It is clear the 'international community', global media and concerned citizenry have erred in rushing to judgement and condemnation whenever Amnesty and other g

It is clear the 'international community', global media and concerned citizenry have erred in rushing to judgement and condemnation whenever Amnesty and other global NGOs file a report on protests and human rights abuse. It appears the right approach is to debate the intricacies of the law and rules of trespassing. Since there has been a systemic failure to consider these important mitigating factors in the past, previous condemnations now stand null and void and will be reconsidered in light of these evolved methods of validating human rights abuse. Of course some apologists would consider this as mere sophistry but its important to point out no one can defend breaking 'the law'. Is Assad really violating human rights or are protesters breaking Syrian law? While it is true NGOs like Amnesty and Reporters Without Borders have shown an unbecoming lack of zeal when it comes to covering their home countries I have been assured it's entirely due to a lack of funds and the greater importance of defending human rights in the middle east and impoverished third world countries.