Brazzil
October 2001
Short and Longer Notes
RAPIDINHAS
Terror
The Manhattan EffectWhat about the American dream? For many Brazilians it was buried under the World Towers rubble that fatal September 11. Some who were getting ready to leave for America have given up the idea and others already living there decided to go back home. For the first time, many Brazilians discovered—to their surprise—that the U.S. is not always a happy ending Hollywood movie and is not necessarily the land where everything works and everybody feels secure. One of the places worst hit by confusion and grief was the city of Governador Valadares, in the state of Minas Gerais. Forty thousand Valadarenses have left their town in recent years to start a new life in the U.S. with the majority going to the American Northeast.
Rio's daily Jornal do Brasil told the story of Conceição Alves de Souza, 45, who received an invitation to be a babysitter in New York and was preparing for her trip in December. It was not an easy decision, but she seemed relieved to give up that opportunity: "I will stay in my little land where nobody will want to throw a bomb on our heads," she said.
Maria Lúcia Silva de Souza, from the state of Alagoas, was also getting ready to leave for New York, following in the steps of her sister who emigrated 30 years ago. She had already sold her bar and was getting more money for the trip. But the images of the planes hitting New York's tallest towers made her change her life's plans: "For now, all I want is to stay in my Alagoas."
SBT, Brazil's largest agency specializing in international student exchange, saw a fall of 40 percent in the number of youngsters interested in going to the United States. Among the comments from those who gave up the idea: "I'm terrified" and "I can't even think about getting into a plane bound for the U.S."
Mostly Illegal
From more than 1 million Brazilians living in the U.S., 300,000 chose New York. The numbers are imprecise since most of the immigrants—70 percent of them, according to some experts—are undocumented and entered the country illegally. They come attracted by wages they would never make back home. For Unicamp's (Universidade de Campinas) sociologist Teresa Sales, an expert in Brazil-United States migration, Brazilians have many unrealistic fantasies about life in the USA. "Brazilians use to overestimate the qualities of the American way of life," she told reporters. "But now they are having a chance to examine this golden fantasy."
Jornal do Brasil also told the story of Solange Gonçalves, 27, who was working as a travel agent in Manhattan and making $2700 a month. She locked herself in her apartment in a state of shock in the days following the terror attack. Solange is seriously thinking about leaving the United States: "I read that Canada has an excellent quality of life and I'm planning to move there."
Aparecida da Silva, 31, from Minas Gerais, works as a cleaning lady in a hospital in Boston—it's believed that some 250,000 Brazilians live in the area. She had planned to spend at least five years in Massachusetts in order to save enough to buy two apartments in Brazil and move back there. The destruction of the World Trade Center, however, has made her reconsider those plans and now she only wants to save enough to pay her ticket back: "I'm terrified. Besides fearing new attacks, I feel that all immigrants now are going to be discriminated against. That's why I will be happy if I'm able to raise money for the ticket and to maintain myself for sometime in Brazil."
Edílson Paiva, from Governador Valadares, the publisher of Brazilian Times, a Portuguese-language newspaper in the Boston area, says that several Brazilians are selling their cars and furniture in preparation to go back to Brazil: "My paper is filled with ads from Brazilians selling what they can. Besides fear, there is this sensation that there will be a wave of xenophobia against immigrants. It is going to be very hard to get a job from now on."
Back Home
Christian Rodrigues, 32, a pharmacist, kissed the tarmac of the Guarulhos airport when she stepped out the plane from New York. She had plenty of motives for that, as she explained: "The only reason I'm alive is because there is a God. I thought I'd never leave New York again. At the time of the attack to the World Trade Center, I should have been there having breakfast, but that meeting was cancelled."
Another Brazilian was next to the tragedy. Amadeu Salles, a worker at the World Trade Center's branch of Union Bank of California, started running the 14 flights of stairs to the street when the first of the twin towers was hit. He saw pieces of concrete falling down: "I thought at first that it was a gas explosion. I went down running and noticed that the tower was catching fire. I went to a nearby public phone to call home and that's when I heard a second explosion and this time even bigger. I turned and saw a scene I will never forget: the building where I worked was on fire." He was shocked by the possibility of having lost several friends.
Another Brazilian, Raul Paulo Costa, 33, had an even closer brush with death. He was on the 25th floor of the first tower to be hit. Costa was also able to leave the building running down the stairway. Costa is the vice-president of exchange for Garban Intercapital. "When the building started to be cleared we already knew it was a terrorist attack. There was generalized panic. I ran to a stairway that was not open and the floor was already filled with water and smoke. I was able to find the correct stairway and went down as a crazy man. The building was shaking a lot and everybody was screaming that it was going to collapse."
Looking from Afar
As expected, the terrorist attacks in the U.S. dominated the news in Brazil. Folha de São Paulo, the daily with the largest circulation in the country, wrote in an editorial: "In a world dominated by one pole of economic and military power, dissatisfaction fermented by misery, exclusion and religious fanaticism, tends to fragment into warring factions of politically irresponsible groups who are not committed to anything except bringing about their own apocalypse….
"The political behavior of the United States is not very sensitive to the international inequalities aggravated by the free market. Nor is it sensitive to the complaints of the poorest countries.... It is obvious that the attack puts its authors outside the orbit of all civilized behavior and that they should pay for the carnage that their actions produced. But one cannot ignore that the United States has not contributed to the reduction of the level of world tension."
Writing in the same Folha, columnist Clovis Rossi commented: "From a strategic point of view, the drama only increases when one thinks of the virtual uselessness of the North American arsenal, even as it is increasing its defense with the so-called "Star Wars" missiles…. In the new war, only a handful of people ready to kill and die at the same time are enough to cause more damage than the Red Army ever could."
As a somber reminder that intolerance is always peeking through the promises of freedom and democracy, a group of 15 white and black American youngsters in Bridgeport, Connecticut, insulted and spanked Brazilian student Hermes Barbosa de Lima, 23, known as Netinho, just because he looked like an Arab. They broke his nose and fractured his arm in two places.
It was around 8:30 PM, the night after the attack, and Lima was going to a nearby public phone in one of many attempts to call his mother in Espírito Santo to tell her that everything was OK, when he was attacked. "Arab, son of a bitch," he heard before being thrown on the floor by a fist blow, according to his own account. It didn't help when he started screaming: "I'm not Arab, I'm Brazilian. I came from Brazil. Please stop." The attack went on for around five minutes until Netinho fell down and seemed unconscious.
Despite his fear, Netinho decided to call the police, which according to him had to be called twice and only appeared 20 minutes later. The officers took notes, but didn't seem impressed and after a 15 minute sweep of the neighborhood came back to announce that no suspects had been found. Possible witnesses from a delicatessen and a gas station close to where the attack occurred refused to get involved.
"I'm desperate," he said later. "I feel like I'm nobody, as if people had no consideration for human life." Only on Friday, two days after being attacked and after going to the Brazilian consulate in New York, did he go to a hospital. The doctor who saw him said that his arm would need special treatment and that she could not put his nose in place because his face was too swollen.
Netinho is back in Brazil now. "It's the end of a dream," he confided. "I had plans to stay four years in the US to study and save enough money to help my mother. All I want now is to be home. I need to be close to people who really love me. I have no money, but I don't feel defeated but for the violence from which I was a victim."
A survey by Datafolha throughout the country, one week after the attack against the World Trade Center, showed that 79 percent of Brazilians are against an American military retaliation against the country or countries where the terrorists live, although 74 percent of the population agrees that the terrorists should be detained and brought to justice. That opinion institute heard 2830 Brazilians.
The survey also found that 78 percent are against a Brazilian military participation in any conflict while 17 percent were in favor of sending Brazilian troops to war. The majority of Brazilians (51 percent) believe that the attacks will negatively affect Brazil's economy and another 29 percent think there will be minor fallout from the terrorist act.
Behavior
Do Brazilians Care?The lack of a political response is disappointing because it shows the U.S. that it cannot rely on Brazil as an ally.
John Fitzpatrick
The reaction in many countries to Tuesday's terrorist attacks in the U.S. has been of genuine sadness and sorrow for the victims and the American people. Across most countries in Western Europe, normal life stopped for three minutes on Friday as people paid tribute to the dead. These were genuine acts from the heart by ordinary individuals, not staged events organized by governments. One gathering in Germany brought together 200,000 people. The British Parliament held a special session. Even Russia observed a minute of silence.
What did we see in Brazil? Virtually nothing. Most of our political leaders kept quiet and the people appeared not to care. President Fernando Henrique Cardoso did condemn the act a few hours after it happened, and offered support. However, he was quick to point out that it could worsen Brazil's economic problems. None of the emotion the world associates with Brazil has been on display.
As Brazilians continued to watch events unfold on television, political life went on in its usual way. No terrorism here, just the usual soap opera of corruption, violence and power mongering—beleaguered Senate President Jader Barbalho finally stood down, more evidence piled up against former São Paulo Mayor Paulo Maluf—also facing corruption allegations, and the Mayor of Campinas, a major city in São Paulo state, was shot dead. Another development this week was the defeat of the anti-government wing of the PMDB party, at a convention that elected São Paulo Congressman Michel Temer as the party's new president. This was a blow to Minas Gerais Governor Itamar Franco, who may now seek membership with another party to launch his presidential ambitions next year.
So there were plenty of things happening here, but why have the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. evoked none of the emotions among Brazilians which they have among others elsewhere in the world? Obviously one cannot force people to feel genuine sorrow, but the muted response has been puzzling and, to a non-American foreigner like me who lives here, disappointing and distressing.
It is distressing because it puts Brazil out of line with the world's democracies, and shows a lack of solidarity with a country where tens of thousands of Brazilians live—300,000 in the New York City area alone. Around 30 of these Brazilians are feared dead in the New York attack. It shows a lack of sympathy for a nation which has suffered a devastating surprise attack. It shows the ignorance of the less educated population, and the smugness of the better educated.
Of eight letters published in the daily O Estado de S. Paulo at the time of writing this article, six are broadly anti-American, accusing the U.S. of reaping seeds it has sown. One wonders if any of the correspondents wrote a letter of condolence to the American ambassador. Another part of the same newspaper expressed relief that the U.S. Consulate in São Paulo would be leaving the posh Jardins area soon for a new location, and the well-heeled residents in the area would not have to endure the disgraceful sight of people queuing up to get visas.
The lack of a political response is disappointing because it shows the U.S. that it cannot rely on Brazil as an ally. By Saturday, President Fernando Henrique Cardoso had yet to speak on the phone to President Bush, an incredible indictment of Brazil's failure to understand the importance of these attacks.
The left-wing Worker's Party (PT) wasted no time in linking the attacks to U.S. policies, making sure that its condemnation of the terrorist acts was part and parcel of its condemnation of the U.S. One is as bad as the other in the PT's view. We should expect this from the PT, but the parties in the governing coalition have been shamefully silent.
However, the U.S. is not relying on any muscular support from Brazil because it knows it will not be forthcoming. During the Second World War Brazil let the Americans use its territory, and even sent troops to fight with the Allies in Italy. This is not the case now. It is obvious there is no support for an active role by Brazil in any future U.S.-led anti-terrorism operations, and the terrorists are already winning with their intimidation tactics.
Two examples prove this. For some time, Brazil and the U.S. have been discussing allowing the Americans to use a Brazilian Air Force base at Alcântara, in Maranhão state, to launch rockets into space. To be fair, there was a lot of political opposition to this before the terrorist attacks hit the U.S., but the opponents are now adding fears that the base could become a terrorist target to their reasons. The chairman of the Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee of the Lower House says now is not the time to discuss the matter, and "maybe it would be better to wait a little", meaning put it on the backburner.
To his credit, Defense Minister Geraldo Quintão said the attacks should not interfere with the discussions, but if this is the case why does the government not do something to show its resolve? Would it not be heartening if, instead of equivocating and being intimidated, Brazil announced, as an act of solidarity, that the U.S. could use the base?
Another example came from Foreign Minister Celso Lafer, who said immediately after the attack that Brazil's relations with countries like Iran, Libya and Iraq might change. By Friday he was eating his words, as the Foreign Ministry called in the ambassadors of these states, all of which have links with terrorist groups, and toned down the minister's comments.
It is interesting to compare Brazil's timid attitude with that of Argentina, where the Peronist opposition movement is calling for Argentina to help the U.S. militarily. Unlike Brazil, Argentina has suffered terrorist bombings against Jewish targets and even sent troops to join the Gulf War coalition against Iraq. Cynics might say Argentina is only offering military help in return for U.S. financial aid to overcome its current crisis. They may be right, but at least Argentina is showing some mettle, unlike Brazil, which is coming across as more of a gentle giant.
John Fitzpatrick, the author, is a Scottish journalist who has been based in São Paulo since 1995. His 26-year career in journalism includes stints as a reporter in Scotland and England, deputy editor of an English-language daily newspaper in Cyprus, news editor of a radio station in Switzerland, financial correspondent in Zurich and São Paulo, and editor of a magazine published by one of Switzerland's largest banks. He currently runs Celtic Comunicações, a São Paulo company which specializes in editorial and translation services. You can reach him at Johnfitz@osite.com.br
Opinion
The Impossible DreamFifty years ago the culprit would have been the Jews. In the case of rape, a black. We can foretell the finale. Holy war against holy war. Terrorism changes place—it leaves the planes and becomes bacteriological war in a vicious circle of vendettas.
João Sayad
Goliath, the Philistine giant, was brought down by a well-aimed stone thrown by David, Israel's first king. The Bible also says, in another place, that Goliath was defeated by someone else, with another name that History didn't record. Probably, this other Hebrew is the real author of the feat, since he is mentioned and known only by this fact.
In history, the trivial, human and concrete facts do not matter. For history the only people that matter are heroes and villains, who always play the same script. The history of the Western civilization, past and future, is already written in the Bible, in the Homerian and Greek tragedies. We don't have a lot of imagination. The actors are chosen right before the act and they play a pre-established drama. Samson, David, Napoleon, Lincoln and Dom Pedro I are chosen like King Momo, Pierrot, Harlequin and the character from the Northeast Bumba-Meu-Boi. The real history, from people who did or did not, is not history, is life.
Last week, the whole world lived the panic of the passengers from the hijacked planes, was asphyxiated by the smoke, screamed from despair and moaned buried by the World Trade Center's debris. Thousands of anonymous people, friends or acquaintances, lost their lives. We will never know who committed the heinous crime. The tragedy became history. We will repeat the drama from 3000 years ago, Jews against Philistines, or Christians against Moors or poor against the rich. David against Goliath. "We" are David. The "others", Goliath.
As an unimaginative movie, last week's tragedy continues as history. The American President declares war against concretely unknown terrorists, but easy to identify when we follow the original script—they are the Cananaean, the Moor, the Saracen. Fifty years ago the culprit would have been the Jews. In the case of rape, a black. We can foretell the finale. Holy war against holy war. Terrorism changes place—it leaves the planes and becomes bacteriological war in a vicious circle of vendettas.
The American government strengthens its spy network, reduces the civil liberties of Americans. Americans become fundamentalists, xenophobes, McCarthyists. In the '50s, Charley Chaplin was persecuted and went back to Europe. Now, they will perhaps persecute Madonna for being indecorous or Muslim Muhammad Ali for his religion. Political refugees from around the world have no place to go anymore.
The lights are turned off in the country of the movies, universities, libraries, museums. All unite against the common enemy, which still has to be chosen—a poor and inhospitable country in Asia, a band of terrorists hidden in a cave, the Palestine (Philistines?), the Persian (Iran?) or the Babylonians (Iraq?).
If we could make science fiction with imagination, history's sequence might be different. After a week of silent mourning, perplexed and respectful in the face of pain, the United States and NATO decide on a fund of 40 billion dollars for investments in Afghanistan, in Iran or another place. They start a new Marshall Plan before any war is begun and which is promoted by the attacked country.
In a few years, the Eastern threat, wherever it might come from, would be controlled. The Eastern fundamentalists would be globalized. They would start to eat at McDonald's and would go to Geneva to protest against globalization. We would really be making history. We would stop being led by characters with pre-established roles. None of this will happen: the human and rational solution is science fiction. The B science fiction has become reality.
João Sayad, the author, is São Paulo city's secretary of Finances and Economic Development. You can get in touch with him at jsayad@attglobal.net
Point of View
No-Win GameNo American has ever cried over millions of people who die every day in Third World Countries, victims (directly or indirectly) of American foreign policies designed to keep America on top. They think they are poor victims who have been attacked for no reason and that's why they have been asking so insistently for retaliation.
Dione Rocha
I could not sit and watch the one-sided views on the attacks America has suffered last week. The non-American view of that fact leads us to the effects that the attacks themselves and possible retaliation may have on Brazil (and other countries, of course). That's why I decided to write the article below.
The first thing one must ask now is what a Brazilian has to do with the attacks that have just happened in NYC and Washington D.C.? My answer is that the attacks do affect Brazil, all the other nations in the world and the further effects of them on humanity will depend on the American response to them.
To show America's power through an armed conflict is a childish and not very intelligent reaction, and makes no sense for a number of reasons. One is that most of Afghanistan's population know nothing but hunger and misery caused by two decades of war. They do not have a clue as to what " The Taliban" or "New York" is, so remote are they from what we call "civilization". Those people are just as innocent as the people who were killed in the towers of the WTC.
Second is that whoever is responsible for the attacks, is ready to respond to retaliation with even bigger and unexpected force. No one is going to tease a giant and not expect a reaction. Further yet, knowing that the giant will react, any being with a minimum of intelligence would have an even bigger (and worse) surprise for later. Responding violently to the attacks will just generate an endless chain of violence that will result in loss for humanity as a whole.
Also, we have to consider every face of the subject. No American has ever cried over the millions of people who die every day in Third World Countries, victims (directly or indirectly) of American foreign policies designed to keep America on top. The average American is not able to see that. They are not supposed to see that link. That is why they think they are poor victims who have been attacked for no reason and that is why they have been asking so insistently for retaliation.
The attack upon a member of the United Nations should be considered as an attack upon all. Who guarantees that if Brazil had been attacked, the States would give us their support? More than once before America turned its back on the interests of humanity in order to serve its own interests. They want us to stop polluting, but they keep on polluting in order to maintain the growth of their economy. They give us the hypocritical speech of tolerance, but when they are asked to do the same, the president leaves an International Conference Against Racism.
Before World War II, Europe was what America is now. The parents of my generation studied French at school. In a couple of decades, America may no longer be what it is. And the same way I had to learn how to speak English in order to achieve better positions in an "Americanized" world, who knows what language my children will have to learn at school? And one day, tired of suffering under the feet of a ruling country, America may be seen as terrorist, and they will want their reasons to be heard.
Dione Rocha is a Brazilian communications major concerned about social issues. You can contact the author at dionerocha@hotmail.com
Point of View
It Serves U.S. RightIn the 80's, Osama Bin Laden was the right arm of the CIA against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. He is a product of the Americans. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and since 1990, Bin Laden has pointed his terrorist arsenal against Uncle Sam.
Frei Betto
Immediately after the terrorist attack on the United States, President Bush declared a war between good and evil. This division of the world into good and evil countries was one that the western world had begun to bury with the end of the cold war. This division fomented the Christian Crusades against the "infidel Muslims" and later, the extermination of Jews by Hitler's troops.
Does it make sense to identify the United States with the good and its critics and enemies with evil? The Bible and the Torah confront the question of good and evil with divine wisdom. Good and evil live together in each of our hearts. Freedom consists in knowing how to choose between selfishness and love. One cannot say that the United States, in its history, has worked harder for justice and prosperity for all people in the world than for the hegemony and financial gains of Uncle Sam.
Since the creation of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, the United States brought Puerto Rico under its dominion (1898), invaded Cuba (1902), took over the Panama Canal, implanted dictators in the southern hemisphere, fomented terror in Nicaragua, trained military leaders in the ways of torture, and now propose FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) as a form of commercial control of Latin America.
The White House which authorized the use of Napalm in the Vietnam War and bombed the civilian population of Sudan during Clinton´s presidency is today a victim of its own power. The oppressed mirror the aggressors when they retaliate with the same methods. Just as the victims of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon did not deserve the tragedy that they suffered, so the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima should not have been exterminated with two atomic bombs.
Saddam Hussein initially was the White House marionette who helped the U.S. fight against the Islamic Revolution in Iran. He demonstrated once again the insidiousness of terrorist training policies of the U.S. The apprentice wizard turns against the sorcerer. In the 1980's, Osama Bin Laden was the right arm of the CIA against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The CIA taught him to make bombs, to plan and activate terrorist attacks, to hide his millions of dollars in fantasy companies and finance paradises, to operate secret codes, and to infiltrate civilian and military groups. Bin Laden is a product of the Americans. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and since 1990, Bin Laden has pointed his terrorist arsenal against Uncle Sam.
The indefinite postponement of peace in the Mid-East including the creation of a Palestinian state is another factor in the growth of dissatisfaction and xenophobia. Since the U.N. resolutions of that region were not taken seriously and attacks continue in the Gaza Strip and parts of Jordan, arms continue to be used to end a conflict that can only be addressed with political negotiations.
In commemorating his 80th birthday last week, Cardinal Arns asked that all Brazilians pressure Brazilian President Cardoso not to support any attitude or policy of vengeance on the part of the United States. In Arns' words, terrorists should be punished for the horrible crimes that they committed but innocent populations should not suffer.
Many of us are pacifists until a robber enters our house and kills a loved one. Thus, we take on the same sentiments of the robber, allowing our violent side that hides inside us to emerge. Peace is the fruit of justice. Thus, we should not do to others what we would not want done to us. It may be impossible not to have enemies but it is possible to avoid treating them with inhumanity and injustice which feeds the spiral of violence. War never brings good solutions, only pain, destruction and more suffering.
Just as Pax Romana was not built on hatred of Christians, Pax Americana will not have a future if it foments hatred toward Islamic people. Without them, western culture would not be as it is today. As the Jewish people gave the world Marx, Freud, Einstein and many other geniuses in science and the arts, the Arab people have given us geniuses such as Al-Khwarizmi in the area of mathematics, Al-Kindi and Alhazem in physics, and Avrróis in the area of philosophy.
It is time for the United States to demonstrate that they are the paladins of democracy, not only in respecting differences but also by ending their support for the autocratic, dictatorial governments of the Arab world where freedom of the people is held ransom to the unjust price of barrels of petroleum.
Friar Betto, the author is a religious, a writer and teacher. Among his many books is
The Work of the Artist—A Holistic Vision of the World.
Opinion
Blame the victimsIf someone offers his condolences and, right after, adds some however, though or but he is in reality saying "my condolences" but negating it soon after with an "it serves you right."
Alberto Dines
It's time for grammar, among other things, to lower our blood pressure. The political simplism that preceded the Black Tuesday doesn't seem to have been interrupted after the slaughter. It's intact and unharmed, fueling resentments, ready to ignite sacred wraths and holy indignations.
The majority of the Arab and Islamic leadership were categorically sympathetic to the victims' families or to the American people. Without attenuation or justification. They were hurt by terrorism as much as those murdered. Fidel Castro, for so long assaulted by American arrogance, was also unequivocal in his solidarity. He said what he felt, period.
But in the rhetoric of our cordial celebrated society, infected with commas and detours, it was inserted as an attenuating resource—a little particle usually destined to link parts of a phrase. Disguised as a pause between two ideas, it has a deleterious, disaggregating function. Without even being touched by the death of so many Brazilians, some of the brief and formal laments for the catastrophe were followed by a disturbing and insulting but.
In the innocent conjunction it's revealed the volcano of rancor still had not been calmed, curtailed or purged by last week's blood bath. Here comes the grammar to remind us about things we don't pay attention to when using the language. Conjunctions are used to link sentences: when additive they work as reinforcement—this is the case of the stubborn and—when adversative they establish the contrast between the respective meanings. If someone offers his condolences and, right after, adds some however, though or but he is in reality saying "my condolences" but negating it soon after with an "it serves you right."
The political "show" presented by the PT (Workers' Party) on TV this Thursday was perfect in every sense, including its mention of the terrorist attacks: neither but nor half but. The repudiation to the violence was brief, clear and the grief, sincere. But the PT is a Party that's getting ready to exercise the power, and it is able to extirpate emotions, choose words that express them and, by and large, avoid the pitfalls of phrasing. It's able, more than anything else, to immunize itself against the poison of the discourse's ambiguities.
This consternation was not shared by the majority of militants or associates who marched through the papers' pages of smoldering rage and wrath, clearly satisfied with the getting even shown in such a spectacular way on TV.
Rapidly grieved, the six thousand missing—including the 17 Brazilians—were soon compared to the dead in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Hanoi, Chile, to which were added the hungry masses of Africa and Latin America's legions of poor wretches. Swinging between justification and vigilantism, with the decisive help of buts, the cruel vindictive arithmetic illustrates a moral relativism from which certain leftists—or pseudo leftists—were still not able to escape. Nor will they escape soon while they continue intoxicated by the dogma that the end justifies the means.
From this spiritual daze don't escape people anointed in international contests: people awarded the Peace and Literature Nobel prizes, tenured professors and illustrious individuals in all sciences and knowledge, rationalists and aestheticians, Marxists and aristocrats. Historians trained to look at humankind under the perspective of centuries—and the journalists used to immediately interpret its spasms—surrendered themselves to the amok unchained by terror. Even bankers so cautious in their emotions and investments took out of the closet their Crusaders' banner.
Incapable of being horrified or feeling pain, and therefore incapable of humanizing themselves by suffering and solidarity, the fiery harbingers of the "we are even" are blowing up all bridges that lead to dialog and tolerance. The xenophobia that only now they notice had been pulsating for a long time in their totalizing and totalitarian speeches, in the way they divide the world between those who deserve compassion and those who deserve condemnatory passion.
George W. Bush is the least desirable person to lead the U.S. at this moment. There is no doubt about this: all of his appearances (starting with a speech in a Florida school in the morning of the assaults and ending ten days later with the speech to Congress in Washington) widely expose his unpreparedness, an intellectual void and a psyche that only knows how to express itself through clichés. The uncomfortable realization cannot lead us to an alignment with fanaticism, terrorism or with those cynical invocations destined to minimize, excuse or justify the barbarism committed Black Tuesday.
In the current evaluations an elementary data is being forgotten: the assaults were not accompanied by public declarations, ultimatums, conditions or demands. The absence of public statements or authorship indicates an indiscriminate war against all, against humankind. The initiators of the crime are not from the left, not even progressive. They are neither agents of the savage capitalism nor revolutionary, reformist, ecologist, thirdworldist or antiglobalizationist. They don't want a strong or minimum state. They don't want states, laws, codes, norms for living or respecting. Besides killing indiscriminately they are intent on sowing hate, igniting fires, exacerbating suspicions, and prevent any possibility of understanding, approaching or tolerance.
In displaying grief with half sincerity or full insincerity, the lucid commentators with their adversative conjunctions and the moral relativism are only vouching for violence as political language. In reality, they are condemning the victims as the only guilty ones for what has happened
Alberto Dines wrote this article for Jornal do Brasil where he signs a column. He became a journalism professor after directing major newspapers and magazines in Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Lisbon (Portugal). He is the author of several books and the creator of Observatório da Imprensa, an Internet site and TV program that presents criticism of the Brazilian media. You can reach him at dines@jb.com.br
Scandal
Risqué Images
Despite close to half a million people, Ribeirão Preto, in the interior of São Paulo state, is a city that retains much of the charm of country life. Agriculture and cattle breeding are common activities in the area, which was once known as The Coffee Capital and Brazilian California. Scandal and gossip are mostly things that happen to other people and in other cities. Happened, until some bawdy pictures presenting some of the town's illustrious couples in compromising positions appeared on the Internet. It was not clear at the beginning of the scandal if the images were authentic or photo montages. It didn't matter, however, since the damage had already been done when those portrayed in the images went to court to try to prove their innocence.
For weeks, in July and August, the naughty pictures seemed to be the only subject Ribeirão-Pretanos had to talk about. It all started when some pictures were stolen from a computer. Soon after, people started to receive in their e-mails a collection of images: well behaved couples in a family barbecue, a group at a nudist beach watching some girls doing strip tease, and then a series of photos with familiar faces showing hardcore scenes, including lesbianism, fellatio and group sex. Most of the images, at least those in the barbecue and on the nude beach, were real, confirmed the people shown in them. But the more risqué stuff, they asserted, was a forgery. Among those exposed in the pictures was an economist (his father is former congressional representative João Cunha) and his architect wife plus an entrepreneur (his father owns a school with 10,000 students) and his wife, who was a teacher in the family's school. The implicated, all in their 20s, are rich and well known in the region. Two traditional families were the main culprits: the Cunhas and the Spinellis.
On September 5, the Ribeirão Preto police presented a report signed by three veteran experts stating that the pornographic pictures were digitally fabricated. The experts, José Lopes Zarzuela, from USP's (Universidade de São Paulo) Law School; Dirceu Carlos Uccelli, who works for the Federal Justice and José Barth, from the State Justice had a unanimous conclusion: "From all that was given as evidence the suspected pieces revealed, after examination, to be forgeries. The modifications were done without the due and accurate technical criteria dictated by the digital art, which, with the proper software that now exists in the market, under the command of an able person, would make such montages imperceptible."
The experts' findings were included in the enquiry being made by the police, who are interviewing at least ten people who are now accused of mail violation, defamation and extortion. Twenty photos were analyzed, but rumors have it that as many as 800 of these pictures exist. According to Antonio Eugênio Minghini, the attorney for those shown in the pictures, "the families of the victims hired the experts in an effort to try to stop the spread of the rumor. They are distraught and if we had to wait for the Justice, it would take a long time."
The case became known as the "suruba dos ricos" (the riches' gangbang) and pictures from other people who don't live in the city started cropping up. Even pictures taken from Brazilian Playboy were added to the sexual imbroglio. According to the police, the same people who stole the pictures and spread them throughout the Internet tried to extort half a million reais ($179,000) from the victims in exchange for not divulging the images. Protecting the identity of the accused, the Brazilian media presented the economist ARDC and entrepreneur NDSJ saying: "The pictures in which we appear in compromising situations are obviously montages. The criminals used our faces taken from stolen pictures and placed them over other images."
NDSJ talked about the pictures taken at the nudist beach: "I went there with my wife and we took pictures that I kept in my computer. This is something intimate we did and it is nobody's business. How could I imagine that someone would get into my computer and manipulate the pictures? After the photos appeared, people started saying we were involved with drugs, that we were homosexuals, that my wife received a standing ovation in a local restaurant and so on." By the way, his wife, who teaches elementary school, decided to take a vacation while things cool off a little.
ARDC says that a hacker stole the pictures from a computer he has at home, but in another version circulating in the streets of Ribeirão Preto, the laptop computer was taken to a repair shop and there one technician copied the pictures and decided to blackmail the economist.
The compromising pictures were taken off an Internet site that was showing them, but at least one webmaster had already copied the whole enchilada, distributing it in a zip file on http://www.geocities.com/malloryknox77/ Apparently, other entrepreneurial minds created CD-ROMs containing the same material with some 80 spicy images being sold for 20 reais ($7) in the streets of Ribeirão.
