World News
Houthi drone ship explodes in Red Sea as US steps up warnings on January 5, 2024 at 3:38 am
A drone boat filled with explosives launched from the part of Yemen controlled by Iran-backed Houthi militants drew within “a couple of miles” of U.S. Navy and commercial ships in the Red Sea before detonating on Thursday, according to the Pentagon.
The explosion of the unmanned surface vessel (USV) — which had transited 50 miles from Yemen out into Red Sea shipping lanes — came after the U.S. and 11 other countries called on Yemen’s Houthis to stop their attacks on merchant ships in the area, warning of unspecified “consequences.”
The incident also marks the first time the group had used a drone ship to attempt to attack commercial vessels in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden since the Israel-Hamas war began in October, according to Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, head of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command.
“It came within a couple of miles of ships operating in the area — merchant ships and U.S. Navy ships — and we all watched as it exploded,” Cooper told reporters, noting that the intended target of the attack was unclear.
Since Nov. 18, the Houthis have aimed numerous exploding drones and missiles at merchant ships in an attempt to damage the vessels in protest of Israel’s deadly and catastrophic air campaign and on-the-ground military operations in the Gaza Strip.
The bombardments have successfully disrupted international shipping, with some companies suspending their Red Sea transits.
Cooper said there have been 25 Houthi attacks on merchant vessels transiting the southern Red Sea and Gulf of Aden since mid-November, including Thursday’s, with “no signs that their irresponsible behavior is abating.”
There have been no casualties thus far, but he hinted that it may only be a matter of time before that could occur.
“Shipping lanes in this region are dense. The vessels approach a chokepoint. . . they often form very narrow lines and travel near each other,” Cooper said. “This, coupled with the fact that Houthi missiles often miss their intended target, means that any ship, really at any time, is at risk of collateral damage when passing through the Houthi-controlled territory in the vicinity of the southern Red Sea.”
Cooper said that no Houthi drones or missiles have hit a commercial ship in the waterways since Dec. 18, when the U.S. launched Operation Prosperity Guardian, a now 22-nation maritime task force meant to defend ships from Houthi aggression in the Red Sea.
The U.S., United Kingdom and France have provided the bulk of the warships, but Greece and Denmark will follow with their own vessels, he said.
Since Operation Prosperity Guardian began, the coalition has shot down 19 drones and missiles, including two cruise missiles and six anti-ship ballistic missiles. The group also sunk three small Houthi boats on Sunday, according to Cooper.
He added that 1,500 commercial ships have been able to transit the waterway safely since the operation began.
Still, President Biden has come under pressure from lawmakers who demand he should respond militarily, an action the administration has expressed hesitation over — baring a defensive strike — due to fears that regional tensions may worsen or expand into a wider conflict.
“This is a global crisis brought on by weak presidential leadership. It is time for President Biden to allow our regional commanders the freedom of action they need to end terrorist behavior by the Houthis,” Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said in a statement later Thursday. “We cannot let terrorists dictate the flow of global trade in one of the world’s largest shipping lanes.”
Cooper, meanwhile, said Operation Prosperity Guardian is strictly defensive in nature.
“Anything that happens outside of the defensive aspect of this operation is a completely different operation,” he said.
A drone boat filled with explosives launched from the part of Yemen controlled by Iran-backed Houthi militants drew within “a couple of miles” of U.S. Navy and commercial ships in the Red Sea before detonating on Thursday, according to the Pentagon. The explosion of the unmanned surface vessel (USV) — which had transited 50 miles from Yemen out into Red Sea shipping lanes — came after the U.S. and 11 other countries called on Yemen’s Houthis to stop…
President Donald Trump says the United States might one day get rid of federal income tax because of money the government collects from tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are extra taxes the U.S. puts on products that come from other countries.
What Trump Is Saying
Trump has said that tariff money could become so large that it might allow the government to cut income taxes “almost completely.” He has also talked about possibly phasing out income tax over the next few years if tariff money keeps going up.
How Taxes Work Now
Right now, the federal government gets much more money from income taxes than from tariffs. Income taxes bring in trillions of dollars each year, while tariffs bring in only a small part of that total. Because of this gap, experts say tariffs would need to grow by many times to replace income tax money.
Questions From Experts
Many economists and tax experts doubt that tariffs alone could pay for the whole federal budget. They warn that very high tariffs could make many imported goods more expensive for shoppers in the United States. This could hit lower- and middle‑income families hardest, because they spend a big share of their money on everyday items.
What Congress Must Do
The president can change some tariffs, but only Congress can change or end the federal income tax. That means any real plan to remove income tax would need new laws passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So far, there is no detailed law or full budget plan on this idea.
What It Means Right Now
For now, Trump’s comments are a proposal, not a change in the law. People and businesses still have to pay federal income tax under the current rules. The debate over using tariffs instead of income taxes is likely to continue among lawmakers, experts, and voters.
Former President Donald Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to declassify all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death in 2019 continues to fuel controversy and speculation.
The order, signed Wednesday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, instructs the FBI, Department of Justice, and intelligence agencies to release documents detailing Epstein’s network, finances, and alleged connections to high-profile figures. Trump described the move as “a step toward transparency and public trust,” promising that no names would be shielded from scrutiny.
“This information belongs to the American people,” Trump said in a televised statement. “For too long, powerful interests have tried to bury the truth. That ends now.”
U.S. intelligence officials confirmed that preparations for the release are already underway. According to sources familiar with the process, the first batch of documents is expected to be made public within the next 30 days, with additional releases scheduled over several months.
Reactions poured in across the political spectrum. Supporters praised the decision as a bold act of accountability, while critics alleged it was politically motivated, timed to draw attention during a volatile election season. Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, emphasized caution, warning that some records could expose private victims or ongoing legal matters.
The Epstein case, which implicated figures in politics, business, and entertainment, remains one of the most talked-about scandals of the past decade. Epstein’s connections to influential individuals—including politicians, royals, and executives—have long sparked speculation about the extent of his operations and who may have been involved.
Former federal prosecutor Lauren Fields said the release could mark a turning point in public discourse surrounding government transparency. “Regardless of political stance, this declassification has the potential to reshape how Americans view power and accountability,” Fields noted.
Officials say redactions may still occur to protect sensitive intelligence or personal information, but the intent is a near-complete disclosure. For years, critics of the government’s handling of Epstein’s case have accused agencies of concealing evidence or shielding elites from exposure. Trump’s order promises to change that narrative.
As anticipation builds, journalists, legal analysts, and online commentators are preparing for what could be one of the most consequential information releases in recent history.
What Happened at the United Nations
On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, defending Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza. As he spoke, more than 100 delegates from over 50 countries stood up and left the chamber—a rare and significant diplomatic walkout. Outside the UN, thousands of protesters gathered to voice opposition to Netanyahu’s policies and call for accountability, including some who labeled him a war criminal. The protest included activists from Palestinian and Jewish groups, along with international allies.
Why Did Delegates and Protesters Walk Out?
The walkouts and protests were a response to Israel’s continued offensive in Gaza, which has resulted in widespread destruction and a significant humanitarian crisis. Many countries and individuals have accused Israel of excessive use of force, and some international prosecutors have suggested Netanyahu should face investigation by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, including claims that starvation was used as a weapon against civilians. At the same time, a record number of nations—over 150—recently recognized the State of Palestine, leaving the United States as the only permanent UN Security Council member not to join them.
International Reaction and Significance
The diplomatic walkouts and street protests demonstrate increasing global concern over the situation in Gaza and growing support for Palestinian statehood. Several world leaders, including Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro, showed visible solidarity with protesters. Petro called for international intervention and, controversially, for US troops not to follow orders he viewed as supporting ongoing conflict. The US later revoked Petro’s visa over his role in the protests, which he argued was evidence of a declining respect for international law.
Why Is This News Important?
The Gaza conflict is one of the world’s most contentious and closely-watched issues. It has drawn strong feelings and differing opinions from governments, activists, and ordinary people worldwide. The United Nations, as an international organization focused on peace and human rights, is a key arena for these debates. The events surrounding Netanyahu’s speech show that many nations and voices are urging new action—from recognition of Palestinian rights to calls for sanctions against Israel—while discussion and disagreement over the best path forward continue.
This episode at the UN highlights how international diplomacy, public protests, and official policy are all intersecting in real time as the search for solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains urgent and unresolved.
Disney Brings Beloved Characters to ChatGPT After $1 Billion OpenAI Deal
Google Accused Of Favoring White, Asian Staff As It Reaches $28 Million Deal That Excludes Black Workers
