One such is 17-year-old Maverick Stow of Long Island, NY. He decided to lead by example – and go back to school. In person rather than virtual – because he's sick of being treated as if he might be sick by people who are sick in the head.
Stow showed up for class – and was promptly suspended, for a year. He has been excluded from his senior prom as well as graduation. He also was arrested by Suffolk County police, who have stopped arresting criminals and now arrest kids for failing to pretend they are sick.
The school says it has a "zero tolerance" policy for "unauthorized people trying to enter our buildings to disrupt the educational process and/or to potentially cause an unsafe environment for our students and staff."
So many italics added. Where to begin?
How about with all these possessives? Our buildings? Aren't public schools public property, Herr (or is it Frau) Gesundheitsfuhrer? They are certainly paid for by the public, which includes Stow's parents – who haven't got a say as far as whether to not pay for buildings their kids are forbidden to enter by those who control them.
Perhaps the Stow family is due a refund?
Aber, the most loathsome italicized thing is this business of sanctioning kids who are potentially unsafe. An assertion which cannot be disproved since anyone – kid or adult – is potentially practically anything. It is a sentence of guilt without even the possibility of establishing innocence – which is the glowing radioactive core of this WuFlu hysteria.
Also italicized – to make the point that punishing anyone on the basis of assertions is a pretty solid working definition of "hysteria."
Stow isn't sick. No one has even accused him of being sick. His actual health status is immaterial. It is apparently sufficient to assert that he might be sick to punish him for refusing to pretend he is sick. Consider what this implies – in principle – if it is allowed to be established as the "new normal" for restricting and punishing people.
Someone – it doesn't have to be anyone specific; indeed, the absence of specificity is entirely the point – might use a gun to shoot up a school. People who never shot up anything (well, other than a paper target at a shooting range) are restricted and punished because the potential exists that they might shoot up something other than a paper target.
You go to an airport. You've never been to a jihadi training camp. You aren't wearing a hijab much less a dynamite corset. But because it is asserted that the potential exists that you might be a "trrrist" – something that requires no proof at all – you are treated as such.
You are out driving – and forced to stop – not because you broke any law or gave any reason to suspect you might be so inclined. Your presence on the road requires you to prove you are not "drunk" – based on the potential that someone might be.
And in the last two cases, at least, one can avoid punishment by proving one's innocence (as opposed to the former standard of it being the obligation of the accuser to prove guilt before imposing punishment). You pass the "drunk" test – and you're free to continue driving. You let them jiggle your junk, you are free to board the airplane.
His "crime" was to question this sickness of being presumed sick – and expected to act accordingly. His refusal to accept guilt – and punishment – for what he hasn't got and didn't do is what landed him in hot water.
What ended up with him in cuffs.
The Herr/Frau Gesundheitsfuhrer says Stow is "irresponsible and selfish" for not playing Sickness Kabuki. The gaslighting is overpowering – much stronger than the WuFlu itself, which hasn't killed 99.6 percent of the healthy/not-elderly population – including practically no school-age kids, who are at greater risk of being killed by an accident such as falling down the stairs or from a bad hit during football practice than by the WuFlu.