagram ​operate, and force Meta to pay billions of dollars in penalties.

Meta has called the allegations unsubstantiated and said it stands by its work to protect teen users of its platforms.

‘A PROJECTION OF UNITY’

Legal experts said in a case against a company as well-capitalized as Meta, a multistate coalition gives the states the ability to pool resources and share expertise, and it may ​improve their credibility with the jury and the judge. They said attorneys general have used the strategy repeatedly in cases against the tobacco and opioid industries to ​strengthen their bargaining power and to present evidence of conduct that allegedly affected consumers across the country.

“A jury will see all these states banding together to do this, and that ‌presents kind ⁠of like a projection of unity,” said Prentiss Cox, a former assistant state attorney general in Minnesota who is now a law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. “Elected officials on different sides of a partisan world can agree that this is a problem that needs solving.”

The states’ lawsuit, which was filed in 2023, stems from a multistate investigation into Instagram and Facebook’s impact on young users. The states generally allege that Meta knowingly designed features in Instagram and Facebook to ​hook young users while assuring the public ​that the platforms were safe, conduct ⁠they argue violated state consumer protection laws.

A large portion of the states are also suing under a federal law, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, claiming Meta failed to obtain parental consent before collecting personal information from young users.

In pushing for ​smaller trials, Meta argued that a combined proceeding would require jurors to understand the different legal standards for each ​state claim, making it ⁠harder to fairly evaluate each one. The company also said it planned to defend against the claims with state-specific evidence, an approach it argued would be more difficult in a larger consolidated trial.

“The AGs offer no proof anyone in their states was misled,” a spokesperson for the company said in a statement ahead of trial. “Rather than sticking to ⁠the facts ​or the law, the states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout.”

Kentucky Attorney General Russell ​Coleman called the case the largest consumer protection lawsuit in American history.

“AGs are in the perfect position to get this done,” Coleman said in a statement. “We did it with the Tobacco Settlement in the ​1990s. We did it with the companies behind the opioid crisis. We’ll do it again with Meta.”

Reporting by Diana Novak Jones, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Nia Williams

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Diana reports on product liability, litigation, mass torts and the plaintiffs’ bar. She previously worked at Law360 and the Chicago Sun-Times.

U.S., Canada in last-minute talks to head off steep new U.S. tariffs

2026-08-18T07:28:23-0400 / CBS News

Washington— The United States and Canada have wrangled for decades over trade, poking each other interminably over sore spots like Canadian softwood lumber imports and U.S. access to Canada’s protected dairy market.

Somehow, the two neighbors still managed to remain friends, allies and trading partners. Canadian soldiers fought alongside Americans in Afghanistan after 9/11. The 5,525-mile U.S.-Canada border is undefended, and nearly 330,000 people and $2 billion dollars’ worth of goods cross it every day; 800,000 Canadians live in the United States.

But a belligerent approach by President Trump to dealing with Canada marks an extraordinary departure from the traditionally cooperative relationship between the two countries. Mr. Trump has hit Canadian goods with tariffs – in a push to bring manufacturing back to the United States – and has repeatedly made inflammatory comments about turning Canada into America’s 51st state.

The Canadian public is fed up. A petition to expel the U.S. ambassador, a Trump ally, has collected nearly 218,000 signatures since July 21. It accuses Ambassador Pete Hoekstra of having “normalized” Mr. Trump’s talk of annexing Canada, among other things.

Tension could hit new heights at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday if Mr. Trump goes ahead with his plan to impose 50% tariffs on $20 billion worth of Canadian products, ranging from hockey sticks to tongue depressors.

As the deadline approaches, the two countries are seeking a truce that would avoid the new round of tariffs.

″We are negotiating,” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told reporters Monday, speaking in French. “The negotiations are very intense and delicate. This is not the time to talk about negotiations in public.”

President Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in undated photos. CBS News

Mr. Trump has had a tense relationship with Canada due to trade,NATO, a dispute over aDetroit-area bridgeand his threats to make Canada the U.S.’ 51st state.

The Trump administration’s tariffs on goods from Canada — thesecond-largestU.S. trading partner —currently standat 10%, though most Canadian imports areexemptbecause they comply with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, a trade deal signed during Mr. Trump’s first term.

Nearly 72% of Canadian goods exported last year went to the United States. And the Trump administration might be wary of imposing a hefty new tariff – paid by U.S. importers who try to pass along the cost to consumers via higher prices – ahead of November’s midterm elections. American voters are already frustrated with the high cost of living.

“I don’t think either side really wants these tariffs to come into effect,” said Ryan Majerus, a partner at King & Spalding and a former U.S. trade official. “There’s a pretty strong push on both sides to find an off ramp here.”

What the two sides are seeking

Majerus said the United States is aiming to get Canada to buy more U.S. military equipment, including F-35 fighters; to take part in Mr. Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense; and to give the United States more access to critical minerals, thereby reducing America’s reliance on tenuous supplies from geopolitical rival China.

The Canadians would like relief from U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum as well as softwood lumber, which America says receives unfair government subsidies.

Mr. Trump has made tariffs the centerpiece of his second-term economic agenda. Last year, he imposed double-digit import taxes on almost every country on Earth, justifying them by declaring the longstanding U.S. trade deficit a national emergency. The Supreme Court in February ruled that he’d overstepped his authority, striking down those tariffs and setting the stage for the federal government to pay refunds to importers.

Mr. Trump immediately looked for other ways to rebuild his tariff wall. Last month, he imposed import taxes of 10% to 12.5% on 59 countries and the European Union – which together account for 99% of U.S. imports – for allegedly failing to have or to enforce restrictions on imports made from forced labor.

Depression-era measure instituted

Then he reached back to the Great Depression to find a cudgel with which to whack Canada, one of his favorite targets.

Mr. Trump invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to impose 50% tariffs on products that account for about 5% of Canadian exports to the United States.

Nearly a century ago, with the U.S. and world economies in collapse, Congress passed the 1930 tariff law imposing hefty taxes on imports from around the world. Known as the Smoot-Hawley tariffs, for their congressional sponsors, they are notorious among economists and historians for limiting world commerce and making the Great Depression worse.

Section 338 tariffs have never been used before. U.S. trade negotiators traditionally have favored another tool, Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 – the provision Mr. Trump invoked for last month’s forced-labor tariffs.

Section 338 authorizes the president to impose tariffs of up to 50% on imports from countries that have discriminated against U.S. businesses. Unlike Section 301 sanctions, no investigation is required. Nor is there any limit on how long the tariffs can stay in place.

In announcing the Section 338 tariffs, Mr. Trump claimed Canada discriminates against American exports of autos, alcohol and cheese. The president is angry because Canada and China were the only countries that punched back with retaliatory tariffs when he slapped levies on their products last year.

“If a country retaliates against us, we’re obviously not going to tolerate that,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told reporters Friday at the Iowa State Fair. “We’ll take action. My sense is the Canadians, they want to have a more conciliatory approach, but we’ll see.”

The U.S. is renegotiating the North American trade pact – the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement – that Mr. Trump strong-armed America’s neighbors into accepting in his first term. The threat of Section 338 tariffs gives the United States leverage to seek fresh concessions from Ottawa.

“From Carney’s perspective, you need (USMCA) to be renegotiated,” said Christopher Gundermann, a fellow in the economics program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “You can’t renegotiate it with a massive trade war going on.”

But the Canadian public’s furor over Mr. Trump’s policies may limit Carney’s ability to cut a deal. Canada could retaliate again if the new 50% tariffs take effect, potentially aggravating a trade fight.

Canada’s government “cannot look like it is simply caving to the Trump administration’s demands,” said Daniel Béland, a political science professor at McGill University in Montreal. “Making further concessions without getting something meaningful in exchange would probably lead to a strong backlash … The risk is for the Carney government to make Canada look weak and, therefore, even more vulnerable to future trade and geopolitical bullying on the part of the Trump administration.”

Dominic LeBlanc, Canada’s minister for U.S. trade, met with Greer on Monday. He was tight-lipped afterward.

“The work is continuing,” he said. “We continue do our job.”

‘One person kind of controls our fate’: Republicans confront growing midterm peril due to Iran war

2026-08-18T09:00:29.122Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/18/politics/republicans-iran-war-donald-trump

Some Republicans are growing impatient with President Donald Trump’s war in Iran as it stretches to nearly six months and threatens to further imperil their chances in the midterms.

But in the most competitive House and Senate races, vulnerable Republicans are largely standing behind him, gambling that voters can stomach the economic pain of the war for national security.

“Let’s deal with this now, and let’s get it done,” Rep. Zach Nunn of Iowa, a combat veteran who served in Afghanistan and Iraq, told reporters Monday in his state, painting a contrast with Democrats who, he said, are advocating for “just giving up.”

It is a central tension in the midterms, when the GOP is defending a thin House majority and hoping to keep its Senate majority too. Poll after poll shows the war is unpopular, but Republicans are reluctant to publicly break with a president who remains popular inside their party.

“There is one person in this country who doesn’t care about gas prices — just one — and unfortunately that one person kind of controls our fate,” said Barrett Marson, a Republican strategist in Arizona. “For Republicans, it is a balancing act on the thinnest of wires to still support the president but also feel the pain that voters are going through.”

Sen. Jim Justice of West Virginia told reporters Monday in Washington that the war has become a “mess” and that Republicans need to do a better job addressing voter concerns about the economy.

“We’ve gone through months that everybody sat back and said, ‘Oh, it’ll be OK. It’ll be OK.’ And I’ve been the voice that’s been saying, ‘You people are living in a cave if you don’t see that the folks out there, the Toby and Ediths out there, are hurting,’” Justice said. “We need to absolutely be more in tune with them.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson, a close Trump ally, offered a matter-of-fact assessment while campaigning Monday in Virginia with swing-district Rep. Jen Kiggans, who will face former Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria in November.

“The Iran conflict has been the cause, of course, of gas prices going up. It’s drug on,” Johnson told reporters.

At the same time, Johnson struck an optimistic note, saying he believes “we’ll be getting into a new phase … that will hold gas prices down to planet Earth and that will also bring down grocery prices.”

Trump has not always been helpful to fellow Republicans who are concerned about the political consequences of the war. He has downplayed concerns about gas prices going up, saying he will “never apologize” for taking military action against Iran. And he has questioned the need to campaign during the midterms because he is not on the ballot in November, though he has green-lighted using millions from his personal PAC to help vulnerable GOP candidates.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Monday found that just 3 in 10 voters approved of Trump’s handling of Iran. Numbers like those have given Democrats an opening to make the war a staple of their campaigns.

During a rally Sunday in Atlanta, one of the most vulnerable Democratic lawmakers in the midterms, Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia, tore into Trump as disengaged and distracted as Americans suffer from a war he started.

“There’s something uniquely despicable about lying a nation into war, treating citizens as fools and those who serve as pawns,” Ossoff said.

Attack ads are increasingly painting Republicans as the party of unending war and rising costs. VoteVets, a group that works to elect Democratic veterans, launched an ad campaign last week that targeted Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan over the war, blaming him for $9-per-gallon gas in Dillingham, Alaska, though rural parts of the state have long had prices well above the national average.

“Billions sent overseas and Alaskans get socked in the wallet,” a narrator says in the spot, which focuses on Sullivan’s votes against reining in Trump’s Iran war powers.

A Sullivan campaign spokesman, Nate Adams, said in a statement that the senator “supported decisive action to stop the world’s leading state sponsor of terror from acquiring a nuclear weapon which was a threat to the United States, American service members, our allies, and to global energy markets held hostage by Iran.”

Among vulnerable House Republicans, Reps. Tom Barrett of Michigan and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania have stood out for voting to limit Trump’s Iran war powers. But they remain outliers as most of their GOP colleagues argue that the war is worth seeing through.

Kiggans, during a podcast interview earlier this month, admitted she would like to see a “quick resolution” to the conflict but otherwise urged support for Trump’s approach.

“We need to continue to support (the military) and to support the objectives which the president has made clear, to make sure Iran, again, doesn’t have nuclear weapons and the Straits of Hormuz are kept open,” Kiggans said. “I support those military actions and I stand with our men and women in uniform and their families every day of the week.”

The National Republican Congressional Committee suggested the election was a choice between Republicans committed to disarming Iran and Democrats who “spent a decade bankrolling the regime.”

“That’s the record Republicans are running on: keep America safe, secure the border, lower costs, cut taxes, and restore common sense,” spokesman Mike Marinella said. “President Trump’s leadership has made America stronger abroad and safer at home.”

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee countered in a statement that Republicans were “blindly following Donald Trump’s ego.”

“They’d rather defend an endless war in Iran than stand up for their constituents,” DCCC spokesperson Aidan Johnson said, “and it will cost Republicans the majority.”

CNN’s Morgan Rimmer contributed to this report.

美国承诺：哈马斯缴械前不逼迫以军撤离加沙

2026年8月18日 19:52 / 联合早报

以色列与哈马斯的战斗仍持续，和平前景不容乐观。图为本月16日加沙南部汗尤尼斯遭以军轰炸后的情况，加沙难民只能无助地看着家园反复被摧毁。 （路透社）

（耶路撒冷综合电）美国向以色列承诺，在哈马斯解除武装前，不会逼迫以军撤离加沙或者对加沙进行重建。美方的最新立场，与哈马斯始终坚持以色列撤出加沙是先决条件的原则相互矛盾，让加沙和平协议的谈判再次蒙上阴影。

美国中东特使、总统特朗普的女婿库什纳周一（8月17日）在耶路撒冷与以色列总理内坦亚胡会面，向以色列作出上述承诺。当天参与会见的，还有和平委员会官员。以色列高级官员会后透露，内坦亚胡和库什纳也达致共识，在哈马斯解除武装之前不启动加沙的重建工作。

官员还说，双方商定，“实现加沙非军事化的第一步，就是要哈马斯交出武器，并在美方将领的监督下将武器销毁”。

美方表达的这一立场，或会削弱加沙达成和平协议的希望。因为哈马斯一直坚持以军必须先撤离加沙，料不会接受美以的最新安排。

不过，库什纳周一接受福克斯新闻台采访称，加沙和平谈判有望在一个月内取得进展。“我们可能最快在30天内就看到进展，希望到时能够开始清除部分武器，并在接下来60到90天内填埋部分地道”。

库什纳还说，一旦威胁迫在眉睫，美方不会限制以色列的自卫权。

由特朗普主导成立的和平委员会上月底公布15点和平计划，要求哈马斯解除武装，以色列分阶段从加沙撤军。内坦亚胡随后在本月9日宣布拒绝接受加沙和平计划，表明在哈马斯解除武装前，以军绝不撤出加沙地带。

中国船只疑似在冲绳日本EEZ进行海洋调查

2026年8月18日 15:35 / 联合早报

日本媒体报道，中国船只疑似在冲绳波照间日本专属经济区（EEZ） 进行海洋调查。

据共同社报道，日本第11管区海上保安总部（那霸）称，星期一（8月17日）下午1时35分前后，在冲绳县波照间岛东南偏南约85公里的EEZ发现中国海洋调查船将类似线缆的物体投入海中。

第11管区称，上周六（8月15日）以后也在尖阁诸岛（中国称钓鱼岛）及久米岛海域EEZ发现另外的中国船只开展类似行动。

日方称，中国船只开展未获日本同意的海洋科考，海保巡逻船对于上述动向，均通过无线电要求停止作业。

涉潜寺庙“钓”善款后离境 两中国男返新被捕

2026年8月18日 15:48 / 陈秋静, 曾薪机 / 新明日报

寺庙僧侣如今每晚都会锁紧门窗。 （曾美玲摄）

两名中国籍男子涉潜入庙宇，“钓”出善款后离境，四个月后返新被捕。

警方星期一（8月17日）晚上发文告指，这起案件发生于今年4月2日凌晨约零时30分，地点在马里士他一带大人路（Tai Gin Road）14号的新加坡缅甸玉佛寺。

根据初步调查，两名落网的中国男子在潜入庙宇后，利用贴有胶带的卡片从捐款箱中“钓”取并盗走300元至400元现金。

东陵警署的警员展开调查和调阅警方电眼画面后，确认两人的身份。两人在案发当天离境，直到星期天（16日）再度入境时被逮捕。初步调查显示，被盗的现金已被两人花掉。

根据控状，两人分别是50岁的廖全万和43岁的廖永詹，他们被控于当天凌晨擅闯寺庙，并从捐款箱内偷走数额不详的款项。

两人星期二（18日）面控时表情冷静，控方要求将他们还押兀兰警署一周，案件展期至本月25日过堂。

两人在庭上都要求通知大使馆，其中廖永詹还要求申请援助律师。

根据刑事法典第451节条文，破门行窃一旦罪成，违例者可被判坐牢最长10年和罚款。

警方提醒业主小心提防偷窃，无人看管时可用栅栏和封闭式挂锁锁好所有门户、卷帘、窗户和其他入口，也应避免存放大量现金，并安装防盗警报器、移动感应灯或闭路电视，同时也要定期检查，确保处于良好的运作情况。（人名音译）

日本福岛县桃子时隔16年恢复出口台湾

2026-08-18 15:49 / 联合早报

时隔16年，日本福岛县桃子再次重返台湾市场。

据日本共同社报道，日本福岛县、JA全农福岛、JA福岛未来星期一（8月17日）正式恢复向台湾出口当地生产的桃子。这是2011年福岛核事故后的首次。

据福岛县等出口商介绍，在核事故发生前的2010年，当地桃子的出口量为28.8吨，其中面向台湾市场的出口占了18.5吨。受核事故影响，出口一度中断，虽然在2023年和2025年试验性地输出经放射性物质检测确认安全的产品，但数量仍较少。

台湾官方去年全面解禁对日本福岛县等地的食品出口限制，促成了上述出口的恢复。

星期一当天共计40箱（约200公斤）的桃子被叉车装上卡车运送到分拣场。桃子将经由东京丰洲市场，从成田机场空运至台湾，预计将在当地的百货店销售。预定到9月11日将出货约4.5吨。

JA福岛未来园艺课课长藤野喜幸对恢复出口表示欢迎，并称：“此举有助于增强生产者的信心，从提升福岛桃子品牌价值来说也是非常大的一步。”

据台湾CTWANT报道，随着台湾卫生福利部去年年11月全面取消对福岛等日本五县市食品的特殊进口管制措施，不再强制要求检附产地证明与辐射检测证明，台日农政检疫单位也加速推进水果出口检疫流程。

台湾农业部防检疫署上星期二（11日）证实，应日本检疫单位邀请，今年7月底派遣人员赴日进行现场实地病虫害检查。经查核，位于福岛县伊达市梁川钉的Anpo工房Mirai以及福岛市荒井的ABE Fruit两处选果场相关设施均通过合格评估。

农业部8月6日正式更新日本水蜜桃进口选果场名单，增列上述两处福岛选果场，代表其产制的水蜜桃正式取得进口台湾的资格。

闯前女友家见男人怒打 火爆男罚5000元

2026年8月18日 15:50 / 吴依瑾 / 新明日报

被告林俊宏被判罚款5000元。 （潘丰源摄）

男子与前女友分手后，为取回游戏机竟闯入女方住家，发现对方家中有男性友人后开始质问双方关系，之后愤而拳打男方，还拿凳子砸人，导致对方拇指骨折。

被告林俊宏（36岁，译音）共面对三项控状，包括蓄意伤人、滋事及擅闯。他承认其中一项，法官将另两项一并考量后，判处他罚款5000元。

受害者是被告前女友（31岁）的一名男性友人（30岁）。

案情显示，2023年2月19日晚上，被告的前女友邀请受害者到家中打电子游戏。不久后，前女友发现被告使用电子门锁密码企图进入她的住家。该密码是被告在两人交往期间取得的。

被告当时声称要取回他的PlayStation游戏机，因为前女友已告知打算结束两人的关系。

被告入屋后，发现受害者坐在沙发上，便质问前女友对方为何在场。前女友解释对方只是来打电子游戏，但被告不满意这个说法，双方随后针对感情关系发生争执。

其间，两人在屋内外持续地吵架。被告一度离开前女友住家后又折返，并直接质问受害者与前女友的关系。

受害者没有回应，结果被告情绪愈发激动，最终升级到肢体冲突。

前女友情急下致电母亲求助，母亲在翌日凌晨2时许帮忙报警，请警员到场。

案情也揭露，被告多次挥拳击打受害者头部、脸部及胸部，并将他按压在沙发上，随后还拿起一张塑料凳子砸向对方。

被告动手后曾一度离开单位，但之后又折返，再次询问两人的关系，几度大闹后才离开。

前女友随后开车送受害者前往盛港综合医院接受治疗。受害者因遭被告袭击，左拇指骨折，额头、手肘和肩胛骨也出现挫伤，右手中指则轻微割伤。他获数天病假，出院时左拇指仍须用夹板固定。

控状也显示，被告曾于2022年9月4日，在本地夜店Marquee Club与数人群殴。