CIA Survival Operation?

Also, I have been looking for combat, survival, training, emergency preparedness, sniper ebooks and I found these rather inexpensive ones for only $2.99 apiece. I downloaded the one on CIA PSYOPS and it was actually pretty comprehensive. Have the CIA really been involved in all of the secret operations this book says they have???

http://www.bardito.com/data/psyops.html

--Hannibal22

It's not a secret if somebody is writing about it. Disinformation and denial serve well to conceal true operations. Is Area 51 a testbed for state of the art aircraft and UFO's a smokescrean? Or, are the exotic aircraft the technical equal of a SPAD X111 compared to the anti gravity interdimesional saucers of rumour? I can't even get the radio to work in my old Volvo so I leave it to others. Thanks for the link. iineresting <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

<<<QUOTE: I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you >>>

How 'bout just a hint and only beat me up? <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

aardwolfe:

Of course you realize that one of your current or former fellow agents would have to kill you for telling him in the first place, and then that agent would have to be killed in case he talked to you before you died, and the agent that killed him would have to be--------------------ad infinitim.

I heard or read somewhere that Egytian kings killed builders of the pyrmiads, then killed the executioners, then killed the executioners of the executioners to the third level in attempts to maintain construction secrets of the tombs. Anyone know if this is true? Reminds me of an old Gene Hackman & Mickey Rooney film whose name escapes me, as well as "The Parallex View" film which starred Warren Beatty.

Being an assasin is not as profitable or romantic as the one portrayed on "Three Days of The Condor", with Robert Redford.

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

<<<QUOTE: Reminds me of an old Gene Hackman & Mickey Rooney film whose name escapes me, >>>

That would be The Dominoe Principle. Good flick

The Soviets also Did this in Russia and Eastern Europe. Such as the Katyn Massacre in Poland. As Did the Mao Red Chinese, and Cambodian Khmer Rouge! Earlier Chinese Emporers too!

I Mean Not to be Passing Comments on various Countries, -But Here it's Only a Fact, and Unavoidable as So.

I'm Not Surprised if Pyramid Builders Did so! But They are Not our World's Only Ones!

Assuming such Executioners even had a Clue that They Themselves would in Turn be Executed! (Which I Often Doubt!, -"Keep Em in the Dark!, -Why Tell Them?!"), -

-I Think it'd Come Down to a Hobson's Choice of, "Do you Want to Die / Be Executed, -Now or Later?!" (A Skitter Off Refusal to Carry Out your Orders *to* Execute Others, -of course Bringing that About!). A Real Catch 22! But the Only Thing One Could Best Adjudge to Do in such a Situation!, -is to Opt to Die Later!

Of course again, -In All Liklihood, -They Weren't even so Told! [color:"black"] [/color] [email]bountyhunter[/email]

This sounds suspiciously like the cannibalism myths found throughout history, where one race/tribe/group demonized their opponents by telling stories of horrible atrocities. Similar to the more modern "premature babies removed from incubators and left to die" story that was told about Iraqi troops in Kuwait (and which subsequently turned out to be a lie).

The problem with this type of scheme would be that sooner or later, one or more of the executioners are going to figure out what's going on. There was a movie starring Pierce Brosnan as a KGB agent who was assigned to set off an atomic bomb in the heart of England (presumably to look like a terrorist attack). On several occasions, he received orders - which he dutifully carried out - to kill the person he had been working with to prevent them from talking afterwards. But of course, being no dummy, he clued in at the end that, if they were killing off everyone who knew about the scheme - and he knew about the scheme - then there really wasn't likely to be a ten-minute delay on the bomb trigger to allow him to escape.

Somehow, I think letting a sociopathic, highly-trained killer know that you were planning to double-cross and murder him would backfire more often than not <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

(Of course, I *have* to say that <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> )

And some...I'm sure they didn't mention failures, embarrassments, or really nasty "wet work" op.s. <img src="/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" />

You gotta be thinking the "Bay of Pigs" fiasco!

Bountyhunter

ScottRezaLogan:

You must have missed the advice I gave to Martinfaczio about his aquaintence that stocked weapons, but not food.

If caught in a no-win position, neutralize the blankety-blank first, immediately, on-the-spot. If he has a second in command present who then neutralizes you, at least you took the problem with you before you left, if not, it is better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I saw the Brosman film, and it was better than any of his Bond films, but he didn't figure to be the patsy until the key to the bomb cover didn't fit and he took the right key off the body of the woman he killed that was with him.

In the Egyptian scenerio, we are talking about soldiers killing workers, then being killed by other soldiers who were probably told a coup was being planned by the soldiers they were being ordered to kill.

In "Three Days of the Condor", the assasin is always available at the beck & call of "The Company" and he also contracted out to other Government "Companies". In real life, if the assasin is not a soldier who believes he is doing it for his countries beliefs, he is a dangerous "loose end" that is best removed so as not to turn in his superior.

To those of you who have ever thought being a "free agent" assasin might be exciting, the second person you terminate after your assigned target should be your employer or superior who gave the order. You might live a little longer depending on how deep the system involved is.

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

You're right about the Pierce Brosnan film, but the point remains the same - if you start killing the killers, and then killing the killers who killed the killers, ad infinitum, you're going to run out of loyal supporters in short order.

I've never worked with the CIA but I did spend 7 years in Canadian military intelligence. The people I worked with may not have been the brightest bulbs but they weren't particularly stupid either, and they certainly weren't a bunch of sociopaths; they were pretty much a cross-section of regular people.

Because organisations like the CIA and NSA are subject to such secrecy requirements, there's a lot of natural curiosity about them. Hollywood and the conspiracy crowd are only too happy to fill the void on this, and the requirements of national security prevent these organisations from setting the record straight, so there's a lot of misinformation being spread about what they do.

(Having said that, the Maher Arar inquiry in Canada is exposing a lot of questionable practices, such as the US and Canadian Intelligence authorities' reliance on information that has been extracted under torture by "friendly" regimes.)

As far as some of your other examples go, I'm not sure how much evidence there is to support them. "Ancient Egypt" ceased to exist in the days of Augustus Caesar, and I find it hard to believe that anyone kept detailed records of something that was so hush-hush that people were murdered simply to prevent them talking about it. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

And "Three Days of the Condor" was a movie, not a documentary <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Aardwolfe:

Unfortunately, there are people out there who believe in movies or stupid writings as portraying real life all the time.

A perfect example is the idiot who bought a copy of "The Hitman" from Paladin Press and then actually hired out and killed someone. The civil trial suing Paladin Press for printing a "do-it-yourself"? book took the book out of legitimate publication because some mental dipstick couldn't figure out fantasy from reality.

You are never going to get me to believe that the lawyer (An anti-gun individual.) who worked for the Clintons walked to a park with a .38 snub nose revolver, stood next to a cannon in the park and shot himself, then died slumped over the cannon.

Likewise I do not believe Timothy McViegh was by himself and even with help from the supposedly known co-conspirators intelligent enough and focused enough to do what he did. There is one thing in that series of events that convinced me "he believed he was properly sanctioned" to blow up the Federal building. When a Sheriff pulled him over for a vehicle stop, he had a sidearm in a shoulder holster.

Governments, Militaries, Intelligence communities, and regular individuals have, do, and will kill their own if the benefit to loss ratio is acceptable.

Bountyhunter

Of course such a Highly Trained Killer, -or any Old Executioner, -Isn't typically Told What they might have in Store for him! <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

As to the Iraqi-Kuwaiti Incubators, -Perhaps that particular Incident may have been a Lie / Fabrication / or Other Mistruth. But the Sdm. Type Iraqis have been Doing these sorts of things Right and Left! For Many Many Years! It's Perfectly Like Them to!, Perfectly in Character!

It's sorta like the Dog who's Always Barking! And a Rare Time Comes Along, -When Indeed he has *Not* been Barking! But Someone either Misunderstands, or Mis-Accuses it of Barking! If that Dog could Speak, -He might say something like!, -"Hey!, -Wait a Minute!, (John Madden Style!), -I Didn't Bark!"

True!, -He Did Not Bark that Specific Time! But Untrue!, -as regards any Seeming Notion Stemming from that, -That he Did Not Bark on Many, Many Another Times and Occasions!

Its Occurred to me in the course of Writing this, -That it could also Seem that I'm Alluding to the Sdm. Iraqis as Dogs! I'm Simply Not! (I've Noticed a Possible Appearance of Such). Though Such Ones who Can and Do Routinely Do Such to Others!, -Have Got to be Pretty Low!

However, -Beyond that Unintended Possible Appearance, -The Larger Analogy as I've Given, -Very Well Applies and Holds!

For Iraqi Occupiers may Not Have "Barked" on that One Occasion. (As Well as any Rare Others). But They've So Barked and Bitten on Many Many Others! Years Both Before and Since! -That Gulf War One Incubator Incident. [color:"black"] [/color] [email]aardwolfe[/email]

makes me think of the old latin phrase "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

who will watch the watchmen?

That's one starting point.

The Bay of Pigs was a Fine Thing Itself in Concept! -If They Only Wouldn't have Muffed it Up! [color:"black"] [/color] [email]bountyhunter[/email]

Well, the "moderate" Iraqi that the US is planning to turn over control to has gone on record as saying that he plans to "cut off their (terrorists) hands and behead them" once he takes power. Do you think President Bush has issues with that? Or is that kind of behaviour okay as long as it's done by a US-friendly "moderate"?

If Such Sterner Measure is Really Whats Called For in the Situation, -Then So Be It! Sometimes you Just Have to Get Tuffer! Softness Won't Do It! Especially with the Likes of Zarquari and Co!

His Likes Can Avoid This Very Easily! By Just Not BeHeading People and Otherwise Terrorizing their Own Country!

*They* BeHead!, -and Does Anyone Really Expect a "Be-Heading of the Be-Headers" Themselves, -Not to be Considered or Entertained?! Especially in the Serious Circumstances their Country so Faces! Sauce for Goose could Well be Sauce for Gander!

Whether our Bush has Issues with that or Not, -is at Least Somewhat Irrelevant to That! And Certainly to me!

Now I'm Not For Unneccessary Ruffness or Force! But to the Contrary, -I Think a Certain Measure of Real, Stern, and Due Force, -IS in All Liklihood now Neccessary! They of Zarkawi and Co Now Make It So!, -For Themselves!

Such would be an Internal Iraqi Matter. They are now Sovereign.

In their New Prime Minister's and President's Best Judgements, -a Strong, Stern, "Mean Business!", Response may Be the Best!, Most Appropriate Way to now Go! They Perhaps Know!, -That Such Stern Measures may now Well be in Order! That!, -and Not Softness!, -May Get various Party's Respect!, -Over There. [color:"black"] [/color] [email]aardwolfe[/email]

I think you're missing the point.

Bush said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. There were no such weapons found.

Bush said Saddam was in cahoots with Al Qaeda. Saddam was not in cahoots with Al Qaeda, and in fact had turned down their requests for assistance.

Bush said that Saddam was a brutal, bloodthirsty dictator (which is true) who had no moral right to treat his countrymen as harshly as he did. Now you're saying that that's really the only way to run the country.

Leaves me wondering just exactly what Saddam was expected to do. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

As to the Egyptian scenario:

When people are repressed by heavy religious superstition...not to mention the real threat of instant and agonizing death, it is much easier to keep them "in line." Superstition is a valuable tool.

When you had threats against desecrating and/or robbing a tomb like :" May you be seized as a wild fowl", I imagine most terrified citizens were more than happy to stay away.

I also think that it is suspected that when some of these thefts took place, it may have been at the bidding of higher ups (such as priests). They could enrich themselves and engage petty thieves to take all the chances.

I Think I'm Gonna Communicate Further with you on this by PM. In Order to Keep such "Politics and Etc" Off our Forum. I Came to the Computer Screen right now, -with the Intention of Printing my Last Post to you, -to which you now Respond. And then Deleteing it! If the Post and it's Content is No Problem with Chris or Others, -Then it's No Problem with me. But if it is a Problem or Over a Line of Acceptability, -Then its so, and I'd like to Delete it, -and Further Comm. on such Matters by PM.

I Know I Lately Refrain Otherwise, -Been Doing a Good Job of That, and in my Last Post, -was Only Responding. But if Over a Political Line, -I Shud Not even so Respond, -Except by PM.

I'll Retype my Earlier Response to you, and Send it to you in a PM. As Well as my Response to This One.

Obviously, -I Differ Much with the Points you've just Made! But I Think that that may be a Matter for such PM. I'll Try to Get Them Off to you, -Reasonably Soon!

Now Let me Hope that my "Deletion Period", Hasn't Ended! [color:"black"] [/color] [email]aardwolfe[/email]

Much as I like to post my beliefs, views, and opinions, this thread is starting to be too depressing.

Good luck to those of you that stay.

Peace!

Bountyhunter

I've Just Found that me Edit Time has Expired. (Where I believe the Delete Option Normally is). And Can't Readily Find a Delete Option anyway.

I'll have to so Let this One Stand. But I'll Respond to your Furher Followup, -in a PM. [color:"black"] [/color] [email]ScottRezaLogan[/email]