Remember when Boston was locked down as a result of the Boston Marathon backpack bomber? The cradle of liberty complied for a couple of days with extreme “stay in your home” orders. Was this a trial balloon to see how the Patriots would react to government edits to “protect” them?
Perhaps it is fitting that Boston, esteemed as a (if not “the”) national center of learning and erudition, with perhaps more PhDs per square mile than anywhere besides Berkeley, CA, is the first major city to cower in obeisance, welcoming a vaccine passport for a vaccine that doesn’t work against a variant that has only killed a handful of Americans.
Pol Pot killed the educated in Cambodia. In America the educated are going for self-inflicted wounds.
SHARE | PRINT | EMAIL
In its infinite Scientific™ wisdom, the city of Boston, Massachusetts just announced a new “vaccine passport” system set to take effect next month. This was one of the first major actions of the recently-elected mayor, Michelle Wu, who’d been hailed by many as a paradigm-shifter for her inspiring Progressive potential. Wu’s passport system is endearingly called “B Together,” because there’s nothing more emblematic of heartwarming communal “togetherness” than compulsory monitoring of medical activity by the government.
Waiters, front-desk clerks, and movie theater ushers will join “together” to carry out this very important epidemiological task. At first, the proof-of-vaccination requirement will apply to all individuals age 12 and up who wish to enter a covered venue — restaurants, museums, sports arenas, etc. — but children as young as five will be included by March. It has been so ordered.
The stated purpose of this system is “to address rising COVID-19 cases” in Boston caused by the “Omicron” variant. This seems a bit strange, because what we’ve been told is supposed to be so alarming about “Omicron” (pronounced “Oh, c’mon”) is that it’s extra transmissible — with rapid viral spread observed even among those who are fully vaxxed and “boosted” out the wazoo, drowning in daily “rapid tests,” and quadruple-masked at the first sign of human contact. These measures have evidently not succeeded in curtailing the exponential spread. Nonetheless, the hammer is about to come down hard again on “The Unvaccinated,” allegedly because they pose such a unique transmission threat. If you don’t quite follow the logic there, you simply must not understand The Science, dummy.
Though the “booster” is not yet required for compliance with this system, Bisola Ajikutu, the head of the Boston Public Health Commission, offered a pertinent clarification at a press conference Monday: “We will adjust the policy as needed when the definition of fully vaccinated changes.” Got that? The people who run these “public health” bureaucracies reserve the right to perpetually modify what it means to be “fully vaccinated,” and therefore add future injections at their pleasure.
“It is the unvaccinated that are killing us right now,” bellowed Joseph Curtatone, the mayor of Somerville, MA, who appeared at the press conference alongside Wu and pledged to implement a comparable system in his own jurisdiction. Also trotted out for the press conference was Heather White, the founder of a “boutique fitness studio” in Boston who oddly boasted of being the first gym proprietor in the city to shutter for COVID.
“We stand here proud to support Mayor Wu and her team’s leadership as we trust in science, we believe in the experts, and we move forward to do what it takes to slow the spread of COVID-19,” White exclaimed. All the while, the press conference was nearly drowned out by protesters belting extremely loud renditions of the Star-Spangled Banner, plus chants of “Shame On Wu.”
If it seems curious that this new behavioral regulation and bio-surveillance scheme could just be summarily decreed one day by the Mayor without any apparent deliberative process, take a look at the fine print of the actual Executive Order. Particularly this section:
Do you have questions about why “stopping the spread” remains a stated goal of these policies, even though the “spread” seems to have continued exponentially in myriad places (like New York City and parts of Europe) where “vaccine passports” have already been implemented? Does mandating vaccines for five-year-olds — who face astronomically low risk of a severe health outcome from COVID — strike you as overkill? Are you wary of additional “boosters” becoming required by state injunction every couple of months — the fourth is already on its way — just so you can go sit somewhere and have a sandwich?
How about the rationale for this specific Boston policy? Despite invoking “Omicron,” its proponents seem to admit that the real motive has nothing to do with current “cases…”