u/sdrawkcabsihtdaeru

Like he's clearly also dead right? Why is everyone pretending Mojtaba isn't dead?

He was at the compound which was the site of the 28 February strike that killed his father, and the official story is that he was grievously injured but survived since he had coincidentally stepped outside moments before. Both his parents, his wife, sister and brother-in-law, and his own daughter died.

It's unclear what happened afterwards. Unverified reports say he was flown to Russia for emergency treatment but they have been denied. What we do know is that since the day of the strikes that killed the other six Khameneis, Mojtaba has never been seen in public, nor have any new audio or video recordings of him been released. Not even a picture.

The most anyone has heard of Mojtaba Khamenei in four months are the statements "he" releases which are read out by newscasters on national broadcasts. He skipped the funeral of his wife last week and despite multiple heads of state and 30 national delegations appearing in Iran for his father's week-long funeral, he says he won't be attending for "national security reasons." Even if he was scared, the implication that he doesn't trust his own security and national defense capabilities enough to protect his own life but he is willing to invite the presidents of Pakistan, Armenia, and Georgia amongst others is a bad look.

Is the West scared that if they acknowledge there's no real leader, it will prevent them from getting another deal like the pathetic nonsense Trump signed in Versailles? Are they worried that people will start wondering who they've even been "negotiating" with this whole time? Was the regime scared to actually go through whatever convoluted excuse for a process they have in selecting a new leader because it might make them look weak during the war? Also, who's calling the shots? Is Sepah operating the country now (to the extent they weren't before, the mafiosos they are)? What actual power does Ghalibaf have now and what are he and Pezeshkian's reasons to go along with this four-month Weekend at Bernie's charade?

Rushed cops paramedics and firefighters to the intersection ~10 minutes ago; saw a car on the sidewalk but no additional vehicles or signs of a crash, a body on the ground got surrounded by paramedics.

### TLDR

Zũm has a suffix used for conjugating verbs that is only used for transitive verbs with stems ending in a dangling nasal modifier when talking about both a group of things and a group of people in the third person and the group of things is the subject of the transitive verb which has a direct object that is also a pronoun.

# Incredibly Funny and Salacious Context You Should Totally Read

So Zũm has no standalone pronouns. Instead, it is a mandatory pro-drop language that has thus just kept adding verb conjugations for everything other languages use pronouns for. It also has pluripersonal head marking and allows you to differentiate by gender as an optional additional differentiator. For example if I'm telling a group of people I see them, I would say **simtundw.** If I wanted to say "but I don't see you" in reference to a different group of people, it's say **doh nsimćundw.** if the first group was all men and the second all women, I could instead say **simtunat doh nsimtunyt,** and add **-ćndat** and **-ćndyt** for four groups, 2 all male, 2 all female.

one of the more common distinguishing suffixes is -ūń. In Classical and Old World Zũm, this is pronounced as /ũː/, and is a pluralization of -ū, the third person inanimate singular, or "it." Normally, humans and things are differentiated in third person singular, but in plural they all take -cym. However, when talking about a group of people and a group of things in third person, rather than use the differentiator -cindw (which would be used for another group of people), you use -ūń.

the problem is a small number of verb stems end in a modifying nasal, a dangling ̃ tasked solely with chaos. It modifies the following vowel in the suffix to be nasal, so **femn** becomes **femnon** but **kamn** becomes **kamõn.**

there are only 2 suffixes that are already nasal, both pluripersonal alternatives: -ūń and -õs. They need a different modification, particularly -ūń, since while **femn** becomes **femnū**, **kamn** becomes **kamūń.** The solution for -ūń is -ūnin. When Zũm nouns end in a nasal vowel, their plural form makes the vowel not nasal, but adds -nin at the end, ie dẽ → denin. However, this -nin condenses to a geminated -ṅ when followed by another letter (which is why the nasal mod of -õs is -oṅs). Therefore, when -ūń is used after a verb with a dangling nasal before an accusative suffix, it should be **-ūṅ.**

*Except it can't be* because Zũm doesn't allow long vowels before geminated consonants. Instead, the vowel is shortened and the macron replaced with an apostrophe (or a grave in some obscure orthographies or teaching books).

Therefore, the appropriate suffix to use when talking about both a group of things and a group of people in the third person when using a transitive verb with a stem ending in a dangling nasal wherein the group of things is the subject of the sentence and the direct object is also a pronoun is **-u'ṅ (-ùṅ).**

So for example, to cushion is a cognate, **kucn,** /ˈkʊ.ʃn̩/, with stem **kucń-.** It cushions is **kucūń,** and this -ūń **is not the same as the one we were just talking about;** this one is a modified -ū. They cushion (for both people and objects) is **kucńcym.** But if I'm talking in the same conversation about both a group of people and a group of objects then when referring to the objects it's **kucūnin.** But let's say a group of people fell off a cliff and landed on a bunch of bushes.

When the people fell off the cliff, there were a bunch of bushes underneath, and *they cushioned them.*

**Twćk unmindi zzyqpdi paycodidcym, y' buscntior kãrbhipãtẽamdi diūń, e** ***kucu'ṅcun.***