Several times, I’ve been asked to explain my silence, and why I have not written about Andrew Wakefield in the past. My concerns started in 1981, and go much deeper and relate to much more fundamental issues than “that” paper. It’s up to Andrew Wakefield to clear his own name. It’s up to Deer to prove he’s right. There are far more serious, fundamental issues people need to face up to when it comes to vaccines.
On 6th February 2001, I wrote an article called More Motives Reviewed based on a publication WHO had put out in 1997 called “The CVI Strategic Plan Managing Opportunity and Change: A vision of Vaccination for the 21st Century.” (PDF is 5.23 mb) 1997 was the year that I realised that Henry Gadsden, Chief executive of vaccine manufacturer Merck was right, and that the plan was bigger than any one drug but encompassed as much of the drug list as feasible - including vaccines. I was shocked at the “reach” laid out by the WHO. And not surprised that "consumers" were never considered. This was all about conditioning people to accept vaccines, and demand them. This was all about getting the pretty, the famous, billboard names, media and the politicians to promote Henry Gadsden et al's vaccine dream.
Plainly, Wakefield had never read that plan, for if he had, and if he had had his pulse on the new vaccine development in the pipeline, he would have known that the CVI Strategic Plan was only possible, if the record of both the DPT and the MMR remained utterly unblemished, so that layer upon layer of other vaccines could be added into both of them to eventually result in super vaccines containing many antigens.
Whether his article was right or wrong was immaterial, because no doubts can be allowed to exist.
His article put a monkey wrench in the CVI Strategic Plan, as well as those of MMR II’s maker, Merck, Pfizer, SKF, Sanofi Pasteur, Chiron - whoever else thinks that their stability on wall street will be funded through vaccine sales. You can’t split a triple vaccine back to singles, (designed that way for ease of administration and to stop parents actively chosing what they will and won’t have) and achieve the ultimate long term aim of super-vaccines containing maybe even 30 vaccines in one needle.
"Choice" is an oxymoron, when the aim is 100% compliance in a world where so called "rights" take on new meaning when money is involved. People have the "right" to be protected from those dirty non-vaccinated, don't they. I suppose those vaccinated people don't believe the vaccine will work....
“The CVI Strategic Plan” makes no bones about how high the future cost of “managing opportunity” would be, and what a challenge that would become as the "cost" took up an ever increasing slice of government money.... In New Zealand vernacular, WHO’s vision was “THINK-BIG” and “THINK LOTS OF MONEY”.
This "vaccines are a gold mine" attitude, was echoed in another WHO publication called “Vaccine & Immunisation News” dated March 1998 which on page 3, in a sidebar signed by Jong Wook Lee MD... said, “... unlike El Dorado, vaccines are for real.” Know your history? What’s “El Dorado”? Jong Wook Lee went on to talk about how WHO must make new and better vaccines and “find ways of ensuring they are fully used.” The mantra was, and still is, “full steam ahead and be damned Jeeves”. To that end, anyone who gets in the way of those opportunities will be character assassinated or smeared in any way possible. Never will the real issues be addressed.
It was exactly this agenda which lead to the silencing, and backrooming of both Drs Bernice Eddy and John Anthony Morris. There were also 20 something other scientists silenced at the same time, but of those, only Dr Morris chose to fight, which resulted in a Senate Hearing (S.3419 April 20, 21; and May 3,4 1972) which revealed a huge raft of other nasty truths about lying vaccine companies. He also sued FDA in an action which was strung out for 7 years and won. But would you want to work for an organisation as utterly dysfunctional as the Senate Hearing revealed?
Don’t think that "eliminating any doubts" is some new agenda. It has always been the underlying motto of vaccine defenders, as was stated on Friday June 1st 1984, in the FDA’s Federal Register (justifying new laws legalising sloppy Polio vaccine manufacturing processes) on page 23607. The FDA said, “...any possible doubts, whether or not well founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to assure that the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation's public health objectives.”
It is this same hypnotising pendulum which lies behind the 2011 statement by Sanofi Pasteur that "At this point no correlation between influenza vaccine and febrile seizures has been established. Adverse events after vaccination may be causally related to vaccine or may be coincidental,"
And even if there is a correlation, we will still be told that there are no lasting effects and that the flu vaccine is just wonderful so use it anyway, because that's the plan. Even if the Cochrane Collaboration continues to say the vaccine is useless.
It's this same philosophy which lies behind WHO's rapid adherence to bowing, scraping and doing whatever vaccine companies want. And it's to their benefit as well, since they partake in the largesse.
To quote Jong Wook Lee, M.D. from the same sidebar in “Vaccine & Immunisation News” dated March 1998:
"And there's no reason why we shouldn't succeed; just 3 years ago there were "only" about 150 candidate vaccines in development; today, only 4 years after GPV was created there are about 240.
Yes, indeed, the news for us in the vaccine business is good."
As Lee said, "There is no reason why we shouldn't succeed." Unless... there are a whole lot of studies, for instance, which show that the health of the never vaccinated is vastly superior to that of fully vaccinated.
The “no possible doubts, are allowed to exist, well founded or not ” doctrine, is extensively written up in their own words, by their own pens, in their own medical literature. You just have to know where to look for the needles in their mountainous haystack. The system relies on you not believing that there is something to look for, let alone trying to look for it.
If you look for it, or write about it, or talk about it, even with the proof of words from their own mouths, you are suddenly a "conspiracist" who has maliciously twisted words to mean something the writer didn't intend. Ha.
Your convictions are only allowed, .... if .... they align with the agendas of Henry Gadsen, Bill Gates, Paul Offit, Gregory Poland etc etc, whose mottos are compliance and control. Nothing else will do. If you know otherwise, - (and I meant "know", not "believe") - you are a fanatic with “low cognitive complexity in thinking patterns, reasoning flaws, and a habit of substituting emotional anecdotes for data.”
Let me repeat the FDA 1984 statement:
“...any possible doubts, whether or not well founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to assure that the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation's public health objectives.”
Not news, not conspiracy, but black and white reality. Remember that, because herein lies the “prime operative” with all vaccines.
If Andrew Wakefield is wrong, he's history. If he's right, he's history. All that matters is that all doubts must be eliminated. Academically, as in the past, History will tell us who was telling the truth and who was not. In the meantime.....
Question. Exactly WHO... is the fanatic?
Can you answer this question in a loud voice and with real conviction, right now?