Chief exorcist says Devil is in Vatican

Father Gabriele Amorth said people who are possessed by Satan vomit shards of glass and pieces of iron.

He added that the assault on Pope Benedict XVI on Christmas Eve by a mentally unstable woman and the sex abuse scandals which have engulfed the Church in the US, Ireland, Germany and other countries, were proof that the Anti-Christ was waging a war against the Holy See.

"The Devil resides in the Vatican and you can see the consequences," said Father Amorth, 85, who has been the Holy See's chief exorcist for 25 years.

"He can remain hidden, or speak in different languages, or even appear to be sympathetic. At times he makes fun of me. But I'm a man who is happy in his work."

While there was "resistance and mistrust" towards the concept of exorcism among some Catholics, Pope Benedict XVI has no such doubts, Father Amorth said. "His Holiness believes wholeheartedly in the practice of exorcism. He has encouraged and praised our work," he added.

The evil influence of Satan was evident in the highest ranks of the Catholic hierarchy, with "cardinals who do not believe in Jesus and bishops who are linked to the demon," Father Amorth said.

In a rare insight into the world of exorcism, the Italian priest told La Repubblica newspaper that the 1973 film The Exorcist gave a "substantially exact" impression of what it was like to be possessed by the Devil.

~ more... ~

My Lai massacre triggered Vietnam's ‘class' war accusations

By Bruce Kauffmann, Appeal-Democrat

This week in 1968, with America's involvement in the Vietnam War increasing every month, several platoons of American soldiers from Charlie Company were ordered to attack the tiny hamlet of My Lai in South Vietnam's Quang Ngai Province. The GIs were charged with destroying any Vietcong (North Vietnam's guerrilla army) they could find, and angered by both the casualties they had suffered at the hands of the Vietcong and their inability to catch this elusive quarry, when these GIs charged this hamlet they were in a "take no prisoners" mood. The result was a village destroyed and some 350 people dead.

Tragically, none of the dead was an armed Vietcong combatant. Rather, they were unarmed villagers who had been murdered in cold blood, prompting many to call My Lai — when (after a massive coverup) it was discovered a year later — the worst atrocity of the Vietnam War. Several soldiers were charged with war crimes, including a platoon commander — and college dropout — named William Calley, who was later convicted of murder, but eventually paroled.

Also in My Lai's aftermath was a vigorous debate about its causes, and although the anti-war movement had a field day with My Lai, many military officials traced a cause of the massacre right back to the student anti-war protesters themselves.

Noting that these students had done all they could (both legally and illegally) to avoid serving in the army, military brass pointed out that this had made Vietnam America's first "class" war, in which most fighting was done by poorer, less educated, lower-class citizens. By undermining the fighting instead of joining it, the educated middle class ("the Harvards," as soldiers called them) so diluted the military's talent pool that misfits like Calley could achieve command rank.

What's more, as many historians have shown, Vietnam was the first American war in which there were no clear objectives or measurements. Unlike, say, World War II, in which major battles resulted in strategic territorial advantages (ports to establish bases, islands to launch raids, liberated countries to gain resources), in Vietnam's jungles the only way to measure who was "winning" or "losing" was body counts. This resulted in intense pressure to produce high enemy casualty figures and as time went by and morale sank, the distinction between civilians and guerrilla soldiers (often dressed alike) blurred.

To conclude then, if one accepts these arguments — that Vietnam was a "class" war fought mostly by America's poorly educated and disadvantaged, that body counts became the only measure of success, that civilians were often indistinguishable from guerrillas and so on — then the astonishing thing about My Lai is not that it happened, but that it didn't happen more often.

~ Link ~

New York Times targets Iran, fingers corporations doing business there

From U.S. Enriches Companies Defying Its Policy on Iran

The federal government has awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments, grants and other benefits over the past decade to foreign and multinational American companies while they were doing business in Iran, despite Washington's efforts to discourage investment there, records show.

That includes nearly $15 billion paid to companies that defied American sanctions law by making large investments that helped Iran develop its vast oil and gas reserves.

For years, the United States has been pressing other nations to join its efforts to squeeze the Iranian economy, in hopes of reining in Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Now, with the nuclear standoff hardening and Iran rebuffing American diplomatic outreach, the Obama administration is trying to win a tough new round of United Nations sanctions.

But a New York Times analysis of federal records, company reports and other documents shows that both the Obama and Bush administrations have sent mixed messages to the corporate world when it comes to doing business in Iran, rewarding companies whose commercial interests conflict with American security goals.

Many of those companies are enmeshed in the most vital elements of Iran's economy. More than two-thirds of the government money went to companies doing business in Iran's energy industry — a huge source of revenue for the Iranian government and a stronghold of the increasingly powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, a primary focus of the Obama administration's proposed sanctions because it oversees Iran's nuclear and missile programs.


From Profiting From Iran, and the U.S.

The New York Times identified 74 corporations that have done business both in Iran and with the United States government over the last decade, using corporate records filed with the Securities Exchange Commission, company Web sites, news accounts confirmed by interviews with company officials, and Congressional reports...

...Halliburton     $27.1 billion     Federal Contracts: $27,080,906,722     Withdrew
United States  

Halliburton, former Vice President Cheney's old company, provided oil and gas drilling services to Iran through foreign subsidies. After a political furor erupted over the work, the company announced it would do no new business in Iran, and it exited the country altogether in 2007. While still operating in Iran, Halliburton won huge contacts from the federal government, including a no-bid contract to restore Iraq's oil sector, as did its subsidiary at the time, Kellogg Brown & Root...

'If this was not about oil in 2003, it certainly is now'

From Iraq: All eyes on the oil prize by Chris Newby

Control of the oil wealth in the predominantly Kurdish area of northern Iraq is a major issue underpinning a lot of tensions. That oil wealth is potentially vast. Estimates put the reserves in Iraq at 115 billion barrels, probably more than Iran's and second only to Saudi Arabia. Yet production is still running at 100,000 barrels per day (bpd) lower than the pre-war daily average of 2.5 million.

In post-Saddam Iraq, the US government was hoping to dramatically increase output under the control of predominantly US oil companies. To try to achieve this aim Paul Bremer, Bush's chief representative in Iraq in the year following the invasion, under the guise of removing all members of Saddam Hussein's Baath party from their positions, sacked oil technicians, engineers and administrators leaving behind only a skeleton crew of Iraqi oil workers to manage the existing production.

Bremer was hoping that private oil companies, eager to exploit the oil wealth, would come in with their workforces to take over. Some companies did, but attacks on oil pipelines and facilities increased from 200 in the first two years of occupation to 600 in 2007. In part this was in response to Bremer ripping up agreements over access to oil by the local population.

The major oil companies weighing up the risks decided the danger was too great at that stage. Also, significant action was taken by Iraqi oil workers striking against the privatisation of oil facilities in Basra.

Arguments developed between the Iraqi government and US about how the oil fields could be developed. None of these arguments centred on improving conditions for ordinary Iraqis, but who gets the biggest share of the oil wealth, the Iraqi regime or the oil companies.

In an attempt to develop the oilfields, on 2 January 2009 the Iraqi government offered a new deal to oil companies wanting to invest in Iraq, offering them $2 for every barrel they extracted after their original investment costs had been met.

The major oil companies initially rejected these terms out of hand, demanding complete control over production and payments of $25 per barrel! However, the Chinese National Petroleum company was keen to gain a foothold in Iraq and get its hands on some of the vast reserves. It induced BP, its partner in Iraq, to develop the Ramaila oilfield near Basra on the Iraqi government terms.

As a result of this other companies, not wanting to see the Chinese government gain all the most lucrative contracts, accepted contracts on the initial terms. These companies are mainly state-owned but include Shell and Exxon.

However, some members of the Iraqi parliament are now challenging these contracts, no doubt wanting to get their own hands on this oil wealth but also feeling the pressure from ordinary Iraqis angry at seeing jobs and the oil wealth leaving Iraq.

~ more... ~

Mafia deeply entrenched in Australia

Days after police smashed a multimillion-dollar drug ring with alleged mafia links in Sydney and Mildura, a new report by Italy's top anti-mafia investigators has named several Calabrian mafia clans that have created "permanent links" with key family members in Australia.

In its annual report for last year, the National Anti-Mafia Directorate said the Calabrian Mafia, also known as 'Ndrangheta, had been transformed from a localised criminal operation in the impoverished south of Italy into a vast and complex international enterprise that exploits "deeply rooted" links in Australia.

In the report, obtained by the Herald, the directorate names several powerful clans, including Sergi, Barbaro and Papalia, as groups that have "active affiliates" in Australia.

"The links with the mafia families are steadfast and deeply rooted in Australia where permanent traditional links with the Calabrian clans have been solidly established," the report says. "Clans like Sergi, Barbaro, Papalia have been active through their Australian affiliates for some time."

In August 2008 a Griffith man, Pasquale Barbaro, was arrested along with 19 others as part of the-then world's biggest ecstasy bust.

Police allege Mr Barbaro was the organiser of the drug operation in which drugs worth $440 million, hidden in tomato tins, were shipped from Italy to Melbourne.

Mr Barbaro is the son of Francesco ''Little Trees'' Barbaro, who was named in the Woodward Royal Commission as a member of the Griffith-based Calabrian group behind the disappearance of anti-drug campaigner Donald Mackay in 1977.

~ more... ~