Free Syrian Army Starts Eating People

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/14/syria-mutilation-footage-rebels-eat

Now most of you know that I wrote that article critiquing Pham Binh's support of the Free Syrian Army. But today I was questioning what I wrote, after all perhaps I was using an unfair standard to judge the FSA, perhaps I should support it despite my theoretical reasons for not doing so. Perhaps I should try to overlook some of the flaws.......

And then when I looked at the Guardian I stumbled upon this lovely piece.



Horrific video footage of a Syrian rebel commander eating the heart or lung of a dead government fighter has aroused furious international controversy, fuelling an already heated debate over western support for the armed uprising against President Bashar al-Assad's regime....

Human Rights Watch (HRW), an independent monitor, said: "The figure in the video cuts the heart and liver out of the body and uses sectarian language to insult Alawites [Assad's minority sect]. At the end of the video [the man] is filmed putting the corpse's heart into his mouth, as if he is taking a bite out of it."




I'm sorry, but you can't justify that. That is fucking disgusting. There is no way in hell that the people of Syria deserve to be liberated by scum like that. I don't even way to see Pham Binh even attempt to rationalize that.

[Bostana]

Look like i have to use this twice....
http://imgix.8tracks.com/mix_covers/000/499/936/66706.original.jpg?fm=jpg&q=65&sharp=15&vib=10&w=521&h=521&fit=crop

Seriously, why? What do you gain from eating a heart?!

[evermilion]

Look like i have to use this twice....
http://imgix.8tracks.com/mix_covers/000/499/936/66706.original.jpg?fm=jpg&q=65&sharp=15&vib=10&w=521&h=521&fit=crop

Seriously, why? What do you gain from eating a heart?!

I was just about to say: how do you feel knowing you already used this today? But I guess it didn't stop you.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Look like i have to use this twice....
http://imgix.8tracks.com/mix_covers/000/499/936/66706.original.jpg?fm=jpg&q=65&sharp=15&vib=10&w=521&h=521&fit=crop

Seriously, why? What do you gain from eating a heart?!

I'll self critize here, I should't base my support of a movement on the actions of one individual. But I admit that I still have some liberal in me, and for the very moment, I'm sorry but I just can't comprehend it. My brain does not compute. I am just so utterly disgusted that I can not think rationally. I mean, Fuck this shit, I'm sorry but just fuck this shit. I can not fathom for the time being why anyone would want to pick sides in this war. I hope the scum of the FSA and Assad's Hencemen get a good place in hell.

[Comrade Nasser]

Saw the raw footage yesterday (no pun intended lmao) and it was some sick shit.

[Le Socialiste]

Sorry, but one Syrian rebel commander eating the heart or lung of a government fighter ≠ "Free Syrian Army starts eating people." Sensationalize much? And who here would justify that? (Hopefully no one.) If you're looking for a fight over this prepare to be disappointed. Don't expect us to buy into your attempt to paint every single rebel as some deranged, sectarian cannibal either.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Sorry, but one Syrian rebel commander eating the heart or lung of a government fighter ≠ "Free Syrian Army starts eating people." Sensationalize much? And who here would justify that? (Hopefully no one.) If you're looking for a fight over this prepare to be disappointed. Don't expect us to buy into your attempt to paint every single rebel as some deranged, sectarian cannibal either.

Erm, how about their involvement in the organ trade? I mean maybe they aren't eating the organs, but it's pretty close to it in terms of being morally repulsive and that is a means of funding that is used quite widely by the opposition.

Again, not to say that our support should be based soley on their moral conduct, but I still find that sickening. And yes I am fully aware of the fact that Assad has done worse.

[evermilion]

Sorry, but one Syrian rebel commander eating the heart or lung of a government fighter ≠ "Free Syrian Army starts eating people." Sensationalize much? And who here would justify that? (Hopefully no one.) If you're looking for a fight over this prepare to be disappointed. Don't expect us to buy into your attempt to paint every single rebel as some deranged, sectarian cannibal either.

Did you start writing this before his second post in the thread?

[Le Socialiste]

Erm, how about their involvement in the organ trade? I mean maybe they aren't eating the organs, but it's pretty close to it in terms of being morally repulsive and that is a means of funding that is used quite widely by the opposition.

Could you provide a link to that info? I haven't heard of that. I'd also be curious to know which brigades or groups are using the organ trade for such purposes.

[Le Socialiste]

Did you start writing this before his second post in the thread?

Yes, I did. At the time no one had posted anything to this thread, so I didn't see it. :blushing:

Regardless, I disagree with how YABM depicted the situation (I also disagree with their conclusion that we shouldn't critically support either side).

[Fourth Internationalist]

This makes sense. If you're gonna be killing people, why waste their bodies?

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Could you provide a link to that info? I haven't heard of that. I'd also be curious to know which brigades or groups are using the organ trade for such purposes.

Here are two articles. I like Global Research for somethings, but it is understandable that some people are skeptical of it.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/syrian-terrorists-involved-in-illegal-human-organ-trade/5308534

http://www.examiner.com/article/free-syrian-army-allegedly-trafficking-human-organs

Here is video evidence if you want something more tangable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GIqcmuFsLQ


From an Article:


According to the article, most of the Syrians abducted by the armed groups are subsequently "killed, and then gunmen trade in their corpses through removing their kidneys, eyes and liver."

Extracting organs would likely kill a person in a matter of hours.


Again, I self criticize for the liberalism, I might not be thinking straight and I admit that. But I simply can not, as the moment stands, support that

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Regardless, I disagree with how YABM depicted the situation (I also disagree with their conclusion that we shouldn't critically support either side).

OK I admit that I normally try to hold myself to a higher standard than the conduct that I have displayed here, so if a moderator sees this, please change the title to "Free Syrian Army Commander Eats A Person"

[Zostrianos]

The Syrian rebels have been taken over by Sunni Islamists who want to turn Syria into Saudi Arabia, they're terrorizing and killing non-muslims and moderate muslims throughout the country, and often forcing Shari'a law in areas under their control. This incident is just another barbaric reminder of this. Also their Wahhabi buddies in the region are encouraging them to rape Syrian women (just as long as they're not Sunni):

An Islamic cleric has cleared the path for rebels in Syria, who are trying to oust President Bashar Assad, to rape women, so long as they’re non-Sunni.
Salafi Sheikh Yasir al-Ajlawni, who hails from Jordan but who lived in Damascus for 17 years, sent a message via YouTube: It’s a “legitimate fatwa” for Muslims waging war against Mr. Assad and trying to put in place a Sharia government to “capture and have sex with” Alawites and other non-Sunni, non-Muslim women, Human Events reports. Mr. Assad is part of the Alawites sect.
In the video, the cleric called non-Muslim women by their Arabic term, “melk al-yamin,” Human Events reports. The term is from the Koran and refers to non-Muslim sex slaves, Human Events says.
This isn’t the first time Islamists have called for the raping of women.
A preacher in Saudi Arabia, Muhammad al-Arifi, sent forth a fatwa a few months ago giving jihadi fighters the right to have “intercourse marriage” with Syrian women they caught, and for that act to take enough time “to give each fighter a turn,” Human Events reports.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/3/islamic-cleric-decrees-it-ok-syrian-rebels-rape-wo/

So fuck the rebels

[Fourth Internationalist]

Here are two articles. I like Global Research for somethings, but it is understandable that some people are skeptical of it.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/syrian-terrorists-involved-in-illegal-human-organ-trade/5308534

http://www.examiner.com/article/free-syrian-army-allegedly-trafficking-human-organs

Here is video evidence if you want something more tangable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GIqcmuFsLQ


From an Article:




Again, I self criticize for the liberalism, I might not be thinking straight and I admit that. But I simply can not, as the moment stands, support that

How is not supporting that "liberal"?

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

I'll self critize here, I should't base my support of a movement on the actions of one individual. But I admit that I still have some liberal in me, and for the very moment, I'm sorry but I just can't comprehend it. My brain does not compute. I am just so utterly disgusted that I can not think rationally. I mean, Fuck this shit, I'm sorry but just fuck this shit. I can not fathom for the time being why anyone would want to pick sides in this war. I hope the scum of the FSA and Assad's Hencemen get a good place in hell.

Who says you should pick sides between bourgeois nationalists and islamic extremists?
You might want to consider joining the user readers' group "On Colonialism" by Mike Macnair, struggling for the "independent position of the working class" during such situations. Mao Zedong's 'Third Period'-esque military strategy should be kept in mind, i.e. 'war against the invaders and national bourgeoisie'.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

How is not supporting that "liberal"?

It's not that refusing to support that act is liberal in of it's self, it is simply that to base my support on these acts neglects the content and context of these movements. Because simply put, there are no moral absolutes, most things can be justified when put in a certain context. Additionally, we can't pretend a proletarian army would be incapable of doing wrong, and that certain activities that are frowned upon might be necessary for funding.


Who says you should pick sides between bourgeois nationalists and islamic extremists?
You might want to consider joining the user readers' group "On Colonialism" by Mike Macnair, struggling for the "independent position of the working class" during such situations. Mao Zedong's 'Third Period'-esque military strategy should be kept in mind, i.e. 'war against the invaders and national bourgeoisie'.

I've already made my position very clear in this article that I wrote

http://aroundthepear.blogspot.com/2013/05/in-response-to-pham-binh.html

The subject of my self critizism here is that I have used moral criteria to judge the FSA in this case when I should be using political content, context, and class orientation to judge their merits.

[BIXX]

2:30-2:35 is the rational explanation for this.

But on a serious note, what the fuck? Seriously?

[Professional Revolution]

It looks like the Free Syrian Army is becoming deformed rather than degenerated. It is a very important distinction, please consult the Trotsky Internet Archive on the subject.

[Rusty Shackleford]

seriously. fuck the whole goddamn FSA. fuck binh/proyect and fuck my mind is so fucking fried right now from this.



Anyone remember the Kosovo Liberation Army? Yeah, some people supported them as revolutionaries once. how the fuck did that turn out (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_organ_theft)?

[L1NKS]

If these reports are true, they sadly back a statement of mine I made earlier on this board. Both Assad and the rebels seem to have entered a competiton for who can execute more gruesome atrocities against the people of Syria.

I think the UN should move in.

[Deity]

If these reports are true, they sadly back a statement of mine I made earlier on this board. Both Assad and the rebels seem to have entered a competiton for who can execute more gruesome atrocities against the people of Syria.

I think the UN should move in.

Lol what? What do you think the UN "moving in" can or will do to help the situation?

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

Lol what? What do you think the UN "moving in" can or will do to help the situation?

UN moving in = nothing happens. Quite simply.

To be honest I don't find this to be a surprise, I sort of expected that things would degenerate this far.

[L1NKS]

Lol what? What do you think the UN "moving in" can or will do to help the situation?
The UN shall investigate into the war crimes of both parties, send independent, non-military officials into the cities and townships to collect evidence and testimonials. The alternative is to just kick back and wait for further atrocities to take place that cynics like you then can get excited about.

[khad]

It looks like the Free Syrian Army is becoming deformed rather than degenerated. It is a very important distinction, please consult the Trotsky Internet Archive on the subject.
Are you serious :confused:

[Luís Henrique]

Sorry, but one Syrian rebel commander eating the heart or lung of a government fighter ≠ "Free Syrian Army starts eating people."

Indeed.

It would be nice to know that he was dishonorably discharged, though.

Luís Henrique

[khad]

I think this guy Abu Sakkar is in charge of the Farouq Brigades, which as one of the "moderate islamist" groups, will be the ones that will be receiving the weapons that the United States would provide, should the United States proceed with directly arming the rebels.

He recently spoke to Time magazine and didn't sound the least bit repentant, vowing more genocide and videos of his atrocities. Plus, he has a lot of facebook fans.

http://world.time.com/2013/05/14/we-will-slaughter-all-of-them-an-interview-with-the-man-behind-the-syrian-atrocity-video/

Al-Hamad, who is Sunni and harbors a sectarian hatred for Alawite Muslims, said he has another gruesome video of his killing a government soldier from the Alawite faith. (Syrian President Bashar Assad is Alawite; the conflict in Syria is increasingly sectarian.) “Hopefully we will slaughter all of them [Alawites]. I have another video clip that I will send to them. In the clip, I am sawing another shabiha [progovernment militiaman] with a saw. The saw we use to cut trees. I sawed him into small pieces and large ones.” Al-Hamad also explained that even though both sides of the conflict in Syria are using video clips of their own brutal actions to intimidate the other, he believes his clip would have particular impact on the regime’s troops. “They film as well, but after what I did hopefully they will never step into the area where Abu Sakkar is,” he said, using his nom de guerre and referring to the part of Syria he currently controls.

[Luís Henrique]

The Syrian rebels have been taken over by Sunni Islamists who want to turn Syria into Saudi Arabia, they're terrorizing and killing non-muslims and moderate muslims throughout the country, and often forcing Shari'a law in areas under their control. This incident is just another barbaric reminder of this.

Mmmm.

Somehow I am very skeptical that the Shariah, or the Kuran, or the Hadith, or whatever, allow, much less command, people to eat human flesh.

Luís Henrique

[Rusty Shackleford]

Mmmm.

Somehow I am very skeptical that the Shariah, or the Kuran, or the Hadith, or whatever, allow, much less command, people to eat human flesh.

Luís Henrique

I dont think it has to. If he is a moderate islamists, then this is where the moderation comes in, cannibalism.

[Luís Henrique]

I dont think it has to. If he is a moderate islamists, then this is where the moderation comes in, cannibalism.

Nah, "moderate" still stands for the same thing ("whatever the United States think is worthy of support at any given moment").

Luís Henrique

[Rusty Shackleford]

Nah, "moderate" still stands for the same thing ("whatever the United States think is worthy of support at any given moment").

Luís Henrique

Im just saying he doesnt have to be anything to be a cannibal.

[Luís Henrique]

Im just saying he doesnt have to be anything to be a cannibal.

No, he hasn't. But there are a few things that he cannot be while being a cannibal, without contradiction.

"Muslim" is one of those things.

Luís Henrique

[cyu]

When western powers (not just limited to western powers of course) want to throw out any established regime, they'll resort to pulling together any gangs, warlords, and common thugs they can get their hands on - so long as it "accomplishes the mission" - so stuff like this doesn't surprise me anymore.

They did it in South America. They did it during the Bush wars. I see no evidence of any serious internal military memos indicating that their strategy has changed.

[Dropdead]

FSA can just fuck off.

[Professional Revolution]

I don't see how any self-described Marxist could possibly give any sympathy to the reactionary bourgeois Islamists. It's simply our duty as revolutionaries to support the rights of women and do everything in our power to prevent the forces of reaction. The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan is a similar example. Lenin and Trotsky both spoke much on these issues; perhaps "comrades" should look into them when possible.

[Le Socialiste]

FSA can just fuck off.

Thank you for that wonderfully illustrative comment. Care to elaborate, or are you satisfied with firing off pointless one-liners?

[Le Socialiste]

The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan is a similar example.

...How, exactly?

[Dropdead]

Thank you for that wonderfully illustrative comment. Care to elaborate, or are you satisfied with firing off pointless one-liners?

Are you trying to say that FSA is good and I should explain why I hate it?

[Deity]

Are you trying to say that FSA is good and I should explain why I hate it?

You can't make a bold and general statement like that and not have anyone expect an explanation. Please elaborate for many reasons including, but not limited to, the fact that one liners are against the rules.

I'm no FSA supporter, but I'm not going to dismiss the entire movement by just saying they should "fuck off"

[Comrade #138672]

So it's alright to kill people, but let's not eat their hearts and lungs, because that is, as opposed to killing people, really "disgusting" and in no way "justifiable"?

Sure, it is kind of barbaric, but why this moralism?

[bcbm]

Seriously, why? What do you gain from eating a heart?!

the power of your enemy

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

So it's alright to kill people, but let's not eat their hearts and lungs, because that is, as opposed to killing people, really "disgusting" and in no way "justifiable"?

Sure, it is kind of barbaric, but why this moralism?

It should be indicative that something is seriously amiss, at best. If the FSA have a guy who's willing to engage in cannibalism merely to intimidate the enemy, then who the fuck knows what sort of thing would happen if he wanted to do something more? Remembering of course that this guy has a command position in the FSA, i.e. he controls a group of armed individuals.

Of course, Assad's forces are no better. Despite being a state army and therefore presumably having better vetting practices than a bunch of rebels, they manage to match the FSA in being a shower of terrible human beings. Levelling neighbourhoods with artillery might not be as viscerally repulsive as eating the odd internal organ, but it causes fuckloads more misery.

They're both shit, but for different reasons.

[cyu]

From 2011 http://everything2.com/title/Libya+and+Syria

Definitions
We, Us, Our: The group of people who control U.S. foreign policy. This may be "the ruling class", "the American people", "well-funded political lobbies", "the voting public", "political pundits", "the mass media", or whatever, depending on who you believe.

Objective
To extend "our" sphere of influence into as many places as possible, using whatever means necessary, including the propping up of dictators that listen to "our" goals.

Any nation that allows "us" to put military bases there is considered a friendly nation, because it aids in the spread of "our" sphere of influence.

Previous Victories
Honduras
Bahrain
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Colombia
Egypt
Jordan

Current Operations
Libya
Syria

Execution in Friendly Nations
As long as the heads of the "friendly" nations listen to "us", it doesn't really matter what they do to their own people. Abuses will be downplayed in the media, if reported on at all. It only becomes a problem when they get so abusive that they risk toppling themselves, and thus risk "our" influence in the area.

This was what happened in Egypt. The previous regime managed to get themselves toppled, and now "we" have to do damage control in order to reign in the country again with the help of the current generals in power, regardless of what any democratic movements want.

Execution in Unfriendly Nations
For nations in which the heads do not listen to "us", every negative thing that happens gets extensive press coverage, while all else is ignored. The purpose is the incite "our" public to support military action against them, until either their government / military heads fall in line with the rest of the dictators that obey "us" or they are replaced by puppets.

We may supposedly be fighting for freedom or women's rights in those nations, but as soon as their "rogue" dictator is replaced by a puppet, then any future abuses get downplayed.

There was non-manufactured discontent in Libya of course, just as there is in any country. The primary difference between Libya and Egypt was that Libya was "our" official enemy while Egypt was not. The result is that pretty much the entire revolution in Libya was carried out by giving vast sums of cash and weapons to whatever gangs and warlords trying to take the place of the previous regime.

The end result was similar to the end result in Afghanistan. Same strategy, same abuses, different rulers.

Similar plans are being carried out for Syria.

Political Movements
Popular movements like the Arab Spring are valuable because they can be used as a cover to carry out operations that "we" would not normally be able to carry out without international outcry. By timing the overthrow of the Libyan and Syrian governments with the rest of the Arab democratic movements, "we" can make it appear that these new regimes are part of these democratic movements, rather than puppets that will be propped up by "us" for years to come.

Similar to Colombia, "we" will then be able to use these new states as a kicking-off point for any operations "we" need to carry out, to ensure that any of the truly democratic nations either remain under "our" sphere of influence, or are replaced by puppets as well.

[Comrade Nasser]

Cannibalism is definitely forbidden in Islam. I mean look many Muslims (some of my friends even) refuse to eat any meat that is not Halal and they don't eat pork. Just thought I'd throw this out there so we don't go blaming the religion or the entire homogenous rebel movement for this one crazy fuck who decided to bite a dudes heart. (Seriously?)

[Professional Revolution]

...How, exactly?

Reactionary Islamists were trying to overthrow the legitimate Communist government and the degenerated Soviet Union simply intervened to protect it. There was no imperialism involved except on the side of the reactionary Mujihadeen. Similarly, the degenerated workers state of China is supporting the legitimate Assad regime, and, while Russia is no longer a worker's state, it does have the right to stop reactionary bourgeois Islamism. Socialist revolution is also much more likely under the stable Assad regime than under a reactionary Islamist tribal-feudal state.

This ICL document is very useful in understanding this matter: http://www.icl-fi.org/english/wv/1009/syria.html

[L.A.P.]

^ just look at those word-games

[Rusty Shackleford]

Reactionary Islamists were trying to overthrow the legitimate Communist government and the degenerated Soviet Union simply intervened to protect it. There was no imperialism involved except on the side of the reactionary Mujihadeen. Similarly, the degenerated workers state of China is supporting the legitimate Assad regime, and, while Russia is no longer a worker's state, it does have the right to stop reactionary bourgeois Islamism. Socialist revolution is also much more likely under the stable Assad regime than under a reactionary Islamist tribal-feudal state.

This ICL document is very useful in understanding this matter: http://www.icl-fi.org/english/wv/1009/syria.html

I dont think either are more fertile for socialist development. on the one hand you have the complacency of social democracy and the veil of nationalism as a unifier and on the other you have the most jagged boot heel on the next of every individual.

not to mention that the bourgeois nationalists, though while in power do make advancements, are still opposed to workers power. National Liberation movements that are based in proletarian organizations are different, obviously.

[Le Socialiste]

Are you trying to say that FSA is good and I should explain why I hate it?

Partly what Deity said. Of course, I also happen to support elements of the FSA and the broader popular movement from which it sprung up. So...there's that. I've gone over why I hold this position so many times over the last couple of weeks that you'll forgive me for not giving a full explanation in this post. Should you require further elaboration on my part, however, I'll readily do so.

But please, refrain from one-liners like that in the future. We try to discourage them on here.

[Le Socialiste]

Cannibalism is definitely forbidden in Islam. I mean look many Muslims (some of my friends even) refuse to eat any meat that is not Halal and they don't eat pork. Just thought I'd throw this out there so we don't go blaming the religion or the entire homogenous rebel movement for this one crazy fuck who decided to bite a dudes heart. (Seriously?)

Sorry, I agree with the point you're making - but the rebel movement is hardly homogenous. The level of infighting and the divisions arising therefrom should be a clear indication of that (and that isn't even noting the ideological and political diversity within the uprising).

[Le Socialiste]

There was no imperialism involved except on the side of the reactionary Mujihadeen.

I'd love to hear your definition of imperialism.


Similarly, the degenerated workers state of China is supporting the legitimate Assad regime,

In order for a state to fall under this particular 'degenerated' form, it would require the working-class to have originally held power in the first place. Now, explain to me why Assad's regime is the legitimate power in Syria, a government that was just two years ago lauded by Hillary Clinton as being committed to 'economic and political reform'? It was Clinton who praised Assad as a reformer, and that's entirely due to the fact that he's overseen a slew of privatization policies that have gutted ordinary Syrians while liberalizing the economy. Folks like you are just rushing into knee-jerk "anti-imperialism" spiels (which is ironic, given your justification of Soviet intervention in Afghanistan) and abandoning anything remotely resembling concrete evidence.

(Your comparison of Syria to Afghanistan is a massive stretch too, btw.)


and, while Russia is no longer a worker's state, it does have the right to stop reactionary bourgeois Islamism. Socialist revolution is also much more likely under the stable Assad regime than under a reactionary Islamist tribal-feudal state.

Why is that, exactly? Because it used to be ostensibly 'communist' at one point in its history? Either way, well done: you've managed to painted yourself into one mess of a corner. Good luck getting out.

[Comrade Nasser]

Sorry, I agree with the point you're making - but the rebel movement is hardly homogenous. The level of infighting and the divisions arising therefrom should be a clear indication of that (and that isn't even noting the ideological and political diversity within the uprising).

Oh I agree bro. It's just some posts in this thread made it seem as if the groups are a homogenous movement that run around screaming "Allah Acbar" and eating peoples hearts, which they most certainly are not.

[Crabbensmasher]

Well, armed struggles aren't exactly a walk in the park.
Considering the sheer mindfuckery that's occurred so far in Syria, I'm not surprised this happened.
Like come on, there have been whole villages gunned down, and we still don't know who's responsible for that shit. Women and children just shot in the street and it's forgotten in a few days. In our culture, we're just more lenient on massacre, but less so on a single act of cannibalism. If you think about this rationally, you'll realize it makes no sense

All in all, like any war, it's fucking dirty. This time around, we just have more mediums to get the truth of some of this shit out.
I know that it's hard not to help it, but I wouldn't change my opinion on one group or the other over this incident considering the shit that's already happened.