Author: HP McLovincraft

Seeker of rabbit holes. Pessimist. Libertine. Contrarian. Your huckleberry. Possibly true tales of sanity-blasting horror also known as abject reality. Prepare yourself. Veteran of a thousand psychic wars. I have seen the fnords. Deplatformed on Tumblr and Twitter.

Covid Vaccines Are “Obviously Dangerous” and Should Be Halted Immediately, Say Senior Swedish Doctors

There follows a public statement by a group of five senior Swedish doctors who, in collaboration with Dr. Johan Eddebo, a researcher in digitalisation and human rights, are raising the alert about the Covid vaccines, which they describe as “obviously dangerous”. They say there should be an “immediate halt” to the mass vaccination pending “thorough investigations” of the true incidence and severity of adverse effects.

The true character and scope of the harm caused by the unprecedented mass vaccinations for COVID-19 is just now beginning to become clear. Leading scientific journals have finally begun publishing data corroborating what the underground research community has observed over the last two years, especially in relation to complex problems of immune suppression.

Truly concerning numbers pertaining to both births and mortality are also emerging.

At this moment in time, a new, allegedly super-infectious Omicron variant is all over the headlines. A sub-variant of XXB, this strain is said to possess immune escape capabilities of precisely the type that some independent researchers predicted would follow on the heels of the mass vaccinations’ narrow antigenic fixation. 

The WHO maintains that worldwide, 10,000 people still die due to Covid every single day, an implausible death toll more than ten times that of an average flu. It reiterates the urgent need for vaccinations, especially in light of China’s reopening and allegedly falsified data on mortality and infections.

The EU has even called an emergency summit in light of the purported Chinese “Covid chaos” that “calls to mind how everything began in Wuhan, three years ago”.

In Sweden, the Minister for Health and Social Affairs has said he cannot rule out new restrictions, and states that everyone must take “their three doses”, since “only” 85% of the population is ‘fully inoculated’.

Keep reading

Is White Paint Racist?

I’ve just spent a week in a very white place. The snow fell solidly for two days, and everything was white – the air, the ground, the trees, the streets. And to complete the picture, the houses, in the little seaside town south of Oslo, blended in perfectly, being painted pure, brilliant white. When I got back to a green(ish) Scotland, I didn’t sigh with relief, “Thank goodness, I’m finally out of that racist hellhole.” But perhaps I should have.

According to Norwegian academics, “whiteness” and “white supremacy” are terms to take literally, and the colour white, in particular the white paint that is so commonly used on Norwegian houses, equals racism. Had it been the first of April, I would have assumed this was a hoax, but alas this is serious, state-funded stuff.

From the research project ‘How Norway Made the World Whiter (NorWhite)’ co-authored by Ingrid Haland, an associate professor at the University of Bergen, we learn that:

Whiteness is one of today’s key societal and political concerns. Within and beyond academia worldwide, actions of revolt and regret seek to cope with our racial past. In the pivotal works in whiteness studies within art and architecture history, whiteness is understood as cultural and visual structures of privilege. The new research project ‘How Norway Made the World Whiter’ (NorWhite) funded by the Research Council of Norway (12 million NOK), addresses a distinctively different battleground for politics of whiteness in art and architecture. Two core premises underpin the project: Whiteness is not only a cultural and societal condition tied to skin colour, privileges, and systematic exclusion, but materialise everywhere around us. Second, one cannot understand this materialisation without understanding the societal, technological and aesthetic conditions of the colour itself.

Following this inane logic, I should be ashamed at owning a white house, but perhaps pleased that my parents’ cabin in the mountains is painted brown? Or is that cultural appropriation?

Keep reading

What is the US “Gas Stove Ban” REALLY about?

The Biden administration is apparently looking to ban gas stoves, calling them a “hidden danger”. But while that sounds bad enough, a deeper dive shows – as usual – it’s not really about what they say it’s about.

Talk of banning gas stoves and “unregulated indoor air quality” could be a Trojan horse designed to get even more “smart” monitoring technology into your home.

Let’s jump in.

ARE GAS STOVES DANGEROUS?

Well, according to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, the New Scientist and million other outlets and pundits who started talking about it in the last two days, yes.

Earlier this week near-identical articles from the National Review, Bloomberg and CNN detail how the US Consumer Product Safety Commission will be opening “public comment on the dangers of gas stoves sometime this winter”.

The articles claim:

The emissions have been linked to illness, cardiovascular problems, cancer, and other health conditions. More than 12 percent of current childhood asthma cases are linked to gas stove use, according to peer-reviewed research published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health last month.

Now would be a good time to talk about the phrase “linked to”. It’s always a good one to look out for in any mainstream publication. Journalists love it because it implies causation without stating it.

Consider, one hundred per cent of serial killers have been linked to the ingestion of water and the wearing of shoes.

If this manipulative use of language were not evidence enough of an agenda, the rather premature deployment of the race card proves it:

Senator Cory Booker (D., N.J.) and Representative Don Beyer (D., Va.) wrote a letter to the agency last month urging the commission to address the issue and calling the harmful emissions a “cumulative burden” on black, Latino and low-income households.

SO, WILL THEY BAN THEM?

Actually, probably not.

Considering that, according to Bloomberg, some 40% of US homes use gas stoves to cook, an outright ban would be impractical to the point of madness. You can’t criminalise 40% of the country. It would be almost unenforceable.

Perhaps they might try a “phasing out”, as they plan for petrol cars in California.

But most likely of all is that this was never really about banning stoves in the first place.

Keep reading

Things We Should Understand: The Aristocracy Is Eating The Peasants

Most people (especially most Americans) still seem to view the events of the past half-century as more or less random.

Booms and busts erupting out of nowhere, impoverishing all but a handful of lucky elites. Political crises that end up dividing rather than uniting. Wars that cost fortunes and resolve nothing. Everything is bad, and nothing is related to anything else.

But of course that’s not true. Each of the above events serves the same purpose: to enrich a modern aristocracy at the expense of everyone else. And the endgame is looking even worse.

To see the scam play out, let’s go back to 1995. Two decades previously, in 1971, the US and by extension the world had ditched sound, gold-backed money in favor of “fiat” currencies that their governments, via their central banks, could create in infinite quantities out of thin air. The result was spiking inflation and exchange rate chaos in the 1970s and soaring government deficits in the 1980s.

By the 1990s it had become clear to the people running major governments and big corporations that unsound money would lead to unsustainable debt, which in turn would destabilize the financial world and bring about a hyperinflationary depression followed by a French Revolution-style reckoning for those responsible.

That generation’s elites were thus left with two choices:

  1. Return to the gold standard and avoid monetary collapse — but at the cost of giving up the ability to create money at will.
  2. Or use their fictitious currencies to steal as much real wealth as possible from the peasants and let future elites deal with the eventual collapse.

They, as the sociopaths we now know them to be, chose the second strategy.

Keep reading

BBC accidentally admits COVID Vaccine is to blame for 2022 being Worst Year for Excess Deaths in Half a Century after “Journalists” choose to LIE believing nobody would “mark their Homework”

The people of the UK should now be in a state of shock.

But instead, they have been distracted by non-stop coverage of Prince Harry’s new book, so will have most likely missed the tragic and devastating information published by BBC News of all organisations.

Information that reveals the UK suffered the highest number of excess deaths throughout 2022 in over half a century.

However, the reporters, driven by ambition and a belief that they will not be held accountable, made the decision to conceal the truth behind why there were so many excess deaths last year.

They most likely thought the majority of the British public would be too lazy to “mark their homework”, so to speak.

But they didn’t count on an independent news organisation committed to reporting the facts that the mainstream refuse to fact-checking their quietly published article.

And we can reveal that the widely but most definitely unjustly trusted news source/propaganda arm of the Government known as the BBC, and its reporters, have knowingly lied about the safety of the vaccine and lied to you.

Keep reading

Kathy Hochul moves to ban gas stoves in New York

On Tuesday, New York Governor Kathy Hochul gave her State of the State address which included detailing “The New York Housing Compact,” which she described as a “strategy to address New York’s housing crisis,” and part of the compact involves a ban on gas stoves, oil furnaces, and hot water heaters in commercial construction and new homes. Gas stoves are used in roughly 40 percent of American households.

In her remarks, Hochul said, the compact would mandate “all new construction to be zero-emission, starting in 2025 for small buildings and 2028 for large buildings,” and she said that her plan to use more electric appliances would help “residents struggling with high electric bills.” 

Hochul’s spokeswoman Hazel Crampton-Hays said, “Governor Hochul has been clear that we have to take bold steps on climate to protect the health and safety of our children, and 30 percent of state greenhouse gas emissions come from buildings.” 

A report from Bloomberg earlier in the week claimed that the Biden administration was looking into banning gas stoves to “reduce climate-warming emissions (such as from methane) that exacerbate climate change.” US Consumer Product Safety Commission Commissioner Richard Trumka Jr said, “This is a hidden hazard” and “Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” 

According to Bloomberg, “peer-reviewed research published last month” connected 12 percent of asthma cases in American children to emissions from gas stoves, and the US Consumer Product Safety Commission was considering regulating gas stoves as a response.

The Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organization have claimed that gas stoves emit gasses such as carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide at levels that are “unsafe and linked to respiratory illness, cardiovascular problems, cancer, and other health conditions.”

Keep reading

AOC Thinks Gas Stoves Cause Brain Damage — But She Still Uses One

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D., N.Y.) belief that exposure to gas stoves “is linked to reduced cognitive performance” hasn’t stopped her from using one regularly in her home.

Multiple videos and images recorded in the New York Democrat’s kitchen and posted to social media show that she has a standard gas range in her apartment.

In one video posted to Instagram, Ocasio-Cortez can be seen bending over to dunk her face in a bowl of ice water with a gas stove clearly visible behind her.

Ocasio-Cortez immediately endorsed the idea of doing away with gas stoves after a Consumer Safety Commissioner told Bloomberg News that a ban on the appliance was on the table due to its alleged health effects.

Keep reading

Western Journalists Are Cowardly, Approval-Seeking Losers

Research conducted by New York University’s Center for Social Media and Politics into Russian trolling behavior on Twitter in the lead-up to the 2016 US presidential election has found “no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.”

Which is to say that all the years of hysterical shrieking about Russian trolls interfering in US democracy and corrupting the fragile little minds of Americans — a narrative that has been used to drum up support for internet censorship and ever-increasing US government involvement in the regulation of online speech — was false.

And to be clear, this isn’t actually news. It was established years ago that the St Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency could not possibly have had any meaningful impact on the 2016 election, because the scope of its operations was quite small, its posts were mostly unrelated to the election and many were posted after the election occurred, and its funding was dwarfed by orders of magnitude by domestic campaigns to influence the election outcome.

What’s different this time around, six years after Trump’s inauguration, is that this time the mass media are reporting on these findings.

The Washington Post has an article out with the brazenly misleading headline “Russian trolls on Twitter had little influence on 2016 voters“. Anyone who reads the article itself will find its author Tim Starks acknowledges that “Russian accounts had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior,” but the insertion of the word “little” means anyone who just reads the headline (the overwhelming majority of people encountering the article) will come away with the impression that Russian trolls still had some influence on 2016 voters.

“Little influence” could mean anything shy of tremendous influence. But the study did not find that Russian trolls had “little influence” over the election; it failed to find any measurable influence at all. 

Keep reading