CNS Misrepresents DC Anti-Discrimination Law Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com, like other ConWeb outlets, does not feel compelled to accurately or fairly report on something that contradicts its right-wing agenda.
In a Feb. 11 CNS article, Rudy Takala asserts as fact in the first paragraph that a new District of Columbia law "forci[es] Christian organizations to employ people who advocate abortion." It's not until the second paragraph that this view of the law is merely the opinion of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, not necessarily fact.
In actuality, the law -- the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act of 2014 -- states that employers "shall not discriminate against an individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of or on the basis of the individual's or a dependent's reproductive health decision making, including a decision to use or access a particular drug, device or medical service, because of or on the basis of an employer's personal beliefs about such services."
Takala did not quote the language of the law in his article, nor did he explain the USCCB's reasoning behind how it concluded the law forces Christian employers "to employ people who advocate abortion."
Lauretta Brown does the same thing in her Feb. 11 CNS article, baselessly asserting as fact that the law "would force religious and pro-life organizations to employ people who advocate abortion. While Brown does quote some of thewording in the law, she presents the USCCB's interpretation as the only valid one.
That, of course, is simply not true, CNS has so far ignored the opinion of Catholics for Choice, which testifed that polling shows "91 pecent of US Catholic voters believe that a company should not be allowed to fire a pregnant, unmarried employee because of the owners' religious beliefs," adding that "one cannot use one's conscience to trample onthe rights of others."
CNS' mission statement states that it "endeavors to fairly present all legitimate sides of a story." Apparently, if one side of that story conflicts with right-wing ideology or Catholic doctrine, it must not be "legitimate" and, therefore, unworthy of coverage.
WND Clings To Another Discredited Birther Conspiracy Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily's birther obsession is slipping from desperate to truly pathetic.
A Feb. 11 unbylined WND article resorts to a birther conspiracy theory to attack Savannah Guthrie as a possible successor to Brian Williams on the "NBC Nightly News":
On April 27, 2011, White House correspondent Savannah Guthrie claimed to have seen Barack Obama’s long-form birth certificate and “touched and felt the raised seal.”
The segment on “NBC Nightly News” was titled “Obama birth certificate – signed, sealed, delivered.”
Guthrie’s claims that the PDF document posted on the White House website is backed up by two certified paper copies delivered to the White House contradicts the digital forensic findings of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse” investigators in Maricopa County, Arizona.
Alan Jones, writing on his 1776 Channel site Wednesday, noted Arpaio’s appointed lead investigator on the birth-certificate case, Mike Zullo, has been promising the release of “universe-shattering” information regarding the document.
The release of additional findings, Jones wrote, likely would pose for NBC News a “credibility crisis far more severe than the Brian Williams fiasco.”
Jones on Wednesday interviewed Zullo, who noted Reed Hayes, a document examiner who has served as expert witness for Seattle law firm Perkins Coie – the firm that flew an attorney to Honolulu to personally deliver two paper copies of the birth certificate to the White House – has concluded in a signed affidavit that the document posted on the White House website is “entirely fabricated.”
“We have no evidence of a raised seal being displayed on that document that Savannah Guthrie supposedly felt,” Zullo said. “We don’t know what she felt. No evidence that we can determine shows alterations to that paper body indicating a raised seal. Their work flow is a scan of the document. Upon examination, there is no evidence of raised seal.”
WND doesn't tell you, of course, that Zullo's investigation is a discredited joke. He obviously didn't look very hard for the seal, because it's right there, as this enhanced image of a photo of the certificate taken by Guthrie demonstrates:
And as we've previously noted, Zullo has never publicly released Hayes' analysis; he's actually expert in handwriting analysis, not digital documents.
The fact that WND is still pushing birther conspiracies and hiding the fact they've been discredited is really all you need to know about why nobody believes WND.
MRC Disappears Sharyl Attkisson From Criticism Of CBS' Anti-Vaccine Coverage Topic: Media Research Center
Joseph Rossell huffs in a Feb. 11 Media Research Center item:
CBS “Evening News” attempted to show that there is no link between vaccines and autism on Feb. 10, but seemed confused that anti-vaccination views got “traction at all.”
CBS News National Correspondent Jim Axelrod did a good job of showing how a “discredited” study by Dr. Andrew Wakefield scared parents away from the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, but he failed to acknowledge that his own network played a part in that fearmongering.
He failed to criticize CBS’s role in publicizing the false claims of a link between autism and MMR vaccinations, even as he aired earlier “60 Minutes” footage of parents who blamed their son’s autism on the shot. Axelrod also ignored the fact that the three broadcast news networks combined helped sustain anti-vaccination views by airing 171 stories that mentioned vaccines and autism over 15 years.
Rossell doesn't mention that one of the chief promulgators of anti-vaxxer sympathy at CBS was Sharyl Attkisson, now a right-wing darling for her factually challenged anti-Obama reporting.
As we've documented, the MRC criticized Attkisson's anti-vaxxer reporting at the time but has been virtually silent about it since she became a conservative cause celebre.
By ignoring Attkisson, Rossell avoids having to confront the uncomfortable question of why Attkisson couldn't be trusted then but is unimpeachable now.
In a followup to last week’s WND column by Matt Barber, I would like to point out that there has to be an orchestrated effort to make certain that the five prisoners swapped for army deserter Bowe Bergdahl are not called terrorists. Why? In the immortal words of Hillary Clinton, “What difference does it make” if we call them terrorists or armed insurgents? The difference is that we don’t negotiate with terrorists, but I suppose we can negotiate with armed insurgents, even though the Taliban is registered on two government lists as terrorists. It seems pretty clear to me that you need to call it as you see it.
So why is this administration turning itself inside out over something so transparent? Why are they so hesitant to use the word? Could it be that, as Matt Barber brought up in his piece, they are afraid of being accused of treason?
It’s not that President Obama can’t utter the phrase “Islamist terror,” it is that he won’t do so, because at this juncture, Obama has become the chief facilitator of Islamist terror on a global scale.
This has gone far beyond dishonesty, disloyalty, or even self-aggrandizing corruption. Hanging offenses have been committed by people in high places; the list of such offenses increases daily, as does the number of those who add themselves to the list of the culpable, or dig themselves in deeper with each diversion they craft and lie they utter.
Why was Barack Hussein Obama calling for a “New World Order” in Europe before becoming America’s president, claiming that there was “no other way”?
Why is he now meeting with designated Muslim terror groups in the White House? Why is he allied with America’s sworn enemies by appointing them to key positions in governmental positions? Why is he aiding and abetting America’s enemies? Why is he trying to disarm the American people through means of terror? Why is he releasing thousands of illegal felons on the streets of America? Why has he transgressed the U.S. Constitution, lied to the American people, wasted taxpayer money and been involved in cronyism in 900 documented incidents?
Not since Santa Claus was in short pants has anyone been as generous as Obama when it comes to bestowing gifts. But unlike Santa, Obama insists on rewarding those who have been naughty and turning into Scrooge when it comes to those who are nice.
Although all it would take to bring about immigration reform is for Obama to build a 21st century fence along our southern border, he keeps it as porous as possible because he wants the nation flooded with future Democrats.
The president made a fundamental error in his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast: He tried to maintain the liberal absurdity that all religions, all beliefs, all theologies, are equally valid. He wants to maintain the myth that all religions are fundamentally the same and only superficially different, whereas the fact is most religions are fundamentally different and only superficially the same.
Those of us who saw this coming back in 2008 and 2009 were excoriated, ridiculed and marginalized for speaking the truth about Obama’s past. In 2007, I wrote a commentary for Israel National News titled, “Obama, the Muslim Thing, And Why It Matters.” Before Obama’s election, anyone who used his middle name, Hussein, was labeled a racist-anti-Muslim-Islamophobic-bigot. And yet the first call he made to a foreign “leader” after he was inaugurated was to terror leader Mahmoud Abbas. The first interview he gave was with al Arabiya television. His first world tour was an apology tour to the Muslim world, culminating in a speech from the leading Islamic university in Cairo, Al Azhar. He invited the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group to his speech in Cairo, despite the fact that it had been banned for decades. Then President Mubarak and his cabinet, America’s 30-year ally in that troubled region, could not attend Obama’s speech because of the terror presence.
It’s why I wrote my 2010 book, “The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America.”
And now, five years later, with the global jihad roiling the world thanks to Obama’s support and sanction, he deigns to tell us what our religion is.
President Dawah. The more jihad rages, the more Obama proselytizes for Islam. Muslim countries like Jordan are taking a much harder line than the U.S. It’s outrageous.
The question isn’t whether Obama is or isn’t a Muslim. The question is, if he were a Muslim, what would he be doing differently? In a word, nothing.
If Obama is not stopped, ISIS, al-Qaida, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood will have their way, and America will be forced to bow to Islam (as Obama bowed to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia). Then, the only choice left for us will be to submit or die.
That is a choice unacceptable to any real self-respecting American.
OK, Barack. That did it. I’m offended, and I know you don’t care.
You pushed your luck with that speech at the National Prayer Breakfast last week. Your words made it abundantly clear to me where you stand on Islam and reveal your antagonism toward Christianity.
Despite the fact you were elected twice to the presidency of this country, your words finally did it for me – and, I suspect, millions of others across the country.
Barack Obama, I have seen your classlessness and insults over the years. Finally, I will say it: You have offended me, and there’s no way for you to correct that. I will be ashamed of you as the president, but I will not be ashamed of my country.
Barack Obama stepped in it so deeply this time, he has no way out of the quagmire. Obama pushed his luck in his unending quest to diminish this country and denigrate Christianity.
It’s too bad there weren’t any people at the prayer breakfast with the courage to stand up during Obama’s speech and turn their back on him. Better yet, they should have walked out.
But no, Christians are not allowed to be offended when their beliefs are dragged into the gutter of insults.
Those who wish to play God do not wish to acknowledge God. Hence, Mr. Obama’s telling silence. During his first election campaign, he made some pretense at being a Christian. Now he is more and more openly Muslim. He treats Christianity either with sneering indifference or with outright contempt.
Mr. Obama’s anti-Christian stance is something his Republican opponents should openly condemn. They need to start making serious inroads into the black and Hispanic vote. Many blacks are Protestant; most Hispanics are Catholic. At present, they vote “Democrat” without thinking further than the next food stamp or benefit check.
CNS Finds More Federal Spending On LGBT Issues It Considers A Waste Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com has long obsessed over federal spending on LGBT-related issues, eager to portray them as a waste of money (while failing to perform any similar analysis of other categories of federal spending). CNS deputy managing editor Melanie Hunter has beenthe leader in this highly biased campaign for CNS of late, and she's at it again in a Feb. 6 article:
The National Institutes of Health has awarded a $435,369 taxpayer-funded grant to the University of Illinois at Chicago to study cessation techniques for LGBT smokers.
“Our long-term goals are to increase smoking cessation in Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) smokers and to understand the processes related to cessation and relapse in this underserved population,” the grant stated.
The purpose of the study “is to develop and evaluate the benefits of culturally targeted smoking cessation intervention” for LGBT smokers.
Hunter obviously thinks this is a waste of money -- otherwise, she wouldn't have written this article.And as is usual for LGBT-related articles ath CNS, its comment section is littered with examples of vicious and vile anti-gay hatred that CNS' comment monitors apparently do nothing to counteract. It's almost as if CNS publishes such articles for express purpose of fostering homophobia.
All six of the articles Hunter has written about government spending in the past three months have focused on LGBT issues. Additionally, she wrote two more disdainful LGBT-related articles published on Jan. 30:
Hunter is simply acting out the anti-gay agenda of her employer, the Media Research Center.
UPDATE: Hunter has penned another article attacking LGBT-related spending, this time highlighting how "The National Institutes of Health has awarded $42,676 in taxpayer funds to the University of Pennsylvania to teach yoga to drug-abusing convicts with HIV to help them once they are released from prison."
When was the last death from measles in the U.S.? Anyone know.
Dr. Lee Hieb, an expert in the field, says 2005. But the vaccine that prevents measles infection has taken the lives of 86 in that time, she reports – 68 of them 3-years-old or younger. Almost 2,000 were permanently disabled by the vaccine.
And Bill Press wants government to mandate forcible vaccines for all children, despite the obvious fact that the shot is far more dangerous than the illness.
As we've documented, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which tracks claims of adverse events to vaccines and which Hieb cites as the source of her claim, clearly and explictly states that it does not verify whether a cause-and-effect relationship exists between vaccines and the reported adverse effects, and that "No proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report." Hieb ignored this disclaimer, making her claim false -- and making Farah a liar yet again for repeating something he should know is a falsehood.
In a delicious irony, Farah's column appeared at WND the same day it published the latest from syndicated columnist Thomas Sowell, who points out that "false claims, based on other false claims, led many parents to stop getting their children vaccinated against measles."
Sowell also noted that "crusading movements are seldom stopped by facts." As a man who pretends to be a journalist but embraceslies, Farah provides a clear example that even Sowell could not have anticipated.
NEW ARTICLE: Lies And The Lying Liars Who Attack Others About Their Lies Topic: Media Research Center
Perhaps Media Research Center chief Brent Bozell -- who lied for years about writing his own column -- is not the person who should be calling for NBC anchor Brian Williams' resignation over a falsehood. Read more >>
No CNS articles so far, however, on themost visible critic demanding Williams resign for his falsehood, MRC (and CNS) chief Brent Bozell, lying for 15 years about writing the column that appears under his name.
How politically extreme is the Southern Poverty Law Center, a well-funded legal hate group known for its guilt-by-association tactics and whipping up hysteria over the ever-present threat of a second coming of the Ku Klux Klan?
The latest target to be placed on the group’s “extremist watch list” will give you a clue.
He’s a highly acclaimed brain surgeon, potential presidential candidate and, according to polls, one of America’s most admired celebrities.
That’s right. Dr. Ben Carson.
The reason? He’s against same-sex marriage.
From the SPLC website: “Ben Carson rapidly ascended as a far-right political star after publicly scolding President Obama, whom he sat a few feet away from, at a National Prayer Breakfast in February 2013. Carson’s reproach of Obama for his health care and tax policies went viral, unleashing a flood of adulation from right-wing media and hate groups.”
2) WND doesn't bother to link to the SPLC article on Carson, so you know it's trying to hide something. And when you actually look at the SPLC's profile of Carson, the first thing you'll notice is that at no point is Carson described as being on an "extremist watch list." WND appears to have lifted the phrase from a post at the right-wing blog Legal Insurrection, which Talking Points Memo states "appeared to have been the first to notice" Carson's SPLC profile.
3) The next thing you'll notice in the SPLC profile is that Carson isn't being criticized for merely being "against same-sex marriage" as WND claims. He's being criticized for portraying homosexuality as equivalent to bestiality and pedophilia.
4) The term "anti-gay" appears nowhere in the SPLC profile, despite WND putting it in quotes. The SPLC describes his "ideology" as "anti-LGBT," and it points out that Carson has spoken to "anti-LGBT" groups.
5) At no point does WND demonstrate what is "unfair" about highlighting Carson's anti-gay rhetoric. Instead, it simply quotes what Carson said, then blamed the SPLC for Floyd Lee Corkins' attempted shooting spree at the Family Research Council because Corkins "admitted that he used SPLC’s hate map to identify FRC as a target."
By that same logic, we should credit WND for helping to inspire Anders Breivik's massacre of dozens in Norway since his manifesto cites WND six times.
In a (similarly unbylined) follow-up article, WND falsely claims the SPLC called Carson a "hater" and repeated the inaccurate "extremist watch list" phrase. The article claims to quote Carson responding to the SPLC designation, but it's unclear where the quotes came from -- WND does not identify their source, and none of the quoted matter specifically references the SPLC.
Interestingly, a Breitbart article carries the same alleged quotes from Carson but also doesn't identify their source. Did WND steal Breitbart's story like it did Legal Insurrection's? If so, that would explain why the WND writer did not want to put his or her name on this work.
Actually, it appears Carson made his statements to the Daily Mail, which neither WND nor Breitbart credit. (Fun fact: The Daily Mail's U.S. political desk is helmed by David Martosko, the former managing editor for the Daily Caller, where he was best known for defending reporting that was clearly false.)
Further, neither article shows any effort on WND's part to contact the SPLC for an explantion of its Carson profile -- that would be too much like journalism, apparently. TPM, meanwhile, did what WND couldn't be bothered to do:
SPLC spokesman Mark Potok told TPM on Monday that including Carson in the organization's "extremist files" isn't tantamount to following the potential presidential contender around in fear that he is plotting to blow up a federal building.
"Our criticism of him was based in large part on his very extreme rhetoric about the evils of gay people," Potok told TPM by phone. "He says that any criticism he makes is always kind and never meant to destroy the person, but then he says that gay marriage will lead to the destruction of America much in the same way the Roman Empire collapsed."
Stealing the work of others, the inability to get basic facts correct and refusal to exhibit any sort of fairness demonstrate why nobody believes WND.
Obama Derangement Syndrome Watch, Accuracy in Media Edition Topic: Accuracy in Media
The Obama years will be forever known as the Dark Ages of US history, a time of political, cultural and economic deterioration. We have yet to see if they will lead to the fall of the American republic.
In the Obama years, the lie became not only a campaign strategy or a means to enact damaging policies, but an institution of government; the Presidency itself, a lie of monstrous proportions guarded by the complicit and the willingly ignorant.
In the Obama years, the Congress finally clearly demonstrated that although we have elections, there is no longer a government representing its citizens, but an entity serving itself, operating outside of Constitutional constraints and unaccountable to the American people for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many.
Unless we undertake a thorough exposition of who Obama really is, what is his background and true agenda, what forces made his unprecedented rise to power possible and who has conspired to hide the truth, an American Renaissance will not be forthcoming.
We are in a new Dark Age. In such situations, the record of history is unequivocal; either we produce a Renaissance, that is, a rebirth of the fundamental principles upon which America was founded or our republic dies.
-- Lawrence Sellin, Feb. 2 Accuracy in Media column
Employment Numbers Are So Good, CNS Can't Find A Way To Make Them Look Bad Topic: CNSNews.com
When the employment news is as good as it was in January, even CNSNews.com can't figure out a way to make it look bad.
Thus, Ali Meyer was forced to play it pretty much straight in her Feb. 6 CNS article:
The labor force participation rate increased from 62.7 percent to 62.9 percent in January as the number of people not in the labor force declined from 92,898,000 in December to 92,544,000 in January, and the unemployment rate ticked up from 5.6 percent to 5.7 percent.
However, Meyer does show her bias in one way: she refused to note that 257,000 jobs were created in January. Instead, she complained that "The number of unemployed and employed both increased in January," failing to explain to her readers what significance, if any, those numbers have.
WND's Homophobes Think They Know Better About Bruce Jenner's Life Than He Does Topic: WorldNetDaily
With the news that Bruce Jenner may be going transgender, WorldNetDaily's resident homophobes have decided they know what's best for him and sent unsolicited advice his way.
A Feb. 5 WND article quotes a couple of its resident anti-gay activists to offer the armchair-psychiatric diagnosis that Jenner needs help that becoming transgender won't solve:
Michael Brown, author of “A Queer Thing Happened to America: And What a Long, Strange Trip It’s Been,” is calling the media’s behavior exploitation at best and sinister at worst.
“I don’t know how much genuine compassion or courage is being shown here,” he said. “Real courage would be for us to work together to help this man without mutilating him.”
But [WND managing editor] David Kupelian, author of “The Marketing of Evil,” expressed concerns similar to Brown’s.
“It’s very sad that legendary Olympian Bruce Jenner is trying to turn himself into a woman,” he said, “The desire to become the opposite gender, which usually involves the amputation of healthy body parts, is a psychological-spiritual problem that cries out for understanding and enlightened counseling, not surgical mutilation.”
Kupelian said “transgender ‘transitioning,’ which is the latest madness infecting the American mind, is in fact so abnormal and unnatural that a staggeringly tragic 41 percent of all transgender individuals living in the United States have attempted to commit suicide, according to a 2010 study.”
Brown, who addresses in his books issues such as how Christians should respond to homosexuals who say they love the Lord and experience God’s power, said: “It’s absolutely tragic. It’s nothing to celebrate. God made him a man and he was a married man with children. Whatever his deep seated issues are, let’s try to help him from the inside out, not be mutilating him.”
Professional gay-basher Matt Barber used his Feb. 6 WND column to declare that God has given him the "authority" to lecture Jenner:
First, the elephant in the room: As you ultimately know in your heart-of-hearts, this extreme path you have chosen to take at this late stage in your life is not the answer to the question, “Who is Bruce Jenner?” You must certainly be aware, if only deep down, that to “transition from male to female” is a hopeless and hapless impossibility, biologically, emotionally, spiritually and in every other way imaginable. If you have been convinced otherwise, you labor under grave deception.
There is a reason that after “sex reassignment” surgery, so-called “transgender” people commit suicide at a rate 20 times higher than normal, and, despite rationalizations to the contrary, imaginary “transphobia” is not that reason. If you follow through with this, Bruce, you will be making, second only to denying Christ, the biggest mistake of your life.
Here, in reality, is what you propose to do. You are about to irreversibly mutilate your body and scar your soul. By all accounts, you have already begun doing so. Cosmetically destroying your genitalia, adding artificial breasts and superficially altering your features to make you appear (you really won’t) as a woman, will no more make you a woman than putting fake antlers on a puppy can make it an antelope.
It will only make you the object of pity and ridicule.
You were, are and will always be the man who is Bruce Jenner – the man God created you to be. My fervent prayer is that you might also become the man He intends you to be – the Bruce Jenner who was created, not primarily to win gold medals, but to worship, magnify and glorify the Son of God. As Saint Augustine reflected, “Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in Thee.”
You’re 65 years old. You have, what, 10, 15, maybe 20 years left? Don’t do it. Don’t destroy yourself. Don’t let this unfortunate and bizarre footnote to your life become that which defines it.
Christ is calling you, Bruce Jenner. You are not “a woman trapped in a man’s body.” You are a child of God awaiting adoption.
Please seek counsel from a biblically faithful pastor or priest. I am likewise delighted to meet with you anytime and anywhere to share with you the good news of the Gospel, which maps out the exclusive path to joy, rest and eternal salvation. My email is firstname.lastname@example.org, if you’d ever like to talk.
Either way, I am praying for you. Many who read this are praying for you.
Needless to say, Barber does not know Jenner and, thus, cannot possibly know the struggles that led Jenner to this apparent decision. Barber only wants to impose his rigid, hateful homophobic lifestyle on the country (and Barber's denigration of gays and transgenders is motived by hate, though he denies it by insisting that his hatred is motivated by "love").
MRC's Bozell Still A Liar, Still Calling Brian Williams A Liar Topic: Media Research Center
Media Research Center chief Brent Bozell just can't stop piling up the hypocrisy regarding NBC news anchor Brian Williams.
On the Feb. 6 edition of Sean Hannity's Fox News show, Bozell asserted that Williams was "lying about everything" and that "the honorable thing for him to do is to resign."
As we'vedocumented, Bozell spent more than 15 years perpetuating the lie that he actually wrote his twice-weekly syndicated column, until the lie was exposed last year. And unlike Williams, Bozell has yet to even discuss his lies publicly -- despite having a weekly guest shot on Fox News -- let alone apologize for his deception or doing the honorable thing of resigning from the MRC.
How ironic that the man calling out an alleged liar is a liar himself.
Bozell's fellow guest, former military pilot Amber Smith, claimed Williams had told a "10-year lie." How would she feel if she knew she appeared on "Hannity" with a man who told a 15-year lie?
WASHINGTON – While those opposing mandatory vaccination for measles are widely portrayed as ignorant and even dangerous by some officials, pundits and even news media accounts, Centers for Disease Control records reveal a startling truth – while no one has died of measles in the U.S. in the last 12 years, 108 have died as a result of the adverse effects of the vaccine in that same time period.
The death statistics are recorded by Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, which captures only a small percentage of the actual number of deaths and other adverse reactions to the vaccine. In addition, 96 of the 108 deaths in that 12-year time period were a result of the MMR vaccine, now the preferred shot for measles immunization.
Beyond the fact that one key reason there have been no deaths from measles in the past 12 years in the U.S. is because there is a measles vaccine, WND repeats a falsehood about vaccine deaths.
VAERS does not claim that the claimed adverse reactions to vaccines it documents are directly attributable to the vaccine. VAERS explicitly states on its website:
When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.
A report to VAERS generally does not prove that the identified vaccine(s) caused the adverse event described. It only confirms that the reported event occurred sometime after vaccine was given. No proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report. VAERS accepts all reports without judging whether the event was caused by the vaccine.
WND also quotes Dr. Lee Hieb -- the fringe-linked doctor and author of a new WND-published book fearmongering about Obamacare -- making a similar claim.
For Hieb and WND to claim that VAERS proves that vaccines kill is, thus, a lie.
The WND article also includes this graphic:
Note that the arrow pointing to the measles vaccine being introduced in 1963 is pointing to somwhere in the late 1970s. WND has since updated the graphic with the arrow correctly pointing to 1963.
Also, the source for WND's information, Health Sentinel, is a blog is filled with vaccine skepticism -- one article asks if vaccines are "a waste of time."
Newsmax Lets Dubious Doctor Fearmonger About Vaccines Topic: Newsmax
We've detailed the questionable medical advice of Newsmax-promoted doctor Russell Blaylock, not the least of which is fearmongering about vaccines.
With the current concern about non-vaccinated Americans contributing to a measles outbreak, Newsmax TV gave Blaylock a platform to peddle more fear about vaccines, as described in a Feb. 3 Newsmax article by Bill Hoffmann:
Childhood vaccinations for viruses like measles and chicken pox should not be mandatory and, in fact, may cause serious health problems, says board certified neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock, editor of The Blaylock Wellness Report.
"Absolutely not. It takes away one of the fundamental rights of people, individuals and families and certainly parents — and that is the protection of their children," Blaylock said Tuesday on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.
"You should not have the right to force my child to receive a vaccine when I think that that could cause severe damage to my child.
"There's compelling scientific evidence that vaccines are not as safe as they're being proposed. In fact, there [can be] significant, serious problems, including death, seizures, encephalitis and severe brain damage. This is well documented in medical literature."
"If you could demonstrate that vaccines never caused serious neurological damage or caused serious health issues, then fine, that's one thing.
"But they can't demonstrate that and what we're seeing is a dramatic increase in autoimmune diseases since they've added so many vaccines to the vaccine schedule. Those include increases in neurological damage and impairment in learning, memory and speech.
"So we're seeing a dramatic increase in all of these disorders as the number of vaccines increased," he said.
Hoffmann didn't mention that Blaylock has defended Andrew Wakefield, the British doctor who penned the notorious, now-retracted study linking vaccines and autism.
In an article on the website of Dr. Joseph Mercola -- a anti-vaxxer and peddler of health supplements who has been sanctioned by the FDA for overstating their effectiveness -- Blaylock claimed that criticism of Wakefield is "unjustifed" and that he was "singled out" because of "bias in academia and government regulatory agencies."
One plus for Newsmax, though: Hoffmann disclosed Newsmax's business relationship with Blaylock in his article.