Iran’s spate of large but mainly peaceful protests in November related to gas prices may have quieted down, but there has still been a lot of focus and debate about violent crackdowns, and the number of people killed.
Amnesty International has reported that 208 were killed in demonstrations, saying the toll might ultimately be higher. The Iranian judiciary declared these numbers “sheer lies,” saying the real toll is “far less.”
Iranian officials are admitting that they’ve killed some of the protesters, however, and on state TV were presenting them as “rioters” who were connected with unnamed hostile groups threatening sensitive sites.
They offered no real evidence to back a lot of this up, claiming some of the protesters had “semi-heavy weapons,” but offered the typical excuse offered by governments in the region when protesters turn up dead.
Still, precise figures are going to be difficult to come up with, and even more so with the attempts to inflate the number killed far beyond what anyone looking into it was actually alleging. President Trump, during his NATO talks, claimed Iran is “killing perhaps thousands and thousands of people right now as we speak,” ignoring both that the protest crackdowns happened over a week ago and that Amnesty’s serious work on documenting the numbers killed has floated around 100-200.
Iran may feel the difference between 208 and whatever lesser number they are offering is substantial, but there seems no reason to believe the thousands number Trump is offering, which is seemingly just a talking point to blow the situation out of proportion.
Protesters are being killed in Iran, Iraq, Bolivia, Chile & Lebanon, but not in Hong Kong. How about that, Trump?
China doesn’t need to kill anyone in Hong Kong. They hold the major resources and will starve them out like U.S. is doing.
Why does Iran have to produce evidence but we accept Amnesty International at their word? We accept U.S. govt statistics all of the time and don’t say, ‘where is the evidence’.
AI is a third party reporter,
while, Iran is involved and
therefore has reasons to hide the truth.
But to your point
ALL reporters should back their statements with evidence.
AI is hardly third party. It’s based and funded from Western sources.
But then if it was funded by eastern sources, you wouldn’t even get that.
There’s no evidence to suggest that.
So AI is a stooge gofer for the State Department?
From wikipedia:
Criticism of Amnesty International (AI) includes claims of selection bias,
as well as ideology and foreign policy bias against either non-Western
countries or Western-supported countries. Governments that have
criticized AI include those of Israel,[1][2]
the Democratic Republic of the Congo,[3]
China,[4]
Vietnam,[5]
Russia,[6]
Chile[7] and
the United States,[8]
which have complained about Amnesty International for what they assert
is one-sided reporting, or a failure to treat threats to security as a
mitigating factor. The actions of these governments—and of other
governments critical of Amnesty International—have been the subject of
human rights concerns voiced by Amnesty. The Catholic Church has also criticized Amnesty for its stance on abortion, particularly in Catholic-majority countries.[9]
Unless you can show a more independent source, you have nothing
Yes, AI is a stooge. Glad we agree. Wikipedia is also funded by Zionist sources.
Yet you offer no better alternative for independent reporting.
Everything is controlled by J-oos?
How infantile.
I have no obligation to offer any alternatives. Zionist does not equal Jews as there are Christian Zionists as well as Muslim and atheist Zionists. Anything else?