4 ms·

>My understanding from previous reading is that after just one or two staff suffered vague symptoms, the rest of the Havana staff were briefed that they may be

>My understanding from previous reading is that after just one or two staff suffered vague symptoms, the rest of the Havana staff were briefed that they may be under attack in some way Citation please.

dundarious 5y ago
The transcript[0] for the Havana syndrome episode of Science Vs[1]. I guess I was wrong that it was "one or two", it was about three. You can argue I was also wrong with "vague symptoms", since they did leave to get medically checked out., but read the footnotes, [6] in particular. So my comment was incorrect in the specifics, but the important thing is that the transcript is an indication that mass hysteria is still a perfectly plausible option. Citations [2-12] are from the podcast. > Let's set the scene. It's 2016… and government officials from the U.S. are working in Cuba -- and before they even get there, they're warned -- it's going to be a little hostile. > TG: they're told - you know, you don't have any privacy, you're going to be listened to, your phones are going to be tapped, you're going to be followed on the street[2] > This is Tim Golden, Editor at Large for ProPublica.[3][4] Tim and a colleague tried to work out how this mystery started… > TG: Initially it was all very murky, and it was unclear what was going on… > They dug into this - talking to more than 3 dozen officials and poring through confidential government documents.[5] And Tim told us that Patient Zero was a young CIA officer > TG: Who had been a fairly athletic guy[6] who in December 2016… wakes up one night because he hears this loud, piercing sound in one ear…and it seems to be following him around the room[7] He feels unstable… nauseated, and soon after said he couldn't think properly[8]…. Just over a month later, two other CIA officers say the same thing happens to them.[9] > TG: Hearing a kind of a sharp sound that was a kind of metallic sound and then they had had headaches and dizziness and other symptoms that had followed that and being sort of shaken by this > These CIA officers were sent back to the US to get checked out-- and a doctor said they'd sustained serious injuries.[10] When the top guy at the Embassy heard this -- in late March[11] - Tim says he called a staff-wide meeting to tell people what they knew. > TG: You know everybody had to leave their cell phones outside and go into what’s called a SCIF - a sensitive compartmented information facility - so you know, a secure, windowless room > He said that some people might have been attacked -- described the loud sound, the weird symptoms. And told diplomats that if they thought they were getting hit... they should move away from windows. At the the time, the US Government's best guess about what was going on - was that this was coming from some kind of sonic device[12]. [0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQd3rwju7de2NP7QPEsLwAfO9YU7vs61UetSl9fbeHjo_0RJOq24ZsjipwZliFXHpkpquG8saPl_eXU/pub https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQd3rwju7de2NP7Q... [1] https://open.spotify.com/episode/1fWVwFPU3cUka8lfaSKU2V https://open.spotify.com/episode/1fWVwFPU3cUka8lfaSKU2V [2] “Before we go to Cuba, it is drilled into our heads: There will be surveillance. There will be listening devices in your house, probably in your car. Assume they are always watching.” [3] Tim Golden; Editor at Large: Tim Golden is a journalist and filmmaker who has worked primarily on issues of national security, foreign policy and criminal justice. [4] Tim’s first ProPublica article on the Havana Sonic Attacks was published on Feb 14, 2018. And here’s Tim’s second ProPublica article on the subject [5] A ProPublica investigation of the case, based on interviews with more than three dozen U.S. and foreign officials and an examination of confidential government documents, represents the first detailed public account of how the Cuba incidents unfolded. [6] it was not until the end of December that the first victim sought help at the small medical clinic inside the embassy. That officer — the fit younger man in his 30s — came with a more serious complaint: He had developed headaches, hearing problems and a sharp pain in one ear, especially, following a strange experience in which something like a beam of sound seemed to have been directed at his home. [7] According to Science magazine: the agent said he had heard “a really odd, loud noise that seemed to follow him in the room,” says Hoffer, who examined him in February. [8] An individual assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Cuba was awakened one night at home in Havana in 2016 by severe pain and a sensation of intense pressure in the face, a loud piercing sound in one ear with directional features, and acute disequilibrium and nausea. Symptoms of vestibular and cognitive dysfunction ensued. [9] On December 30, 2016, Patient Zero in the Cuba crisis visited the Embassy health office... Around January 9, 2017, the same C.I.A. officer reported a second incident to the medical office. [10] The New Yorker (details confirmed through other interviews): In early February, 2017, Michael Hoffer, a professor of otolaryngology at the University of Miami, received a call from a State Department doctor, who told him, “We have a problem.” Hoffer—who had worked with the military to treat head traumas, and had kept his security clearance—agreed to help. He soon saw one of the victims, and in the following months others flew to Miami. Hoffer ran a battery of tests, which confirmed that the C.I.A. officers had sustained serious injuries. [11] In late March, DeLaurentis convened a town-hall-style meeting for staff at the Embassy. Several of Lee’s colleagues came forward to report that they, too, had been exposed. And : At the end of March 2017, recalls the U.S. diplomat who spoke with Science, then Ambassador Jeffrey DeLaurentis summoned personnel with security clearances—about 30 in all—for a classified briefing in a special installation in the embassy. Also, confirmed through Conversation on Background [12] The “working hypothesis,” the diplomat says, was the victims were being targeted by a long-range acoustic device
- unclebucknasty 5y ago
  >So my comment was incorrect in the specifics... You were completely wrong WRT what you were trying to assert with that comment. >...transcript is an indication that mass hysteria is still a perfectly plausible option... But, rather than reconsider your position upon discovering that you were mistaken, you immediately pivoted to finding other ways to justify your conclusion. And, you do so with this really odd, rambling epistle of footnotes that essentially amounts to, "it's possible". Sure, anything's possible, but I prefer proof along the lines of the altered brain matter findings in many of the sufferers. Do these physical findings affect your conclusion? It's really odd that you're working so hard to dismiss this. Are you aware that if this is an attack, the attackers would want people to dismiss it as hysteria or otherwise? Are you aware that they'd push propaganda to that effect? Does that fact impact your eagerness to dismiss it?
  - dundarious 5y ago
    No, I misremembered exactly how I came to my conclusion. It was from listening to that exact podcast. There's no pivot. I didn't seek out any alternative sources to back up my original claim. I found the original source and noted where it differed from my recollection. I think your argument that I'm falling prey to foreign propaganda is pretty weak. Nevermind that the same logic applies in the other direction as well. We can all scream "CIA/KGB stooge!" at each other, or we can look at specific claims and require specific evidence. Especially from organizations that have every means to provide it.
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      >your argument that I'm falling prey to foreign propaganda is pretty weak. Nevermind that the same logic applies in the other direction as well. We can all scream "CIA/KGB stooge!" at each other, or we can look at specific claims and require specific evidence... My "conclusion" leaves open the possibilities and looks at the evidence. Your conclusion is that this is likely mass hysteria, which you "supported" with a wall of text that is essentially a statement of possibilities, masquerading as evidence. This, after invalidating prior info I presume you'd relied on. In all you are, in effect, working really hard to hold a specific line and prove a negative, which in itself is odd. Why do you think that is? No. The logic does not apply in the other direction. For one, if these are attacks, then there is motivation for the attackers to propagandize in exactly the manner you are demonstrating/repeating here. OTOH, the idea that the U.S. is somehow propagandizing here means...what, exactly? They've made no definitive claims beyond acknowledging these incidents exist and that they are investigating them. They've even allowed that mass hysteria is a possibility they've considered. So, no, your vague "both-sides" allusions that I am equally likely being manipulated by U.S. officials doesn't hold up. The thing about propaganda is that we're all susceptible to it and, by definition, it primarily works without our awareness. But, there are things we can do to filter and identify to protect ourselves, even if it's by likelihood versus by certainty. So, applying that, I'm saying that while I'm not certain you've been had, it seems pretty likely at this point. And, whether or not you care to acknowledge that, one thing you cannot deny is that your premature, dismissive conclusions here are in lockstep with the propaganda known to be promulgated by guilty parties.

dundarious 5y ago

The transcript[0] for the Havana syndrome episode of Science Vs[1]. I guess I was wrong that it was "one or two", it was about three. You can argue I was also wrong with "vague symptoms", since they did leave to get medically checked out., but read the footnotes, [6] in particular. So my comment was incorrect in the specifics, but the important thing is that the transcript is an indication that mass hysteria is still a perfectly plausible option. Citations [2-12] are from the podcast. > Let's set the scene. It's 2016… and government officials from the U.S. are working in Cuba -- and before they even get there, they're warned -- it's going to be a little hostile. > TG: they're told - you know, you don't have any privacy, you're going to be listened to, your phones are going to be tapped, you're going to be followed on the street[2] > This is Tim Golden, Editor at Large for ProPublica.[3][4] Tim and a colleague tried to work out how this mystery started… > TG: Initially it was all very murky, and it was unclear what was going on… > They dug into this - talking to more than 3 dozen officials and poring through confidential government documents.[5] And Tim told us that Patient Zero was a young CIA officer > TG: Who had been a fairly athletic guy[6] who in December 2016… wakes up one night because he hears this loud, piercing sound in one ear…and it seems to be following him around the room[7] He feels unstable… nauseated, and soon after said he couldn't think properly[8]…. Just over a month later, two other CIA officers say the same thing happens to them.[9] > TG: Hearing a kind of a sharp sound that was a kind of metallic sound and then they had had headaches and dizziness and other symptoms that had followed that and being sort of shaken by this > These CIA officers were sent back to the US to get checked out-- and a doctor said they'd sustained serious injuries.[10] When the top guy at the Embassy heard this -- in late March[11] - Tim says he called a staff-wide meeting to tell people what they knew. > TG: You know everybody had to leave their cell phones outside and go into what’s called a SCIF - a sensitive compartmented information facility - so you know, a secure, windowless room > He said that some people might have been attacked -- described the loud sound, the weird symptoms. And told diplomats that if they thought they were getting hit... they should move away from windows. At the the time, the US Government's best guess about what was going on - was that this was coming from some kind of sonic device[12]. [0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQd3rwju7de2NP7QPEsLwAfO9YU7vs61UetSl9fbeHjo_0RJOq24ZsjipwZliFXHpkpquG8saPl_eXU/pub https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQd3rwju7de2NP7Q... [1] https://open.spotify.com/episode/1fWVwFPU3cUka8lfaSKU2V https://open.spotify.com/episode/1fWVwFPU3cUka8lfaSKU2V [2] “Before we go to Cuba, it is drilled into our heads: There will be surveillance. There will be listening devices in your house, probably in your car. Assume they are always watching.” [3] Tim Golden; Editor at Large: Tim Golden is a journalist and filmmaker who has worked primarily on issues of national security, foreign policy and criminal justice. [4] Tim’s first ProPublica article on the Havana Sonic Attacks was published on Feb 14, 2018. And here’s Tim’s second ProPublica article on the subject [5] A ProPublica investigation of the case, based on interviews with more than three dozen U.S. and foreign officials and an examination of confidential government documents, represents the first detailed public account of how the Cuba incidents unfolded. [6] it was not until the end of December that the first victim sought help at the small medical clinic inside the embassy. That officer — the fit younger man in his 30s — came with a more serious complaint: He had developed headaches, hearing problems and a sharp pain in one ear, especially, following a strange experience in which something like a beam of sound seemed to have been directed at his home. [7] According to Science magazine: the agent said he had heard “a really odd, loud noise that seemed to follow him in the room,” says Hoffer, who examined him in February. [8] An individual assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Cuba was awakened one night at home in Havana in 2016 by severe pain and a sensation of intense pressure in the face, a loud piercing sound in one ear with directional features, and acute disequilibrium and nausea. Symptoms of vestibular and cognitive dysfunction ensued. [9] On December 30, 2016, Patient Zero in the Cuba crisis visited the Embassy health office... Around January 9, 2017, the same C.I.A. officer reported a second incident to the medical office. [10] The New Yorker (details confirmed through other interviews): In early February, 2017, Michael Hoffer, a professor of otolaryngology at the University of Miami, received a call from a State Department doctor, who told him, “We have a problem.” Hoffer—who had worked with the military to treat head traumas, and had kept his security clearance—agreed to help. He soon saw one of the victims, and in the following months others flew to Miami. Hoffer ran a battery of tests, which confirmed that the C.I.A. officers had sustained serious injuries. [11] In late March, DeLaurentis convened a town-hall-style meeting for staff at the Embassy. Several of Lee’s colleagues came forward to report that they, too, had been exposed. And : At the end of March 2017, recalls the U.S. diplomat who spoke with Science, then Ambassador Jeffrey DeLaurentis summoned personnel with security clearances—about 30 in all—for a classified briefing in a special installation in the embassy. Also, confirmed through Conversation on Background [12] The “working hypothesis,” the diplomat says, was the victims were being targeted by a long-range acoustic device

unclebucknasty 5y ago
>So my comment was incorrect in the specifics... You were completely wrong WRT what you were trying to assert with that comment. >...transcript is an indication that mass hysteria is still a perfectly plausible option... But, rather than reconsider your position upon discovering that you were mistaken, you immediately pivoted to finding other ways to justify your conclusion. And, you do so with this really odd, rambling epistle of footnotes that essentially amounts to, "it's possible". Sure, anything's possible, but I prefer proof along the lines of the altered brain matter findings in many of the sufferers. Do these physical findings affect your conclusion? It's really odd that you're working so hard to dismiss this. Are you aware that if this is an attack, the attackers would want people to dismiss it as hysteria or otherwise? Are you aware that they'd push propaganda to that effect? Does that fact impact your eagerness to dismiss it?
- dundarious 5y ago
  No, I misremembered exactly how I came to my conclusion. It was from listening to that exact podcast. There's no pivot. I didn't seek out any alternative sources to back up my original claim. I found the original source and noted where it differed from my recollection. I think your argument that I'm falling prey to foreign propaganda is pretty weak. Nevermind that the same logic applies in the other direction as well. We can all scream "CIA/KGB stooge!" at each other, or we can look at specific claims and require specific evidence. Especially from organizations that have every means to provide it.
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    >your argument that I'm falling prey to foreign propaganda is pretty weak. Nevermind that the same logic applies in the other direction as well. We can all scream "CIA/KGB stooge!" at each other, or we can look at specific claims and require specific evidence... My "conclusion" leaves open the possibilities and looks at the evidence. Your conclusion is that this is likely mass hysteria, which you "supported" with a wall of text that is essentially a statement of possibilities, masquerading as evidence. This, after invalidating prior info I presume you'd relied on. In all you are, in effect, working really hard to hold a specific line and prove a negative, which in itself is odd. Why do you think that is? No. The logic does not apply in the other direction. For one, if these are attacks, then there is motivation for the attackers to propagandize in exactly the manner you are demonstrating/repeating here. OTOH, the idea that the U.S. is somehow propagandizing here means...what, exactly? They've made no definitive claims beyond acknowledging these incidents exist and that they are investigating them. They've even allowed that mass hysteria is a possibility they've considered. So, no, your vague "both-sides" allusions that I am equally likely being manipulated by U.S. officials doesn't hold up. The thing about propaganda is that we're all susceptible to it and, by definition, it primarily works without our awareness. But, there are things we can do to filter and identify to protect ourselves, even if it's by likelihood versus by certainty. So, applying that, I'm saying that while I'm not certain you've been had, it seems pretty likely at this point. And, whether or not you care to acknowledge that, one thing you cannot deny is that your premature, dismissive conclusions here are in lockstep with the propaganda known to be promulgated by guilty parties.