The following articles were authored by J.J. Jon

Delegate Election Fraud in Missouri

Reality Check

 

 

Raw Footage

WHOLE FOOTAGE

Arrest of Brent Strafford

Behind the Scenes SPECIAL FOOTAGE of Officals in Backroom conversations

[Satire] Why Bailouts Work and the Dangers of Austrian Economics [Satire]

Stimulus packages and bailouts are required to maintain the stability of a society. If the wealthiest and most powerful people in a society make a mistake, it is the responsibility of everyone in that society to collectively and financially forgive them of their mistakes. If it were not for this collective financial forgiveness of the bad decisions made by the elite, they would not be able to continue to impose the necessary policies on society.

 

The benefits may be obvious to most, but there are many that incorrectly believe these offer no improvement to the economy and even go as far as calling it a scam or conspiracy theory. Klaus Masuch of the European Central Bank (ECB) offers a “depth of discussion” on this issue. The eloquence and precision of his words need no clarification.

The so called “journalist” in the video was clearly a conspiracy theorist which Masuch handled with great composure. The benefits to the Irish people are absolutely clear. The banks will be saved. Without the necessary bailouts for the banks there would be no place to deposit depreciated euros.

 

CEO of Euro Pacific Capital Peter Schiff claims he predicted the housing bubble would come, but has absolutely no proof or documentation of this; unless one considers YouTube videos and published books as valid proof. The most stubborn and unconvinced can never refute the dialectic of former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Paul Volker. Watch what happens when an obvious trickster hands Volker a loaded question.

 

 

If you cannot hear Volker clearly or understand anything he is saying, then you have heard him correctly. The question Peter Schiff asked is completely off base and does not even deserve a direct response. Schiff is an obvious charlatan. He takes sound principles, pushes them out to the extreme, and makes bold arrogant predictions using logic and reasoning. This arrogance is not only limited to Schiff. Notice the arrogance in GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul’s face as Joe Scarborough reads from his book. Paul sits there with a causal smirk like he was the only one that guessed the housing bubble.

 

 

It is completely fallacious to believe that Schiff and Paul predicted this alone. They are known to have ties with a group that calls themselves Austrian economists. An investigation from the Department of Homeland Security discovered that speculation was the real cause of the severe housing bubble and crash. This organization was the impetus behind the prediction. These so called soothsayers have openly claimed responsibility for predicting the housing bubble and bust. The State Department has now declared this group a terrorist organization.

 

Due to the unfortunate clauses in the First Amendment, the previous and current administrations were unable to silence the Austrians before they wreaked havoc on the American economy. Sources tell us that they are developing or have already developed new predictions for the economy. The FBI believes the next target is the bond market. Fortunately, we have a president that is working night and day to do away completely with the First Amendment rather than succumbing to the Austrian’s threats. On March 9th, 2012, Obama signed into law HR 347. Although it was meant to quiet protesters, this was the first step in the incremental process to repeal the First Amendment so that one day we can stop any future economic speculation or ideas that can further destroy the economy. The administration hopes that these measures will give the people of this nation comfort in knowing that the necessary bailouts and other economic policies will continue, domestically and internationally, unchecked and with minimal critic.

Delegate Election Fraud in Athens Georgia

Reality Check

 

 


Raw footage

 

For More Information, and how to help, please share this video and visit us at:http://www.facebook.com/groups/Athens4RonPaul/289378184465167/

 

On Saturday March 10th, in Athens, GA, the democratic process was trampled on. The Athens-Clarke county GOP met to hold their annual county convention. The convention was held to nominate, approve, and pass slates of delegates to the party’s district and state conventions. County chairman Matt Brewster and nominating committee chairman John Elliot blatantly broke the rules of their own party when they improperly, and without a majority, passed delegate slates and adjourned the convention amidst cries for “division”, which is a call for a standing head count. With that, many sitting precinct delegates were disenfranchised, and the convention was improperly closed. When warned that their conduct was jeopardizing the status of the delegates and alternates for the entire county, the chair Matt Brewster directed all questions to John Padgett, who was identified by Brewster as the Secretary of the Georgia State Republican Party. Unfortunately, Mr. Padgett refused to answer questions and fled the scene along with the rest of the local GOP leadership.

 

Apparently, this is not the first time that the Georgia GOP has alienated Ron Paul supporters. In a March 2011 speech given by Sue Everhart, Chairwoman of the Georgia State GOP, she apologizes to Ron Paul supporters for “shoddy treatment” in 2008. She also admits that pressure from an outside source was the reason that Ron Paul supporters were mistreated. During the same speech, Everhart holds up a copy of the Georgia Republican Party Rules, vowing that such treatment will not happen in the future.

 

Many of the precinct delegates, who were elected in February at the county’s mass precinct meetings, were new to the process and were appalled by the conduct they witnessed. Delegate Gary J. Warenfelt of 5C said, “This is the first time I have ever been actively involved in politics and to see illegal actions taking place in a major U.S. political party is very saddening. They cherry-picked the delegates that they wanted to go to the district and state conventions without following party rules. They did not listen to any voice of opposition and ended the meeting illegally.” Fellow delegate Shawn Lewis added, “I personally called for a count of the votes of the ayes versus the nays, and was refused. I was told that the convention was closed, and watched as everyone just up and fled from the scene. I was ignored by the state GOP secretary after we were told that he would answer questions. I’m thoroughly disgusted; this is my first time participating in the process, and I feel violated.”

 

 

News that Is not “Good Enough” For The Main Stream Media

 

March 10th 2012

Delegate Election Fraud in Athens Georgia

Delegate Election Fraud in Missouri

Election Fraud in Maine

 

Guide to Make Powerful Arguments for Ron Paul

 

I have found a collection of videos that will help educate you to make a case for Ron Paul. This is not a complete list, but I will add more when I find them. There are many things that most people do not understand. Hopefully this will help you and others understand some of his positions. The purpose here is to give you a guide on how to stand up for the principles that Ron Paul speaks about.

 

One important thing to remember when making a case for Ron Paul is to ask them defend their position (on why he is a a crank, unelectable, etc.) rather than forcing your issue or beliefs on them for why he is a good candidate. For example, inquire the specifics on why they do not like Ron Paul and ask them what lead them to that conclusion. Most of the time they have false information or false logic that lead them to to believe their conclusion. Then clear up the misinformation they have. After doing so, see if there are any other objections and address those as well.

 

It can be very fun and easy to make a case for Ron Paul because he has integrity and principles.  Have Fun :)

 

1. Be polite but firm (see Rand Paul speaking)
2. Be curious: (seek first to understand and then be understood)

—–”I’m curious how you came to believe that, what lead you to that conclusion”

—–”Really, which specific policies of his are the ones you don’t agree with”

3.  Be prepared with videos below

 

His foreign policy is crazy!

Just War Theory from Ron Paul

He wants to cut aid to Isreal! We need to defend Isreal! They are our ally!

 

He is a rasist!

 

Ron Paul is Crazy! He wants to legalize drugs!

Ron Paul is Crazy! He wants to get rid of the Federal Reserve, what does he want to replace it with?

 

Ron Paul wants to shrink the size of government and get rid of the income tax! What a crank!

The idea of Liberty is not intuitive (explained)

Government is not the problem, it’s the greedy corporations!

 

Everyone deserves free health care (social programs)

We need welfare! We need government funded education!

We need Social Services, its inhumane to get rid of them

Im a yogi, I dont ever vote republican, I always vote democrat. All republicans are the same!

 


 

 

Veterans March on White House for Ron Paul

Below is a collection of video coverage on the Veterans for Ron Paul March on the White House on February 20th, 2012. Due to the main stream media blackout of this event, the purpose of this page is to reach as many as people as possible. Please share, like, tweet and get this out to as many as people as possible. Thank you.

!!! THE NEXT MARCH IN THE MAKING ON THE RNC AUGUST 27-30 2012!!!

http://ronpaulisthechoiceofthetroops.com/

Go to the 40:55 Minute Mark on the video below to get details for the event

http://ronpaulisthechoiceofthetroops.com/

THE MARCH ON DC FEBRUARY 20TH

Adam Vs the Man http://www.adamvstheman.com

 

Revolution PAC coverage http://www.revolutionpac.com/

 

One Second for every death  Revolution PAC coverage http://www.revolutionpac.com/

 

Revolution PAC Julie Borowski

 

Veterans turn their back on white house (raw footage)

 

RT news coverage

 

Raw footage

 

Raw footage

 

Raw footage

 

Raw footage

 

Raw footage

 

NDAA: National Defense Authorization Act Section 1021

 

This blog was written to condense various information on the NDAA Section 1021. It will answer what it is, why it is important, who is involved, and what you can do about it.

What is the NDAA?

Who is involved?

Sen. Lindsey Graham: shut up you don’t get a lawyer video

 Ask yourself, who will decide that you are an enemy combatant? The government? How will they determine that without due process?

Obama’s Signing Statement

“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.”

 

So as long as Obama is president he won’t use it. Got it. What about the next president? Then why did his administration ask for the language that excluded American citizens to removed?

 

Obama Administration insists on stripping rights of Americans

 

Legal arguments that the legislation allows indefinite detention

 The American Civil Liberties Union has stated that “While President Obama issued a signing statement saying he had ‘serious reservations’ about the provisions, the statement only applies to how his administration would use the authorities granted by the NDAA.” and, despite claims to the contrary, “The statute contains a sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provision… [without] temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.” The ACLU also maintains that “the breadth of the NDAA’s detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war.”

What is at stake? 

The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV)

 “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

 

The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and arrest should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it.

 

Most of America is asleep with this issue

What will it take for us to wake up? What will be the breaking point? If they took away our Superbowl, would America wake up?

 

Ron Paul Moves to REPEAL NDAA Section 1021

H.R.3785 - To repeal section 1021 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2012.

The bill is simple. Take out the lines that give this power to the president. We stopped SOPA and PIPA. What makes you think we can’t stop this? Wake up some people and stop it.


CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES!

Below is a link to Open Congress. Its a free site to get you actively involved in the bills that come through the house and senate. It requires minimal time and effort. Pick the bill you like or hate and automatically write your representatives. Then repost it on facebook or tweet it so others can join the fight to stop this.

 Link to Open Congress on Ron Paul’s Bill

The easiest way to email your members of Congress

Nullify the NDAA

States have been hard at work to nullify this measure. Any federal or military personnel can be arrested by state police if they come into Virginia and try to arrest anyone.

 

Virginia’s NDAA Nullifying Bill Passed by State Senate

 

Real Intellectual Argument for Ron Paul

Below is a conversation I had with an acquaintance about Ron Paul. My purpose was to to educate him and clarify Ron Paul’s position so he can better make a decision for himself rather than have the media make it for him. One important thing to remember when making a case for Ron Paul is to make them defend their position rather than forcing your issue or beliefs on them why he is a good candidate. For example, inquire the specifics on why they do not want to vote for Ron Paul and ask them what lead them to that conclusion. Most of the time they have false information that lead them to to believe their conclusion. Then clear up the misinformation they have. After doing so, see if there are any other objections, and address those as well.

Polite Exchange:

Sorry John,

 

I’m not drinking the kool-aid.  He is more extreme than the most right wing candidate I can think of.  There are so many reasons why I would never support this man, and here’s a big one: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/01/ron-paul-civil-rights-act_n_1178688.html

 

I’m black.  I cherish and appreciate the decades of blood that was spilled to ensure civil rights for all citizens.  Anyone who is crazy enough to oppose the Civil Rights Act in 2012 is a nut job, deserves to be called a nut job, and yes, a bigoted racist.

 

-G

 

G,

 

Thank you for raising this issue. Just so we are clear, I would never endorse or vote for a bigoted racist. Please consider the following. Listen to what Ron Paul actually says rather than what a bias media is saying. The issue about civil rights is not about bigotry, its all about property rights. This is major attempt to smear him an get the focus off the real issues. I invite you to watch the follow videos and I hope you to come to your own conclusions when you have more information available to you. I sincerely hope you take the time with the videos below. I think you will be very surprised.

 

MSNBC Slanderous Misquote Corrected

From Ron Paul’s own mouth

James Williams speaking out for Ron Paul

Clarification of media spin on the civil rights issue by his son Rand Paul

The videos against the idea that Ron Paul is a racist are endless. Listen to this man. He speaks  to this very simply.

 

Respectfully,

John

 

John,

 

Arguing that he opposes the Civil Rights Act because of property rights doesn’t make his position any more egregious.  He basically believes that property owners have a right if they so choose to not serve people based on the color of their skin.  Yet, his belief goes beyond the hypothetical.  As recently as 2004, he was the ONLY senator who voted against extending the Civil Rights Act.  I was floored when I saw one of your clips and Paul said he sees Martin Luther King Jr. as a hero yet denounces what is easily King’s seminal achievement.  Can you see how some people would question his sincerity?

 

Look, let’s move on from the Civil Rights Act.  That’s just one example and despite Paul’s beliefs, we’re probably past the point where it will even be rolled back (I hope).  I’ll even take back calling him a racist bigot cause in all fairness, I can’t look into his heart.  I’ll certainly give him credit for having the courage to have a foreign policy that is unique among all the presidential candidates and whose position I agree with the most.  I also can’t disagree with decriminalizing drug use (as long as that also coincides with increased funding for drug abuse treatment centers).  Those points make him initially enticing as a candidate, yet what’s the tradeoff? He has made it consistently clear that his domestic policies would aggressively dismantle the welfare state, particularly everything that came out of The New Deal and The Great Society.  He has repeatedly said that he would eradicate entire government agencies such as the FDA, EPA, and the Dept. of Education (among others).  He even joked about it in that same infamous clip where Rick Perry couldn’t name the three govt agencies he’d dismantle.

 

Perhaps this is where we disagree, but we need government.  We need a watchdog to protect the people from other’s irresponsibility.  The FDA wouldn’t exist if there wasn’t a time where people were being sold fake home remedies like is currently the case in China.  We wouldn’t have an EPA if there wasn’t a time where companies polluted our water and air and put us at risk.  We wouldn’t have a Dept. of Education if there wasn’t a need to educate more members of our society to build a robust Middle Class.  Perhaps the greatest argument against Paul and libertarianism in particular is the econ meltdown of 2008.  A philosophy of deregulation that has run through both parties since Reagan lead to a steady decline in govt regulation that allowed Wall street execs and bankers to make outrageously risky investments that almost collapsed the world economy.  The problem isn’t too much government but too little.  Because of monetary influence and lobbying, the govt has been ineffective in policing big business and with the Supreme Court decision in 2009, things will get only worse.

 

For those reasons, I cannot support Ron Paul but I respect your decision to do so.  I’ll be supporting Obama and although he’s been disappointing, he in my mind is the best option we’ve got.

 

-G

 

 

G,

 

Thank you for raising the points you did. I also voted for Obama in 2008 thinking that he was going to give us change. I also thought that the government needed to take care of us to protect us. There are a lot of things that I was not aware of and I have taken a lot of time to get educated on issues that America faces. I was never involved in the political process until I heard Ron Paul. I appreciate you willing to have a discussion about this and I hope that we can continue this with respect.

 

I agree with a lot of the civil rights act but I also think it is clear that it has had some adverse and unintended consequences. Putting that aside for the moment I want to address some of the other points you bring up.

 

You mention the welfare state and how we need government as a watch dog for people acting irresponsible. I was for ObamaCare. My mother still does not have health insurance and I thought that it would be a good idea for her to have it. What I have since come to understand is that when the government gets involved in economic or social issues however well intend, inefficiency, fraud, and lobbyist with specialist rule. This becomes the norm today.

 

A good simple example of this to make my point is sugar. Did you know that corporations lobby the government to limit the amount of cheaper sugar to come into this country? A few (special interests) benefit greatly from getting the government to limit the amount sugar to come into this country so they can use their own alternative (high fructose corn syrup). The few (special interest) benefit in the billions from this. The cost to the American people is probably around $50-$100 per person per year. Not enough to rise up and rebel about when its spread out like that.

 

The point I am trying to make is when government gets together with special interests that have A LOT of money our government is for auction. This also applies to ObamaCare. It’s not the disenfranchised, sickly people that come together to petition the government in their favor, its the health insurance companies that get all the benefit under the guise that this will be “better for everyone”. The FDA, EPA, or DOE are no exception. I think they have good intentions but are not solving anything. We spend around $20k (more than double) what we spent 10 years ago and people are not getting a better education. I would argue that it is getting worse. The allocation of the money is not going to the student’s education or teacher salaries, rather to the DOE bureaucratics.

 

When the government takes your hard earned money (taxation) and allocates to another group, it assumes that the government owns you. In a country where the government’s only purpose is to protect civil liberty, lobbyist could not exists. (See Video below)

 

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=2503659468374

 

The fact of the matter is that we have 50-60 Trillion in entitlements that we cannot afford. Its not that we don’t want to take care of the people its that the money is not there. By 2026 all medicare and social security will be tapped out. We have a government that does not care to balance its check book because the Federal Reserve prints more money for the government when it needs it because no politician would get reelected if they raised taxes. When they print more money it becomes a “stealth tax” on the people. When the Federal Reserve increases the money supply that means any dollar you have saved in the bank is worth less. Think about it, if they continue to print money to pay for things what will $1 buy when you retire and start collecting social security? How much will medicare cost?

 

You say we need more government and that we don’t have enough. I would argue that the federal government is ballooning out of control and it is related directly to the Federal Reserve. The problem on Wall street is directly related to the federal reserve. When Obama bailed out the banks, where do you think they got the money? The federal reserve printed money out of thin air and gave it to them. It was a blatant transfer of wealth from the middle class to banking interest under the guise that “it will be good for the economy” and they were “too big to fail”. That is the result of when the government gets too big.

Ron Paul is the only one talking about these issues; Personal Liberty and Federal Reserve. Not only has he been talking about these, he has been saying the same exact thing for 30 years. The only thing that has changed is the country itself. He predicted all this would happen.

 

 

Again, might come to a surprise to you.

 

Respectfully

John

Sidelines to Frontlines for Ron Paul

Up until this point I have been afraid to go to my friends and family and get them to change their mind about politics. I have been on the sidelines hoping other people would do something to help get a principled man elected in office as president. I have moved from being an observer to a participant in getting Ron Paul elected as president. The media often portrays this man as a crank but nothing could be further from the truth. I thought I would start right here. For those of you not familiar with him I would invite you to watch a video that was really inspiring for me.

 

Once you hear this man speak you will realize that he is not giving lip service nor will say just anything to get elected. He speaks from unwavering integrity. I invite you to watch, listen, and come to your own conclusion (rather than be told what to think) and ultimately vote for Ron Paul.

 

http://www.youtube.com/user/ronpaul#p/a/f/0/GR4WYqabTxU

 

If you are ready to vote for this man and need to understand how to make your vote count in the primary please see like below.

http://www.dailypaul.com/165288/register-republican-to-vote-for-ron-paul-in-republican-primary

Thank you for your time.

Vaccines: Separating Fact from Factoid in the Age of Information

Today, an increasing percentage of parents are choosing not to vaccinate their children based on fears that are unfounded. The tragedy here is that more and more children are now not protected from preventable diseases.  As a result, disease outbreaks not been seen by generation have occurred. The other tragedy is the children that have chronic illnesses such as autism who desperately need better research into why and, more importantly, what to do about it is not being done because of these fears. The fears that most parents have about vaccines needs to be address so they can then make the best decision for their family. In 2008 there were several small pockets of infections. One involving measles erupted in an under vaccinated area in San Diego. Like most measles outbreaks, it came from abroad. Due to parents who exercised the personal belief exemption allowed by California, measles were spread throughout the community. Why did they choose not to vaccinate their children?

 

People who have never encountered these diseases become complacent. Individuals who grew up in the 50s encountered diseases like measles, mumps and polio. Vaccines are an easy sell for this generation. Many of them have personal familiarity of the effects of these debilitating diseases. Today’s generation has never seen these diseases or had any firsthand childhood experience with them. Many parents are oblivious to the risks of the diseases. Vaccines have been so effective that most young doctors today have also never seen these diseases.

 

Government health officials struggle to communicate with a skeptical public because people are more likely to believe this YouTube video.

 

 

Her neurologist later concluded that her condition was psychogenic. Psychogenic diseases are a result of mental or emotional conflict. Although this was proven to be a complete hoax, the inaccurate and destructive information was widely spread and had a serious damaging effect on the public’s view of vaccines.

 

The theory that vaccines cause autism has become well known in part due to celebrities like Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carry. Former Playboy playmate, Jenny McCarthy knew nothing about autism until her son received a series of vaccines including the MMR triple shot. A few weeks later, her son Evan developed seizures and was diagnosed with autism. She found the website Generation Rescue. Generation Rescue was founded by business man Richard Handly. His son was also diagnosed with autism following a series of shots in 2004. At the time, he also went on the web and found a community of parents with similar stories to share. Combining his resources and her celebrity, they have been highly effective at organizing a movement of concerned parents.

 

The science that planted the seeds of fear was a 1998 article published in the medical journal, The Lancet. British gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield reported on 12 children with gastrointestinal problems on which 8 of them developed symptoms of autism following an MMR triple shot. Wakefield’s theory was that the measles vaccine inflamed the intestines causing harmful proteins to leak into the blood stream that would eventually damage the brain and lead to autism. Wakefield concluded that the MMR triple shot may be too much for the immune system of some children to handle at that particular age. News of Wakefield’s article spread and generated fear that measles shots might cause autism. This was followed by a dramatic decline in the vaccination of measles for young children. There were areas in England where the vaccine rate dropped lower than 70%. Due to the drop, there was a large outbreak of measles. One hundred and ten infants were admitted to hospitals in critical condition and 3 died from this preventable disease.

 

On February 2, 2010, the Lancet retracted Andrew Wakefield’s article. This was the article which gave rise to the theory linking vaccines to autism. The study was found to be scientifically flawed and scientists around the world were not able to replicate Wakefield’s findings. The Sunday Times reported that some of the children in his study were referred to him by a lawyer who was suing pharmaceutical manufactures on the children’s behalf.

 

Scientists have been studying groups of children searching for a possible link between vaccines and autism. The methods that they have been using are the same types that linked smoking to lung cancer. Unlike the United States, Danish authorities collect demographic information on the entire population. They know when every child was born, vaccinated, and every case of autism diagnosed. Data was analyzed on all children born between 1991 and 1998. The total sample size was over a half a million children which contained two groups. The two groups studied were children given the MMR triple shot and children that did not receive it. They compared the autism rate between the two groups and found no significant difference. Children who didn’t receive the shot were just as likely to be diagnosed with autism as the children that did. These findings were published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Other studies carried out by researchers in Finland, Britain, and the US also found no relationship between MMR triple shot and autism. These studies are not easily assessable to everyone or as entertaining as YouTube videos. However dry, they are extremely important studies that clearly dispel the myths about vaccines. The links to these studies are listed below.

 

 

Supplementary evidence came from Japan. The Japanese altered their vaccine schedule in 1993 by replacing the MMR triple shot with 3 separate vaccinations. Following the change, autism rates did not decrease. In fact, autism rates appeared to increase thus making the triple shot an unlikely cause of autism. (See link below)

 

 

The Danish team then went on to explore the second theory. Is thimerosal in vaccines related to autism? In Denmark since the 70s, only one vaccine has contained thimerosal until 1992. This was the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine. After 1992, the same vaccine continued without thimerosal. Two groups were compared; children given the thimerosal vaccine and children given vaccine without thimerosal. The rates of autism were identical. Other studies in the US, UK, and Canada also found no relationship between thimerosal and autism. (See links below)

 

 

In 2004 the Institute of Medicine conducted its own research and concluded that “the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between MMR vaccine and autism… and also between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.”

 

 

In the age of information, it is important to decipher fact from factoid.  Parents need to understand the consequence of their decision in this matter because it includes other’s children as well. These parents are making decisions based on the sensationalism of the media, charismatic celebrities, YouTube videos and other uncensored internet sites. Although all of it is very entertaining, the criticisms on vaccines are baseless. The scientists are not as charismatic as Jenny McCarthy or as entertaining as YouTube but they are the experts. Most of the experts have dedicated their entire lives to their discipline. When parents are making a decision based on false information, it is impossible to find what is in the best interest for their children. The types of methodologies used in the multiple studies that showed no association between vaccines and autism were the same types used in linking smoking to lung cancer. If they were good enough for smoking, then why are they not good enough for vaccines?