NATO, which includes Canada, Turkey, and a host of other countries, as well as our allies, which include Wahhabi Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies, supports the opposition in the illegal invasion of the sovereign country of Syria.
Canada's Defense Minister Harjit Sajjan publically stated that Assad "needs to go", amidst the familiar unsubstantiated refrain -- the same one falsely used against Libya's Gadaffi -- that Assad is "killing his own people", all of which is an endorsement of illegal regime change.
Meanwhile, the opposition in Syria includes ISIS, al Nursra Front/al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Free Syrian Army (FSA), and a myriad of other terrorist groups. There are no moderates.
A declassified Defence Intelligence Agency document explicitly states that the West supports the opposition, and this document is dated 2012.
Corporate media serves the important function of confusing the narrative, especially as it uses corrupt NGOs such as the White Helmets for on-the-ground sources in Syria, but the truth sometimes leaks out regardless.
A recent Globe and Mail article, "Spy agencies see sharp rise in number of Canadians involved in terrorist activities abroad", might well provide fodder for another "truth leak". The article explains,
"'The total number of people overseas involved in threat-related activities -- and I'm not just talking about Iraq and Syria -- is probably around 180,' Canadian Security Intelligence Service director Michel Coulombe told The Globe and Mail after testifying before the House of Commons public safety committee. 'In Iraq and Syria, we are probably talking close to 100.'"
This statement begs the question: "If the suspects are supporting the opposition in Syria, then are they not on the same side as NATO?"
The answer recalls a "terror trial" where Swedish national Bherlin Gildo's trial collapsed after it was revealed that British intelligence agencies were also supporting the opposition, and so the suspect was on the same side as the intelligence agencies and the UK government.
But the Globe and Mail article doesn't stop there. It also serves as a platform to promote Canada's unconstitutional police-state legislation (C-51).
According to the article, Mr. Colombe, Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS):
"CSIS has already used its new disruptive-activities authority under Bill C-51, the controversial anti-terrorism law enacted by the former Conservative government. This power allows CSIS to disable a mobile device, halt financial transactions or talk to someone who might be susceptible to engaging in terrorist acts."