Syria, 5,000 peaceful protestors dead or are they?

stuar

Was just looking at a RT video about the number of protestors killed in Syria, these figures are unverifiable even by the UN according to this, so is the media exaggerating the numbers?, and I've heard freedom fighters have been flown in from Libya.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEV8t3CEn_o

The Syrian opposition says 5,000 have been killed during a nine-month crackdown, with more than 250 civilians killed in two last days alone, calling for UN protection from "acts of genocide." But researchers say the information is tough to verify.

RT spoke with Julie Levesque from the Centre for Research on Globalization, who says the most significant problem with the figures from Syria is that, simply, "we do not know where they come from."

"I've discovered that it mostly comes from one group, which is a local coordination committee in Syria. We do not know who these people are," she said.

"We do not know who has been killed, and we do not know who has killed them. There are 17,000 armed men, according to a report from the Institute for Strategic Studies, which is based in London," the researcher further explained.

Levesque also said that verification is difficult because the opposition does not provide names to support their claims, and even the UN admits the information is hard to vouch for.

"All we hear is that government forces are cracking down on peaceful protesters. And if there are 17 thousand armed men among the protesters, they are no longer peaceful protests."

Syrian authorities also claim over 2,000 troops have been killed since uprisings began in mid-March. But, Levesque says, authorities have provided a list of names of those killed

Qatar builds Sunni intervention force of Libyan, Iraqi terrorists against Assad

When they saw the Syrian massacre continuing unabated this month, the Qatari and Saudi rulers approved a crash program for the Qatari chief of staff Maj.-Gen Hamas Ali al-Attiya to weld this mobile intervention Sunni Muslim force out of al Qaeda linked-operatives for rapid deployment on the Turkish-Syrian border.
A force of 2,500 has been recruited up until now, our sources report. The hard core is made up of 1,000 members of the Islamic Fighting Group in Libya-IFGL, which fought Qaddafi, and 1,000 operatives of the Ansar al-Sunna, the Iraqi Islamists which carried out 15 coordinated bomb attacks in Baghdad last Thursday killing 72 people and injuring 200.
Qatar has just had them airlifted from Libya and Iraq to the southern Turkish town of Antakya (Antioch) in the border province of Hatay.


A year has gone by since the Arab Revolt first broke out in December 2010. Yet this is the first time a Sunni Muslim power has established an intervention force - one moreover which is composed almost entirely of fighting men drawn from the ranks of al Qaeda and its extremist Islamist affiliates and allies.
The new Sunni force, funded by the Persian Gulf oil states, is silently backed by the US and NATO members, with Turkey in the forefront of this support group.

http://www.debka.com/article/21602/

So are the numbers of dead civilians correct?, are there 17,000 armed peaceful protestors, and why are opposition fighters being brought in from Libya?, and why am I not surprised the US are lurking in the background.

From the UN:

“I am not in a position to confirm those reports, but the prospect of such an attack is extremely alarming,” she said after briefing Security Council members in a closed-door session on the latest developments in Syria.

Ms. Pillay’s office (OHCHR) has received reports that hundreds of tanks and weapons have been deployed over the past few days, dozens of checkpoints have been set up and numerous trenches have been dug.

While OHCHR is unable to verify those reports because it has not been allowed access, it has seen video footage showing corpses on the streets, buildings riddled with bullets and tanks in residential streets.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=40708&Cr=syria

Jonny7

Well there's little or no foreign media in the country so these are really the best estimates. I haven't checked the number recently but believe it includes dead on the Syrian military side as well (as well as defected units). Even with the Arab League observers there the violence continues pretty much unabated. For the conspiracy theorists 2 "Islamist" bombs have gone off as soon as the observers arrive under extremely suspicious circumstances.

The Libyan rebels are (obviously) in strong support of the Syrian opposition, so I wouldn't be surprised if they have or will try to send support in some form.

There is the possibility that Turkish elements could be providing support to some of the opposition as well, but again, very slight.

RT is Russia Today, it is Russian propaganda sanctioned by Putin.

Debak is a hawkish Israeli news which draws heavily on unidentified sources.

There is little the outside world can really do about the Syrian situation without potentially making it worse. Assad knows this and continues to violently oppress.

Jaafa

Jonny7 wrote: »

Well there's little or no foreign media in the country so these are really the best estimates. I haven't checked the number recently but believe it includes dead on the Syrian military side as well (as well as defected units). Even with the Arab League observers there the violence continues pretty much unabated. For the conspiracy theorists 2 "Islamist" bombs have gone off as soon as the observers arrive under extremely suspicious circumstances.

The Libyan rebels are (obviously) in strong support of the Syrian opposition, so I wouldn't be surprised if they have or will try to send support in some form.

There is the possibility that Turkish elements could be providing support to some of the opposition as well, but again, very slight.

RT is Russia Today, it is Russian propaganda sanctioned by Putin.

Debak is a hawkish Israeli news which draws heavily on unidentified sources.

There is little the outside world can really do about the Syrian situation without potentially making it worse. Assad knows this and continues to violently oppress.

They have sent several hundred members, confirmed by them. I wouldn't be surprised if it was them behind the bomb attacks.

studiorat

Jaafa wrote: »

They have sent several hundred members, confirmed by them. I wouldn't be surprised if it was them behind the bomb attacks.

Why would that be then?

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

They have sent several hundred members, confirmed by them. I wouldn't be surprised if it was them behind the bomb attacks.

Highly unlikely. The bombing strongly supports the Syrian government's position, who have been trying to claim that armed terrorist gangs are behind the unrest in the country. Assad almost immediately blamed Al Qaeda (or associates) - who have no history of violence within the country.

Libyan rebels obviously wouldn't support Assad in this way, they have no history of using this tactic before, and they certainly wouldn't time it to happen just as the Arab League observers arrived (whom support the Libyan rebels).

enno99

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3flBnf4Lb4

worth a look seems all these dead people are alive

Jonny7

enno99 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3flBnf4Lb4

worth a look seems all these dead people are alive

Syrian state propaganda.

studiorat

Jonny7 wrote: »

Syrian state propaganda.

does that count as "mainstream" or not?

Jaafa

The UN says 5000 dead in Syria. Where does the UN get these figures? From 'activists'. Who are these 'activists'? This group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Observatory_For_Human_Rights.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. They are the ones who pass on the information of these casualties as well as defections and other information. They claim to have

extensive contacts throughout Syria, often informing major news outlets of goings-on in the country's uprising

As you can see here http://blogs.aljazeera.net/liveblog/Syrian%20Observatory%20for%20Human%20Rights IF a source is given for these casualties it is almost always The SOHR, or can be sourced back to the SOHR.

But who are they? Well this is the interesting bit. They are a UK BASED group who suddenly sprung up during the crisis in Syria. They receive their funding from a US non-profit (National Endowment for Democracy) who , surprise surprise, is funded by the US CONGRESS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy

This all ties in with the fact that earlier this year, the US was revealed to be funding opposition groups and media in Syria since 2005. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-secretly-backed-syrian-opposition-groups-cables-released-by-wikileaks-show/2011/04/14/AF1p9hwD_story.html

Of course this is probably all a coincidence seeing as the US never ever uses the media to lie to the public when attempting regime change, like in
Iraq 2003, WMD etc.
Venezuela 2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Venezuelan_coup_d'%C3%A9tat_attempt#Allegations_of_U.S._involvement,
Iraq 1990 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_(testimony),
gulf of tonkin etc etc.

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

The UN says 5000 dead in Syria. Where does the UN get these figures? From 'activists'. Who are these 'activists'? This group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Observatory_For_Human_Rights.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. They are the ones who pass on the information of these casualties as well as defections and other information. They claim to have

As you can see here http://blogs.aljazeera.net/liveblog/Syrian%20Observatory%20for%20Human%20Rights IF a source is given for these casualties it is almost always The SOHR, or can be sourced back to the SOHR.

But who are they? Well this is the interesting bit. They are a UK BASED group who suddenly sprung up during the crisis in Syria. They receive their funding from a US non-profit (National Endowment for Democracy) who , surprise surprise, is funded by the US CONGRESS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy

This all ties in with the fact that earlier this year, the US was revealed to be funding opposition groups and media in Syria since 2005. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-secretly-backed-syrian-opposition-groups-cables-released-by-wikileaks-show/2011/04/14/AF1p9hwD_story.html

Of course this is probably all a coincidence seeing as the US never ever uses the media to lie to the public when attempting regime change, like in
Iraq 2003, WMD etc.
Venezuela 2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Venezuelan_coup_d'%C3%A9tat_attempt#Allegations_of_U.S._involvement,
Iraq 1990 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_(testimony),
gulf of tonkin etc etc.

From wikipedia
Other estimates range from 3,416 to 6,874. Except for the U.N. claim, which does not count security forces, all tolls include both civilians, defectors and security forces:
Source Casualties Time period
Human Rights Watch 5,000 killed[36] 15 March – 12 November 2011
Syrian Observatory for Human Rights 4,604 killed[37][38] 15 March – 11 December 2011
Syrian National Council 5,000 killed[262] 15 March – 12 December 2011
Syrian government 3,416 killed[263] 15 March – 22 December 2011
Local Coordination Committees 5,862 killed[264] 15 March 2011 – 1 January 2012
Avaaz 6,874 killed[43] 15 March 2011 – 4 January 2012
United Nations 5,400 killed[44][45] 15 March – 9 January 2011

Foreign media is almost entirely barred from the country, the Syrian government is untrustworthy, therefore the "media" has no alternative but to use the figures given by the opposition/human rights groups. The figure of 5,000 correlates with the above as a median.

I love how posters here go from challenging something (e.g. the figures) to suddenly implicating the US in the whole thing. Clearly not suspicion and agenda based reasoning.

Jaafa

Human Rights Watch 5,000 killed[36] 15 March – 12 November 2011 Are they even in Syria anymore?If not you can assume they too are getting these numbers from the SOHR

Syrian Observatory for Human Rights 4,604 killed[37][38] 15 March – 11 December 2011

Syrian National Council 5,000 killed[262] 15 March – 12 December 2011 Gets its figures from the SOHR.

Syrian government3,416 killed[263] 15 March – 22 December 2011

Local Coordination Committees 5,862 killed[264] 15 March 2011 – 1 January 2012 Are the sources for the SOHR

Avaaz 6,874 killed[43] 15 March 2011 – 4 January 2012 Gets its figures from the SOHR

United Nations 5,400 killed[44][45] 15 March – 9 January 2011 As mentioned gets it's figures from the SOHR

If you can provide links for where these organisations are getting their numbers from I'd be grateful.

Brown Bomber

good reasons to not let in foriegn "journalists"
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3218415.htm
http://electronicintifada.net/blog/ali-abunimah/how-cnn-helped-spread-hoax-about-syrian-babies-dying-incubators

Jonny7

Why are you doubting the above figures?

Here's a profile of the Syrian observatory for Human Rights
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15896636

"It was started in May 2006 by a businessman, Rami Abdul Rahman, in an effort to raise awareness of human rights and freedom of speech in a country where those who spoke out frequently found themselves arrested.

The group of mainly professionals, many of them lawyers, monitored changes to the law and the judicial system, and worked to highlight cases of human rights abuses to international organisations such as Amnesty International."


If you personally choose not to trust them, that's fine.

I don't know how you've made the jump from that - to implicating the US in all this?

Jaafa

Jonny7 wrote: »

Why are you doubting the above figures?

Here's a profile of the Syrian observatory for Human Rights
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15896636

"It was started in May 2006 by a businessman, Rami Abdul Rahman, in an effort to raise awareness of human rights and freedom of speech in a country where those who spoke out frequently found themselves arrested.

The group of mainly professionals, many of them lawyers, monitored changes to the law and the judicial system, and worked to highlight cases of human rights abuses to international organisations such as Amnesty International."


If you personally choose not to trust them, that's fine.

I don't know how you've made the jump from that - to implicating the US in all this?

Why do I doubt them? How about you look at BB's link above, about the fake story of the dead babies (strikingly similar to the same story from Kuwait all those years ago)

Given that the two CNN reports and the Syrian Observatory report are all dated 7 August, what seems like a likely sequence is that the Syrian Observatory fed this unverified report to CNN Arabic, which then published it.

The Syrian Observatory then may have put the report on its website citing CNN Arabic as the source, giving it the appearance of added credibility. I wasn’t able to find an earlier report of the alleged incident on the Syrian Observatory website.

As for them being set up in 2006,well that fits in with the other link I provided from the washington post which states that funding for such 'pro democracy' groups began in 2005.

Some more evidence for you against these so called human rights NGO's.

the corporate-owned Western media exclusively relies on “activists inside and outside the country,” the London-based “Syrian Human Rights Monitoring Centre” which apparently has no web presence, the Damascus Center for Human Rights which boasts memberships with the National Endowment for Democracy and Tides Foundation-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, funded by the European Union, the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Open Society Institute, the Sigrid Rausing Trust, and Humanity United.

http://www.sovereignindependent.com/?p=32242

These groups funding undoubtedly has to be called into question.

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

Why do I doubt them? How about you look at BB's link above, about the fake story of the dead babies (strikingly similar to the same story from Kuwait all those years ago)

Your reasoning is based purely on suspicion. The above is an unrelated, unconnected situation.

As for them being set up in 2006,well that fits in with the other link I provided from the washington post which states that funding for such 'pro democracy' groups began in 2005.

Some more evidence for you against these so called human rights NGO's.
http://www.sovereignindependent.com/?p=32242

These groups funding undoubtedly has to be called into question.

Sovereignindependent is an agenda conspiracy theory site.

Human rights NGO's are not popular, to put it mildly, with nasty regimes, hence have to often receive their support from abroad.

In this case what you'd done is..

"UK support, therefore conspiracy".

Jaafa

The above is an unrelated, unconnected situation.

How the hell is it unrelated? It's completely related. Did you even read the article? The SOHR KNOWINGLY LIED and then pass on this lie to other news organisations, and then used those news organisations as evidence to back up their own claim!

I'm sorry but if you can't accept that as relevant then I'm done talking here.

UK support, therefore conspiracy

Wow you aren't even trying anymore are you? Are you capable of following a simply argument? Nowhere did I saw the UK supports. I said the US congress supports.

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

How the hell is it unrelated?

Woah relax there. Read what you wrote again.
Why do I doubt them? How about you look at BB's link above, about the fake story of the dead babies (strikingly similar to the same story from Kuwait all those years ago)

I didn't look at BB links I was replying to that part of your post (the infamous incubator story from Kuwait)

Wow you aren't even trying anymore are you? Are you capable of following a simply argument? Nowhere did I saw the UK supports. I said the US congress supports.

In conflict, propaganda exits on both sides therefore I have zero doubt of discrepancies in the reports from Syria, both sides are easily capable of propaganda.

The media report from both Assad's regime and organisations like SOHR. The UN has decided to trust SOHR rather than the Syrian regime for obvious reasons.

If highlighting discrepancies and tying similarities to previous, decades old conflicts is the crux of your theory - thats a bit weak in fairness.

Jaafa

Jonny7 wrote: »

Woah relax there. Read what you wrote again.
Why do I doubt them? How about you look at BB's link above, about the fake story of the dead babies (strikingly similar to the same story from Kuwait all those years ago)

I didn't look at BB links I was replying to that part of your post (the infamous incubator story from Kuwait)



In conflict, propaganda exits on both sides therefore I have zero doubt of discrepancies in the reports from Syria, both sides are easily capable of propaganda.

The media report from both Assad's regime and organisations like SOHR. The UN has decided to trust SOHR rather than the Syrian regime for obvious reasons.

If highlighting discrepancies and tying similarities to previous, decades old conflicts is the crux of your theory - thats a bit weak in fairness.

By focusing on my comparison to Iraq, which was just a sidenote really, you've missed the main point quite conveniently.

The SOHR is funded by the US, the US is know to actively fund other such 'pro-democracy' groups in Syria since 2005, as such they will undoubtedly have extreme biases.

It's been shown to lie before on very serious issues, such as the baby and then feed these lies to the mainstream media.

Can you honestly say taking all this into account that the SOHR is a trustworthy source?

If the answer is no, do you not think it is dangerous for almost every major media group and the UN to trust them and use them as their main source of information?

Lastly does this situation not bear any resemblance to the media lies and direct manipulation of the media, before the Iraq war? (to use the latest example)

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

The SOHR is funded by the US, the US is know to actively fund other such 'pro-democracy' groups in Syria since 2005, as such they will undoubtedly have extreme biases.

Have extreme biases against what?

It's been shown to lie before on very serious issues, such as the baby and then feed these lies to the mainstream media.

"Such as the baby".. explain which incident and how the US have created the lie and fed it to the media. The Kuwait incident was a woman testifying, they had no way of doubting her credibility and the media reported the story.

Can you honestly say taking all this into account that the SOHR is a trustworthy source?

You aren't taking into account their testimonies, their videos, their records, their members, a huge myriad of factors - you are only focusing on any discrepancies (which are unavoidable in war) and applying that.

If the answer is no, do you not think it is dangerous for almost every major media group and the UN to trust them and use them as their main source of information?

The media groups are reporting. I am not sure you grasp this concept.

If Assad stands up and makes a speech - it gets reported, even if its total lies and garbage. Assad himself doesn't "control" the world media.

Likewise if the UN high commissioner deems the information from sources such as SOHR as credible and extends that information in a speech. The media reports it.

Lastly does this situation not bear any resemblance to the media lies and direct manipulation of the media, before the Iraq war? (to use the latest example)

The Bush administration took an internal decision to falsify and exaggerate intelligence, this was reported by the media. It was also subsequently dissected and analysed by the media in articles, opinion pieces, debates, discussion shows.

Every government, organisation, movement, etc has some form of credibility and carries certain levels of weight.

At the moment Assad has almost zero credibility. The SOHR, on the other hand has significant credibility.

If you want to solely doubt SOHR figures then that is hardly a CT topic

If you think the figures are entirely false as part of a plot or theory, then please flesh out the details, reasoning, etc.

stuar

Western media lie about Syria – eyewitness reports

On March 29, I saw a rally in Hama to support the president – indeed, many thousands of men and women, with their children, and entire families went out. The streets were flooded with people. It was quite a shock to see Al-Jazeera presenting rallies in support of the president as if they were protests against him. It was just as surprising to see the Israeli websites post photos and videos of supporters' rallies with comments saying those were opponents of the regime. There you have people holding portraits of Bashar al-Assad and flags, and we’re told that these people are against him.

RT: The media reports mass anti-government rallies.

AK: There’s a powerful misinformation swell going on. On April 1, the media reported a large anti-governmental rally in Damascus. I was in Damascus on that day. This rally never happened – I didn’t see it, and neither did the locals.
On April 16, Reuters news agency wrote that 50,000 opponents of the regime took to the streets of Damascus, and that they had been dispersed with tear gas and batons. Damascus’ residents realize that such a rally could not take place in the city unnoticed. How many policemen would it take to disperse it? And how come nobody saw it except Reuters? Five hundred people in the streets of Damascus are a large crowd. Reuters broadcast their material around the world, including Russia. One source lies, and then this lie is like a snowball rolling downhill creating a fake reality, and picking up rumor and speculation.

http://rt.com/news/syria-lies-interview/



Coventry - an unlikely home to prominent Syria activist

"Are there clashes? How did he die? Ah, he was shot," said Rami Abdulrahman into a phone, the talk of gunfire and death incongruous with his two bedroom terraced home in Coventry, from where he runs the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
When he isn't fielding calls from international media, Abdulrahman is a few minutes down the road at his clothes shop, which he runs with his wife.
Cited by virtually every major news outlet since an uprising against the iron rule of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad began in March, the observatory has been a key source of news on the events in Syria.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/12/08/uk-britain-syria-idUKTRE7B71XG20111208

Jonny7

stuar wrote: »

Western media lie about Syria – eyewitness reports

http://rt.com/news/syria-lies-interview/

Russian Today - state media, run by the Kremlin.

Coventry - an unlikely home to prominent Syria activist

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/12/08/uk-britain-syria-idUKTRE7B71XG20111208

Where is the lie in this piece?

stuar

Jonny7 wrote: »

Russian Today - state media, run by the Kremlin.

SOHR......Run from 2 bedroom house in Coventry and sometimes from clothes shop just down the road.

Jonny7 wrote: »

Where is the lie in this piece?

It's true, just I wouldn't want a butcher to fix my car.

Jonny7

stuar wrote: »

SOHR......Run from 2 bedroom house in Coventry and sometimes from clothes shop just down the road.
It's true, just I wouldn't want a butcher to fix my car.

You mentioned media lies, then post a link Press TV, on top of which your initial post contains a story from Russia Today - not good examples

SOHR operates covertly because members face capture and interrogation. Out of around 200 members, about 6 so far have been killed and several captured.

What's the conspiracy theory again?

stuar

Jonny7 wrote: »

You mentioned media lies, then post a link Press TV, on top of which your initial post contains a story from Russia Today - not good examples

SOHR operates covertly because members face capture and interrogation. Out of around 200 members, about 6 so far have been killed and several captured.

What's the conspiracy theory again?

The conspiracy theory is, actually it says it on the tin, media lies concerning the amount of people killed and who's killing them, seems to me it's a pack of US/UK/Israeli backed mercenaries doing most the killing and the world media blaming Goverment troops.
I'm not saying the government aren't killing people but can we blindly watch CNN/BBC/SKY etc and not question it's legitimacy as SOHR seem to be the one and only source the pick their "news" from, using years old footage from elsewhere and lying, all communicated by a Sunni Muslim in Coventry with a vendetta.
17,000 armed (by US/UK/Israel and whoever else) mercenaries from outside Syria is not what I call a popular Uprising!

In the US/UK/Israel these "resistance" fighters would be called terrorists and would be slaughtered, yet because Syria don't tow the line/ aren't lapdogs for said nations a smear campaign is put in place, I notice the popular uprising in Bahrain doesn't get much air time nor exaggerations same as Syria, nor does Saudi Arabian capital punishment as much as Iranian or US.

I'll get back to this later and show the hypocrisy between "western media" concerning "good brutal regimes" and "bad brutal regimes".
RT and Press TV are a balance to the propaganda spewed left right and centre here in "the west"

Jonny7

stuar wrote: »

The conspiracy theory is, actually it says it on the tin, media lies concerning the amount of people killed and who's killing them, seems to me it's a pack of US/UK/Israeli backed mercenaries doing most the killing and the world media blaming Goverment troops.

Yup, knew this was coming, never fails.

Jaafa

Just on this video, 3:15 on is particularly interesting if true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3flBnf4Lb4

Whether you believe this or not really isn't what I want to point out. The fact is the SOHR and others make these claims of the dead, based on little other than word of mouth and shaky, unverifiable and sometimes completely false videos on youtube.

This video shows it is equal easy to make the counter claim, in an attempt to disprove the figures, using the very same 'evidences'. i.e word of mouth from people who could be lying and some videos. Why is one side more believable than the other?

Because of the shady and sometimes brutal history of the Syrian government? Granted that's true, but what about the equally shady and brutal history of western governments getting involved in situations like this time and time again?

The Syrian government is known to torture and kill and illegal hold people in prison. But so is the US.
The Syrian government is known to violently put down revolts in the past. But the US is known for starting them.
If you wish to bring up one you cannot ignore the other.

To me neither side is trustworthy. One says 6000 dead all killed by the goverment, the other says far less all killed by terrorists.

Is it so hard to think the truth more than likely lies in the middle?

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

Just on this video, 3:15 on is particularly interesting if true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3flBnf4Lb4

Whether you believe this or not really isn't what I want to point out. The fact is the SOHR and others make these claims of the dead, based on little other than word of mouth and shaky, unverifiable and sometimes completely false videos on youtube.

This video shows it is equal easy to make the counter claim, in an attempt to disprove the figures, using the very same 'evidences'. i.e word of mouth from people who could be lying and some videos. Why is one side more believable than the other?

Because of the shady and sometimes brutal history of the Syrian government? Granted that's true, but what about the equally shady and brutal history of western governments getting involved in situations like this time and time again?

The Syrian government is known to torture and kill and illegal hold people in prison. But so is the US.
The Syrian government is known to violently put down revolts in the past. But the US is known for starting them.
If you wish to bring up one you cannot ignore the other.

To me neither side is trustworthy. One says 6000 dead all killed by the goverment, the other says far less all killed by terrorists.

Is it so hard to think the truth more than likely lies in the middle?

So if the SOHR was Swedish backed you wouldn't ask any questions?

What about the Holocaust? must the truth lie somewhere say.. in the middle (you know to average it out)?

Jaafa

So if the SOHR was Swedish backed you wouldn't ask any questions?

I would still be suspicious but less so than the US funding them.

What about the Holocaust? must the truth lie somewhere say.. in the middle (you know to average it out)?

That is a totally ridiculous analogy and you have lost any remaining credibility for making it. The holocaust happened 70 years ago and is one of the most extensively documented events in human history. There is no comparison whatsoever to ongoing events in a closed off country.

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

That is a totally ridiculous analogy and you have lost any remaining credibility for making it. The holocaust happened 70 years ago and is one of the most extensively documented events in human history. There is no comparison whatsoever to ongoing events in a closed off country.

What are you talking about? people use the same technique and logic you just described to challenge holocaust figures. Any figures throughout history in fact.

The UN head has accepted figures from a UK based organisation that has around 200 Syrian members in the subject country Syria

The Syrian government is known to torture and kill and illegal hold people in prison. But so is the US.
The Syrian government is known to violently put down revolts in the past. But the US is known for starting them.
If you wish to bring up one you cannot ignore the other.

Agreed, but what has this got to do with the UN accepting the figures?

What is the conspiracy exactly? if you have one, what evidence do you have?

jackiebaron

Jonny7 wrote: »

So if the SOHR was Swedish backed you wouldn't ask any questions?

What about the Holocaust? must the truth lie somewhere say.. in the middle (you know to average it out)?

time out

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

time out

from what? deathtoll revisionism is commonplace - there's been holocaust threads here before. I don't see the conspiracy in this thread.

stuar

The Syrian Observatory: The Inside Story

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has become the most quoted, and most disputed, primary source of casualty figures in Syria. Al-Akhbar investigates the political disputes, personal gain and prejudice, and media role behind a recent row over its ownership.
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/syrian-observatory-inside-story

A huge poster of President Bashar Assad hangs over government supporters during a pro-regime rally in Damascus on 26 January 2012 . (Photo: AFP - Louai Beshara)


I'm sure this picture will turn up somewhere as an anti Assad rally

Jaafa

The plot thickens. Bloody mess of a situation, you just can't trust anyone.

The gulf countries wish for regime change completely out in the open nowhttp://english.al-akhbar.com/content/saudi-recognize-fund-snc-russia-rejects-syria-resolution.

Absolutely ridiculous decision for them to not only back, but also fund the SNC when it's clear they do not represent the majority, the hypocrisy of them alleging Iran's involvement in Bahrain (when in that case it was a clear majority) and now they do this.

Jonny7

I am curious, whats the conspiracy theory here lads?

Sounds like nothing more than casualty discrepancies between different parties to me. Unless someone wants to go out on a limb and actually declare something..

stuar

Jonny7 wrote: »

I am curious, whats the conspiracy theory here lads?

Sounds like nothing more than casualty discrepancies between different parties to me. Unless someone wants to go out on a limb and actually declare something..

If you can't follow the evolution of the thread thats your problem, maybe read it again and put 2+2 together, if your still none the wiser, better to avoid the thread or your head could hurt.
Oh and read the title and it may help.

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

I am curious, whats the conspiracy theory here lads?

Sounds like nothing more than casualty discrepancies between different parties to me. Unless someone wants to go out on a limb and actually declare something..

I declare that you won't even once refer to the Syrian national army by their proper title and refer to them only as "Assad's forces" /"Assad loyalists" / "Assad's enforcers" etc....

I declare that you'll cheer on as Wahabbi terrorists, armed from Riyadh by Prince Bandar or Turki terrorise Syrians.

I declare that this is more about isolating Iran and a war on crushing any Shia opposition to Saudi-Zionist-US hegemony.

I declare that 99% of all Western coverage will be one-sided.

I declare that CIA-Mossad backed Wahabbi terrorists will make cameraphone videos of them massacring Syrians but labelled as "Assad massacring civilians", which the media will report as fact and then people here will then parrot as fact.

Jonny7

stuar wrote: »

If you can't follow the evolution of the thread thats your problem, maybe read it again and put 2+2 together, if your still none the wiser, better to avoid the thread or your head could hurt.
Oh and read the title and it may help.

Nope I just see number discrepancies just like Iraq - e.g. the Lancet report

What is the actual conspiracy theory here?

1. The SOHR are exaggerating figures?

2. Something else, if so, what?

Jonny7

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I declare that you won't even once refer to the Syrian national army by their proper title and refer to them only as "Assad's forces" /"Assad loyalists" / "Assad's enforcers" etc....

I declare that you'll cheer on as Wahabbi terrorists, armed from Riyadh by Prince Bandar or Turki terrorise Syrians.

I declare that this is more about isolating Iran and a war on crushing any Shia opposition to Saudi-Zionist-US hegemony.

I declare that 99% of all Western coverage will be one-sided.

I declare that CIA-Mossad backed Wahabbi terrorists will make cameraphone videos of them massacring Syrians but labelled as "Assad massacring civilians", which the media will report as fact and then people here will then parrot as fact.

Ah, so you are backing Assad's line that the people aren't rising up, its just "armed terrorists"?

Quelle surprise!

Jaafa

I would argue that its no longer a conspiracy, now that SOHR has been to shown to be be backed by the US and be unreliable as a source.

Turkey has been shown to back the SNC and FSA,providing them with a safe heaven.

And the gulf states now shown to back, fund and arm the FSA and SNC, in an attempt to overthrow Assad, tantamount to an act of war IMO.

It's all out in the open now, so I guess your right no conspiracy here....then again does a conspiracy have to be a secret?

Jonny7

These figures are accepted as they are the most credible available. Foreign media are banned, and internal groups have to be supported from abroad.

The SNC and FSA are as a result of Assad's actions. If any other nations want to support them financially/militarily/etc they can run that risk themselves.

I agree though, no conspiracy theory.

Jaafa

Jonny7 wrote: »

These figures are accepted as they are the most credible available. Foreign media are banned, and internal groups have to be supported from abroad.

The SNC and FSA are as a result of Assad's actions. If any other nations want to support them financially/militarily/etc they can run that risk themselves.

I agree though, no conspiracy theory.

And Al Qaeda are a result of the US actions does that make their cause legitimate our worthy?

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

And Al Qaeda are a result of the US actions does that make their cause legitimate our worthy?

Does Jewish occupation justify suicide bombs?

Did Nazi occupation justify the French resistance?

Did US occupation of Iraq justify Sunni resistance? yet why did those Sunni's join the US forces to fight against Al Qaeda?

Obviously there are many different levels, and just like war, there are limits.

The old IRA very different from the "modern" IRA. If any leadership, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi, Syria, etc, wants to machinegun their own civilians - they should expect eventual non-peaceful resistance.

It ain't rocket science.

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

Ah, so you are backing Assad's line that the people aren't rising up, its just "armed terrorists"?

Quelle surprise!

Strawman, I never said that it's "just armed terrorists". The International Crisis Group carried out an investigation into the Libyan protests and conluded the Libyan peaceful protests were infiltrated and violent. I see no reason to suspect that Syria is any different.

At the same time, much Western media coverage has from
the outset presented a very one-sided view of the logic of
events, portraying the protest movement as entirely peaceful
and repeatedly suggesting that the regime’s security
forces were unaccountably massacring unarmed demonstrators
who presented no real security challenge.21 This
version would appear to ignore evidence that the protest
movement exhibited a violent aspect from very early on.
While there is no doubt that many and quite probably a
large majority of the people mobilised in the early demonstrations
were indeed intent on demonstrating peacefully,
there is also evidence that, as the regime claimed,
the demonstrations were infiltrated by violent elements.22
Likewise, there are grounds for questioning the more sensational
reports that the regime was using its air force to slaughter demonstrators, let alone engaging in anything
remotely warranting use of the term “genocide”.23
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/Middle%20East%20North%20Africa/North%20Africa/107%20-%20Popular%20Protest%20in%20North%20Africa%20and%20the%20Middle%20East%20V%20-%20Making%20Sense%20of%20Libya.pdf

When will you accept that all the propaganda that you parroted has now been discredited?

Jaafa

Jonny7 wrote: »

Does Jewish occupation justify suicide bombs?

Did Nazi occupation justify the French resistance?

Did US occupation of Iraq justify Sunni resistance? yet why did those Sunni's join the US forces to fight against Al Qaeda?

Obviously there are many different levels, and just like war, there are limits.

The old IRA very different from the "modern" IRA. If any leadership, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi, Syria, etc, wants to machinegun their own civilians - they should expect eventual non-peaceful resistance.

It ain't rocket science.

I get your point, my opinion is that Assad is the lesser of two evil's. That's all.

Jonny7

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Strawman, I never said that it's "just armed terrorists". The International Crisis Group carried out an investigation into the Libyan protests and conluded the Libyan peaceful protests were infiltrated and violent. I see no reason to suspect that Syria is any different.

When will you accept that all the propaganda that you parroted has now been discredited?

You say strawman and then talk about another conflict, are you for real?

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

You say strawman and then talk about another conflict, are you for real?

Do you deny that the protests in Libya were both infiltrated and violent? If so, what proof do you have?

Jonny7

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Do you deny that the protests in Libya were both infiltrated and violent? If so, what proof do you have?

I think you are in the wrong thread.. this is Syria.

Jaafa

I find it odd that people have made little of the once hailed observer mission to Syria, perhaps because it confirms what many here have suspected. That yes the government of Syria is killing people,

to the excessive use of force by Syrian government forces in response to protests,

On being assigned to their zones and starting work, the observers witnessed acts of violence perpetrated by government forces and an exchange of gunfire with armed elements in Homs and Hama.

but those people are very often the armed gangs it has always claimed have been operating in syria, and the attacks of the government forces are often a response to attacks by others.

In Homs and Dera‘a, the mission observed armed groups committing acts of violence against government forces, resulting in death and injury among their ranks. In certain situations, government forces responded to attacks against their personnel with force. The observers noted that some of the armed groups were using flares and armor-piercing projectiles.”

as well as clear acts of terrorism by these groups

“In Homs, Idlib and Hama, the observer mission witnessed acts of violence being committed against government forces and civilians that resulted in several deaths and injuries. Examples of those acts include the bombing of a civilian bus, killing eight persons and injuring others, including women and children, and the bombing of a train carrying diesel oil. In another incident in Homs, a police bus was blown up, killing two police officers. A fuel pipeline and some small bridges were also bombed.”

The medias role is also condemned:

“Since it began its work, the mission has been the target of a vicious media campaign…that increased in intensity after the observers’ deployment. Some media outlets have published unfounded statements, which they attributed to the head of the mission. They have also grossly exaggerated events,"

The mission noted that many parties falsely reported that explosions or violence had occurred in several locations. When the observers went to those locations, they found that those reports were unfounded. The mission also noted that, according to its teams in the field, the media exaggerated the nature of the incidents and the number of persons killed in incidents and protests in certain towns.”

And the claims of lack of access are unfounded:

“The Government had accredited 147 Arab and foreign media organizations. Some 112 of those organizations entered Syrian territory, joining the 90 other accredited organizations operating in Syria through their full-time correspondents.”

I should note that I was in Syria doing research for some articles during the mission’s investigations and that I am not on the list. While my own visa was arranged through a connected non-Syrian friend, I know of other writers who entered the country without incident. I spent my time there freely interviewing many opposition groups and individuals and was at no time accompanied by government minders – or monitored, to the best of my knowledge.

One prominent case of media lies

was Gilles Jacqiuer, the France 2 Channel cameraman who was killed during a visit to a pro-regime neighborhood in Homs. The French government has loudly sought to implicate the Syrian government in this killing, but the mission says that “mission reports from Homs indicate that the French journalist was killed by opposition mortar shells.”

And some more lies pertaining to the credibilty of the observer mission

The report also refers to controversial statements made by several monitors who abandoned their positions and publicly criticized the mission afterward. Probably the most memorable of these is Algerian Anwar Malek who famously claimed on Al Jazeera: "What I saw was a humanitarian disaster...The regime is not just committing one war crime, but a series of crimes against its people. The snipers are everywhere, shooting at civilians. People are being kidnapped. Prisoners are being tortured and none were released."
The Arab League released a terse statement in response, saying Malek’s allegation “does not relate to the truth in any way," and claiming instead, that "since he was assigned to the Homs team, Malek did not leave the hotel for six days and did not go out with the rest of the team into the field giving the excuse that he was sick."

And before anyone claims the mission is not trustworthy, let me remind you it has been sent by the very countries that have supported and imposed sanctions against Syria, and the same countries that supported the UNSC resolution on Syria. It seems some of these countries changed their minds and attempted to sabotage the mission. Namely Saudi, who openly back and arm the opposition now.

To claim they have been fooled by the regime is also false, while the mission notes the Syria forces were on their seeming 'good behavour' during the mission

As a result of the mission’s insistence on a complete end to violence and the withdrawal of army vehicles and equipment, this problem has receded

They also note

that the Syrian regime “strived to help it succeed in its task and remove any barriers that might stand in its way. The government also facilitated meetings with all parties. No restrictions were placed on the movement of the mission and its ability to interview Syrian citizens, both those who opposed the government and those loyal to it.”

In conclusion:

This, for the first time, introduces the notion that the Syrian government may not be entirely responsible for the civilian casualty numbers flaunted in media reports. And it is an important point – regular soldiers reportedly account for approximately 2,000 deaths in the country since March 2011.

There loads more in the full article and the report itself here http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/foolishly-ignoring-arab-league-report-syria and here http://www.innercitypress.com/LASomSyria.pdf

Duiske

US ‘disgusted’ with Syria peace plan veto.

Before declaring their disgust at the use of the UN veto system, perhaps the US might consider their own abhorant use of the veto. Funnily enough, the United States very first use of the veto was when they vetoed a 1972 resolution condemning Israel for killing hundreds of people in Syria and Lebanon in air raids.

Full list of Resolutions Vetoed by the US

You may notice a pattern in there.

Jonny7

Duiske wrote: »

US ‘disgusted’ with Syria peace plan veto.

Before declaring their disgust at the use of the UN veto system, perhaps the US might consider their own abhorant use of the veto. Funnily enough, the United States very first use of the veto was when they vetoed a 1972 resolution condemning Israel for killing hundreds of people in Syria and Lebanon in air raids.

Full list of Resolutions Vetoed by the US

You may notice a pattern in there.

A clear obsession with US/Israel in here.

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

I find it odd that people have made little of the once hailed observer mission to Syria, perhaps because it confirms what many here have suspected. That yes the government of Syria is killing people,

The mission itself was been heavily criticised from the outset. Disorganised, fleeting visits, avoiding many areas, around two dozen members quit. It's been branded a farce, I wouldn't go that far myself, but it was far from professional.

The report itself, whilst addressing the situation in Syria, spends too much time on its own defense. The head of the mission has also been criticised.