The bombing

The Abdullah restaurant was the kind of place Iraqis took their families on special occasions. It was the kind of place high-ranking officials in the northern city of Kirkuk chose for power lunches, where they dug in to plates on tables covered with white cloths as water burbled from a decorative fountain.
On Thursday, as families celebrated the Eid al-Adha holiday and Arab and Kurdish leaders talked reconciliation in the crowded dining room, it was the kind of place a suicide bomber decided was the perfect target. He set off his explosives during the height of the lunch rush, killing at least 50 people, wounding about 100, and ending what had been a remarkable stretch of calm nationwide during the four-day Eid celebration.

The above is from Tina Susman's "Kirkuk bomb shatters a moment of reconciliation in Iraq" (Los Angeles Times) and she really is one the best writers the Green Zone has had since the start of the illegal war. Forget her on the treaty where she's as useless as all but one reporter for a domestic outlet, set that episode aside and just grade her on the way she pulls in the reader reporting the same things that other outlets do. She really does a have a gift for story telling. So yesterday's bombing claimed as many as 57 lives (plus the bomber) and left over 120 injured. Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) adds:

Hundreds of families were inside the Abdullah restaurant, an area landmark, celebrating the end of the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha, police and hospital officials said. It was the deadliest attack in Iraq in six months. Many of the victims were women and children.
"I had just finished lunch and went to the washing area, leaving my family and relatives sitting at the table, when the explosion happened," said Kamal Aziz Khokaram, 55, a Kurdish businessman. "I fell to the ground, and then got up and hurried back to see two of my friends stretched out on the floor, stained in blood. My wife and my three children were wounded. I saw scores of the wounded, some standing up bleeding and others lying on the floor soaked in blood."

Timothy Williams gets a Baghdad byline at the New York Times and you have to wonder if his peers played a joke on him? He includes this: "Even before the bombing, the fear of violence in Kirkuk was so high that the city was exempted from nationwide provincial elections, scheduled for Jan. 31." While violence was and is a concern the why of the violence is the issue when it comes to Kirkuk. It's disputed territory with the central government claiming it and the Kurdistan region claiming it. In fact, as the Times has reported, the KRG has been shipping Kurds into the area -- 'housing' them in a stadium in some cases -- in an effort to influence any vote or census. Amazingly considering how much time Williams spends sketching out history (most of it not specific to Kirkuk), he fails to use the term so often applied to the city, the reason it is in dispute and wanted by competing interests: "oil rich Kirkuk." Williams quotes Abdalla Kabab's supervisor Shirzad Mowfak Zangana explaining, "All of a sudden we heard a very loud explosion. Two of the walls collapsed, and then the next thing I remember is that I felt blood covering my face. People were screaming. Children were crying. Smoke filled all three dining rooms."

AP reports that singer and host of the TV program "The Sweet Voice" Kanaan Mohammed Saleh was among the dead in yesterday's bombings:

He took his wife, Bushra, three young children and his newlywed brother and sister-in-law along for the occasion, which also marked the end of the four-day Islamic holiday Eid al-Adha, according to another brother, Karim.

The brother said Kanaan's wife was seriously wounded and the other five relatives were killed in Thursday's bombing, which has shaken growing public confidence in a sharp decline in violence.

Meanwhile Carole Laleve (UNHCR) notes that the United Nations agency helped "the 50,000th Iraqi refugee submitted for resettlement" in Syria yesterday:

UNHCR has not been bragging about the statistic, which has resulted from the violence and persecution that has forced hundreds of thousands of people to flee Iraq in recent years. But Mohamed* was thrilled when he was given the news that he and his family had been recommended for resettlement in Sweden. "I felt that our suffering had been acknowledged, and that was important to me," he told UNHCR staff in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo.
The resettlement programme, covering refugees in Egypt, the Gulf states, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey and Yemen, began last year when it became apparent that some people would never be able to return to their homeland and could not, or would not, remain in host countries.
With 21,312 submissions in 2007 and 29,684 from January to the end of November this year, UNHCR hopes the most vulnerable Iraqi refugees will continue to be given an opportunity to rebuild their lives in third countries.
Laurens Jolles, the UNHCR representative in Syria, which hosts the largest refugee population from Iraq, said the agency had worked hard over the past year to give the most vulnerable Iraqis an opportunity to rebuild their lives in a new home. "It is vital for resettlement countries to allow them to start anew as quickly as possible," he added.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

iraq
the los angeles times
tina susman
the washington post
sudarsan raghavan
the new york times
timothy williams

I Hate The War

In today's snapshot, we noted some of the weapons announcement and we're going to start with some (not all) of those. For a reason. See if you don't get the point while reading over the excerpt:

DSCA announced: "On Dec. 9, the Dfense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 36 AT-6B Texan II Aircraft as well as associated support. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $520 million." And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 400 M1126 STRYKER Infantry Carrier Vehicles as well as associated equipment. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $1.11 billion." And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 20 T-6A Texan aircraft, 20 Global Positioning Systems (GPS) as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $210 million."

"The total value, if all options are exercised, could be . . ." Did you notice that? What does that mean. It means that two parties are entering into an agreement and that along with the basics of the agreement, there are options. Think of the US treaty masquerading as the Status Of Forces Agreement. The way it is set up, it runs one year. That's because the cancellation clause requires one year's notice. Either side can cancel but they have to give one year's notice. So it's a one-year contract with the options of 2010 and 2011. If all options are exercised, the treaty can run through 2011.

The fact that it could run that long does not mean that anything in the treaty is binding beyond 2009. The treaty allows the parties to change details. So to cover the treaty by pretending it is a binding, three-year contract that cannot be cancelled and cannot be changed is to lie. To insist that it means a US withdrawal in 2011 is to lie really big.

Let's turn to Crazy Ass Patrick Cockburn who scribbled about Iraq today at CounterPunch. Cockburn lies from the beginning insisting that the Iraqi Parliament passed the treaty "by a large minority" when that's simply not the case. There are 275 members of Parliament. Some chose not to show up for the vote, some did. 149 MPs voted for the treaty. That is not "a large majority." The fact that Cockburn cares so damn little about the truth demonstrates how out of touch he currently is. And it may remind many of his 'reporting' on the woman being hanged (when she was stoned) not all that long ago.

He goes on to repeat all the usual lies about how "150,000 American troops in Iraq will withdraw from cities, towns and villages by June 30, 2009 and from all of Iraq by December 31, 2011. [. . .] There will be no US military bases left behind when the last US troops leave in three years time and the US military is banned in the interim from carrying out attacks on other countries from Iraq." What a liar. What a fool. What a Cockburn.

He continues by calling the treaty masquerading as a SOFA "categorgical and unconditional." If it seems like Cockburn's just tossing out words and hoping something sticks, that's because he is doing that.

Everything in the treaty is conditional after 2009. Will the treaty run through 2010? That's conditional on whether it's cancelled or not. It can be cancelled. Cockburn's been crazy for months now. He's been seeing a New World Coming through his Barack lusting eyes for some time now.

He embarrasses himself further:

So many spurious milestones in Iraq have been declared by President Bush over the years that when a real turning point occurs people are naturally sceptical about its significance. The White House was so keen to limit understanding of what it had agreed in Iraq that it did not even to publish a copy of the SOFA in English.

Today Patrick Cockburn wants to claim that the White House hasn't published a copy? How stupid is this whack-job nut? As McClatchy pointed out before the Parliament vote, the White House planned to publish it after the vote and only after the vote. And, pay attention Cockbum, the White House did that. The vote took place Nov. 27th (Thanksgiving) and the White House immediately posted it. From that day's snapshot:

"Iraqi lawmakers today approved a pact allowing U.S. forces to stay in the country through 2011 after winning support from skeptics by promising a public referendum on the plan," explain Raheem Salman and Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) and they go on to note that "[a]ccording to the agreement" troops out in 2011! Which agreement? The Arabic one the puppet government thinks is final or the English one the White House refuses to release because, as Adam Ashton, Jonathan S. Landay and Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) reported, "Officials in Washington said the administration has withheld the official English translation of the agreement in an effort to suppress a public dispute with the Iraqis until after the Iraqi parliament votes." This was noted last week in a Congressional hearing as well so it's really past time to stop speaking of the agreement singular. Salman and Susman do a better job explaining this:

The pact, while not explicitly stating that an extension can be sought, allows for amendments if both sides agree to them.
U.S. officials have indicated that they interpret that as permitting a possible extension, if security conditions in Iraq are deemed too shaky to leave Iraqi security forces in charge. "There is a provision for extension, by agreement of both sides," one U.S. official said in discussing the pact.

Yeah, it's a one-year agreement. Only 2009 cannot be changed or cancelled. Everything else that the White House says is set-in-stone is actually a conditional option that can be wiped away by either side. Today the White House finally released the agreement in English. We'll jump in at Article 30 The Period for which the Agreement is Effective:

1) This Agreement shall be effective for a period of three years, unless terminated sooner by either Party pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.

Get it? Paragraph three: "This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect." Meaning only 2009 is set in stone. It is too late for either party (US or Iraq) to give one year's notice and cancel it in 2009. They can give notice to cancel in 2010 or 2011. The second clause is also worth noting because it weakens the strength of any agreement as well: "This Agreement shall be amended only with the official agrement of the Parties in writing and in accordance with the constitutional proceudures in effect in both countries." That's the aspect that allows for a change and all the 'flowery' respect for Constitutional procedures is hog wash. The Iraqi Parliament needed to have two-thirds of all members (not just members present) to pass the treaty today. They did not have that. According to their Constitution and their laws, that's what was needed. In the US, Congressional approval is needed over all treaties and we know that has not take place. We further know that Barack Obama -- alleged Constitutional scholar -- doesn't give a damn about the Constitution. He show boated and did his little pretty words number while campaigning but despite all his insisting that the treaty would have to come before the Congress -- including becoming one of thirteen co-sponsors on Hillary Clinton's Senate bill insisting upon that -- he shut his corporate mouth and put his tiny tail between his legs to slink off like the disgusting, cowering trash he is. He's not going to stand up for the Constitution 'later.' He couldn't stand up for it right now.

An agreement built upon a systematic disrespect for the rule of law does not suddenly develop one. An agreement built upon lies does not suddenly embrace honesty. The treaty is built on lies and they include the lies to the American people. Why is the US pursuing this treaty? The White House keeps talking about these 'recent' gains in Iraq. Today is November 27th of 2008. Recent would, for most of us, go back no further than the end of spring. But Article 25 explains Nouri al-Maliki and Condi Rice notified the United Nations that the Security Council's mandate would be cancelled at the end of this year . . . last year. al-Maliki's letter was dated December 7th, Rice's December 10th. 'Recent' events?

The agreement the White House has released may not be the official agreement or the final one. It is the one that US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari signed November 17, 2008. The note above their signatures states: "Signed in duplicate in Baghdad on this 17th day of November, 2008, in the English and Arabic languages, each text being equally authentic."

That version is published online by the White House in PDF format (click here). The Bully Boy of the United States released the following statement today: "Earlier today, in another sign of progress, Iraq's Council of Representatives approved two agreements with the United States, a Strategic Framework Agreement and a Security Agreement, often called a Status of Forces Agreement or SOFA. The Strategic Framework Agreement sets the foundation for a long-term bilateral relationship between our two countries, and the Security Agreement addresses our presence, activities, and withdrawal from Iraq. Today's vote affirms the growth of Iraq's democracy and increasing ability to secure itself. We look forward to a swift approval by Iraq's Presidency Council. Two years ago, this day seemed unlikely -- but the success of the surge and the courage of the Iraqi people set the conditions for these two agreements to be negotiated and approved by the Iraqi parliament. The improved conditions on the ground and the parliamentary approval of these two agreements serve as a testament to the Iraqi, Coalition, and American men and women, both military and civilian, who paved the way for this day."

The White House published an English language version of the treaty on Thanksgiving day. There is no excuse for Patrick Cockbum to lie or flaunt his stupidity. Regardless of which it was, it goes to how little care or concern there is over the truth at CounterPunch that the piece just posted automatically.

This was all known in real time and as embarrassing as Patrick Cockbum's ignorance would be coming from, say, Norman Solomon or Matthew Rothschild or any others of that ilk, Patrick Cockburn is a journalist, allegedly trained, and he is one assigned to cover Iraq by a daily newspaper. Meaning that while we could have a good laugh at these comments coming from Solomon or Rothschild, there's a world of difference from there being unaware (ignorant) of details that they missed while they weren't playing check-in on the Iraq War and with Cockbum -- assigned by a daily paper to cover Iraq -- not knowing the details.

And poor Patrick.

Of all the days and all the outlets to act like a sick fool, he had to pick today.

Sing it again, Reuters, "Ali al-Dabbagh, spokesman for the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, said some U.S. forces could be needed for 10 years but told reporters that the terms of any extended presence would be negotiated between the next Iraqi and U.S. governments." Golly. al-Maliki's spokesperson, his mouth piece, just too a wizz in Patrick's breakfast cereal. What does it mean when al-Maliki spokesperson explains that "US forces" might "be needed" for another ten years? It means there's no withdrawal agreed to at this point, it means the puppet will ask for the extension and that the things Patrick applauded in the treaty were nothing but sop tossed out by the US to make al-Maliki appear 'strong.' (Which means you should now question those al-Maliki is "strong!" articles popping up everywhere. Were reporters that foolish or were they working with the US military?)

Now that's not a surprise, the above statement by al-Dabbagh. Though Patrick and others couldn't pay attention a joint-press conference in Baghdad, US military and Iraqi, revealed that the Iraqi air force wouldn't be up and running by the time the treaty ended.

But everyone either missed it or wanted to pretend it didn't happen. Let's drop back to the November 4th snapshot:

There's no rush to leave Iraq or even a desire. That needs to be grasped. Iraqi General Nasier Abadi made that pretty clear during Sunday's press conference in the Green Zone. Questioned by the Washington Post's Mary Beth Sheridan as to when the Iraqis would be able to handle "their own internal security . . . how many years are you away from reaching that goal," Abadi tried to distract by listing duties before declaring, "We have no duties or missions to protect the air on the borders of the country. But in case we have this responsibility, there is a brief that -- to the minister of defense, if he ask us to -- task us with that, a reportw ent also to the Prime Minister, what are the capabilities and the army's specifics to do those duties?" Asked how many years again, he responded, "Building an aerial force, building an Army is not easy, but it's still easier than building naval and air force. The naval force, as I said before, that the first ship will come in 2009 and the fourth will arrive in . . . at the end of 2011. In regard to 200- . . . Air Force, the first aircraft we will receive in 2011 until 2015. And that depends on the support and the help that the coalition forces can secure to Iraq so we can be able to maintain and defend our airspace and territories. Without that, there will be also agreements with the neighboring countries on the security of Iraq. But it's possible that we will go with those missions without having an air force or naval force because this is a common battle, it's not just an army's duty." Setting aside the naval force and focusing only on the air, if the period they'll be taking possession of aircraft will last from 2011 through 2015, how likely is it that they will be prepared to handle their own airspaceby the end of 2011?

Not likely at all and that was always known. (Or damn well should have been. This wasn't 'classified' information. It was out there in the public for anyone who gave a damn and attempted to find it.)

It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)

Last Thursday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4209. Which is the number it remains this week. Just Foreign Policy lists 1,297,997 as the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war, up from 1,288,426.

Reuters notes: "Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other senior U.S. officials share much of the blame for detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to portions of a report released on Thursday by the Senate Armed Services Committee."
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

iraq
i hate the war
the ballet
jonathan s. landay
mcclatchy newspapers
nancy a. youssef
adam ashton
the los angeles times
tina susman

Iraq snapshot

Thursday, December 11, 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, Iraq's latest buying spree, Punk Ass Liars for the Treaty Get It Upside The Head from al-Maliki's spokesperson (the sound you hear is a thousand liars trying to delete all their past commentaries and 'reporting'), and much, much more.   Let's start by remembering recent events.  October 31st, AP reported the puppet government in Baghdad's latest boo-hoo: Oil prices had dropped and their budget for 2009 had to be cut by $13 billion. The Guardian of London (via Iraq Directory) was writing that there was talk of raising production due to the drop from the expected $80 billion 2009 budget to the $67 billion budget. In 2008, they couldn't meet their spending targets and sat on a ton of money while infrastructure remained unrepaired and Iraqis suffered without electricity and potable water.  This week they're on a spending spree. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency made several announcements yesterday [all links of announcements take you to PDF format].   DSCA announced: "On Dec. 9, the Dfense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 36 AT-6B Texan II Aircraft as well as associated support.  The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $520 million."  And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 400 M1126 STRYKER Infantry Carrier Vehicles as well as associated equipment.  The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $1.11 billion." And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 20 T-6A Texan aircraft, 20 Global Positioning Systems (GPS) as well as associated equipment and services.  The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $210 million."  And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of (20) 30-35 meter Coastal Patrol Boats and (3) 55-60 meter Offshore Support Vessels as well as associated equipment and services.  The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $1.010 billion." And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 140 M1A1 Abrams tanks modified and upgraded to the M1A1M Abrams configuration, 8 M88A2 Tank Recovery Vehicles, 64 M1151A1B1 Armored High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV), 92 M1152 Shelter Carriers, 12 M577A2 Command Post Carriers, 16 M548A1 Tracked Logistics Behicles, 8 M113A2 Armored Ambulances, and 420 AN/VRC-92 Vehicular Receiver Transmitters as well as associated equipment and services.  The total value, if all options are exercised could be as high as $2.160 billion."  And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of 26 Bell Armed 407 Helicopters, 26 Rolls Royce 250-C-30 Engines, 26 M280 2.75-inch Launchers, 26 XM296 .50 Cal. Machine Guns with 500 Round Ammunition Box, 26 M299 HELLFIRE Guided Missile Launchers as well as associated equipment and services.  The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $366 million."  And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of (80,000) M16A4 5.56MM Rifles, (25,000) M4 5.56MM Carbines, (2,550) M203 40MM Grenade Launchers as well as associated equipment and services.  The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $148 million."  And they announced: "On Dec. 9, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of (64) Deployable Rapid Assembly Shelters (DRASH), (1,500) 50 watt Very High Frequency (VHF) Base Station Radios, (6,000) VHF Tactical Handheld Radios, (100) VHF Fixed Retransmitters, (200) VHF Vehicular Radios, (30) VHF Maritime 50 watt Base Stations, (150) 150 watt High Frequency (HF) Base Station Radio Systems, (150) 20 watt HF Vehicular Radios, (30) 20 watt HF Manpack Radios, (50) 50 watt Very High Frequency/Ultra High Frequency (VHF/UHF) Ground to Air Radio Systems, (50) 150 watt VHF/UHF Ground to Air Radio Systems, (50) 5 watt Multiband Handheld Radio Systems as well as associated equipment and services.  The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $485 Million."  That is over six billion dollars being committed "if all options are exercised" -- which is a little over 10% of their entire budget for 2009.  There's always money to spend when it comes to weapons.  And human life is always done on the cheap.    Bill Van Auken (WSWS) observes, "In Iraq, the death toll has risen to well over a million.  An estimated 2 million more have been wounded and at least 4 million have been forced to flee the country or turned into internal refugees.  In short, nearly six years of war and occupation hvae left more than 20 percent of the nation's pre-war population, dead, maimed, expelled or homeless."  IRIN reports on Egypt's Information and Decision Support Center (IDSC) and the American University in Cairo's Center for Migration and Refugee Studies survey of Iraqi refugees in Egypt which found, as stated by lead researcher Sara Sadek, "Lack of income is the main problem, followed by education."  Meanwhile Christopher Watt (Maisonnueve) reports on Iraqi refugees in Syria, "In Damascus refugee circles, limbo is a popular word.  The problems these people face often go deeper than uncertainty about their legal status.  In the Sunni-Christian neighborhood of Jaramanah, where 100,000 Iraqis are said to live, a boy named Zaid is silent while his father, a former meachnic in Saddam's air force, describes a bus crash last year that left Zaid without his right arm and his face covered in scars.  He shields them from view with a New York Yankees hat pulled down low.  In a cruel irony, Zaid received his injuries on a visa run.  The family had received its new stamps from Al Tanf border crossing east of Damascus, but on the road home to Jaramanah the bus driver lost control.  They are seeking help in Canada, but the father believes his connection to the Baath regime could ruin Zaid's shot at plastic surgery and a better prosthetic."  As the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres noted (writing in the Telegraph of London), "The refugee problem is a responsibility of the international community as a whole, and can only be effectively tackled by means of collective and cooperative action."  And the issue of refugees (both Iraqi and non-Iraqi) inside Iraq?   Today the United Nations Assitance Mission for Iraq released the following statement:   UNAMI SRSG Staffan de Mistura expresed concern about the situation of over 1000 foreign workers brought by international contractors currently in Baghdad Interntaional Airport.  Mr. de Mistura said that "UNAMI takes the allegations of human trafficking by contractors in Iraq very seriously and is concerned about their predicament.  The case in BIAP is one that has made public headlines but we are aware of other cases, some of which have reached relevant courts, and we hope will also be addressed in accordance with international labor law standards".     Mr. de Mistura stated that UNAMI has just conducted its own evaluation of the situation in BIAP which supplements the assessment conducted by Internaional Organization for Migration and others and coincides with their findings.  He added that the relevant authorities and contractors concerned are expected to ensure that international labor standards are respected and enforced.  Mr. de Mistura welcomed the indications that those directly involved are already looking into the issue and hoped it will soon be resolved, "so that the suffering of these people, whose hopes have been shattered and who have had to endure severe hardship and disappointment, is rapidly brought to an end."     This morning, we were wondering which of Patrick Cockburn's personalities would show up next?  Turns out it was Patrick Crazy Ass Cockburn.  And if you doubt it, check this from Reuters: "Ali al-Dabbagh, spokesman for the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, said some U.S. forces could be needed for 10 years but told reporters that the terms of any extended presence would be negotiated between the next Iraqi and U.S. governments."  Poor Crazy Ass Patrick Cockburn.  You know what, if I had LIED non-stop about what the treaty said, if I was nothing but a FILTHY LIAR, I'd be hanging my head in shame.  If I were, for example, Leila Fadel, I'd hide away for days (and maybe use some of that time to buy a decent bra).  But if I was Patrick Cockburn and had just FLAT OUT LIED about the treaty this morning at CounterPunch, I think I would have to just state, "I am a worthless liar that no one should ever believe.  Like everyone else in my crazy family, I have no grip on reality."  Sucks to be one of the liars today.  Poor babies.  Poor, pathetic, useless trash babies.  That's our topic for this evening.  Lies the sort that Patrick, Leila and oh-so many others have trafficed in KILL.  That's what's wrong with them.  It's not like they're pretending they're still virgins or something personal.  They're lying in ways that cost lives.     On violence, mass fatalities today in Iraq from a single bombing.   Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) notes the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan warned earlier this morning (when the death toll was said to be 30) that the "toll in today's attack is expected to rise."  The BBC notes that the bombing took place "at a restaurant near the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk" and that it was done by a suicide bomber.  Hurriyet adds, "The bomber detonated explosives inside a Kurdish restaurant about 10 km (6 miles) north of Kirkuk, said Major General Jamal Tahir, police chief of Kirkuk."  CNN reports the death toll is "at least 55" with one-hundred and nine people injured according to local police and that the name of the restaurant is Abdalla Kabab.  PBS' NewsHour calls it "one of the deadliest attacks in Iraq in the past six months" and also notes 'at least 55" dead but with one-hundred and twenty injured before adding, "The bombing apparently targeted a high-profile meeting of Kurdish officials from the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, the party of President Jalal Talabani, and a group of Arab tribal leaders called the Awakening, who had gathered in an attempt to negotiate ethnic tensions in the region."  Yaseen Taha and Adam Ashton (McClatchy Newspapers) quote Khadijah Mohammed whose sixteen-year-old son died in the bombing, "My son has become a body.  He was invited by his friends to have lunch on the last day of Eid.  He went out with them.  He told me that they will have a nice time in this restaurant and reluctantly, we allowed him to go, and now he is just a body."  Now picture that.  The son is begging his mother to go Adballa Kabab.  She is stating it is still too dangerous.  At some point he brings up or maybe she remembers the reports of how violence is down in Iraq, of how David Petraeus says that's true and of how every news outlet she can think of has run with that garbage.  Bad news 'reporting' costs lives.  Own it, accept that the blood of the young men is on your hands if you've lied or pimped the illegal war.  Not just before it started or at the start, but if you 'report' spin as fact, accept your responsiblity in this death and all the others.  Operation Happy Talk kills, accept it.  Mustafa Mahmoud (Reuters) describes an emergency room following the bombing, "Men and women clutched their wounds as they lay on gurneys, while medics and family members rushed about, shouting and wailing. A small girl around five years old was curled up quietly on a stretcher, her clothes bloodied."  AP quotes Salam Abudllah who was wounded in the attack along with his wife, "I held my wife and led her outside the place.  As we were leaving, I saw dead bodies soaked with blood and huge destruction."  Aswat Al Iraq reports President Jalal Talabani stated, "With heartfelt grief, we have received news of the death and injury of a large number of innocent citizens in a cowardly terrorist operation that targeted a crowded restaurant on the Kirkuk-Arbil highway. As we vehemently condemn this heinous terrorist operation perpetrated by the vanquished terrorist remnants, we stress for our great Iraqi people, particularly the steadfast residents of Kirkuk, that terrorists will never be able to upset the fantastic security achievements made all over the country's province."        Turning to US politics, Dee Dee Myers (Vanity Fair) observes of Barack Obama's speech writer and professional pig Jon Favreau (not the actor-writer-director) groping a cut-out of Hillary Clinton:   I can't stop thinking about this picture, and I confess I find it really upsetting. And, no, it's not because I don't have a sense of humor. I like to think I have a well-earned reputation for often irreverent, sometimes ill-advised humor. But I'm not laughing now. And it's not that I was never young. My friends from college and in the years just beyond can testify that I did some things then that I wouldn't want to see on the Internet now. But I had a big job in the White House at a young age too; at 31 -- just a few years older than Favreau is now -- I became White House press secretary. And I knew instantly that the rules had changed for me, that I could no longer go to all the parties of the people just a little younger than me, who had just a little less responsibility, and expect to be anonymous. Clearly, Favreau should have understood that too. If he's old enough and wise enough and mature enough to write for the president of the United States -- and not just any president but one who seems poised to take words more seriously than any since Abraham Lincoln -- than he's clearly old enough and wise enough and mature enough to avoid getting his picture taken behaving in a way that is embarrassing to him, his boss, the secretary of state -- designate, his family, and, one hopes, a majority of 27-year-old males (though that may be too optimistic.) It's indefensible. But that's still not what's bugging me. What's bugging me is his intention. He isn't putting his hand on her "chest," as most of the articles and conversations about the picture have euphemistically referred to it. Rather, his hand -- cupped just so -- is clearly intended to signal that he's groping her breast. And why? Surely, not to signal he finds her attractive. Au contraire. It's an act of deliberate humiliation. Of disempowerment. Of denigration. And it disgusts me.    It is disgusting.  And good for Dee Dee for speaking out.  Murphy (PUMA Pac) observes:   Every day that Jon Favreau continues to have a job as obama's chief speech writer is ANOTHER day that the office of the Secretary of State is undermined. Every day that the above image is in the news is another day that creeps like Carville and Blitzer can convene all-male panels of sexperts and joke about how fun it is to gang up and sexually assault Hillary Clinton in effigy. (Wolf Blitzer, Alpha Epsilon Pi brother, along with Robert Novak and Jerry Nadler.Carville was a raging frat boy at LSU, where the motto is, "frat hard, frat often.") We need to amp up our message. Columnists ARE talking about this issue, but they are saying that women's groups have been strangely silent. We know that National NOW and Emily's List are keeping a deafening silence, but the good women at New York and Los Angeles NOW have spoken up. But still, the message is not being received.    Emily's List won't say a damn word.  You don't get cabinet positions (or more of them) by speaking out.  What about the pathetic Women's Media Center?  They haven't said one word as usual.   Yesterday, they had the nerve to write about human dignity while being silent on Jon Favreau.  Ms. is just as bad with their Feminist Wire that managed to note violence against women has "increased attention in Angola" but fails to raise objections to Favreau and his friend/male lover's attempt to prove they can get it up by (at best) disrepecting women.   Independent journalist John Pilger and Chris Martin won Best Documentary for The War On Democracy at the One World Media Awards and The War on Democracy is now available on DVD.  Groundhog Day is a Harold Ramis film starring Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell and Pilger references it in his new column (New Statesman):   Obama's slogan is now "continuity".  His secretary of defence will be Robert Gates, who serves the lawless, blood-soaked Bush regime as secretary of defence, which means secretary of war.  (America last had to defend itself when the British invaded in 1812.)  Gates wants no date set for an Iraq withdrawal and "well north of 20,000" troops to be sent to Afghanistan.  He also wants America to build a completely new nuclear arsenal, including "tactical" nuclear weapons that blur the distinction with conventional weapons. [. . .] There is more continuity in Obama's appointment of officials who will deal with the economic piracy that brought down Wall Street and impoverished millions.  As in Bill Murray's nightmare, they are the same officials who caused it.  For example, Lawrence Summers will run the National Economic Council.  As treasury secretary, according to the New York Times, he "championed the law that deregulated derivatives, the . . . instruments -- aka toxic assets -- that have spread financial losses [and] refused to heed critics who warned of dangers to come."  There is logic here.  Contrary to myth, Obama's campaign was funded largely by rapacious capital, such as Citigroup and others responsible for the sub-prime mortgage scandal, whose victims were mostly African Americans and other poor people.     Yes, the greed.  As Elaine noted of the scandal involving who will replace him in the Senate, "I think the whole thing is poetic. Barack's home state governor accused of attempting some form of payment to appoint someone to replace Barack. It's all about greed and what was Barack's campaign run on but greed?  He refused public financing. Broke the pledge on that. He took in overseas donation and has no way to prove that the donations came from US citizens. He allowed individuals to repeatedly break the legal donation limit. The greed that built him could break him and, in fact, it should."  That's Illinois.  In New York, the assumption is that, in January, Hillary Clinton will be confirmed as the Secretary of State and will leave the US Senate.  That will allow the current governor (never elected to that post, as Ruth has pointed out) to appoint someone to serve the remainder of Clinton's Senate term.  Caroline Kennedy wants the Senate seat.  Marie Cocco (Washington Post Writers Group) wonders:   How can Democrats, who ridiculed Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as an inexperienced political wannabe, now embrace the idea of elevating Caroline Kennedy -- who hasn't served a day in public office -- to Hillary Clinton's New York Senate seat? How, indeed, can the same "progressives" who opposed Clinton's election as president because they were repelled by the notion of extending the "Clinton dynasty" now be keen on perpetuating the Kennedy dynasty through an appointment? As a longtime admirer of Sen. Ted Kennedy, I am embarrassed. The iconic Massachusetts senator and others in the family are actively promoting John F. Kennedy's daughter -- who famously shunned the gritty political world for the sanctuary of public service through her private endeavors -- to take the Senate seat once occupied by her late uncle, Robert F. Kennedy, and now held by Clinton. A decision on filling the vacancy should Clinton be confirmed as secretary of state is up to New York Gov. David Paterson, who could be forgiven, in moments like this, if he fleetingly wishes that he'd not ascended to the office after predecessor Eliot Spitzer's indiscretions. What, exactly, is the case to be made for Caroline Kennedy?     iraq caroline alexander bloomberg news mustafa mahmoud john pilger marie cocco