Brazzil

Cynical. The explosive global economic investment in Brazil will have a governing consequence. Bovespa for all intents and purposes has become legalistically transparent. Brazil is heeling to international standards of investment law. The greater the international economic successes of Brazil the greater the motivation for all levels of Brazilian institutions to support the existential necessities of these events. The global success of Brazil will transform and codify Brazil into a nation of just democratic norms. Brazil is born anew ala the free democratic nations of the European Union. The nations of Latin America that have launched themselves on a retrograde socialist course will follow history onto the rocks of their own destruction. The definition of insanity is to repeat the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

A true Democracy only last as long as the policy makers concider them selves people .

liken to the US brasilian law makers have set them selves apart from the people , by ruel of law , doo as we say not as we do

to try to say something about the bill of rights , looking from a latin point of view is .
trying too explain the rights of the person granted by the goverment .

We all are born with free will we choose too obay the laws set down by thoes incharge .
if not we suffer there punishment ,

at any given time the population can and has taken back its goverment .

under the socialist path most of the latin countries have chosen
people are second .the electied body are the new kings .
can never be held up to the law they set forth ,
they have no fear

and are domed to repet the past

Heitor De Paola reminds me of Ron Paul, the Republican running for President of the USA.
This is the type of clear thinking needed today. Such insights will help us all to live as God intended us to do.

I was so proud of the Brasil for voting down Lula the regime's disarming of the innocent civilians.
God bless, God save Brasil and the USA.

I applaud the author's mention and quoting of John Tyler. He, above all all American politicians, truly understood the simple notion that that national government which functions best and most benefits the citizenry in general is one based on states' rights and free enterprise. He greatest moment may have been standing up to Andrew Jackson during the first nullification crisis, when senior Senator from Virginia, and pointing out the absurdity of a central government threatening to coerce a state by force of arms in what was supposed to be considered a free country. Further, contrast probably the
greatest era of economic freedom a country has ever known that Tyler ushered in as president in 1841 with the destruction and death wrought by Lincoln's base stupidity and the lowest common
denominator majoritarian kleptocracy that passes for government in the U.S. today.

I applaud the author's mention and quoting of John Tyler

Who the hell is this John Tyler and why the hell do you have to applaud him?

Shame on you,Conceiçaõ. With your name, I expected you to have a reasonable knowledge of written Portuguese and you confessed that you have none. Forrest or Bo can give you lessons free of cost on how to read Portuguese, just because you happen to be an American. However, if you need any further help, please do not hesitate to ask rest of us. Our CEO is based in Geneva and he is authorized to give you the right quote and he firmly believes in "value added product" and "Spreadsheet" .As you might have discovered already, we do believe in globalized economy.

Desculpe, senhor. I thought that when they put in that touch-screen voting system that it meant that it was okay for illiterates like me to post on this blog. Also, I do now realize that I have lost any chance at obtaining the Swiss citizenship that I have coveted for so long. On the bright side, I somehow have avoided the helmet up to this point - although I realize that things could change very quickly for me.

"The time has come for American policymakers and political observers to take a deeper look into the grim reality of our countries instead of being satisfied with pleasant but deceiving appearances."

Which "American policymakers and political observers ," are you refering too. Do you mean the idiots who do not even understand there own system of government and the American people who are constantly manipulated by them. Do not expect an American to understand what the word DEMOCRACY means. What they misunderstand are the words Republicans and Democrats, and Democracy for them is defined by these words, not the true meaning of the words. Anything else for them is either Socialist or Communist, and the meaning of these words they do not understand either.

I am still here, stuck in Texas for a few days. I probably will leave on Tuesday.

I was able to complete part 4, including the commentaries. I wish I could have participated in the debate. There were some very interesting point of views. I will probably refer to some of these views in future blogs.

".....someone who defends free market economy, individual freedom, the rule of law, private property and in many ways, as in morals, religion, education....." ".....one who defends ..... welfare state, state owned enterprises in some 'strategic' areas of the economy....."

Notice what was left out of the quote from the article above. The quote is how I define myself and is the system of government under which I grew up. I call this system of government Social Democract which is not the defined meaning in the article above. There is no room here for static or demagoguery, people (society) first then self. It is sometimes difficult to find leaders and representatives who truely believe in these ideals. Thus it is the responsibility of an educated populace to hold their representatives feet to the fire. That is one reason why education was and still is important in the development of my country. Educated people making educated choices after sound reasoning of the pros and cons of issues, minimizing manipulation.

I am still here, stuck in Texas for a few days. I probably will leave on Tuesday.

Good to hear from you. I guess you don't mind spending a few more days in Texas before embarking on your long voyage.

I was able to complete part 4, including the commentaries. I wish I could have participated in the debate. There were some very interesting point of views. I will probably refer to some of these views in future blogs.

Your participation would have made it more interesting .Ricardo is likely to come out with another article soon. Hopefully you will be on dry land with access to Internet, when he publishes it.

Thus it is the responsibility of an educated populace to hold their representatives feet to the fire. That is one reason why education was and still is important in the development of my country. Educated people making educated choices after sound reasoning of the pros and cons of issues, minimizing manipulation.

These are the exact reasons why politicians in many countries do NOT want their population to get educated.In another thread, Shelly came out with comments on the situation of the Federal and State universities here in Brazil.Talking to people who are directly involved in education and reading newspapers, one gets the impression that the situation is deteriorating.When the Presidents of the Universities are elected on partisan basis, by the professors,students and staff, their hands are tied and they tend to dedicate their time and energy more on politics than education. A couple of months ago, in the local Federal university, some students went on strike and occupied the office of the President for days.The same thing happened in USP. I get a feeling that the situation is going to get worse in the coming years.

BTW, I accessed "The Sun" and got to learn a bit more about your country. You seem to be generating quite a bit of revenue through well organized tourist industry. I will be reading it more frequently.

Bon voyage and take care.

Desculpe, senhor

My congrats and you learn' t Portuguese very fast! BTW, I was just pulling your leg and no offense meant!!

This time I am posting a link titled " Hugo Chavez's criminal paradise" in ENGLISH!

http://www.latimes.com/news/pr...ws-comment

This reinforces our theory of V/B/A axis.

Joao, the threat of the helmet - that is why I confessed so quickly.

to free people from out right ownership was a very good deal
the out right riping apart of the US was not so grate

tyler just got in on the end of the fight but he backed lincon

unlike brasil slave laubor that has never ended

Tyler was the anti-Lincoln. He alone stood up in the Senate more than 20 years before anyone knew that there was Lincoln and promised that Virginia would fight any attempt to coerce South Carolina.
Given that he died in Richmond in 1862 while serving in the Confederate Congress, after voting for secession at the Virginia convention, I would have to say that Mr. Brown is wrong on this one.
Interesting that Tyler's father, Thomas Jefferson's law school roommate and lifelong friend and political ally, got his start in politics with service in the Virginia legislature during the American Revolution.
Despite all that happened in between - both were Governors of Virginia - the son ended up serving politically exactly where the father had started, and both for the same reasons based on the same
principles.

I assume no research was done for this article...It is full of some absurd and completely baised statements. In Britain -an Anglo Saxons country and Portugal the State DOES provide health care to its citizens - it is therefore responisible for their health. The US does not - it also has one of the worst levels of health care in the developed world even lagging some developing countries.

Democracy in America: George Bush won his first term because a pro republican judge deciding he was president. Isn't democracy supposed to be decided by the people and who they vote for - usually the guy with the most votes wins?

Another interesting fact about the US : with over 200mil people you only seem to have two families that are fit enough to run the country - the Bush's and the Clinton's. Is that democracy?

"These are the exact reasons why politicians in many countries do NOT want their population to get educated."

You are right. Knowledge is power.

"You seem to be generating quite a bit of revenue through well organized tourist industry."

That is correct; however, there a recognized need for diversification also. Diversification is a major problem for small countries that do not have natural resources. Education is one of the key elements in this battle.

"Bon voyage and take care."

Thank you, Merry Xmas and Happy New Year.

Joao, the threat of the helmet - that is why I confessed so quickly.

A great progress you are making. I didn't even have to call our Electronic Warfare Officer "Brazilian Dude" who is an expert in such hi tech tools!

after the war the the US had many troubles to get passed

tyler started the deal with a begruged atiude but did what was best for the country , not the party
polk went a little father , and then taylor well he wa sthe most anti lincon

assume no research was done for this article...It is full of some absurd and completely baised statements. In Britain -an Anglo Saxons country and Portugal the State DOES provide health care to its citizens - it is therefore responisible for their health. The US does not - it also has one of the worst levels of health care in the developed world even lagging some developing countries.

You are correct. Not only does Great Britain provides FREE health care to all, but up to 16 years of age a child has the right to have FREE medicine. If you look deep, you will see that economically the US is a first world (which is changing, remember my brother-in-law forecast about the US economy, RIC where are you now!), go to Europe with your hard done dollars, it is a joke!

Democracy in America: George Bush won his first term because a pro republican judge deciding he was president. Isn't democracy supposed to be decided by the people and who they vote for - usually the guy with the most votes wins?

In a Democracy, people vote directly and choose their representatives. This is not a democracy, as in the Federalist number 10, it says that the US is different from a Democracy and it gives the reasons why the a republic is better than a democracy. Let's be honest here, Americans in general, not the one's that participate here, are quite ignorant about their own country and laws. Just ask about the First Amendment, many have not idea. Same goes on in Brazil, but America is supposed to be a first world country, right? In my opinion is downhill from now on. The British empire lasted for centuries, compare that to the US and we have a clear picture of where this country is going.

Another interesting fact about the US : with over 200mil people you only seem to have two families that are fit enough to run the country - the Bush's and the Clinton's. Is that democracy?

This is because money talks. And it does in all cultures when it comes to politics. The fact is, political corruption happens everywhere, but Americans seem to think that it doesn't happen here. The difference is, once they get caught, they usually leave the office or "rarely" end up in jail. Brazil on the other hand...still has to bring justice to families of the coup'd'etat in Brazil. Which was fully supported by the US, has anyone seen a photo of Goulart and Kennedy outside the American embassy in Rome in 1963? How about the letters from Nixon and Medici praising him for the great job that he was doing in the country? Have you seen it? Medici's regime was the most violent and America fully supported him.

Confused
written by One Man Standing, 2007-11-13 04:56:53
I assume no research was done for this article...It is full of some absurd and completely baised statements. In Britain -an Anglo Saxons country and Portugal the State DOES provide health care to its citizens - it is therefore responisible for their health. The US does not - it also has one of the worst levels of health care in the developed world even lagging some developing countries.

Democracy in America: George Bush won his first term because a pro republican judge deciding he was president. Isn't democracy supposed to be decided by the people and who they vote for - usually the guy with the most votes wins?

Another interesting fact about the US : with over 200mil people you only seem to have two families that are fit enough to run the country - the Bush's and the Clinton's. Is that democracy?

As Shelly stated, in a pure democracy people have a direct vote on those that represent them. The United States is a *representative democracy* or put another way, it is a *republic.*

Democratization has also been an ongoing *process* in the United States, requiring a number of amendments to the U.S. constitution. Not all white men could vote originally in the United States, and at one time neither Amerindian, black, or woman could vote. There use to also be a poll tax before casting a vote, if memory serves me correct, within the United States.

The so called Founding Fathers decided upon a republic for a number of reasons: a century or more ago there was no rapid form of communication and media as there is today (in other words info traveled slower), most people in the various states of the union were not very educated, and the elite within the states desired to rule (as they did).

The United States has perhaps, the most hierarchal form of democratic government in the world, for better or worse. The U.S. President operates as both "head of state" and "chief executive" a power more diffused in other nations.

Without a doubt, the most prevalent profession found in the executive office and both chambers of Congress is the lawyer. Hardly a plumber. While less than 1% of Americans (USA) are millionaires (0.7%) something like 1/3 of Congresspersons are millionaires. Money talks, bullsh*t walks. The electoral college system, as it operates at the state level, does not operate by majority vote. Whatever candidate takes the larger number of votes in a state gains *all* electoral college votes in that state. That is hardly direct democracy in action.

To become a U.S. President you must socialize in a certain social class (whether you are a Democrat or Republican), you must dine in certain class, sleep in certain hotels, network with certain people (movers and shakers). Having a Ph.D. and teaching at a community college and sleeping in low budget motels when you travel or talking with the homeless and down and out is the last f*cking thing on earth that will get you into the U.S. White House.

Without a doubt, the most prevalent profession found in the executive office and both chambers of Congress is the lawyer. Hardly a plumber

Here it is slightly better. In the executive office, we have a Turner (Lathe Operator). However, both the chambers of Congress are full of half arsed lawyers.

While less than 1% of Americans (USA) are millionaires (0.7%) something like 1/3 of Congresspersons are millionaires.

Here we are faring much better than the Americans. Almost 100% of our congress persons are millionaires.Around 50% of Brazilians makes less than $2500 a year and so what,we are represented in the congress by millionaires who are concerned about our welfare.

Having a Ph.D. and teaching at a community college and sleeping in low budget motels when you travel or talking with the homeless and down and out is the last f*cking thing on earth that will get you into the U.S. White House.

In this aspect, we are far ahead of you . One can get a Ph.D, but there are no jobs and so the doctoral degree holders don't have to sleep in low budget motels ,but can talk to the homeless, because many of them are homeless too. For a Ph.D to aspire to get into the equivalent of the "White House" ? Forget it. Plumbers and Ambulance Chasers have better chances.

written by João da Silva, 2007-11-14 20:27:35

Here it is slightly better. In the executive office, we have a Turner (Lathe Operator). However, both the chambers of Congress are full of half arsed lawyers.

There are several reasons why lawyers are disproportionately found in politics (civil servants), but to have a Lathe Operator elected to the highest office of the land evidences democracy at work in Brazil. The issue of meritocracy aside (unlike the Kennedy's or Bushes which is aristocratic privileged) the only way Lula could have been elected by a political culture in Brazil where millionaires run the Congress - and the nation - is by actionable voice of the "people" at the ballot.

In the United States generally less than 50% of the voting age (and eligible) population votes, so a person can be elected to the U.S. Presidency with 20% or 27% of the voting age population. This brings in the issues of demographics among voters. Long story short, the U.S. is less democratic than it pretends to be, even political scientist in the U.S. say this. Essentially elite classes run the United States along with the political interest groups (that could be teamsters to oil companies to Mothers Against Drunk Driving). If it were not so, and the U.S. had a very high voting turn out (along with a tradition of more political parties than the 2 party system), then you would in all probability see a Lathe Operator today or yesterday as Commander in Chief of the United States military forces.

Here we are faring much better than the Americans. Almost 100% of our congress persons are millionaires.Around 50% of Brazilians makes less than $2500 a year and so what,we are represented in the congress by millionaires who are concerned about our welfare.

Yeah, that is the nature of the beast. Even in an advanced "first world" democracy like the United States only 22% of U.S. families have annual earnings over $50,000 in contrast to the annual income (one person) of U.S. Congresspersons of $165,200 and 1/3 of whom are already millionaires on top of their stellar federal salaries.


In this aspect, we are far ahead of you . One can get a Ph.D, but there are no jobs and so the doctoral degree holders don't have to sleep in low budget motels ,but can talk to the homeless, because many of them are homeless too. For a Ph.D to aspire to get into the equivalent of the "White House" ? Forget it. Plumbers and Ambulance Chasers have better chances.

There are jobs for people with Ph.D's in Brazil, unless 90% of the country is employed in agriculture. Brazil is still employs a very large percentage of its population in the agricultural sector (I think all nations were there at one time or another) but this is changing - and has been changing for sometime. Brazil already had a President with a Ph.D. not so long ago I thought? He was a sociologist by profession if I remember correct, and world respected as an intellectual.

I like the Charlie Rose show, and I watch it sometimes (it's an informative news/interview show in the USA). I remember he was speaking with some political figure from Latin America (can't remember who) and he was asking why Latin America has so much more of a tradition of electing *intellectuals* as leaders (Presidents) than the United States? Charlie Rose noted that in the United States the tradition is for intellectuals to avoid becoming politicians - they look down on politics for the most part.

written by João da Silva, 2007-11-14 20:27:35

In this aspect, we are far ahead of you . One can get a Ph.D, but there are no jobs and so the doctoral degree holders don't have to sleep in low budget motels ,but can talk to the homeless, because many of them are homeless too. For a Ph.D to aspire to get into the equivalent of the "White House" ? Forget it. Plumbers and Ambulance Chasers have better chances.

I should have put this in the quote box so my post above should be edited for this above ^ to be placed in quotes.

the more they stay the same.

Brazil on the other hand...still has to bring justice to families of the coup'd'etat in Brazil.

Are you out of your mind!? The military prevented Brazil from becoming another Cuba. Why nobody mentions the ties of many revolutionary paramilitary groups with Cuba or Soviet Union by then? They are heroes.

A Brazilian. If you know the history, you should know that not all of the protesters and people against the gov. were commies. You sound like the neo-cons "running like beheaded chickens" saying -"I'm scared of Cubans!

Some had, if you look the list of desaparecidos, some of them were Russian and Italian, willing to spread communism in Brazil. I have seen the list and have spoken to someone in Pernambuco, she lost her brother and 3 husbands during the military. She was a campesina and they fought hardly to have land rights, but were decimated by the military. However, the mass killing, was approved by this country because they were worried that South America would become the next Cuba. To be honest with you, the US is a two faced country when it comes to politics. Why they treat Cuba the way they do, but not Russia? Most artists, university professors, students, left Brazil or stayed under increased surveillance. How about the torturados? Do you know their story? Do some research first, then you will see that ALL of them, as you like to portray were commies.

You must be from the elitist side of the equation, they were for the Golpe.

Let's reason here. So you are saying that it is O.K. to kill people for their political views? Saddam, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, Stalin and you are not far different them. All kill or killed people because they somehow "disagreed" with their political views.
Wow, I knew you were a crack pot!

What about the 30,000 in Argentina and 300 babies that do not know who their real parents are? The military could have incarcerated, but they decided to execute. They are not heroes. Medici's government was the most brutal of all and Nixon praised him for the "miraculous economic growth". If they were heroes, they would stop the poca vergonha in Brazilia once and for all. In the end the military and the politicians are all the same: corrupt criminals

You were the one defending the legalization of marijuana in the other thread and now you call me "pot smoker". No, you are the pot smoker here.

First, learn what neo-con is. Then learn about what you are talking about.

However, the mass killing, was approved by this country because they were worried that South America would become the next Cuba.

What!? Only a few hundred guerrilla fighters were killed and others involved with communists were arrested! Where did you get this "mass murder" from!? Mass murder is what Fidel and Che Guevara did in Cuba.

Let's reason here. So you are saying that it is O.K. to kill people for their political views?

That was the lesser evil. A bitter medication, but needed nonetheless. Between pot-smoking-murderous revolutionaries that kill by the millions and the military I pick the military any day. At least they didn't fight ideas back then, only communism. Nowadays if you say anything the political elite dislike you are threatened with lawsuits, with losing your job and will be publicly attacked by a mob of useful idiots such as yourself.

The military could have incarcerated, but they decided to execute.

They killed only armed guerrilla fighters, at least in Brazil. You should know better than Americans that Brazil, Argentina and Chile are completely different countries.

They were heroes and you should thank them that you can say this amount of bulls**t today without going to the paredón like it is in Cuba.

ou were the one defending the legalization of marijuana in the other thread and now you call me "pot smoker". No, you are the pot smoker here.

First, learn what neo-con is. Then learn about what you are talking about.

Do you know what the word is?

However, the mass killing, was approved by this country because they were worried that South America would become the next Cuba.

You must be from the elitist side of the equation, they were for the Golpe.

Brazil, Argentina and Chile are completely different countries.

No, s**t. However they were all fighting the same thing. Learn about history dear, they are different countries indeed, but were "fighting communism" and what they brought to its people were mass murder. In essence, Brazil, Argentina and Chile had the same problems, one more than other, but nevertheless we were all run by the military. We actually had a junta at one point!. Don't try to portray that Brazil was "less violent", that were better than them, you are a typical snobbish middle class idiot if you think that our s**t stink less than theirs.


Really, how do you know that? So your solution is to kill people?

Go to torturanuncamais and see the LONG list of desaparecidos and killed, learn a bit more about the history of your country.

What!? Only a few hundred guerrilla fighters were killed and others involved with communists were arrested!


Again you can check the web site in Pernambuco, and see that the "guerrilla" fighters were most of them farmers wanting a piece of land to work know. The land distribution problem that we have today in Brazil, began a long time ago, even before you and I were born. I know of them. Her name is Amparo, if you need I am glad to put you in touch with her. Again, you speak of what you don't know, as usual.

They were heroes and you should thank them that you can say this amount of bulls**t today without going to the paredón like it is in Cuba.

Wow, again the military suppressed all free speech. I am thankful for the "democracy" we have now, not given to us by the military. I don't agree with what they did and never will be for any authoritarian regime.

They killed only armed guerrilla fighters, at least in Brazil.


This is the side of the story that you want to believe.How about listening to the other side and then make you judgment? I can put you in touch with some people from the "guerrilla" that you mentioned. Some people like to believe whatever bulls**t their government throws at them without questioning, you have proven to be ignorant to think that you can believe in what one side says, but then again you are the elitist for the Golpe.

One more thing A Brazilian.

I called you A Brazilian dictator on the other post, you have shown your true colors here. I knew I was right!

You are pathetically ignorant. And use the f**king quote because I can't tell what text is yours and what is yours.

Boo, did I touch a nerve then. You sure can see what you wrote from what I wrote. You don't need a PHD for that!

Seriously, you have no idea of what you are talking about.

Nowadays if you say anything the political elite dislike you are threatened with lawsuits, with losing your job

Sadly true. Even if you work for a private company and are in a mid or upper level management position.

At least they didn't fight ideas back then, only communism.

Never had problems in selling good ideas. The motto was "lets make it work". These days one has to be politically correct with our political masters.

I have seen the list and have spoken to someone in Pernambuco, she lost her brother and 3 husbands during the military.

Jolly sporty of her to have had 3 husbands during the military government that permitted her to do so.How many does she have now?

You are soooo funy. Your sarcasm is a true gem. Why don't you ask her yourself?

Some people like to believe whatever bulls**t their government throws at them without questioning, you have proven to be ignorant to think that you can believe in what one side says.

WANKER!

So, are you saying that I should believe you instead?

How old are you? If you are older than 12 then it means you are retarded.

So, are you saying that I should believe you instead?


Moron, idiot, retard, I said you should at least look at both side of the story. But that would be too much brain function, your neurons cannot make fast connections and assimilate information that quickly, that would explain!

I am a bitch and love it! You are a wanker, if you know what the word means!

X
XXXXXXXX)>
X

my middle finger to you, not very good

http://www.iht.com/articles/20...brazil.php
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/stoptorture/2007/11/04/waterboarding-in-history-a-lesson-dedicated-to-schumer-and-feinstein/

A few sites for you to start seeing the other coin. Can you take read? Harvard University has a good law blog, maybe you can learn something from them?

How much $$$ for a BJ? Send me a picture of your butt-hole so I can prequalify you...OK sweety?

Yours truly

Dear, no offense to you, but I am a high maintenance bitch . I do not accept personal checks or dollars. Only Euro and Pounds

Why don't you ask her yourself?

No, Shelly, a scholar and gentleman would never ever think of asking that female who had 3 husbands (Wow), one brother and her self fighting against the "dictatorship" . That makes 5 people from PE. 4 dead and she alive.Must be a rich widow,collecting all the "Indenizações". God knows how many husbands she has now.

If you really want to know how 1964 was, I suggest you talk to your dad in Rio to find out his impression (or your mom,aunt,etc. They will tell ya.

Unfortunately (or fortunately), I share the opinion of "A Brazilian" regarding the "Military Government". At least there was a government! While you are talking about the lady with 3 husbands, you forget the victim of Capt. Lacerda, an unsung hero. I couldn't help laughing that Lacerda's family got a huge "indenização" while the Lt he beat to death has been forgotten.

Sorry, Shelly, I feel so upset that the tax payer´s money is being spent on Dona.Flor, trés maridos (falecidos),irmão (falecido) e os varios maridos atuais (e futuros). Your friend Medici must be laughing his ass off.

Another thing I wanted to say is: Some months ago you mentioned that, though your little sister got through the "vestibular" to do medicine in UFRJ, she opted to do it in a private university because of the constant strikes in the Federal universities. You also mentioned that your dad has to pay R$6000 a month. During the military government, the strikes in the Federal universities were unheard of and if Medici was still alive, your dad could have saved 6 K Reais a month!

You draw your own conclusions and lets not romanticize the leftist loonies.

No, Shelly, a scholar and gentleman would never ever think of asking that female who had 3 husbands (Wow), one brother and her self fighting against the "dictatorship" . That makes 5 people from PE. 4 dead and she alive.Must be a rich widow,collecting all the "Indenizações". God knows how many husbands she has now.

Yeah, you are above everyone else, shame to know that you think this way. Look at the web site and ask to speak to Amparo, the head of the organization. The fact of the matter is, she lost 4 people in her family .

"http://www.pernambucoestadodepaz.org.br/asp/Default.asp?ID_PROJETO=19

"Another thing I wanted to say is: Some months ago you mentioned that, though your little sister got through the "vestibular" to do medicine in UFRJ, she opted to do it in a private university because of the constant strikes in the Federal universities. You also mentioned that your dad has to pay R$6000 a month. During the military government, the strikes in the Federal universities were unheard of and if Medici was still alive, your dad could have saved 6 K Reais a month!"

That is up to my father to decide, not you. Also, under the military, you could not teach certain disciplines. I still have my school book, full of bullet points, some history missing, it is hilarious that you even think that not old enough to know what was going on. Yes, strikes were unheard of, because people weren't allowed to protest. If the present government payed the Federal University Professors a decent wage, they would not be on strike. They are allowed to protest now, before they received a s**tty salary and had to put up with. Great! You have no clue, do you?

Your friend Medici must be laughing his ass off. "

Why do you assume that he is my friend, I am Dutch not Italian.

Also, you seem to have missed the point here. Go back to my posts and you will see that I have clearly stated, that they could have incarcerated everyone, instead of killing them. I am against the killings and the torture that went on. Brazil did have a government then, now we are in the hands of a drunk, corrupt and liar. What are the generals waiting for? Also, nowadays the US would smack down our hands heavily (Pervez anyone?). My father was for the golpe, however, he disapproves the killings and the torture. He has given us a good upbringing and we do not condone violence in our household.

"During the military government, the strikes in the Federal universities were unheard of and if Medici was still alive."

Joao, you may be a scholar and a gentlemen, not doubt about it. As I said on a post, I would rather see your gene being passed down the line. However, I believe this is a dumb point you are making here. Ask yourself why the strikes were unheard of? You don't need a Phd. to figure it out.

and by the way, if I am right Amparo Araujo has a degree. So, you point is nulled. Maybe you can talk to the coronel and learn some points from him. I have spoken to this people, because I rather be informed on both side of the issue, than choose one side uninformed.

Presidência
Amparo Araújo - Assistente Social
Vice-Presidência
Pedro Pontual Carvalho Junior - Historiador
Primeiro Secretario Geral
Odilon Antonio do Nascimento Gonçalves Dias - Historiador
Segundo Secretário Geral
Marli Moura do Nascimento - Professora
Primeiro Tesoureiro
Gustavo José Monteiro Guimarães - Coronel Reformado da PMPE
Segundo Tesoureiro
Luiza Alina - Médica

Go back to my posts and you will see that I have clearly stated, that they could have incarcerated everyone, instead of killing them.

Let me try to understand something here. Are you saying that a bunch of fanatical guys in the middle of the woods with lots of guns and planning to overthrow to government, robbing banks, kidnapping people and assassinating others shouldn't be killed? I think ending up dead is a distinct possibility when someone chooses this way of life.

I have spoken to this people, because I rather be informed on both side of the issue, than choose one side uninformed.

Please do read the following link to hear the opinion of the other side (The site has some more good articles too):

http://www.clubemilitar.com.br...ustria.htm

You may even send e-mail criticizing them, without being worried of any retaliations!

What are the generals waiting for?

They are very busy conducting "Operação Charrua", which ends today:

www.charrua.mil.br

"Let me try to understand something here. Are you saying that a bunch of fanatical guys in the middle of the woods with lots of guns and planning to overthrow to government, robbing banks, kidnapping people and assassinating others shouldn't be killed? I think ending up dead is a distinct possibility when someone chooses this way of life."

Here maybe in ENGLISH you will understand better.
http://eaaf.typepad.com/pdf/2001/06BRAZIL.PDF
"Military rule in Brazil focused in large part on economic reforms designed to promote economic growth and restore the confidence of foreign investors. Earlier nationalization projects sponsored by Goulart gave way to policies which “open[ed] up all doors to foreign capital through measures such as easy credit and fiscal incentives for the establishment of multi-national corporations in Brazil and the removal of obstacles to the repatriation of profits.”3 These policies led to a high rate of economic growth in Brazil between 1969-1973, but they also exacerbated social tensions by enlarging the gap between rich and poor citizens, as the latter’s conditions of living deteriorated. Popular dissent against the government’s economic policies led to heightened military repression,and eventually to guerrilla attacks on the government and a wave of state-sponsored human rights abuses.
During the period of military rule, small guerrilla groups emerged to oppose the government, frequently groups associated with one or more factions formed from the Brazilian Communist party, which split in 1962 over differences in revolutionary strategy. One faction supported a peaceful transition to power, while the other advocated an armed struggle based in rural areas. The latter faction adopted the name Communist Party of Brazil, known by its initials in Portuguese as the PC doB. Throughout the 1960s and early 1970s, a number of splinter groups and guerrillas associated with the PC do B waged campaigns against the dictatorship, targeting, among others, fazendas (large rural estates), government
officials, and occasionally foreign diplomats.In response, the government of General Emilio Garrastazú Médici, the successor to Costa e Silva, undertook a massive campaign of military repression, in the process committing a multitude of human rights abuses. The most complete account of such abuses in Brazil was the 1985 report Brazil: Nunca Mais, translated into English as Torture in Brazil. BNM, as it is known, is the most complete account of human rights abuses in Brazil. It consists of a collection of testimonies that were kept in military archives, and secretly photocopied there by lawyers working with the Catholic Church. The testimonies, collected at great risk, confirmed that “reports made during the Médici period by human rights organizations on tortures, killings of political opponents, disappearances, raids on private homes, the complete lack of respect for the rights of citizens, and failure to observe the legislation enacted by the regime itself. The BNM study revealed that the highest level of tortures and deaths occurred during this period.”4
It was during this period that the majority of cases of disappearance of political opponents also occurred, the result of kidnappings and assassinations of guerrilla members
and others who fought against the military regime."


As you can see crack pot, you don't even know the root of the conflict. You talk of s**t that you have no f**king idea. The problem continuous to be of the same color and same origin. Last week a MST member was killed, do you think it is right? I don't. As usual, the "white" middle-class in Brazil, prefers to keep those less fortuned muzzled. Brazil is a rich country with lots of natural resources, but only 1% has access to all. This creates social tensions, if you know a bit more about sociology, you will see that if your put people on the corner and give them no option, they will fight back.
I don't agree with the armed guerrilla, but how else would they fight for, if you read the article carefully, you should ask the question who began the conflict, the campesinos or the government? I just wish the poor would fight back in Brazil and they should not allow people like you to decide if they are allowed to have education, health care and a job to support their families. You are a snobbish jerk and believes in whatever the government tells you. I do believe that during the military we had a better government. At least we had someone managing the country. Right now we have idiots and thieves running the congress.
Why don't we see armed conflict in Brazil? Because Lula and his thieves, are silencing the poor with the Bolsa familia.

PCdoB split into two groups. One was for the armed guerrilla, the other is similar to what we see today. I don't agree that they were killing people, I don't think that you and I have the right to kill anyone. However, I still believe that the government should have set an example here. This is my question to you: You are reasoning that the military had the right to decimate the militia because they were killing, kidnapping, robbing banks? You already gave me the answer, which is yes. So, why then corpses were found with signs of post-postmortem torture signs, with eye cavities destroyed, disemboweled, etc? Don't you think at least, the ethical thing here is to kill and let it be? But, the same people that you are for are just barbaric thugs. In the end, their actions are worse than the militia. Criminals in the end, come in uniform as well.

You and a lot of people that I know, would love to see the gens taking over the country again. However, as you know, by abusing their power, they have lost credibility. Also, think about how investors would feel about? I am much more inclined to believe in organization set outside of Brazil, that has no direct contact with the media in our country. There several in Argentina, and they have studied the Brazilian experience under the military extensively. The Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team has helped the families recover some of the remains and they are highly involved in Chile, Argentina and Brazil. These are their list of Donors.

* ICCO, The Netherlands
* The Open Society Institute, USA
* The John Merck Fund, USA
* The Ford Foundation, USA, Mexico Office
* The Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency
* The Government of Argentina
* The legislative branch of the Province of Córdoba, Argentina
* The Government of The Netherlands
* The Government of France
* The Dutch Embassy in Mexico
* OAK Philanthropy Limited, United Kingdom
* International Committee of the Red Cross, Switzerland
* General Service Foundation, USA
* Anbinder Family Foundation, USA
* The Prosecutor's Office of the State of Chihuahua, Mexico
* USAID, USA

What did the operation achieve?

"fanatical guys in the middle of the woods with lots of guns"

Where did you get this information from? The information that is posted and has been looked up the the police in Pernambuco, says the opposite. Houses were raided in search of guns, but a few were found. In the end, they tried to cover up and say that it was "suicide". Hard to believe that a dead person could take it own bowls, cut its hands and strangle itself. Again, do a little more research!

bowels

As you can see crack pot, you don't even know the root of the conflict.

The root of the conflict was the fact that Fidel and Soviet Union had plans for Latin America.

you should ask the question who began the conflict, the campesinos or the government?

The guerrilla started it long before the coup.

I just wish the poor would fight back in Brazil and they should not allow people like you to decide if they are allowed to have education, health care and a job to support their families

I agree, that's what democracy is for. Curiously they fought for communism, a regime that doesn't recognize individual merit and keep people like slaves.

Right now we have idiots and thieves running the congress.

The same idiots and thieves that fought the military government.

And I started using the epithets in the message titles, you are copying me!

No, I did. You only asked if I was smoking? You could have meant cigarettes

Again, you are ignorant!

"I agree, that's what democracy is for. Curiously they fought for communism, a regime that doesn't recognize individual merit and keep people like slaves."

And is Brazil a democracy? Has ever been? Therefore, aren't people living under subhuman conditions and are being kept like slaves?

"The root of the conflict was the fact that Fidel and Soviet Union had plans for Latin America."

And the military brought social justice, equal rights, to everyone? Ohh, in your opinion it saved the country! The Brazilian society has a great level of living standards, education, health!

"The guerrilla started it long before the coup."

Prove it.

"The same idiots and thieves that fought the military government."

You have the president you deserve.

Idiot,

Here from JSTOR

Pheasants and Rural labores in Pernambuco. Their problem began with land distribution! STUDY MORON>

* Articles by F. Mallon

Google Scholar

* Articles Citing this Article
* Related Articles
* Articles by F. Mallon


Peasants and Rural Laborers in Pernambuco, 1955-1964, by Florencia E. Mallon
Latin American Perspectives © 1978 Sage Publications, Inc.

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0094-582X(197823)5:42.0.CO;2-U

My question to you:" you should ask the question who began the conflict, the campesinos or the government?"

Your answer : "The guerrilla started it long before the coup."

My question: "Why?" Go and read the article, the problem began even before Fidel and Russia on the scene. But again, you don't have enough neurons left, stop snorting all that s**t!

Y R U ignoring me!

Too f.u.c.k.i.n.g busy or vice-versa?

Kisses nas vossas nadegas....

Shelly, what have you been smoking?

Can I have some of that s.h.i.t.?

Yes, you have copied me. But you are funny though. Hahahaha.

Dear not ignoring you, just busy! Anyway, kisses for you too By the way, don't come with you S.H.I.T. dollars, they won't by a pack of candy in Europe, no use to me.

While America has its flaws, it has been the most successful such democracy in history.

Bush won the 2000 Election because, it would be illegal for Al Gore to be President under the Constitution.

President must uphold and defend the Constitution. Gore would have been treated by many Americans as an illegitimate President whom ignores the Constitution when it benefits his political power. Bush was the only legal president allowed.

As for the America's uling class, many of them are self-made millionaires not aristocrats.

The current lading Presidential Candidate is Rudy Guiliani and he grew rich by the sweat of his brow, ironically most Social Democrats like John Kerry or Ted Kennedy are richer than the rest of Congress, President Bush, and the Supreme Court combined. Its amazing how socialist love their own money but, hate everybody else from getting it. He was born into a working-class family of Italian Immigrants. America is one of the few nations in which a poor man can become the richest man in the world or even President of the United States.

I believe Brazil could be like America if it chose to, until then you are all welcome to move here, to learn how America works and bring back ideas to Brazil. Or I suggest you stay, after all we New Yorkers could use some immigrants from Rio or Sao Paulo. From what I hear Brazilians are the fastest growing immigrant group in the US. In 2000, there were 200,000 Brazilians here now its 2,000,000, in merely 7 years. Anyway, Brazil is a great nation with a bright future, God Bless you all and good luck.

As you can see crack pot, you don't even know the root of the conflict. You talk of s**t that you have no f**king idea. The problem continuous to be of the same color and same origin. Last week a MST member was killed, do you think it is right? I don't. As usual, the "white" middle-class in Brazil, prefers to keep those less fortuned muzzled. Brazil is a rich country with lots of natural resources, but only 1% has access to all. This creates social tensions, if you know a bit more about sociology, you will see that if your put people on the corner and give them no option, they will fight back.
I don't agree with the armed guerrilla, but how else would they fight for, if you read the article carefully, you should ask the question who began the conflict, the campesinos or the government? I just wish the poor would fight back in Brazil and they should not allow people like you to decide if they are allowed to have education, health care and a job to support their families. You are a snobbish jerk and believes in whatever the government tells you. I do believe that during the military we had a better government. At least we had someone managing the country. Right now we have idiots and thieves running the congress.
Why don't we see armed conflict in Brazil? Because Lula and his thieves, are silencing the poor with the Bolsa familia.

I heard some suggest that the largely Mixed Black and Native people to the North will split off and create a separate nation, leaving a largely white Brazil in the South and a largely Brown or Black nation to the North. From what I understand Southern Brazil is culturally/demographically European while the North is more African or Native culturally/demographically.