All Global Research articles can be read in 27 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

***

The Washington Post has published an op-ed by Dorry Segev and Marty Makar, professors at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Because they apparently understand some medicine, Segev and Makar feel comfortable throwing out some central planning ideas.

In their essay, they call for “local lawmakers to allow ‘immunity nights’ or designated days or times for businesses to accommodate immune customers at a higher capacity.”

“It’s time we mature our guidance,” they add.

The “papers please” details:

Here’s how it could work: Businesses such as restaurants would allow those with documentation of immunity to enter with 100 percent capacity during certain times. Documentation could be in the form of an app-based boarding pass or a QR code showing proof of vaccination, antibodies against the disease or a prior positive coronavirus test — similar to arenas scanning tickets or bars checking IDs.

How damn mad can you get?

For a virus that is not a serious threat to 99.9% of the population (and appears to be reaching herd immunity), these two want to launch a documentation program?

Do they have any sense of history and understanding of how government often expands its authoritarian grip one step at a time? Do they not know that you should never create another crack in the wall by which government authoritarian measures can be expanded, especially when it comes to tracking and “papers please”?

Have Segev and Makar ever heard of freedom where businesses can each choose their own guidelines, especially for a virus that is not a serious threat to 99.9% of the population?

Remarkably, their essay discusses all kinds of objections to their plan but never goes near the foundations. Not once is it discussed what is wrong with the argument raised by those who point to the fact that the low risk of the virus causing a serious consequence means no special measures are required. They don’t discuss the unknown long-term effects of the vaccine, nor do they address the objections to the suffocation of basic freedoms that they support via their authoritarian government tracking plan. Or have they not even thought of these objections?

My view of “follow the science” takes its lead from Richard Feynman who wrote, “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Target Liberty