A scene from some futuristic political thriller: the secretary of state gives the embassy staff secret instructions on collecting the DNA of foreign heads of state, while the president speaks at a dinner party with an admission ticket of $ 1,000 per person.
Surrounded by a group of special agents, wiping clean his glasses and picking up his inopportunely fallen hair follicles. They don't just protect the president - they protect his DNA.
If this sounds like a script for a Hollywood production of a Philip K. Dick novel, take note of the following: the Secretary of State is named Hillary Clinton, and her directives to embassies were revealed in a 2010 WikiLeaks telegram.
The president in this scenario is Barack Obama, and the special forces that should protect his DNA are a group of Navy waiters. Ronald Kessler's 2009 book, In the Presidential Security Service, sheds light on these facts.
Our government's obsession with DNA made the headlines again this week when the Supreme Court issued a George Orwell-worthy ruling that law enforcement collecting DNA from detainees was not considered an invasion of privacy.
The decision equated DNA with fingerprints, cleverly bypassing the fact that these droplets of blood contain complete information about a person's genetic makeup, which police can collect with impunity without fear of a civil rights lawsuit.
In addition to the surface obvious reasons for concern that this decision violates the Fourth Amendment and the later rule on the inadmissibility of illicit evidence, there are other reasons that go even deeper and are relevant to why our government is doing this. passionate about collecting data about our DNA.
The stated goal of facilitating crime detection loses its credibility when you realize that the state also collects DNA from newborns. In 2007, President Bush signed into law the Life Saving Newborn Screening Act, which formalized the process that the federal government has been doing for several years now - DNA screening for US newborn babies.
Promotional video:
Since we are not yet threatened with the prospect of the little ones committing bank robberies and rapes, we should investigate this issue in more detail to find out what is so special about our DNA.
Back in 1997, at a meeting of the United Kingdom Medical Society's Department of Science and Ethics, Dr. Wayne Nathanson warned that "gene therapy" can be aimed at achieving hidden goals and ultimately provide a "genetic weapon" that can be used against specific people who are carriers of a certain genetic structures.
These weapons, Nathanson warned, “can be delivered not only in such well-known forms as gas and aerosol, but also by adding water to sources, leading not only to deaths in target groups, but also to infertility, as well as congenital developmental defects.
In the decades before Dr. Nathanson's widely publicized warning, the American government had already worked hard in scientific efforts to find genes and ethnicity-targeted weapons.
It is known that in the 1970 Military Review article "Ethnic Weapons" the author, Dr. Karl Larson, wrote with pathos about the technological level that facilitates the selection of ethnic groups as targets for a secret weapon strike. Here is what he wrote: “In many laboratories, a systematic search for new disabling agents is being conducted, shrouded in secrecy. The main idea, as discussed in the open literature, was initially to cause the least amount of destruction."
However, his tone soon changes, and he writes something that creeps out: "It is entirely possible to use disabling agents across the entire range of offensive operations, from covert activity to mass destruction."
Larson ends with the following blatant statement: “The enzymatic process of RNA synthesis has been known for several years, but now factors have been discovered that regulate the onset and specificity of enzyme production. Not only factors were discovered, but also their inhibitors. Therefore, the functions of life are open to attack”(emphasis mine).
Research by Dr. Wouter Basson for Project Coast, a chemical and biological weapons program in apartheid South Africa, has been reported to have focused on developing black-only bioweapons. It was reported that Basson, associated with intelligence centers and laboratories in both the UK and the United States, was successful in his efforts, which took place back in the 70s. According to a source close to Basson, his research included the search for substances that would bind to melanin. Melanin is present in high gradations in darker skin.
Since Basson's work on the melanin project, there has been a surge in hypertension and diabetes among people with colored skin - especially those of African descent, as well as among indigenous, swarthy peoples. Reportedly, coverage of these diseases in some communities is now reaching 50 percent.
The information that these melanin-related disease agents have leaked into processed foods matches the skyrocketing rates of silent killers, hypertension and diabetes in developed countries, where people eat more processed foods. For example, in rural Africa, where the population consumes food from natural sources, rates of diabetes and hypertension have remained at the same level all these years.
The mapping of the human genome meets all the needs of the creation of a gene-specific weapon. Geneticists said that the development of ethnic weapons is actually a much more difficult task than the creation of genetic weapons, sharpened for the defeat of a particular person.
Differences between groups appear to be much smaller than differences between individuals, and therefore the creation of genetic weapons that can strike, for example, the president, is much less difficult than the creation of such weapons designed to act against an entire race.
DNA weapon delivery systems would be simple - whatever.
Since the weaponized genetic material will only hit its target, these weapons can be leaked into food supply systems, water supplies, or sprayed through air delivery platforms - the same inexplicable chemtrails that now envelop our skies. And if an unobtrusive target suddenly dies, who even knows that her death was caused by a weapon based on genetic principles? And if a conspicuous target dies, like perhaps Hugo Chavez or Jack Leighton in Canada, who can establish a link between his terminal illness and the weapon that beats his DNA?
The US government's insistence that it is only trying to protect its citizens from a terrorist threat is the perfect cover for the doctrine of "plausible denial." Under the guise of “protection”, we are systematically deprived of our rights, while wars are unleashed abroad against the Semitic peoples of the Middle East.
Genetic weapons are another tool for the doctrine of plausible denial about the presence of a eugenic arsenal. In fact, it may be one of his most conspicuous tools.