Examining A Questionable Big Pharma Influence in Connecticut Law and Politics

Exploring the individuals, and individual entities, that are really behind the actions taken by government, whether local, state, federal, or global, is a constant theme here at TheGoodmanChronicle.com, and one such organization that will continue to come up, when researching events taking place in Connecticut, as well as across the country, is the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF).

The RWJF is one of the largest private foundations in the country, with a stated goal to "improve the health and health care of all Americans."  Important to note, as we trace the RWJF's involvement in Connecticut legislative policy, is that the RWJF was established with a bequest of shares of Johnson & Johnson (J&J) from its late chief executive, Robert Wood Johnson.  Johnson & Johnson is one of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies.  This connection is important because many legislative actions, and programs, supported, and funded, by the RWJF, would seemingly benefit the pharmaceutical industry.  Let us explore some of these programs, and legislation, supported by the RWJF, in the state of Connecticut.

In March 2014, I published an article titled Forced Mental Health Assessments Being Proposed For All Children In Connecticut, which discussed legislation that was being presented in the state legislature of Connecticut, which would have required "each pupil enrolled in public school at grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 and each home-schooled child at ages 12, 14 and 17 to have a confidential behavioral health assessment."  This legislation was lobbied for by the president of the board of directors for the CT Association of School
Based Health Centers, JoAnn Eaccarino.  The CT Association of School Based Health Centers receives funding and support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

There is also a program in operation in Connecticut, that has received millions of dollars from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, called "Child First", which is an "evidence-based model that uses home visits and a network of community services to prevent the devastating effects of early childhood adversity."  The founder of Child First, Darcy Lowell, regularly submits testimony to the state legislature, usually in favor of legislation that would use the state to increase the number of children being examined for "mental health".

In a presentation to the state Commission on Children, Lowell discussed the Child First program, where she listed situations that her organization deems "environmental risks" to children.  The list includes obvious risks to children, such as physical abuse, and lack of food, but it also includes questionable risks such as "single parenthood", and "unemployment".  The DCF, or Department of Children and Families, is listed as the leading agency of the Child First program.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation connection to these type of programs should be scrutinized.  It is important to understand how these home-visitation programs and behavioral mental health assessments can be used to increase the number of children on pharmaceutical drugs, thus profiting big pharmaceutical companies like Johnson & Johnson.  Former veteran Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, in 2011, was speaking out against this push for mandatory health screenings, calling it "a persistent lobbying effort, funded by pharmaceutical companies, to increase the number of these (drug) prescriptions to even more children."  If you are thinking that you have nothing to worry about, because neither you, or your children, have a mental illness, keep in mind that the list of mental disorders is ever-growing, and includes illness' such as "Oppositional Defiant Disorder", which you can be labeled with for "disagreeing with someone in a position of authority".  Also, some studies, like the one put out by the Children’s Services Working Group, suggest that the number of people that have a mental illness, many of whom unknowingly, may be as high as 20%, in a state like Connecticut.

Go To Work and Give The Government Your Children: The Feminist UN Agenda 21 Plan To "Empower" Women

The original intention in writing this analysis was simply to discover the reason that the role of women seemed to be such a vital part of United Nations Agenda 21.  As one connection led to another, I found myself with a massive amount of information, all of which important, and necessary, to explain what is happening in terms of the manipulation of women in today's society.  This is my attempt to condense all of that information into a reasonably short overview.  The reader should understand that there is much more to this story, and can follow any of the many links, and sources, provided in this analysis, if they want to learn more.

Upon my first complete reading of United Nations Agenda 21, the UN's plan for the world for the 21 century,  I noticed how nearly every chapter of the Agenda curiously emphasized the necessary role of women in the implementation of the plan.  Of course, implying that women play a major role in society is not, in itself, odd in any way, however the manner in which these ideas are presented, I did find questionable.  Aside from recommending governments implement strategies to increase the amount of women in positions of "decision makers, planners, managers, scientists and technical advisers", the agenda also wants to have influence in people's lives at home by looking to "promote the reduction of the heavy workload of women and girl children at home", and, somehow, influence "the sharing of household tasks by men and women on an equal basis."  Reducing the number of children that women have was another concept continuously discussed as a matter of importance in the Agenda.  (Sidenote:  For more information on the actual Agenda 21 document, I highly recommend reading my article A Critical Analysis of Agenda 21 - United Nations Program of Action)

At first, I just kept the Agenda's emphasis on women as a mental note, as there were seemingly more important aspects of Agenda 21 to discuss, and analyze.  However, as I began to read more UN books, and documents, an anti-men/pro-women agenda seemed to emerge.  For example, in the children's version of Agenda 21, Rescue Mission: Planet Earth , a book promoted by the United Nations, former executive of the United Nations Population Fund, Dr. Nafis Sadik, is asked the question "There's a lot in Agenda 21 about women playing a critical role in population, but aren't men usually the problem?", and her response was:

"Yes - there's a lot of male authority but not much male responsibility in relation to child bearing.  Men are not burdened with the problem of giving birth, they tend to exploit children -sending them to work instead of investing in their education. What can children do? They should challenge their parents not to have any more children until they can look after them properly." [emphasis added]

Aside from the blatant, and in my opinion, unjustified, attack on men, the idea that children are being exploited by their family reminded me of a quote from the Communist Manifesto:

"Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents?  To this crime we plead guilty" - The Communist Manifesto 

These type of quotes, and concepts, compelled me to re-examine Agenda 21, and find a possible origin to these ideas.  The full Agenda 21 document, in book form, is 351 pages, however Agenda 21 is much more complex than just what is written in this action plan, due to the fact that there are numerous other resolutions referenced, and recommended, for further implementation.  One such resolution that is recommended for implementation is the Nairobi Forward-looking Strategies for the Advancement of Women report.  When I decided to look into, and read, this report from Nairobi, I discovered a feminist agenda, with dubious objectives.  (For a greater understanding of the objectives discussed in the Nairobi report, read my article A Critical Summary of the Nairobi Forward-looking Strategies for the Advancement of Women)

In the following examination, I will be making connections with this Agenda 21-related report, and current events that are taking place, as well as the people, and organizations, causing these events to take place.

Children's Edition of United Nations Agenda 21: Blatant Anti-Human Propaganda

Children are the future; the course of humanity is ultimately dependent on what the little human beings of the world are taught today.  The United Nations understands this, and this is why they publish materials attempting to influence the attitudes, and beliefs, of children, often presenting only one side of an argument, with a goal of having these children's beliefs, and attitudes, be more aligned with the future goals of the United Nations.  This is called propaganda, and the children's book, promoted by the UN, Rescue Mission: Planet Earth: A children's edition of Agenda 21, published in 1994, is definitely propaganda.  (Side note: To view a scanned .pdf version of this book, in full, click here.)

According to the book's introduction, the purpose of publishing Rescue Mission was to condense the massive United Nations plan for the 21st century, "Agenda 21", "into a language that ordinary people can understand." (pg 7)  A critical thinker, at this point, may ask, why was not the original plan written in a language that ordinary people can understand?  I have took the time to read, and analyze, the original plan, Agenda 21, and my guess as to why it was not written in a language that ordinary people can understand is, the average person may more easily come to the same conclusion that I came to, that Agenda 21 is a plan, by the United Nations, to gain more decision making power, or sovereignty, from countries, and create a world in which every resource, water, animals, food, etc., even human resources, and population size, is tracked, collectivized, and controlled by a group of non-elected bureaucrats at the UN, working in conjunction with big corporations, and non-governmental organizations (NGO's).

Interesting to note, also in the introduction of Rescue Mission, there is an opening quote by the former General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and former leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, about needing to "save the planet from destruction."  The fact that Gorbachev is a communist, and openly being promoted in UN literature, should not come as a surprise, as the United Nations is an organization with a collectivist philosophy, as well as having many specific connections to Communism.  In an effort not to stray away from this specific critique of Rescue Mission, I will not detail the history of the United Nations, and their connection with communists/collectivism, in this examination, but intend to do so in the future.

Among the many controversial ideas discussed, or maybe, pushed through propaganda, is a better way to put it, in Rescue Mission, are:

• Humans are bad for, and ruining, the Earth.
• There is an urgent need to reduce population, including through abortions.
• A lowering of the standard of living is required for inhabitants of first world countries.
• A world government is needed to fix the problems of the globe.