The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy - Part 5 - Connection to the United Nations

(This is a video presentation of the following analysis.)

(download .mp3 here)

An important point that needs to be made when discussing Connecticut climate change policy is that it was not some grass roots movement that began pushing for climate change legislation in Connecticut but instead the push comes from the international level at the United Nations.  This fact can be easily documented by reading through the various Connecticut climate change papers and viewing the numerous citations to the United Nations and related organizations.

One early example of th e United Nations direction into Connecticut climate change policy can be seen in the agreement made in 2001 between the Governors of New England and the Premiers of Eastern Canada known as the "2001 Regional Climate Change Action Plan".  In the action plan it is stated that "The ultimate goal [of greenhouse gas emission] mirrors that of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC], to which both the United States and Canada are signatories."  The UNFCCC would then go on to be cited multiple times in the Connecticut climate change papers .

Signatories of the 1992 UNFCCC have agreed to adopt policies that help fight "climate change", encourage the "stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere", and "promote sustainable development." (To get a better understanding of the UNFCCC read A Brief Analysis of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).) 

It should also be noted that at the 1992 United Nations conference in Rio where the UNFCCC was presented , another important UN document, Agenda 21, was also presented and accepted by President George Bush on behalf of the United States.  Even though, to my knowledge, Agenda 21 is not directly referenced in Connecticut Climate change documents, it is important to note because being a much larger and more detailed plan than the UNFCCC, it lays out a more specific agenda on how "sustainab le development" is to be carried out.  It is highly recommended to any interested reader on this subject to read A Critical Analysis of Agenda 21 - United Nations Program of Action.

 The 2001 New England Governors agreement would go on to form the foundation of Connecticut climate change policy, and as just explained, its goal mirrored that of the United Nations.

The following year, 2002, the Connecticut Governor's Steering Committee met to further discuss the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions as agreed to in the 2001 New England Governors meeting.  Important to note about this 2002 meeting is that it was held at the The Pocantico Center, in Tarrytown, New York.  This land at Pocantico was originally purchased by John D. Rockefeller, and is now managed by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.  The Rockefellers have multiple connections to the United Nations, including donating the money for the land on which the U.N. stands today.  (For a more comprehensive analysis of the United Nations - Rockefeller connection check out the 4th part in this series titled The Rockefeller Connection, as well as the presentation titled The Rockefeller - United Nations Connection.)

In the paper which derived from that 2002 meeting, and several times after that, the organization ICLEI, or the International Council for Local Enviornmental Initiatives, is cited as a group working in Connecticut to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Indeed, several cities across the state have become members of ICLEI at one time or another.  ICLEI, today known as Local Governments for Sustainability, is a major non-governmental organization (NGO) that has been highly influential in spreading the concept of "sustainable development", and other United Nations programs, across the world.  ICLEI was founded at the United Nations and is cited in the United Nations program of action, Agenda 21, as one of three non-governmental organizations active in the field of propagating sustainable development policy.

Finally, we get to the "scientific" body known as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).  State officials rely heavily on information put out by the IPCC to justify their "climate change" programs, citing their reports throughout the Connecticut Climate Change papers.  And of course, the IPCC was established by the United Nations.

Further connections could be presented, but the point is made.  Connecticut Climate Change policy is being influenced and ultimately directed by international organizations, specifically the United Nations.

Related Reports:

• The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy - Part 4: The Rockefeller Connection - January 25, 2016 (link)
• The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy - Part 3: The War on Cars - November 9, 2015 (link)
• The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy - Part 2: Inaccurate Data - September 28, 2015 (link)
• The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy - Part 1: Is Man-Made Global Warming Real? - September 21, 2015 (link)

CT Governor Dan Malloy's New Message For 2016

To open the legislative session for 2016 the governor of Connecticut Dan Malloy has a new message: get used to a lowering of your standard of living because the pre-recession prosperity of your parents days, where wages and home prices went up, is not coming back.

"Really what the overall message today is that Connecticut's and the nations economy was changed by the Great Recession.  We all thought that, you know, that we'd get back to what was an old normal.  Well quite frankly, we're in the new normal.  And I think government has to catch up to where the people are and understand that the people have already made that adjustment.  They're not counting on an economy that their parents and their grandparents counted on where wages and home values went up steadily every single year." - Governor Malloy, opening day round-table discussion

"We live in changing times, you don't have to take my word for it, you hear it from your constituents everyday.  A visceral feeling that our country and our state are not going back to how things were before the great recession.  Families are budgeting differently. Their expectations are changing. They know that they can't rely on the same economy their parents and grandparents did, where wages and home values steadily increased." - Governor Malloy's Opening Day Address to the General Assembly 

What the governor does not tell you is that many policy makers view the economic downturn and the lowering of our standard of living as a good thing because it means we use less energy, thus saving the planet from greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).

As an example, in 2014 the state announced that it had met its goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels and credited "the economic downturn" as one of the major factors involved with helping to reach that goal.  Director of Policy for the Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection, Jessie Stratton, was working for, and speaking on behalf of the Environment Northeast Organization back in 2010 when she also credited the economic downturn for "reduced electricity consumption."

To better understand this concept of a reduction in energy consumption being a good thing we have to go back to at least 2001 when the state had announced its goal of reducing green house gas emission in the state by up to 85%.  This means a reduction in energy use, which means a reduction in the use of products that require energy to be made, which means a reduction in pretty much everything.  As an example of the vast level of green house gas reduction looking to be imposed by the state, a 2008 state document said that "Connecticut will need to decrease GHG emissions by more than one million metric tons per year for over 40 years"  which they say is "equivalent to the emissions from electricity used by over 137,000 homes each year or the emissions from over 190,000 passenger vehicles each year."

This idea that single family homes and private motor vehicles are bad for the environment is being used by the state and federal government to implement a program of "Smart Growth".  Smart Growth occurs when government attempts to reduce private motor vehicle and single family home ownership by using taxes, laws, and regulations to focus high-density development around a transit line.  An example of this is occurring in the capital city of Hartford where over a thousand apartment units have been or are being constructed in the downtown area along the newly built CTFastrak bus line.  These construction projects have received millions of tax-payer dollars in loans, grants, and other forms of financial assistance.

Policy makers like to tout the benefits of living in an apartment, next to a bus line, and not needing to own a car or maintain property, but they leave out the many benefits of home and car ownership.  For example, your options as to where you would like to live, work, grocery shop, or seek entertainment are vastly increased when you have a personal motor vehicle.  Without a personal motor vehicle your options on where to live, work, shop, and play are limited to what is on your bus or train route.  There are a number of benefits of personal home ownership as well, not the least of which being privacy, and not having to be around people that you do not want to be around.  When our buying options are limited in such a way by these state-sponsored energy-reduction Smart Growth policies designed to restrict private motor vehicle ownership and single-family home ownership this directly results in a lowering of our standard of living.

This policy of Smart Growth was not created at the state level though, it is a top down policy that extends up through the federal government all the way up to the international government level with the United Nations.  Evidence of this can be found in the various Connecticut climate change papers where various organizations affiliated with the United Nations, like the IPCC, are cited, but most specifically in the 2001 Regional Climate Change Action Plan where the topic of greenhouse gas emission is discussed, it is stated: "The ultimate goal mirrors that of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to which both the United States and Canada are signatories."  This is relevant because the United Nations is more explicit in their desire to lower the standard of living of industrialized nations like the United States, all in the name of fighting "climate change".  In the United Nations Agenda 21 Program of Action, an action plan presented at the same 1992 Earth summit in Rio that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was presented, it states that "the major cause of the continued deterioration of the global environment is the unsustainable pattern of consumption and production, particularly in industrialized countries."  This sentiment is even more explicitly expressed , and quite coincidentally in almost the same terms that Governor Dan Malloy is using, in the children's edition of Agenda 21.  Rachel Kyte, the Vice President of the World Bank Group at the time of the publishing of the childrens edition of Agenda 21 is quoted as saying that children should not expect as much as their parents.  The actual quote is this:

"You can't bring up a new generation of people telling them they can have everything we have and more."

An interested person researching climate change and the United Nations will continue to come across this concept of a lowering in the standard of living of industrialized nations being a necessity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  At TheGoodmanChronicle.com we attempt to document how this agenda is directly affecting residents of Connecticut.

To conclude, we need to look at this recent revelation by Governor Malloy in its proper context.  The state government, along with the federal government, have been adopting policies in order to get the people to use less energy and reduce consumption.  This is why the economic changes brought with the recession are being embraced.  When we have less money, we consume less.  As we progress further in this agenda to reduce greenhouse gas emission we can expect further economic, as well as social and cultural changes, all in an apparent effort to fight "climate change".  Only an informed and vigilant citizenry can get in the way of these changes from taking place.

The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy - Part 4: The Rockefeller Connection

(This is a video presentation of the following analysis.  Click here for an .mp3 audio version)

In this part of the series of 'The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy' we are going to take a look at many of the groups behind CT climate change policy, and their curious connection to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which will be referred to as RBF from this point on.  We are going to start by following the timeline of the implementation of Connecticut climate change policy.

The first action taken by the state in regards to "global warming" was in 1990 with the passing of Public Act 90-219 "An Act Concerning Global Warming", but we will start this analysis in the year 2000 as that is when the state's focus on climate change and global warming began in earnest and significant action began to be taken.

In the year 2000 an alliance of New England Governors met with Premiers from Eastern Canada to adopt "Resolution 25-9 concerning global warming and its environmental impacts."  These New England Governors were brought together through a forum named CONEG, or the Coalition of North Eastern Governors. According to their website, "CONEG works with the governors and their staff and policy advisors to examine current and emerging regional issues, develop effective solutions, and undertake cooperative actions that benefit the individual state and the region."  CONEG polices are identified, formulated, and carried out by their staff at the CONEG Policy Research Center Inc.  Various official documents from the RBF show that they were funding CONEG Policy Research Center Inc. from its inception in the mid-1970's through the 1980's.  Therefore the RBF has had an influential connection to Connecticut climate change policy from its inception.

In 2001, this coalition of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers came together once again to create a Climate Change Action Plan for the region.  This plan called for each state to create their own climate change plans, programs, and policies.  As a result, the governor of Connecticut at the time, John Rowland, in 2002, created a Steering Committee "to coordinate Connecticut’s actions on climate change."

The same year that Governor Rowland created the Steering Committee, the Commitee met at the The Pocantico Center, in Tarrytown, New York.  This land at Pocantico was originally purchased by John D. Rockefeller, and is now managed by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

At this meeting it was stated that one of the first steps that Connecticut needs to do to address climate change is to have an inventory of "greenhouse gas" in the state.  It was announced that Connecticut had approached the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) to develop this greenhouse gas inventory for the state, and in 2003 NESCAUM released their report titled "Connecticut Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990-2000".

NESCAUM is an organization cited throughout the state documents in relation to climate change.  The Rockefeller Brothers Fund has given multiple grants to NESCAUM, funding various studies put out by the organization.

In the 2003 report on Connecticut Greenhouse Gas Inventory, written by agents of NESCAUM, the origins of the concern over "greenhouse gases" is detailed, and they cite the starting point when "[i]n 1992, the United States joined more than 160 other countries in signing and ratifying the [United Nations] Framework Convention on Climate Change. [UNFCCC]"

As detailed in the report Agenda 21: The Rockefellers Are Building Human Settlement Zones In Connecticut, the UNFCCC was a specific aspiration of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, as they admittedly "organized and funded some of the earliest meetings of advocates addressing climate change."  One of those early advocate organizations that has played, and continues to play, a leading role in the climate change debate is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).  The IPCC operates under the auspices of the United Nations, and has been a highly influential organization propagating the belief that man-made global warming is a real and serious threat.  The IPCC is known as an "internationally accepted authority on climate change."  IPCC reports are cited  throughout the many Connecticut official documents relating to climate change policy.  The IPCC was co-funded into existence by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

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.

United Nations Agenda 21 In Connecticut; New Britain-Hartford Busway, CTfastrak

The availability of having your own personal form of transportation, like a car, is a great asset to add to a persons life.  I don't believe people would sacrifice their car for the seemingly cheaper form of getting around, public transportation, or else they would have done it already.  Many people, that I know, that do take the bus, do so because they can't afford, or are saving up for, a car.  Despite the significant benefit one receives from owning a vehicle, Connecticut Governor Dan Malloy, and a number of other Connecticut elected 'officials', are determined to get you taking the bus, even if it means making it harder for you to own your own personal vehicle.

Why would public officials have a policy of forcing people off the road and into public transportation?  The short answer is United Nations Agenda 21.  For a few decades now, many nations, including the United States, have been adopting and implementing various policies that have been directly, and indirectly, handed down from the unelected bureaucrats at the United Nations.  Agenda 21 is the plan for the world, by the United Nations, for the 21st century.  United Nations Agenda 21 is so vast, and covers nearly every thing, and every place on this planet, it deserves its own level of deep research.  There have been many documentaries, some books, and other resources on Agenda 21, you should definitely check out.  In this article I will just focus on Connecticut and the New Britain-Hartford Busway, also known as CTfastrak, in relation to United Nations Agenda 21, but it is important for the reader to understand that this busway is just a small part of a fairly secretive, broader, global plan.

(CTfastrak Rapid Transit Virtual Tour)

CTfastrak is a bus rapid transit line currently under construction between Union Station in Hartford and downtown New Britain, in central Connecticut.  The CTfastrak is promoted on it's official website as "the beginning of a new era of transportation in Connecticut, combining the fast, traffic-free advantages of a train with the frequent, direct and flexible benefit of a bus. With express and feeder routes that will use a new dedicated roadway to avoid traffic congestion on local streets and on I-84, CTfastrak will benefit a large geographic area and provide a one-seat, no transfer ride to regional employment, shopping, cultural, educational and healthcare destinations."  The estimated cost of this project is now $569 million.  A Yankee Institute poll found that 60 percent of 500 likely voters believe the busway is “bad” use of taxpayer money.

The remainder of this article will be dedicated to showing the true nature of CTfastrak.  At best, the New Britain to Hartford busway is a colossal waste of tax payer money, at worst, it is part of a wider, much more broad United Nations program designed to remove the sovereignty of local governments, and lower the standard of living of Americans.

Billionare Ted Turner Says He Thinks Its 'Good' That Troops Are Committing Suicide

When billionare Ted Turner was asked, on CNN by Piers Morgan, his thoughts on the vast number of suicides in the military, he said he thought it was 'good', and tried to justify his response. This may seem like a crazy response to a normal person, but if you have been following Ted Turner, this comes as no surprise.  (Sidenote: Also notice how at 0:48 in the video, Piers Morgan openly admits there is a "New World Order" at work.)

Ted Turner has been complaining that the world is "over populated" for some time now.  Ted Turner is the 2nd largest landowner in the United States, yet he believes there is not enough room for everyone!  Turner believes that billions of people need to be taken off of this planet, or else man-made global warming will kill us all.  He has called for a dramatic decrease in population, and a one-child policy for the world to adopt.  Keep in mind that this man has five children! Here is a short clip of an interview Ted Turner gave to Charlie Rose, where be briefly touches on his views of "depopulation".

The alternative media organization We Are Change confronted Ted Turner and asked him about his hypocricy of wanting a one-child policy for the world, but also having five children.  Turner didn't like that question.  Check out the video here:

Also, what should be mentioned about the recent interview given to Piers Morgan, Ted Turner calls for the United Nations to be the police of the world.  Ted Turner is a big United Nations supporter, and he even gave a $1 billion gift to the UN.  He is one of the many evil, rich, powerful men that are bringing us into a one world dictatorial government.