MostDangerousMen_History" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">MostDangerousMen_History 

                                             
 INLNews.com

 Easy to Find...... Hard to Leave..see you there soon at your INLNews.com

                                                                                       International News Limited Domain Pricing Per Year
                                                                          .com* $9.99 | .net* $9.99 | .org* $9.99 | .info* $9.99 | .us* $9.99 | .biz* $9.99 | .ws* $9.75 | .name* $7.95
                                                                                                                 Save even more on multi-year registrations!
                                                       INLNews YahooMail HotMail GMail AOLMailUSA MAILYahooMail HotMailGMail AOLMail MyWayMail CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs
                                                 INLNsNYTimes WashNs 
AustStockEx WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust 
                                                                                               WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs TasNews ABCTas DarwinNs 
USA MAIL

Some of the History’s Most Dangerous People
 
The Most Dangerous Man In London


Julian Assange- The Unauthorised AutoBiography ..
The Australian Enemy of the State but the Hero of the people... for exposing the truth...when  it needed to be exposed



ABC News Video  FOX News Video  FOXBusiness Video  CNN Video  AP Video  BBC News Video  Reuters Video  AFP Video  CNET Video
CNBC Video  Australia 7 News Video   Rocky Mountain News Elections Video  CBC.ca Video  NPR Audio  
Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone Video
Richard Bangs Adventures Video  Charlie Rose Video   Expanded Books Video  Assignment Earth Video 
ROOFTOPCOMEDY.com Video 
Guinness World Records Video  weather.com Video  AccuWeather Video  You Witness News User Video

NPR Audio BY CATEGORY Top Stories  Politics  World  Business  Sports 
 
Technology  Health & Science  Arts  U.S. 

VIEW LOCAL VIDEO KVUE-TV Austin  WJZ 13 Baltimore  WBZ Boston 
 
WCNC Charlotte  CBS 2 Chicago

Video by Category
 
U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
 
Climate Change 

More INL News Video !Finance Sports


Video by Category
 
U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
 
Climate Change 

More INL News Video !Finance Sports

This is real, don't be fooled. This is happening.


Read the book  called: Hows do I kill 11 million people by Andy Andrews
 

I think it basically comes down to that 9/11 was their Reichstag Fire. The Patriot Act was theirEnabling Act of 1933 or Reichstag Fire Decree. Blackwater, Xe, Academi is basically their SS.

I'm not sure how accurate or how far this analogy is going to go, but they've improved on their tactics and I don't see an enemy that is going to stop them at hand. If we don't expose the truth about 9/11 we don't stand a chance in my opinion. The truth stands the test of time.

This whiteboard animation shows what happened when Hitler lied to get elected and people don't care or pay attention to the lies of their leaders, until they do care...and at that point, it is too late. Parts of this video are narrated by a man who served as a German soldier and a German woman who lived right by the railroad tracks the cattle trains ran on that carried the Jews to their deaths.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH_Izul6J5M

Based on Andy Andrews' book, How Do You Kill 11 Million People?

Hey … we’re still honoring one of the Amendments! Score one for We the People!

Communist Manifesto - Congressional Record

 In America, Journalists Are Considered Terrorists
Painting by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com.

Fourth Amendment

The 4th Amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

But the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

Senator Rand Paul correctly notes

Fourth Amendment

The 4th Amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

But the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

Senator Rand Paul correctly notes:

The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy.

Paul introduced a bill to “protect individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles commonly called drones.”

Emptywheel notes in a post entitled “The OTHER Assault on the Fourth Amendment in the NDAA? Drones at Your Airport?”:

http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Picture-7.png

***

As the map above makes clear–taken from this 2010 report–DOD [the Department of Defense] plans to have drones all over the country by 2015.

Many police departments are also using drones to spy on us. As the Hill reported:

At least 13 state and local police agencies around the country have used drones in the field or in training, according to the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, an industry trade group. The Federal Aviation Administration has predicted that by the end of the decade, 30,000 commercial and government drones could be flying over U.S. skies.

***

“Drones should only be used if subject to a powerful framework that regulates their use in order to avoid abuse and invasions of privacy,” Chris Calabrese, a legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said during a congressional forum in Texas last month.

He argued police should only fly drones over private property if they have a warrant, information collected with drones should be promptly destroyed when it’s no longer needed and domestic drones should not carry any weapons.

He argued that drones pose a more serious threat to privacy than helicopters because they are cheaper to use and can hover in the sky for longer periods of time.

A congressional report earlier this year predicted that drones could soon be equipped with technologies to identify faces or track people based on their height, age, gender and skin color.

Americans – Like Nazi Germans – Don’t Notice that All of Our Rights Are Slipping Away






                               CRIME: Most Dangerous Man Alive or Dead


    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,929144,00.html
    When a big car driven by a droop-cheeked, mild-eyed man bunted another last week in St. Joseph, Mich., Patrolman Charles Skelly told the guilty driver to come along to the police station to pay the few dollars damage. The driver yanked out an automatic, shot Officer Skelly dead, sped away. When he smashed up his car, he used his gun to persuade motorists to give him lifts. Officers traced the police-killer closely for an hour, then lost him. The wrecked car was registered in the name of Frederick Dane, owner of a commodious...

    FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives

    A color photograph of a man with a moustache wearing tinted glasses, a white undershirt, and a yellow overshirt in front of a white wall 

    On May 19, 1996, Leslie Ibsen Roggebecame the first person on the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list to be apprehended due to the Internet.

    The FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives is a most wanted list maintained by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The list arose from a conversation held in late 1949 between J. Edgar HooverDirector of the FBI, and William Kinsey Hutchinson,[1]International News Service (the predecessor of the United Press International) Editor-in-Chief, who were discussing ways to promote capture of the FBI's "toughest guys". This discussion turned into a published article, which received so much positive publicity that on March 14, 1950, the FBI officially announced the list to increase law enforcement's ability to capture dangerous fugitives.[2]
    Individuals are generally only removed from the list if the fugitive is captured, dies, or if the charges against them are dropped; they are then replaced by a new entry selected by the FBI. In six cases, the FBI removed individuals from the list after deciding that they were no longer a "particularly dangerous menace to society".[1] Víctor Manuel Gerena, added to the list in 1984, has been on the list longer than anyone, at 29 years. Billie Austin Bryant spent the shortest amount of time on the list, being listed for two hours in 1969.[3] Fidel Urbina is the person most recently listed still at large. On rare occasions, the FBI will add a "Number Eleven" if that individual is extremely dangerous but the Bureau does not feel any of the current ten should be removed.[4]
    The list is commonly posted in public places such as post offices. In some cases, fugitives on the list have turned themselves in on becoming aware of their listing. As of April 23, 2013, 498 fugitives have been listed, eight of them women, and 469 (94%) captured or located,[5] 155 (31%) of them due to public assistance.[5] On May 19, 1996,[6] Leslie Ibsen Rogge became the first person on the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list to be apprehended due to the internet.[7] The FBI maintains other lists of individuals, including the Most Wanted Terrorists,[8] along with crime alerts, missing persons, and other fugitive lists.
     

    New additions

    The Criminal Investigative Division (CID) at FBI Headquarters calls upon all 56 Field Offices to submit candidates for the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted Fugitives" list.[9] The nominees received are reviewed by Special Agents in the CID and the Office of Public Affairs.[9]The selection of the "proposed" candidate(s) is forwarded to the Assistant Director of the CID for his/her approval and then to the FBI's Director for final approval.[9] This process takes some time which is why James Joseph "Whitey" Bulger, Jr., who was arrested inSanta MonicaCalifornia on June 22, 2011,[10] remained on the list until May 9, 2012[11] despite no longer being at large, and Osama bin Laden remained on the list for almost a year after his death at the hands of U.S. forces on May 2, 2011.[12]

    List as of April 23, 2013 

    Rewards are offered for information leading to capture of fugitives on the list; the reward is $100,000 for all fugitives, with the exception of Victor Manuel Gerena, which is $1,000,000.
    Photo Name Date added Sequence number Comments
    FBIVictorManuelGerena.jpg Víctor Manuel Gerena May 14, 1984 386 Gerena is wanted in connection with the armed robbery of approximately $7 million from a security company in West Hartford, Connecticut, in 1983. He allegedly took two security employees hostage at gunpoint and handcuffed, bound, and injected them with an unknown, non-lethal substance to disable them further. The FBI is offering a reward of up to $100,000 for information leading to Gerena's capture.[13][14]
    Glen Godwin.jpg Glen Stewart Godwin December 7, 1996 447 Godwin is wanted for his 1987 escape from Folsom State Prison in California, where he was serving a lengthy sentence for murder. He was subsequently imprisoned in Mexico on drug trafficking charges, but escaped from prison after allegedly murdering a fellow inmate.[15][16]
    FBIRobertWilliamFisher.jpg Robert William "Bobby" Fisher, Sr. June 29, 2002 475 Fisher is wanted for murder of his wife Mary and their two children Robert, Jr. and Brittney and then blowing up the house in which they all lived inScottsdale, Arizona, in April 2001. Investigators believe that Robert Fisher murdered his family because he felt threatened by his wife's intent to divorce.[17][18]
    Alexis Flores.jpg Alexis Flores June 2, 2007 487 Flores is wanted for the kidnapping, rape and murder of five-year-old Iriana DeJesus in PhiladelphiaPennsylvania, in July 2000. He was deported back to his native Honduras in 2005 after serving a prison term for forgery in Arizona. He was added to the list after deportation when his DNA was matched to the DeJesus crime.[19][20]
    FBIJasonDerekBrown.jpg Jason Derek Brown December 8, 2007 489 Brown is wanted for murder and armed robbery in Phoenix, Arizona. Authorities say that in November 2004, Brown allegedly shot and killed an armored car guard outside a movie theater and fled on a bicycle with $56,000 in a duffel bag.[21][22]
    Eduardo Ravelo.jpg Eduardo "Tablas" Ravelo October 21, 2009 493 Ravelo is wanted for his alleged involvement in racketeering activities, conspiracy to launder monetary instruments, and conspiracy to possess heroin, cocaine and marijuana with the intent to distribute. His alleged criminal activities began in 2003.[23]
    FBISimonMogilevich.jpg
    October 22, 2009 494 Mogilevich is wanted for his alleged participation in a multi-million dollar scheme to defraud thousands of investors in the stock of a public company incorporated in Canada, but headquartered in Newtown, Pennsylvania, between 1993 and 1998. The scheme to defraud collapsed in 1998, after thousands of investors lost in excess of $150 million, and Mogilevich, thought to have allegedly funded and authorized the scheme, was indicted in April 2003.[24]
    Eric justin toth.jpg Eric Justin Toth April 10, 2012 495 Toth, a former private-school teacher, was wanted for allegedly producing child pornography in Washington, DC. In June 2008, pornographic images were found on a school camera that had been in Toth's possession. Toth was arrested in Estelí, Nicaragua on April 22, 2013 by local police and awaits deportation to the United States of America.[25] [26]
    Fidel Urbina.jpg Fidel Urbina June 5, 2012 497 Urbina is wanted for allegedly beating and raping a woman in March 1998. While out on bond, he also allegedly beat, raped and strangled a second woman to death in October 1998. Her body was later found in the trunk of a vehicle that had been burned. Both crimes occurred in Chicago, Illinois. Urbina may be residing in DurangoMexico. He also has ties to the Chicago, Illinois, area.[27]
    EDWIN ERNESTO RIVERA GRACIAS.jpg Edwin Ernesto Rivera Gracias March 14, 2013 498 Gracias was wanted for first-degree murder in the stabbing death of a 63-year old Denver resident on August 17, 2011.[28] He was apprehended in Guadalajara, Mexico on March 27, 2013.[29]

    See also

    References

    1. a b "Facts on the Program". FBI. Retrieved 2006-07-10.
    2. ^ "This Day in History 1950: The FBI debuts 10 Most Wanted". History.com. Retrieved 2008-06-20.
    3. ^ McCabe, Paul (2001-03-21). "Ask the FBI.: The Ten Most Wanted list". USA Today.
    4. ^ Douglas, John; Mark Olshaker (July 1999). The Anatomy of Motive: The FBI's Legendary Mindhunter Explores the Key to Understanding and Catching Violent Criminals. Mindhunters, Inc. ISBN 0-671-02393-4.
    5. a b "FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives FAQ". FBI.com. Retrieved 2012-05-16.
    6. ^ "U.S. Fugitive Surrenders In Guatemala After Photo Is Seen On Internet". Associated Press. 05-19-1996.
    7. ^ Biography - Wanted: Gentleman Bank Robber: The True Story of Leslie Isben Rogge, One of the FBI’s Most Elusive Criminals from Nish Publishing Company [1]
    8. ^ "FBI Most Wanted Terrorists". FBI.com. Retrieved 2008-06-20.
    9. a b c ""Ten Most Wanted Fugitives" Program". FBI. Retrieved 02-17-2013.
    10. ^ Melley, Brian and Greg Risling (2011-06-23). FBI arrests mob boss Whitey Bulger in Calif. Associated Press.
    11. ^ "FBI Ten Most Wanted". Retrieved 2011-11-27.
    12. ^ Pelofsky, Jeremy (2012-04-10). "FBI replaces bin Laden on Ten Most Wanted list". Yahoo! News. Reuters.
    13. ^ "Gerena's FBI Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive Alert". FBI. Retrieved 2006-07-10.
    14. ^ "Fugitive Watch: Wanted by the FBI: Wanted for Bank Robbery Theft". ABC News. Retrieved 2008-06-20.
    15. ^ "Godwin's FBI Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive Alert". FBI. Retrieved 2006-07-10.
    16. ^ Underwood, Melissa. "Glen Stewart Godwin Wanted for Murder, Escape From Prison". FOXNews.com. Retrieved 2006-06-20.
    17. ^ Zoellner, Tom (August 7, 2002). "Report portrays suspect in family killing as cruel, controlling"The Arizona Republic. Retrieved 2-05-2010.
    18. ^ "Fisher's FBI Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive Alert". FBI. Retrieved 2006-07-10.
    19. ^ "Flores' FBI Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive Alert". FBI. Retrieved 2007-07-02.
    20. ^ "AMW Fugitive Data File for Alexis Flores". AMW.com. Retrieved 2008-06-20.
    21. ^ "Brown's FBI Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive Alert". FBI. Retrieved 2007-12-08.
    22. ^ "AMW Fugitive Data File for Jason Derek Brown". AMW.com. Retrieved 2008-06-20.
    23. ^ "Ravelo' FBI Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive Alert". FBI. Retrieved 2010-05-14.
    24. ^ "Mogilevich' FBI Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitive Alert". FBI. Retrieved 2010-05-14.
    25. ^ Detienen a gringo buscado por el FBI
    26. ^ "Former teacher wanted for child porn makes FBI list".CNN. 10-04-2012. Retrieved 10-04-2012.
    27. ^ "Fugitives". America's Most Wanted. Retrieved 06-05-2012.
    28. ^ "Colorado Fugitive Edwin Ernesto Rivera Gracias Newest Addition to FBI 'Ten Most Wanted' List". ABC News. Retrieved 14 March 2013.
    29. ^ Langlois, Jill. "Edwin Ernesto Rivera Gracias: Murder suspect on FBI's Top 10 Most Wanted list arrested". Global Post. Retrieved 28 March 2013.

    External links



    CRIME

    Top 10 Deadliest Rampage Killers

    JOSH FOX OCTOBER 22, 2011

    We’ve seen plenty of movies, books and documentaries on serial killers, but not so many on those who are so efficient and deadly that they can murder dozens of people in a single day. Murder sprees seem to have become more prominent over time – notably the tragedy in Norway, which is as recent as July 2011. This evil act will no doubt happen again thousands of times in the future. What I have presented in this list is no more than the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
    10
    George Hennard
    23 dead, 20 injured
    R 4645
    On October 16th, 1991, George Hennard, of Bell County Texas, drove his pick-up truck through the window of a Luby’s Cafeteria. The carnage that followed later became known as the Luby’s Massacre. Hennard crawled out of the vehicle and screamed at the top of his voice: “This is what Bell County has done to me!” before shooting the man closest to him, who had come to assist with the crash. He then ordered everyone not to move, before systematically targeting and stalking women (against whom he was bitterly prejudiced) and shooting them at point blank range with his Glock pistol.
    Throughout the massacre, the patrons of the cafeteria could do no more than hide underneath tables. Nobody dared to make a dash for the door, even when Hennard stopped to reload. One man made an attempt to tackle Hennard so his family could escape, but Hennard simply gunned him down and carried on. The rampage lasted for 10 minutes before police arrived and the situation turned into a stand-off. Hennard was cornered in the restroom area and shot four times by police before he turned the pistol on himself and put an end to the madness. Hennard’s motivation for the massacre was apparently his hatred for women in general, whom he was constantly being rejected by.
    9
    Baruch Goldstein
    29 dead, 125 injured
    Baruch-Goldstein-Terrorist-Jew-Murderer
    Baruch Goldstein was an American-born Israeli settler who perpetrated the notorious Cave of the Patriarchs massacre, in 1994. As a member of the militant Jewish Defense League, Goldstein heavily discriminated against Arabs throughout his life before the massacre. He worked as a physician in the Israeli Defense force, though he refused to treat wounded Arabs at all. After his close friend Rabbi Kahane was assassinated by Arab Extremists, Goldstein swore to take revenge. On February 25th, 1994, Goldstein entered the Cave of the Patriarchs, where 800 Palestinian Muslims were praying. He wore a military uniform in order to appear inconspicuous and blend in with the guards. Goldstein positioned himself at the back of the mosque, strategically covering the only exit. After waiting for a significant amount of time, he opened fire on the crowd with a Galil Assault Rifle.
    In an incredibly short amount of time, Goldstein managed to shoot 29 people to death and wound over a hundred more. According to witnesses, he stood rigid, without moving from his original spot, and tried his hardest to injure as many people as possible by spraying bullets in all directions. The massacre came to an end when someone in the crowd smashed a fire extinguisher over Goldstein’s head, and proceeded to beat him to death with the help of many others present. Goldstein has since been described as a martyr by Jewish extremists, though his actions have been condemned by the Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin.
    8
    Toi Mutsuo
    30 dead, 3 injured
    Primary
    In May 1938, 21-year-old Toi Mutsuo was severely depressed and suffered from tuberculosis, which at the time was an incurable and terminal illness. He lived in the small village of Kaio, on the outskirts of Okayama in Japan. Mutsuo’s parents died when he was very young, forcing him to be brought up by his grandmother. His depression began when local women started to reject his advances because of his suffering of tuberculosis. Before the massacre, Mutsuo wrote suicide notes that implied the reason for his actions was the pain of rejection by his peers.
    In the early hours of May 21st, 1938, Mutsuo used an axe to kill his grandmother via decapitation. He then proceeded to cut the electricity line to the village and strapped two torches to his head, before systematically moving from house to house and killing anyone he found inside. He used a shotgun for most of the killings, though he also made use of the axe and a katana. Before the sun came up, he committed suicide by shooting himself in the chest with the shotgun, but not before he’d taken the lives of 30 innocent people. At this point in history, the massacre perpetrated by Mutsuo was the worst ever to be committed by an individual.
    7
    Campo Elias Delgado
    30 dead, 15 injured
    Campo Elias Delgado
    Campo Elias Delgado was a Colombian English teacher and Vietnam War veteran, who embarked on a horrific killing spree in a luxurious Pozzetto restaurant. Leading up to the massacre, Delgado had become increasingly lonely and his experiences in Vietnam had embittered him against society. He blamed his mother for most of his problems and worked up a sincere hatred for her over time. The murders began on the evening of December 4th, 1986, when Delgado followed one of his female students from school to her apartment, and subsequently killed her and her mother with a hunting knife. He then returned to his mother’s apartment and executed her with a single stab to the back of the neck. Delgado proceeded to wrap her body up in paper and set it on fire. When the fire alarm sounded, many of the other residents fled into the main hallway where Delgado was waiting for them. He stabbed one man to death before shooting five more with a .32 Caliber Revolver.
    In the aftermath of this attack, he walked over to the Pozzetto restaurant with a briefcase that held five rounds of ammunition for his revolver. Once there, he ordered an expensive meal of Spaghetti alla Bolognese and ate for one hour, before walking over to the nearest diner and shooting her in the face at point blank range. Delgado subsequently killed 21 people in the restaurant by cornering his victims and shooting them in the forehead, before moving on to the next person. After 10 minutes of carnage the police arrived and engaged in a gunfight with Delgado, during which he was fatally shot in the temple.
    6
    Cho Seing-hui
    32 dead, 17 injured
    Cho
    Cho Seung-hui is infamous for murdering 32 pupils and teachers, during a school shooting known as the Virginia Tech Massacre in 2007. Cho suffered from mental problems and severe anxiety during his college years, especially after he was reprimanded for stalking two female students. He began to plan out his attack meticulously, by practicing his shooting technique at a local firing range. He also video-taped himself confessing to the massacre and indicating that he was angry at the world for treating him so badly. In his tapes he also expressed admiration for Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold; the perpetrators of the Columbine massacre. These tapes can be viewed on the internet, though most of Cho’s speech is just nonsensical ranting.
    Cho began the attack on April 6th, 2007, by using a Walther semi-automatic pistol to murder two fellow students at a high-rise dormitory of Virginia Tech. He then returned to his room and mailed his video footage to NBC news, before re-arming himself with a Glock pistol. The second part of the massacre had been carefully planned. Cho entered Norris Hall and chained every single exit shut, to prevent people escaping. He even placed notes on the door that said that if anyone attempted to force them open, a bomb would explode. Cho then moved from classroom to classroom, shooting anyone he found inside. He worked hard to kill every single person in each classroom he targeted, and often shot students more than once in a double-tap fashion. Once students heard shots they attempted to barricade classrooms, which stopped Cho from entering on numerous occasions, although he did shoot and kill more than one student through a door. After approximately 9 minutes of Cho’s murderous rampage, the police arrived and forced their way through the chained-up doors. When Cho heard this, he shot himself directly in the face rather than face punishment.
    5
    Ahmed Ibragimov
    34 dead, 20 injured (approx)
    Russia-Colonel-Budanov-Chechnya
    Ahmed Ibragimov was a Chechen bus driver who killed 34 Russians in the village of Mikenskaya, in 1999. The motive for Ibragimov’s rampage remains unknown and little information exists on the internet regarding the massacre. What is known is that, prior to the murders, Ibragimov had created a list of Russian targets, and had included information about where these individuals lived. He knew most of this information as he had previously worked as a postman. On October 8th, he went from house to house tracking down and systematically killing the people listed. His method was to call the victim outside under false pretenses, before shooting them dead with a rifle. He even murdered the 10 year-old child of one of his victims. In the aftermath of the massacre, Ibragimov went on the run for two days before being captured by rebels and delivered to the families of his victims, who proceeded to beat him to death with iron rods and leave his body in the street.
    4
    Martin Bryant
    35 dead, 21 injured
    Martin-Bryant
    In 1996, Martin Bryant had been described as an immature yet harmless man by his neighbors. He was loved by the local children, for whom he often bought expensive gifts. However, Bryant had become lonely, as he didn’t work and lived off a $1.5 million inheritance. He had also told his psychiatrist that he wanted to go around shooting people. His loneliness culminated in Australia’s deadliest spree killing in history, the Port Arthur massacre.
    On April 28th, 1996, Bryant walked into Port Arthur’s Broad Arrow cafe with a large black bag, and ordered a meal. He sat down and conversed with other patrons of the cafe and made comments that there were a lot of wasps around as it was a hot day. He then returned his empty tray and opened up his bag which contained an AR-15 assault rifle with 30 rounds attached. The cafe was full of people and was remarkably small, with tables packed tightly together. Within 15 seconds, Bryant fired 13 shots at close range, killing 12 people instantly. Bryant chased down and killed another 8 people in the gift shop area of the site, before moving outside to the car park. Many coaches were parked in this area, with lines of people waiting outside them. When these people realized what was going on, they scattered, but Bryant managed to chase down and murder several more people, before changing his weapon to an FN FAL.
    Bryant hijacked a car at the toll booth area of the site, but not before shooting dead the driver and his 3 passengers. He then took a hostage in the boot of this car and drove down to a local B&B known as Seascape. When police arrived at Seascape an 18-hour standoff ensued, during which Bryant communicated with police with a telephone. Bryant claimed he knew nothing about the previous massacre at Port Arthur and that everyone inside was in perfect health, even though it was later proved that Bryant had already shot dead the two owners of the B&B and his hostage, who was handcuffed to the banister. Eventually, Bryant deliberately set fire to Seascape for some unknown reason, and ran out with his clothes on fire, surrendering to police.
    After his arrest, Bryant was reportedly obsessed with knowing the number of people he had killed, and wanted to know if he had “beaten” Thomas Hamilton, who had perpetrated the Dunblane massacre just weeks beforehand. Bryant received a sentence of over 1000 years of imprisonment, without parole, for the massacre, and is currently serving his time in the psychiatric wing of Risdon Prison, in Hobart, Australia. Recently, a Police training video has been leaked on the internet that contains photographs of the victims after being shot and a clip that shows Martin Bryant running near the buses in the Port Arthur car park. The video also plays a recording of the phone call between Bryant and police during the standoff at Seascape, in which Bryant claims to have made a cup of tea for his hostage.
    3
    William Unek
    57 dead, 30 injured
    Screen Shot 2011-10-22 At 12.00.14
    The case involving William Unek is unique, in that Unek perpetrated not one, but two deadly massacres that occurred three years apart. Despite the incredibly large death count, both massacres received surprisingly little media coverage. What is known is that, in 1954, Unek worked as a police constable in the Belgian Congo. During this period he embarked on a brutal killing spree and murdered at least 21 people with an axe, while injuring many more. The motive for this massacre remains unknown. He then apparently escaped to Tanganyika, where he assumed a false identity and started his life over.
    Unek found work again, though it isn’t clear what profession he chose, before repeating history and going on another murderous rampage on February 11th, 1957. This time his chosen weapon was a stolen rifle. He stormed through a local village, invading people’s homes and shooting anyone he found inside. At some point he torched a house and the blaze killed a further three people. He also hacked several people to death with the axe and strangled a young woman. During this massacre he managed to kill 36 villagers before fleeing. This time police sent out dogs and a helicopter to hunt Unek down, and eventually he was discovered at a house just two miles away from the scene of the massacre. The house owner conversed with Unek until police arrived, at which point Unek was fatally injured while trying to evade capture.
    2
    Woo Bum-Kon
    57 dead, 37 injured
    South-Korea-Killing-Spree
    Woo Bum-Kon is responsible for the deadliest shooting spree in South Korea’s history. According to his relatives and close friends, before the massacre Woo was severely depressed and had anxiety issues, as well as an inferiority complex. Prior to the rampage in 1982, he had served in the military and worked as a police officer in the province of Gyeongsangnam-do. His motive was apparently blind rage; on the night of the massacre Woo got into a fight with his girlfriend after she woke him up by swatting a fly on his chest. He assaulted her and wrecked his house in a tantrum before going out drinking. He then went to the police station and somehow managed to gather an arsenal of weapons without anyone noticing. This arsenal consisted of two rifles with hundreds of rounds of ammunition and seven hand grenades.
    At around 9:30pm, Woo visited a local village, where he positioned himself behind some bushes and began firing upon passers-by with an M1 Carbine. His girlfriend, who had gone out looking for him, happened to walk by at this moment and he shot her in the upper thigh, wounding but not killing her. Later that night Woo visited a local post office and shot three people dead, before cutting the phone lines of the entire village in order to prevent anyone from calling the emergency services. He then began to target houses at random, using his position as a police officer to trick people into letting him inside, before pulling out his rifle and murdering everyone. Using this method, Woo managed to kill a total of 42 people in five different villages.
    He broke the trend on numerous occasions, for example one time he took a family hostage in their home and ordered a teenage boy living there to go and buy him a drink from the local grocery store. The boy complied, but when he returned Woo simply killed him and all of his family. On another occasion Woo was unable to gain entry to a house, so he used a grenade to kill everyone inside. The massacre lasted for eight hours – culminating in Woo killing himself with two grenades in a suicide attack that claimed four lives. In the aftermath, many police officials involved in the manhunt for Woo resigned, as much blame was placed on them for not ending the rampage sooner. Police were very quick to be informed of the shootings but were sluggish in their attempts to track down the perpetrator.
    1
    Anders Behring Breivik
    77 dead, 96 injured
    Anders Behring Breivik
    Sadly, the deadliest spree killing in history is also the most recent. Anders Behring Brievik is a right-wing extremist who murdered 69 teenagers aged 14-19, at the Norwegian island of Utoya. On July 22nd, 2011, before the shooting began, Breivik detonated a massive car bomb in Oslo which killed 8 people. He then boarded a ferry to the island of Utoya were 600 teenagers were attending a youth summer camp. Brievik wore a police uniform and used a forged police ID badge to pass through security without incident. He then approached the campers and falsely informed them that he was a police officer who had come to perform a routine check after the bombing in Oslo. He announced that everyone should gather around him while he did a head count, before pulling out a rifle and indiscriminately firing into the crowd.
    Survivors later described the horrors that occurred on the island; many of whom said that Breivik targeted individuals after the initial spray of bullets, and laughed as he murdered those who begged for their lives. Many people tried to play dead in order to survive, but Breivik came back and shot the bodies twice. Some campers desperately jumped into the water and attempted to swim to shore, but many drowned and only a few were able to be rescued by boaters who came to help. Breivik also shot many people in the water, causing otherwise non-fatal injuries that incapacitated victims and caused them to drown. Some of the teenagers hid in underground lavatories and used cell phones to communicate with each other via text messages. After 90 minutes of carnage, police arrived, and Breivik surrendered peacefully.
    The massacre had been planned by Breivik since 2009, at the very least. He created a diary of the planning process that he allegedly shared with terrorist organizations over the internet. The diary shows that his motive was to use the influence of the attacks to start an uprising against the Norwegian government. The diary also reveals that he made an unsuccessful attempt to purchase firearms in Prague in 2009, and that he founded a farming company called Breivik Geofarm, as a cover for his bomb making experiments. Breivik has been observed to be completely sane by court psychiatrists, but he is described as having strong narcissistic tendencies in his personality. He hasn’t received a prison sentence yet, though it is certain that he will live the rest of his life behind bars.

    This TIME Magazine article is free for subscribers.

    If you are already a subscriber, please login or sign up — registration is free!

    Subscribe
    Subscribe

    Your subscription includes:

    • The print magazine in your mailbox (optional)
    • The Tablet Edition on your iPad®, Kindle Fire, NOOK Tablet™, and on Android™ tablets via Next Issue®
    • Subscriber-only content on TIME.com, including magazine stories and access to the TIME Archive.
    Subscribe Now

    Learn more about the benefits of being a TIME subscriber

    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,929144,00.html#ixzz2UIgexmXN

    http://listverse.com/2013/05/25/10-dirty-secret-cia-operations/

    http://listverse.com/2013/05/25/10-dirty-secret-cia-operations/

    HISTORY

    10 Dirty Secret CIA Operations

    MIKE FLOORWALKER 

    FightFast.com/Fight_Moves
    Punishing Hand 2 Hand Fight Moves Taught By U.S. Black OPS Commandos


    We’ve always loved to discuss some of the shadier dealings of the government and the military—and no organization provides more fodder for these discussions than the American Central Intelligence Agency.

    The CIA has a way of very publicly blowing their cover—seeming to pop up wherever turmoil, strife, and political unrest materialize. Despite being almost synonymous with dirty tricks, the Agency has essentially been given free rein, permitted to use whatever tactics they see fit to deal with any (real or perceived) threat to American interests.

    If there’s one thing we know about absolute power, it’s that it corrupts absolutely; and if there’s one thing we know about the CIA, it’s that the astoundingly unethical and criminal projects highlighted in this list are probably just the tip of the iceberg.

    10
    Operation PBSUCCESS











                                                                INLNews.com  
                                 Easy to Find...... Hard to Leave..see you there soon at your INLNews.com
                                                                                           International News Limited Domain Pricing Per Year
                                                                              .com* $9.99 | .net* $9.99 | .org* $9.99 | .info* $9.99 | .us* $9.99 | .biz* $9.99 | .ws* $9.75 | .name* $7.95
                                                                                                                     Save even more on multi-year registrations!
                                                           INLNews YahooMail HotMail GMail AOLMailUSA MAILYahooMail HotMailGMail AOLMail MyWayMail CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs
                                                     INLNsNYTimes WashNs 
    AustStockEx WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust 
                                                                                                   WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs TasNews ABCTas DarwinNs 
    USA MAIL






    Your Daily Motivation from Inspiration Line Add Inspiring Daily Quotes to YOUR Website

    Click Here For Your Up To Date World Live Sports Scores
    INLNews  YahooMail  HotMail  GMail  AOLMail USA MAILMyWayMail 
     CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs INLNsNYTimes WashNs WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust 
    WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs 
    TasNews ABCTas DarwinNsUSA MAIL


    ABC News Video  FOX News Video  FOXBusiness Video  CNN Video  AP Video  BBC News Video  Reuters Video  AFP Video  CNET Video
    CNBC Video  Australia 7 News Video   Rocky Mountain News Elections Video  CBC.ca Video  NPR Audio  
    Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone Video
    Richard Bangs Adventures Video  Charlie Rose Video   Expanded Books Video  Assignment Earth Video 
    ROOFTOPCOMEDY.com Video 
    Guinness World Records Video  weather.com Video  AccuWeather Video  You Witness News User Video

    NPR Audio BY CATEGORY Top Stories  Politics  World  Business  Sports 
     
    Technology  Health & Science  Arts  U.S. 

    VIEW LOCAL VIDEO KVUE-TV Austin  WJZ 13 Baltimore  WBZ Boston 
     
    WCNC Charlotte  CBS 2 Chicago

    Video by Category
     
    U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
    Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

    Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
     
    Climate Change 

    More INL News Video !Finance Sports


    Video by Category
     
    U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
    Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

    Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
     
    Climate Change 

    More INL News Video !Finance Sports




    AP WORLD
    AP NATIONAL
    AP WASHINGTON
    AP BUSINESS
    AP ENTERTAINMENT
    AP ON THE HOUR
    AP HEADLINES
    AP BREAKING
    AP REUT PHOTO WIRE
    AP AUDIO 
    ABCNEWS 
    ABCNEWS THE NOTE
    AD AGE DEADLINE
    BBC
    BBC AUDIO
    C-SPAN 
    CHICAGO TRIB
    CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
    CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
    CNN
    CNN POLITICAL TICKER
    DAILY SWARM
    DAILY VARIETY
    ECONOMIST
    EDITOR & PUBLISHER
    BILLBOARD 
    BOSTON GLOBE
    BOSTON HERALD 
    BREITBART
    CBS NEWS 
    EMIRATES TODAY
    FINANCIAL TIMES 
    FORBES
    FOX NEWS
    FREE REPUBLIC
    HOT AIR
    HILL
    HUMAN EVENTS
    IAFRICA
    INTERNATIONAL HERALD
    INVEST BUS DAILY
    JERUSALEM POST
    JEWISH WORLD REVIEW
    LA DAILY NEWS
    LA TIMES 
    MEDIA WEEK 
    MSNBC
    MSNBC FIRST READ 
    NATIONAL REVIEW
    NEW REPUBLIC
    NEW YORK
    NY DAILY NEWS
    NY OBSERVER
    NY POST
    NY SUN 
    NY TIMES
    NEW YORKER
    NEWSBUSTERS
    NEWSBYTES 
    NEWSMAX
    NEWSWEEK
    N. KOREAN NEWS
    PHILLY INQUIRER
    PHILLY DAILY NEWS 
    POLITICO
    R & R
    RADAR 
    REAL CLEAR POLITICS
    REASON MAG
    ROLL CALL
    SAN FRAN CHRON 
    SKY NEWS
    SLATE
    SMOKING GUN
    SPLASH NEWS
    SYDNEY HERALD
    U.K. DAILY MAIL 
    U.K.DAILY MIRROR
    DAILY RECORD
    UNDER THE RADAR
    U.K.EVENING STANDARD
    U.K.EXPRESS
    U.K.GUARDIAN
    U.K.INDEPENDENT 
    U.K.LONDON PAPER 
    U.K.NEWS OF THE WORLD
    U.K.SUN
    U.K.TELEGRAPH
    U.K.TIMES
    US NEWS
    USA TODAY
    VILLAGE VOICE
    WASH POST
    WASH TIMES
    WEEKLY STANDARD
    WORLDNETDAILY







    4 Reasons Marriages End in Divorce

    Why Marriages End and What You Can Do To Keep Yours Alive

    When I found out that Tiger Woods had been cheating on his blonde bombshell-of-a-wife with about fifty different women, I was flabbergasted. He had a great career, lots of money, and a hot wife, so why would he do something so stupid? The simple truth is that there are several reasons why marriages fail; being aware of the most common reasons for divorce can help couples alleviate problems in their marriages and help prevent divorce in the future.

    1. Infidelity

    Cheating seems like the most common reason for divorce, due largely in part to the media. Athletes, singers, politicians, and other “celebrities” are often in the spotlight because of their infidelity; in some cases, this cheating involves multiple people and is usually quite scandalous, garnering worldwide attention and often wrecking their personal and professional lives. But infidelity isn’t just reserved for those in the limelight – it’s a situation that arises in the marriages of normal people, too. Infidelity is different from the other reasons on this list primarily because it’s usually caused by other issues. As a matter of fact, it may occur because of…

    2. Communication

    Communication is often the glue that holds a marriage together. If two people are in-tune with each other’s feelings, opinions, and values, then it’s a great benefit to their relationship. Generally, this means that they actually have to speak honestly and openly with each other, and although it may seem difficult to do this amidst jobs, children, and other obligations, it’s an important component to any relationship. If two people don’t openly express their feelings or concerns, then there’s no way to work together to help or fix them. Talk about sex. Tell your partner if you feel emotionally or mentally unfulfilled. If you need attention, ask for it. Two people get married because they communicate that they love each other and want to make their love official…so this is a great place to start.

    3. Money

    Money is one factor that heavily influences the stability and solidity ...

    http://listverse.com/2013/05/25/10-dirty-secret-cia-operations/

    HISTORY

    10 Dirty Secret CIA Operations

    MIKE FLOORWALKER 

    We’ve always loved to discuss some of the shadier dealings of the government and the military—and no organization provides more fodder for these discussions than the American Central Intelligence Agency.

    The CIA has a way of very publicly blowing their cover—seeming to pop up wherever turmoil, strife, and political unrest materialize. Despite being almost synonymous with dirty tricks, the Agency has essentially been given free rein, permitted to use whatever tactics they see fit to deal with any (real or perceived) threat to American interests.

    If there’s one thing we know about absolute power, it’s that it corrupts absolutely; and if there’s one thing we know about the CIA, it’s that the astoundingly unethical and criminal projects highlighted in this list are probably just the tip of the iceberg.

    10

    Operation PBSUCCESS

    arbenz-mural

    PBSUCCESS was the code name for a CIA-backed coup led against the democratically elected government of Jacobo Arbenz, the President of Guatemala, in 1954. It’s one of the first in a long line of suspected or acknowledged CIA interventions in the governments of foreign countries, and it was indeed a tremendous success from the Agency’s point of view.—the first indication that such a feat could be accomplished relatively smoothly.

    Elected in 1950, Arbenz set about instituting reforms aimed at making his country self-sufficient, by giving huge chunks of government land back to citizens. This rubbed the US Government the wrong way, as much of this land was “owned” by the United Fruit Company, a truly evil corporation with which the Eisenhower administration was snugly in bed at the time (CIA director Allen Dulles and his brother John, the Secretary of State, both had strong ties to the company).

    The Agency snidely referred to Arbenz policies in internal memoranda as “an intensely nationalistic program of progress colored by the touchy, anti-foreign inferiority complex of the ‘Banana Republic.’ ” In other words, non-dependence on the US and its allies was not to be tolerated.

    Four hundred and eighty CIA-trained mercenary soldiers, led by exiled Guatemalan military officer Colonel Carlos Castillo Armas, forcibly wrested Guatemala from Arbenz’ control. While he and his aides were able to flee the country, CIA documents show that “the option of assassination was still being considered” right up until the day he resigned on June 27, 1954.

    9

    Operation Mongoose

    Fidel Castro 01

    After the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, the Agency’s public image was worse than ever. President Kennedy famously proclaimed that he would “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds” (shortly before getting shot, but we digress). But to deal with Cuba, he turned to the only person he knew he could trust: his brother, Robert, who organized Operation Mongoose. This operation was conducted by the Department of Defense in conjunction with the CIA, under Robert Kennedy’s supervision. He told his team at its first briefing that deposing Castro was “the top priority of the US government—all else is secondary—no time, money, effort, or manpower is to be spared.”

    Among the dozens of extremely silly methods of assassination proposed: infecting Castro’s scuba gear with tuberculosis; planting exploding seashells at a favorite diving site; slipping him a poisoned fountain pen; and even even poisoning or slipping a bomb into one of his cigars. Castro’s bodyguard asserted that there were hundreds of CIA schemes on Castro’s life—and they all ended in failure, a gigantic waste of time and money. Castro was Cuba’s dictator for forty-nine years, stepping down in 2008 due to failing health, and appointing his younger brother as his replacement.

    8

    CIA-Produced Pornography

    So

    President Sukarno ruled Indonesia from 1959 until 1966, when he was deposed by Suharto, one of his generals. Sukarno had been deemed pro-Communist by the CIA, which meant there would inevitably be an attempt to oust him or at least make him look bad—but the plot they actually came up with was truly laughable.

    The CIA produced a porno film starring a Sukarno look-alike, titled “Happy Days”, for distribution in Indonesia. Not that the culture generally frowns upon such things, but as the CIA understood it, “being tricked, deceived, or otherwise outsmarted by one of the creatures God has provided for man’s pleasure cannot be condoned” in Indonesian culture, and “what we were saying was that a woman had gotten the better of Sukarno.” The film went as far as production, and stills were made, but for some reason (perhaps common-sense) it was never deployed.

    Bizarrely enough, this idea resurfaced shortly before the Second Gulf War, when the CIA suggested that a fake gay porno featuring Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden be produced in order to discredit these men in the eyes of their followers. This went nowhere—at least one official claiming that nobody would care. “Trying to mount such a campaign would show a total misunderstanding of the target. We always mistake our own taboos as universal when, in fact, they are just our taboos.”

    7

    Pakistani Vaccine/DNA Collecting Drive

    Vaccinate 87126793

    The May 2011 raid that killed Osama Bin Laden was the result of an insane amount of intelligence collecting and planning; regardless of his crimes, conducting a US military operation to kill a foreign national on Pakistani soil was bound to have myriad consequences. A courier had been tracked to an Abbottabad compound, where it was pretty damn certain Bin Laden was hiding. But before conducting the raid, they had to be absolutely sure—and one method of collecting this proof was shady in the extreme.

    The CIA recruited a respected Pakistani doctor to organize a fake vaccination drive in the town, and in the process collected thousands of blood samples from children in the area children—among them, as it turned out, Bin Laden’s children. Since theirs was a fairly upscale section of town, the campaign began in a poorer area to make it look more authentic, then moved on to the neighborhood housing the Bin Laden compound a month later—without even following up with the required second or third doses in the poor area. The whole thing worked—with consequences.

    For one thing, Dr. Shakil Afridi—the doctor involved—has been convicted of treason by the Pakistani government and given a thirty-three-year prison sentence (“Wouldn’t any country detain people for working for a foreign spy service?” one Iranian official helpfully pointed out). For another, the campaign has caused irreparable damage to organizations that carry out legitimate vaccinations. There are deep-seated suspicions in many Middle Eastern regions about those who provide vaccinations, and this gambit to assist in finding Bin Laden has only bolstered those suspicions—particularly in Nigeria, India and of course Pakistan, where efforts to eradicate polio are ongoing.

    6

    Muammar al-Qaddafi

    In+Profile+Muammar+Al+Gaddafi+Rklg5Zxgaccl

    February 2011 saw the beginning of the Libyan Revolution, which would culminate in the August ousting of Libyan dictator Muammar el-Qaddafi, followed by his capture and killing in October. There was little mention at the time of any potential involvement by foreign interests—but about one year later, an incident occurred which shed a curious light on the entire Revolution.

    On September 11, 2012, an American diplomatic mission in Benghazi came under attack by armed militants. The response came not from within the mission itself, but from half a dozen CIA agents deployed from a hidden base within the city. More reinforcements arrived from Tripoli, and diplomatic personnel where whisked by convoy to chartered aircraft which carried them out of the country.

    This betrayed a CIA presence in the city, which had hitherto been unknown. The Agency was forced to admit that it had maintained a fairly strong presence in Libya since about February 2011—right around the time the Libyan Revolution began. The annex which had housed the secret base was scrubbed clean and abandoned after the incident at the mission.

    5

    Operation Mockingbird

    Tumblr Lxuvhc1Xto1Qa64A4O1 500

    Operation Mockingbird was a bit of a two-pronged approach to dealing with the media: on the one hand, journalists were routinely employed by the CIA to develop intelligence and gather information, or to report on certain events in a way that portrayed the US favorably. On the other, there were actual plants within the media—paid off with bribes or even directly employed by the CIA—to feed propaganda to the American public.

    Mostly, this program was meant to convince the public of how incredibly scary Communism was, and to make sure that public opinion favored taking out the Red Menace at any expense. Even scarier was the fact that having major newspaper publishers and the heads of TV stations bought and paid for meant that significant overseas events could be excluded from coverage in the media—events like the aforementioned coup in Guatemala, which didn’t see the light of the day in the American press at the time.

    Congressional hearings in 1976 (the “Church Committee”) revealed that the CIA had been bribing journalists and editors for years. Following the Church hearings, newly minted CIA director and future President George H.W. Bush announced: “Effective immediately, the CIA will not enter into any paid or contract relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station.” Yet he added that the CIA would continue to welcome unpaid, voluntary support of said journalists.

    4

    Operation CHAOS

    00 - Intro - Vietnam War Protests 2

    Protests against US involvement in Vietnam were proving to be a giant pain in the backside for the government’s plans in the mid 1960s. While Mockingbird was busily using the mainstream to try to shove the necessity of the war down the throat of the public, the “counter-culture” couldn’t be controlled so easily. Ever-mindful of the KGB’s propensity for their own style of dirty tricks, the CIA attempted to weed out any foreign influence on the American anti-war movement by launching Operation CHAOS—and they didn’t even bother to come up with an innocuous-sounding code name.

    Since the FBI’s COINTELPRO program of domestic surveillance wasn’t quite producing the desired results, President Lyndon B. Johnson authorized the CIA to undertake its own program of spying on US citizens. Their main task was to infiltrate student organizations—both radical and otherwise—in order to gather intelligence on potential foreign influences, and to subvert such groups from within. Famous groups such as “Students For a Democratic Society” and the Black Panthers were targeted; eventually, the program for some reason expanded to include women’s liberation and certain Jewish groups.

    There is strong evidence that this type of activity has never ceased, though CHAOS itself was shuttered after the Watergate scandal. In 2011, the Agency came under fire for allegedly working with the New York Police Department to conduct surveillance of Muslim groups in the area, who had not done anything wrong and who are now suing in Federal court.

    3

    Phoenix Program

    Phoenix-Program-Vietnam-War-001

    Phoenix was a program headed by the CIA, in conjunction with US Special Forces and Australian and South Vietnamese commandos, during the Vietnam War. Its purpose was simple: assassination. And although this was a military unit, their targets weren’t military, but civilian.

    From 1965 to 1972, Phoenix was involved in the kidnapping, torture, and murder of thousands upon thousands of citizens. People deemed critical to the infrastructure of the Viet Cong, or thought to have knowledge of VC activities, were rounded up and taken to regional interrogation centers, were they were subjected to: “rape, gang rape, rape using eels, snakes, or hard objects, and rape followed by murder; electric shock . . . rendered by attaching wires to the genitals or other sensitive parts of the body, like the tongue; the ‘water treatment’; the ‘airplane’ in which the prisoner’s arms were tied behind the back, and the rope looped over a hook on the ceiling, suspending the prisoner in midair, after which he or she was beaten; beatings with rubber hoses and whips; the use of police dogs to maul prisoners…”

    Phoenix was the subject of 1971 Congressional hearings on abuse. Former members described it as a “sterile depersonalized murder program”, and it was phased out after negative publicity, though the replacement program F-6 was quietly phased in to take its place.

    2

    Operation Ajax

    Shah-Eisenhower1-620X350

    The success of Operation Ajax paved the way for all future CIA operations of a similar nature. It resulted in the return to power of the Shah in 1953, after a military coup planned by American and British intelligence.

    The first democratically-elected leader of Iran, Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh, was seen as a potential liability because of his plans to nationalize the oil industry. Fearful of having to compete with the Soviet Union for Iranian oil, the decision was made to install a leader who was partial to US interests. You can probably see a theme developing here.

    CIA agents Donald Wilber and Kermit Roosevelt Jr. (the grandson of Theodore Roosevelt) carried out the campaign by bribing everybody who could be bribed in Iran: government officials, business leaders, and even street criminals. These recruits were asked to support the Shah, in various ways, and to oppose Mossadegh.

    It worked: an uprising was instigated, Mosaddegh was jailed, and pro-Western Iranian Army General Fazlollah Zahedi was installed in his place. Zahedi had been arrested by the British during World War Two for attempting to establish a Nazi government, and he lived up to that legacy by appointing Bahram Shahrokh—a protege of Joseph Goebbels—as his director of propaganda.

    1

    The Mujahideen

    Chechen Mujahideen By Chewolf-D36M170

    In 1978, Afghanistan became mired in civil war as two Communist parties seized control of the country. When it began to look like anti-Communist rebels were gaining a foothold, the Soviet Union invaded the country to lend support. And that’s when the US, of course, decided to get involved.

    The CIA set up camps to train the rebels, known as Mujahideen, in the necessary tactics for beating back the Soviets. Advanced weaponry was also part of the deal, including—importantly—Stinger surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles. Soviet airstrikes had driven hundreds of guerrillas out of the cities and into the surrounding hills, and mitigating the effectiveness of those strikes proved to be essential in prolonging the conflict, placing a great strain on Soviet resources.

    The Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan almost until its collapse in the early 1990s, but the legacy of the Mujahideen lives on. The CIA are finding their own tactics and training turned against them by Mujahideen veterans who have begun their own training programs, producing highly trained and skilled terrorists who now make up the backbone of Al-Qaeda and other radical groups. The US discovered these ramifications the hard way after invading Afghanistan in 2001. The invasion led to a quagmire of an occupation, which—as of this writing—has dragged on for just as long as that of the Soviets.

    MIKE FLOORWALKER

    Mike Floorwalker's actual name is Jason, and he lives in the Boulder, Colorado area with his wife Stacey. He enjoys loud rock music, cooking and making lists.

    Read More: Cracked Twitter Distractify







                                 Some of the History’s Most Dangerous People
     
    The Most Dangerous Man In London


    Julian Assange- The Unauthorised AutoBiography ..
    The Australian Enemy of the State but the Hero of the people... for exposing the truth...when  it needed to be exposed


                                                                                              http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/more-dangerous/

                                                                                         More of the World’s Most Dangerous People, Selected by You

    • BY ROBERT BECKHUSEN
    • 12.20.12

    Tags: AfricaBashar AssadBenghaziCIAcybersecurityEgyptEugene KasperskyEye on ChinaF-22FeatureInfo WarIsraelJoaquin GuzmanJohn BrennanMexicoMohamed MorsiMullah MenacePaula BroadwellPolitricks,Rogue StatesSomaliaSyria

    North Korean leader Kim Jong-un with his wife, Ri Sol-ju, during a visit to a Pyongyang park on July 25, 2012. Photo: AP/KCNA

    We’ve published our list of the 15 people most responsible for turning this world haywire. But 15 dangerous folks weren’t nearly enough, you told us in your comments, your tweets and your Facebook mentions. So here’s a second helping of dangerousness, all thanks to you.

    No, your mother-in-law doesn’t get on the list. Nor does Chuck Norris or the Sith. (We’re trying to keep it relevant to 2012.) But we’ve picked out 15 of the best suggestions, with links to your comments and tweets.

    • Kim Jong-un. The 29-year-old dictator managed to launch North Korea’s first satellite into space. Plus, he’s got those nukes, and a dastardly plan to invade America. On the list you go, and at the top.
    • Ashfaq Kayani. Pakistan’s army chief of staff and former director of its spy service isn’t just one of that unstable country’s most important leaders; he’s emerged as one of the main go-to people in Pakistan as the U.S. pulls out of Afghanistan. Let’s hope he doesn’t make it too hard on us as we leave.
    • Vladimir Putin. Since Russia’s potentate returned to the presidency this year, he’s brought with him ambitious plans to rebuild Moscow’s military, launched a massive internet surveillance project, and arrested dissidents who aren’t too excited about this never-ending presidency stuff.
    • David Petraeus. He goes on the list, and we’re talking about the whole man. While Paula Broadwell sent the e-hate that got ultimately led the FBI to their affair, the general made the choice to start screwing around. In other words, he’s responsible for his own demise.
    • Satoshi Nakamoto. The pseudonymous creator of the Bitcoin digital cryptocurrency has seemingly disappeared into the shadows, but his invention lives on with potential to disrupt the powers-that-be. What happens when crooks can move money effortlessly online, without ever being traced? We might soon find out.
    • Ken Shamrock: “Wait a minute. Why is Ken Shamrock not on the top of this list??” asked one of our commenters. If he wants to call himself the world’s most dangerous man, that’s cool. You won’t see me arguing with him about it.
    • Cosmo the God. The 15-year-old hacker isn’t legally allowed to use the internet without supervision, since he was caught breaking into Amazon.com and taking down the websites for the CIA and NASDAQ, but it might not also stop him from hijacking your Twitter. In another sense, Cosmo has been revealed as the ultimate example of how online security — for even the America’s spy agency — can still be brought down by a teenager.
    • Ayman al-Zawahiri. The al-Qaeda chief has been dangerous for a long time, but hasn’t been particularly dangerous in 2012. But it probably wouldn’t hurt to keep an eye out for him. And with al-Qaeda moving into Libya and Syria, it’s a wonder what Zawahiri has been doing behind the scenes.
    • Zaheer ul-Islam. Pakistan’s current spy chief since March 2012 is not only in charge of subterfuge in one of the most volatile regions of the world, but is in a position to determine what happens next to Afghanistan as U.S. troops withdraw.
    • Ke$ha: Joshua Foust of the American Security Project was skeptical we didn’t include the autotuned pop singer. Alright then, if you insist.
    • Fethullah Gulen. Is this influential Turkish scholar a liberal reformer or an Islamic extremist? The answer is more complicated than that, but with his millions of followers and a network of more than 1,000 schools around the world, he’s shown to be a force against the powers of Istanbul’s military.
    • James Carter IV. Had the grandson of former U.S. President Carter not discovered an obscure clip of Mitt Romney on YouTube, and hadn’t tracked down the guy who filmed the complete video, Romney’s “47 percent” comment may have never been heard. Call it dangerous if you want, but it sure is disruptive.
    • Anonymous. While the hacker group flipped over the collective table in 2011, they’ve still remained a dangerous force, and even joined in during the Israel’s strikes on Gaza.
    • Unknown. One commenter made the observation that the most dangerous people in the world are “not currently on anyone’s radar. This is what makes them so dangerous.” Worth considering, no?
    • Michael Bay. Because seriously.

    Thanks again, everyone. Tune in next year for more danger.

    Army Says This General Sexually Abused an Officer, Then Threatened Her Career

    • BY SPENCER ACKERMAN
    • 12.18.12
    • HTTP://WWW.WIRED.COM/DANGERROOM/2012/12/SINCLAIR/

     

    •  

    Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair, shown here in Afghanistan in 2011, stands accused of forcible sodomy, conduct unbecoming an officer, and other charges. Photo: DVIDSHUB

    An Army general isn’t just accused of sexually assaulting a female subordinate. According to newly released military documents, the one-star general ”threaten[ed] to use his rank, position, and authority to damage or ruin [the captain's] military career if she ended their sexual relationship.” And he disobeyed a direct order from his superior officer to leave the female officer alone.

    Army Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair, the former deputy commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, “received a lawful command from Major General (O-8) James L. Huggins,” then Sinclair’s superior officer, to cease contact with an unnamed female Army captain that Sinclair stands accused of sodomizing “without [her] consent.” That’s according to Sinclair’s official charge sheet, which Danger Room has acquired. Sinclair “attempt[ed] to willfully disobey the same by calling her cell phone” in March 2012. That attempted contact occurred after Sinclair allegedly sexually abused the captain.

    It is unclear from the charge sheet if Huggins knew that Sinclair had forced himself on the captain, who apparently maintained a sexual relationship with Sinclair for years. Huggins recently completed a tour as the 82nd’s commanding officer and commander of U.S. forces in southern Afghanistan. He is slated for a promotion to lieutenant general.

    On Tuesday, officials at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, announced that Sinclair will definitely face a court-martial on charges of forcible sodomy, sexual misconduct, conduct unbecoming an officer, and other charges. Sinclair’s arraignment at Fort Bragg is scheduled for Jan. 22.

    According to the charge sheet, the married Sinclair displayed “pornographic and sexually explicit photographs and movies” while serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan; used his government charge card for personal uses; and carried “inappropriate relationship[s]” with at least two other female officers, one a major and the other a lieutenant. The charge sheet does not accuse Sinclair of abusing those officers.

    Sinclair is also charged with covering up his abuse of the female captain. In March of 2012, while he was serving in Kandahar, the charge sheet alleges Sinclair “wrongfully endeavor[ed]] to impede an investigation in the case of himself, by deleting nude photographs” and the e-mail account that either sent or received them.

    As has been previously reported, when criticized for using “derogatory and demeaning words to refer to female staff officers,” Sinclair allegedly responded, “I’m a general, I’ll say whatever the [redacted] I want,” according to the charge sheet, which calls that “conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman.” The female captain allegedly abused by Sinclair testified at a pre-trial hearing at Fort Bragg in November.

    Secrecy has surrounded the Sinclair case since it became public in September that Sinclair faced potential prosecution. It’s unusual for the sheet listing the charges facing an accused servicemember to be delayed for so long. Retired Air Force Col. Morris Davis, a former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo Bay, told Danger Room in November that it smelled of favoritism shown to a general officer that an enlisted soldier wouldn’t enjoy. The Army insists that’s flat wrong.

    “We did not initially release the charge sheets because the Article 32 investigating officer needed to decide if the evidence presented was sufficient to bring forward to the General Court Martial Convening authority for his action,” says Col. Kevin Arata, the spokesman for the XVIII Airborne Corps at Fort Bragg. “Now that the GCMCA has made a decision on those charges, and the accused is being arraigned, we know explicitly what charges are being referred against the accused, thus the release of the redacted charge sheets at this time.”

    Gary Solis, a military law scholar at Georgetown University, considers that a credible explanation. “There is much to criticize, when it comes to public access to disciplinary matters denied by the military, but this is not such a case,” Solis tells Danger Room. “To have publicly announced un-investigated charges in the case of a general officer, even this one, would have been a miscarriage of justice, had any of the charges been demonstrated at the 32 to be groundless.”

    Davis, unconvinced, adds: “I can’t recall a case where there was public interest where the charges were withheld from public disclosure until after the Convening Authority decided to refer the case to trial.”

    Sinclair is one of a number of prominent generals whose ethical lapses have prompted Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to launch an inquiry into whether the military needs to review its ethics training. (Dempsey’s initial findings, delivered last Friday, are that general and flag officers could benefit from ethics refreshers.)

    But those other generals either misused small amounts of their official salaries for personal benefit, like Army Gen. William “Kip” Ward and Navy Adm. James Stavridis, or may have had “flirtatious” relationships over e-mail, like Marine Gen. John Allen. Sinclair stands accused of sexually assaulting, harassing and humiliating one of the officers under his command. It’s hard to imagine that a general officer needs a refresher course to understand how wrong that is.

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/05/air-force-sexual-assault/

    Air Force Chief of Sexual-Assault Prevention Arrested on Sexual Battery Charges

    • BY SPENCER ACKERMAN
    • 05.06.13

    Lt. Col. Jeffrey Krusinski, the chief of the Air Force’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program, was arrested and charged with sexual battery in Arlington, Virginia. Photo: Arlington Police Department

    How serious is the Air Force’s sexual assault epidemic? Yesterday, police in northern Virginia arrested the Air Force’s chief of sexual-assault prevention — for sexual assault.

    In the early hours of Sunday morning, Jeffrey Krusinski, 41, was “arrested and charged with sexual battery,” according to the Arlington, Virginia police department. According to the arrest report, Krusinski drunkenly “approached a female victim in a parking lot and grabbed her breasts and buttocks.”

    Until today, Krusinski, a lieutenant colonel, was the chief of the Air Force’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program. An Air Force spokesman, Maj. Eric Badger, told Danger Room that the Air Force removed Krusinski from his position within the program, “immediately upon learning of the arrest.” (It’s worth mentioning that the Air Force did not initially confirm Krusinski’s arrest when Danger Room spoke to a different spokeswoman, Jennifer Cassidy; and deferred that confirmation to the Arlington police.)

    Dustin Sternbeck, a public information officer with the Arlington Police Department, released a mugshot, shown here, to Danger Room. While Sternbeck could not confirm Krusinski’s profession, the man shown in the mugshot looks a lot like Lt. Col. Krusinski, shown in this 2011 video from Afghanistan.

    The office Krusinski ran “reinforces the Air Force’s commitment to eliminate incidents of sexual assault through awareness and prevention training, education, victim advocacy, response, reporting and accountability,” according to its website. “The Air Force promotes sensitive care and confidential reporting for victims of sexual assault and accountability for those who commit these crimes.”

    According to the police report, Krusinski’s alleged intended victim “fought the suspect off” as he attempted a second groping, and called the police. “Police arrived on scene a short time after the victim reported the incident,” Sternbeck told Danger Room. “He did not resist arrest.” The intended victim was apparently responsible for the wounds visible on Krusinski’s face.

    Krusinski was held on a $5,000 unsecured bond. His arrest was first reported by the website ARLnow.

    “If these allegations are true, this is one more example on a long list of how fundamentally broken the military justice system and culture are,” emailed Nancy Parrish, the president of Protect Our Defenders, an advocacy group for the survivors of military sexual assault. “The idea that the head of the Air Force’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office could be arrested for sexual assault indicates the depth of the problem. It’s outrageous.”

    Time and again, the Pentagon — and the Air Force in particular — has assured the public that it’s taking its sexual-assault problem seriously. An estimated 19,000 rapes or sexual assaults occur annually in the military, although a fraction ever get reported. “If we don’t take steps to deal with it — if we don’t exercise better leadership to confront it — it’ll get worse,” former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta remarked in September.

    Yet it’s often been leaders within the military who carry out the abuse. Air Force instructors at Joint Base Lackland-San Antonio, where the Air Force conducts its training, allegedly sexually assaulted at least 59 cadets and airmen in the worst sexual assault scandal in the service’s history. Some instructors are facing military trials. Yet the Air Force also has shown leniency for its top officers: although Lt. Col. James Wilkerson was convicted by a military court of groping a sleeping woman’s breasts and vagina, the general in charge of the Third Air Force voided Wilkerson’s conviction and returned him to active duty. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) has placed a hold on a promotion for Air Force Lt. Gen. Susan J. Helms after learning Helms overturned the sexual-assault conviction of an Air Force captain.

    It’s not just the Air Force. The former deputy commander of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division is facing a military tribunal for sexually abusing multiple women, and threatening their careers if they exposed the abuse.

    News of Krusinski’s arrest comes at an inopportune time for the Pentagon. Tomorrow, it’s expected to release an annual report on sexual assault in uniform.

    “On the eve of the Pentagon releasing their annual report on the epidemic of sexual assault in the military,” added Brian Purchia, a spokesman for Protect Our Defenders, “these latest allegations for the head of the Air Force’s sexual assault prevention program are sickening. … The reporting, investigation and adjudication of sexual assault must be taken out of the chain of command in 2013.”

    “When I saw this it made me literally sick to my stomach,” Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) said in a statement emailed to Danger Room. Speier is the author of a bill that would remove the military chain of command from investigating and prosecuting cases of sexual assault, something advocates believe would remove a conflict of interest that inhibits adequately addressing the extent of the sexual-abuse epidemic. “How many more reasons do we need to take cases of rape and sexual assault out of the chain of command?”

    Update, 10:08 p.m.: From a statement just released by Pentagon press secretary George Little: “This evening Secretary Hagel spoke to Air Force Secretary Donley about allegations of misconduct involving an Air Force officer who had been responsible for the service’s sexual assault and prevention efforts and was removed today from his position pending the outcome of an investigation. Secretary Hagel expressed outrage and disgust over the troubling allegations and emphasized that this matter will be dealt with swiftly and decisively. Secretary Hagel has been directing the Department’s leaders to elevate their focus on sexual assault prevention and response, and he will soon announce next steps in our ongoing efforts to combat this vile crime.”

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/more-dangerous/

    15 More of the World’s Most Dangerous People, Selected by You

    Tags: AfricaBashar AssadBenghaziCIAcybersecurityEgyptEugene KasperskyEye on ChinaF-22FeatureInfo WarIsraelJoaquin GuzmanJohn BrennanMexicoMohamed MorsiMullah MenacePaula BroadwellPolitricks,Rogue StatesSomaliaSyria

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1704

    1: Qassem Suleimani

    As the country most likely to spark a world war, Iran has to be considered the most dangerous country on the planet. And if you were looking for the most dangerous man in that most dangerous country, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone as ruthless and mysterious as Gen. Qassem Suleimani. Since Suleimani's promotion in the late 1990s to head the Quds Force — the combination special forces and CIA-styled group within the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps — he's unleashed terror against U.S. forces in Iraq; and in 2012, expanded Tehran's military aid to Assad while becoming the focus of rumors over who will become Iran's next leader.

    Suleimani many not be the general in charge of assisting the North Koreans with their missile program. Nor does he run the Iranian nuclear effort. But if Barack Obama or Bibi Netanyahu were to strike Iran's nuclear program, it'll be Suleimani and the Quds Force in charge of taking Iran's counterattacks beyond its borders, as Iran launches waves of commando and terrorist strikes against the U.S. and its allies across the region and the world. In 2008, while waging a guerrilla war by proxy against the United States in Iraq, Suleimani even texted Gen. David Petraeus, boasting about being in charge of "the policy for Iran with respect to Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza and Afghanistan." That was an exaggeration — Iranian policy is set by the Supreme National Security Council which includes Suleimani along with 19 other members — but not entirely false, either. His influential position may also serve as the launching pad for higher political aspirations. In 2012, Suleimani emerged as the center of media attention in Iran just in time for upcoming presidential elections in June. And as a prominent war veteran, he could be a unifying and formidable president during a period of heightened tensions with the United States.

    Suleimani shows a history of "bold moves and military successes leading to overconfidence, miscalculations and sometimes risk-prone behavior which make him an aggressive and dangerous commander," Ali Alfoneh, who studies the Iranian military for the American Enterprise Institute, tells Danger Room. Born in 1957 to impoverished peasants, the general's military career was born during the Iran-Iraq War after becoming commander of the 41st Tharallah Division, where he was known as a charismatic leader who bade individual soldiers farewell while weeping, personally carrying out reconnaissance missions, and where he experienced the loss of "family members and most of his closest friends," Alfoneh says. That's not the kind of Iranian spy and terror chief you want to underestimate.

    — Robert Beckhusen

    Photo: IRNA

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1700

    2: Bashar Assad

    There was a brief period of national optimism in the summer of 2000 when Bashar Assad, then 34, took over Syria following the death of his father, longtime president Hafez Assad in June. The junior Assad, a member of Syria's minority Alawite clan, signaled a willingness to embrace democratic reforms. Civil society groups sprang up, dissidents spoke out and the country's intelligentsia penned a document demanding multiple political parties and limits on the police and military.

    But the so-called "Damascus Spring" was short-lived. Assad soon conformed to his father's repressive ways, cracking down on opposition groups and concentrating wealth and power among his own family and fellow Alawites. The winter that followed the Damascus Spring was a long one. But the revolutionary fervor of the Arab Spring finally reached Syria early this year. Since last summer Assad's regime has been under relentless assault by the rebel Free Syrian Army, testing just how far the president is willing to go to stay in power.

    As the rebellion has grown so has Assad's desperation. He sent tanks into rebel strongholds, fired artillery into densely populated towns and, this summer, unleashed the full might of his air force. When the rebels learned to shoot down Assad's jets and helicopters, the president upped the ante. He fired Scud rockets and, according to U.S. government sources, began prepping lethal sarin gas. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the use of those weapons represented “a red line,” the crossing of which would prompt a U.S. response. Turkey, which borders Syria, and other NATO nations are equally alarmed and have rushed troops and missiles to the Syrian border. More than a year after the rebellion began, Assad still clings to power, in no small part owing to support from Iran and Lebanese militant group Hezbollah. The Syrian rebels in turn have been aided by Shi'ite militias in Iraq.

    Assad is running out of options. If he resorts to chemical weapons, the U.S. and its allies could be forced to intervene, and the conflict's ties to foreign extremists could cause the fighting to expand beyond Syria's borders. In that way the Syrian civil war could become a regional war — and the first conflict to involve Weapons of Mass Destruction since Iraq's suppression of the Kurds in the 1980s.

    Twelve years ago in the euphoria of the Damascus Spring it would have been hard to imagine Syria's new leader falling so far.

    — David Axe

    Photo: AP/SANA

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1691

    3: Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman

    Mexico's Ciudad Juarez — the formerly so-called "Murder Capital of the World" — saw its murder rate plummet in 2012. Local authorities say that's because they've clamped down on crime. But another theory is that there are now fewer people left for Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman to kill. But it wasn't just brutality that made El Chapo, the Sinaloa Cartel kingpin and CEO, emerge as the most powerful drug trafficker in the world. He's a keen businessman who has turned a criminal organization into a global, vertically integrated corporation. El Chapo's empire is the Costco of cocaine.

    The Mexican government considers him to be the most wanted man in Mexico. The Sinaloa Cartel's yearly earnings in drug money, at an estimated $3 billion, isn't that much lower than the annual revenue of social media colossus Facebook. But a combination of bribes and violence ensures public officials stay out of his way, and El Chapo's enemies can find themselves besieged by his own private army. And if a company like Amazon.com has sought to diversify its products and control its distribution — like a customer buying an e-book and downloading it to their Kindle — the Sinaloa Cartel has sought to cut out their own middlemen as well. Instead of negotiating with Colombian drug cartels from access to South America's coca fields, El Chapo has sought to bypass them and gain access directly while diversifying his product lines into methamphetamine.

    Those are several reasons why Guzman is believed to be directly responsible for anywhere between 40 and 60 percent of the number of illegal drugs smuggled into the U.S. each year. He's also reportedly anobsessive micromanager  — a trait shared by some of the most successful corporate executives — and is believed to base his operations out of the mountains of western Mexico. He may have even surpassed the infamous deceased Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar in wealth, if not brutality. El Chapo's main rival, the notorious Zetas, also fell into disarray this year after leader Heriberto Lazcano was killed in a shootout with Mexican marines. That may ensure El Chapo will be able to maintain dominance over his share of Mexico's drug trade. The next question is how far El Chapo will go to push back against the Zetas and take even more turf for himself.

    — Robert Beckhusen

    Photo: AP/Damian Dovarganes

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1692

    4: John Brennan

    This is the deadliest man in the U.S. government.

    John Brennan doesn't command any armies. But as President Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser, he's arguably more powerful than the generals who do. Brennan runs the shadow wars against al-Qaida, a global campaign of lethal drone strikes and command raids.

    Brennan's war shifted in 2012. There have been only 43 drones strikes in Pakistan, way down from its 2010 high of 2012. But it moved into high gear in Yemen, which by June saw more drone strikes than Pakistan did, not to mention new U.S.-funded spy planes for its Yemeni allies. (Brennan doubles asshadow ambassador to Yemen, too.) And with U.S. forces set up at a Djibouti base to confront al-Qaida's operations in Africa, one of the next undeclared battlefields may be Mali, where U.S.-supported African forces are preparing to take the country's north back from an al-Qaida offshoot. There are rumors that Brennan is in contention to succeed David Petraeus as CIA chief, which would put Brennan formally at the head of one of the main agencies implementing his war — and would finally make him accountable to Congressional oversight. Maybe then he can explain how his shadow wars actually end.

    — Spencer Ackerman

    Photo: AP/Carolyn Kaster

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1695

    5: Mohamed Morsi

    In the span of a few weeks, Egypt's new president stopped a war on his borders, gave himself nearly dictatorial powers, and then relinquished them. Egypt is supposed to be the bedrock of stability in the Mideast, a predictable and sober force against chaos and bellicosity stretching from Gaza to Israel to Syria to Iran. But if you can predict Mohamed Morsi's behavior, please clue us in.

    Washington has held its breath to see if Morsi, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, would move Egypt away from the pro-U.S. tilt of deposed dictator Hosni Mubarak. He hasn't, and Morsi's role brokering a ceasefire in November's war between Israel and Hamas caused many in D.C. to exhale. But that doesn't mean Morsi's behavior is predictable. In the wake of the war, he declared that his decisions were beyond the scope of Egypt's judges and then reversed himself after weeks of sometimes violent street protests. Morsi didn't do himself any favors with a bizarre Time interview in which he viewed Planet of the Apes as a prism for global affairs; said his self-declared new powers showed "the Egyptians are free"; and seemingly compared himself to Abraham Lincoln. Egypt may still be a linchpin in the Middle East, but many wonder if Morsi's come unhinged.

    — Spencer Ackerman

    Photo: AP/Khalil Hamra

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1702

    6: Sheikh Ahmed Madobe

    America mostly relies on allied nations, mercenaries, militias and other proxies to wage its secretive African shadow wars. Things can get confusing when the proxies have proxies of their own. None of these front men is more powerful, and potentially dangerous, than Sheikh Ahmed Madobe, commander of the Somali Ras Kamboni Brigade militia. In late September, U.S.-backed Kenyan forces assaulted the southern Somali port city of Kismayo, the last stronghold of the al-Qaida-affiliated terror group Al Shabab. The air- and sea-based Kenyan attack was a triumph for the new American way of war, which provides cash and technical support but relies on proxy forces to do the main fighting and dying.

    But there's a catch. For the hardest fighting on Kismayo's outskirts, the Kenyans had hired their own proxies: the local Ras Kamboni militia and its avuncular, red-bearded commander Madobe, described by the Kenyan press as "the smiling warlord." A former Al Shabab gunman, Madobe had split from the militants as the tide of war turned against them.

    The 39-year-old Madobe seemed to relish his new role as the Kenyans' dog of war. "We will deal with them robustly, I assure you," he said of his former Islamist colleagues.

    But in the war's aftermath, Madobe has threatened to do what soldiers-for-hire often do. He's gone rogue. Having helped wrest Kismayo from the Islamists, Madobe is now refusing to leave town. His rebellion illustrates the dark side of proxy warfare, and could thwart U.S. and regional efforts to finally stabilize war-torn, terror-ridden Somalia.

    — David Axe

    Photo: AP/African Union-United Nations Information Support Team, Stuart Price

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1697

    7: The Men Behind the China Aviation Industry Corporation

    The U.S. used to be the undisputed warplane king. But that dominance may be starting to erode, if only just a bit, thanks to an unexpected player. The state-owned China Aviation Industry Corporation (CAIC) is fast growing into one of the world's leading makers of military aircraft. And the implications to the international order of that growth are enormous.

    Testing ramped up for CAIC's first stealth fighter prototype, the Chengdu J-20. Another stealthy prototype, the Shenyang J-31, flew for the first time in October. And in November the Shenyang J-15 took off and landed for the first time from Liaoning, China's refurbished aircraft carrier, opening a new era in naval warfare.

    These accomplishments were overseen by a small and publicity-shy cabal of world-class engineers and managers. Yang Wei, at 49 regarded as China's leading fighter-designer, directed the continued development of the J-20's radar-evading features. Luo Yang, 51, managed the J-15's high-stakes carrier flights. Both men answered to Lin Zuoming, a 55-year-old legend of Chinese industry who heads CAIC.

    But the relentless pace of CAIC's work took its toll. While watching the J-15's first carrier launches and landings aboard Liaoning, Luo suffered a fatal heart attack "by overworking," state media revealed. The Chinese cabinet posthumously awarded the engineer the title "Heroic Model in the Aviation Industry."

    — David Axe

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1703

    8: Eugene Kaspersky

    Not long ago, the U.S. had a widespread online campaign to spy on and destroy the work of Iran's atomic scientists. Then along came a group of cybersecurity researchers who systematically identified each of Washington's malware projects — and in so doing, rendered the Stuxnet, Flame, and Duqu espionage programs useless.

    A great many of those researchers now work for Eugene Kaspersky, the Russian cybersecurity mogul who runs one of the planet's largest and most sophisticated malware-fighting firms. And if all he did in the last year was intercede in America's efforts to short-circuit Iran's nuclear ambitions — definitively unmasking a cyber weapon for the first time — Kaspersky would've earned himself a spot on our list of the most dangerous people in the world.

    But there's more to Kaspersky. A longtime ally of Russia's secret security services, Kaspersky supplies technical expertise to the FSB, the successor to the KGB. His researchers train their agents in computer forensics. And when Kaspersky's son was kidnapped, FSB agents came to his rescue. Not long after that, Kaspersky complained publicly that there was "too much freedom" online and pushed for additional government controls over social networks, which he blamed in part for his son's abduction. A few months later, Moscow passed a new bill banning wide categories of websites and introducing new surveillance techniques to Russian telecom firms.

    All of which now has Western intelligence services scratching their heads. Did Kaspersky's researchers operate on their own when they outed all that anti-Iran malware? Or did they pull it off with some Kremlin help?

    — Noah Shachtman

    Photo: Stephen Voss

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1698

    9: Ahmed Abu Khattala

    Ahmed Abu Khattala may not have played any role in the September attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. But he represents its enduring message: He mocked the impotence it projected about the United States.

    The U.S. still doesn't know exactly who's responsible for the hours-long Benghazi assault. That's partially the problem: Despite numerous precursor attacks during the summer of 2012, the U.S. intelligence presence in Benghazi wasn't focused on jihadism. The Obama administration has sworn to bring the perpetrators to justice, but the hunt appears … less than substantial. That's where Ahmed Abu Khattala comes in. Although ostensibly wanted for questioning in the attacks, the Libyan militant laughed at the feebleness of the U.S. manhunt during a leisurely chat with a New York Times reporter at a Benghazi hotel. Over a strawberry frappe.

    Not to make too much of one interview, but, like the Benghazi attack itself, Abu Khattala went a long way toward undercutting the perception of competence that Obama projected in world affairs after killing Osama bin Laden. It's spooked Obama's administration: His advisers stopped talking about beingthisclose to ending al-Qaida; and it stopped him from appointing Susan Rice as secretary of state after her account of Benghazi sparked a political scandal. Now the Libyan government has stalled in its aid to the Benghazi investigation. Abu Khattala can probably order another frappe.

    — Spencer Ackerman

    Photo: AP/Mohammad Hannon

    11 and 10: The Stealth Jet Whistleblowers

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?cid=5018694&pid=1701

    The F-22 Raptor is supposed to be the future of the U.S. Air Force — stealthy, lethal, and generations ahead of any dogfighter on the planet. But that future was called into question in 2010, when one of the stealth fighters crashed under mysterious circumstances in Alaska, killing pilot Capt. Jeffrey Haney. Citing problems with the planes' oxygen systems that were choking the pilots, the following May the Air Force temporarily grounded all 180-plus Raptors, depriving the U.S. of nearly half of its front-line air-defense force.

    In a hurry to get its most high-tech plane back in the air, the flying branch blamed "contaminants" and hastily installed an extra charcoal filter in the F-22s. The $400 million Raptors went back into action. That's when Maj. Jeremy Gordon and Capt. Josh Wilson, both experienced Raptor fliers with the Virginia Air National Guard’s 192nd Fighter Wing, blew the whistle. With the support of Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Illinois), himself an Air Force pilot, Gordon and Wilson told 60 Minutes that the F-22's problems had not been solved.

    Pilots were still choking, Gordon and Wilson insisted. “In a room full of F-22 pilots, the vast majority will be coughing a lot of the times," Gordon said. He went on to describe black phlegm from charcoal apparently shed by the new filters plus chronic "dizziness, tumbling, vertigo kind of stuff." It was damning testimony. In prematurely declaring the F-22's problems solved, the Air Force appeared to value its reputation over the lives of its pilots and the actual combat effectiveness of its top-of-the-line planes. Gordon and Wilson revealed the flying branch for the dangerously self-serving organization it can sometimes be.

    In the wake of the pilots' 60 Minutes interview, the Air Force promptly ordered the Raptors' charcoal filters removed, limited F-22 flights and doubled down on its investigation of the Raptor's faults, even calling in Navy divers experienced in oxygen deprivation. Gen. Mike Hostage, commander of U.S.-based fighters, took the unusual step of training on the F-22 so he could run the same risks as his pilots. By this fall the Air Force believed it had figured out how to minimize the choking risk, by tweaking a valve in the pilots' vests and installing a backup oxygen generator.

    They may have been proved right, but Gordon and Wilson still faced Air Force reprisal for speaking out. Gordon's career was almost over anyways, but the younger Wilson should have had years of flying ahead of him. A reprimand letter threatened to cut short his time in the cockpit, so Wilson sought whistleblower protection under federal law. The man who helped save the F-22 wasn't done fighting.

    — David Axe

    13 and 12: Matthew Dooley and Mark Basseley Yousef

    Two successive White Houses have been at pains to emphasize that the U.S. is not at war with Islam. In 2012, two little-known individuals did their best to undermine that goal.

    Mark Basseley Yousef is a man of many names (Kritbag Difrat, P.J. Tobacco, Nikoula Basseley Nakoula) and one dubious accomplishment: producing a film, "The Innocence of Muslims," that went viral and prompted riots around the Middle East for its disrespectful portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad. (For a while, the Obama administration blamed the video for the attack on the Benghazi consulate, but later abandoned that narrative.) As much as Yousef sought to cast Islam in a negative light — something repudiated by his movie's cast and crew — Yousef's own criminal antics quickly overshadowed his creation. He's been jailed for charges related to manufacturing PCP and using false names for fraudulent checks. After he used the name "Sam Bacile" to help produce "The Innocence of Muslims," a judge ruled Yousef violated the terms of his probation and sent him back to jail in September.

    Army Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley didn't do nearly as much damage to U.S. foreign policy. But the chairman of the Joint Chiefs didn't take any chances after learning in March that Dooley taught a course for senior military officers that mused about a "total war" on Islam — including "Hiroshima" tactics against Islam's holiest cities. Gen. Martin Dempsey suspended the elective course at the Joint Forces Staff College, calling it "totally objectionable," and ordered a comprehensive review of military education to weed out similar material. Dooley, a formerly well-regarded officer, got an administrative reprimand and was shipped out to a bureaucratic backwater of the Army. His defenders have threatened to sue Dempseyand portray Dooley as a free-speech martyr, but so far their threats have been about as substantial as Yousef's multiple identities. Still, Dooley and Yousef showed that random Islam haters can leave a huge impact.

    — Spencer Ackerman

    14: Cody Wilson

    Cody Wilson, a 24-year-old law student at the University of Texas, didn't invent the concept of printable, downloadable guns. He's only created the first platform devoted to sharing the blueprints online for free to anyone who wants one, anywhere in the world, at any time. Wilson and his group of amateur gunsmiths, known as Defense Distributed, are also currently working on producing what may become the world's first fully 3-D printed gun, which they call the "Wiki Weapon." If it's successful, and on a long enough timeline, it could change the way we look at guns — and make them.

    But realizing this hasn't been easy. After leasing a 3-D printer from additive manufacturing firm Stratasys in late September, the company got wind of Wilson's plans and revoked its lease, then quickly dispatched a team to Wilson's apartment to seize the machine. "They came for it straight up," Wilson told Danger Room after it happened. "I didn't even have it out of the box." He's been questioned by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms over concerns he may violate federal law. Wilson has since sought a firearms manufacturers license from the ATF, which has yet to be approved, and has secured access to printers from a sympathetic company in the Austin area, plus a range in San Antonio where the group tested its first prototype. That prototype only lasted six shots, but the possibilities being introduced are huge. What happens to gun control when anyone can download and print a gun with their computer?

    Wilson and the Wiki Weapon project have also become something of a test case for how far a group can push those legal limits. "It is just a matter of time before these three-dimensional printers will be able to replicate an entire gun," Rep. Steve Israel (D-New York) said in December while urging for a renewal of the Undetectable Firearms Act, which outlaws guns that can defeat airport metal detectors. Josh Horwitz of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, wrote: "The Wiki Weapon project is not the work of a dispassionate techie seeking to push the outer limits of modern technology. Instead it is a blatant, undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government." That may actually be true. "How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the Internet?" Defense Distributed asks on its website. The answer may only be a matter of time.

    — Robert Beckhusen

    There used to be an established order to the world. A structure to things. You couldn't print a gun like a term paper. It was impossible to wreck a nuclear production plant with a few lines of code. Flying robots didn't descend on you in the dead of night and kill you in your home.

    But that order has been upended. Cheap videos in California help spark riots in Cairo. Lynchpins of the Middle East now rant about 'Planet of the Apes' in public, and Iranian generals trash-talk David Petraeus over SMS. The world has gone a little haywire — sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. Here are our choices for the 15 people most responsible for making it that way.

    Who did we miss? What did we get wrong? Sound off in the comments, or find us on Facebook or Twitter(we'll retweet the best suggestions).

    — Noah Shachtman

    15: Paula Broadwell

    One day you're pitching a biography of a top general. The next you've brought down a CIA director, stalled the career of another top general and ensnared numerous federal agencies — and yourself — in a sprawling investigation-cum-media circus. Paula Broadwell didn't mean to wreck any careers, but she accomplished something that no U.S. adversary could: remove David Petraeus from the U.S. government.

    Broadwell, a former Army intelligence officer, developed an unhealthy attraction to Petraeus. What started out as spinning for Petraeus' Afghanistan strategy and a florid book became a full-blown affair once Petraeus became director of the CIA. All that would have stayed between the two lovers — had Broadwell not used an anonymous e-mail account to berate Jill Kelley, a Tampa socialite whom Broadwell considered unduly flirtatious with the military brass. Kelley turned to an FBI agent she knew, Frederick W. Humphries II, to open a cyber-stalking investigation.

    The feds don't usually pursue cyber-stalking cases. And this one ended without any charges filed against Broadwell — but not before uncovering poor data hygiene from Broadwell's famous paramour. Petraeus and Broadwell shared a password on an e-mail account and would pass messages to each other by saving e-mails as drafts. What's more, Broadwell got into the habit of talking openly aboutsensitive CIA operations, like its response to the September attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. It's unclear whether there will be any charges filed against either Broadwell or Petraeus over classified material discovered on Broadwell's computer.

    Petraeus, the most celebrated general of his generation, resigned in humiliation. The FBI inquiry also turned up what the Pentagon called "flirtatious" e-mails between Gen. John Allen, the outgoing Afghanistan war commander, and Kelley, which has now blocked Allen's promotion to NATO commander. What's more, the coming reshuffle in President Obama's national security team has reopened a debate into whether the CIA should back away from Petraeus' torrid pace of drone strikes. Petraeus, and not Broadwell, is ultimately responsible for his own poor decision-making. But the next time a cabinet official sleeps around, he'd better make sure his mistress keeps the affair offline.

    — Spencer Ackerman

    Photo: AP/Nell Redmond

    Osama Bin Laden is Dead, Here are the New 5 Most Dangerous Men in the World

    • Joseph Sarkisian in Politics, National Security

    http://www.policymic.com/articles/7605/osama-bin-laden-is-dead-here-are-the-new-5-most-dangerous-men-in-the-world

    • Osama Bin Laden met his demise at the business end of an M4 assault rifle a year ago tomorrow, effectively ridding the world of its once most dangerous man. But not to worry, there are plenty more where he came from.
    • Thus far, 2012 has brought with it a slew of international pariahs, scumbags, idealistic fanatics, and creeps of all shapes and sizes. However, there are always a few who top the list for being the most malevolent of the bunch. So without further ado, the world’s top five most dangerous men.
    • 5) Joseph Kony

    5) Joseph Kony

    It shouldn’t surprise anyone that Joseph Kony is one of the biggest piles of garbage on the planet. There isn’t a war crime he hasn’t committed, and Interpol wants to hang him before the International Criminal Court. From lip circumcision to forced prostitution, Kony has been there, done that. Over 20 years of terror have made him one of the world’s most wanted men, but unfortunately nobody had the balls to go get him until a YouTube video exemplified his atrocities. Isn’t it time we gave up a little sovereignty here or there? Does anyone remember responsibility to protect?

    4) Bashar al-Assad

    When a person’s biggest fashion statement is the blood splatter on their suit jacket, you know that sooner or later they will cause a ruckus. Assad is now responsible for the deaths of close to 10,000 Syrian civilians who had the audacity to demand a representative government and some semblance of democracy. Big papa Assad, Bashar’s father, knew how to throw down the gauntlet to quash descent and Bashar has taken all of his plays right out of his father’s book. From random street murders to targeted assassination, the Assad regime is quickly becoming one of the most repressive in the world. Unfortunately, Syria is arguably the world’s most volatile flashpoint, and with any luck someone will step in to put a bullet in Assad’s head and stomp out this escalating conflagration of Arab ire.

    3) Jalaluddin Haqqani

    Haqqani, now said to be bed ridden in the group’s hometown of Waziristan -where the smoke monster from “Lost” hails from- has led the charge of one of the world’s most dangerous terrorist organizations. Al-Qaeda should take notes; the Haqqani network is as strong as ever and just recently unleashed a wave of seven coordinated attacks across Afghanistan. Their potency has the potential to keep Pakistan and Afghanistan at war for the foreseeable future. Haqqani is an institution: he has fought occupation after occupation for over 30 years, with plenty of help from Uncle Sam when we needed him to fight off the Red Menace. Better dead than red? I wonder what Gorbachev would say…

    2) Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

    Much like Chuck Norris, there’s a fist behind that beard. Ayatollah Khamenei may not look like much, but he stands at the helm of one of the world’s most confusing and terrifying theocracies. Nobody really knows how much power the Ayatollah commands given the fractured nature of Iranian politics, but when Khamenei speaks, the Revolutionary Guards listen like a well-trained pack of anti-Semitic pit bulls. As it stands, the Ayatollah can literally transform the entire Middle East with one command: insert uranium, light fuse, stand back. As long as his divinity lines up with his rationality, keep your “Ayatollah Assaholah” t-shirt in the closet.

    Mitt Romney (just kidding…kind of)

    1) Wen Jiabao

    Though he looks sharp in a suit, watch out America — and any country with natural resources — the prime minister of China is behind the meteoric rise of the country’s economic growth, and has turned that growth into military might. In fact, America is in the middle of a strategic pivot to Asia due to China’s earth-shattering aggrandizement. If Jiabao continues his course, China will find itself on the other side of a Cold War 2.0 with the West. There are chilly days ahead for the world’s powers, and although not one for war crimes, Jiabao is dangerous in a whole different way.

    Did I miss anyone? Feel free to add your favorite madmen for us to hate in blissful harmony.

    Picture Credit: KeizerStreetArt

    http://www.smashinglists.com/10-most-evil-men-in-the-history/

    10 Most Evil Men In the History

    Probably we all would have gotten bored about reading who is famous and who isn’t these days, however, there is one thing which would have clicked the minds of very few people. Why not consider, looking briefly into the evil world and their minds. It sounds interesting doesn’t it. Let us see why our top ten are famous for their evilness.

     

    10. Attila The Hun

    DeviantArt
    Attila The Hun considered as one of the history`s greatest villains was the emperor of the Huns Empire in the 5th century which stretched from the Ural River to the Rhine River and from the Danube River to the Baltic Sea. As it’s said, Attila the Hun was made to life by the Holo-Shed on Nimbus after which he along with his friends caused a lot of destruction and mayhem.  In addition, he had an evil version of Amy`s favorite pony named as Spirit. His barbaric acts were uncountable and one of his quotes was very famous that is “Pay up or we`ll eat you”, while destroying everything that came in his path with a fierce attitude during the barbaric invasions.

     

    9. King John

    King John was the king of England and during his reign, England lost duchy of Normandy. People until now have regarded him as “distasteful, even dangerous personality traits”, which includes acts of pettiness, spitefulness and cruelty. A couple notable facts of his time were his treacherous behavior to his brother and forming of the legend of Robin Hood. History states that King John gave the head of ST Philip to reading Abbey, where pilgrims visited then. In addition, due to his poor law and order and high taxes, the Barons rebelled against him. King John broke all his promises after which the Barons asked the King of France to overthrow him which lead to King John’s terrible death.

     

    8. Gaius Caesar


    Gaius Caesar was the real name of Caligula famous as “The Evil Emperor who proclaimed himself a god”. The start of his reign was very much progressive in nature with economy boosting but after his ill self, he sustained injuries to his mind. This injury made him crush everyone with his cruelty. He was immensely brutal in nature that he fed the lions with common criminals and allowed the ringleaders of the rebellions to be sent in arenas with their tongues cut, who died fighting. He made the wealthiest citizens his priests, whilst the Romans worshiped him. The last massacre under him was to put to death the richest people and confiscating their property at Gaul.

     

    7. Adolf Hitler

    Adolf was a dictator who has marked the world history for the world leaders until now. Also named as “Fuhrer”, he was appointed Chancellor of Germany in 1933. When the Second World War ended, his policies of racial subjugation and geographical conquest had brought death and mayhem to tens of millions of people, known as the Holocaust. In 1945, when the soviet troops spotted him near them, he committed suicide by shooting himself while having a cyanide capsule. The massacre, which he created, has changed the world map, as we know it.

     

    6. Idi Amin Dada

    Idi Amin Dada was a military leader and President of Uganda. Initially, he was in the British colonial regiment and then took power in the military sector, later ending up as the Field Marshal and Head of State. Amin’s rule was notoriously famous for human rights abuse, along ethnic persecution, killings, corruption and political repression and gross economic mismanagement. Numerous people were killed under his regime, with an estimation of death by international observers and human rights groups to range from 100,000 to 500,000.

    5. Ivan

    Ivan was born to Vasili and after death of his father; he became the Grand Prince of Moscow. At that time, he was just 8 years old. Ivan was one of those violent rulers who became more brutal in his later years such that he killed his own son during a fit of rage. The translated meaning of his name is “Terrible” whereas his name originally meant “great” or “mighty”. His tenure was embarked as being merciful even though he had a whole town of people killed. In addition, he beat  his pregnant daughter, which led to a miscarriage.             

     

    4. Nero

    The tenure of Nero was tranquilized by the worst crimes, the biggest of all was the Burning of Rome. In AD 64, a fire broke out in Rome and it lasted for six days which engulfed all the major parts of the city. As history revealed, Nero was the one who ordered this event to happen and that while Rome was burning he amused himself upon musical instruments. The worst part of this event was that he blamed the Christians for the acts, followed by severe form of punishments. The city was rebuilt and Nero occupied a bigger part of it for his palace named “Golden House”.

     

    3. Pol Pot -Saloth Sar

    Pol Patt with the real name of Saloth Sar lived in a village in Cambodia. After the war with Vietnamese and American bombing Pol Patt rose to power.  During his time, millions of people were displaced and many ended up starving to death. His four-year communist plan damaged the country so much that farmers actually collapsed on the fields and his export policies brought malnourishment to the country. He was responsible for the creation of interrogation center now named S-21 where more than 20000 men, women and children were tortured to death during lengthy interrogations, which was equal to psychological abuse.

     

    2. Vlad

    Vlad III was the prince of Wallachia and also known as Vlad the impeller. He was best known for resisting against the expansion of the Ottoman Empire and for the impaling of enemies. It is said that the Dracula tale was inspired from him. Even during his imprisonment, he enjoyed torturing insects. After this when he became Prince, the hate his father had for the Ottoman Empire made him conquer some parts of the Empire. Throughout his life from 30,000 to 320,000 people were found dead without reason. He never showed mercy and tortured his victims before killing them.

     

    1. Joseph Stalin

    Stalin was perhaps more ferocious than Hitler. He was General Secretary of the Communist party from 1922 until his death in 1953. Under his leadership, Ukraine suffered from a famine named Holodomor. It was with such a high intensity that the estimated deaths were from 2.5 to 10 million due to his direct political and administrative decisions. He refused foreign aid in the country.  He deported more than 850,000 people to frozen tundra’s of Siberia, where many lost their lives. In his reign, statistic show that the total number of people murdered ranged from 10 to 60 million.

    Europe's most dangerous man turns out to be a pussycat


    barnier2
     
    Jeremy Warner, assistant editor of The Daily Telegraph, is one of Britain's leading business and economics commentators. He is@telegraphwarner on Twitter. Subscribe to the City Briefing e-mail.
     
    Michel Barnier, described by some in the British press as "Europe's most dangerous man", has been on a whistle stop tour of London policymakers, bankers, hedge fund and private equity managers over the last 24 hours, and though plainly nobody's poodle, Europe's new single market commissioner hardly lives up to his moniker.
     
    He's (Michel Barnier)  been in to see the Chancellor, he's been in to see the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority, and he's breakfasted with the hedgies and the private equiteers.
     
    With the usual proviso that rhetoric is one thing and actions quite another, he doesn't give the impression of being in the pay of Nicolas Sarkozy or wanting single handedly to dismantle Anglo-Saxon capitalism.
    If this is "Le Stitchup", I can think of worse people to lose your sovereignty to.
    His English is still faltering, and he often needs to speak with the aid of a translator, but the message from this rather courteous man is clear enough. Yes, he wants to deepen the single market, he wants to impose better corporate goverance on European banks and business, and following the trouncing of the Greek bond market, he most definitely wants to regulate the market in Credit Default Swaps virtually out of existence. As for the "Volcker rule", the US proposal to split proprietary trading from ordinary banking, he thinks this inappropriate for the European banking model.
    So much, so predictable. But beyond these relatively uncontentious responses to the financial crisis he doesn't give the impression of being "out to get" London or to impose the Gaillic economic model on everyone else. Obviously he's a true believer in Le Grand Projet, and perhaps worryingly for Britain, he thinks the single market inevitably has to be accompanied by a single currency. Yet he's not so out of line with British europhiles on that one, including Lord Mandelson, who said something pretty similar only a few days ago.
    Otherwise, it's all motherhood and apple pie. He wants future growth to be greener and more equitable – don't we all – he's determined to get the framework right for Intellectual Property, including a single market solution on patent rights, and of course he wants to foster small and medium sized enterprise.
    So did M. Barnier's London charm offensive work? Did he set minds at rest? If he is indeed a wolf in sheep's clothing, and as Sarkozy claimed, Britain is the big loser from his appointment, then he certainly wears his disguise well.
    I don't think London has much to fear from Mr Barnier, but I do think Britain's fast devaluing exchange rate, and the competitive advantage this inevitably gives British goods and services within the single market, is going to be a big issue and source of complaint over the next year. Watch out for a sharp deterioration in relations on that one.
     



    London’s Most Dangerous Men

    We take a look back at some of London's most notorious criminals.



    Most Dangerous Men in London




    New York had Lucky Luciano, Chicago had Al Capone, and London had the Krays, along with a host of other East End gangsters who are nowadays idolised, with even Tony Blair commenting in 2005 that “when you watch the films back in the 1950s about this type of criminal there were certainly rules or a code that even some of those people seemed to have - it was not of the same nature as some of the really appalling ugly violent crime that you get today linked with drugs." If Mr Blair had looked beyond the movie world’s glamorous portrayal of the “honourable” gangster he would have found a deeply sadistic and premeditated underworld every bit as ugly as the crimes being committed today, regardless of how many former criminals dabble in showbiz and have offspring that are football players. 

    Billy Hill
    It is quite possible that the Krays as we know them would never have happened had it not been for Billy Hill’s mentoring, in fact Reggie Kray himself admitted that Hill was the man him and his brother most wanted to emulate from a young age. From the 1920s onwards, the Humphrey Bogart lookalike fleeced aristocrats, smuggled food and petrol during World War II and masterminded the Eastcastle Street Robbery, pocketing him and his gang a cool £287,000, over £6 million in today’s money. His quick thinking and plotting made him London’s top gangster; he also had a penchant for carving a ‘V’ for ‘Victory’ on the faces of his victims, although he “was always careful to draw my knife down on the face, never across or upwards. So that if the knife slips you don't cut an artery. After all, chivving is chivving, but cutting an artery is usually murder. Only mugs do murder." Hill is sometimes credited as being singlehandedly responsible for introducing knives onto the streets of London, a legacy that long outlives him. 

    Charles Sabini
    Charles ‘Darby’ Sabini and his gang were similarly handy with sharp objects, and they became known for “razoring” their victims with barbershop blades. During the 1930s Sabini’s business was mostly gambling - he offered protection to bookmakers in exchange for large commissions, looked after illegal bookies and acted as a loan shark to gamblers with serious debts, making himself a hefty profit in the process. The Sabinis often drew comparisons to the Mafia, due to their Sicilian heritage and the fact that they were based in Clerkenwell, then known as “Little Italy”, where they aggressively protected their community against gangs from other cities. They had many scuffles with the Elephant Boys (the gang the Richardsons belonged to) and their most serious confrontation inspired a scene in Graham Greene’s underworld thriller Brighton Rock. 


    ‘Mad’ Frankie Fraser
    Billy Hill’s bodyguard earned his nickname after being certified insane on three occasions due to his extremely violent temperament – on one occasion he attempted to hang a prison governor and his dog from a tree - which led to stints at Broadmoor and Cane Hill Hospitals. It was he who was in charge of the dirty deeds of recovering money via torture - he pulled teeth out with pliers, shot rivals on the say so of his bosses and was named Britain’s most violent man, although today the octogenarian is content giving gangland tours and courting celebrity. He was loosely portrayed in the 2001 British film Gangster No. 1, as influential mobster Freddy Mays. 

    Ronnie and Reggie Kray
    Undisputedly Britain’s most famous criminals. Their thuggish behaviour landed them both criminal records while in their 20s, thereby ending promising boxing careers. In the 50s and 60s they tortured and murdered their way through the East End while attaining celebrity status; they were photographed by David Bailey and Reggie had a fling with Barbara Windsor (her Eastenders character, Peggy Mitchell, is based on the twins’ mother). Their power throughout the 60s can be gleaned from Ronnie’s autobiography: “The Beatles and the Rolling Stones were rulers of pop music, Carnaby Street ruled the fashion world... and me and my brother ruled London.” So intimidating were they that potential witnesses refused to cooperate, plus Ronnie’s alleged sexual relationships with members of both the Conservative and Labour parties meant it was in neither of their interests to pursue them. Thus their activities continued for many years, until Reggie was arrested for the gruesome stabbing of fellow criminal Jack “the Hat” McVitie - according to Kray associate Tony Lambrianou his liver popped out and had to be flushed down the toilet. The ex-boxers’ reputation for violence coupled with Ronnie’s paranoid schizophrenic behaviour made them feared and respected in equal measures – both their funerals attracted thousands of well-wishers.

    Charlie and Eddie Richardson
    The Krays’ main rivals, the Richardsons ruled over the West End, a territory the Krays attempted to conquer unsuccessfully. Hailing from South London, they never achieved the fame of their arch enemies but they were no less notorious, one of their specialities being removing the victim’s toes with bolt cutters. Other preferred methods of punishment included nailing victims to the floor for hours on end and urinating on them, and placing them in a cold bath while administering electrical charges to their genitalia. Their nickname for torture was “taking a shirt from Charlie”, as ever the gentleman, he would lend them a clean shirt with which to go home in afterwards. Their business was fraud, racketeering and later the distribution of Class A drugs; both were eventually imprisoned for torture and affray. 

    Gangsters Today
    Today gangsters keep a low profile – although former firefighter and 7/7 hero Simon Ford, recipient of a bravery award for his efforts during the terrorist attack was recently sentenced to 14 years in jail for masterminding one of Britain’s biggest drug operations. A more common example of gangland today is The Brick Lane Massif, an Asian teenage street gang based in Whitechapel that was formed in 1979. Gone are the smartly dressed, professional-looking criminals, instead today’s street wars are conducted by young boys and men who stay out of the limelight, avoiding the glamorisation that has elevated London’s old gangsters to semi-mythical status. 



    Sebastian Moran

    Colonel Sebastian Moran is a character in the stories written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. An enemy of Sherlock Holmes, he first appears in the short story "The Adventure of the Empty House". Holmes once described him as "the second most dangerous man in London" - the most dangerous being Professor Moriarty, Moran's employer.
    Empt-06.jpg
    Colonel Moran is arrested in "The Adventure of the Empty House"
    House" First appearance"The Adventure of the Empty House"
    Information
    GenderMale  Title: Colonel  NationalityBritish

    Fictional character biography

    According to Sherlock Holmes's index of criminal biographies, Sebastian Moran was born in London in 1840, the son of Sir Augustus Moran, CB, sometime Minister to Persia.
    He was educated at Eton College and the University of Oxfordbefore embarking upon a military career. Formerly of the 1st Bangalore Pioneers, he served in the Jowaki Expedition of 1877-1878 and in the Second Anglo-Afghan War, seeing action at the Battle of Char Asiab, 6 October 1879 (for which he was mentioned in despatches); the Battle of Sherpur, 23 December 1879; and at Kabul.
    A devoted sportsman and highly skilled shot, he was author of the books Heavy Game of the Western Himalayas in 1881 and Three Months in the Jungle in 1884, and reportedly once crawled down a drain after a wounded man-eating tiger.
    He soon turned to the bad (Holmes attributes this to a hereditary trait), and although there was no open scandal he was obliged to retire from the army and return to London. Outwardly respectable, with an address in Conduit Street, Mayfair and membership of the (fictional) Anglo-Indian Club, the Tankerville Club and The Bagatelle Card Club, he nevertheless continued in his evil ways. He was soon recruited by the criminal mastermind Professor Moriarty, and served for a time as his chief of staff. Maintained in a comfortable lifestyle by Moriarty, Moran soon came to be used solely for assassinations that required his peculiar skill with the rifle, including that of Mrs Stewart of Lauder in 1887. On the break-up of the Moriarty crime ring inThe Final Problem (early 1891), Moran escaped incrimination, and followed the Professor to Reichenbach Falls. After witnessing his chief's death at the hands of Holmes, Moran attempted to kill the detective by rolling boulders down upon him, but Holmes escaped. Now left without employment, Moran earned a living back in London by playing cards at several clubs.
    However one of the other players, Ronald Adair, noticed that Moran won by cheating and threatened to expose him. On 30 March 1894, Moran murdered Adair by shooting him with a silenced air rifle that fired revolver bullets. Dr. Watson and a returned Holmes took the case, and Moran, learning that Holmes was back in London, attempted to kill the detective by firing his air rifle from a vacant house across the street from Holmes' residence. However Holmes, who had figured out how Moran killed Adair, fooled the Colonel: what Moran ended up shooting was a wax dummy of Holmes while the real Holmes, with Watson and Inspector Lestrade in tow, hid within the vacant house with Moran without the Colonel's knowledge. As soon as Moran fired, he was seized and arrested.

    In The Adventure of the Illustrious Client, Holmes mentions Moran as being still alive. This story is set in September 1902. Moran is also mentioned in His Last Bow as an example of those of Holmes's many adversaries who have futilely sworn revenge against him. Colonel Sebastian Moran was also the villain in Doyle's Sherlock Holmes play The Crown Diamond written in the early 1900s but not performed until 1921. However, when this play was adapted as the short story The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone, Moran was replaced by Count Negretto Sylvius.

    Other appearances

    Literature

    Moran appears in the Flashman novella Flashman and the Tiger, and as a boy in the novel Flash for Freedom!, by George MacDonald Fraser. (MacDonald gives him a birth-date of 1834, and the full name "John Sebastian 'Tiger Jack' Moran".) In Flashman and the Tiger, during the battle of Rorke's Drift, Moran demonstrates amazing speed and unearthly accuracy with a revolver.
    In Sherlock Holmes's War of the Worlds, the Artilleryman from The War of the Worlds is said to be Moran's son.
    In Martin Powell's short story "Sherlock Holmes in the Lost World" (collected in Gaslight Grimoire) Moran attempts to rebuild Moriarty's criminal empire after the latter's death, but is killed by Professor Challenger.
    Moran appears in several works by Kim Newman:
    • He appears as a vampire character in the alternate history horror novel Anno Dracula.
    • In the short story "The Man Who Got Off The Ghost Train", Richard Jeperson is dispatched to investigate a decades-old mystery in which Colonel Moran played a brief but memorable part.
    • In the book Professor Moriarty: The Hound of the D'Urbervilles, a collection of related stories, Moran is the Watson to Moriarty's criminous Sherlock Holmes, from their first meeting in "A Volume in Vermilion" to their final parting in "The Problem of the Final Adventure". Moran, nicknamed 'Basher', is portrayed as debauched, violent and as something of an adrenaline junkie but also as educated and not entirely without morals. As the title suggests, the stories feature guest appearances by many of Moriarty and Moran's fictional contemporaries. Around half the stories in the collection had previously been published separately: "A Shambles in Belgravia" in BBC Online's Sherlock Holmes anthology, "A Volume in Vermilion" in Sherlock Holmes' Mystery Magazine, "The Red Planet League" in Gaslight Grimoire, and "The Adventure of the Six Maledictions" in Gaslight Arcanum.
    Moran appears in two stories in the anthology Shadows Over Baker Street: "A Study in Emerald" by Neil Gaiman (reprinted in Gaiman's collection Fragile Things) and "Tiger! Tiger!" by Elizabeth Bear. In "A Study in Emerald", a reimagining of A Study in Scarlet set in an alternate world, Moran takes on the role of narrator usually given to Dr Watson, as he takes up residence in Baker Street with a consulting detective - although from then on events turn out very differently.
    In David McDaniel's Man from U.N.C.L.E. novels, Moran is the founder of THRUSH after Professor Moriarty's death at Reichenbach.
    Moran appears as a minor character in Alan Moore's comic book series The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Volume I, as an underling of Moriarty, where they are both secret agents who are assigned by MI5 to create a criminal empire through which the government can be in control of the criminal underworld.
    In T. S. Eliot's poem "Gus: The Theatre Cat" (which became one of the songs in Cats), it is said that Gus once played a man-eating Tiger pursued by an Indian Colonel down a drain.
    In John Gardner's novel The Return of Moriarty, Moran is stated to have taken temporary charge of Moriarty's organization while The Professor was away from London following the events at the Reichenbach Falls (which are explained as never having happened as Watson [and later Holmes] described them). The events leading up to and of "The Empty House" are told from Moran's point of view. Naturally, The Professor is not pleased to hear of Moran's actions and arrest, and has Moran poisoned while in police custody to prevent him from talking.
    He appears briefly in Michael Kurland's 'Professor Moriarty' novel Death by Gaslight as an associate of the professor, and in a much larger role in the later The Empress of India, where he enlists Moriarty's help in retrieving a golden statue.
    He appears in David Stuart Davies's The Veiled Detective, a novel based mainly around a retelling of part of A Study in Scarlet, in which Dr. Watson is planted in Holmes's life by Professor Moriarty in order to monitor and report back on him.
    In the anthology My Sherlock Holmes edited by Michael Kurland, a collection of stories told from the viewpoints of minor characters from canon, A Study in Orange by Peter Tremayne recounts how Moran partly outwitted Holmes on a case. Moran also appeared in Tremayne's The Affray at the Kildare Street Club in The Mammoth Book of New Sherlock Holmes Adventures where he was foiled in a petty theft by a young Holmes.
    He appears as a minor character in the clockpunk/steampunk novel Whitechapel Gods by S.M. Peters (as does the blind mechanic Von Herder, the manufacturer of Moran's air rifle).
    A female version of Moran appears in Liar-soft's 2008 visual novel Shikkoku no Sharnoth ~What a beautiful tomorrow~ as one of the principal characters.
    He is credited as having compiled the book The Moriarty Papers - The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes's Great Nemesis which claims to give an insight into many of Professor Moriarty's plots and schemes.
    Moran appears in the Italian comic book Storie di Altrove/Stories from Elsewhere (a spin-off series of Martin Mystère). In 1910, he unsuccessfully attempts to kill Sherlock Holmes. In the end, he was killed by Sherlock's brother Sherrinford who was possessed by a demon from another dimension.[1]
    Moran appears in the book The File on Colonel Moran - Volume One: The Lure of Moriarty by Vernon Mealor, the first part being a first person account by the colonel of his pursuit of Holmes and his arrest for the Adair murder, the other two stories being accounts of his early days with Moriarty, presented as stories related by a reporter who conducted interviews with him.

    Television

    Although he doesn't appear himself, Sebastian Moran plays a small part and is mentioned in the novel and Granada television series Young Sherlock: The Mystery of the Manor House written by Gerald Frow (his non-canonical younger brother Jasper Moran does appear however).

    He appears in the Granada television adaptation of The Adventure of the Empty House opposite Jeremy Brettas Holmes, here played by Patrick Allen. In this Moran is shown in flashback attempting to shoot Holmes at the Reichenbach Falls, rather than rolling rocks upon him as in the original story. A similar event occurs with Moran in the Soviet television version of The Adventure of the Final Problem.
    He is introduced initially as the serial killer (actually hitman) M. played by Vinnie Jones in the CBS television series Elementary, a former Royal Marine, known for hanging his victims upside-down via a tripod device and slitting their throats so that their blood all pools out, later dumping the bodies in a nearby body of water. He eventually reveals his true identity and becomes the first character in the show to give Holmes (Jonny Lee Miller) the name of his employer, Moriarty; prior to this Holmes believed M was a simple serial killer.[2] Moran subsequently confesses to his crimes when he learns that Moriarty had set him up to be caught by Holmes (Moriarty had killed Sherlock's lover Irene Adler and made it appear that Moran did it when Moran was in prison at the time), wanting Holmes to catch Moriarty for his betrayal of Moran.

    Film

    He appears in three films starring Arthur Wontner as Sherlock Holmes. In the 1931 The Sleeping Cardinal he is played by Louis Goodrich. In the 1935 The Triumph of Sherlock Holmes he appears very briefly played by Wilfrid Caithness. He then appears in a larger role as Moriarty's right-hand man in the 1937 Silver Blaze(a.k.a. Murder at the Baskervilles), here played by Arthur Goullet.

    Moran appears as the main villain in the 1946 Basil Rathbone film Terror by Night.
    In the film Without a Clue, Moran (portrayed by Tim Killick) appears as Moriarty's tall bodyguard and has a scar down one side of his face. His weapon of choice is a switchblade which he uses to stab and cut his victims, and he is also a highly skilled knife thrower.
    Moran, played by Paul Anderson, appears in the 2011 film Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows as the secondary antagonist. Moran was renowned as one of the best marksmen in the British army, but following a dishonourable discharge he became a mercenary in the employ of Professor Moriarty, on whose orders Moran undertakes several assassinations throughout the film. He remains at large after the end of the film.

    References

     ^ Stories from Elsewhere: The Woman Who Lived Two Lives

     



    THE THIRD MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN LONDON
    by Rick Lai
    © 2007 Rick Lai rlai@optonline.net
    In the aftermath of the trial of the Moriarty gang in 1891, two of the most dangerous members remained at liberty. One was Colonel Sebastian Moran, the second most dangerous man in London after Professor Moriarty. The name of the other remains unknown. Perhaps he was the third most dangerous man in London. Because of these associates of the late Professor, Holmes absented himself from London for three years.
    When Holmes returned to London in April 1894, Moran was still present, but his compatriot was conspicuously absent. Who was this member of the Moriarty gang? A clue to his identity lies in a series of stories by a contemporary of Sir Arthur Conan
    Doyle.
    Arthur Morrison recorded the exploits of a detective named Horace Dorrington.
    While his abilities as a criminal investigator ranked below those of Holmes, his talents as a criminal rivaled those of Moriarty and Moran. Morrison’s The Dorrington Deed-Box (1897) contains six tales of the corrupt detective: “The Narrative of Mr. James Rigby,”
    “The Case of Janissary,” “The Case of the ‘Mirror of Portugal,’” “The Affair of the Avalanche and Bicycle and Tire Co, Limited,’” “The Case of Mr. Loftus Deacon” and “Old Cater’s Money.” The Dorrington Deed-Box has been reprinted as part of Arthur
    Morrison: Complete Fiction Volume I: Martin Hewitt and other Detective Stories (Battered Silicon Dispatch Box, 2003). As with the Holmes stories, these tales were not presented in chronological order. Some reconstruction of Dorrington’s probable career is necessary before his relationship to Holmes can be construed.
    Born in 1856, Horace Dorrington was a tall muscular man with a dark military mustache and deep penetrating eyes. Except for a round and full face, he was rather handsome. For a brutally ruthless man, he could be deceptively charming. He possessed a fondness for cigars and a passion for grouse-shooting.

    In 1885, Dorrington was working for meager wages in Deptford (“Old Cater’s Money”). His employer was Flint, an unscrupulous ship-stores dealer. Upon the death of Flint’s uncle, Jerry Cater, his will left a considerable fortune to his other nephew, Paul Cater. Learning that a missing codicil existed which made him heir to his uncle’s wealth, Flint dispatched Dorrington to find the document. Unearthing the codicil, Dorrington
    treacherously sold it for a thousand pounds to Paul Cater. Dorrington secretly had a copy of the codicil that he intended to sell for the same price to Flint. His plan never reached fruition due the discovery of a later codicil that disinherited both nephews.
    The tidy profit of one thousand pounds enabled Dorrington to establish himself as a private inquiry agent in London. With a partner named Hicks, he took offices in Bedford Street, Covent Garden. While Dorrington conducted the firm’s investigations, Hicks did most of the office work. Little is known about Hicks except that he was a small wrinkled man about fifteen to twenty years older than Dorrington.

    Dorrington achieved considerable fame in 1890 by solving the murder of a wealthy collector of Oriental curios (“The Case of Mr. Loftus Deacon”). Hired by the executor of the deceased’s will, Dorrington behaved in an exemplary way throughout the investigation. It suited Dorrington to act honestly in order to gain the reputation that would lure trusting clients to his doorstep.

    During 1891, Dorrington was hired to protect a horse before a big race (“The Case of Janissary”). Dorrington prevented Robert Naylor, a bookmaker, from drugging the horse. Furthermore, Dorrington learned that Naylor had a unique way ofcircumventing the payment of large winnings to his customers. With his wife acting as an accomplice, Naylor murdered any exorbitantly successful gambler. After drugging their
    victim, the Naylors drowned him in the cistern of their house. Dumping the bodies into the Thames misled the authorities into believing that the drowning occurred elsewhere.
    Rather than expose the Naylors to the police, Dorrington blackmailed them into his service. Changing their name to Crofting, the Naylors and their cistern moved to another part of London where they served as Dorrington’s executioners.
    Very little is told of Dorrington’s activities over the next two years. The year 1892 found him involved in a case concerning a secret society in Soho. When this unrecorded exploit made him a feared figure in the foreign colony of Soho, Dorrington was drawn into an unsuccessful search for a diamond that had been missing since the French Revolution (“The Case of the ‘Mirror of Portugal’”). In 1893, Dorrington extorted a check for 10,000 pounds from an unethical manager o a bicycle company (The
    Affair of the ‘Avalanche and Bicycle and Tire Co, Limited’”). The check was never cashed because subsequent events revealed that the manager had squandered his fortune. -In early 1894, Dorrington visited Italy to retrieve an American millionaire’s documents that had been stolen by the Mafia. Upon the successful completion of this assignment, Dorrington did not return to England. He departed for Australia where he spent three months on a matter of unknown nature. In the summer of 1894, he embarked on a voyage back to England. On of his traveling companions was James Rigby, a young
    wealthy Australian landowner (“The Narrative of Mr. James Rigby”).
    Twenty-one years earlier, Rigby, then only eight years of age, and his family had been touring Europe. During their stay in Naples, Rigby’s father killed an Italian bandit in self-defense. The bandit was a member of the indigenous criminal community, the Camorra. Trailing the Rigby family back to London, the Camorra slew the father.

    Aware of this family tragedy, Dorrington launched an elaborate plot to gain possessions pf Rigby’s land holdings. Ingratiating himself to young Rigby, Dorrington utilized his recent experience with the Mafia in order to present himself as an expert on Italian secret societies, Dorrington impressed upon the credulous Rigby that it was common for the Camorra to engage in endless vendettas against the families of its
    enemies.
    When they arrived in England during August, Dorrington’s scheme entered a new phase. The Australian was tricked into believing that agents of the Camorra were seeking his life. Of course, he went to the firm of Dorrington and Hicks for protection, Dorrington pretended that he needed to impersonate Rigby in order to lure the Camorra into a trap. After Rigby entrusted all his papers including his land deeds into Dorrington’s hands. The young Australian was conveyed supposedly for his own protection to the house of Mr. and Mrs. Crofting (formerly Naylor). After being drugged by Mrs. Crofting, Rigby awoke to find himself inside the deadly cistern. As the cistern filled with water, Rigby pounded on the walls. He was saved from certain death by a
    plumber who had been working on the cistern of a neighboring house. Taken to the abode of the Croftings' neighbors, Rigby summoned the police. Unfortunately, the Croftings had fled. The noises made by the plumber rescuing Rigby had alerted them to the peril of arrest. Furthermore, they had warned their employers. The authorities found the offices of Dorrington and Hicks abandoned.
    In his haste to elude the law, Dorrington had left virtually all of his private papers in the office. Months afterwards, Rigby wrote of his experience in 1895. From the papers abandoned by Dorrington, Rigby was able to rebuild cases of the sinister sleuth.
    Most of these documents gave only faint outlines of the cases. Rigby was indebted to nebulous “outside inquiries” for most of his detailed information. Rigby must have given his collected findings to Arthur Morrison for major revision. Two years later, these tales
    of Dorrington were published.
    Horace Dorrington could have been the third most dangerous man in London. News of Dorrington’s behavior in the case of Jerry Cater’s testament would have reached Professor Moriarty in 1885. Recognizing Dorrington as a capable criminal, the Professor offered him employment. With the Professor’s support, Dorrington established himself as a private inquiry agent. Aware that Dorrington had betrayed his previous employer, Moriarty fostered another of his hirelings, Hicks, upon the new recruit as a partner. Hicks’s main role was to guarantee Dorrington’s continued loyalty to the Professor.
    Certainly Holmes was aware of Dorrington’s existence by the time of the Loftus Deacon case. Unlike the rest of the British public, Holmes recognized Dorrington as a murderous rogue. Holmes’s disruption of the Moriarty gang in 1891 caused Dorrington
    to form his own gang by enlisting the Naylors and others as his minions. The Professor’s death in Switzerland prompted Hicks to shift his allegiance to Dorrington, the true brains of their joint enterprise. In the years that followed, Dorrington pursued an independent
    course from Colonel Moran whose sole income after Moriarty’s death appeared to be
    derived from cheating at cards.
    When Holmes returned to London in April 1894, Dorrington was abroad conducting business in wither Italy or Australia. After having disposed of Moran in “The Adventure of the Empty House,” Holmes waited for Dorrington to return for their inevitable confrontation. Bering in communication with Hicks by telegraph during his travels, Dorrington must have been aware of Holmes’s presence in London long before his own arrival. The overconfident Dorrington did not feel threatened by Holmes. By 1894, the firm of Dorrington and Hicks was so prestigious that it numbered royalty, both European and Asiatic, among its clients. Dorrington felt that he was a figure above reproach. He wrongly concluded that Holmes could never damage his reputation.
    As demonstrated by his guise as Escott in “The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton,” it wasn’t difficult for Holmes to impersonate a plumber. Doing odd jobs in the neighborhood, Holmes kept an eye on the Croftings’ residence. Upon seeing Rigby enter the house of death, Holmes saw the opportunity to unmask Dorrington by saving his intended victim.
    Just as Holmes desired anonymity in the capture of Colonel Moran, the great detective did not want to be publicly connected to Dorrington’s exposure. Rigby knew of his benefactor’s true identity, but he pretended at Holmes’s insistence that the rescuer was merely a common workman who stumbled upon the scene. Watson’s popular accounts of Holmes had given the public the impression that all private detectives were incorruptible. Holmes felt that the publicity attached to his own career had created a climate of trust that Dorrington had exploited. Therefore, Holmes desired that4 Dorrington’s nefarious doings be highly publicized in order to put society on guard against such scoundrels in the future. He conducted the “outside inquiries” that gave Rigby the details of Dorrington’s earlier activities. The next step was to find the proper
    Literary Agent for Rigby. Since Conan Doyle was too openly associated with Watson and himself, Holmes opted on Arthur Morrison.

    Dorrington most likely fled England in 1894. What happened to Dorrington afterwards? Did he ever return for another battle with Holmes? While the answer can never be found in The Dorrington Deed-Box, it may lie in Watson’s dispatch-box at Cox and Co,

    Europe's most dangerous man turns out to be a pussycat

     
    Jeremy Warner, assistant editor of The Daily Telegraph, is one of Britain's leading business and economics commentators. He is@telegraphwarner on Twitter. Subscribe to the City Briefing e-mail.
     
    Michel Barnier, described by some in the British press as "Europe's most dangerous man", has been on a whistle stop tour of London policymakers, bankers, hedge fund and private equity managers over the last 24 hours, and though plainly nobody's poodle, Europe's new single market commissioner hardly lives up to his moniker.
     

    He's (Michel Barnier)  been in to see the Chancellor, he's been in to see the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority, and he's breakfasted with the hedgies and the private equiteers.
     
    With the usual proviso that rhetoric is one thing and actions quite another, he doesn't give the impression of being in the pay of Nicolas Sarkozy or wanting single handedly to dismantle Anglo-Saxon capitalism.
    If this is "Le Stitchup", I can think of worse people to lose your sovereignty to.
    His English is still faltering, and he often needs to speak with the aid of a translator, but the message from this rather courteous man is clear enough. Yes, he wants to deepen the single market, he wants to impose better corporate goverance on European banks and business, and following the trouncing of the Greek bond market, he most definitely wants to regulate the market in Credit Default Swaps virtually out of existence. As for the "Volcker rule", the US proposal to split proprietary trading from ordinary banking, he thinks this inappropriate for the European banking model.
    So much, so predictable. But beyond these relatively uncontentious responses to the financial crisis he doesn't give the impression of being "out to get" London or to impose the Gaillic economic model on everyone else. Obviously he's a true believer in Le Grand Projet, and perhaps worryingly for Britain, he thinks the single market inevitably has to be accompanied by a single currency. Yet he's not so out of line with British europhiles on that one, including Lord Mandelson, who said something pretty similar only a few days ago.
    Otherwise, it's all motherhood and apple pie. He wants future growth to be greener and more equitable – don't we all – he's determined to get the framework right for Intellectual Property, including a single market solution on patent rights, and of course he wants to foster small and medium sized enterprise.
    So did M. Barnier's London charm offensive work? Did he set minds at rest? If he is indeed a wolf in sheep's clothing, and as Sarkozy claimed, Britain is the big loser from his appointment, then he certainly wears his disguise well.
    I don't think London has much to fear from Mr Barnier, but I do think Britain's fast devaluing exchange rate, and the competitive advantage this inevitably gives British goods and services within the single market, is going to be a big issue and source of complaint over the next year. Watch out for a sharp deterioration in relations on that one.
     
     

    Is this the most dangerous man in Europe?

    27 April 2012

    THE ECONOMIST LONDON

    François Hollande at a press conference on 25 April in Paris.
     
    The socialist candidate is set to become the next French president, but his refusal to reform would be bad for his country and most of all for Europe, argues the London weekly.

    It is half of the Franco-German motor that drives the European Union. It has been the swing country in the euro crisis, poised between a prudent north and spendthrift south, and between creditors and debtors. And it is big. If France were the next euro-zone country to get into trouble, the single currency’s very survival would be in doubt.
    That is why the likely victory of the Socialist candidate, François Hollande, in France’s presidential election matters so much. In the first round on April 22nd Mr Hollande came only just ahead of the incumbent, Nicolas Sarkozy. Yet he should win the second round on May 6th, because he will hoover up all of the far-left vote that went to Jean-Luc Mélenchon and others and also win a sizeable chunk from the National Front’s Marine Le Pen and the centrist François Bayrou.
    Mr Sarkozy has a mountain to climb. Many French voters seem viscerally to dislike him. Neither Ms Le Pen (who, disturbingly, did well) nor Mr Bayrou (who, regrettably, did not) is likely to endorse him, as both will gain from his defeat. So, barring a shock, such as an implosion in next week’s televised debate, Mr Hollande can be confident of winning in May, and then of seeing his party triumph in June’s legislative election.
    This newspaper endorsed Mr Sarkozy in 2007, when he bravely told French voters that they had no alternative but to change. He was unlucky to be hit by the global economic crisis a year later. He has also chalked up some achievements: softening the Socialists’ 35-hour week, freeing universities, raising the retirement age. Yet Mr Sarkozy’s policies have proved as unpredictable and unreliable as the man himself. The protectionist, anti-immigrant and increasingly anti-European tone he has recently adopted may be meant for National Front voters, but he seems to believe too much of it. For all that, if we had a vote on May 6th, we would give it to Mr Sarkozy – but not on his merits, so much as to keep out Mr Hollande.
    With a Socialist president, France would get one big thing right. Mr Hollande opposes the harsh German-enforced fiscal tightening which is strangling the euro zone’s chances of recovery. But he is doing this for the wrong reasons – and he looks likely to get so much else wrong that the prosperity of France (and the euro zone) would be at risk.

    ·      
     

    France's election

    The rather dangerous Monsieur Hollande

    The Socialist who is likely to become the President of France



    MESSAGE MACHINE

    Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand

    A PENTAGON CAMPAIGN Retired officers have been used to shape terrorism coverage from inside the TV and radio networks

    .
    In the summer of 2005, the Bush administration confronted a fresh wave of criticism over Guantánamo Bay. The detention center had just been branded “the gulag of our times” by Amnesty International, there were new allegations of abuse from United Nations human rights experts and calls were mounting for its closure.
    The administration’s communications experts responded swiftly. Early one Friday morning, they put a group of retired military officers on one of the jets normally used by Vice President Dick Cheney and flew them to Cuba for a carefully orchestrated tour of Guantánamo.
    To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.
    Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
    The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.
    Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks themselves. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants. The companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror. It is a furious competition, one in which inside information and easy access to senior officials are highly prized.
    Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.
    Analysts have been wooed in hundreds of private briefings with senior military leaders, including officials with significant influence over contracting and budget matters, records show. They have been taken on tours of Iraq and given access to classified intelligence. They have been briefed by officials from the White House, State Department and Justice Department, including Mr. Cheney, Alberto R. Gonzales and Stephen J. Hadley.
    In turn, members of this group have echoed administration talking points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false or inflated. Some analysts acknowledge they suppressed doubts because they feared jeopardizing their access.
    A few expressed regret for participating in what they regarded as an effort to dupe the American public with propaganda dressed as independent military analysis.
    “It was them saying, ‘We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you,’ ” Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret and former Fox News analyst, said.
    Kenneth Allard, a former NBC military analyst who has taught information warfare at the National Defense University, said the campaign amounted to a sophisticated information operation. “This was a coherent, active policy,” he said.
    As conditions in Iraq deteriorated, Mr. Allard recalled, he saw a yawning gap between what analysts were told in private briefings and what subsequent inquiries and books later revealed.
    “Night and day,” Mr. Allard said, “I felt we’d been hosed.”
    The Pentagon defended its relationship with military analysts, saying they had been given only factual information about the war. “The intent and purpose of this is nothing other than an earnest attempt to inform the American people,” Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said.
    It was, Mr. Whitman added, “a bit incredible” to think retired military officers could be “wound up” and turned into “puppets of the Defense Department.”
    Many analysts strongly denied that they had either been co-opted or had allowed outside business interests to affect their on-air comments, and some have used their platforms to criticize the conduct of the war. Several, like Jeffrey D. McCausland, a CBS military analyst and defense industry lobbyist, said they kept their networks informed of their outside work and recused themselves from coverage that touched on business interests.
    “I’m not here representing the administration,” Dr. McCausland said.
    Some network officials, meanwhile, acknowledged only a limited understanding of their analysts’ interactions with the administration. They said that while they were sensitive to potential conflicts of interest, they did not hold their analysts to the same ethical standards as their news employees regarding outside financial interests. The onus is on their analysts to disclose conflicts, they said. And whatever the contributions of military analysts, they also noted the many network journalists who have covered the war for years in all its complexity.
    Five years into the Iraq war, most details of the architecture and execution of the Pentagon’s campaign have never been disclosed. But The Times successfully sued the Defense Department to gain access to 8,000 pages of e-mail messages, transcripts and records describing years of private briefings, trips to Iraq and Guantánamo and an extensive Pentagon talking points operation.
    These records reveal a symbiotic relationship where the usual dividing lines between government and journalism have been obliterated.
    Internal Pentagon documents repeatedly refer to the military analysts as “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who could be counted on to deliver administration “themes and messages” to millions of Americans “in the form of their own opinions.”
    Though many analysts are paid network consultants, making $500 to $1,000 per appearance, in Pentagon meetings they sometimes spoke as if they were operating behind enemy lines, interviews and transcripts show. Some offered the Pentagon tips on how to outmaneuver the networks, or as one analyst put it to Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, “the Chris Matthewses and the Wolf Blitzers of the world.” Some warned of planned stories or sent the Pentagon copies of their correspondence with network news executives. Many — although certainly not all — faithfully echoed talking points intended to counter critics.
    “Good work,” Thomas G. McInerney, a retired Air Force general, consultant and Fox News analyst, wrote to the Pentagon after receiving fresh talking points in late 2006. “We will use it.”
    Again and again, records show, the administration has enlisted analysts as a rapid reaction force to rebut what it viewed as critical news coverage, some of it by the networks’ own Pentagon correspondents. For example, when news articles revealed that troops in Iraq were dying because of inadequate body armor, a senior Pentagon official wrote to his colleagues: “I think our analysts — properly armed — can push back in that arena.”
    The documents released by the Pentagon do not show any quid pro quo between commentary and contracts. But some analysts said they had used the special access as a marketing and networking opportunity or as a window into future business possibilities.
    John C. Garrett is a retired Marine colonel and unpaid analyst for Fox News TV and radio. He is also a lobbyist at Patton Boggs who helps firms win Pentagon contracts, including in Iraq. In promotional materials, he states that as a military analyst he “is privy to weekly access and briefings with the secretary of defense, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staffand other high level policy makers in the administration.” One client told investors that Mr. Garrett’s special access and decades of experience helped him “to know in advance — and in detail — how best to meet the needs” of the Defense Department and other agencies.
    In interviews Mr. Garrett said there was an inevitable overlap between his dual roles. He said he had gotten “information you just otherwise would not get,” from the briefings and three Pentagon-sponsored trips to Iraq. He also acknowledged using this access and information to identify opportunities for clients. “You can’t help but look for that,” he said, adding, “If you know a capability that would fill a niche or need, you try to fill it. “That’s good for everybody.”
    At the same time, in e-mail messages to the Pentagon, Mr. Garrett displayed an eagerness to be supportive with his television and radio commentary. “Please let me know if you have any specific points you want covered or that you would prefer to downplay,” he wrote in January 2007, before President Bush went on TV to describe the surge strategy in Iraq.
    Conversely, the administration has demonstrated that there is a price for sustained criticism, many analysts said. “You’ll lose all access,” Dr. McCausland said.
    With a majority of Americans calling the war a mistake despite all administration attempts to sway public opinion, the Pentagon has focused in the last couple of years on cultivating in particular military analysts frequently seen and heard in conservative news outlets, records and interviews show.
    Some of these analysts were on the mission to Cuba on June 24, 2005 — the first of six such Guantánamo trips — which was designed to mobilize analysts against the growing perception of Guantánamo as an international symbol of inhumane treatment. On the flight to Cuba, for much of the day at Guantánamo and on the flight home that night, Pentagon officials briefed the 10 or so analysts on their key messages — how much had been spent improving the facility, the abuse endured by guards, the extensive rights afforded detainees.
    The results came quickly. The analysts went on TV and radio, decrying Amnesty International, criticizing calls to close the facility and asserting that all detainees were treated humanely.
    “The impressions that you’re getting from the media and from the various pronouncements being made by people who have not been here in my opinion are totally false,” Donald W. Shepperd, a retired Air Force general, reported live on CNN by phone from Guantánamo that same afternoon.
    The next morning, Montgomery Meigs, a retired Army general and NBC analyst, appeared on “Today.” “There’s been over $100 million of new construction,” he reported. “The place is very professionally run.”
    Within days, transcripts of the analysts’ appearances were circulated to senior White House and Pentagon officials, cited as evidence of progress in the battle for hearts and minds at home.
    Charting the Campaign
    By early 2002, detailed planning for a possible Iraq invasion was under way, yet an obstacle loomed. Many Americans, polls showed, were uneasy about invading a country with no clear connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. Pentagon and White House officials believed the military analysts could play a crucial role in helping overcome this resistance.
    Torie Clarke, the former public relations executive who oversaw the Pentagon’s dealings with the analysts as assistant secretary of defense for public affairs, had come to her job with distinct ideas about achieving what she called “information dominance.” In a spin-saturated news culture, she argued, opinion is swayed most by voices perceived as authoritative and utterly independent.
    And so even before Sept. 11, she built a system within the Pentagon to recruit “key influentials” — movers and shakers from all walks who with the proper ministrations might be counted on to generate support for Mr. Rumsfeld’s priorities.
    In the months after Sept. 11, as every network rushed to retain its own all-star squad of retired military officers, Ms. Clarke and her staff sensed a new opportunity. To Ms. Clarke’s team, the military analysts were the ultimate “key influential” — authoritative, most of them decorated war heroes, all reaching mass audiences.
    The analysts, they noticed, often got more airtime than network reporters, and they were not merely explaining the capabilities of Apache helicopters. They were framing how viewers ought to interpret events. What is more, while the analysts were in the news media, they were not of the news media. They were military men, many of them ideologically in sync with the administration’s neoconservative brain trust, many of them important players in a military industry anticipating large budget increases to pay for an Iraq war.
    Even analysts with no defense industry ties, and no fondness for the administration, were reluctant to be critical of military leaders, many of whom were friends. “It is very hard for me to criticize the United States Army,” said William L. Nash, a retired Army general and ABC analyst. “It is my life.”
    Other administrations had made sporadic, small-scale attempts to build relationships with the occasional military analyst. But these were trifling compared with what Ms. Clarke’s team had in mind. Don Meyer, an aide to Ms. Clarke, said a strategic decision was made in 2002 to make the analysts the main focus of the public relations push to construct a case for war. Journalists were secondary. “We didn’t want to rely on them to be our primary vehicle to get information out,” Mr. Meyer said.
    The Pentagon’s regular press office would be kept separate from the military analysts. The analysts would instead be catered to by a small group of political appointees, with the point person being Brent T. Krueger, another senior aide to Ms. Clarke. The decision recalled other administration tactics that subverted traditional journalism. Federal agencies, for example, have paid columnists to write favorably about the administration. They have distributed to local TV stations hundreds of fake news segments with fawning accounts of administration accomplishments. The Pentagon itself has made covert payments to Iraqi newspapers to publish coalition propaganda.
    Rather than complain about the “media filter,” each of these techniques simply converted the filter into an amplifier. This time, Mr. Krueger said, the military analysts would in effect be “writing the op-ed” for the war.
    Assembling the Team
    From the start, interviews show, the White House took a keen interest in which analysts had been identified by the Pentagon, requesting lists of potential recruits, and suggesting names. Ms. Clarke’s team wrote summaries describing their backgrounds, business affiliations and where they stood on the war.
    “Rumsfeld ultimately cleared off on all invitees,” said Mr. Krueger, who left the Pentagon in 2004. (Through a spokesman, Mr. Rumsfeld declined to comment for this article.)
    Over time, the Pentagon recruited more than 75 retired officers, although some participated only briefly or sporadically. The largest contingent was affiliated with Fox News, followed by NBC and CNN, the other networks with 24-hour cable outlets. But analysts from CBS and ABC were included, too. Some recruits, though not on any network payroll, were influential in other ways — either because they were sought out by radio hosts, or because they often published op-ed articles or were quoted in magazines, Web sites and newspapers. At least nine of them have written op-ed articles for The Times.
    The group was heavily represented by men involved in the business of helping companies win military contracts. Several held senior positions with contractors that gave them direct responsibility for winning new Pentagon business. James Marks, a retired Army general and analyst for CNN from 2004 to 2007, pursued military and intelligence contracts as a senior executive with McNeil Technologies. Still others held board positions with military firms that gave them responsibility for government business. General McInerney, the Fox analyst, for example, sits on the boards of several military contractors, including Nortel Government Solutions, a supplier of communication networks.
    Several were defense industry lobbyists, such as Dr. McCausland, who works at Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, a major lobbying firm where he is director of a national security team that represents several military contractors. “We offer clients access to key decision makers,” Dr. McCausland’s team promised on the firm’s Web site.
    Dr. McCausland was not the only analyst making this pledge. Another was Joseph W. Ralston, a retired Air Force general. Soon after signing on with CBS, General Ralston was named vice chairman of the Cohen Group, a consulting firm headed by a former defense secretary, William Cohen, himself now a “world affairs” analyst for CNN. “The Cohen Group knows that getting to ‘yes’ in the aerospace and defense market — whether in the United States or abroad — requires that companies have a thorough, up-to-date understanding of the thinking of government decision makers,” the company tells prospective clients on its Web site.
    There were also ideological ties.
    Two of NBC’s most prominent analysts, Barry R. McCaffrey and the late Wayne A. Downing, were on the advisory board of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, an advocacy group created with White House encouragement in 2002 to help make the case for ousting Saddam Hussein. Both men also had their own consulting firms and sat on the boards of major military contractors.
    Many also shared with Mr. Bush’s national security team a belief that pessimistic war coverage broke the nation’s will to win in Vietnam, and there was a mutual resolve not to let that happen with this war.
    This was a major theme, for example, with Paul E. Vallely, a Fox News analyst from 2001 to 2007. A retired Army general who had specialized in psychological warfare, Mr. Vallely co-authored a paper in 1980 that accused American news organizations of failing to defend the nation from “enemy” propaganda during Vietnam.
    “We lost the war — not because we were outfought, but because we were out Psyoped,” he wrote. He urged a radically new approach to psychological operations in future wars — taking aim at not just foreign adversaries but domestic audiences, too. He called his approach “MindWar” — using network TV and radio to “strengthen our national will to victory.”
    The Selling of the War
    From their earliest sessions with the military analysts, Mr. Rumsfeld and his aides spoke as if they were all part of the same team.
    In interviews, participants described a powerfully seductive environment — the uniformed escorts to Mr. Rumsfeld’s private conference room, the best government china laid out, the embossed name cards, the blizzard of PowerPoints, the solicitations of advice and counsel, the appeals to duty and country, the warm thank you notes from the secretary himself.
    “Oh, you have no idea,” Mr. Allard said, describing the effect. “You’re back. They listen to you. They listen to what you say on TV.” It was, he said, “psyops on steroids” — a nuanced exercise in influence through flattery and proximity. “It’s not like it’s, ‘We’ll pay you $500 to get our story out,’ ” he said. “It’s more subtle.”
    The access came with a condition. Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon.
    In the fall and winter leading up to the invasion, the Pentagon armed its analysts with talking points portraying Iraq as an urgent threat. The basic case became a familiar mantra: Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, was developing nuclear weapons, and might one day slip some to Al Qaeda; an invasion would be a relatively quick and inexpensive “war of liberation.”
    At the Pentagon, members of Ms. Clarke’s staff marveled at the way the analysts seamlessly incorporated material from talking points and briefings as if it was their own.
    “You could see that they were messaging,” Mr. Krueger said. “You could see they were taking verbatim what the secretary was saying or what the technical specialists were saying. And they were saying it over and over and over.” Some days, he added, “We were able to click on every single station and every one of our folks were up there delivering our message. You’d look at them and say, ‘This is working.’ ”
    On April 12, 2003, with major combat almost over, Mr. Rumsfeld drafted a memorandum to Ms. Clarke. “Let’s think about having some of the folks who did such a good job as talking heads in after this thing is over,” he wrote.
    By summer, though, the first signs of the insurgency had emerged. Reports from journalists based in Baghdad were increasingly suffused with the imagery of mayhem.
    The Pentagon did not have to search far for a counterweight.
    It was time, an internal Pentagon strategy memorandum urged, to “re-energize surrogates and message-force multipliers,” starting with the military analysts.
    The memorandum led to a proposal to take analysts on a tour of Iraq in September 2003, timed to help overcome the sticker shock from Mr. Bush’s request for $87 billion in emergency war financing.
    The group included four analysts from Fox News, one each from CNN and ABC, and several research-group luminaries whose opinion articles appear regularly in the nation’s op-ed pages.
    The trip invitation promised a look at “the real situation on the ground in Iraq.”
    The situation, as described in scores of books, was deteriorating. L. Paul Bremer III, then the American viceroy in Iraq, wrote in his memoir, “My Year in Iraq,” that he had privately warned the White House that the United States had “about half the number of soldiers we needed here.”
    “We’re up against a growing and sophisticated threat,” Mr. Bremer recalled telling the president during a private White House dinner.
    That dinner took place on Sept. 24, while the analysts were touring Iraq.
    Yet these harsh realities were elided, or flatly contradicted, during the official presentations for the analysts, records show. The itinerary, scripted to the minute, featured brief visits to a model school, a few refurbished government buildings, a center for women’s rights, a mass grave and even the gardens of Babylon.
    Mostly the analysts attended briefings. These sessions, records show, spooled out an alternative narrative, depicting an Iraq bursting with political and economic energy, its security forces blossoming. On the crucial question of troop levels, the briefings echoed the White House line: No reinforcements were needed. The “growing and sophisticated threat” described by Mr. Bremer was instead depicted as degraded, isolated and on the run.
    “We’re winning,” a briefing document proclaimed.
    One trip participant, General Nash of ABC, said some briefings were so clearly “artificial” that he joked to another group member that they were on “the George Romney memorial trip to Iraq,” a reference to Mr. Romney’s infamous claim that American officials had “brainwashed” him into supporting the Vietnam War during a tour there in 1965, while he was governor of Michigan.
    But if the trip pounded the message of progress, it also represented a business opportunity: direct access to the most senior civilian and military leaders in Iraq and Kuwait, including many with a say in how the president’s $87 billion would be spent. It also was a chance to gather inside information about the most pressing needs confronting the American mission: the acute shortages of “up-armored” Humvees; the billions to be spent building military bases; the urgent need for interpreters; and the ambitious plans to train Iraq’s security forces.
    Information and access of this nature had undeniable value for trip participants like William V. Cowan and Carlton A. Sherwood.
    Mr. Cowan, a Fox analyst and retired Marine colonel, was the chief executive of a new military firm, the wvc3 Group. Mr. Sherwood was its executive vice president. At the time, the company was seeking contracts worth tens of millions to supply body armor and counterintelligence services in Iraq. In addition, wvc3 Group had a written agreement to use its influence and connections to help tribal leaders in Al Anbar Province win reconstruction contracts from the coalition.
    “Those sheiks wanted access to the C.P.A.,” Mr. Cowan recalled in an interview, referring to the Coalition Provisional Authority.
    Mr. Cowan said he pleaded their cause during the trip. “I tried to push hard with some of Bremer’s people to engage these people of Al Anbar,” he said.
    Back in Washington, Pentagon officials kept a nervous eye on how the trip translated on the airwaves. Uncomfortable facts had bubbled up during the trip. One briefer, for example, mentioned that the Army was resorting to packing inadequately armored Humvees with sandbags and Kevlar blankets. Descriptions of the Iraqi security forces were withering. “They can’t shoot, but then again, they don’t,” one officer told them, according to one participant’s notes.
    “I saw immediately in 2003 that things were going south,” General Vallely, one of the Fox analysts on the trip, recalled in an interview with The Times.
    The Pentagon, though, need not have worried.
    “You can’t believe the progress,” General Vallely told Alan Colmes of Fox News upon his return. He predicted the insurgency would be “down to a few numbers” within months.
    “We could not be more excited, more pleased,” Mr. Cowan told Greta Van Susteren of Fox News. There was barely a word about armor shortages or corrupt Iraqi security forces. And on the key strategic question of the moment — whether to send more troops — the analysts were unanimous.
    “I am so much against adding more troops,” General Shepperd said on CNN.
    Access and Influence
    Inside the Pentagon and at the White House, the trip was viewed as a masterpiece in the management of perceptions, not least because it gave fuel to complaints that “mainstream” journalists were ignoring the good news in Iraq.
    “We’re hitting a home run on this trip,” a senior Pentagon official wrote in an e-mail message to Richard B. Myers and Peter Pace, then chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
    Its success only intensified the Pentagon’s campaign. The pace of briefings accelerated. More trips were organized. Eventually the effort involved officials from Washington to Baghdad to Kabul to Guantánamo and back to Tampa, Fla., the headquarters of United States Central Command.
    The scale reflected strong support from the top. When officials in Iraq were slow to organize another trip for analysts, a Pentagon official fired off an e-mail message warning that the trips “have the highest levels of visibility” at the White House and urging them to get moving before Lawrence Di Rita, one of Mr. Rumsfeld’s closest aides, “picks up the phone and starts calling the 4-stars.”
    Mr. Di Rita, no longer at the Defense Department, said in an interview that a “conscious decision” was made to rely on the military analysts to counteract “the increasingly negative view of the war” coming from journalists in Iraq. The analysts, he said, generally had “a more supportive view” of the administration and the war, and the combination of their TV platforms and military cachet made them ideal for rebutting critical coverage of issues like troop morale, treatment of detainees, inadequate equipment or poorly trained Iraqi security forces. “On those issues, they were more likely to be seen as credible spokesmen,” he said.
    For analysts with military industry ties, the attention brought access to a widening circle of influential officials beyond the contacts they had accumulated over the course of their careers.
    Charles T. Nash, a Fox military analyst and retired Navy captain, is a consultant who helps small companies break into the military market. Suddenly, he had entree to a host of senior military leaders, many of whom he had never met. It was, he said, like being embedded with the Pentagon leadership. “You start to recognize what’s most important to them,” he said, adding, “There’s nothing like seeing stuff firsthand.”
    Some Pentagon officials said they were well aware that some analysts viewed their special access as a business advantage. “Of course we realized that,” Mr. Krueger said. “We weren’t naïve about that.”
    They also understood the financial relationship between the networks and their analysts. Many analysts were being paid by the “hit,” the number of times they appeared on TV. The more an analyst could boast of fresh inside information from high-level Pentagon “sources,” the more hits he could expect. The more hits, the greater his potential influence in the military marketplace, where several analysts prominently advertised their network roles.
    “They have taken lobbying and the search for contracts to a far higher level,” Mr. Krueger said. “This has been highly honed.”
    Mr. Di Rita, though, said it never occurred to him that analysts might use their access to curry favor. Nor, he said, did the Pentagon try to exploit this dynamic. “That’s not something that ever crossed my mind,” he said. In any event, he argued, the analysts and the networks were the ones responsible for any ethical complications. “We assume they know where the lines are,” he said.
    The analysts met personally with Mr. Rumsfeld at least 18 times, records show, but that was just the beginning. They had dozens more sessions with the most senior members of his brain trust and access to officials responsible for managing the billions being spent in Iraq. Other groups of “key influentials” had meetings, but not nearly as often as the analysts.
    An internal memorandum in 2005 helped explain why. The memorandum, written by a Pentagon official who had accompanied analysts to Iraq, said that based on her observations during the trip, the analysts “are having a greater impact” on network coverage of the military. “They have now become the go-to guys not only on breaking stories, but they influence the views on issues,” she wrote.
    Other branches of the administration also began to make use of the analysts. Mr. Gonzales, then the attorney general, met with them soon after news leaked that the government was wiretapping terrorism suspects in the United States without warrants, Pentagon records show. When David H. Petraeus was appointed the commanding general in Iraq in January 2007, one of his early acts was to meet with the analysts.
    “We knew we had extraordinary access,” said Timur J. Eads, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and Fox analyst who is vice president of government relations for Blackbird Technologies, a fast-growing military contractor.
    Like several other analysts, Mr. Eads said he had at times held his tongue on television for fear that “some four-star could call up and say, ‘Kill that contract.’ ” For example, he believed Pentagon officials misled the analysts about the progress of Iraq’s security forces. “I know a snow job when I see one,” he said. He did not share this on TV.
    “Human nature,” he explained, though he noted other instances when he was critical.
    Some analysts said that even before the war started, they privately had questions about the justification for the invasion, but were careful not to express them on air.
    Mr. Bevelacqua, then a Fox analyst, was among those invited to a briefing in early 2003 about Iraq’s purported stockpiles of illicit weapons. He recalled asking the briefer whether the United States had “smoking gun” proof.
    “ ‘We don’t have any hard evidence,’ ” Mr. Bevelacqua recalled the briefer replying. He said he and other analysts were alarmed by this concession. “We are looking at ourselves saying, ‘What are we doing?’ ”
    Another analyst, Robert L. Maginnis, a retired Army lieutenant colonel who works in the Pentagon for a military contractor, attended the same briefing and recalled feeling “very disappointed” after being shown satellite photographs purporting to show bunkers associated with a hidden weapons program. Mr. Maginnis said he concluded that the analysts were being “manipulated” to convey a false sense of certainty about the evidence of the weapons. Yet he and Mr. Bevelacqua and the other analysts who attended the briefing did not share any misgivings with the American public.
    Mr. Bevelacqua and another Fox analyst, Mr. Cowan, had formed the wvc3 Group, and hoped to win military and national security contracts.
    “There’s no way I was going to go down that road and get completely torn apart,” Mr. Bevelacqua said. “You’re talking about fighting a huge machine.”
    Some e-mail messages between the Pentagon and the analysts reveal an implicit trade of privileged access for favorable coverage. Robert H. Scales Jr., a retired Army general and analyst for Fox News and National Public Radio whose consulting company advises several military firms on weapons and tactics used in Iraq, wanted the Pentagon to approve high-level briefings for him inside Iraq in 2006.
    “Recall the stuff I did after my last visit,” he wrote. “I will do the same this time.”
    Pentagon Keeps Tabs
    As it happened, the analysts’ news media appearances were being closely monitored. The Pentagon paid a private contractor, Omnitec Solutions, hundreds of thousands of dollars to scour databases for any trace of the analysts, be it a segment on “The O’Reilly Factor” or an interview with The Daily Inter Lake in Montana, circulation 20,000.
    Omnitec evaluated their appearances using the same tools as corporate branding experts. One report, assessing the impact of several trips to Iraq in 2005, offered example after example of analysts echoing Pentagon themes on all the networks.
    “Commentary from all three Iraq trips was extremely positive over all,” the report concluded.
    In interviews, several analysts reacted with dismay when told they were described as reliable “surrogates” in Pentagon documents. And some asserted that their Pentagon sessions were, as David L. Grange, a retired Army general and CNN analyst put it, “just upfront information,” while others pointed out, accurately, that they did not always agree with the administration or each other. “None of us drink the Kool-Aid,” General Scales said.
    Likewise, several also denied using their special access for business gain. “Not related at all,” General Shepperd said, pointing out that many in the Pentagon held CNN “in the lowest esteem.”
    Still, even the mildest of criticism could draw a challenge. Several analysts told of fielding telephone calls from displeased defense officials only minutes after being on the air.
    On Aug. 3, 2005, 14 marines died in Iraq. That day, Mr. Cowan, who said he had grown increasingly uncomfortable with the “twisted version of reality” being pushed on analysts in briefings, called the Pentagon to give “a heads-up” that some of his comments on Fox “may not all be friendly,” Pentagon records show. Mr. Rumsfeld’s senior aides quickly arranged a private briefing for him, yet when he told Bill O’Reilly that the United States was “not on a good glide path right now” in Iraq, the repercussions were swift.
    Mr. Cowan said he was “precipitously fired from the analysts group” for this appearance. The Pentagon, he wrote in an e-mail message, “simply didn’t like the fact that I wasn’t carrying their water.” The next day James T. Conway, then director of operations for the Joint Chiefs, presided over another conference call with analysts. He urged them, a transcript shows, not to let the marines’ deaths further erode support for the war.
    “The strategic target remains our population,” General Conway said. “We can lose people day in and day out, but they’re never going to beat our military. What they can and will do if they can is strip away our support. And you guys can help us not let that happen.”
    “General, I just made that point on the air,” an analyst replied.
    “Let’s work it together, guys,” General Conway urged.
    The Generals’ Revolt
    The full dimensions of this mutual embrace were perhaps never clearer than in April 2006, after several of Mr. Rumsfeld’s former generals — none of them network military analysts — went public with devastating critiques of his wartime performance. Some called for his resignation.
    On Friday, April 14, with what came to be called the “Generals’ Revolt” dominating headlines, Mr. Rumsfeld instructed aides to summon military analysts to a meeting with him early the next week, records show. When an aide urged a short delay to “give our big guys on the West Coast a little more time to buy a ticket and get here,” Mr. Rumsfeld’s office insisted that “the boss” wanted the meeting fast “for impact on the current story.”
    That same day, Pentagon officials helped two Fox analysts, General McInerney and General Vallely, write an opinion article for The Wall Street Journal defending Mr. Rumsfeld.
    “Starting to write it now,” General Vallely wrote to the Pentagon that afternoon. “Any input for the article,” he added a little later, “will be much appreciated.” Mr. Rumsfeld’s office quickly forwarded talking points and statistics to rebut the notion of a spreading revolt.
    “Vallely is going to use the numbers,” a Pentagon official reported that afternoon.
    The standard secrecy notwithstanding, plans for this session leaked, producing a front-page story in The Times that Sunday. In damage-control mode, Pentagon officials scrambled to present the meeting as routine and directed that communications with analysts be kept “very formal,” records show. “This is very, very sensitive now,” a Pentagon official warned subordinates.
    On Tuesday, April 18, some 17 analysts assembled at the Pentagon with Mr. Rumsfeld and General Pace, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
    A transcript of that session, never before disclosed, shows a shared determination to marginalize war critics and revive public support for the war.
    “I’m an old intel guy,” said one analyst. (The transcript omits speakers’ names.) “And I can sum all of this up, unfortunately, with one word. That is Psyops. Now most people may hear that and they think, ‘Oh my God, they’re trying to brainwash.’ ”
    “What are you, some kind of a nut?” Mr. Rumsfeld cut in, drawing laughter. “You don’t believe in the Constitution?”
    There was little discussion about the actual criticism pouring forth from Mr. Rumsfeld’s former generals. Analysts argued that opposition to the war was rooted in perceptions fed by the news media, not reality. The administration’s overall war strategy, they counseled, was “brilliant” and “very successful.”
    “Frankly,” one participant said, “from a military point of view, the penalty, 2,400 brave Americans whom we lost, 3,000 in an hour and 15 minutes, is relative.”
    An analyst said at another point: “This is a wider war. And whether we have democracy in Iraq or not, it doesn’t mean a tinker’s damn if we end up with the result we want, which is a regime over there that’s not a threat to us.”
    “Yeah,” Mr. Rumsfeld said, taking notes.
    But winning or not, they bluntly warned, the administration was in grave political danger so long as most Americans viewed Iraq as a lost cause. “America hates a loser,” one analyst said.
    Much of the session was devoted to ways that Mr. Rumsfeld could reverse the “political tide.” One analyst urged Mr. Rumsfeld to “just crush these people,” and assured him that “most of the gentlemen at the table” would enthusiastically support him if he did.
    “You are the leader,” the analyst told Mr. Rumsfeld. “You are our guy.”
    At another point, an analyst made a suggestion: “In one of your speeches you ought to say, ‘Everybody stop for a minute and imagine an Iraq ruled by Zarqawi.’ And then you just go down the list and say, ‘All right, we’ve got oil, money, sovereignty, access to the geographic center of gravity of the Middle East, blah, blah, blah.’ If you can just paint a mental picture for Joe America to say, ‘Oh my God, I can’t imagine a world like that.’ ”
    Even as they assured Mr. Rumsfeld that they stood ready to help in this public relations offensive, the analysts sought guidance on what they should cite as the next “milestone” that would, as one analyst put it, “keep the American people focused on the idea that we’re moving forward to a positive end.” They placed particular emphasis on the growing confrontation with Iran.
    “When you said ‘long war,’ you changed the psyche of the American people to expect this to be a generational event,” an analyst said. “And again, I’m not trying to tell you how to do your job...”
    “Get in line,” Mr. Rumsfeld interjected.
    The meeting ended and Mr. Rumsfeld, appearing pleased and relaxed, took the entire group into a small study and showed off treasured keepsakes from his life, several analysts recalled.
    Soon after, analysts hit the airwaves. The Omnitec monitoring reports, circulated to more than 80 officials, confirmed that analysts repeated many of the Pentagon’s talking points: that Mr. Rumsfeld consulted “frequently and sufficiently” with his generals; that he was not “overly concerned” with the criticisms; that the meeting focused “on more important topics at hand,” including the next milestone in Iraq, the formation of a new government.
    Days later, Mr. Rumsfeld wrote a memorandum distilling their collective guidance into bullet points. Two were underlined:
    “Focus on the Global War on Terror — not simply Iraq. The wider war — the long war.”
    “Link Iraq to Iran. Iran is the concern. If we fail in Iraq or Afghanistan, it will help Iran.”
    But if Mr. Rumsfeld found the session instructive, at least one participant, General Nash, the ABC analyst, was repulsed.
    “I walked away from that session having total disrespect for my fellow commentators, with perhaps one or two exceptions,” he said.
    View From the Networks
    Two weeks ago General Petraeus took time out from testifying before Congress about Iraq for a conference call with military analysts.
    Mr. Garrett, the Fox analyst and Patton Boggs lobbyist, said he told General Petraeus during the call to “keep up the great work.”
    “Hey,” Mr. Garrett said in an interview, “anything we can do to help.”
    For the moment, though, because of heavy election coverage and general war fatigue, military analysts are not getting nearly as much TV time, and the networks have trimmed their rosters of analysts. The conference call with General Petraeus, for example, produced little in the way of immediate coverage.
    Still, almost weekly the Pentagon continues to conduct briefings with selected military analysts. Many analysts said network officials were only dimly aware of these interactions. The networks, they said, have little grasp of how often they meet with senior officials, or what is discussed.
    “I don’t think NBC was even aware we were participating,” said Rick Francona, a longtime military analyst for the network.
    Some networks publish biographies on their Web sites that describe their analysts’ military backgrounds and, in some cases, give at least limited information about their business ties. But many analysts also said the networks asked few questions about their outside business interests, the nature of their work or the potential for that work to create conflicts of interest. “None of that ever happened,” said Mr. Allard, an NBC analyst until 2006.
    “The worst conflict of interest was no interest.”
    Mr. Allard and other analysts said their network handlers also raised no objections when the Defense Department began paying their commercial airfare for Pentagon-sponsored trips to Iraq — a clear ethical violation for most news organizations.
    CBS News declined to comment on what it knew about its military analysts’ business affiliations or what steps it took to guard against potential conflicts.
    NBC News also declined to discuss its procedures for hiring and monitoring military analysts. The network issued a short statement: “We have clear policies in place to assure that the people who appear on our air have been appropriately vetted and that nothing in their profile would lead to even a perception of a conflict of interest.”
    Jeffrey W. Schneider, a spokesman for ABC, said that while the network’s military consultants were not held to the same ethical rules as its full-time journalists, they were expected to keep the network informed about any outside business entanglements. “We make it clear to them we expect them to keep us closely apprised,” he said.
    A spokeswoman for Fox News said executives “refused to participate” in this article.
    CNN requires its military analysts to disclose in writing all outside sources of income. But like the other networks, it does not provide its military analysts with the kind of written, specific ethical guidelines it gives its full-time employees for avoiding real or apparent conflicts of interest.
    Yet even where controls exist, they have sometimes proven porous.
    CNN, for example, said it was unaware for nearly three years that one of its main military analysts, General Marks, was deeply involved in the business of seeking government contracts, including contracts related to Iraq.
    General Marks was hired by CNN in 2004, about the time he took a management position at McNeil Technologies, where his job was to pursue military and intelligence contracts. As required, General Marks disclosed that he received income from McNeil Technologies. But the disclosure form did not require him to describe what his job entailed, and CNN acknowledges it failed to do additional vetting.
    “We did not ask Mr. Marks the follow-up questions we should have,” CNN said in a written statement.
    In an interview, General Marks said it was no secret at CNN that his job at McNeil Technologies was about winning contracts. “I mean, that’s what McNeil does,” he said.
    CNN, however, said it did not know the nature of McNeil’s military business or what General Marks did for the company. If he was bidding on Pentagon contracts, CNN said, that should have disqualified him from being a military analyst for the network. But in the summer and fall of 2006, even as he was regularly asked to comment on conditions in Iraq, General Marks was working intensively on bidding for a $4.6 billion contract to provide thousands of translators to United States forces in Iraq. In fact, General Marks was made president of the McNeil spin-off that won the huge contract in December 2006.
    General Marks said his work on the contract did not affect his commentary on CNN. “I’ve got zero challenge separating myself from a business interest,” he said.
    But CNN said it had no idea about his role in the contract until July 2007, when it reviewed his most recent disclosure form, submitted months earlier, and finally made inquiries about his new job.
    “We saw the extent of his dealings and determined at that time we should end our relationship with him,” CNN said.
    This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
    Correction: April 22, 2008 
    An article on Sunday about the Pentagon’s relationship with news media military analysts misidentified the military affiliation of one analyst, John C. Garrett. He retired as a colonel from the Marines, not the Army.


    Crazy: Some in CIA wanted to create fake Saddam Hussein sex video, report asserts


     
    Crazy: Some in CIA wanted to create fake Saddam Hussein sex video, report asserts
    By Raw Story
    Tuesday, May 25th, 2010 -- 9:47 am
    A little-noticed blog post by a veteran intelligence reporter averred Tuesday that the CIA's Iraq Operations Group weighed a plan prior to the 2003 Iraq invasion that sought to discredit Saddam Hussein by portraying him as gay.
    According to Jeff Stein, a longtime intelligence reporter who first revealed that FBI officials had eavesdropped on a sitting Democratic congresswoman, the CIA's Iraq Operations Group considered creating a video that would the then-Iraqi leader having intercourse with a teenage boy.
    “It would look like it was taken by a hidden camera,” a former CIA official purportedly told Stein. “Very grainy, like it was a secret videotaping of a sex session.”
    The CIA would have then “flood[ed] Iraq with the videos,” the official added.
    A third former CIA official said that the plan was shot down, in part, because others in the agency thought that claiming Saddam had sex with boys would do little to undermine him.
    “Saddam playing with boys would have no resonance in the Middle East -- nobody cares,” another purported CIA official is quoted as saying. “Trying to mount such a campaign would show a total misunderstanding of the target. We always mistake our own taboos as universal when, in fact, they are just our taboos.”
    A current U.S. official told Stein he couldn't confirm or deny the former CIA employees' claims.
    "While I can't confirm these accounts, if these ideas were ever floated by anyone at any time, they clearly didn't go anywhere," the official told Stein.
    Stein notes, however, that the CIA did make a video in which a fake Osama Bin Laden enjoys a campfire and the company of his associates while bragging about their juvenile paramours.
    The agency actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys, one of the former CIA officers recalled, chuckling at the memory. The actors were drawn from “some of us darker-skinned employees,” he said.
    Eventually, “things ground to a halt,” the other former officer said, because no one could come to agreement on the projects.
    They also faced strong opposition from James Pavitt, then head of the agency’s Operations Division, and his deputy, Hugh Turner, who “kept throwing darts at it.”
    Fundamentalists in Iraq have shown disdain for their gay compatriots since Saddam's fall. In some cases, according to human rights activists, they've resorted to grotesque violence.
    The television news agency Al Arabiya reported last year that a prominent Iraqi human rights activist asserted that some men have died after gruesome anal torture.
    "A prominent Iraqi human rights activist says that Iraqi militia have deployed a painful form of torture against homosexuals by closing their anuses using "Iranian gum,” the network said. "Yanar Mohammad told Alarabiya.net that, “Iraqi militias have deployed an unprecedented form of torture against homosexuals by using a very strong glue that will close their anus.”
    "According to her," the report added, "the new substance 'is known as the American hum, which is an Iranian-manufactured glue that if applied to the skin, sticks to it and can only be removed by surgery. After they glue the anuses of homosexuals, they give them a drink that causes diarrhea. Since the anus is closed, the diarrhea causes death. Videos of this form of torture are being distributed on mobile cellphones in Iraq.'"
    Correction: Because of an editing error, the gender of the Democratic representative referenced in the second paragraph was incorrect in the initial version of this story. It has been corrected: the congresswoman in question was Jane Harman (D-CA)

    Comments

    bin Laden videos...

    Best quote: "The agency actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys, one of the former CIA officers recalled, chuckling at the memory. The actors were drawn from “some of us darker-skinned employees,” he said."
    So what he's saying is that they made Bin Laden videos, but decided not to deceive the public and release THIS one only because its message would not have been as effective as having him admit guilt for 911.

    Dead strange...

    O.O

    This story prompts a most

    This story prompts a most unsavory thought with which start the morning.. a child actor would have to be recruited by CIA in order to simulate "Saddam Hussein's" proposed sex act. For an organization with a history of every evil act doable by humankind, a little pædophilia would be a walk in the proverbial park.

    The other ones...

    If they made these but didn't use them, what about the ones they did show after 9/11? The spook interviewed on NPR today, thought it hilarious that such creative minds from Langley could make this stuff. LOL!

    health alert

    Mesothelioma &Asbestos Cancer

    Hazardous asbestos fibers at the WTC exposed more than 110,000 people to the dangerous material; this includes 80,000 tower workers, 30,000 area residents and nearly 4,000 first responders. Asbestos exposure is directly linked to mesothelioma cancer and other asbestos-related diseases.


    Bipartisan Report: U.S. Practiced Widespread Torture

    Bipartisan Report: U.S. Practiced Widespread Torture, Torture Has “No Jusification” and Doesn’t Yield Significant Information, Nation’s Highest Officials Bear Responsibility

    HEADLINES

    .
     





    This is real, don't be fooled. This is happening.


    Read the book  called: Hows do I kill 11 million people by Andy Andrews
     

    I think it basically comes down to that 9/11 was their Reichstag Fire. The Patriot Act was theirEnabling Act of 1933 or Reichstag Fire Decree. Blackwater, Xe, Academi is basically their SS.

    I'm not sure how accurate or how far this analogy is going to go, but they've improved on their tactics and I don't see an enemy that is going to stop them at hand. If we don't expose the truth about 9/11 we don't stand a chance in my opinion. The truth stands the test of time.

    This whiteboard animation shows what happened when Hitler lied to get elected and people don't care or pay attention to the lies of their leaders, until they do care...and at that point, it is too late. Parts of this video are narrated by a man who served as a German soldier and a German woman who lived right by the railroad tracks the cattle trains ran on that carried the Jews to their deaths.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH_Izul6J5M

    Based on Andy Andrews' book, How Do You Kill 11 Million People?

    Hey … we’re still honoring one of the Amendments! Score one for We the People!

    Communist Manifesto - Congressional Record

     In America, Journalists Are Considered Terrorists
    Painting by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com.

    Fourth Amendment

    The 4th Amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    But the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

    Senator Rand Paul correctly notes

    Fourth Amendment

    The 4th Amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    But the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

    Senator Rand Paul correctly notes:

    The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy.

    Paul introduced a bill to “protect individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles commonly called drones.”

    Emptywheel notes in a post entitled “The OTHER Assault on the Fourth Amendment in the NDAA? Drones at Your Airport?”:

    http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Picture-7.png

    ***

    As the map above makes clear–taken from this 2010 report–DOD [the Department of Defense] plans to have drones all over the country by 2015.

    Many police departments are also using drones to spy on us. As the Hill reported:

    At least 13 state and local police agencies around the country have used drones in the field or in training, according to the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, an industry trade group. The Federal Aviation Administration has predicted that by the end of the decade, 30,000 commercial and government drones could be flying over U.S. skies.

    ***

    “Drones should only be used if subject to a powerful framework that regulates their use in order to avoid abuse and invasions of privacy,” Chris Calabrese, a legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said during a congressional forum in Texas last month.

    He argued police should only fly drones over private property if they have a warrant, information collected with drones should be promptly destroyed when it’s no longer needed and domestic drones should not carry any weapons.

    He argued that drones pose a more serious threat to privacy than helicopters because they are cheaper to use and can hover in the sky for longer periods of time.

    A congressional report earlier this year predicted that drones could soon be equipped with technologies to identify faces or track people based on their height, age, gender and skin color.

    Americans – Like Nazi Germans – Don’t Notice that All of Our Rights Are Slipping Away

    Americans Are Acting Like Slowly Boiling Frogs

    In the classic history of Nazi Germany, They Thought They Were Free, Milton Mayerwrites:

    “What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

    “This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.

    The German citizens were boiling frogs … the water heating up so gradually that they didn’t realize they had to jump out of the pot to safety.

    Because the exact same thing is happening to Americans (fear of terror makes people stupid no matter what country they live in), let’s remember exactly what we’ve lost in recent years …

    First Amendment

    The 1st Amendment protects speech, religion, assembly and the press:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    However, the government is arresting those speaking out … and violently crushing peaceful assemblies which attempt to petition the government for redress.

    A federal judge found that the law allowing indefinite detention of Americans without due process has a “chilling effect” on free speech. And see this and this.

    There are also enacted laws allowing the secret service to arrest anyone protestingnear the president or other designated folks (that might explain incidents like this).

    The threat of being labeled a terrorist for exercising our First Amendment rightscertainly violates the First Amendment. The government is using laws to crush dissent, and it’s gotten so bad that even U.S. Supreme Court justices are saying that we are descending into tyranny.

    For example, the following actions may get an American citizen living on U.S. soil labeled as a “suspected terrorist” today:

    And holding the following beliefs may also be considered grounds for suspected terrorism:

    Of course, Muslims are more or less subject to a separate system of justice in America.

    And 1st Amendment rights are especially chilled when power has become so concentrated that the same agency which spies on all Americans also decides who should be assassinated.

    Second Amendment

    The 2nd Amendment states:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Gun control and gun rights advocates obviously have very different views about whether guns are a force for violence or for good.

    But even a top liberal Constitutional law expert reluctantly admits that the right to own a gun is as important a Constitutional right as freedom of speech or religion:

    Like many academics, I was happy to blissfully ignore the Second Amendment. It did not fit neatly into my socially liberal agenda.

    ***

    It is hard to read the Second Amendment and not honestly conclude that the Framers intended gun ownership to be an individual right. It is true that the amendment begins with a reference to militias: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Accordingly, it is argued, this amendment protects the right of the militia to bear arms, not the individual.

    Yet, if true, the Second Amendment would be effectively declared a defunct provision. The National Guard is not a true militia in the sense of the Second Amendment and, since the District and others believe governments can ban guns entirely, the Second Amendment would be read out of existence.

    ***

    More important, the mere reference to a purpose of the Second Amendment does not alter the fact that an individual right is created. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is stated in the same way as the right to free speech or free press. The statement of a purpose was intended to reaffirm the power of the states and the people against the central government. At the time, many feared the federal government and its national army. Gun ownership was viewed as a deterrent against abuse by the government, which would be less likely to mess with a well-armed populace.

    Considering the Framers and their own traditions of hunting and self-defense, it is clear that they would have viewed such ownership as an individual right — consistent with the plain meaning of the amendment.

    None of this is easy for someone raised to believe that the Second Amendment was the dividing line between the enlightenment and the dark ages of American culture. Yet, it is time to honestly reconsider this amendment and admit that … here’s the really hard part … the NRAmay have been right. This does not mean that Charlton Heston is the new Rosa Parks or that no restrictions can be placed on gun ownership. But it does appear that gun ownership was made a protected right by the Framers and, while we might not celebrate it, it is time that we recognize it.

    The gun control debate – including which weapons and magazines are banned – is still in flux …

    Third Amendment

    The 3rd Amendment prohibits the government forcing people to house soldiers:

    No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

    Hey … we’re still honoring one of the Amendments! Score one for We the People!

     In America, Journalists Are Considered Terrorists
    Painting by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com.

    Fourth Amendment

    The 4th Amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    But the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

    Senator Rand Paul correctly notes:

    The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy.

    Paul introduced a bill to “protect individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles commonly called drones.”

    Emptywheel notes in a post entitled “The OTHER Assault on the Fourth Amendment in the NDAA? Drones at Your Airport?”:

    http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Picture-7.png

    ***

    As the map above makes clear–taken from this 2010 report–DOD [the Department of Defense] plans to have drones all over the country by 2015.

    Many police departments are also using drones to spy on us. As the Hill reported