More on Minab

Bellingcat's analysis of the strike in Minab on Feb 28th doesn't make sense. At https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2026/03/08/video-shows-us-tomahawk-missile-strike-next-to-girls-school-in-iran/ they show a video of a Tomahawk hitting an IRGC facility. Aerial photos show the blast field for that hit and bellingcat draw a red frame around that blast field. That shows the school outside the blast zone and they also say that the Tomahawk only hit a "clinic" and an earth-covered "magazine or bunker".

People on Bluesky used this to claim that the Tomahawk hit the school, but this shows the hit on the IRGC facility did NOT hit the school.

Iranian state media released video footage of bombs, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6FLJ-h8WRs

The regime footage shows one view where they point out a large explosion (hitting the school), followed by 98 smaller explosions - each a significant distance from the other. Then at 1 minute they switch to a different vantage point and show the school explosion again - again, much larger than any of the other 8 explosions and significantly to the other side of the IRGC communications tower that is inside the IRGC complex. At 1:14 you can see the Tomahawk at the top of the screen and then a concise, smaller explosion on the military complex - the explosion that Bellingcat analyzed. There was not a similar Tomahawk swooping close before the school explosion.

Maybe somebody in the military can comment on the difference in the size of these blasts. 8 blasts are similar in size but the one at the school was much bigger.

I've learned that this was near the Strait of Hormuz, and it seems that Bellingcat says there was something buried there - my guess is munitions used for controlling Hormuz. The tall communications tower would also have been an important military asset. Iran had to know that the Hormuz area would be critical and would likely be hit.

The theory right now is that the US military didn't update their info when the school was created in 2014 so they didn't know the building had been converted to a school. Obviously, the military is investigating what happened.

But at https://x.com/kusha_alagband/status/2034380764301975885 an X poster named Kusha tells what one of her long-time trusted followers heard when her cousin was finally able to contact her. He is the uncle of a girl killed in Minab and said that there was still a satellite on the roof of that school and that the IRGC-aligned families did not send their kids to school that day. The "clinic" nearby still had 2 missile launchers in it. This uncle said the people in that area believe that the IRGC shot a missile using one of those launchers to hit the school.

Another x poster (at https://x.com/Farida98479017/status/2034383427961840101 ) posted video of an Iranian girl who said when she got to school the teachers acted funny so she asked what was wrong. She was told there was war but they didn't want the kids to worry. This girl and her friends tried to go to the basement to get their little brothers and take them home but the door was locked for the first time ever. The girl escaped but her younger brother was killed, trapped in the basement. If you look at that conversation I asked for a summary of the video because I don't do Instagram & couldn't see it, so a (non-verbatim) transcript is there in the replies.

Another poster on Kusha's original thread noted anomalies with the exif data, etc of the photos claimed to be the only photos of the damage from the strike. He is very skeptical of the claims - regardless of who hit the school. His post is at https://x.com/OzzyManReviews/status/2032239700057170320

I approach this subject with fear & trembling because I am not good at 3D analysis & know nothing of military operations or weapons. Also, even if we did hit that school, there being the satellite on top of it makes it a legitimate military target. I strongly doubt we would have targeted it if we knew it was a school. But the things the actual witnesses say suggest that the IRGC people knew not to send their kids to school. So the only kids killed were anti-regime kids. By the time the school was hit, the government had already told schools to send the kids home, and obviously the teachers there knew there had been strikes and yet somebody locked those little boys in the basement so nobody could get them out.

I spend quite a bit of time on x these days working to mow down the lies. The leftists ALWAYS bring up Minab to say we're the bad guys. I'd be interested to hear feedback regarding the anomalies I've mentioned - especially from military folks.

Can’t figure out how to get a transcript since Grok doesn’t do it. But it can analyze the claims. PSA: Grok is not always accurate. Garbage In, Garbage Out. Sometimes I have to point out specific sources of information before Grok knows anything about it. So take with a grain of salt. Here’s what Grok said (sorry if it comes out a wall of text):

OzzyManReviews’ metadata claims (from his ~18-minute video attached to the March 12, 2026 X post) center on alleged “red flags” in photos of the Minab school strike aftermath that were distributed by major agencies like AP and Getty Images. He argues these images show signs of manipulation, recycling, or AI generation, undermining reported casualty figures (especially the 165–175+ deaths, mostly schoolgirls) and broader media coverage. He explicitly states he is not denying a U.S. strike occurred, but questions sensationalism, unverifiable numbers, and photojournalism standards.Specific Claims (Based on the Video and Related Posts)From the post caption and video content (sampled frames + Ozzy’s spoken analysis):

Inconsistent or suspicious EXIF/metadata: He points to timestamps, camera data, editing history, or file properties in multiple images that “don’t add up” (e.g., photos allegedly taken at times or with devices inconsistent with the reported sequence of events).
Signs of recycling or reuse: Some images appear to be older photos repurposed or from unrelated events (he references a graveyard image he previously traced to a 2021 Indonesia cemetery).
Potential AI manipulation or digital alteration: He claims visual artifacts, compression issues, or metadata patterns suggesting generative AI or heavy post-processing in images validated by AP/Getty.
Broader pattern: He cites the 2008 precedent where Iranian state media altered missile photos (adding more missiles for dramatic effect), leading to media retractions. He argues the same “manipulation in photojournalism” is happening again and “snuck by the industry.”
Implication: These issues make the extreme casualty numbers and graphic aftermath photos unreliable. He stresses that “less kids being dead, if any, is way better” and highlights the internet blackout preventing independent Iranian witness verification.

He calls on AP and Getty to “address this truthfully asap” and frames it as a failure of media verification when relying on Iranian state-controlled sources (e.g., Mehr News, WANA, Iranian Press Center).Analysis: How Substantiated Are the Claims?

Partial validity on verification challenges: Ozzy is correct that independent access to Minab was severely restricted (internet/comms blackout + regime control). All ground-level photos and videos originated from Iranian state or affiliated sources. Mainstream outlets (AP, Getty, Reuters, NYT) credited these sources but did not have their own journalists on the ground initially. Satellite imagery (Planet Labs, analyzed by BBC Verify, NYT, Amnesty International) independently confirms multiple strikes and damage to the school + adjacent IRGC compound. However, exact casualty numbers remain unverified by outsiders and rely solely on Iranian officials.
Metadata red flags: No public, independent forensic metadata audit (e.g., from Bellingcat, Reuters Fact Check, or digital forensics experts) has directly confirmed or debunked Ozzy’s specific EXIF claims as of late March 2026. In conflict zones, metadata is frequently stripped, altered, or inconsistent due to agency workflows, compression, or regime editing. Some images have shown signs of manipulation in related Iran coverage (e.g., a separate AI-generated backpack photo used by the Iranian embassy was flagged by Google’s SynthID). Ozzy’s point about “a whole heap” of photos having issues aligns with broader skepticism from Iranian diaspora voices and outlets like HonestReporting, which criticize media over-reliance on regime visuals. However, this does not prove the strike or deaths were fabricated—satellite and munitions evidence (Tomahawk fragments, crater patterns) support a real incident.
Casualty numbers and sensationalism: The reported death toll (165–175+, mostly children) comes exclusively from Iranian authorities and has not been independently corroborated. U.S. officials and rights groups (HRW, Amnesty) treat it as plausible given the timing (Saturday morning classes) and school location but note verification limits. Ozzy’s emphasis that “it matters” and questioning inflated figures is a reasonable call for scrutiny, especially with historical regime propaganda precedents. That said, U.S. investigations acknowledge likely American responsibility due to outdated targeting data (school misclassified as IRGC facility from pre-2016).
AI/recycling concerns: Some unrelated AI fakes circulated post-strike (e.g., celebrity donation hoaxes, fabricated images). Ozzy correctly flags one graveyard photo as recycled (traced to Indonesia 2021). However, core damage imagery aligns with satellite data from multiple independent analysts.

Overall assessment: Ozzy raises legitimate, evidence-based concerns about media over-reliance on unverified Iranian state imagery and the difficulty of confirming exact casualty counts amid a blackout. His metadata critique highlights real problems in war-zone photojournalism (as seen in past conflicts). However, his claims are not yet forensically proven in public analyses, and they do not disprove the underlying strike (corroborated by satellite, U.S. admissions of error, and munitions experts). The video is opinionated commentary (typical of his style) rather than a peer-reviewed forensic report. Mainstream coverage has acknowledged verification challenges while standing by the core facts of a tragic civilian incident caused by a targeting error. Further transparency from AP/Getty on sourcing/editing would address his call.

What do you mean by “a huge line of targeting data”?

How would Tomahawk damage be different than, say, an Iranian missile? I noticed the blast on the school was bigger & wider than the Tomahawk hits, which were much more concise.

I was looking at what Grok gave for evidence, and the teacher & principal that are cited as sources are the ones who knew the kids were supposed to go home but didn’t send them home. And somebody locked the door so the boys COULDN’T go home. Those are the “credible eyewitnesses”? The internet is shut down & only people with Starlink can get through. The regime has been going door to door to get rid of Starlink devices. Any witnesses that the “credible reporting” cites early on are regime-approved folks. There is a reason the regime shut off internet access.

Grok’s talk about “double tapped” uses contortions also. They say the area of the “IRGC facility & the school” was hit more than once. What the videos show is that the school was hit and the IRGC facility was hit. The ones claiming otherwise say so on the basis of these regime-approved “witnesses”. I would LOVE it if a group of witnesses like that uncle and the girl who tried to save her brother could be interviewed as a panel, to clarify some of the details.

Are you a military person? The more I can learn from people who know what they’re talking about, the better.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.