Ralph Nader was once a hero for exposing and going after Ford for their Pinto which could burst into flames and was killing people. His effort enshrined in progressives the idea that government should enforce safety safety standards on corporate products because corporations will do all they can to slip by with unsafe products if it saves them money.
So why have progressives and liberals gone along with corporate media demonization (by Bill Gates most recently) of the efforts of parents to expose dangers of vaccines which, just as with the Pinto, are kill people, and often small children? And where is Nader now?
Vaccines, like the Pinto, are a corporate product that kills. They have not only not been taken off the market but they are mandated to infants, children, young adults and increasing so to healthcare workers, and the list of mandated vaccines and the list of groups forced to take them, is growing. Where is Nader as vaccines manufacturers have gotten fundamental vaccine safeguards removed, have gotten the FDA to argue in court that the public has no fundamental right to its bodily and physical health, and have just been given complete immunity from liability by the Supreme Court?
Do progressives think parents seeking more safety (and choice) around corporate products are doing so in order to endanger other children or that these parents are on the take? How are thousands of parents putting in untold time to research these issues, to alert the public to the pharmaceutical industry bills that remove rights, and to ask for safeguards and better (non-corporate) studies around vaccines doing anything different from what Nader once did? How is it different from progressive groups exposing and standing up to corporate assaults on the public including the storm of corporate bills threatening pensions, health care, rights to join unions, etc.? The parents standing up for everyone, around safety and rights in regard to potentially lethal corporate products being shot into children, are doing this work without pay and without progressive help as they face corporate media attacks. And if there is anything progressives have learned is that corporate media lies and if they are attacking a group trying to expose something, that something is financially crucial to the corporations.
The mandating of poorly or untested and liability-free vaccines which can kill makes a joke of everything Nader worked to achieve in terms of consumer protect. It goes beyond allowing unsafe products to using the state to force them on people. And it is occurring at a time when the corporations are rolling back every other protection for people, so where are progressives who are fighting that corporate deregulation and removal of rights in all other areas?
Do progressives think that parents acting as Nader once did and demanding human rights around vaccines based on the Nuremberg Code (which was designed to protect the public from a repeat of the pharmaceutical industry's grotesque experiments at Auschwitz, including with vaccines), are doing something wrong in demanding that the very same pharmaceutical industry remain within the framework of the Nuremberg Code?
Are progressives allowing those seeking something as reasonable as vaccine safety and choice ("informed consent") to be demonized by corporations because progressives believe vaccines are life saving miracles, and based on pure science?
If so, then progressives have ditched all progressive principles - in civil and human rights, in siding with ordinary people who are suffering, in trusting people's version of reality, not corporate media or government - and taken on belief in vaccines at a religious level.
Because only religious belief in the miraculous qualities of vaccines would lead progressives not to recognize them as fallible corporate products and products worth billions, coming from the most corrupt, powerful and dangerous industry in the world. Only such faith in vaccines would lead progressives to give a pass to an industry the WHO has put out a warning about for its endemic<http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_20747.cfm> corruption?
Is it a religious belief in vaccines that makes progressives set vaccines apart from the persistent and large scale criminal activities of the pharmaceutical industry which produces them? Is it religious believe that makes them ignore the severe corruption of science in the studies the pharmaceutical industry uses to promote them (and drugs)?
What, in short, keeps progressives believing that vaccines are synonymous with health and "science" when children are dying from them and doctors, researchers, international agencies and parents are all signaling something is terribly wrong with the industry that produces them?
How can progressives criticize Bill Gates for his support of Monsanto, and his working with the Rockefellers to forcie life threatening GMOs on the third world, yet not see that he and the Rockefellers are also forcing vaccines as well, and with eagerness to lover world population? Is it blind faith that creates a historical disconnect in which progressives fail to remember that the Rockefellers have been devoted to lowering world population and were engaged in it as funders of Hitler during WWII, a time in which the pharmaceutical industry ran the concentration camps and prisoners were experimented on and killed with vaccines? Is it absolute faith in the goodness of vaccines that allows progressives to forget the plan Henry Kissinger (closely tied to the Rockefellers and Bush) developed for the US to use vaccines to covertly sterilize people?
And then there is Bush. The president put in office by and advised by the pharmaceutical industry (whose family made their money in Germany during WWWI, who is closely tied to the Rockefellers who are behind the pharmaceutical industry). The man who inserted in the public's mind the completely false idea that as with the 1918 flu, we are now threatened with millions dying from pandemics. At the same time and in the same way,he said we are all threatened by Muslims terrorists. And he used both terrors he drummed up himself, to push through the most extreme unconstitutional laws the country has even seen.
Flu (or virus) did not cause the 1918 deaths, but vaccines forced on soldiers at the end of WWI may have been what triggered the massive bacterial infections that suddenly sprang up in 1918, as the pharmaceutical industry (as it does today) tried to unload left over vaccines and go military to impose them.
An incomplete list of vaccines given in 1917. Soldiers were given 14-25 at a time.
yellow fever vaccine
a strepticocci, staphylococci, micrococci-catarrhalis, colon bacilli, pneumoncocci vaccine
Mixed Triple Vaccine (B. typhosus, B. paralyposus a and B. apratyphosus b)
actinofragments vaccine ("New growths include carcinoma of the glands and esophagus, sarcoma, lymphosarcoma, cysts of various types including dermoid cysts, gladular enlargements ...")
shot gun vaccine for colds
mixed influenza vaccine
mixed catarrahal vaccines
Is progressive faith in vaccines any different than Catholics who speak of holiness but deny the sexual predation occurring in the Church, or the part of the Jewish community that says "never again" to the Warsaw Ghetto but is fine with walling in Palestinians and denying them basic things to sustain life?
For those progressives who believe that vaccines lower risk of disease, look only at the measles vaccine. An unpublished WHO study shows the measles vaccine increases the risk of measles by 14 times.What is not included is the death rate that comes with increasing measles to such a level or, perhaps larger, the death rate from vaccination themselves.
If that is not enough to convince the true believers no one should not trust vaccines to be miraculously helpful, perhaps a single corporate patent will do so. Faith drops away in looking at that patent. It becomes undeniable that vaccines are simply a corporate product, one they hope to make money off of, and one they not only intend to harm people with, but one they are trying to beat out competing vaccine manufacturers with - by patenting their profit-laden achievement in doing damage to people first.
That single patent certainly should pull vaccines out of any realm of the holy.
What one might call corporations specifically seeking out a means to damage people and destroy one of the most fundamental of human rights is left to one's imagination. The UN, though, has given it a name.
This video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQTgv_Vs_tU describes the removal of people's rights around vaccines by the Supreme Court, the same court which gave that the pharmaceutical industry which makes those vaccines, personhood.