Monday, September 29, 2014



The Indignant Brazilian People identifies with Senator Aécio Neves.


personalities like roberto damatta and other will vote for senator aécio neves.

érico VERISSIMO EXPLAINS THE reasons to why not vote for  why not vote for MARINA




Roberto Da Matta. .
03/09/2014 00:00
Basically, all radical wants the return of the aristocratic immobility, hidden in the nomenclature

I am fascinated by the "election period". Change is difficult anywhere, but it is a drama in societies that combined with a eurocentered African slavery and white Catholic aristocracy in politics and social habits. In Brazil, the hierarchy of good manners prevented civility and derived a Salvationist leftism, curiously Christian.

This scenario may explain the idea that politics is the place of all behaviour in the ethical field and that self-interest within the law is enough.
 - except lose or "drop". As if power were a mountain climb where the elect, when what we need is a state in the service of society. It is able to demand more accountability and transparency than arrogance and bad faith family, whose holiness knows no errors.
How to establish an egalitarian society having as starting point the inhuman legacy of a blessed slavery? This matrix is the confusion between the actor-candidate and public office. The confusion between person and role is the fundamental mechanism of both patrimonial, family-like relationships (the law is related to  Friends) when the charismatic (X or Y is holy and cut out for the job), complicating the bureaucratic domination (the rule of law to all) because without fixed rules, institutions do not work and national states can not provide education, health and security to its citizens.
It's not just a matter of program, but how to manage. How to move from "government" (which can squander and steal) the public management (which has a duty to be efficient). But without honoring the ethical demands of public office belonging neither the actor nor his party, we will never control aparelhamentos and the impunity with which we are stuck.
The match between people and roles is the basis of the election as the most important political ritual in liberal democracies and competitive - even those systems open to candidates whose proposal is liquidated. Basically, all radical wants the return of the aristocratic immobility, hidden in the nomenclature. This is the paradox of modern political radicalism. He invented the freedom individual who undertakes, but rejects their creativity without control. And hates discipline it by consensus.
Prefer the old social immobility of birth and death in the same social segment. This traditional rule that transforms the election by voting, which glue candidates for public office. The "legitimate" election and "formalizing" candidates, but this is done in the ritual of voting. The humble vow that adjusts the limited and transient reality of the ideal actor and ongoing responsibilities of the role.
When elected become owners of public office, sponsorship happens, denial of merit and corruption - these perversions of democracy. The role cannibalized by actor or by the party to the right ending of institutions and bureaucratic rules should be - as Weber saw with Prussian exaggeration - autonomous and invariant, but that may change by democratic consensus.
A tragic instance of appropriation of the role the person was the case of German National Socialism. In Brazil, it is expressed in the saying "Who was King never loses the majesty!" And has been called the lulopetismo. The term implies a theoretical unlikely marriage of charisma and personalism with impersonal bureaucracy and ideology. But as societies do not study sociology, worked conjunction and today she looks back with great appeal. After all, as Albert Hirschman said, our Latin America has a huge love for careless and political experiences.
Finish this structural analysis environment, with a reminder about the election time. Marina Silva is the proposal to join with charisma ideology on the basis of personal successes secured by a tragedy alongside the impeccable biography. Your financial program is very close to Aecio Neves. The difference is that Aetius does not have the aura of holiness and loads the institutional commitments of the PSDB: the obligation to govern administering. We can not forget that it was this attitude that gave Brazil the respect and monetary stability. Stability in the plane of the ordinary citizen, allowed him to see the future, distinguish boundaries and understand how the government steals and wastes.
On your right-wing, Aecio Neves has the figure of the president. It's a powerful ideological rooting trailer, however, a figure without a drop of charisma or even sympathy. Moreover, Brazil Ms Rousseff is  the “gerentona” (something like bossy manager)  invented by Lula, shows that their formulas antigrowth and bring a structural patronage whose result is a series of scandals. I vote for Aécio Neves. But I am convinced that he has to relativize the programmatic review for entering the field a clearer delivery to the voter. The recipe solves the serve requires emphasis in public administration with and for the public. To be performed routinely with serenity and without the risk of charismatic stunts.
Roberto Da Matta is an anthropologist
© 1996 - 2014 All rights reserved Infoglobo Comunicação e Participações SA This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

VERISSIMO EXPLAINS THE reasons to why not vote for
 why not vote for MARINA

  The writer Luis Fernando Verissimo from Rio Grande do Sul State. Photo: Neco Varella
09/14/2014 00:00
Do not imagine that Malafaia and other evangelical bishops would have the same power in the government who had on the wording of the principles of candidate

The comparison of the Marina with fore Presidents Quadros and Collor is a  free demonstration, but if she would be elected, she will enter the list of our exotic presidents - which does not mean it will have the same fate as the others. Female, black, with a most admirable overcoming personal story of her origin even more remarkable than that of Lula, she would, in government, at least one international curiosity, and perhaps a surprise.  I find it difficult to survive all her characteristic contradictions and get there, but in Brazil, definitely, you can never say you've seen that, you  can imagine everything that may happen. We are quite slaves to eccentric.

The influence of religion in a hypothetical Marina management is debatable. Do not imagine that the bishop Malafaia and other evangelical bishops would have the same power in the government who had on the wording of the principles of candidate forced to change some not to be displease them. And what  does it mean to have an evangelical government rather than a Catholic or like “Umbanda” religion government? Obscurantism by obscurantism, would mean the same. Another oddity of the moment – related to “ Exclusively happens only in Brazil" – and in fact there is a paradox related to her in the same time she is the most revolutionary and conservative candidate at the same time.

The almost universal approval of gay marriage is becoming obsolete this issue, that means annoyed, but other issues clashed with religious principles, such as the release of abortion and stem cell research, affect the life and death of millions of people. It is impossible to know how many women have died in illegal abortions clandestine clinics by direct fault of the prohibition of the use of condoms by the Vatican, for example.

It doesn’t make no difference to me, for you and for our everyday if God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh because He was not of iron made , or if humanity is descended from apes. I even adopted a mixed belief: I believe that all the ancestors of our species were sons of apes except  mine ancestors, who were adopted. But opposition to stem cell research that may lead to cures for various deadly diseases today is no joke. It is in some way  criminal.
I think the Marina an extraordinary woman. But as someone who is in line to receive any benefits of stem cell research, I vote according to irrational
Read more about this topic in
© 1996 - 2014 All rights reserved Infoglobo Comunicação e Participações SA This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.


5 Reasons Why Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff Should Not Be Re-Elected

Over the last 20 years, Brazil has undergone a huge social and economic transformation that culminated with the country lifting tens of millions of people out of extreme poverty and reaching seventh place among the world’s largest economies. Such transformations began to take place during the government of former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who was elected in 1994 (and previously acted as Brazil’s Finance Minister) and is arguably credited with laying the groundwork that put Brazil’s hyperinflation to bed, though often at the neglect of social problems.
Cardoso was elected for a second term in 1998, during which he adopted a critical position to maintaining the fundamentals of monetary stability, especially after the 1997 crisis erupted. Then in 2002, former metalworker and trade unionist Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was elected with the promise of governing for the people, but keeping the principles and achievements of his predecessor’s government, which earned him the confidence from investors and the global markets. Helped by a positive global economic scenario, Lula da Silva’s share in turning Brazil into a booming, world-class economy is unquestionable.

Dilma Rousseff (PHOTO: Ueslei Marcelino/Reuters)
As Cardoso, he served two terms as president, and left office in 2010 after playing a major role in successfully electing his sidekick, Brazil’s current president Dilma Rousseff. A technocrat who had never before occupied elective office and with no impressive resume except a history of fighting against the dictatorship in Brazil’s so-called “Years of Lead,” Rousseff’s task was to continue and expand the achievements of both Cardoso’s and Lula da Silva’s governments, and keeping Brazil on track toward growth with income distribution.
Under Rousseff, though, Brazil went from booming to gloomy, with its economy stalling even as Latin America as a whole is growing. Investors from all the globe, who once lined up to buy a piece of the Brazilian Dream, are now looking to more attractive markets, such as Mexico (and celebrating every time she appears losing ground in polls). More recently, Brazil’s economy has slipped into a recession, the country’s annual inflation is accelerating and its outlook is deteriorating. It is as if Brazil is on its way to revisiting the past, due to a crisis bad management that are already costing the achievements of its people since the country’s re-democratization in the 1980s.

Dilma Rousseff

1 of 33
Wiktor Dabkowski/

EU - Brasil summit 2014

Feb. 24, 2014 - Brussels, Bxl, Belgium - Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff holds press conference at the end of an EU-Brazil summit in Brussels, Belgium on 24.02.2014 by Wiktor Dabkowski (Credit Image: © Wiktor Dabkowski/ (Newscom TagID: zumaamericasten305135.jpg) [Photo via Newscom]

In other words, Rousseff, who is campaigning for reelection in the Brazil’s October 5 elections, failed to keep things together and put it all at risk. As if that was not enough reason for Brazilians to not vote for her, here are five other reasons why she should not be reelected:
1. Brazil Didn’t Grow As It Could and Should Have Under Rousseff’s Government
Not long ago, Brazil was the country of the moment, with its vibrant economy providing significant growth and jobs. As a leading exporter of agricultural and manufactured goods, as well as iron ore and services, Brazil’s economy expanded by 7.5% in 2010. It is a very different scenario now, as the country’s economy shrank by 0.6% from the first quarter to the second quarter, according to the Brazilian government’s statistics agency. It is the first time in five years that the economy has retracted. The drop was bigger that what most economists were expecting, and was mostly caused by a 5.3% dip in investment, although government spending also fell. Consumer spending also remained weak, increasing by just 0.25% in the second quarter, after declining 0.2% in the first quarter. Despite the tourism attracted by the FIFA World Cup, Brazil’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product, the measure of all goods and services produced) shrank 0.9% in the second quarter when compared with the same period a year ago. The Index of Economic Activity, as measured by Brazil’s Central Bank, dropped 1.5% in June from May, the fifth consecutive monthly negative result and the worst since summer 2013. It’s the first time Brazil’s economy contracted for two straight quarters since the aftermath of the global financial crisis in 2008.
And even though Rousseff says the weak economic performance of her government is to blame in a globally inospitable scenario for investors, numbers prove her wrong. By the end of her term this year, Brazil’s growth under Rousseff is expected to be two percentage points lower than Latin America’s overall growth between 2010-2014. It will be the first time in 20 years that Brazil was left eating its neighbors’ dust – during both Cardoso and Lula da Silva’s government, the country grew at the same rate registered for Latin America.
If we are to consider the world economy during the period, which grew 3.9% in 2011, 3% between 2012 and 2013, and should hit the mark of 3.6% this year, Brazil grew by a modest 1.7% during Rousseff’s years. That’s way behind than the growth registered in Chile (4.1%), Colombia (4%) and Peru (5.6%) between 2008 and 2013. By the way, Morgan Stanley MS +1.6% sees Brazil’s GDP going negative in the first half of 2015, contracting -0.4%. Moody’s yesterday changed its outlook to Brazil to negative from stable citing “a sustained reduction in Brazil’s economic growth, which shows little sign of a return to potential in the near term;” “a marked deterioration in investor sentiment which has negatively impacted fixed capital formation in Brazil;” and “fiscal challenges these economic headwinds pose, impeding the reversal of the upward trend in government debt indicators.”
2. Brazil’s Largest Company, State-Controlled Oil Giant Petrobras , Is Being Seriously Damaged By Rousseff
The number one propaganda success of Brazil’s outlawed Communist Party was the slogan O Petroleo e Nosso (The Oil Is Ours). A product of the-oil-is-ours nationalism was Brazil’s 1953 law, which set up an oil monopoly, Petrobras. Ever since then, the company become a symbol of nationalism and pride for many Brazilians. It gained on new force in 1997, when then president Cardoso declared the end of the state monopoly and opened the company up to local and foreign private investment. Then in 2007 Petrobras discovered massive offshore oil reserves 180 km from the coast and 7,000 km below sea level, under a thick layer of salt. It was the proof that “God is indeed Brazilian,” as former president Lula da Silva excitedly said at the time. But the truth is Petrobras is neither the people’s nor God’s — it was taken by Lula da Silva’s and Rousseff’s Workers’ Party (PT) as soon as they ascended to power in 2002 and has been continuously used as a party machine at the expense of taxpayers’ money. The latest political scandal in Brazil originated within the walls of Petrobras, and involves allegations of bribery in a multi-billion dollar corruption scheme. A congressional inquiry into the company’s activities has already been called, after one of its former executives turned into whistleblower made an arrangement with authorities to give information on government allies’ allegedly receiving kickbacks on contracts in exchange for a lighter sentence.
Petrobras’ finances under PT are anything but disappointing. Today the company has a market capitalization of about $119 billion (it must be said the company has regained value recently mostly on the prospect that Rousseff could lose the October elections). That’s way below the $190 billion it was worth four years ago, when oil prices hit an all-time high and it had just announced its oil discoveries in the pre-salt. Petrobras reported a decline in net income of 26.7% to $2.2 billion owing to increasing financing costs. Its net debt is expected to rise to $117.2 billion by end of 2014 compared to $94.7 billion reported last year. As result, Petrobras investment-grade is now under question. Citing the increasing debt load, Moody’s downgraded the Petrobras’ debt last October to Baa1, the third-lowest investment grade rating offered by the credit agency.
Petrobras has long being used by Lula da Silva and Rousseff and a factory hunger jobs. Those are faithful and necessary for the government, are awarded jobs at the oil behemoth, as well as lucrative (and, sometimes, suspicious) contracts. That has deteriorated Petrobras’ potential, as some of its top executives are there simply because of their political connections. The company is being used by the government as a way to control inflation, by holding up increases in the pricing of oil and aggregates, which generated a loss of $20 billion to the company in 2013, according to Folha de S. Paulo newspaper. Petrobras erratic investments include the 2006 acquisition of Pasadena Refining System Inc., for which the company reportedly paid $1.25 billion, or 20 times the true value of the Pasadena, Texas-based refinery. The deal is currently being probed by Brazilian authorities.
The irony on this case came in the form of the only logical solution for the Petrobras imbroglio, suggested by the unlikeliest of presidential candidates, the Social Christian Party member and preacher known as Pastor Everaldo. “If I win, Petrobras will be privatized. It is the only way to end corruption there and from within the company,” he said during an interview aired by TV Globo last month. Recent polls show that Christian fundamentalist Everaldo would get only 1% of the vote.

3. Rousseff’s Approach To Keep Inflation High In Order To Keep Jobs Is Questionable
That has been a long debate among analysts. The consensus, though, is that inflation and low unemployment may work when there is growth in the economy, which is not happening in Brazil. As Roberto Altenhofen, a partner at Empiricus Reseach, recently pointed in an article, since the 1976 argument of Robert Lucas (which became known as “Lucas critique”), economists began to incorporate the idea that the trade-off between inflation and unemployment exists only in the vert short term. “When working with a systematically higher inflation, we quickly return to a new equilibrium, with higher levels of prices and the same level employment,” Altenhofen wrote.
Inflation in Brazil has worsened due to the fact that over the years wages have risen at a steady clip and corporate profits have declined. For Rousseff the solution would be to raise interest rates, tighten Brazil’s fiscal policy and allow prices to adjust, accelerating inflation before the situation normalizes. That’s not an easy task, as consumption represents the largest part of the country’s economy — 63%. For a populist governant such as Rousseff, it sounds like a harsh medicine that the patient, as much as he needs to, will not have access to it.
4. Brazil’s Public Debt Keeps Growing, And National Savings Are Still Low
Brazil’s public debt is still relatively low ($951.4 billion in July), at 35%. But it is growing. The federal budget is constantly in deficit, and Rousseff has committed to meet a primary surplus target of 1.9% of GDP this year and 2% next year, should she be reelected. In the first six months of the year, the primary surplus hit R$ 29.4 billion, the lowest sum in history. The nominal deficit has hit 4% of the GDP, flirting with increased debt, higher taxes and more inflation ahead. After taking power in 2010, Rousseff concentrated all her work o the Growth Acceleration Program (PAC), which was created by Lula da Silva. The $225 billion plan to promote development through housing, sanitation and every, and transportation, is still mostly on paper. Many projects are mired in controversy and cost overruns. Many others are delayed and, in all of them, fiscal pressures keep pouring in.
Brazil is not a great saver either, having only about 13% of its GDP in savings, well below China’s mark of 51% and Russia’s 30%. In order to keep costs afloat, the government has recurred to privatizations, especially of new roads and railways, airports and ports projects. But the biggest problem, though, is what Rousseff’s opponents call swelling of public administration. Rousseff’s government has a total of 39 ministries aiding her, many with no significant function. Currently, there are nearly 2 million government employees, many of whom getting paid generous salaries. Both Aecio Neves and Marina Silva, who are disputing the presidency with Rousseff, have said they would halve the ministries. Neves, who is third in polls, went as far as to say he would dismiss a third of the government employees.
Brazil’s government swallowing causes inefficiency and corruption, bureaucracy and is responsible for a byzantine tax system. Last March, Standard & Poor’s downgraded Brazil for the first time in a decade citing Rousseff’s sluggish economic and expansionary fiscal policies, which the agency believes are fueling an increase in debt levels.
5. Rousseff Didn’t Promote The Changes Required To Make The Lives Of Brazilians, Especially The Poorest, Better
PT has long proclaimed itself as the party whose mission is to defend the poor and socially excluded, by promoting the changes that could ultimately make their lives better. That has not been the case during Rousseff’s government. One of the reasons, only to keep it recent, is the return of the ghost of inflation. It has been scaring Brazilians since the 1970s, when it was relatively stable, and began rising in the early 1980s until it accelerated uncontrollably to reach hyperinflation status after 1985. The problem was tackled by Cardoso in the early 1990s, thanks to a reform package that included the creation of the Brazilian real and stipulated measures to maintain the economy in balance. Such measures were embraced by Lula da Silva during his two terms as Brazil’s president, when he stood still by PT’s mission in regards to workers.
On the other hand, Rousseff doesn’t seem to have made her homework. According to a 2012 survey, the PNAD (Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicilios), Brazil’s income inequality improved continuously from 2002 through the next decade. Based on the Gini coefficient, a statistical dispersion measurement that ranks income distribution on a scale between 0 and 1, income distribution in Brazil stopped getting betters i 2012. At the same time, the income generated by the richest 1% of the population and the poorest 50% increased 50% from 0.66 to 0.69, which implies that Rousseff’s government broke a string of 10 years of progress in income distribution in Brazil. In a related topic, during Rousseff’s government the number of illiterates grew for the first time in 15 years, a personal defeat for her and Lula da Silva, who have both famously promised to eradicate illiteracy in Brazil, which is primordial for promoting income equality.
“Brazil’s current heterodox economic policy is not growing the cake and is ot dividing it equally either,” Altenhofen wrote. “The economic growth under Rousseff was the lowest since president Floriano Peixoto, whose government ended in 1894.”
Simply put, not only is Brazil not growing but it also reduced its income distribution.
Rousseff, who is campaigning and acting as Brazil’s president simultaneously, already signaled she will change her economic team in case the wins the October elections. The sentiment is, however, the time for promises is behind her. There’s no doubt about Rousseff’s importance for Brazil, as the first woman who won an election to be president years after being tortured by the dictatorship for her left-wing activities in the 1970s. But politicians, especially those elected for public office, should be evaluated by the deeds they accomplish once they put themselves up for a job, and by how their actions will positively affect the majority of people, and not by what they say or want.
Rousseff seems like someone who wants the best for Brazil, but her country will be better off once she is gone.


Friday, September 19, 2014



you a link to a blog:

Indifference: The Worst Attitude

It is true that the reasons for outrage today may seem less

clear or the world more complicated. Who runs things? Who

decides? It is not always easy to distinguish the answers from

among all the forces that rule us. (Stéphane

Hessel - Do Livro Indignez-vou! = trad para Português Ingnai-vos!!!  =
trad para Inglês (Indgnez vous :Time to Outrage)





Powered by Blogger


LISTS 5 Reasons Why Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff Should Not







The Brazilian People belong to the right-wing and certer right political position , but…


By Reinaldo Azevedo


Datafolha Survey: right-wing  and center-right  positions are the relative majority in Brazil Screen Shot 03-13-14 at 12.38 PM

Reinaldo Azevedo

Policy analysis in one of Brazil's most visited blogs
Right and center-right are the relative majority in Brazil

Brazil is the sole democracy in the world that does not have a conservative party - if they want, "right" - feasible.  Sole means exactly that: an experience that is not repeated anywhere else. All parties call themselves leftist or center-left or, as has become fashionable, anything. Entered the political anecdotes PSD Gilberto Kassab, who is "neither right nor left nor center". The Network of Marina, repeats this same whole litany, but then from the ethereal plane she  wandered aimlessly through with their metaphors about sustainability: "neither situation nor opposition but position". What does that mean? Nothing,  at this moment! But it seems to be a quite deep and confusing political position.
In fact, there are conservative politicians in Brazil - that would be classified as "right-wing" in Europe, in the USA and even in Chile, very near here. Are in all parties - even in (Work Party) PT. If we would to put things in order, Palocci (Work Party) as public administrator, certainly took more measures "right" - or "conservative" - than José Serra, which remains, however, the a PT furious target. The lack of identity of paties  in Brazil is great. And also ideological vagueness. In a recent article published by “Folha de São Paulo” Newspaper on the 25th anniversary of the Constitution, José Serra, who members from Work Party PT members who claim to belong to the right-wing position, but that was always the leftmost wrote something interesting to refer to ideological clashes in the Constituent Assembly:
"Not surprisingly, the two" sides "- left and right - with the complicity of successive governments, have been and continue to be active members of more consolidated all Brazilian parties: a imaginary party named Fuce (Frente Única Contra o Erário) - Single Front Against the Exchequer and in favor of corporations and special and self interests.
Fuce do belong falsely to right-wing position. FUCE, however  is really and objectively against the interests of Brazil and the Brazilians. Incidentally, this is not the most consolidated and hegemonic party in Congress.  25 years later? "

I think that’s a good observation. The so-called "right" in Brazil loves a notary and a National “Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES) Grant", is that right? The subject is so wide. For that reason, I make these considerations because  Folha de São Paulo, publishes article about a poll done by Datafolha  identifying the ideology of Brazilians. Then intersect these data with the possible option of voting in 2014 See it.

As  you will see, Brazil has a relative majority of people who identify with the center-right or right-wing positions. Those who belong clearly to the right-wing are almost triple the clearly leftists. There is no parties who represent them vocalize their values​​? Why not? Indeed, it will be written a lot here about that. See now how they vote these currents of opinion.
What are the criteria to identify the ideology? The newspaper report explains:

To identify and to pool  ideological groupings of voters, Datafolha makes a set of questions involving social, political and cultural values​​, as the influence of religion in shaping the character of the people and the understanding of the causes of crime. The questions were more divided opinions that addressed the hypothesis and the death penalty that assessed the importance of unions. Half of the respondents (50%) responded that it is not up to the courts to kill someone, even if the person has committed a serious crime, most position associated with right-wing values ​​esquerda. Other  46% said that the death penalty is the best punishment for serious crimes , the idea linked to the right-wing. About employees’ unions, 48% responded that they serve themselves and to politics than to defend workers (right-wing position). As for 47%, they are important to defend the interests of workers (left-wing).
In fact, the criterion is valid, but not perfect. The overwhelming majority of Catholics I know conservatives opposed, for example, the death penalty, which is, as we know, applied with dedication and method officially communist countries. At these times, there is always the risk of identify humanism as a basis for the left-wing position, which is an affront to the facts.
In any case, I believe the ideological distribution in Brazil follows more or less the pattern. It's what you see and hear on the streets. That is to say: for many years, a considerable part of the Brazilian electorate is orphan of representation. The ideological right-wing and center-right vote on the left and center-left because, after all, does not have who to vote for (remark of the editor Link Connecting Denise Abreu: until then, in 2013, had not). Moreover, one must be an idiot to believe that topped the PSDB party is a "right-wing". It may even be that, without option, many voters right end up choosing the lesser evil, since there are in politics what would be its natural representation.

By Reinaldo Azevedo




A Conversation With Reinaldo Azevedo, Brazil's Most Hated -- And Widely Read -- Blogger

Brazilian blogger Reinaldo Azevedo (Photo: Courtesy of VEJA)
Brazilian blogger Reinaldo Azevedo (Photo: Courtesy of VEJA)
As Brazil’s online news market grows at a fast pace, attracting the likes of The Huffington Post — which just announced a partnership with the Abril Group, one of the largest media conglomerates in the South American nation — so does the offer of “free” news and classified advertising to audiences that no longer care for paid subscriptions. As has been seen in the rest of the world, the Internet undercut the business model of many Brazilian daily newspapers and weekly news magazines, resulting in a journalistic style that emphasizes more personalization, strongly based on social media.
Given that Brazil may be the place to be in when it comes to the future of the Internet niche market, as Hootsuite CEO Ryan Holmes stated recently, it’s worth taking a look to see how they are doing things there.
What better way than by talking to Brazil’s most successful blogger, Veja magazine contributor Reinaldo Azevedo? His blog, hosted by Veja’s official website, averages about 30 million unique visitors per year, and already resulted in spin-offs such as three best-selling books. Azevedo, who was also recently hired by Folha de S. Paulo, Brazil’s leading newspaper, to write a weekly column, is the biggest and most outspoken voice against the Workers Party and the government of President Dilma Rousseff, whom FORBES says is the world’s second most powerful woman in the world. That has possibly turned him into one of the most hated figures in Brazil’s online universe, but he says he doesn’t mind at all.
During a period of a few days last week, Azevedo and I exchanged e-mails in which we discussed the current state of Brazilian media, the persecution of  journalists, the loose behavior of the current opposition and the reason why former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who was in power when the country’s biggest corruption scandal was discovered, hasn’t seen his reputation and political power diminished.
Here is an excerpt of our conversation:
You’re a contributor to Veja, Brazil’s leading news magazine, which adopts a far-right editorial line, similar to yours. Because of this, both you and Veja are constantly accused of being partial in a country whose government, which has considerable public approval, is more inclined to the left-wing point of view. Based on this, do you think it is possible for Veja and for the Brazilian press at large to be impartial?
I’ll begin to answer your question by making a point. First, I think it’s inaccurate to say that Veja positions itself in the far-right of the Brazilian press. Although I don’t consider the word “right” a defamation, that’s the feeling in the left circles. Let’s think: Veja defends the free-market system, and so does the Workers Party (PT, Brazil’s current ruling party), and it does not occur to anyone to say that they are a right-wing party. Actually, those who try to label the magazine with an ideological taint only do it because Veja does not bend toward corruption or assaults on the rule of law.
As for me, it is important to nuance a few things. In Brazil and abroad, the terms “right” and “left” have undergone an important shift in what they mean. What today distinguishes the right from the left, those who are called “conservatives” from those who are called “progressive,” is something else: it’s about whether it is acceptable or not to violate the rules of democracy and the rule of law in order to do social justice. I am a liberal-conservative, and I think that’s not acceptable today. Leftists tend to think it is. Also, the concept of “social justice” has changed. Nowadays it has become synonymous with special rights and privileges to the so-called minorities, even if that requires attacking the fundamental principles of a liberal-democratic society, such as equality before the law and the right to property. Partial means to choose a part. My part is to defend the foundations of the democratic state and law, so it’s a liberal-conservative approach. I have the right to think what I think. And it is important to register: Veja and I have our differences. The magazine is well more progressive than me in many ways.
I believe it is possible to have a press based in journalistic objectivity. A narrative is always something to look compromised by the narrator, it is impossible to be otherwise. Think of a journalist who was in Dresden when there was the attack of the allies. If he ignored the historical context, what judgment could he have done? I always read reports on war very carefully. Sometimes, you can be mistaken just by being at the war zone. The press, in what concerns its job to inform — opinion is something else — must stick to the facts. But this is not enough. Neither journalism nor journalists are an unwritten page. Both have to have values. What are the values of a free press? Is it possible to have a free press with a socialistic, even Marxist, approach? I don’t think so. Marxism only believes in freedom of opinion as an instrumental value, not as a foundation. What we routinely known as freedom of speech, freedom of expression and individual rights are pillars of a capitalist and democratic society, thus the only way for the press to be impartial is to be partial, that is, to take advantage of the free market system and individual freedoms and public achievements of capitalist democracies.
Do you think Veja, based on its coverage — which is considerably more anti-government than pro-government — is under such fire because it actually does a better job in opposing the government than the current opposition?
I cannot speak on behalf of Veja. I will speak as a reader of the magazine. Veja was an ardent advocate of the measures adopted by the government of former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in the economic area, especially in the first two or three years of his government, when the credibility deficit of the Workers Party was still great. Antonio Palocci, a former finance minister, threw in the trash the party program and adopted the fundamentals that the left wing of the Workers Party called neoliberal. That was great! It was just common sense, but in the framework of a free market. If Veja was against the government, the magazine would have criticized the measures, regardless of their content. That didn’t happen. Veja is not against the government, it is only against corruption, which I think is positive. Veja is not against the government, but against the machinery of the state, which is also good. Veja is not against the government, but instead it is against the assault of some principles of a free society.
Yes, the fact that we have a weak opposition to the current government creates the false impression that the press, while doing its job of reporting the news, ends up becoming the only relevant source of criticism in the country. In the United States is different. Since the New Deal, I believe, there is not a single force of such hegemonic power able to impose its worldview unchallenged. That’s good! In Brazil and abroad, Republicans, for instance, were demonized because they took to the limit their fight with President Barack Obama’s debt-ceiling. I would have stopped before them for strategic reasons.
Where many saw a problem, however, I saw a solution. What do I mean by that? If American laws give the Congress the prerogative, then just exercise it is part of the democratic game. Since in the U.S. there are no parties on rent for co-optation on the basis of vicious exchanges, there can be a halt. But it is an impasse that prevents the formation of a harmful hegemony for democracy. Thus, the left in the U.S. — the country is lucky that it is not a Marxist left — and the fanatics of the Democratic Party barely know that the Republicans they both demonize so much, especially the Tea Party, are actually the ultimate evidence that they live in a free society. More than that, to some extent, this more radical wing is a kind of guarantor of the system. While there, the contradiction is assured, which is part of the game. Moreover, no one there acted outside the law. Democracy must accept all opinions and must be tolerant — less with those who do not accept the very values of democracy. Or rather: to tolerate practices that undermine democracy is not a democratic behavior, it’s just a behavior of fools that resembles the Weimar Republic.
But would it be wrong for Veja to assume a political position? The New York Times, for example, often openly endorses candidates for political office in the U.S. The press inevitably influences the public.
I think it isn’t, but that is not the understanding of the Brazilian press. In this respect, unfortunately, it is different from the American press and even the European press. Without endorsing candidates, the Brazilian press already is the victim of a smear campaign in the media connected to the Workers Party, financed with public money — or money from the direct administration or state-controlled companies. This kind of thing only exists in countries with a poor democratic culture of proto-dictatorships.

Journalism has undergone major changes in recent years and the fronts that are surviving the crisis in the industry are precisely those where there is a defense of opinions, especially on the Internet (blogs, etc.). In a way, journalism is increasingly becoming more opinionated and less impartial. Do you see that happening in Brazil?
Yes and no. I’ll explain. The biggest source of advertising money in Brazil is still broadcast television. Cable channels are almost getting there. In both cases, given the Brazilian law, those are public concessions. In the months before the elections, the restrictions imposed by the Electoral Court are so strict that they could be considered as censorship. In the U.S., those impositions would be unthinkable. Both broadcast and paid television also seek that sort of neutrality, although in Brazil being neutral is synonymous with being a leftist, which is worth saying. In Brazil, we have GloboNews (the country’s leading news channel), which is a kind of native CNN, just as generally progressive as the U.S. broadcaster is generally Democrat. But here there is not a Fox News-like channel, for example. Of course this is bad for the plurality. Take the case of the recent protests. All channels made favorable coverage to the protesters without anything to report on the contradictory side. Written journalism, both printed or online, that certainly is becoming more authorial. All major media companies are now exploring the universe of authorial blogs, such as mine.
On the issue of right and left, those who attack you and Veja still defend this outdated separation. Why is that?
I don’t think that’s an outdated separation nor is it not worth of being recognized. I do acknowledge its existence. What I think is that there was a change of content. Here, given the size of the state, there is a debate about whether it should have greater or lesser presence in the economy. Is ideology at the root of such discussion? Not really. State-controlled companies that suck off the government teat, with subsidized interest rates, are of left origin? Elsewhere in the world, this issue does not arise anymore. Clashes take place in the sphere of values.
The fact that you use the right to express your ideas and opinions openly, while those who disagree with you also do the same, is not an indication that Brazilian democracy is experiencing a unique moment of great freedom? At other times perhaps this wouldn’t be possible.
In practice, there is no censorship in Brazil since the Sarney government, though it was officially closed down with the new Constitution of 1988. Here and there, even today, there are controversial rulings, or frankly authoritarian, due to misinterpretation of the law. That aside, the freedom of opinion is in its plenitude. What is increasing, especially after the scandal that became known as “Mensalao,” is what can be called as an organized patrol to intimidate those who consider the Workers Party members as opponents. The architect of this police-ish scheme was Franklin Martins (a former journalist who served as Press Secretary during the government of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva). Although there are no legal barriers to the expression of ideas, a lot of people fear being a victim of what I call an “Electronic Al-Qaeda” barrier, or online terrorism. The allies of Hugo Chavez used to do the same in Venezuela. In Argentina, the supporters of the Kirchners do it as well. There they became known as “Los K.” Here I created a term for them: the “petralhas” (a word inspired by the Brazilian translation of Carl Barks’ The Beagle Boys). Official censorship is, of course, always the worse. But the informal one is also harmful. These militias are funded with public money. In any healthy democracy in the world, this kind of thing doesn’t exist. Can you imagine, in the U.S., public money funding blogs, magazines, websites and newspapers only to defame Obama’s opponents? Of course he has his partisans on the internet, but is private money that sustains them.
Veja and its parent company, the Abril Group, grew most during the years of the Lula-Dilma government. The Civita family even appeared on the Forbes billionaires list last year. During this period, the Brazilian press, in general, was very critical of both governments, in spite of their great popular support. What was strengthened: the government, the press or the people?
I didn’t follow the evolution of the Civita family fortune, but if it is as you say, I’m glad to know. Let’s see. The Brazilian press was very tough with the government of former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso (known as FHC and a member of PSDB, Brazil’s main opposition party). Veja, for example, published dozens of highly critical cover stories on accusations of corruption. It’s a lie that the Brazilian press has been docile with the current opposition. I was deputy editor of Folha de S. Paulo and I worked in Brasilia. We were relentless with them when FHC was in power. Indeed, I would argue that everyone sinned by excess of criticism to them. The proclaimed irregularities in privatization were driven by the pure ideological war machine of the Workers Party. There was, yes, shenanigans, and the press did its job in reporting them. The Workers Party invented the fallacy that the press is with the opposition just so they can more easily patrol and control it. They are obsessed with it. The Brazilian people was strengthened by institutional achievements: a new constitution, the Fiscal Responsibility Act (created in 2000 to enforce control in public expenses), the end of hyperinflation and the entry of private capital in private areas that were long controlled by the state, which democratized services, such as telecommunications. When FHC took power in 1995, having a telephone at home was something that only the rich could afford. If you had a landline, you would state it in your tax income.
Then the partisans of the Workers Party took advantage of these achievements, and did well in doing it. But they invested in a historical fraud: that they received a cursed legacy from the previous government of FHC. That is a lie. The legacy, if anything, was a blessed one. Lula had a favorable international environment, anchored, especially, in stratospheric valuation of commodities, driven by China’s growth, and he used that to improve the programs of social assistance, which he also inherited from FHC. He united them all in what has since become the Bolsa Familia (a social welfare program). Very well. That does not mean you have increased popular participation in power or that people have become stronger. What we note is a stronger presence of corporativist structures and unions in the machine of the state. But I do not think that’s good, quite the contrary. For example, what prevents the Brazilian education system to go forward — and any intellectually honest person must acknowledge this — is not a lack of public investment but instead the unions’ corporativism, which prevents reforms. The leftists who dominate the field are totally against any program anchored on meritocracy. This weakens the people because it weakens the school.
The government, under leftist rule, is no stronger. It is simply more present in areas where it should not be, taking as reference the FHC government. Today, we have more government presence in the oil sector, in the petrochemical industry, in the banking industry… Is that good? I think not. The more government in the economy, the greater the chances of corruption and dictated ideas by political expediency.
Moreover, regulatory agencies, which could represent, in fact, the force of citizens, have never been so weak. As for the press, our press, as that of the entire free world, it is still looking for a way to finance itself with the advent of the internet. That weakens the industry a bit. Nobody has yet found a safe environment. Let’s see where it goes. There’s also a lack of plurality. I offer you a challenge: try to list all columnists of major magazines, major newspapers, including their respective online versions, and major portals. Then check how many could be described as liberal. I think there are some 300 columnists out there, without exaggeration. How many aren’t leftists or center-leftists? If they pass 10, it sure does reach 20. And yet, they are fiercely persecuted. I know what I’m talking about, right?
I would like to know your opinion on public TV channels in Brazil, especially TV Brasil. Would it be utopian to imagine a Brazilian PBS or a Brazilian BBC in the country?
Unfortunately, yes. These channels that you’ve mentioned were born of the conviction that there is information that is of public interest, and not informed in order to please this or that political group. There is always some bias — the BBC is generally progressive — but not enough to be relevant. The TV Brasil, which I dubbed “Lula News,” in its current form, was born of bad faith and bad conscience. In its origin is the idea that the press, in Brazil, only serves the interests of powerful elites. But much of these so-called elites are sided with the Workers Party now. Thus, the purpose of TV Brasil is to carry the eternal truths of the Workers Party, their values, and their worldview. And, as you know, TV Brasil is also still looking for viewers, nobody watches it. It consumes almost $500 million per year in taxpayers’ money and only serves to employ members of the Workers Party. The TV Cultura (another Brazilian public channel run by the government of the state of Sao Paulo), has no such ideological bias, but it also leaves much to be desired. Public broadcasters in Brazil have not yet discovered… the public.
On the pro-government blogs you mentioned, you are a constant target in several of them. And in these same blogs the issue of the “Mensalao” is presented as a farce created by the press. Why do you think they so ferociously target the press and you particularly?
They hate me. I like to say that hatred is far more faithful than love. Those who love often distract themselves with other things, other people. Those who hate never give up on their object of worship. They target the press because these people are being paid handsomely with money from the Workers Party and from the government, which are their alleged advertisers, for slandering the only consistent source of criticism to the current government: the press. And the press does not criticize the Workers Party because they are against it, but because one of its roles is to point out what is wrong in the government.
That’s how things work in the democratic world. The truth is the Workers Party does not accept criticism. Socialism, in what the economy is concerned, is over. In politics, it survives. The Workers Party still sees itself as a Bolshevik party. And the Bolsheviks did not live well with opponents. They simply eliminated them. These blogs, sites and magazines make a pro-government party work. So far so good. The outrageous is the fact of using public money for that.

Do you think the Brazilian press, particularly the big players, make use of their power for their own benefit? What do you believe is the thermometer of media executives in Brazil with regard to the coverage of events that must be addressed: the people’s opinion or that of the government status quo? I ask because Globo (Brazil’s leading TV network) covered the protests in June in a negative way as soon as they surfaced, but the network changed its tone after suffering strong popular pressure.
I disagree with the last part of your question. Globo and the other major networks were very critical of the violence that has always been present in these protests, from the very first day. That’s what they all should’ve done. They begin to make mistakes afterwards, Globo in particular. The network was clearly intimidated by some slogans that were launched against it in the streets. It was a time of intellectual and journalistic cowardice. Globo makes an obvious effort to get closer to the left parties — there is even ideological merchandising in their primetime telenovelas — because they obviously fear the government threats to the public concession of TV. The risk is there, of course, but we do not know any details on the backstage pressure, which certainly is not small. President Dilma doesn’t address the issue, Paulo Bernardo (Minister of Communications), doesn’t seem especially interested in it, but the pressure of the Workers Party continues. All resolutions and notes from the Workers Party national directory insist in the so called “end of the monopoly,” which reads: split Globo. They act towards Globo in such a way that the network feels permanently threatened and as a result will always do the right thing. And Globo has done it, with its usual competency. The big players in Brazil’s press must take great care to not become hostage to organized militias on the internet.
You said that hatred is more faithful than love, and in a way that explains the great success of your blog. Those who criticize you apparently pay attention to everything you write and possibly follow your blog just as much as the readers who share your opinions. Based on this, one can say that they (the critics) are also responsible for the success of your blog. Do you think they know it?
They should know, but they certainly don’t resist the temptation. There are many people who read me only to have something to be against. And there are also a lot who simply do not know what I think and write, but hate me anyway. The left is responsible for creating scarecrows. I am writing a book about the things that I don’t actually think, but they said I think, gathering everything that I have never written. Seriously. But there are thousands of readers who enjoy my blog, but disagree with many of my opinions. I was against the Supreme Court decision that freed the abortion of anencephalic fetuses, for instance. The overwhelming majority of readers who like the blog assessed that I was wrong. I have a contract with, in fixed values that are not tied to anything. I write what I want, when I want, and how I want. If they pay me, is because I have readers.
Also, the fact that you don’t strongly criticize certain partisan people that made the news recently in Brazil certainly didn’t help your reputation. You actually defended Marcos Feliciano (a Brazilian anti-gay preacher and lawmaker who was appointed as the president of a human rights commission in the Senate), when everybody was against him. Do you consider yourself to be misunderstood or is this just a natural reaction to your controversial opinions?
Feeling misunderstood is one step closer to think and to do silly things. I’m not a victim of anything. Take the case of Feliciano. I limited myself to write that the people’s desire for him to leave the commission was normal and democratic, but the pressure for his resignation was authoritarian. He was chosen for the job due to democratically agreed rules. If someone does not like what he thinks and defends, they should use the same rules to combat his presence there. Promoting lynching in the name of alleged good causes is not right. As for the gays, I have always been in favor of civil unions and the adoption of children by same sex couples. But I was against the Supreme Court decision that equaled civil unions to gay and straight couples alike while ignoring what’s in our Constitution. The problem is that these organized minorities turn everything into a battle of good against evil. And the evil is, of course, sided with those who do not think what they think and who do not join their respective causes.
Last question: why did the “Mensalao” scandal, which was discovered during Lula’s government and ended up with the recent prison of some of his biggest aides, not hurt him in the slightest?
Because since the end of the military rule, when he first ascended to the political scene, he has become some sort of untouchable entity. The press itself turned him into a genial thinker. He is considered, only to use a leftist expression, an organic intellectual. To criticize him in Brazil would be a kind of prejudice. But there’s more to it than that. His government applied rules that are against the Workers Party historical preaching, rules that were previously followed by the government of FHC. He was lucky to get a unique moment in the world economy, which allowed him to anchor the expansion of Brazilian growth in consumption. That choice had, as we are seeing now, limited range, but it contributed to his government’s image. And there is a third element: Lula is an illiterate, one ignoramus, as I call him, but he is a person of a rare intelligence, including in politics. I’ve always said that. Lula, in fact, has popular roots and speaks the language of the people. He does not personally get involved with the politically correct agenda of minorities that make up his party.
Lula is a truly conservative. Clearly FHC and the overwhelming majority of his partisans are more leftists in this regard that Lula. But nevertheless, he became the spokesman of the so called progressive agenda. It takes great political skill and a lot of talent to operate this equation. And Lula has both. Political intelligence has nothing to do with erudition.



Reinaldo Azevedo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
José Reinaldo Azevedo e Silva (born August 19, 1961) is a Brazilian journalist. He writes regularly for Folha de São Paulo and Veja and has a radio show on Jovem Pan.
Azevedo's blog is one of the most read political blogs in Brazil.

External links

Flag of BrazilBiography icon
This article about a Brazilian journalist is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.



O brasileiro é de "direita, mas...

Pesquisa Datafolha: direita e centro-direita são a maioria relativa no Brasil

Screen Shot 03-13-14 at 12.38 PM

Reinaldo Azevedo


Direita e centro-direita são a maioria relativa no Brasil

O Brasil é a única democracia do mundo que não tem um partido conservador — se quiserem, “de direita” — viável. Única quer dizer exatamente isto: é uma experiência que não se repete em nenhum outro lugar. Todos os partidos se dizem de esquerda ou centro-esquerda ou, como tem virado moda, coisa nenhuma. Entrou para o anedotário político o PSD de Gilberto Kassab, que não é “nem de direita, nem de esquerda, nem de centro”. A Rede, de Marina, repete essa mesma ladainha, mas aí naquele plano etéreo em que ela flana com suas metáforas sobre sustentabilidade: “nem de situação nem de oposição, mas posição”. O que isso significa? Nada, ora essa! Mas parece ser uma coisa danada de profunda.

Há, sim, no Brasil políticos conservadores — que seriam classificados como “de direita” na Europa, nos EUA e até no Chile, aqui bem perto. Estão em todos os partidos — até no PT. Se a gente fosse botar as coisas na ponta do lápis, Antonio Palocci, como gestor público, certamente tomou mais medidas “de direita” — ou “conservadoras” — do que o tucano José Serra, que continua a ser, no entanto, alvo dos furiosos do PT. A salada partidária no Brasil é grande. E a indefinição ideológica também. Em artigo recente sobre os 25 anos da Constituição, publicado pela Folha, Serra, aquele que os petistas dizem ser “de direita”, mas que sempre esteve mais à esquerda, escreveu algo interessante ao se referir aos confrontos ideológicos na Constituinte:
“Não por acaso, os dois “lados” – esquerda e direita – , com a cumplicidade de sucessivos governos, foram e continuam sendo integrantes ativos do mais consolidado de todos os partidos brasileiros: a Fuce – Frente Única Contra o Erário e a favor das corporações de interesses especiais. Ninguém é mais falsamente de esquerda do que ela. Ninguém é mais falsamente de direita do que ela. Ninguém, a exemplo dela, é tão objetivamente contra os interesses do Brasil e dos brasileiros. Aliás, não é esse o partido mais consolidado e hegemônico do Congresso, 25 anos depois?”
Acho a observação boa. O que se convencionou chamar de “direita” no Brasil adora um cartório e uma “Bolsa BNDES”, não é mesmo? O tema é vasto. Faço essas considerações porque a Folha desta segunda traz 
reportagem sobre pesquisa feita pelo Datafolha identificando a ideologia dos brasileiros. Em seguida, cruzam-se esses dados com a possível opção de voto em 2014. Vejam isto.

Como se vê, o Brasil tem uma maioria relativa de pessoas que se identificam com a centro-direita ou com a direta. Os claramente de direita são quase o triplo dos claramente de esquerda. Não é mesmo impressionante que não exista um partido que vocalize seus valores? Por que não? Ainda se escreverá muito a respeito aqui. Vejam agora como votam essas correntes de opinião.
Quais são os critérios para identificar a ideologia? A reportagem do jornal explica:
Para identificar e fazer os agrupamentos ideológicos dos eleitores, o Datafolha faz um conjunto de perguntas envolvendo valores sociais, políticos e culturais, como a influência da religião na formação do caráter das pessoas e o entendimento sobre as causas da criminalidade. As questões com opiniões mais divididas foram a que tratava da hipótese de pena de morte e a que avaliava a importância dos sindicatos. Metade dos entrevistados (50%) respondeu que não cabe à Justiça matar alguém, mesmo que a pessoa tenha cometido um crime grave, posição mais associada a valores de esquerda.Outros 46% disseram que a pena de morte é a melhor punição para crimes graves, ideia mais ligada à direita. Sobre os sindicatos, 48% responderam que eles servem mais para fazer política do que para defender os trabalhadores (direita). Já para 47%, eles são importantes para defender os interesses dos trabalhadores (esquerda).

O critério é válido, sim, mas não é perfeito. A esmagadora maioria dos conservadores católicos que conheço se opõe, por exemplo, à pena de morte, que é, como se sabe, aplicada com dedicação e método em países oficialmente comunistas. Nessas horas, há sempre o risco de se identificar o humanismo como um fundamento da esquerda, o que é uma afronta aos fatos.
Em todo caso, creio que a distribuição ideológica no Brasil obedece mais ou menos a esse padrão. É o que se vê e se ouve nas ruas. Vale dizer: há muitos anos, parte considerável do eleitorado brasileiro é órfão de representação. O eleitorado de direita e centro-direita vota na esquerda e na centro-esquerda porque, afinal de contas, não tem em quem votar (observação do editor do Conexão Denise Abreu: até então, 2013, não tinha). De resto, é preciso ser um rematado idiota para considerar que o PSDB é um partido “de direita”. Pode até ser que, sem opção, muitos eleitores de direita acabem escolhendo o mal menor, já que não encontram na política aquela que seria a sua representação natural.
Por Reinaldo Azevedo


Denise Abreu Biography

Denise Abreu
Born October 15, 1961 (52 years)
Bandeira da cidade de São Paulo.svgSão Paulo

public servant
official website

Connecting Denise Abreu

Denise Maria Ayres Abreu (
São Paulo city, 15 October 1961) is a lawyer, teacher, public servant and political brasileira.

Table of Contents
1 Training and professional life
• 2 Lawsuit and the "cigar case"
• 3 Criticism of the government PT
• 4 Practice policy
• 5 See also
• 6 References
• 7 External links

Training and professional life
1976 and up to 1978 he attended high school at the Colegio Bandeirantes. He began to study Right at the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo (PUC-SP) in 1979, graduating in 1983.1
From 1983 to 1985, and was assistant monitors the chair of constitutional law at USP-SP.1
In 1987, he joined the attorney general of the
state of São Paulo. Worked in state departments of education, science and technology, planning, prison administration and the Board of Trade of the state. He has held the following directorships in state administration: legal advice from government (1991-1995), chief of staff in the departments of health, social care and development of the state's founding welfare of the child (FEBEM, current CASA Foundation) of 1999 to 2000 in 1998 he was teacher of the first Training Course Managers' Health, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo.1
In the
federal public service, was advisor and Deputy Chief Deputy subchefia for legal affairs of the Civil Office of the Presidency of the Republic (2003 and 2005). Helped draft decrees, provisional measures, bills and helped create agency policies and guidelines of the aviation sector. Was special advisor to the Minister of health1.

Judicial process and the "cigar case"
2007, after the disaster of TAM Flight 3054, was prosecuted. Being then director of ANAC (National Civil Aviation Agency), was identified as the one responsible for the accident. Claims that this lawsuit is retaliation because they oppose the sale process VarigLog and Varig. She said that process was fraudulent, favored people directly connected to the PT government and the then Minister Dilma Rousseff, had knowledge of that3.
"(...) How many times, the National Congress has proposed a confrontation between what I said what was happening in the case of Varig, with the evidence I had 4 and
Ms Rousseff and she never accepted. The block of the base along with the government set up a battalion and an army not to approve her confrontation with me. So I think it would be very interesting to be interviewed and demonstrate their performance to their ability to complete only one reasoning. 3

One your photo, smoking a cigar at a wedding, was released nationally. Claims that this was part of a campaign defamation.  Romeu Tuma describes the methods used by the Workers Party (PT) to damage the image of their opponents5.
"(...) I attended the" pastry” Worke’s Party PT, "where they grind the meat first and then they fry.
(...) They first began to disqualify me because it had a picture of me smoking a cigar. A national crime cigar. Never saw it and was stamped on the first page of O Estado de S. Paulo on Sunday because I was smoking a cigar. Now, they are not as progressive as innovative? Defend gay marriage and cigar smoking woman can not. It was woman can not. It was the beginning of the destruction of the image. When you will manifest the people are already in doubt as to their fala.3

Criticism of the government Workers Party (PT)
About PT government says: 3
"(...) I went through several administrations: Quercia, Fleury, Mario Covas very beginning of Geraldo when Covas died, until the federal government administration. I've never seen an administration in which all government projects without exception have some private interest behind. And along with private rulers. Is not the interest on private initiative. It is private in the sense of the physical person of the ruler.
(...) And it is no coincidence that at this stage of the season is going on a judgment as to whether or not you will be able to have input of private resources in campaigns. Clearly there is no interest in PT that every campaign may have private government contribution. They already have the money. They do not need more capital. "

Political Action
It is the pre-candidate
(PEN) National Ecological Party for the presidency of Brazil in 2014 having possibly 2 Romeu Tuma as vice on their plate. Her application can cause discomfort in the current governo.6 According to her, this hassle is due to his knowledge of the administrative structure of the PT, obtained during his time as a servant of this technique governo.3
Through cash offer,
Senator Gleisi Hoffmann (PT-PR) tried to get support from PEN-PR.7
Clearly identifies himself as a
conservative and his campaign proposals include the recovery of traditional values ​​in politics and society.8 Denise Abreu proposes the predominant view of the state in national policy, in place of the vision of government.9

See also
Presidential election in Brazil in 2014

1 FEDERAL SENATE - OPINION No. 72, DE 2006 Curriculum Denise Abreu. Accessed 05/17/2014.
World News - Lobao interview Denise Abreu. (February 2, 2014). Accessed 05/20/2014.
Senate - Documents submitted by Mrs. Denise Abreu in the infrastructure services committee meeting, held on 11 July 2008 Accessed 05/21/2014..
5 Murder Reputations - A Crime of State. Romeu Tuma &
Claudio Tognolli, Topbooks, 2013 ISBN 9788574752280 Added on 20.05.2014.
Ucho Info - Planalto Palace articulates against pre-Denise Abreu candidacy for president. Accessed 05/20/2014.
Ucho Info - Gleisi Hoffmann is alerted to stop trading "buy" party in Paraná. Accessed 05/20/2014.
World News 8 - Denise Abreu and Olavo de Carvalho. Accessed 05/20/2014.
Ucho Info - Former Director of ANAC, Denise Abreu promises to enforce the popular will in the 2014 presidential race Accessed 05/20/2014.

External links
GGN Newspapers - Denise Abreu: the lobby that helped in the tragedy of TAM. Accessed 05/17/2014.
Connecting Denise Abreu - Personal page. Accessed 05/17/2014.
• newspaper Estadao =,mais-polemica-que-sucesso-em-10-anos-de-vida-publica,40751,0.htm
• Revista Veja - of the city of São Paulo politics of women biographies Brazil 
  This article about an individual is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

  This article about
politics, political party or a politician is related to Project Social Sciences sketch. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Born in 1961
• Alumni of the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo
• Natural São Paulo (city)
• Politicians of Brazil

Edit Links
• This page was last modified on (s) 20:20, September 15, 2014.
• Text is available under the Creative Commons - Attribution - Share Like 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0); may be subject to additional conditions. For more details, see the Terms of Use.


Let's jump TOGETHER to the Future (SALTEMOS): mandate proposals
Due to the limitation imposed by the electoral law, it fell to my exposure only 6 six seconds in the electoral program aired on radios and TVs. So I decided to post every Tuesday; Thursdays and Saturdays I intend to bring proposals to Congress and which derive from a government program that was written with the collaboration of some of you, when pre-candidate for president.

Do not miss the "let's jump!"

TOGETHER give a JUMP to rescue the values ​​of Western society! 'Let's jump together', my proposals for the Chamber of Deputies,

Let's jump: 'S' SAFETY
The Brazil is experiencing critical moments. Rural and urban violence, economically unproductive, disintegration of transport networks, education and health of poor quality are always occupying the last lugarres in international indices. We are opening our electoral program dealing with the subject of my first work plan in the House of Representatives.

Denise Abreu, 5120, candidate for Federal Deputy for São Paulo, presents its proposals for SECURITY in 9/17/14 hangout day, 21:30 hours, with Luiz Panadés, engineer and researcher of the causes that led to chaos in which we find .

The Brazil is experiencing critical moments. Rural and urban violence, economically unproductive, disintegration of transport networks, education and health of poor quality are always occupying the last lugarres in international indices. Today, we deal with the second theme of my work plan in the House of Representatives.

Denise Abreu, 5120, candidate for Federal Deputy for São Paulo, presents its proposals for the day hangout in AGRICULTURE 19.09.14, 20:30 hours, with Nelson Barretto, journalist, writer and lecturer, author of the bestselling 'Reform land - the myth and reality '.



Denise Abreu
15 de outubro de 1961 (52 anos)
Bandeira da cidade de São Paulo.svgSão Paulo
Servidora pública
Página oficial
Denise Maria Ayres Abreu (cidade de São Paulo,15 de Outubro de 1961) é uma advogada, professora, servidora pública 1 e política brasileira.2

Formação e vida profissional
Entre 1976 e 1978 cursou o ensino médio no Colégio Bandeirantes. Iniciou o curso de direito na Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) em 1979, formando-se em 1983.1
De 1983 a 1985, foi monitora e assistente da cadeira de direito constitucional da USP-SP.1
Em 1987, ingressou na procuradoria geral do estado de São Paulo. Trabalhou nas secretarias estaduais de educação, ciência e tecnologia, planejamento, administração penitenciária e junta comercial do estado. Ocupou os seguintes cargos de direção na administração estadual: assessoria jurídica do governo (1991-1995), chefe de gabinete nas secretarias de saúde, assistência a desenvolvimento social e da fundação estadual do bem-estar do menor (FEBEM, atual Fundação CASA) de 1999 a 2000. Em 1998, foi professora do primeiro Curso de Formação dos Gestores de Saúde, da Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo.1
No serviço público federal, foi assessora e subchefe adjunta da subchefia para assuntos jurídicos da Casa Civil da presidência da república (2003 e 2005). Ajudou a elaborar decretos, medidas provisórias, projetos de lei e auxiliou a criação de políticas orientadoras das agências e do setor de aviação. Foi assessora especial do ministro da saúde.1
Processo judicial e o “caso do charuto”
Em 2007, após o desastre do Voo TAM 3054, foi alvo de processo judicial. Sendo então diretora da ANAC (Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil), foi apontada como uma das responsáveis pelo acidente. Alega que esta ação judicial é uma represália por opôr-se ao processo de venda da VarigLog e da Varig. Segundo ela aquele processo foi fraudulento, favorecia diretamente pessoas ligadas ao governo PT e, a então ministra Dilma Rousseff, tinha conhecimento disso.3
(...) Quantas vezes, o congresso
nacional propôs uma acareação
entre o que eu dizia o que estava
acontecendo no caso da Varig,
com as provas que eu
tinha 4 e a Dilma e ela
nunca aceitou. O bloco da base junto
 com o governo montou um batalhão e um exército para
não aprovar a acareação dela comigo. Então acho que seria muito interessante ela ser entrevistada
e demonstrar sua performance
a sua capacidade de concluir
apenas um raciocínio.3
Uma foto sua, fumando charuto numa festa de casamento, foi divulgada nacionalmente. Alega que isto fez parte de uma campanha de difamação.3 Romeu Tuma Júnior descreve os métodos usados pelo PT para prejudicar a imagem de seus adversários.5
(...) Eu participei da "pastelaria do PT," onde primeiro eles moem a carne e depois eles fritam.3
(...) Eles primeiro começaram a me desqualificar porque tinha uma foto minha fumando um charuto. Um crime nacional fumar charuto. Nunca vi isto e fui estampada na primeira página de
O Estado de S. Paulo num domingo porque eu estava fumando charuto. Ora, eles não são tão progressistas tão inovadores? Defendem casamento gay e mulher fumar charuto não pode. Não era mulher não pode. Era o começo da destruição da imagem. Quando você vai se manifestar as pessoas já estão em dúvida quanto a sua fala.3

Críticas ao governo PT
Sobre o governo PT, afirma:3
(...) Passei por várias administrações: administração Quércia, Fleury, Mário Covas, comecinho do Geraldo, quando Covas morreu, até chegar no governo federal. Eu nunca vi uma administração em que todos os projetos de governo sem exceção tem algum interesse privado por trás. E privado junto com os governantes. Não é o interesse mais da iniciativa privada. É privada no sentido da pessoa física do governante.
(...) E não é à toa que nesta altura do campeonato esta acontecendo um julgamento para saber se vai poder ter ou não aporte de recursos privados nas campanhas. É evidente que não há interesse do governo petista de que todas as campanhas possam ter o aporte privado. Eles já tem o dinheiro. Eles não precisam mais de capital.

Atuação política
É pré-candidata do Partido Ecológico Nacional (PEN) para a presidência do Brasil em 2014 2 possivelmente tendo Romeu Tuma Júnior como vice em sua chapa. Sua possível candidatura causa incômodo no atual governo.6 Segundo ela, tal incômodo é devido ao seu conhecimento sobre a estrutura administrativa do PT, obtida durante seu período como servidora técnica deste governo.3
Mediante oferta em dinheiro, a senadora Gleisi Hoffmann (PT-PR) tentou obter apoio do PEN-PR.7
Identifica-se claramente como conservadora e suas propostas de campanha incluem o resgate dos valores tradicionais na política e na sociedade.8 Denise Abreu propõe o predomínio da visão de Estado na política nacional, no lugar da visão de governo.9
Ver também
1.  SENADO FEDERAL - PARECER Nº 72, DE 2006. Currículo de Denise Abreu. Acessado em 17/05/2014.
2.  PEN51 - O PEN51 TERÁ CANDIDATO (A) A PRESIDENTE DA REPÚBLICA. Acessado em 17/05/2014.
3.  World News - Lobão entrevista Denise Abreu. (2 de Fevereiro de 2014). Acessado em 20/05/2014.
4.  Senado - Documentação entregue pela Sra. Denise Abreu, em reunião da comissão de serviços de infraestrutura, realizada no dia 11 de Julho de 2008. Acessado em 21/05/2014.
5.  Assassinato de Reputações – Um Crime de Estado. Romeu Tuma Júnior & Claudio Tognolli, Topbooks, 2013. ISBN 9788574752280 Adicionado em 20/05/2014.
6.  Ucho Info - Palácio do Planalto se articula contra pré-candidatura de Denise Abreu à Presidência da República. Acessado em 20/05/2014.
7.  Ucho Info - Gleisi Hoffmann é alertada para interromper negociação de “compra” de partido no Paraná. Acessado em 20/05/2014.
8.  World News - Denise Abreu e Olavo de Carvalho. Acessado em 20/05/2014.
9.  Ucho Info - Ex-diretora da ANAC, Denise Abreu promete fazer valer a vontade popular na corrida presidencial de 2014. Acessado em 20/05/2014.
Ligações externas
· da cidade de São Paulo
· da política
· das mulheres
· de biografias
· do Brasil
Ícone de esboço
Este artigo sobre uma pessoa é um esboço. Você pode ajudar a Wikipédia expandindo-o.

Ícone de esboço
Este artigo sobre política, partidos políticos ou um político é um esboço relacionado ao Projeto Ciências Sociais. Você pode ajudar a Wikipédia expandindo-o.


SALTEMOS: propostas de mandato
Em razão da limitação imposta pela legislação eleitoral, coube a minha exposição apenas por 6 seis segundos no programa eleitoral veiculado nas rádios e TVs. Decidi, então, postar todas as terças; quintas e sábados as propostas que pretendo levar ao Congresso Nacional e que derivam do programa de governo que havia escrito com a colaboração de alguns de vocês, quando pré-candidata à Presidência da República.

Não percam o "SALTEMOS"!

JUNTOS daremos um SALTO ao resgate dos valores da sociedade ocidental! 'SALTEMOS', minhas propostas para a Câmara dos Deputados

O Brasil está vivendo momentos críticos. A violência rural e urbana, improdutividade econômica, desintegração das redes de transportes, educação e saúde de péssima qualidade estão ocupando sempre os últimos lugarres nos índices internacionais. Estamos abrindo nosso programa eleitoral tratando do primeiro tema de meu plano de trabalho na Câmara dos Deputados.

Denise Abreu, 5120, candidata a Deputada Federal por São Paulo, apresenta suas propostas relativas à SEGURANÇA em hangout dia 17/09/14, 21:30 horas, com Luiz Panadés, engenheiro e pesquisador das causas que nos levaram ao caos em que encontramos.

O Brasil está vivendo momentos críticos. A violência rural e urbana, improdutividade econômica, desintegração das redes de transportes, educação e saúde de péssima qualidade estão ocupando sempre os últimos lugarres nos índices internacionais. Hoje, tratamos do segundo tema de meu plano de trabalho na Câmara dos Deputados.

Denise Abreu, 5120, candidata a Deputada Federal por São Paulo, apresenta suas propostas relativas à AGRICULTURA em hangout dia 19/09/14, 20:30 horas, com Nelson Barretto, jornalista, escritor e conferencista, autor do best-seller 'Reforma Agrária - o mito e a realidade'.


Monday, September 15, 2014

Conspiracy, Occult Forces Plan or Domain?
One of Denise Abreu Article
Monday, 15/09/2014

Content text below:

Recently in Brazil we follow up the media the occurrence of a crash, whose investigations was not permitted enter  in mysterious  and gruesome backstage of Power in Brazil.
The comprehension of the real causes, therefore, demands a brief historical contextualization / policy of accidents in the last decade, deservedly known as a period of darkness.
The biggest crash in Brazil's history occurred during the so-called "air chaos" absolute irresponsibility by the Workers Party (PT) government was only concerned with their public image and, carelessly, went to press air authorities and industry to give vent to flights booked for the high season, regardless of the safety factors are assessed as favorable to the measure.
Related to the Lula government in 2006 and 2007, would do anything not to come to be stamped as responsible for the continuity of recurring flight delays that left thousands of passengers to abandon the national airports.
The concern of the Lula government was never about the welfare and proper care of the population.

Always been poring over versions that could shift the focus of the core of the problem and prevent new images of abandonment of passengers at airports were to be stamped on the front pages of newspapers and on the small screen of Brazilian television.
For the media that there be someone with name, ID photo and stamped to give credit to the matters which bring the public. That's how the Workers Party (PT) elected a "scapegoat."
In this context, the press eagerly seeking the truth, became provided  with untruths planted by PT itself in the newsrooms of media outlets. And they had no way of knowing they were being deceived. The Tsunami also hid the heads of journalists.
Brings to the scene, then, Denise Abreu as the protagonist of a improvisational theater without know the actual content of the roadmap adopted by PT!
My name was involved in this process with the sole purpose of diverting the focus and attention of the public about the real reasons that led the Brazilian civil aviation to face the biggest crisis the industry in our country.
In the last and endless seven years , I was criminally prosecuted by attack  being sued criminally for the safety of aircraft. This offense is intended by the legislature of the Brazilian Penal Code, in the 40s, to predict RESPONSIBILITIES, faults and incidents feathers on terrorist acts that threaten air safety and passenger. Also, I answer in the process by a responsibility that clearly was not the National Agency Civel Aviation (ANAC), of which I was one of the directors.
Taking into consideration,  the authorities responsible for the safety of aircraft and the Brazilian airspace and the decisions resulting from weather conditions at airports - taking into account the opening, closening  and oversight of the security conditions of landing and takeoff are administered respectively, by the airlines, the Brazilian Air Force (FAB) and INFRAERO.
The National Civil Aviation Agency (ANAC), as any regulatory agency, is an organ of state and no government, which is why the particulars of its Directors are forwarded by the President to the Senate. After conducting some questions and prior approval of the names submitted to Congress by the President to the Committee on Infrastructure, the directors will have their names submitted to the Senate itself and receive, or not, the delegation of office, after being approved by a majority vote.
The powers of the ANAC and consequently its Directors and staff are focused on market regulation and consumer protection through the application of penalties to airlines for breach of contract governing the relationship of buying and selling tickets.
So despite the powers are clearly established by law, remains the accusation against me by the Federal Public Ministry in the process that has dragged on for several years in the Federal Court.
So in the midst of such "torture" I still had to find the strength to remove rubble, piece by piece together the shards of lies that fired my honor and decided to report this article foul play behind the scenes of the "raw power" that tried to shatter me.
I had to muster the courage to face the political system and through, then uncover what are the "dark forces" of power, quoted from the 60s by former President Quadros and never explained by any Brazilian polítiacian.
I decided I should be the Brazilian exclarecer this statement of former president: reported REPORT AND ALL THE TRUTH WITHOUT FEAR! This is the only "crime" I've been practicing for several years.
Finally, the truth about the true responsible for the conditions of the track where the accident with TAM aircraft and the landing clearance flight JJ 3054 at Congonhas Airport on that fateful beginning of the rainy night of July 17, 2007 occurred which resulted in tragedy, begins to appear.
In early September 2014, even very recently, AIRBUS, responsible for the design and manufacturer of aircraft model Airbus 320, decided to break the silence of seven years and passes the blame TAM today LATAM and INFRAERO own guilt the accident and consequent liability for damages dating back to millionaires values.
In the course of this action in the civil sphere, which is directly correlated with the criminal action in progress at the 8th Federal Court of São Paulo and is awaiting trial, do not speak, even superficially about any liability, direct or indirect, of the Director Denise Abreu.
You do not need deep knowledge of the legal framework for the country, with a minimum of logical reasoning, understanding that compensation should be paid by the real culprits that gave rise to tragedy.
This civil lawsuit, which challenges seven years ago who bears the payment of reimbursements from victims' families, pay equity compensation, never floated to enlist me, either as a mere witness who will say as accused.
The court for the payment of such war reparations to the families of victims and other passengers who were in the vicinity and TAM Express building, payment for the total loss of the aircraft, among other expenses, ends by bringing to light the truth.
The reimbursement of the compensation paid to the families of victims cited, has just come to light in the prosecution of Itaú Insurance, insurance company TAM, which accuses Airbus as the culprit for the tragedy.

The isurer arques that because the ithe "flaws in the A320 project" – would be the aircraft that pierced the runway at Congonhas Airport in Sao Paulo, crossed Washington Luiz Avenue and crashed into the cargo terminal with TAM's death 199 people.

For its part, Airbus, which has been processed by Itaú Insurer denies responsibility for the accident and blames TAM, either for technical failures of the airline, either by lack of pilots who erred in landing that plane procedure training.

And this same action, Airbus also accuses INFRAERO, pointing to poor condition of the tracks from Congonhas Airport on July 17, 2007.

The truth, in short, becomes denuded!

Even if the recent revelations arise not respect the families of accident victims who have always claimed to know what actually caused the tragedy, but by economic interests governing this perverse market.

Thus, the masks begin to fall.
Sometimes it seems that the sparse collection of articles published at the time of the accident and the CPI has the lowest value.
To form the quilt there to rearrange the flaps.
The first is to find out: Denise Abreu elected because of several authorities who commanded part of the system?
In fact, the FAA was installed on March 20, 2006 and throughout its first year of operation the machine was placed at the service of VARIG, for two reasons.
First, in June, during the World Cup in Germany, more than 6000 passengers VARIG were on German soil without having to return to Brazil because the company was virtually bankrupt consolidated with 7 billion dollars in tax debt, fuel with the distributor BR, with IATA and the passengers themselves who, despite the frequent flyer program known as "Smile", could no longer use it.
Secondly, because Roberto Teixeira, old buddy of the President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, was hired as the VARIG lawyer and thus gave up early the "ordeal" of the Regulatory Agency which became the "fire brigade" of many " fire "generated within the government.
This is due to the interference of the Chief Minister, Ms Rousseff - that aviation only knew the fear that had aircraft - and Roberto Teixeira, who would be the open wards consolidating Rousseff as Lula's chosen to were to be the PT candidate for president in 2010.
I was then appointed in the board meeting and the collegiate ANAC, as rapporteur of the approval process of the "New Varig" and that, however, the "new" had nothing beyond the office of Roberto Teixeira have been hired to represent him in the proceedings of the bankruptcy process that was proceeding through the 1st and 8th Corporate Court of Rio de Janeiro under the command of Luiz Roberto Ayube.
As a public servant, jealous of my duties, I discovered that there was a "horse trading" going on involving the sale of VARIG auction in court in Rio de Janeiro.
At that moment, I expressed myself requiring the submission of entrance money Lap Wai Chan, representative of the American investment fund Mattlin Patterson, the Central Bank.
With the same consistency, who examines in depth a process, demanded the submission of Income Tax of the three Brazilian partners that, in our view, did the role of "oranges" just to comply with the law that imposes such a limitation of 20% of foreign capital in domestic airlines.
Natural to be so.
After all, authorizations LEGAL operation of airlines receiving new concessions was the responsibility of the Board and that I commanded was, specifically, market regulation and consequent procedures.

In order to fulfill the duty as Director of ANAC and responsible to command the Superintendent Air Services (SAS), I did what any Brazilian good would have done: I was opposed to the sale Variglog and Varig in shape and "modus operandi" to apply no properly tax by the Lula government at that moment.
The intention was that I closed my eyes to fraud, but I resisted.
I even heard of Ms Rousseff the following statement:
"Require income tax? We know that Brazilians evade taxes in our country! "
The requirement of demonstration input international money transaction involving a public utility, contained in the letter I despatched to the Central Bank, own Dilma told me:
"Nonsense ... just a contract of drawer is necessary to destroy that information that the Central Bank may provide."
All this, in fact, ended up happening.
Never got an answer, whether the Central Bank either the IRS, about the questions contained in that letter quoted.

These facts served then to enrage those who felt disadvantaged by not being able to demonstrate the legality of what they intended.
But time is wise.
A black cloud settled over the blue skies of lies invented against me that cruelly wronged, I was accused of "murder" and identified as "responsible" for the tragic crash of TAM, as if I had committed a terrorist act.
Cruelly maligned and lack of tact and management capacity of Ministers comprising the National Civil Aviation Council (CONAC) turned me into a punching bag of the PT government needed to pinpoint a culprit before the public outcry and the families of victims. Not only by the tragic accident, but also to avoid the air debacle that reigned in his (mis) government.
There was so much effrontery that shortly before the accident with the 3054 JJ TAM in Congonhas, Minister of Tourism, Marta Suplicy, had overcome arrogance and blatant disregard for the population, buffeted by flight delays at airports around the country, urged the passengers: "relax and enjoy".
We cannot help recalling the "flagrant" scene of Marco Aurélio Garcia, Special Advisor to the presidency of the republic, the government Lula and Dilma, commemorating the crash of TAM and announced the deaths.
What would the friend, advisor and member of the Forum of Sao Paulo to commemorate a tragedy?
It would be the death of former Congressman Julio Redecker that that time had his life threatened by PT since he was denouncing the transmutation of the monthly allowance for semanão?
A possible assault on government critics, Marcus Aurelius made with hands the characteristic gestures of "fuck", beating one hand flat on the other closed, while others similarly grotesque gestures were repeated by Bruno Gaspar also advisor to the president on government squid.
A television reporter recorded this video with obscene gestures of Lula aides. See excerpt of which was published and reflected in the press at the time: "At the moment the story} {TV Globo aired at 20h17, Garcia made three times the gesture in which the palm is extended knocks against other hand closed. Beside her, the aide Bruno Gaspar was more effusive, stretching both arms forward and then bringing your elbows toward the hip. The image was transmitted in the Jornal da Globo "- reported the BBC website. And on July 20, 2007.
On the other hand, the existence of the Sao Paulo Forum was hidden for nearly two decades the general public by Brazilian newspapers and opposition alleged.
Founded in 1990 by Lula and Fidel Castro, attending this forum all leftist rulers of the South American continent.
The feat was cause for celebration on video by the Lula, which textually stated: "In 1990, when we created the Forum of Sao Paulo, none of us imagined that in just two decades arrive where we arrived. At that time, the left was only in power in Cuba. Today, govern a large number of countries ... "
It is not conspiracy theory!
Who wants to deny it is because it will not know the historical truth of Latin America.
One must also remember that the situation of lack of federal government in relation to the commercial airline industry had reached such an extent that, since January 2007, was underway in the Senate to "CPI Air Blackout", but it has also been purposely forgotten.

None of this was considered at the time the allegations against me were swarming across the national media.
No one realized what was happening in parallel to the public incident alleged.
My professional reputation was shattered, like a plane that explodes in the air, only to divert the attention of excuses disputes, frauds concocted in the basements of the PT, strike flight controllers and popular discontent against the chaos caused by the PT government for lack command of the Chief Minister of the Civil Office that would have been appointed by Lula to "manage" the issues in the airline industry.
However, there is time to plant and a time to reap and the truth begins to show its face.
Justice begins to be made, as before facts there are no arguments against the truth and the lie will not triumph!
After the recent revelations in early September, brought to public by journalist Ricardo Gallo in “Folha de S. Paulo” Newspaper, the Brazilian would fit ask: how far are the charges against the name of Denise Abreu, amidst this public dirty laundry and questioning of millions in damages that would have been paid by TAM and the victims' families that have just been publicly denounced by Airbus?
TAM would have assumed the payment of the assistant prosecutor hired by the Association of families of accident victims to accuse Denise Abreu?
It would be for the two TAM box?
And why do it? To the cry of the families would fall, then exclusively on the former Director of ANAC and not on the TAM itself?
Because this lawyer is, coincidently,  former secretary of public security of the state of São Paulo, at the time when the tragic accident occurred?
Link of the subjetc:
The questions do not end there.
As occurred with Eduardo Jorge, former Secretary General of the former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who was vilified in CPI and acquitted after 11 years in all actions that proved his absolute innocence, the PT will also not come to public apologize for the harm it caused to me and my family, as well as the contempt shown to the families of the victims?
It's hard to believe they have the honor of doing so.
Did with Jorge Eduardo and will not do with me, too.
Therefore, we can not fail to reveal the hidden dirt on this "horse trading" that I found in the dark basements of the PT government, the filth mounding beneath red carpets sparkling and speak mainly of the "evil" that permeates this government and the left that seeks to perpetuate itself in power.

This is the "evil" that follows the soul and defiling the memory of dead pilots and commanders considered "responsible" followed by the occurrence of airline tragedies that regrettably has been occurring in our country.
There were more than 900 air accidents in the last three years in Brazil, when the Aviation Command was not longer under the authority of the first board of ANAC I, Denise Abreu, composed.

Worse than that : it's air accident which strangely does not leave traces to identify the real culprits.

Again, on August 13, 2014 in Santos, São Paulo south coast, yet another nebulous story further darkened the blue skies: the executive jet brand CESNA CITATION disintegrated exploding in the air or on the ground of Santos, as they pretend to believe, killing the "president" Eduardo Campos and part of his entourage of campaign, as well as the pilot, aircraft commander.
This model airplane incorporates a fleet of approximately 200 000 identical aircraft with a history of only one crash in Africa and without any fatality.
In the recent "accident" occurred with Eduardo Campos, the "black box" found in the rubble, mysteriously, did not record anything that went on inside that cabin during that flight path.
The deceased victims became the "black box" because true black box of the aircraft had become white plate!
The script of the horror film repeats: this mysterious episode of the black box also occurred in "If TAM".
The first "black box" sent to the United States for data reading and hearing the recorded voice was strangely not the TAM aircraft that had exploded in the TAM Express building in São Paulo, but only a voice recorder to another flight.
Was a national scandal!
The deputies of the CPI had gone to the United States accompany the reading of the black box. Returned without hearing anything and without any information.
After ten days "true" black box arrived in the United States, and this time, with only 20 minutes of recording, when the flight time from Porto Alegre to Sao Paulo was approximately 1:30 a.m..
Coincidences in Brazilian air accident began to intensify in the last ten years and the plot is always the same: lack evidence materials to reach the truth.
Unfortunately, the Brazilian and the Brazilian authorities have come to anchor their passivity lies in Brazil, as attacks were not likely to occur in our country.
Also in September, in Chile, a bomb exploded in the underground leaving no fatal victims, yet the country responsibly investigates and ponders that has elapsed terrorist act.
If it was in Brazil, never would adopt this line of research. Brazil does not want to take as a country that was after BUSH is also the focus of interest for international terrorists demonstration or maintaining power.
Clearly, the PT was the central power, Brazil lined up to terrorist countries.
This the reason for Lula and Mr. Roussef have concealed the true motives of accidents, placing authorities to filed before the TV cameras give instant verdicts without any investigation.
This fact does not occur in the United States, Europe and other countries with responsibility towards the population.
Never shut up before these revelations.
Never ceased to report to interested journalists the true history and causes of air accidents we experience.
Unfortunately the space that I was never exposed granted the full content of the interviews.
Sometimes, the editors prefer to face the allegations as mere conspiracy theory, until the day that may be the next victim.
The testimonies of the witnesses for the defense and prosecution of the case to which I reply, that has not had outcome in federal court, has never been of interest to the media.
Suffice to access the process. This process is PUBLIC. The truth is there. Stamped on all statements and all reports of numerous technical expertise.
But, how to reverse the damage done to a woman, "curriculum" exalted, that was never the focus of complaints or any type of investigation into misuse of public money, despite having exercised positions where he was responsible for billionaires budgets as the State Department of Health of São Paulo, in the State Department of Social Welfare and Development of São Paulo and also in ANAC, which held approximately 4% of the national GDP.
A woman who was always breadwinner and raised her children alone.
Giving shelter to his elderly parents.
He faced the fight for life after a cancer that struck at 40 years of age.
That has always strived to do their best in public positions in absolute respect to taxpayers who, after all, are the ones who pay the salaries of public employees, the servers commissioned positions, political actors, public authorities, when they collect their taxes!
Enough with impunity! Enough of injustice!
Brazilians expect these destructive episodes of lives cease to occur.
Expect the infamies that destroy reputations of innocent people go to be replaced by justice and mere fulfillment of what is prescribed by national legislation.
We believe that justice may soon bring more rapid responses, since the PT was, like say the backwoodsman, she walked the walk while injustice flew free, lightweight and loose on the wings of impunity and traveled in stupid speed of light, packed By "powerful" in the exercise of political and economic control of our country.