I know many of you are too far out there to even consider the facts and numbers I am going to present now. Nevertheless I will try to show you some things that you can easily verify for yourself.
Let's have a look at this image macro. Aside of the typo "2113", which we assume means "2013", the numbers seem to be pretty self-evident on the first glance. But is that so? Let's expand this minimalistic time line Icke presents here.
1983: US autism rate is 1 in 10,000. Autistics usually are people with severe mental inabilities, completely unable to live alone, work or communicate properly.
1994: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) gets changed to version IV. In DSM IV the diagnosis criteria for autism got drastically broadened. Some of you might be familiar with the term "Asperger syndrome". "Aspies" have a light version of autism and were not diagnosed as autistics before this change was applied. So naturally many, many more people were diagnosed as autistic. Most of them able to live their life without problems. Only about 1 in 10,000 being so severely autistic that he or she would have been diagnosed as autistic in 1983.
2008: US autism rate has "skyrocket" up to 1 in 150. Icke deliberately hushes up the changes in the definition of the diagnosis. Asperger autism is now a fashionable diagnosis for people who wonder why their kids don't act like those on TV. Some of them have problems finding friends, others just love to play alone. But in the age of kindergarten kids learning Chinese in order to be prepared for their later careers, this deviation from the media propagated norm is frightening to many parents.
May 2013: DSM version 5 is released. Again broadening the definition of autism. You sometimes like being alone? You have a hobby you like to focus on? You are no virtuoso with words? According to DSM 5 you might be autistic!
End of 2013: US autism rate in children is 1 in 88. If this would be the diagnosis criteria from 1983, this would mean about every 5th kid is severely disabled and depending on care for as long as it lives. Just take a step outside your house to see that this is not the case.
If someone presents you a simple A->B relation like this, you need to make sure that there is no factor C that influences the huge changes in B. Changes in definition of an illness are a quite gargantuan factor C with enormous influences on the numbers. Ignoring that or even hushing it up is more than dishonest, it is actively misleading fellow human beings. If that person at the same time claims there are reptile aliens from Saturn (Which is a gas planet! No surface! No life!) that pretend to be humans and are to blame for all bad things, that should be another clue for you.
The child mortality rate in the US sank from 200 dead children per 1000 life births (about 1/5. Means: The kids you now fear could get light autism would be the number of kids that died back then) in the 1880s to less than 10 dead children per 1000 life births in the 1980s. 2000% less dead kids. And vaccinations play a big role there. You can easily prove that by looking at child mortality numbers and causes in todays 3rd world countries. The correlation between increases in vaccination and decreases of child mortality rates can be tracked. So can the efficiency.
This is how childhood looked before vaccinations:
And this is how the childhood of a vaccinated kid with diagnosed light autism looks:
(pic broken: Duck as a smiling baby)
Note how I do fixate the eyes. Note how I am able to express myself. Note how I am smiling. (Note my enormous bald head!)
Note that today I have university degrees, a job, a happy and healthy marriage, friends, sufficient social skills and a good life. I like how I am and wouldn't want to change a thing. I am happy and healthy.
I am alive.
Now, again, remember that there is no scientific proof that vaccinations cause autism.
But there is ample scientific proof for the fact that not vaccinating your children can cause their death or severe disabilities.
If you don't want to dismiss the baseless hypothesis that vaccinations cause autism, fine. Then still look at the two pictures and ask yourself which one of those two options you want to risk for your child.
And now choose wisely.