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.

Innocent Man Falsely Jailed for a Year Only to Be Released and Forced to Pay for His Stay Behind Bars

When David Allen Jones was accused of trafficking in child pornography in 2013, his life came crumbling down. Lexington police allegedly linked Jones’ IP address to a child sex video downloaded from the web. The Clark County Sheriff’s office subsequently raided his home and Jones was thrown in jail before police found any evidence.

Despite repeated searches of his property, including digital devices seized by authorities like his cell phone, computer tablet, Xbox, server, modem, printer and DVDs — police found absolutely nothing incriminating. The alleged IP address link was a fluke that led to the incarceration of an innocent man.

Nevertheless, Jones was thrown in a cage and his bail was set to $15,000 which was too high for him to afford, so he had to wait for his day in court. Knowing he was entirely innocent, Jones waived his right to counsel thinking that it would help speed up his release. He was mistaken.

Despite prosecutors acknowledging that someone else in Jones’ apartment complex was the likely child predator, Jones spent the next 14 months locked in a cage — completely innocent.

In December of 2014, Jones was finally released. His life was in shambles, his name had been dragged through the mud over false accusations, forcing him to have to  move out of Winchester.

“My reputation, it’s shot. I mean, I’ve got people that I’ve known for years won’t have anything to do with me anymore because they believe the law,” Jones said.

After ruining the man’s life over false accusations, just how does the state attempt to repay him? They send him a bill for his stay in their cage.

Keep reading

ACLU Again Cowardly Abstains From an Online Censorship Controversy: This Time Over BLM

Whatever one’s views are on this particular censorship controversy, there is no doubt that it is part of the highly consequential debate over online free speech and the ability of monopolies like Facebook to control the dissemination of news and the boundaries of political discourse and debate. That is why Smith devoted his weekly column to it. And yet, when Smith approached the standard free speech advocacy groups for comment on this story, virtually none was willing to speak up. “Facebook’s usual critics have been strikingly silent as the company has extended its purview over speech into day-to-day editorial calls,” he wrote.

Among those groups which insisted that it would not comment on Facebook’s censorship of the Post‘s BLM story was the vaunted, brave and deeply principled free speech organization, the American Civil Liberties Union. “We don’t have anyone who is closely plugged into that situation right now so we don’t have anything to say at this point in time,” emailed Aaron Madrid Aksoz, an ACLU spokesman. Smith said “the only criticism he could obtain came from the News Media Alliance, the old newspaper lobby, whose chief executive, David Chavern, called blocking The Post’s link ‘completely arbitrary’ and noted that ‘Facebook and Google stand between publishers and their audiences and determine how and whether news content is seen.’”

How is it possible that the ACLU is all but invisible on one of the central free speech debates of our time: namely, how much censorship should Silicon Valley tech monopolists be imposing on our political speech? As someone who intensively reports on these controversies, I can barely remember any time when the ACLU spoke up loudly on any of these censorship debates, let alone assumed the central role that any civil liberties group with any integrity would, by definition, assume on this growing controversy.

Keep reading

New blood disorder warnings appear on Covid-19 vaccine made by Johnson & Johnson

New blood disorder warnings appear on the Johnson and Johnson (Janssen) Covid-19 vaccine label, now that the federal “pause” on administering the vaccine has ended.

The warnings flag an increased risk of thrombosis, clotting of the blood in the circulatory system. This disorder can be combined with thrombocytopenia, or low blood platelet count, which can lead to dangerous internal bleeding, according to the new warnings. The warnings say the symptoms can appear approximately one to two weeks after vaccination.

A 56-year old Miami Beach doctor, Gregory Michael, died of the rare blood disorder two weeks after his Dec. 18 vaccination with a different brand: Pfizer/BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine. However, his official cause of death was ruled to be “natural.” Dr. Michael was described as “very healthy” before his Covid-19 vaccine and sudden onset of “immune thrombocytopenia,” or low blood platelet count. There is no word as to whether officials have reclassified or reinvestigated his death.

One reason why relatively rare reports of a serious adverse event are cause for such concern and added warnings is that scientists have documented that they only capture a small percentage of actual illnesses that occur.

Each recognized case is presumed to represent many more that are not correctly diagnosed or reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System or VAERS. Patients and doctors are encouraged to report all illnesses after vaccination to VAERS, whether they are proven to be linked to the inoculation or not. As professionals comb through the data, they are able to identify previously unknown side effects.

Several European countries report similar blood clot complications after use of AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine.

Keep reading

‘It’s the biggest thing in the history of the internet’: Pentagon quietly transfers 175 million internet addresses worth $4BILLION to mysterious firm at shared workspace in Florida

A very strange thing happened on the internet the day President Joe Biden was sworn in. 

A shadowy company residing at a shared workspace above a Florida bank announced to the world´s computer networks that it was now managing a colossal, previously idle chunk of the internet owned by the U.S. Department of Defense.

That real estate has since more than quadrupled to 175 million addresses – about 4 percent the size of the entire current internet. It’s also more than twice the size of the internet space actually used by the Pentagon.

‘It is massive. That is the biggest thing in the history of the internet,’ said Doug Madory, director of internet analysis at Kentik, a network operating company.

The sell off of Internet space sparked theories the Pentagon could be eventually responding to repeated demands to monitise its collections of millions of dormant web pages. 

But it now seems officials hope to place the pages on the open market in order to allow them to gather huge amounts of intelligence data about Internet users, including hostile actors.   

The military hopes to ‘assess, evaluate and prevent unauthorized use of DoD IP address space,’ said a statement issued Friday by Brett Goldstein, chief of the Pentagon’s Defense Digital Service, which is running the project. 

But it has not answered many basic questions, beginning with why it chose to entrust management of the address space to a company that seems not to have existed until September.

Keep reading