"He's just sleeping, I kept telling myself"

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
48
www.soundclick.com
#1
"He's just sleeping, I kept telling myself"
The Guardian
Tuesday September 14, 2004

On Sunday, 13 Iraqis were killed and dozens injured in Baghdad when US helicopters fired on a crowd of unarmed civilians. G2 columnist Ghaith Abdul-Ahad, who was injured in the attack, describes the scene of carnage - and reveals just how lucky he was to walk away.



It started with a phone call early on Sunday morning: "Big pile of smoke over Haifa Street." Still half asleep I put on my jeans, cursing those insurgents who do their stuff in the early morning. What if I just go back to bed, I thought - by the time I will be there it will be over. In the car park it struck me that I didn't have my flak jacket in the car, but figured it was most probably just an IED (improvised explosive device) under a Humvee and I would be back soon.
On the way to Haifa Street I was half praying that everything would be over or that the Americans would seal off the area. I haven't recovered from Najaf yet.

Haifa Street was built by Saddam in the early 80s, part of a scheme that was supposed to give Baghdad a modern look. A long, wide boulevard with huge Soviet high-rise buildings on both sides, it acts like a curtain, screening off the network of impoverished alleyways that are inhabited by Baghdad's poorest and toughest people, many of whom are from the heart of the Sunni triangle.

When I arrived there I saw hundreds of kids and young men heading towards the smoke. "Run fast, it's been burning for a long time!" someone shouted as I grabbed my cameras and started to run.

When I was 50m away I heard a couple of explosions and another cloud of dust rose across the street from where the first column of smoke was still climbing. People started running towards me in waves. A man wearing an orange overall was sweeping the street while others were running. A couple of helicopters in the sky overhead turned away. I jumped into a yard in front of a shop that was set slightly back from the street, 10 of us with our heads behind the yard wall. "It's a sound bomb," said a man who had his face close to mine.

A few seconds later, I heard people screaming and shouting - something must have happened - and I headed towards the sounds, still crouching behind a wall. Two newswire photographers were running in the opposite direction and we exchanged eye contact.

About 20m ahead of me, I could see the American Bradley armoured vehicle, a huge monster with fire rising from within. It stood alone, its doors open, burning. I stopped, took a couple of photos and crossed the street towards a bunch of people. Some were lying in the street, others stood around them. The helicopters were still buzzing, but further off now.

I felt uneasy and exposed in the middle of the street, but lots of civilians were around me. A dozen men formed a circle around five injured people, all of whom were screaming and wailing. One guy looked at one of the injured men and beat his head and chest: "Is that you, my brother? Is that you?" He didn't try to reach for him, he just stood there looking at the bloodied face of his brother.

A man sat alone covered with blood and looked around, amazed at the scene. His T-shirt was torn and blood ran from his back. Two men were dragging away an unconscious boy who had lost the lower half of one leg. A pool of blood and a creamy liquid formed beneath the stump on the pavement. His other leg was badly gashed.

I had been standing there taking pictures for two or three minutes when we heard the helicopters coming back. Everyone started running, and I didn't look back to see what was happening to the injured men. We were all rushing towards the same place: a fence, a block of buildings and a prefab concrete cube used as a cigarette stall.

I had just reached the corner of the cube when I heard two explosions, I felt hot air blast my face and something burning on my head. I crawled to the cube and hid behind it. Six of us were squeezed into a space less than two metres wide. Blood started dripping on my camera but all that I could think about was how to keep the lens clean. A man in his 40s next to me was crying. He wasn't injured, he was just crying. I was so scared I just wanted to squeeze myself against the wall. The helicopters wheeled overhead, and I realised that they were firing directly at us. I wanted to be invisible, I wanted to hide under the others.

As the helicopters moved a little further off, two of the men ran away to a nearby building. I stayed where I was with a young man, maybe in his early 20s, who was wearing a pair of leather boots and a tracksuit. He was sitting on the ground, his legs stretched in front of him but with his knee joint bent outwards unnaturally. Blood ran on to the dirt beneath him as he peered round the corner. I started taking pictures of him. He looked at me and turned his head back towards the street as if he was looking for something. His eyes were wide open and kept looking.

~continued~
 
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
48
www.soundclick.com
#2
There in the street, the injured were all left alone: a young man with blood all over his face sat in the middle of the cloud of dust, then fell on to his face.

Behind the cube, the other two men knew each other.

"How are you?" asked the man closer to me. He was lying against the cube's wall and trying to pull out his cellphone.

"I am not good," said the other, a young man in a blue T-shirt, resting against a fence. He was holding his arm, a chunk of which was missing, exposing the bone.

"Bring a car and come here please, we are injured," his friend was saying into his cellphone.

The man with his knee twisted out, meanwhile, was making only a faint sound. I was so scared I didn't want to touch him. I kept telling myself he was OK, he wasn't screaming.

I decided to help the guy with the phone who was screaming. I ripped his T-shirt off and told him to squeeze it against the gash on his head. But I was scared; I wanted to do something, but I couldn't. I tried to remember the first-aid training I had had in the past, but all I was doing was taking pictures.

I turned back to the man with the twisted knee. His head was on the curb now, his eyes were open but he just kept making the faint sound. I started talking to him, saying, "Don't worry, you'll be OK, you'll be fine." From behind him I looked at the middle of the street, where five injured men were still lying. Three of them were piled almost on top of each other; a boy wearing a white dishdasha lay a few metres away.

One of the three men piled together raised his head and looked around the empty streets with a look of astonishment on his face. He then looked at the boy in front of him, turned to the back and looked at the horizon again. Then he slowly started moving his head to the ground, rested his head on his arms and stretched his hands towards something that he could see. It was the guy who had been beating his chest earlier, trying to help his brother. He wanted help but no one helped. He was just there dying in front of me. Time didn't exist. The streets were empty and silent and the men lay there dying together. He slid down to the ground, and after five minutes was flat on the street.

I moved, crouching, towards where they were. They were like sleeping men with their arms wrapped around each other in the middle of the empty street. I went to photograph the boy with the dishdasha. He's just sleeping, I kept telling myself. I didn't want to wake him. The boy with the amputated leg was there too, left there by the people who were pulling him earlier. The vehicle was still burning.

More kids ventured into the street, looking with curiosity at the dead and injured. Then someone shouted "Helicopters!" and we ran. I turned and saw two small helicopters, black and evil. Frightened, I ran back to my shelter where I heard two more big explosions. At the end of the street the man in the orange overall was still sweeping the street.

The man with the bent knee was unconscious now, his face flat on the curb. Some kids came and said, "He is dead." I screamed at them. "Don't say that! He is still alive! Don't scare him." I asked him if he was OK, but he didn't reply.

We left the kids behind the bent-knee guy, the cellphone guy and the blue V-neck T-shirt guy; they were all unconscious now. We left them to die there alone. I didn't even try to move any with me. I just ran selfishly away. I reached a building entrance when someone grabbed my arm and took me inside. "There's an injured man. Take pictures - show the world the American democracy," he said. A man was lying in the corridor in total darkness as someone bandaged him.

Some others told me there was another journalist in the building. They took me to a stairwell leading to the basement, where a Reuters cameraman, a cheerful chubby guy, was lying holding his camera next to his head. He wasn't screaming but he had a look of pain in his eyes.

I tried to remember his name to call his office, but I couldn't. He was a friend, we had worked together for months. I have seen him in every press conference, but I couldn't remember his name.

In time, an ambulance came. I ran to the street as others emerged from their hiding places, all trying to carry injured civilians to the ambulance.

"No, this one is dead," said the driver. "Get someone else."

The ambulance drove away and we all scattered, thinking to ourselves: the Americans won't fire at an ambulance but they will at us. This scene was repeated a couple of times: each time we heard an ambulance we would emerge into the streets, running for cover again as it left.

Yesterday, sitting in the office, another photographer who was looking at my pictures exclaimed: "So the Arabiya journalist was alive when you were taking pictures!"

"I didn't see the Arabiya journalist."

He pointed at the picture of the guy with V-neck T-shirt. It was him. He was dead. All the people I had shared my shelter with were dead.

Ghaith Abdul Ahad

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1303827,00.html
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I found this to be a great article and thought I'd share this with the GOM fam....
There's always two sides to every war, out here we only hear one side of it.
This article paints a very graphic picture of the civilian casualty side of war....

The horrors of war.
While we go on with our lives, we don't think much of the people living through hell.
Yet most of us sit in the comfort of our homes debating amongst each other whether war is a necessary tool.
I wonder what our opinions would be if the war was fought on our turf.
Would the necessity of war even be debated?
We are so selfish....
 
Mar 18, 2003
5,362
194
0
44
#4
If you create a thread about how Americans are helping Iraqi's it will just get bombarded with articles about Americans killing civilians. That is why you don't see people up on it. It's all one sided around these parts.
 
Mar 18, 2003
5,362
194
0
44
#5
Well there is a lot more bad shit then good with our situation in Iraq, especially now more than ever. A lot of soldiers went in wanting to help Iraqi's, but it seems like things are slowly changing. Most of these soldiers now just want out of the country, while the others continue to pour amunition into the streets. The "good hearted stories" should be recognized, but they are overshadowed, and less frequent as time goes on.
 
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
48
www.soundclick.com
#10
Lil Pino said:
I agree. It seems that all these anti-U.S. sentiments focus solely on the war side and not that the troops are helping the people. It is a two sided issue, so when reporting that we bomb them and kill their civilians we must also report that we are also trying to aid them.
True, but that is not what our media is doing.
Real journalism consists of covering the entire picture.
 
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
48
www.soundclick.com
#11
Nitro the Guru said:
If you create a thread about how Americans are helping Iraqi's it will just get bombarded with articles about Americans killing civilians. That is why you don't see people up on it. It's all one sided around these parts.
In the words of Michael Moore, "I tell one side of the story because our media is already doing a great job of covering the other side"....

In other words, no point in bringing up the obvious....
 
Mar 18, 2003
5,362
194
0
44
#12
The obvious? The obvious is what a big fuck up this is. When I turn on the television I see people bashing Bush just as I do on this message board. In this forum it's like 90% bro. Thats a cute little quote, but extremely outdated. The only people covering Bush's side of the story are Bush loyalists, and you know that will never change.
 
Jul 7, 2002
3,105
0
0
#13
Nitro the Guru said:
The obvious? The obvious is what a big fuck up this is. When I turn on the television I see people bashing Bush just as I do on this message board. In this forum it's like 90% bro. Thats a cute little quote, but extremely outdated. The only people covering Bush's side of the story are Bush loyalists, and you know that will never change.
But what about the months before/after the war. WHere was the media questioning the war...and as i said before why did 70% of the population believed iraq was involved in 9/11, and that Saddam had ties with al queda. that is why the majoirty of the people in polls were supporting the war, and the rest of the world looked in disbelief.
 
Mar 18, 2003
5,362
194
0
44
#15
nefar559 said:
But what about the months before/after the war. WHere was the media questioning the war...and as i said before why did 70% of the population believed iraq was involved in 9/11, and that Saddam had ties with al queda.
I don't think the media is completely to blame. The biggest reason Americans believe Saddam had ties with al-Qaeda is because they cant distinguish between different cultures in the middle east. I wouldn't be suprised if 70% of Americans believe that "Middle Eastern" is a nationality. Bush could have said Iran was completely behind 9/11 and you would get the same results. Is the media to blame for this? It's not like they put a Bush body double behind a podium to declare Saddam behind the 9/11 attacks.
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,356
218
0
70
#16
Nitro the Guru said:
When I turn on the television I see people bashing Bush just as I do on this message board.
What fucking channel??? Tell me please.

How can you praise Bush? Nitro you're so obsessed with the idiotic FNC notion of "Fair and Balanced" that you miss site of the big picture.

1. I fail to see all this Bush-bashing. Please, tell me where it is. I may watch TV often again.

2. Bush is a fuck up. Plain and simple. What happens when you elect a fool? Foolish things.
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,356
218
0
70
#17
Nitro the Guru said:
The biggest reason Americans believe Saddam had ties with al-Qaeda is because they cant distinguish between different cultures in the middle east.
GNDSJBGDSJKGBSDJKGBVDS BGSDKfg,dghkdghl,dgh,ldgh,,ghd,dgh

Hahahaha.

While it is true that 1. American's can't distinguish between nation-states or cultures *anywhere*, the main reason people though the connection existed is because BUSH IMPLIED IT.

"We can't wait for the Mushroom Cloud, we are fighting Terror, look what Terrorists did on our own soil"

Bush could have said Iran was completely behind 9/11 and you would get the same results.
True, but Bush is supposed to be a SMART GUY. Bush and Co implied it up until the very end when they absolutely HAD to recant. God you are like a fuckin sheep who, when informed of its own existance, argues as to the nature of wood fencing. What is the issue here? Is the issue that Americans are culturally geocentric? Or is the issue the fact that Bush and company fooled the idiots of our humble nation into an Iraq-9/11 connection to bolster his war support?

"Hey, we can't tell Uzbekistan from France!" While that might be true, Bush either can't, or doesn't. You hold the fault with the person who makes the decisions...not the people who could really give two shits.

Is the media to blame for this? It's not like they put a Bush body double behind a podium to declare Saddam behind the 9/11 attacks.
It's also not like they said ANYTHING critical leading up to the war. What was the war coverage, 50/50 positive and negative?? Fuck no. It was probly 50 percent positive, 40 percent neutral, and 10 percent negative. These are the people who are supposed to instill doubt in our minds about anything and everything. You're in school Nitro. Research the scientific method. Science does not "prove" anything...it lends itself to being disproved constantly.

There was no fucking debate about Iraq. None whatsoever. Our congresspeople stood behind it, and we got goaded into it. The "liberal media" seriously fucked up on this one.

And you defend Bush why? To be fair and balanced? Maybe he gets negative coverage because he's an inadequate, incompetent failure. Did that ever cross your mind? Or did you sit at a tack board counting negative and positive and decide there needed to be more positives?
 
Mar 18, 2003
5,362
194
0
44
#19
WHITE DEVIL said:
True, but Bush is supposed to be a SMART GUY. Bush and Co implied it up until the very end when they absolutely HAD to recant. God you are like a fuckin sheep who, when informed of its own existance, argues as to the nature of wood fencing. What is the issue here? Is the issue that Americans are culturally geocentric? Or is the issue the fact that Bush and company fooled the idiots of our humble nation into an Iraq-9/11 connection to bolster his war support?
Let me get this straight. As far as this discussion is concerned: I believe that Bush is unfit for office; that he tricked the American people into believing Iraq had something to do with 9/11; yet I am a sheep... how so? And as you answer this, in what ways do you differ, that make you unlike myself, a sheep as you put it.

WHITE DEVIL said:
"Hey, we can't tell Uzbekistan from France!" While that might be true, Bush either can't, or doesn't. You hold the fault with the person who makes the decisions...not the people who could really give two shits.
I think you took what I said out of context, or perhaps, just maybe, I worded it differently than it was intended. When I say Americans believe Iraq was behind 9/11 - because they can't tell the difference - it is to highlight a correlation to those who have the advantage, or the power to utilize this ignorance to trick the American people. Would I blame you for touching a hot stove, even though you didn't know it was hot - how can you argue it either way? You're so stuck on pointing out my flaws, that you completely fail to realize that the ignorance of Americans, and the American government exploiting this ignorance go hand in hand, or in other wrods, they are one in the same. I pointed out the ignorance of Americans because people seem to think that if Bush says it, then Americans believe it when in reality, it only works when the American people are ignorant of what Bush tells them.

WHITE DEVIL said:
"And you defend Bush why? To be fair and balanced? Maybe he gets negative coverage because he's an inadequate, incompetent failure. Did that ever cross your mind? Or did you sit at a tack board counting negative and positive and decide there needed to be more positives?
As I read this, questions arouse as to how one human can be so dumb. Should I engrave it, etch it into stone, tattoo it, for nothing seems to work.

You continue on the same path, accusing me of praising Bush, when I have done nothing of the sort. I made a comment about blame needing to be placed on Americans for being so gullible, and you say I praise Bush. I say that I see democrats (answer to half your post) bash the president on television, and you call me a sheep. I am left with the understanding that you know nothing of what these terms truely mean.

I do honestly believe that you have some obsession with me; this need to refute my every word. And when I point it out, nothing but sarcasm to mask your true colors.

I do not claim to be "down the middle", or "fair and balanced", as you claim. I just don't like either side. So you will have to forgive me if I wish both the democrat and republican party a swift demise. For you to think this there is even a middle says a great deal about your infatuation with politics. How about this, I am now self proclaimed to be Diagonal.

I do not wish to go this route. I have had plenty of peacefull discussions with many of the members affiliated with this forum, so I ask you, with respect, either discuss these topics (my posts) in a civilized manner, or just stay the fuck away from them. Look at the type of responses you're giving, they are not even associated with mine. I read over these three posts and through most of them I asked myself, did he respond to the correct thread?



Now shower me with sarcasm, my dear friend WHITE DEVIL.
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,356
218
0
70
#20
First, I never use sarcasm. It's a tool of liberals and stuffy college intellectual liberal types in turtlenecks and glasses and shit. Fuckin college faggots.

Second we have this...
Nitro the Guru said:
Let me get this straight. As far as this discussion is concerned: I believe that Bush is unfit for office; that he tricked the American people into believing Iraq had something to do with 9/11; yet I am a sheep... how so? And as you answer this, in what ways do you differ, that make you unlike myself, a sheep as you put it.
Are you a sheep? That's up to you. What I said was you were *like* a "sheep" who being ignorant or dismissal of its own "sheepishness", decides to instead discuss something completely irrelevant.

In this case, instead of placing the blame on Bush for starting a war of choice and not necessity, (while he was obviously gunning for Iraq in the first place) you place the blame on the cultural and paroquial centricity of Americans. While that is obviously an issue, the real issue is who brought us to war and how we got there. In other words, which is a larger issue, "Am I a sheep"? or "is that a wood or metal fence"?

I think you took what I said out of context, or perhaps, just maybe, I worded it differently than it was intended. When I say Americans believe Iraq was behind 9/11 - because they can't tell the difference - it is to highlight a correlation to those who have the advantage, or the power to utilize this ignorance to trick the American people.
What I took it as was this - the primary blame for believing in a Hussein-9/11 connection lies in the attitudes of America, not our leaders.

Would I blame you for touching a hot stove, even though you didn't know it was hot - how can you argue it either way? You're so stuck on pointing out my flaws, that you completely fail to realize that the ignorance of Americans, and the American government exploiting this ignorance go hand in hand, or in other wrods, they are one in the same. I pointed out the ignorance of Americans because people seem to think that if Bush says it, then Americans believe it when in reality, it only works when the American people are ignorant of what Bush tells them.
I don't blame America for believing that. A fact I quote often...Average American = 1500 hours of TV yearly, along with 90 hours of book reading. I give a shit about your "flaws", I just think you sometimes subvert reality in order to simply support Bush. And as for how you see people on TV bashing Bush daily, I really, honestly wish I could see that. All I see are neutral or positive stories about him, especially on the ever-so-popular "Fox News Channel", which is affecting the entire political discourse in America with its "right is center" attitude.

The ignorance of Americans is well known...I would not disagree with you about that for a second. However, we can't expect Americans to read/learn/etc. That would be asking way too much. Instead, we hopefully elect leaders who are able to see beyond our borders, the Bible, or the comments of Limbaugh (Bush regularly listens to the idiot).

American politics is a joke. We elect based on attractiveness, catch phrases, and an overall ignorance to the world. Perhaps one day we will elect capable leaders.

As I read this, questions arouse as to how one human can be so dumb. Should I engrave it, etch it into stone, tattoo it, for nothing seems to work.
Definitely etch. Etch-A-Sketch, as a matter of fact.

You continue on the same path, accusing me of praising Bush, when I have done nothing of the sort. I made a comment about blame needing to be placed on Americans for being so gullible, and you say I praise Bush.
I didn't see you as blaming Bush, which is where the obvious blame lies, regardless of your political stripe. Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc. fought a pre-emptive, elective war, one they planned the same day as 9/11.

I say that I see democrats (answer to half your post) bash the president on television, and you call me a sheep.
I said *like*. Furthermore, I qualified the simile with a situation. I could have said "A prisoner who argues as to the nature of mildew", "a dying man wondering about the intricacies of sewing", etc. It was a somewhat complex metaphor. You saw the sheep part and ran with it.

I don't see Democrats or anyone else attacking Bush on TV often.

I am left with the understanding that you know nothing of what these terms truely mean.
What are you getting at? Philosophical sheep? Forms? String theory?

It has wool, it makes a *baaaa* noise. Or maybe a *behhhh*.

I do honestly believe that you have some obsession with me; this need to refute my every word. And when I point it out, nothing but sarcasm to mask your true colors.
Once again, I never use sarcasm. It is a tool of the weak to mask their true colors.

I do not claim to be "down the middle", or "fair and balanced", as you claim. I just don't like either side. So you will have to forgive me if I wish both the democrat and republican party a swift demise. For you to think this there is even a middle says a great deal about your infatuation with politics. How about this, I am now self proclaimed to be Diagonal.
I don't claim to be either. Your statement, made several times, about defending Bush or presenting the other side because no one does, is a "fair and balanced" thing. Let me know if you never made that statement, or I am quoting you out of context.

I do not wish to go this route. I have had plenty of peacefull discussions with many of the members affiliated with this forum, so I ask you, with respect, either discuss these topics (my posts) in a civilized manner, or just stay the fuck away from them. Look at the type of responses you're giving, they are not even associated with mine. I read over these three posts and through most of them I asked myself, did he respond to the correct thread?
My posts were hardly hostile. You saw the sheep thing and got in a panty twist without actually understanding what I meant. I will quote myself on the "sheep" thing:

"What is the issue here? Is the issue that Americans are culturally geocentric? Or is the issue the fact that Bush and company fooled the idiots of our humble nation into an Iraq-9/11 connection to bolster his war support?

This thread is about Iraq. Supporting Bush or the "other side" because "no one else does", even if the position is wrong, is being "fair and balanced". You made these statements yourself...unless I am wrong about them. Where this comes out is how you rarely debate an issue dealing with the present without somehow supporting Bush/the USA/conservatism/etc. whether or not you even believe you are taking the correct position.