Under House Arrest

It seems I’m under house arrest.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson placed the country under effective house arrest Monday evening, the latest development in the country’s fight against coronavirus which has ranged from the simply sclerotic to the outright authoritarian.

Speaking to the nation on Monday evening, Boris Johnson ordered the public to stay at home except in a small number of circumstances, including infrequent trips to buy food, visits to the doctors, and essential work travel. The United Kingdom also banned public gatherings of more than two people, and empowered the police to enforce these rules.

The British government’s road towards what some critics have described as “putting the country under house arrest” has taken several twists and turns, with the Johnson administration and its expert advisers having taken a comparatively lax approach towards the coronavirus pandemic. The nature of the response started slow, now reaching apparent fever-pitch in shutting down the country in a bid to slow the spread of the virus.

And it does seem rather quiet round here.



About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Under House Arrest

  1. Mark Jarratt says:

    Australia too, even using tracking and surveillance technology on “carriers”. It is irrational to implement measures where the cure is worse than the illness, treating all citizens as infectious rabble with potential (a key word used often in the recent media utterances of doctors with no patients) to kill others. Public health is not superior to social cohesion and freedom of association and economic activity.
    Authoritarian over reach of dubious legality (trade and commerce between the states shall be free), beloved by elites who distrust the masses…
    One benefit could be the sanctimonious public health w@nkers might turn their attention to real health issues rather than prohibitionist lifestyle control, but it’s an industry funded by theft from those who do not support their illiberal dictatorial aims, so I won’t hold my tobacco protective breath.

  2. slugbop007 says:

    I just finished reading this essay by Susan Sontag in the New York Review of Books, 1978:



    It is well worth reading and still very up to date. Hope you have no problem copying it.

    I went to the Second Cup yesterday and they too no longer allow customers to drink coffee indoors. It really ticked me off.  I started thinking that the piling on of government restrictions on our movements is the same as declaring/imposing Martial Law. Where is the difference? None, as far as I am concerned.


  3. slugbop007 says:

    Before we had enough money to go inside the Whisky A Go Go and actually watch a live Cream or John Mayall’s Bluesbreakers concert we used to stand outside on the sidewalk and listen to the music coming through its walls. Invariably, a police officer would come along and tell us to keep moving. In those days it was three’s a crowd. When Ronald Reagan became Governor of California the police used to fly a helicopter over our high school every day at the end of school and four to five police cars would pull up, park, sweep the area and tell us to go home.

    ‘Nothing has changed, it’s still the same … Good morning, good morning’ slugbop007

  4. slugbop007 says:

    This from today’s Guardian: The WHO loves to use the word may.


    Further down the page it appears that the Dutch government is turning out to be one of the worst. Very alarming.


  5. Joe L. says:

    You can’t make this stuff up. Or maybe you can …

    Greta Thunberg says she may have coronavirus and is isolating with her father after displaying symptoms

    Greta Thunberg says she may have contracted coronavirus and has self-isolated at home with her father.
    The teenage climate activist said she appeared to have been infected along with her dad, actor Svante Thunberg.
    Both began having symptoms after a recent train tour of Europe together and so have been in isolation for the last weeks, she said.
    They were travelling in Europe before lockdowns were imposed by many governments across the continent in a bid to halt the spread of the virus.
    In an Instagram post today, Thunberg said she suffered shivers, a sore throat, a cough and felt tired after travelling with her father from Brussels.
    The Swedish 17-year-old said in a video published by the New Scientist today that her father had ‘more intense symptoms’.

    Maybe it’s just me, but it seems very coincidental that most of the bigger-name celebrities who are going public with claims that they have supposedly contracted COVID-19 (and are reporting only very minor symptoms) are outspoken Progressives/Environmentalists/Globalists (Tom Hanks, Idris Elba, Sophie Trudeau, and now St. Greta, to name a few).

  6. DP says:

    Dear Mr Davis

    The BMJ has reported on tobacco and smoking.


    “In coming months, WHO and countries should:

    Ensure that the smoking status of patients identified with Covid-19 is recorded and included in all data sets, so that it can be determined if smokers are indeed more vulnerable.” Or not?

    “Fund research into:

    Whether countries with high smoking rates are more vulnerable to Covid-19 than those with low smoking prevalence.”
    Or not?

    “Take decisive action to:
    Fund and rapidly accelerate tobacco control actions, including taxation increases, minimum price policies, regulation of engineering and content of cigarettes, retail measures to reduce accessibility, enhanced cessation support and mass media anti-smoking campaigns.

    What a surprise. Bold is in the original.

    There seems to be a determined assumption what the result will be – smoking is bad.


  7. slugbop007 says:

    It’s a lot of bullshit. How can they make a connection between COVID-19 and smokers deaths? They will surely try, it’s in their modus operandi. Monies that would be better spent on vaccines and cures not just for COVID-19 but other diseases will be set aside to fund their obsession with, what is for them, the number one global health problem: tobacco.. They really are a slimy bunch and it really shows where there true obsessions lie. Can we trust them to be forthright and honest? I doubt it.


    • Rose says:

      After the WHO took the Pharma shilling in 1999 they stopped recruiting smokers or any one who enjoyed tobacco in any form, so I expect by now any personal experience of the subject is lost.
      Which would make sticking to their brief much easier.


      8. Does this policy of not recruiting smokers or other tobacco users apply to serving staff(both fixed term and temporary)?

      No. The policy states that smokers or other tobacco users will not be “recruited” by WHO.
      Since serving staff have already been recruited and are already in WHO’s employ, the policy will not affect them. If a currently serving staff member were to leave WHO and later seek to return to work for WHO, the policy would apply”

  8. Joe L. says:

    This is interesting. The UK government classified COVID-19 as a “High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID)” in January. However, just 5 days ago (March 19), they removed that classification. Why, then, did Boris Johnson issue the stay-at-home order yesterday, four days after the government determined that COVID-19 is not an HCID? Also, If everything we’re being told about the virus/disease is true, SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 clearly meets all of the criteria of a HCID (see excerpt below). Why was it declassified? Because, “more information is available about mortality rates (low overall)”. So, if they have determined the mortality rates are “low overall,” then why are governments across the world enacting authoritarian lockdowns? Is it because they’ve already generated a mass panic, and now anyone with a slight cough will flood the hospitals and overwhelm the healthcare system? Or is there something we’re not being told?

    High consequence infectious diseases (HCID)

    Status of COVID-19

    As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.

    The 4 nations public health HCID group made an interim recommendation in January 2020 to classify COVID-19 as an HCID. This was based on consideration of the UK HCID criteria about the virus and the disease with information available during the early stages of the outbreak. Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.

    The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) is also of the opinion that COVID-19 should no longer be classified as an HCID.

    The need to have a national, coordinated response remains, but this is being met by the government’s COVID-19 response.

    Cases of COVID-19 are no longer managed by HCID treatment centres only. All healthcare workers managing possible and confirmed cases should follow the updated national infection and prevention (IPC) guidance for COVID-19, which supersedes all previous IPC guidance for COVID-19. This guidance includes instructions about different personal protective equipment (PPE) ensembles that are appropriate for different clinical scenarios.

    Definition of HCID

    In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the following criteria:

    – acute infectious disease
    – typically has a high case-fatality rate
    – may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
    – often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
    – ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
    – requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely

    Classification of HCIDs

    HCIDs are further divided into contact and airborne groups:

    – contact HCIDs are usually spread by direct contact with an infected patient or infected fluids, tissues and other materials, or by indirect contact with contaminated materials and fomites
    – airborne HCIDs are spread by respiratory droplets or aerosol transmission, in addition to contact routes of transmission

  9. Onosha Ugory says:

    This is weird because “As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.” Quoting from here https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#status-of-covid-19
    You can find a lot of information and latest updates for different countries here https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/ and here http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2132&sid=49010e01a77ad3c435bb36456c81cea1
    Take a look at these websites. Good luck!

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.