Were Brazilian Protests an Anti-Marxist Counter-Revolution?

By Julio Severo

Socialist Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff faced, according to FoxNews, massive demonstrations protesting against corruption and calling for her impeachment last Sunday (March 15).

Different from FoxNews, which is a huge conservative news outlet, Cliff Kincaid announced in his small outlet that the Brazilian demonstrations were an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution.”

Kincaid said, “Such a development would be a major blow to the anti-American left in Latin America, which has been operating since 1990 under the rubric of the São Paulo Forum, a pro-communist movement started by Rousseff’s predecessor, Luiz Inácio Lula de Silva, and Fidel Castro.”

The Brazilian protests were not about Marxism. Any anti-Marxism expression was an isolated event. The protests were, according to Reuters, about “a sluggish economy, rising prices and corruption.”

When Brazilians are discontent, they protest. The same demonstrators would protest Barack Obama if discontent with him.

Many Brazilians who live in the U.S. are discontent with Rousseff, but not with Obama.

Last year, Obama announced a major amnesty benefiting millions of immigrants. Many of those benefited are Brazilians, who are fleeing from the leftist hell in Brazil, but by being aided by Obama, they are also aiding to produce a leftist hell in the U.S.

A Brazilian friend helped spread Kincaid’s article about an alleged “anti-Marxist counter-revolution” in Brazil. Frequently, he attacks Rousseff, because she is a Marxist. But he praised Obama’s amnesty. I told him that conservative Americans did not like Obama’s amnesty because it is a handout. He answered that the important thing is Brazilian immigrants need it and so he praised such wonderful policy for immigrants.

In general terms, this is the profile of an “anti-Marxist” Brazilian in Kincaid’s piece.

A true anti-Marxist counter-revolution would be characterized especially by a moral fight against two fundamental banners of the U.S. and Brazilian Left: abortion and the homosexual agenda.

Yet, a fight against abortion and the tyrannical homosexual agenda had no place in what Kincaid termed “anti-Marxist counter-revolution” in Brazil.

In fact, Monday (March 16), just one day after the massive demonstrations, Catholic Levy Fidelix, a former Brazilian presidential candidate, was condemned to pay a fine of R$ 1 million (over US$300,000) in a public civil action filed by the LGBT movement. There was no massive or even small demonstration in his support.

He was condemned because in the last Brazilian presidential election he made pro-family declarations. The other main contenders — Dilma Rousseff, Aécio Neves and Marina Silva — also lambasted him for his pro-family view.

Evangelical Marina was the candidate of the Brazilian Socialist Party, and was heavily involved in the anti-Rousseff protests. Does a socialist fighting a socialist look like an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”?

Because he knew I am a Brazilian, a minister with some evangelical churches in the U.S. praised Silva, saying that she is a conservative evangelical politician who absolutely fights abortion and the gay agenda. I asked him where he had read it, because in her history, Silva never undertook such fight. I emphasized that she always was leftwing. He said that he had read about her strong evangelical “conservatism” in the U.S. mainstream media.

Neves, admired by most demonstrators, had his candidacy built by Marxist strategist David Axelrod, a longtime top Obama adviser. Does a socialist helping a socialist look like an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”?

Even so, Kincaid said, “President Barack Obama’s fellow Marxist, Dilma Rousseff.”

It is correct to say that Obama and Rousseff are Marxist. But they are not fellows. Rousseff and her administration have had a very hard time with Obama and his administration because of NSA and its economic espionage against Brazil.

There is a big difference between pro-U.S. Marxists and anti-U.S. Marxists. Neves is in the former group; Rousseff is in the latter one. Yet, Rousseff is not totally anti-U.S. Her administration has faithfully supported every pro-sodomy measure by the U.S. in the United Nations.

Fidel Castro and Aécio Neves

There is a picture of Neves with Fidel Castro. Even so, he and Marina Silva, a radical environmentalist, were portrayed in the U.S. mainstream media as “conservative.” They were the leading political figures in the massive demonstrations.

In this point, you could think then that the massive protests were pro-U.S. and pro-Obama Marxists protesting anti-U.S. Marxists. Hardly an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”!

Basically, Brazilians protesting Rousseff because of rising prices would also protest Obama if he backtracked in his amnesty policy benefiting millions of immigrants, including Brazilians. While Obama does not backtrack in his handout, Brazilian immigrants in the U.S. will keep attacking only Rousseff.

What about if Socialist Aécio Neves and environmentalist Marina Silva agreed to denounce the São Paulo Forum to destroy Rousseff’s socialist party, the Workers’ Party? Would Marxism be politically destroyed in Brazil? No. There is a bigger threat: the National Conference of Bishops of Brazil (NCBB).

Professor Hermes Rodrigues Nery, a prominent Catholic pro-life leader in Brazil, said recently that NCBB is “an extension of the São Paulo Forum.” It was a generous charge.

Actually, Marxist NCBB is credited, by many Catholic conservative and pro-life leaders, as the original creator of the Workers’ Party. And as a mother nurses her baby, NCBB nursed its red monster.

Above all, long before the São Paulo Forum’s birth, there was a NCBB guiding Brazil, the largest Catholic nation in the world, into socialism.

Ignoring the Brazilian reality, Cliff Kincaid said, “The protests in Brazil are giving hope to those who see an opportunity to defeat Marxism in the Western hemisphere.”

If Brazil is the best example of an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution” that Kincaid is able to see, then it is no wonder that Obama is at the White House.

Immediately after Rousseff’s reelection, her opponents made a petition in the White House asking help from Obama. Nowhere the petition mentioned the threat of abortion policies and the homosexual agenda. But it mentioned “São Paulo Forum” and said, “We call a White House position in relation to communist expansion in Latin America.”

Oh, my God! Does people asking help from a socialist produce an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”?

The most important Marxist today is at the White House. Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, quoted often by Kincaid, said recently: “Because I am just a legal resident and not an American citizen, I cannot get involved actively in the anti-Obama fight, but I believe that this fight is the ONLY thing that matters today.”

The most important fight — against Obama and his wicked policies — has been one of the main focuses of my ministry, because the Obama administration is impacting the whole world. I would not avoid this calling even if threatened of losing a chance to get a U.S. citizenship.

Of course, the other huge threat is Islam, the greatest murder machine in the history. Its main victims have been Christians.

But Kincaid (and Obama!) has been focusing his attacks and provocations on Russia. Kincaid’s radicalism does not spare even pro-family events in Russia. Last year, an international conservative pro-family congress was held at the Kremlin, attended even by an Inter-American Institute (IAI) fellow. But Kincaid preferred to join the U.S. homosexual militant and radical Marxist chorus who attacked the event and the Russian laws banning homosexual propaganda for children.

Another IAI member recommended the book “The War Against Putin: What the Government-Media Complex Isn’t Telling You About Russia” to me and made it clear that he disagreed with the radical criticism of some Americans against the Russian president.

While Kincaid and other ultranationalist Americans are heavily busy attacking Russia, Obama and neocons are trying to destroy pro-family cultures by advancing their Marxist revolution and imposing around the world their pro-sodomy, pro-Marxism, pro-abortion and pro-Islam policies.

To denounce, expose and fight Obama’s pro-abortion, pro-sodomy and pro-Islam Marxist revolution — that is the ONLY thing that matters today.

Portuguese version of this article: Os protestos anti-Dilma foram uma contrarrevolução antimarxista?

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Former Brazilian Presidential Candidate Levy Fidelix Condemned to Pay R$ 1 Million for Voicing “Homophobic” View

Interview with Don Hank: Interpreting What is Happening in the U.S., Europe and Russia today

US Names First Global Envoy for Homosexual Agenda

OLAVO DE CARVALHO AND THE INQUISITION

Former Brazilian Presidential Candidate Levy Fidelix Condemned to Pay R$ 1 Million for Voicing “Homophobic” View

By Julio Severo

Former Brazilian presidential candidate Levy Fidelix was condemned by the São Paulo Supreme Court to pay a fine of R$ 1 million (over US$300,000) in a public civil action filed by the LGBT movement.

Levy Fidelix, in a TV show, after being lambasted by Dilma Rousseff, Aécio Neves e Marina Silva

The condemnation, delivered Friday (March 14), deals with declarations that Catholic Fidelix made in an interview in a TV show September 28, 2014, where he said:

“The large intestine does not reproduce… How can I, a family man and a grandfather, be afraid of losing votes? I prefer not having such votes, but to be a moral father and a moral grandfather to teach his child, to instruct his grandchild. Let us end this. I just read that the Holy Father, the Pope, expelled a pedophile from the Vatican. He did very well. He is right! We train our children all their lives in a religious way so that they may really find a good family way.”

Fidelix also recommended psychological treatment for homosexuals and he said that homosexuals should be kept away from families and their children.

In that time, the TV show also interviewed the other presidential candidates, who did not like Fidelix’s view.

Workers’ Party candidate Dilma Rousseff, who eventually won the presidential election, said about his view: “I have already said that I am against homophobia and I think Brazil has reached such a degree of civility that we cannot live together with acts and words of discrimination leading to violence. I think that homophobia should be outlawed.” Rousseff is a leftist with Venezuelan and Cuban connections.

Brazilian Socialist Party candidate Marina Silva said that the declarations of Levy Fidelix were “homophobic and unacceptable in any circumstance.” In the TV show, she had committed herself to mobilize her party, Rede Sustentabilidade (Sustainability Network), to carry on a lawsuit against Fidelix for “homophobia.” Strangely, Silva was eventually portrayed, by a propaganda from an unknown source, as “conservative” in the U.S. media, which was silent on Fidelix and his much more conservative stances.

PSDB candidate Aécio Neves moaned about Fidelix’s declarations, saying, “We absolutely repel those declarations. And as I have already said more than once, in my view all kind of discrimination is crime. Homophobia too.”

David Axelrod, who served as a top White House adviser after helping Obama get elected, had been hired to help build Aécio Neves candidacy for the 2014 Brazilian presidential.

Axelrod was brought to Brazil with the help of former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, also known by his initials FHC — who is close to former US President Bill Clinton. FHC founded PDSB, the Brazilian Social Democrat Party, whose presidential candidate was Neves.

Longtime Obama adviser Axelrod wrote in his new biography, “Believer: My Forty Years in Politics,” that Obama followed his advice that he should not declare his real position on gay “marriage” so he could avoid opposition from African American religious leaders and others to get elected president in 2008. He said Obama “modified his position” to say he supported civil unions — but not same-sex “marriage.”

Possibly, Axelrod taught his Brazilian candidate to lie about the same issues. Even so, both Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Aécio Neves were portrayed as “conservative” by the mainstream media in the U.S. In this point, I wonder why the U.S. media labels Brazilian leftist politicians as “conservative” if all of them opposed and attacked Fidelix and his anti-sodomy views.

Axelrod’s candidate lost, but the homosexual agenda not. To the detriment of moral issues, especially a resistance to the advance of homosexual tyranny, the focus of political battles has been economic.

Yesterday (March 15), according to Reuters, “Over one million demonstrators marched in cities and towns across Brazil on Sunday to protest a sluggish economy, rising prices and corruption — and to call for the impeachment of leftist President Dilma Rousseff.”

Among those opposing Rousseff were Neves and Marina Silva.

Today (March 16), with Brazilian headlines about the Fidelix condemnation, there was no demonstration, by Neves or Silva, to defend Fidelix’s free speech.

In an ideal world, he would not have been condemned, and Rousseff, Neves and Silva would see millions of demonstrators marching against their leftist agendas.

The São Paulo Supreme Court said that Fidelix’s declarations exceeded the limits of free speech and reflected hate speech. In its ruling, the court added, “[Fidelix’s declarations] reflect a sad Brazilian reality of violence and discrimination against this population group. We, the public authority, have the fundamental responsibility to protect human dignity.”

Now, homosexual vice equals “human dignity.”

The lawsuit filed by the LGBT movement also wants Fidelix and his party to pay all expenses for the production of a TV show promoting homosexual rights. Moreover, it imposes a daily fine of R$ 500,000 for each day of judicial order breach.

During the September TV show, where Fidelix made his declarations, a member of Marina Silva’s Brazilian Socialist Party said: The worst thing is that most constituency thinks as Fidelix does.

As Fidelix, most of the Brazilian people are Catholic.

Even not taking his religion in consideration, is his view different from what most Brazilians think? No. According to a study by an institute connected to the Workers’ Party, 99% of the Brazilian people are “homophobic,” that is, they have views contrary to homosexual behavior.

Today, Fidelix has been fined R$ 1 million for voicing a view against the obvious homosexual depravity. Tomorrow, ministers and priests and their members may be the next.

If the Brazilian people do not make demonstrations for Fidelix’s free speech, Cuba, Venezuela, Axelrod, Obama and other antifamily radicals are going to keep in the Brazilian presidency individuals committed to homosexual agenda.

Portuguese version of this article: Ex-candidato presidencial Levy Fidelix é condenado a pagar 1 milhão por expressar opinião “homofóbica”

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

“Homosexuality is Unnatural”: The Last Great Message of Myles Munroe on the Gay Agenda

Brazilian Government Says 99% of Citizens Are “Homophobic” and Must Be Reeducated

“Study” in the Brazilian newspaper O Globo: 99% Brazilians do not accept homosexuality

Brazil Says 99% of Citizens “Homophobic”

Inflamed by American Prophecy, Brazilian Evangelicals Want a Woman for Brazil Presidency

Gay “Marriage”: Obama Lied, Rick Warren Believed

Obama Strategist in the Brazilian Presidential Campaign

Gay “Marriage”: Obama Lied, Rick Warren Believed

By Julio Severo

Barack Obama “deceived” Pastor Rick Warren during the 2008 presidential election in an appearance at Warren’s Saddleback Church, where Obama said, “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

David Axelrod, who served as a top White House adviser after helping Obama get elected, said Obama lied when he publicly stated his opposition to same-sex “marriage” in 2008. In his new book, “Believer: My Forty Years in Politics,” Axelrod writes that he knew Obama supported gay “marriage.”

The real Obama said in 1996, “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

Longtime Obama adviser Axelrod writes in his new memoir that Obama followed his advice that he should not declare his real position on gay “marriage” so he could avoid opposition from African American religious leaders and others to get elected president in 2008. He said Obama “modified his position” to say he supported civil unions — but not same-sex “marriage.”

Obama feigned opposition to gay “marriage” for most of his political career, compromising his true beliefs out of concern it could hurt him with voters.

But as president in 2010 he returned publicly to his original position.

Axelrod writes in “Believer: My Forty Years in Politics” that he told the future president in 2008 that he should hide the ball and deceive the American public for political purposes.

Axelrod had been also hired to help build Aécio Neves candidacy for the 2014 Brazilian presidential election campaign. Sadly for Brazil, both Neves and incumbent Dilma Rousseff are members of pro-homosexuality parties. It is not known how Axelrod taught his Brazilian candidate to hide the ball and deceive the Brazilian public for political purposes, but he lost.

Sadly for America, Axelrod’s U.S. candidate never lost.

How can Brazilian and American voters choose candidates according to pro-family values if they are deceived? And they have been deceived especially in homosexual issues, including homosexual “marriage.”

Ancient Jewish tradition holds that homosexual “marriage” was the “final insult” to God which caused Him to bring the Great Flood. If this is true, how could not Pastor Rick Warren discern this terrible sign for America?

According to WorldNetDaily, in the 2008 presidential campaign, Warren hosted in his church the Civil Forum on Leadership and Compassion, open to all media, where Democrat candidate Barack Obama and Republican candidate John McCain answered questions posed exclusively by Warren, who wanted to help evangelicals choose the “best” candidate based on their own answers and “sincerity.” The problem was: there was a lot of answers and insincerity.

Obama gave Warren an answer about marriage that Warren and evangelicals wanted to hear: “marriage is the union between a man and a woman” and also a “sacred union.”

Yet, the responsibility of a man of God is not to ask sinners to answer public questions to guide God’s people. It is obvious that sinners are free to lie — and Obama used this right abundantly.

Of course, McCain also lied, because he told Warren that he did not believed in the homosexual version of marriage, but more recently, he has been supportive of adoption by homosexuals and hostile to the Russian laws banning homosexual propaganda to children.

Warren’s job was not to ask sinners what they are, but to show, based in a Christian discernment, what their true convictions were. God says that his leaders “must teach my people the difference between what is holy and what is unholy. They must show the people how to tell the difference between what is clean and what is unclean.” (Ezekiel 44:23 GWV)

Yet, instead of teaching his evangelical public how to use true Christian discernment, Warren let two liars to speak freely their lies as he instructed his public to analyze their lies. He, not his public, should analyze and interpret Obama and McCain’s lies and insincerity.

There is no surprise that Obama lied about his true agenda, which is to lie to advance more lies.

But the Christian agenda for a Christian leader is crystal-clear: to help his public to see through liars and their lies, and to understand and support what is right.

Obama had always been a believer in the homosexual “marriage,” according to Axelrod, who said of Obama in 2008: “He also recognized that the country wasn’t there yet—that we needed to bring the country along.”

Warren was “deceived” because he wanted to be deceived. There is no lack of Bible instruction from God for his leaders to understand their responsibilities to sinners, including sinners who want to govern the most powerful nation in the world.

With a little help from the Holy Spirit and his gift of spiritual discernment (which would enable him to see what he is not able to see), Warren could have said, “I do not believe that Obama and McCain are prepared for the U.S. presidency. Folks, let us pray, for our country needs a powerful visitation from God!”

I know many good American who do not possess spiritual discernment. But they would not need a polygraph to test Obama’s sincerity. By looking at his background, they were able to understand what Obama would eventually do — which he did.

I hope that Rick Warren and his public have learnt precious lessons about liars and their lies.

With information from the Associated Press, Daily Beast, Daily Mail and WorldNetDaily.

Portuguese version of this article: “Casamento” gay: Obama mentiu, Rick Warren acreditou

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Leading the world by evil example: Obama and gay “marriage”

Land of Billy Graham legalizes homosexual “marriage” and six judges resign rather than be forced to officiate such perversion

Washington, D.C.: The Seat of the Immoral World Government

Obama Strategist in the Brazilian Presidential Campaign

By Julio Severo

The 2014 Brazilian presidential campaign had the involvement of an important campaign strategist of the president of United States, Barack Obama: David Axelrod. According to the Brazilian daily Folha de São Paulo, Axelrod had been hired to help build Aécio Neves candidacy.

Obama and David Axelrod

The idea of Americans strategists working on Brazilian election campaigns is nothing new. During the 2010 election, Ben Self, who worked on the Obama campaign, was hired as a consultant for current president Dilma Rousseff.

The unusual thing about David Axelrod’s involvement in the Aécio Neves campaign is that he is a major player in the US Democratic Party.

According to WND, Axelrod was mentored by an American communist. WND also says, “More than any other figure, David Axelrod made Barack Obama president… The Obama persona was in large part Ax’s carving.”

According to Ann Coulter, Axelrod was known for destroying men who denounced Obama.

Axelrod made Obama president — the most pro-abortion and pro-sodomy president in the U.S. history.

Considering that president Dilma Rousseff is as abortionist and homosexualist as Obama is, what is then the main interest of the main Obama strategist in helping Rousseff’s opponent?

In the past, Obama has openly praised Rousseff and his antecessor, Luiz “Lula” da Silva, even though Rousseff and Lula are anti-U.S. socialists. Both Brazilian presidents are aligned with the abortion and homosexualist agenda of the U.S. government, especially in the UN system. Their relationship has been strained only over economic issues that could jeopartidze the U.S. economic hegemony.

Axelrod was brought to Brazil with the help of former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, also known by his initials FHC — who is close to former US President Bill Clinton. FHC founded PDSB, the Social Democrat Party, whose presidential candidate is Aécio Neves.

The presidential platform of Neves is as homosexualist as the platform of Rousseff is. And Neve’s vice, Aloísio Nunes, is as pro-abortion as Rousseff is. For me, there is no false hope that Neves could discontinue the homosexualist politics of Rousseff.

Even so, both FHC and Neves are misidentified as “conservatives” by the U.S. media.

Desperate by the abortion and homosexualist politics of Rousseff, many Christians in Brazil want to vote for Neves. But if the American socialist strategist who made Obama president is also successful in making Aécio Neves president, will he also the most pro-abortion and pro-sodomy president in the Brazilian history?

I do not know. But I know that Neves is the candidate of the socialist strategist of the most pro-abortion and pro-sodomy president in the U.S. history!

So I have no false hope on Neves to oppose anti-life and anti-family agendas. I have no hope that Neves will oppose the homosexualist agenda that the Obama administration has been imposing on the nations.

As a pro-family writer, I have to be honest about the two socialist (anti-U.S. and pro-U.S) candidates running for the Brazilian presidency. In fact, two days ago, in the height of this political campaign, my blog was shut down by Google after I published my article attacking the homosexualist platform of both candidates. Under pressure, Google restored my blog in 24 hours.

To understand Aécio Neves and his connections to the Obama administration, I have invited for an interview Wayne Madsen, an American investigative journalist whose work has appeared in my favorite website, WorldNetDaily. I do not agree with Madsen in many things, but I think that he is correct in some points. Read the interview:

Julio Severo: For 12 years, Brazil has had today a socialist party (Workers’ Party) ruling. In many respects, this ruling party is also aligned to the abortion and homosexual agenda of America. Why do neocons accept a Brazilian alignment with this agenda, but not with Cuba and Venezuela?

Wayne Madsen: George Soros is the bank roller of FEMEN and Pussy Riot, which have carried out attacks on churches in Russia and throughout Europe. Soros and his gang, which have an alliance with such neocons to force the world to beg to a powerful cabal of Wall Street/City of London gangsters — the Rothschilds included — for all goods and services, are the real enemies of the people. They wish to place their man Neves and his finance adviser Arminio Fraga Neto, a former Soros Quantum Fund executive, in charge in Brasilia.

Julio Severo: Most of the Brazilian conservatives are willing to vote for any candidate just to get rid of socialist Rousseff. What do you think about it?

Wayne Madsen: If they vote for Neves, Brazilians will get a Soros-influenced government that will first sell off Brazilian state assets for pennies to the dollar.

Julio Severo: Neves’ government platform follows the homosexualist items of the current Rousseff administration. There is no difference. The difference in other respects is: Rousseff is involved with very bad guys in Cuba and Venezuela. In contrast, Aécio wants nominated for his possible future administration people connected to George Soros. He has also connections to U.S. neocons. Could you tell us the knowledge you have about it?

Wayne Madsen: Neves's foreign policy adviser, Rubens Antônio Barbosa is a die-hard neocon who will withdraw Brazil from BRICS. US neo con diplomats at the US embassy in Brasilia and the Consulate General in Rio have been actively assisting the Neves campaign in order to get “their boy” in power.

Julio Severo: The book “The Next Decade: What the World Will Look Like,” by George Friedman (of Stratfor), has an interesting chapter saying that Brazil could represent the next threat to the U.S. economic supremacy, and it suggests that the U.S. strategy to hamper the Brazil expansion would be to strengthen Brazil’s neighbors, especially Argentina. Essentially, the U.S. would treat Brazil in the next decades as it treats today Russia, but not because the U.S. wants to hinder some Brazilian communism. The reason is to hinder Brazil from becoming an economic rival to the U.S. What do you think about it?

Wayne Madsen: If Brazil becomes a major economic power, America should just accept that and stop thinking of itself as a neo-Roman Empire. If Washington wants to continue down the path of neo-Romanism with a fascist flair, the US will collapse as fast as did the Roman Empire.

Portuguese version of this article: Estrategista de Obama na campanha presidencial do Brasil

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Recommended Reading:

U.S. Betrays Military Men Who Protected Brazil from Communist Threat

After Pressure, Google Restores Blog Julio Severo in Portuguese

Inflamed by American Prophecy, Brazilian Evangelicals Want a Woman for Brazil Presidency

US wants to combat anti-homosexuality movement worldwide

Presidential Candidacy of Leftist Pentecostal in Brazil Shoots Up After Suspicious Plane Crash And Bolsters Globalist Interests