International, Media, Military, Society

Wikileaks Releases Alleged Video Showing Killing of Civilians and Reporter — In Contradiction of U.S. Accounts

Wikileaks has released what it claims to be a video contradicting U.S. accounts of an attack that killed a Reuters photographer and 11 other people in Iraq in July 2007. Wikileaks says that it received the tape from a whistleblower in the military.

The tape shows the crews of two American Apache attack helicopters kill the civilians and gloat about the killings of presumed insurgents.

Click here for the video.

In the group was Reuters photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen, 22. Also killed was Reuters driver, Saeed Chmagh, 40.

The attack targeted the group of men on the street in an eastern Baghdad district on July 12, 2007.

The video shows only one individual with a weapon, which is dangling on his side.
On the tape, you can hear one pilot state “Look at those dead bastards. Nice.”

The recording continues after the crew targets a vehicle that arrives to help the wounded and the crew hears that U.S. troops needed to take a child to the hospital who was in the car. One voice states “Well, it’s their fault bringing their kids into the battle.”

The U.S. military is not denying that the tape is authentic.

For the full story, click here.

49 thoughts on “Wikileaks Releases Alleged Video Showing Killing of Civilians and Reporter — In Contradiction of U.S. Accounts”

  1. http://twitter.com/wikileaks WikiLeaks funding blocked after blacklisting | Guardian http://bit.ly/91T6X9

    Another interesting article. Though, I would agree that it is wrong to post the names of those who might be endangered by their release, we need a group that won’t buckle when it comes to transparency. There are some truly monstrous activities that still haven’t come to light — if they remain hidden, we are all in peril.

  2. Sy Hersh: Hands off WikiLeaks | Spiegel ***http://bit.ly/c3EpA8***

    3:18 AM Oct 13th via web (via Twitter) – the story is dated 10/12/10

    If someone locates an English version, please post. Thanks.

  5. hmm

    Double post.

    What’s up with that?

    Most humble apologies for what seems to be some kind of computer burp.

  6. bdaman,

    Wow. That guy is an idiot! He’s saying crap dumber than anything you’ve said with the possible exception of thinking you could call someone “Christ Killer” and then expect to get a pass on it.

    Surely you’re not putting forth this apologist crap as some kind of evidence? Because that blog is the pure Neocon propaganda trash and if offered as “evidence” a new low for even you. That douche bag even thanks Michelle Malkin for linking him to the story. Michelle might as well have “I work for PNAC” tattooed on her FauxNews contributing and generally revolting forehead. And the other “linker” which that nitwit Ross thanks is the blog Gateway Pundit (Jim Hoft). The only reason he’s less offensive than Malkin is that he’s not a paid corporatist stooge like her, but rather a garden variety dupe and regurgitating troll who hosts his own blog because he’d get his propaganda spewing ass eaten alive in a room full of even marginally critical thinkers.

    So let’s be clear.

    Where as “the left” has video tape evidence obtained by Reuters and other stories like this one titled “U.S. Admits Role in February Killing of Afghan Women” from the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/world/asia/05afghan.html?ref=world), these known right wing extremists are pointing to each other for their “evidence”. Doug Ross has his panties twisted up because of spoon-fed bullshit from known a far right wing propagandist and a blog that collects propaganda poisoned nut jobs as their core audience much like his own blog.

    Seriously. Get some better sources if you’re pointing to that bullshit as evidence that “the left” are somehow trying to frame the military for crimes they are committing in Iraq – crimes that started with the illegal invasion of Iraq ordered by Cheney and Halliburton. Which, by the way, had nothing to do with what that blathering willfully ignorant apologist twit Ross tagged as “Protecting America” but everything to do with poisoning America.

  7. bdaman,

    Wow. That guy is an idiot! He’s saying crap dumber than anything you’ve said with the possible exception of thinking you could call someone “Christ Killer” and then expect to get a pass on it.

    Surely you’re not putting forth this apologist crap as some kind of evidence? Because that blog is the pure Neocon propaganda trash and if offered as “evidence” a new low for even you. That douche bag even thanks Michelle Malkin for linking him to the story. Michelle might as well have “I work for PNAC” tattooed on her FauxNews contributing and generally revolting forehead. And the other “linker” which that nitwit Ross thanks is the blog Gateway Pundit (Jim Hoft). The only reason he’s less offensive than Malkin is that he’s not a paid corporatist stooge like her, but rather a garden variety dupe and regurgitating troll who hosts his own blog because he’d get his propaganda spewing ass eaten alive in a room full of critical thinkers.

    So let’s be clear.

    Where as “the left” has video tape evidence obtained by Reuters and other stories like this story titled “U.S. Admits Role in February Killing of Afghan Women” from the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/world/asia/05afghan.html?ref=world), these known right wing extremists are pointing to each other for their “evidence”.

    Doug Ross has his panties twisted up because of spoon-fed bullshit from known a far right wing propagandist and a blog that collects propaganda poisoned nut jobs as their core audience much like his own blog.

    Seriously. Get some better sources if you’re pointing to that bullshit as evidence that “the left” are somehow trying to frame the military for crimes they are committing in Iraq – crimes that started with the illegal invasion of Iraq ordered by Cheney and Halliburton. Which, by the way, had nothing to do with what that blathering willfully ignorant apologist twit Ross tagged as “Protecting America” but everything to do with poisoning America.

  10. One technical aside – a lot of discussion of this video describes it having been shot from a helicopter. As I watched the video, that seemed odd – the aircraft is consistently circling, and no one on the ground seems to notice it or look at it. An alternative is that the camera/gun was shot from a Lockheed AC-130 gunship. It’s essentially a big turboprop cargo plane full of huge guns. From a distance, you might not pay attention to a distant cargo plane making a big, arcing turn over Baghdad. This is also important, because the airplane would be much further away from the targets than a helicopter. This means both psychological detachment, but also a poorer view of a camera vs. a RPG.

    My reaction to the video is to feel that this was not a black or white situation, but a grey one. If it is true that the air crew were focused on the area because of previous shooting/fighting, then it is not out of the question to perceive a group of men peering around corners with odd, long objects as possible armed insurgents.

    The initial round of firing (before the van pulls up) was, in hindsight, a mistake, but not a totally crazy one, assuming that the air crew believed that there was fighting in the area and that such an action was within the Rules of Engagement.

    Shooting at the van is a whole different issue. I know that I don’t know what the Rules of Engagement were and what the “standard operating procedure” was for insurgents in that area. If the decision to shoot people who are not visibly armed while they help injured people laying on the street is the “standard operating procedure” for the coalition forces, and it may well be, then we have a much bigger problem.

    In the end, this was a bad situation, and people did things that they probably shouldn’t have done. If the military had more-or-less fessed up at the time and told much smaller lies, it would have been a not-so-big situation. The US media would have done what it consistently does, and left the story mostly ignored. Instead, the military decided to totally BS this situation, even after they found out that international press people had been killed. As usual, the cover up is much worse than the initial transgression.

  12. I think if a video of the shooting of Tilman had not existed the Armed Forces would still claim he died by enemy combatants.

  15. Duh: omygosh…. 🙁 How awful. We were supposed to protect the wounded.

    Our officials and those in authority have no hesitancy about doing this to foreigners or Americans:

    ” Initial reports claimed that Abdullah was killed in a “shootout” or “exchange of gunfire” with the Feds in a warehouse allegedly containing stolen goods. The word “execution” might be a more appropriate description in light of the fact that Abdullah was shot at least twenty times, including an entry wound in his back and an oddly specific grouping in and around the genital region.

    The imam allegedly provoked the federal fusillade by shooting one of the FBI’s “K9 agents.” Significantly, the official autopsy report – a document actively suppressed by the Dearborn Police Department for more than three months – describes a series of “lacerations” (also described by Wayne County Chief Medical Examiner Carl Schmitt as “puncture wounds”) that are consistent with being mauled by a dog.

    It’s possible Abdullah shot the dog to protect himself. It’s also possible that he never fired a shot, and the dog stepped in front of one or more round intended for Abdullah. The official FBI narrative is that “Freddy,” the Belgian Malinois killed during the raid, “gave his life in the line of duty” on behalf of “his team.” The dog was buried in a solemn ritual and his name was added to the FBI’s “memorial wall.”

    We’ll never know the exact circumstances of “Freddy” death. This much has been clearly established, however: Abdullah bled to death with his hands cuffed behind his back while the FBI took the time to arrange an emergency medical airlift for their attack dog.” Will Grigg

    Another article:
    http://detnews.com/article/20091029/METRO01/910290448

    MY POINT IS THEY LET THE MAN BLEED TO DEATH

  17. This is unacceptable under any circumstances. I wonder if this happened to Tilman?

  18. Even if we give them all the benefit of the doubt possible (i.e. mistaking cameras for weapons), that still can’t explain the attack on the rescue van.

    It is clear that they requested, and received authorization, to open fire, not on a hostile target, but on an effort to recover the wounded. That is unacceptable under any standard. That is cold-blooded murder.

    Here’s what the Geneva Convention says about wounded and sick.
    http://www.hrweb.org/legal/geneva1.html#Chapter 2

  20. I saw this already at Lew Rockwell. I didn’t ever see any weapons in the hands of those who were shot. Since 2 Reuters reporters were killed, I doubt that this couldn’t circulate too long without being outted as fraud. That hasn’t happened so far.

    Horrible.

    Drudge has an article about 5 civilians who were killed in Afghanistan, including two men who OPPOSED the Taliban and Al Qaida!.

    The family said that spies mislead NATO and Afghan forces and that is how that friendly fire situation got those working against the Taliban killed.

    This is out of control and it is time to go. Obama went over to Afghanistan and insulted Karzi. What a boob.

Comments are closed.