XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math   
   From: physfitfreak@gmail.com   
      
   On 4/19/25 8:06 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   > On 4/19/25 7:39 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >> On 4/19/25 5:19 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>> On 4/19/25 2:37 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>>> On 4/19/25 1:59 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> An Iranian more independent and self-centered news outlet (in   
   >>>>> Telegram) which does not necessarily obey any demands on them by   
   >>>>> Iran's government, early on, towards the beginning of the talk   
   >>>>> disclosed that Araghchi and his team had cancelled the talk minutes   
   >>>>> into its start, and for about 15 minutes or so were preparing to   
   >>>>> leave the building (Ommani embassy in Italy) and return to Iran.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> This news piece was not touched on at the end of the 2nd rounds   
   >>>>> talks by spokesperson of foreign ministry. No other Iranian sources   
   >>>>> of news also touched on that, either because they didn't have the   
   >>>>> information, or they followed ministry's directive in keeping it   
   >>>>> quiet. No news of it in Western outlets that I could see either.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> In this round of talk, no reporters were allowed in the building.   
   >>>> Even spokesperson himself wasn't allowed to be there. And I don't   
   >>>> think anyone among Iran's team texted this out directly to that news   
   >>>> agency. It'd be absurd to do that. Much more likely, Araghchi   
   >>>> himself called up other Iran's authorities to ask for permission to   
   >>>> abort, and it was granted. Then some Iranians in the government   
   >>>> itself immediately leaked it to that news agency against the wishes   
   >>>> of the government.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> There's a second route also. Perhaps some Mossad agent among   
   >>>> Americans' team texted it out to Mossad, and Iran's spies among   
   >>>> Mossad (plenty of them!) texted it to that news agency and perhaps   
   >>>> scores of other ones as well, then only the most independent one   
   >>>> disclosed it in Telegram. I think these two are the only routes that   
   >>>> the news could take to come out.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I saw the news piece just minutes after the attempt to abort took   
   >>>> place! I.e. during those minutes that mission was aborted. This is a   
   >>>> bit too fast to be normal reaction on either side. I think there's   
   >>>> more to it than it seems.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> How it was handled _after_ 2nd round was over, was of course just   
   >>>> correct diplomatic behavior preserving both sides' face. Such nitty   
   >>>> gritties are washed and cleaned off before news to media is given.   
   >>>> But the fact that somebody, some side, wanted very badly and quickly   
   >>>> for it to come out, is the strange and interesting part of it :)   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Could be that somebody will explain this in the news for a wider   
   >>>> audience. We'll see.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> On the official Iranian news channel whose reporter woman was in Rome   
   >>> broadcasting live from outside the place of meeting, the only clue   
   >>> that could point to this event is that she said (live cast)   
   >>> spokesperson was called inside and despite arrangements made between   
   >>> them to relay the news to the woman reporter, she was saying he had   
   >>> gone silent for the past few minutes and is not responding to our   
   >>> queries. Then she herself concluded that "talks may have started to   
   >>> cover very serious matters, taking all spokesman's attention." :)   
   >>> This is the only sign that you could see in Iran's official news.   
   >>>   
   >>> Anyway, this thing isn't deserving all this attention and I'm already   
   >>> sick of it. As far as my own view is concerned, as I've said it   
   >>> multiple times, it doesn't matter how this talk "goes forward" or   
   >>> even is kept going or not. This whole thing to contact and create a   
   >>> dialogue with the Americans is inconsequential to Iran because   
   >>> regardless of the outcome, Iran must and would do exactly what she   
   >>> should, with or without a talk. There aren't "choices" there for Iran   
   >>> to think and choose from when Nazis are pressuring her.   
   >>>   
   >>> In fact this is also the stance of Pezeshkiyan and Iran's Leader   
   >>> himself. Both of them have pointed out that this matter of   
   >>> "negotiation" is one among tens of other tasks that foreign ministry   
   >>> is involved in and does not absorb any more attention than that, and   
   >>> some people's tying the events or their decisions and plans to it is   
   >>> ridiculous.   
   >>>   
   >>> Talking with Americans is not consequential for Iran, and therefore,   
   >>> it is not consequential _to_ Iran. End of this crap story.   
   >>>   
   >>> Talking with Russia is, and talking with China is, and similarly   
   >>> developing ties with central Asians and Arabs and Indians and central   
   >>> and south Americans ARE consequential for (and to) Iran.   
   >>>   
   >>> USA and its cohorts and to tell you the truth the whole fucking   
   >>> cro-magnon people is a thing of the past for Iran. It was over   
   >>> decades ago.   
   >>>   
   >>> Here let me one more time quote Raisi on that:   
   >>>   
   >>>     "They are the past; we are the future. I repeat, they are the   
   >>> past, and we are the future."   
   >>>   
   >>>                     - Raisi in delivering his speech in   
   UN   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> More bits and pieces of what went on has come out. Same reporter to   
   >> whom Araghchi had told, "It is moving forward", when reporter asked   
   >> directly whether negotiations were constructive, Araghchi emphasized   
   >> that, "The negotiations took place in a constructive _atmosphere_"..   
   >>   
   >> So the machinery was there at best as it could be arranged, but as far   
   >> as results are concerned it is too soon to comment. I.e. nothing is   
   >> yet done.   
   >>   
   >> Next round is one week later in Omman again. I don't know how they   
   >> came up with the idea of doing it once a week. Who decided that one   
   >> week of thinking it over and making up the mind is neither too short   
   >> nor too long? Is there some study that has determined that? Is it what   
   >> Iran wants, or is it USA's choice? Too long for Trump personally, but   
   >> what is the norm and where has it come from. What study?   
   >>   
   >> In physics, for instance, the period is about one year. You won't 100%   
   >> understand, and won't integrate it fully with your present knowledge,   
   >> what you are packing into your brain right now, till a year later. And   
   >> as you continue packing stuff in it, only what you packed a year   
   >> earlier will make 100% sense to you and 100% available for you to   
   >> apply and utilize.   
   >>   
   >> But that's physics. How about sensitive negotiations? Did they   
   >> discover this one-week period by trial and error in settling spousal   
   >> disputes or something? Does court of law do it also?   
   >>   
   >> For the decision my dick made to dump physics and destroy my degree,   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)