US Government Placed COVID Mandate Critics on Watchlists, Intelligence Documents Confirm

Parents with questions became potential suspects in a bureaucratic algorithm built to profile dissent.

ReclaimtheNet.org | Christina Maas

Once upon a pandemic, in the era of sourdough starters and Zoom fatigue, the US federal government took a break from misplacing pallets of money overseas to focus on a more pressing threat: suburban moms with Facebook accounts and questions about vaccine mandates. In a tale that feels ripped from the fever dreams of a high school civics teacher, newly unearthed intelligence documents show that under President Joe Biden, dissenting Americans weren’t simply annoying to the administration; they were suspicious.

The Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the National Counterterrorism Center got together for what must’ve been a bureaucratic bake-off of paranoia, whipping up a December 13, 2021 bulletin that redefined domestic extremism. Gone were the days when such warnings targeted people who, say, mailed pipe bombs. Now, if you complained about your kid being forced into a cloth mask or dared mention the possibility that the government might have botched the vaccine rollout, you just might be on a watchlist.

The documents, obtained through a freedom of information request by Public and Catherine Herridge, gave federal agents carte blanche to initiate what they called “assessments.” That’s intelligence-speak for: “We’re going to poke around your life now, no warrant necessary.” The threshold? Low. Very low. Just enough to trip over a tweet or a protest sign.

What were the red flags? Things like “opposition to mask mandates,” “concerns about vaccine safety for children,” and an all-purpose accusation that someone believed mandates were “government overreach.” You know, the kind of extremism you might overhear at a PTA meeting or in line at Costco.

The government’s rationale was that these pesky ideas had “resonated” with conspiracy theorists — QAnon, anti-government militias, the usual suspects. But the report didn’t bother with trifles like evidence. Instead, it sprinkled “coulds” and “mights” around like seasoning. These beliefs could lead to violence. They might incite unrest. It reads less like an intelligence bulletin and more like the voiceover to a made-for-TV thriller: “In a world where parents ask questions…”

It’s no coincidence that this redefinition of extremism happened while the Biden administration was pushing mandates like Oprah handing out cars. “You get a jab, and you get a jab!” Except if you didn’t, you got something else: flagged. A bureaucratic love note suggesting your resistance was maybe, possibly, theoretically the first step toward insurrection.

Nearly 100 million Americans were affected by the vaccine mandate or digital vaccine passport blitzkrieg, from federal workers to private employees. Predictably, some people weren’t thrilled. Healthcare workers voiced concerns. Truckers honked in defiance. Parents rallied outside school board meetings. You’d think this would’ve sparked dialogue in a democracy. Instead, it triggered surveillance. Criticize the mandates online? That’s an “assessment.” Refuse to inject your five-year-old with a brand-new pharmaceutical product? Radical tendencies.

By early 2022, things got even worse. A sequel to the first document, charmingly titled Special Analysis: Joint Analytic Cell, doubled down on the practice of turning constitutional rights into case numbers.

That follow-up claimed to track political and social drivers of domestic terrorism. A noble goal, if you’re hunting actual terrorists. Instead, the bulk of the FBI’s nearly 3,000 “domestic terrorism” cases were linked to the January 6 circus, and even those included gripping offenses like “parading” and “picketing” in a federal building. Somewhere, the ghost of J. Edgar Hoover is probably smiling.

Meanwhile, internal documents reveal that the CDC, that bastion of scientific rigor and consistent messaging (/s), had knowledge of post-vaccine complications like myocarditis. Instead of telling the public, they kept it quiet.

Social media companies got their marching orders too, with federal agencies flagging content for removal regardless of whether it was true. The goal wasn’t to correct “misinformation” — it was to drown out opposition. From healthcare workers fearing job loss to parents worried about mandates for kids, the government’s response was less “let’s have a conversation” and more “shut up and comply.”

What emerges from these documents is a portrait of a government that, faced with public hesitancy, chose suppression over dialogue. When your own citizens start asking questions and your first instinct is to start a file on them, you’re not governing, you’re managing the optics of control.

This wasn’t a war on extremism. It was a campaign to delegitimize discomfort. An exercise in bureaucratic gaslighting where questioning policy equaled potential radicalization. The real threat, apparently, was always ordinary people who remembered they had the right to say “no.”

Document Source: https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/dve-1-dve-2-merged.pdf

Image: Source [Edited]

Original Article: https://reclaimthenet.org/biden-administration-placed-covid-mandate-critics-on-watchlists