Rothschild Proxies Destabilize Syria
January 1, 2012
Just as we saw in Libya, the terrorists are once again labeled as "opposition forces" by western media and defending yourself against a terrorist is considered a violation of "human rights."
by Branden Moore
Since the destabilization of Syria began roughly nine months ago, western media coverage has emphasized only the "peaceful"
protests against President Bashar al-Assad, and those who have fallen victim of his regime.
The sources of these assertions are either anonymous or tied to US and British money. There has been very little mention of the violence being carried out by opposition forces like the Free Syrian Army in Syria. Pro-Assad demonstrations have also been ignored. 
In November, Abdulhakim Belhadj, the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group who helped overthrow Muammar Gaddafi, met in Turkey with Free Syrian Army leaders to send Libyan fighters to train troops. The new Libyan authorities had previously offered money and weapons to the growing insurgency against Bashar al-Assad. 
The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) were trained and armed by NATO. They are linked to al-Qaeda which operates under the CIA. There is no doubt that false flag attacks are used against the Syrian people. Outrages are being committed and then blamed on Assad. Assad states that Islamist militants from abroad are the source of unrest and have killed 2,000 of his men. 
In fact, The Washington Post has revealed, "the 'Free Syrian Army' (FSA) has swelled in size in recent weeks, encouraging defections by ambushing patrols, shooting commanders, and then convincing the soldiers to switch sides. While their numbers are not known, they are led by Colonel Riyad al-Asad, a former Colonel in the Syrian Air Force who defected in June. Since then, the army has increasingly employed guerrilla-style tactics to fight government forces, carrying out hit-and-run attacks or planting bombs on buses." 
This fits all the characteristics of Western special operations and is terrorism by any definition. Aiding these terrorists is an act of war. Just as we saw in Libya, the terrorists are once again labeled as opposition forces by western media and defending yourself against a terrorist is considered a violation of human rights.
Recently, The Arab League has sent a small team of observers to Syria to check whether President Bashar al-Assad is keeping his promise to end his crackdown on this uprising against his rule. Critics have already noted that the violence has only increased since their arrival.
Considering the blatant psy-op that is already in motion, the observer mission appears to serve the ulterior motive of:
1) Legitimizing future economic sanctions against Syria on an international scale by condemning Assad regardless of his behavior and
2) Eventually monitoring a buffer zone allowing larger shipments of weapons and ammunition into areas under rebel control. The shipments of course would come in the form of "humanitarian aid" as we saw in Libya.
Having the Arab league monitor a buffer zone had previously been suggested by the terrorists. 
The main opposition groups have signed a pact in which they "reject any military intervention that harms the sovereignty or stability of the country, though Arab intervention is not considered foreign."
So violating the sovereignty of Syria appears to be okay as long as it results from Arab intervention which has already been backed by the west. 
Furthermore, the idea that the Arab League could somehow offer an unbiased assessment of Assad's regime is a joke.
The organization has a track record of condemning any country that refuses to outsource its sovereignty to foreign interests. Its members have been carefully vetted in advance. This of course is essential to establishing a (globalist) corporate dictatorship. As of right now, Syria is an impediment.