Collateral Murder

The story of Saeed Chmagh, an Iraqi journalist, underscores the immense risks journalists face in war zones. War zones are dangerous for everyone, but for journalists, the hazards are compounded by their role in documenting the conflict.

The Life and Work of Saeed Chmagh

Saeed Chmagh worked as a driver and assistant for Reuters. His job involved transporting journalists to and from their assignments, often through perilous areas. Despite the risks, Chmagh was dedicated to his role, understanding the importance of reporting from the front lines.

Chmagh’s Commitment to Journalism

• Dedication: Despite constant threats, Chmagh remained committed to his work.
• Courage: He navigated dangerous areas to ensure journalists could report the truth.
• Support: Chmagh’s logistical support was crucial for Reuters’ coverage of the Iraq war.

The Incident That Shook the World

On July 12, 2007, Saeed Chmagh and Reuters photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen were killed by a U.S. military helicopter in Baghdad. The incident, later revealed through a leaked military video, highlighted the dangers journalists face and sparked global outrage.

The Broader Impact of War on Journalists

Journalists in war zones are not just storytellers; they are witnesses to history. Their work ensures the world remains informed about conflicts that might otherwise be shrouded in darkness. However, the price they pay can be extraordinarily high.

Physical Risks

• Violence: Journalists are often caught in the crossfire or targeted by hostile forces.
• Kidnappings: Abductions for ransom or propaganda are common in conflict zones.
• Injuries: Many journalists sustain life-threatening injuries while on assignment.

Psychological Toll

• Trauma: Constant exposure to violence and suffering leads to severe psychological stress.
• Isolation: War journalists often feel isolated, as few can relate to their experiences.
• Burnout: The relentless pace and danger can lead to significant burnout and mental health issues.

Ethical Dilemmas

• Objectivity vs. Safety: Balancing the need to report the truth with personal safety is a constant challenge.
• Intervention: Deciding whether to intervene in a situation or remain an observer can be ethically challenging.
• Reporting vs. Propaganda: Ensuring that reports are accurate and not manipulated by one side of the conflict.

Support Systems for War Journalists

Support systems are vital for helping journalists cope with the risks and stress associated with war reporting.

Safety Training

• Preparation: Journalists undergo extensive safety training to handle conflict zones.
• First Aid: Learning first aid is crucial for survival in remote areas.
• Escape Tactics: Knowing how to escape or evade danger can be life-saving.

Psychological Support

• Counseling: Access to mental health professionals helps journalists process trauma.
• Peer Support: Connecting with other war journalists can provide mutual support.
• Decompression Programs: Structured programs help journalists recover from their experiences.

Organizational Support

• Insurance: Comprehensive insurance covers injuries, kidnappings, and other risks.
• Logistics: Organizations provide logistical support to ensure journalists’ safety.
• Legal Assistance: Legal support is crucial for dealing with detentions or legal issues in foreign countries.

The Legacy of Saeed Chmagh

Saeed Chmagh’s story is a powerful reminder of the perils journalists face in war zones. His dedication and sacrifice underscore the importance of a free press, even in the most dangerous conditions.

Remembering Saeed Chmagh

• Tributes: Memorials and tributes honor Chmagh and other fallen journalists.
• Awareness: His story raises awareness about the dangers journalists face.
• Inspiration: Chmagh’s courage inspires current and future journalists to pursue the truth despite the risks.

Impact on Journalism

• Transparency: The incident involving Chmagh led to increased calls for transparency in military operations.
• Protection: Advocating for better protection and rights for journalists in conflict zones.
• Ethics: Ongoing discussions about the ethical responsibilities of war journalists.

Conclusion

Saeed Chmagh’s life and tragic death highlight the critical role of journalists in war zones and the immense challenges they face. Their work is not just about reporting events; it’s about bearing witness to history, often at great personal risk. The legacy of Chmagh and others like him serves as a testament to the courage and dedication of war journalists worldwide.

Saeed Chmagh’s life and legacy provide a poignant reminder of the risks journalists take to bring the truth to light. Saeed Chmagh, a dedicated Reuters journalist, left an indelible mark on the field of war correspondence. His commitment to covering the most dangerous conflicts of our time is a testament to his bravery and dedication.

Early Life

Saeed Chmagh was born in Iraq, a country steeped in rich history and cultural diversity. From a young age, he showed a keen interest in storytelling and journalism. His passion for truth and justice led him to pursue a career that would eventually place him at the forefront of some of the most perilous war zones.

Career Beginnings

Chmagh’s career began with local reporting in Iraq, where he quickly gained a reputation for his fearless approach to journalism. His ability to navigate the complexities of war-torn regions and his commitment to unbiased reporting made him a valuable asset to Reuters.

Notable Achievements

• Coverage of the Iraq War: Chmagh was one of the leading journalists covering the Iraq War. His reports provided a raw and unfiltered view of the conflict, highlighting the human cost of war.
• Exclusive Interviews: He secured interviews with key figures in the conflict, offering unique insights into the war’s dynamics.
• Photographic Documentation: Chmagh’s photography captured the harsh realities of war, providing visual evidence of the conflict’s impact on civilians.

The Tragic Day

On July 12, 2007, Saeed Chmagh and his colleague, Namir Noor-Eldeen, were covering a skirmish in Baghdad. This day would become infamous due to the tragic events that unfolded. While performing their duties, they were targeted and killed in an attack by a U.S. Apache helicopter. The incident was later brought to global attention through the release of the “Collateral Murder” video by WikiLeaks.

Impact of the Incident

• Global Awareness: The release of the video sparked international outrage and brought attention to the dangers faced by journalists in war zones.
• Policy Changes: The incident prompted discussions on the rules of engagement and the protection of journalists in conflict areas.
• Tributes and Memorials: Chmagh and Noor-Eldeen’s bravery was honored through various tributes, including memorials and dedications by journalist organizations worldwide.

Personal Life

Beyond his professional achievements, Saeed Chmagh was a family man. He was known for his kindness and generosity, traits that endeared him to colleagues and friends alike. His dedication to his family was evident, and his loss was deeply felt by those who knew him personally.

Family and Legacy

• Wife and Children: Chmagh left behind a wife and children, who continue to remember him as a loving husband and father.
• Continued Inspiration: His legacy continues to inspire journalists worldwide to pursue truth and justice, regardless of the risks involved.

The Role of War Correspondents

The work of journalists like Saeed Chmagh highlights the critical role of war correspondents. These individuals risk their lives to provide accurate and timely information from conflict zones. Their reports help the world understand the complexities of war and the human suffering that often accompanies it.

Challenges Faced

• Physical Danger: War correspondents face constant threats from combat, bombings, and targeted attacks.
• Psychological Trauma: The brutal realities of war can take a significant psychological toll on journalists.
• Ethical Dilemmas: Reporters often face ethical challenges in balancing the need to report the truth with the potential consequences of their reporting.

Honoring Saeed Chmagh’s Legacy

Honoring Saeed Chmagh’s legacy involves acknowledging the sacrifices made by journalists in conflict zones and advocating for their protection. Various organizations and initiatives have been established to support and protect journalists worldwide.

Key Organizations

• Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ): CPJ works to safeguard the rights of journalists and ensure their safety in dangerous environments.
• Reporters Without Borders (RSF): RSF advocates for press freedom and provides assistance to journalists facing threats.

Conclusion

Saeed Chmagh was more than just a journalist; he was a beacon of truth in a world often shrouded in misinformation and propaganda. His unwavering commitment to his craft, even in the face of danger, serves as an enduring example of journalistic integrity and bravery. His life and legacy remind us of the critical role journalists play in our society and the profound impact they have on our understanding of the world.

In remembering Saeed Chmagh, we honor all journalists who have sacrificed their lives in the pursuit of truth. Their contributions are invaluable, and their legacies continue to inspire future generations of reporters to uphold the highest standards of journalism.

Ethan McCord, a former U.S. Army specialist, transitioned from being a soldier to a whistleblower, raising significant questions about military conduct and the moral responsibilities of soldiers.

Early Life and Military Service

Ethan McCord joined the U.S. Army in the early 2000s, driven by a desire to serve his country and protect its values. He was deployed to Iraq, where he participated in numerous missions, including the infamous 2007 Baghdad helicopter attack. This mission would become a turning point in his life.

The 2007 Baghdad Helicopter Attack

In 2007, McCord was part of a unit conducting operations in Baghdad. On July 12th, two U.S. Army Apache helicopters attacked a group of men, mistaking them for insurgents. Among the victims were two Reuters journalists. This incident was recorded and later became known as the “Collateral Murder” video, released by WikiLeaks in 2010. Read the entire event timeline of the incident.

Immediate Aftermath

McCord was one of the first on the scene after the attack. He found a van with injured children and dead adults. The sight of the injured children deeply affected him, leading him to question the mission and the actions of his comrades.

From Soldier to Whistleblower

McCord’s experience in Iraq, particularly the 2007 incident, prompted a significant shift in his perspective. He began to speak out against the war and the conduct of U.S. forces in Iraq.

Public Disclosure

In 2010, when WikiLeaks released the “Collateral Murder” video, McCord decided to go public. He participated in interviews and gave speeches, describing the horrors he witnessed and the moral conflicts he faced. His decision to speak out was driven by a desire for transparency and accountability.

Challenges and Controversies

Becoming a whistleblower was not without its challenges. McCord faced criticism and ostracism from some former comrades and sections of the public. He also dealt with personal struggles, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the burden of his experiences in Iraq.

Criticism from Military and Public

Some military personnel viewed McCord’s actions as a betrayal. They believed that speaking out against the actions of fellow soldiers could endanger ongoing missions and the safety of troops. Public opinion was divided, with some seeing him as a hero and others as a traitor.

Personal Struggles

McCord’s journey was marked by intense personal battles. The trauma of war and the pressure of being a public whistleblower took a toll on his mental health. He worked tirelessly to manage his PTSD and rebuild his life.

Advocacy and Activism

Despite these challenges, McCord remained steadfast in his commitment to advocacy and activism. He continued to speak out about the realities of war and the importance of accountability.

Anti-War Advocacy

McCord became a vocal critic of the Iraq War and U.S. military policies. He joined various anti-war organizations and participated in events aimed at raising awareness about the human cost of war.

Support for Veterans

Understanding the struggles faced by veterans, McCord also focused on supporting his fellow soldiers. He advocated for better mental health services for veterans and spoke about the importance of addressing PTSD and other war-related traumas.

Impact and Legacy

Ethan McCord’s journey from soldier to whistleblower has had a profound impact on public perception of the Iraq War and the role of soldiers in conflicts.

Raising Awareness

Through his public disclosures and activism, McCord helped raise awareness about the complexities and moral dilemmas faced by soldiers. His story shed light on the often unseen consequences of war.

Encouraging Accountability

McCord’s actions have encouraged a broader conversation about accountability within the military. His bravery in speaking out has inspired others to come forward with their stories, fostering a culture of transparency.

Influence on Military Policy

While it is difficult to measure the direct impact of McCord’s actions on military policy, his advocacy has contributed to ongoing discussions about the ethical conduct of military operations and the treatment of civilians in conflict zones.

Conclusion

Ethan McCord’s transformation from a soldier to a whistleblower is a powerful testament to the importance of individual conscience and moral responsibility. His journey highlights the complexities of war and the need for transparency and accountability in military operations. Through his courage and activism, McCord has made a lasting contribution to the discourse on war and ethics, inspiring others to question and speak out against injustice.

The release of classified information by Wikileaks significantly impacted public opinion on the Iraq War. By exposing previously hidden aspects of the war, Wikileaks provided the public with new insights, altering perceptions and fueling debate. Did these revelations change the way people viewed the Iraq War? The evidence suggests a resounding yes.

Exposing the Truth: The Collateral Murder Video

One of the most significant leaks was the “Collateral Murder” video, which showed a 2007 incident in Baghdad where a U.S. military helicopter killed multiple people, including two Reuters journalists. This footage, stark and unfiltered, provided a raw look at the realities of war. The public reaction was immediate and intense, leading to increased scrutiny of U.S. military actions and policies in Iraq.

According to our detailed timeline of events, the ‘Collateral Murder’ video captures the harrowing moments leading up to and following the tragic incident, providing a comprehensive look at the unfolding of this controversial event.

Key Points of the Collateral Murder Video:

• Displayed the brutality of war, challenging the sanitized version often presented in media.
• Raised ethical questions about military engagement rules.
• Intensified calls for accountability and transparency from the military and government.

The Iraq War Logs: A Data-Driven Revelation

Wikileaks further released the Iraq War Logs, a collection of 391,832 military reports documenting the war from 2004 to 2009. These logs provided an unprecedented level of detail about the daily operations and incidents in Iraq, highlighting the human cost and operational complexities of the war.

Key Takeaways from the Iraq War Logs:

• Civilian Casualties: Revealed higher civilian casualty numbers than previously reported.
• Torture and Abuse: Documented numerous instances of detainee abuse by Iraqi forces, raising concerns about the oversight and ethical implications of the U.S.’s partnership with these forces.
• Military Struggles: Showed the difficulties faced by coalition forces, including internal conflicts and logistical challenges.

Public Reaction and Media Coverage

The release of these documents had a profound effect on public opinion and media coverage. News outlets around the world extensively covered the leaks, providing in-depth analyses and commentary on their implications. The transparency brought by Wikileaks’ revelations spurred public debate and influenced opinions on the war’s justification and execution.

Influences on Public Opinion:

• Shift in Perception: The raw data and footage shifted public perception, leading many to question the official narratives provided by governments.
• Media Focus: Increased media focus on the ethical and human costs of the war.
• Political Repercussions: Heightened political debate and criticism of the war, influencing policy discussions and decisions.

Political and Ethical Implications

The ethical implications of the Wikileaks releases were vast. By bringing hidden information to light, Wikileaks forced a reevaluation of the ethical considerations surrounding the Iraq War. The disclosures prompted discussions about the morality of war, the importance of transparency, and the role of whistleblowers in a democratic society.

Key Ethical Issues Raised:

• Transparency vs. Security: Balancing the need for government transparency with national security concerns.
• Accountability: Holding military and government officials accountable for actions taken during the war.
• Whistleblower Protection: The role of whistleblowers in exposing truths and the protection they deserve.

Impact on Government and Military Policy

The fallout from the Wikileaks disclosures had tangible impacts on government and military policy. The increased public scrutiny led to policy changes aimed at improving transparency and accountability within military operations.

Policy Changes Influenced by Wikileaks:

• Improved Oversight: Strengthening oversight mechanisms to prevent abuses and ensure ethical conduct.
• Enhanced Transparency: Implementing measures to increase transparency in military operations and government actions.
• Whistleblower Protections: Developing stronger protections for whistleblowers to encourage the reporting of unethical or illegal activities.

The Global Perspective

While the immediate impact of the Wikileaks disclosures was felt most acutely in the United States, the influence of these revelations extended globally. Countries involved in the Iraq War faced similar scrutiny and public debate, leading to international discussions about war ethics, transparency, and accountability.

Global Reactions:

• International Media Coverage: Extensive coverage by international media outlets, highlighting the global interest in the Iraq War’s conduct and implications.
• Policy Reforms: Policy reforms and debates in various countries about their military engagements and the ethical standards they uphold.
• Public Opinion Shifts: Shifts in public opinion across different nations, reflecting a more critical view of the Iraq War and its justification.

Conclusion: A Lasting Legacy

The influence of Wikileaks on public opinion about the Iraq War is undeniable. By exposing hidden truths, Wikileaks not only changed the way people viewed the war but also sparked essential debates about transparency, accountability, and the ethical conduct of war. The lasting legacy of these revelations continues to shape public discourse and policy decisions, highlighting the profound impact that information can have on society.

In October 2010, WikiLeaks released the Iraq War Logs, a collection of nearly 400,000 US Army field reports detailing the Iraq War from 2004 to 2009. These documents provided unprecedented insight into the conflict, revealing instances of unreported civilian deaths, torture, and the involvement of private military contractors.

Unreported Civilian Deaths

The Iraq War Logs highlighted the stark difference between reported and actual civilian casualties. The logs revealed that the US military recorded over 66,000 civilian deaths during this period, a figure much higher than previously acknowledged.

Civilian Casualties

• Undisclosed Incidents: Many civilian deaths were not reported by the US military, contradicting official accounts that emphasized transparency and minimized civilian harm.
• Causes of Death: Civilians were often caught in crossfire, bombings, and airstrikes. The logs included harrowing details of families decimated by air raids and checkpoints.

Torture and Abuse

The logs exposed widespread torture and abuse by Iraqi security forces, often with the knowledge of US authorities. This included beatings, electric shocks, and sexual assault.

Abuse Cases

• Torture Reports: US soldiers documented numerous instances where detainees exhibited signs of severe abuse, yet these reports rarely led to investigations or interventions.
• US Complicity: The US military’s “Frago 242” order instructed soldiers to report abuse but take no action against the perpetrators, effectively allowing torture to continue unabated.

Role of Private Military Contractors

The Iraq War Logs shed light on the significant role of private military contractors (PMCs) in the conflict. These contractors were often involved in controversial actions and operated with little oversight.

Contractor Involvement

• Blackwater and Others: Companies like Blackwater were frequently implicated in violent incidents, including the 2007 Nisour Square massacre where 17 Iraqi civilians were killed.
• Legal Impunity: PMCs operated under ambiguous legal frameworks, often escaping accountability for their actions.

Friendly Fire and Fratricide

The logs also detailed numerous incidents of friendly fire and fratricide, highlighting the chaos and confusion prevalent on the battlefield.

Friendly Fire Incidents

• Accidental Deaths: Miscommunication and misidentification often led to US and allied forces mistakenly engaging their own troops, resulting in tragic losses.
• Case Studies: Specific incidents, such as the 2004 death of Italian intelligence officer Nicola Calipari by US forces, underscored the dangers of the conflict’s unpredictable nature.

Insight into Insurgent Tactics

The documents provided valuable insight into insurgent tactics and operations, revealing the sophistication and adaptability of these groups.

Insurgent Strategies

• IEDs and Ambushes: Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) were the insurgents’ weapon of choice, responsible for numerous US military and civilian casualties.
• Guerrilla Warfare: Insurgents employed hit-and-run tactics, blending into civilian populations to evade capture and maintain pressure on coalition forces.

Political Implications

The release of the Iraq War Logs had significant political implications, both in the US and internationally. The revelations fueled debates over the justification and conduct of the Iraq War.

Political Reactions

• US Government Response: The US government condemned the release, citing national security concerns and potential harm to soldiers and civilians.
• International Reactions: The logs intensified criticism of US foreign policy, with many calling for greater accountability and transparency.

Media Coverage and Public Perception

The logs received extensive media coverage, shaping public perception of the Iraq War. Major news outlets analyzed the documents, highlighting key findings and their implications.

Media Highlights

• Key Reports: Outlets like The Guardian, The New York Times, and Der Spiegel published in-depth analyses, bringing the logs’ revelations to a global audience.
• Public Debate: The information sparked widespread debate about the ethics and legality of the Iraq War, influencing public opinion and policy discussions.

Impact on Military Policy

The revelations prompted some changes in military policy, although the extent and effectiveness of these changes remain debated.

Policy Changes

• Rules of Engagement: The US military revised its rules of engagement to reduce civilian casualties and improve accountability.
• Oversight of Contractors: Efforts were made to increase oversight of private military contractors, though challenges persisted.

Legacy of the Iraq War Logs

The Iraq War Logs remain a crucial source of information about the Iraq War, offering a sobering reminder of the conflict’s human cost and the importance of transparency and accountability in military operations.

Continuing Relevance

• Historical Record: The logs contribute to the historical record, providing a detailed account of the war’s impact on Iraq and its people.
• Advocacy for Change: The revelations continue to inform advocacy efforts for policy changes and accountability in military operations.

In summary, the Iraq War Logs unveiled critical aspects of the Iraq War, including unreported civilian casualties, widespread torture, the role of private military contractors, and the complex dynamics of insurgent warfare. These revelations have had lasting implications for military policy, public perception, and the historical understanding of the conflict.

The enigmatic figure of Julian Assange has stirred global debate. His role as the founder of WikiLeaks, the platform that leaked countless confidential documents, has made him a controversial character. Is he a hero fighting for transparency, or a villain endangering national security?

The Genesis of WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks, founded in 2006 by Julian Assange, aimed to promote transparency by publishing classified information provided by anonymous sources. The platform’s first major release was a document revealing corruption in Kenya, earning it significant attention and setting the stage for more high-profile leaks.

Significant Leaks

1. Collateral Murder (2010)

• A video showing a US helicopter attack in Baghdad that killed several people, including two Reuters journalists. The footage sparked outrage and raised questions about the conduct of US forces in Iraq.

2. Afghan War Diary (2010)

• Over 75,000 classified documents detailing the war in Afghanistan. The leak exposed the grim realities of the conflict, including civilian casualties and the Taliban’s resurgence.

3. Iraq War Logs (2010)

• Nearly 400,000 military logs from the Iraq War. The documents revealed civilian deaths, torture by Iraqi forces, and the involvement of private contractors in military operations.

4. US Diplomatic Cables (2010)

• A collection of more than 250,000 diplomatic cables exposing behind-the-scenes actions of US diplomacy. The cables included frank assessments of world leaders and sensitive negotiations.

The Supporters’ View

Supporters of Julian Assange see him as a champion of free speech and government accountability. They argue that:

• Transparency: Assange’s work has exposed corruption and human rights abuses, promoting transparency in governments and institutions.
• Whistleblower Protection: WikiLeaks provides a secure platform for whistleblowers to reveal wrongdoing without fear of retribution.
• Public Interest: The information released by WikiLeaks is deemed to be in the public interest, enabling citizens to make informed decisions about their governments.

The Critics’ Perspective

Critics, however, label Julian Assange as a reckless individual who jeopardizes national security. Their arguments include:

• Endangering Lives: Leaked documents have potentially endangered the lives of informants, military personnel, and civilians by exposing their identities.
• National Security: The release of classified information has compromised national security efforts and diplomatic relations.
• Lack of Accountability: Critics argue that Assange operates without accountability, releasing information without considering the consequences.

Legal Battles and Asylum

Assange’s legal troubles began with allegations of sexual misconduct in Sweden in 2010. Fearing extradition to the US, where he could face charges related to WikiLeaks, Assange sought asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in 2012. He remained there for seven years until his arrest in 2019.

Charges and Extradition

• US Charges: Assange faces 18 charges in the US, including conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and violations of the Espionage Act. The charges carry significant prison time if he is convicted.
• UK Legal System: The UK courts are currently deliberating on whether to extradite Assange to the US, a decision that has profound implications for press freedom and international law.

Impact on Journalism

Julian Assange’s actions have sparked a broader debate about the role of journalism in a digital age. Key points include:

• Press Freedom: The prosecution of Assange is seen by many as an attack on press freedom, potentially criminalizing journalistic activities.
• Ethics in Journalism: The ethical considerations of publishing classified information have become a focal point, with discussions on balancing public interest with potential harm.
• Digital Age Challenges: The case highlights the challenges and responsibilities of journalism in an era where digital platforms can disseminate information globally in an instant.

Public Opinion

Public opinion on Julian Assange is deeply divided. Some view him as a hero, standing up against powerful governments and institutions to expose the truth. Others see him as a villain, recklessly endangering lives and national security for the sake of transparency.

Supporters’ Arguments

• Champion of Truth: Assange is praised for his commitment to uncovering hidden truths and holding those in power accountable.
• Freedom Fighter: Many see him as a defender of free speech and a fighter against censorship and oppression.

Critics’ Arguments

• Dangerous Recklessness: Critics argue that Assange’s disregard for the consequences of his actions makes him dangerous.
• National Threat: The information released by WikiLeaks is viewed as a threat to national security and diplomatic efforts.

Conclusion

The question of whether Julian Assange is a hero or villain remains unresolved. His work with WikiLeaks has undeniably had a profound impact on global politics, journalism, and the public’s right to know. As his legal battles continue, the debate over his legacy will likely persist, reflecting the complex interplay between transparency, security, and freedom in the modern world.

The term Collateral Murder refers to a classified US military video released by WikiLeaks in 2010, depicting the killing of over a dozen people in Baghdad, including two Reuters news staff. The footage raised questions about military ethics, transparency, and the impact of war on civilians.

Background

In July 2007, a US Apache helicopter opened fire on a group of men in Baghdad, leading to the deaths of multiple individuals, including Reuters photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen and journalist Saeed Chmagh. The video, classified as “Secret,” was leaked to WikiLeaks and released on April 5, 2010. This footage, titled Collateral Murder, shocked the world and sparked intense debate about the conduct of US military forces in Iraq.

Key Events in the Collateral Murder Video

• Initial Engagement: The video starts with the Apache crew identifying a group of men on a street corner. The crew mistakes camera equipment for weapons and receives permission to engage, leading to the first round of gunfire.
• Second Engagement: As a wounded Saeed Chmagh crawls away, a van arrives to assist him. The helicopter opens fire again, killing more individuals, including the driver of the van.
• Aftermath: US ground troops arrive at the scene, discovering children in the van. Despite their injuries, the children are transported to a nearby hospital.

Check out our article for a detailed timeline of events leading up to and following the Collateral Murder incident.

Ethical and Legal Implications

Rules of Engagement

The US military operates under strict rules of engagement, designed to minimize civilian casualties and ensure lawful conduct during combat. However, the Collateral Murder video raised questions about the application and adherence to these rules. Critics argue that the Apache crew’s actions violated both international humanitarian law and the US military’s own regulations.

Transparency and Accountability

The release of the Collateral Murder video highlighted the lack of transparency in military operations. It took nearly three years for the footage to surface, raising concerns about the US government’s commitment to accountability. The video also demonstrated the challenges of obtaining justice for victims of war crimes.

Impact on Journalism

The deaths of Noor-Eldeen and Chmagh underscored the dangers faced by journalists in conflict zones. Their deaths prompted calls for better protection measures for media personnel and increased scrutiny of military operations involving journalists.

Public Reaction and Media Coverage

Immediate Response

The Collateral Murder video generated significant media attention and public outrage. News outlets around the world covered the story, and human rights organizations condemned the actions depicted in the footage.

Long-Term Impact

Over a decade later, the Collateral Murder video continues to influence public discourse on military ethics and transparency. It remains a critical reference point in discussions about the conduct of war and the treatment of civilians and journalists in conflict zones.

Military and Governmental Response

Official Statements

The US military initially defended the actions of the Apache crew, stating that they acted in accordance with the rules of engagement. However, subsequent investigations revealed discrepancies in the official account, leading to increased scrutiny and criticism.

Policy Changes

In response to the fallout from the Collateral Murder video, the US military implemented policy changes aimed at improving transparency and accountability. These included stricter reporting requirements and enhanced training for soldiers on the rules of engagement and the protection of civilians.

The Role of WikiLeaks and Whistleblowers

WikiLeaks’ Mission

WikiLeaks, founded by Julian Assange, aims to publish classified and sensitive information to promote transparency and accountability. The release of the Collateral Murder video was one of the organization’s most significant actions, bringing global attention to the realities of modern warfare.

Whistleblowers

Chelsea Manning, a former US Army intelligence analyst, was responsible for leaking the Collateral Murder video, along with other classified documents. Manning’s actions sparked a broader conversation about the role of whistleblowers in exposing government wrongdoing and the ethical implications of leaking classified information.

The Impact on US-Iraq Relations

Diplomatic Fallout

The release of the Collateral Murder video strained US-Iraq relations, highlighting the broader issues of civilian casualties and military conduct during the Iraq War. It prompted Iraqi officials to call for greater accountability and transparency from the US military.

Long-Term Consequences

The video continues to shape perceptions of the US military’s role in Iraq, influencing both domestic and international views on the war. It also serves as a reminder of the ongoing challenges in achieving justice and accountability for wartime actions.

Conclusion

The Collateral Murder video remains a powerful testament to the complexities and ethical dilemmas of modern warfare. It underscores the importance of transparency, accountability, and the protection of civilians and journalists in conflict zones. As the world continues to grapple with the implications of this footage, it serves as a reminder of the need for vigilance and oversight in military operations.

Engagement

All times are presented in Zulu time (UTC), which is used by the military and can be seen on the top left corner of the video. Baghdad local time at the time of the incident was UTC+4. Military documents state that events start at 09:50, which is approximately 28 minutes before the video starts.

06:50:00	1/8 CAV moves in to assist 2/6 after a report of Small Arms Fire (SAF) in the area. They fail to positively identify (PID) the attacker.
06:18:40	Crazyhorse [lead helicopter] notices a group of people on an open plaza.
06:20:05	Crazyhorse: “Have five to six individuals with AK47s. Request permission to engage.”
06:21:09	First shots fired at the group.
06:21:41	Helicopters cease fire.
06:22:02	Helicopters notice that Saeed is injured and is crawling.
06:24:54	Crazyhorse: “Come on, buddy. All you gotta do is pick up a weapon.”
06:25:26	Helicopters notice a mini-van arriving, attempting to help Saeed.
06:25:58	Crazyhorse: “Roger. Break. Uh Crazyhorse One-Eight request permission to uh engage.”
06:26:29	Bushmaster gives permission to engage. Proceed to open fire on the mini-van.
06:27:27	Helicopters cease fire.
06:31:53	Bradley armored vehicle arrives on the scene, followed by ground personnel.
06:33:12	They discover two wounded children in the van.
06:35:14	Ground unit reports: “I’ve got uh eleven Iraqi KIAs [Killed In Action]. One small child wounded. Over.” – “Roger. Ah damn. Oh well.”
06:36:05	“Well it’s their fault for bringing their kids into a battle.”
06:36:45	Humvee drives over Namir’s body.
06:43:06	Bradley armored vehicle drives over a second body.
06:49:09	Video cuts.
07:20:42	Helicopter reports that 6 individuals have entered a building. It appears to be either under construction or an abandoned construction site.
07:21:40	“This is Bushmaster Six Romeo. Crazyhorse One Eight is going to be engaging north to south with Hellfire missiles over.”
07:23:39	Hellfire missile is fired. “Target hit.”
07:25:27	“There it goes! Look at that bitch go!”
07:26:42	“Roger, building destroyed. Engaged with three hellfire missiles.”

About Collateral Murder

“Collateral Murder” is the title given by WikiLeaks to a classified U.S. military video they released on April 5, 2010. The video, recorded from the gunsight of an Apache helicopter, shows an incident that occurred on July 12, 2007, in the New Baghdad area of Baghdad, Iraq. It captures U.S. military personnel attacking a group of individuals on the ground, resulting in the deaths of over a dozen people, including two Reuters journalists, Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh.

WikiLeaks released this video to raise awareness of what they saw as the indiscriminate killing of civilians by U.S. forces. The footage also includes radio transmissions and shows the military personnel opening fire on a van that attempted to rescue the wounded. The van contained two children who were seriously injured.

The video sparked widespread debate and criticism, particularly over the rules of engagement and the classification of the attack as justified by the military investigation. The controversy highlighted concerns about the conduct of U.S. forces during the Iraq War and the treatment of journalists in conflict zones.

Summary of the WikiLeaks Video Controversy

On April 5, 2010, WikiLeaks published a classified U.S. military video that showed an Apache helicopter gunship indiscriminately killing over a dozen people in New Baghdad, an Iraqi suburb. Among the victims were two Reuters journalists. Reuters had sought this footage via the Freedom of Information Act since the incident occurred but was unsuccessful. The video depicts the unprovoked killing of a wounded Reuters journalist and his rescuers, as well as the serious wounding of two children involved in the rescue.

After Reuters demanded information, the U.S. military investigated and concluded that the soldiers’ actions complied with the law of armed conflict and their “Rules of Engagement.” WikiLeaks released the military’s Rules of Engagement from 2006, 2007, and 2008, revealing guidelines before, during, and after the killings.

The video, available in both a 38-minute full version and a shorter edited version with initial analysis, contains added subtitles from radio transmissions to clarify the context. It was leaked to WikiLeaks by military whistleblowers, and the organization verified its authenticity through cross-checking multiple sources and consulting witnesses and journalists directly involved.

On July 6, 2010, Private Bradley Manning, a 22-year-old U.S. Army intelligence analyst stationed in Baghdad, was charged with disclosing the footage after allegedly speaking to a journalist. Daniel Ellsberg, famous for releasing the Pentagon Papers, called Manning a “hero.” Manning was imprisoned in Kuwait, while none of the Apache crew or those involved in the cover-up faced charges.

WikiLeaks aims to ensure that all leaked information receives the attention it deserves. The video serves as a reminder that journalists often risk their lives to report on conflicts, especially in dangerous areas like Iraq, where 139 journalists were killed between 2003 and 2009.

For those seeking further information on “Collateral Murder,” additional resources include the official WikiLeaks page, which offers both the full and edited versions of the video along with detailed analysis and background information. Academic studies, journalistic articles, and documentary films delve into the implications of the video on the ethics of warfare, military transparency, and the treatment of journalists in conflict zones. Investigative reports from organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch provide in-depth analysis of the attack, shedding light on the challenges facing journalists and civilians in war zones. Interviews with military experts, whistleblowers, and journalists offer varying perspectives on the incident and its aftermath. Additionally, books and articles detailing the legal proceedings of Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning, who was charged with leaking the footage, provide insight into the broader context of whistleblowing and government accountability.

News articles and blogs from 2007 onwards

• Reuters seeks U.S. probe into killing of Iraqi staff
• 2 Iraqi Journalists Killed as U.S. Forces Clash With Militias
• Iraq War Grief Daily Witness; some photos of Namirs
• The New York Times: 2 Iraqi Journalists Killed as U.S. Forces Clash With Militias
• Facts about Chelsea Mannings (fka. Bradley Mannings)
• Facts about Wikileaks
• 23 Facts about Collateral Murder
• Thoughts on the Middle East, Politics & the Media: A Tribute to Namir Noor Eldeen
• U.S. Soldier on 2007 Apache Attack: What I Saw
• US Rules of Engagement for Iraq, August 2007
• US Rules of Engagement for Iraq, March 2007
• US Rules of Engagement for Iraq, Flowchart 2007
• US Rules of Engagement for Iraq, Refcard 2007
• US Rules of Engagement for Iraq, Refcard 2006