1. They are not AQ backed.
2. I don't care who it helps if it punishes the use of Chemical Weapons, and if they help the rebels, they do something don't they?  This is not about taking any side except for the side opposed to the use of chemical weapons.
		
		
	 
One of the most effective Syrian rebel groups fighting President Bashar al-Assad is the Nusra Front, effectively a branch of al Qaeda. Opponents of President Barack Obama's plan to attack Syria point out that hitting Syrian government forces in response to a chemical weapons attack last month might end up helping Nusra.
http://tinyurl.com/px2jjsr
AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — Syrian rebels led by al-Qaida-linked fighters seized control of a predominantly Christian village northeast of Damascus, sweeping into the mountainside sanctuary in heavy fighting overnight and forcing hundreds of residents to flee, activists and locals said Sunday.
http://tinyurl.com/npkdp95
The fact that al-Nusra has publicly aligned itself with central al Qaeda is worrisome. A long-term safe haven for this group in Syria could be the prelude for the formation of an organization with the wherewithal to attack the West, just as al Qaeda's sojourn in Afghanistan when it was controlled by the Taliban prepared the group for the 9/11 attacks.
Second, al-Nusra is widely regarded as the most effective fighting force in Syria, and its thousands of fighters are the most disciplined of the forces opposing Assad.
http://tinyurl.com/qbfdnlb
And now we have the flip-flop......or outright lie if you prefer...
The Obama administration has started to rebrand Syria’s rebels by de-emphasizing the number of al Qaeda fighters among them — a move critics say is based on questionable intelligence designed to downplay the risks associated with a U.S. military strike on the regime of President Bashar Assad.
After two years of the Obama administration arguing that the Syrian rebellion was rife with fighters linked to al Qaeda, Secretary of State John F. Kerry said last week that Islamic extremists are marginal players in Syria’s civil war and are unlikely to profit much from a U.S. bombing campaign.
Read more: 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news..._source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS#ixzz2eWP9yDCd
Amazing how well you toe the party line, flip floping like a fish out of water.....
You're not taking any side ?.....what bullshit....of course you're taking a side, the one you want to attack is Assad...how the fuck can that act not be
taking a side....fool.