
At risk…


The day has finally come. You’ve received the second dose of a Covid-19 vaccine currently on the Western market — Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech or Oxford-AstraZeneca.Does that mean you’re free to go about life as you did before the pandemic once immunity kicks in?
Sorry, there is no immunity passport yet, experts told CNN. There are still safety precautions you need to follow in order to keep you, your loved ones and everyone else safe and protected from the deadly coronavirus.Read on for answers from the experts on top questions such as when can you stop wearing a mask, eat inside a restaurant, travel, go to sporting events and concerts, and freely visit friends and family.
Despite Joe Biden running on a platform of unity to bring Americans back together, before he was even sworn in, he reneged on this promise by alienating tens of millions of Trump supporters — essentially declaring them the enemy.
“Don’t dare call them protesters,” Biden said after the largely peaceful march on DC which ended with a few hundred goons out of tens of thousands of peaceful protesters raiding the capitol. “They were a riotous mob. Insurrectionists. Domestic terrorists. It’s that basic. It’s that simple.”
While some of the folks certainly thought they were part of some coup, the reality of the situation was nothing at all as serious as the media and establishment is claiming.
Just like Trump used Antifa violence to bolster the police state and add stricter penalties for protests, Biden is using the riot at the capitol to do the same. We predicted this outcome last month, and now it is escalating even further.
Using The DHS National Terrorist Advisory System — or NTAS — the Department of Homeland Security has issued a warning that anger “fueled by false narratives,” including unfounded claims about the 2020 presidential election, could lead some inside the country to launch attacks in the coming weeks.
This is the first time in a year that a terror threat bulletin has been issued on the system, and the first time we can find that it was issued over a domestic terror threat.
This threat bulletin is worrisome as it is all encompassing and covers a range of issues and beliefs held by tens of millions of Americans.
Closing out the bulletin, DHS urged Americans to report any “suspicious activity and threats of violence, including online activity, to local law enforcement, FBI Field Offices, or their local Fusion Center.”

Question: does anyone with a media job find this situation to be worthy of some further inquiry? Or in other words, worthy of questioning the premise of why such an extravagantly intensive military presence is allegedly necessary? Is it proportionate to the scale of the purported threat? Has the nature of the threat itself — whatever that might be, exactly — been adequately probed to determine whether it is grounded in reality? Already a bunch of purported threats initially trumpeted across the media with the usual five-alarm-five hysteria have dissipated in short order, so there is perhaps some reason for doubt in that regard.
Instead of applying a modicum of skepticism to this gigantic show of military force, much of which appears to be “security theater” in its purest form, our vaunted media is doing little other than cheering it on. And of course, inflating the threats being cited as justification for it. They can repeat over and over again that what occurred on January 6 at the Capitol was an “attempted coup,” and therefore everything and anything is justified to retaliate, but everyone with a brain by now should be able to recognize that the government was never at a greater than 0% risk of being overthrown that day. Fear-inducing terms like “insurrection,” “domestic terrorism,” “seditious conspiracy,” “armed rebellion,” and others have been marshaled intentionally to inure the public to extreme actions such as the swiftly-executed corporate censorship purge and now, the transformation of the country’s capital into a military fortress.
Anew study evaluating COVID-19 responses around the world found that mandatory lockdown orders early in the pandemic did not provide significantly more benefits to slowing the spread of the disease than other voluntary measures, such as social distancing or travel reduction.
The peer reviewed study, which was conducted by a group of Stanford researchers and published in the Wiley Online Library on January 5, analyzed coronavirus case growth in 10 countries in early 2020.
The study compared cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and the U.S. – all countries that implemented mandatory lockdown orders and business closures – to South Korea and Sweden, which implemented less severe, voluntary responses. It aimed to analyze the effect that less restrictive or more restrictive measures had on changing individual behavior and curbing the transmission of the virus.
Sarah Vresk was heading to work at around 4 a.m. Tuesday when she was stopped near her home by Montreal police and asked to prove she had the right to be on the road during curfew.
“I got my letter out of my glove compartment and he asked for my ID. I gave him that,” said Vresk. “He then asked me what was in my bag.”
Vresk demanded to know why that mattered, and why she wasn’t free to go after showing a letter from her employer stating she works for a snow-removal contractor and needs to be on the job during curfew.
The officer questioned the validity of that letter, saying it’s just a piece of paper, and threatened to give her a ticket anyway, Vresk said. The officer accused her of delaying detainment by not co-operating and showing the bag’s contents.
Vresk finally gave into the officer’s demands, allowing him to inspect her lunch bag.
The officer then returned to his cruiser to check her credentials while his partner took over questioning. Finally, Vresk was let go without a ticket.
The government should toughen the lockdown by giving officers the right to force entry into homes of suspected law breakers, a policing leader has said.
David Jamieson, the police and crime commissioner for the West Midlands police, England’s second biggest force, said: “For the small minority of people who refuse entry to police officers and obstruct their work, the power of entry would seem to be a useful tool.
“I have raised this issue with the policing minister previously and clarity on the power of entry would help police officers enforce the new Covid regulations more easily.”
As the third lockdown comes into force in England at midnight on Wednesday, the rising infection rate is also causing increasing absences from the ranks of officers needed to help enforce the lockdown.


You must be logged in to post a comment.