I am not in any way an anti-vaxxer, my own child has been vaccinated according to the standard protocols in my country, and I agree that NatPhilosopher should have mentioned that alongside the scary-sounding stuff s/he quoted the quoted sources contain statements that aluminium-based vaccines appear to be safe, and that not doing so is dishonest.

BUT it seems to me (as far as the material you've quoted goes; of course there may be more that points the other way) that NatPhilosopher is correct to say that this report suggests that the safety of injected aluminium salts is poorly understood, particularly with respect to long-term consequences as opposed to acute adverse events.

NatPhilosopher may very well be dead wrong, and indeed my guess is that s/he is. But the material s/he quoted doesn't seem to me much less worrying with context than without.