RISCO COMUNISTA - A OUTRA FACE DOS PARTIDOS DE ESQUERDA
(
http://www.leandrotr.de.ms)
A primeira explicação que escutei me pareceu farisaica... que era para jogar a MST no colo do PT, esvaziando ambos para sempre... Parece até milico tentando pensar... A segunda é mais tenebrosa ainda... O país está literalmente falido (tipo Argentina) e isso está sendo oculto de forma absoluta, devendo a bomba estourar nas mãos do PT... Algo, mais ou menos, como já ocorreu quando os milicos decidiram abrir o regime depois que verificaram que já não tinham como tocar o barco financeiro, ou seja, quando verificaram que teriam que pagar todos os emprestimos que haviam realizado para suas estatais de merda e coroneizinhos de pijama... A notícia que quase houve um descontrole econômico de grandes proporções essa semana em torno de operaçãoes de mercado corriqueiras sendo os juros chegaram a subir em um só dia 4% corroboram esta segunda tese... O efeito Roskoff é uma bomba relogio que vai explodir no proximo mandato. É por isso que, eu acho, o Lula deverá ser eleito. Mesmo que o pais não esteja falido, os FMI forçará uma falencia e criará, sob o governo do PT, a pior crise economica da nossa historia. Porém, se elegerem o Serra, o FMI fará o feito Roskoff em camera lenta, tentando tapar o sol com a peneira, até que a coisa acabe estourando também no possivel mandato de Serra, como aconteceu com o segundo mandato de FH. A diferença do Serra para o Lula é que, com o Lula, a coisa vai ser mais rapida e mais direcionada. Já sobre o MST, eu sempre falei que o Brasil está no rumo de uma guerra civil. Os bandidos traficantes do Rio já estão em campanha militar, fazendo atentado terrorista. Agora, para começar a festa no Rio, só falta a direita e a classe media contra atacar. No caso do campo, tenho informações de que a FARC, secretamente, educou,treinou e armou alguns membros radicais do MST, que já está dividido, rachado, em vias de extinção, devido os desentendimentos entre radicais e moderados. Não apoio a UDR e acho que os latifundiários merecem mesmo perder as terras. De qualquer modo, logo, o MST vai começar a invadir fazenda com fuzis na mão. Então, a UDR, que está armada até os dentes, via Paraguai, vai contra atacar, criando a versao brasileira dos paramilitares da Colombia. Como na Colombia, o exercito vai ajudar a UDR e dará apoio e treinamento secreto aos paramilitares, que também aterrorizarao o pais com milhares de assassinatos e bombas contra lideres e pessoas da esquerda. Voltaremos a guerra suja com direito a tortura, perseguição e terrorismo. Os E.U.A. querem manter o terceiro mundo falido, para que eles nunca se levantem ou se transformem em potencia militar, para que eles entreguem a matéria prima, as riquezas e a mão de obra por um preco de banana. Portanto, diante desse contexto que beira a terceira guerra mundial, é muito importante para os US manter o Brasil falido e obediente. Veja o que aconteceu na Argentina. O FMI criou uma dependecia aos emprestimos e passaram, com isso, a manipular a economia do pais, usando as "ajudas" economicas como uma forma de chantagem politica, criando assim a falencia da Argentina na hora que eles bem quiseram Para finalizar, outro dia, eu assisti aqui na PBS (uma boa TV americana), a entrevista de um cara (esqueci o nome dele, mas eu acho que era Kaplan) que dizia haver informação publicas sobre os planos perversos do FMI para o Equador. Segundo as informações, o FMI, por razões politicas, criou, deliberadamente, uma crise economica no Equador. Nos planos do FMI, havia a intenção de causar colapso, revolta e banho de sangue no povão. Isso tinha haver com os US, que já estavam preparados para intervir. Porém, parece que o banho de sangue não aconteceu, muito menos a intervenção militar americana, mas houve sim uma puta quebradeira no Equador, coisa que até acabou com a moeda local. Parece que o FMI conseguiu mudar os politicos, a constituiçao e as leis do Equador, para satisfazer as corporações e os investidores estrangeiros. No caso do alto escalão, a "empresa de onibus" é uma grande grupo de corporaçoes e investidores internacionais que são ligados ao FMI e aos bancos americanos e europeus. Por isso, o FHC é mesmo empregado do FMI, e o Lula tem que ser também, pois, senão, principalmente agora que os americanos estão afim de dar porrada em alguém, os caras vem com uma desculpa tipo "terrorismo" e arrembentam com tudo, fodendo o nosso pais até o osso. Não estou falando em ataque militar, estou falando de coisa igual ou pior do que o que aconteceu na Argentina. É serio, eu não sou a favor disso, mas eu acho melhor o Brasil eleger um presidente bem corno e mansinho. A economia do Brasil foi sequestrada pelo FMI e pelo poder economico em que ela está associada. Não tem para onde correr. Depois da guerra fria, a potencia ficou uma só. Ou dá a bunda ou morre. Na Argentina, o FMI quebrou o pais com a recusa de bancar os erros que o proprio FMI, através do Cavallo, cometeu. Vendo que estava sendo feito de palhaço, o Cavallo marionete deve ter ficado puto e começou a desobedecer. Parece que o FMI queria que o Cavallo mudasse constituiçao, lei, baixasse mais pacote recessivo e o caralho, para arrochar mais ainda, para a Argentina pagar a divida certinho. Viu no que deu. A Argentina faliu, os bancos roubaram a grana do povo otário e ficou tudo por isso mesmo. O Cavallo foi fritado e acabou em cana. Então, falei isso tudo para te dizer que o tal de Kaplan, que falou aquilo sobre o Equador, estava falando que o FMI impos as privatizações e subornou varios politicos Argentinos. Eles queriam privatizacões de forma fraudulentas, para vender estatais estrategicas de energia para a Enron. Ele falou que a quebradeira da Argentina e de outros paises é resultado do tratamento medieval com "sangue-sugas", que matam o paciente de anemia. Ele se referia a politica de arrocho salarial, arrocho de impostos, restrições burocraticas, altas taxas de juros, e coisas que só fazem reduzir consumo, reduzir o poder aquisitivo, para criar recessao generalizada e matar a economia, tudo isso para o pagagamento da divida sair certinho, em dia. Segundo o cara, para salvar o paciente, o FMI deveria perdoar, pelo menos, a divida dos paises mais pobres. Eu já questiono a legitimidade dessa divida no Brasil, que foi contraida por golpistas ilegais da ditadura. Se os americanos resolveram emprestar dinheiro para corruptos, bandidos, pilantras e assassinos, então não somos nós que devemos pagar por isso, pois ja pagamos bem caro, com 30 anos de ditadura e muito sangue. Portanto, essa divida "sangue-suga" é a chave da questão. Parece que estamos sendo achacados por uma mafia mundial, com os dedos no botao nuclear, que cobra "pedagio" na porta da "favela". Não é bem uma "empresa de onibus", é muito mais do que isso. A porra dessa divida é uma tremenda invenção. Ela foi criada para haver uma desculpa. A verdade é que os nossos politicos são empregados desse pessoal e a divida é uma fachada para esconder o completo dominio do refen. Se não fosse a divida, seria um ataque ou golpe militar mesmo. Eu estou sabendo o que o PT quer fazer, motivo pelo qual os investidores, banqueiros e o FMI resolveram mostrar a força, aumentando assim o risco país. Sim, o Lula quer impor restrições ao fluxo de capital. Ele quer combater a especulação e impor restrições `a fuga de capital. Ele quer limitar, restringir ou proibir as transferencia bancarias para o exterior. Isso deixa o investidor estrangeiro em panico. O Lula precisa ser muito claro nesse assunto, e explicar direitinho o que ele vai querer fazer para tentar combater a especulação e salvar o sistema bancario. Caso contrario, na semana antes do Lula tomar posse, haverá uma corrida aos bancos. Todos vao querer sacar para comprar dolares. Com isso, o sistema bancario vai falir, vai haver feriado bancario igual o que foi na Argentina. Os investidores, temendo as tais restrições na liberdade de fluxo de capital, antes do Lula tomar posse, vão vender tudo e tirar o dinheiro do país. Portanto, o Lula precisa mostrar que haverá estabilidade no governo do PT. Ele precisa mostrar que as regras do jogo não mudarão durante o jogo. Não sou fã do FHC, mas, pelo menos, esse presidente trouxe uma certa confiabilidade ao Brazil. Com o FHC, sendo entreguista ou não, podiamos saber que as regras do jogo seriam respeitadas, que não haveriam pacotões surpresa e outras coisas que destroem a confiabilidade e a estabilidade do país. Com o Lula, não temos essa certeza. Além do mais, depois de ver o país rebaixado, o Lula ainda não esclareu os seus planos, programas e intenções. Como o PT não tem programa, fica então o misterio. De qualquer modo, eu não confio no Lula porque eu acho que ele vai fuder com a classe media mais ainda. Como ele não tem nada para tirar dos pobres, como as elites já tem contas no exterior, só vai sobrar a classe media. Eu tenho certeza que o Lula vai aumentar impostos, restrições e outras coisas, contra a classe media, é claro. Concluindo, eu aconselho o pessoal da classe media a se proteger agora. A classe media precisa comprar dolar e abrir uma conta bancaria no exterior, para depositar as poupanças por lá. Se o Lula respeitar as regras e não vier com viadagem de populista peão, então, a classe media poderá trazer o dinheiro de volta. É assim que devemos tratar esses politicos de merda. Para encerrar o assunto das proximas eleições, eu diria que o Brasil é um refen acorrentado em um cativeiro do FMI. Os populista de esquerda do PT acham que o Brasil dever espernear, rebolar, gritar...mas eu acho que isso não adianta, o sequestrador vai é enfiar uma porrada nos cornios dos refen otário e, talvez, comer a bunda dele. Isso sem falar do tiro nas idéias. Não há como pedir socorro. A policia honesta, em sua delegacia lá em Andromeda, não tem a minima idéia do que se passa. Também, se fossemos investigar direitinho, os sequestradores terraqueos do FMI são Policiais Militares fazendo cerão. Portanto, eu recomendo um presidente bem mansinho, que não fique rebolando e dando chilique, que fique quieto, não reaja e obedeça as ordens do sequestrador.
Para o articulista americano do jornal 'Washington Times' e professor de política internacional Constantine Menges, uma vitória de Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva na eleição presidencial de outubro pode levar o Brasil a ser inimigo dos EUA na guerra contra o terrorismo. Para Menges, citado como ex-integrante do Conselho de Segurança Nacional e ex-agente da CIA (agência secreta dos EUA), a aproximação de Lula com líderes da esquerda que, segundo ele, financiariam o terror internacional, levaria o Brasil a compor, ao lado da Venezuela e de Cuba o novo 'eixo do mal', expressão usada pelo presidente George W. Bush para classificar Iraque, Irã e Coréia do Norte como patrocinadores do terrorismo em todo o mundo e produtores de armas de destruição em massa. Menges falou com exclusividade ao GLOBONEWS.COM, por telefone, de Washington.
GLOBONEWS.COM - Por que o senhor inclui o Brasil em um possível novo 'eixo do mal'?
CONSTANTINE MENGES - O líder das pesquisas na corrida presidencial no Brasil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, não esconde suas preferências e seu alinhamento com a elite comunista na América Latina. Podemos esperar tudo de um homem que diz que Castro (Fidel Castro, presidente de Cuba) é o ideal político da América Latina. Há anos Lula vem mantendo estreitos laços com os maiores nomes latino-americanos da esquerda e com líderes no Oriente Médio. Sua aproximação com países que patrocinam o terror mundial é clara e pode levar o Brasil a se chocar com os interesses americanos. A vitória de Lula seria muito perigosa.
Em que o senhor se baseia para fazer tais declarações sobre a ligação etre Lula e o terrorismo internacional?
MENGES - Desde a criação do Fórum de São Paulo, em 1990, o Lula vem se encontrando sistematicamente com líderes que representam grande ameaça para a segurança mundial. Além de ter Fidel como um modelo, alinha-se com o presidente da Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, cujo governo tem orientação pró-Iraque, país produtor de armas de destruição em massa. Em vez de dar melhores condições de vida a seu povo, o ditador da Venezuela usa os US$ 70 bilhões que arrecada com o petróleo financiando candidatos que possam fortalecer o comunismo na América Latina, como é o caso do Brasil. Com esse dinheiro, Chávez sustenta os guerrilheiros das Forças Armadas Revolucionárias da Colômbia (Farc) e pretende espalhar o regime do terror por países de frágil democracia como Peru, Equador e Bolívia.
O senhor realmente acredita que, caso o candidato Lula vença a eleição presidencial, será instalado no Brasil um regime radical contrário aos interesses americanos?
MENGES - Sim, ele vai fazer o mesmo que Chávez fez na Venezuela e, escondido sob o manto de uma falsa democracia, vai tentar se manter no poder de forma ilegal. Para isso vai contar com o apoio de grupos e regimes opressores no continente. O povo do Brasil tem que refletir sobre isso para não cair na armadilha em que os venezuelanos caíram com Chávez.
No seu artigo publicado na semana passada no jornal 'Washington Times', a vitória da esquerda no Brasil é tida como uma ameaça à segurança americana. Baseado em que o senhor acredita nisso?
MENGES - Não há dúvidas de que Lula vai desenvolver um programa de armas nucleares e se aproximar da China, que está de olho em um intercâmbio com o Exército brasileiro. O governo chinês negocia urânio com o Brasil e investe na indústria aeroespacial brasileira.
O senhor alega que foi agente de inteligência da CIA. Essa experiência incluiu observações sobre o Brasil e o candidato petista à Presidência?
MENGES - Sim, durante o governo do presidente Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) fui encarregado de observar o cenário político da América Latina e minhas pesquisas incluíram o Brasil e o atual candidato do Partido dos Trabalhadores à Presidência. O governo dos EUA sempre esteve preocupado com a cubanização dos principais países da região.
Na sua opinião, Lula poderia se transformar em um Fidel Castro brasileiro?
MENGES - Provavelmente Lula seria um misto de Fidel Castro e de Hugo Chávez. O próprio Fidel se diz orgulhoso de seus camaradas latino-americanos. Os três culpam os EUA pelos problemas sociais de seus países e prometem combater o que chamam de terror econômico.
Qual seria o perfil de presidente ideal para o Brasil?
MENGES - O oposto do de Lula. O melhor presidente para o Brasil seria um político de um partido democrático, capaz de proporcionar bem-estar à população e garantir liberdade aos cidadãos.
Um novo bloco de terrorismo e armas de longo alcance/nucleares pode muito bem surgir de um eixo incluindo Fidel Castro (Cuba), do regime de Chavez na Venezuela e um futuro presidente radical eleito no Brasil, todos com links no Iraque, Irã e China.
Visitando o Irã no ano passado Fidel Castro disse: "Irã e Cuba podem fazer os Estados Unidos ficar aos seus joelhos", enquanto Chaves (Venezuela) expressou a sua admiração por Saddam Hussein durante visita ao Iraque.
O novo eixo se mantém evitável, mas se o candidato pró-Castro (Lula) for eleito presidente do Brasil, os resultados podem incluir um regime radical no Brasil reestabelecendo seu armamento nuclear e programas de defesa com misseis, desenvolvendo ligações secretas com países colaboradores do terrorismo como Cuba, Iraque e Irã, e participando na desestabilização das frágeis democracias dos seus países vizinhos. Isso pode acarretar em 300 milhões de pessoas em seis países diferentes sobre controle de regimes radicais anti-EUA, e a administração em Washington parece dar pouca atenção a isto tudo.
Os brasileiros irão passar por eleições presidenciais em Outubro, e se a atual pesquisa de intenção de votos se concretizar poderá tomar posse um radical pró-Castro com ampla identificação com o terrorismo internacional. Seu nome é Luís Inácio (Lula) da Silva, candidato a presidente do PT e que lidera as pesquisas com 40% de preferência. O candidato Comunista (Ciro Hehe) é segundo com 25% e o candidato da situação (Serra) tem cerca de 14%.
Lula não faz mistério sobre as suas simpatias políticas. Foi um aliado de Fidel Castro por mais de 25 anos. Com a ajuda de Fidel Lula realizou em 1990 em São Paulo o Forum Anual de Organizações Comunistas e outras organizações terroristas e políticas da América Latina, Europa e Leste Europeu. Este forum foi usado para coordenar e planejar atividades políticas e terroristas em todo o mundo e contra os EUA. O último encontro foi realizado em Havana em Dez/2001. Envolveu terroristas da América Latina, blabla... e condenou duramente a administração Bush e as suas ações contra o terrorismo internacional.
Como Fidel, Lula culpa os EUA e o Neo-Libearlismo por toda a condição de caos social e econômico do Brasil e da América Latrina. Lula taxou a ALCA (Área de Livre Comércio das Américas - Um tipo de Mercado Comum Europeu, no qual os EUA tem enorme interesse) como uma conspiração por parte dos EUA para anexar o Brasil ao seu governo de vez, e disse que os credores que buscam refinanciamento dos empréstimos de US$250 bilhoes ao Brasil são terroristas economicos. Ele também argumentou que aqueles que retiram seus investimentos no Brasil por medo de sua iminente eleição são terroristas econômicos. Isso traz uma dica do tipo de guerra contra o terrorismo que seu governo vai adotar.
o Brasil é um país vasto, rico em recursos naturais, tamanho aproximado ao dos EUA com uma população de 180 mi e a oitava maior economia do mundo (Dados meio ultrapassados, já que passamos para 11º ou 12º já desde 2000). Ele pode muito bem se tornar uma das potências nucleares mais armadas do mundo.
Entre 1965 e 1994, os militares trabalharam ativamente no estudo de armas nucleares, desenvolvendo efetivamente 2 bombas atômicas e foi notificado um teste de armas nucleares durante este período após a eleição de um governo democrático eleito e de uma investigação do congresso causou o encerramento do programa de armas nucleares no país.
Aquelas investigações revelaram, no entanto, que militares venderam durante 8 anos toneladas de Urânio para o Iraque em 1981. Também foi revelado que após o encerramento do programa de armas nucleares, um General e 24 cientistas envolvidos no programa foram trabalhar no Iraque. Há relatos que com financiamento do Iraque, uma base de armamentos nucleares é matida no país (Aqui, no Brasil!) ao contrário da vontade dos líderes democráticos do país.
Lula disse que deveria haver armas nucleares e estas foram enviadas à China (tá lembrando aquela música "Disneylândia" dos Titãs) a qual tinha assediado os Militares brasileiros. A China vendeu ao Brasil Urânio enriquecido e investiu na indústria aerospacial Brasileira, resultando num projeto conjunto de mapeamento de terrenos por satélite.
O Brasil compartilha fronteiras com outros 10 países na América do Sul. Isso ajudaria Lula a imitar - como ele próprio disse que faria - a política externa pró-Castro e pró-Iraque do gaverno Chaves (Venezuela), e que tem mantido apoio aos comunistas narco-terroristas das FARC na Colômbia assim como outros grupos anti-democráticos em outros países sulamericanos. HUgo Chaves trabalhou com Fidel para desestabilizar temporariamente a frágil democracia no Equador 2 anos atrás. Agora ambos apoiam o líder "radical" socialista líder dos produtores de cocaína, Evo Morales, que tem esperança de e tornar presidente da Bolívia em agosto.
Além de ajudar as guerrilhas comunistas a tomar o poder contra a democracia na Colômbia, um governo de Lula no Brasil seria cômodo na ajuda de comunistas, narco-terroristas e outros grupos anti-democráticos na desestabilização das frágeis democracias da Bolívia, Equador e Peru, assim como agravar a profunda crise na Argentina e no Paraguay.
Além disso, um governo de Lula é plausível no calote da dívida externa, causando uma profunda recaída na economia de todos os países da América Latina, causando assim vulnerabilidade nas suas democracias. Isso pode também engatilhar uma recaída na recente crise econômica dos EUA por exemplo pelos contratos de exportação vigentes.
Um eixo Fidel-Chavez-Lula significaria a união de 43 anos de um passado de guerra política contra os Estados Unidos com a riqueza do petróleo da Venezuela e as armas nucleares e o potencial economico do Brasil.
Nas eleições de Novembro de 2004, os americanos devem se perguntar: quem perdeu a América do Sul? Os Estados Unidos foram passivos politicamente falando durante a administração Clinton, quando ignorou ajuda aos lideres democratas da Venezuela contra às ações anti-constitucionais e ilegais de Chavez e também ignorou as suas alianças públicas com finciadores do terrorismo. Porque a administração Bush não pode agir depois de 20 anos de progressos democráticos na América Latina estão para ser jogados fora? Porque nada pode ser feito antes de um imenso posto de ataque ao nosso lado sul é aberto pelo bloco terrorista e nossa nação ameaçada por mais um regime de intenção anti-americana que possui armas nucleares e mísseis de longo alcance?
Esse desastre para a segurança nacional e para o povo da América Latina deve e pode ser evitado se nossos políticos agirem rapidamente e decisivamente, mas eles devem agir agora. Atenção política e ações na hora certa por parte dos EUA e outras democracias devem incluir encorajamento às frentes pró-democráticas no Brasil de modo a resultar num líder político honesto e capaz que possa representar os anseios da maioria dos brasileiros (e do TIo SAM) para a democracia genuína e que tenha as condições para realizar uma campanha de âmbito nacional e vitoriosa.
Were a Communist coalition under front-running presidential candidate Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva allied with Cuban President Fidel Castro and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to take power in Brazil following this October’s presidential election, it would undoubtedly be the greatest Communist coup since Mao and his Red Army proclaimed the People’s Republic of China in Beijing over fifty years ago. In one fell swoop, 175 million more Latin Americans would fall under Marxist domination and together with Communist Cuba and Communist led Venezuela would automatically be the dominant power bloc in Latin America with a sizable majority of the population and territory there.
Constantine Mendes, a senior fellow with the Hudson Institute and former member of the National Security Council who recently preceded me in being interviewed on Howard Phillips’ excellent and informative Conservative Roundtable public access program, has written a series of similar, but highly important articles regarding the developing political situation in Brazil. His articles serve to confirm what I wrote in an editorial on the Communist threat back in June. In addition to da Silva’s strong ties to rogue states such as Cuba, Iraq, and Libya, Mendes states that da Silva has publicly praised his friend, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez as “an example to emulate” if he succeeds in getting elected President in October. He states that this would mean that we could expect “the use of pseudo-electoral process and referenda to consolidate his rule as dictator.” Da Silva would probably embark upon a slow path of transforming Brazil into an authoritarian, though not doctrinaire Marxist state. He would likely subvert political freedoms in Brazil and change the constitution and/or commit electoral fraud to ensure his indefinite continuance in power as has been done by Chavez in Venezuela. His political opponents should expect no mercy.
Mendes has attempted to highlight the dangers posed by a da Silva victory in the Brazilian presidential elections and prod the Bush Administration to pursue whatever options are available to avert what would undoubtedly amount to the greatest regional crisis for the US since the Soviets parked nuclear-tipped medium range ballistic missiles in Cuba in 1962. He warns of the formation of “a new axis of evil” if da Silva wins the election. Mendes writes that da Silva has spoken of his desire to restart Brazil’s nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs if re-elected. He reveals that Brazil’s military actually “successfully designed two atomic bombs and was reportedly on the verge of testing one nuclear device” when its democratic participant discovered the rogue program and shut it down in 1994. Da Silva has essentially declared his intention to have Brazil join the Sino-Russian axis of nations against the United States if he becomes President. He has also expressed interest in providing Communist China with naval bases along Brazil’s long Atlantic coastline.
Brazil is the second largest and second most powerful country in the Western Hemisphere, comprising over half the population and territory of South America. As it borders on ten other countries in Latin America, Brazil would be well-positioned to serve as regional hegemon of the South American continent were it to find the political will to do so. This would be particularly true were it to test a nuclear weapon and become a nuclear power. Brazil also boasts the world’s eighth largest economy.
Da Silva has established extensive ties to international terrorism. He has been very critical of the US “War on Terror” and has professed admiration for such widely respected international statesmen as Saddam Hussein and Mohomar Quadafi. His election as President would greatly increase the prospect of a successful takeover of Columbia by the Communist FARC guerillas, which he fully supports. Mendes states that a Marxist regime in Brazil would also be well-positioned to help cause Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru to fall to would-be Marxist dictators and exploit the deepening economic crisis in Argentina, which I recently visited in June, and Paraguay. All told, a da Silva victory could well result in “as many as 300 million people” falling “under the control of anti-American dictatorships.”
In 1990, da Silva co-founded the Forum of Sao Paulo with Cuban President Fidel Castro and former Nicaraguan Marxist President Daniel Ortega. The Forum is a kind of annual “Communist Party Congress” for Communists, anti-American terrorists and Marxist revolutionaries to meet together and strategize on how to best effect their plans for Communizing much if not most of Latin America. Venezuelan President and self-proclaimed Communist, Hugo Chavez has become a major power player in this organization since coming to power in 1998. Chavez is probably supporting the da Silva campaign to the tune of millions of dollars while Castro may also be committing hundreds of his intelligence operatives to help da Silva win the election.
Under da Silva’s leadership, Brazil would become the new Marxist powerhouse of Latin America and the base of operations for a new Latin American “axis of evil” from which much of the rest of Latin America, beginning with Panama could fall like a series of dominoes to well-supported Marxist politicos and revolutionaries. America's surviving allies in Latin America would be completely isolated. Losing Brazil to a Communist-aligned regime would be a loss that the US could not recover from anytime soon. It would force the US to retool its entire foreign policy and change its main focus from the Eurasian subcontinent to Latin America with a concomitant redeployment of forces to the South American theater of operations (SOCOM). It would also require the reoccupation by US military forces of the Panama Canal and the eviction of its current Communist Chinese tenets for the US to have any hope of restoring a measure of continental, let alone hemispheric security.
During a pre-brief for my last trip to Brazil’s capitol last March as part of an official US government delegation, I queried the intelligence community briefer on whether he believed that an electoral victory by da Silva would adversely effect Brazil’s foreign policy towards the US. He told me that he did not believe that it would, despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary. Since then, I have determined that neither the Bush Administration nor the US intelligence community is focusing much attention on the threat of a Marxist takeover of Brazil and determining what that outcome would mean for US foreign policy initiatives in Brazil. Accordingly a victory by da Silva in this fall’s election will be a wake-up call for which they will be woefully unprepared. The Bush Administration would be well-advised to correct course and take immediate action designed to prevent the unthinkable loss of Brazil to a Communist-aligned coalition government.
David T. Pyne, Esq. works as an International Programs Manager with the Department of the Army responsible for cooperation with Latin America. He is a former Army Reserve Officer. He spent two years in Brazil from 1988-1990 serving as a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Mr. Pyne recently served as a member of an official Department of Defense-led trip to meet with officials of Brazil’s newly established Ministry of Defense. Mr. Pyne holds an MA in National Security Studies from Georgetown University and is a member of the Center for Emerging National Security Affairs based in Washington, D.C. He has been cited in the New American magazine and was recently interviewed on Howard Phillips’ Conservative Roundtable TV program in regards to issues related to the coming Brazilian election.
As Washington focuses on Afghanistan and Iraq, a time bomb ticks in our hemisphere.
Brazil — which occupies half a continent, has borders with every country in South America save two, and has more people and a larger economy than Russia — could soon be ruled by a radical anti-U.S. leftist.
Brazil's presidential election is Oct. 6, and polls show Luiz Inacio "Lula" da Silva, now in his fourth run for the presidency, with a 20-point lead.
Mr. da Silva is co-founder with Fidel Castro of a network of terrorist groups, Marxist parties, and radical enemies of the United States, known as the "Forum of Sao Paulo," named after the Brazilian city where it first met in 1990.
Revolutionary leftists (like Nicaragua's Sandinistas, El Salvador's FMLN, the Cuban Communist Party, and Brazil's Worker's Party), terror-sponsoring states (such as Iraq, Libya, Syria), and terrorists (like the Irish Republican Army, the Basque ETA, Colombia's FARC, and some of the most notorious Middle Eastern terror groups), converge and conspire at the Forum of Sao Paulo. The most recent meeting was last December in Havana, Cuba.
To have Mr. da Silva take the presidency of Brazil is, in the words of Latin America analyst and former Reagan speechwriter Mark Klugmann, "Fidel Castro's top political objective for 2002."
Rather than face the challenge, Clinton administration holdovers on Voice of America's governing board ended broadcasts to Brazil, "transmitting" instead the appearance that the U.S. has downgraded its interest in Brazil in this critical election year.
Meanwhile at the Bush White House, the Brazil problems are sent to John Maisto.
Mr. Maisto, who is from the State Department, was placed on Condoleezza Rice's National Security Council staff to oversee all of Latin America. Yet he appears to have lodged no complaint about the VOA walking away from the largest country in his region last year, even as House International Relations Chairman Rep. Henry Hyde had called upon the VOA board to resume broadcasting to Brazil.
It is hardly news that a political-ideological struggle is under way for control of Brazil. The most populous Catholic country in the world with 175 million people, and home to a thriving Protestant evangelical movement, Brazil is also the birthplace of Marxist liberation theology.
Mr. da Silva's Worker's Party already controls the Brazilian state government of Rio Grande do Sul and is reported to be inserting Marxism into public school textbooks and imposing party politics and ideology on the running of the police force.
Nor would the effects of a da Silva victory stop at Brazil's borders. On Sept. 6, Mr. da Silva said his election would "change many things in the region, with repercussions in Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Colombia." In previous years he had stated he favored nuclear weapons for Brazil and a much closer relationship with Communist Cuba and China, but he had kept his views about international issues out of the campaign. Then on Sept. 13, Mr. da Silva publicly said Brazil should move toward resuming its nuclear weapons program by leaving the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Yet Washington appears passive.
Mr. da Silva is said to be considering a visit to Washington. U.S. policy is to deny visas to groups and individuals that support terrorism. But Mr. Maisto has given no indication that da Silva, Mr. Castro's partner in creating the Forum of Sao Paulo, will be denied a U.S. visa.
Mr. Maisto's tenure as Bill Clinton's ambassador in Venezuela may shed light on his passive approach in Brazil. Columnist Robert Novak reported that Ambassador Maisto "privately advised Congress not to worry about accession of the leftist populist Hugo Chavez to that nation's presidency" in 1999.
In office, Col. Hugo Chavez threw out the constitution and sent armed brigades to attack his civic opposition. He began aiding the FARC terrorists trying to subvert Colombia. Former Reagan National Security Council official Constantine Menges warned in 1998 and 1999 that Mr. Chavez would be an ally of Fidel Castro as well as other state sponsors of terrorism such as Iran and Iraq. That has happened. Mr. Maisto saw no such problem.
Today Col. Chavez provides a $2 billion petroleum subsidy to Fidel Castro and allies his government with states like Iran, Iraq and communist China.
Mr. da Silva calls Col. Chavez "an example to emulate." Col. Chavez calls Mr. da Silva "a great man," and predicts: "The left is going to win in Brazil. Changes are coming step by step on this continent. I think about it day and night."
Robert Novak reports that since arriving at the Rice NSC, Mr. Maisto has "pressed for normalization with communist Cuba" and has worked to maintain the Clinton-era guidelines that impede a stronger U.S. policy against Colombian terrorist groups.
The Washington-based Center for Security Policy, directed by former Pentagon official Frank Gaffney Jr., describes Mr. Maisto as "a career Foreign Service officer known for his soft line on narco-terrorism and other security issues," and says he is "a major roadblock to realization of the President's agenda."
Has Mr. Maisto provided President George W. Bush the advice and help he deserved as the United States seeks to preserve political democracy and avoid what Mr. Menges recently called the possibility of a "nuclear armed axis of evil in the Americas" including Mr. Castro, Mr. Chavez and a radical da Silva regime in Brazil? We will know next month.
• Faith Whittlesey is chairman of the Institute of World Politics, a graduate school of international affairs. Under President Reagan, she was U.S. ambassador to Switzerland and served on the senior White House staff as director of public liaison where she headed the White House Outreach Working Group on Central America.
A new terrorist and nuclear weapons/ballistic missile threat may well come from an axis including Cuba's Fidel Castro, the Chavez regime in Venezuela and a newly elected radical president of Brazil, all with links to Iraq, Iran and China. Visiting Iran last year. Mr. Castro said: "Iran and Cuba can bring America to its knees," while Chavez expressed his admiration for Saddam Hussein during a visit to Iraq.
The new axis is still preventable, but if the pro-Castro candidate is elected president of Brazil, the results could include a radical regime in Brazil re-establishing its nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs, developing close links to state sponsors of terrorism such as Cuba, Iraq and Iran, and participating in the destabilization of fragile neighboring democracies. This could lead to 300 million people in six countries coming under the control of radical anti-U.S. regimes and the possibility that thousands of newly indoctrinated terrorists might try to attack the United States from Latin America. Yet, the administration in Washington seems to be paying little attention.
Brazilians will hold presidential elections in October, and if current polling is any guide the winner could be a pro-Castro radical with extensive ties to international terrorism. His name is Luis Inacio da Silva, the presidential candidate of the Workers Party who is currently at about 40 percent in the polls. The Communist candidate is second with 25 percent and the pro-democratic contender is at about 14 percent.
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 Sao 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 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.
Like Mr. Castro, Mr. da Silva blames the United States and "neo-liberalism" for all the real social and economic problems still facing Brazil and Latin America. Mr. Da Silva has called the Free Trade Area of the Americas a plot by the United States to "annex" Brazil, and he has said that the international lenders who seek repayment of their $250 billion in loans are "economic terrorists." He has also said that those who are moving their money out of Brazil because they fear his regime are "economic terrorists." This gives a hint about the kind of "war against terrorism" his regime will conduct.
Brazil is a vast, richly endowed country, nearly the size of the United States with a population of about 180 million and the world's eighth largest economy (with a GDP of more than $1.1 trillion). It could soon become one of the world's nuclear armed powers as well. Between 1965 and 1994, the military actively worked to develop nuclear weapons, it successfully designed two atomic bombs and was reportedly on the verge of testing one nuclear device when a newly elected democratic government and a Brazilian congressional investigation caused the program to be shut down.
That investigation revealed, however, that the military had sold eight tons of uranium to Iraq in 1981. It is also reported that after Brazil's successful ballistic missile program was ended, the general and 24 of the scientists working on it went to work for Iraq. There are reports that with financing from Iraq, a nuclear weapons capability has been covertly maintained contrary to directives from the civilian democratic leaders.
Mr. da Silva has said Brazil should have nuclear weapons and move closer to China, which has been actively courting the Brazilian military. China has sold Brazil enriched uranium and has invested in the Brazilian aerospace industry, resulting in a joint imagery/reconnaissance satellite.
Brazil shares common borders with 10 other countries in South America. This would help da Silva to emulate — as he has said he would — the foreign policy of the pro-Castro and pro-Iraq Chavez regime in Venezuela, which has provided support to the communist narco-terrorist FARC in Colombia as well as other anti-democratic groups in other South American countries. Hugo Chavez worked with Mr. Castro to temporarily destabilize the fragile democracy in Ecuador two years ago. Now both support the radical socialist leader of the cocaine growers, Evo Morales, who hopes to become president of Bolivia this August.
Along with helping the communist guerrillas take power in the embattled democracy in Colombia, a da Silva regime in Brazil would be well situated to aide communists, narco-terrorists and other anti-democratic groups in destabilizing the fragile democracies of Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru, as well as to exploit the deep economic crisis in Argentina and Paraguay.
Further, a da Silva regime is likely to default on its debt, causing a sharp economic downturn in all of Latin America, thereby increasing the vulnerability of its democracies. This could also trigger a second phase of economic downturn in the United Staes as export markets contracted.
A Castro-Chavez-da Silva axis would mean linking 43 years of Fidel Castro's political warfare against the United States with the oil wealth of Venezuela and the nuclear weapons/ ballistic missile and economic potential of Brazil.
Come our own elections in November 2004, Americans may ask: Who lost South America? The United States was politically passive during the Clinton administration, when it ignored the pleas of Venezuela's democratic leaders for help in opposing the anti-constitutional and illegal actions of Mr. Chavez and also ignored his public alliances with state sponsors of terrorism. Why can't the Bush administration act before 20 years of democratic gains in Latin America were allowed to be reversed? Why can't anything be done before a vast new southern flank is opened up in the terrorist threat and our nation menaced by one more radical anti-American regime intent on acquiring nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles?
This disaster for U.S. national security and for the people of Latin America must and can be averted if our policy makers act quickly and decisively, but they must do so now. Timely political attention and actions by the United States and other democracies should include encouragement for the pro-democratic parties in Brazil to unify behind an honest, capable political leader who can represent the hopes of the majority of Brazilians for genuine democracy and who has the resources to mount an effective national campaign.
Constantine C. Menges, a senior fellow with the Hudson Institute, is a former National Security Council member.
Brazil's next president most likely will be an anti-American radical with an appetite for atomic bombs. Leading in the polls, Ignacio "Lula" da Silva could win either today's first-round election or the Oct. 27 runoff. If so, Brazil, Venezuela and Cuba could unite in hostility to the United States.
"We must prevent a nuclear-armed Axis of Evil in the Americas," says Constantine Menges, a senior fellow in the Washington office of the Hudson Institute. Since last spring, the former adviser to President Reagan has offered spoken and written warnings of Mr. da Silva's mounting menace. "Lula's a supporter of terrorism," Mr. Menges continues.
"He will, I believe, permit covert support to be given to bring about anti-American regimes in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru."
Mr. da Silva chillingly hinted on September 13 that Brazil should resume its quest for atomic weapons. Speaking at the Air Force Club in Rio de Janeiro, he criticized Brazil's compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"I imagine this would make sense only if all countries that already have [nuclear weapons] also gave them up," the former metalworker said. As O Globo On Line reported the next day, Mr. da Silva added: "It is not fair that developed countries, who have nuclear weapons technology, demand that others not have them or deactivate what they have. All of us developing countries are left holding a slingshot while they have atomic bombs."
But Brazil clearly surpassed the slingshot. In 1975, according to a Federation of American Scientists study, Brazil "transferred technology from its power plant projects to a secret program to develop an atom bomb." Brazil's Congressional Investigating Committee discovered that the initiative was funded through covert bank accounts.
It determined that the former military regime shipped 8 tons of uranium to Iraq and also concluded that Brazil built but never tested a 12-kiloton atomic weapon and another 20- to 30-kiloton device. Brazil officially halted its nuclear arms program in the mid-1990s. (For details, go to www.fas.org/nuke/guide/ brazil/nuke).
Why should a Brazilian bomb be more bothersome than a British or French nuke? Mr. da Silva's comrades answer that question. He is a co-founder of the Sao Paulo Forum, a consortium of militant, often Marxist groups that huddles regularly.
The Forum "brings together all the anti-U.S. elements," Mr. Menges says. "They gather to see how they can attack America and harm democratic governments."
The Forum convened last December in Havana. Joining Mr. da Silva were Cuba's Fidel Castro, former Nicaraguan dictator Daniel Ortega and representatives of the Argentine, Colombian, Chilean, Peruvian, Uruguayan and Venezuelan communist parties. The 400 delegates included members of Colombia's FARC and ELN guerrillas and Peru's Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement, all included on the State Department's list of active terrorist groups. As Granma, Cuba's official daily, reported, Zuhair Dhaif — chief of the Latin American Division of Iraq's Ba'athist Party — participated, as did a Libyan emissary. With friends like these, why not fear a nuclear-armed Lula da Silva ?
Mr. da Silva calls Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez Frias "an example to emulate." Not good. Mr. Chavez, among other things, has used pseudo-legal means to consolidate power between himself and a unicameral legislature his Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement dominates.
He and Mr. Castro have held numerous, private visits within and outside Cuba. Mr. Chavez hosted Mr. Castro's three-day-long 75th birthday bash in August 2001. More important, since fall 2000, Mr. Chavez has sent Mr. Castro 106,000 barrels of oil daily in exchange for Cuban doctors and sports specialists.
Mr. Chavez also has conducted official missions to Libya, Iran and Iraq. Venezuelan Brig. Gen. Nestor Gonzalez has complained that Mr. Chavez has taken a "passive" attitude toward FARC rebel camps on Venezuelan soil.
Mr. da Silva also denounces Brazil's lenders as "economic terrorists" and threatens to default on its $200 billion external debt. Such a financial belly flop could soak the already fragile economies of Brazil's neighbors.
The election of Lula da Silva could shift Earth's eighth-largest economy and its 180 million people into the "problem" column in the War on Terror. Combine Brazilian nukes with Venezuelan petrodollars and Cuban subversion, and Washington policymakers will suffer migraines for years. While the Bush administration's plate already overflows with Iraq, al Qaeda and homeland security matters, it better find some space for Brazil — pronto.
Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a Senior Fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in Fairfax, Va.
The results from this Sunday's election in Brazil should be a red flag to conservatives in the United States that the gains most countries in South America have made over the last decade are about to come further undone. Placing first in the balloting for a new president of Brazil was Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. "Lula," as he is called, may dress more conservatively these days because he has taken to wearing suits rather than jeans, and is trying to sound more moderate and reasonable. No matter how much he tries to make his agenda look a pale shade of "pink," he is at heart a red Marxist. Conservatives in the United States certainly do not buy this new "Lula," even though Brazilian voters must decide which Socialist candidate in the October 27th runoff is the lesser of two evils. The second balloting provides some hope that Lula can be stopped.
Lula is the candidate of the Workers Party, and has already run three losing campaigns for the presidency of Brazil. He is a former union leader. His opponent in the runoff will be Jose Serra, the candidate of the Brazilian Social Democracy Party, which is a member of the current coalition governing Brazil. But it is worth noting that there was no credible center-right choice in this election because the candidate who represented the Liberal Front Party, which had been a member of the coalition representing the current government, saw her candidacy founder on charges of corruption.
Some think Lula will win a majority on the 27th by garnering votes from supporters of the two candidates who were also-rans in this Sunday's balloting: Ciro Gomes of the People's Socialist Party (the former Brazilian Communist Party) and Anthony Garotinho of the Socialist Party of Brazil.
But that thinking may turn out to be wrong. Another school of thought holds that Lula has maximized his support as the candidate of the Left in the first round. If Serra can find and develop significant contrasts between himself and Lula, that can help to reframe the election as one in which voting for Lula presents a risk to the well-being of Brazilians.
Already, Serra has made an effort to do that, calling for abortion to remain illegal in Brazil, which may help him with Brazil's more traditionally minded voters. There are even more issues for him to exploit against Lula. But the quieter, more understated Serra will need to skillfully polarize the contest while not losing his core base. This runoff will be a true test of his political skills.
"Lula," on the other hand, is considered to be a cagey, charismatic politician. He has been at the vanguard of the Latin American left and should be judged by the company that he keeps.
He is an ally of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and is opposed to a continued embargo by the United States against Cuba. Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, whose policies have wreaked havoc on his country, is considered to be another friend of Lula's. As The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property has noted, "Lula" has been a regular at anti-globalism rallies in Brazil in which our American flags are burned while Cuba's are held high by demonstrators.
Most disturbing is Lula's threat to have Brazil forego adherence to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. "Why is it that someone asks me to put down my weapons and only keep a slingshot while he keeps a cannon pointed at me," he has asked rhetorically. "Brazil will only be respected in the world when it turns into an economic, technological, military power."
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher has quoted Lula as having said Brazil's sticking to the treaty's guidelines "would make sense only if all countries that already have nuclear weapons also gave them up." Rohrabacher is outraged and rightfully so. If Brazil, under Lula, scuttles participation in that treaty, it would sabotage our relations with his country, perhaps even igniting a deadly arms race in South America or making Brazil a supplier of dangerous weaponry to terrorist states or organizations.
As part of his effort to project an image of moderation, Lula has jettisoned his past talk of having Brazil default on loan payments. He now talks of cooperating with the guidelines of the International Monetary Fund for reform. But many in Brazil view his newfound moderation to be nothing but talk. When a poll on September 24th showed Lula closing in on a majority, the stock market in Sao Paulo took a dramatic downward turn. The Brazilian markets suffered again with news of his strong first-place showing.
United States corporations including Ford, GM and Cargill, much less to say our banks that have invested in Brazil, have reason to be about the consequences of a Lula victory. Many Brazilian and foreign investors doubt that he really has the backbone to make the tough decisions needed to bring order to Brazil's problem-plagued economy. There's plenty of ground for reasonable doubt about Lula, not withstanding his leftist views, just because he has no prior experience in holding elective office. The Economist has called Lula "fuzzy on policy details."
Moreover, even if Lula's red agenda is at least momentarily paled down on economic issues during the campaign season, there is no doubt whatsoever that his platform will definitely be bad for those in Brazil who believe in traditional values. Because Lula advocates the policies that promote abortion, homosexuality, and legalized prostitution in a country that has traditionally looked to Christianity for moral guidance.
Even before the first round of balloting had taken place, conservatives and even moderates in Congress were sounding the alarm bell about what a Lula presidency might mean. A letter signed by noted congressional foreign policy experts Ben Gilman (R-NY), a moderate, Chris Smith (R-NJ), a conservative, and eleven other House members including Rohrabacher, that expresses concern about Lula's election and its implications has been sent to President Bush. They asked that the State Department assess the threat that Lula's election would pose to security in the Americas.
The letter notes that Lula and Castro established in 1990 the leftist meeting called the "Forum of Sao Paolo," which convenes leftist leaders and organizations regularly. The last meeting was in December 2001 in Havana. Participants at that forum included Colombia's FARC that has committed numerous acts of violence against law-abiding Colombians and foreigners and has links to narcotics traffickers, and its National Liberation Army, another Marxist group, that engages in kidnapping. Peru's Tupac Amaru, which in 1996 held 72 hostages for over four months at the Japanese ambassador's residence in Lima, also were represented. So was Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega.
The fact that Lula associates with the worst elements of Latin America should make clear that this is no moderate that Brazilians are being asked to elect as their next President. Voters may think that he is a break from the status quo. But they should not be surprised to discover if they elect him that what Lula really represents is a return to the failed policies of the past that left South American countries bankrupt, their citizens impoverished, and their political and economic systems unstable. Lula's apparent interest in kicking off a new arms race in South America may end up hurting the very people he talks of wanting to help because it will mean either taking away money from social programs or jacking up government spending and creating an inflationary spiral.
So Lula may be wearing suits these days, but his policies could end up putting Brazil in a straitjacket.
Paul Weyrich is president of the Free Congress Foundation.
With the Washington Times reporting earlier this week that the candidate of the Brazilian Workers’ Party, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, best known simply as Lula is polling only one percentage point less than what he needs to win the first round of voting in the Brazilian presidential election on Sunday while a couple of far left candidates leading in the race for Argentina’s presidential elections to be held next March, it appears that the Bush Administration’s Latin America policy is about to be thrown for a loop. It appears that a new terrorist supporting “axis of evil” seeking to develop WMD and long range ballistic missiles is about to be established in America’s backyard.
According to the latest poll, Lula leads his nearest opponent, Jose Serra, by a margin of 44% to 19% and virtually all observers agree that if he does not obtain a majority or exceed the voting percentage of all of his competitors when Brazilians go the polls this Sunday, he would probably beat any of his competitors by a comfortable
margin in the second round of voting on October 27. Lula is the leader of a Communist coalition consisting of both of Brazil’s Communist parties. As yet, this author has been alone in reporting on Lula’s strong internal Communist connections and the fact that he has enjoyed the strong support of both Brazilian Communist parties in all four presidential elections in which he has run including this one. This author lived in Brazil in 1989 when Lula came within a whisker of wining the Presidency and is accordingly intimately familiar with Lula and what a Lula victory would mean.
On Sept. 6, Lula said that his election would "change many things in the region, with repercussions in Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Colombia." Lula has praised both Cuban President Fidel Castro and President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and has declared Chavez to be the model, which he intends to emulate when he wins the Presidency later this month. Chavez has aligned himself with Cuba, the PRC, Iran, Iraq and Libya and assorted other rogue states and provides $2 billion a year in oil subsidies to help support Castro in power in Cuba. Chavez repudiated the Venezuelan constitution and dissolved Congress shortly after he was elected to consolidate power. Hugo Chavez has called Lula "a great man," and predicts that "the left is going to win in Brazil. Changes are coming step by step on this continent. I think about it day and night." A Lula electoral victory in this month’s Brazilian presidential elections is, "Fidel Castro's top political objective for 2002" in the words of Latin America analyst and former Reagan speechwriter Mark Klugmann.
Lula has expressed a desire to forge an alliance with Communist China if elected and strengthen military ties. He has expressed strong support for Marxist insurgents and terrorists throughout Latin America included the FARC narcoterrorists in Columbia fighting to take control over their respective nations though his Forum of Sao Paulo, which he founded with Fidel Castro over a decade ago. The Forum of Sao Paulo’s ultimate objective is nothing less than the Communization of the entire Latin America continent, one country at a time. In December 2001 at a meeting of his Forum of Sao Paulo, Lula and his comrades proclaimed their united opposition to the US war on terrorism.
While campaigning for his Marxist comrade, Lula, in Brazil this past week, the Reverend Jesse Jackson hailed Lula as being inspired by the “same special spirit" as that which inspired African National Congress leader and former South African President Nelson Mandela. Indeed he is, for the ANC was and remains a Marxist terrorist organization that today rules the Republic of South Africa in open coalition with the South African Communist Party (SACP). In fact, Mandela’s successor as South African President, Thabo Mbeki, is a member of the SACP. Just like Mandela, Lula is essentially Communist both in outlook and by the friends and associates he keeps, although not yet a card carrying member. Like Castro and Chavez, Lula will wait to formally declare himself a Communist once his permanent dictatorship and control over Brazil is assured. Argentina appears to be on the verge of electing a far-left candidate as President early next year as well. It is increasingly apparent that much of the region may well be in danger of falling like dominoes to the Communists beginning when Lula is elected President of Brazil later this month. The Bush Administration will have to act quickly and a lot more effectively then they have in regards to Brazil if it has any hopes of stemming the “Red” storm rising over Latin America.
Luiz Inacio "Lula" da Silva has lost three Brazilian presidential elections. Polls show his fourth run might end with a win. That could spell trouble for the United States.
If Lula does pull out a victory, local Cuban exile leaders will say, "I told you so." They will then face the awful truth that what they describe as a hardcore leftist will take control of Latin America's largest country and biggest economy.
The exiles fear Lula would line up with Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Fidel Castro of Cuba.
Castro, Chavez, and Lula are a threesome that could build a leftist challenge to U.S. interests in Latin America with sheer people numbers and natural resources. The potential triad could, at the same time, shore up Fidel Castro's shopworn political system and sinking economy. That's how exiles are analyzing it, and it bears watching. The Miami "take" on Lula is that he is connected to Castro through a common leftist ideology laced with a belief that the U.S. wants to economically annex Latin America.
Lula is also a major player in The Sao Paulo Forum.
According to Alejandro Penas Esclusa, a respected Venezuelan journalist who recently spoke at the University of Miami, Fidel Castro and Luis Ignacio 'Lula' Da Silva founded The Sao Paulo Forum in 1990 after the fall of the Berlin Wall. The organization caters to leftist political groups through out the hemisphere. It is designed to organize a united front representing the interests of a myriad of Latin American political groups dedicated to destroying capitalism. It fills the political vacuum left by the Soviets.
In 2001, The Sao Paulo Forum opened the group's 10th annual meeting in Havana. Lula was there; so was Nicaragua's former President Daniel Ortega and other leftist groups, several of which are on the U.S. State Department's list of active terrorist organizations.
They included Colombia's FARC and ELN, Peru's MRTA, and the Chilean MIR. Representatives of Iraq, and Libya also attended. Cuba is on the United States' list of terrorist nations.
The Brazilian Primary Election comes October 6. Early on, U.S. State Department and Washington think tank scholars did not give Lula much of a chance. They now do. As Brazil's economy worsens, Lula's populist message is beginning to resonate with the electorate.
Wealthy Brazilians are flocking to South Florida. It is another economic exodus. Bank accounts are set up, homes purchased. The influx continues. Just ask real estate brokers in Miami Beach and on Key Biscayne.
Brazil is in political and economic flux. Out of the ashes Lula might rise. He'd be democratically elected just like Hugo Chavez and that spells trouble, big trouble, for the U.S., say worried exiles who do not trust anyone who is in bed with Fidel Castro.
Hank Tester often reports on the Cuban exile community. Besides his reports on NBC 6 he is heard three times a week at 7:15 a.m. on WFFG, Keys Talk Radio, 1300AM.
Something to Celebrate
Will Wall Street and Washington see the bright side of Brazil's election?
Need cheering up? here's a good news story. The world's fifth largest country — with a history of military rule and endemic corruption — holds a free and fair presidential election. All voters, even in remote villages, cast their ballots on high-tech electronic machines of a kind that make the conduct of elections in, say, Florida, look shamefully outmoded. The candidate who wins the most support in the first round of voting has made his name criticizing the nation's power elite. But the results are accepted by all, and the country begins a three-week campaign before the top two candidates square off in a second round.
Worth raising a glass to, right? But all last week's election in Brazil got from Wall Street was a Bronx cheer. The Brazilian currency, the real, continued a slide that, apart from a brief rally after an International Monetary Fund (IMF) rescue package last August, has gone on all year. In the markets, interest rates on Brazilian bonds (a proxy for the extent to which Wall Street regards investment in Brazil as a risk) are running more than 20 percentage points above comparable U.S. securities.
No prizes for guessing why the markets are jumpy. The winner of the first round, with 46.4% of the vote, was Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva — universally known as Lula — the candidate of the Workers' Party, which has in the past flirted with repudiating Brazil's massive external debt. Lula, 56, a former labor-union leader running for the presidency for a fourth time, is likely to defeat Jose Serra, the candidate of the governing coalition, in the runoff on Oct.27. Following the economic catastrophes in Argentina and Uruguay, American bankers fear that the commitment of Latin America to the Washington Consensus, the bundle of free-market policies that has been adopted on the continent since the late 1980s, may be in jeopardy. Given the exposure of U.S. banks and exporters to Latin America, that could translate into lost jobs and profits north of the Rio Grande.
As it happens, the man who coined the term Washington Consensus, John Williamson of the Institute for International Economics in Washington, is a longtime expert on the Brazilian economy. When I spoke with him last week, Williamson sounded a lot more relaxed about the prospect of a Lula government than Wall Street seems to be. After years of failure, says Williamson, the Workers' Party is now electable precisely because its policies have "converged on the middle ground." Whatever its program may have been in the past, the party now seems ready to accept the strictures of the IMF and U.S. Treasury, including tight government budgets and a commitment to pay off the debt. Given the economic constraints, a Lula government would be likely to concentrate on those areas that the Workers' Party has stressed when it has run state and local governments, especially expanding educational opportunities and improving health care.
Still, Lula's election, should it happen, would be no small matter. Brazil has the largest economy in Latin America; some of the trends that seem likely to propel Lula to power are visible elsewhere on the continent as well. Peter Hakim, president of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington think tank, says that Lula's success reflects widespread "unhappiness with the results of economic reform and the quality of leadership." Lula will be nobody's stooge, least of all Washington's. "The U.S. thinks first and foremost of the U.S.," he told Time recently. "It is up to us Brazilians to think more about ourselves. I always say a human being will never be respected if he is a servant but rather for the fight he has in him." Though Lula says he is a free trader, he is unlikely to agree to the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas — before Sept. 11, 2001, a priority for the Bush Administration — on anything like the terms sought by business lobbyists in Washington.
If Lula is elected and Washington is wise, the U.S. will accept occasional annoyances with Brazil (Lula will doubtless make nice with Fidel Castro) as a price worth paying for something rather remarkable. It has been 20 years since, in her unwitting gift to Latin America, Margaret Thatcher defeated the Argentine junta in the Falklands war and revealed the bankruptcy of politics run by men in dark glasses and military uniforms. Democracy in Latin America is robust; Hakim calls last week's election "tremendously clean, competent and decent." One mark of health in any democracy is the election of those who once opposed a regime. That is why the election to the Mexican presidency of Vicente Fox, a right-winger, was so important in 2000, and that's why it will be worth cheering if Brazil chooses a man of the left later this month. "Brazil has changed," Lula told Time. "I am the result of the political evolution of Brazilian society."
So he is. But have Washington and Wall Street evolved enough to celebrate Brazil's triumph of democracy?
Queridos amigos: Desde que os candidatos José Serra e Lula foram oficialmente lançados como candidatos à Presidência da República, venho recebendo incessantemente e-mails apaixonados de eleitores de ambos, invariavelmente tecendo considerações sobre importância ou falta de importância de diploma universitário, experiência administrativa, compromisso com a nação, etc.
Os eleitores de Lula, como sempre, menosprezam a importância de um diploma ou de experiência anterior na Administração Pública. Muito embora possuir um diploma não seja a rigor a coisa mais importante a considerar num candidato a cargo público, o fato é que a idéia de Lula na Presidência da República me tira o sono.
Por favor, antes que me chamem de "elitista", ou "preconceituoso", ou até mesmo coisas que a boa educação recomenda não escrever, esclareço desde logo que a ausência de um canudo universitário não é o motivo que me leva a não votar em Luís Inácio Lula da Silva. Aliás, não tenho apenas um motivo, os tenho em pencas.
Eis porque jamais, repito, jamais darei meu voto ao candidato do PT:
1) O PT é um partido que mantém íntimas relações com um grupo terrorista. Isso mesmo: terrorista. As FARC (Forças Armadas Revolucionárias da Colômbia) foram e são recebidas no território brasileiro há anos, mais intensamente no estado do Rio Grande do Sul pelo governador Olívio Dutra, do PT, fato denunciado há tempos por pouquíssimos jornalistas. Este grupo é visceralmente ligado ao tráfico de cocaína, explode bombas matando civis inocentes, seqüestra pessoas às dúzias, ameaça e assassina quaisquer políticos, enfim, transformou a Colômbia num dos lugares mais perigosos da face da Terra. Mas isso não impede que prefeituras do PT, especialmente no sul do país, convidem representantes deste grupo para dar palestras às nossas crianças. Um simples convite de um político nacional de qualquer partido feito a representantes das FARC para doutrinar crianças brasileiras deveria causar escândalos, denúncias, gritaria generalizada, reação imediata e enérgica das autoridades. Mas rigorosamente nada acontece.
2) Para os que pensarem que as conexões do PT com as FARC representam uma calúnia monstruosa contra um partido político em época eleitoral, aconselho a se informarem melhor sobre esta guerrilha de orientação marxista. Aliás, tais ligações podem ser averiguadas da maneira mais simples do mundo: basta acessar o site http://www.forosaopaulo.org/ para que suas ligações sejam constatadas. A ligação do PT com grupos comunistas internacionais e as FARC é coisa tão clara e escancarada que chega a ser estonteante; é simplesmente publicamente exposta.
3) O denominado Foro de São Paulo surgiu em 1990, organizado pelo PT. Foi primeiramente chamado de Encontro de Partidos de Esquerda da América Latina e do Caribe, recebendo o nome atual em 1991, num encontro no México, homenageando a cidade brasileira que primeiro sediou o encontro. O Foro se considera, como a própria homepage afirma, "um exemplo de diplomacia para a cidadania", embora um grupo de narcoguerrilheiros seqüestradores seja participante dos encontros. Narcoguerrilheiros estes que circulam no território brasileiro a convite de políticos do PT.
4) O envolvimento dos traficantes de drogas brasileiros e as FARC foi cabalmente provado com a prisão de Fernandinho Beira-Mar. Este pura e simplesmente o confessou em depoimentos a agentes da DEA, agência americana anti-drogas. Além do que, o Ministério Público do Rio de Janeiro tem o laptop do traficante, onde tais ligações são materialmente verificáveis, através de troca de armas por drogas, contabilidade, etc. Os documentos apreendidos com Fernandinho Beira-Mar mostram que as FARC são possivelmente as maiores fornecedoras de cocaína para o Brasil, sendo o traficante brasileiro um fornecedor de armas para a guerrilha colombiana.
5) Lula assim organizou e organiza juntamente com Fidel Castro um encontro para o qual, entre vários partidos comunistas latino-americanos, é convidada uma guerrilha marxista, traficante de cocaína e armas, promotora de seqüestros, ameaças e explosões de bombas em território colombiano -- enfim, banhos de sangue em geral. Tudo, é claro, como exemplo de "diplomacia para a cidadania".
6) Lula assinou pactos de solidariedade com organizações comunistas de todo o continente, pactos assinados também pelas FARC.
7) Lula é candidato de um partido cujo presidente, José Dirceu, foi treinado em guerrilha na década de 70 na ilha de Fidel Castro, além de ser membro do serviço secreto cubano, fato solenemente ignorado por algumas dezenas de milhões de brasileiros.
8) Lula é amigo e franco admirador de Fidel Castro, ditador que está no poder há 43 anos a custa de, entre outras coisas, fuzilamentos sumários de opositores. Cerca de 17.000 vidas humanas se perderam até hoje no paredón, esporte favorito do ditador cubano. Cuba é ainda uma nação de encarcerados: Há nada menos que 800 prisões na ilha caribenha, para uma população de cerca de 12 milhões de habitantes. O Brasil, com cerca de 170 milhões de habitantes, tem menos presídios. Cuba tem milhares de dissidentes políticos (cerca de 125.000) que agora, fora do território cubano, podem fazer suas denúncias sem correr o risco do trancafiamento em alguma masmorra.
9) O regime de Fidel Castro, aliás, é tão bom que muitos cubanos, certamente por não compreenderem as maravilhas do socialismo, se aventuram a fugir da democrática ilha a bordo de jangadas rumo à Flórida. Morrem às dezenas pelos ataques de tubarões e pelas tempestades do Caribe. Os sobreviventes podem contar como é viver no paraíso da ilha de Fidel, graças, entre outros periódicos, do Diário Las Américas de Miami.
10) Quando subiu ao poder em 1959, Fidel Castro, entre outras providências inevitáveis a serem tomadas por um marxista-leninista, passou a perseguir cristãos, pelo simples fato de professarem sua fé. Fidel fechou igrejas e inúmeros sacerdotes que escaparam da mira dos fuzis foram torturados, encarcerados ou, quando estrangeiros, expulsos de Cuba. Os que teimaram não adotar o único credo permitido, ou seja, o comunismo, foram fuzilados na prisão de La Cabaña.
11) Cuba encarcera opositores políticos. O advogado cego e militante cristão Dr. Juan Carlos González Leiva se encontra na prisão de Pedernales, situada na província de Holguín. As atrocidades cometidas pelo governo comunista de Fidel são incansavelmente denunciadas por entidades de direitos humanos e por cubanos exilados. Armando Valladares é um deles. Embaixador dos Estados Unidos na Comissão de Direitos Humanos da ONU em Genebra, sistematicamente denuncia as atrocidades do regime implantado na ilha caribenha há 43 longos anos. Vários textos sobre a verdade do regime cubano podem ser encontrados no site http://www.cubdest.org/.
12) Apesar dos fatos narrados acima, Lula rendeu em dezembro de 2001, durante a 10a reunião em Havana do Foro de São Paulo, juntamente com Rodolfo Gonzáles, líder narcoguerrilheiro das sanguinárias FARC e mais de 300 líderes comunistas de diversas partes do mundo, uma comovida homenagem a Fidel Castro, com as seguintes palavras: "Embora o seu rosto esteja marcado por rugas, Fidel, sua alma continua limpa porque você nunca traiu os interesses de seu povo... Obrigado, Fidel, obrigado por vocês existirem".
13) Quem quiser conhecer melhor o que é um regime marxista-leninista de governo não pode deixar de conhecer a constituição e o Código Penal Cubano. A constituição cubana, em seu art. 5°, estabelece que o regime será o marxista-leninista. O capítulo IX trata dos princípios de organização e funcionamento dos órgãos estatais, e mostra bem como as coisas funcionam: o art. 68, c, determina candidamente que "los elegidos tienen el deber de rendir cuenta de su actuación y pueden ser revocados de sus cargos en cualquier momento". Isso mesmo: os eleitos podem ser chutados para fora do cargo a qualquer momento. Isto sim é democracia!
14) O Código Penal não chega a ser um primor de preocupação com os direitos humanos. Há penas de morte e desterro, penas estas proibidas pela constituição brasileira, constituição que Lula terá que jurar defender no ato da posse se for eleito. O art. 216 pune com prisão de um a três anos quem tentar sair de Cuba sem autorização. O que no Brasil é mera infração administrativa, em Cuba é um crime. Logo, aqueles que se lançam ao mar tentando escapar da ilha e são capturados vão para alguma masmorra do democrata Fidel. Quem quiser checar a veracidade dos artigos citados pode acessar o site http://www.gacetaoficial.cu/, site oficial do governo cubano, e ler o Código Penal e a Constituição.
15) Lula já fez alianças com outro admirador de Fidel Castro: Hugo Chavez, presidente da Venezuela. O PT tem ainda relações com o partido comunista chinês, campeão do universo em execuções e torturas, denunciadas ad nauseam pela Anistia Internacional e omitidas magistralmente pela mídia brasileira.
16) O MST, Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra, já avisou que vai suspender as invasões "para não atrapalhar a candidatura de Lula à presidência", fato divulgado há dois meses pela imprensa, sem que as pessoas tenham dado a mínima para um fato de gravidade descomunal.
17) E caso alguém ainda desconheça, este mesmo movimento sem terra já foi doutrinado à exaustão pelo PT. O jornal O Estado de São Paulo fez uma série de reportagens entre os dias 20 a 22 de junho de 1999 mostrando os bastidores do movimento. Em maio daquele ano, 93 pessoas participaram do curso de capacitação de militâncias do cone sul, em Sidrolândia, Mato Grosso do Sul. Foi um seminário realizado numa chácara, onde o que mais se ouvia era: "Qual é a nossa grande causa?" E os participantes respondiam: "A libertação do proletariado!" Nova pergunta: "Quais sãos os caminhos para se chegar a essa causa?" Resposta: "A reforma agrária e o socialismo!" Nova pergunta: "Quais são as formas para realizar isso?" Resposta: "Todas as formas de luta possível, tendo sempre em mente o poder". Essa lavagem cerebral levada a cabo em pessoas sem a menor bagagem cultural, que não têm a mínima capacidade de compreender que estão sendo utilizadas para fins profundamente escusos, só pode ser classificada como um crime monstruoso.
18) Finalmente, Lula mentiu acintosamente para 170 milhões de brasileiros quando, perguntado por William Bonner no Jornal Nacional do dia 26 de setembro qual a ligação que o PT tinha com as FARC colombianas, foi categórico: "nenhuma".
19) Luís Inácio Lula da Silva é comunista. Comunista até a raiz do cabelo. É um admirador de regimes genocidas, monstruosos. Os argumentos ouvidos o tempo inteiro na mídia e repetidos infantilmente pelo rebanho popular de que "o comunismo acabou, o perigo vermelho não existe mais" é de uma ingenuidade que ultrapassa os limites da oligofrenia. Mandarei este texto aos meus amigos, já sabendo que pagarei um preço alto. Mas antes de tudo, peço gentilmente que meus furiosíssimos futuros opositores, e creio serão muitos, façam o favor de derrubar com provas tudo o que aqui foi dito. Me provem que as FARC não são um grupo de traficantes assassinos e terroristas, que não participam do Foro de São Paulo, e que o PT não doutrina camponeses. Me provem que Lula não admira o regime de Fidel Castro, e que Cuba não mantém ninguém no cárcere por suas ideologias oposicionistas. Me provem que integrantes das FARC não transitam lépidos e fagueiros pelo meu país a convite de políticos do PT, e retiro cada linha deste texto, me comprometendo ainda publicamente a votar em Lula.
20) Por fim, caso alguém argumente que o comunismo não representa qualquer perigo, e que são lendas idiotas e fantasiosas o que se diz a seu respeito, peço a seguinte gentileza: comprem um novo HD para seus computadores, de preferência acima de 40 GB, porque vai ser a única forma de gravar todas as informações acerca das atrocidades, massacres destruição e morte causados por esta doutrina infinitamente perversa que mandarei aos interessados.
21) Como se vê, o motivo para que eu não vote em Luís Inácio Lula da Silva para a presidência do meu país passa longe, infinitamente longe da ausência de um diploma universitário.
Estas linhas são a minha mais profunda e sincera homenagem a Olavo de Carvalho, que com sua coragem de lutar contra o sistema perverso da mídia brasileira vem conquistando uma crescente e silenciosa legião de admiradores. Uma homenagem a quem combate com vigor inesgotável a arrogância burra e ignorante que reina em toda parte, e que nem mesmo diante de ameaças se cala. Se por um lado angaria o ódio de muitos, por outro conquista a admiração e o respeito daqueles que só conseguem viver voltados para os valores mais altos, aqueles que nos tornam verdadeiramente filhos de Deus.
World Social Forum
The World Social Forum, founded at the so-called "Anti-Davos Conference" held in Pôrto Alegre, Brazil, on Jan. 25-30, 2001, is yet another wing of the "Seattle movement." Formalized as a permanent organization, with an International Council and plenty of financing (although no fixed address), the WSF is organizing for a second conference to be held in Pôrto Alegre from Jan. 31 to Feb. 5, 2002. Its organizers project that 100,000 people will attend.
The WSF claims that it has no bureaucratic structure, nor any deliberative function, nor does it take decisions as a body, nor commit its members to any particular agenda; it is, rather, "a world process ... designed to build an international unifying movement of alternatives."
Translated, that means that the WSF's function is to provide the global "Seattle movement" with a central political umbrella, through which to garner publicity and legitimacy, establish networks, coordinate actions, and channel money.
The first WSF conference, touting itself as "part of the movement which has grown since Seattle," surpassed even its organizers' expectations: Anywhere from 12-16,000 people attended, representing hundreds of groups and a smorgasbord of political, academic, indigenous, feminist, gay, Marxist, counterculture, homeless, labor, peasant, student, anarchist, terrorist, drug-trafficking, etc. interests from around the world.
A leading attraction at the conference was Javier Cifuentes, representative of the largest dope cartel in South America, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), who, provided with special protection, waltzed around the conference, speaking publicly.
The WSF "anti-Davos" movement is the brainchild of Teddy Goldsmith, the French daily Le Monde reported shortly before the Pôrto Alegre conference opened in January 2001. The two principal agencies used to set Goldsmith's murderous idea into motion were the Brazilian Workers' Party and its Landless Movement (MST), and Bernard Cassen, director of France's Le Monde Diplomatique, the leader of the French ATTAC movement (Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions and for the Aid of the Citizenry), and, more recently, would-be travel agent for the Zapatistas' Subcommander Marcos.
Held at the same time as the annual gathering of world business, financial, and government leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, "anti-Davos" was given massive publicity. A teleconference debate between the Davos Forum, featuring George Soros, and leaders from the WSF's "anti-Davos" forum, was used to build the credibility of the WSF as the new counterpole to neo-liberal economics and the Davos crowd. That the so-called "Dialogue Between Davos and Pôrto Alegre" boiled down to a heated, but contentless, exchange of name-calling, mattered not.
France's Le Monde, as did others, painted the Pôrto Alegre forum as having launched "the bases for 'another globalization.' " "Another globalization" which clearly could mobilize money. The "debate" with Soros, involving four satellite hookups, cost over a million dollars, alone.
Luddite Movement
Filippino activist Walden Bello, a board member of Teddy Goldsmith's International Forum on Globalization and one of the panelists who "debated" Soros, characterized Pôrto Alegre as a "combination of celebration, hard discussion, and militant solidarity." Activists were urged to organize their troops to participate in the numerous global demonstrations planned against various international summits throughout 2001, from Quebec City in April, to Genoa in July, to the International Monetary Fund-World Bank meeting in Washington, scheduled for Sept. 28-Oct. 4.
Over a thousand of those present showed their "militant solidarity" on the spot, Bello wrote, by joining the Brazilian Landless Movement and "the celebrated French anti-McDonald's activist," José Bové, in vandalizing a Monsanto experimental laboratory working on genetically modified seeds, and uprooting several hectares of its experimental plants. Such destruction is characteristic of the Goldsmith movement: Bové's aide, René Riesel, explained in an article in the premier, Autumn 2000 issue of the French edition of Goldsmith's perverted Ecologist magazine (see Goldsmith article, in this section), that their movement models itself on the actions of Ned Ludd, and his "Luddites," who launched an "insurrectional movement" based on destroying machines in the early 1800s.
At its conclusion, the "anti-Davos" crew decided that the WSF would be established as a permanent international institution; that a Forum of Local Authorities, linking up mayors and the like around the world, and a similar Forum of Parliamentarians, be created; and that "anti-Davos" conferences be held yearly.
Rio Grande do Sul Gov. Olivio Dutra, his Secretary of Agriculture, José Hermetto Hoffman, and Pôrto Alegre Mayor Tarso Genro, all leaders of the Brazilian Workers Party, have been back and forth to Europe this year, consolidating the WSF network. Within a month of the anti-Davos meeting, Venezuela's Frantz Fanon-promoting, existentialist rageball, President Hugo Chávez, announced that he had been invited to attend WSF-II, and intends to go. By June, organizers reported that preparatory organizing meetings for WSF-II were planned for Libya, Canada, Italy, Mali, and, possibly, Spain; and the problem faced by organizers was to locate sufficient gymnasiums in Pôrto Alegre to fit 5,000 people at a time, to handle the 100,000 they expect to attend.
Who Promotes and Organizes It?
Delegates of 43 non-Brazilian groups participated as full members in the June 9-11, 2001 meeting in São Paulo, at which the International Council for the WSF was formed. Many present are well-known by now as the leadership of the mass protests roving from city to city across the globe: the 50 Years Is Enough Network, ATTAC, Focus on the Global South, Friends of the Earth, the Genoa Social Forum, Teddy Goldsmith's International Forum on Globalization, International Rivers Network, the MST-Bové-run Via Campesina (a.k.a. Via Camponesa), etc.
Active also are various figures identified with the previous generation of "guerrilla" terrorism and the 1968 counterculture. The most notable, is University of Louvain's Tricontinental Center, in Belgium, a training ground for the Theology of Liberation guerrillas in Ibero-America for decades, and still going at it. Introducing the WSF International Council's discussion of "the present stage of globalization," was the Tricontinental Center's François Houtart, S.J., who first gained notoriety as the man who trained Camilo Torres, founder of Colombia's National Liberation Army (ELN), in the 1960s. Houtart is very active in the WSF, and keynoted one of the four major panels at the Pôrto Alegre conference.
Nine other groups supported the formation of the Council, but could not attend, and a few others participated as guests. Representatives of the U.S. labor federation AFL-CIO, the European Trade Union Confederation, and the once-staunch "free traders" of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) participated as observers, because their organizations are still "evaluating internally" whether to join the WSF's Council.
The WSF proudly lists among the "WSF Partners" which serve as its financial angels, several leading instruments of social control of the Anglo-Dutch-American establishment, most notably:
The Ford Foundation, whose seminal role in the creation of the 1968 counterculture, under the personal direction of man known as the patriarch of the Wall Street establishment, McGeorge Bundy, had been identified, and fought, by the LaRouche movement since its outset;
The International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development, Canada's British Crown-appointed component of the Bush-Thatcher Project Democracy operation, in partnership with the United States' notorious National Endowment for Democracy (NED) of Iran-Contra fame; and
ICCO, one of four Dutch co-financing organizations, channeling money from the Dutch Crown's government, the European Union, and unnamed "private funds," which describes itself as "closely connected" with the British Crown's World Council of Churches, founded in 1937 with the mission of crushing, in its own words, "the demonic influence of national sovereignty."
The list of their establishment benefactors may expand. East Timor's guerrilla-turned-"Foreign Minister," Jose Ramos Horta, another WSF star, recommended in July, according to Italy's Corriere della Sera, that "the Pôrto Alegre people" should cosy up to the "modern Robin Hoods"—Bill Gates, World Bank President James Wolfensohn, and George Soros himself—as they, he shamelessly proclaimed, have shown "a sincere concern to help the poor."
The full list of the participants and financiers (at least, those publicly acknowledged) is available on their website.
Narco-Terrorist Core
The nasty wetworks capability of this allegedly merely political "world process of alternatives" is typified by the Brazilian combo which runs the nitty-gritty WSF organizing: the Workers Party (PT) and its offshoot, the MST. Here, we are looking at the hard core of the studiously ignored, but very active centralized narco-terrorist force in Ibero-America, the São Paulo Forum. The São Paulo Forum was founded in São Paulo, Brazil in 1990, to ensure that centralized coordination among the numerous terrorist forces operating in Ibero-America continued smoothly after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union. Officially co-sponsoring its founding were Fidel Castro's Cuban Communist Party and Brazil's PT. Playing a leading role from the outset was Manuel Piñeiro (alias "Redbeard"), the decades-long head of the Cuban CP's wetworks—the Americas Department—and his Chilean wife, Marta Harnecker, whose mind-deadening structuralism probably killed more Ibero-American youth than all the terrorist wars advised by her late husband combined.
With Soviet, and therefore Cuban financing cut off, Cuban organizers told the leaders of the erstwhile beneficiaries of Cuban largesse, that the dope trade would henceforth have to finance their operations. While Social Democratic political parties and movements and other ideological movements swell the lists of the São Paulo Forum's members, its central leadership is made up of the war-hardened terrorist forces which first emerged in the 1970s and 1980s: the FARC and its companion, François Houtart's and Camilo Torres' ELN; Nicaragua's Sandinistas (FSLN); El Salvador's Farabundo Martí Liberation Front (FMLN); the Uruguayan Tupamaros; etc. The emergence in 1994 of Mexico's Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) from its decades-long incubation in the jungles of Chiapas, was used to rally enormous international publicity and support for the São Paulo Forum apparatus, into which the EZLN is fully integrated.
Spain's ETA, the Basque separatists whose terrorist specialists provided hands-on expertise in most of those Ibero-American wars, have their representatives, too, in the São Paulo Forum activities—and in those of the WSF. "Hemen eta munduan," an organization within the ETA movement created specifically to intervene in the global "anti-globalization" demonstrations, participated in the first meeting of the Pôrto Alegre gang.
The PT hosts of the "anti-Davos" conference ensured that various representatives of the São Paulo Forum's hard core were present at the WSF, including representatives of the FARC. Governor Dutra personally assured the FARC protection, over the bitter objections of official security forces. By so doing, the PT ensured that the Brazilian drug cartel was well-represented at the conference: Less than three months later, in April 2001, Colombian military forces arrested the "Pablo Escobar of Brazil," Luiz Fernando da Costa (better known by his mafia nickname, Fernandinho Beira Mar), who had been living in Colombia under the protection of the FARC for over a year. Beira Mar controlled 60% of Brazil's enormous drug trade, and was believed to be one of the largest suppliers of cocaine to the U.S. market, with most of his cocaine supplied by the FARC. An estimated 80% of the FARC's income was said to have come from the Beira Mar operation.
Since the PT took the governorship of Rio Grande do Sul in 1998, the state has become an important center of political and logistical support for the FARC, with state governor and WSF star Olivio Dutra meeting with FARC "ambassadors" at least three times since 1999.
The prominent role of the PT and the MST in the WSF ought to send off alarm bells. While the MST enjoys international prominence as a "grass-roots" idealistic mass movement, chiefly due to promotion by its friends in such British Crown-run organizations as Christian Aid, it is, in fact, fast becoming the "FARC" of Brazil, and represents a very dangerous armed capability for mass insurgency.
Its leadership ranks heavily overlapping those of the PT, the MST has made no secret that when the time is ripe, "the interior of Brazil could turn into another Colombia," as MST national spokesman João Pedro Stedile threatened in 1997. MST leader Gilmar Mauro reiterated after the MST's Fourth National Congress, in August 2000, that "the decision to become guerrillas or not," would be taken on the basis of an evaluation of the state of "mass struggle."
Collaboration between the MST and Colombia's FARC is extensive, and one of the most dangerous threats to the security of the Western Hemisphere. Hard evidence of the FARC-PT-MST relationship led Brazilian authorities to arrest the FARC's unofficial "ambassador" to Brazil, former Jesuit priest Francisco Antonino Cadenas Collazos (a.k.a. Comandante Oliverio Medina) in September 2000. Cadenas had spent much of his time travelling back and forth between the city of São Paulo and the southwestern corner of São Paulo state, known as the Pontal do Paranapanema, a major focus of MST organizing, which, according to statements by MST leader Gilmar Mauro when he returned from the EZLN-hosted July 1996 international gathering in Trinidad, Chiapas, Mexico, was targetted by the MST as the site for a "liberated zone," where they intend to set up an "MST republic."
Some European sources suggest that a "side benefit" of the WSF, is to build up the PT's international prominence, with an eye to the Brazilian Presidential elections of 2002, in which the PT's Luís Inacio da Silva, better known as "Lula," is a leading contender. WSF promotional materials emphasize that Pôrto Alegre, the capital of Rio Grande do Sul, was suggested as the site for the founding of the WSF by French organizers, to promote it as a model for "people's democracy." The PT has run the city's administration since 1988, and its current Mayor, Tarso Genro, is rumored as a possible Vice Presidential candidate for Lula. Genro, whose website opens with an existentialist quote from Toni Negri's mentor Norberto Bobbio, represented the WSF at the recent "anti-globalization" show in Genoa, from where he continued on, to dine with its political godfather, Teddy Goldsmith.
Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina, Paraná, Mato Grosso do Sul, São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Espirito Santo, Minas Gerais, Goiás, Mato Grosso, Rondônia, Acre, Amazonas, Roraima, Amapá, Pará, Tocantins, Maranhão, Piauí, Ceará, Rio Grande do Norte, Paraíba, Pernambuco, Alagoas, Sergipe, Bahia, Distrito Federal. - GLÓRIA AO BRASIL, AO MERCOSUL E A ALCA.
