After this coup, a lengthy rule of various brutal U.S. backed military dictators left hundreds of thousands of Guatemalans dead from counterinsurgency campaigns. So after the U.S. backed coup of 1954, Guatemala became a "Killtown".
So on that bright note, lets jump in and see what it takes to be a government sponsored hitman (or woman). When I read through this, I couldn't help but think of one of my favorite wet boys, Mitch "Booth" Leary. It really helped me get into the spirit of things.
Oh by the way, this study is pretty long (they sure don't miss any opportune method to whack you!), so we're just going to skim through it. I do recommend you read the whole study though. To really get the full effect.
A STUDY OF ASSASSINATION
Assassination is a term thought to be derived from "Hashish", a drug similar to marijuana, said to have been used by Hasan-Dan-Sabah to induce motivation in his followers, who were assigned to carry out political and other murders, usually at the cost of their lives.
Yeah, smoke up! Now you can tell your parents "But Mom, Dad, I have to smoke the Ganj. I'm training to be an assassin!"
It is here used to describe the planned killing of a person... who has been selected by a resistance organization for death, and whose death provides positive advantages to that organization.
What was that flap with Pat Robertson and the Venezuelan President again a couple of weeks ago?...
Assassination is an extreme measure not normally used in clandestine operations. It should be assumed that it will never be ordered or authorized by any U.S. Headquarters, though the latter may in rare instances agree to its execution by members of an associated foreign service.
That's it, don't authorize it yourself, but go ahead and participate if someone else orders it!
No assassination instructions should ever be written or recorded.
Hey, but writing a manual about it is ok!
Murder is not morally justifiable. Self-defense may be argued if the victim has knowledge which may destroy the resistance organization if divulged. Assassination of persons responsible for atrocities or reprisals may be regarded as just punishment. Killing a political leader whose burgeoning career is a clear and present danger to the cause of freedom may be held necessary.
Justifying assassinations. Wow. And I'm sure they're going to assassinate someone for the cause of "freedom".
But assassination can seldom be employed with a clear conscience. Persons who are morally squeamish should not attempt it.
That's right, it's not for the squeamish! Do you think they had potential assassins fill out a job application before hand?
The techniques employed will vary according to whether the subject is unaware of his danger, aware but unguarded, or guarded. They will also be affected by whether or not the assassin is to be killed with the subject hereafter,
Wow, they whack their own whackers!
This is an important point though. Most people who don't believe in government conspiracies (such as 9/11) seem to not believe in them because they don't think everybody that's involved with the conspiracy can keep quiet over time. I've brought up the point before that in a conspiracy that needed the assistance of a lot of people and that there would be fear that some might try to "rat" them out, the conspiracy planners could have already planned to whack those hired conspirators that they don't trust. It would also be a way to send a stern warning to their fellow conspirators to keep quiet or else.
assassinations in which the subject is unaware will be termed "simple"; those where the subject is aware but unguarded will be termed "chase"; those where the victim is guarded will be termed "guarded."
If the assassin is to die with the subject, the act will be called "lost." If the assassin is to escape, the adjective will be "safe."
How about classifying them as "sick", "twisted", "psychotic", and "MURDERER".
In lost assassination, the assassin must be a fanatic of some sort. Politics, religion, and revenge are about the only feasible motives. Since a fanatic is unstable psychologically, he must be handled with extreme care. He must not know the identities of the other members of the organization, for although it is intended that he die in the act, something may go wrong.
Yeah, it's probably best to stick with "sane" assassins!
The essential point of assassination is the death of the subject.
What other point would there be for an assassination?
A human being may be killed in many ways but sureness is often overlooked by those who may be emotionally unstrung by the seriousness of this act they intend to commit. The specific technique employed will depend upon a large number of variables, but should be constant in one point: Death must be absolutely certain.
Got it. No "almost dead" subjects left behind.
Techniques may be considered as follows:
It is possible to kill a man with the bare hands,
but very few are skillful enough to do it well. Even a highly trained Judo expert will hesitate to risk killing by hand unless he has absolutely no alternative. However, the simplest local tools are often much the most efficient means of assassination. A hammer, axe, wrench, screw driver, fire poker, kitchen knife, lamp stand, or anything hard, heavy and handy will suffice.
Who are the sick fucks who think of this stuff? I can just image their resume...
Financial Analyst, Lenders Group, Inc
• Handled the collection and dissemination of financial data.
• Compiled and analyzed financial information for general ledger accounts.
• Installed, modified, and coordinated accounting systems and control procedures.
Marketing Manager, Trident Computers
• Worked closely with product marketing during development to ensure products were on time and on budget.
• Coordinated with Web team to develop web site and e-commerce logistics.
• Developed financial models including forecasting, margin analysis and pricing policy.
Assassination Script Writer, Central Intelligence Agency
• Sat around all day thinking up creative and effective ways to kill people.
The most efficient accident, in simple assassination, is a fall of 75 feet or more onto a hard surface.
Falls into the sea or swiftly flowing rivers may suffice if the subject cannot swim. It will be more reliable if the assassin can arrange to attempt rescue, as he can thus be sure of the subject's death and at the same time establish a workable alibi.
Got to admit, these script writers are sure thorough. I never would have thought to go swim out to someone I just threw in a river to go drown them some more!
All right, the good stuff!
An overdose of morphine administered as a sedative will cause death without disturbance and is difficult to detect. The size of the dose will depend upon whether the subject has been using narcotics regularly. If not, two grains will suffice.
Better give me three.
4. Edge Weapons
Absolute reliability is obtained by severing the spinal cord in the cervical region. This can be done with the point of a knife or a light blow of an axe or hatchet.
O-o-o-o-o-w, that just hurts thinking about it.
Another reliable method is the severing of both jugular...
Ok! I think we get the picture.
Now just think that this study was written up in the early 50's. Imagine all the creative assassination methods our CIA has thought up since.Crap, I might be looking over my shoulder a little bit more now.
PS - Be sure to check out the Conference Room Technique at the bottom of the study. It's a fun exercise to do with a friend. And remember to leave some propaganda.