Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Scores Killed, Hundreds Wounded in Bomb Attacks in Baghdad
BAGHDAD - Twin car bombs targeted two government buildings in downtown Baghdad Sunday, wrecking pillars of the state's authority and cutting like a scythe through snarled traffic during the morning rush hour. The government said at least 108 people were killed and 512 wounded in one of the worst attacks in Baghdad.
Smoke rises near the Iraqi Ministry of Justice, shortly after a blast, in Baghdad October 25, 2009. Twin car bombs targeting two government buildings killed at least 75 people and wounded 460 in central Baghdad on Sunday, police and health officials said, in the bloodiest attack in the capital for two months.
REUTERS/Stringer (IRAQ CONFLICT) The first bomb struck an intersection near the Justice Ministry and the Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works at around 10:15 a.m. on the first day of the Iraqi work week, when streets are always more crowded. Less than a minute later, a second blast targeted the Baghdad provincial headquarters, draped in a sign heralding its renovation.
The bombings bore the hallmarks of an Aug. 19 attack that targeted the Finance and Foreign Ministries, killing more than 100 people. Both appeared aimed at undermining faith in the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has staked his political future on restoring a semblance of security to the war-wrecked country.
Hours after the attack, he visited the scene, surveying the damage.
"This is part of the struggle over power in Iraq, and Iraqis will have to sacrifice themselves for it," said Mohammed al-Rubai, an opponent of Maliki who serves as a member of the Baghdad provincial council. "Everyone in charge shares responsibility."
The blasts, which the Interior Ministry said were carried out by suicide bombers, detonated under a pale gray sky, shattering windows more than a mile away. Broken water mains sent water coursing through the street, strewn with debris. Pools of water mixed with blood gathered along the curbs, detritus floating on the surface.
Cars caught in traffic jams turned into tombs, bodies incinerated inside.
"Bodies were hurled into the air," said Mohammed Fadhil, a 19-year-old bystander. "I saw women and children cut in half." He looked down at a curb smeared with blood. "What's the sin that those people committed? They are so innocent."
The cacophony of destruction ensued after the blasts: the thud of helicopters intersecting with the noon call to prayer as rescue workers frantically pulled charred bodies from crumpled cars. Broken glass littered the sidewalk like ice in a hailstorm.
"Bring blankets! Bring blankets!" Iraqi relief officials shouted at colleagues, as they trudged through the flooded streets. "There are more bodies!"
"Clear the street!" other police shouted at bystanders who had gathered.
On the sidewalk, corpses were covered in checkered brown blankets.
"What kind of improvement is there? None," said Riyadh Jumaa, 32, who fled with his 3-year-old son in his arms. When the second blast struck, both were hurled to the ground. "The ministers, the officers, they're sitting in their chairs doing nothing."
Like the Aug. 19 attack, the blasts Sunday bore a cold logic, seemingly designed to reveal the government's inability to protect the capital, the seat of its authority.
The earlier attacks prompted criticism of Maliki because his administration had scaled back security measures in Baghdad just days earlier. Maliki blamed those attacks on members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party allied with the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq. In the wake of the attacks, his government arrested several army and police officers, accusing them of negligence. Officials also promptly purported to have detained the culprits, and they aired a video of a man who confessed to organizing the attacks. American officials later cast doubt on the veracity of the arrests or confession.
The attacks Sunday seem sure to accentuate doubts in Maliki's ability to maintain security, the cornerstone of his party's campaign in national elections in January. Critics have lambasted him for being overconfident in his security forces' readiness as American forces pull back from the cities in preparation of a larger U.S. withdrawal next year.
At the scene, bystanders grew angry as high-ranking police and army officers visited the devastated ministries, surrounded by security details of dozens of men.
"Look! 200 just to protect him!" shouted Ahmed Abed. "Who has trust in the government," he went on. "Why should I have trust? Should I trust the son of a dog?"
In front of the provincial headquarters, Iman Barazinji, a Kurdish member of the provincial headquarters, made the same complaint, echoing popular frustration at the inability of Baghdad's ubiquitous checkpoints to stop cars laden with explosives and at the caravans that escort officials ensconced in offices fortified by blast walls.
"We don't want anyone to hide behind the walls any longer," she shouted.
Correspondent Ernesto Londoño and special correspondents Aziz Alwan and Qais Mizher contributed to this report.
14 Comments so far
Show AllJust another gift from Bush/Cheney and the psychopaths they have doing the bidding of the corporate murderers.
Bring America Back !!!!
****These kinds of atrocities were NOT happening in Baghdad
prior to the US Invasion and Occupation of 2003!!!
****If the so called 'Surge' was such a success as touted and reported---WHY are these atrocities still happening ????
The only humane answer is:
GET OUT OF IRAQ====GET OUT OF AFGHAN===STAY OUT OF IRAN !!!!
BRING OUR TROOPS HOME N O W !!!!
O'l Malaki is going to have to use Saddam's tactics of control, if he hasn't been using them already.
Yes, we have created another Saddam! Justice goes out the window when you are trying to stop such violence.
The problem is the United States has divided that country up and gave one group power. Power to obey the wishes of it's corporate masters.
- GET OUT OF IRAQ====GET OUT OF AFGHAN===STAY OUT OF IRAN !!!!
BRING OUR TROOPS HOME N O W !!!! -
I have posted a plan to do this. Repeatedly.
American troops will stay in Iraq to prevent future terrorism, because that's what Congress told them to do.
American troops will get stuck in other places because Congress told them to prevent future terrorism.
TruthKnoller, will your post next year include more places that US troops should leave?
You can't expect the military to go against orders, against what they're told to do.
If you want to stop this madness, repeal the insane law that Congress passed. Change the orders for the military.
Blaming these bombings on the ususal suspects--"suicide" bombers--prior to any evidence ruling out remote control is quite wrong. We must remember that the US govenment would like to see--to the point of actually implementing--such destruction as it provides it a rationale for its remaining--and with its history of death squad promotion and other past bombings done by CIA, the US government cannot feign innocence by saying "we'd never do such a thing."
I wonder if they will find anymore "Foreign soldiers" disguised as Arabs with a carload of bombs.
Looks like another convenient excuse to stay there.
It's hard to believe that Iraqis would do such horrible things, just as it's hard to believe that Pakistanis are doing the terror bombings there. But it's also hard to believe the U.S. and Israel could be behind all these attacks. There are too many of them.
Either way, it's terrible to contemplate. Would removing all the US troops stop the terror? Let's remove them and find out. It can't be any worse.
I know this may be a 'streeeeech of the imagination' for many Americans;
but I do not remember these kind of 'terrorist demonstrations' during the 'previous leadership'---you know, that dictator 'what's his name--- Hussein' but I am sure that the people of Iraq appreciate the fact that it was the USA that 'liberated them' from all of that 'comparative relative peace' they had prior to the 'liberation'.
I am sure that it is 'comforting' for so many Iraqis to wake to each new day that may be your last as a direct result of 'liberation by the good ole USA'. That will, I am sure, make many Americans feel better about their 'impact on other's lives, especially the innocent'----even so far away.
"If the USA were another nation the USA would invade the USA to keep it safe; and they would be justified."
genicon
Good thing the SURGE was a success or it would be a lot worse. Now if we can have a SURGE in Afghanistan everything will be as good as it is in Iraq.
Everyone must convince just one teabag that war is wrong and mostly every USAan would be against war.
The following video is a roughly 3-minute AlJazeera report on these bombings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV4itqDEZnc
And after viewing the report, I suspect that these bombings are, again, covert ops by the U.S., perhaps along with some Iraqi government forces members, maybe even with PM Nouri al-Maliki having involvement. It's [possible] that some Iraqi resistance fighters did this, but the U.S. and U.K. have conducted covert attacks in Iraq to then turn around and blame it on Iraqi resistance and/or Al Qaeda in Iraq. That has been proven, and the U.S., U.K., Israel, and others have histories of committing covert attacks and assassinations for the purpose of terrorising local or national populations, getting rid of resistance leaders, etcetera.
Seems to me that I'll repeat my words of last December and which were that the U.S., under Obama or any Dem. or Repub. Party President, does not truly intend to withdraw from Iraq. They don't intend to hand over control of Iraq to Iraqis in any honest, law-abiding, respectful, ... way. Learning enough U.S. history since WW II, f.e., tells us this much; no intention of really giving up U.S. control of Iraq!
However, it's still [possible] that some Iraqi resistance groups or fighters committed these bombings. Probable? Perhaps not. But possible? Sure it's possible; unless they have insufficient explosives and/or can't get them to the locations where these bombs were exploded. I think they probably have those abilities, but think the U.S., and U.K., having conducted covert "terrorist" acts during this present war on Iraq, and prior history of these western countries doing these types of things, needs to be kept in mind. If this was a horse race, then I think I'd bet that the U.S. is behind these bombings.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
The surge worked...the surge worked...the surge worked. Just keep telling yourself that.
Meanwhile General Odierno wants another troop surge in northern Iraq and admitted violence was increasing there and in "pacified" Anbar Province. Recruitment is breaking records and Obama will soon have 169,000 new troops at his disposal next year.
But as far as our media is concerned: The surge worked...the surge worked...the surge worked...and it will work in Afghanistan for the same reasons that it worked in Iraq because, uh, because, er-um, because we say it will.
The Republican rank & file are still stupidly in denial that these wars have anything to do with oil.
I wasn't aware of the "Republican rank & file" denying or not realising the the GWoT wars are about oil, albeit they're not really for that purpose as much as they are for increasing global domination for the real rulers of the government of the USA, and their allied real rulers of some European countries in NATO. The energy sector is only one of the run-amok-capitalist sectors seeking to profit in this "adventure" for global dominance. Many, not relative to the size of our populations, but still too many parties want as large a piece of the "pie" as they can get from this "adventure".
Nevertheless, to deny or not realise that energy resources constitute one of the driving interests is to be in what Ralph Schoenman refers to when quoting some (I believe) historical individual and which is "invincible ignorance"; an ignorance that's not really ignorant, the people living this way rather knowing what they're choosing to ignore is true, just that they refuse to live according to this awareness they work to repress. Some people are simply so incapable of intellectual thought of any notable value that they believe the lies of Washington, but not everyone in denial is doing other than maintaining their "invincible ignorance". It's like lying while knowing one is lying, but wishing to try to persuade oneself that one is not lying, sort of; I guess, anyway.
And the so-called "left" also suffers from such ignorance. It may, or not, be about energy or simply natural resources being a driving interest behind these war-makings, but one definite example is when they fault Ralph Nader for causing the Dem. Party's presidential nominee to lose the election. Another example was with the "leftists" who supported Obama for the presidency, or Hillary Clinton, pretending that these are valid, qualified people for the U.S. presidency when it was easy to prove the opposite and the opposite was rather obvious for anyone who half-followed the political votes of these two people during their political careers. Many on the "left" suffer from such "invincible ignorance", and there are other examples.
Like Ralph Schoenman says in a couple of videos with him at Google, these above types of "leftists" really [facilitate] the continuation of making wars of aggression, rogue capitalism, etcetera; due to their refusal to stop living with their "invincible ignorance".