Two-year anniversary of Boston’s order that 5-year-olds be injected with an experimental vaccine in order to appear in public

It’s the two-year anniversary of the Boston Covidcrats ordering 5-year-olds to be injected with a non-FDA-approved vaccine if they wanted to enter a restaurant, do an after-school sport, see a movie, or visit a museum. The Science-informed order says “vaccinated individuals are less likely to develop serious symptoms or spread COVID19 to those near them” (i.e., claims that the injection prevents transmission despite the fact that the injection was never tested for its ability to reduce transmission).

“Mayor Michelle Wu announces COVID-19 vaccine requirement for certain indoor venues in Boston” (Boston.com) summarized the situation:

The requirement will apply to indoor dining at restaurants, including bars and nightclubs; indoor fitness centers; and indoor recreational spaces, like theaters, concert venues, and sports arenas.

The first phase — requiring employees and patrons ages 12 and up to show they’ve gotten at least one dose of a vaccine — takes effect on Jan. 15. They will subsequently be required to show they’ve received at least two doses on Feb. 15.

Boston will also require children as young as 5 to show they’ve gotten at least one dose to enter those indoor spaces by March 1. And by May 1, children aged 5 to 12 will be required to show proof of full vaccination as well.

The order Monday follows similar policies in other major American cities, including New York, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia. And it was announced in conjunction with other neighboring Massachusetts communities — including Arlington, Brookline, Cambridge, Salem, Somerville — that are advancing mirroring vaccine requirements for their local indoor venues.

Some initial resistance was anticipated:

Businesses will also be required to post a printed notice, available in multiple languages, informing visitors of the policy. And according to Wu, the city’s Inspectional Services Department will run checks to ensure compliance with the order.

“Once it gets to the point that it is part of the culture, part of the standard expectation, there’s much less direct challenge in compliance,” she said.

However, Wu described the proof of vaccination check as “just one more interaction that is already happening” between customers and staff.

“It would be a quick glance at an app or a card or a photo of your card,” she said.

If the following is true, why didn’t Mayor Wu order a real Chinese-style lockdown?

We need to take every available action to protect our cities, residents, businesses, and institutions,” she said.

Why did the Followers of Science allow the filthy unvaccinated remnants to continue to congregate inside the never-closed (“essential”) marijuana stores, for example?

Separately, here’s a photo of the Scientist who imposed the order wearing a rainbow sash, but the sash lacks the trans-enhanced rainbow triangle that is part of our state religion. From “Boston mayor under fire after sending list of critics and protesters to police” (New York Post, July 16, 2023):

More recently…. “Boston Mayor Michelle Wu shows off photo from ‘electeds of color’ holiday party after defending gathering: ‘A special moment’” (New York Post):

8 thoughts on “Two-year anniversary of Boston’s order that 5-year-olds be injected with an experimental vaccine in order to appear in public

  1. > The requirement will apply to indoor dining at restaurants, including bars …
    And:
    > And according to Wu, the city’s Inspectional Services Department _will run checks to ensure compliance with the order_.

    Finally, an order fallowed with check-and-balance. Now, if only similar orders with check-and-balance were issued for far more critical issues, how about education to start with? How about real prove before getting on welfare?

    I love this one:
    > However, Wu described the proof of vaccination check as “just one more interaction that is already happening” between customers and staff.

    Liberal don’t see this as inconvenience or hardship, but requiring to show an ID to vote *is* considered inconvenience or hardship.

    • I think it’s high time we stop calling American Left “liberals”. They are nothing of the sort. We should call these national socialist totalitarians fow what they actually are: neofascists.

      In this case, we’ve seen a defining frature of fascism known as dirigisme.

    • Averros, I agree, it is very confusing when (conservative) people call “liberals” people who have nothing to do with Libertas. Notion of “classical liberal” is also very confusing. So, if you like throwing racist parties, you are “liberal”. If you do not like racism, you are “classical liberal”. Maybe we should introduce notion of “classical nazi”: if you want freedom of speech, then you are a “nazi”, but if you want to kill all Jews, then you are “classical nazi”.

    • @mata:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
      Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism which advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; and civil liberties under the rule of law, with special emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech.

    • Perplexed: Wikipedia (and many similar articles) go back centuries ago, and describe many people who, I am quite certain, never called themselves “classical liberals” and nobody ever called them “classical liberals” in their time. When I remember discussions 30, 40 years ago, I remember people using terms “right wing liberals” and “left wing liberals”, or “social liberals” and “economic liberals”, but I can not remember anyone using the term “classical liberal”. I do not know when did the notion “classical liberal” become widely used, but I suspect this century, maybe earlier. It could have been partly used from “right wing liberals” to distinguish themselves from “left wing liberals”, but it seems to me that it is mostly used by any kind of liberals to distinguish themselves from people who are not liberals, but neobolsheviks. In that form it is sort of defensive newspeak, and I do not like it, because “He who controls the language controls the masses.”

  2. Diagnostic pathologist @ClareCraigPath on testing vax on children:
    – started with 4526 children, aged from 6mo to 4yrs, but 3000 did not complete?
    – ignored vax’d group getting c19 at higher rate than placebo group between doses
    – defined ‘severe c19′ as: ‘slightly elevated heart rate’ and ‘more breaths per minute’
    – declared effectiveness based on only 10 children getting ‘severe c19’: 3 vax’d + 7 placebo, out of 4526

    source: https://twitter.com/bambkb/status/1737516294931382531

  3. it is like whites only places(laws) of 1900s , this is other way around party for Electeds of color

  4. It’s interesting that the mayor of Boston, an Asian-American, supports racial segregation while across the Charles River Harvard is limiting the number of her people they accept.

Comments are closed.