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.

EU Climate Cultist EXPLODES in Unhinged RAGE at Renowned Geologist During Brussels Lecture – Calls Opponents “Criminals,” Then Fires Off Midnight LinkedIn Meltdown to the Professor!

Brussels, the beating heart of the European Union’s bureaucratic empire – where “science” means whatever the green agenda demands and dissent gets you labeled a heretic. In a jaw-dropping display of totalitarian intolerance straight out of the climate cult playbook, a top EU official completely lost it during a public lecture by one of Europe’s leading geologists.

The incident unfolded Monday night at the end of a conference featuring Professor Alain Préat, a respected geologist and one of the finest scientific minds of his generation. Préat had just delivered a measured, fact-based presentation painting an encouraging picture of the evolving climate debate. Including the IPCC quietly ditching some of its most hysterical alarmist scenarios.

You know, the kind of inconvenient truth that doesn’t fit the EU’s trillion-euro “climate emergency” grift.

Enter Philippe Tulkens, Director of the European Commission’s Climate & Planetary Boundaries unit (and apparently self-appointed High Priest of the Green Inquisition). Under the flimsy pretext of “asking a question,” Tulkens launched into a foaming-at-the-mouth tirade. Screaming like a man possessed at the elderly professor.

Witnesses described him as red-faced, sweating, and completely unhinged as he ranted about the sacred “climate urgency” while insulting Préat and fellow professor Samuele Furfari – who tried to step in and restore order – as “old” and “flat-earthers” (platistes in French). He even took a bizarre swipe at Belgium’s classical-liberal MR party, calling it “far-right” for no apparent reason other than pure ideological derangement.

Keep reading

The Ascent of Mediocrity

Regular readers of Brownstone Journal have been graced with insight provided by many authors of diverse backgrounds and experiences. As a physician, I have found those authored by Dr. Joseph Varon to be exceptionally helpful in their insight into the state of medicine today. In particular, his essay, “When Physicians are Replaced With a Protocol,” struck a chord with me.

Perhaps it was my conscience, as I probably bear some responsibility for furthering this viewpoint, at least on a local level. You see, I once was a True Believer. It was plausible. It seemed so believable, so “scientific,” so simple. But it was a vicious hoax that, I am ashamed to say, took me in. Let me tell the story:

In the early 1990’s, medicine was under siege. The cost was rising at a steep rate, and some people saw an opportunity. Rather than looking at the rapid corporatization of healthcare and the proliferation of administrative costs, it was easy to shift the blame to the “providers. We were no longer “physicians,” but providers of a service. In truth, that is what we had become. The Health Equation had been shifted, whether intentionally or by accident. Just a few years before, physicians had directed patients to hospitals. Now, some bright businessperson, probably from The Wharton School or other such academic Ivory Tower, had seen the profit if the hospitals (or other corporate entities like insurance companies or A COMBINATION OF THE TWO) directed the patients to the physicians. It was like some financial martial arts reversal move…A perfect Sumi Gaeshi.

Keep reading

Canadian Liberal Who Championed Mass Migration Questions Election Results After Losing Race to Immigrant

Nate Erskine-Smith, a former Canadian Minister of Housing, Infrastructure, and Communities who served under both Prime Ministers Justin Trudeau and Mark Carney, was supposed to be a shoo-in for the nomination for a by-election in Ontario for the left-wing Liberal Party.

Instead, the open-borders advocate got beaten by a Bangladeshi immigrant pizza shop owner — and he’s complaining about ID issues while voting. Whoa, pal, getting into a bit of denialism there, aren’t you?

Erskine-Smith, who had been a member of Parliament for a neighboring seat — or “riding,” as they’re known in Canada’s idiot nomenclature — had meant the nomination in the Scarborough Southwest riding to be “a first checkpoint en route to the party’s leadership,” according to the Oakville, Ontario, News.

One hopes he has an alternative checkpoint to start off his journey there, because he got beaten by Ahsanul Hafiz.

“After a full day of ranked ballot voting to select the riding’s Liberal candidate in the upcoming provincial byelection, Hafiz emerged victorious with 718 votes, followed by Beaches-East York Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith with 699 votes by the third ballot of the ranked count. Other candidates seeking nomination were Qadira Jackson and Mahmuda Nasrin,” Beach Metro reported Saturday.

“I’m honored to have the support of Scarborough Southwest Liberals and I’m ready to get to work,” Hafiz said after the win.

“This community deserves a strong voice at Queen’s Park that understands the challenges people are facing and is focused on delivering real results for local families.”

Hafiz came to Canada roughly 25 years ago on a student visa and is now “a businessman owning about 30 Domino’s Pizza shops across the province,” Oakville News reported. This might have actually been a good outcome otherwise, since, you know, he works for a living, as opposed to having spent most of his 40-odd years on this planet Earth just mindlessly climbing the rungs of the Liberal Party hierarchy.

However, this whole thing is rich on a number of levels, beginning with Hafiz telling his supporters that certain opportunities “do not exist” for immigrants to Canada. What, they might only have to settle for 15 Domino’s franchises?

“Like many of you, I came here as an immigrant,” he said before the voting. “Ontario is not moving forward. I want to help build the same opportunities that were available to me.”

However, Erskine-Smith is crying foul. According to the CBC, Hafiz and fellow candidate Qadira Jackson apparently struck a deal to play the ranked-choice system, urging their supporters to put the other candidate as No. 2 so that the guy who used to be in the Trudeau and Carney governments wasn’t back there.

He wasn’t leftist enough for the Liberals. Let that one sink in.

And then there’s Erskine-Smith, who said he would need to “debrief” with his team about possible fraud after the loss.

“At one table, it was 50 per cent of the people that had ID issues, saying they lost driver’s licenses and that they lived in the area, so I don’t know,” Erskine-Smith said. “It’s unfair for me to specifically speculate.”

Keep reading

George Bush’s 2005 Fowl Play

A leading columnist for the Washington Post just wrote: “Hantavirus has an incubation period of up to 8 weeks and kills 30-40% of people who show symptoms….It’s not pandemic yet and probably won’t be, but if it were, the rational action would be—lockdown.” She added: “If this thing goes pandemic, I personally will be hiding in my house.”

Yes, and let the workers and peasants deliver food and drink to you while you safely type and tell the rest of us what to do. We know how this works. 

Keep in mind that no one thought this way a quarter century ago. No one was pushing for society-wide lockdowns in the event of a pandemic. 

That changed in 2005. I wrote an article about it at the time. It was my first foray into commentary on pandemic planning. I can recall my shock that George W. Bush gave a presser in which he pushed for lockdowns. I was even more shocked that more people were not alarmed. 

I wrote the following article reprinted below. So far as I know, I was alone in raising protest against this insanity. Here we are 20-plus years later and “lockdown until vaccinate” is the presumed protocol. 

Keep reading

King’s Speech 2026: Britain’s Monarchy Reads a Doomed Agenda as Starmer Clings to Power

For many years, it was called the Queen’s Speech and delivered year after year by Queen Elizabeth II. Now it’s the King’s Speech — the traditional State Opening of Parliament where King Charles reads out the government’s planned laws. The Prime Minister’s team writes the whole thing, so it’s really their agenda, not the King’s personal views. Think of it like a presidential address to Congress, but with all the robes, crowns, and centuries of tradition.

This year’s speech, delivered on May 13, 2026, felt particularly awkward. Just six days earlier Labour had been hammered in the local elections — losing over 1,000 council seats while Nigel Farage’s Reform UK stormed ahead with more than 1,100 gains and took control of several councils. Keir Starmer is clearly fighting for his job. Dozens of Labour MPs are already calling for him to go, four ministers have resigned, and the party looks in open revolt. Yet there was the King in full ceremonial dress, reading out Starmer’s wishlist as if everything was business as usual.

The optics aren’t great. Critics are right to worry that the monarchy is getting dragged into Labour’s internal mess at a time when trust in institutions is already low. When the head of state appears to back the government’s plans just days after voters delivered a clear rejection, it raises serious questions about whether the Crown is staying truly neutral.

Conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic should pay close attention to the six main priorities. Far from listening to last week’s verdict at the ballot box, Starmer’s team looks completely tone-deaf to the issues that drove so many people toward Reform UK.

Keep reading

Who’s Your Daddy Now? Failing War Empowering Euros To Break With Trump

Nearly a year ago, NATO Chief Mark Rutte of the Netherlands was excoriated for calling Donald Trump “daddy” in reference to the American president’s “tough talk” on Europe, whether it be on member states’ per capita contributions to the defense pot, or Washington’s demands to “take” Greenland.

This was at a time of course when European leaders believed that appeasing Trump in such ingratiating terms, and in dulcet tones pitched to soothe rather than challenge, was the way to the man’s heart, if not soul. It certainly did not work.

So after Trump’s second attack on Iran in Feb. 28 and the resulting Iranian closure of the Hormuz Strait happened, some Europeans decided to change their tune. In addition to Rutte never again uttering the word “daddy,” the Spanish president Pedro Sanchez closed off the country’s bases to U.S. military access and condemned Trump’s war as a violation of international law. Germany’s Frederich Merz called the Iran War “humiliating” for the U.S. Italy has closed its bases, and UK and French leaders said the U.S. could only use their bases to defend UK and French assets, not to launch operations against Iran.

Meanwhile, Trump looked around and demanded NATO member states help him wrench control of the strait from Iran. Aside from pledging to meet and come up with ideas to secure the strait after the war, no one has complied. To say Trump is agitated and lashing out as a result is an understatement.

The situation has called into question the future of NATO, as the administration has suggested that the alliance is falling down on its Article 5 obligations, which is not true — a member was not attacked and NATO is not an offensive alliance designed to enter wars at members’ behest. Regardless, if the cohesion of NATO was shaky before, some are saying it’s on life support now.

Keep reading

Is Trump Following in LBJ’s Footsteps?

On 12 May 2026, I was on “Judging Freedom” talking with the Judge about the growing realization in the American body politic that not only is the Iran war lost, but the defeat will have disastrous consequences for the US and countries all over the world. Of course, the Judge and virtually all of his regular guests have been saying that for a long time, but many refused to believe that the war was a lost cause. That is no longer the case, as the essay in The Atlantic by the prominent neoconservative Robert Kagan illustrates.

It seems to me, as I noted to the Judge, that the war appears to be having serious negative effects on President Trump. He often looks worn down and sometimes even disoriented. And his comments — especially his Truth Social posts — sound like the ravings of a desperate man, not someone who is in control of the events around him. He surely knows he has no war-winning strategy in Iran and that his presidency is likely to be badly damaged, if not ruined, by this war, which he foolishly started against the advice of his principal advisors.

As I remarked to the Judge, it reminds me of what happened to President Johnson during the Vietnam war. He was sworn in on 20 January 1965 (sixty years to the day before Trump was sworn in for his second term) after winning a landslide victory in the presidential election on 3 November 1964. Johnson was on top of the political world, but then in March 1965, he sent the first US combat troops into South Vietnam and launched the famous “Rolling Thunder” bombing campaign against North Vietnam. In effect, he started a losing war that destroyed his presidency and made his life a living nightmare. It looks like President Trump is heading into a similar situation.

Keep reading

SO AUTHENTIC! Camera Catches Pete Buttigieg and Another Democrat Being Coached on How to Act ‘Normal’ at a Campaign Event

One of the things you’ve heard a lot of in recent months is that voters like authentic candidates. People who are not acting but just being themselves is popular, largely due to Trump, who pulls this off effortlessly.

Democrats struggle with this. They come off as polished and rehearsed. They are perceived as saying things just to please the people in front of them at any given time, not because they actually believe what they are saying.

In the video below, Pete Buttigieg and another Democrat are seen being coached on how to appear authentic and normal. Buttigieg even cracks a joke about it at one point.

They’re so bad at this.

FOX News reports:

Democrats caught on camera coaching candidate on how to be ‘authentic’ in 2026 messaging

Democrats campaigning in Pennsylvania inadvertently posted a video online, giving a look behind the curtain of their 2026 midterm strategy and how they’re preparing to appear more authentic and win back voters who felt “left behind.”

The clip, viewed by Fox News Digital and not previously reported, shows Democratic Pennsylvania candidate Bob Brooks in a conversation with Biden-era Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who couldn’t even remember what district he was campaigning in. The pair received coaching from an off-screen staffer, urging them to stay on message.

“Think about your audience,” the staffer prompted. “Why is this race so important? We need to win the House [of Representatives] — all of that. Winning over people who feel like they’re left behind by the party, flipping the district. All of that, I think, is really strong, showing up for working people, affordability.”

The rare look at a behind-the-scenes campaign moment, filmed by Democratic campaign arm The Bench, highlights the efforts the party is taking to underscore affordability, appeal to everyday voters and come across as naturally as possible after losing swaths of their base in the 2024 election.

“We are going to have a really normal conversation with three cameras pointing at you,” the staffer joked.

“Everybody act normal,” Buttigieg chuckled.

Keep reading

When Killing Becomes Commonplace

“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished
unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”
— Voltaire (1694-1778)

Last week, when the Pentagon resumed its attacks on small boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific Ocean, the media barely noticed. The U.S. military has now destroyed 56 vessels and killed 190 persons. The killings began in September 2025 and have continued to this month.

The attacks caused a stir a few months ago when one of the strikes disabled the boat at which the attack was aimed but failed to kill all the passengers. When a follow-up strike was ordered, it succeeded where the initial strike had failed. The admiral who ordered the murder of the survivors told members of Congress in secret that he believed he was following orders. The secretary of defense denied that he ordered the survivors to be killed.

Killing survivors is expressly prohibited by federal law as well as by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And, of course, ordering the killing of innocents is always unlawful.

So, the Pentagon made two changes. It produced more lethal strikes so as not to be burdened with the problem of survivors, and it either stopped killing survivors or stopped revealing that it killed them.

Everyone who professionally monitors the government expects that it will not be truthful when the truth is unpleasant or reveals criminal behavior. This expectation is realistic, considering history and Supreme Court rulings that permit the government to lie.

The Navy rescued two survivors whom it failed to kill. Under the law, rescuing is to be done by the Coast Guard. But that law was written when the Coast Guard was in the Department of Defense. Today, it is in the Department of Homeland Security, which is largely mistrusted by the DoD.

So, rather than share information about its attempted murders with a department of the government over which it has no control, rather than having a team ready and nearby to rescue survivors, the Pentagon assigned the Navy to arrive long afterward and rescue two fishermen.

But the Navy didn’t know what to do with them, so its legal team asked Department of Justice lawyers for guidance. They asked the DoD what evidence of crimes it had on these fishermen, whereupon the DoD was unable to provide an answer that would rise to the level of probable cause — the legal standard for charging and detaining anyone.

Probable cause is a level of evidence such that a neutral person would conclude that it is more likely than not that the detained persons committed a stated crime. At that point, the DoJ told the DoD to return these would-be victims to their home countries.

In 56 attacks, and one follow-up attack, only three persons survived. Two of them have hired American lawyers and have served notice of their intention to sue the federal government for its attempted murder of them.

The government initially claimed that these killings were of known drug dealers and this was part of a law enforcement operation. Yet, under federal law, the military is prohibited from engaging in law enforcement.

Keep reading

Mamdani Brags He Eliminated NYC’s $12 Billion Budget Deficit, But Then a New York Outlet Dug Into the Numbers

On Tuesday morning, New York City’s ultra-progressive mayor, Zohran Mamdani, took to X to take quite a boastful victory lap.

“When we came into office, we uncovered a $12 billion budget deficit,” Mamdani posted to X. “Today, I’m proud to say we brought it down to zero.”

“We didn’t close the gap on the backs of working people,” he continued. “We closed it while funding parks, libraries, safer streets and making historic investments in public housing. Call it Pothole Politics. Call it Democratic Socialism. It’s government that delivers for the people who make this city run.”

“That’s what New Yorkers deserve. And that’s what we will keep fighting for every single day.”

In a vacuum, this certainly sounded like it should’ve been a good Tuesday for NYC residents. But shortly after Mamdani’s post went up, the New York Post came out with a blistering rebuttal of Mamdani’s claims — and a much closer look at the numbers that Mamdani largely avoided delving into.

Blasted for including “a menu of hidden fee hikes” in his budget plan, the outlet pointed out that this deficit “fix” from Mamdani was anything but.

And notably, some of the harshest criticisms lobbied against Mamdani came from a fellow Democrat.

“Banking on yet to be determined revenue-raising gimmicks and identifying fake savings are not wins,” an unnamed Democratic operative told the New York outlet.

The operative savagely added, “This budget plan is as real as Kim Kardashian’s lips.”

So why is this budget plan so inauthentic?

Critics argue that the holes in Mamdani’s budget vision become glaringly obvious once you look beyond the lofty rhetoric and into the actual revenue proposals being floated by City Hall.

According to city budget documents cited by the New York Post, officials are eyeing a laundry list of new fees, fines, and enforcement crackdowns to help plug fiscal gaps.

Keep reading