Brazzil

Serious remaining economic and social challenges notwithstanding, Brazil appears to have 'arrived' although Brazilians of color have 'less arrived' than white Brazilians.
By Brazzil Magazine

The reaction in many countries to Tuesday's terrorist attacks in the U.S. has been of genuine sadness and sorrow for the victims and the American people. Across most countries in Western Europe, normal life stopped for three minutes on Friday as people paid tribute to the dead. These were genuine acts from the heart by ordinary individuals, not staged events organized by governments. One gathering in Germany brought together 200,000 people. The British Parliament held a special session. Even Russia observed a minute of silence.

What did we see in Brazil? Virtually nothing. Most of our political leaders kept quiet and the people appeared not to care. President Fernando Henrique Cardoso did condemn the act a few hours after it happened, and offered support. However, he was quick to point out that it could worsen Brazil's economic problems. None of the emotion the world associates with Brazil has been on display.

As Brazilians continued to watch events unfold on television, political life went on in its usual way. No terrorism here, just the usual soap opera of corruption, violence and power mongering—beleaguered Senate President Jader Barbalho finally stood down, more evidence piled up against former São Paulo Mayor Paulo Maluf—also facing corruption allegations, and the Mayor of Campinas, a major city in São Paulo state, was shot dead. Another development this week was the defeat of the anti-government wing of the PMDB party, at a convention that elected São Paulo Congressman Michel Temer as the party's new president. This was a blow to Minas Gerais Governor Itamar Franco, who may now seek membership with another party to launch his presidential ambitions next year.

So there were plenty of things happening here, but why have the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. evoked none of the emotions among Brazilians which they have among others elsewhere in the world? Obviously one cannot force people to feel genuine sorrow, but the muted response has been puzzling and, to a non-American foreigner like me who lives here, disappointing and distressing.

It is distressing because it puts Brazil out of line with the world's democracies, and shows a lack of solidarity with a country where tens of thousands of Brazilians live—300,000 in the New York City area alone. Around 30 of these Brazilians are feared dead in the New York attack. It shows a lack of sympathy for a nation which has suffered a devastating surprise attack. It shows the ignorance of the less educated population, and the smugness of the better educated.

Of eight letters published in the daily O Estado de S. Paulo at the time of writing this article, six are broadly anti-American, accusing the U.S. of reaping seeds it has sown. One wonders if any of the correspondents wrote a letter of condolence to the American ambassador. Another part of the same newspaper expressed relief that the U.S. Consulate in São Paulo would be leaving the posh Jardins area soon for a new location, and the well-heeled residents in the area would not have to endure the disgraceful sight of people queuing up to get visas.

The lack of a political response is disappointing because it shows the U.S. that it cannot rely on Brazil as an ally. By Saturday, President Fernando Henrique Cardoso had yet to speak on the phone to President Bush, an incredible indictment of Brazil's failure to understand the importance of these attacks.

The left-wing Worker's Party (PT) wasted no time in linking the attacks to U.S. policies, making sure that its condemnation of the terrorist acts was part and parcel of its condemnation of the U.S. One is as bad as the other in the PT's view. We should expect this from the PT, but the parties in the governing coalition have been shamefully silent.

However, the U.S. is not relying on any muscular support from Brazil because it knows it will not be forthcoming. During the Second World War Brazil let the Americans use its territory, and even sent troops to fight with the Allies in Italy. This is not the case now. It is obvious there is no support for an active role by Brazil in any future U.S.-led anti-terrorism operations, and the terrorists are already winning with their intimidation tactics.

Two examples prove this. For some time, Brazil and the U.S. have been discussing allowing the Americans to use a Brazilian Air Force base at Alcântara, in Maranhão state, to launch rockets into space. To be fair, there was a lot of political opposition to this before the terrorist attacks hit the U.S., but the opponents are now adding fears that the base could become a terrorist target to their reasons. The chairman of the Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee of the Lower House says now is not the time to discuss the matter, and "maybe it would be better to wait a little", meaning put it on the backburner.

To his credit, Defense Minister Geraldo Quintão said the attacks should not interfere with the discussions, but if this is the case why does the government not do something to show its resolve? Would it not be heartening if, instead of equivocating and being intimidated, Brazil announced, as an act of solidarity, that the U.S. could use the base?

Another example came from Foreign Minister Celso Lafer, who said immediately after the attack that Brazil's relations with countries like Iran, Libya and Iraq might change. By Friday he was eating his words, as the Foreign Ministry called in the ambassadors of these states, all of which have links with terrorist groups, and toned down the minister's comments.

It is interesting to compare Brazil's timid attitude with that of Argentina, where the Peronist opposition movement is calling for Argentina to help the U.S. militarily. Unlike Brazil, Argentina has suffered terrorist bombings against Jewish targets and even sent troops to join the Gulf War coalition against Iraq. Cynics might say Argentina is only offering military help in return for U.S. financial aid to overcome its current crisis. They may be right, but at least Argentina is showing some mettle, unlike Brazil, which is coming across as more of a gentle giant.

John Fitzpatrick, the author, is a Scottish journalist who has been based in São Paulo since 1995. His 26-year career in journalism includes stints as a reporter in Scotland and England, deputy editor of an English-language daily newspaper in Cyprus, news editor of a radio station in Switzerland, financial correspondent in Zurich and São Paulo, and editor of a magazine published by one of Switzerland's largest banks. He currently runs Celtic Comunicações, a São Paulo company which specializes in editorial and translation services. You can reach him at Johnfitz@osite.com.br  

Opinion
The Impossible Dream

Goliath, the Philistine giant, was brought down by a well-aimed stone thrown by David, Israel's first king. The Bible also says, in another place, that Goliath was defeated by someone else, with another name that History didn't record. Probably, this other Hebrew is the real author of the feat, since he is mentioned and known only by this fact.

In history, the trivial, human and concrete facts do not matter. For history the only people that matter are heroes and villains, who always play the same script. The history of the Western civilization, past and future, is already written in the Bible, in the Homerian and Greek tragedies. We don't have a lot of imagination. The actors are chosen right before the act and they play a pre-established drama. Samson, David, Napoleon, Lincoln and Dom Pedro I are chosen like King Momo, Pierrot, Harlequin and the character from the Northeast Bumba-Meu-Boi. The real history, from people who did or did not, is not history, is life.

Last week, the whole world lived the panic of the passengers from the hijacked planes, was asphyxiated by the smoke, screamed from despair and moaned buried by the World Trade Center's debris. Thousands of anonymous people, friends or acquaintances, lost their lives. We will never know who committed the heinous crime. The tragedy became history. We will repeat the drama from 3000 years ago, Jews against Philistines, or Christians against Moors or poor against the rich. David against Goliath. "We" are David. The "others", Goliath.

As an unimaginative movie, last week's tragedy continues as history. The American President declares war against concretely unknown terrorists, but easy to identify when we follow the original script—they are the Cananaean, the Moor, the Saracen. Fifty years ago the culprit would have been the Jews. In the case of rape, a black. We can foretell the finale. Holy war against holy war. Terrorism changes place—it leaves the planes and becomes bacteriological war in a vicious circle of vendettas.

The American government strengthens its spy network, reduces the civil liberties of Americans. Americans become fundamentalists, xenophobes, McCarthyists. In the '50s, Charley Chaplin was persecuted and went back to Europe. Now, they will perhaps persecute Madonna for being indecorous or Muslim Muhammad Ali for his religion. Political refugees from around the world have no place to go anymore.

The lights are turned off in the country of the movies, universities, libraries, museums. All unite against the common enemy, which still has to be chosen—a poor and inhospitable country in Asia, a band of terrorists hidden in a cave, the Palestine (Philistines?), the Persian (Iran?) or the Babylonians (Iraq?).

If we could make science fiction with imagination, history's sequence might be different. After a week of silent mourning, perplexed and respectful in the face of pain, the United States and NATO decide on a fund of 40 billion dollars for investments in Afghanistan, in Iran or another place. They start a new Marshall Plan before any war is begun and which is promoted by the attacked country.

In a few years, the Eastern threat, wherever it might come from, would be controlled. The Eastern fundamentalists would be globalized. They would start to eat at McDonald's and would go to Geneva to protest against globalization. We would really be making history. We would stop being led by characters with pre-established roles. None of this will happen: the human and rational solution is science fiction. The B science fiction has become reality.

João Sayad, the author, is São Paulo city's secretary of Finances and Economic Development. You can get in touch with him at jsayad@attglobal.net

Point of View
No-Win Game

I could not sit and watch the one-sided views on the attacks America has suffered last week. The non-American view of that fact leads us to the effects that the attacks themselves and possible retaliation may have on Brazil (and other countries, of course). That's why I decided to write the article below.

The first thing one must ask now is what a Brazilian has to do with the attacks that have just happened in NYC and Washington D.C.? My answer is that the attacks do affect Brazil, all the other nations in the world and the further effects of them on humanity will depend on the American response to them.

To show America's power through an armed conflict is a childish and not very intelligent reaction, and makes no sense for a number of reasons. One is that most of Afghanistan's population know nothing but hunger and misery caused by two decades of war. They do not have a clue as to what " The Taliban" or "New York" is, so remote are they from what we call "civilization". Those people are just as innocent as the people who were killed in the towers of the WTC.

Second is that whoever is responsible for the attacks, is ready to respond to retaliation with even bigger and unexpected force. No one is going to tease a giant and not expect a reaction. Further yet, knowing that the giant will react, any being with a minimum of intelligence would have an even bigger (and worse) surprise for later. Responding violently to the attacks will just generate an endless chain of violence that will result in loss for humanity as a whole.

Also, we have to consider every face of the subject. No American has ever cried over the millions of people who die every day in Third World Countries, victims (directly or indirectly) of American foreign policies designed to keep America on top. The average American is not able to see that. They are not supposed to see that link. That is why they think they are poor victims who have been attacked for no reason and that is why they have been asking so insistently for retaliation.

The attack upon a member of the United Nations should be considered as an attack upon all. Who guarantees that if Brazil had been attacked, the States would give us their support? More than once before America turned its back on the interests of humanity in order to serve its own interests. They want us to stop polluting, but they keep on polluting in order to maintain the growth of their economy. They give us the hypocritical speech of tolerance, but when they are asked to do the same, the president leaves an International Conference Against Racism.

Before World War II, Europe was what America is now. The parents of my generation studied French at school. In a couple of decades, America may no longer be what it is. And the same way I had to learn how to speak English in order to achieve better positions in an "Americanized" world, who knows what language my children will have to learn at school? And one day, tired of suffering under the feet of a ruling country, America may be seen as terrorist, and they will want their reasons to be heard.

Dione Rocha is a Brazilian communications major concerned about social issues. You can contact the author at dionerocha@hotmail.com  

Point of View
It Serves U.S. Right

Immediately after the terrorist attack on the United States, President Bush declared a war between good and evil. This division of the world into good and evil countries was one that the western world had begun to bury with the end of the cold war. This division fomented the Christian Crusades against the "infidel Muslims" and later, the extermination of Jews by Hitler's troops.

Does it make sense to identify the United States with the good and its critics and enemies with evil? The Bible and the Torah confront the question of good and evil with divine wisdom. Good and evil live together in each of our hearts. Freedom consists in knowing how to choose between selfishness and love. One cannot say that the United States, in its history, has worked harder for justice and prosperity for all people in the world than for the hegemony and financial gains of Uncle Sam.

Since the creation of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, the United States brought Puerto Rico under its dominion (1898), invaded Cuba (1902), took over the Panama Canal, implanted dictators in the southern hemisphere, fomented terror in Nicaragua, trained military leaders in the ways of torture, and now propose FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) as a form of commercial control of Latin America.

The White House which authorized the use of Napalm in the Vietnam War and bombed the civilian population of Sudan during Clinton´s presidency is today a victim of its own power. The oppressed mirror the aggressors when they retaliate with the same methods. Just as the victims of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon did not deserve the tragedy that they suffered, so the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima should not have been exterminated with two atomic bombs.

Saddam Hussein initially was the White House marionette who helped the U.S. fight against the Islamic Revolution in Iran. He demonstrated once again the insidiousness of terrorist training policies of the U.S. The apprentice wizard turns against the sorcerer. In the 1980's, Osama Bin Laden was the right arm of the CIA against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The CIA taught him to make bombs, to plan and activate terrorist attacks, to hide his millions of dollars in fantasy companies and finance paradises, to operate secret codes, and to infiltrate civilian and military groups. Bin Laden is a product of the Americans. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and since 1990, Bin Laden has pointed his terrorist arsenal against Uncle Sam.

The indefinite postponement of peace in the Mid-East including the creation of a Palestinian state is another factor in the growth of dissatisfaction and xenophobia. Since the U.N. resolutions of that region were not taken seriously and attacks continue in the Gaza Strip and parts of Jordan, arms continue to be used to end a conflict that can only be addressed with political negotiations.

In commemorating his 80th birthday last week, Cardinal Arns asked that all Brazilians pressure Brazilian President Cardoso not to support any attitude or policy of vengeance on the part of the United States. In Arns' words, terrorists should be punished for the horrible crimes that they committed but innocent populations should not suffer.

Many of us are pacifists until a robber enters our house and kills a loved one. Thus, we take on the same sentiments of the robber, allowing our violent side that hides inside us to emerge. Peace is the fruit of justice. Thus, we should not do to others what we would not want done to us. It may be impossible not to have enemies but it is possible to avoid treating them with inhumanity and injustice which feeds the spiral of violence. War never brings good solutions, only pain, destruction and more suffering.

Just as Pax Romana was not built on hatred of Christians, Pax Americana will not have a future if it foments hatred toward Islamic people. Without them, western culture would not be as it is today. As the Jewish people gave the world Marx, Freud, Einstein and many other geniuses in science and the arts, the Arab people have given us geniuses such as Al-Khwarizmi in the area of mathematics, Al-Kindi and Alhazem in physics, and Avrróis in the area of philosophy.

It is time for the United States to demonstrate that they are the paladins of democracy, not only in respecting differences but also by ending their support for the autocratic, dictatorial governments of the Arab world where freedom of the people is held ransom to the unjust price of barrels of petroleum.

Friar Betto, the author is a religious, a writer and teacher. Among his many books is
The Work of the Artist—A Holistic Vision of the World.

Opinion
Blame the victims

It's time for grammar, among other things, to lower our blood pressure. The political simplism that preceded the Black Tuesday doesn't seem to have been interrupted after the slaughter. It's intact and unharmed, fueling resentments, ready to ignite sacred wraths and holy indignations.

The majority of the Arab and Islamic leadership were categorically sympathetic to the victims' families or to the American people. Without attenuation or justification. They were hurt by terrorism as much as those murdered. Fidel Castro, for so long assaulted by American arrogance, was also unequivocal in his solidarity. He said what he felt, period.

But in the rhetoric of our cordial celebrated society, infected with commas and detours, it was inserted as an attenuating resource—a little particle usually destined to link parts of a phrase. Disguised as a pause between two ideas, it has a deleterious, disaggregating function. Without even being touched by the death of so many Brazilians, some of the brief and formal laments for the catastrophe were followed by a disturbing and insulting but.

In the innocent conjunction it's revealed the volcano of rancor still had not been calmed, curtailed or purged by last week's blood bath. Here comes the grammar to remind us about things we don't pay attention to when using the language. Conjunctions are used to link sentences: when additive they work as reinforcement—this is the case of the stubborn and—when adversative they establish the contrast between the respective meanings. If someone offers his condolences and, right after, adds some however, though or but he is in reality saying "my condolences" but negating it soon after with an "it serves you right."

The political "show" presented by the PT (Workers' Party) on TV this Thursday was perfect in every sense, including its mention of the terrorist attacks: neither but nor half but. The repudiation to the violence was brief, clear and the grief, sincere. But the PT is a Party that's getting ready to exercise the power, and it is able to extirpate emotions, choose words that express them and, by and large, avoid the pitfalls of phrasing. It's able, more than anything else, to immunize itself against the poison of the discourse's ambiguities.

This consternation was not shared by the majority of militants or associates who marched through the papers' pages of smoldering rage and wrath, clearly satisfied with the getting even shown in such a spectacular way on TV.

Rapidly grieved, the six thousand missing—including the 17 Brazilians—were soon compared to the dead in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Hanoi, Chile, to which were added the hungry masses of Africa and Latin America's legions of poor wretches. Swinging between justification and vigilantism, with the decisive help of buts, the cruel vindictive arithmetic illustrates a moral relativism from which certain leftists—or pseudo leftists—were still not able to escape. Nor will they escape soon while they continue intoxicated by the dogma that the end justifies the means.

From this spiritual daze don't escape people anointed in international contests: people awarded the Peace and Literature Nobel prizes, tenured professors and illustrious individuals in all sciences and knowledge, rationalists and aestheticians, Marxists and aristocrats. Historians trained to look at humankind under the perspective of centuries—and the journalists used to immediately interpret its spasms—surrendered themselves to the amok unchained by terror. Even bankers so cautious in their emotions and investments took out of the closet their Crusaders' banner.

Incapable of being horrified or feeling pain, and therefore incapable of humanizing themselves by suffering and solidarity, the fiery harbingers of the "we are even" are blowing up all bridges that lead to dialog and tolerance. The xenophobia that only now they notice had been pulsating for a long time in their totalizing and totalitarian speeches, in the way they divide the world between those who deserve compassion and those who deserve condemnatory passion.

George W. Bush is the least desirable person to lead the U.S. at this moment. There is no doubt about this: all of his appearances (starting with a speech in a Florida school in the morning of the assaults and ending ten days later with the speech to Congress in Washington) widely expose his unpreparedness, an intellectual void and a psyche that only knows how to express itself through clichés. The uncomfortable realization cannot lead us to an alignment with fanaticism, terrorism or with those cynical invocations destined to minimize, excuse or justify the barbarism committed Black Tuesday.

In the current evaluations an elementary data is being forgotten: the assaults were not accompanied by public declarations, ultimatums, conditions or demands. The absence of public statements or authorship indicates an indiscriminate war against all, against humankind. The initiators of the crime are not from the left, not even progressive. They are neither agents of the savage capitalism nor revolutionary, reformist, ecologist, thirdworldist or antiglobalizationist. They don't want a strong or minimum state. They don't want states, laws, codes, norms for living or respecting. Besides killing indiscriminately they are intent on sowing hate, igniting fires, exacerbating suspicions, and prevent any possibility of understanding, approaching or tolerance.

In displaying grief with half sincerity or full insincerity, the lucid commentators with their adversative conjunctions and the moral relativism are only vouching for violence as political language. In reality, they are condemning the victims as the only guilty ones for what has happened

Alberto Dines wrote this article for Jornal do Brasil where he signs a column. He became a journalism professor after directing major newspapers and magazines in Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Lisbon (Portugal). He is the author of several books and the creator of Observatório da Imprensa, an Internet site and TV program that presents criticism of the Brazilian media. You can reach him at dines@jb.com.br

Scandal
Risqué Images

Despite close to half a million people, Ribeirão Preto, in the interior of São Paulo state, is a city that retains much of the charm of country life. Agriculture and cattle breeding are common activities in the area, which was once known as The Coffee Capital and Brazilian California. Scandal and gossip are mostly things that happen to other people and in other cities. Happened, until some bawdy pictures presenting some of the town's illustrious couples in compromising positions appeared on the Internet. It was not clear at the beginning of the scandal if the images were authentic or photo montages. It didn't matter, however, since the damage had already been done when those portrayed in the images went to court to try to prove their innocence.

For weeks, in July and August, the naughty pictures seemed to be the only subject Ribeirão-Pretanos had to talk about. It all started when some pictures were stolen from a computer. Soon after, people started to receive in their e-mails a collection of images: well behaved couples in a family barbecue, a group at a nudist beach watching some girls doing strip tease, and then a series of photos with familiar faces showing hardcore scenes, including lesbianism, fellatio and group sex. Most of the images, at least those in the barbecue and on the nude beach, were real, confirmed the people shown in them. But the more risqué stuff, they asserted, was a forgery. Among those exposed in the pictures was an economist (his father is former congressional representative João Cunha) and his architect wife plus an entrepreneur (his father owns a school with 10,000 students) and his wife, who was a teacher in the family's school. The implicated, all in their 20s, are rich and well known in the region. Two traditional families were the main culprits: the Cunhas and the Spinellis.

On September 5, the Ribeirão Preto police presented a report signed by three veteran experts stating that the pornographic pictures were digitally fabricated. The experts, José Lopes Zarzuela, from USP's (Universidade de São Paulo) Law School; Dirceu Carlos Uccelli, who works for the Federal Justice and José Barth, from the State Justice had a unanimous conclusion: "From all that was given as evidence the suspected pieces revealed, after examination, to be forgeries. The modifications were done without the due and accurate technical criteria dictated by the digital art, which, with the proper software that now exists in the market, under the command of an able person, would make such montages imperceptible."

The experts' findings were included in the enquiry being made by the police, who are interviewing at least ten people who are now accused of mail violation, defamation and extortion. Twenty photos were analyzed, but rumors have it that as many as 800 of these pictures exist. According to Antonio Eugênio Minghini, the attorney for those shown in the pictures, "the families of the victims hired the experts in an effort to try to stop the spread of the rumor. They are distraught and if we had to wait for the Justice, it would take a long time."

The case became known as the "suruba dos ricos" (the riches' gangbang) and pictures from other people who don't live in the city started cropping up. Even pictures taken from Brazilian Playboy were added to the sexual imbroglio. According to the police, the same people who stole the pictures and spread them throughout the Internet tried to extort half a million reais ($179,000) from the victims in exchange for not divulging the images. Protecting the identity of the accused, the Brazilian media presented the economist ARDC and entrepreneur NDSJ saying: "The pictures in which we appear in compromising situations are obviously montages. The criminals used our faces taken from stolen pictures and placed them over other images."

NDSJ talked about the pictures taken at the nudist beach: "I went there with my wife and we took pictures that I kept in my computer. This is something intimate we did and it is nobody's business. How could I imagine that someone would get into my computer and manipulate the pictures? After the photos appeared, people started saying we were involved with drugs, that we were homosexuals, that my wife received a standing ovation in a local restaurant and so on." By the way, his wife, who teaches elementary school, decided to take a vacation while things cool off a little.

ARDC says that a hacker stole the pictures from a computer he has at home, but in another version circulating in the streets of Ribeirão Preto, the laptop computer was taken to a repair shop and there one technician copied the pictures and decided to blackmail the economist.

The compromising pictures were taken off an Internet site that was showing them, but at least one webmaster had already copied the whole enchilada, distributing it in a zip file on http://www.geocities.com/malloryknox77/ Apparently, other entrepreneurial minds created CD-ROMs containing the same material with some 80 spicy images being sold for 20 reais ($7) in the streets of Ribeirão.

Send your
comments to
Brazzil

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment Preview