Julian Assange speaks in London on Aug. 18, 2014. (Wikimedia Commons)
The footage starts with an aerial view of a group of nine men walking along mostly-empty streets in Al-Amin, a neighborhood in Baghdad. Two of them are holding cameras, while two others appear to have weapons.
The black-and-white video quickly turns chaotic as U.S. forces on the Apache helicopter, with the call sign Crazyhorse 18, gain permission to fire and then shoot indiscriminately at the men.
Gunfire continues for 25 seconds and it appears that nearly everyone is dead. The airmen can be heard laughing and at one point complimenting each other on their “good shoot.”
But just as an explosion of dust fills the screen, Reuters staff photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen, 22, can be seen sprinting toward the right before crashing into a heap of trash and falling to the ground. The gunner then fires three more bursts with the cannon, killing Noor-Eldeen as he could be seen trying to stand, The Washington Post previously reported.
The 38-minute classified aerial video of a 2007 attack in a Baghdad suburb that killed at least 11 — including two Reuters staffers — was released by WikiLeaks in April 2010, causing a media maelstrom and bringing global attention on Julian Assange, the creator of the anti-secrecy website.
The leak came at a time when the Iraq War was widely unpopular across the country. President Barack Obama’s self-imposed deadline to shut down Guantánamo Bay had passed months ago without action, and his promises to end the “long war,” which began even before he took office in 2009, were starting to ring hollow.
News outlets around the world, including The Post, used video clips from “Collateral Murder” - the title WikiLeaks gave the raw footage, along with a 17-minute edited version and other documents - to publish their own stories. WikiLeaks also released a transcript of conversations between the U.S. forces firing on the Baghdad site.
Fourteen years after the video was published and the U.S. military verified its authenticity, Assange is on the precipice of a plea deal with the Justice Department, which could finally put an end to his international legal saga. News of his possible release has drawn applause and critique given that much of what put WikiLeaks on the global map came from obtaining and publishing classified military and diplomatic documents.
U.S. prosecutors did not, however, include the graphic video from Baghdad in the indictment against Assange, the Guardian reported in 2020. Assange was indicted in 2019 for violating the Espionage Act by publishing military documents about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and diplomatic cables almost six months after the Baghdad video was released.
U.S. prosecutors accused Assange of seeking to help hack into classified systems with Chelsea Manning, a former Army intelligence analyst. Manning was court-martialed and served seven years of a 35-year sentence for violating the Espionage Act, until Obama commuted her sentence in 2017.
When the video first published in 2010, the Pentagon had already identified WikiLeaks as a threat to national security in a confidential report, which was also published by the whistleblower website in 2010, leading to further embarrassment.
WikiLeaks’ arrival on the global scene shook up the international community and the journalism world. The New Yorker in 2010 asked, “What Does Julian Assange Want?” WikiLeaks received more than $200,000 in donations after publishing the Baghdad video, reported the New Yorker, and two days later, Assange tweeted: “New funding model for journalism: try doing it for a change.”
Others were critical of Assange. Lisa Lynch, an assistant professor of journalism at Concordia University in Montreal who has written academic papers on WikiLeaks, described the publication’s coverage at the time as “an audacious attempt to assert themselves into the conversation,” reported the New York Times.
The government’s assertion that WikiLeaks was a criminal entity for releasing leaked classified documents raised fears in the media industry about eroding access to government officials.
Reuters had seen the video footage of the Al-Amin attack before WikiLeaks published it, but the news outlet was unable to obtain it through a Freedom of Information request because the Pentagon blocked it.
At the time, WikiLeaks said that it had “obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers” and verified its authenticity in conversations with “witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.”
WikiLeaks said the specific aim of publishing this video was that “some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war,” The Post reported.
The existence of the video and killing of at least 11 people had already been reported before WikiLeaks but “Collateral Killing” still garnered international attention partly “because the banter of the soldiers was so far beyond the boundaries of civilian discourse,” according to the New Yorker.
When the lead helicopter opens fire, an airmen shouts: “Hahaha. I hit ’em.” Another responds a little later: “Oh yeah, look at those dead bastards.”
Once the dust settles and the helicopter hovers higher, a wounded survivor, believed to be Reuters driver Saeed Chmagh, 40, can be seen in the footage. He appears wounded and unarmed.
“All you got to do is pick up a weapon,” a crewman can be heard saying, hoping that the man reaches for a gun so there is a viable reason to shoot again.
The footage then shows a van drawing closer, as two unarmed men step out and start carrying the wounded victim to the vehicle. The helicopter requests permission to engage and, upon receiving it, opens fire again, killing the wounded man and those trying to help him, and injuring two children present in the van.
Ten minutes after the second round of shooting began, it’s discovered that children have been wounded. The aircrew can be heard blaming the Iraqis, reported the Guardian. “Well it’s their fault for bringing kids in to a battle,” says one. “That’s right,” says another.
