Global Intel Hub 4/20/2019 Basel, Switzerland — Zero Hedge Exclusive — This may sound like a sci fi movie plot – but as you read on, you will see that this story will prove the adage that often truth is stranger than fiction. Before getting into the gory details, we need a bit of history so let’s go back to the year 1984. In this year two movements began which at the time were not likely connected, which will be the topic of this article.
What happened in 1984 Major News Stories include Indria Ghandi assassinated, DNA profiling developed, Virgin Atlantic Starts Operations, Grand Hotel Brighton Bombing, Union Carbide Pesticide plant in Bhopal India leaks lethal gas, McDonalds Restaurant Shooting Leaves 20 dead. The Aids Virus is identified it is not the worldwide problem it is today. Following on from the PC Apple releases the Macintosh computer. Following the Widespread Famine in Ethiopia many of the top British and Irish USSR pop musicians join together under the Name Band Aid and record the song “Do They Know It’s Christmas”. Following the boycott by the US of the Moscow Olympics the soviet block boycotts the Los Angeles Olympic games. Recession continues to be a problem in the US and 70 US Banks fail in just one year.
Note the historical use of the word ‘profiling’ – a term that wouldn’t be heard with DNA for another 30 years. The Human Genome Project was ostensibly about mapping your DNA which is, at least scientifically – all of who you are.
The Human Genome Project was a 15-year-long, publicly funded project initiated in 1990 with the objective of determining the DNA sequence of the entire euchromatic human genome within 15 years. In May 1985, Robert Sinsheimer organized a workshop to discuss sequencing the human genome, but for a number of reasons the NIH was uninterested in pursuing the proposal. The following March, the Santa Fe Workshop was organized by Charles DeLisi and David Smith of theDepartment of Energy’s Office of Health and Environmental Research (OHER). At the same time Renato Dulbecco proposed whole genome sequencing in an essay in Science. James Watson followed two months later with a workshop held at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. In 1990, the two major funding agencies, DOE and NIH, developed a memorandum of understanding in order to coordinate plans and set the clock for the initiation of the Project to 1990. At that time, David Galas was Director of the renamed “Office of Biological and Environmental Research” in the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science and James Watson headed the NIH Genome Program. In 1993, Aristides Patrinos succeeded Galas and Francis Collins succeeded James Watson, assuming the role of overall Project Head as Director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Center for Human Genome Research (which would later become the National Human Genome Research Institute). A working draft of the genome was announced in 2000 and the papers describing it were published in February 2001. A more complete draft was published in 2003, and genome “finishing” work continued for more than a decade.
Many have heard about the project but there are a few facts you probably don’t know that we’d like to elaborate on here. First, did you know the entire thing was sponsored by the US government with a final bill of about $5 Billion USD? You’re probably asking why the US Government wants a map of your DNA (well, some of you may be asking – others know why). The second thing you probably don’t know is that the project was headed by accused racist James Watson the profound scientist who actually discovered DNA in the first place.
James Watson is a great example of the irony of how the Elite twist science and opinion to mold public consent. Chomsky calls this “Manufacturing Consent” which really should be the motto on the door of various TV editorial offices. James Watson is a scientist that’s not politically correct. He has been revoked of all his credentials because he stated the facts, that there are 3 human races which are genetically different, each with their own peculiarities. Of course it was only offensive when he said Africans are less intelligent:
Dr Watson’s remarks “in full”. Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really”. He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”. …
At a conference in 2000, Watson suggested a link between skin color and sex drive, hypothesizing that dark-skinned people have stronger libidos. His lecture argued that extracts of melanin – which gives skin its color – had been found to boost subjects’ sex drive. “That’s why you have Latin lovers,” he said, according to people who attended the lecture. “You’ve never heard of an English lover. Only an English Patient.” He has also said that stereotypes associated with racial and ethnic groups have a genetic basis: Jews being intelligent, Chinese being intelligent but not creative because of selection for conformity, and Indians being servile.
In a politically correct world, you can’t call a man a man – a man is a ‘non-woman’ and all people are equal. This is the same twisted double speak that applies to the degradation of our education system, with the policy that ‘everyone deserves an A’ which is possible when you lower the testing standards. This is the same Elite group that has twisted “Paternity Science” into “Paternity Ethics” that means it is ethical to lie to children about who their parents really are. In this brave new world, it’s a crime to tell a child that your father is actually not your father. It’s better to let them live with the lie.
And now we come to the second phenomenon that has been metastasizing since 1984 – The Bradley Amendment:
In United States law, the Bradley Amendment 1986, Public law 99-509 42 U.S.C. § 666(a)(9)(c). Requirement of statutorily prescribed procedures to improve effectiveness of child support enforcement. Bill Bradley requires state courts to prohibit retroactive reduction of child support obligations. Specifically, it:
- automatically triggers a non-expiring lien whenever child support becomes past-due.
- overrides any state’s statute of limitations.
- disallows any judicial discretion, even from bankruptcy judges.
- requires that the payment amounts be maintained without regard for the physical capability of the person owing child support (the obligor) to promptly document changed circumstances or regard for his awareness of the need to make the notification.
But, like any other past-due debt, the obligee may forgive what is owed to them.
When past-due child support is owed to a state as a result of welfare paid out, the state is free to forgive some or all of it under what’s known as an “offer in compromise”. The state and government agencies are non-profit organizations. … Bobby Sherrill, a Lockheed employee in Kuwait from North Carolina, was captured by Iraqis and spent nearly five months as an Iraqi hostage. Sherrill was arrested the night after his release for not paying $1,425 in child support while he was a hostage.
For those in Finance, it will shock you to learn that under the Bradley Amendment, child support is the only thing that you can go to prison for – debt related. Although the ACLU is again on the hunt with twisted agendas about Debtors Prisons, by matter of fact and law, child support is the only debt that can cause a bench warrant to be issued for your arrest and you can be imprisoned (even if you finally pay!):
Consequences for Non-Payment of Child Support: Because child support is essentially a court order, a non-custodial parent who is not making these payments will be found in contempt of court. They are informed of the contempt charge in writing and ordered to appear in court. If the parent does not appear, a bench warrant for their arrest will be issued. Even if the parent does appear, they may still be sent to jail if they cannot provide adequate proof that they could not make the child support payments, rather than simply being unwilling to do so.
“Adequate Proof” of being held captive by Iraqi warlords during time of war wasn’t a burden of proof in the case of Bobby Sherrill. It’s also the only way a court can garnish your wages, seize your assets, take tax refunds, and even suspend your driver’s license! Let that sink in a little. Only the IRS has similar powers, but unlike Bradley claims, the IRS provides a set of rules and methods to avoid things like asset seizure and wages garnishment. For Bradley cases there ARE NONE. It’s important to understand this difference. As powerful as the IRS is – there is an entire industry built around dealing with the IRS and in fact it’s possible to negotiate big tax payments down to reasonable levels. There are a number of options. For child support cases there are NONE.
Now like with all draconian laws an argument will be made that it’s just a way to get deadbeat dads to pay what they owe. Who can argue with that? Well let’s use the argument about the IRS. The IRS gets people to pay. They will even send the jackals to Switzerland and corrupt an entire government just to shake down 100 seriously delinquent taxpayers. So the aggressiveness of the Bradley Amendment is not only unconstitutional it’s much worse – it’s modern slavery. Because it’s not about the cases where parents are guilty – it’s about cases where they are not; or where they are NOT EVEN THE FATHER. Imagine this scenario:
In the late 1990s, Andre Chreky already was a star hairstylist with his own salon. But he reached new heights after he was profiled in Washingtonian magazine and it became known that his clients included first lady Laura Bush. Soon after, Chreky said, a former receptionist began showing up at his shop on K Street NW, demanding money.
“You have a child,” the woman, Adele Doudaklian, 43, of Gaithersburg, told him — a teenage son he had never met. He ordered her out. Doudaklian did not return phone calls to her home. Chreky said he dated her several times in the early 1980s but stopped long before Doudaklian’s son, Andrew Lucas, was born in March 1986. When the paternity action was brought in early 2003, Chreky said, he thought the DNA test would end the whole episode. Instead, Chreky was ordered to pay $1,715 a month in child support, plus health insurance premiums, after LabCorp’s report said he was the father. By the time Lucas turned 18, Chreky had paid $25,000. (Even after he won the case, Virginia law did not allow him to get the money back.) Chreky pleaded his case to the Virginia Division of Child Support Enforcement and then in an appeal to Fairfax Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. But LabCorp’s “99.99 percent” finding was too tough to overcome. In fact, under Virginia law, 98 percent is automatic proof of paternity. This spring, his case landed in Fairfax County Circuit Court in a full-blown trial. Douglas S. Levy, one of Chreky’s attorneys, said Chreky offered to take another DNA test before his trial. But the state rejected the offer, he said. So Chreky’s attorneys hammered LabCorp’s experts, mostly about what the lawyers saw as two errors on the lab report. The director of LabCorp’s DNA identification testing division, Gary M. Stuhlmiller, said in a sworn report that he had arrived at his conclusions after comparing Chreky’s DNA with a database of the Moroccan population. Chreky is a native of Morocco. But at trial, Stuhlmiller acknowledged that LabCorp did not have a Moroccan database. Chreky is no scientist. He said he just knew that this was something he needed to fight. Most people don’t have the means to contest a “99.99 percent” finding. His wife, Serena, said the couple spent more than $200,000 to fight the case.
So after this poor guy spent $200,000 to fight this – only to win what they always knew was the truth – this woman was a lying financial criminal attempting to steal money from someone she knew who she felt had money. Is Chreky able to get legal fees or anything back? No. Is this woman prosecuted for fraud? No. Can he sue for damages? No.
IN ANY OTHER SITUATION – HE WOULD BE ABLE TO SUE FOR RELIEF.
The connection between these 2 events
Scroll forwards 30 plus years into the future (today) and we’re seeing people thrown in jail for sitting on a park bench or being picked up by an Ambulance. Fortunately, many of them have been released. But the US justice system in particular, is a Dinosaur in this field – perhaps intentionally. Yes, it appears this is all part of a greater plan. While rights activists have been partying and congratulating themselves, the Elite have been busy shaping and developing a more sinister and more subtle method of control: A global DNA grid backed by Draconian undefendable laws like the Bradley Amendment, enforced on a county and city level. Heck, it’s a great way to control men – because all it takes is a crazed accusation by a woman (and who doesn’t believe a victimized woman in today’s world) – to ruin someone’s life whether it be financially, a character witness, or something even more complex such as the case against Julian Assange.
“Hitmen” used to be mostly male, mostly olive skinned, mostly with a particular accent – but no more. Those days are gone. The Vinny you once knew is now poolside at the Tropicana living life (permanently retired). Now the “Hitman” has become the “Hitperson” which is politically correct speak for “Hitwoman.” Basically, the Elite have created an Artificial Intelligence net in order to control you. The basis of this net is a Matrix-like DNA network so intertwined in our society the Department of Justice (DOJ) has its own Commission on the topic, the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. The National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence was established by the Attorney General to maximize the value of forensic DNA evidence in the criminal justice system.
The FBI maintains a database of more than 13 Million DNA profiles, and publishes some of this information online:
The National DNA Index (NDIS) contains over 13,674,427 offender1 profiles, 3,435,350 arrestee profiles and 915,052 forensic profiles as of January 2019. Ultimately, the success of the CODIS program will be measured by the crimes it helps to solve. CODIS’s primary metric, the “Investigation Aided,” tracks the number of criminal investigations where CODIS has added value to the investigative process. As of January 2019, CODIS has produced over 451,781 hits assisting in more than 440,381 investigations…Read More at