Latest UN Syria Report Compiled by Washington Think-Tanker, by Tony Cartalucci
- Petri, as much as I value his opinion, I don't think this should be on the page, which is a pure link collection. Let's stay NPOV. --CE 10:00, 16 August 2012 (EST)
- On that, I say we re-create the core research and include the role of Mrs. AbuZayd as a possibly crucial clue. As a side-note, maybe cite or nod to Tony, but just cite what he cited mostly... --Caustic Logic 18:07, 27 August 2012 (EST)
A link I don't think I'd seen, in case it adds any useful details on Syria's investigation: Syria: Armed Terrorist Groups committed Taldao, al-Shoumarieh Massacres
- Whoever hadn't seen that, it's old to us, an early SANA report that helped me realize what the Shomaliya family must actually meant. --Caustic Logic (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
New Blog: Taldou. Truth.
I've been working on this report to formalize our video findings for the 'Battle for the Houla Massacre." Not to be final word, but an organized interim summary others could understand, review, and challenge. (I think the report is about done, just waiting for feedback to see if others agree) Then, I decided they should have a space for it, and should be encouraged to use it. I see how comments at blogs simply attract way more activity, more casual involvement, than we've ever gotten waiting for people to register here. I haven't talked about this very much with others, but the site is up anyway, rudimentary form. Fishing for thoughts on how best to run that to reflect well on ACLOS, avoid redundancy, etc.
See also the resource there: ACLOS Research Guide (incomplete links)
Eliot Higgins Review
As added to the front page now,
- Challenge publicly issued, background laid out, December 12, 2014: Brown Moses on the Hook - main place to check for his review. Hoping for initial response by December 16. Also maybe at Twitter:
- provocative Tweet to Eliot Higgins "Brown Moses' flakiness and calls for "cynicism" were no match for our solving the Houla Massacre case."
I've heard you catch more flies with something than with something else. Just what doesn't matter, since we aren't talking about flies here. What helps secure a peer review from Mr. Higgins in light of what things are and what I just said? I can't help that we have the high ground on an issue he hasn't wanted to re-visit anyway, but do I come across as a bully he can use as an excuse to conveniently let Houla lie? Isn't there a way to convince him to just surrender early to the waves of history this once and conduct a dang cursory review and - presumably, since he's pretty good - confirm us - up to a point? I think it's important to try this and do it well, as a step in nailing this point down for the historical record and as a sorely lacking precedent for what seems to be the major truth of the Syrian massacre of 2011-present. (Also taking suggestion on other reachable researchers on the anti-Assad side that are worth pushing on the subject - "peer review" I think they call it. Supposed to be important. Being right but ignored doesn't seem to get you even in the Wikipedia article on a subject... --Caustic Logic (talk) 11:00, 13 December 2014 (UTC)