Hacker News Reader

Comment by tyingq | Hacker News Reader

Earlier reports mentioned a spray bottle, now this one, in the text shown in the video, says:

"The footage shows the woman in white lunging and wiping a man's face with a cloth"

Earlier reports also mentioned both women applying something to his face, which sort of suggested a binary agent being used, where each part is non-toxic on it's own, and only deadly when combined.

This one doesn't say much about the other woman, and whether she applied anything to the victim's face.

Funny how these details change.

View on HN

It's been a constant source of confusion for me as well, as articles posted on social media sites like HN will refer to one delivery mechanism, and the comments to those articles will refer to the other. It's really odd.

See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13720147, where the article refers to the two women rubbing it on their hands and then his face. The top comment from tlow, however, refers to the article pointing to "atomization" instead of "dermal" and then something else completely absent from the article about the women attempting to aid him "with bare hands". Nobody seems to really call him out for the inconsistency either.

"An atomized version targeting the respiratory system and not the dermal would explain why two women attempting to aid "with bare hands" would not have been harmed."

Yep...I've seen stories and comments referring to bare hands, gloved hands, hand with a cloth, and spray bottle. The video doesn't help much, as it's zoomed out pretty far.

A lot of this seems funny to me.

Immediately after the attack, before the Malaysians had even publicly named the victim, South Korean media was already reporting his identity, the cause of death (poisoning) and that it was carried out by two females. Going further, and without any evidence, they establish and spread the story that they were agents of North Korea.

Malaysian authorities do not release the CCTV footage, but Japanese media somehow comes into possession of it and broadcasts it, while a Japanese journalist claims Kim Jong Nam was recently warned about criticising North Korea.

The people who carried out the attack were Vietnamese and Indonesian, not North Korean, and one of them claims she met with someone who looked Japanese or Korean. This could mean North or South Korean.

The Malaysians say VX killed the victim, yet nobody else was affected.

The last time North Korea was accused (by South Korea) of attempting to kill Kim Jong Nam, it was no more convoluted than trying to hire a taxi driver to run him over.

Yet now they're using "binary concoction" VX (ah, now we're back to discussing WMDs again), involving multiple assassins, and choosing the absolute worst location possible, a public space crawling with witnesses and armed security guards and covered by CCTV?

It makes no sense for North Korea to carry out such a public attack in an airport when they are already viewed so poorly as being a totalitarian state with a slave economy. They're corrupt, but they're not stupid.

This seems state sponsored, and considering all the conflicting reports, and various news releases is various countries, I doubt we'll ever know who really killed him.

In 30 years, declassified documents may even point to the US's CIA. After all the US did cause the 73 coupe in Chile, Bay of Pigs, Iranian Contras, the instalment of the Shah in Iran, MKUltra .. it would make sense that a State (US, South Korea, Japan?) sponsored this and did it because they want another war.

What is it North Korea would lose by carrying out such an attack?

The DPRK already basically holds the people hostage for the aid they do get, so I'm not sure what further sanctions would be forthcoming from this.

Why would they even bother denying it then, in that case?

There's no advantage to North Korea of doing such an unnecessarily complicated and risky assassination in such a public and relatively secure place, when they could do it anywhere else, using any other weapon.

There is an obvious motivation for countries hostile to North Korea to so publicly frame them for this though, and bring up the issue of WMDs, particularly a week or so after their latest missle launch.

We'll probably never know what really happened, but just because North Korea is a bad place doesn't mean we should automatically accept everything they're accused of.

The current leader executed his uncle with an anti-aircraft gun. I think the natural human tendency towards pique and irrationality more than explains away the obvious flaws in the plan.

The other side of it is what do they gain by admitting they did it?

That people tend to believe Malasia (in reporting the attack used VX) and tend to believe the straightforward explanation (assassination by the DPRK) doesn't mean they are not weighing the evidence, it is quite possible to believe the picture being painted in the media without having automatically accepted it.

> In 30 years, declassified documents may even point to the US's CIA.

What would the US stand to gain from attacking someone who fell out of favour with the DPRK regime?

I don't think it's the case here, but false flag operations always have a clear motive. If I were being a conspiracy theorist for this case...establish a narrative to justify something you plan on doing later.

Why would the US need to do that? North Korea gives them free PR ammunition all the time.

Again, playing devil's advocate. This incident would drum up support from Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, perhaps China, etc.

Edit: Suppose, for example, the goal was to get some newer, especially harsh sanctions imposed on the DPRK. This incident shows the DPRK doing their usual crazy stuff, but in somebody's else's sovereign territory, and getting other sovereign nation citizens in trouble. It might sway some votes and support in your direction.

There's a North Korean suspect in custody and Malaysian authorities have named, have CC footage of and are looking for several others. It doesn't seem as mysterious as you make it out.

Interesting note on the North Korean suspect, Ri Jong Chol, that's in custody:

"He said Ri has a degree in software engineering from the Kim Cheak University of Technology in North Korea and that Ri had wanted to open his own IT business in Malaysia"

So...one of our own.

source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/kim-jong-nam...

Heh, there was a report earlier on he was educated as a chemist because, of course he was. This Reuters report

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-malaysia-kim-su...

makes it sound like it's much less clear who the hell he is. Some guy who was living in Malaysia and maybe they didn't mind burning all that much? Who knows.

> North Korean suspect in custody

Yes they've arrested a North Korean, along with a Malaysian, Indonesian and Vietnamese, in an investigation into the murder of a North Korean.

> and Malaysian authorities have named, have CC footage of

What is this supposed to prove? On the day the half-brother of the North Korean leader was killed, some North Koreans based in Malaysia were unexpectedly recalled by Pyongyang to report on it and, like everyone else leaving KUL that day, appeared on airport CCTV?

On the day the half-brother of the North Korean leader was killed, some North Koreans based in Malaysia were unexpectedly recalled by Pyongyang to report on it

That's not what the reporting says, neither does the Malaysian police. You should read the coverage, a lot of what you've listed as evidence for this being something other than what it appears to be is simply inaccurate.

The point of my post was to show there are completely legit reasons why they may have left that day, whereas it's simply being painted by the media as them fleeing the scene.

If you have evidence that proves they were involved and my suggested reason they left is "simply inaccurate" I'd like to see it. News reports are not evidence though.

Wait, you're asking me for evidence? I think it's the other way round - on my side are the stated views of the Malaysian authorities conducting the actual investigation, the fact that China has sanctioned North Korea, basic common sense (there's no such thing as a government-independent North Korean simply living in Kuala Lumpur period, let alone one who is connected to the murder), the use of a poison typically only available to state actors, etc. You have: a bunch of unfounded contrarian speculation. What's your evidence?

> stated views of the Malaysian authorities conducting the actual investigation

The Malaysian authorities have not blamed North Korea, so I'm not sure why you keep implying they have by posting this.

> China has sanctioned North Korea

If you're talking about the coal imports, that was related to their nuclear program and missile tests, not this murder.

> basic common sense (there's no such thing as a government-independent North Korean simply living in Kuala Lumpur period, let alone one who is connected to the murder)

In my post I said they could have been recalled due to the murder. Obviously that means they are agents or diplomats. It does not mean they were involved; nor does getting on a plane at a major international airport.

In fact basic common sense would tell you that the last place someone involved in a murder is going to be hours after the event is at the scene of the crime.

> the use of a poison typically only available to state actors, etc

There is no hard evidence that North Korea even possesses VX, let alone is capable of using it in the convoluted "binary" way people are having to suggest to keep this story going.

AFAIK the USA and Trump's best buddy Russia are the only state actors that admit they have VX.

"Malaysia’s deputy national police chief, Noor Rashid Ibrahim, said four other North Korean suspects were on the run. The men arrived in Malaysia on different days beginning Jan. 31 and flew out of the country last Monday, when Kim died, Noor Rashid said.

“I am not going disclose where they are,” he told a room packed with journalists, adding that Interpol was helping with the investigation.

Noor Rashid showed photographs of the four men, who were traveling on regular — not diplomatic — passports and are ages 33, 34, 55 and 57."

So they've identified them as suspects because, what? They just like to call random people suspects for no reason? 'Recalled due to murder' doesn't really fit the timeline either. And what's the North Korean that's actually in custody, an innocent bystander? And on, and on. The overwhelming preponderance of circumstantial evidence suggests North Korean involvement. Other alternatives require logical contortions that make no sense at all.

> So they've identified them as suspects because, what? They just like to call random people suspects for no reason?

If North Korea is being framed for this, why wouldn't they be pointing the finger at North Koreans?

Even if you believe it's impossible that saintly countries like China, Russia or the USA would do such a thing, the police chief's statement was completely unprofessional, since he actually said:

"I confirm today the perpetrators, the four suspects are from North Korea"

We of course know from the video that the perpetrators are two women from Indonesia and Vietnam, but according to you this guy's comments are the last word on this, case closed?

> 'Recalled due to murder' doesn't really fit the timeline either.

I don't know what you mean by that. Perhaps you can suggest some reasons, though, why secret agents involved in a complicated high-profile murder like this, that they have apparently been working on for ages, are going to be anywhere near the scene of the crime on the day it happens.

> And what's the North Korean that's actually in custody, an innocent bystander?

Maybe he is. I wouldn't like to have you on a jury if you seriously believe everyone arrested by police is guilty of something.

If he was involved why did he stay in Malaysia when the others left? Your apparent theory - that some of the people responsible left but one of them just decided to hang around for the police to show up - makes no sense.

> The overwhelming preponderance of circumstantial evidence suggests North Korean involvement.

The hard evidence is that the two women who carried out the attack are from Vietnam and Indonesia. Circumstantial evidence is that one Malaysian was also arrested and one North Korean arrested, in a crime where the victim is also North Korean.

More circumstantial evidence away from NK is that the Indonesian woman stated she met with people who looked Japanese or Korean (possibly South Korean), and the Vietnamese woman was taken to visit South Korea (which seems rather strange and risky for a North Korean agent to do, particularly when it has nothing to do with this mission).

This on top of the fact that within 24 hours, before the Malaysians had even publicly identified the victim, who was using a passport under a different name, South Korean media had already named him, given a cause of death, and stated who carried out the attack (two women), throwing the mud that they were North Korean agents.

And while the Malaysians did not release the CCTV, somehow Japanese media got access to it and broadcast it.

It seems funny that South Korea and Japan, two countries notoriously hostile towards North Korea, keep cropping up in this story.

If North Korea is being framed for this

Well, I think we can stop right there. Your premise is, the Malaysians are framing the North Koreans for someone else murdering a high-profile North Korean exile. I don't know what to say to that but 'ok'.

As you're ignoring 99% of what I posted and your premise is simply "I'm not saying it was North Korea, but it was North Korea", then yes we can stop right here.

Wait no I'm absolutely saying 'it was totally North Korea' and that any other premise is, given the facts, wild tinfoilhattery. I'm completely unambivalent about it. Your premise is 'it might be Santa Claus'.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=fallibility+of+eyewitne...

It would be funny if everyone told the same story about something far more trivial than this. After all, no witness would have known what they were seeing until later, by which time they'd be relying on distant recollections of the event.

Witnesses suck.

Don't put too much stock in early reported details. Unfortunately, people are prone to wild speculation and mistakes are made. That said, you must be reading less cautious news sources than I as none of these "facts" were included in the stories I read. I have not seen any definitive statements as to how the chemical was applied except in hacker news comments.

>I have not seen any definitive statements as to how the chemical was applied except in hacker news comments

I already quoted the text passage in the video from this BBC story, but here it is again: "The footage shows the woman in white lunging and wiping a man's face with a cloth." I assume the BBC aren't generally in your "less cautious" category.

It's fairly easy to google around and find other news outlets saying "spray bottle", and the other terms I mentioned.

Yes, I understand wild speculation. But I expect less of it from journalists.

Perhaps, I was uncharitable in reading your comment. To me it is unsurprising that we don't know exactly how it went down. Based on published quotes, Kim Jong-Nam, himself, did not know exactly what happened. It just struck me as an odd detail to call out.

I wish I could expect better of journalists, but I find many news sources will publish any random speculation, and therefore, there are many that I either avoid or take with a very large grain of salt. As you highlight, the BBC is one of the better ones.

> Funny how these details change.

Not funny, but weird.

It would be weird if details in a breaking news story didn't change

It would be so weird if journalists still had this thing called integrity where they raced to verify, not release, speculation about a breaking story.

I guess we're well past that now though

Seems harsh. It's hard to tell exactly what's happening from the blurry video.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com