Category Archives: vaccines

Breaking down the vaccine propaganda machine!

Internet talk show host, Vinnie Eastwood out of New Zealand, does an excellent job explaining how vaccination-propaganda misleads the public into believing that vaccines are safe and how parents who protect their children from these unsafe products are demonized!

Judge shoots down the vaccination “choice” movement!

LAWYERS WHO FILED A REQUEST TO STOP THE ENFORCEMENT OF SB 277 WERE SHOT DOWN BY THREE SUPREME COURT RULINGS!

By AL Whitney © copyround 2016
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and ParentsAgainstMandatoryVaccines.net  is acknowledged.

 

Supreme Court SealSenate Bill 277 was passed and signed into ‘law’ by Governor Brown last year. This so-called law prevents parents from opting out of California’s vaccination requirements for children entering public or private schools.  Essentially no child can be enrolled without proof that they have been subjected to a litany of unwarranted pharmaceutical products called vaccines.

Before the passage of SB 277 parents could submit a document or form requesting permission to opt out (get an exemption) with the assurance that this permission would be granted. This process has been relied on by California vaccine-savy parents for many years, allowing them to ignore the fact that the ‘state’ had no authority to force them to have their progeny injected with any substance whatsoever. The privilege (the Judge’s words not mine) of opting out created what is referred to as the vaccine “choice” movement, i.e. the parent could chose to vaccinate or not!

Well, on August 26, 2016 Judge Dana Sabraw of the UNITED STATES SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA filed a motion in the court denying the request of a group of attorneys (on behalf of multiple people and institutions) to stop the implementation of SB 277. The attorneys had sited several reasons to halt the application of SB 277 including ‘Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion’.

Some of us were expecting this response for the very same reasons the Judge cited, the main one being case law that was established by the 1944 Supreme Court decision Prince vs. Massachusetts. Judge Sabraw not only cited the Prince case, he sited two others as well: Jacobson vs the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1905) and Zucht vs. King (1922). None of these three cases has been overturned mainly because the Supremes have refused to hear suits challenging them, which is their prerogative in our current injustice system. In fact, the Rutherford Institute filed a petition to challenge mandatory vaccines in 2011 and the Supremes rejected it.

Here is Judge Sabraw’s official conclusion: Continue reading

Calling the shots: State forces parents to sign vaccine docs

STINGING FIGHT ERUPTS OVER NEW ‘ATTEMPTS’ TO INVADE FAMILIES PRIVACY!

By Bob Unruh, WND.com
August 21, 2016

[Comments from the PAMV editor:  Ahhh! The ongoing battle between the statutory code writers and the administrative code enforcers! Question: are the administrative code enforcers merely meeting their obligations to a federal grant contract ($$$) that the statutory code writers are unaware of? If you read the fine print in Clinton’s Ex Or 13132 on “Federalism” it becomes a distinct possibility.]

vaccine injectionA fight has erupted over a decision by bureaucrats in Colorado to go, according to critics, well beyond what the law allows and threaten parents of homeschoolers seeking exemptions from state vaccinations requirements for their children.

There was a plan before the legislature earlier this year that would have demanded homeschool parents sign forms stating things like, “My child may be at increased risk of developing …” and “Failure to follow the advice of a physician … who has recommended vaccines may endanger my child’s/my health or life and others who come into contact with my child/me.”

Officials with the Home School Legal Defense Association said they helped defeat the “attempts to invade families’ privacy.”

The proposal didn’t give parents the option – it simply demanded they make that particular political statement.

But, the HSLDA explains, demanding that parents “affirm that by exempting their child from immunizations they are endangering the life and health of that child … is at odds with some parents’ personal and/or religion beliefs.”

“By forcing parents to make this statement, the state of Colorado is unconstitutionally compelling speech.”

The issue now is that although lawmakers rejected the idea, “overzealous state officials are back at it – this time with an unconstitutional form which may force parents to violate their conscience in order to obtain immunization exemptions for their children.”

A new report explained the form was created in June by the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment and “is mandatory for anyone seeking a non-medical exemption from state immunization requirements. Persons who sign the form in order to obtain an exemption are required to affirm a number of statements which may go against their personal and religious beliefs,” HSLDA reported.

Continue reading

Doctor offers vaccination contract to parent of sick child!

CONTRACTS SIGNED UNDER DURESS OR COERCION ARE NOT ENFORCEABLE – UNLESS THEY CONTAIN NO EVIDENCE OF EITHER THREAT OR COERCION!

Earlier this year a relatively ill advised physician in California permitted his office personnel to administer a nasty little contract agreement to his new patients, that is if he even knew about the paper work they were handing out to all new patients.  Many times physicians foolishly allow business managers to process whatever paperwork they feel appropriate and are completely in the dark.

Excerpts from an article found on jeffereyjaxen.com/blog titled Doctor’s Refusing Care Unless Patients Sign “Immunization Contract” Forcing Full Schedule of Shots

It was a day like any other at the Carmichael, California practice of Matthew T. Cohan, MD. A father entered the waiting room with his daughter by his side. The daughter — a new patient — was experiencing upper respiratory congestion. Before she could be seen, standard new patient paperwork needed to be filled out. However, on the final page of this paperwork, the office required new documentation to be complete before the patient could be seen.

Here is Dr. Cohan’s Immunization Contract:

Immunization Contract

As the father was seeking medical attention for his sick daughter, it is unlikely the physician would have vaccinated the girl during that visit anyway. However, by demanding this agreement be signed PRIOR to the child seeing the doctor, it could easily be seen as a denial of care.  Unfortunately there is no indication on the contract that the child was even ill.

So, why would a pediatrician deny care to a child whose parent prefers not to vaccinate per the CDC schedule, outside of the fact he is grossly ignorant of the nature of the CDC itself?

Was it the carrot or the stick?

In the case of this physician it could be BOTH the carrot and the stick. Continue reading

We cannot let the STATE inoculate our children without our knowledge or consent!

. . . WHICH GOVERNOR BROWN AUTHORIZED IN CALIFORNIA BY SIGNING AB499 IN 2011!

By AL Whitney © copyround 2016
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and ParentsAgainstMandatoryVaccines.net  is acknowledged.

gardasil vialThe passage of Assembly Bill 499 in California should have been a wake up call for all parents. It essentially eliminated the parent’s authority when it comes to the administration of some vaccines. It grants the STATE (school) permission to vaccinate 12 year old boys and girls with the dangerous HPV vaccine without their moms and dads knowledge or consent.

While there will be some activists who continue to beat the freedom of religion and parental rights drums, these arguments were defeated way back in 1944 with the Supreme Court decision Prince vs Massachusetts and the doctrine of Parens Patriae. The Center for Disease Control knows this and posts it on their web site. (Chapter 13, page 273)

”Neither rights of religion nor rights of parenthood are beyond limitation. Acting to guard the general interest in youth’s well being, the state as parens patriae may restrict the parent’s control by requiring school attendance, regulating or prohibiting the child’s labor, and in many other ways. Its authority is not nullified merely because the parent grounds his claim to control the child’s course of conduct on religion or conscience.

Thus, he cannot claim freedom from compulsory vaccination for the child more than for himself on religious  grounds. The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death. (321 U.S. at 166–7, 64 S.Ct. at 442)”

I have no idea why the vaccine-aware non-profits and vaccine rights attorneys ignore Prince vs. Massachusetts! Are they intentionally misleading the public?

As it is likely that other states will go down the same path as California due to the Healthy People 2020 program of the UNITED STATES’ (federal corporation – see Title 28 US Code, section 3002) Department of Health and Human Services, this action in California should inspire all parents to think about who should decide if their children receive inoculations, i.e. who owns our children . . . legally?

There is no way to answer that question from inside the Matrix that we have been stuck in our entire lives. Those unwilling to face our Matrix reality are dooming themselves and their sons and daughters to much heartache and suffering because the vaccination agenda is not going away anytime soon, as Dr. Sheri Tenpenny explained eloquently on Red Ice Radio.

So dear Matrix people, will it be the blue pill or the red pill?

Continue reading

Former NBC boss asserts his grandson damaged by vaccines

Former NBC boss asserts his grandson damaged by vaccines

bob wright

By Jon Rappoport, nomorefakenews.com
April 20, 2016

The roof is beginning to cave in on the vaccine empire.

Now, in the wake of the unsuccessful attempt to censor the film Vaxxed (trailer), we have Bob Wright, the former CEO of media giant, NBC Universal, authoring a new book, “The Wright Stuff: From NBC to Autism Speaks.”

In its review of the book, Accuracy in Media provides a devastating quote from Wright about his autistic grandson:

“Right after he got the standard one-year vaccinations, he developed a very high fever and screamed for hours. Katie [Wright’s daughter] was so frightened she called her husband to come home from work and they put the baby in an ice bath to bring down the fever. When they called the doctor they were told the reaction was completely normal.”

Yes, completely normal in the eyes of a lunatic licensed to practice medicine.

Normal, if brain damage is something parents should be expected to shrug off.

Normal, if destroying the life of a child, through officially sanctioned means, is simply written off as the cost of doing pharmaceutical business.

Wright goes on to say that he tried, without a shred of success, to convince Bush and Obama they needed to improve vaccine safety. According to Wright, the Bush people feared negative press reaction, and Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett killed the idea.

In the past few days, a long-time blogger for Huffington Post, Lance Simmens (twitter), submitted a positive review of Vaxxed. It was posted, then deleted—and Simmens’ account at Huff Po was canceled without notice. More censorship. The geniuses at Huff Po haven’t gotten the memo yet: blacking out information about the film only gives it more legs. Do they even have a press operation over there? I always assumed Huff Po was built as a façade/cardboard box, in order to sell it. That objective was achieved in 2010, when AOL gobbled it up for $315 million. What an extraordinary hustle.

Huff Po can’t even stomach allowing a positive review of Vaxxed to see the light of day. I wonder how they feel about vaccines causing brain damage—I mean the actual occurrence of it. Perhaps they don’t care. Perhaps they’re so far removed from the truth they don’t even think about it. But I’m willing to bet at least a few people on the payroll know the reality of it, and under the surface they’re boiling.

The CDC has large numbers of vaccine scandals buried in their files. One of them involves a vast over-exaggeration of flu deaths in the US every year. As researcher Peter Doshi noted, years ago, the old canned figure for annual flu deaths, 36,000, was a gross exaggeration. One year, the actual number of confirmed flu deaths in America—where the flu virus was positively identified—was, wait for it: 18. Of course, the CDC uses those flu-death stats to convince Americans they must take the flu vaccine.

Original article

Related

CDC Exposed