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.

A look through CIA’s declassified Bilderberg files

The annual Bilderberg Conference is shrouded in nearly as much mystery as CIA itself, with a number of conspiracy theories that seeing these meetings of the elite as where the strings of the world are pulled. To get an idea of how intelligence agencies view the Bilderberg meetings, I reviewed the references in the CREST archive. While there weren’t many references, they were enlightening.

The earliest declassified reference in CIA files to the Bilderberg conference actually comes shortly before the group’s first meeting. A formerly TOP SECRET description of a Deputies Meeting from May 21, 1954 shows that the conference was brought up in a meeting between CIA Director Allen Dulles and his deputies. Although the conference isn’t referred to by name, it lists several attendees of the inaugural Bilderberg meeting and mentions the general location. On May 29th, the Bilderberg conference began.

Keep reading

New document reveals scope and structure of Operation Warp Speed and underscores vast military involvement

When President Trump unveiled Operation Warp Speed in May, he declared that it was “unlike anything our country has seen since the Manhattan Project.”

The initiative — to accelerate the development of Covid-19 vaccines and therapeutics — lacks the scale, and the degree of secrecy, of the effort to build the atomic bomb. But Operation Warp Speed is largely an abstraction in Washington, with little known about who works there other than its top leaders, or how it operates. Even pharmaceutical companies hoping to offer help or partnerships have labored to figure out who to contact.

Now, an organizational chart of the $10 billion initiative, obtained by STAT, reveals the fullest picture yet of Operation Warp Speed: a highly structured organization in which military personnel vastly outnumber civilian scientists.

Keep reading

Democrats feign outrage and falsely claim Amy Coney Barrett used an anti-gay slur

Reasonable people, whether they share Barrett’s ideology or not, ought to dismiss this faux outrage for the partisan smear job that it is. But arguably more disturbing than the smear itself was the way that in Orwellian fashion, politically correct institutions, including the Merriam-Webster dictionary, tried to silently change the term’s definition and act as if it had always been viewed as offensive.

We should never accept such blatant attempts to twist language to control thought and retroactively condemn speech. As far as left-wing gay activists and Democrats are concerned, if the state of your “fight for human rights” is reduced to petty squabbling over minor word choice, it’s time to move on from your victimhood narrative once and for all.

Keep reading

Webster’s Dictionary Sprints To Edit Definition Of Word ‘Preference’ To Comply With Grievance Culture

Webster’s Dictionary quickly edited the definition of the word “preference” after it was declared by some as an “offensive” term to use when discussing sex.

The dictionary previously added in a definition for “preference” to include “orientation” and “sexual preference,” Steve Krakauer, the executive producer of Megyn Kelly’s podcast, tweeted.

After Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett used the term “sexual preference” Tuesday during confirmation hearings, some, including Democratic Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, claimed that the term is offensive – despite it being used widely. Barrett later apologized, saying she “honestly did not mean any offense or to make any statement by that.”

Shortly after, Webster’s Dictionary sprinted to edit the definition of “preference” in regards to the term “sexual preference,” this time declaring that it is “offensive,” archives of the website suggest.

Keep reading

Joe Biden is the luckiest, least scrutinized frontrunner

Eight months ago, Joe Biden was in danger of losing the Democratic nomination. Now he’s a prohibitive favorite for president — who got there with lots of luck and shockingly little scrutiny.

Why it matters: The media’s obsession with Trump — and Trump’s compulsion to dominate the news — allowed Biden to purposely and persistently minimize public appearances and tough questions.

Since Aug. 31, Biden has answered less than half as many questions from the press as Trump — 365 compared with 753 — according to a tally by the Trump campaign, which the Biden campaign didn’t dispute.

Keep reading