Narendra Modi becomes first sitting PM to visit Dharmasthala

The US military has struck the western Yemeni oil port of Ras Isa, leaving dozens of workers and paramedics dead, and dozens more injured.

The facility in Hudaydah governorate was hit at least two times on Thursday night, with the second strike coming as civil defense and rescue teams were extinguishing fires and recovering victims. The second attack killed at least five paramedics.

The Palestinian Information Center and al-Manar TV now report that at least 38 people have been killed in that attack, while 102 others injured.

The Yemeni government slammed the attack as a clear war crime aimed at supporting the Zionist regime and enabling it to continue the Gaza genocide.

It said the strikes prove that the US deliberately attacks civilian infrastructure in Yemen with false justifications.

The government vowed that this crime would not pass without painful punishment, and the US would reap nothing but humiliating defeat and failure.

The US military claimed the port was a source of fuel for the Ansarullah resistance movement.

The governorates of Sana'a, al-Bayda and Hudaydah were also hit with multiple strikes.

The United States intensified its deadly attacks on the country last month at President Donald Trump’s direct orders.

Washington claims the raids are strictly aimed at protecting shipping activity around Yemen, alleging that the regional waterways’ maritime security had been endangered by Sana’a.

Yemeni officials have, however, roundly rejected such claims, underlining that the country only targeted vessels belonging to the Israeli regime and ships taking supplies to it.

The operations implemented by Yemen’s Armed Forces began in October 2023, when the Israeli regime, the US’s most cherished regional ally, began taking the Gaza Strip under a genocidal war.

More than 51,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, have been killed as a result of the warfare, which receives hugely enhanced and unstinting arms support on the part of Washington.

India has banned 16 Pakistani YouTube channels, which collectively boast 63 million subscribers, for spreading provocative and communally sensitive content in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack, government sources confirmed. The ban was enforced following recommendations from the Union Ministry of Home Affairs.

The banned channels include those affiliated with prominent news outlets such as:

Dawn

Samaa TV

ARY News

Bol News

Raftar

Geo News

Suno News

Additionally, channels operated by journalists:

Irshad Bhatti

Asma Shirazi

Umar Cheema

Muneeb Farooq

Other banned channels include:

The Pakistan Reference

Samaa Sports

Uzair Cricket

Razi Naama

Government sources indicated that these channels were responsible for spreading provocative content, false narratives, and misinformation targeting India, its army, and its security agencies. The action follows the deadly terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, which resulted in the deaths of 25 tourists and a local Kashmiri. These channels were accused of fueling tensions between India and Pakistan, exacerbating the already strained diplomatic relations.

When attempting to access these channels, users are met with the following message: "This content is currently unavailable in this country due to an order from the government related to national security or public order. For more details about government removal requests, please visit the Google Transparency Report (transparencyreport.google.com)."

The ban comes as part of India’s broader response to Pakistan, which is suspected of playing a role in the Pahalgam terror attack. In retaliation, India has suspended the Indus Water Treaty and visa services for Pakistani nationals. Pakistan has responded by stating its right to suspend all bilateral agreements with India, including the Simla Agreement.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has vowed that those responsible for the attack on April 22 would face unimaginable consequences. He emphasized that India would identify, track, and punish every terrorist and their backers, stating that the spirit of the country would remain unbroken.

"From Kargil to Kanyakumari, there is grief and rage. This attack was not just on innocent tourists; the country’s enemies have shown the audacity to attack India’s soul," Modi said. "The time has come to demolish whatever remains of the terror haven. The will of 140 crore people will break the back of the masters of terror," he added.

In a related development, the Indian government has issued a warning to the BBC over a controversial headline in its coverage of the Kashmir attack. The headline, which read "Pakistan suspends visas for Indians after deadly Kashmir attack on tourists," was criticized for implying that India was responsible for the killings of the tourists. Several social media users highlighted the issue, prompting the Ministry of External Affairs' External Publicity Department to convey the government's displeasure to Jackie Martin, BBC’s India head. Sources indicate that a formal letter was also sent to the BBC regarding its use of the term "militants" to describe the terrorists involved in the attack. The government has stated that it will closely monitor future BBC reporting on the issue.

In a controversial statement that has sparked alarm among legal experts and constitutional scholars, Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar criticized the judiciary for allegedly overstepping its bounds, particularly targeting the Supreme Court’s recent verdict that set deadlines for the President and Governors to act on Bills.

“We cannot have a situation where courts direct the President,” Mr. Dhankhar said, suggesting that the judiciary is interfering with the powers of the executive. He further described Article 142 of the Constitution — which empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary to do "complete justice" — as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24x7.”

This incendiary metaphor has drawn backlash for implying that judicial independence — a cornerstone of democracy — is somehow hostile or dangerous. Critics argue that such rhetoric undermines public trust in the judiciary and risks damaging the careful separation of powers between branches of government.

While addressing the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns, the Vice President also referred to a serious incident involving a Delhi High Court judge, Yashwant Varma, from whose residence a large amount of cash was allegedly recovered in March. He questioned the delayed disclosure of the incident and criticized the absence of an FIR against the judge.

“An FIR in this country can be registered against anyone, any constitutional functionary, including the one before you... But if it is Judges, FIR cannot be straightaway registered. It has to be approved by the concerned in the Judiciary, but that is not given in the Constitution,” he argued.

He went on to question why judges, unlike the President and Governors, appear to enjoy immunity not explicitly provided in the Constitution.

“If the event had taken place at his house, the speed would have been an electronic rocket. Now it is not even a cattle cart,” he remarked, criticizing the pace of response and investigation.

Why These Remarks Are Dangerous

While scrutiny of public institutions is necessary in a democracy, the Vice President’s remarks are concerning for several reasons:

1.    Undermining Judicial Authority: By calling Article 142 a "nuclear missile," the Vice President risks portraying the judiciary as a threat rather than a guardian of constitutional rights.

2.    Challenging Separation of Powers: The suggestion that courts should not “direct” the President could erode judicial checks on executive inaction or overreach, especially when constitutional responsibilities are being delayed or ignored.

3.    Eroding Public Confidence: As the Vice President of India — also the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha — such statements carry institutional weight. Attacks on judicial legitimacy can embolden other political actors to disregard court rulings, weakening the rule of law.

4.    Threatening Judicial Independence: Implying that judges should be more easily prosecuted, without proper due process and internal accountability, could be seen as an attempt to intimidate the judiciary.

5.    Fueling Distrust During Sensitive Times: At a moment when public trust in institutions is essential, these remarks may sow unnecessary suspicion and politicize judicial matters that require careful and independent handling.

The Vice President’s speech has ignited a vital conversation about accountability and judicial conduct. However, framing the judiciary as a rogue institution and questioning its constitutional powers without nuance is fraught with danger. Safeguarding democracy requires mutual respect and balance among all pillars of governance — executive, legislature, and judiciary. When this balance is disturbed through political rhetoric, it threatens not just institutions, but the very foundation of constitutional democracy.