October 9, 2020 • 52 mins
Almost a thousand years after the reign of the original Order of Assassins, you might think assassination tactics would be universally illegal -- however, that's not the case. Assassination is a valuable tool for both corporations and nations alike. It's also a big business, a web of conspiracies with an at-times global reach, evolving in step with the world's latest technological innovations. Listen in to learn more about assassination in the modern day in the second part of this two-part series.
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of I Heart Radio. Hello, welcome back to the show.
(00:26):
My name is Matt, my name is all they call
me Ben. We are joined as always with our super
producer Paul Mission control of decades. Most importantly, you are you.
You are here, and that makes this stuff they don't
want you to know. The Hidden History of Assassins Part two,
The Modern Day. If you have, through accident or design,
(00:50):
not listen to the first part of this two part series,
please hold do your best not to get assassinated. While
you listen to part one, things will make much more sense.
So we'll give you a second m Beware of the
old man in the mountain. As you do so, he's
no he's bad news. Yep. And through the magic of editing,
(01:12):
you just listen to that episode so, as you know.
In part one of the series, we explored the truth,
the fact, the myth, the fiction about a strange, secretive
group today known as the Assassins. We also explored, more importantly,
the bloody tactics that made them infamous. They were not
(01:33):
the first people to use assassination tactics, and they weren't
the last. But today we have to ask how much
of their strategy has informed similar operations in the modern day. Spoiler,
the answer is a lot. It's its own genre of conspiracy.
These are active conspiracies that have existed since before you
(01:57):
were alive and continued on a regular base asis most
likely as you listen to the show today. So here
are the facts. Yeah, as we said last episode, we
discussed the fact that assassinations did not begin or end
with that sect that that existed for a time just
outside of Tehran. Today, assassinations definitely still occur, and they
(02:22):
have been occurring since the twelve hundreds when the group
known as the Assassins were taken down by Mongols. So
it's crazy to think about the assassinations that were taken
out by that group were mostly, if not all, very
(02:42):
close to all done with daggers in close combat, uh
in secret by usually an individual person. And you would
think about all the technology that exists out there today
that makes killing people easier. Oh yeah, humanity, same old dicks,
brand new toys. WHOA, that's a lot to unpack there.
(03:10):
But what what what? What do you talk about? A
couple episodes ago, fusion bombs, you know, like the murderous
wave of the future is here, boys, Yeah, it's the uh,
it's the Christmas Elmo of the intelligence community. There's there's
a really great scene in Toast of London, which we've
talked I think we're all fans of where Uh toasts
(03:30):
mistress Um he's cheating or she's cheating on her husband,
who's toasts Nemesis Ray purchase. Um. She's been like she
got hired like as a subcontractor for the Department of Defense,
and she's controlling drones and basically taking out blocks in
like some you know, Middle Eastern country and she lets
(03:51):
Toast take over for a minute and she says, now
only blow up the houses on the right side of
the street. And then he comes back. He's having a
good old time. She goes, oh, did I say the
rights I'm at the last side. That joke, as we'll see,
did not come from whole cloth. No it did not,
because you know, not only are the weapons of war
(04:15):
being enhanced in their technology, so are the the communication
abilities right, which means well and also you know economic
trade expands across the globe at this point, and all
kinds of other possible conflicts arise from that, and resource
extraction across the world. So, I mean, you really imagine
(04:36):
that they are all of these world leaders with competing interests,
and they can see all the other world leaders out there,
they can even talk to them if they wanted to,
or maybe someone close to them, and maybe they think,
you know, it would be nice if we could take
out leader X and country why so that we could
get resource Z. That's right, And you would assume that
(05:00):
over the intervening centuries, at some point, during the construction
of various world orders, someone in one important rumor another
would have pitched something against the assassination. At some point,
surely someone would have said, hey, guys, you know, while
(05:20):
while I have you all here, I know we're almost
done with the meeting, but we should we should make
assassination illegal, right like, guys, Oh yeah, sure, let's make
it illegal, which would prevent all of those assassins from
doing it. Yeah. Well, and that's a hard and long
(05:40):
well that doesn't seem to be entirely true. According to
a guy named Michael L. Gross in a paper called
assassination and targeted killing, Law enforcement, execution, or self defense,
which was published in the Journal of Applied Philosophy. Assassination,
it turns out, can be more or less perfectly legal, right,
(06:03):
and he writes he's got a a nuanced take on it.
We thought the best way to do this would be
to give you an excerpt from this paper, and he writes, quote,
international law does not ban assassination unequivocally, but instead prohibits
perfect e, which is the word of the day. I
think we can agree or those acts that abuse the
(06:24):
protections that the laws of armed conflict guarantee. Common examples
of perfecty include attacking from under the protection of a
white flag or harming combatants who laid down their arms. Uh.
These protections are integral to modern warfare and underlie the
conventions of surrender. Without them, war would end only in
(06:44):
extermination or the proverbial fight to the death. Assassination is
perfidious only insofar as it abuses these or similar protections
really quickly. But I just want to add, like, this
is basically just saying, Okay, you have to follow some
basic rules, but the only thing governing following those rules
is our agreement to follow those rules both sides. Once
(07:07):
that breaks down, then it's it's it's chaos, and that
a lot of that depends on who has the upper
hand in terms of weaponry or are we truly gentlemen
when it comes down to achieving total dominance. I don't know,
I think probably not. Or escaping our own death of course,
of course. Um, that's a fascinating concept. Yeah. So basically
(07:32):
the world has agreed that assassination is it's fine. You
know what I mean, it's it's it's fine so long
as you obey certain rules. Yeah, which is ridiculous. It's
basically everyone say, look, look, you can try and assassinate us.
We're gonna try and assassinate you. Cool, Okay, cool, Just
(07:55):
don't just don't pretend like you're not going to assassinate
us and then assassinate us. Does that make a right? Yeah.
Being perfidious means being deceitful or untrustworthy. So so it's
it's a very uh, it's very difficult thing to enforce,
and that that's probably a big part of why modern
(08:16):
history is riddled with and to no small degree, shaped
by assassinations. Think about it, like in Russia alone, five
emperors were assassinated within less than two hundred years, and
I think in the case of Nicholas the Second his
family was assassinated to that fundamentally altered the course of
(08:40):
Russian history, and therefore I would argue world history. The
most notable assassination victims in US history tend to be
um civil rights activists like Martin Luther King or sitting
US presidents. You know, President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. Three
other US presidents also die by assassins h James Garfield,
(09:02):
William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy. That one is probably
still the most controversial in recent history. In Europe, as
we mentioned in episode one, the assassination of an archduke
named Franz Ferdinand by the Black Hand, which we also
mentioned triggered World War One. Wasn't the Black Hand a
(09:26):
Serbian group nationalist serb um insurgents, I believe right? Yeah,
exactly exactly. And if you listen to or watch one
of our earlier episodes about the Black Hand, the story
is so amazing. History hinges on such small things. Uh.
The guy, the guy responsible for the assassination actually screwed
(09:51):
it up the first time. And only got the friends
Ferdinand by accident. Well, it's interesting we're seeing stuff like that,
not not with assassination, she's necessarily, but certainly in the moment,
it's hard to see what that match strike is that
sets off the series of events. But in the times
that we're living in, it could certainly be something like
the killing of George Floyd. You know, that could be
(10:12):
looked back on as that powder keg ignition point. You know,
something like that exactly exactly, And it's it's tantalizing, and
it is also tricky to say how history would have
played out if these and other murders had not occurred.
I mean, look at World War One. The stage was
(10:34):
already set for World War One on multiple levels. So
you could argue that if Ferdinand had not been assassinated,
another assassination or another conflict could have sparked the flame.
And and Abraham Lincoln at the time of his death
watching my American cousin in the Ford Theater, he had
(10:54):
already made a lasting impact on the United States, and
so on and so on. We'll never know what would
have happened had these murder victims been allowed to live
out their natural lifespan just before you keep um, John
of Kennedy's brother, I feel like his assassination is one
(11:17):
of those those things that, on the cusp of possibly
becoming president, could have actually changed the course of history
more than any sitting president being assassinated. That's a really
good point, Matt, because I was gonna ask Ben, what,
in your opinion, was the goal in assassinating Kennedy and
and did we see results if we had to simplify
(11:41):
it to a political end game situation for whatever group?
Well again, because we probably think it was maybe the
government itself. I mean, there's so many that's such a
can of warmth. But I was wondering what you think,
I don't know, or what would be one possible reason.
Oh man, this is this is one for all of
us and for those of us listening along at home.
(12:05):
We have we have gone back and forth in this
for years that I would say, go back and listen
to like four episodes we've done on JFK's assassination. Um,
were it just comes up? Yeah in episodes or when uh,
when we used to hang out in person, there would
be there we would be talking about, you know, a
(12:28):
film we liked and then twenty minutes later, Uh, we're
back to JFK. Listen to the Harmon Town episode that
we were on. We have a great discussion about all
that was good. Yeah, I guess I just mean in
terms I'm thinking about it more than in the in
the framework of assassinations as like a tool, you know. Um,
(12:48):
And there's obviously all kinds of different end games. Some
people might just assassinate somebody because they don't like them,
or they disagree with their politics, or it could be
more spacific, like to achieve something that they know is
brewing in legislation. But we also know that the president
is not nearly as powerful as as one would like
(13:08):
to think, So it's not you know, yeah, yeah, I
mean that's an arguable I just mean in terms of
like actually pushing through legislation if if Congress is out
of balance, like right now, it's it's yeah, but who
needs legislation when you've got the executive order moment We'll
see how effective those things are as well. Just short
(13:31):
answer the the benefit of killing President Kennedy, Uh, It's
it's multiple because you could say some groups in the
US government. I'm not accusing them of doing it. But
some groups in the US government benefited from losing one
of the most powerful opponents to their plans for Castro
(13:55):
in Cuba. You could also say Lyndon Johnson benefited by
becoming president. You could also say, uh, the USS are
benefited by seeing a powerful blow to the ideology of
Western democracy and capitalism. I'm very careful to say putin
(14:16):
if you're listening. Yeah, yeah, I still don't open the
mail he sends though, which I always like, probably profiling handle.
It was one of those like grabber clause, you know,
like not polonium. Right. Please send all complaints to our
(14:39):
seven Complaint department here, especially for you. That's Jonathan Strickland.
Did iHeart radio dot com? So we know that these
we know that these assassinations continue as a tool, as
a mechanism. It continues because it is effective. Right, We're
in the realm of practicality. No matter how it is
sold to a given public or given audience. If something
(15:03):
doesn't work, then an intelligence apparatus, a corporation, or a
government will try to find a better method. There's not
really a better method than an assassination in certain cases.
That's why during the Cold War we see this massive
increase in the number of political assassinations specifically, and just
(15:23):
like assassinations of old, this was probably due to the
stark ideological differences between what we're called the First and
second worlds. Uh quick, myth myth busting. If we haven't
talked about this before, when you hear things like third
world country or second World country, first world that's that's
(15:44):
a Cold War relic. That's not about income or inequality.
What the first world was pitched as the world of
democracy and capitalism, second world being the world of communism, right,
and the third world was just a phrase that was
used to describe unaligned countries, and it transformed over time.
(16:05):
So now when you hear people say third world country
in the West, they're not talking about ideology, they're talking
about developmental status. Anyway, These people on either side of
this ideological divide, the world's superpowers, were more than willing
to not only put out put out a successful assassination operations,
(16:27):
they're also more than willing to publicly justify these killings,
to finance them, and take care of the people they
sent out to do it. And eventually both sides started
to realize this practice may have a diminishing return. That's
why many modern countries nowadays, between now and the age
(16:48):
of the assassins. Uh, they have taken legal steps, at
least in theory, to ban this practice. And I think
this is what you're getting to met with executive orders, right. Well, yeah,
in any executive order, really it's just a handy tool
to have there in the oval office. Um, and so
many presidents have wielded it terrifying not not not not
(17:12):
to mention this one an totally glossed over when I
was talking earlier the ability to install lifetime lawmakers on
the Supreme Court, which which is a pretty pretty pretty
serious power move. Yeah it is. But however, we are
not speaking of that. We are speaking of a nineteen
seventy six executive order put forth by Gerald Ford. Old
(17:34):
Gerald Ford. If you were a fan of SNL back
in the day, you probably very much like Gerald Ford.
I do. Uh. That was impressions. Uh no, when I
was watching it, it was not feral Department, those of you,
those of who, those of you who know no, Um,
it was executive order one to three three three. Isn't
(17:57):
that fun? Or twelve? That's a fun way to say it.
And it says, or at least in parts, says, no
person employed by, or acting on behalf of the United
States Government shall engage in or conspire to engage in assassination.
They're done. Ha ha, we won't do it really simple
language too, Like that's very explicit and it seems somewhat definitive.
(18:22):
But okay. So the thing about Executive Order twelve three
or one two three three three is that it's not
as altruistic as it sounds. If you just here that
part where they say, okay, no more, no more daggers
in the dark. Uh. This is the same executive order
that authorized the expansion of data collection and surveillance. It's
(18:47):
been it's been cited by the n s A, the
National Security Agency, as the legal foundation for its work
in collecting unencrypted information flowing through data centers. Like that's
this order is why the n s A says it's
totally fine to intercept information from Google, Yahoo, and so on.
(19:12):
So we can't mistake it for goody two shoes stuff.
But in any case, if you still think, oh great,
go uncle Sam, no more assassination, we do need to
point out that under George W. Bush's administration, this executive
order was diplomatic way to see it. Relaxed. When we
(19:35):
say relaxed, you know, it's it's a situation where they said, look,
there are different kinds of good. You know. There's a
day to day good. Yeah, there's the individual good, and
there are some things that are great, and a greater
good sometimes requires things that seems like small evils. Anyway, guys,
(19:59):
remember we're doing this for you, you know what I mean.
That's how it went, and that's the question for today.
Has the world moved on from this grizzly, perfidious, insidious practice.
With so many countries officially banning these activities to one
degree or another, how do we respond to those who
(20:22):
allege assassinations continue in the modern day. We'll tell you
after word from our sponsors. Here's where it gets crazy. Okay,
if we're responding to someone who says, hey, I think
(20:43):
assassinations continue in the modern day, and if we're responding
objectively and honestly, the only thing we can do is agree.
We can only agree. In fact, assassinations don't just continue apace.
They're a huge business. They are a vital piece of geopolitical, corporate,
and sometimes even religious networks and they come in several
(21:06):
different types, but you'll you'll recognize these if you've listened
to Eppisode one of this series. Yeah, the stuff we
talked about in episode one, all of the motivations, the
reasoning behind using assassination tactics, it all applies to modern assassinations,
all of it. Uh, if they're they're generally a few reasons.
Let's let's outline them here of why assassinations occur in
(21:30):
the modern day. One, you're gonna eliminate some kind of
military commander from an opposing threat, an opposing army. Right,
you're doing that too, destabilize that military like lop the
head off, so that other generals or whoever else exists
there has to move up. And maybe they don't know
the strategies as well as that person that you killed does.
(21:52):
And you think, Yeah, we talked about the assassination of
the Iranian general rather recently the United States its assassination
of the Iranian general and how even the use of
the term assassination was contentious at the time. Was it
just an act of war? Was it, you know, in
an extra judicial killing. It's interesting, it's sort of fizzled
(22:16):
a little bit because there is a whow when that happened,
where an ambassador from Iran was being very vocal about
how this was an outright act of war, an outright
act of aggression, an assassination of a beloved official, you know.
And there were people interviews on NPR and stuff. Are
people in the streets just saying that America was overstepped
and that it was absolutely, you know, an outright act
(22:38):
of aggression. And then that story kind of disappeared because
I remember hearing it. It seemed so intense. I was like,
oh God, have we done a thing that we cannot
go back from? Like have we really let the badger
out of the bag at this point, Well, well, you know,
you know what it could have been instead of you know,
anything else. It could have been the US military sending
(23:00):
a good old fashioned message. Ah, yes, that's a that's
another type of modern assassination. This is the one, uh
and glad, if you're listening, I think you'll enjoy this.
This is the one I like to call from Russia
with love, think of think of the polonium murders. The
(23:21):
Russian intelligence apparatus knew this substance would be a clear
indication of their involvement at some level, or the involvement
of someone who was involved with them, But they also
knew it would occur in a way that was difficult
to trace and and very difficult to publicly prosecute. Right,
It's kind of a finger along the nose wink. Right. Yeah,
(23:46):
good luck with your journalism degree, buddy. So so okay,
we could be more conspiratorial talking about sending a message?
Uh did everybody else for yet? I only knew about
this from doing strange news daily? Did everybody else forget
that time a few months ago when Russian doctors just
(24:06):
kept falling out of windows during the coronavirus scientistic a
new definistration of Prague Almost Yeah, I mean scientists around
the globe for the past couple of decades have been
dropping off, which we still haven't done an episode on.
That's right, we should do that. Uh. Their type of
(24:28):
modern assassination is to eliminate internal competition. Tale as old
as time. Think of violent regimes that are inherently unstable,
Some pretty often family lead North Korean leadership as assassinated
internal competitors that might have later proven to be challengers
(24:48):
to the throne or challengers to the line of secession
in the days of the Ottoman Empire, which I know
is a little old for this example, but in the
days of the Ottoman Empire was also then for people
to kill their siblings. There can only be one sultan,
you know what I mean. And we have to think
about coups so common in recent history don't get reported
(25:12):
near as often as they should. Definitely don't get reported
as they're occurring. Uh. These assassination attempts are It's kind
of like what what we talked about earlier with who
owns the motivation for an action? Who in their mind
is pulling the trigger and turning the assassin into just
(25:34):
a tool. Uh. These assassination attempts in coups, they're often
incited by a foreign power, and I know that makes
most of us think of the US and South America
or something. That's true. That's a great example, but we
need to also think of corporations, especially in the great
game of resource extraction. They're seeking too. They don't really
(25:55):
care about the motivation of the individual assassin or the people.
Uh do we doing the coup? They just won a
government or a regime. There's more pliable to their goals.
You see this in South America, you see it all
over the African continent, you see it in Central Asia.
The list goes on, what was the banana company about
(26:16):
the fruit fruit fruit man brutal And that's I mean,
it's a business. I don't think it's unfair to refer
to this as the as an industry. So when we
look at the modern assassination industry, we see we see
(26:37):
examples that clearly prove assassination is ongoing. It exists on
multiple levels in the world, and a lot of people
are involved. A ton of people are involved. Yeah, and
we have to caveat this a little bit and use
some swissy air quotes around the word terrorism here, because,
as we know, it's a term, pejorative term. Oftentimes it's
(26:58):
used in political rhetoric to brand uh an opposing force
as somehow like you know, the bad guys, when you
know one person's terror ast, another person's freedom fighter or
what have you. We we've we've said this many times
in the past. It's all about which side of the
conflict that you're on. Um. But those referred to as terrorists,
regardless of any ideology, clearly and on a regular basis,
(27:22):
deploy these kinds of tactics. UH. The date as far
back as the hashisham Um clan of ancient times that
we talked about in the first part of this this series.
UM they have to elevate a powerful individual leader again
by merit insane idea, UM infiltrated network or attack without
(27:43):
regard to personal safety, UM be willing to die for
their cause, for their mark, disregard any possible collateral damage civilians,
non military structures, you know, infrastructure, gatherings, events, all in
service of the target. And the attacks are often motivated
by strong personal beliefs. So this this is a little
(28:04):
bit different than our idea of a hired gun. You
know this, These are very personal, personally motivated attacks based
around ideology a lot of oftentimes even even if they're
just personally motivated by that leader, whoever that powerful individual
leader is, and then those beliefs are impart. It is
almost in a cult like fashion at times, you know
(28:25):
what I mean, If someone has this magnetism. We often
see this with suicide bombers who perhaps aren't really invested personally,
but they've been either I don't know, I don't hate
that term brainwashed. It seems so divisive. But you know,
you often hear stories of of women who have been
forced to become suicide bombers by their husbands or you know,
(28:46):
because of this hierarchy of like an individual wielding this
kind of authority over people's very minds, um and actions. Yeah,
if you want to see indoctrinated or radicalize, Uh, those
those are similar terms, you know. But but with that,
with that list of commonalities that you gave us here,
(29:10):
let's all pause for a second and think back on
just how many international murders of notable journalists, activists, politicians, criminals,
and business tycoons fit the bill here. Like this stuff is,
This stuff is happening, and it probably will happen again.
One quick example close to home here in Fort Benning, Georgia,
(29:35):
there's something that was once upon a time called the
School of the America's. Its opponents called it, uh the
School of Assassins, and they did so for a reason.
It was established in in the U S Control Panama
Canal Zone as the Latin American Center Ground Division. Pretty
(29:55):
innocuous name, but it's called the School of Assassins in
reference their specific training programs which appear to and we're
being overly fair here. They appear to advocate actions that
are in direct violation of that executive order we mentioned
earlier one, two, three, three three, Yeah, and again established
(30:19):
in that executive order went through in seventies six, so
it's forty six to seventy six, thirty years. It's really
it's really interesting stuff. We did a whole I can't
remember we did a whole podcast episode on it. I
know we did a video on this, and we've done
quite a bit of research on the place. But School
of the America's fascinating. So let's go to UM Major
(30:43):
Joseph Blair, who was a former instructor at the school.
He said, quote, the author of s O A, the
School of America's and c I A torture manuals drew
from intelligence materials used during the Vietnam War that advocated assassination, torture, extortion,
and other techniques techniques. Yeah, interesting stuff. How is that
(31:09):
not illegal? Evenh Yeah? That's oh man, that's the thing.
So so to put a fine point on it, the
School of America's taking people from other countries and training
them to be insurgents, right to be direct action operatives,
(31:30):
to be coupmakers, yeah, or cookings, so the yeah, right,
a bunch of coups So aside, there is internal reasoning here,
and the internal reasoning on Uncle Sam's side and for
proponents of the School of America's was something like, well, yeah, oversight,
(31:54):
regulations and prohibitions, those things are important. I get it,
you get it right. Those things are important for US personnel.
They don't apply to foreign officers. They're not part of
our government. We can't really tell them what to do
under US law to with. What that means is we
(32:15):
are not actually committing assassinations. Instead, we're just helping some
friendly forces from foreign lands figure out how to do
the right thing, you know, if something happens, right, if
if something happens, or if something needs to happen and there.
(32:39):
So that's the idea. It's kind of like five Eyes
gets around the laws against domestic surveillance right of your
own population because now it's not Uncle Sam telling on
its citizens. Now it's the UK. So now we're just
getting mail from some friends, you know what I mean.
This also gives us possible to deny it ability in
(33:01):
case one of those graduates of the School of America's
goes rogue and commits human rights atrocities. During his time
as president, Jimmy Carter temporarily suspended the use of those
training manuals because the administration was concerned over what they
called again, possible human rights violations. And again we see
(33:25):
the specter of the greater good. No, not that, not again, um,
but yeah, you know our our Georgia boy. Jimmy Carter,
he believed that the international military education and training that
was being provided there at the School of the America's
um and several other institutions, by the way, several other
(33:45):
places there were for training and like that, he thought
it was critical to furthering quote, the national interests of
the United States, which in a way it was and is.
Having that kind of tool at your disposal kind of
is integral to national interests, right, Like with the US
(34:09):
actions in Libya leading to the fall of Gaddafi, it
was national interest, right. So those training manuals, which explicitly
tell you how to torture people, how to assassinate people,
and so on. I think I've got them on my
computer somewhere from yeah, oh gosh, our search histories, I'm
(34:31):
telling you, yea. So those manuals, by the way, were reintroduced.
That's why I said they were temporarily suspended. They were
reintroduced to the school's training curriculum by the Reagan administration.
In Currently, the School of America is still exists. It
just changed its name. It's wind SEC under the William J.
(34:53):
Perry Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies. Don't worry though, everybody.
They say they have a much more rigorous elements of
human rights training in the program. So good on us,
you know, good hustle team. Yeah, yep, good, good on us.
And we have to point out that there are there's
(35:15):
a number of graduates from the School of the Americas
back in the day and now win SEC that have
been accused of doing things, really bad things that they
were trained to do in those places, and they have
even been sentenced for human rights violations and criminal activity
(35:35):
in their home countries. So come on over and get
some training. It will be really fun. Here's here's your manuals,
and then go back to gonna be snacks. We're gonna
have craft services. You guys will be all well taken
care of, sure, and then they're gonna do these crimes
um and you can even you can find online a
couple of places where there are lists of people who
(35:57):
have graduated from these schools and these training programs, who
you know, who then did later crimes. You can see
the crimes that they were accused of later, both alleged
by the way, and some proved. And they're they're even um, yeah,
they're they're numerous databases where you can find this information. Actually, yeah,
check out the School of America's watch if you want
(36:21):
to see the prize bad apples of this program. Uh.
And again, you know, this is not to say I
feel like we have to say. This is not to
say that every graduate of the School of America's instantly
went off and became warlord, but several did, and to
say otherwise is equally disingenuous. So we have not only
(36:45):
um in this nation, we have not only taken lessons
learned from that ancient sect of assassins and from earlier
assassin training programs in Vietnam, in the U s s R.
And so on, we have built was often called a
training program for this sort of behavior, not too different
from Alam Castle itself all those years ago. And that
(37:09):
that's so that's just a very a very high level
look at the modern state of assassinations. Today. We're gonna
pause for a word from our sponsors, and when come back,
we're going to talk about the future of assassination and
(37:35):
we're back drones. Baby, Look, we're gonna talk about drones,
and drones are the scariest part of this assassination business
that exists out there. But I think we should just
quickly mention that militaries across the world have elite soldiers
(37:55):
and operators who and I'm thinking of something like the
um Navy, Seals or brass exactly, so people who are
teams that go out early, right and if there's going
to be a conflict or if there's something perhaps going
to arise somewhere, teams that will go out there and
(38:17):
that have the ability or at least are trained, I
would say, with the ability to take out someone the
way an assassin would. Um. Of course, I've never been
in either of those, and correct me if I'm completely wrong.
I just feel like that would be a very smart
thing to have in, you know, in the tool belt
of anyone who is you know, a seal or a
(38:39):
Green Beret or one of those elite and maybe even
a ranger. I don't know. Yeah, that's a great point.
That's a great point. Multiple the US gets beat up
on for this lot or singled out for it, because
the US has multiple versions of this. Uh. These operators
are highly trained professionals, and it is openly admitted that
they you is Uh. They use their training in what
(39:03):
are called targeted killings or extraction missions as well from
unfriendly territory. But a ton of other nations have them too,
you know what I mean. It's the kind of thing
where if you're a superpower and someone has that capacity
and you do not, then there is a defense gap.
You have to have something like this. That's why there's
(39:26):
spects nuts, that's why massad exists, I mean pretty much.
Any Yeah, any any country that has international reach or
global interest is going to have some sort of analog
to those things. And there maybe we should do an
episode on those because they are fascinating. Yeah, I'd love
(39:47):
to just to pausitive from what I'd love to hear
from anyone out there who can talk to us who
has experience as essentially an elite military operator. Um, just
to know even if that's maybe that's a completely wrong
thing to say, just a unit within a team that
would be considered elite. Yeah, and they do a lot
(40:08):
of we know, of course it's not all cloak and
dagger assassination. As we said, they are extraction missions, they're
also protection and escort missions. Um. But yeah, there there's
a wealth of stuff out there. This we we need
to do this episode, and we would love to hear
from you if you have firsthand experience in this regard
a lot of those special forces. Also, I'm so glad
(40:31):
you're pointing that out, Matt. A lot of special forces
also collaborate with Drown Technology, which is the the sky
net elephant in the room. And again, Matt, thank you
for putting in that important piece we've missed because as
you can tell, both Nolan i A are always excited
(40:52):
to talk drones. Modern governments are super into the strategy
of changing names and erms to avoid controversial language and
public statements. That's why Blackwater became Academy or whatever. That's
why Comcast became infin exfinity, That's why clear Channel became
my Heart. That's why George Carlin was such a successful
(41:14):
comedian because of euphemisms. It's true, and so we see
a name change there with assassination, targeted killing named killing. Uh,
he's even drones they referred to more as U A V.
S now right, because that's a little more innocuous than drones.
Drones sounds very future e and sinister. When I think
(41:35):
of a drone, I think of something scary coming to
kill me. Right, you can hide a lot a lot
of evil behind some acronyms or initialisms. U A V
just means unmanned aerial vehicle. A kite is a ua V.
That's right, yes, kind of is it? Yeah, there's no
(41:55):
one driving, it's unmanned. You're right. The string is the
same thing. It's just a physical version of the connection
between the drone and the controller. Yeah, yeah, that's the
argument I would make. But let's so targeted killing is
euphemism is a form of assassination carried out by governments
against their perceived enemies. So it's important here to note
(42:19):
that this is seen as a sub genre of assassination
applicable only to governments. So you can't go into court
as an individual, or you shouldn't be able to go
into court as like an individual or a representative of
a religious institution or corporation. And say you know, yes,
I am the in and out burger assassin. Uh. And
(42:44):
this was a targeted killing at an arpy's and that
was for the greater good. They are enemies of in
an out burger, you can't say stuff like that. You
can only do it if you're a government, because then
you can argue there's a greater good. I mean, think
of weaponized drones as the robo version of those ancient assassins.
(43:05):
They have a lot in common. The two big things
they have in common they're relentless and they don't care
about self preservation. Oh and there's an old man in
a mountain controlling them somewhere. And now it's more at
it's not really Nora, but yeah, I love that. Like,
(43:26):
they're also very effective at killing, but they're probably less
so weird, they're probably less precise the assassins of old. Yeah,
the assassin of old used a blade up close to
take someone out. This sends a missile generally a missile
that causes collateral damage almost every time it's used, well,
(43:50):
not infrequent number of times. I mean. The scary thing
about the toast of London, uh scene that you alluded
to earlier, all is again, it's not it doesn't come
out a whole cloth, or there wasn't just some clever
person in the writer's room. According to statistical analyzes by
some nonprofits, including nonprofit organization called Reprieve, which is composed
(44:14):
of international lawyers and investigators, UH nine children. Nine children
have been killed for every targeted adult the United States
has tried to assassinate since programs like this began. I'm
okay with that. No, I'm not okay with that's unforgivable.
(44:35):
That's but that's what there's a there's a there's a
non offensive sounding term for that. It's collateral damage. It
takes the humanity out of the equation. When you're not
actually having to wield the knife yourself, you know, you're
doing it from such a remove. Mistakes were made, Right,
what's what's the what's the common complaint for people in
online gaming? It's not me, you messed up. It's the
(44:58):
lag time. Right. So maybe as someone has blamed collateral
damage on that in the past, but it doesn't make
these people, it doesn't make these civilians magically resurrected, you know. Uh.
Like the Reprieve also found that UH, in the course
of attempting to kill one. I'm in al Zawahiri. Uh.
(45:19):
The US, specifically, the CIA is believed to have killed
seventy six children and twenty nine adult by standards, and Ben,
you know, this would have been under the Obama administration,
wouldn't it correct? That's I mean, you know, he gets
such a he's so lauded and held up as this
like shining example of like a great president. There's obviously
a lot of great things about it. First of all,
(45:39):
he could speak in complete sentences, which was pretty dope.
But um, he was oversaw massive amounts of these kinds
of attacks that resulted in this sort of collateral damage.
And people don't gloss over that entirely, but it certainly
doesn't seem to be the first bullet point on his resume. Right. Well,
it increased the use of of U A. V's and
(46:02):
drones increased so much under under President Obama. It's really
disturbing considering we entered, you know, what was called the
War on Terror from the previous administration, when we were
actively you know, starting wars, and then it only increased.
And it's it's likely a a function of the technology improving, right,
(46:28):
I mean, and it has by leaps and bounds, and
even now as they have been for gosh two decades now,
um scholars and military officials, politicians people like you, me,
everyone else. We were divided on the use of of
drones and U a v s and and targeted killings
(46:50):
named killings whatever you want to refer to them as,
because I mean, it is complicated, right, Some supporters of
using drones would say, it's actually more humane to do this.
It's safer for military personnel on whichever side is doing
the killing or attacking. And you know, you're not just
(47:11):
sending in a bunch of troops, let's say, to try
and kill a group of people or even a team
of people. Then where you're going to have multiple people firing,
you've got maybe one, maybe two maximum a handful of
drones that are going in, uh to kill someone. Generally
it's one that is literally going in to kill someone.
(47:32):
You know. The other thing that would be stated, I
think by someone who supports this is that these drone
attacks aren't going to be done in a time of
peace against any nation that we're not at war with. Right,
Let's see, that's the thing. It's true. Supporters do say
that but recent events have conclusively proven this not to
be the case. That's where we come up with another
(47:53):
euphemism for assassinations, extra judicial killings right outside of the law,
which are you know, technically banned by the US Military Code.
This leads us to uh, this leads us to a
troubling conclusion. We have to explore the future of assassination.
(48:14):
What we've sadly proven here is the following. It appears
it does not matter what laws are written. Right as
many as you want, say whatever you want, as explicitly
or as obliquely as you please. These laws do not
matter if they are not continually enforced, and the truth
of the matter is that they are not continually enforced.
(48:36):
Assassination is effective. It may not be effective in terms
of counter terrorism, it's arguably terrible pr but it works
for what people want it to do. And in the future,
we're only going to see more increasingly sophisticated uses of
these tactics, newer, more advanced drones, increasingly effective poisoning um
(48:59):
to livery systems and substances. Importantly, and this is what
we should all think about, They're also going to be
increasingly sophisticated, nuanced rationalizations for assassination, increasingly sophisticated ways of
hiding the hand that ultimately triggered the thing. Right, So
(49:21):
the front organizations are going to be tough. The war
of information and narrative will only continue to evolve, and
as always, one thing will remain the same. Both the
assassins and their masters will argue this is necessary for
you guessed it the greater good. And so today we
(49:43):
end our episode with questions for you, what do you
think the future of assassination holds? Killings continue, specifically in
any of the ways we've described, will they increase, Will corporate, political,
and religious actors be held accountable for their actions? And
(50:07):
if so, by whom some international group? Maybe let us know,
are you one of these uh puppeteers, you know, pulling
the strings of all of these you know, hidden assassins
in our midst Let us know he can. Well, we'll
keep your secrets, buddy, that we promise um right to us.
(50:27):
You can reach us on the social media channels of note, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter,
all that stuff are preferred. Means is our Facebook group.
Here's where it gets crazy, where you can be part
of the conversation with your fellow conspiracy realists, that's right.
If you don't want to do that, you can find
us on Twitter and Facebook. On the other side at
(50:47):
conspiracy stuff and on Instagram. We are Conspiracy Stuff Show.
Of course, visit us on YouTube YouTube dot com slash
conspiracy Stuff. If you are not given to sip the
social needs no worries, we have a phone number for you.
You can call us at one eight three three s
t d W y t K. You'll have three minutes
(51:10):
on your call. Let us know what's on your mind,
Let us know your experience, give us your feedback on
this series, or suggestions for topics you think your fellow
listeners will find of interest. Most importantly, let us know
if it's okay to use your voice and your name
on air. That's right. If you don't want to do
any of those things, you can still write to us.
(51:32):
You can contact us Ben noll and I and Paul
will see you. Send us a good old fashioned email.
We are conspiracy at iHeart radio dot com. Stuff they
(52:00):
Don't Want You to Know is a production of I
Heart Radio. For more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit
the I heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
listen to your favorite shows,
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of I Heart Radio. Hello, welcome back to the show.
(00:26):
My name is Matt, my name is all they call
me Ben. We are joined as always with our super
producer Paul Mission control of decades. Most importantly, you are you.
You are here, and that makes this stuff they don't
want you to know. The Hidden History of Assassins Part two,
The Modern Day. If you have, through accident or design,
(00:50):
not listen to the first part of this two part series,
please hold do your best not to get assassinated. While
you listen to part one, things will make much more sense.
So we'll give you a second m Beware of the
old man in the mountain. As you do so, he's
no he's bad news. Yep. And through the magic of editing,
(01:12):
you just listen to that episode so, as you know.
In part one of the series, we explored the truth,
the fact, the myth, the fiction about a strange, secretive
group today known as the Assassins. We also explored, more importantly,
the bloody tactics that made them infamous. They were not
(01:33):
the first people to use assassination tactics, and they weren't
the last. But today we have to ask how much
of their strategy has informed similar operations in the modern day. Spoiler,
the answer is a lot. It's its own genre of conspiracy.
These are active conspiracies that have existed since before you
(01:57):
were alive and continued on a regular base asis most
likely as you listen to the show today. So here
are the facts. Yeah, as we said last episode, we
discussed the fact that assassinations did not begin or end
with that sect that that existed for a time just
outside of Tehran. Today, assassinations definitely still occur, and they
(02:22):
have been occurring since the twelve hundreds when the group
known as the Assassins were taken down by Mongols. So
it's crazy to think about the assassinations that were taken
out by that group were mostly, if not all, very
(02:42):
close to all done with daggers in close combat, uh
in secret by usually an individual person. And you would
think about all the technology that exists out there today
that makes killing people easier. Oh yeah, humanity, same old dicks,
brand new toys. WHOA, that's a lot to unpack there.
(03:10):
But what what what? What do you talk about? A
couple episodes ago, fusion bombs, you know, like the murderous
wave of the future is here, boys, Yeah, it's the uh,
it's the Christmas Elmo of the intelligence community. There's there's
a really great scene in Toast of London, which we've
talked I think we're all fans of where Uh toasts
(03:30):
mistress Um he's cheating or she's cheating on her husband,
who's toasts Nemesis Ray purchase. Um. She's been like she
got hired like as a subcontractor for the Department of Defense,
and she's controlling drones and basically taking out blocks in
like some you know, Middle Eastern country and she lets
(03:51):
Toast take over for a minute and she says, now
only blow up the houses on the right side of
the street. And then he comes back. He's having a
good old time. She goes, oh, did I say the
rights I'm at the last side. That joke, as we'll see,
did not come from whole cloth. No it did not,
because you know, not only are the weapons of war
(04:15):
being enhanced in their technology, so are the the communication
abilities right, which means well and also you know economic
trade expands across the globe at this point, and all
kinds of other possible conflicts arise from that, and resource
extraction across the world. So, I mean, you really imagine
(04:36):
that they are all of these world leaders with competing interests,
and they can see all the other world leaders out there,
they can even talk to them if they wanted to,
or maybe someone close to them, and maybe they think,
you know, it would be nice if we could take
out leader X and country why so that we could
get resource Z. That's right, And you would assume that
(05:00):
over the intervening centuries, at some point, during the construction
of various world orders, someone in one important rumor another
would have pitched something against the assassination. At some point,
surely someone would have said, hey, guys, you know, while
(05:20):
while I have you all here, I know we're almost
done with the meeting, but we should we should make
assassination illegal, right like, guys, Oh yeah, sure, let's make
it illegal, which would prevent all of those assassins from
doing it. Yeah. Well, and that's a hard and long
(05:40):
well that doesn't seem to be entirely true. According to
a guy named Michael L. Gross in a paper called
assassination and targeted killing, Law enforcement, execution, or self defense,
which was published in the Journal of Applied Philosophy. Assassination,
it turns out, can be more or less perfectly legal, right,
(06:03):
and he writes he's got a a nuanced take on it.
We thought the best way to do this would be
to give you an excerpt from this paper, and he writes, quote,
international law does not ban assassination unequivocally, but instead prohibits
perfect e, which is the word of the day. I
think we can agree or those acts that abuse the
(06:24):
protections that the laws of armed conflict guarantee. Common examples
of perfecty include attacking from under the protection of a
white flag or harming combatants who laid down their arms. Uh.
These protections are integral to modern warfare and underlie the
conventions of surrender. Without them, war would end only in
(06:44):
extermination or the proverbial fight to the death. Assassination is
perfidious only insofar as it abuses these or similar protections
really quickly. But I just want to add, like, this
is basically just saying, Okay, you have to follow some
basic rules, but the only thing governing following those rules
is our agreement to follow those rules both sides. Once
(07:07):
that breaks down, then it's it's it's chaos, and that
a lot of that depends on who has the upper
hand in terms of weaponry or are we truly gentlemen
when it comes down to achieving total dominance. I don't know,
I think probably not. Or escaping our own death of course,
of course. Um, that's a fascinating concept. Yeah. So basically
(07:32):
the world has agreed that assassination is it's fine. You
know what I mean, it's it's it's fine so long
as you obey certain rules. Yeah, which is ridiculous. It's
basically everyone say, look, look, you can try and assassinate us.
We're gonna try and assassinate you. Cool, Okay, cool, Just
(07:55):
don't just don't pretend like you're not going to assassinate
us and then assassinate us. Does that make a right? Yeah.
Being perfidious means being deceitful or untrustworthy. So so it's
it's a very uh, it's very difficult thing to enforce,
and that that's probably a big part of why modern
(08:16):
history is riddled with and to no small degree, shaped
by assassinations. Think about it, like in Russia alone, five
emperors were assassinated within less than two hundred years, and
I think in the case of Nicholas the Second his
family was assassinated to that fundamentally altered the course of
(08:40):
Russian history, and therefore I would argue world history. The
most notable assassination victims in US history tend to be
um civil rights activists like Martin Luther King or sitting
US presidents. You know, President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. Three
other US presidents also die by assassins h James Garfield,
(09:02):
William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy. That one is probably
still the most controversial in recent history. In Europe, as
we mentioned in episode one, the assassination of an archduke
named Franz Ferdinand by the Black Hand, which we also
mentioned triggered World War One. Wasn't the Black Hand a
(09:26):
Serbian group nationalist serb um insurgents, I believe right? Yeah,
exactly exactly. And if you listen to or watch one
of our earlier episodes about the Black Hand, the story
is so amazing. History hinges on such small things. Uh.
The guy, the guy responsible for the assassination actually screwed
(09:51):
it up the first time. And only got the friends
Ferdinand by accident. Well, it's interesting we're seeing stuff like that,
not not with assassination, she's necessarily, but certainly in the moment,
it's hard to see what that match strike is that
sets off the series of events. But in the times
that we're living in, it could certainly be something like
the killing of George Floyd. You know, that could be
(10:12):
looked back on as that powder keg ignition point. You know,
something like that exactly exactly, And it's it's tantalizing, and
it is also tricky to say how history would have
played out if these and other murders had not occurred.
I mean, look at World War One. The stage was
(10:34):
already set for World War One on multiple levels. So
you could argue that if Ferdinand had not been assassinated,
another assassination or another conflict could have sparked the flame.
And and Abraham Lincoln at the time of his death
watching my American cousin in the Ford Theater, he had
(10:54):
already made a lasting impact on the United States, and
so on and so on. We'll never know what would
have happened had these murder victims been allowed to live
out their natural lifespan just before you keep um, John
of Kennedy's brother, I feel like his assassination is one
(11:17):
of those those things that, on the cusp of possibly
becoming president, could have actually changed the course of history
more than any sitting president being assassinated. That's a really
good point, Matt, because I was gonna ask Ben, what,
in your opinion, was the goal in assassinating Kennedy and
and did we see results if we had to simplify
(11:41):
it to a political end game situation for whatever group?
Well again, because we probably think it was maybe the
government itself. I mean, there's so many that's such a
can of warmth. But I was wondering what you think,
I don't know, or what would be one possible reason.
Oh man, this is this is one for all of
us and for those of us listening along at home.
(12:05):
We have we have gone back and forth in this
for years that I would say, go back and listen
to like four episodes we've done on JFK's assassination. Um,
were it just comes up? Yeah in episodes or when uh,
when we used to hang out in person, there would
be there we would be talking about, you know, a
(12:28):
film we liked and then twenty minutes later, Uh, we're
back to JFK. Listen to the Harmon Town episode that
we were on. We have a great discussion about all
that was good. Yeah, I guess I just mean in
terms I'm thinking about it more than in the in
the framework of assassinations as like a tool, you know. Um,
(12:48):
And there's obviously all kinds of different end games. Some
people might just assassinate somebody because they don't like them,
or they disagree with their politics, or it could be
more spacific, like to achieve something that they know is
brewing in legislation. But we also know that the president
is not nearly as powerful as as one would like
(13:08):
to think, So it's not you know, yeah, yeah, I
mean that's an arguable I just mean in terms of
like actually pushing through legislation if if Congress is out
of balance, like right now, it's it's yeah, but who
needs legislation when you've got the executive order moment We'll
see how effective those things are as well. Just short
(13:31):
answer the the benefit of killing President Kennedy, Uh, It's
it's multiple because you could say some groups in the
US government. I'm not accusing them of doing it. But
some groups in the US government benefited from losing one
of the most powerful opponents to their plans for Castro
(13:55):
in Cuba. You could also say Lyndon Johnson benefited by
becoming president. You could also say, uh, the USS are
benefited by seeing a powerful blow to the ideology of
Western democracy and capitalism. I'm very careful to say putin
(14:16):
if you're listening. Yeah, yeah, I still don't open the
mail he sends though, which I always like, probably profiling handle.
It was one of those like grabber clause, you know,
like not polonium. Right. Please send all complaints to our
(14:39):
seven Complaint department here, especially for you. That's Jonathan Strickland.
Did iHeart radio dot com? So we know that these
we know that these assassinations continue as a tool, as
a mechanism. It continues because it is effective. Right, We're
in the realm of practicality. No matter how it is
sold to a given public or given audience. If something
(15:03):
doesn't work, then an intelligence apparatus, a corporation, or a
government will try to find a better method. There's not
really a better method than an assassination in certain cases.
That's why during the Cold War we see this massive
increase in the number of political assassinations specifically, and just
(15:23):
like assassinations of old, this was probably due to the
stark ideological differences between what we're called the First and
second worlds. Uh quick, myth myth busting. If we haven't
talked about this before, when you hear things like third
world country or second World country, first world that's that's
(15:44):
a Cold War relic. That's not about income or inequality.
What the first world was pitched as the world of
democracy and capitalism, second world being the world of communism, right,
and the third world was just a phrase that was
used to describe unaligned countries, and it transformed over time.
(16:05):
So now when you hear people say third world country
in the West, they're not talking about ideology, they're talking
about developmental status. Anyway, These people on either side of
this ideological divide, the world's superpowers, were more than willing
to not only put out put out a successful assassination operations,
(16:27):
they're also more than willing to publicly justify these killings,
to finance them, and take care of the people they
sent out to do it. And eventually both sides started
to realize this practice may have a diminishing return. That's
why many modern countries nowadays, between now and the age
(16:48):
of the assassins. Uh, they have taken legal steps, at
least in theory, to ban this practice. And I think
this is what you're getting to met with executive orders, right. Well, yeah,
in any executive order, really it's just a handy tool
to have there in the oval office. Um, and so
many presidents have wielded it terrifying not not not not
(17:12):
to mention this one an totally glossed over when I
was talking earlier the ability to install lifetime lawmakers on
the Supreme Court, which which is a pretty pretty pretty
serious power move. Yeah it is. But however, we are
not speaking of that. We are speaking of a nineteen
seventy six executive order put forth by Gerald Ford. Old
(17:34):
Gerald Ford. If you were a fan of SNL back
in the day, you probably very much like Gerald Ford.
I do. Uh. That was impressions. Uh no, when I
was watching it, it was not feral Department, those of you,
those of who, those of you who know no, Um,
it was executive order one to three three three. Isn't
(17:57):
that fun? Or twelve? That's a fun way to say it.
And it says, or at least in parts, says, no
person employed by, or acting on behalf of the United
States Government shall engage in or conspire to engage in assassination.
They're done. Ha ha, we won't do it really simple
language too, Like that's very explicit and it seems somewhat definitive.
(18:22):
But okay. So the thing about Executive Order twelve three
or one two three three three is that it's not
as altruistic as it sounds. If you just here that
part where they say, okay, no more, no more daggers
in the dark. Uh. This is the same executive order
that authorized the expansion of data collection and surveillance. It's
(18:47):
been it's been cited by the n s A, the
National Security Agency, as the legal foundation for its work
in collecting unencrypted information flowing through data centers. Like that's
this order is why the n s A says it's
totally fine to intercept information from Google, Yahoo, and so on.
(19:12):
So we can't mistake it for goody two shoes stuff.
But in any case, if you still think, oh great,
go uncle Sam, no more assassination, we do need to
point out that under George W. Bush's administration, this executive
order was diplomatic way to see it. Relaxed. When we
(19:35):
say relaxed, you know, it's it's a situation where they said, look,
there are different kinds of good. You know. There's a
day to day good. Yeah, there's the individual good, and
there are some things that are great, and a greater
good sometimes requires things that seems like small evils. Anyway, guys,
(19:59):
remember we're doing this for you, you know what I mean.
That's how it went, and that's the question for today.
Has the world moved on from this grizzly, perfidious, insidious practice.
With so many countries officially banning these activities to one
degree or another, how do we respond to those who
(20:22):
allege assassinations continue in the modern day. We'll tell you
after word from our sponsors. Here's where it gets crazy. Okay,
if we're responding to someone who says, hey, I think
(20:43):
assassinations continue in the modern day, and if we're responding
objectively and honestly, the only thing we can do is agree.
We can only agree. In fact, assassinations don't just continue apace.
They're a huge business. They are a vital piece of geopolitical, corporate,
and sometimes even religious networks and they come in several
(21:06):
different types, but you'll you'll recognize these if you've listened
to Eppisode one of this series. Yeah, the stuff we
talked about in episode one, all of the motivations, the
reasoning behind using assassination tactics, it all applies to modern assassinations,
all of it. Uh, if they're they're generally a few reasons.
Let's let's outline them here of why assassinations occur in
(21:30):
the modern day. One, you're gonna eliminate some kind of
military commander from an opposing threat, an opposing army. Right,
you're doing that too, destabilize that military like lop the
head off, so that other generals or whoever else exists
there has to move up. And maybe they don't know
the strategies as well as that person that you killed does.
(21:52):
And you think, Yeah, we talked about the assassination of
the Iranian general rather recently the United States its assassination
of the Iranian general and how even the use of
the term assassination was contentious at the time. Was it
just an act of war? Was it, you know, in
an extra judicial killing. It's interesting, it's sort of fizzled
(22:16):
a little bit because there is a whow when that happened,
where an ambassador from Iran was being very vocal about
how this was an outright act of war, an outright
act of aggression, an assassination of a beloved official, you know.
And there were people interviews on NPR and stuff. Are
people in the streets just saying that America was overstepped
and that it was absolutely, you know, an outright act
(22:38):
of aggression. And then that story kind of disappeared because
I remember hearing it. It seemed so intense. I was like,
oh God, have we done a thing that we cannot
go back from? Like have we really let the badger
out of the bag at this point, Well, well, you know,
you know what it could have been instead of you know,
anything else. It could have been the US military sending
(23:00):
a good old fashioned message. Ah, yes, that's a that's
another type of modern assassination. This is the one, uh
and glad, if you're listening, I think you'll enjoy this.
This is the one I like to call from Russia
with love, think of think of the polonium murders. The
(23:21):
Russian intelligence apparatus knew this substance would be a clear
indication of their involvement at some level, or the involvement
of someone who was involved with them, But they also
knew it would occur in a way that was difficult
to trace and and very difficult to publicly prosecute. Right,
It's kind of a finger along the nose wink. Right. Yeah,
(23:46):
good luck with your journalism degree, buddy. So so okay,
we could be more conspiratorial talking about sending a message?
Uh did everybody else for yet? I only knew about
this from doing strange news daily? Did everybody else forget
that time a few months ago when Russian doctors just
(24:06):
kept falling out of windows during the coronavirus scientistic a
new definistration of Prague Almost Yeah, I mean scientists around
the globe for the past couple of decades have been
dropping off, which we still haven't done an episode on.
That's right, we should do that. Uh. Their type of
(24:28):
modern assassination is to eliminate internal competition. Tale as old
as time. Think of violent regimes that are inherently unstable,
Some pretty often family lead North Korean leadership as assassinated
internal competitors that might have later proven to be challengers
(24:48):
to the throne or challengers to the line of secession
in the days of the Ottoman Empire, which I know
is a little old for this example, but in the
days of the Ottoman Empire was also then for people
to kill their siblings. There can only be one sultan,
you know what I mean. And we have to think
about coups so common in recent history don't get reported
(25:12):
near as often as they should. Definitely don't get reported
as they're occurring. Uh. These assassination attempts are It's kind
of like what what we talked about earlier with who
owns the motivation for an action? Who in their mind
is pulling the trigger and turning the assassin into just
(25:34):
a tool. Uh. These assassination attempts in coups, they're often
incited by a foreign power, and I know that makes
most of us think of the US and South America
or something. That's true. That's a great example, but we
need to also think of corporations, especially in the great
game of resource extraction. They're seeking too. They don't really
(25:55):
care about the motivation of the individual assassin or the people.
Uh do we doing the coup? They just won a
government or a regime. There's more pliable to their goals.
You see this in South America, you see it all
over the African continent, you see it in Central Asia.
The list goes on, what was the banana company about
(26:16):
the fruit fruit fruit man brutal And that's I mean,
it's a business. I don't think it's unfair to refer
to this as the as an industry. So when we
look at the modern assassination industry, we see we see
(26:37):
examples that clearly prove assassination is ongoing. It exists on
multiple levels in the world, and a lot of people
are involved. A ton of people are involved. Yeah, and
we have to caveat this a little bit and use
some swissy air quotes around the word terrorism here, because,
as we know, it's a term, pejorative term. Oftentimes it's
(26:58):
used in political rhetoric to brand uh an opposing force
as somehow like you know, the bad guys, when you
know one person's terror ast, another person's freedom fighter or
what have you. We we've we've said this many times
in the past. It's all about which side of the
conflict that you're on. Um. But those referred to as terrorists,
regardless of any ideology, clearly and on a regular basis,
(27:22):
deploy these kinds of tactics. UH. The date as far
back as the hashisham Um clan of ancient times that
we talked about in the first part of this this series.
UM they have to elevate a powerful individual leader again
by merit insane idea, UM infiltrated network or attack without
(27:43):
regard to personal safety, UM be willing to die for
their cause, for their mark, disregard any possible collateral damage civilians,
non military structures, you know, infrastructure, gatherings, events, all in
service of the target. And the attacks are often motivated
by strong personal beliefs. So this this is a little
(28:04):
bit different than our idea of a hired gun. You
know this, These are very personal, personally motivated attacks based
around ideology a lot of oftentimes even even if they're
just personally motivated by that leader, whoever that powerful individual
leader is, and then those beliefs are impart. It is
almost in a cult like fashion at times, you know
(28:25):
what I mean, If someone has this magnetism. We often
see this with suicide bombers who perhaps aren't really invested personally,
but they've been either I don't know, I don't hate
that term brainwashed. It seems so divisive. But you know,
you often hear stories of of women who have been
forced to become suicide bombers by their husbands or you know,
(28:46):
because of this hierarchy of like an individual wielding this
kind of authority over people's very minds, um and actions. Yeah,
if you want to see indoctrinated or radicalize, Uh, those
those are similar terms, you know. But but with that,
with that list of commonalities that you gave us here,
(29:10):
let's all pause for a second and think back on
just how many international murders of notable journalists, activists, politicians, criminals,
and business tycoons fit the bill here. Like this stuff is,
This stuff is happening, and it probably will happen again.
One quick example close to home here in Fort Benning, Georgia,
(29:35):
there's something that was once upon a time called the
School of the America's. Its opponents called it, uh the
School of Assassins, and they did so for a reason.
It was established in in the U S Control Panama
Canal Zone as the Latin American Center Ground Division. Pretty
(29:55):
innocuous name, but it's called the School of Assassins in
reference their specific training programs which appear to and we're
being overly fair here. They appear to advocate actions that
are in direct violation of that executive order we mentioned
earlier one, two, three, three three, Yeah, and again established
(30:19):
in that executive order went through in seventies six, so
it's forty six to seventy six, thirty years. It's really
it's really interesting stuff. We did a whole I can't
remember we did a whole podcast episode on it. I
know we did a video on this, and we've done
quite a bit of research on the place. But School
of the America's fascinating. So let's go to UM Major
(30:43):
Joseph Blair, who was a former instructor at the school.
He said, quote, the author of s O A, the
School of America's and c I A torture manuals drew
from intelligence materials used during the Vietnam War that advocated assassination, torture, extortion,
and other techniques techniques. Yeah, interesting stuff. How is that
(31:09):
not illegal? Evenh Yeah? That's oh man, that's the thing.
So so to put a fine point on it, the
School of America's taking people from other countries and training
them to be insurgents, right to be direct action operatives,
(31:30):
to be coupmakers, yeah, or cookings, so the yeah, right,
a bunch of coups So aside, there is internal reasoning here,
and the internal reasoning on Uncle Sam's side and for
proponents of the School of America's was something like, well, yeah, oversight,
(31:54):
regulations and prohibitions, those things are important. I get it,
you get it right. Those things are important for US personnel.
They don't apply to foreign officers. They're not part of
our government. We can't really tell them what to do
under US law to with. What that means is we
(32:15):
are not actually committing assassinations. Instead, we're just helping some
friendly forces from foreign lands figure out how to do
the right thing, you know, if something happens, right, if
if something happens, or if something needs to happen and there.
(32:39):
So that's the idea. It's kind of like five Eyes
gets around the laws against domestic surveillance right of your
own population because now it's not Uncle Sam telling on
its citizens. Now it's the UK. So now we're just
getting mail from some friends, you know what I mean.
This also gives us possible to deny it ability in
(33:01):
case one of those graduates of the School of America's
goes rogue and commits human rights atrocities. During his time
as president, Jimmy Carter temporarily suspended the use of those
training manuals because the administration was concerned over what they
called again, possible human rights violations. And again we see
(33:25):
the specter of the greater good. No, not that, not again, um,
but yeah, you know our our Georgia boy. Jimmy Carter,
he believed that the international military education and training that
was being provided there at the School of the America's
um and several other institutions, by the way, several other
(33:45):
places there were for training and like that, he thought
it was critical to furthering quote, the national interests of
the United States, which in a way it was and is.
Having that kind of tool at your disposal kind of
is integral to national interests, right, Like with the US
(34:09):
actions in Libya leading to the fall of Gaddafi, it
was national interest, right. So those training manuals, which explicitly
tell you how to torture people, how to assassinate people,
and so on. I think I've got them on my
computer somewhere from yeah, oh gosh, our search histories, I'm
(34:31):
telling you, yea. So those manuals, by the way, were reintroduced.
That's why I said they were temporarily suspended. They were
reintroduced to the school's training curriculum by the Reagan administration.
In Currently, the School of America is still exists. It
just changed its name. It's wind SEC under the William J.
(34:53):
Perry Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies. Don't worry though, everybody.
They say they have a much more rigorous elements of
human rights training in the program. So good on us,
you know, good hustle team. Yeah, yep, good, good on us.
And we have to point out that there are there's
(35:15):
a number of graduates from the School of the Americas
back in the day and now win SEC that have
been accused of doing things, really bad things that they
were trained to do in those places, and they have
even been sentenced for human rights violations and criminal activity
(35:35):
in their home countries. So come on over and get
some training. It will be really fun. Here's here's your manuals,
and then go back to gonna be snacks. We're gonna
have craft services. You guys will be all well taken
care of, sure, and then they're gonna do these crimes
um and you can even you can find online a
couple of places where there are lists of people who
(35:57):
have graduated from these schools and these training programs, who
you know, who then did later crimes. You can see
the crimes that they were accused of later, both alleged
by the way, and some proved. And they're they're even um, yeah,
they're they're numerous databases where you can find this information. Actually, yeah,
check out the School of America's watch if you want
(36:21):
to see the prize bad apples of this program. Uh.
And again, you know, this is not to say I
feel like we have to say. This is not to
say that every graduate of the School of America's instantly
went off and became warlord, but several did, and to
say otherwise is equally disingenuous. So we have not only
(36:45):
um in this nation, we have not only taken lessons
learned from that ancient sect of assassins and from earlier
assassin training programs in Vietnam, in the U s s R.
And so on, we have built was often called a
training program for this sort of behavior, not too different
from Alam Castle itself all those years ago. And that
(37:09):
that's so that's just a very a very high level
look at the modern state of assassinations. Today. We're gonna
pause for a word from our sponsors, and when come back,
we're going to talk about the future of assassination and
(37:35):
we're back drones. Baby, Look, we're gonna talk about drones,
and drones are the scariest part of this assassination business
that exists out there. But I think we should just
quickly mention that militaries across the world have elite soldiers
(37:55):
and operators who and I'm thinking of something like the
um Navy, Seals or brass exactly, so people who are
teams that go out early, right and if there's going
to be a conflict or if there's something perhaps going
to arise somewhere, teams that will go out there and
(38:17):
that have the ability or at least are trained, I
would say, with the ability to take out someone the
way an assassin would. Um. Of course, I've never been
in either of those, and correct me if I'm completely wrong.
I just feel like that would be a very smart
thing to have in, you know, in the tool belt
of anyone who is you know, a seal or a
(38:39):
Green Beret or one of those elite and maybe even
a ranger. I don't know. Yeah, that's a great point.
That's a great point. Multiple the US gets beat up
on for this lot or singled out for it, because
the US has multiple versions of this. Uh. These operators
are highly trained professionals, and it is openly admitted that
they you is Uh. They use their training in what
(39:03):
are called targeted killings or extraction missions as well from
unfriendly territory. But a ton of other nations have them too,
you know what I mean. It's the kind of thing
where if you're a superpower and someone has that capacity
and you do not, then there is a defense gap.
You have to have something like this. That's why there's
(39:26):
spects nuts, that's why massad exists, I mean pretty much.
Any Yeah, any any country that has international reach or
global interest is going to have some sort of analog
to those things. And there maybe we should do an
episode on those because they are fascinating. Yeah, I'd love
(39:47):
to just to pausitive from what I'd love to hear
from anyone out there who can talk to us who
has experience as essentially an elite military operator. Um, just
to know even if that's maybe that's a completely wrong
thing to say, just a unit within a team that
would be considered elite. Yeah, and they do a lot
(40:08):
of we know, of course it's not all cloak and
dagger assassination. As we said, they are extraction missions, they're
also protection and escort missions. Um. But yeah, there there's
a wealth of stuff out there. This we we need
to do this episode, and we would love to hear
from you if you have firsthand experience in this regard
a lot of those special forces. Also, I'm so glad
(40:31):
you're pointing that out, Matt. A lot of special forces
also collaborate with Drown Technology, which is the the sky
net elephant in the room. And again, Matt, thank you
for putting in that important piece we've missed because as
you can tell, both Nolan i A are always excited
(40:52):
to talk drones. Modern governments are super into the strategy
of changing names and erms to avoid controversial language and
public statements. That's why Blackwater became Academy or whatever. That's
why Comcast became infin exfinity, That's why clear Channel became
my Heart. That's why George Carlin was such a successful
(41:14):
comedian because of euphemisms. It's true, and so we see
a name change there with assassination, targeted killing named killing. Uh,
he's even drones they referred to more as U A V.
S now right, because that's a little more innocuous than drones.
Drones sounds very future e and sinister. When I think
(41:35):
of a drone, I think of something scary coming to
kill me. Right, you can hide a lot a lot
of evil behind some acronyms or initialisms. U A V
just means unmanned aerial vehicle. A kite is a ua V.
That's right, yes, kind of is it? Yeah, there's no
(41:55):
one driving, it's unmanned. You're right. The string is the
same thing. It's just a physical version of the connection
between the drone and the controller. Yeah, yeah, that's the
argument I would make. But let's so targeted killing is
euphemism is a form of assassination carried out by governments
against their perceived enemies. So it's important here to note
(42:19):
that this is seen as a sub genre of assassination
applicable only to governments. So you can't go into court
as an individual, or you shouldn't be able to go
into court as like an individual or a representative of
a religious institution or corporation. And say you know, yes,
I am the in and out burger assassin. Uh. And
(42:44):
this was a targeted killing at an arpy's and that
was for the greater good. They are enemies of in
an out burger, you can't say stuff like that. You
can only do it if you're a government, because then
you can argue there's a greater good. I mean, think
of weaponized drones as the robo version of those ancient assassins.
(43:05):
They have a lot in common. The two big things
they have in common they're relentless and they don't care
about self preservation. Oh and there's an old man in
a mountain controlling them somewhere. And now it's more at
it's not really Nora, but yeah, I love that. Like,
(43:26):
they're also very effective at killing, but they're probably less
so weird, they're probably less precise the assassins of old. Yeah,
the assassin of old used a blade up close to
take someone out. This sends a missile generally a missile
that causes collateral damage almost every time it's used, well,
(43:50):
not infrequent number of times. I mean. The scary thing
about the toast of London, uh scene that you alluded
to earlier, all is again, it's not it doesn't come
out a whole cloth, or there wasn't just some clever
person in the writer's room. According to statistical analyzes by
some nonprofits, including nonprofit organization called Reprieve, which is composed
(44:14):
of international lawyers and investigators, UH nine children. Nine children
have been killed for every targeted adult the United States
has tried to assassinate since programs like this began. I'm
okay with that. No, I'm not okay with that's unforgivable.
(44:35):
That's but that's what there's a there's a there's a
non offensive sounding term for that. It's collateral damage. It
takes the humanity out of the equation. When you're not
actually having to wield the knife yourself, you know, you're
doing it from such a remove. Mistakes were made, Right,
what's what's the what's the common complaint for people in
online gaming? It's not me, you messed up. It's the
(44:58):
lag time. Right. So maybe as someone has blamed collateral
damage on that in the past, but it doesn't make
these people, it doesn't make these civilians magically resurrected, you know. Uh.
Like the Reprieve also found that UH, in the course
of attempting to kill one. I'm in al Zawahiri. Uh.
(45:19):
The US, specifically, the CIA is believed to have killed
seventy six children and twenty nine adult by standards, and Ben,
you know, this would have been under the Obama administration,
wouldn't it correct? That's I mean, you know, he gets
such a he's so lauded and held up as this
like shining example of like a great president. There's obviously
a lot of great things about it. First of all,
(45:39):
he could speak in complete sentences, which was pretty dope.
But um, he was oversaw massive amounts of these kinds
of attacks that resulted in this sort of collateral damage.
And people don't gloss over that entirely, but it certainly
doesn't seem to be the first bullet point on his resume. Right. Well,
it increased the use of of U A. V's and
(46:02):
drones increased so much under under President Obama. It's really
disturbing considering we entered, you know, what was called the
War on Terror from the previous administration, when we were
actively you know, starting wars, and then it only increased.
And it's it's likely a a function of the technology improving, right,
(46:28):
I mean, and it has by leaps and bounds, and
even now as they have been for gosh two decades now,
um scholars and military officials, politicians people like you, me,
everyone else. We were divided on the use of of
drones and U a v s and and targeted killings
(46:50):
named killings whatever you want to refer to them as,
because I mean, it is complicated, right, Some supporters of
using drones would say, it's actually more humane to do this.
It's safer for military personnel on whichever side is doing
the killing or attacking. And you know, you're not just
(47:11):
sending in a bunch of troops, let's say, to try
and kill a group of people or even a team
of people. Then where you're going to have multiple people firing,
you've got maybe one, maybe two maximum a handful of
drones that are going in, uh to kill someone. Generally
it's one that is literally going in to kill someone.
(47:32):
You know. The other thing that would be stated, I
think by someone who supports this is that these drone
attacks aren't going to be done in a time of
peace against any nation that we're not at war with. Right,
Let's see, that's the thing. It's true. Supporters do say
that but recent events have conclusively proven this not to
be the case. That's where we come up with another
(47:53):
euphemism for assassinations, extra judicial killings right outside of the law,
which are you know, technically banned by the US Military Code.
This leads us to uh, this leads us to a
troubling conclusion. We have to explore the future of assassination.
(48:14):
What we've sadly proven here is the following. It appears
it does not matter what laws are written. Right as
many as you want, say whatever you want, as explicitly
or as obliquely as you please. These laws do not
matter if they are not continually enforced, and the truth
of the matter is that they are not continually enforced.
(48:36):
Assassination is effective. It may not be effective in terms
of counter terrorism, it's arguably terrible pr but it works
for what people want it to do. And in the future,
we're only going to see more increasingly sophisticated uses of
these tactics, newer, more advanced drones, increasingly effective poisoning um
(48:59):
to livery systems and substances. Importantly, and this is what
we should all think about, They're also going to be
increasingly sophisticated, nuanced rationalizations for assassination, increasingly sophisticated ways of
hiding the hand that ultimately triggered the thing. Right, So
(49:21):
the front organizations are going to be tough. The war
of information and narrative will only continue to evolve, and
as always, one thing will remain the same. Both the
assassins and their masters will argue this is necessary for
you guessed it the greater good. And so today we
(49:43):
end our episode with questions for you, what do you
think the future of assassination holds? Killings continue, specifically in
any of the ways we've described, will they increase, Will corporate, political,
and religious actors be held accountable for their actions? And
(50:07):
if so, by whom some international group? Maybe let us know,
are you one of these uh puppeteers, you know, pulling
the strings of all of these you know, hidden assassins
in our midst Let us know he can. Well, we'll
keep your secrets, buddy, that we promise um right to us.
(50:27):
You can reach us on the social media channels of note, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter,
all that stuff are preferred. Means is our Facebook group.
Here's where it gets crazy, where you can be part
of the conversation with your fellow conspiracy realists, that's right.
If you don't want to do that, you can find
us on Twitter and Facebook. On the other side at
(50:47):
conspiracy stuff and on Instagram. We are Conspiracy Stuff Show.
Of course, visit us on YouTube YouTube dot com slash
conspiracy Stuff. If you are not given to sip the
social needs no worries, we have a phone number for you.
You can call us at one eight three three s
t d W y t K. You'll have three minutes
(51:10):
on your call. Let us know what's on your mind,
Let us know your experience, give us your feedback on
this series, or suggestions for topics you think your fellow
listeners will find of interest. Most importantly, let us know
if it's okay to use your voice and your name
on air. That's right. If you don't want to do
any of those things, you can still write to us.
(51:32):
You can contact us Ben noll and I and Paul
will see you. Send us a good old fashioned email.
We are conspiracy at iHeart radio dot com. Stuff they
(52:00):
Don't Want You to Know is a production of I
Heart Radio. For more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit
the I heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
listen to your favorite shows,
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.