Month: February 2026

Iran’s military starting Thursday issued a warning to ships at sea that it planned to run a drill starting this weekend which is to include live firing in the Strait of Hormuz, potentially disrupting traffic through a waterway which sees 20% of all the world’s oil pass through it.

This prompted a US warning in response, given US forces are also in the region – but quite a bit further away. On Iran’s two-day live-fire naval exercise, US Central Command (CENTCOM) said it will not tolerate any unsafe behavior which threats US forces, and somewhat awkwardly called on IRGC forces to operate professionally.

“We will not tolerate unsafe IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) actions including overflight of U.S. military vessels engaged in flight operations, low-altitude or armed overflight of U.S. military assets when intentions are unclear, highspeed boat approaches on a collision course with U.S. military vessels, or weapons trained at U.S. forces,” CENTCOM said in its statement Friday.

“US forces acknowledge Iran’s right to operate professionally in international airspace and waters,” it added, and noted that “any unsafe and unprofessional behavior near U.S. forces, regional partners or commercial vessels increases risks of collision, escalation, and destabilization.”

Meanwhile the US forces build-up continues in the region:

A U.S. Navy destroyer made a port visit to the southern Israeli city of Eilat on Friday. The USS Delbert D. Black is one of six U.S. destroyers now in the Middle East, along with an aircraft carrier and three other combat ships.

China and Russia have just sent a big, resounding message to Washington in dispatching their own naval assets which have been sailing near Iranian vessels over the last several days – though this appeared for a prior, pre-planned joint drill.

China has dispatched several advanced destroyers toward Iranian waters, as Iran, Russia, and China prepare to hold joint naval drills near the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday.

Follow: https://t.co/7Dg3b41hTx pic.twitter.com/VtAp4fF8V8

— PressTV Extra (@PresstvExtra) January 30, 2026

According to the details of this prior joint exercise:

Ahead of the exercises, Iran issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), warning of live-fire military activity in the airspace surrounding the Strait of Hormuz.

According to the notice, military firing activity was conducted between January 27 and 29 within a five-nautical-mile radius. The airspace—from ground level up to 25,000 feet—was designated as restricted and hazardous throughout the duration of the maneuvers.

In parallel, the three countries just deepened trilateral ties:

In a dramatic geopolitical development… Iran, China and Russia formally signed a comprehensive strategic pact, marking one of the most consequential shifts in 21st-century international relations. While the full text of the agreement is being released in stages by the three governments, state media in Tehran, Beijing and Moscow have acknowledged the ceremony and described it as a cornerstone for a new multipolar order.

The pact comes against the backdrop of decades of growing cooperation between these three states. Iran and Russia earlier concluded a 20-year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty designed to deepen economic, political, and defense ties, and to blunt the impact of Western sanctions — a treaty that was signed in January 2025 and entered into force last year.  Meanwhile, Iran and China have been bound by a 25-year cooperation agreement first signed in 2021, aimed at expanding trade, infrastructure, and energy integration.

Still, none of this has deterred the ongoing Pentagon build-up in the Middle East with an eye on Iran. One thing the White House should be able to perceive, however, is that any military action against Tehran is going to clearly be much more complex, and harder, than some one-off mission in Venezuela.

The potential for massive blow-back and for things to go seriously awry is much greater in the case of the Islamic Republic.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epcoh Times,

The new work requirements to gain or continue eligibility for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) will start being implemented in several U.S. states beginning Feb. 1.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump in July, instituted new work requirements for SNAP beneficiaries to continue receiving benefits, targeting able-bodied adults without dependents.

People ages 18 to 54 are required to meet these conditions to receive SNAP benefits for more than three months in a three-year period, according to the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS).

Able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWD) must meet any of the following conditions—work at least 80 hours a month, participate in a work program for this duration, take part in a combination of work and work program hours for 80 hours a month at a minimum, or remain in a workfare for the required number of hours assigned each month, FNS said.

Millions of ABAWDs use SNAP benefits despite being able to work, compromising the true goal of the program, which is to provide financial support for vulnerable people who need help.

Some people are exempt from the work requirements, such as individuals who are unable to work due to mental or physical limitations, veterans, homeless people, and pregnant women, the agency said.

Individuals who meet the criteria but fail to fulfill work requirements will lose SNAP benefits after three months.

“To get SNAP again, you must meet the ABAWD work requirement for a 30-day period or become excused. Otherwise, you need to wait until the end of your three-year period, when you’ll get another three months under the time limit,” according to the agency.

The implementation dates of the SNAP work requirements vary from state to state.

In some states, people could lose benefits as soon as Feb. 1, if they can’t show they’re working. But many people have a month or more before their benefits are at risk.

Texas started its requirement in October, so people there could have exhausted their three months of benefits by Jan. 1 and already been removed from the rolls.

Several states started the three-month clock in November, opening the possibility of people losing benefits in the coming days. Among them are Alaska, Colorado, Georgia, and Hawaii.

The requirements take effect Sunday in other states, including Illinois and Ohio. In those places, people could lose benefits in May. Ohio says people will have to show proof of work starting in March.

Some states have exemptions because of relatively high unemployment rates, either statewide or in certain regions, that let them delay implementation, but most of those have ended or will soon. California’s waiver is scheduled to be in place until January 2027. For most of New York, the work requirement is to start in March.

Roughly 42 million Americans make use of the SNAP program and receive $177 per month on average, according to the Department of Agriculture.

Debate Over New Policy

The new work requirements for ABAWDs have faced criticism.

In an Oct. 21 statement, the advocacy group National Skills Coalition argued that the measure undermines workers.

Such requirements punish people for “systemic barriers outside their control,” it said. Losing out on SNAP benefits can make it harder for people to focus on their training or show up to work.

“Moreover, enforcing work requirements places a heavy administrative burden on states and workers. Human services agencies must notify recipients of the new requirements, verify work hours, track compliance, and process exemptions. In each of these activities there is room for error that can have devastating consequences for workers,” the National Skills Coalition said.

The group called on states to expand access to skill-building programs that connect SNAP beneficiaries with training and other supportive services, calling it a “better path forward” than enforcing punitive work rules.

In a May 15 statement published at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Health and Human Services secretary; Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of the CMS; Brooke Rollins, secretary of Agriculture; and Scott Turner, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, said the need for work requirements is justified.

Over the past decade, millions of able-bodied adults have been added to the SNAP program. Some of them do not work at all or work inconsistently throughout the year, the officials wrote.

The higher share of welfare spending taken by able-bodied individuals of working age disrupts the true goal of programs like SNAP—to help people in need.

“For able-bodied adults, welfare should be a short-term hand-up, not a lifetime handout. But too many able-bodied adults on welfare are not working at all,” they wrote.

“Establishing universal work requirements for able-bodied adults across the welfare programs we manage will prioritize the vulnerable, empower able-bodied individuals, help rebuild thriving communities and protect the taxpayers.”

A jury on Friday found a psychologist and a surgeon liable for malpractice after they convinced a 16-year-old girl to lop off her breasts. This marks the first medical malpractice case involving a detransitioner to reach a verdict – and it has huge implications. 

Fox Varian, who identified as transgender at the time, was awarded $2 million in damages – which includes $1.6 million for past and future pain and suffering, and $400,000 for future medical expenses. Now 22, Varian identifies as a woman. 

The January 30 decision at Westchester County Courthouse in White Plains, New York, found both Dr. Kenneth Einhorn, a psychologist, and Dr. Simon Chin, a surgeon, liable for failing to meet standards of care before performing irreversible surgery on Fox Varian, as they had skipped over important steps while evaluating whether she should move forward with the surgery, and failed to adequately communicate with each other in a “departure from the standard of care.” 

BREAKING: 1st Detransitioner to Take a Medical-Malpractice Lawsuit to Trial Wins $2 Million Judgement

Fox Varian sued her Westchester, NY, area psychologist and plastic surgeon for the gender-transition mastectomy she got at 16.

I was the only reporter to attend the entire… pic.twitter.com/4e89PSgGDg

— Benjamin Ryan (@benryanwriter) January 31, 2026

In closing arguments, Varian’s attorney Adam Deutsch asked the jury for $8 million in damages, citing Varian’s reaction to seeing her post-surgical chest scars. 

“I immediately had a thought that this was wrong, and it couldn’t be true,” she said, adding that the surgery left her with ‘searing hot’ nerve pain that were ‘ripping sensations across my chest.’

“Shame. I felt shame,” she added. “It’s hard to face that you are disfigured for life.”

The case centered on a referral letter Einhorn sent Chin in October 2019, roughly two months before the procedure. Deutsch argued the letter contained inaccuracies and omissions that left the surgeon without a complete picture of Varian’s psychological state.

Even more tragic is the way that Varian felt pressured into her decision and the doctors never figured it out.

Elon Musk referred to the doctors as “modern day Mengeles.”

There will be thousands of court cases of children who were mutilated by evil doctors, modern day Mengeles.

The schools, psychologists/psychiatrists and state officials who facilitated this will pay dearly too. https://t.co/1FrB6M50Tj

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 31, 2026

The Free Press reported last year, “gender doctors acknowledge they perform life-altering procedures on vulnerable youth with no supportive evidence—and they are proud of it.” One clinician even admitted, “We’re all just winging it, you know? And which is okay, you’re winging it too. But maybe we can just, like, wing it together.” 

The defense also claimed that Varian expressed no regret about the surgery until she filed her lawsuit in 2023. But Varian explained her earlier positive statements reflected cognitive dissonance as she tried to maintain a brave face despite inner turmoil.

Varian’s mother, Claire Deacon, testified she opposed the surgery but consented because she feared her daughter would commit suicide without it. This is a common occurrence with young people suffering from gender dysphoria. In 2024, the New York Times reported how parents of confused children are often emotionally blackmailed into consenting to these procedures when doctors tell them ‘Do you want a dead son or a live daughter?’

Parents are routinely warned that to pursue any path outside of agreeing with a child’s self-declared gender identity is to put a gender dysphoric youth at risk for suicide, which feels to many people like emotional blackmail. Proponents of the gender-affirming model have cited studies showing an association between that standard of care and a lower risk of suicide. But those studies were found to have methodological flaws or have been deemed not entirely conclusive.

As the Epoch Times continues, Varian wept and hugged her mother and attorney following the verdict, which concluded a three-week civil trial at the state Supreme Court in Westchester County.

“A jury of everyday Americans sent a clear message: justice will be served for vulnerable individuals who were misled into gender-transition procedures without appropriate safeguards,” said Josh Payne of the firm Campbell Miller Payne, who was not involved in the case but was in court observing Friday’s proceedings. His firm was founded three years ago to represent plaintiffs in cases similar to Varian’s.

The decision came after the young woman regretted the 2019 surgery and sued psychologist Dr. Kenneth Einhorn, surgeon Dr. Simon Chin, and their respective employers.

The six-member jury was not asked whether gender-related surgical procedures are appropriate for minors. The question was whether the therapist and doctor took the appropriate steps before the surgery was performed.

Varian’s attorney argued the healthcare professionals did not correctly diagnose and treat her for gender dysphoria—distress and anguish caused by a mismatch between one’s physical sex and their internal perception of their gender.

Chin and Einhorn’s attorneys argued that Varian did not express regret for the surgery until years later, when she filed the suit in 2023. They noted that she told Einhorn, Chin, and her mother that she was “happy” with the results, and continued to live as either male or non-binary for years after the procedure.

Neil Kornfeld, who represented Einhorn, read from an essay Varian wrote 10 months after the surgery to back up their claim.

“It’s such an immense relief to wake up and not feel at odds with my body,” she said at that time. On the witness stand, Varian said such comments came from “cognitive dissonance” as she tried to put on a brave face about her inner turmoil.

In October 2019, Einhorn wrote a referral letter to Chin supporting Varian’s decision to have the chest surgery; she had first brought up the idea to him in March that same year. Varian’s attorneys said that since the letter contained some omissions and inaccuracies, Chin didn’t have a clear picture of his patient’s psychological history.

Trial evidence showed that Einhorn didn’t have the full picture either.

Before the surgery, Varian had told staff at the Albany Pride Center that she felt she “felt pressure to decide” on a male identity or a female identity “by family, friends, and culture.” She also said she continued to question her gender identity, but was afraid she might “lose credibility” if she brought it up with her mother.

Einhorn said he might not have written the letter had he known; Chin also testified that had he known Varian was unsure of her gender identity, he would not have performed the surgery.

Deutsch said Einhorn should have reached out to Albany Pride Center for records of her time there; he also said Chin and Einhorn should have communicated with each other, at least once, by phone call.

He began the trial by suggesting that Einhorn “drove the train” and had been “putting ideas in Fox’s head” during attempts to change her gender.

But defense attorneys argued that Varian, not Einhorn, had spurred decisions like using “he/him” pronouns, cutting her hair short, and changing her name from Isabelle to Gabriel, then Rowan, then Fox. They said the decision to wear a chest binder, and later the breast removal, were also her idea.

Deutsch, in his closing statements, said that was the problem, describing Einhorn’s attitude as “Whatever the kid wants, the kid gets.”