Re: [SPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

[Guest guest]

The "rage" that we all feel in regards to what happened to our kids is understandable....DIRECTING that "rage" towards FELLOW PARENTS is NOT!

Kelli

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

Henry, there was nothing CONSTRUCTIVE or remotely deserved in robert's "criticism." Let's see him do a FRACTION for this community that the folks at NAA have done before we allow him this kind of attack.Passion is healthy, yes. Misdirected passion is divisive and destructive.>> We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from criticism. > >

[Guest guest]

Kerbob's passion is healthy. Perhaps unfair, but healthy.

If we're too thin-skinned to have one on our list call us names and call out our motivations, how are we ever going to have impact on a $1.5 trillion sector of this economy that seeks to bury this issue and prevent this society from realizing the damage that has been done?

The primary issue is thimerosal in vaccines and what it did to our kids. That primary consideration begets medical treatment and hopefully a reversal in biomedical condition. It opens the door to causation.

The other approaches are palliatives.

Helpful, but mere palliatives.

The work done by the autism groups in seeking passage of CAA is laudatory- compromised, but laudatory.

That is part of the process.

To the extent that Kerbob's diatribes keep us honest or at least force an explanation, that is a healthy.

Otherwise, his posts have been most instructive and are an important addition to the website.

We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from criticism.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

I am in complete agreement. If there is one thing that scares me as much as neurotoxins being administered to children, it is censorship. n Wendrow <reedicalousisay > wrote:

Lenny,

I firmly believe that your response and interpretation of 's post is wy too extreme.

By definition if a party or person "sells" out to the detriment of those they purport to be aiding, then I don't believe that any person who opposes and takes umbrage with former's position is incorrect by analogising and likening their conduct to prostitution.

Let's not kid ourselves, congress, big pharma et al. are really nothing more than "pimps" directing funds etc to those who serve their best interests.

I personally don't think that extreme vitriol will make the powerbrokers listen to our position. I do unequivocally say without any reservation however, that I fully understand and respect those who wish to opine in a deleterious aggressive manner.

is passionate in his concern for all our children, and like me is concerned that every day that the main issue of Hg in vaccines goes unaddressed more kids will be mowed down by autism at the rate of almost three per hour.

We can disagree all we like but if we start censoring and limiting open sincere honest expression, no matter how uncomfortable the content, we start on a slippery slope to nowhere. I grew up in South africa, where censorship was nothing less than antedilluvian draconianism. It was horrible and malevolently evil. It is stupid, because any authority cannot stop people from thinking freely. They can oppress and intimidate reluctant compliance, but thought is sacrosanct. There shouldn't be any room on any list for censorship

Thanks, take care

nschaferatsprynet <schafersprynet> wrote:

,Your rhetoric is way over the line here. NAA did not go "a-whoring"when they decided to continue to support the CAA. It was a principleddecision, made by principled people (even if some here happened todisagree with it).I would suggest you cool it or find another place to vent.LennyEOH List Co-Host> >> > The August 18 article by Hotez and lynn ,> > > <http://www.registerguard.com/news/2006/08/18/ed.col.autism.0818.p1.ph> p?sect> > ion=opinion> "Act could turn the tide on common birth defect" reads > not so> > much as an endorsement of the Combating Autism Act as a > pharmaceutical press> > release, continuing the drug industry's desperate attempts to > discredit the> > growing science linking mercury exposure from vaccines to the myriad> > neurological disorders that plague our nation's children. Even the > title is> > designed to perpetuate the notion that autism is a condition > present at> > birth. If the drug companies can convince the public that > diagnoses such as> > autism and ADHD are unavoidable, they'll escape taking > responsibility for> > the outcome of overexposing a generation of children to a dangerous> > neurotoxin. Phrases such as "one in 166 live births" are carefully > chosen> > to further depict an inevitable genetic condition. However, most > parents> > describe their "autistic" children at birth as healthy, with none > of the> > physical and emotional problems which later claimed their > children's health.> > > > > > > > The article doesn't acknowledge that the "small group" of physicians> > supporting the vaccine/autism link includes scientists conducting > credible> > research from renowned institutions such as Baylor, Columbia > University,> > Northeastern University, and the University of Washington among > many others.> > That "small group" of parents is growing into an ever more powerful > force as> > the scientific evidence continues to re-confirm what common sense > could have> > foretold: injecting a known neurotoxin repeatedly into infants has > its> > consequences. These consequences are called autism, Asperger's > syndrome,> > ADHD, obsessive compulsive disorder, and a host of other diagnoses > the drug> > companies stand at the ready to "treat." Claims that faulty genes > have led> > to an epidemic of neurological disorders ring increasingly hollow > as parents> > are reading the science for themselves and applying common sense to> > determine the cause of their children's illnesses, knowing that > epidemics> > cannot be attributable solely to genetics. > > > > > > > > Mrs. 's involvement with Every Child by Two undoubtedly > sprang from> > good intentions, just as those of us who made sure our babies > received each> > vaccine on time thought we were acting in the best interests of our > children> > and our society. Later, we realized that for years we had been > holding our> > children down to be injected with mercury and now are forced to > deal with> > the reality before us. Our children were vaccine-injured, poisoned > by the> > mercury injected from infancy through kindergarten. Anyone still > claiming> > that injecting mercury into pregnant women and children is safe > either> > hasn't read the science or has ties to the vaccine industry. > > > > > > > > Since Mrs. began promoting vaccines thirty years ago, the > number of> > mandated pediatric vaccines has increased tremendously. Throughout > the 90's> > and into 2003, children often received amounts of mercury from > vaccines in a> > single office visit that were over 100 times the safety level for > adult> > exposure, with additional exposures following at regular intervals. > The> > CDC's recommendation of flu shots, most of which still contain > mercury, for> > pregnant women and children 6 months through five years of age has > ensured> > that overexposure to mercury via direct injection will continue to > damage> > the vulnerable developing brains of the fetus and infant.> > > > > > > > Many parents and scientists are no longer willing to > accept "coincidence" to> > explain what has happened to the one in six children in this > country now> > diagnosed with a learning or behavioral disorder. Vaccine makers and> > promoters would have us believe that coincidence is responsible for > the> > regression of previously healthy children after receiving mercury-> containing> > vaccines. We're told that coincidence also explains that the > symptoms of> > autism, ADHD, Tourette's, and many other diagnoses are all > duplicated in the> > symptoms of mercury toxicity. Still more coincidence occurs when > lab tests> > confirm huge levels of mercury in "autistic" children, and those > who improve> > following treatments to rid the body of toxic metals are doing so> > "coincidentally." > > > > > > > > Vaccine promoters like ECBT need to re-evaluate their mission: is > it really> > okay to inject babies with shots containing so much mercury the > vials> > wouldn't be allowed in landfills? I urge Mr. Hotez and Mrs. > to look> > beyond the drug company and CDC funded studies referenced in their > article.> > The truth about what happened to a generation of American children > is> > disturbing, but must be acknowledged so that meaningful research > into> > treatments can begin.> > > > > > > > Rita Shreffler> > > > Executive Director> > > > National Autism Association> > > > <http://www.nationalautism.org/> www.nationalautism.org> > > > Think Autism. Think Cure. TM> >>

Stay in the know. Pulse on the new .com. Check it out.

[Guest guest]

I agree that being mean is wrong, however, what if a person feels that those parents whom you allude to in your post have let him down by compromising (in his view) his child's and others welbeing by cutting a deal that he perceives to be treacherous ? Again I say, it is hightime that someone did get up and walk away from a negotiation instead of compromise. I don't say that the CAA issue is necessarily the one, but ntil someone steps up and chooses an issue, the message of compromise will continue to strangle real progress like a python strangles the life out of its victims. When we rail against an NIH/cdc etc. official.remember they're a person or parent as well. someone posted that a parent spit at one such official recently . and they admired them for doing so etc......... Good behaviuor should cut all ways, and believe me I could easily bludgeon many who have

and are doing harm to our kids with little remorse. We do need to show restraint and compassion, byt we're human and sometimes the cauldron overboils and spills over I wish everyone well, take care nseekingtruth4miles <kellianndavis@...> wrote: The "rage" that we all feel in regards to what happened to our kids is understandable....DIRECTING that "rage" towards FELLOW PARENTS is NOT!Kelli> >> > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from criticism. > > > >>

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

[Guest guest]

All good, fair points. But remember that the visceral emotion displayed by is a hearfetl reflection of the frustration he feels each time his son acts out or becomes difficult and thinks of what could have been and the fact that congressional processes are designed to compromise and in many instances to frustrate.

I know I go on tirades sometimes, I just channel it differently.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

Henry, there was nothing CONSTRUCTIVE or remotely deserved in robert's "criticism." Let's see him do a FRACTION for this community that the folks at NAA have done before we allow him this kind of attack.Passion is healthy, yes. Misdirected passion is divisive and destructive.>> We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from criticism. > >

[Guest guest]

But we're also like members of a tribe or extended family.

Have you ever seen or read of the barkings that go on at tribal council meetings?

It's not unhealthy.

And it focuses attention on the measures to be discussed and action to be taken.

Nice nice may get you killed.

And very often it doesn't get it done.

That's not to suggest you don't show respect.

But remember, we must focus.

If biomedical recovery occurs, it will be due to reversing the toxicity and immune dysfunction/disregulation associated with the exposure of our kids to the mercury poisoned vaccines.

We must remember that.

We must also remember that those associated with vaccines do not want to acknowledge that and will do whatever they can to prevent that from happening.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

Then that person goes out and trys to effect the change that he'd like to see...he DOES NOT publicly "slam" other parents because he "disagrees" with them....We all have the "right" (and from my own perspective it's an obligation actually)to speak up for our own child in the best way that we know how....and the reality of the matter is there will NEVER BE TOTAL agreement on issues and approaches....That's why, in my view, the overriding factor MUST BE to remember that we are all are parents struggling to do the absolute BEST for our kids...and we need to show each other mutual respect and compassion....Kelli > > >> > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from > criticism. > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > ---------------------------------> Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.>

[Guest guest]

Kelli, there is a chasm of difference between differing on strategies when dealing with an issue pertaining only to your kid AND participating on a committee involved in making a decision which will IMPACT EVERYONE who has Autism. In the latter's case, ONLY the RIGHT decision is ACCEPTABLE. I agree though that being rude is uncivilized, unnecessary and unwise. it does cause rifts between those who should be allies. Always remember, that to the big guns against us, a compromised bill is a stick of candy providing them with, more time to deflect, obfuscate, avoid being confronted bythe truth which is their ultimate main objective. Take care n seekingtruth4miles

<kellianndavis@...> wrote: Yes...but this is not some sort of "closed door" tribal meeting between our "family"....this is a semi-public forum which encompasses many groups with differing ideas on how best to address this issue....and because I choose to "tackle" this issue in a different way than you should not be an automatic "invitation" for public ridicule....There are plenty of individuals on this list who I KNOW don't share my "views" and approach on the issue....and truthfully, it's

okay....because I believe that they are genuinely doing what they believe "in their heart of hearts" is the absolute best thing for their child....and likewise, I'm doing the same....and that is what I wish we would remember to focus on....Kelli> > >

>> > > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from > > criticism. > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. > Great rates starting at 1¢/min.> >>

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.

[Guest guest]

No Kelli.

Walking away is the best way of negotiating an effective conclusion to soemthing that is a critical feature.

When you are totally correct as we are and you have leverage, use the leverage to get what you want. If you can't, walk away and raise hell.

Look at the possiblities.

Frist in January can no longer do the President's bidding (he's retired) and hopefully Imus can get Harold Ford elected.

Santorum likely looses to Casey in Pennsylvania.

Thus, two major impediments to an honest deal regarding the thimerosal issue will be gone.

So walking away is the best approach. Because it allows you to go to the well again in January when the playing field will be much more favorable.

Anything less will not be as effective.

Compromise just plays into the hands of those who wish to corrupt this issue.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

n,As the old saying goes, "There are many ways to skin a cat" and as such, there are "many ways" to get to the same goal...and while I'm sure that most of us on this list probably share the "same goal" that does NOT mean that we will necessarily be in agreement on the "processes" that get us to that goal.These are "approach" issues and I know from personal experience over the last several years, that there are "divides" within our community on which "approaches" should be implemented....hence, the "Who's to say which decision (opinion on approach) is correct?" We are a diversified bunch of folks and that's why there are multiple groups....each group encompassing their own unique "take" in regards to this issue....Your "walking away decision" is exactly that....yours. And while I totally respect your right to that "approach" I certainly don't agree with it. And because you "believe it" doesn't mean you're "right" and I'm "wrong"....THAT'S THE FUNDAMENTAL POINT that I'm trying to make here....THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DIFFERING OPINIONS....but there should ALWAYS be mutual respect and tolerance towards fellow parents -- regardless of which "approach" (or group) they align themselves with.Kelli > > > > >> > > > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from > > > criticism. > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. > > Great rates starting at 1¢/min.> > >> >> > > > > > ---------------------------------> Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business. > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> All-new - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.>

[Guest guest]

Not exactly right. Note that when this society discovered in the late 50's. early 60's that 11-12 children were maimed by thalidomide in utero, the FDA was completely restructured and Congress descended on the culprits like a pack of wolves.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

I ain't saying the process ain't broken, but what I am saying is thathistorically groups who seek to find a solution end up in compromise.I'm not saying it's best or ideal, just historically what happens. Debi>> Don't agree, the political process is broken, and it must change. Compromises are only made to cover up or protect selfish interests. Lobbyists selfishly "protecting" the interests of their corporateemployers is dishonest compromise.> >

[Guest guest]

We should treat the members of the autism community with all measures of respect- except those who, either through ignorance or intent, go out of their way to corrupt our attmempts to seek justice and to correct this horrendous wrong.

Lead, follow- or get the hell out of the way!

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

I agree Kelli. I chat with adults with autism that are all about theneurodiversity thing. They are immediately offended by me and me bythem. Yet once we open the fingers to communication we find that wereally aren't so different from each other. many of the neurodiversitypeople don't want people with autism to suffer from health conditionsand many of us trying to heal our kids are not about not respectingthem as people. Yet human nature, and especially autism nature, seemsunable to comprehend the other's thoughts and gets so stuck on oneaspect they can't get past it. If we come together and want 3 things and 2 get accomplished, that'sprogress. Not ideal, but progress. And through the fight to get the 2,new people become enlightened and are more open the next time thesingle issue comes up. Eventually, it too shall come to pass we justcan't grow weary in the battle and we can't alienate ourselves fromthose who aren't too far from our support, we must find ways toencourage them to join us. Telling them how bad they suck typicallyisn't the ideal way. More flies with sugar and all that.Debi>> n,> > As the old saying goes, "There are many ways to skin a cat" and as > such, there are "many ways" to get to the same goal...and while I'm > sure that most of us on this list probably share the "same goal" > that does NOT mean that we will necessarily be in agreement on > the "processes" that get us to that goal.> >

[Guest guest]

You and I fundamentally disagree on the process.

Whereas you simply state "we agree to disagree"

I say that specific approach actually corrupts the process.

I believe you are fundamentally wrong. I believe your strategy is absolutely wrong.

You appear not to have much experience (if any) in negotiations. And if you do, why you are taking the positions that you take? It seems as if you are working at cross purposes to the goals of the group.

If you have extensive negotiating experience, then I question your motivations. Because your approach is synchronous with delay and deny.

We must actually get something done here.

This is not a debating society.

If you want that- there is a ton of make-work projects at the UN.

By agreeing to disagree you simply frustrate the purposes of the goal- you must know that by positing your negotiating strategy you are playing into the hands of the thimerosal deniers who refuse to address the one paramount issue regarding the mercury in vaccines and the poisoning of a generation of children. They seek to deny and delay.

It is a classical tactic used by people on the defensive.

Running out the clock cannot be our strategy.

It should be and is their strategy.

It should not be yours.

And if it is yours- tell us your plan.

Because if the approach is to play into their hands through your tactics, my antenna go way, way up.

Nice nice is not a result.

It is a plan for suicide.

You have leverage.

Understand your leverage.

And use it.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

Well....in this case we will have to "agree to disagree"....Hopefully, our statement (to be issued shortly) will help explain in greater detail WHY we chose to "stay at the table" during this difficult and challenging process....Kelli> > > > > >> > > > > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from > > > > criticism. > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. > > > Great rates starting at 1¢/min.> > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. > Small Business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > All-new - Fire up a more powerful email and get > things done faster.> >>

[Guest guest]

You and I fundamentally disagree on the process.

Whereas you simply state "we agree to disagree"

I say that specific approach actually corrupts the process.

I believe you are fundamentally wrong. I believe your strategy is absolutely wrong.

You appear not to have much experience (if any) in negotiations. And if you do, why you are taking the positions that you take? It seems as if you are working at cross purposes to the goals of the group.

If you have extensive negotiating experience, then I question your motivations. Because your approach is synchronous with delay and deny.

We must actually get something done here.

This is not a debating society.

If you want that- there is a ton of make-work projects at the UN.

By agreeing to disagree you simply frustrate the purposes of the goal- you must know that by positing your negotiating strategy you are playing into the hands of the thimerosal deniers who refuse to address the one paramount issue regarding the mercury in vaccines and the poisoning of a generation of children. They seek to deny and delay.

It is a classical tactic used by people on the defensive.

Running out the clock cannot be our strategy.

It should be and is their strategy.

It should not be yours.

And if it is yours- tell us your plan.

Because if the approach is to play into their hands through your tactics, my antenna go way, way up.

Nice nice is not a result.

It is a plan for suicide.

You have leverage.

Understand your leverage.

And use it.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

Well....in this case we will have to "agree to disagree"....Hopefully, our statement (to be issued shortly) will help explain in greater detail WHY we chose to "stay at the table" during this difficult and challenging process....Kelli> > > > > >> > > > > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away from > > > > criticism. > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. > > > Great rates starting at 1¢/min.> > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. > Small Business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > All-new - Fire up a more powerful email and get > things done faster.> >>

[Guest guest]

You're right, n. My passion sometime gets the better (best) of me.

Thanks for the reality check.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn > > > Well....in this case we will have to "agree to disagree".....> > Hopefully, our statement (to be issued shortly) will help explain in > greater detail WHY we chose to "stay at the table" during this > difficult and challenging process....> > Kelli> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away > from > > > > > criticism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > > > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone > calls. > > > > Great rates starting at 1¢/min.> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help.. > > Small Business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > All-new - Fire up a more powerful email and get > > things done faster.> > >> >>

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.

[Guest guest]

I think it's a question of tactic, versus one of motivation. The softer approach may be completely appropriate. It may evidence something else with respect to motivation.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

What you're suggesting is to change human nature. That's far beyondone issue and, no matter how well-meaning and idealistic, does itreally serve this issue to try to do so? Wouldn't attempting to changehuman nature quickly lose the sight of helping the kids? I hate havingto schmooze at IEP meetings, but the fact is, it's human nature. Ishouldn't have to try and suck up to the people who are supposed tohelp my child, but often to get the help I must. Should I change it? Icould try, but it wouldn't help my daughter. Same thing with biggerstuff. What you propose, in addition to changing human nature, wouldrequire an entire overthrow of the government, and even then therestructuring would end up with the same old problems, it always hasand always will. P.S. To all homeland security people, no I'm not seriously suggestingsuch, just posing a philosophical discussion, lol.Debi> I ain't saying the process ain't broken, but what I amsaying is that> historically groups who seek to find a solution end up in compromise.> I'm not saying it's best or ideal, just historically what happens. > > Debi> >

[Guest guest]

That present danger is one of the primary motivators of why we fight so hard. The therapy for our children is critical and time is of the essence there, but getting parents to understand the potential danger to their chilren in the present vaccine protocol, in the flu vaccine and recommendations by certain corrupt government health officials and pediatric inistitutions is absolutely critical.

[sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn > > > Well....in this case we will have to "agree to disagree".....> > Hopefully, our statement (to be issued shortly) will help explain in > greater detail WHY we chose to "stay at the table" during this > difficult and challenging process....> > Kelli> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away > from > > > > > criticism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > > > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone > calls. > > > > Great rates starting at 1¢/min.> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help.. > > Small Business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------> > > All-new - Fire up a more powerful email and get > > things done faster.> > >> >>

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.