• Home
  • Vaccines/Autism

Vaccine Mandates for Everyone, Everywhere—A Globally Coordinated Agenda


By the Children’s Health Defense Team
Childrenshealthdefense.org

In the United States, those who are vaccine risk-aware have much to be concerned about right now. More and more states—and many legislators from both political parties—are displaying a willingness to impose heavy-handed vaccine mandates that trample on religious, parental and human rights—including the precious right to “security of person” guaranteed by Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

What some Americans may not realize is that the current push for mandates is playing out not just in the U.S. but in other countries as well, reflecting a broader—and indeed, global—agenda. Countries such as Australia, Italy and France have taken the lead in transitioning away from government interventions that “merely nudge or persuade individuals to vaccinate” and toward a more punitive exercise of “coercive power”—even though research suggests that “tougher stances on the part of doctors and public health experts tend to polarize attitudes in the public.” Australia’s 2016 “no jab, no pay” law, for example, withholds thousands of dollars in childcare subsidies from parents branded as “vaccine refusers,” and some Australian states restrict unvaccinated children’s access to child care altogether.

One of the primary cover stories that governments are using to justify the fierce uptick in vaccine coercion is the argument that infectious diseases pose a threat to national security. Measles represents the overblown threat du jour, while around the world, officials and media keep the public in the dark about the measles vaccine’s risks. In 2014, the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) formed to “elevate global health security as a national and global priority.” One of the eleven “Action Packages” to which GHSA stakeholders agreed was an “Immunization Action Package” that just so happens to use measles vaccine coverage as its proxy indicator for success. Considering that the Action Package’s aim is to marshall regional and global collaboration to “accelerate” vaccine coverage, how should we construe the measles hysteria that international organizations, governments and the media have been fomenting ever since the GHSA’s creation?

… taking the concept of an “interconnected global network” to an entirely new level all sorts of public and private ‘advisory partners’ are also in on the push for unitary action, including various United Nations (UN) agencies, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, the African Union (AU), the European Union (EU) and even, somewhat ominously, Interpol.

 

An interconnected global network

Although generally not in the media spotlight, the GHSA attracted high-level attention and commitments from the powerful from the get-go. Within four months of its February 2014 launch, the GHSA received a key endorsement from the G7, and in September, President Obama hosted the new entity’s first major meeting at the White House. Distracting the public from the earth-shattering revelations of CDC vaccine fraud issued a few weeks earlier by whistleblower William Thompson (on August 27, 2014), GHSA meeting participants instead solemnly declared: “A biological threat anywhere is a biological threat everywhere, and it is the world’s responsibility to respond as one.”

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: RFK, Jr. Hammers Anti-Choice Democrats for Forced Vaccines, Being Stooges for Big Pharma



 

 
 
 

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the son of a former Senator and nephew of a former President, has been a Democrat his entire adult life. But in a moment that seems similar to Ronald Reagan’s famous quip, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me,” the environmental activist hammered his fellow California Democrats for their authoritarian passage and subsequent signing of SB 714 and SB 276, the “Vaccination Exemption Bills” that will force parents to have their children vaccinated by preventing doctors from giving them exemptions.

“This is the party that’s supposed to stand up to big corporations,” Kennedy said before a passionate group of medical choice advocates. “This is the party that’s supposed to stand up for women. This is the party that’s supposed to stand up to the bullies. This is the party that’s supposed to stand up for freedom of choice. When did it become the enforcement weapon of the pharmaceutical industry in its war against our children?”

The controversial bills have prompted medical choice and parental rights activists to protest loudly and oftentimes aggressively to the point that several arrests were made. Protesters shut down debate for two hours in the state legislature before the bills were amended, passed, and sent to the Governor’s desk. Republicans generally opposed the bills as medical oppression and removal of parental choice.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Big Pharma, Forced Vaccinations, And Population Control

What does the globalist medical-industrial-complex have in store for humanity?


In 1986, The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was established to protect the Vaccine manufacturers from any liabilities.

This program insured that the taxpayer would pay for all injuries the public suffered from Vaccines.

Once this protection was set in place, the government took control of the vaccine industry and Big Pharma profits increased by over 600%.

Is it all about money? Or is there something more nefarious at play?

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Interview with a Retired Vaccine Researcher


“[These days,] If I had a child, the last thing I would allow is [my child to be vaccinated].”

 

By Jon Rapport

Dr. Mark Randall is the pseudonym of a vaccine researcher who worked for many years in the labs of major pharmaceutical houses and the US government’s National Institutes of Health.

Mark retired in the 1990s. He says he was “disgusted with what he discovered about vaccines.”

As you know, since the beginning of NoMoreFakeNews, I continue to launch attacks against non-scientific and dangerous assertions about the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

Mark was one of my early sources.

At the time this interview was originally published — in January 2002, Mark was a little reluctant to speak out, even under the cover of anonymity. But, with the push to make vaccines mandatory and with penalties like quarantine lurking in the wings (even back then), he decided to break his silence.

Like many of my sources, he developed a conscience about his former work. Mark was well aware of the scope of the medical cartel and its goals of depopulation, mind control, and general debilitation of populations.


(Q) Jon Rappoport

(A) Retired Vaccine Researcher (given the pseudonym of “Dr. Mark Randall”)


Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.

A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won’t say which ones.

Q: Why not?

A: I want to preserve my privacy.

Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?

A: I believe I could lose my pension.

Q: On what grounds?

A: The grounds don’t matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.

Q: Harassed by whom?

A: The FBI.

Q: Really?

A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.

Q: So much for free speech.

A: I was “part of the inner circle.” If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.

Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?

A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall “brilliance” of modern medicine.

Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?

A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It’s one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.

Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.

A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.

Q: Why?

A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.

Q: And then?

A: I did my own investigation.

Q: What conclusions did you come to?

A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.

Q: What conditions?

A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don’t contract the diseases as easily.

Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?

A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.

Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?

A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I’m concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.

Q: Why?

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

6-in-1 Vaccine KILLS 36 Infants, Reveals “Confidential” Document

Do we need more proof that vaccines are harmful?


Editor's Note:  What other product would be allowed to remain on the market if it KILLED 36 BABIES?



By Ehan Huff
NaturalNews.com

If all vaccines were truly “safe and effective” as establishment health authorities and government goons routinely claim, then 36 infants wouldn’t have died from a 6-in-1 vaccine known as “Infanrix Hexa,” developed by pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), over a two-year period.

Confidential documents recently unearthed and made public by the website “Initiative Citoyenne” show that there were at least 1,742 adverse reactions, 503 of which were classified as “serious,” as well as the aforementioned 36 deaths, that occurred between October 23, 2009, and October 22, 2011 – but that were never reported by GSK.

The eye-opening information contained in this 1,271-page document reveals that at least 1.5 deaths per month occurred in association with Infanrix Hexa – and these were just the deaths that were reported. Seeing as how only 1-10 percent of vaccine adverse reactions even end up in the official statistics, the number of deaths could be far higher.

According to that data that is publicly available, most of the babies who were reported to have died from Infanrix Hexa passed away within the first few days following vaccination. Three of the infants reportedly died within hours of receiving the vaccine.

“It’s not that 14 deaths were recorded by GSK between October 2009 and end in October 2011 as we had originally calculated but 36 (14 from 2010 to 2011 and 22 from 2009 to 2010),” Initiative Citoyenne reported.

“In addition to these 36 deaths [there were] at least 37 other deaths (sudden death mainly), bringing the total to at least 73 deaths since the launch of the vaccine in 2000, and again, this concerns only the death by sudden death, no further recovery of under-reporting.”

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Herd Immunity: A False Rationale for Vaccine Mandates


By the Children’s Health Defense Team
Childrenshealthdefense.org

 

Herd immunity is a largely theoretical concept, yet for decades, it has furnished one of the key underpinnings for vaccine mandates in the United States. The public health establishment borrowed the herd immunity concept from pre-vaccine observations of natural disease outbreaks. Then, without any apparent supporting science, officials applied the concept to vaccination, using it not only to justify mass vaccination but to guilt-trip anyone objecting to the nation’s increasingly onerous vaccine mandates.

… 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.

Apparently, herd immunity bullying sometimes works: A review of 29 studies showed that “willingness to immunize children for the benefit of the community” was a “motivating reason” for about a third of parents. There is one problem with using herd immunity as a motivator, however—the theory of herd immunity relies on numerous flawed assumptions that, in the real world, do not and cannot justify compulsory vaccination policies. In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors show that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” It is time, they suggest, to cast aside coercion in favor of voluntary choice.

False logic and troubling consequences

One of the principal arguments made by Holland and Zachary is that herd immunity is not achievable with modern vaccines. In part, this is because the underlying assumptions upon which herd immunity is premised are largely “irrelevant in the real world.” These assumptions include the erroneous notions that all members of the population are equally susceptible to infectious disease and that all persons behave identically in spreading disease. In reality, many different factors shape patterns of risk and susceptibility to disease, including age and sex, race/ethnicity and life circumstances, including stress. Although the NYU scholars do not mention it, a healthy lifestyle and naturally resilient immune system also matter, giving individuals the “upper hand” in encounters with pathogens. In contrast, the artificial immunity engineered by vaccines— administered to children before their immune systems have even had a chance to develop—not infrequently leads to subsequent immune dysfunction and chronic illness.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Bombshell: Gov Official Confirms Link Between Vaccines and Autism

Big Pharma working to discredit scientist’s vaccine-autism connection


A medical expert working for the government found a causal link between vaccines and autism, but federal lawmakers influenced by the powerful pharmaceutical lobby helped bury that info. In an episode of award-winning journalist Sharyl Attkisson’s program Full Measure, she breaks down how a scientist relied on by the government to debunk vaccine-autism claims was silenced after reporting there was indeed a link between the neurological disease and vaccines.