MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
US supports Temer: “there has been a clear and undeniable respect for democratic institutions”
United States ambassador before the Organization of American States, OAS, dismissed the notion that a coup is underway in Brazil and openly rejected concern voiced by other member states such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesUS supports Temer.....well,..... we already knew that.
May 20th, 2016 - 05:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Hard to be more highly flawed than rg.
May 20th, 2016 - 05:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Outstanding performance, brzzer!
“Imperial Designs? Current US Ambassador to Brazil Served in Paraguay Prior to 2012 Coup”
May 20th, 2016 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0www.globalresearch.ca/imperial-designs-current-us-ambassador-to-brazil-served-in-paraguay-prior-to-2012-coup/5525790
“Is the U.S. Backing Rousseff's Ouster in Brazil? Opposition Holds Talks in D.C. as Obama Stays Quiet”
www.democracynow.org/2016/4/20/is_the_us_backing_rousseff_s
“Brazil and CIA by Peter Gribbin” www.namebase.org/brazil.html
so the US supports a coup to subvert and overthrow a democratic government in Latin America. Nothing new there then
May 20th, 2016 - 08:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Amazing how weak the people above think Brazil is.
May 20th, 2016 - 10:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Instead of being this big, strong global player as it has been made out to be, it is just some minor tin pot dictatorship that lets more powerful countries interfere and control.
If that's the case, then I guess Brazil was never really that impressive after all.
5 Skip
May 20th, 2016 - 11:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Instead of being this big, strong global player as it has been made out to be, it is just some minor tin pot dictatorship that lets more powerful countries interfere and control.”
So we're into “blaming the victim” game. So according to your logic 9/11 and the subsequent 3,000 American deaths was entirely the fault of the US as they weren't sufficiently a “big, strong global player” able to resist the aims Bin Laden and his operators.
It's you guys that are claiming the US orchestrated a coup using the constitution and systems already in place. Not me. I don't believe this is true.
May 21st, 2016 - 12:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0If your claims are true then the US is so powerful that it could subvert the systems and all the people involved. This isn't possible in a country that is strong and secure.
Comparing Dilma's ouster with 9/11 is disingenuous and an attempt to confuse the issue. There was no change in US government or claims of a coup. Find a better analogy.
7 Skip
May 21st, 2016 - 12:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0“This isn't possible in a country that is strong and secure” Where've spent your life under a rock? The only thing that is disingenuous is your attempt to gloss over the continued and appalling breaches of international law that have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, under filmiest of pretences. Usually following one of the brutal dictators that the US shoe-horned into power, with the excuse “That he may be a SOB, but he's our SOB.” “35 countries where the U.S. has supported fascists, drug lords and terrorists” http://www.salon.com/2014/03/08/35_countries_the_u_s_has_backed_international_crime_partner/ “America's Coup Machine: Destroying Democracy Since 1953 | Alternet” http://www.salon.com/2014/03/08/35_countries_the_u_s_has_backed_international_crime_partner/ Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) http://www.salon.com/2014/03/08/35_countries_the_u_s_has_backed_international_crime_partner/
Terence you continually try to deflect the topic to other issues. I don't fall for that.
May 21st, 2016 - 01:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0If you can't show a definitive link between the current situation in Brazil and US actions, then you can't.
It isn't my fault that you are unable to do so.
Relying on past historical actions doesn't prove current actions.
If you continue to desire to portray Brazil's current crisis with US meddling or interference or actions then do so.
No one is preventing you from providing the proof or facts. Opinion pieces are just that, someone's opinion.
9 Skip “A definitive link between the current situation in Brazil and US actions,”
May 21st, 2016 - 02:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0What an amazing coincidence, where have seen that before. Hmm “Brazil and CIA by Peter Gribbin” www.namebase.org/brazil.html
“Imperial Designs? Current US Ambassador to Brazil Served in Paraguay Prior to 2012 Coup”
www.globalresearch.ca/imperial-designs-current-us-ambassador-to-brazil-served-in-paraguay-prior-to-2012-coup/5525790
“Is the U.S. Backing Rousseff's Ouster in Brazil? Opposition Holds Talks in D.C. as Obama Stays Quiet”
Another wasted post where you couldn't prove a link.
May 21st, 2016 - 02:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0Innuendo and opinions don't beat facts.
You're not very good at this Terence. You've failed multiple times to link Dilma's impeachment with US actions. Continually repeating the exact same opinions and posting the same links only proves you are incapable of supporting your claim.
Repetition creates a meme not a fact.
Skip,
May 21st, 2016 - 03:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0I've been in Latin America as a press observer since 2003, and in Brazil since 2008. In Brazil, the media is 80% in the hands of a small group (called Grupo Globo) who had supported the 1964 Military Coup and have been guiding the present process, including calling people to the streets, publishing illegal/false material and bribing right-wing officials. Most of the Congress was bribed by the leader of the House, notorious criminal Eduardo Cunha, who is already charged of corruption; the Senate, also. There is rampant corruption in all levels in Brazil, but the elected president, Mrs. Rousseff, is not involved in any of them. Laws in Brazil allow for pretty weird things: the Congress was 93% indirectly elected (i.e. people did not put them there, it is a proportionally thing so foreign to Democracy that it is difficult to fathom); Senate is directly elected, but privileged instances mean that most of them are involved in corruption. Most of the Supreme Court has partisan interests, being filmed in secrets talks with right-wing leaders. The mess is too big to explain in few characters, but it is a coup. The right-wing leader promised to remove the left-wing government to give oil exploration rights to Exxon and Chevron (it's on Wikileaks). The judge who started the whole mess was trained in the US; the interim president was an informant to US Embassy; the right's leader travels to Washington for “advice”; and the US Embassador currently in Brazil “oversaw” coups in Honduras and Paraguay, “coincidently”. It reeks of US interference once again. FoIA papers previously released from Washington confirmed US interference in the 1964 Military Coup. It is an US-backed coup going on in Brazil. Again.
Ooh a glitch in the Matrix!
May 21st, 2016 - 03:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0TWIMC
May 21st, 2016 - 08:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Two nice surprises and a confirmation on this thread about Brazil...
Firstly..., I'm positively surprised about the ease Anglo poster Terence Hill has to see the realities of the Imperial designs of the American leg of the Anglosphere with Brazil and many others places... Good analysis... good links... good conclusions...
A sharp contrast though to his brainwased approach to the very same Imperial designs by the British leg of the Anglosphere in the South Atlantic...
Secondly..., Nice to read such a concise, informative and true summary about the current and pasts political realities of Brazil, written by poster (12) Mr. Ivor Scwartz...
A pity that such posters are usually just shooting stars in this bizarre MercoPress corner of the disinformation universe...
Thirdly..., yet another confirmation that poster Skip is just an stuffy Anglo neo-liberal Fräulein with denial capacities that easily match the best stalinist apparatchics from the sixties...
Latam is just as vulnerable to the effects of dishonesty and corruption in all its manifestations as Asia and Africa is to islam.
May 21st, 2016 - 08:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0No matter how you attempt to depict these uncivilized clowns they have previously and are continuing to devolve.
And yet still no one can provide any evidence or facts that this is anything but a domestic Brazilian action.
May 21st, 2016 - 09:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0I mean there's some awesome conspiracy theories being bandied about...... but that is all they are. Even when a new poster appears and states the same version of events..... unsurprisingly nothing new.
Even Think's bland attempts at insults didn't provide any new proof.... again unsurprising.
Latam is fertile ground for fascism.
May 21st, 2016 - 09:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0As digitization has been a potent agent for capitalism and consumerism in Asia and for the tenets of strict orthodox islam in Europe - it to can have a profound effect as the masses in latam are forced to confront just how much the commies have deprived them of in the name of economic liberation as compared to the relative wealth of others.
@6, 8, 10. Some, hopefully, quick and simple points. I didn't see Skip “blaming” Brazil. It's Brazil that has touted itself as a strong, global player. But it's left-slanted Bolivia and Venezuela that are rushing to Rouseff's defence. So the “sides” are left-slanted Rousseff and her left-slanted and corrupt Workers Party on one side and the constitution and institutions of a supposedly-democratic Brazil on the other. Bit like Hitler rushing to Mussolini's aid. As Skip says you are attempting to deflect to your own ant-American agenda.
May 21st, 2016 - 09:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0@12. So you're a “press observer”. What's one of those? Don't you have to follow certain rules? Like not calling someone a criminal until they've been convicted. What's stopping you from passing on all these tasty tidbits to newspapers outside Latin America? Don't you have a favourite newspaper that you'd like to give a “scoop” to? Thing is that your descent into the “left - good, right - bad” rhetoric causes one to think that you have a left agenda. I think “observers” are supposed to be neutral. Except for Russians and Chinese. No-one believes in their “observations”.
11 Skip
May 21st, 2016 - 10:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry omitted the URL on the last post. “Innuendo and opinions don't beat facts.”. But the opine of experts, circumstantial evidence, plus imperial knowledge trumps your baseless denials.
“Is the U.S. Backing Rousseff's Ouster in Brazil? Opposition Holds Talks in D.C. as Obama Stays Quiet”
www.democracynow.org/2016/4/20/is_the_us_backing_rousseff_
”Sen. Aloysio Nunes of Brazil’s center-right PSDB party reportedly is meeting with the chair and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee, and others to discuss the situation in Brazil. He also apparently attended a luncheon hosted by the Washington lobbying firm Albright Stonebridge Group, headed by former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Kellogg Company CEO Carlos Gutierrez.
Carlos Eduardo Martins, a sociology professor at the University of Sao Paulo, told teleSUR that Ayalde is using similar language to defend the parliamentary coup against Rousseff.
“That ambassador acted with great force during the coup that happened in Paraguay and she is in Brazil, using the same discourse, arguing that there is a situation that will be resolved by Brazilian institutions,” Martins said.
Meanwhile, Argentine political analyst Atilo Boron called Ayalde an “expert in promoting ‘soft coups.’”U.S. Department of State spokesperson Elizabeth Trudeau also used similar phrasing when referring to the parliamentary coup in Brazil.
Ayalde left her position as ambassador to Paraguay in August 2011 and went on to serve as Senior Assistant Administrator for the Latin American and Caribbean Bureau for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) before being promoted to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the State Department.
Ayalde became ambassador to Brazil in 2013. She arrived to that post shortly after it was revealed that the U.S. government was spying on Brazil, going so far as to intercept personal communications
#14
May 21st, 2016 - 11:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0Imperial designs by the British leg of the Anglosphere in the South Atlantic...
Elaborate.
“OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro, revealed his public support for Rousseff and has questioned several times the legal and legitimate basis of the impeachment process against Brazil's first woman president.”
May 21st, 2016 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0This execrable person was the rent boy for Dovina the ex-Ambassador to Uruguay for The Dark Country. Uruguay suffered under his term as Foreign Minister, he always agreed with TMBOA.
He has just proven yet again what a useless person he is in any political position and I was overjoyed when the OAS fell for the bullshit and appointed him instead of somebody with a brain.
The US are correct in everything they say.
Every LatAm country is 'ruled' by non-entities, illiterate and innumerate children even in the case of Uruguay, yet they think they are important to the rest of the world.
Nothing could be further from the truth apart from the comedic value.
“reportedly”
May 21st, 2016 - 12:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“apparently”
Well, was he?
Well, did he?
Again, no evidence or facts Terence
I wouldn't even use “apparently” or “reportedly” in stating how bad you are at proving a point.
22 Skip “reportedly” “apparently”
May 21st, 2016 - 01:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Actually stands, as it seemingly hasn't been denied. The legal effect of silence on international organizations and nations is as following: “Thus, he who keeps silent is assumed to consent; silence gives consent. In law, the silence of a party implies his consent.. ”
SOMA'S DICTIONARY OF LATIN QUOTATIONS MAXIMS AND PHRASES
A Compendium Of Latin Thought And Rhetorical Instruments For The Speaker Author And Legal Practitioner
So again,the opinion of experts, the historical narrative, circumstantial evidence, plus empirical knowledge trumps your baseless denials.
”If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck.
^
May 21st, 2016 - 02:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Priceless discourse amongst intellectuals giants.
“reportedly”
May 21st, 2016 - 02:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“apparently”
Well, was he?
Well, did he?
Just because something isn't denied doesn't make it fact.
Saying something must be fact because someone has failed to deny it is non-sequitur.
I have claimed you are an idiot on another Mercopress thread..... you have not denied my claim ergo you are an idiot!
Now that you have supported my claim to your idiocy (refer to post 23), I suppose if I have time I will state you are a paedophile on another thread!
Should you fail to find this thread and deny my claim then we can assume you are a kiddy-fiddler.... make sure you use a gag when you do, because supposedly silence equals consent.
You're pathetic. I'm guessing you didn't complete high school before you became a Google warrior.
^
May 21st, 2016 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Freshman debate champ?
25 Skip
May 21st, 2016 - 02:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Saying something must be fact because someone has failed to deny it is non-sequitur.” The only non-sequitur is your unqualified opinion. The reality is:
Overview of International Law and Institutions, Sources of International Law
“Nations that remain silent, however, may become bound by the rule, even if they did not expressly support it. Silence, in other words, is considered a form of implicit acceptance.”
p. xxv, FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW
https://lawfare.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/staging/s3fs-public/uploads/2013/05/FRLCM_FM.pdf
“I will state you are a paedophile on another thread” That would be more of your uninformed opinion that would simply reveal you as the lying, libelling cocksucker you really are. Like all true trolls, when you don't have the brains to win an argument resort to personal attack, thus showing what a complete and utter loser you really are.
^^
May 21st, 2016 - 02:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Forensic warrior?
23
May 21st, 2016 - 03:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck.
Unless of course...it's a Mallard....
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/crows/images/Mallard%20domestic%20Union%20Springs,%20Cayuga%20Co.,%20NY%2019Feb06%207593a.jpg
#29
May 21st, 2016 - 03:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“We're sorry. The web address you entered is not a functioning address on our site”
The same result on Google, Firefox and I.E
Of course, it could be a Drake instead of a duck.
Try again...
May 21st, 2016 - 03:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.birds.cornell.edu/crows/domducks.htm
“There are many legitimate reasons for the anger of Brazilian society toward the government. But for many of Brazil's most powerful economic and media elites, corruption is merely the excuse, the pretext, for achieving an anti-democratic end. …Impeachment of a president is a legitimate tool in all democracies. But it is an extreme measure, to be used only in the most compelling circumstances of crimes by the Republic's President, and only when there is concrete evidence of that criminality. The case for Dilma's impeachment meets none of those criteria.
May 21st, 2016 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In an advanced democracy, the rule of law, not political power, must prevail. If, despite all this, the country is truly determined to remove Dilma, the worst alternative is to permit the corrupt line of succession to ascend to power.” Opinion: If Impeachment, Then Who? Glenn Greenwald, David Miranda
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/opinion/2016/04/1757991-opinion-if-impeachment-then-who.shtml
“Thus, he who keeps silent is assumed to consent; silence gives consent. In law, the silence of a party implies his consent.. ”
May 21st, 2016 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Terence you failed to deny you were idiot. You also failed to deny you were a paedophile.
Do you see the deficiency of the logic you presented?
I have not introduced the logic, you have. You were hoisted on your petard.
”Like all true trolls, when you don't have the brains to win an argument resort to personal attack, thus showing what a complete and utter loser you really are.“
Which brings us to this.... ”...you as the lying, libelling cocksucker you really are.“
So by your own words, ”you don't have the brains to win an argument [and] resort[ed] to [a] personal attack, thus showing what a complete and utter loser you really are.”
I'm not trying to win an argument. You're trying to turn it into an argument to avoid proving something.
I just want proof of your claim.
Then I'll argue.
I just keep using your own words and logic against you. I'm not introducing anything. You keep doing this to yourself.
You can't provide any proof or fact to support your supposition of current US interference in Brazilian domestic politics and, pointedly, US actions leading to the impeachment of Dilma.
Not one.
All you do is trawl the Internet vainly finding officially sounding or quasi-legal terms to support...... SUPPORT WHAT? You haven't proven anything.
Rumour, innuendo, opinion..... you love trying to sounds like a barrister so find out how far such things would get you in court.
PS: Calling me a cocksucker can't be an insult when it is a fact.
33 Skip
May 21st, 2016 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you really that stupid?, the US government hasn't denied specific allegations about interfering in the internal affairs of Brazil. I have shown with citations, the legal consequences. Which is the assertions become established facts. You are unable to show any other possible legal interpretation to what I have proffered. You further conceded the issue when you engaged in an argumentum ad hominem. So the issue is over, you only get only get one kick at the can. You lost, get over it.
For me it's never about winning or losing...
May 21st, 2016 - 11:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's about watching people come apart at the seams in the process....
It can take days....
..but always worth watching....
Now where's my popcorn....;-))))
So still no proof, Terence?
May 21st, 2016 - 11:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“the US government hasn't denied specific allegations about interfering in the internal affairs of Brazil”
Hmmm “allegations”! I'm sure you can find the definition of that on Google.
You honestly keep making my point.
I also note you have still failed to deny you are idiot or a paedophile. You do realise that failing to do so, using your own logic, can have legal consequences?
I don't want to win anything. I just want you to prove your supposition of current US interference in Brazilian domestic politics and, pointedly, US actions leading to the impeachment of Dilma.
So far you have provided an allegation.
36 Skip
May 22nd, 2016 - 12:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0There's none so blind as those that do not see. So here go, absolute proofs for second time, that you have failed to refute, troll.
Your argumentum ad hominem was answered thus: “That would be more of your uninformed opinion that would simply reveal you as the lying, libelling cocksucker you really are. Like all true trolls, when you don't have the brains to win an argument you resort to a personal attack, thus showing what a complete and utter loser you really are.”
US governments failure to deny the claims of “Is the U.S. Backing Rousseff's Ouster in Brazil? Opposition Holds Talks in D.C. as Obama Stays Quiet” www.democracynow.org/2016/4/20/is_the_us_backing_rousseff and “Imperial Designs? Current US Ambassador to Brazil Served in Paraguay Prior to 2012 Coup” www.globalresearch.ca/imperial-designs-current-us-ambassador-to-brazil-served-in-paraguay-prior-to-2012-coup/5525790
You are unable to refute the legal consequences of their failure which results in the claims being established as true. According to SOMA'S DICTIONARY OF LATIN QUOTATIONS MAXIMS AND PHRASES “Thus, he who keeps silent is assumed to consent; silence gives consent. In law, the silence of a party implies his consent.. ”
and ”Silence, in other words, is considered a form of implicit acceptance.” p. xxv, FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW lawfare.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/staging/s3fs-public/uploads/2013/05/FRLCM_FM.pdf
We are not in a court of law.
May 22nd, 2016 - 01:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0And none of these allegations have been made in a court of law.
They are opinion pieces and allegation made by individuals in the media.
They have been made in the court of public opinion.
So why do you keep continually harping back to legal doctrine that is not applicable?
There is no court case here. And you aren't a lawyer.
The idea that a national government needs to refute every single claim appearing in the media is simply farcical.
You keep providing two articles. One article does not disclose the author excerpt to say it from Telesur (which isn't independent from government control). The other is authored by Mark Weisbrot and Andrew Fishmam.
In which court have these 2 known and 1 unknown author made their allegations?
38 Skip
May 22nd, 2016 - 02:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0The difference is you claim with absolutely no proof. Everything I've stated is corroborated with citations. Thus, it is proven and I have fulfilled the requirements of my burden of proof. Whilst you have failed to meet your burden of proof.
”Burden of proof (or onus probandi in Latin) is the obligation on somebody presenting a new idea (a claim) to provide evidence to support its truth (a warrant). Once evidence has been presented, it is up to any opposing “side” to prove the evidence presented is not adequate. Burdens of proof are key to having logically valid statements: if claims were accepted without warrants, then every claim could simultaneously be claimed to be true.
Abuse
Burden of proof is often abused in rhetoric and arguments.
Shifting the burden
Fallacious shifting of the burden of proof occurs if someone makes a claim that needs justification, then demands that the opponent justify the opposite of the claim. The opponent has no such burden until evidence is presented for the claim.”
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Citation is nothing more than referencing a source of information. It does not verify the source and nor does it automatically make the source sufficient or correct. Did you even finish high school? That is pretty basic research fundamentals.
May 22nd, 2016 - 02:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0I do not require proof. I am not making any claims.
I'll repeat that because you keep repeating a falsehood.... I AM NOT MAKING ANY CLAIMS.
It is you that is making a claim not me.
I don't have to provide anything. It is you that must provide proof and and you have yet to do that.
Continue to deflect. Continue to introduce links to legal terms and concepts. However it is you that is shifting a burden of proof to me. Which is impossible because I have not made any claim.
“Fallacious shifting of the burden of proof occurs if someone makes a claim that needs justification...”
That's you!
“...then demands that the opponent justify the opposite of the claim.”
That's you again!
”The opponent has no such burden until evidence is presented for the claim.”
That's me!
So again, you do my job for me.
I just want you to prove your supposition of current US interference in Brazilian domestic politics and, pointedly, US actions leading to the impeachment of Dilma.
You made the claim so now present the proof.
Skippy is a dishonest, lying little wussie weasel.
May 22nd, 2016 - 02:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0When he's contradicted he obfuscates.
He busted himself out on this just the other day.
lol
Shame on you, weasel.
40 Skip
May 22nd, 2016 - 03:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Citation is nothing more than referencing a source of information. It does not verify the source and nor does it automatically make the source sufficient or correct.” Then it stands unless you meet your burden and prove it is in fact invalid.
“The idea that a national government needs to refute…” Is a claim made by you, that has failed to refute my cited assertion. Thus, you have failed to meet your burden.
“I don't have to provide anything. It is you that must provide proof and and you have yet to do that.”
Oh yes you do “..it is up to any opposing “side” to prove the evidence presented is not adequate. ..”
I have provided all the properly provided proof and ”..provided evidence to support its truth (a warrant). “Which you have failed to refute.
”Continue to deflect.” Is a lie as my claims are firmly established according to the rules of rhetoric and arguments.
It is you who has failed to refute any of my proven assertions, and thus continues to try to make fallacious shifting of the burden of proof.
Wooooo - hooooo!
May 22nd, 2016 - 03:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0Skippy, skint by a canoooki.
When skippy's ideas fail (often) he equivocates.
The canookis are dumber than a box of rocks skippy but at least they don't dither incessantly.
What stands Terence? I am not denying that someone made a claim.
May 22nd, 2016 - 03:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0But there is no proof. How can a claim be proof? An opinion cannot be proof of an action.
I am not the opposing side. I am just asking you to prove your claim. That doesn't make me an opposing side. Anyone can ask for this - even someone who agrees with you.
“..my claims are firmly established according to the rules of rhetoric and arguments.”
See you clearly state that you have made claims.
Rules of rhetoric and arguments.... Whose rules. You always try to fall back on some set of rules or law to bolster your position. But you still fail to deliver proof.
Critical thinking is at the core of discourse, rhetoric and arguments. You have failed to critically think. You have taken someone's claim at face value and accepted it as a fact without them providing any proof other than their opinion.
However when someone asks you to substantiate your support of this claim, you don't analyse the original claimants proof but ask someone to disprove an opinion.
You can continue to repeat your claims in myriads of different ways but it all boils down to the same thing. You cannot show any proof to substantiate your supposition of current US interference in Brazilian domestic politics and, pointedly, US actions leading to the impeachment of Dilma.
Except for someone's opinion, namely Mark and Andrew's opinion.
I cannot refute your proven assertions simply because you have not proven them. If perhaps you had been able to do that, then I would attempt to refute them.
But as you can't, you prevent me from doing that. You continue to prevent me because you continue to fail to provide proof other than Mark and Andrew's opinion.
@32. As I pointed out elsewhere, I wouldn't believe Glenn Greenwald if he was the last man on the planet. He is demonstrably anti-American and probably in Rousseff's pocket. And to add in Miranda just makes it worse. A Brazilian operating as a courier between Snowden and Greenwald.
May 22nd, 2016 - 11:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0@34. I read that “legal citation”. Do you have trouble comprehending English? I point first to the word “may” included in the content. “May” admits the possibility of “may not”. Moreover you can take the whole of the last sentence in its entirety. It doesn't say that silence means fact. Here's an interpretation. Silence means that acceptance of what has been said is preferable, in appropriate circumstances, to setting out the actual facts. See how easy it is? An analogy would be the offender who, after being found guilty of one offence, admits to 40 other similar offences on the basis that his sentence won't be as much as if he were tried for each offence separately. Don't have much experience of law, do you? So quit trying to quote opinions. Incidentally, there are undoubtedly many articles published about the US government every day. Do you expect that government to waste its time responding to each one? There is such a thing as considering an article, a probe, whatever you want to call it, beneath contempt and not worth responding to. But your aim is to blame the US for everything? Should it take the blame for global warming? China and India are far more guilty. Argieland interfered in Paraguay's internal affairs and tried to do so in the UK. It's also regularly interfered in Uruguay. Why does your finger only point one way? And suppose the US had said nothing about Temer? How would you have interpreted that “silence”?
44 Skip
May 22nd, 2016 - 12:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The proof is clarity shown by the US's failure to, at a minimum deny the claims in the press that present ambassador to Brazil has been in three latin
American nations where coups have happened on her watch. Secondly,the leader of the Brazilian opposition flew to the US for consultation with US government and a private firm with ties to the US foreign affairs. The US's failure gives rise to a legal consequence that is shown in two citations.
The fact that you are ignorant of such rules, imposes no obligation on me to acquaint you with them. All that is required, is that I meet the prerequisites of the burden of proof, which I have done.
United States is a liar!
May 22nd, 2016 - 01:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0^^^^^^^^^^^^^
May 22nd, 2016 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0lol
Two cretins arguing the rhetorical equivalent of how many angels will fit on the point of a needle.
Very entertaining - NOT!
Slight edge to Teri.
The U.S. says all is well with Brazil's soft coup?
May 22nd, 2016 - 04:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For once, it's good they show once more where the true interests of the “champion of the free world” stands, Obama or not Obama.
The U.S. government is no doubt happy this new soft coup mechanism appears to work to keep things the way they want in Latin America, as a replacement of the old strategy of military coups they used in previous decades.
The signs are clear: Formal democracy still needs much improvement in Latin America, with the media and the judiciary in serious need of revamping so that real democracy can begin to exist.
As Ivor Schwartz writes in his excellent post at #12, concentrated media ownership and complicity among the U.S. and the most reactionary elements of Brazilian society runs deep and has been able, once more, to topple a government that threatened to change the old order.
With Argentina and Brazil back to the fold, expect similar strategies to be now used against the remaining unconventional governments still in existence in Latin American countries.
In addition to it's “interference” in Brazilian politics, did the U.S. exercise some covert interference in the recent Argentine presidential elections also?
May 22nd, 2016 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'd like to ask about this statement of yours also:
“with the media and the judiciary in serious need of revamping so that real democracy can begin to exist.”
Can you tell me what kinds of revamping of the media and judiciary you think would be best?
50 bushpilot “Revamping of the media and judiciary you think would be best?” I'm, guessing a little less of the following.
May 22nd, 2016 - 10:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”Now, there are two actors involved around coup d’état: the judiciary and media. Media
The role of media over Brazilian public opinion, Globo controls more than 60% of the market, ... Globo was the cornerstone of ideological legitimation of the military dictatorship that ruled Brazil, also its principal financial beneficiary. Globo has operated as a veto player. Its role in producing a persistent biased narrative about corruption on Petrobras has been decisive to undermine Dilma’s administration. According to this narrative, corruption scandals are the exclusive responsibility of Workers’ Party.
Judiciary
Lula and Dilma have introduced something originally weird: they voluntarily gave up their constitutional prerogatives to appoint the Chief of Staff of Public Prosecutor’s Office (in charge of Petrobras investigations) with a naive presupposition to improve the independence and rigor of judicial enforcement. That partly has led to judicial activism and its procedural arbitrariness used to overthrow the government that guaranteed judiciary’s anomalous autonomy and dangerous scope to the partisan capture.
The Coup’s Mechanics
The judge and prosecutors have joined forces with the media, and opposition leaders in an alliance. There is only one condition: the leadership from opposition parties shouldn’t be accused of anything. Those in charge of the Lava Jato operations have used procedures to acquire evidence, submitting suspects to long periods of preventive detention, to push them to agree with a plea bargain. Judge Moro is openly engaged in illegal leaks from the investigation, creating a climate of daily media ... Much of the leaked information isn’t corroborated by material evidence. The Coup d’Etat in Brazil http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/voices/the-coup-detat-in-brazil/
So still no proof of any wrong doing Terence?
May 22nd, 2016 - 10:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Two opinion piece and one is written by the Venezuelan controlled Telesur. Interesting that Chronic thinks this is acceptable (interesting but hardly surprising).
I guess the burden of actually trying to find proof other than these articles is just impossible for you Terence.
All this proof you have.... and yet not a peep from Dilma or the PT about it. Why is that Terence? Why is it that only people like you and these fringe publication can see this conspiracy for which they can provide any proof except innuendo.
I'm sure you can find the definition of innuendo.
52 Skip “So still no proof of any wrong doing”
May 22nd, 2016 - 11:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Every thing has been confirmed according to the tenets of the burden of proof. Of course, there “is none so blind as those that refuse to see”
But the failure of the US response, coupled with a historical narrative. www.salon.com/2014/03/08/35_countries_the_u_s_has_backed_international_crime_partner/ “America's Coup Machine: Destroying Democracy Since 1953 | Alternet” www.alternet.org/world/americas-coup-machine-destroying-democracy-1953 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) www.icj-cij.org/docket/?sum=367&p1=3&p2=3&case=70&p3=5
Which becomes irrefutable with an appeal to Judicial notice
“Judicial notice is a rule in the law of evidence that allows a fact to be introduced into evidence if the truth of that fact is so notorious or well known, or so authoritatively attested, that it cannot reasonably be doubted.”
Judicial notice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_notice
So the articles become fait accompli according to: ”Silence, in other words, is considered a form of implicit acceptance.” p. xxv, FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW lawfare.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/staging/s3fs-public/uploads/2013/05/FRLCM_FM.pdf
lol
May 22nd, 2016 - 11:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Is Skippy the queen of denial?
And yes - no acceptance of your attempt to speak for me, Skippy.
: )
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/05/20/us-supports-temer-there-has-been-a-clear-and-undeniable-respect-for-democratic-institutions#comment441046: I have seen no evidence for any US involvement in the Brazilian impeachment and trial. And, to counter the headline, I would understand the ambassador's statement as US support of Temer. (Mercopenguin is a British government run propaganda site so I do interpret this article as British support of Temer.)
May 23rd, 2016 - 02:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0Impeachment and trial is a quasi judicial procedure but it fundamentally a political act. This is why various Republicans have stated that Nixon's probable impeachment and conviction as 'pay back' - for something - I cannot remember exactly for what right now.
It is unclear what Dilma's defense is to be. But if is to be, “I am not guilty because others have done it before me”, then it will fail. This is what I call the 'Tricky Dickie' defense - it was made in the run up to the committee vote by various Nixon supporters - but not by Nixon himself.
#55
May 23rd, 2016 - 08:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0Mercopenguin is a British government run propaganda site so I do interpret this article as British support of Temer.)
You obviously have proof of this so please give us your evidence...not your skewed and biased opinion.
As for the average Brit. all we know about Brazil is football, samba and what appears to be a cheery people. As to their politics, we don't give a rat's arse.
I doubt if anybody could name the president if asked.
(56) Lowlander Clyde15
May 23rd, 2016 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Bought and paid for...
See last entry at...:
“Falkland Islands News Agencies”...
http://fiassociation.com/article.php/28
#57
May 23rd, 2016 - 04:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The old man of Chubut....with apologies to E.Hemingway.
Google blocked access to this site as phishing attempts have been reported.
Thanks for that!!!!!
(58) Lowlander Clyde15
May 23rd, 2016 - 05:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://fiassociation.com is the link to the Official Engrish Pirate Charity site of the FALKLANDS ISLANDS ASSOCIATION....
Never had any problem wit that site...
But... Being Engrish pirates as they are, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they tried to, once again, take advantage of an unaware gullible Lowland Scot...
Thank your Sassenach friends..., not me...
I am many things but not gullible. I saw through you years ago.
May 23rd, 2016 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 059 Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer and impersonator extraordinaire
May 23rd, 2016 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The link to the Official Engrish Pirate Charity site of the FALKLANDS ISLANDS ASSOCIATION….” Thank for more confirmation that you are a proven liar since you have failed to meet your burden of proof. The only piracy committed with regard to the Islands, was exclusively by Argentine agents. “Argentina, which employed privateers …One Argentine privateer was the Herotna, which sailed in 1820 commanded by an American called David Jewett…he captured a Portuguese one, the Carlota, which was piracy, since Argentina and Portugal were not at war….American charge d'affaires Francis Baylies accused Vemet of piracy” Getting it right: the real history of the Falklands/Malvinas by Graham Pascoe and Peter Pepper
“There is scarcely a Buenos Ayrean privateer which has not committed piracy of every description - it appears that at Buenos Ayres itself commissions of Artigas have been sold to the Captains of the Buenos Ayres privateers, who have gone to sea, and used one or the other commission as suited their purposes... There is not a day passes but we hear of new crimes of this description committed under the flag and commission of Buenos Ayres ...” John Quincy Adams July 20th, 1820
#59
May 24th, 2016 - 08:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0As usual you have got it all wrong. Phishers use genuine sites and download dodgy links hoping someone will open them.. SO, it is more likely that it is some of your ARGIE colleagues who are attempting to subvert this website. There is absolutely NO benefit to the fiassociation.com to alienate their prospective viewers.
However, from the Argentine mafia point of view, they would love any site promoting the Falklands to be closed...hence the attempts at phishing.
(62) Lowlander Clyde15...
May 24th, 2016 - 01:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cut the Sasseenach whinging.....
Did you see the London based Falkland Islands (Pirate) Association confitmation of the status of MercoPress as a Falkland Islands News Agency or not...?
Oi 'no bikes' Think and 'no decent bikes' ugly mug Voice. Argentina is leading the Southern hemisphire 'crook index' according to your much loved newsrag Clarin..
May 24th, 2016 - 04:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.clarin.com/politica/Robos-America_Latina-ONU_0_1029497294.html
Never mind Falkland Island matters they are nothing to do with you anyway. Now the crook in chief is heading for a life behind bars you can start the process of decriminalising the population. Who knows, this wave of righeousness could spread to those other SA dens of iniquity that call themselves countries too. There is hope for you you know.
#43 Pathetic Ist generation Chubut moaning squatter.
May 24th, 2016 - 05:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No I did not. I am not going to open sites that you and your pals have possibly tried to wreck.
So what has your comments to do with phishing attempts on that site?.
Is Clarin a Falklands/UK mouthpiece....please tell.
I would rather be your proclaimed ”unaware gullible Lowland Scot...and Sasseenach whinging.....than a mendacious, bumptious sad character like you living in a Celtic dream world where you use vocabulary that you don't understand..
A you have decided to use snide insults, I am more than happy to reciprocate.
Stay tuned.
(65) Lowlander Clyde15
May 24th, 2016 - 05:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At (56), you ask poster Hepatia to provide evidence about MercoPress' being a British government run propaganda site...
At (57) I provide you with su h asked evidence through a perfectly functioning link to the “Falkland Island Assosiation”.
At (58), (62) & (65) you find paranoid excuses not to look at the provided proof....
Why the fkuck do you ask then...?
Oi Think. What are you wittering about now? Why dont you tell us about your chief crook and what is happening to her know. And, Fat Max, tbe son that ate all tbe pies and wrecked your airline. The Chief crook wrecked your economy, Mr Macri has an almost impossible task thanks to her.
May 24th, 2016 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How are you going to play your part to help him?
#66 Pathetic Ist generation Chubut moaning squatter.
May 24th, 2016 - 07:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I took the link you provided and came to the web site. Yes, it is for dissemination of news about the Falklands and associated comment about Argentina and S.America. I would say that it is no worse than the lies your government has been issuing against the Falklands ...even at UN level.
I could not find anything saying that Mercopress was an official Falklands Island Association site. I do not have the time or inclination to troll through reams to verify or not that this is true. If it is true I don't care. It must be a typical British example of fairness to let Hepatica, the idiot Troll with a thousand names and others, including yourself to bombard it with anti-British venom based personal prejudice.
Even then, can you prove it is funded by the UK Foreign Office ?
What I could not find was any statement that this site was financed and run by the UK Foreign Office. Can you direct me to where this information can be verified....not a Hepatia statement please as her scholarship is piss poor.
63 Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer and impersonator extraordinaire
May 24th, 2016 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”London based Falkland Islands (Pirate) Association” No such organization exists by description or deed. Again, the only historically confirmed piracy was practiced by Argentina and no one else in the South Atlantic(re: post #61). If this wasn't true you would have been able to provide evidence to the contrary. Instead of revealing such a claim hasn't been proved because it's a lie.
I'm being referred to...and I haven't said anything...
May 25th, 2016 - 12:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0....but if you want my penny's worth...
I'll provide some pieces of the puzzle and see if you can make the connections...
Also a dash of linked proof to top it off....
Falklands Islands Association was responsible for the formation of the Falklands Islands Trust....
The administrative secretary of the trust was Doris Dodson....
Doris Dodson was also employed by MercoPress...
Anyone see the connections....;-))))
http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Doris-Dodson/353723815
@70 Seems to me you neednt have bothered. No one believes a word you say anyway. Your credentials are clear.
May 25th, 2016 - 01:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0About MercoPress
May 25th, 2016 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0MercoPress is an independent news agency started in 1993 which focuses on delivering news related to the Mercosur trade and political bloc, and member countries, covering an area of influence which includes South America, the South Atlantic and insular territories.
http://en.mercopress.com/about-mercopress
read on...
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/05/20/us-supports-temer-there-has-been-a-clear-and-undeniable-respect-for-democratic-institutions#comment441256: The location from which each post originates is contained within the post. Trace that back to - guess where?
May 27th, 2016 - 12:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Also the British operate a mini AIPAC like lobbying operation in Washington, DC. You will find a number of British government links through this organization.
Clyde15
May 27th, 2016 - 06:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you may well be wasting your time,
escaped asylum personal are just not interested in the truth,
only their warped minds,
Hepatia
introducing a back link just proves the point
And Argentina will still be waiting 25 years from now..
#73
May 28th, 2016 - 10:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0The planet X ?
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!