Dr. Blaylock shares his views on mandating vaccinations

Dr. Blaylock shares his views on mandating vaccinations –
Vaccinations should not be mandated as they have never been proven to be 100% safe nor effective.
There is compelling scientific evidence showing that vaccinations are not as safe as the pharmaceutical industry-sponsored mainstream media are suggesting. Significant serious complications such as death, seizures, encephalitis and brain damage can occur as a result of vaccination, all this is well documented in the medical literature and such complications are more frequent than the pharmaceutical industry-sponsored mainstream media would have people believe.
No one has the right to force parents to vaccinate especially when it is well documented in scientific studies demonstrating the mechanisms by which vaccinations can cause harm to children.
If it could be demonstrated that vaccinations were 100% safe and do not cause any adverse effects or harm, then it would be a different story. However, this cannot be demonstrated and the scientific evidence is clearly showing that vaccinations are continuing to cause complications..
Since the increase in the vaccination schedule, there appears to also be a correlation between the increase in auto-immune disease, neurological damage, impairment in learning, memory and speech linked to vaccination.
The argument for mandating vaccination is that non-vaccinated children put other children at risk of disease But if the vaccinations are as effective as the pharmaceutical companies suggest, why does it matter if other children are not vaccinated? If the vaccines are supposed to prevent the child from getting the disease anyway? This is a poor argument, but it makes a lot of money for the pharmaceutical industries who sponsor the media and lobby politicians to support mandating their vaccinations.
When the evidence for outbreaks like measles are examined we find that most of the children in these outbreaks were already fully vaccinated and that the vaccines are in fact no where near as effective as what the pharmaceutical companies are claiming. Many of these diseases such as measles and chicken pox are not fatal diseases in western countries, only in poor countries where there is lack of nutrition and the children there have compromised immune systems

The term ‘conspiracy theory’ was created in the 20th century to debunk alternative views that threatened establishment lies

Everybody’s heard the term “conspiracy theory,” and most of us have heard at least one “conspiracy” in our lifetimes. In fact, conspiracy theories abound, but that’s only because actual conspiracies really do exist.

In more recent times there were a great many conspiracies floating around about the World Trade Center attacks on 9/11, but perhaps the biggest conspiracy theories of the modern era are tied to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in November 1963.

Some believe that the CIA did it. Others have said it was a mob hit. Still others believe it could have been in response to Kennedy’s desire to stay out of Vietnam. Some have said that they believe it is a combination of these other theories.

In fact, as noted by the Center for Research on Globalization, a Canada-based think tank, the term was actually born from the Kennedy assassination, and was manipulated intentionally by the CIA, coincidentally, to debunk alternative views about what had happened, based on various accounts and other evidence at the time.

‘Government’s reputation at stake’

As the center noted:

“Conspiracy theory” is a term that at once strikes fear and anxiety in the hearts of most every public figure, particularly journalists and academics. Since the 1960s the label has become a disciplinary device that has been overwhelmingly effective in defining certain events off limits to inquiry or debate. Especially in the United States raising legitimate questions about dubious official narratives destined to inform public opinion (and thereby public policy) is a major thought crime that must be cauterized from the public psyche at all costs.

The center noted that the negative connotations surrounding the term are traceable to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known attacks against the “New Right.” But, the think tank noted, it was the CIA that most likely played the greater role in sort of “weaponizing” the term.

Following much skepticism over the findings of the Warren Commission, a panel formed by President Lyndon Johnson to investigate the circumstances surrounding the assassination that was led by then-Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Earl Warren (future president Gerald Ford, then a U.S. congressman, was also on the panel), the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its desks and bureaus. Titled, “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the communique was key in transforming the term “conspiracy theory” into a weapon that could be used against any group or individual who questioned the federal government’s increasingly clandestine operations.

CIA Document 1035-960 was made public by The New York Times in the late 1970s, following a Freedom of Information Act request by the paper in 1976. The directive is notably significant because it lays out the top spy agency’s concerns regarding “the whole reputation of the American government,” vis-a-vis the Warren Commission report, which concluded, by the way, that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman who assassinated the president. A motive could never be established (more on that in a moment), since Oswald was killed by low-level gangster Jack Ruby the following day, as he made his way to a waiting car in the basement of a Dallas police station.

‘Likely a conspiracy’

The CIA was very interested in maintaining its own image and role as it “contributed information to the investigation” conducted by the Warren Commission.

As further noted by the Canadian think tank:

The memorandum lays out a detailed series of actions and techniques for “countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.” For example, approaching “friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors)” to remind them of the Warren Commission’s integrity and soundness should be prioritized. “[T]he charges of the critics are without serious foundation,” the document reads, and “further speculative discussion only plays in to the hands of the [Communist] opposition.”

This memo, and its directives, are utilized often today – by the media, most often, but also by politicians, presidential administrations and government agencies – to try to discredit anyone or any group that disagrees with the official government narrative (the global warming hoax immediately comes to mind).

Finally, there is this: In the late 1970s the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations launched a new probe into the Kennedy assassination. The congressional panel generally adopted the Warren Commission’s findings and agreed that two bullets from Oswald’s rifle did indeed kill Kennedy. But the HSCA also said that there was a high likelihood of a second shooter, and that some unknown conspiracy – a plot of some sort – was behind the murder.

Read more at:

http://www.naturalnews.com/053452_conspiracy_theories_Kennedy_assassination_CIA.html