It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Give DNA or no job; A.F.P.

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 07:17 PM
Well, in the Sunday Herald Sun, 8-1-06, in the little "news in brief" column, we find that the Australian Federal Police have introduced a "policy" that officers, (the article starts with "recruits", how many "recruits" get sent overseas on dangerous missions?) "may" be refused a job overseas, without first "volunteering" their DNA.

Now it's written in a very ambiguous way.

They want to collect DNA from serving officers AND "recruits", who "may" be required to work overseas. Doesn't this mean those who want to advance their career, would 'offer' their DNA, straight up, so as not to miss out on a job they wouldn't know about without already being on the 'concideration' list?

According to the news brief, AFP commander Alan Scott, said, "If it happens that the employee is going on an overseas mission that we concider to be particularly dangerous, we may have to concider whether or not we send the person on that mission,"

So does this mean some, who don't want their DNA collected, 'could' still get these jobs? Who would/could 'they' be? NWO head honchoes?

If the 'dangers of the job' 'require' DNA records stored, shouldn't it be from all members? Even a retired AFP officer could find himself 'blown up' by an old enemy or vengance seeker, while he's shopping in his local mall.

They claim, the "aim" is to eliminate them from crime scenes they may have contaminated and "help" identify any killed in disasters or terror attacks. do they currently 'eliminate' officers from crime scenes and identify remains?

I think one "aim", like all the many bio and permanant personal ID systems around the world, is to get folk trusting the 'benifits' over worrying about abuses. I also believe there are other reasons that have nothing to do with identifying individuals, but that's a whole other topic.

I also have an ugly feeling that some poor AFP officer is going to be blown to bits, in the not too distant future and we will hear no end of 'gratitude' from the family for being able to get closer and bury their loved hero.

It's an ugly feeling because all our overseas serving officers (not just AFP) have a great record for not getting killed or accused of crimes, particularly concidering how many deadly hot spots they get sent to.

There were just too many 'if's', may's' and 'concider's' in this story not to wonder about the facts, details and ultimate reasons and end.

[edit on 8-1-2006 by suzy ryan]

[edit on 8-1-2006 by suzy ryan]

posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 07:53 PM
It's just a cautionary step. Despite them having a great record, there is still the possibility that something could go wrong or someone could get accused. This way they can identify and investigate death's and possible implications of criminal activity. It affects only the AFP, not all of australia. I don't see how that would imply an nwo plot. There's no harm in taking cautionary steps. There's no evil behind it.

posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 08:07 PM
Where does it stop? thats the question.

The collected our DNA in the US army for "I.D." purposes incase we got mutilated beyond recognition. Sounds reasonable.

But cops arent government property last time I checked. This is opening up the gates of hell if you ask me.

posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 08:26 PM
This is for over seas jobs tho, which would make it reasonable. I think your reading into it way too much.

posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 09:31 PM
Ta Produkt, but the points you made were in the article and did not allay the 'worrying' aspects of it.

I was concerned with the ambiguousness of the "policy", particularly, "may" and "whether or not", when referring to this step being a requirment for overseas service.

Successfull overseas service can dramatically advance a career and 'never qualifying' for overseas service can dramatically hamper one. So is it really something they can say officers and "recruits" "volunteer" to do, particularly when it comes to recruits, who are new to the many internal workings of the AFP?

To me, if it isn't an "all or none" situation then there is "built in" room for corruption and injustice, when it comes to career advancement of individuals.

The AFP however, is far from clear of serious corruption claims. Being such an important and powerfull organization, it seems like they are setting themselves up for future complaints that can only harm their respect and effectiveness.

As to, "only affecting the AFP" and not the whole of Australia, I've heared this argument far too many times, from all the other times permanent ID requirements and policies have been implemented around the world, to accept it as comforting.

Australian pet owners have been fighting mandatory micro chipping for over a decade, for many sound and valid reasons, yet for all dog owners, that is now also a new "law" in Victoria.

Besides all that 'pedestrian' stuff, I do believe there is 'evil' behind it.

posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 09:44 PM
Older officer's would already be known and established and trusted. New recruits wanting to advance their career's on oversea jobs should offer up dna. Things do go wrong. Atleast this way the new recruits can be identified if found dead or have their butts saved if implicated in a crime. Another thing to look at, does that article say they are going to do this, or from what you posted, just wanting to do this? Wanting and doing are two different thing's.

As for pet's, I can understand a mandatory tagging. Sometime's I wish something like this was done in the USA. There are alot of strays and alot of lost pets or abandoned pets. With tagging, you know which are the stray's, which are the abandoned and which are the lost and can then take the needed action's concerning each case. I fail to see the harm in that.

If you feel there is evil behind any of it, could you please point out your source's that would lead you to conclude there is evil behind it?

posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 11:33 PM
Yep, "The AFP has introduced a policy to collect DNA samples from recruits and serving officers who may be required to serve overseas."

Sorry, but I can't support your arguments as I've seem too many "policies", with built in flexability, that "cause" corruption and injustice to grow, by people being forced to "work the system" in an effort to advance their careers.

Please refresh my memoury, aren't you of the belief that there is no NWO or think it wouldn't be a "bad thing"? If so, can't you at least acknowledge that those of families that remember freedoms being taken by "justifiable" increments untill the Stazi is the norm, should at least be heared?

I'm not 'making a claim', but drawing attention to something my history has taught me to 'suspect'.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 05:05 AM
Right... But what about this is leading you to conclude it's part of the NWO. Let's think for a second. What possible reason would the NWO have to collect dna from just new recruits of the AFP and not the whole world? Why force just a select few and not everyone?

If there was an NWO, why have the entire earth so divided and at war. No orginization would ever hope to control or implement a one world government when the whole world can't even get along. It's just common sense. Can you control even two or more kids who can't get along? Now imagine that on a world scale. It's impossible.

Let's not forget, all these claims of NWO are bit's and peices of technology that people are having a fear of. These bits and peices of technology are widley seperated also. Why just new recruits of the AFP and not the whole world? Why tag the liscence plate's of just the UK and not the whole world? Why put up camera's in major cities of the uk and not the whole world? My city doesn't have camera's or any of this other stuff, does that mean my city isn't in on the NWO plot?

All I'm asking for, if people are going to claim NWO, PROVE it. Show your evidence that is leading you to conclude that such an event is occurring. Yes, some technology can seem scary, but HOW is that implying an NWO plot when it's meant for a select few when NWO implies WORLDWIDE?

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 10:32 AM
Proof? Galileo had proof and look where it got him. What's more, it wasn't an original idea by a long shot! Proof or not, acceptance or not, it's how it was, and even those privy to the data, chose not to see it. Same thing now with the NWO.

Produkt, you to, and the the too many who say/believe what you do, are 'proof' as well. Your list of 'suspect' activities was very short but it still illustrates a key tool; make the world see and trust every new thing as benificial and independant.

Iris scan here, finger prints there, a bit of micro chipping (well alot, whether animal, mineral or vegtable, fixed or moving, dead or alive) and collect, collect, collect DNA and blood samples (which Australia and other countries have been doing for decades from every baby born) then tweek away and work out all the bugs, bypasses, resistances etc.

Why so many can't see the NWO comming in (as opposed to those who know but 'must' DENY), is because it has been with us for a long time and we have gotten used to all it's 'little ways' as 'normal'.

What most believers in the NWO are waiting for is the culmination of all the hard (sly) work, and the forced (by withholding all basic 'living' rights) acceptance of one "religion of peace", one financial system, one legal system etc.

Long before the World Council of Churches was established, people warned of it and everyone said, "It will never happen, can't happen, they hate each other, blah, blah, blah, and if it did we would know it's what the Bible warned about and we wouldn't stand for it." then it came about and everyone said "Great!"
But it hasn't been great by a long shot, there is far more religious disharmony and fanatisism now than before it's creation and 'work', because that is actually what they've been 'working for'.

Oh what a delightfully 'short memoury' mankind has. Short and selective, but who has time to remember anything of recent, let alone ancient history, they are all too busy, "saving the world" or chasing their next 'high' (of which power, respect, fame, fortune and lust, are the strongest and hardest to kick) so slipping major events, past a world full of 'junkies', is too easy.

Of course we have to have International Laws, with all the corporate and private business trading across borders and spawning that 'evil' little "stop think" term, Worlds Best Practice. World this, world that it's all soooo normal, sensible and 'good'.

Well I could go on and further drift from the topic in answering you, Produkt, but there are near countless threads on ATS alone, that cover these issues in depth.

The intention of my post wasn't to 'prove' a NWO to "dyed in the wool DENYERS", but point out another 'fallen skittle' to those following the build up to the culmination of it.

One of my many 'jobs' was trainning animals and I was damn good at it because I learned, when I was a skinny little kid retraining mad horses, that the safest, simplest and most effective method was making them think they were "choosing" their actions and reactions.

We will "choose" permanant 'bodily' ID (for health and safety reasons) and accept useing it in lew of 'money' (for financial security) and embrace "one religion of peace" (to save mankind and the world from destruction) and "worship" the one who 'saves us' from this current 'crazy', 'disorganized' system (my left foot, it is organized chaos for this reason) by 'pulling it all together'.

Why is DNA collection such a worry? For many biological (weapons anyone?) and other reasons, but not least of which is tracking and tracing BLOODLINES. Tell yourself a democratic society is 'classless', all you like, it ain't.

The "right" Royal blood, is very important to gaining the acceptance of many key people. You can kill the first million or so in line if they won't 'play the game', but as so many like to point out, as an argument against 'family ties' having unearned power, most people can claim 'royal' blood if they go far and wide enough.

When the first news of, "a girl from Tasmania" being engaged to the Crown Prince of Denmark, hit the world as a 'fairytale', I reminded people that I'd told them to watch for such an event and to not believe the fairytale garbage. Sure enough it turned out her daddy's ancestors had driven the Vikings, his daddy's ancestors, out of Scotland and now, the future King of Denmark, is 1/2 Aussie.

Curiously too, it seems the Rightfull King of England, lives in rural New South Wales, has a grandson called Jet (that tickles me, Prince Jet) and they are the sort of family anyone would be proud to call, their Sovereign.

Oh yes, DNA and blood samples are very important to the NWO.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 10:45 AM
Gee, well... why don't they just take the sample's the second your born rather then year's later IF you decided to donate blood or join the AFP or any orginization that required blood? Idk, seeing as I'm not in the "know" with the NWO maybe the thought of it being easier to get your DNA from the hospital when your born is just way too complicated then it sounds

Really. Think about it. How many government do you think would be willing to join forces and start an NWO? I don't see a single one doing that! Everyone hate's everyone else including those that claim to be allies
Religion's will never get along no matter how hard they try, that's just an obvious given

The claim's of technology being implicated as possible NWO plot's in this forum aren't even on a world wide scale, so how is that tying into an NWO plot if NWO = world wide?

I ... IDK, maybe my judgment has been clouded by false choices and false freedoms! Maybe I don't have the freedom or choice to grow my own food, or use certain technologies, or shop at certain places or hell, go live in another country. It's just all in my head! My gawd you guy's are right! They tricked me into believing in freedom.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 03:26 PM
Like it or not, they will in the next 20 years have a database of DNA, vocal recognition and so on and so fourth because that is what a lot of people want to see.

Working in the legal field/training, you see it a lot in Courts how they are pushing for it along with the Police and the Government. People really need to get to gether and start to point out the problem with all of this...the ability to make someone a criminal easily, when this evidence is owned by the Police who are a heavily corupt organisation.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 04:01 PM
Really, and what's to make you think they don't already?

[edit on 9-1-2006 by Produkt]

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 04:23 PM
Thanks for that point Odium. When you look at the massive problem of corruption in Australia's Police Forces, you can't deny they are the last people who should have control of DNA samples. Those samples can put you literally in the 'body', not just the 'scene' and they're there anytime anyone becomes "a bother".

Umm, how come so many people are so anti-conspiracy all of a sudden? It seems everything is fine and dandy, and what obviously isn't, no one wants to talk about. There's plenty of threads going at the moment that form a very scary picture but folk keep 'rubbing out the dots' instead of 'connecting them'.

The anti-conspiracy folk used to say they'll never force you to give DNA, but now that they do, for so many 'reasons' around the world, it's not a problem anyway.

I'd just like to know what these people would have to see to make them go, "Yes, well that isn't right so there could be more to this". Everything they say won't, can't, shouldn't happen, becomes fine when they do.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 04:35 PM

Originally posted by Produkt
Really, and what's to make you think we don't already?

[edit on 9-1-2006 by Produkt]

Are you saying that bio ID's are all collected up already, without 'our' knowledge or consent, but that's fine with you?
Sorry but you've lost me.

Oh, and who's "we"? Is that your way of saying, "Shut up or "we" will get you!"? It's how alot of other people make threats they end up carrying out.

I'm glad I'm too sleepy to to get angry or worried but you shouldn't use the sort of language others recognize as thinly veiled threats, it's not nice.

[edit on 9-1-2006 by suzy ryan]

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 04:47 PM
I don't believe anyone's threatened anyone here. The minute your born would be the optimal chance to get a sample of your DNA. No one would ever know it was even done, making it very hard to prove it ever happened. Don't worry about the "we" part... I meant to say they.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 06:37 PM
Cool Produkt. I fully accept a slip of the fingers.

Biological identifying data has been collected all over the world for a miriad of 'reasons' and a few generations.

Admitting this doesn't make it so easy for them to say, "Right, now we're going to use it, like it or not".

They need to give us 'reasons' to volunteer it for permanent ID purposes.

Soon you will find them admitting what they already have on record just to 'prove' they won't abuse it, and even many of the reluctant will be comforted into complying. The trap will then be sprung.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 06:44 PM
Don't you realize though... If there was/is a trap, you've already fallen into it the day you were born. They would have no need to convince you of giving them dna sample's. You already do it as an adult when you go for drug test's or goto your anual physical's or goto the dentist's. Are you starting to understand yet? Why would the start obtaining dna sample's of just new recruits for the AFP when they can get it so easily already and without anyone's knowledge or consent?

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 07:20 PM
Ahh but you see with all these criminals, terrorists and deadly disease infected people running around all over the globe, they'll need you offer your bio ID for everyones safety, and if you don't, you must be one of those people with something to hide, and they'll lock you up till they find it.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 07:28 PM
Maybe, but no one is forcing anyone else to be tagged like that. Nor would society as a whole allow any government agency tag anyone. Nor does any government agency have the legal right to invade your personal body to do such a tagging procedure. Basicly, forced tagging won't happen.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 08:21 PM

Originally posted by Produkt

Basicly, forced tagging won't happen.

So we're left with coercion by "personal choice."

IMO - the "reasons" presented in the article were rationales. Pushing us, pushing us...

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in