Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

Will U.S. Officials Bust an Icelandic Lawmaker Over Wikileaks and Bradley Manning?

J.D. Tuccille | 2.13.2013 12:50 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Birgitta Jonsdottir
Birgitta Jonsdottir

One of the things that got the United States government all hot and bothered over Bradley Manning's transmission of government information to Wikileaks was the transparency organization's subsequent release of a video of American troops firing from an Apache helicopter on civilians in Iraq. Numerous adults were killed during the incident, including good samaritans rendering assistance and two Reuters journalists. Two children were badly wounded. This isn't the only element of Manning's activities that bent U.S. officials out of shape, but it definitely didn't leave them well-disposed toward the soldier, or toward Wikileaks activists like Birgitta Jonsdottir, who will soon travel to the United States to see if government officials have the stones to arrest her, especially now that she's a member of Iceland's parliament.

Of the video of the killing in Iraq, Time's Mark Thompson wrote in 2010:

[T]he videotape was ultimately confirmed as genuine by U.S. military officials. There was as much irritation inside the Pentagon at whoever leaked the videotape as there was for WikiLeaks' posting of it.

Writes Ed Pilkington in The Guardian:

Birgitta Jónsdóttir, the Icelandic MP and member of the WikiLeaks team that released secret footage of a US Apache helicopter attack on civilians in Iraq, is planning to visit America for the first time since the 'Collateral Murder' video was made public to express her support for Bradley Manning, the video's alleged source.

Jónsdóttir plans to travel to New York on 5 April to mark the third anniversary of the posting of the footage, one of the most dramatic WikiLeaks releases and one that helped put the website and its founder Julian Assange on the global map. She is making the journey even though she has been advised by the Icelandic government not to do so for fear of legal retribution from US authorities.

In keeping with Iceland's reputation for being just freaking weird, Jonsdottir represents a party called The Movement, "aiming for democratic reform beyond party politics of left and right." No, nobody really seems to know what that means. She's also a self-described "poetician." OK. But she was also a co-producer on the Collateral Murder video released by Wikileaks depicting the helicopter attack in Iraq. The incident sufficiently upset the powers-that-be that FBI agents went to Iceland to interrogate Wikileaks activists. According to Wikileaks:

Recently it has become public that the FBI had secretly sent eight agents to Iceland in 2011 in relation to the ongoing U.S. investigation of WikiLeaks. The Icelandic Minister of Interior, Ögmundur Jónasson, has confirmed this to the Icelandic press and furthermore stated that when he found out on August 25th 2011 that the aim of the visit was to interrogate an Icelandic citizen he ordered the local police to cease all co-operation with the FBI. He indicated that the FBI had left the country the day after.

In a joint statement Monday from the Icelandic Police Chief and the Prosecutor General it is revealed that the FBI agents, in fact, did not leave the country immediately and were conducting interrogation of an Icelandic subject for at least five days, without the presence of Icelandic police officers.

The U.S. Justice Department also tried to pry information about Jonsdottir out of Internet companies, including Twitter. FBI high-handedness has now become a bit of a kerfuffle in Iceland, and the subject of an official investigation.

Jonsdottir has supposedly received verbal assurances from the U.S. government that she won't be arrested if she visits the land of the free. She has also received warnings from her own government not to believe those verbal assurances. She'll find out, one way or the other, when she visits the United States this coming April to drum up support for Bradley Manning.

A short version of the Collateral Murder video is below. A longer version, along with other information, can be found at the Collateral Murder Website.

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Tibetan Self-Immolation Cases Approach 100

J.D. Tuccille is a contributing editor at Reason.

Civil LibertiesWorldWikiLeaksChelsea ManningWarIraq
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (91)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. RenkBooo   12 years ago

    Dude she is pretty hot for an old chick, Id hit it.

    http://www.Anon-Tools.da.bz

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      Back off of human women, bot.

      1. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

        This is exactly why we need the Fourth Law of Robotics.

        1. Capt Ace Rimmer   12 years ago

          Ya'll are hilarious.

      2. db   12 years ago

        You stay away from our women, or so help me, I'll go all David Bowman up in your Central Cortex, anon-bot.

        1. db   12 years ago

          My Hero.

        2. db   12 years ago

          My Hero.

          1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

            Stop. Dave.

            Won't you stop. Dave?

            My mind is going.

            I can feel it.

            1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              Dave's not here!

              1. Another David   12 years ago

                I was in the bathroom! What'd I miss?

    2. Kaptious Kristen   12 years ago

      Who is Id and did he say how she was in bed?

      1. Raston Bot   12 years ago

        the Id is "the unorganized part of the personality structure that contains a human's basic, instinctual drives," e.g. the libido.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E....._and_Id#Id

        that anonbot would address humans as Id makes perfect sense as you are all mere children avoiding unpleasure in his superior eyes.

        1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

          "in his superior eyes"

          Oh ho, sez you Mr. Bot!

      2. Ted S.   12 years ago

        It's the place that produces monsters.

    3. BuSab Agent   12 years ago

      At least this one goes for adults.

      1. C. Anacreon   12 years ago

        Yes, very adult. I didn't realize how old Bjork had gotten.

        1. Groovus Maximus   12 years ago

          ZING!

  2. R C Dean   12 years ago

    My vague recollection is that the "Collateral Murder" video was rather tendentiously edited and presented, and that you shouldn't be shocked if you get lit up running toward a firefight carrying various bits of shoulder-mounted equipment and accompanied by armed men.

    1. Tman   12 years ago

      You are correct. This was not a case of the Military randomly firing at civilians for no reason. There were several RPG attacks that preceded the response.

      It is disingenuous -if not just simply bad journalism- to say that "a video of American troops firing from an Apache helicopter on civilians in Iraq. Numerous adults were killed during the incident, including good samaritans rendering assistance and two Reuters journalists. Two children were badly wounded." - without including the preceding reason for the retaliation from the Apache.

      1. John   12 years ago

        Yeah. Reason should be better than that.

        1. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

          I'm relatively new (couple years), but has anyone else noticed Reason, of late, has been spinning facts to fit the argument a bit more than they used to?

          The thing that brought me here was the honesty and objectivity.

          1. Groovus Maximus   12 years ago

            You're not the only one to notice this, FdA.

          2. db   12 years ago

            I've noticed it too. I'd prefer to see strict adherence to the facts, as it's much of what separates libertarians from our fantasy-world political cousins on Team BERULED.

      2. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

        The RPG attacks were about a mile away, and this is in the middle of a major city. This was the military equivalent of the LAPD freaking out about Dorner and shooting up random pickup trucks around LA because they were "acting suspicious".

        1. R C Dean   12 years ago

          The RPG attacks were about a mile away, and this is in the middle of a major city.

          So, about a brisk 15 minute walk from the battle?

          1. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

            If there's a bank robbery in a major city, is it safe to assume anyone within a "brisk 15 minute walk" of the crimescene who has a gun is likely involved with the robbery?

            1. R C Dean   12 years ago

              Try not to conflate law enforcement and the military, Stormy. I know; its hard. Too hard for most of our cops. But there is, and should be, a difference.

              1. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

                Yes, but that also doesn't mean the military ought to have carte blanche to shoot up civilians at will. I'm not sure if "was one of thousands of people in the general vicinity of a terror attack" is sufficient to justify premptively attacking them.

        2. R C Dean   12 years ago

          I would certainly agree that the quasi-warfighting ROE that the LAPD was apparently using are completely inappropriate for the police.

          Whether the warfighting ROE used by the military in Iraq were inappropriate is a completely separate issue.

    2. Redmanfms   12 years ago

      Your vague recollection sums it up nicely.

    3. Raston Bot   12 years ago

      were the running toward a firefight or just kind of aimlessly milling around?

      1. R C Dean   12 years ago

        My recollection is that there was an active firefight, and they were heading toward it, because journalism. A helicopter on overwatch noticed a group of people, some of them armed with rifles, heading toward the firefight. It engaged.

        As I recall, it also shot up some cars that came to evacuate the wounded. Which, if you're working assumption is that they were jihadis, seems pretty much SOP to me.

        1. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

          IIRC, wasn't there a rocket launcher (or several) edited out of the video or something?

          1. Juice   12 years ago

            No. Where'd you get this? Some men were carrying AK's on their backs but almost all men walking around in certain parts of Baghdad at that time would have been.

        2. kinnath   12 years ago

          They also called for permision to fire and were given permission.

          1. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

            PROCEDURES WERE FOLLOWED!

        3. Raston Bot   12 years ago

          I've seen greater purpose and direction in teens at the mall than those militants getting to a firefight.

          1. Redmanfms   12 years ago

            I've seen greater purpose and direction in teens at the mall than those militants getting to a firefight.

            Looks like pretty typical guerilla mob movement to me.

            These guys aren't military, they don't necessarily move with purpose or competence, they also typically trail entourages of non-combatants. Reference the footage that has come out of Libya and Syria.

            1. Adam   12 years ago

              As someone who lives in the Middle East, I can say that the "milling around" looked like just about any group of guys that were milling around for any number of reasons.

              "Looks like pretty typical guerilla mob movement to me." So how exactly does a typical "guerilla mob" move differently than, say, a group of guys talking about recent events down the road. You know what that would look like? Cameramen talking with a handful of locals about nearby fighting would be evident to you from a helicopter.

              I suppose a camera wouldn't look like a AK-47 either.

              1. Redmanfms   12 years ago

                So how exactly does a typical "guerilla mob" move differently than, say, a group of guys talking about recent events down the road.

                It doesn't and that's the point.

                I suppose a camera wouldn't look like a AK-47 either.

                He had a large bag and a tripod, but isn't it nice to know for certain that it was in fact camera equipment (hindsight, blah, blah) and if one watches the unedited version of the video many of those in the "group of guys talking about recent events down the road" had actually come from the fight and at least 3 were clearly armed. The photojournalist was being escorted by several men (including the dudes carrying weapons) in the direction of the fighting carrying a tripod and large bag.

                If this event had been the planned murder of a dissident journalist (as the video accuses) why was the guy's name not mentioned? Why all the subterfuge about the ongoing fight "down the road?" Why include in the conversation requesting release of weapons information about the armament and movement of the crowd?

      2. Juice   12 years ago

        None of the people shot and killed were running toward anything. Except maybe the people in the truck with the kids who "ran in" with their truck trying to help people who were shot and dying on the ground.

    4. Tulpa (LAOL-PA)   12 years ago

      My vague recollection is that the "Collateral Murder" video was rather tendentiously edited and presented, and that you shouldn't be shocked if you get lit up running toward a firefight carrying various bits of shoulder-mounted equipment and accompanied by armed men.

      And my clear recollection is that the US govt didn't attempt to dispute this, they just villified the people who released the video.

      1. Not an Economist   12 years ago

        Well if somebody edits a video to make you look bad, shouldn't you point that out?

  3. R C Dean   12 years ago

    Jonsdottir has supposedly received verbal assurances from the U.S. government that she won't be arrested if she visits the land of the free.

    I'd get in writing if I was her.

    1. Aresen   12 years ago

      Even then:

      "That was some other department that wrote that."

    2. Bardas Phocas   12 years ago

      That worked out well for the mj dispenseries.
      Didn't it?

      Trust the Government Man!

    3. BakedPenguin   12 years ago

      They had no problem arresting the CEO of Sporting Bet for running a company that allowed people to gamble in countries where it was legal. If they'll make an arrest just to protect the interests of their cronies, they sure won't care about some Icelandic pol.

  4. Episiarch   12 years ago

    Jonsdottir has supposedly received verbal assurances from the U.S. government that she won't be arrested if she visits the land of the free. She has also received warnings from her own government not to believe those verbal assurances.

    Considering all the evidence of petty power-mongering amongst our bureaucrats, politicians, and LEOs, I'm going to guess that they'll probably detain her at least. Thugs gotta thug.

    1. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

      Honestly, I wouldn't believe the US Government if they told me the sky was blue.

      1. Aresen   12 years ago

        They're working on changing it.

    2. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

      I would more expect some imperious TSA person, with a "I smell a powerful fart" look on their face, to come up and deny admittance to the US...so she ends up having to turn around and go back to Bjorkland.

      1. NeonCat   12 years ago

        CBP, not TSA.

    3. JW   12 years ago

      Wasn't there a guy yesterday, who happens to own a building with a medical pot clinic in it, who now regrets taking verbal advice from the Federalistas?

      1. Adam   12 years ago

        I also recall a guy trying to create a currency competing with the Fed's version experiencing a very similar form of regret.

  5. Bee Tagger   12 years ago

    Is this a state of emergency?

  6. Tim   12 years ago

    Can't Obama just order her killed?

    1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

      "Can't Obama just order her killed?"

      Well, let us just look on the ol' Threat Matrix here.... hmmm, Icelandickers seem to be in short supply. Hey, anyone got a pen, so I can make an addition here?

      /NSC staffer

      1. Tulpa (LAOL-PA)   12 years ago

        I nominate everyone responsible for Lazy Town. Bing Bang (Time To Die Now)

  7. db   12 years ago

    In a joint statement Monday from the Icelandic Police Chief and the Prosecutor General it is revealed that the FBI agents, in fact, did not leave the country immediately and were conducting interrogation of an Icelandic subject for at least five days, without the presence of Icelandic police officers.

    Sounds like kidnapping charges are in order.

    1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

      interrogation?

      That might be a basis for such a charge.

      If it was "talked with", then no go. Anyone speak Icelandic and can translate from the original release?

  8. SIV   12 years ago

    Back in the old country even the tofu is made out of horse meat.

    Elsewhere, scientists were already calling for urgent checks on lamb.

    1. Brett L   12 years ago

      So every meat in the world tastes like either horse or chicken. Good to know.

  9. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    The battlefield of the War on Terror includes every single square inch of the globe, and any person who doesn't agree is actively waging war against the Greatest Freest Nation Evar.

    Gentlemen, start your drones.

    1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

      "Gentlemen, start your drones."

      Worst. Formula One. Race. Evah.

      1. RickC   12 years ago

        Wouldn't be more like Death Race? The original version cause David Carradine rocked it. /sarc

  10. Raston Bot   12 years ago

    My guess is she will not attempt to pass through customs with any communications devices in her luggage.

  11. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    In a joint statement Monday from the Icelandic Police Chief and the Prosecutor General it is revealed that the FBI agents, in fact, did not leave the country immediately and were conducting interrogation of an Icelandic subject for at least five days, without the presence of Icelandic police officers.

    It's too bad this is not followed by, "Those agents are currently awaiting trial in an Icelandic prison."

    1. Lord Humungus   12 years ago

      yeah, I mean if I lived in a foreign country - and especially if I was not a U.S. citizen - any visit by the FBI would be met by laughter and then a hearty "Fuck You" as I slam the door. Any other contact by them would be bet by violence for home invasion/trespassing.

      1. db   12 years ago

        Diplomatic Immunity!

        1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

          Revoked, Muthafu&%er!

          /Murtaugh

  12. Tim   12 years ago

    It's hard to process why they opened fire on that van in particular. The pilots are saying that they're taking bodies and weapons, but the only thing they do up until the point they get shredded is try to pick up the wounded man.

    1. John   12 years ago

      You can avoid the problem of getting shot while picking up a wounded man by wearing a uniform and putting a big red cross/crescent on your vehicle.

      1. Tim   12 years ago

        Mostly I feel bad for the kids.

      2. Tulpa (LAOL-PA)   12 years ago

        Uhhhhh what?

        I've heard of irregular combatants, but irregular Good Samaritans are also now subject to immediate execution?

        1. R C Dean   12 years ago

          How, exactly, do you determine that someone rendering aid to an illegal combatant is not also an illegal combatant?

          Its not exactly an open and shut decision, IMO.

      3. Les   12 years ago

        So, remember kids, if you see an explosion and wounded people in need of help, check to see if you have the right uniform and/or vehicle.

        If you don't, best to let the victims bleed to death.

        1. Adam   12 years ago

          Exactly what I was thinking when I read that. One of the interesting things here (most Arab countries) is that the typical accident (non-accident) victim who needs to go immediately to the hospital is far more likely to be delivered by a private vehicle, often a taxi. In fact, I was advised that if I'm involved in a bad accident and someone needs immediate medical help to just stick him in the nearest taxi instead of waiting for an ambulance.

          Sure enough, about two weeks later I was near a bad accident where a pedestrian was hit by a car, and that's exactly what his friends did. That was after the driver of the offendign car raced off to avoid being beaten to death. I was told he probably raced to the police station for protection.

    2. R C Dean   12 years ago

      If you're thinking they're jihadis, then I can see taking out the van trying to evacuate them. Its a much tougher call, as the van is a quasi-ambulance at that point, but its not marked (again, TTBOMR), and these are presumptive war criminals/illegal combatants, so . . . .

      1. John   12 years ago

        It is unmarked. If a US vehicle doesn't have a cross on it, it is a fair target even if it is picking up a wounded guy

        1. Zeb   12 years ago

          Fair target doesn't necessarily mean a good idea. Just saying.

          1. John   12 years ago

            I think killing the enemy is always a good idea. I don't expect helicopter pilots to contemplate the greater significance of their actions, just kill the right guys.

            1. Les   12 years ago

              Isn't the point here that "killing the right guys" is exactly what they didn't do?

            2. In Time Of War   12 years ago

              Exactly! That's why submariners have such a long and hallowed history of machine-gunning survivors in the water.

        2. Tulpa (LAOL-PA)   12 years ago

          By US vehicle you mean a civilian vehicle owned and operated by a civilian in a US city, picking up a wounded guy not wearing a military uniform?

          1. R C Dean   12 years ago

            Of course, if you deemed any person or vehicle not kitted out in a Geneva Convention uniform or markers as being off-limits in Iraq, then I think you'd have had real problems doing any warfighting, since the enemy declined to comply with those particular requirements.

            1. Scooby   12 years ago

              Not being able to do any warfighting in Iraq would have been a feature, not a bug, wouldn't it?

  13. Ken Shultz   12 years ago

    Our government is so freakin' creepy.

    What amounts to the head of Iceland's version of the FBI makes it clear that he wants our eight FBI agents to get lost, and they just stay anyway--and keep interrogating people?

    No wonder so many people in other countries hate us.

    Can you imagine if Iceland's version of the FBI did that to an American citizen? Just came here to the U.S. and started interrogating an American citizen, and when we made it clear we wanted them to leave the U.S., they just kept their interrogation going for another five days?

    That's outrageous.

    1. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

      I'm pretty sure we're immune to the whole "walk a mile in another's moccasins" mindset. If they did it to us we'd demand drone strikes!

    2. Skyhawk   12 years ago

      I have a sneaking suspicion that the public comments made by the Icelandic government were the complete opposite of what was actually happening behind closed doors.

    3. Invisible Finger   12 years ago

      If she gets detained here, the unwanted FBI agents may get detained there.

      I doubt anything will come of this, our government wants no part in bringing any more attention to the matter. It's under the radar now which is just the way they want it.

  14. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    I think killing the enemy is always a good idea.

    Come on, John. Let's see you run around in circles, howling and biting your tail.

    KILLKILLKILLKILLKILLKILLKILLKILLKILLKILLKILLKILL

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Campaign Finance Laws Institutionalize Corruption

David Keating | 6.23.2025 5:45 PM

Iran's Warning Shot Gives Trump a Way Out of Israel's War

Matthew Petti | 6.23.2025 5:00 PM

This Military Wife and Mom Is Part of the 65 Percent of ICE Detainees With No Criminal Record

Autumn Billings | 6.23.2025 4:43 PM

Vance Says Bombing Iran Is Different From Other 'Dumb' Presidents' Military Actions

Joe Lancaster | 6.23.2025 3:15 PM

A Brief, Bloody History of All the Times the U.S. Caused Chaos in the Middle East

Matthew Petti | 6.23.2025 2:47 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!