Thursday, June 29, 2006

"Midia sem Mascara" censored on Google News Brazil!!

Is not only in China that Google followed the rules on filtering the search to avoid unwanted results. Here in Brazil, Google does the same.
They excluded "Midia Sem Mascara" (Media Without Mask) as a primary source news.

After a while being part of the sites considered as primary source to feed  google news Brazil, mysteriouslya Mídia Sem Máscara was excluded from the results shown.

"Midia.." is the only Brazilian site dedicated to unmask the lies from the Main Stream Media and the first conservative site in Brazil.

It is clearly a political measure of censorship from Google and it is unacceptable!!
While "Midia.." is ousted from Google, digital garbage like "Vermelho" (from the Communist Party) and "CMI" (Independent Media Center - leftist to the bone) are still shown as sources of (dis) information.

This is exactly what is going on: Brazil is looking - day bay day - as a country like China. Or Venezuela.

Philosopher Olavo de Carvalho needs your help!!

Who entered at the home page of Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho - my philosophy teacher and friend - has come across a surprise: an ask for donation!

It is helpful to show that that the "poweful" Brazilian right is not fueled by the IMF, nor by the CIA nor even by GWB, as Olavo's detractors had claimed all over the years.

While mob-men from Landless Movement, Unions and Workers Party received thousand of brazilian reals or even dollars from official money (even from our taxes) from NGO's inside and outside Brazil to pose as "social movements" - a term that define mobster-headed groups of brainless people acting as "independents" - to promote what they programmed to do: To destroy the sociel tissue to the limit, to finish any kind of moral values and to create a chaotic environment perfect to the snake's egg of totalitarism.

Well, right beside these "revolutionaries", Olavo's fearless and self-motivated behavior shine even brighter.

I had learned important lessons from Olavo. One of these was about the so called "Socratic Project": the philosophical awakening of mankind through the breaking the myth-poethical universe in which men had created their society. Until a man called Socrates dared tp think all by himself. In his path Plato, Aristotle and even Jesus Cristo has came.

Olavo represents the Brazilian "Socratic Project" like few: the likeliness of breaking the bars of the jail that inprisons the (true?) national soul.

Let's help him?

According to his website:

To make donation in dollars, by credit card, simply click on the button below and follow the instructions (in the form, write "donation" in the field "payment for") :


Other contact, send an e-mail to

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Aleksander Boyd left the blogosphere: We'll miss him!

A true freedom-fighter called Aleksander Boyd - the blood and soul of  website - has withdrawn arms.
The exit-note on his website said : 
"Dear readers, this site is going into static mode until further notice. I have only words of gratitude for the thousands of visitors who, over the years, have developed a keen interest in our version of Venezuelan contemporary politics. As increasingly evident it is rather futile to oppose one's own country's idiosyncrasy. The very emergence of irresponsible leaders is but the natural consequence of remiss peoples. The dictum 'a country gets the government it deserves' was never truer than in the case of Venezuela."
We have to think about it very seriously. This is not the first, but another fact in a series. Here in Brazil we have recently lost an important conservative site/magazine "Primeira Leitura".

The conservative blogosphere explosion in LA was a very good thing to celebrate. But I have to agree with Boyd: to have such -good- fighters on the front demands to have a good back-up team to keep the territory.
The Venezuela case is not different from Brazil's case.
While we fight in the open, government fight back in the shadows and the opposition is so weak, so self-absorbed and so power-seeker that they would let people down if government showed them a good (budgeted) ministery to take.

Yes, in the end we will be left alone in the dark.

I understand perfectly Boyd's position. Boyd is one of my heros. Hope he could be back on the front soon. Not just Venezuela, but Latin America too need it. 

The reason I am not talking about World Cup

Many foreign readers of my blog wrote about their enthusiasmus towards Brasil`s team on Germany World Soccer Cup.
I´m going to disappoint you a little bit, but I am not a fervorous soccer fan anymore. At least this time.
In 2002 when we won Japan/Korea cup we were in the middle of a presidential campaign too. But it was very different.
Lula da Silva uses Brazil´s team as a propaganda tool so heavily that disgusts me.
Our president had given - in almost four years in presidency - just one collective interview, but it is unacountable times the he used soccer or metaphors on soccer to sell his point of view.
He even framed an interview by satellite with our team on Germany. It was a show made to Lula to shine. No player could ever ask to the president. Just to answer what he asked.
It was this event Ronaldo missed, and Lula asked the coach, Parreira, about Ronaldo´s weight.

There´s a video here showing Ronaldo´s answer the day after "They said that I am overweighed just like they said the president drinks too much. It´s not true that I am overweighed as is untrue that president drinks a lot" (reality: Ronaldo IS REALLY overweighed, so the second part...)

The fact that Brazil´s team is a mere propaganda tool for Lula. That´s why I have doubtful feelings about Brazil´s soccer team.

But let you know that I am a Portugal fanatic right now!
Portugal is coached by Luiz Felipe Scolari, former Gremio Football Club´s coach (my favourite soccer team in Brazil), was born in Passo Fundo (the same city that I used lived) so he is "gaucho" like me.
"Gauchos" feel like a breed apart. We are not "brazilians" at all, we not share the same taste for 'butts' and 'samba' like regular brazilians do. I think it´s because here is the most cold part of Brazil. Rio Grande do Sul is not "tropical" and I think the we- gauchos - share the "southern sadness" or "Iberic sadness". Our music is totally different from Brazilian music too - we are nearer from Spain, Flamenco and Tango than Samba and Caipirinha.

But returning to the point, Larry Rohter - the NYTimes correspondent Lula tried to extraditated when he published a story on the drinking habits of our president - wrote an article about the political use of soccer.

This article is partially correct. But it fails miserably - according to the NYT tradition of hiding-the-truth - when it started to comment the relation of soccer and the military government in Brazil. They used false terms to qualify General Emilio Medici president as "The executioner".

Brazil´s "victims" of military rule are in number of around two hundred people. Just like the innocent killed by the red terrorists (around two hundred too). All "victims" were terrorists killed in the battlefield. They are the very responsable for their own deaths when they decided to implement a communist dictatorship in Brazil.

The big lie was that they were "freedom fighters". No, their fight started BEFORE the beginning of the military rule and was the main cause of military reaction.
Other fact is that Emilio Medici government (1969-1974) did not need soccer to embellish his poll rates.
First - we did not have direct presidential elections (they were decided by a electoral college unitl 1984) that time.
Second - Medici was approved by 80% of the country!! There´s no need to use this. We had public security, we were know as the faster-growing country in the world! We have jobs, we had sovereignty.

That was the truth.

After this little introduction, here is Larry Rohter article.

"With the knockout round in soccer's World Cup under way and an election looming, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has found the perfect way to combine his two main passions: when the opposition complains about incompetence and corruption in his government, he responds by linking himself to Brazil's wildly popular and successful national team.(..)"

Monday, June 26, 2006

Chavez take his "regional integration" to Curaçao

"Regional Integration" as Publius Pundit noted is an euphemism for just plain "Cubanization". Always for the good of Latin America - and to remove the region from the "fangs of USA".
At least Curaçao is aware of this threat.
Read the source from Publius Pundit
"The Dutch are deeply concerned about Venezuela’s renewed threats to take over the nearby island of Curacao as its dictator, Hugo Chavez, flexes his military muscles with an unprecedented arms buildup and condemns the Dutch for their colonialism on the island. Seeking to add more territory of his own, his stated aim is “regional integration,” which is an emerging term that bears more watching. One Chavista foreign ministry official explained it this week as the growing federation between Cuba and Venezuela, which he euphemized as “alternative models.” But his description of that “alternative” was very specific: the Cubanization of the country". (continue..)

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Another PT´s "work of art": Bio-Terrorism

Last week a crowd of vandals a.k.a MLST- Landless Liberarion Movement, assaulted National Congress in a clear demonstration of their hate of democracy.
Group was headed by an high ranked PT´s affiliated - President Lula had met several times as 'social movement' representative.
Lula´s government even gave more than 5 millions of reals to the group, creating a new form of state-sponsored terrorism.

Now, magazine Veja has reported another and frightening form of terrorism supported by PT´s (Workers Party) affiliated: Bio-terrorism. Read this.

Bio-Terrorism of Worker's Party
On may, 22th , 1989, during a routine inspection, a group of technicians discovered the first focus of a devastating infection known as "vassoura-de-bruxa" (witch-sweep)in a cocoa farm in the south of Bahia (northeast of Brazil). This plague is mortal to the cocoa tree. The technicians, however, calmed down with the supposition that it was just an isolated focus. It was a mistake. In less than three years, in a frightening pace and weirdly linear way, the witch-sweep destroyed cocoa harvests in the region - and raised suspicious of a foreign country sabottage. Technicians found infected branches tied to cocoa trees. Now, seventeen years later, come the first eye witness to explain that has been, in fact, a sabottage, but it was a brazilian work. (read full here)

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Coulter´s new book sets "Church of Liberalism" on fire!!

Coulter´s book is at the top on NYT best seller list. But it upsets many democrats exposed in the book.
She´s been attacking for:
a) Cited some 9/11 widows as being the liberal darlings of the moment by taking political profits from their husbands death.
b) For being "loveless" and greedy, by taking financial profits from other´s death.

For all these reasons, Coulter has been a synonym for "trouble" and her today´s visibility is a sign of the size of conservative thinking.

Until some years ago, NYT best sellers, are always from liberal authors. Now a conservative is on top - and the reaction has been high. But don´t waste you time, Ann´s critics. Consevative are there to stay.

I am counting time until the other lone sanctuary for the left - Hollywood - would be "conspurcated" too. We have Mel Gibson and the new-comer Andy Garcia on the way...

By the way "Godless" could be the first Coulter´s book published in Brazil, hence it´s the number one!! (Personally I doubt because brazilian book publishers love Michael Moore so much for such kind of "Treason").

Here´s a brief description of Coulter´s new book : Godless: The Church of Liberalism
"Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution."

Monday, June 19, 2006

The Last Reading

A neo-conservative brazilian site/magazine sunk into the red tide: Primeira Leitura (First Reading). In its website it is informed:
"Primeira Leitura (First Reading) , website and magazine, terminate today its trajetory. But, how it was said in old times that political disputes were hidden by the seethrough veil of fantasy 'the struggle goes on' ..."
That is it, boys: "Primeira..." is finished!!

While there a lot of "alternative" (better to say "red") magazines and websites that never went out of fuel (when are we going to have some kind of site like Activist Cash to undress these "alternative" media??) it's painful to see a conservative site, that really 'swum against the red tide' to gave up.

Somehow , the drowning of "Primeira Leitura" in a electoral year like this, where all oposition needs to show to the public (drug-addicted ?) what is Lula da Silva government about, could be taken as a warning.

A warning that there will be no better times for democracy in Brazil. When we look around we can count a very few independent media channels: a magazine, called "Veja" and another website "Midia Sem Mascara" (where I write quite often)
Long live to them..

powered by performancing firefox

powered by performancing firefox

Article on Frontpage Magazine

The article from my friend , Heitor de Paola, - "The Lula Deception"-  has just been published on Frontpage Magazine.

Check it out!!

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Text of Document found in Al-Zarqawi´s Safe - House

Despite the MSM insistent news on Iraq saying that the local government and the americans are "trying" to stop the violence. This document shows exactly the actual status of the War on Terror in Iraq: US and Iraq forces are winning!!
It is clear on Al-Zarqawi´s own words - a text found in his safe-house (through Jerusalem Post).

"The situation and conditions of the resistance
in Iraq have reached a point that requires a review of the events and
of the work being done inside Iraq. Such a study is needed in order
to show the best means to accomplish the required goals, especially
that the forces of the National Guard have succeeded in forming an
enormous shield protecting the American forces and have reduced
substantially the losses that were solely suffered by the American
forces. This is in addition to the role, played by the Shi'a (the
leadership and masses) by supporting the occupation, working to
defeat the resistance and by informing on its elements.

As an overall picture, time has been an element
in affecting negatively the forces of the occupying countries, due to
the losses they sustain economically in human lives, which are
increasing with time. However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to
be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance
for the following reasons:

1. By allowing the American forces to form the
forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to
undertake military operations against the resistance.

2. By undertaking massive arrest operations,
invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence
causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.

3. By undertaking a media campaign against the
resistance resulting in weakening its influence inside the country
and presenting its work as harmful to the population rather than
being beneficial to the population.

4. By tightening the resistance's financial
outlets, restricting its moral options and by confiscating its
ammunition and weapons.

5. By creating a big division among the ranks of
the resistance and jeopardizing its attack operations, it has
weakened its influence and internal support of its elements, thus
resulting in a decline of the resistance's assaults.

6. By allowing an increase in the number of
countries and elements supporting the occupation or at least allowing
to become neutral in their stand toward us in contrast to their
previous stand or refusal of the occupation.

7. By taking advantage of the resistance's
mistakes and magnifying them in order to misinform.

Based on the above points, it became necessary
that these matters should be treated one by one:

1. To improve the image of the resistance in
society, increase the number of supporters who are refusing
occupation and show the clash of interest between society and the
occupation and its collaborators. To use the media for spreading an
effective and creative image of the resistance.

2. To assist some of the people of the resistance
to infiltrate the ranks of the National Guard in order to spy on them
for the purpose of weakening the ranks of the National Guard when
necessary, and to be able to use their modern weapons.

3. To reorganize for recruiting new elements for
the resistance.

4. To establish centers and factories to produce
and manufacture and improve on weapons and to produce new ones.

5. To unify the ranks of the resistance, to
prevent controversies and prejudice and to adhere to piety and follow
the leadership.

6. To create division and strife between American
and other countries and among the elements disagreeing with it.

7. To avoid mistakes that will blemish the image
of the resistance and show it as the enemy of the nation

In general and despite the current bleak
situation, we think that the best suggestions in order to get out of
this crisis is to entangle the American forces into another war
against another country or with another of our enemy force, that is
to try and inflame the situation between American and Iraq or between
America and the Shi'a in general.

Specifically the Sistani Shi'a, since most of
the support that the Americans are getting is from the Sistani Shi'a,
then, there is a possibility to instill differences between them and
to weaken the support line between them; in addition to the losses we
can inflict on both parties.

Consequently, to embroil America in another war
against another enemy is the answer that we find to be the most
appropriate, and to have a war through a delegate has the following

1. To occupy the Americans by another front will
allow the resistance freedom of movement and alleviate the pressure
imposed on it.

2. To dissolve the cohesion between the Americans
and the Shi'a will weaken and close this front.

3. To have a loss of trust between the Americans
and the Shi'a will cause the Americans to lose many of their spies.

4. To involve both parties, the Americans and the
Shi'a, in a war that will result in both parties being losers.

5. Thus, the Americans will be forced to ask the
Sunni for help.

6. To take advantage of some of the Shia elements
that will allow the resistance to move among them.

7. To weaken the media's side which is presenting
a tarnished image of the resistance, mainly conveyed by the Shi'a.

8. To enlarge the geographical area of the
resistance movement.

9. To provide popular support and cooperation by
the people.

The resistance fighters have learned from the
result and the great benefits they reaped, when a struggle ensued
between the Americans and the Army of Al-Mahdi. However, we have to
notice that this trouble or this delegated war that must be ignited
can be accomplished through:

1. A war between the Shi'a and the Americans.

2. A war between the Shi'a and the secular
population (such as Ayad 'Alawi and al-Jalabi.)

3. A war between the Shi'a and the Kurds.

4. A war between Ahmad al-Halabi and his people
and Ayad 'Alawi and his people.

5. A war between the group of al-Hakim and the
group of al-Sadr.

6. A war between the Shi'a of Iraq and the Sunni
of the Arab countries in the gulf.

7. A war between the Americans and Iraq. We have
noticed that the best of these wars to be ignited is the one between
the Americans and Iran, because it will have many benefits in favor
of the Sunni and the resistance, such as:

1. Freeing the Sunni people in Iraq, who are (30
percent) of the population and under the Shi'a Rule.

2. Drowning the Americans in another war that will
engage many of their forces.

3. The possibility of acquiring new weapons from
the Iranian side, either after the fall of Iran or during the

4. To entice Iran towards helping the resistance
because of its need for its help.

5. Weakening the Shi'a supply line.

The question remains, how to draw the Americans
into fighting a war against Iran? It is not known whether American is
serious in its animosity towards Iraq, because of the big support
Iran is offering to America in its war in Afghanistan and in Iraq.
Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to
convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming
from Iran, and this would be done by the following:

1. By disseminating threatening messages against
American interests and the American people and attribute them to a
Shi'a Iranian side.

2. By executing operations of kidnapping hostages
and implicating the Shi'a Iranian side.

3. By advertising that Iran has chemical and
nuclear weapons and is threatening the west with these weapons.

4. By executing exploding operations in the west
and accusing Iran by planting Iranian Shi'a fingerprints and

5. By declaring the existence of a relationship
between Iran and terrorist groups (as termed by the Americans).

6. By disseminating bogus messages about
confessions showing that Iran is in possession of weapons of mass
destruction or that there are attempts by the Iranian intelligence to
undertake terrorist operations in America and the west and against
western interests.

Let us hope for success and for God's help."

Friday, June 16, 2006

The Lula Deception

My friend, Heitor de Paola has published this article.
It shows the real nature (and intentions) of Brazilian President Lula da Silva.

Publihed on Defend Democracy web site.

By Heitor De Paola
June 16, 2006

Latin America, and particularly South America, is living a dizzying political turmoil in the last years. Populist and revolutionary leaders are rising to power in many countries. While some of them arose from recent popular and indigenous movements, like Hugo Chávez, Evo Morales, Lopez Obrador and Ollanta Humala, others are deeply rooted in the revolutionary movements of the 60's and 70's, like the former Montonero Néstor Kirchner, the Sandinista Daniel Ortega, socialists Michelle Bachelet and Tabaré Vázquez. Bachelet and Vazquez are ruling in coalition with revolutionary movements like MIR and the Tupamaros.

The President of Brazil, Lula da Silva, took too many experts in Latin America by surprise when, six months before elections in 2002, he and his Workers' Party (PT) changed abruptly from a radical and revolutionary socialist vision of society to what seemed to be a more pragmatic stand. After years campaigning for the non-payment of external debts, nationalization of "strategic" sectors of the economy, rigid government control of private enterprises, review of previous privatizations - the all embracing communist recipe - they came to a sudden and radical change. They started to boast their newly born commitment to paying external debts, their respect for contracts, defense of private property including private enterprises, rigid inflation control and so on. From Lula, the radical, to what suddenly became known in Brazil as 'Lula of peace and love'. Only a small minority understood that this change in Lula's mood was no more than a deception, no more than a lull to calm down the more suspicious voters and to be finally elected.

Indeed, after his Inauguration Day an orthodox economic plan was put into action through a former Trotskyist militant, Antonio Palocci, appointed as Minister of Economy. Oh, wonderful!, exclaimed relieved Brazilians as well as so many experts in Latin American politics all around the world. At last a pragmatic and reliable leftist leader! Now, almost four years later, in view of Chávez, Morales and Kirchner radicalization, in close association with the almost eternal Castro, all hopes to save Latin America from leftist radicalism turn to Lula. He is the only moderate politician that can stop those populist revolutionary nuts! I heard this point of view expressed by experts like Alvaro Vargas Llosa, Carlos Alberto Montaner, Senior Policy Analyst Stephen Johnson and also by high officials in the State Department. I also heard from Montaner that José Dirceu, then third in command in Lula's government, had "went through an ideological change". By all means it seems that this still is the assessment of Latin American political situation by the State Department. The former (?) American Ambassador to Brasilia, Donna Hrinak, went so far as to say that Lula, a member of the working class, by becoming a President, represented the fulfillment of the "American dream".

The core of such a diplomacy is to believe in the existence of two lefts: the old revolutionary radical left – the 'carnivorous' left - and another one, a modern, pragmatic left – the 'vegetarian' left. While the former is still a threat to private property, individual freedom, free elections and so on, the latter can be trusted to defend property, individual freedom, the rule of law and free elections at regular intervals, thus accepting the prospect of losing power now and then. Whilst Chávez and Morales represent the old left, Lula represents the modern and moderate one. It follows that all diplomatic efforts on the part of the free world should be to enforce this moderate left and stimulate friendly relations with its leaders. To promote an alliance with Lula is the basic diplomatic doctrine nowadays, in order to use Lula to soothe and restrain his radical colleagues in Venezuela, Bolivia and elsewhere.

For example, one political analyst close to the State Department Latin American inner circle, Alvaro Vargas Llosa, has recently published in El Diario Exterior, an article entitled 'Can Lula stop Chávez? (¿Puede Lula frenar a Chávez?). He declares himself amazed with Lula's lack of leadership and indolent reaction to Chávez aggressions to 'Lula's project of integration in a community of South American nations' and its substitution for what he calls 'Bolivarian megalomania'. Again Vargas Llosa cannot understand the reaction of Lula to the nationalization of the Bolivian natural gas operations, i.e., the plants of the Brazilian state owned PETROBRAS operating in Bolivia. He calls it a 'slap' in the face of Lula and a severe blow to his strategic project of South American integration and concludes: The man to stop Chávez is not President Bush whose direct actions against Chávez would be favorable to the latter, but instead, Lula, who comes from the left and is a key actor in the region (…) and is under challenge from Caracas'.

To anyone who is familiar with the real history of Latin American leftist organizations in the last two decades these are naïve opinions and when they become the basis of American diplomacy towards the region, they can only put into jeopardy both American interests at large as well as the survival of democratic regimes in Latin America. One must be deceived to be blind to Lula's help to Chávez on many critical occasions, as for example, his support when the latter seized power after renunciation; when he, supposedly a "workers' leader", sent Brazilian oil tankers to boycott the strike of the oil workers of Venezuelan state owned oil company PDVSA indeed the crucial movement of the Venezuelan general strike of December 2002; and also in the fraudulent Referendum Revocatorio in 2004; by sending millions of dollars to special plans of the Chávez government, as is the case of Caracas' subway construction project, while at the same time has denied even a penny to the same kind of public project, now in the Brazilian most important city, São Paulo; recently, the Brazilian government strongly supported Venezuela to be elected to the United Nations Security Council, showing undeniably the close links of both Presidents and their common strategy to establish a South American community of socialist nations, the Union of Latin-American Socialist Republics, URSAL.

However, it was not difficult to know the truth, if only one wanted to. Already in August 7, 2002, before Lula's election, late Professor Constantine Menges, senior fellow at Hudson Institute, published an article in Washington Times, 'Blocking a new axis of evil', in which he denounced the Havana-Caracas-Brasilia anti-American and revolutionary axis in case Lula – whom he called Mr. da Silva, was elected. He showed that 'Mr. da Silva makes no secret of his sympathies. He has been an ally of Mr. Castro for more than 25 years. With Mr. Castro's support, Mr. da Silva founded the São Paulo Forum in 1990 as an annual meeting of communist and other radical terrorist and political organizations from Latin America, Europe and the Middle East. This has been used to coordinate and plan terrorist and political activities around the world and against the United States. The last meeting (at that moment) was held in Havana, Cuba in December 2001. It involved terrorists from Latin America, Europe and the Middle East, and sharply condemned the Bush administration and its actions against international terrorism'.

In that same year and for the same reasons, Alejandro Peña Esclusa, a well-known Venezuelan opposition leader and President of the organization Fuerza Solidaria, when visiting Brazil wrote an Open Letter to the Brazilian People: Lula, the Candidate of Fidel Castro and FARC (the Colombian narco-guerrilla movement). As well as Lula, Chávez made the same appeasing movement in the direction of the political center when still a candidate in Venezuela. Esclusa also addressed the issue of the Forum of Sao Paulo. Such Forum derives its name because Lula himself and Castro founded it in that City in 1990 and its main aim is, as stated by both, 'to regain in Latin America what was lost in Eastern Europe'. The Forum remained until last year a ghost organization, not completely secret but one that never was to be mentioned. During Lula's campaign a journalist who dared to ask Lula about it, former anchorman Boris Casoy of Record TV Network, was threatened by the then candidate, who said he should never mention again such an inexistent organization 'invented by an obscure journalist of a second class American newspaper' (referring to Professor Menges and The Washington Times). I can only imagine that such an exchange between an American presidential candidate and, let's say, Bill O'Reilly would trigger a Second American Revolution!

Finally, on July 4, 2005, perhaps calculated to coincide with the American Independence Day, Lula showed that he had lied for in the meeting to commemorate the 15th anniversary of the Forum, he declared: I have founded together with other companions(an euphemism to conceal the old communist comrade) here present, this instance of democratic participation in Latin America (…) thanks to that (special) relationship we were able to construct (…) the consolidation of what happened in Venezuela, as the Referendum that consecrated Chávez as President.

The main realization of the Forum is that we were able to talk among companions (an euphemism to conceal old communist comrades) (from different countries) as if it were not political interference. Meaning that, apart from official foreign relations with regular governments, the members of the Forum – even before rising to power by elections - have 'another deeper level' of secret talks without outsiders – mostly the USA - being aware of the political consequences of these talks. Indeed, Brazilian foreign relations are not conducted from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs but from the Presidential Palace through the man who makes things happen, the Presidential Advisory for Foreign Relations and Secretary General of the Forum, Marco Aurelio Garcia. Minister Amorim is no more than a puppet just suited to give ceremonial speeches and to attend to cocktail parties. Therefore, to accept official Brazilian diplomacy at face value is not only naïve, but extremely dangerous.

Lula is not a solution, but a part of the problem, indeed the core of the problem. The 'vegetarian' left is no more than a deception to disguise the real, 'carnivorous' one.

Heitor De Paola is psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, political and diplomatic analyst, and a columnist at

MLST: Example of a State-sponsored saboteurs

Last week when a revolutionary movement called MLST - Landless Liberation Movement - invaded and looted Brazilian Congress (as you saw here), the "common sense" (Brazilian common sense is everything but a real "common sense") it was that they were a group of fanatical radicals, and exception. A Brancaleone Army, indeed.
But the reality goes deeply further: this revolutionary group received money - thousand of brazilian reals, exactly 5.7 millions of brazilian reals last year (link to a portuguese article here)

What we are facing is the real State-sponsored revolution. The goal? Simple.
To show to people that only Lula da Silva can control such radicals and if he won't get re-elected this year, they can fire-up the country!!!

Another round: All involved in the destruction in the congress were arrested - and they claimed now they are being treated like were in a "concentration camp" by the police.

While a bunch of revolutionary supporters (like this) of these "movements" publish their hate pages claiming that the Landless Movement is trying to get "criminalized" by the media and must be freed immediatly..
It's doublethink in its peak..

But nothing matters anyway. We are under the "Soccer World Cup" kingdom, where all that matters is Ronaldo, Ronaldinho and Kaka..

powered by performancing firefox

Thursday, June 15, 2006

Brazil and Venezuela logos: created by the same (stupid) brain??

See these two logos below

Isn´t the similarity impressive??
My guess is that logos were created by the same stupid brain... in Havana!!

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

In good company » Search results

"An explicit act of vassalism": Uribe grateful to ..Castro.

Like one of my friends said about it. It's an explicit act of
vassalism from President Uribe!

Uribe for me was the only president in Latin America that we could
really call "president" and not a Sao Paulo Forum representative, as
Lula, Chávez, Evo and tutti quanti.

Here's what I just received. Uribe was asked about Castro in an
interview and he declared that "I am grateful in the name of all
Colombian people. He has helped us on all South America and Latin
America issues in general and the question of peace".

Castro?? Peace?
Oh God. What can I say?
Uribe has turned into another Castro's ass-kissing?
It seems that Castro's power in Latin America is so high that even a
president of a country like Colombia cannot fight against him, without
suffer the consequences.

Just some days ago I heard elected president of Peru - Alan Garcia
- speaking out his support of Lula's re-election in Brazil. Lula!! The
one that is a close friend of Chavez and, by association, Humalla...

If Brazil is finished, so is South America...

Here's the Armando Valladares quoting the interview of Mr. Uribe.


fuente: Diario Las Américas.

Presidente Uribe: ¿tributo al "César" comunista?

por Armando F. Valladares

El Dr. Alvaro Uribe, presidente reelecto de Colombia, acaba de
pronunciar un elogio y un agradecimiento al sanguinario dictador Fidel
Castro, con palabras que ni Evo Morales, Chávez, Humala, o líderes
guerrilleros de las FARC o del ELN se han atrevido a pronunciar
públicamente. En declaraciones al diario El Tiempo, de Bogotá (4 de
junio de 2006), reproducidas por el Granma, de La Habana (5 de junio
de 2006), al ser preguntado sobre la existencia de un "acercamiento
especial" con Castro, el presidente Uribe declaró textualmente: "Ha
sido muy bueno en todas las horas. Le tengo gratitud en nombre de todo
el pueblo colombiano. Nos ha ayudado mucho en todos los temas de
Suramérica, de Latinoamérica en general y en el tema de la paz".

Objetivamente, respetando el contexto de la entrevista presidencial en
que fueron dichas y, aún cuando cueste decirlo, por tratarse de una
figura que durante su primer mandato mostró loable firmeza en relación
a las guerrillas, las inesperadas palabras del presidente Uribe pueden
ser calificadas como un acto de casi vasallaje al tirano que desde
hace casi 50 años oprime a mi pueblo, a sangre y fuego. Se explica
entonces que ellas hayan producido perplejidad, dolor e indignación en
el millón de cubanos desterrados y entre los 12 millones de mis
hermanos cubanos que agonizan en la isla-presidio.

Pero esas palabras también produjeron dolor en innumerables
latinoamericanos que sufrieron en carne propia, y aún sufren -como es
el caso del heroico pueblo colombiano- la acción homicida de
movimientos revolucionarios alentados, entrenados, financiados y
armados por La Habana. Sí, de ese heroico pueblo colombiano, que ha
dado un ejemplo a las Américas y al mundo de altivez, de coraje y de
resistencia a un chantaje guerrillero que ya dura décadas, con crueles
atentados, secuestros, "boleteos", torturas y lamentables asesinatos,
inclusive, el de propio progenitor del presidente colombiano.

El dictador Castro es el causante e inspirador de toda esa tragedia
con un inimaginable costo humano, el mismo que hoy es calificado por
una de sus víctimas, el presidente Uribe, contra todas las evidencias
históricas, como "muy bueno en todas las horas", merecedor de
"gratitud" por su constante "ayuda", inclusive, en el tema de la
"paz"; calificado de esa manera, sorprendentemente, por un presidente
en el cual la gran mayoría de los colombianos confió y hasta el
presente continúa confiando en su capacidad de liderazgo para impulsar
la reconstrucción moral y material de la sufrida y admirada Colombia.

En noviembre de 2000, durante la sesión de clausura de la X Cumbre Iberoamericana de Panamá, Castro se responsabilizó públicamente por el entrenamiento y apoyo a los movimientos revolucionarios en las Américas, incluyendo por lo tanto a las guerrillas colombianas y salvadoreñas que asesinaron a decenas de miles de personas, concluyendo de manera afrentosa: "Y no nos arrepentimos" (Granma, La Habana, 20 de noviembre de 2000). Fue entonces que el joven presidente de El Salvador, Lic. Francisco Flores, defendiendo la honra de su pequeño gran país y de las Américas, increpó al dictador caribeño por haber estado "involucrado en la muerte de tantos salvadoreños", por haber entrenado "a tanta gente para matar salvadoreños" y por haber "tenido una participación cruel, sangrienta e irresponsable" en la guerra civil movida por las guerrillas marxistas (La Vanguardia, Barcelona, 20 de no viembre de 2000). El contraste entre la actitud del entonces presidente salvadoreño y la del actual presidente colombiano no podría ser mayor.

En marzo de 2002, el obispo auxiliar de Miami, monseñor Agustín Román, durante una ceremonia por la paz en Colombia celebrada en la Ermita de la Caridad, reconoció que "ha sido de nuestra sufrida Cuba de donde han emanado muchos de los males que aquejan a los países de América"; que "de allí ha salido el odio que ha motivado muchas de las batallas fratricidas que han ensangrentado a otros pueblos latinoamericanos"; y que también "de allí han salido la subversión y el terrorismo, así como las armas que han sido instrumentos de muerte desde el Río Bravo hasta la Patagonia". El prelado afirmó a continuación que Colombia no solamente "no ha estado exenta de ese flagelo" sino que es uno de los países "donde se han hecho sentir, con mayor rigor, las trágicas consecuencias de los males promovidos y estimulados por los que mandan en Cuba". Aclarando que "el pueblo cubano no es de culpar por ello, pues ese pueblo ha sido la primera víctima de esos hombres sin Dios que han promovido la violencia y el terror", afirmó solemnemente: "Yo quiero, como hijo de esa noble tierra, pedirles perdón a ustedes y a todas las familias de Colombia que han sido laceradas por la violencia marxista salida de Cuba". Y concluyó con palabras que el presidente de Colombia debería considerar: "Mientras las doctrinas del terror estén vivas en Cuba, no habrá paz en América" (cf. Agencia Católica de Informaciones - ACI y agencia CubDest, ambas del 11 de marzo de 2002).

Pobre Colombia, si su máximo gobernante alienta la esperanza de que podrá asegurar la "paz" en la querida y sufrida nación colombiana con rasgados elogios al lobo rojo. Disponiéndose a pagar ese tributo al "César" comunista, el presidente Uribe no obtendrá la merecida paz para su pueblo y tampoco dará a Dios lo que es de Dios.

Armando Valladares, ex preso político cubano, autor del libro "Contra toda esperanza", donde narra 22 años en las prisiones castristas, fue embajador de Estados Unidos ante la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de la ONU, en Ginebra, durante las administraciones Reagan y Bush.

Wednesday, June 07, 2006

Vandalism in the Brazilian Congress: The Images

Here are the images from Globo TV Network's famous "National Journal" where they show the images of the MLST (Revolutionary Group of Landless Workers) looting and destroying everything they found into the National Congress.
MLST's leader, Bruno Maranhão, is a member of the National Committee of Workers Party (PT) - The party of president Lula!!
The attack was detailed prepared, as showed on today's news.

All involved with this, including women and kids were dettained for investigation: all 495 militants that took part on this event.

It's sad to see the melting down of Brazil's democracy before our very eyes while the real guilty for this still at 60% of approval ratings on this year's election polls..

Aleksander Boyd is a menace to Venezuelan Democracy!!??

Perhaps I was too occupied covering the melting of democracy in Brazil.. But this fact somehow got unnoticed here.
Aleksander Boyd (owner of the spectacular website called "") issued and lawsuit against London social-democrat mayor Livingstone, for conceding London as a safe place to Chávez to visit in Europe.

(Chávez must have saluted the mayor with the phrase "Dr. Livingstone, I presume?"..)

But Livingstone fought back, accusing Boyd as a "supporter of terrorism against the Venezuela democracy". Yes! A humble blogger is a menace to the Venezuelan strong democratic institutions like Chávez and his big-belly!!
Here´s his reply..

Publius Pundit - Blogging the democratic revolution
  • "It was I, who conspired for many years with fellow military men to overthrow democratically elected governments.

  • It was I, who led a coup d’etat in 1992 against a democratically elected president, causing numerous deaths.
  • It was I, who, whilst safely sheltered from bullets in the Military Museum, ordered the assassination of the democratically elected president of Venezuela and that of his family..."


Terror offspring in Brazil: MST degenered into a Revolutionary group

Oh, when I said - in othe article - that Brazil was over, it meant that it was only the beginning of the end..

Protesters invaded the Congress and hurted 20 people.

'A group of 1.3 thousand agitators invaded today (06-06-06 --the day of the beast!) the Deputies Chamber building in Brasilia hurting more than twenty people. The integrants of a group called MLST (Landless Workers Liberation Movement) destroyed totally the entrance glass door and continued to destroy and looth inside the building towards the "Salão Verde" (Green Chamber).
An employee of the House suffered a skull traumatism and was taken to an hospital. Other man, not yet identified, broke his leg in the entrance of building attachment 4. Some protesters hurt themselves during the riot and were attended in the local infirmary.
According to Valmir Macedo, one of the leaders of the MLST movement, the protest was carried out  as  a repudy against the "slave work" still existent in Brazil and the Congress that not yet voted for the Federal Budget, besides being favor of the agrarian reform. He afirms that there are manifesters that came from São Paulo (PCC territory), Rio Grande do Norte, Bahia, Alagoas e Tocantins. Macedo said that the manisfesto and the MLST movement has not liasons with MST (landless workers movement).

A car (Fiat) that was parked in front of the building, was turned upside down by the protesters. The group went to the Green Chamber where concentraded before invasion. In the path to the Green Chamber, lights, panels and walls were discontructed.

According to Valmir Macedo, the moviment intended to peacefully get in House, but they were stopped. "And we had no other alternative but this", he said.'

Friday, June 02, 2006

.Evo Immorales runs aways from the press

In this semi-interview, the journalist asks Evo about democracy, Cuba and drug-smuggling. Result: Immorales runs scared!!!
I think he was afraid to get Castro and Chavez angry ...

From the blog "collective enemy" (portuguese)

Thursday, June 01, 2006

Evo + Chavez= Bananas in Pyjamas

A friend of mine, reminded that the photo of the previous post, showing Evo and Chavez in costumes, made them look exactly like one of the kid's favourites: Bananas in pyjamas.