BC

[Craig Foster @Craig_Foster]

Exactly.

When it suits, and only when politically and commercially expedient, FIFA will suspend member countries, sanction officials, take necessary action.

But never when there’s money to be made, political points to be scored, if Infantino’s opportunity to take Oval Office photos is compromised, or when basic principles, ethics or morality are at risk.

Although we’ve had many shocking World Cups from Mussolini 34, Argentina military junta 78, Russia after Crimea in 2018, and many worker deaths in Qatar, the 2026 Trump World Cup with an absent FIFA is an absolute doozy.

Mistreating players, staff, fans, racism against some countries entering the US and being treated as criminals, while others are feted.

Horrendous.

Not just Infantino, but the whole Council, and silent Federations pocketing the cash are accountable for what they’ve allowed to occur.

Thank god, the football will start soon.

[John Boland (JIB) @actualjib]

Bofors 3P is a helluva round, but lethality is a probability distribution.

It took three hits to kill this target drone. The attached image is a composite of three frames of the second hit, during which the drone appears to maintain stable flight. Oof.

[Brett Erickson @BrettErickson28]

Many people believe that INSURANCE is the reason that vessels are not navigating the Strait of Hormuz. This is simply not true, and something that @mercoglianos has addressed repeatedly throughout this conflict.

But there is a far more challenging hurdle that will need to be overcome: sanctions and terror financing laws.

Vessels are able to secure insurance, AND that insurance can cover transit through the Strait of Hormuz. Now is it more expensive than it was pre-conflict? Of course, but we're still talking about rates generally between 1-4%. If that is every journey perpetually? No, that's clearly an issue. But for a single journey to get a hundred million dollar vessel, loaded with hundreds of millions of dollars of cargo, alongside the captain and crew out of a war zone? Easy choice.

... And that's what Greek shipping tycoon Evangelos Marinakis thought as well when he said he would be happy to pay up to $200,000 per vessel to transit the Strait of Hormuz.

Now why wouldn't this work?

ASSUMING that you paid Iran via the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), also known as the Tehran Toll Booth, you would be able to navigate under the assumption that Iran would not launch drones or missiles at your vessel. Is that a guarantee? Of course not, but this eliminates the "morality risk" element that many other people say is the "real" reason why vessels are unable to transit the Strait of Hormuz.

Insurance is not an issue. Crew safety, assuming a toll was paid, would not inherently be an issue... So why aren't vessels crossing the Strait of Hormuz in large numbers?

Sanctions and Terror Financing laws.

As it currently stands, this is the single greatest barrier as to why we are not seeing transit through the Strait of Hormuz, and why we will NOT see transit through the Strait of Hormuz the second an MOU is agreed upon by the United States and Iran.

Speaking to @abcnews today, I spoke to this risk, and why it's not just a "US problem":

"It really is kind of the single greatest barrier, because there's sanctions across various different countries, the US, UK, Canada, Australia, EU, and also terrorist-financing laws that are significant. You'd have, potentially, the individual who owns the company or who is operating the vessel, they would be personally sanctioned."

See the issue here? Many people have suggested, "Well if it REALLY is that great of an emergency, vessels will just pay the toll and risk sanctions".

Okay... but WOULD they? Would they PERSONALLY be willing to be sanctioned by the United States, EU, UK, Canada, and Australia? Effectively be personally cut off from the ENTIRE Western world? I don't think so.

Okay, okay, okay, Brett. But... what if the sanctions were just... not enforced! The governments just "looked the other way".

Enter terror financing laws. With the exception of the United Kingdom, the IRGC is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) across the jurisdictions of the US, EU, Canada, and Australia. While carveouts CAN be made for sanctions, although it is unclear whether or not they would be, nor that all jurisdictions would do so simultaneously as would be necessary, terror financing laws are a far greater hurdle to roll back.

This is EXACTLY what we saw take place when the United States unsanctioned Iranian oil under General License U in the early days of the Iran War. Roughly 180M barrels became effectively "sanction-free"... But the primary buyer was still overwhelmingly China... and India.

Why? Because, while the sanctions were not applicable, purchasing said oil would be in violation of terror financing laws across the US, EU, Canada, and Australia. Providing "payment" or "material support" (meaning no, you can't just "barter") to the IRGC comes with the lovely penalty of PRISON.

"Okay, okay, okay, Brett... But what if the governments of the US, UK, EU, Canada, and Australia didn't enforce sanctions AND the governments of the US, EU, Canada, and Australia didn't enforce terror financing laws... simultaneously..."

Wonderful question! Viola! Problem solved!

... Nope.

Under the terror financing laws of the United States and Canada, private citizens can bring forth lawsuits against those who finance terror organizations. And that's the nail in the coffin.

So while vessels may WANT to navigate the Strait of Hormuz. While vessels may be WILLING to make payments to Iran or the IRGC, the laws not just of the US, but also the UK, EU, Canada, and Australia, make this an impossibility due to the ability for these payments to violate not just the sanctions and terror financing laws brought forth by the GOVERNMENT... but because the governments can't stop private CITIZENS from bringing forth terror-financing lawsuits.

https://t.co/oV9p1KXXTo

[The Sting @TheStingisBack]

THIS IS HUGE!!!!!

From what I can tell: if you reshare any video I upload to X, I get the impressions AND the resharing account gets them too.

So the fight is OVER and the pressure is OFF.

Reshare anything you want from my feed and I'll love you for it!

Mi casa, su casa!

[DataFut @DataFutebol]

A diferença do recebimento da Seleção de Senegal nos Estados Unidos em relação ao recebimento da Seleção da Espanha no México.

[Daniel Davis Deep Dive @DanielLDavis1]

No, Mr. Bolton, it was the president choosing the war *you advocated for* that has been THE source of heightening risks for the entire world.

By following your advice, the U.S. has lost 13 service members dead, 400 wounded, over 40 aircraft lost, and 20 bases damaged or destroyed.

The Iranians now have the Strait of Hormuz firmly in their power, and despite what you are *again* advocating here, there is NO military option that can force the Strait from Iranian control. If there was, we would already have succeeded, bc we burned through *huge* percentages of our most expensive and sophisticated offensive and defensive missiles in the predictably failed attempt.

Trying the same thing, against the same targets, but trying it harder, won't change the outcome. It'll only *significantly* add to our losses and further deplete our missile inventories.

[Peter Murphy @PeterWMurphy1]

"I say to you again, this disregard for international law will not stop in Palestine. It is already unfolding from Lebanon to Iran, ... And if left unchecked, it will spread far beyond. What is lost in Palestine will be lost to us all."
— Francesca Albanese
#FreePalestine

[David Pocock @DavidPocock]

Well done to Tom Emerson for taking on this usage in the ACT. He is introducing a bill to ban gambling donations in the ACT.

Vested interests have far too much power over the major parties and communities pay the price.

This is a sensible step that ACT Labor & Liberals should support.
https://t.co/HZ5JbbxxZ6

[CineHub @RoseElla1234]

Ethan Edwards leads the Texas Rangers against a fierce Comanche assault in one of The Searchers' most memorable scenes.

Ethan Edwards is considered one of the greatest and most complex characters in Western cinema. With his rare psychological depth, this role helped John Wayne create one of the most memorable performances of his career.

Director John Ford filmed much of the movie in Monument Valley, a location that has become iconic to Western cinema thanks to his works.

[Hans Kristensen (also on Bluesky) @nukestrat]

Our updated world nuclear arsenal overview in the SIPRI Yearbook is now public. Honored to assemble, with @mattkorda, this annual production with @SIPRIorg to assist the public debate about the status and future of nuclear weapons. Press release: https://t.co/l4OaCo3e7j

[David Pocock @DavidPocock]

My piece in the @GuardianAus today arguing govts can't afford to repeat the mistakes they made with the gas industry.

With huge investment in data centres - why aren't we asking what this is all for and how Australians are going to benefit from it?

If we do want data centres and multinational tech giants are going to use Australian land, Australian energy, Australian water & Australian workers to build the infrastructure that powers the AI revolution, then Australians deserve a fair return.

That's the lesson we failed to learn with gas. We shouldn't wait another generation to learn it again.
https://t.co/HJvwk474L9

[Bob Bowker @BobBowker]

My interview with ABC TV news after Israeli strikes. Speculative comments about where each of the parties may go from here, but making the point that, for Trump, any deal will be painful politically, but will be worse if reached a month or two from now. https://t.co/bNR0JFJXfW

[Tom Shugart @tshugart3]

In case anyone needs to hear this, even a used Block IV VA-Class SSN is the most capable submarine on the planet.

Also, the electronics (sonar, fire control, etc.) get regularly refreshed via the ARCI Program, so in many cases older boats have better gear than newer ones.

[Policy Tensor @policytensor]

I feel that Chinese success is being totally misread as the triumph of industrial policy. Here’s an alternative theory.

Chinese success is due to the general competence of Chinese institutions, of state capacity, of social trust. There is no possibility of capture by anything like the lobby, no space conducive to the hypertrophy of rent-seeking we find in the US (see attached).

The Chinese have a dramatically more effective political order; esp compared to the US. This stable and effective political order is in part due to and in part generative of social trust. Together they provide China with the greatest state capacity in the world.

The political order, the social trust and the state capacity is upstream of and makes possible the highly effective industrial policy that Western elites fetishize. Plenty of states have tried and are trying industrial policy. Almost all of them in vain.

It’s not industrial policy, but the Chinese political order that you need to pay attention to if you want to pull a China.

[David Pocock @DavidPocock]

Yet another parliamentary inquiry recommends a full ban of gambling advertising.

What will it take for govts to put people first, act on the evidence and reduce harm?

The evidence is there we just need the political will.
https://t.co/2evTxJXPLy

[Carl Worker @carlworker]

“Let's be clear about what AUKUS actually is: the greatest military protection racket in modern history. Washington looked at its own crippled submarine industrial base—17 boats short, yards choking, Congress screaming—and found the perfect mark. A wealthy, eager, insecure middle power with a bipartisan fetish for great-power relevance and a defense minister who treats strategic questions like a classified state secret
The deal? Australia pays half a trillion dollars. In return, it gets used Virginia-class hand-me-downs—Block IV boats with a decade of wear already on the hulls, probably smelling faintly of its previous crew.”

[StarBoySAR 🇭🇰 🇨🇳 🥭 @StarboySAR]

Brilliant piece from Pearls and Irritations. Finally, someone in Australia is saying out loud what the rest of us have been watching for the past five years

Let's be clear about what AUKUS actually is: the greatest military protection racket in modern history. Washington looked at its own crippled submarine industrial base—17 boats short, yards choking, Congress screaming—and found the perfect mark. A wealthy, eager, insecure middle power with a bipartisan fetish for great-power relevance and a defense minister who treats strategic questions like a classified state secret

The deal? Australia pays half a trillion dollars. In return, it gets used Virginia-class hand-me-downs—Block IV boats with a decade of wear already on the hulls, probably smelling faintly of its previous crew

Even more intriguing, the article confirms for what this overpriced second-hand Australian "sovereign" nuclear submarine fleet is actually for:

Hunting Chinese Jin-class and Type 096 SSBNs. Not to protect Sydney Harbour. Not to secure Australia's trade routes. To find, track, and if ordered, destroy the Chinese nuclear submarines that threaten continental America!

That's the job. That's the whole job. Australia just committed A$368 billion to be the US Navy's underwater security guard!

The comedy of "sovereign capability" is almost too rich. Sovereign? The reactors are American. The combat system is American. The weapons are American. The fuel is American. The intelligence feed is American. The maintenance schedule is American. Permanently tethering Australia to U.S. software, maintenance, and logistics, effectively ending any "sovereign" capability. The only thing Australian is the taxpayer—and the Prime Minister standing in front of a camera calling this independence

Australia is not buying a submarine; it is buying a node in a U.S. sensor network. The acquisition deeply integrates Australia into the U.S. military command structure, making Australia a tool for U.S. strategic objectives in the Indo-Pacific — while a massive amount of Australian wealth is transferred into the U.S. military-industrial complex

And the timing is exquisite. Washington just added another half-trillion to its own defense budget while Australia is told to hit 3.5% of GDP. America gets the money, the boats, the basing rights at HMAS Stirling, and a Pacific ASW auxiliary. Australia gets the bill, the dependency, and the warm fuzzy feeling of being taken seriously by the adults.

The U.S. 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) emphasizes "burden-sharing among allies" and "realist diplomacy." This submarine deal is the perfect execution of that strategy: the U.S. maintains its military overmatch against China by essentially "outsourcing" the financial cost of undersea surveillance to Australia 🤡

Paul Keating called this three years ago. He was mocked, of course. The press club gasped. The security establishment rolled its eyes. But he was right then, and this article proves he's right now. It is worse than he thought. It's not that AUKUS is of little military benefit to Australia. It's that AUKUS is of negative military benefit to Australia—actively diverting resources from actual defense needs toward a capability designed for someone else's homeland

https://t.co/f7lYAMf3JY

[The Sting @TheStingisBack]

I edited a film a couple of years ago. The director was very open about the fact that the film only works because of the way I cut it and what I managed to do with the footage presented to me.

The film was a mess, it made no sense, plot holes galore, and I jumped through hoops to make it work. 16 hour days, mental exhaustion, falling asleep at the dinner table kind of deal.

This was two years ago and I still haven't been paid, and I doubt I ever will. I also did it to get a foot in the film door, and that didn't happen either. I approached agents who told me I need to make a film to get an agent, when I told them I made one, they said you have to make another one, I asked how do I do that, they said get an agent.

So, I edited a feature film after working 25 years in TV and I was left without either getting paid, or getting more work.

It was fun though... and there's still time to make another... if anybody needs me...

[Garry Kasparov @Kasparov63]

Trump is exactly what we knew he was. The harshest questions and criticisms of journalism today and history tomorrow are about how a generation of Republican politicians, partisan media, and US voters willingly chose to ignore it for power.

[David Wallace-Wells @dwallacewells]

“The real surprise from the OECD’s subsidy numbers is that it cost China less than $18bn in sectoral support over 15 years to build an industry that can now provide more clean power than the world can readily absorb.”