Pinned Tweet
If you want info (detailed, with links) on the how the Russia/Ukraine conflict came about, read this comprehensive 🧵
It includes articles from John Pilger, Paul Keating and Malcolm Fraser
#auspol
Susan Smith retweeted
donald trump has died
Susan Smith retweeted
The Financial Times, refuse to correct their fake news reporting.
How can they be trusted?
Financial Times claimed that Putin spent most of the 90-minute phone call lecturing the Norwegian Prime Minister about medieval Slavic history. The Norwegian Prime Minister (and the Russian side) claims this is fake news and has demanded that Financial Times correct its reporting, which the newspaper has refused to do.
** The narrative supporting a long war in Ukraine is that nothing can be achieved with diplomacy. The Norwegian PM will learn that the war narratives are immune to facts and reality.
Susan Smith retweeted
Wow the so called “China Expert” @niubi is willing to put his entire reputation on the line by going after @RnaudBertrand and accusing him of being paid by China’s government to visit Xinjiang earlier this summer.
The problem? Arnaud funded the entire trip for his family this summer himself and kept the actual receipts of everything!
You would think Bill Bishop, who runs a China focused Substack with well over 200k followers, would do some basic research before jumping to conclusions.
Heck if he was smart, Bill would reach out to Arnaud who also runs a fantastic Substack page and ask for an interview
But this is nothing more than a cheap shot at a foreigner who has spent considerable time traveling across Xinjiang and wrote THE most comprehensive article about Xinjiang written in recent years
Shame on you @niubi you’ve opened a can of worms here and you should immediately retract your statements and apologize
Talk about one of the dumbest ways to ruin your reputation as a source of reliable information on China
The full truth 👇
I long knew that Bill Bishop was the high priest of these so-called "China experts" who systematically promote a negative image of the country.
What I didn't know is that he was a straight-up conspiracy theorist, I thought he was a tad more subtle than this.
This article he's pushing - written by an anonymous account (these people are always so courageous) - says my trip to Xinjiang this summer was part of a promotion campaign by the Chinese government.
Which is of course completely false, and I can prove it: I personally paid for everything and I have the receipts.
My two biggest expenses, given this was an RV trip and we were sleeping in the RV (as everyone who followed the trip here on X knows) were:
A) the RV rental fee
B) the plane tickets to travel to Xinjiang from Malaysia and back
All four receipts are attached. The RV cost us RMB 18,000 (about US$2,650) for the month, paid in two installments: a RMB 3,000 down payment to the rental company in May to reserve it, and the RMB 15,000 balance when we picked it up.
The plane tickets for the four of us cost RM 8,164 (about US$2,050): RM 3,915 to fly from Kuala Lumpur to Urumqi and RM 4,249 to fly back.
Except for these, all our other expenses were relatively small: mostly restaurants, snacks, attraction fees and a hotel in Urumqi for the last 10 days, during which our daughters were at a holiday camp to perfect their Chinese with local kids. I also, unfortunately, had some medical fees because, as followers know, I ended up having health issues during the trip. Happy to show receipts for all of these too...
The supposed "proofs" that this was a promotional trip in Bishop's promoted article are 1) that I got interviewed by Chinese media at some point towards the end of my trip, and 2) that I met up with my friend Daniel Dumbrill and his family.
The second one is particularly hilarious. They write "One foreigner spending weeks touring Xinjiang in an RV with his young family is odd. Two is odder." That's it, that's the extent of the proof: it's "odd" 🤷 Yes, super odd indeed that two friends would meet up on holiday, completely unheard of! What a joke...
Plus, it's anything but "odd" for me to travel in China in an RV with my family: as people who follow me are (maybe painfully) aware, it's the third summer we've done this. Before Xinjiang we'd toured Dongbei in an RV in 2023 (China's northeast) and some of the central provinces like Gansu in the summer of 2021.
It's even less odd for my friend Daniel who owns his RV and lives in China: he travels in his RV with his family all the time.
And it's actually the third time our 2 families have met during trips to China: friends, oddly, have this strange habit of wanting to see each other. Deeply suspicious behavior, I know.
As for the first "proof", the fact I got interviewed by Chinese media, it's such a stupid accusation. For better or worse (I'd argue for worse, and because of people like Bill Bishop), a foreign family travelling to Xinjiang is indeed news in China. It shouldn't be, it should be normal, but the geopolitical climate is such that it is.
I agreed to meet up with @FriedaLi3 from Beijing Review by the end of our trip because we already knew each other and I like her work, which I find nuanced and thoughtful.
It's basically the equivalent of, say, a Uyghur family from Xinjiang doing an RV trip in France: it's a good story and I'm sure French media would want to interview them. I don't see how it'd be scandalous, unless of course you're Bill Bishop, in which case it'd be irrefutable proof of an Orwellian French influence operation.
Bishop's promoted article also points out the Substack post that I wrote at the end of my trip (substack.com/@arnaudbertrand…) as some sort of propaganda piece, cherry-picking one line and the title. And the one line they "quote" isn’t even my wording: they apparently took a Chinese translation of my article, ran it back into English, and passed the result off as a direct quote from my Substack, grammar mistakes included. That’s the level of rigor we’re dealing with here...
Also, anyone who actually read my Substack post knows how intellectually dishonest this framing of it is, given how I wrote at length about the heavy-handed security we encountered in Xinjiang, the climate of "institutional paranoia" that I describe alongside the resentment some Uyghurs feel toward Beijing. Believe me, no censor in China would read those paragraphs and think "great job, Arnaud, exactly what we ordered", and that's an understatement 😅
Last point: that's not to say that sponsored trips in China don't exist, there are plenty but they look nothing like what we did. You travel as part of a group - never individually - and are accompanied all the time by official minders, with an itinerary fixed weeks in advance and every hotel, meal and visit arranged for you. We were alone as a family in a rented RV, with two kids fighting in the back...
I've been offered actual sponsored trips many times and I've always refused them with one exception: when I was with an official French delegation with the French minister of the interior (Christophe Castaner) and other French officials. Precisely because in that instance there was zero ambiguity and I couldn't be accused of being a Chinese agent or a traitor to France: hard argument to make when you're traveling alongside the minister in charge of its counterintelligence...
The fact that Bill Bishop and this anonymous writer want to push the narrative that any travel to Xinjiang is inherently suspicious is, of course, no accident and exactly why you too should go.
See it for yourself, film whatever you want, talk to whoever you meet. The more "odd" foreigners driving around Xinjiang, the less odd it becomes, and the harder it gets for people like Bishop to sell their "open-air prison" story. If the witnesses are few, you can always discredit them one by one. When there are thousands of them, what they describe has a name: reality.
Susan Smith retweeted
Curiosa la III Cumbre Rusia-África que se está celebrando en la ciudad de Moscú.
Os cuento los principales hitos de la cumbre 👇🏽
48 de 54 países africanos están representados. Países enfrentados abiertamente como Etiopía, Sudán y Egipto han ido en la misma línea.
Muy llamativo como sus presidentes han intercalado declaraciones mientras sus países están en tensión diplomática.
El Presidente de Egipto al Sissi: "La voz de África debe ser escuchada y debe ejercer influencia en la toma de decisiones internacionales."
Por ejemplo, Rusia y Tanzania han lanzado un programa espacial conjunto. Rusia lanzará el primer satélite de teledetección de Tanzania.
El evento se ha desarrollado bajo un enfoque fuertemente orientado a lo económico, lo estratégico y lo humanitario. Aquí os dejo lo que he visto más importante:
1. Putin ha propuesto duplicar el comercio bilateral con el continente africano. El punto más crítico en este aspecto fue la iniciativa de estructurar un sistema de pagos mutuos que no dependa del dólar estadounidense ni del euro (evitando el control de Washington y Bruselas), buscando blindar las transacciones financieras ante las sanciones occidentales.
2. Rusia está buscando consolidarse como el socio clave para combatir las crisis de las hambrunas. Se destacó el suministro de 13 millones de toneladas métricas de productos agrícolas y cereales a África en los primeros nueve meses de 2026.
Asimismo, se ha acordado avanzar más allá de la simple ayuda para buscar la industrialización y procesamiento de materias primas directamente en suelo africano.
3. Se han abordado proyectos de infraestructura y cooperación en el uso pacífico de la energía nuclear.
Un punto novedoso de esta edición ha sido la redacción de una declaración conjunta específica orientada a la colaboración en materia de Inteligencia Artificial (IA) para uso civil.
4. Moscú ratifica su papel como proveedor de seguridad y estabilidad interna para los gobiernos africanos. Rusia recordó que mantiene acuerdos de cooperación técnico-militar vigentes con 45 naciones de la región.
5. Tanto el Kremlin como los líderes africanos coincidieron en la necesidad de construir un orden mundial multipolar basado en la igualdad soberana.
Rusia ha articulado un fuerte discurso contra lo que denomina el "colonialismo de plataformas" e imperialismo occidental, presentándose a sí misma como un socio más equitativo y respetuoso.
6. Se ha puesto en valor el ámbito humanitario, resaltando que actualmente cerca de 40.000 estudiantes africanos se forman en universidades rusas.
7. Durante la cumbre se ha pautado la adopción de un Plan de Acción conjunto para el periodo 2027-2029, junto con la firma de un paquete de aproximadamente 33 documentos intergubernamentales y contratos comerciales.
En la teoría suena bien, pero la práctica a veces dista mucho de la realidad. El tema de Rusia como proveedor de seguridad es controvertido, sobre todo en países del Sahel.
Lo cierto es que estamos ante un cambio de orden y Rusia ha puesto el foco en África, desplazando a otros actores tradicionales.
Susan Smith retweeted
Indeed. And 20 years after the events of this film they were still killing Poles - mostly civilians - as the Galician Brigade of the Waffen SS.
What on earth has happened to govt transparency?
It’s like Australia is living in though it’s Dark Age
#auspol #SApol
3 justices of the SA Supreme Court ruled SA citizens are allowed to see briefs used by officials to inform the SA Parliament on what Govt is doing. @PMalinauskasMP disagrees and is asking the High Court to restore secrecy. You can follow the case here 👉 hcourt.gov.au/cases-and-judg…
Susan Smith retweeted
Senator @ChrisMurphyCT,
You have told the public that you were briefed on the plan to resume attacks on Iran, that you cannot share its details, and that "the plan is insane." You have said it will escalate the war, break international law and destroy America's commitment to the rule of law. Knowledge of that kind carries obligations.
Public reporting points to what the plan holds. Israeli sources told ABC News the next strikes would target petrochemical facilities to erode Iran's economy. CNN reports US forces could strike within 96 hours of an order.
In April your president promised that every bridge in Iran would be "decimated" and every power plant left "burning, exploding and never to be used again," and said he was "not worried" about war-crimes charges. You called that threat "a clear war crime." In July he told Fox News the United States would "knock out" all of Iran's power plants and bridges unless Tehran negotiated. The stated purpose was never military advantage but coercion: punish the population until its government yields. The UN called such attacks a very clear violation of international law.
If the briefing showed the same intent, you are among the few Americans who "officially" know a war crime is being prepared.
Secrecy does not bind you to silence about it. Executive Order 13526 forbids using classification to conceal violations of law; a stamp cannot convert complicity into a duty. The Speech or Debate Clause protects what you say in the Senate, as the Supreme Court confirmed in Gravel v. United States after Senator Gravel read the Pentagon Papers into the record. Senate Resolution 400 provides for disclosure over executive objection.
Your oath runs to a Constitution that makes the Geneva Conventions the supreme law of the land, and their Common Article 1 requires every organ of the United States to ensure respect for them, the Senate included.
The same duty reaches the chain of command. You said military leaders gave no sign of their private views. Make them state those views on the record: demand that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the CENTCOM commander say, in open session, whether each target passes the military-objective test.
Remind them that a source of revenue is not a military objective, and that the "war-sustaining economy" theory behind such targeting is rejected by the ICRC and most states. Tell every service member that the UCMJ requires obedience only to lawful orders, that superior orders are no defense to a manifestly unlawful one, and that the War Crimes Act follows them for life.
History will not ask whether the plan was classified. It will ask who knew, and what they did.
Susan Smith retweeted
MEMO TO BRETT SYLVIA: Be the 1st general to break Omerta. There is not one general among earlier recipients of the Sam Adams Award for Integrity samadamsaward.ch/ Here's your chance. Tell us your candid views on a new round of war on Iran. You could save thousands of lives.
Susan Smith retweeted
I’m sure not many know that “AIPAC” was formerly known as the “American Zionist Council” and Robert F Kennedy was determined to get it designated as a foreign agent and refused to budge. This was 4 months before “Sirhan Sirhan” a “Palestinian assassin” shot RFK in that hotel
Susan Smith retweeted
To są jakieś kpiny❗ Rząd Tuska tak się oburzył gloryfikowaniem UPA na Ukrainie, że aż... oddał im polskie MiGi-29 🙃 Za co? Za nic. Jak zwykle 🤢
Ale to nie wszystko. Polska ma oddać Ukrainie nie tylko dwa MiGi-29, ale również pociski artyleryjskie kalibru 155 mm i 152 mm, a także amunicję kalibru 20 × 102 mm przeznaczoną do sześciolufowych działek montowanych w samolotach F-16 oraz pociski do zestawów przeciwlotniczych krótkiego zasięgu Piorun.
Jeszcze niedawno minister Kosiniak-Kamysz bajerował Polaków, że będziemy domagać się od administracji Zełenskiego dostępu do technologii związanych z dronami, ale jak dotąd Ukraina przekazała je... Estonii 🙃 Polska oczywiście wciąż nic nie dostała.
Oni nam Banderę i Szuchewycza, my im samoloty i amunicję. Umowa godna rządu frajerów, który daje się rozgrywać jak amatorzy.
Susan Smith retweeted
Former Sky reporter reports on current Sky reporter over reports that the Sky agenda needs reporting on 7.30 (Report).
Reportedly.
Susan Smith retweeted
Remember when Sacha Baron Cohen, the guy behind Ali G guy, tried to humiliate Ron Paul, because Ron Paul wanted to stop aide to Israel and opposed its wars?
Susan Smith retweeted
Kishore Mahbubani tells a story you won't read in Western papers.
Former US ambassador to China Stapleton Roy, fluent in Mandarin, told him that at a meeting with Obama, "maybe 2014", Xi Jinping offered to demilitarize the South China Sea.
"The United States, instead of accepting the offer, rejected the offer. And that's why the militarization began."
What is on record : September 2015, White House Rose Garden, Xi says China "does not intend to pursue militarization" in the Spratlys.
Washington's answer was more patrols, then years of "China lied" headlines.
Mahbubani's other point >
> China is "the world's number one trading power"
> so it has "a greater vested interest in freedom of navigation than the United States"
I have heard the "China will block the sea lanes" line for years. Block its own trade ?
So was there an offer on the table ? And if there was, who walked away ?
Susan Smith retweeted
There’s a museum in Lhasa specifically about serfs’ lives that will break your heart. You’ll see how ordinary people lived in hell under the Dalai Lama. No romance at all!
For example, ritual instruments made from slaves’ skulls, bones, and skin… Slaves required to stick their tongues out like dogs before their owners…
The West won’t tell you that it was Mao that emancipated them and gave them rebirth into a decent life. So Tibetans thank Mao.
Susan Smith retweeted
FRANCE, UK AND GERMANY slammed Iran at the United Nations this week for not allowing in nuclear inspectors recently—but China and Russia pointed out that the US and Israel have literally been dropping bombs on those facilities for more than a year.
The argument that broke out at the United Nations on Tuesday was shocking for many reasons.
Western countries said they had the right to hit Iran with even more sanctions, because it has not fulfilled all the requirements of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action agreed in 2015.
But China and Russia pointed out that the agreement was clearly altered by a key signatory, the United States, who in 2018 abandoned the plan and hit Iran with another long list of sanctions--and then attacked the country with missiles.
The Chinese delegate said the “root causes of the current predicament” are the United States’ withdrawal from the agreement, and its subsequent behaviour.
Iran’s representative said: “Iran is victim of war, not the aggressor”.
.
TWO BIG ISSUES
There are two big issues here, which should be highlighted.
First, the west paints Iran as a recalcitrant nation which doesn’t let inspectors visit.
This is not true. (It’s a perfect description of Israel, but that country gets a free pass from the west on this topic.)
The International Atomic Energy Agency admits that its inspectors have spent more than 14,000 calendar days in Iran, conducting verification activities in more than 1,400 facilities and locations.
The IAEA then chose to withdraw in June 2025, 16 months ago, because the US and Israel suddenly started bombing those facilities.
This clearly was not Iran’s fault. The US attacks and threats of even larger airstrikes on Iran are continuing to this day.
.
RUSSIA’S DEFENCE
Russia also defended Iran at the United Nations discussion. “Today, we have already heard another round of fabrications about the absence of IAEA verification activities in Iran,” said the Russian Federation's delegate.
He pointed out that Western countries preferred not to notice that, even after the first series of strikes by the United States and Israel against Iran’s nuclear plants in June 2025, Iran continued to engage with the agency, including enabling inspections at facilities not hit by airstrikes.
.
ISRAEL NOT MENTIONED
The other big issue is Israel. Virtually all the accusations unfairly aimed at Iran are actually true of Israel—which clearly DOES have an illegal secret nuclear weapons program, which DOES ban inspectors from their facilities, and which DOES ignore global non-proliferation treaties.
But western leaders, for unclear reasons, will not criticize Israel for this.
.
BARGAINING CHIP
After years of unfair treatment, Iranian scientists enriched some of their uranium to the 60 per cent level, as a bargaining chip.
This is above the level used for civilian purposes, and sent a message saying that Iranian scientists have the same capability as Israeli scientists, but have chosen not to create nuclear weapons—as the US director of intelligence confirmed.
The United Kingdom’s representative this week criticized Iran for this, saying “there is no credible civilian justification” for enriching uranium to the 60 per cent level.
Yes, that’s the point.
Every western mainstream media outlet has religiously printed US assertions that they are attacking Iran because they want to stop it acquiring nuclear weapons.
But I have never seen a single article or column pointing out that the US-Israel attacks on Iran have clearly proved the opposite—which is that Iran needs nuclear weapons to stop violent rogue nations attacking it.
.
.
Susan Smith retweeted
You silly Zionist.
Your Mossad directed propaganda no longer works.
Israel is a blood soaked ethno supremacist state and hopefully a temporary one.
Zionism is getting desperate as it earns it place amongst Nazi ideology.
I appeared on @abcnews 7:30 last night talking about IRGC influence here in Australia and why the government should fully close the Iranian embassy in Canberra.
abc.net.au/news/2026-10-29/c…
Susan Smith retweeted
The groundbreaking documentary by Lebanese journalist @radwanmortada about Israel’s pager attacks is now available for English speakers.
3 weeks after it was released, the Israelis looted and then blew up Radwan’s house.
Tomorrow pro-Israel fanatics will release a propaganda film in U.S. theaters about the criminal pager attacks.
Watch Radwan’s movie instead ⬇️
aljazeera360.com/video/10423…

















































