The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) says it is worried about the way the web has been “used to spread disinformation”. They want to introduce a new system that would give websites a label for trustworthiness or unreliability.
One “damaging conspiracy theory” they want to shut down is the notion that MMR vaccines are harmful. Of course, this “conspiracy theory” stems not from paranoid forum postings and misquoted blog entries, but from scientific research into the mercury based preservative thimerosal.
Thimerosal was developed by Eli Lilly, and Merck is the world’s largest supplier of the MMR triple jab -- and it is little wonder W3C considers such information to be “damaging” given that Eli Lilly and Merck are both paid up and approved members of the Consortium! If anyone should be labeled with an “unreliable” rating, it is the WC3.
One of the reasons I love the web is because it offers access to virtually limitless amounts of information. Information needed to make conscious, well-informed decisions about your health, for example. Today, the web is one of the few places where you can find non-suppressed truth being told, as the vast majority of mainstream media has been corporately influenced and biased to the point where many are little more than mouthpieces for various industry interests.
It also allows a forum for everyone, including me, to be challenged.
However, what the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is proposing is to pull the plug on free speech, free thinking, truth telling, and personal decision making, where only industry-sponsored propaganda is allowed to flourish freely.
What a nightmare.
What is the World Wide Web Consortium?
W3C is an international consortium of members that work together to develop Web standards and guidelines to make sure that various web technologies are compatible, and that hardware and software used to access the web work together. Since 1994, W3C has published more than 110 such standards, called W3C Recommendations.
As of 23 September 2008, the W3C has 420 Members, which include many of the biggest players of the corporate world, colleges and universities, hospitals, pharmaceutical giants, government agencies, and military entities.
Are You Capable of Rational, Independent Thought?
Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web, said in his BBC News interview:
“The internet needs a way to help people separate rumor from real science. On the web the thinking of cults can spread very rapidly and suddenly a cult which was 12 people who had some deep personal issues find a formula which is very believable. A conspiracy theory of sorts, and one which you can imagine spreading to thousands of people and being deeply damaging."
He follows up by saying:
"One of the things I always remain concerned about is that the medium remains neutral. It's not just where I go to decide where to buy my shoes -- which is the commercial incentive -- it's where I go to decide who I'm going to trust to vote. It's where I go maybe to decide what sort of religion I'm going to belong to or not belong to; it's where I go to decide what is actual scientific truth -- what I'm actually going to go along with and what is bunkum."
Now I have enormous respect for Tim; by every right he should be the richest person on the planet as he invented the web (not the internet) but consciously chose to let it be free and open, and did not retain any intellectual ownership of it.
What is so deeply disturbing about this though is that he, along with his consortium members, believe they have a monopoly on neutral and truthful information; that somehow some “entity” should decide for you what’s “bunkum” and what’s not, rather than letting you make up your own mind.
Based on the conspiracy theories, or “cult thinking,” examples he gave, letting this group have anything to do with deciding what scientific truth is, is nothing short of information genocide; vital truths that can save lives will be effectively driven into the silent depths, with their “unreliable” or “false” labels around their necks like a two-ton slab of cement.
Have You Heard the Rumors About Vaccines?
Of particular concern to Berners-Lee and the consortium is what he refers to as “the spread of rumors” that the MMR vaccine given to children in Britain is harmful.
Rumors? What rumors?
What about the undisputed fact that the British government introduced three brands of MMR vaccines in 1988, and by 1992, two of those brands were withdrawn from the market after serious adverse reactions were recorded in Canada, Japan and Britain? Granted, at the time the government announced it was merely a "change in supply," rather than fessing up the ugly truth. Only later was it admitted that these vaccines had caused encephalitis (a serious brain condition) in some children.
Far from what the W3C would have you believe, the fears that vaccines are harmful and damage children’s health are anything but unfounded conspiracy theories created by a hysterical few.
And, although autism gets most of the attention when discussing vaccines, it's by no means the only health risk. The MMR vaccine, for example, is not implicated directly as causing autism, since it does not contain mercury, but rather as having other dangerous side effects and potentially being a contributor to other neurological disorders that stem from over-vaccination.
The list of scientific research backing these claims is a very long one. (For a short list, see this link.) Yet somehow the totality of these findings is to be ignored as disinformation from within the scientific and medical community itself?
Another interesting fact to note is that most of the studies funded by industry conclude vaccines are safe, whereas independent studies keep finding serious flaws and raise alarming questions about their safety and efficacy.
Could this be because the pharmaceutical industry is worth more money than the gross domestic product (GDP) of these COUNTRIES?
- Belgium ($448.5 billion)
- Sweden ($444 billion)
- Switzerland ($415.5 billion)
- Norway ($382 billion)
- Saudi Arabia ($381.7 billion)
What most people don’t realize is that the pharmaceutical industry’s power and influence over government, the field of conventional medicine, and your mind through massive marketing efforts, is in a class of its own. In fact, if placed on the list ranking the countries of the world according to gross domestic product, the pharmaceutical industry would rank number 17 out of 185 countries in 2007!
If you still believe that money doesn’t talk; where have you been?
Just the Facts, Ma’am
In the early 1980s, the incidence of autism was 1 in 10,000 births. In 2001, it was 1 in 500, and by 2005, the incidence had leaped to 1 in 250 births.
Today it is 1 in 150 births, and some estimate lower than one in 50, and still climbing.
One of the strongest links to this terrible set of disorders was a drastic change in the vaccine programs of the United States and many other countries, which included a dramatic increase in the number of vaccines being given at a very early age.
No other explanation has been forthcoming from the medical elite.
In 1976, children received 10 vaccines before attending school. Today they will receive over 36 injections. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Center for Disease Control assures parents that it is safe to not only give these vaccines, but that it’s safe to give multiple vaccinations at the same time.
Is this true? Or are we being lied to on a grand scale?
The medical establishment has created a set of terms, which they use constantly to boost their egos and firm up their authority as the unique holders of medical wisdom -- the mantra is “evidence-based medicine”, as if everything outside their anointing touch is bogus and suspect.
But a careful examination of many of the accepted treatments reveals that most have little or no scientific “evidence-based” data to support it.
One often repeated study found that almost 80 PERCENT of medical practice had NO scientific backing!
There’s a persistent double standard when it comes to “our” evidence versus “theirs.” The proponents of vaccination safety can just say they are safe, without any supporting evidence what-so-ever, and it is to be accepted without question or opposition.
Yet, let any otherwise accomplished scientist or medical expert suggest that excessive vaccination can increase the risk of not only autism, but a host of other neurodegenerative diseases as well, and the proponents claim there’s “no supporting evidence,” despite the reams of studies showing harm is being done.
Censorship by Any Other Name is Still Censorship
What the W3C consortium is offering by labeling web sources as either “reliable” or “unreliable” is nothing but an extension of this already corrupted “evidence-based” system.
Mandatory vaccine policies depend on overwhelming public acceptance, but public confidence is being eroded by reports in the free media on the web about conflicts of interest, secrecy, and questionable data. No wonder the industry feels pressured to put on the gloves and quench the opposing side once and for all.
But the whole concept of the government and industry forcing experimental treatment on healthy individuals is disturbing to those who value freedom, and unilaterally censoring information deemed unfavorable to industry interests should be an outrage to all capable of independent thought.