Substack, but a very good introduction to the puppet masters behind Epstein, the Epstein Class and the current escalations in the Middle East.
Excerpt:
Most Americans have never heard of the Mega Group. And that’s exactly what the members of the Mega Group want.
In 1991 — the same year Ghislaine Maxwell’s father, Israeli asset Robert Maxwell, fell from his yacht into the Atlantic and was buried in Jerusalem with six heads of Israeli intelligence in attendance — two North American billionaires quietly founded what they called the Study Group. These men were Leslie Wexner, […]
That AI has nothing to do with this article is self-evidently obvious, from the very first paragraph.
More importantly, it addresses propaganda head-on from the first word, something AI will never do. It is also meticulously sourced and footnoted with real sources, another thing AI can’t seem to manage. The proofs of authenticity are there for anyone who cares enough to look.
But that’s not you. You didn’t care enough to look. And for someone that admittedly uses AI themselves, it’s hard to understand how you would be completely unable to spot obvious human authorship.
Also, you should know I’ve been through this before, so before you come at me personally for “being AI” take a long look at my post history, and the thousands of very long and intricate posts I write all by myself.
This article is very clearly not AI. So why do you need people to think that it is?
I don’t know what you are on about, the author writes 1-2 of these articles per day and that is just not a speed at which you can write articles with that density of citations. I use AI because I am fucking tired of reading AI slop articles by someone who wants me to sell AI thoughts as their own.
But here you are just saying “AI won’t do this” as your sole reason why you and the article are not AI. Show me where the annoying frequency of “it’s not this – it’s that” in that article is human made. yea sure human can do that too, but when I look up articles from websites with an AI policy vs no AI policy there are often two distinct differences: the frequency of articles by a single author And the usage of “it’s not this – it’s that” and m-dashes, because they don’t follow that pattern in every damn paragraph and use m-dashes are completly different places most of the time.
Bot behaviour to defend youself not being a bot btw.
So what I wrote was too long and you didn’t read it, so you puked forth defensive nonsense to deflect? Suits me.
Everyone else can see it for what it is. My post history will stay up, as will the above author’s extensive list of citations, as well as their Substack, meaning that anyone who wants to can see for themselves that you both exaggerate and outright lie – I mean, above and beyond being a hypocrite who will blast someone else for supposedly using AI while you use it yourself.
I will also note the author does not post as frequently as Heather Cox Richardson, who also writes her own daily and completely non-AI articles. With citations.
And by the way, it’s em-dash, not m-dash. I don’t use em-dashes. I use – these. Hit the source button. See it for yourself. An em-dash does not an AI article make, and mine are not even those.
If you don’t want to read AI slop, then don’t. But you did not read it here. Have a nice day.
Bro says I can’t read when I say “the authors use of m-dashes” and thinks I mean you.
deleted by creator