Showing posts with label Marina Silva. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marina Silva. Show all posts

Sunday, March 20, 2016

Brazilian Crisis Sparks Chances for Socialist Marina Silva in the 2018 Presidential Election


Brazilian Crisis Sparks Chances for Socialist Marina Silva in the 2018 Presidential Election

By Julio Severo
In the midst of the deep political and financial crisis in Brazil, and massive protests against its leftist President Dilma Rousseff — despised by most Brazilian population who, according to Datafolha polls, wants her impeached for corruption and economic recession —, a new political scenery and possibilities begin to emerge.
Former Brazilian presidential candidate Marina Silva is one of these possibilities. According to another poll by Datafolha, she is the preferred choice for most Brazilian constituents for the 2018 presidential election in Brazil. In second place is Aécio Neves, a social democrat. In the last place is Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva, from the ruling socialist Workers’ Party.
Neves, who was also a presidential candidate in the last election, had his candidacy built by Marxist strategist David Axelrod, a longtime top Obama adviser. Yet, he has received less support now than earlier, because his name is also involved in the political and financial scandals sweeping the socialist Brazilian government.
Even though not directly involved in these scandals, Marina Silva had her origins in the Workers’ Party and Liberation Theology, and today she is heavily involved in international environmentalist causes. She and other socialists have strategically supported the Brazilian protests. This is a far cry of some interpretations of the Brazilian political reality in some websites, which try to present the Brazilian anti-government protests as exclusively “anti-Marxist.”
The popular dissatisfaction has been provoked by economic constraints in the Brazilian workers’ pockets. The choice of Silva, Neves and even Lula among Brazilian constituents is an evidence that Marxism is a dominating force in the people’s aspirations.
The portrayal of the Brazilian reality in some websites as protests against Marxism is as mistaken as the portrayal of Silva as “conservative.” In fact, even the U.S. Christian media had portrayed her this way in the last election, perhaps because she is a Pentecostal from the Assemblies of God, and Pentecostals are generally conservative.
Her background is Catholic, in the Liberation Theology, never giving up this ideology. Even though the Assemblies of God is the largest evangelical denomination in Brazil, with over 15 million members, Marina Silva has not received its political support.
Most of her political support comes from liberal Catholics. Brazil is the largest Catholic nation in the world and its National Conference of Bishops of Brazil (NCBB) was founded by Marxist Bishop Helder Camara, who is in process of sainthood in the Vatican.
The founding of the Workers’ Party is credited to prominent NCBB bishops.
Silva and her former party are children of this institution.
So if the Workers’ Party is removed by the popular impeachment of its president, NCBB bishops will manage to support a new president with its socialist convictions.
Marina Silva’s political growth is a symptom that to come out from Worker’s Party pit, many Brazilians are willing to come into any other pit, whether socialist or otherwise, not minding that Silva’s pit is not different from Worker’s Party pit.
Recommended Reading:

Thursday, March 19, 2015

Were Brazilian Protests an Anti-Marxist Counter-Revolution?


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.
Recommended Reading:

Monday, March 16, 2015

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


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.
Recommended Reading:

Thursday, October 02, 2014

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


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

By Julio Severo
The most important events for Brazil in 2014 are the World Cup — where the Brazilian team suffered its worst and most shameful defeat in such football event — and the presidential election.
Prophecy said Brazil would win the World Cup
From a rational standpoint, the election will bring another shameful defeat, because the main contenders — incumbent Dilma Rousseff and Marina Silva and Aécio Neves — are socialists. This week, these three major candidates have, joined by homosexual activists and federal prosecutors, condemned and attacked Levy Fidelix, a Catholic candidate with minimal chance to win the election. Fidelix was accused of “homophobia” after defending that homosexual relations are dirty and that a homosexual couple is never a family.
Yet, Brazilian evangelicals, stirred up by a prophecy of an American minister, have massively backed Marina Silva for president. In a tour of conferences in Brazil in 2011, Bob Hazlett prophesied:
“I heard the Lord say that even in the next two years ‘I will begin to raise up women in power in this nation and I am going to put a woman with the Spirit of God within her, who will kneel before Me, like Esther knelt before the king, because I am removing the Mordecai spirit that tries to controls the women in this nation and I am going to raise up a woman after My heart and I am going to shake this nation, but I am going to lead this nation to a season of prosperity even though other nations are in crisis. I am going to release Christ in this nation.’”
This prophecy made headlines in August in GospelPrime and GospelMais, the two main Protestant websites in Brazil, after a mysterious plane crash killed Brazilian presidential candidate Eduardo Campos, of the Brazilian Socialist Party. Marina was his vice and, with his death, she became the presidential candidate of the Brazilian Socialist Party.
In this point, Marina grabbed international headlines too, including in Reuters and Associated Press.
You can watch Hazlett’s prophecies here: http://youtu.be/3BhbUiOPTGs

According to investigative journalist Wayne Madsen, the plane crash was an operation of the Obama CIA to help Marina get the presidential candidacy.
The Obama opposition to incumbent Dilma Rousseff is explained by the fact that she is a socialist who is anti-U.S. economic interests. For example, in her administration Brazil is a member of BRICS, which wants to de-dollarize trade affairs, which would potentially be a disaster for the U.S. economy. In contrast, Marina Silva — who, according to Madsen, is a George Soros puppet —, is a socialist who is pro-U.S. economic interests.
Apparently, these socialist differences affect only economic issues, because the U.S. gave full support to a Brazil-sponsored homosexual resolution approved in the U.N. last week.
I am sure that God can see these and many other political maneuvers by anti-U.S. or pro-U.S. socialists. But many Brazilian evangelicals are backing Marina because they are blindly following Bob Hazlett’s prophecy.
I want in no way to disqualify the life and ministry of Hazlett. But, whether in his case or other cases, the Apostle Paul explains that Christians are free to prophesy in a meeting, and everyone else should evaluate whether a prophetic message is correct or not (see 1 Corinthians 14:29).
So Christians are instructed by God to evaluate prophecies made by other Christians.
The World Cup and the presidential election are the two main subjects for Brazilians in 2014, and Hazlett’s prophecies addressed both subjects. What did he prophesy about the World Cup?
He said in 2011,
“The Spirit of the Lord says: Four years from now, I will bring back the World Cup to this nation and I will anoint this nation to fill the Cup of prayer and pour out to the world, for the day when the Brazil team holds the World Cup, will be the day that I begin a revival that will cause Brazil bring revival to the world.”
Contrary to Hazlett’s optimistic prediction, there was no victory for the Brazilian team. There was no worldwide revival stemming from a Brazilian revival as a result of a Brazilian victory in the World Cup.
Besides, socialist Rousseff took advantage of the Cup euphoria to pass a law banning spanking, effectively criminalizing Christian parents who, in obedience to God’s Word, discipline their children. This was a massive defeat — not victory — to the Brazilian family. In fact, the Brazilian team had its worst defeat ever.
Hazlett’s prophecy was far away from perfection.
Why then are a multitude of Brazilian evangelicals using his another prophecy to vote for the Soros-backed socialist Marina Silva?
Hazlett’s prophecy said: “I am removing the Mordecai spirit that tries to controls the women in this nation and I am going to raise up a woman after My heart and I am going to shake this nation.”
The most important mission of Esther was to protect her people and their interests. In this mission, she was under the influence of Mordecai. Was his influence positive or negative? Positive. Mordecai was a man of God. Without him, Esther would never have defended God’s people the way she did.
If Hazlett had prophesied that God was going to remove the Karl Marx spirit that controls men and women in Brazil, including Catholics and evangelicals, I would understand. The Marxist influence is negative. This influence is an important component of the political militancy of Marina Silva, seen by Brazilian evangelicals as their “messiah” because of Hazlett’s prophecy. In an interview with Caio Fábio in 2010, Marina said that the Marxist Liberation Theology is the “living gospel.”
Caio, formerly the greatest Presbyterian minister in Brazil, was supportive of Silva in 2010 and 2014, including as an adviser. Caio, who disgraced himself in financial and sexual scandals years ago, was the strategic evangelical leader who in the 1990s connected the evangelical population with the socialist Workers’ Party, where Marina had her militancy and became an environment secretary during the Lula administration.
Marina left the Workers’ Party when the 2010 presidential candidacy of her party was given not to her, but to Dilma Rousseff.
Now the current prophecy-inflamed, Marina Silva campaign has been championed by Valnice Milhomens, a female apostle who, in 1994, hosted, with Caio Fábio, an evangelical TV show introducing socialist Lula to the evangelical population.
Caio’s intent, as reported by him later, was to connect evangelicals with Lula — a successful project, because in his first election to the Brazilian presidency Lula was supported by all the major evangelicals leaders in Brazil, equally stirred by strange prophecies and visions that his administration would bring advances to Brazil. Actually, in the first year of the Lula administration, Brazil introduced in the United Nations the first resolution classifying homosexuality as an unalienable human right. Milhomens was unable to see prophetically Caio’s intent, but she is sure that, prophetically, Marina is now God’s intent.
Hazlett’s mentions of a puppet president and strings have been interpreted as applying only to Rousseff and Lula. By the interpretation of Mordecai as a supposedly “negative” influence, deserving removal, you could also include Esther as a “puppet.” In fact, Hazlett’s prophecy treated the “Mordecai spirit” as if it were a harmful spirit to women, when this “spirit” brought wisdom and strategy to Esther.
But what about Marina Silva and Karl Marx? What about her and Caio Fábio? What about her and George Soros? Are there no strings in all of this? Is there no puppet in these relationships? Why to remove a Mordecai spirit, but not a Marx, Caio and Soros spirit?
Esther’s submission to Mordecai was a blessing, not curse.
Immediately connected with the prophetic behavior in the Christians meetings is Paul’s teaching about female behavior in these meetings:
“Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.” (1 Corinthians 14:29-34 ESV)
Paul explains that Biblical submission is protection:
“For this reason, and because the angels are watching, a woman should wear a covering on her head to show she is under authority.” (1 Corinthians 11:10 NLT)
“Because of the angels” — my understanding is that without Biblical submission, there are spiritual breaches for intrusions of demonic forces, also known as fallen angels.
With Biblical submission, God’s angels watch over the obedient.
Surely, Esther was a blessed woman, truly protected by God’s angels, because she lived according to this principle.
Now, what about Hazlett’s prophecy being used to portray Marina Silva as a Brazilian Esther, deserving the Brazil presidency — but “delivered” only from Mordecai, not from Marx, Caio and Soros? His prophecies — just as the prophecies of all other Christians — should be evaluated, as commanded by Apostle Paul.
What about Marina as Esther?
Perhaps she might win the election and become president of Brazil.
Perhaps she might eventually become an Esther too.
But first, she needs to let God remove the Marx, Caio and Soros spirits, and any other spirits, including Liberation Theology.
Yet, how do she and Hazlett expect her to be successful and a woman after God’s heart if they want to remove Mordecai — the positive influence of a man of God — from her life?
Recommended Reading:

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Brazil’s evangelicals gain clout, close to electing first president — a Liberation Theology adherent


Brazil’s evangelicals gain clout, close to electing first president — a Liberation Theology adherent

Commentary by Julio Severo: Striking in this report is the complete absence of journalistic criticism at the Pentecostalism of presidential candidate Marina Silva. This is the same media that would never spare Michele Bachmann, a Pentecostal/charismatic politician. The only difference is that Silva is rabidly socialist and Bachmann is a conservative. Even more striking is that Reuters, whose investigative journalism should supposedly have no omission, did not comment on the fundamental role of Liberation Theology in the spirituality and political career of Silva. Even after her “conversion” to the Assemblies of God church al, Silva extolled Liberation Theology as the “living gospel.” In the 2010 presidential election, she attacked the conservative wave against abortion and homosexuality.
Reportedly, Silva has connections with George Soros and, according to Wayne Madsen, the CIA has helped her.
Why did not Reuters choose attack her Pentecostalism? By the same reason that it hid the fact that she is more Liberation Theology than evangelical or Pentecostal. Socialism is her most important religion.
Now read the pro-Marina Silva report of Reuters:

Brazil’s evangelicals gain clout, close to electing first president

By Anthony Boadle
(Reuters) — Brazil's increasingly powerful evangelical Christians are tantalizingly close to electing one of their own as president next month in what would be a historic shift for the world's largest Catholic nation.
Marina Silva, an environmentalist running neck and neck in polls with incumbent President Dilma Rousseff, is a Pentecostal Christian who often invokes God on the campaign trail and has said she sometimes consults the Bible for inspiration when making important political decisions.
Some 65 percent of Brazil's 200 million people are Roman Catholics but evangelicals are rapidly gaining followers and power.
They grew from 5 percent of the population in 1970 to more than 22 percent in 2010 and the trend has continued. Evangelical groups have made particular inroads among urban working Brazilians who benefited from economic prosperity over the last two decades and are now demanding a greater say in politics.
Recent polls show evangelical voters would support Silva over Rousseff by a margin of about 54 percent to 38 percent if the two face each other in a runoff on Oct. 26, as most expect.
In a tight race, that could swing the result.
The evangelicals' rise has drawn comparisons to the "religious right" that began to influence U.S. politics in the 1980s.
There are important differences - most Brazilians are politically well to the left of Americans, perhaps inevitably in a country with one of the world's biggest gaps between rich and poor. Silva and Rousseff both call themselves socialists and push for robust welfare programs.
Infighting within evangelical groups has also limited their ability to create a unified bloc.
Yet similarities with the "religious right" abound. Brazil's evangelical faithful have turned their opposition to gay marriage and abortion, which are both illegal here, into key national political issues.
Funded by the tithes their followers are asked to pay, the more successful evangelical churches are increasingly turning their newfound wealth into political influence.
They have bought up radio and television stations across Brazil and financed campaigns to elect evangelical candidates, including many pastors, to seats in Congress.
The evangelical caucus in Congress showed its muscle in May by forcing Rousseff to revoke authorization for public health service abortions in exceptional cases of pregnancies caused by rape and of fetuses with brain defects.
For the first time in a Brazilian election, there are two evangelical candidates running for president. Silva has eclipsed the second hopeful, Pastor Everaldo, although he has made his mark in debates by accusing Rousseff's government of trampling on family values and seeking to legalize abortion.
Under evangelical pressure, Silva has changed her party's position on gay rights. And Rousseff, a Catholic who has rarely used faith in her political career, is now presenting herself as a good Christian. "Happy is the nation whose God is the Lord," she quoted from Psalms at one campaign stop.
"The evangelical vote will be decisive in this election," said Rodrigo Delmasso, a pastor of a Brasilia-based Pentecostal church, who is running for a seat in the city's legislature.
"As the community grows it's natural that our share of political representation grows too," the 34-year-old pastor said during a campaign stop where he handed out bumper stickers and posters to metro workers.
Delmasso said he voted for Rousseff in 2010, but he now backs Silva, trusting she will sweep out corruption after 12 years of rule by the leftist Workers' Party.
MORALITY
Many evangelicals believe their churches are uniquely equipped to cleanse politics - and society at large.
In a shabby shopping center in the center of Brazil's capital, two theaters that used to show porn films are now churches. In one that doubled as a strip club, pastors preach about salvation from a stage where strippers once performed.
Pentecostalism, the fastest growing branch of evangelical Christianity, was introduced to Latin America by U.S. missionaries a century ago.
These days, virtually every town and neighborhood in Brazil seems to have a Pentecostal chapel where vibrant song and prayer blare over loudspeakers onto the street outside. Many converts say the uplifting services and emphasis on material prosperity are more appealing than what they found in the Catholic Church.
The exodus is happening across Latin America and is especially strong in Brazil.
The Catholic Church retains political influence of its own - gathering all the major presidential candidates for a debate in Aparecida, the shrine of Brazil's patron saint, earlier this month, for example.
But while it bans its priests from engaging in politics, evangelical preachers are free to launch their own political careers from the pulpit or televangelist studios.
Recently, at the doors of a church in Brasilia, youths in shirts and ties handed out campaign flyers to people attending the service. A vote for the evangelical congressional candidate was "the same as voting for the Church," one of the youths said.
One major goal of evangelicals is to keep expanding their caucus in Congress, which has grown from 17 in 1985 to 76 today - about 15 percent of the Chamber of Deputies.
They have in many ways followed the path taken by the U.S. Christian right, which didn't really get involved in national politics until the early 1980s when one of its own - Pat Robertson - ran for president, said Andrew Chesnut, an expert on Brazil's Pentecostal boom.
"Up until then, American evangelicals saw the political arena as the devil's arena where even forthright Christians could be contaminated," said Chesnut, a professor of religious studies at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond.
"The view was that if they had critical mass they could elect their own people and that would inoculate them from the contagion of the political arena. That was the same in Brazil."
CONVERSION
Silva's rise could further boost political engagement among Brazilian evangelicals. Many, like Silva, are Afro-Brazilian women who come from a poor background.
Silva came to the faith somewhat late in life. She was born to illiterate rubber-tappers in the Amazon rainforest and wanted to become a Catholic nun as an adolescent, before turning to environmental activism and a career in politics.
Her conversion to Pentecostalism came in 1997 after her doctor said only a "miracle" would heal her fragile health, wrecked by malaria, hepatitis and lead poisoning when she was a child on the rubber plantation.Silva has tried to strike a careful balance between pride in her faith and not alienating more secular-minded Brazilians. She said in an interview this month that "the Bible is without a shadow of a doubt a source of inspiration," but immediately added that all of her decisions are "taken on a rational basis."
One campaign jingle celebrates "the faith of every believer and the reason of every atheist."
Last month, her Brazilian Socialist Party issued an official platform supporting gay marriage and making homophobia a crime but Silva quickly reversed the stance after Brazil's best-known televangelist, Silas Malafaia, threatened to withdraw his support for her.
It was a costly embarrassment for Silva, losing her support among young and urban middle-class voters and fueling broader concerns that she flip-flops on major issues.
Rousseff tried to capitalize, announcing after Silva's gaffe that she would push through legislation granting evangelical churches the same tax benefits as the Catholic Church.
Analysts say many evangelical voters are still up for grabs. Brazil's poor depend on social programs introduced by the ruling Workers' Party, and could vote for Rousseff regardless of what their pastor may say.
Rousseff has the backing of Brazil's second-largest evangelical church, the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God. Silva belongs to Assemblies of God, which has more members but is less well-organized.
Rousseff even attended the opening last month of a 10,000-seat, 11-story Solomon's Temple built in Sao Paulo by the Universal Church's leader, Bishop Edir Macedo. A media magnate, Macedo has a fortune estimated by Forbes magazine at $1.24 billion.
Macedo's PRB party backs Rousseff and even has a seat in her cabinet. But he exerts more influence with his ownership of the second largest television network, Rede Record.
Bishop Robson Rodovalho, a physicist who founded a Pentecostal church in 1992 that now has more than 1 million followers and a TV channel, said he expects that Silva still has room to grow her support in coming weeks.
"Much of the Church will converge on her candidacy," he told Reuters before going on stage to preach to the sound of rock music in a darkened church hall lit with discotheque lights.
"Brazil is a real democracy. It's only a matter of time before we have an evangelical president. That's a fact."
(Editing by Brian Winter and Kieran Murray)
Recommended Reading: