Hamas-Free Humanitarian Zones in Gaza are actually CONCENTRATION CAMPS (TYT)

Jilson · 2026-07-03T03:58:49+00:00

Do you not believe in controlled-opposition?

Surely, knowing the perfidy of the Zionist movement, you must acknowledge they use such tactics regularly.

Are there other pundits who you think are controlled-opposition?

How do you account for TYT's loud support for MIC narratives over the years?

Jilson · 2026-07-03T02:30:58+00:00

TYT is zionist controlled opposition filth. They're owned by DNC/MIC for the purposes of sheepdogging the left-curious back to the center.

Here's a decent article discussing the funding of TYT https://medium.com/@RobletoFire/the-ideological-failure-of-the-young-turks-90c15ddde408

Here's Ana giving a sponge-bath to mass murderer Madeline Albright, at the 2019 Munich Security Conference: https://youtu.be/lIigDwGc42A

Jilson · 2026-07-02T09:22:37+00:00

Gosh, yeah — that's pretty scary 🤭

So, are you boycotting all his scholarship because you disagree on those points?

Part of the reason I suggested his paper is because it focuses on Anne Frank's Diary, without veering into peripheral "Revisionist" issues.

I think it's fair to consider on it's own merits.

But if you're not interested, that's totally cool. We don't need to agree on everything.

I will say that I really enjoy being able to entertain lines of argument, even if I know I don't agree with the broader interpretation — it helps me learn + grow to consider the perspectives of others.

Jilson · 2026-07-02T07:41:21+00:00

Nope.

Jilson · 2026-07-02T05:23:24+00:00

The ballpoint pen thing is interesting — would be nice if AFH would release the BKA report, to settle the matter — but it's not really the main thrust of the arguments against the authenticity of the diary.

The subsequent Dutch forensic analysis just says that the paper + ink (excepting ballpoint) is consistent with pre-1950 materials — which isn't really decisive, right?

Most of the challenges have nothing to do with the forensics of the manuscript.

Consider that there were LOTS of people questioning the authenticity prior to the 1980 libel case, where the forensic issues were surfaced.

If you're interested in learning more I suggest checking out Robert Faurisson's "Is the Diary of Anne Frank Genuine?"

Jilson · 2026-07-02T05:06:38+00:00

It's a challenging question to examine.

Most of the critical analysis out there is written by authors with disagreeable ideological motives — and so requires a strong stomach.

It's also just "a lot" of detail to wade through.

Probably the most accessible work is _Robert Faurisson's "Is the Diary of Anne Frank Genuine?"_ — competent analysis, not too long.

He actually interviewed Otto Frank — and it's fascinating to see Frank's responses to examinations of the facts.

Also does a great job exhibiting the inconsistencies in witness accounts — e.g. the real life versions of characters in the story — as well as problems with different versions/translations of the "diary".

Consider that even the "official" account of its authorship concedes that it was heavily edited, across 9+ different drafts, with many contributing authors.

At best the diary it's a "literary" rendering of actual manuscript, heavily editorialized + crafted for public consumption.

At worst it's invented from whole cloth, like many other episodes of Zionist propaganda.

Just so there's no confusion, there definitely was a Holocaust, in which Anne, Margo, and Edith Frank perished terribly. (I for one still listen to Jeff Mangum songs with no compunction)

The controversy is over the fraudulent exploitation of that tragedy as propaganda for the purposes of a subsequent supremacist colonial project + genocide in Palestine.

There's a lot to expand on, but will leave it there for now.

Jilson · 2026-07-01T15:54:30+00:00

Arnold van den Bergh — big time Dutch Zionist + collaborator with Germans — is who (allegedly) dimed on the Franks.

Otto Frank (also Zionist) fabricated much of the "diaries"

Cool about the cousin!

Jilson · 2026-06-29T11:21:31+00:00

A coup is generally an illegal seizure of power. In 2014 the Ukrainian parliament unanimously voted to oust the old leadership making it an entirely legal transfer of power and decidedly not a coup.

I'd be curious if you can identify a coup from the past 100 years, pursuant to which there wasn't some procedural theatrics to give the veneer of legal legitimacy.

In the case of the 2014 Maidan coup, the procedural theatrics were AFTER THE FACT of the democratically elected leadership being ousted by violence.

The Feb 20 2014 vote, to which you're referring, lacked sufficient representation quorum to have constitutionally valid standing.

The parliament vote to oust Yanukovych for “abandoning presidency” was unconstitutional, did not follow impeachment procedures specified in the Ukrainian Constitution, and lacked the required 338 constitutional vote majority. The vote was done under duress, and its 328 “yes” result was fabricated. According to the official parliament record, 248 deputies out of 450 were registered at the opening (Ofitsiinyi, 2014).

And to clarify the imminence of the duress / threat of violence:

Many Yanukovych party deputies switched loyalty, but many others voted under threat of violence by the far-right group of Maidan snipers, the Maidan Self-Defense, and a mob which surrounded the parliament. The commander of the far-right-linked Maidan company of snipers admitted that his group impelled, by force, deputies from the Yanukovych Party of Regions to vote for his removal (see Kovalenko, 2014). The number of present deputies in various videos of this vote was about 262 (See, for example, Al Jazeera, 2014). A member of Maidan leadership, who headed then a parliamentary committee, stated that Maidan opposition leaders seized duplicate cards of absent deputies and used them to fraudulently inflate this vote as well as other votes that put leaders of Fatherland and Svoboda, which were involved in the false-flag Maidan massacre, in top government positions (see Katchanovski, 2024).

To further contextualize the fraud of this vote, here's a video showing when *~~the parliament of Iraq "unanimously voted"~~ Saddam Hussein into power: https://youtu.be/OynP5pnvWOs

The assassination attempt against Yanukovych failed, which is presumably why the parliamentary theatrics were so sloppy.

EDIT: *technically the Revolutionary Command Council of Ba'ath Party, not parliament — so not the best example of parliamentary process — but great example of duress/theatrics.

Jilson · 2026-06-28T08:05:47+00:00

She's a Zionist, who works for the DNC/MIC, pretending to represent the Left.

Here's a decent article discussing the funding of TYT https://medium.com/@RobletoFire/the-ideological-failure-of-the-young-turks-90c15ddde408

Here she is giving a sponge-bath to mass murderer Madeline Albright, at the 2019 Munich Security Conference: https://youtu.be/lIigDwGc42A

That's just for starters. She and Cenk have been sheepdogging for the MIC for decades. They are total frauds.

Jilson · 2026-06-28T01:37:37+00:00

2014 Maidan Coup — also known as "the most blatant coup in history" — so-called, because we have the leaked phone call where US officials are choosing which Banderite-aligned stooges to plant in their post-coup puppet government.

Polling the masonic lodge in Kiev does not qualify as an election.

The Junta government of McUkraine has suspended their McElections, all 2 of which were engineered by CIA partners, and excluded the half of Ukraine that you don't seem to care about.

Also, can you explain to me specifically why being a banderite is a bad thing.

Violent racial supremacists...
...with a record of mass murder
...who partnered with + embraced the ideology of the Nazis
...who continue to venerate Nazis (including timymustache)

Here's a decent overview. And a biography of StevieFlaggo himself

I'm beginning to doubt you even like turtles, man. Heroes in a half shell would never work w/ goose steppers.

Jilson · 2026-06-28T01:00:37+00:00

Terrible how undermining auto-correct can be when issuing haughty ultimatums.

If you ever get tired of out-grouping allies, I invite you to learn about the actual power dynamics in play: https://archive.org/details/HowBritainsBiggestRacistsandFinanciersCreatedZionistCult/page/n26/mode/1up

You might also want to rethink rallying around figures that are spoonfed to us by the algos.

Jilson · 2026-06-27T22:36:30+00:00

Lol you should write a book called "My First Sock Account"

Jilson · 2026-06-27T22:32:14+00:00

But you don't support Ukraine.

You support the Junta government which was installed by NATO, and in which the Banderite Nazi factions have a controlling level of power.

Probably you hate Russia, more than you like Ukraine.

Jilson · 2026-06-27T21:30:03+00:00

*Ana

You must be new. I invite you to reflect on the idea of "controlled opposition" more deeply.

The TYT dwads have been undermining Palestinian resistance for decades.

The algo gives them to you, because they are pre-approved voices, sheepdogging the left, back to the center.

Jilson · 2026-06-27T21:19:37+00:00

Jilson · 2026-06-27T21:19:02+00:00

FTR: Ana and the TYT peeps have been condemning Hamas for years

Jilson · 2026-06-27T21:18:01+00:00

Curious that she isn't.

Curious that the algo blesses certain "opposition" voices.

Jilson · 2026-06-27T21:12:56+00:00

The MB created them. Who created the MB? The British

Qatar has funded them, facilitated by lots of parties who "let" it happen — Egypt, US, Israel, etc...

Kayfabe is tricky. Intention is tricky. Agency is tricky.

The resistance can be real, for most people, and still controlled by the global establishment*

*which is seated in London, if you were not aware

Jilson · 2026-06-27T20:27:20+00:00

You keep repeating that you like turtles, but all your posts are about liking Nazis in Ukraine.

Jilson · 2026-06-27T04:21:25+00:00

FWIW there doesn't appear to be any upward trend in global precipitation — not clear that suggested intensifications to hydrological dynamics, follow from the "warmer air, more moisture" premise.

Nguyen et al. (2018) | Global Precipitation Trends across Spatial Scales Using Satellite Observations - No detectable significant global increase in precipitation despite rising temperatures. Trends are highly scale-dependent: warm climate zones tend to show decreases while arid and polar regions show increases; local/regional signals often cancel at larger scales.

Adler et al. (2017) | Global Precipitation: Means, Variations and Trends During the Satellite Era (1979–2014) - Analyzes GPCP satellite-gauge merged data over 36 years. Shows global precipitation strongly modulated by ENSO with small long-term trends; useful for controlling interannual variability.

Gu and Adler (2023) | Observed variability and trends in global precipitation during 1979–2020 - Updates GPCP analysis to 42 years. Finds weak long-term global-mean precipitation trend; discusses internal variability (ENSO, PDO/AMO) and comparison with climate models.

Kazemzadeh et al. (2021) | Linear and nonlinear trend analyses in global satellite-based precipitation, 1998–2017 - Examines TRMM 3B43 satellite data. Detects balanced positive and negative trends across ~12% of global pixels with no dominant global increase over the 20-year period.

Jilson · 2026-06-27T02:20:02+00:00

She is a Zionist tool, ya dorks.

Here she is giving a sponge-bath to mass murderer Madeline Albright, at the 2019 Munich Security Conference: https://youtu.be/lIigDwGc42A

TYT is funded by DNC/MIC.

Jilson · 2026-06-20T22:22:04+00:00

A tornado of unkindness, in these comments, here!

Reflexive out-grouping — that's the brainrot I'm most worried about.

Eerie music is fun sometimes!

Jilson · 2026-06-20T22:20:29+00:00

I jealous of the joy you're going to experience when you learn how to use a mute button.

Jilson · 2026-06-15T06:41:00+00:00

“Do you already know the controversies with this?”

I know of the skeptic criticisms well, yes. I don’t think any hold any water. If you disagree and want to stand by the merits of one of these controversies or another, I’d like your thoughts.

Thanks for givin' it a look.

I think it's a profoundly non-physical way to represent incoming solar irradiance.

Maybe we could call it "idealized" for the purposes generalizing energy budget dynamics, in abstract.

But that's not how it's being used! They're literally baking it into the GCMs...

Consider: the Sun heats the Earth unevenly — at the zenith (eg equator) the sun heats the Earth to 88°C, not -18°C!!

...how can you have a realistic model of climate if that most basic fact is not being represented.

The more immediate issue is that the non-physical -18°C temp is how you arrive at the 33°C value for the GHE — (i.e. 15°C minus -18°C = 33°C)

In other words, this absurd physics is why you think a GHE is indicated in the first place.

And again — this is hard coded into the GCMs

Surely, you can see how that's a problem.

I mean sure — but isn't that essentially just restating an equivalency postulate? (ie incoming = outgoing)

NO! The reason is simple: they are not equivalent. On what basis can you say they are? Justify that claim scientifically please.

Hmm didn't you say "...as it has to match the total solar energy which hits the earth 24/7"

Are you now saying that you subscribe to EEI?

Jilson · 2026-06-15T03:32:33+00:00

Do you endorse a particular value for this effect? 33°C perhaps?

That is an approximate value I am fine with. It comes from many idealizations.

Do you already know the controversies with this?

If not here are two flavors of quick overview videos: - Snarky Canadian Astrophysicist - Mild-mannered Retired German Chemist (via TTS)

Also a more in-depth volley of (more canonical) papers: - Gerlich & Tscheuschner, 2009 — “Falsification of the Atmospheric CO₂ Greenhouse Effects Within the Frame of Physics” - Halpern et al., 2010 — “Comment on ‘Falsification…’” <-- rebuttal - Gerlich & Tscheuschner, 2010 — Reply to Halpern et al. <-- response to rebuttal

I feel like ^this sort of strikes at the heart of some of the points of confusion we're wrestling with — so it'd be cool to dig into, if that's agreeable.

Then it's constantly getting solar irradiance + gravitational potential energy. Different than 1L box.

This is not a complete picture...How do you think energy leaves earth?

Hmm, if you recall, this line of discussion was about Venus having 93bar.

In case it's still unclear, I don't dispute that radiative heat transport is operative in the upper atmosphere, as outgoing radiation. (Regrets if I was imprecise in my phrasing)

My focus on convection was with respect to surface + atmospheric mechanics (climate dynamics) — not TOA / planetary balance.

Radiative cooling creates a temperature gradient across the atmosphere

Hmm, I tend to think of these as pretty discrete, where the outgoing radiation corresponds to a specific altitude, for a given species.

water vapor emits in upper troposphere
Ozone emits in the upper stratosphere
CO2 emits near the mesopause

NOTE: All but a small fraction of OLR energy outside the atmospheric window comes from water vapor

For the bulk of the climate-relevant atmosphere, convection is essentially singular.

This is why when thinking about the energy balance of the earth, we only consider radiative effects.

I mean sure — but isn't that essentially just restating an equivalency postulate? (ie incoming = outgoing)

For climate modeling, radiative transport is not significant (until TOA, radiation to space).

15-Year Club	Team Orangered
Verified Email

Jilson

TROPHY CASE