Timothy Birdnow

Here is the CIA manual for assassinations. This document, dating to the '50's, was "officially" rescinded, but we all know what that means.

Here are some of the interesting passages:

"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. This reticence is partly due to the necessity for committing communications to paper. No assassination instructions should ever be written or recorded. Consequently, the decision to employ this technique must nearly always be reached in the field, at the area where the act will take place. Decision and instructions should be confined to an absolute minimum of persons. Ideally, only one person will be involved. No report may be made, but usually the act"

...

"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."

...

"If the assassin is to die with the subject, the act will be called "lost.” ...The assassin must not fall alive into enemy hands.'

...

"If the assassination requires publicity to be effective it will be termed "terroristic.”'

...

"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 iden tities of the other members of the organization, for although it is intended that he die in the act, something may go wrong"

...

"In resistance situations, assassination may be used as a counter-reprisal. Since this requires advertising to be effective, the resistance organization must be in a position to warn high officials publicly that their lives will be the price of rep risal action against innocent people."

...

"Firearms are often used in assassination, often very ineffectively. The assassin usually has insufficient technical knowledge of the limitations of weapons, and expects more range, accuracy and killing power than can be provided with reliability. Since certainty of death is the major requirement, firearms should be used which can provide destructive power at least 100% in excess of that thought to be necessary, and ranges should be half that considered practical for the weapon."

End

In so many ways the first atttempt on Trump's life followed these procedures. The assassin was clearly a dupe, intended to die - a "lost".He appeared as a "lone gunman" despite the fact the very building he shot from had police on a lower floor. This fit the bill of a "reprisal" too as it was not just about killing Trump but killing his movement; had that bullet hit Trump's skull rather than his ear it would have ended any hope of reforming America. Everyone would understand that they would be next. It was a "resistance".

And as for weapons, Thomas Crooks had an AR-15. An AR-15 has an optimal range of 500 to 600 yards and Crooks was shooting from just 200 yards away; it should have been a sure kill had Crooks had any skill whatsoever.

Meanwhile we know the path was clear for Crooks. The defensive perimeter was far too small, and nobody was on the roof of that building, a building owned by Democrat donors. Crooks walkedright in holding his gun, and in fact even arrived early with it and hung around. Yet nobody stopped him.

In fact a police officer went onto the roof and left when he saw Crooks with the gun.

Then Crooks happily died from a counter-sniper bullet. How convenient.

Bomb making material was "found" in his car and home, and he had a detonator on him. Curiouser and curiouser. Yet no reason has ever been found for why Crooks did it, and his social media was scrubbed as has become all too common these days. We have seen this repeatedly, with mass shooters often having their social media disappearing. Another example was the mass shooting in Las Vegas a while back.

That attack stinks of a black op.

There are so many others; the Clintons had Vince Foster, for instance. And a second intern was going to testify before the Starr Committee and was shot dead at a Starbucks by a "stray bullet" the day before her appearance before the Committee. There was Seth Rich. I could go on and on.

But having failed in taking Trump out I strongly suspect they will use a professional next time and risk being exposed. In many ways they have little choice; they set events in motion a long time ago and now they must rid themselves of the head of the serpent lest they lose their power.

I don't expect the President to live out his term. If I were Mr.Trump I would have elaborate security in place, food tasters (a dog, maybe) and would definitely wear bullet-proof vests. The CIA is ruthless and won't stop.

Ditto the Democrats. The two assassination attempts on Trump will not be the last.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 861 words, total size 6 kb.