“Autistic Rights Together” = Libel, Censorship and Cry-Bullying Together

ART.png

 

Autistic Rights Together (or ART as it is abbreviated) is a crooked, basement-style group of special snowflake activists purporting to promote neurodiversity and “autistic rights”. It is a mean-spirited gang of character assassins against doctors and scientists whose opinions merely reflect the emerging science that autism spectrum disorders are treatable medical conditions caused by vaccination. When ART’s censorship and defamation activities are rebuffed, they resort to the familiar cry-bully tactics employed by so many trolls for the pharmaceutical industry. ART’s leader Fiona O’Leary has become neurodiversity’s Irish replacement for Kathleen Seidel: the proprietor of the dormant neurodiversity.com website and who has engaged in the same activities. 

O’Leary played a key role in ruining the practice of the late Dr. Jeff Bradstreet, who has contributed to significant research discoveries shedding light on vaccines’ link to autism. Now she is trying to block screenings of Vaxxed: From Cover-up to Catastrophe, a documentary on how the government has covered up associations between vaccines and autism. In response, the film’s distributors sent her a much-deserved cease-and-desist letter. 

O’Leary has gone crying for sympathy to Jezebel blogger Anna Merlan of Gawker Media, which is now being sued into bankruptcy for libel. ART and Gawker couldn’t be a more perfect match for each other.

But even more perfect than that unholy alliance is an online petition that has been started against “unqualified advocates” like O’Leary. Please sign and spread the word.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

10 Thoughts on ““Autistic Rights Together” = Libel, Censorship and Cry-Bullying Together

  1. Hans Litten on July 29, 2016 at 12:13 pm said:

    Has any progress been made by the authorities into Jeff Bradstreet’s murder ?
    Does anyone know ?

  2. Catherine Hall on July 29, 2016 at 12:17 pm said:

    Petitioning against unqualified autism advocates is pointless as the word advocate ( with a small a) is not a protected title when not used in a legal context. Anyone can ‘advocate’ on the behalf of themselves or others. Are you not ‘advocating’ on behalf of people who belive that autism is a treatable medical condition caused by vaccines. Fiona advocates on behalf of autistic people who are equally convinced that autism is a genetically influenced neurological difference. Yes she is very critical of the people who promote the idea that all people with autism are tragic, disease ridden, damaged and less than the child or adult they were supposed to be. As she is an intelligent, healthy autistic woman herself, is it not reasonable that she should feel agreived by the negative portrayal of autism.
    She may well have played a key role in triggering the investigation into Dr Bradstreet’s practice but she wasn’t responsible for him treating autistic children with unlicensed, experimental products as well as a range of ‘off label’ treatments which have subsequently been found to have no efficacy in treating the core symptoms of autism. Regardless of whether you consider Dr B to have been heroic, naive or a charlatan – he was a qualified Dr and fully aware of the regulations he was breaking.
    I find it pretty ironic that a petition to stop an autistic person advocating on behalf of other autistic people on the grounds that they are not qualified should be started by someone who is supporting a view of autism that is highly controversial. Also apparently supporting a film who’s chief protagonists are a discredited and struck off gastrenterologist, the mother of an autistic child, and a film producer. So what exactly are their ( and your) credentials that make them qualified to advocate on behalf of autistic people any more than Fiona O’Leary

    • “As she is an intelligent, healthy autistic woman herself” – Then she should mind her own business, assuming she even has autism which is doubtful with a lot of these people.

      “unlicensed, experimental products as well as a range of ‘off label’ treatments which have subsequently been found to have no efficacy” – Largely debatable, although the real risk to children with autism is not posed by treatments for autism, but by their autism.

      “a discredited and struck off gastrenterologist” – The basis for which was reversed in a court appeal four years ago.

      “So what exactly are their ( and your) credentials that make them qualified to advocate on behalf of autistic people any more than Fiona O’Leary” Well I’m actually diagnosed with autism and have a background in public health. For all we know O’Leary’s only qualifications could be that she’s good at shutting down opinions she doesn’t like.

      • Fuzzy D on August 6, 2016 at 9:53 pm said:

        “assuming she even has autism which is doubtful with a lot of these people”

        – Fancy providing any evidence for any part of this statement? Didn’t think so.

        “the real risk to children with autism is not posed by treatments for autism, but by their autism”

        – I’m sorry, are you actually arguing that its irrelevant what treatments children with autism receive since they already have autism? Bring out the medicinal leeches and aura crystals!

        “Well I’m actually diagnosed with autism and have a background in public health.”

        -So you claim, but did you know that apparently lots of people lie about having autism just to make themselves seem more authoritative?

        “For all we know O’Leary’s only qualifications could be that she’s good at shutting down opinions she doesn’t like.”

        – Glass. House. Stones.

  3. Jake, Fiona is autistic herself and has two autistic children. What she does is use scientific consensus to make decisions about which treatments and protocols are sound and which are dangerous. Bradstreet espoused unsound, unproven, dangerous quackery. MMS is even worse. Fiona is a fighter and for a very good cause.

    • Let’s review ART’s “About” statement, shall we?

      “We exist to provide true advocacy for the Autistic Community, by representing the all too often forgotten children, adolescents and adults on the Autistic Spectrum who live under the negative and shameful stigma which exists in society today. A stigma driven by the search for a cure, for the elimination of Autism, allowing for blatant and cruel experimentation and dehumanisation which often goes unchallenged by so many prominent Autism organisations and charities.”

      She doesn’t believe treatments period. She believes in neurodiversity.

    • Eddie Unwind on July 30, 2016 at 11:57 am said:

      Kathy – if what you say is true regarding O’Leary, well, that pretty well points the finger right back at her. From what I understand, she is pro-vaccine, right? And on top of this – according to what you say – she has two autistic children? If both of these things are true, then you’d assume that she would make every effort to insist that her children’s autism has nothing to do with having been vaccinated, correct? But this issue is somehow sidestepped via the claim that those on the spectrum ought not be ‘cured’, since such cures presuppose an unethical process of investigation.

      In effect, she is protecting whatever it is that she believes to be the cause of her and her family’s autism on the grounds that it is unethical to pursue whatever that cause might be.

      Therefore, she suspects that the cause is vaccines. Otherwise, she would advocate having the matter investigated scientifically in order to reveal the contrary to be true. For that – hypothetically – would almost certainly establish the grounds which she ultimately seeks; namely, that autism no longer be regarded as a medical condition, since consequently, the so-called ‘stigma’ that she perceives would no longer have grounds to exist.

      Reflecting on this I can’t see how one can afford to adopt her as a positive example since her actual position is so tenuous and transparent. In short, she’s one step from embracing vaccines as the cause of her and her family’s autism.

      I think she is definitely experiencing emotional trouble regarding her children’s autism (if what you contend is true), which is always a terrible thing. Not sure if ART is quite the word for it.

  4. Pingback: False Rape Story-Pusher Anna Merlan Profits Off Crocodile Tears - Autism Investigated

  5. Pingback: AUTISTIC RIGHTS TOGETHER CASTRATES AUTISTS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Post Navigation