“When the government touts the release of such heavily redacted documents as an act of transparency, leaving us to guess what we might be missing, the question inevitably comes up: Are there ways we can peer behind the black bars? According to a number of researchers, there often are.”

The Declassification Engine: Reading Between the Black Bars

The New Yorker (October 16, 2013)

February 8 2022 — The Executive Summary was DECLASSIFIED by DNI Haines on February 1st 2022. As expected, the document is redacted. Can you guess a couple of words? Intel Today believes it can be done… Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_TODAY

“I think what we all want is a declassification process that we could be confident withholds material that really does have serious security or privacy implications, in contrast to the over-classification that we experience now.”

Richard H. Immerman

When Richard H. Immerman — a historian at Temple University who, as a former Assistant Deputy Director of National Intelligence, has a top-secret security clearance — heard about the project’s potential for un-redaction, he started to worry about the mosaic theory, a precept that the intelligence community often invokes in the alleged and legally tenuous interest of national security.

The theory’s thesis is clear-cut: pieces of banal, declassified information, when pieced together, might provide a knowledgeable reader with enough emergent detail to uncover the information that remains classified. [Reading Between the Black Bars — The New Yorker]

RELATED POST: BREAKING — Who Is The Mysterious GOLFER? — Part III : Unmasking the Devil [UPDATE — Unredacted Lockerbie Report confirms Intel Today Analysis]

FLASHBACK — Over the years, many people have tried to identify GOLFER, also known as the Lockerbie Deep Throat, but no one ever succeeded.

In May 2012, the Sunday Herald published the full Lockerbie Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) 800-page report. For those who like statistics, this report contains 285,300 words, and a total of 1,384,109 (no space) characters.

The chapter regarding GOLFER was redacted to hide his identity. But one letter of just one word had been only partially redacted. After a bit of thinking, I came to the conclusion that this letter was a (Times New Roman) capital G. And that was all that was needed to start cracking a two-decade-old secret.

On February 8 2021, I was able to announce that my guess had been entirely correct. So yes, there are ways we can peer behind the black bars…

Back to the present — The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) jointly convened an Intelligence Community Experts Panel to help elucidate potential causal mechanisms of the Havana Syndrome. [Anomalous Health Incidents (AHIs)]

RELATED POST: Havana Syndrome — CIA Report : “No Worldwide Campaign by Foreign Adversary” [UPDATE — Intelligence Community Experts Panel : “Incidents plausibly caused by pulsed electromagnetic energy”]

The Executive Summary was DECLASSIFIED by DNI Haines on 1 February 2022. Here is one extract from the 4 pages document.

Amazingly, all MSM [see references below] have reported the following:

“Using nonstandard antennas and techniques, the signals could be propagated with low loss through air for tens to hundreds of meters, and with some loss, through most building materials.”

The statement about “nonstandard antennas” is entirely fabricated. As you can see for yourself, words between ‘nonstandard’ and ‘antennas’ have been redacted! Is this serious journalism?

What do you think has been redacted between “nonstandard” and “antennas”? [If we can guess WHAT has been redacted, we will probably understand WHY it has been redacted.]

Let us know. Send us your comments and suggestions!

Please do not hesitate to contact me, should you have any further queries.

Kind regards,

Intel Today — gosint2016 @ gmail.com

REFERENCES

The Declassification Engine: Reading Between the Black Bars — The New Yorker

—

All major newspapers have already reported the findings of the Intelligence Community Experts Panel. Most of them do not report these findings accurately. Here is a typical example from CNN [US intelligence community report says ‘pulsed electromagnetic energy’ could cause Havana Syndrome] :

“Using nonstandard antennas and techniques, the signals could be propagated with low loss through air for tens to hundreds of meters, and with some loss, through most building materials.”

The same claim is repeated by the BBC [Havana Syndrome may be caused by ‘directed energy’ by Security correspondent Gordon Corera] :

“It says that non-standard antennas could create the effects on the human body. Such a source could be concealed and require only moderate power. It could also travel through the air and through walls of buildings.”

How about The Guardian? [Havana Syndrome could be caused by pulsed energy devices – US expert report]

Using what the report described as “nonstandard antennas and techniques”, electromagnetic pulsed energy could be directed at a target “through air for tens to hundreds of meters, and with some loss, through most building materials”.

=

Random Thoughts — Reading Behind the Black Bars [ODNI Redacted Summary on Havana Syndrome]

Response to the readers

A reader suggests that the redacted words could be: “Using nonstandard [frequencies, directional] antennas and techniques…”

I find this idea excellent. It is certainly a very plausible statement. [But why would the ODNI have decided to redact these words?]

However, I think that these 2 words are just a bit too long. But, I will have to check that I did this correctly. [Margin size, font, font size, etc…] What do you think?