4 ms·

Sometimes "edit" button disappears, with Bossy I refer to the woman on the right, and Postpony is the woman on the left. The observer "O" is sitting on the 5th

Sometimes "edit" button disappears, with Bossy I refer to the woman on the right, and Postpony is the woman on the left. The observer "O" is sitting on the 5th row, right at the corridor, black pants, black and white shoes, her coat (?) is black and white checkered pattern. She is constantly looking at how Bossy and Postpony are interacting with Mahsa, only looks away shortly as Mahsa collapses from vertigo and systemic failure. She is also suspectly close as Mahsa was searching a place and momentarily looks back as if interrupted (probably her name was called). She is also the only one who remained seated even though the rest of the detained women are processed FIFO. For some reason it scrubbed my reference url's: dang please help: the main video: yt-dlp -f dash-video_2277485 https://www.reddit.com/r/BrothersSection/comments/xphi85/cctv_footage_of_iranian_mahsa_amini_collapsing_at/ https://www.reddit.com/r/BrothersSection/comments/xphi85/cct... sha256sum: 809668fbb0a568bb8c923ebdecb0db33cb5837a1f314d371aa0893d1d6aefb57 the extra video: yt-dlp -f 270 https://youtu.be/GiCSejWJMQU https://youtu.be/GiCSejWJMQU sha256sum: 4f13245dbd4a6351bfef1d1c4f88e0dc130f3d9c7157a1cf45e441c052747629 Also: I don't understand Persian, but there is this investigative article (author doesn't realize she was killed with hydrogen cyanide): https://faktyoxla.az/en/news/view/2186/how-did-iranian-media-expose-mahsa-amini-as-terrorist https://faktyoxla.az/en/news/view/2186/how-did-iranian-media... https://web.archive.org/web/20250114025320/https://faktyoxla.az/en/news/view/2186/how-did-iranian-media-expose-mahsa-amini-as-terrorist https://web.archive.org/web/20250114025320/https://faktyoxla... In it is described how the regime at a certain point tried to claim she was a member of the kurdish Peshmerga, and used cyanide to kill herself to avoid interrogation. So we have a brain-dead body of which the state coroner agrees no blows to the head etc. The IRGC then claims she killed herself with cyanide, and that she was a trained member of the Kurdish Peshmerga. This is debunked as described in the last URL (the image is much older, and Mahsa would have been a child at that time). It is unclear to me if they intentionally chose to make the provably false claim that she was a Peshmerga soldier: if so, the above explanation could be broadcast domestically, while globally this explanation would be dumped in the trash, causing any claim of cyanide poisoning to be associated with this provably false story in an international setting, basically discrediting the correct cause of cyanide poisoning internationally. Mixing truth and fiction. So IRGC at some point decides that the safest explanation of death is to stick to objective cause of death (cyanide poisoning), but to mix this truth with disinformation: she supposedly administered this to herself (provably wrong, since Bossy and Postpony turn away in advance of her collapsing; are they telepathic?), because she was supposedly member of kurdish Peshmerga (provably wrong: age of picture and age of Mahsa don't correspond). Feel free to ask questions (in case I forgot to note insights, or forgot to mention alternative explanations which I ruled out other ways), and also certainly feel free to add insights. Then there is this Iranian national detected and arrested in a timely fashion, who was procuring cyanide and ricin in Germany: https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-police-arrest-iran-man-chemical-terror-attack-castrop-rauxel/ https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-police-arrest-iran-m... It is unclear if this was a lone actor, or Iran foreign agent procuring cyanide with plausible deniability cover of being a lone wolf if caught.

DoctorOetker 2y ago
A suggestion for the US agencies involved with investigating the Havana syndrome: take the subset of employees affected who objectively visible brain damage (not to separate the "false" and "true" victims, but to enrich that fraction for investigation purpouses, alternatively accept all self-reported victims with potentially lower signal to noise ratio as a result). next take a subset of unaffected employees with similar task distributions as a control group then for each person (affected or control) check the origins of all mail, check scheduled appointments with Iranian nationals, ask if they recall ever experiencing something being spritzed close to their face (they may have interpreted as something innocuous like perfume), allow them to make as many entries as possible, then ask the same question (any dates or times of occurence, especially before onset of symptoms) but for specific odors (cherry odor = control, vanilla odor = control, bitter almond odor = scent of hydrogen cyanide, mint odor = control, eye irritant = added to disinfection hydrogen cyanide for repelling human end-users, ...), then for each type you take the difference between time of symptom onset minus odor exposure event and convert to same units (floating point days for example plus or minus estimated error), convert these time intervals to reciprocals for rates ( floating point "per day"), then for each type of odor, or for each type of meeting with Iranian, or for each parcel from Iranian nationals, make a grand sum of that rate once for the affected group, and once for the unaffected control group. then compare the mean rates between control group and affected group, and use hypothesis testing statistics to calculate the likelihood for the observed rates in the affected group given the rates from the unaffected group, if the null hypothesis of mere random clustering can be rejected you have detected that it is unlikely to explain by random chance, and those Iran associated links are proven significant (not in size of correlation, but that the correlation however small or large can not be explained away by chance). You could redo (or simultaneously do the same exercise with different nationalities).

DoctorOetker 2y ago

A suggestion for the US agencies involved with investigating the Havana syndrome: take the subset of employees affected who objectively visible brain damage (not to separate the "false" and "true" victims, but to enrich that fraction for investigation purpouses, alternatively accept all self-reported victims with potentially lower signal to noise ratio as a result). next take a subset of unaffected employees with similar task distributions as a control group then for each person (affected or control) check the origins of all mail, check scheduled appointments with Iranian nationals, ask if they recall ever experiencing something being spritzed close to their face (they may have interpreted as something innocuous like perfume), allow them to make as many entries as possible, then ask the same question (any dates or times of occurence, especially before onset of symptoms) but for specific odors (cherry odor = control, vanilla odor = control, bitter almond odor = scent of hydrogen cyanide, mint odor = control, eye irritant = added to disinfection hydrogen cyanide for repelling human end-users, ...), then for each type you take the difference between time of symptom onset minus odor exposure event and convert to same units (floating point days for example plus or minus estimated error), convert these time intervals to reciprocals for rates ( floating point "per day"), then for each type of odor, or for each type of meeting with Iranian, or for each parcel from Iranian nationals, make a grand sum of that rate once for the affected group, and once for the unaffected control group. then compare the mean rates between control group and affected group, and use hypothesis testing statistics to calculate the likelihood for the observed rates in the affected group given the rates from the unaffected group, if the null hypothesis of mere random clustering can be rejected you have detected that it is unlikely to explain by random chance, and those Iran associated links are proven significant (not in size of correlation, but that the correlation however small or large can not be explained away by chance). You could redo (or simultaneously do the same exercise with different nationalities).