Nearly A Million Brazilians March To Demand President’s Ouster

[Purveyor]

Source: REUTERS

Latest update : 2015-03-15

Close to a million demonstrators marched in cities and towns across Brazil Sunday to protest a sluggish economy, rising prices and corruption - and to call for the impeachment of leftist President Dilma Rousseff.

The marches across the continent-sized country come as Brazil struggles to overcome economic and political malaise and pick up the pieces of a boom that crumbled once Rousseff took office in 2012.

Now in the third month of her second four-year term, Rousseff is unlikely to resign or face the impeachment proceedings called for by many opponents angry about a fifth year of economic stagnation and a multibillion dollar corruption scandal at state-run energy company Petroleo Brasileiro SA, or Petrobras.

For a president that was narrowly re-elected just five months ago, the protests are a sign of a polarized country increasingly unhappy with its leadership. Rousseff has recently been jeered at public appearances and Brazilians in some cities banged pots during a televised speech she made earlier this month.

Read more: http://www.france24.com/en/20150315-brazil-million-protest-president-rousseff/

[geek tragedy]

1. three months into a second term is absurdly premature for this nonsense.

if people wanted someone else, they had the opportunity to vote for that person

[Fred Sanders]

3. The Oligarths and their supporters are restless in Latin America as well.

[forest444]

6. Oh, yes - and they smell blood.

These are the same people who, when the neocon-friendly regimes (many, unelected) of the '70s, '80s, and '90s perpetrated record-level, nation-busting financial collapse, called for patience or actually cheered them on outright, telling themselves and every business rag that would listen that "recovery is just around the corner."

Where, as Americans, have we heard that before?

[Fred Sanders]

7. You are correct, sir, but what are the test scores for American folks you need to have a beer with

in regards to Latin America political history and American aggression?

The throngs of other educated American folks who do not know history are also the same folks who insist they DO SO!, because their always Truth-sayer "leaders", even the black surgeons and Harvard Law graduates who always appear on Chief Truthsayer Fox told them all they need to know, other than the Holy Book.

And if you disagree with them, or Fox, you are the scum of the earth, the demon, and the real liar, obviously.

Ain't that the truth?

[forest444]

9. It's the sad truth, Fred.

And False News has the illegally-obtained FCC licenses and tailor-made court rulings to prove it.

[Blue_Tires]

21. Brazil was a military junta from '65 to '85...

[forest444]

22. That's right.

And like in all Latin American countries that were governed by right-wing juntas during the Cold War, the dictatorship you referred to still has a lot of supporters and apologists in Brazil - very influential apologists.

You'll find them most often among the business elite, the landowners, and much of the middle and upper-middle class, many of whom feel nostalgia for those days because they perceive military dictatorships to be "tough on crime" - and sometimes just out of sheer racism (these dictatorships were invariably run by inveterate racists themselves, and thus appealed to those of the same persuasion).

While high crime rates motivated some of that, these sentiments were actively cultivated and encouraged by Big Media in Brazil (http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/sep/09/brazil-newspapers). More often that not, no censorship was required where Big Media was concerned; they were enthusiastic participants then, and remain more or less protective of the long-gone junta even now. The same, of course, can be said for media conglomerates in Chile, Argentina, and elsewhere.

[Judi Lynn]

24. So glad you've shared this important link. Never learned about it until just now.

Huge surprise they confessed their grotesque support for Brazil's brutal military dictatorship. Also interesting in the article:

It also named several other media outlets as being complicit, such as O Estado de Sao Paulo, Folha de Sao Paulo, Jornal do Brasil and Correio da Manha.

A DU poster from Brazil who informed us tremendously, graciously, for a very long, fascinating time, told us, before the trolls ganged up on her, attacked her, then got her banned for trying to protect herself, said the major papers there are all still right-wing extremists, but there are small sources which are springing up which are trying hard to get the truth out.

Thank you for your welcome information.

[forest444]

26. Certainly, Judi Lynn.

People often think of censorship as something imposed from the top (government) down; but in post-dictatorship Latin America, most of it happens from the bottom (the media) up. The same, course, can be said to a considerable extent about the U.S. - what with the extreme media consolidation we've been seeing since St. Ronnie exempted the media from anti-trust laws (as you know, we had 85 major media firms in 1983; we have 6 now).

Worst of all, the corporatist right has learned how to use the media to radicalize bigots with divide-and-conquer tactics and shape a nation's discourse more than ever before - in many ways inflicting more censorship than any ham-handed government ever could.

The most effective fighter we've had against consolidation in the media in recent years was probably Frank LaRue, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom Expression (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_William_La_Rue). I believe he was the first UN Rapporteur to publicly express that media consolidation - rather than crass censorship - has become the great threat to freedom of the press in Latin America (I would have added the U.S.). He was certainly the first Rapporteur to make that a cause, and Latin American Big Media was none too pleased. LaRue was especially vocal in the dispute around Argentina's 2009 Media Law - the first in the region to apply anti-trust law to prevent media consolidation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_between_Kirchnerism_and_the_media).

He retired last August from the post, but hopefully not from the cause; his successor, Prof. David Kaye of UCI, seems promising (http://www.law.uci.edu/news/press-releases/08-01-14.html).

[11 Bravo]

2. A million Brazilians? George W. Bush is pretty sure ...

that would be pretty much every one on the planet!
Of course, he's a dumb ass … so … there's always that.

[forest444]

8. It was even worse than that.

Bush was of the belief (based on personal projection, no doubt) that Brazil intended to invade Paraguay. Accordingly, he surrounded the South American giant with military bases - doubling the number of these to around 20 despite pressing obligations in Iraq and elsewhere. Why?

Because the Bush family, in 2006, became the largest landowners there. Owning 100,000 of acres in a small, landlocked, and relatively impoverished country may not make much sense until you realize they're now sitting on a prime section of the Guaraní Aquifer - one of the largest, most accessible, and purest fresh water aquifers in the world.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/oct/23/mainsection.tomphillips

[hack89]

11. You realize that those rumors were never confirmed?

the Cubans started a rumor that a few people fell for.

[forest444]

12. Defending Bush? With a red herring no less! I didn't realize this was Free Republic.

There may not be hard evidence to the effect; but considering the people and place involved, that hardly proves anything, does it? (remember: means, motive, and disposition) - but then, they wouldn't exactly leave a paper trail, would they? Not with a family history like this: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar .

It so happens that the purchase is, 8 years later, discussed as fact in the Paraguayan press itself: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.hoy.com.py/nacionales/lucha-mundial-por-tierras-de-cultivo-bush-y-su-rancho-millonario-en-paragua&prev=search

As with all matters - be they Nazi finance, Miami business associations, the 'October Surprise' and other international intrigue, Air America, Iran-Contra, the Iraq War, or other controversies - the benefit of the doubt typically ends up being nothing more than naiveté when it comes to people like the Bushes.

[hack89]

13. So a quote from RT news is your "proof"? Ok. Nt

[forest444]

14. And Bush's denials and protestations are yours?

Right.

[hack89]

15. Bush never commented on it. Why would he?

it was an Internet myth.

[forest444]

16. Why indeed? (and why, btw, are you on DU?)

He (and the rest of them) certainly never entertained any such second-guessing during the run-up to and early months of the Iraq War - even after it had become clear that his stooges were fabricating evidence to justify their disastrous invasion.

Why start with something of personal interest like this?

But belaboring the subject is useless. I'm sure you can find plenty of fluff articles explaining why Jenna Bush was in Paraguay.

[hack89]

18. Why have I been on DU for ten years?

because I enjoy the conversations with fellow Dems. I also enjoy debunking CTs - I spent a lot of time in the old 911 forum. I don't think CTs have any place in a reality based party like ours.

[forest444]

19. Fair enough. But remember:

Yours is a CT too - i.e. that the whole thing is Cuban/RT propaganda and that Dubya and his family would never do anything so sinister as buy, sub-rosa, 100,000 acres of land sitting on one of the purest and most accessible aquifers on earth at a time when fresh water is nearing a critical shortage; and of course Paraguay would never allow it.

(Paraguay, if you didn't know, makes Colombia look like Sweden as far as contraband activities and corruption are concerned)

Neither of us has hard evidence to support our opinions, true. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence - and definitely not when it comes to the Bushes, given their very sordid history.

[blkmusclmachine]

23. Rev. Moon owns large tracts of land in Paraguay, as does Bush. Confirmed by reliable news sources.

[eggplant]

20. I think a million Brazillians is a Trazillian. n/t

[7962]

4. I'm sure everything went smoothly!!

I know some folks will get the joke...........

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. Geez! That's a lot! How many zeroes would that be? n/t

[Blue_Tires]

10. At least it's proven beyond all doubt that Glenn Greenwald

Last edited Mon Mar 16, 2015, 01:39 AM - Edit history (1)

doesn't give a shit about Brazil, the Brazilian government or the Brazilian people unless it's the NSA or some other issue he can blame on Obama...Of course just like Ukraine, Glennie boy will only start to write about this once he can concoct his 'Washington connection'...

What a "fearless" journalist who doesn't have the sack to expose corruption and human rights abuses he can see from his mansion window...I guess he just moved down there for the sunshine and easy sex (which is the *only* thing I can't fault him for)

[leftynyc]

25. I was just going to search

around to see if glenn had written anything about this. I should have guessed that would be a waste of time. He can't blame the US President so he has no interest.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. History repeating itself?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Brazilian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

[Calista241]

27. I'm sure the US is responsible for this somehow.