3 ms·

It's possible it's a side effect of something else. Maybe they are using directed microwaves to power eavesdropping equipment, and the individuals in proximity

by enkid 5y ago

It's possible it's a side effect of something else. Maybe they are using directed microwaves to power eavesdropping equipment, and the individuals in proximity to that equipment are getting sick.

teachingassist 5y ago
This makes it seem like friendly fire is a reasonable hypothesis - as some side-effect of physical security measures taken by the US government. Since the reported attacks generally happen within a radius of US locations requiring physical security - and apparently not in any other location. It's otherwise difficult to explain why the USA would be the singular target of these alleged attacks, for a period stretching across decades.
- dasudasu 5y ago
  Canadian diplomats were also affected in the case of Havana. They have good relationships with Cuba, send a good flow of tourists, and have no sanctions in place.
- rvba 5y ago
  Your post looks like disinformation. Something bad happens to US and Canadian diplomats in a foreign country, yet you find a way to blame USA.
  - DubiousPusher 5y ago
    No, it's that based on the scant material evidence here, almost any explanation is just as reasonable as, it's a secret Cuban ray weapon.
ogurechny 5y ago
Probably the most obvious explanation. I suppose that both attacking a diplomatic staff with a knife and just intentionally serving them contaminated food that puts them on the toilet for a couple of days would lead to some response. If something that can be easily identified with technical means produces no diplomatic response, then, despite the consequences, it's not considered an attack. Seems to be part of the job description. Most likely, they couldn't even ask politely, behind the curtains, to stop that because the answer would be “Sure, if you stop doing the same, too”. And none of that can be discussed openly because of the secrecy of spying technologies, so they have to invent stories about non-lethal weapons when the case could probably be described as “Major Ivanov, increase the power until we get a clear signal”. When you start paying attention to these stories, it becomes clear that these secrets are kept first and foremost from the general public of the native countries, mostly for both public image and non-accountability privilege. It makes no sense to deny something that has been known to secret services of every developed country otherwise. It's quite ironic that before Snowden, military insurgents trained by this or that superpower, and mafia bosses who hired ex-special-agents had a more clear picture on, say, phone surveillance than law-abiding citizens.

by enkid 5y ago

It's possible it's a side effect of something else. Maybe they are using directed microwaves to power eavesdropping equipment, and the individuals in proximity to that equipment are getting sick.

teachingassist 5y ago

This makes it seem like friendly fire is a reasonable hypothesis - as some side-effect of physical security measures taken by the US government. Since the reported attacks generally happen within a radius of US locations requiring physical security - and apparently not in any other location. It's otherwise difficult to explain why the USA would be the singular target of these alleged attacks, for a period stretching across decades.

dasudasu 5y ago
Canadian diplomats were also affected in the case of Havana. They have good relationships with Cuba, send a good flow of tourists, and have no sanctions in place.
rvba 5y ago
Your post looks like disinformation. Something bad happens to US and Canadian diplomats in a foreign country, yet you find a way to blame USA.
- DubiousPusher 5y ago
  No, it's that based on the scant material evidence here, almost any explanation is just as reasonable as, it's a secret Cuban ray weapon.

ogurechny 5y ago

Probably the most obvious explanation. I suppose that both attacking a diplomatic staff with a knife and just intentionally serving them contaminated food that puts them on the toilet for a couple of days would lead to some response. If something that can be easily identified with technical means produces no diplomatic response, then, despite the consequences, it's not considered an attack. Seems to be part of the job description. Most likely, they couldn't even ask politely, behind the curtains, to stop that because the answer would be “Sure, if you stop doing the same, too”. And none of that can be discussed openly because of the secrecy of spying technologies, so they have to invent stories about non-lethal weapons when the case could probably be described as “Major Ivanov, increase the power until we get a clear signal”. When you start paying attention to these stories, it becomes clear that these secrets are kept first and foremost from the general public of the native countries, mostly for both public image and non-accountability privilege. It makes no sense to deny something that has been known to secret services of every developed country otherwise. It's quite ironic that before Snowden, military insurgents trained by this or that superpower, and mafia bosses who hired ex-special-agents had a more clear picture on, say, phone surveillance than law-abiding citizens.