Tuesday, January 01, 2013

Collateral Murder: the stills





I was the one that had the task of pulling out the stills from the video named Collateral Murder so that journalists could use it without delay online and in printed media. A friend suggested I should blow them up really big and hang them up in galleries. I think it would be a great fundraising event in order to help the Bradley Manning defense fund. I need help in order to find the best possible venue for this. Perhaps in more then one city. It would also get more attention on why Manning is still in prison and hopefully bring those that are responsible for these war crimes to justice. If you think you can help please write to birgitta@birgitta.is





here are links to the photos i am thinking of blowing up
http://www.collateralmurder.com/en/p-helicopter.html
http://www.collateralmurder.com/en/p-carnage.html
http://www.collateralmurder.com/en/p-shot.html




I have never done any task that has moved me so profoundly and deeply
I urge you to watch the video if you have not done so already: 
http://www.collateralmurder.com/en/index.html





here is what we wrote on the official webpage as an explanation of what it contains: 


Update: On July 6, 2010, Private Bradley Manning, a 22 year old intelligence analyst with the United States Army in Baghdad, was charged with disclosing this video (after allegedly speaking to an unfaithful journalist). The whistleblower behind the Pentagon Papers, Daniel Ellsberg, has called Mr. Manning a 'hero'. He is currently imprisoned in Kuwait. The Apache crew and those behind the cover up depicted in the video have yet to be charged. To assist Private Manning, please see bradleymanning.org.
5th April 2010 10:44 EST WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff.
Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-sight, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded.
The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.
After demands by Reuters, the incident was investigated and the U.S. military concluded that the actions of the soldiers were in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own "Rules of Engagement".
Consequently, WikiLeaks has released the classified Rules of Engagement for 2006, 2007 and 2008, revealing these rules before, during, and after the killings.
WikiLeaks has released both the original 38 minutes video and a shorter version with an initial analysis. Subtitles have been added to both versions from the radio transmissions.
WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.
WikiLeaks wants to ensure that all the leaked information it receives gets the attention it deserves. In this particular case, some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war. Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work.


7 comments:

Anonymous said...

the collateral murder video should definitely give enough material for a lot of scientific branches.

also, a look at it from a linguistic perspective is definitely valuable.

http://wikinews030.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/nato-narrative-we-value-life-snap1.jpg

"so, uh, you are free to engage. over"

a linguistic specialist should be able to take a closer look at what the US military is doing with the word here. "political engagement" is usually, in everyday language, used in other contexts (demonstrations, for example, protests...) - it's "politisches engagement" in german.

it's worth noting that the US military in internal communications uses, when actually shooting, killing, committing murder, use - "engage".


this here is also interesting:

http://wikinews030.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/nato-narrative-we-value-life-snap3.jpg

what they think they do is finding "targets". this is what they thought they had when they were targeting human beings. "finding targets". their behaviour, their language tells you that they think they are in a training, with "targets" in neutral form - like let's say a target poster - a thing. confirmed in the next one: "we definitely got *something*"

they are not aware anymore that they are shooting at humans, at living beings.


----

however - thinking at the people who spent their time on editing (in your case, it were the Eastern Holidays, isn't it?) and thinking at the time the bradley manning support networks members spend on it... it's indeed quite. quite embarassing what currently JA is doing with the name wikileaks:

http://wikinews030.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/what-does-the-link-to-a-neonazi-page-do-in-the-wikileaks-tweetfeed-just-another-not-that-easy-topic/

this - the screenshots you see - the repost of nazi content by an official supporter, linking to it by another official support page, tweeting links to the Swedish pendant of the Junge Freiheit by the official WL twitter account... - this is very destructive for the project.

Surprisingly, however, the official WL account still has avoided to address the issues pointed out.



Anonymous said...

People I know that were on the ground during this incident, basically said that this stuff was an everday occurance!

Anonymous said...

Absolutely commendable effort Brigitta, your work with WikiLeaks on this video has been an example to us all, it's an importance landmark for taking stock of where our Western Civilisation is going.

But of course I cannot help noticing the anti-wikileaks website wikinews030 has gone and advertised its smearing services above getting onto your chariot of credibility to harvest publicity. :-/ we keep going though :-)

Many thanks for your work, greekemmy

Anonymous said...

quoting from the comment above:

"But of course I cannot help noticing the anti-wikileaks website wikinews030 has gone and advertised its smearing services above getting onto your chariot of credibility to harvest publicity. :-/ we keep going though :-)"

re the "anti-wikileaks-website wikinews030" - coul you kindly care to elaborate?

is wikinews030 supposed to assume that -they- -wikinwes030- have sent the incredibly embarrassing tweets sent by the official wikileaks acount?

how so?

are the readers supposed to assume that they - wikinews030 - placed the nazi content on the official supporter site pushed by wikileaks and linked in tweets [rixstep] and that they - wikinews030 - placed the link to the nazi article repost on the 2nd official suppoters page justice4? - an repost even directly linking to the nazi blogpage, openly providing advertisement this way?

how so, because if you ask me, the tweets to the right wing populistic paper were sent - 9 times in total - by the official wikileaks account and by no one else. 9 tweets in total between march 7 and nov 28.

just like the tweets to rixstep were sent by the official wikileaks account, by the person responsibl for it himself.

and you go and post comments re the "anti-wikileaks website wikinews030" instead of referring to the issue, the absolute, absolute bullshit that happened there and instead of thinking how to repair what has been done there (if possible at all now)?

you think that anyone is caring for claims about "pro" or "anti" when comments are clearly pointing at an issue and when reply comments are not referring to it with a single word?

BULLSHIT! Where is the dissociation!

this guy is trolling work results of others, enough of that - where is the dissociation?

Ethan McCord said...

To the comments. ...I think that we have taken "collateral murder which is a horrific event, one that destroyed many life's of many involved. And instead of keeping the eye on what was important in the release, we took it to s place it never was really about ie JA or Wiki leaks. We must maintain focus on what "collateral murder IS about. The lives murdered, Bradley Manning, and the systematic problem that wreaks havoc across the globe. the US M.I.C to me anything else is diminishing the intentions of Bradley Manning.

Gilda Fleming said...

Really impressed! Everything is very, very clear, open is a wedding accessories cheap, prom dresses store, top wedding dresses description of the problem. It contains the information.

Anonymous said...

Hi Birgitta, my very best wishes and lots of love for your American adventure. I think that your idea of blown up stills of this carnage is fantastic, it would make a great exhibition to tour countries. I'll see what I can drum up from the bottom of the world xox