Are Vaccinations Safe?

Since hearing some disturbing things regarding immunization shots, and since it happens that my son's going into kindergarden this year, I've decided to look into the safety of childhood vaccinations..
Here's a website that I came across that gives multiple reasons why they think vaccinations should be avoided. They seem to have a reference system set up, but unfortunately I haven't found where the references actually are. Oh well, here's a brief glimpse into what they had to say anyways:

"In 1956, soon after the Salk polio vaccine was introduced, officials decided to determine how safe and effective it really was. The results of this study -- the now infamous Francis Field Trials -- would help determine the feasibility of continuing to vaccinate millions of young children. What they discovered would have stopped most ethical people from continuing: large numbers of children were contracting polio after receiving the vaccine. Clearly, the vaccine was either unsafe (it was causing the disease it was meant to prevent) or ineffective (it failed to protect). Instead of removing the vaccine from the market, however, officials decided to exclude from the statistics all cases of polio that occurred within 30 days after vaccination on the pretext that such cases were 'pre-existing.'"

I would like to find out exactly what the percentage was, and compare it to the percentage in that area that contracted polio without the vaccine. Although, it does give rise to thought. They also refer to a "pardon me" rule that exempts physicians from being required to receive the vaccines that other employees of medical institutions are required to submit to.

"A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association reports that obstetrician-gynecologists are the least likely of all doctors to submit to the rubella vaccine. Fewer than 10 percent are inoculated, and blood tests indicate they are susceptible to rubella. The researchers conclude that a "fear of unforeseen vaccine reactions" lead these specialists to invoke their self-exempting 'pardon me' rule."

Of all the people who would be the most familiar with the positive (er, maybe not so positive) effects of immunizations, you would think it would be the physicians themselves right? Well, even if they don't bother to receive the vaccines, they would certainly require them for their children right? Or maybe not:

"According to Dr. Jerome Murphy, former head of Pediatric Neurology at Milwaukee Children's Hospital, 'There is just overwhelming data that there's an association [between the pertussis vaccine and seizures]. I know it has influenced many pediatric neurologists not to have their own children immunized with pertussis.'"

So then they go on to talk about the FDA:

"The FDA recently lost an important legal battle when they permitted the live virus polio vaccine, manufactured by Lederle Labs, to be released to the public even though it did not meet existing safety standards. As a result, several people were severely damaged."

Of course, if you know me very well then you know that I don't think this should be going through the FDA anyway. As a matter of fact I don't think there should even be an FDA at all:

"After losing the U.S. Supreme Court case, the FDA immediately implemented the "pardon me" ploy, and rewrote its safety procedures so that previously unacceptable safety measures would be allowable. Consequently, Lederle can continue to produce and the FDA can continue to sanction the same kind of polio vaccine that caused injuries in the first place."

Can you say false sense of security? Not that I've decided that all vaccines are inherently harmful, but this certainly raises some issues that I'd like to look into further.