You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
-Great Cultural Revolution
If You Thought The Mask Mandate Was Bad...
2024-11-10
[MerylNass] CDC Planned Quarantine Camps, Nationwide/Jeffrey Tucker @ Brownstone Institute

No matter how bad you think Covid policies were, they were intended to be worse.

Consider the vaccine passports alone. Six cities were locked down to include only the vaccinated in public indoor places. They were New York City, Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, Washington, D.C., and Seattle. The plan was to enforce this with a vaccine passport. It broke. Once the news leaked that the shot didn’t stop infection or transmission, the planners lost public support and the scheme collapsed.

It was undoubtedly planned to be permanent and nationwide if not worldwide. Instead, the scheme had to be dialed back.

Features of the CDC’s edicts did incredible damage. It imposed the rent moratorium. It decreed the ridiculous “six feet of distance” and mask mandates. It forced Plexiglas as the interface for commercial transactions. It implied that mail-in balloting must be the norm, which probably flipped the election. It delayed the reopening as long as possible. It was sadistic.

Even with all that, worse was planned. On July 26, 2020, with the George Floyd riots having finally settled down, the CDC issued a plan for establishing nationwide quarantine camps. People were to be isolated, given only food and some cleaning supplies. They would be banned from participating in any religious services. The plan included contingencies for preventing suicide. There were no provisions made for any legal appeals or even the right to legal counsel.

The plan’s authors were unnamed but included 26 footnotes. It was completely official. The document was only removed on about March 26, 2023. During the entire intervening time, the plan survived on the CDC’s public site with little to no public notice or controversy.

It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.”

“This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings. This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available.”

By absence of empirical data, the meaning is: nothing like this has ever been tried. The point of the document was to map out how it could be possible and alert authorities to possible pitfalls to be avoided.

The meaning of “shielding” is “to reduce the number of severe Covid-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (‘high-risk’) and the general population (‘low-risk’). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector, or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.”

In other words, this is what used to be concentration camps.

Who are these people who would be rounded up? They are “older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions.” Who determines this? Public health authorities. The purpose? The CDC explains: “physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population” allows authorities “to prioritize the use of the limited available resources.”

This sounds a lot like condemning people to death in the name of protecting them.
Related:
CDC: 2024-11-06 Kenyan Jihadi is convicted of plotting a 9/11-style terror attack in America on behalf of al-Shabab
CDC: 2024-11-02 The Biden-Harris Administration Wasted Nearly One Billion Dollars On Misinformation
CDC: 2024-11-02 Bombshell video rocks court in case of Marine vet Daniel Penny
Related:
Quarantine camp 03/18/2024 This Is Tyranny
Quarantine camp 12/24/2022 Over 248 Million in China Infected with Covid - est. 5,000 deaths per day
Quarantine camp 11/14/2022 Democrat Attorney Who Halted Hochul's Quarantine Camp Regulation
Posted by:Mercutio

#12  The Bureaucratic State has gotten way out of control and needs to be seriously reined in. Also, the weaponization of agencies has to stop. Currently trust for government is zilch.
Posted by: JohnQC   2024-11-10 22:52  

#11  4^
Yes but they do restrict droplets and meant for others not your own protection.
Posted by: crazyhorse   2024-11-10 19:27  

#10  In July 2022, I met a high ranking NIH official on a cruise. I asked if masks and 6 foot social distancing worked. He said no and they only put that out to assuage the public.
Posted by: Jack Salami   2024-11-10 16:17  

#9  If you wonder about CDC , the leadership and directors are the problem

*sigh* The above, of course, is true — basic psych of orgs theory. But your hypothesis about the reason why is fatally flawed, and on the internet everyone can prove, in less than ten seconds, exactly what you got wrong. I’m leaving up your link to give everyone here a chance to see if they can beat my speed.

https://x.com/LetsGoBrando45/status/1854997430170747214?t=VhdbLZtAgSsb6hOtQ8W6Bw&s=03
Posted by: Rex Dominic    2024-11-10 15:50  

#8  Start with tearing down the entire edifice.
Posted by: Chesney+Sleting4519   2024-11-10 11:33  

#7  More likely 'camps' would be used to concentrate the deportables.
Posted by: Skidmark   2024-11-10 10:22  

#6  Out is those cities, how many are thriving now based on commercial real estate value and population? Seems not to have worked out.
Posted by: Super Hose   2024-11-10 10:12  

#5  ^#4

Yeah they knew the masks didn't stop the virus. It was just the modern equivalent of the Yellow Star of David.
Posted by: Warthog   2024-11-10 09:00  

#4  um, Crazy, masks don't stop viruses... read the label.
Posted by: Mercutio   2024-11-10 08:22  

#3  The CDC needs to be completely torn down and if necessary, built back up from the ashes, sparingly. I am certain that we do not need such an organization as it currently exists.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike   2024-11-10 06:57  

#2  Yeah and how many cops/CDC people would survive trying to put Americans into camps?
Posted by: Silentbrick   2024-11-10 04:57  

#1   Japan had a simple solution.
They masked up early and focused on super spreader
events(Cluster Busting) and trained its public to avoid closed spaces, crowded spaces and close conversations.
Posted by: crazyhorse   2024-11-10 02:24  

00:00