Wayne Madsen, an investigative journalist whose research on security issues I first knew in my favorite conservative website WND, tackles the skyrocketing rise of Marina Silva, a radical environmentalist, socialist who is the most likely candidate to defeat the socialist incumbent, Dilma Rousseff, in the Brazilian presidential election.
Madsen makes some interesting points, but in other respects he fails to see what is obvious for us Brazilian conservatives. For example, he said, “Rousseff’s defeat would signal a victory for the Obama administration’s covert activities to eliminate from the scene progressive presidents throughout Latin America.”
Well, why would progressive Obama want to eliminate his progressive counterparts in Latin America? The standard, according to Madsen, seems to be “pro-business” versus “anti-business” — and the U.S. champions business. So if a progressive president in Latin America is opposed to the big businesses of the progressive U.S. president, he will be opposed by the U.S. government. On the other side, if a Latin American progressive president advocates abortion and homosexuality, he will face no opposition from his counterpart in the White House. The avid pro-sodomy and pro-abortion policies of Rousseff have never faced any opposition from the U.S. government. She is facing U.S. opposition only over business issues.
Madsen also seems to think that “socialist” and “pro-business” are strange bedfellows.
Trending: Will Oregon Voters Defund Abortions?
If “pro-business” does not qualify a socialist to be a socialist, then China, with its thousands of American factories, certainly is not socialist in this definition. But the truth is, China is rabidly socialist and a great and privileged commercial U.S. ally.
Socialists in Brazil may have varied nuances to address economics, but their approach to fundamental moral issues is basically equal. In words and political actions, they have advocated, in a greater or lesser degree, abortion and the gay agenda, especially gay “marriage,” the way the Western socialists do.
Madsen says that Marina Silva is “pro-Israeli.” What is his basis for such a statement? He seems to dislike Israel. Al Jazeera, a Muslim news site not known for sympathies for Israel, has reported sympathetically about Silva. No mention about “pro-Israeli” stances of Silva.
The apparent anti-Israel stance of Madsen makes no sense, because George Soros, denounced by him as behind of the rise of progressive individuals like Silva and, consequently, the “destabilization” of the Brazilian election, is equally investing in the destabilization of the traditional evangelical support of Israel. He successfully invested in the destabilization of Ukraine. Such is his power. As usually leftists do, Soros puts his anti-Israel socialist ideology above his Jewish heritage. Similarly, Silva puts her socialist ideology above her Christian faith.
I talked to Midnight Call in Brazil, the biggest pro-Israel group in Brazil, and they know nothing about a “pro-Israeli” Silva. Besides, her political allies are anti-Israel socialists.
Perhaps Madsen supposed that because Marina Silva is a member of a Pentecostal church — the Assemblies of God — it follows that she is naturally pro-Israel, as are most Brazilian Pentecostals. Yet her original religious roots lie in the most popular form of Catholicism in Brazil: Liberation Theology, which is anti-Israel.
This theology is very common among Catholics in Brazil, which is the largest Catholic nation in the world. But it is not common among Pentecostals. Usually, people who have a conversion in the Assemblies of God abandon their past views, including Catholicism and Liberation Theology. There is no explanation for what happened in Silva’s case and why her popular Catholic Marxism has survived her religious conversion to Pentecostalism.
My e-book “Theology of Liberation versus Theology of Prosperity” says, “Marina Silva, who today is a member of the Assembly of God in Brasília, brags that she knew the ‘living Gospel’ in Liberation Theology that she learned from Leonardo Boff, one of the most important propagandists of that theology in Brazil. Boff and his theology were officially condemned by the Vatican during the papacy of John Paul II, but that official condemnation didn’t keep Silva from following the man and his theology” (p. 12). Boff is her counselor.
Marina Silva complained about the “wave of conservatism” that almost defeated Dilma Rousseff in the 2010 presidential election. The conservative wave was the expression of strong Christian feelings against abortion and homosexuality. Instead of a staunch stance against the blatantly pro-abortion and homosexualist history and positions of Rousseff and the Workers’ Party, Silva, in her “Open Letter to Presidential Candidates Rousseff and Serra,” criticized openly what she saw as “that obstinate conservatism that colonizes Brazilian politics and sacrifices any Utopia on behalf of a limitless pragmatism.” (p. 16)
Her political background is the same as Rousseff’s: the ruling socialist Workers’ Party. She would qualify to be a Brazilian female version of Jim Wallis.
Madsen’s analysis has just one conclusion: the U.S. will only support “pro-business” (aka pro-U.S.) progressives.
My opinion is that Brazil should get rid of both (pro and anti-U.S.) progressives. And America should also get rid of her progressive occupier in the White House.
About CIA killing individuals who are an inconvenience to the interests of the U.S. government, I recommend the book “Target: Patton: The Plot to Assassinate General George S. Patton,” which shows how the CIA’s predecessor, the OSS, may have been the responsible for the murder of Patton, who wanted the overthrow of the Soviet Union. In fact, this book shows the CIA and its predecessor killing many other (innocent or not) enemies of the interests of the U.S. government.
Don’t get me wrong: I am not opposed if the U.S. government and the CIA kill the bad guys. There is information that when the military overthrew communists in Brazil in the 1960s, the U.S. government helped them. But the current U.S. administration is betraying the anti-communist military and helping only Brazilian progressives to bolster the interests of “pro-business” American progressives.
Now the war is not about communists versus conservatives. It is pro-U.S. progressives versus anti-U.S. progressives. It is “pro-business” American progressives against “anti-business” foreign progressives.
Interestingly, Madsen makes no mention of the massive and unified socialist obsession for the promotion of abortion and homosexuality. Do economic issues matter more for him than moral and ethical issues? Obama and Rousseff have no disagreement about imposing their progressive abortion and homosexual ideologies. Their disagreements are just economic. In other respects, they are “family” — a progressive family.
Now read the Madsen analysis having in mind what the Bible says:
“Test everything. Hold on to what is good.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21 GWV)
All factors point to CIA aerially assassinating Brazilian presidential candidate
The plane crash that killed Brazilian presidential candidate Eduardo Campos, who was running in second place behind incumbent President Dilma Rousseff, has severely harmed Rousseff’s chances for re-election. Campos’s successor on the ticket, former Green Party leader Marina Silva, a George Soros puppet, now stands a very good chance of unseating Rousseff in an expected run-off election. Rousseff’s defeat would signal a victory for the Obama administration’s covert activities to eliminate from the scene progressive presidents throughout Latin America.
A review of post-World War II history reveals that of all the many ways intelligence services have used to eliminate political and economic threats, murder by plane crash rank in second place, just ahead of automobile accidents and poisoning, and only behind the use of firearms and munitions, as the Central Intelligence Agency’s favorite modus operandi for political assassination.
The aerial assassinations of United Nations Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold, Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana, Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira, Portuguese Prime Minister Francisco sá Carneiro, Pakistani President Muhammad Zia Ul-Haq, prospective Indian Prime Minister Sanjay Gandhi, American United Auto Workers’ Union President Walter Reuther, former Texas Senator John Tower, and Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone all bore the markings of the involvement of one or more U.S. intelligence agencies in putting ends to political careers that threatened the underpinnings of Imperial America.
Latin America, in particular, has been plagued by plane crashes that have killed two leaders who were determined to pull away from American political influence, President Jaime Roldos Aguilera of Ecuador and President Omar Torrijos of Panama. Both leaders died in 1981, with Roldos dying just a few months before Torrijos. John Perkins, the author of “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” and a former member of the U.S. intelligence community, fingered the United States in both plane crash assassinations.
This background of U.S. involvement in aerial assassinations makes the August 13 crash of the Cessna 560XLS Citation aircraft in Santos, Brazil, which killed pro-business Brazilian Socialist Party presidential candidate Campos, his aides, and the crew, all that more suspicious, The timing of the crash, during an election campaign that had favored an easy victory for Rousseff, has raised significant questions among Brazilian investigators and the general public.
Since its introduction in 1996, the Cessna 560XLS Citation model has enjoyed a perfect safety record. The sudden death of Campos upended the Brazilian presidential election campaign in a manner that may benefit the United States and the Central Intelligence Agency’s long-range agenda for Latin America.
Disturbing questions are being raised about the ownership of the aircraft bearing the tail number PR-AFA. The plane’s murky record of owners and registration, along with the lack of cockpit voice recordings thanks to an apparent malfunction in the plane’s cockpit voice recorder, has a number of Brazilians wondering whether the plane was sabotaged by the United States. Rather than having the recording of the conversations of Campos’s flight crew, the recorder only had the voice recordings from a previous flight.
The plane was flying en route from Rio de Janeiro-Santos Dumont Airport to Guaruja when it crashed in a residential area of Santos.
The plane was operated by AF Andrade Enterprises and Holdings, which is based in Ribeirão Preto in Sao Paulo state, but leased from Cessna Finance Export Corporation, a division of Textron, a major U.S. defense and intelligence contractor. Cessna is a division of Textron. The malfunctioning cockpit voice recorder was manufactured by another U.S. defense and intelligence contractor, L-3 Communications. AF Andrade’s business is centered on its ownership of a distillery. A spokesman for AF Andrade said the $9 million aircraft had not been recently inspected but stressed that it had a perfect maintenance record.
However, the spokesman for AF Andrade could not specifically state who owned the aircraft but admitted that it, but likely only the lease, was up for sale and had recently been purchased by a group of factory owners and importers from Pernambuco. Campos was a former governor of Pernambuco.
The purchasers turned out to be a consortium that included Bandeirantes Tires, Ltd. The tire company said that negotiations on transferring ownership were ongoing when the plane crashed and that Cessna Finance Export Corporation had not yet approved the final leasing rights. Brazilian observers believe the Cessna that crashed was a “ghost plane,” with murky ownership in order to cover up the plane’s use for covert operations involving the CIA. Similar planes with spotty ownership and registration records were used by the CIA to rendition kidnapped Muslims for interrogation and imprisonment at American “black sites” around the world.
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) sent a team to Brazil to investigate the plane crash. However, if the NTSB’s performance on such crashes as TWA 800 and American Airlines 587 is any indication, the agency only excels at cover-ups of criminal actions.
Campos was replaced on the ticket by Silva, who is a darling of the Soros-financed and directed globalization and “civil society” movement. Silva, who is a pro-Israeli adherent of the Assemblies of God Pentecostal church, is much more pro-business and pro-American than Rousseff of the left-leaning Brazilian Workers’ Party. Recently, Rousseff, along with her fellow BRICS leaders from Russia, India, China, and South Africa, created a new development bank that challenges the supremacy of the U.S.-run World Bank. The creation of the bank infuriated Washington and Wall Street.
Silva, who may be enjoying more than a mere sympathy vote, recently gained in polls against Rousseff. The Brazilian president is seen by Washington as an adversary, especially after details were leaked by Edward Snowden of massive National Security Agency surveillance of the Brazilian president.
If Rousseff were forced into a run-off with Silva as either first or second-place finisher in the first round, Aecio Neves, of the conservative Social Democratic Party has stated he would endorse Silva if he comes in third. The political arithmetic could then spell trouble for Rousseff, who would have likely glided to victory had it not been for Silva’s advancement to the head of the Socialist Party ticket. Silva’s vice presidential running mate is Beto Albuquerque, whose “civil society” credentials in consumer and human rights protection indicates a Soros “upbringing.”
The current polls for the October 5 first round is Rousseff with 36% of the vote, Silva with 21%, and Neves with 20%. However, with Neves out of the race in the scheduled October 26 second round, some polls show Silva beating Rousseff 47% to 43% while others show Silva defeating Rousseff by a staggering 9%. Of course, opinion polls are no longer independent but corporate and Western intelligence agency contrivances used to sway public opinion and engage in the “predictive programming” of entire populations.
The favorable outcome for Silva as a result of the possible aerial assassination of Campos and his aides has many suspicious about the CIA’s role in the plane crash, especially after CIA fingerprints were discovered on presidential aerial assassinations of Torrijos and Roldos in 1981. Just this past February, the presidential helicopter normally used by Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa, a strong opponent of Washington’s policies and an ally of Rousseff, crashed in the mountains on a flight from Guayaquil to Quito. Correa’s personal pilot was killed in the crash. Correa, who was addressing a campaign rally at the time of the crash, stressed that he was not scheduled to be on the flight of the Indian-made Dhruv helicopter. However, the suspicion of CIA sabotage could not be suppressed among the Ecuadorian population.
Source: Strategic Culture Foundation
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.