If you read the document in your link, it ranks so low because it scores 0 in a number of areas because they don't have the data to generate a score.
It does? Well that's it settled then.
Come on, Syria doesn't even fall into a flawed democracy!
If you read the document in your link, it ranks so low because it scores 0 in a number of areas because they don't have the data to generate a score.
about as flawed as the uk.....
Yeah the total score is an average of the individual scores and as 3/5 of them are missing the total is much lower than it should be, Syria should be in the top 100 easy.
IMO they shouldn't provide fake listings if they don't have the data to create one as it's just bad/shoddy practice, they should just be honest and say "N/A insufficient data" or something.
they snoop on everyone , already , a lot....
Russian ambassador's murder is 'provocation aimed at undermining Syria peace process' – Putin.
How did he do that?
Change the record
Well in 70 years of "trying" nothing has improved in the Middle-east, that's enough evidence to simply steer clear until they wise up themselves.
Please show my defence of them.
You're the one who everything someone posts a criticism of assad attempts a pathetic deflection.
'But but look what America did'
Get it in to your skull that this isn't about saying someone else is bad too. This is about the fact that peaceful protests were oppressed and a giant crap storm arose. Those that are suffering are the innocents.
It really isn't, I explained why their evidence is not actual evidence but hearsay, and I gave a detailed explanation of why what they say makes no logical sense, then I drew the most likely conclusion. That's not bizarre it's rational, of course it could be wrong, but it's most likely correct.
I shall reiterate:
1: I explained why what they claim as their "evidence" is not actually evidence.
2: I gave a detailed explanation of why what they say makes absolutely no logical sense.
3: I then pointed out that it's unlikely what they say is true (I drew the most likely conclusion from the facts available, not opinion but analysis).
Again it's not a bizarre conclusion it's rational, of course it could well be wrong, but with the information currently available it's the most likely one.
2: It claims it happened in Aleppo. To put that in perspective, while all the fighting was going on in Aleppo between the rebels/loyalists neither side took out the city's power station or tried to cut the other off from it (because both having power was preferable to neither). Considering that level of planning/sense it seems ludicrous that the side controlling the majority of the city (the bigger target) would use chemical weapons on the smaller side thus opening themselves up to retaliatory action in kind.