As I wrote earlier, the CIA is whitewashing so-called “Havana Syndrome.” One piece of evidence for this is that its new report contradicts the intelligence community’s established knowledge about the Russians’ possession of radio frequency weapons.
In 2016, the National Security Agency’s then-Counterintelligence Director Kemp Ensor reported to the agency evidence supporting the conclusion that former NSA officer Mike Beck and colleague Charles Gubete had been targeted with such a weapon in 1996 (Beck and Gubete were in Russia at the time). Both contracted early onset Parkinson’s disease, they believe as a result of their exposure to the weapon. Gubete has since died. Beck has fought a long and largely fruitless battle for NSA recognition and compensation for his on-the-job injury.
So we already know that Radio Frequency/Microwave devices exist and have been used by Russia. In fact, they might have been there since the 1960s — you can read more about the “Moscow Signal.” Indeed, the Russians openly admit they have such weapons. So why would those investigating Havana Syndrome suggest that that is still a question to be investigated?
As I reported in December, “A 2012 Russian government gazette recorded how its intelligence services had RF/MW capabilities ‘that influence the psycho-physical state of an individual with their fields and rays’ and bragged, ‘in a number of areas not long ago our specialists were far ahead of the Americans.'”
A 2019 Russian army report claimed that RF/MW weapons “have significantly decreased in size and can be installed on a tank turret and even at the head of a tactical missile … The [target] begins to hear non-existent noises and whistles … When exposed to low frequency electromagnetic radiation, the human brain releases chemicals that regulate its behavior. [The RF/MW devices] can cause symptoms of various diseases…”
Currently, I can confirm that the CIA has received highly credible reporting on Russia’s possession of an RF/MW capability that operates via pulsed nanosecond bursts nearly impossible to detect. Former CIA officer Mark Oliver has also identified numerous open-source reports by Russian scientists engaged in just this kind of RF/MW research, corroborated by tests on living animals.
Considering this baseline, then, how can the CIA say it is considering “whether” RF/MW devices “could possibly” be responsible — specifically, whether the Russians possess this capability? The case seems to be closed on that specific point. The CIA report only shows its unseriousness by implying that the question remains open.
This is just one more indication that the report wasn’t about getting to the truth as much as it was about being able to evade hard questions.
There are highly compelling geolocation data to go alongside the technical evidence of Russia’s possession of these weapons. This data put Russian intelligence personnel in close and repeated proximity to U.S. personnel who have subsequently reported Havana Syndrome symptoms.
What the CIA does not have, however, is credible human reporting that says the Russians are responsible for the incidents.
Sources tell me that this is likely a result of the attack team being small and highly compartmented outside of the GRU-FSB’s organizational structure. Until that team is penetrated or caught red-handed with RF/MW equipment, reports such as this one will have at least a thin pretense of plausibility, and Nikolai Patrushev will have reason to smile and keep on attempting to “short tour” U.S. intelligence officers, military attaches, and diplomats.
Time, however, will not be kind to this whitewash of a report.
