Civilians fired on by Iraqi paramilitary

[Skunk]

In war, who is more despicable depends on who's side you're on - and which television channel you happen to be tuned into.

Raw, Devastating Realities That Expose the Truth About Basra
Two British soldiers lie dead on a Basra roadway, a small Iraqi girl – victim of an Anglo American air strike – is brought to hospital with her intestines spilling out of her stomach, a terribly wounded woman screams in agony as doctors try to take off her black dress.

An Iraqi general, surrounded by hundreds of his armed troops, stands in central Basra and announces that Iraq's second city remains firmly in Iraqi hands. The unedited al-Jazeera videotape – filmed over the past 36 hours and newly arrived in Baghdad – is raw, painful, devastating.

It is also proof that Basra – reportedly "captured'' and "secured'' by British troops last week – is indeed under the control of Saddam Hussein's forces. Despite claims by British officers that some form of uprising has broken out in Basra, cars and buses continue to move through the streets while Iraqis queue patiently for gas bottles as they are unloaded from a government truck.

A remarkable part of the tape shows fireballs blooming over western Basra and the explosion of incoming – and presumably British – shells. The short sequence of the dead British soldiers – over which Tony Blair voiced such horror yesterday – is little different from dozens of similar clips of dead Iraqi soldiers shown on British television over the past 12 years, pictures which never drew any condemnation from the Prime Minister.

The two Britons, still in uniform, are lying on a roadway, arms and legs apart, one of them apparently hit in the head, the other shot in the chest and abdomen.

Another sequence from the same tape shows crowds of Basra civilians and armed men in civilian clothes, kicking the soldiers' British Army Jeep and dancing on top of the vehicle. Other men can be seen kicking the overturned Ministry of Defense trailer, which the Jeep was towing when it was presumably ambushed.

Also to be observed on the unedited tape – which was driven up to Baghdad on the open road from Basra – is a British pilotless drone photo-reconnaissance aircraft, its red and blue roundels visible on one wing, shot down and lying overturned on a roadway. Marked "ARMY'' in capital letters, it carries the code sign ZJ300 on its tail and is attached to a large cylindrical pod which probably contains the plane's camera.

Far more terrible than the pictures of dead British soldiers, however, is the tape from Basra's largest hospital that shows victims of the Anglo-American bombardment being brought to the operating rooms shrieking in pain.

A middle-aged man is carried into the hospital in pajamas, soaked head to foot in blood. A little girl of perhaps four is brought into the operating room on a trolley, staring at a heap of her own intestines protruding from the left side of her stomach. A blue-uniformed doctor pours water over the little girl's guts and then gently applies a bandage before beginning surgery. A woman in black with what appears to be a stomach wound cries out as doctors try to strip her for surgery. In another sequence, a trail of blood leads from the impact of an incoming – presumably British – shell. Next to the crater is a pair of plastic slippers.

The al-Jazeera tapes, most of which have never been seen, are the first vivid proof that Basra remains totally outside British control. Not only is one of the city's main roads to Baghdad still open – this is how the three main tapes reached the Iraqi capital – but General Khaled Hatem is interviewed in a Basra street, surrounded by hundreds of his uniformed and armed troops, and telling al-Jazeera's reporter that his men will "never'' surrender to Iraq's enemies. Armed Baath Party militiamen can also be seen in the streets, where traffic cops are directing lorries and buses near the city's Sheraton Hotel.

Mohamed al-Abdullah, al-Jazeera's correspondent in Basra, must be the bravest journalist in Iraq right now. In the sequence of three tapes, he can be seen conducting interviews with families under fire and calmly reporting the incoming British artillery bombardment. One tape shows that the Sheraton Hotel on the banks of Shatt al-Arab river has sustained shell damage.

On the edge of the river – beside one of the huge statues of Iraq's 1980-88 war martyrs, each pointing an accusing finger across the waterway towards Iran – Basra residents can be seen filling jerry cans from the sewage-polluted river.

Five days ago the Iraqi government said 30 civilians had been killed in Basra and another 63 wounded. Yesterday, it claimed that more than 4,000 civilians had been wounded in Iraq since the war began and more than 350 killed.

But Mr Abdullah's tape shows at least seven more bodies brought to the Basra hospital mortuary over the past 36 hours. One, his head still pouring blood on to the mortuary floor, was identified as an Arab correspondent for a Western news agency.

Other harrowing scenes show the partially decapitated body of a little girl, her red scarf still wound round her neck. Another small girl was lying on a stretcher with her brain and left ear missing. Another dead child had its feet blown away. There was no indication whether American or British ordnance had killed these children. The tapes give no indication of Iraqi military casualties.

But at a time when the Iraqi authorities will not allow Western reporters to visit Basra, this is the nearest to independent evidence we have of continued resistance in the city and the failure of the British to capture it. For days the Iraqi have been denying optimistic reports from "embedded'' reporters – especially on the BBC – who gave the impression that Basra was "secured'' or otherwise in effect under British control. This the tape conclusively proves to be untrue.

There is also a sequence showing two men, both black, who are claimed by Iraqi troops to be US prisoners of war. No questions are asked of the men, who are dressed in identical black shirts and jackets. Both appear nervous and gaze at the camera crew and Iraqi troops crowded behind them.

Of course, it is still possible that some small-scale opposition to the Iraqi regime broke out in the city over the past few days, as British officers have claimed. But, seeing the tapes, it is hard to imagine that it amounted, if it existed at all, to anything more than a brief gun battle.

The unedited reports therefore provide damaging proof that Anglo-American spokesmen have not been telling the truth about the battle for Basra. And in the end this is far more devastating to the invading armies than the sight of two dead British soldiers or – since Iraqi lives are as sacred as British lives – than the pictures of dead Iraqi children.
http://argument.independent.co.uk/co...p?story=391460

[Skunk]

Bombs return after more than 50 die in market blast

Bombs return after more than 50 die in market blast
Agencies
29 March 2003

Allied forces renewed their heavy aerial attacks on Baghdad today as Iraqi officials said the number of people killed in last night's market bombing had risen to more than 50.

A strong explosion shook central Baghdad this morning, with the Information Ministry in the centre of Baghdad the target of Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Today, the market in north-west Baghdad was strewn with wreckage and there were bloodstains on a sidewalk. Crowds of mourners wailed and blood-soaked children's slippers sat on the street not far from a crater blasted into the ground.

The US Central Command in Qatar said it was looking into the bombing, while the Iraqis continue to insist the deaths were caused by a US cruise missile.

The ministry building remained standing but was seriously damaged. Many of the satellite dishes on the building's roof —used by Western and Arab TV stations to transmit reports from Baghdad — were damaged, and glass from broken windows was strewn in the building's hallways.

Many of the foreign TV reporters still in Baghdad have been working from a car park opposite the ministry for fear of an attack on the building. In anticipation of a bombing, ministry workers have moved computers, printers, TVs and video editing equipment from the building and into warehouses.

Aircraft were heard over the capital this morning, drawing anti-aircraft fire. The sound of distant explosions was becoming more frequent and louder. At 9.30am, a huge blast was heard in the centre.

Information Minister Mohammed al-Sahhaf said 58 people were killed in the market explosion, and said the number was likely to rise because many others were wounded. There were conflicting reports, however, on the number of casualties.

Haqi Ismail Razouq, director of al-Nour Hospital, where the dead and injured were taken, put the death toll at 30 and the number of injured at 47; surgeon Issa Ali Ilwan said 47 were killed and 50 injured. Witnesses said they counted as many as 50 bodies.

There was no immediate explanation for the discrepancy.

"Why do they makes mistakes like these if they have the technology?" asked Abdel-Hadi Adai, who said he lost his 27-year-old brother-in-law Najah Abdel-Rida in the blast. "There are no military installations anywhere near here."

Mr Sahhaf said civilians were being targeted because Iraqi troops had defeated coalition forces in battles

"These are cowardly air raids," he told Lebanon's Al-Hayat LBC satellite television.

Dr Ahmed Sufian said: "The women and children were screaming. We were overwhelmed. What will they hit next? This hospital?"

The Al-Nasr market is in the working-class district of al-Shoala. Witnesses said the bombing took place when the market was at its busiest, around 6pm. They said they saw an aircraft flying high overhead just before the blast.

The explosion left a crater the size of a coffee table on a sidewalk in front of a row of shops. Curiously, nothing was blackened in the immediate surrounding area.

Water was seeping from ruptured pipes and corrugated iron was dangling from the roofs of the damaged shops.

A red Volkswagen was parked only a few yards (meters) from the crater, peppered with what could have been flying shrapnel.

At the hospital, relatives of the dead and wounded wept hysterically and yelled the names of their loved ones. Many searched for relatives or friends.

At the scene of the bombing, women in black chadors were sobbing outside homes where some of the victims lived. Men cried and hugged each other and a funeral procession moved through the market.

Down the road, residents gathered at a Shiite Muslim mosque, crowded around seven wooden coffins draped in blankets. Some of the men stood silently. Others sobbed into trembling hands. In the background, women cried, "Oh God! Oh God!"

Another witness, Omar Ismail, a 35-year-old engineer who witnessed the explosion, said body parts were strewn across the street. "Why do they hate the Iraqi people so much?" he asked.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...p?story=391844

[ 03-29-2003, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

[Skunk]

And finally - when Al Jazeera is not busy fighting Denial Of Service Attacks on it's internet sites, you can view some of the pictures of the casualties that are not seen in western media.

THIS IS IMPORTANT - AND I WILL REPEAT THE MESSAGE MULTIPLE TIMES TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD BEFORE YOU PROCEED!

THE IMAGES ARE GRAPHIC - SMALL CHILDREN SHOULD *NOT* BE PRESENT IF YOU DECIDE TO VIEW THEM!
THE IMAGES ARE GRAPHIC - SMALL CHILDREN SHOULD *NOT* BE PRESENT IF YOU DECIDE TO VIEW THEM!
THE IMAGES ARE GRAPHIC - SMALL CHILDREN SHOULD *NOT* BE PRESENT IF YOU DECIDE TO VIEW THEM!
THE IMAGES ARE GRAPHIC - SMALL CHILDREN SHOULD *NOT* BE PRESENT IF YOU DECIDE TO VIEW THEM!
THE IMAGES ARE GRAPHIC - SMALL CHILDREN SHOULD *NOT* BE PRESENT IF YOU DECIDE TO VIEW THEM!
THE IMAGES ARE GRAPHIC - SMALL CHILDREN SHOULD *NOT* BE PRESENT IF YOU DECIDE TO VIEW THEM!

Al Jazeera's website is : http://www.aljazeera.net

Daily images can be seen by clicking on the moving gif image that shows a crying child with a bandage on his head (I say this because the actual url changes slightly, as they update it).
Currently the direct link is:
http://www.aljazeera.net/news/arabic/2003/3/3-22-26.htm

Pictures of fallen Allied troops and those in captivity can be found in the following link. Again, I would issue you with a warning.
THE IMAGES ARE GRAPHIC - SMALL CHILDREN SHOULD *NOT* BE PRESENT IF YOU DECIDE TO VIEW THEM!
http://www.arabnews.com/WebExclusives.htm

As I said before:
In war, who is more despicable depends on who's side you're on - and which television channel you happen to be tuned into.

[Ronn_Bman]

Is Al-Jazeera showing graphic pictures of the civilians killed by Iraqi soldiers?

Are they reporting that Iraqi soldiers are putting Shiite women and children into the streets during fire fights, and that they are putting those civilians in the lines with the military?

Did they report the Iraqi militia's automatic weapons and mortar fire against civilians fleeing Basra?

[Skunk]

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: Is Al-Jazeera showing graphic pictures of the civilians killed by Iraqi soldiers? Are they reporting that Iraqi soldiers are putting Shiite women and children into the streets during fire fights, and that they are putting those civilians in the lines with the military? Did they report the Iraqi militia's automatic weapons and mortar fire against civilians fleeing Basra?

1. To the best of my knowledge, Al Jazeera has not shown pictures of civilians killed by Iraqi soldiers.
2. They reported no evidence of Iraqi soldiers puting women and children in the streets during firefights. Their story was confirmed by the BBC, who said that the civilians had remained in their cellars.

3. They *did* run the story of the alleged targeting of civilians fleeing Basra.

But Ron - this is not the issue that I'm raising.
I am only pointing out that there are two sides to the story:
One told by CNN and one told by Al Jazeera - the 'truth', if such a concept exists anymore in journalism, lies somewhere in between.

One should be aware of that while watching the newscasts.

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Skunk: I am only pointing out that there are two sides to the story: One told by CNN and one told by Al Jazeera - the 'truth', if such a concept exists anymore in journalism, lies somewhere in between. One should be aware of that while watching the newscasts.

Absolutely!

I wasn't disagreeing with this at all, just pointing out some of the inconsistencies from my point of view (not in your statement, but in the coverage).

As to the women and children staying in their basements and not being in the streets in Basra after the fight began, I'm not so sure. I saw reports from several different sources last week reporting this, and no, they weren't all US sources. [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img]

But let's be fair. If we're going to refer to the Iraqi military as allegedly firing on fleeing civilians, let's also say pictures of people wounded, maimed, and killed allegedly by coalition weapons. If the term needs to be used, then not using it when referring to both sides appears to discount half of the story.

[Skunk]

But let's be fair. If we're going to refer to the Iraqi military as allegedly firing on fleeing civilians, let's also say pictures of people wounded, maimed, and killed allegedly by coalition weapons. If the term needs to be used, then not using it when referring to both sides appears to discount half of the story.

Absolutely - my mistake.

Reminds me of the way that western news organisations introduce their reports:
From Qatar Central Command: "Obviously, I can't give you exact military details"
From Bagdad: "This report was made under Iraqi reporting restrictions"

Likewise, the skepticism of Bagdad's official news briefs is both health and wise. The lack of skepticism of US/UK official news briefs (everything that they say has been generally accepted as 'fact') has produced some enormous blunders:
.
.
.
.

Facts, some fiction and the reporting of war

The Pentagon had long predicted that the confrontation with Iraq would be unlike any other war in history. That claim has been proved correct, although not for the reasons the US top brass may have been thinking of.

For the first time, the public back home has had access to round-the-clock reports of every cough and spit of the military campaign, much of it supplied by the 750-strong army of correspondents embedded with US and British military units in the thick of the action.

From live television pictures of battles through up-to-the-minute internet headlines to acres of newspaper coverage, this has become the fastest, most extensively scrutinsed war ever.

But in such a rapidly changing environment, the sheer volume of information has at times made it almost impossible to establish what is true and, just as importantly, how that affects the big picture. The problems of sorting out fact from fiction and claim from counterclaim have been compounded by the unpredictable nature of the war.

With just nine days of the conflict passed, there have already been a series of apparently critical developments, all of them beamed instantly onto television screens and reported as fact in a blaze of newspaper headlines, that have subsequently turned out to be inaccurate.

1 Republican Guard convoys head south from Baghdad
The Daily Telegraph front page headline on Thursday could not have been more dramatic. "Saddam sends out his tanks," it thundered. According to the paper, two Iraqi columns, each containing 1,000 Republican Guard vehicles, were heading south to attack coalition forces in what would be the pivotal battles of the war. The tank columns, however, failed to materialise.

It seems to have been a case of a journalist embedded with the military being fed spurious information by forces on the ground. In this instance, the reporter was from CNN, embedded with the US 7th Cavalry, part of the main coalition advance force.

The correspondent, Walter Rodgers, said Iraqi units were streaming out of Baghdad under cover of a sandstorm to engage US marines around Najaf. The claim was downplayed almost immediately by the Pentagon. General Richard Myers, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, told reporters that a few "light vehicles" were understood to be heading in the general direction of the US forces.

But that was not enough to calm the headline writers. The following day, the Mirror described the Iraqi move as a "pincer attack on US force", and both the Mail and the Independent carried similar stories. "One of the problems we have got is that journalists embedded with our forces are talking to people all the time. So 'military sources' could just be a conversation with a squaddie who's shining his boots," said one Whitehall official.

2 The taking of Umm Qasr
As coalition ground forces poured across the Iraqi border from Kuwait on the first night of fighting on March 20, a pooled despatch from a reporter with the Royal Marines gave an action-packed and detailed account of the British assault on the Faw peninsula and the port of Umm Qasr. The marines, the report said, had successfully secured the port.

A couple of hours later, an advisory note was sent out by the Press Association telling newsdesks to hold the Umm Qasr copy because the taking of the town was not yet complete. By that time it was too late: most newspapers had gone to press and both Sky and BBC News 24 were reporting that Umm Qasr was in British hands, reading verbatim from the pooled report. By the next morning, it seemed academic anyway: Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, chief of the defence staff, announced that Umm Qasr had been "overwhelmed" by coalition forces, a claim repeated again by both US and British commanders on Saturday.

But last Sunday, it became clear that Umm Qasr was far from being under control, as television news broadcast dramatic live pictures of a prolonged firefight between US marines and about 150 Iraqis, who held out against artillery shelling and intense air strikes until Tuesday, when the port, finally, was secured. Whitehall admits it was a "bit forward" about Umm Qasr.

3 Chemical weapons factory
The news story that politicians and media alike have been waiting for broke late on Sunday evening: the apparent discovery of an Iraqi chemical weapons factory and, with it, vindication of the coalition assault on Saddam Hussein.

The story came from a correspondent from the Jerusalem Post who was travelling with the US 3rd Infantry. The plant, the paper said, had been discovered by American troops at Najaf. US television network Fox immediately began running the story, which also quoted Pentagon officials.

On Monday, much of the British press treated the discovery with some caution. Part of the scepticism stemmed from the fact that one of the board members of the Jerusalem Post is Richard Perle, the Bush defence adviser and most vocal backer of the invasion of Iraq.

The Guardian gave the claims of a chemical factory find a short story on the front page, and warned that Pentagon officials had been unable to confirm the story. The London Evening Standard gave the claims lots of space but also enveloped them in health warnings, pointing out that the story had originated from unconfirmed reports.

Its sister paper, the Daily Mail, was not so circumspect. Under the headline "Allied troops storm massive chemical weapons factory", it reported the discovery as fact, quoting Pentagon sources describing the installation as "very well-disguised". Within 24 hours, General Tommy Franks, commander of the US-led forces, was ccautioning that most claims about weapons of mass destruction finds were "based on speculation". Former weapons inspectors also dismissed the reports.

4 Executions
A series of images broadcast on the Arabic television channel al-Jazeera have ignited one of the biggest controversies of the war. The channel showed lingering pictures of the bodies of two British soldiers, Sapper Luke Allsop and Staff Sergeant Simon Cullingworth, who had been caught in an ambush in southern Iraq. The Sun claimed the "sickening" al-Jazeera film showed the two men had been executed. "One trooper had a massive chest wound and the other's neck and upper chest was covered in blood," the report said. "Both men's faces were clearly visible on the film - shot at close range in the border town of Safwan."

During a press conference with George Bush at Camp David on Thursday evening, Tony Blair claimed the soldiers were the victims of "an act of cruelty beyond all human comprehension". But the prime minister's official spokesman later began backtracking from that position, saying there was no "absolute evidence" that they had been executed. British commanders in Qatar also downplayed the story, pointing out that the pictures were of poor quality.

Yesterday, the Mirror led with Luke Allsop's sister Nina emphatically denying that he had been executed. She said his colonel had told them he had died instantly when the vehicle was ambushed. But Downing Street was still insisting that it had acted on the basis of information from army commanders.

5 Basra uprising
With coalition forces brought to a halt by a fierce sandstorm and facing repeated guerilla attack by Iraqi forces, both the military and the media were searching for a breakthrough in the campaign. That came on Tuesday evening when BBC News 24 began broadcasting reports of an uprising against Saddam Hussein's forces in the southern city of Basra. This was momentous news. About 1,000 troops and militia loyal to President Saddam had held off the British forces dug in around the city for almost five days. Inside, a humanitarian crisis was unfolding as many of the 1.2 million residents were forced to survive without water or power. The story was broken by Richard Gaisford, a GMTV correspondent embedded with the British. He cited "military intelligence" as the source, and soon television news and wire services were running reports of British artillery hitting Iraqi mortar positions which had been firing on civilians. Pooled despatches from reporters with other British units around Basra added weight to the story.

On Wednesday morning, the Daily Telegraph greeted the uprising in a leader article as "the best news of the war so far for the allied forces". Except it was not so straightforward. Four days later, the much heralded uprising is yet to happen. The city remains under the control of Saddam Hussein's forces and the British remain camped on the outskirts.

6 Basra tank column
On Wednesday evening, news broke of one of the biggest tank battles involving British forces since the second world war. A convoy of up to 120 Iraqi armoured vehicles had been spotted breaking out of the southern city of Basra in broad daylight, heading south towards the British-held Faw peninsula in what commanders described as an "offensive posture".

TV news reports on Wednesday evening and newspapers on Thursday were filled with gripping accounts of the battle between British tanks and the Iraqi armour."British artillery and jets launched a fierce attack last night on a convoy of up to 120 Iraqi tanks and armoured personnel carriers seen pouring out of the city of Basra," the Guardian's front page story said. The story had come from correspondents with the British forces, who had been given accounts of the battle by commanders.

It was not until yesterday's MoD press briefing that the truth emerged: rather than 120 Iraqi vehicles, there had been only three. A contrite military admitted that the error had stemmed from an "erroneous signal" from the coalition's electronic moving target indicators. US Brigadier General Vince Brooks described it as a "classic example of the fog of war".
http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandt...925192,00.html

[ 03-30-2003, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

[John D Harris]

Are ther any pictures of this market? The ones I have seen fron Al Jazeera have shown a small crater 15 x 15 ft. Now if I rememer correctly the Tommahawk crusie missle has a 1,000 pound warhead and that makes approx. 100 x 100 ft crater.(That's on the conserveative side) it seems to me there are about 85 ft missing from the crater. The market looks like it is about the size of half a football field. the blast area or area of almost total destruction from a tommahawk cruise missle more then covers half a football field. Now the Crater form a falling SAM with a warhead of 50-100 lbs that would make about a 15x15 ft crater. But what does phsyics have to do with the facts presented by Al Jazeera.

[Skunk]

Originally posted by John D Harris: Are ther any pictures of this market? The ones I have seen fron Al Jazeera have shown a small crater 15 x 15 ft. Now if I rememer correctly the Tommahawk crusie missle has a 1,000 pound warhead and that makes approx. 100 x 100 ft crater.(That's on the conserveative side) it seems to me there are about 85 ft missing from the crater. The market looks like it is about the size of half a football field. the blast area or area of almost total destruction from a tommahawk cruise missle more then covers half a football field. Now the Crater form a falling SAM with a warhead of 50-100 lbs that would make about a 15x15 ft crater. But what does phsyics have to do with the facts presented by Al Jazeera.

The witness's it believed it to be a *plane*:
"Witnesses said the bombing took place when the market was at its busiest, around 6pm. They said they saw an aircraft flying high overhead just before the blast"
and the US Command *did* confirm that they were conducting an operation in the area, claiming that they were targeting AA installations.

I am no expert, and I have no idea what kind of munitions the fighter bombers are carrying, but I would expect that if they are serious about limiting civilian casualties and were targeting AA emplacements in a residential area, it would be a low yield munition, would it not?

A mis-fired/faulty UK/US air-to-ground missile is plausible.

As for Al-Jazeera's credentials, one thing to bear in mind is that the station grew out of BBC Arab News. A second is that almost every ME state (with the exception of Qatar) has tried to ban the station. The PA even arrested one of their journalists for reporting evidence of PA support for terrorisism (See: http://www.likud.nl/extr255.html). Try your own google search with +"Al Jazeera" +banned. You'll soon see what I mean.

Of course, I'm not saying that Al-Jazeera is not biased - even if it did win an Anti-Censorship award (http://media.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,...634155,00.html). I am only saying that it is no more pro-Arab than CNN is pro-US. To get a balanced picture, one has to watch both - unfortunately few people do.

[Night Stalker]

Even the smallest bombs dropped would have a larger impact crater than 15'. More likely it was a misfired MANPAD like an SA-7 or SA-11. They tried to shoot down the plane - and missed.