General Discussion

You cannot confirm what you cited earlier. And not trying only makes it even more difficult.

And you are not questioning Al Jazeera (did you ever?). You are quoting them verbatim without question. Nothing to be proud of.

You can call it what you want, but you attributed a certain string of numbers directly to ACLED. You still have no idea where this string of numbers came from except to say it came from analysis of data, without having a clue about what data you are talking about or what methodology was used in its analysis. When you are talking about two unknowns, there is nothing to conflate, and as gifted as I am, I wouldn't presume to possess sufficient talents to conflate two unknowns.

What I did, and I can only repeat it again, is definitively state that THERE WAS NO DATA YOU ATTRIBUTED TO ACLED ON THE ACLED WEB SITE! You've been trying to prove me wrong for hours, and instead of proof, all you end up doing is confirm what I stated: you can't find the data you attributed to ACLED anywhere on their web site.

I appreciate that, but seriously, there is no need for such persistent self-deprecation. I see no further purpose in beating this long dead horse.