Bradley C Hughes

Creator/builder @NeuralCommander. I stand for fair markets, permaculture, local democracy, the beautiful economy, social safety nets, power of prayer. ♒️🚴🏖️⛵️

[Dave Smith @ComicDaveSmith]

The situation unfolding right now is the perfect example of why the majority of the American people have either outright rejected or are at least requestioning the US-Israeli relationship.

Currently, there is an obvious divergence between the US interests and the goals of the Israeli government.

We desperately need a deal to end this disastrous war and save the global economy. Trump obviously wants that at this point and has already said Israel was forbidden from attacking Lebanon. (You may recall every pro Israel account on here claiming this as proof that Trump calls the shots). The ceasefire that the President of the United States of America wants depends on Israel not attacking southern Lebanon.

So, Israel announces they’re doing it. The best Trump can say is no boots on the ground and he won’t even hold on that.

This is a country whose very survival let alone ability to conduct any of these elective wars is completely dependent on US tax payer money, and support. We unconditionally support them even as they undermine our nation.

This is beyond intolerable. You can call all of us every name in the book but it’s just too obvious.

[Bradley C Hughes @AngelsInTheAI]

Australia was almost certainly a co-belligerent in the war of aggression against Iran.

[Peter Cronau @PeterCronau]

Australia’s defensible little ally, UAE, was actually a ‘combatant’ in the US war against Iran from the earliest days of the war — and not just supplying bases and intelligence for US attacks.

This is according to the @WSJ — contradicting @ABCnews reporting at the time.

The question that must be now be asked:
👉 Was the Australian RAAF E-7A Wedgetail battle management plane being used to ‘defend’ UAE military making these attacks?

[Bradley C Hughes @AngelsInTheAI]

More self-inflicted wounds in the slow suicide of Europe.

[Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand]

It always astonishes me how there is virtually ZERO public debate - or even public awareness - in Europe about the decisions that will most shape ordinary people's lives.

These days, the EU is drafting a new anti-China legal framework where - quite literally - the more affordable and competitive Chinese products are, the more illegal they'd become.

You'd think EU citizens would want to be informed about such things - as it couldn't be more consequential for their prosperity.

Yet I bet virtually no EU citizen is even aware of it, beyond a vague sense that there is some sort of trade dispute going on.

So what's going on exactly? It all centers around a new legal instrument the EU is drafting called the "overcapacity instrument" (https://t.co/mNpCMudYyS).

First of all, the very notion of "overcapacity" is pretty ridiculous to begin with, especially the way it's being defined by the EU, as it basically means being competitive enough to export.

By this definition of "overcapacity," pretty much every European industry that's ever run a trade surplus - German cars, French wine, Italian fashion - has been guilty of "overcapacity."

I'm not even exaggerating: if you read this study by the EU Parliament on "Industrial overcapacities, with a focus on China" (https://t.co/TcwEBoL8mD), they define "overcapacity" as building more capacity than your domestic market can absorb. So the moment you build capacity to export abroad, you're in "overcapacity."

Utterly ridiculous.

And what this "overcapacity instrument" is about is creating a permanent legal mechanism for the EU to block Chinese competition across whole sectors of the economy, if they happen to be in "overcapacity."

In effect, this means that if China is competitive globally in a given sector in such a way that it exports a lot, that's proof of overcapacity, and legally it'd mean that the entire sector can be restricted from the EU market.

Which means it really, factually, is a legal framework where the more affordable and competitive your products are, the more illegal they become.

Which is a CRAZY economic concept! 🤦‍♂️

Please note that it's different from the anti-subsidy legal instrument, which the EU has already put in place in 2023 (the "Foreign Subsidies Regulation": https://t.co/SvPKFyN0zo).

This "overcapacity instrument" would be above and beyond this: it wouldn't even matter if a particular sector was subsidized by the Chinese government or not, the mere fact of its competitiveness in exports would be grounds for restrictions in the EU.

It doesn't take a genius to understand how badly this could impact everyday people: this is European consumers being forced to pay more for worse products by law, so that uncompetitive European firms don't have to improve.

Politicians frame it as avoiding a "China shock 2.0" but really this is choosing an even steeper self-inflicted decline than is already the case, where EU citizens would subsidize mediocre EU companies that would have even less pressure to catch up. It's a hidden tax: subsidies for uncompetitive firms paid by consumers instead of governments, which in turn makes them less incentivized to become competitive.

The first "China shock" did de-industrialize Europe somewhat, but at least it made things cheaper for European consumers. If this becomes Europe's response to a second "China shock" not only it'd make everything more expensive but it'd do nothing for EU industry: you don't become competitive by banning the competition...

Look at China itself: the way it industrialized was NOT by banning Western firms but on the contrary by welcoming them strategically and learning from them. You learn to compete by... competing, duh!

What I find most shocking in all of this isn't even the policy itself - you can make arguments for and against protectionism, and reasonable people can disagree.

What's shocking is that virtually no European media outlet is explaining any of this to the public. This is unarguably one of the single most consequential economic decisions the EU will make this decade, affecting the price of everything, and it's being drafted in near-total silence.

No newspaper is running the headline "EU plans to make Chinese goods illegal if they're too affordable" - even though that's essentially what's happening.

But that's what you call a "democracy" with "freedom of expression" these days apparently...

[Bradley C Hughes @AngelsInTheAI]

Exactly how it goes

[Daniel Mayakovski @DaniMayakovski]

En Chile, en una presentación contra el narcotráfico, unos perros policiales entrenados para oler y localizar la droga, mordieron el bolsillo del almirante del ejército chileno que estaban presentando el acto.

Surrealista, ¿qué es lo que llevaba en el bolsillo ese almirante? 🤔

[Daniel Mayakovski @DaniMayakovski]

"Esta es la última generación libre, la unión de los sistemas de vigilancia de los gobiernos creará un apartheid de información digital en todo el mundo del que ninguno de nosotros podrá escapar, nuestras identidades serán parte del estado".

Julian Assange, sobre la digitalización de nuestras identidades en internet bajo el capitalismo y la creación con ellas de un sistema de vigilancia masivo interconectado.

[Daniel Mayakovski @DaniMayakovski]

"Los soldados israelíes me abofetearon, me patearon, me rompieron el coxis, me agredieron sexualmente... arrancaron mis pantalones y mi ropa interior, me insertaran una mano... a otras personas les insertaron armas dentro."

Juliet Lamont, una cineasta de documentales australiana y activista de la flotilla humanitaria de Gaza, denunció ser víctima de una violación por parte de los soldados terroristas de "Israel".

No verás esto en TV ni en la prensa occidental, "Israel" violó a mujeres que llevaban medicinas y alimentos a niños en Gaza... y a sus gobiernos occidentales ni siquiera les importa.

[Bradley C Hughes @AngelsInTheAI]

More AI funding ponzi structure details

[UNKNΘWN @X333VOID]

@BullTheoryio This research much more clearly demonstrates how this scheme works

https://t.co/KhmBjalogz

[Bradley C Hughes @AngelsInTheAI]

Alarming levels of financial engineering obfuscation and retiree wealth appropriation

[Bull Theory @BullTheoryio]

🚨Michael Burry just said Elon Musk and Nvidia's deal is built on fake numbers.

Burry published a detailed breakdown calling the entire structure "Fugazi", his word for fake.

He is alleging that billions of dollars in Nvidia chips are being hidden off balance sheets, and that American retirees are unknowingly funding the whole thing.

Nvidia, the world's largest AI chip company sold $5.4 billion worth of its most advanced GPUs, the GB200, to a company called Valor.

Valor is not a real operating business. It is a special purpose vehicle, a shell company created specifically to hold these chips and nothing else. Nvidia also invested $1.9 billion of its own money directly into Valor on top of the sale.

Those 100,000+ chips are now physically inside xAI's data center. xAI is Elon Musk's artificial intelligence company, the one that builds Grok. xAI is using every single one of those chips right now to run its AI models.

But here is what Burry is flagging.

Neither Nvidia nor xAI owns those chips on paper. Valor, the shell company holds legal title. That means $5.4 billion in GPU assets do not show up on Nvidia's balance sheet as inventory.

They do not show up on xAI's balance sheet as assets. They are legally invisible to both companies.

Nvidia gets to book the $5.4 billion as a completed sale and record it as revenue. xAI gets full use of the chips without owning them. And the risk disappears into a shell company in the middle.

Now here is where American retirees enter the picture.

Valor needed $3.5 billion in debt to fund this structure. Apollo provided it. Apollo is one of the largest asset managers on earth with $1.03 trillion under management and $834 billion specifically in private credit.

Apollo raised the $3.5 billion, packaged it into debt securities, and sold those securities to Athene.

Athene is Apollo's own insurance company. It sells fixed and indexed annuities, retirement savings products, to ordinary Americans.

When a retiree buys an Athene annuity, they believe their money is sitting in safe, stable investments. That money is now inside a structure funding Elon Musk's AI data center.

The numbers inside Athene are most alarming.

Athene holds $74.2 billion in reserves. It has moved $217 billion in assets into a captive insurer based in Bermuda, meaning those assets sit outside normal US insurance regulation and oversight.

Of the entire portfolio, 34.7%, equal to $103 billion, is classified as Level 3 assets.

Level 3 is an accounting classification that means there is no observable market price for these assets. No outside party can independently verify what they are actually worth.

The leverage sitting on top of those unpriced assets is 16 times.

Burry's says:
Every step of this structure is technically legal and publicly disclosed. But the entire thing was deliberately engineered across 8 to 12 steps to move credit risk off balance sheets and away from any market pricing.

- Nvidia books the revenue.
- Apollo collects the fees.
- xAI gets the computing power.
- And retirees sitting at the bottom of a 16x leveraged Bermuda insurance structure, holding $103 billion in assets with no market price carry the risk without knowing it exists.

[Yanis Varoufakis @yanisvaroufakis]

Tony Blair is the living embodiment of what happens when political office becomes a down payment on future plunder. Ejected in 2007 by his own MPs as a massive liability, he bequeathed Britain a wild casino economy primed for the 2008 crash. And when the British economy crashed and burned, Mr Blair kept quiet while honing his skills at securing power by other means.

His first job, after his ejection from 10 Downing Street, was as the West’s Middle East envoy, with a supposed emphasis on Gaza. It took six painful years for Mr Blair’s tenure to prove a failure so profound it amounted to active complicity in Israel’s ethnic cleansing, in Palestinian erasure, and in paving the ground for the ongoing genocide.

Soon after, the Chilcot Inquiry demolished Blair’s Iraq lies, exposing him as a liar, a chancer and a war criminal responsible for countless corpses of Iraqis, but also of British soldiers.

Then came Blair’s real innovation: the financialisation of the ex-premiership itself. The Tony Blair Institute, fuelled by £130 million from Oracle's Larry Ellison—coincidentally, the largest individual donor to the Friends of the IDF—became a shadow state, brokering governance contracts for autocrats and companies like Palantir that weaponise AI to produce mega-death abroad and full-on surveillance of Western populations.

Now, in May 2026, this corporate fixer issues a 5700 word tantrum demanding that Labour embrace Trump even more than Starmer already has, denounce what is left of Labour’s betrayed Green New Deal, and trash the remnants of workers' rights. This is not the wisdom of an aging statesman. It is the frantic squirming of a man fearing his grip on oligarchic power might soon wane and whose entire post-10 Downing Street existence depends on preventing the many from ever reclaiming what the few have plundered.

https://t.co/1Onlpx9Nkh

[stranger @strangerous10]

David Pocock left gobsmacked after asking why a contract - no tender - no minister sign off - has gone to a co founded by Scott Morrison’s fmr priv sec Yaron Finkelstein
Home Affairs Sec Stephanie Foster has the answer, a decision by the unelected Antisemitism envoy. FFS #auspol

[Bradley C Hughes @AngelsInTheAI]

@TristynClare @clowndownunder They were in international waters, proceeding to Gaza, which is an illegally occupied territory of the State of Palestine.

As of late 2025, 157 of 193 UN member states recognise the State of Palestine (with Gaza as part of it).

Over 75% of countries recognise what you deny.

[Artur Nadolny @ArturNadol7566]

SHE DOCUMENTED ELECTION FRAUD IN 25 COUNTRIES

Sophie Zhang @szhang_ds was a low-level data scientist at Facebook @Meta. Her actual job was removing fake likes and bot accounts. Routine stuff.
Except she kept finding something much worse.

From 2018 to 2020, she uncovered political manipulation and opposition harassment networks across 25 countries.

Governments using fake accounts to drown out critics. Politicians manufacturing fake approval. Real elections. Fake numbers. Real consequences.
Honduras. Azerbaijan. India. Ukraine. Spain. Brazil. Bolivia. Ecuador. And more.

She documented all of it. She raised it internally. She pushed. She escalated.

Facebook's response?

Everyone agreed it was terrible. Nobody could agree who should be responsible, or even what should be done.

She was fired in September 2020. Then she was offered a $64,000 severance package tied to a non-disparagement agreement. She turned it down.

On her last day, she posted a 7,800-word memo on the internal message board. It was later leaked to BuzzFeed @BuzzFeedNews.

The world finally read what Facebook had been sitting on for years.

Facebook's priority, she wrote, was PR. Issues got bumped up the queue when someone threatened to go to the press.

Not because they were serious. Because they were embarrassing.

She testified before the British Parliament in October 2021. She shared documents with US law enforcement. She said she has blood on her hands. She meant it literally.

Countries she chose not to prioritise later descended into civil unrest.

One data scientist. Holding back election interference across half the planet in her spare time while her employer calculated the reputational math.

The platform that connects the world couldn't connect the dots. Or wouldn't.

Sources: BuzzFeed News @BuzzFeedNews, September 2020 | The Guardian @guardian, April 2021 | MIT Technology Review @techreview, July 2021

[John Cusack @johncusack]

There is no universe where this is not an evil act - cold blooded murder of innocents

[Ana Kasparian @AnaKasparian]

This woman is disgraceful and incites violence on this platform daily. The only thing more vomitous than her face is her thirst for hate and lust for terrorism against Muslims.

[Ben Norton @BenjaminNorton]

Corruption is nothing new in US politics, but the billionaire Trump has taken it to a whole new, extreme level.

Trump was forced to disclose 3,700 financial transactions conducted in 3 months, from January through March.

The value of his trades was between $220 million and $750 million. Up to $750,000,000 in one quarter!

The sitting US president is using insider information to speculate in the stock market, in trades worth hundreds of millions of dollars every quarter.

If you don't think the government policies Trump implements are influenced by his financial interests, you are extremely naive. This is as corrupt as it gets.

[James Tate @JamesTate121]

In August 2010, Jane Mayer published a long article in The New Yorker called "Covert Operations."
It introduced most Americans, for the first time, to two brothers — Charles and David Koch — and the quiet network of foundations, think tanks, and political organizations they had spent decades building to reshape American politics from behind the scenes.
The article was meticulously sourced. It named names. It followed the money.
A few months later, Mayer started getting strange messages.
A blogger asked her how she felt about the private investigator who was looking into her. She thought it was a joke. Then a former reporter told her, at a Christmas party, that he'd been approached and asked to help dig up damaging information on a journalist who had written something two billionaires didn't like.
Then, in January 2011, her editor at The New Yorker, David Remnick, forwarded her a query from the New York Post. The Post had been handed material claiming Mayer was a serial plagiarist. The "evidence" was being shopped to multiple outlets at once.
It wasn't true. The reporters she had supposedly stolen from confirmed she had cited them properly or asked permission. The Post dropped the story. But the campaign had been real — and Mayer eventually traced it to a firm called Vigilant Resources International, run by Howard Safir, the former NYPD commissioner. The firm had been hired, she would later document, by people connected to Koch business interests.
The dirt didn't exist. So someone had tried to manufacture it.
That moment told Mayer something about her own work that she has never forgotten.
She wasn't being attacked because her reporting was sloppy. She was being attacked because it was accurate.
Mayer has spent more than three decades doing this. Before Dark Money, she wrote The Dark Side, the definitive account of how the United States adopted torture as policy after September 11. After Dark Money, she investigated dark money behind Supreme Court confirmations, the network funding election-denial campaigns, and the secret political work of a Supreme Court justice's spouse.
Each story has followed the same arc.
Reporting comes out. Power responds — not by disputing the facts, but by going after the reporter. Lawyers get involved. Personal information gets leaked. Old colleagues get phone calls. The accusation is always the same in spirit, even when the words change: she went too far.
But "too far" has never meant inaccurate. It has meant inconvenient.
That's the quiet education buried in Jane Mayer's career: powerful institutions rarely correct the record. They reach for the messenger. They make the cost of telling the truth so high that the next person thinks twice.
It only works if it works.
Mayer is still reporting. The stories are still landing.
The lines, it turns out, were never where we were told they were.
Someone just had to be willing to walk past them, and write down what was on the other side.

[Craig Kelly:🇦🇺Foundation for Economic Education @craigkellyAFEE]

If you are earning less than $45,000 your marginal tax rate is zero for $0 – $18,200 and 16% for $18,201 – $45,000.

However if you’ve bought a few shares, or maybe invested in a few antiques - that have had a capital gain, sneaky Albanese now wants to tax that not at your marginal rate, but at 30%.

Its a direct attack on low income earners and pensioner.

[Peter Cronau @PeterCronau]

Australia has a violent history.

Think how it shapes who we are today.

Ask ourselves why we are always happy to join a US war against weak people of a poor country.

[Sony Thăng @nxt888]

The most subversive document in American political history is not the Declaration of Independence.

It is Hồ Chí Minh's letter to Truman.

Because it takes the Declaration at its word.

It says: you said these things. Self-evident truths. Unalienable rights. The consent of the governed. The right of a people to determine their political future.

We are a people.

We are determining our future.

We are asking you to apply your own stated principles to our situation.

The letter is a trap built entirely out of American rhetoric.

And Truman could not answer it.

Because to answer it honestly would be to admit that the principles were never universal.

That "all men" had always meant something narrower than it said.

That the freedom they were exporting was a product, not a principle, and like all products it came with terms of service that the marketing materials didn't mention.

The letter still sits in the National Archives.

Still unanswered.

Still the clearest possible X-ray of the gap between the American idea and the American reality.

Hồ Chí Minh understood America better than America understood itself.

He always had.