A Critical Analysis of Agenda 21 - United Nations Program of Action

To some people, Agenda 21 is an evil plan for the further creation, and control, of a world government, by the non-elected bureaucrats at the United Nations. To other people, Agenda 21 is a just well-meaning, harmless, non-binding set of recommendations, created by a group of men, and women, at the United Nations, that care about the preservation of the world's environment.

Before debating the true intentions, or effects, of Agenda 21, we must first understand the details of this document.

In can be difficult, and confusing, for the average person who hears about Agenda 21, to really understand it, through a simple search.  The program is hundreds of pages, and not too many people will take the time to read all of it.  An internet search of UN Agenda 21 will lead to a lot of information, but much of it is without reference to the actual document, thus seemingly just an opinion.  I have took the time to read the document myself, and will chronicle my findings, and thoughts, here.

(It should be noted that I am not going into this examination completely ignorant of Agenda 21.  I have, in the past, written critically about events taking place in my local community, that are connected to United Nations Agenda 21.)

The full document 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, such as the Healthy Cities Programme of WHO, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and many more.  I have yet to read all of these other resolutions, conventions, and programs, but as I do, I will document, and update, my research, at TheGoodmanChronicle.com.  For now, I will just examine the text of this specific document, which can be viewed, in full, online here.

Let us start with the front cover of the hard copy version of Agenda 21 (picture below), which reads:

"EARTH SUMMIT - AGENDA 21 - THE UNITED NATIONS PROGRAMME OF ACTION FROM RIO".  

Agenda 21, Front Cover

By using the words "programme of action", the creators of this document are informing the reader that this is a plan, or program, that they intend to have performed, or put into action, and not just some ideas that they hope for people to consider.

Agenda 21 is broken up into forty chapters, divided into three sections, and nearly every part of this document revolves around the idea of creating, what they refer to as, "a new global partnership for sustainable development." (Chapter 1, Section 1).  Though the adjective "sustainable" is used numerous times, and in conjunction with various other pleasant sounding nouns, to create ideas like "sustainable livelihood" (Ch. 3, Sec. 4-a), and "sustainable city networks" (Ch. 7, Sec. 20-d), throughout Agenda 21, what is meant by "sustainable" is never really made clear, or specifically defined.

The opening preamble of Agenda 21 alludes to the idea that the term "sustainable development" means an "integration of environment and development concerns", which, according to the United Nations, will lead to "the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future." (Ch. 1, Sec. 1)  This sounds nice, but again, is not specific, and could mean anything.

As the reader progresses through the document, a more sinister, controlling, agenda seems to emerge, that is ingrained in this plan, but it is masked with nice sounding phrases, and friendly language.  The United Nations claims to want to create a sort-of utopia, where the environment is clean, nobody is hungry, everyone has a home, etc., but to do this, they need to have the power to create laws, or recommendations, that effect changes in your local community.

The Fight To Oppose Mandatory Vaccinations Has Been A Continuous Battle For Centuries

( A poster advertising a demonstration in Andover Town Hall in support of a Mrs. Blanchard on her release from imprisonment for refusing to allow her children to be vaccinated (date unknown). (Photo courtesy of MicroBiology Today).

I was under the false impression that controversy over vaccinations was a new phenomena, however as I was reading a biography on Thomas Jefferson, titled "A Strange Case of Mistaken Identity" by Alf Mapp Jr., I came across a passage concerning Thomas Jefferson receiving the smallpox inoculation, and the controversy surrounding this medical procedure, at the time:

"Fatalities were so numerous that doctors debated whether the disease or the supposed preventative was the greater menace...it was generally believed that inoculated persons spread smallpox to others...Inoculation was forbidden by law in New York and had excited mob action in Boston."

After doing a little research to get more information regarding this topic, I found that, in actuality, opposition to vaccination has existed as long as vaccination itself!

Even before vaccinations, it was common knowledge that survivors of smallpox became immune to the disease, so doctors were practicing a procedure called variolation, which is when a person was purposefully infected with smallpox (Variola), in a controlled manner, so as to minimize the severity of the infection, and also to induce immunity against further infection.  This procedure came under heavy criticism.

The origins of the practice of variolation, or inoculation, are hard to trace, however, we know that under the guidance of Rev. Cotton Mather, and Dr. Zabdiel Boylston, variolation became quite popular in the American colonies.  Mather went around advocating the need for immediate variolation, however, he persuaded only Dr. Boylston, and not many others.  Still, with Mather's support, Dr. Boylston immediately started a variolation program and inoculated many volunteers, despite much opposition in both the public and the medical community in Boston. As the disease spread, so did the controversy around Mather and Boylston.  At the height of the epidemic, some in opposition to the variolation procedure were urging the authorities to arrest Dr. Boylston for murder, and a grenade was even thrown into the house of Reverend Cotton Mather!

According to Thomas Jefferson biographer, Alf J. Mapp, Jr.:

"On the eve of the [American] Revolution, debate over the practice [of variolation] would further exacerbate differences between Norfolk's rebels and tories.  At the climax rebels would smash the windows of a tory mayor's residence and march the inoculated women and children of his family to the Pest House, last home of those suffering contagious terminal illnesses."

Edward Jenner

Then came a physician/scientist named Edward Jenner.  For many years, Jenner had heard the tales that dairymaids, which are women who work milking cows, making butter, and cheese, on a farm, were protected from smallpox naturally, after having suffered from cowpox.  Using this information, Jenner concluded that cowpox not only protected against smallpox, but also could be transmitted from one person to another as a deliberate mechanism of protection.  On May 14, 1796, using matter from the cowpox lesions of a dairymaid, he inoculated an 8-year-old boy, James Phipps. Afterward, the boy developed mild fever, and discomfort in the axillae, or armpit. Nine days after the procedure he felt cold and had lost his appetite, but on the next day he was much better. Jenner inoculated the boy again, this time with matter from a fresh smallpox lesion. No disease developed, and Jenner concluded that protection was complete.

The Latin word for cow is vacca, and cowpox is vaccinia; Jenner decided to call this new procedure vaccination.

Connecticut: Registered Nurses Speak Out Against New Bill That Would Force Vaccinate All Health Care Workers In The State

A bill introduced by the state's Public Health Committee would require all employees of the health-care field, to receive a flu shot.

Quoting from the actual bill, Senate Bill 1128, AN ACT CONCERNING INFLUENZA IMMUNIZATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE EMPLOYEES:

"Each hospital...nursing home facility...and emergency medical service organization...shall ensure that each employee of such hosptial, nursing home facility, or emergency medical organization, who may have direct contact with a patient or resident, is immunized against influenza."

Several registered nurses submitted compelling testimony in opposition to this bill, Senate Bill 1128. Here are some excerpts of those testimonies:

• John Brady, a Registered Nurse at Backus Hospital in Norwich, submitted testimony in opposition to this bill.  Brady, who is also President of the Backus Federation of Nurses, a union representing approximately 400 registered nurses, writes about the adverse effects of vaccinations, as well as the ineffectiveness of the shots.  "As an emergency room nurse, I care for many patients who have received the flu vaccine and then tested positive for the flu."
• Mary Consoli RN, President of Danbury Nurses’ Union, representing 600 plus nurses, also gave testimony in opposition to SB 1128, quoting OSHA, which believes "there is insufficient scientific evidence for the federal government to promote mandatory influenza vaccination programs that do not have an option for the health care employees to decline for medical, religious and/or personal philosophical reasons.”  Consoli also related a personal story to the possible health risks associated with vaccinations.  "We had one RN at Danbury Hospital have a severe allergic reaction.  If it were not for the fact she was working in the Emergency Department, the consequences could have been more life threatening."  
• Jeanette Schultz, Registered Nurse, testifying in opposition to this bill, says "within 4 days of obtaining the flu shot, I noticed increased sensitivity and tingling in my hands and feet. It lasted approximately four days and then resolved. Since then I haven’t received the flu shot."  Last year, Schultz decided to choose the other option provided to her by her employer, to wear a surgical mask, however after twelve hour shifts, Schultz had complications to her throat, as a result of the mask.  
• Registered Nurse Tracey Rullo, who has gone over twenty years without ever receiving a flu shot, or being sick from the flu, spoke on the vaccines ineffectiveness.  "Many, if not, all of our patients admitted with the flu did have the flu vaccine."
• A nurse employed at Danbury Hospital, Michele Lopez, discussed how she was forced to take the flu shot, because the other option her employer provided her, to wear a surgical mask, after four weeks, caused her to have an upper airway and esophageal reaction.  After receiving the shot, Lopez said she felt "violated as a human being", and several hours later, she noticed her arm swelling, itching, and breaking out in hives.  Lopez was then admitted into the emergency room as a patient. 
• Erin Cummings, who has been a Registered Nurse for 8 years, believes this bill is a violation of his civil rights, and described his adverse reaction, after being forced vaccinated by his employer.  "Shortly after being injected, I experienced the frightening sensation of not being able to take a deep breath, and severe heart palpitations resulting in dizziness and vertigo."

To read the entire list of testimonies concerning Senate Bill 1128, click here.

Dr. Steven Aronin

One person who gave testimony in support of this bill, to force immunize nearly all health care workers in the state, was Steven I. Aronin, Chief of Infectious Diseases at Waterbury Hospital.  Aronin explained that he knows "first-hand the potentially devastating and debilitating impact that influenza and other infectious diseases can have on patients".  Aronin claims there "is abundant peer reviewed and evidence-based research supporting" the idea that forced vaccination of healthcare workers is correlated with decreased transmission and acquisition of influenza, though he did not provide any actual research, or study.

Steven Aronin boasts that Waterbury Hospital was able to administer over 2000 flu shots this year and achieve 100% compliance among clinical and non-clinical staff, though Aronin falsely credits this 100% compliance rate with the hospital "educating our employees about influenza, as well as the risk and benefits of the influenza vaccine".  Aronin must have forgot to point out the fact that these immunizations were FORCED, and there were hospital employees who protested, but were threatened with their jobs.

Also left out of his testimony, Aronin never gives any evidence indicating that the 100% FORCED compliance immunization rate in Waterbury Hospital, worked.  I know people who work at this hospital, who were involved in this debate, and they say there were several employees still sick with the flu, after being forced immunized, which again proves the ineffectiveness of the vaccination.

Another bill introduced this year in the Connecticut legislature looks to do the complete opposite of this bill.  Senate Bill 55, introduced by Senator Joe Markley, would prohibit employers from requiring employees to receive mandatory flu shots.  Let us hope that Senate Bill 55, gets more support than Senate Bill 1128.

I don't work in the medical field, however I know that I have to stick up for the rights of the people who do, because this attempt to force vaccinate everyone will continue to expand, until it is destroyed. I believe in the idea of liberty, and that includes a free-market, where a private business can set requirements for their employees, including mandatory vaccinations, and if an employee doesn't like it, they can leave and work somewhere else.  HOWEVER, hospitals, as well as public schools, receive government funding, therefore they are public entities, and cannot violate our natural inalienable rights, as a condition to our receiving services from, or working for, these organizations.

Related Stories:

• Connecticut Business Owners Could Soon Face $500 Fine For Not Having Paper Towels In Restroom - March 11, 2013 (link)
• Know Your Reps! CT State Senator Joe Markley Wants Fluoride Out Of The Water, and A Ban On Mandatory Flu Shots - March 07, 2013 (link)
• President Obama's 23 Executive Actions; Federal Spy Doctors, Forced Medication & Involuntary Commitment - January 21, 2013 (link)
• TV Doctors Are Paid To Push Drugs and Vaccines - January 16, 2013 (link)
• Legislators Pushing Forced Medication In Wake of CT School Shooting - December 22, 2012 (link)
• Newtown, CT School Shooting: Medication, Tragedy, Truth, & Conspiracy - December 18, 2012 (link)

Federally-Funded Disney Cartoon "Doc McStuffins" Teaching Kids To "Do What The Doctor Says"

Doc McStuffins is an animated series, on the Disney Channel, about a six-year-old girl who communicates with, and heals, stuffed animals and toys in her backyard clinic.  The show was created under the consultancy of the Hollywood Health & Society, which is a federally-funded organization, through which "public health and medical experts offer expert consultation, education and resources for writers, and producers, who develop scripts with health storylines and information."

Television and Sports Are Used to Control The Masses.

Television can be an extremely effective tool to push a certain message, to a mass amount of people.  In the past, I have written about how Hollywood is used, to push the agenda of the military industrial complex, as well as the agenda of Big Pharma, in particular vaccinations.

This particular organization, Hollywood, Health, & Society, works with over 800 writers, and has helped shape over 300 television shows, in the past two years.  In the Hollywood Propaganda section of my previous article, TV Doctors Are Paid To Push Drugs and Vaccines, I have more information on Hollywood, Health, & Society.

I wouldn't want to get into a debate about whether vaccinations are good, or whether a cartoon that gets children comfortable with going to the doctor is helpful, when discussing this issue.  I just don't believe tax money should be used to influence writers, and producers, in Hollywood.  We have people in America who worry about not being able to eat, after their food stamps gets delayed by one day, but yet we are comfortable enough to pay this group to influence Hollywood ? (Not too mention the money spent on military bases all over the world, the drones, the tanks, foreign aid, etc.)

I just think it's creepy to know that the government is covertly funding a Disney cartoon that sings songs about "Do What The Doctor Says" (video above), and has their agent at the Hollywood, Health, & Society, Sandra de Castro Buffington, consulting with the show to get them teaching kids about getting shots.