5 ms·
I take every CIA press release with a huge grain of salt as it is. But a presser about a mysterious ailment heavily suggested to be an attack perpetrated by Cub
by salt-thrower 5y ago
I take every CIA press release with a huge grain of salt as it is. But a presser about a mysterious ailment heavily suggested to be an attack perpetrated by Cuba, at a time when American media is hyping "anti-government" protests in Cuba, and U.S. officials are calling for more action to be taken against Cuba as a result?
I'll take the whole salt shaker.
- anigbrowl 5y agoThis phenomenon has been observed for quite a while (at least a few years) now, so there goes that theory.
- salt-thrower 5y agoAnd aggression against Cuba by the U.S. military and intelligence apparatus has been going on for six decades. Accompanying that has been numerous press releases, op-eds, and articles over the years attempting to sway public opinion towards U.S. intervention in Cuba. This fits right into that pattern. I'm not saying it DEFINITELY is that, hence the "grain of salt" phrase - I just view any CIA statement relating to Cuba with a huge degree of skepticism. That's all.
- jonnybgood 5y agoThere is no sway and if so by who? I think you may be nitpicking. Don’t forget the Cuban thaw under Obama. Instead of following the media, follow actual policy. I have no doubt Biden will follow suit with Obama’s policy on Cuba.
- _-david-_ 5y agoI am not sure if we will see Biden follow suit. Biden's Homeland Security director said >Allow me to be clear: if you take to the sea, you will not come to the United States At a minimum they don't want the refugees from Cuba. It seems quite clear they won't relax the immigration rules for Cubans. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-homeland-security-secretary-cuba-haiti-boats-no-refuge https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-homeland-security-secretary-...
- jonnybgood 5y agoI'm not aware this ever changed under Obama. Obama's policy had to do relations to the Cuban government and not the status of refugees.
- _-david-_ 5y agoI am not sure if an official policy changed, but typically, in the past, if a Cuban refugee made it to the US they were granted amnesty.
- salt-thrower 5y agoI'm not sure I understand your comment. The Cuban thaw under Obama was largely reversed by Trump, and Biden has not done much of anything to relax the embargo again since his term began (but correct me if that's wrong). Any press release is a form of PR, and the CIA is no different. Government officials release press statements all the time in order to sway public opinion on a specific issue. In recent history, the buildup to the Iraq War is a perfect example, in the way that demonstrably false statements to the media and deliberate misdirection were used to gin up public support for the war. There are several great documentaries, books, and podcasts that go over it in great detail. I highly recommend looking into that period of time as an example of what I mean by "sway."
- jonnybgood 5y ago> Accompanying that has been numerous press releases, op-eds, and articles over the years attempting to sway public opinion towards U.S. intervention in Cuba. My point is that your statement above is made incorrect by actual policy. > was largely reversed by Trump Again you are incorrect. Trump actually made very little changes.
- salt-thrower 5y agohttps://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/06/trump-cuba-policy/530514/ https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/06/trump-cuba-... It still represents a reversal towards a more aggressive stance. Also, this is worth pointing out: https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1094612 https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1094612 EDIT: I'm still not sure what you mean by "incorrect when it comes to actual policy," in case that wasn't clear. The policy of the U.S. has been to prevent Cuba from engaging in international trade as a sovereign nation for decades. That is still the case. Even during the pandemic, Cuba was not allowed to receive vaccine supplies from the international community, and had to develop their own. What is that if not an act of aggression?
- jonnybgood 5y agoThe embargo can only be lifted by Congress. What Trump says and does are two different things. Follow the policy. He never actually reversed it. > EDIT: I'm still not sure what you mean by "incorrect when it comes to actual policy," in case that wasn't clear. The policy of the U.S. has been to prevent Cuba from engaging in international trade as a sovereign nation for decades. That is still the case. There cannot be a campaign to sway public opinion for US intervention when there has been a policy in effect for the warming of relations for the last 7 years. It's a contradiction in policy.
- ikerdanzel 5y agoUnlikely. His fate is a no 2 terms president based on astrology and some of the predictions. Surprisingly similar fate predictions with Kamala as well. So how this play out in reality gonna be interesting. He also isn't as persuasive as Obama plus a lot of people in the administrations are staff with Trump people. Just look at him unable to normalize relationship with China. Check his son investment relationship with China. It is in his best interest to do so. Yet can't.
- anigbrowl 5y agoAttacks targeting U.S. intelligence personnel were reported, beginning in late 2017, in locations around the world, including in Moscow, Russia; Poland; Tbilisi, Georgia; Taiwan and Australia;[82] other reports came from Colombia, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Austria, among other countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havana_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havana_syndrome Look, I don't agree with US policy towards Cuba but arguing that the whole thing is a PR campaign isn't very persuasive either. It might be a case of psychological contagion among a relatively small and insular community (ie the diplomatic corps) or it might have some factual basis. There's some evidence (detailed elsewhere in this thread) to suggest the latter. Skepticism is good, but I think your argument here is mere contrarianism.
- SantalBlush 5y agoUsername checks out. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
- salt-thrower 5y agoLol, I knew someone would make that joke
- Bud 5y agoIf you read up about this, there are multiple very reliable sources for different attacks of this nature, in various locations, most not tied to Cuba in any way, going back quite a few years now. I especially recommend Marc Polymeropoulos as a source: 26 years in the intelligence service and was a target.
- salt-thrower 5y agoGiven the CIA's well-documented history of openly lying to the public (Colin Powell comes to mind), I don't consider a 26-year member of the CIA to be a particularly reliable source. I'm not denying that this could all be true. Even if it's true, the timing of this press release with everything else going on about Cuba in the news is a very obvious strategic play. This is old news, why release a new statement about it right now of all times? Any intelligence service worth their salt (I can't get away from the salt theme today) would obviously use media statements as part of their strategy. It stands to reason that anything the CIA says or does in the public sphere is well-planned and has intention behind it that we can only guess at.
- wmil 5y agoThere are also some well documented competence problems. In the mid 2000s the Canadian Mint was briefly stamping poppies into their coins and putting a red enamel on them to commemorate remembrance day. A CIA employee found one in his pocket coming back from Canada and claimed the Canadian government was planting listening devices on a coin to record him.
- mrobot 5y agoJust my reaction take on the Marc Polymeropoulos guy, i watched some videos and i don't trust him. Feels like they made up a story and he is the designated person to tell it. Also maybe unrelated how come he doesn't have a Wikipedia entry? Why would anyone trust someone who worked for or works for the CIA exactly? Their job is to lie to people and be good at it.
- hoppyhoppy2 5y agoIt's not heavily suggested by the CIA to have been perpetrated by Cuba; I think that's an incorrect assumption on your part. Since the incidents, involving up to 130 U.S. personnel, have happened in Cuba, China, Russia, and elsewhere (including at least one possible incident inside the U.S.) it would have to be someone with the resources to carry out such attacks across the world (and the CIA director said as much if you listen to the interview). The most likely culprit being eyed by Pentagon officials is Russia (as previously reported[1]), but the CIA director chose not to name names during this latest interview even when directly asked if it was Russia. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/12/us/politics/biden-cia-brain-injury.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/12/us/politics/biden-cia-bra...
- whimsicalism 5y agoI think it's become very politically incorrect/insensitive to suggest psychosomnia in the 21st century. See: many (but certainly not all) long covid reports.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- rtpg 5y agoOf course it’s been heavily suggested! They have been openly hypothesizing this is some sort of directed microwave attack on people, from Cuba. Articles by the NYT initially put the microwave hypothesis hand in hand with strained US-Cuba relations! Of course now it’s being revealed that people in other countries are having it so it’s hard. But they’re actively implying this is some microwave super weapon (it feels so absurd that when talking about it even Obama alum Ben Rhodes basically talks about it as “allegedly some weapon thing” in a “don’t believe that” theory). I’m curious what is going on here too, but definitely don’t believe the weapon hypothesis compared to the much more banal explanations that we all know.
- unethical_ban 5y agoSure it was, when it was first discovered five years ago. Sure the initial reports suggested that, years ago when maybe it did strain relations. It's 2021.
- dmix 5y ago> heavily suggested to be an attack perpetrated by Cuba Every article I read has suggested Russia may be likely, but only as an early suggestion, and they only used "Havana" because that's where the initial incident took place. This is why reading articles is important. Much like the people who can't get over the simple "UK strain" or "South Korean variant" of COVID merely because it was initially identified in those countries.
- outworlder 5y agoLabels can be used innocently. But they can be used maliciously (e.g. "the China virus"). Once a malicious variant has been found, we should stop using it. It is not distracting to call a variant "Delta" instead of a country. If anything, it removes distractions.
- fakedang 5y agoI don't get the logic behind terming "China virus" as malicious use, while we call past viruses names such as "Middle East Respiratory Syndrome" and "Spanish flu" and "Japanese encephalitis". The only difference between one and the rest is that its host country it was named after raised a ruckus about it in a highly biased and obliging media under a belligerent president, while the other countries either did not care enough in the past or in the present.
- wmil 5y agoOriginally people were using "Wuhan Flu", which was consistent with norms. Then the CCP launched a massive international PR campaign to declare that racist. Then the CCP started domestically claiming it was from the American government and calling it the American virus. At this time Andrew Cuomo was calling it "a European virus" to appease China. So Trump started saying "China virus" out of spite. Trump supporters followed suit.
- krapp 5y agoHe also called it the "Kung Flu."
- Lammy 5y agoMaybe they can solve Gulf War Syndrome next.
- micromacrofoot 5y agoI don't think you need to take it with a grain of salt; don't trust it at all. The CIA is untrustworthy on a fundamental level... there are decades of instances to pull from.
- unethical_ban 5y agoDid you read the article? Despite the name of the syndrome, I see no-one directly pointing at Cuba for the ailment.
- salt-thrower 5y agoThe name is the thing. For the same reason people didn't like when Covid was referred to as "the China Flu." The name creates a negative association. Names, phrasing, and associations can be very powerful.
- unethical_ban 5y agoSo despite all the evidence in the article, you're going to assert that the CIA, despite explicitly saying they don't know where exactly it comes from, is trying to blame Cuba for it to destabilize them, because of the name? You realize part of the issue with the "China Flu" label was conservatives beating the shit out of Asians? You realize that there are no reports of US citizens beating the shit out of Cubans because of Havana syndrome? And that a niche affliction in the foreign service is different than a pandemic killing 600,000 domestically?
- salt-thrower 5y agoYou're reading too far into what I'm saying. I was not likening it to the phrase "China flu" in that I think the CIA is encouraging hate crimes against Cubans. I'm saying that the name of any phenomenon is able to generate an association and a sentiment about what it's named after. > you're going to assert that the CIA, despite explicitly saying they don't know where exactly it comes from The CIA has a long and well-documented history of lying to the public. I'm not asserting that I know what's going on, I'm asserting that the CIA has previously used interviews and media statements to influence public opinion about countries the U.S. is seeking to destabilize. Colin Powell is the most famous and egregious example in recent history. This is obviously not as overt as what Powell did, but every statement the CIA makes to the media should be viewed in that context.
- csomar 5y agoI can't find where the CIA suggested Cuba as the culprit. (Trump did, but then hardly anyone takes him seriously). The incident is also very old (2016) and happened in multiple locations worldwide.