Sunday, November 26, 2017

Answer to John Haskins, the Creator of the Inter-American Institute


Answer to John Haskins, the Creator of the Inter-American Institute

By Julio Severo
To hide his own effeminacy, John Haskins accuses Christian leaders of “effeminate.” To hide his own apostasy, he accuses Christian leaders of “apostate.” To hide the suspicion that he himself received money, he accuses Christian leaders of “accepting quietly money.” He does such accusations because Christian leaders in America have rejected him. Only a Brazilian astrologer has accepted him, for the time being, while there is some usability in his recruiting skills.
A conservative organization is supposed to help a sick society to reach some measure of conservative health, and such was my expectation regarding the Inter-American Institute (IAI), whose idea and creation came from John Haskins.
I contacted IAI recently to expose the moral and spiritual condition of Olavo de Carvalho, whom Haskins chose to head IAI. This assistance is especially necessary because Haskins and other IAI members are unable to follow Carvalho’s prolific radical stances, his prolific profanities, his prolific diatribes against Protestants, his prolific advocacy of the Inquisition and his prolific attacks on a Protestant America traditionally opposed to the Inquisition. His prolific stances are available only in Portuguese.
In fact, it is very strange for Haskins to choose a Brazilian immigrant, who has very few articles published in English, to head an organization ostensibly to impact America.
Why Haskins would choose a Brazilian whom most IAI members and most Americans cannot read and understand is a mystery.
A conservative organization should defend life against pro-abortion and pro-death forces, and such mission is obviously conflicted if a IAI member has been the most prominent propagandist of the Inquisition in Brazil. This is Carvalho’s specific case.
IAI has never been a prominent organization in the U.S. When I came to know it almost ten years ago, it had no physical headquarters, which has been a reality until very recently. In all of these years, there has been no systematic activity to promote, in the name of IAI, pro-family values. But there is an IAI website where there is an effort to introduce Carvalho to the U.S. public through very few articles in English, because he is not prolific in English.
Perhaps the biggest opportunity to put IAI in a U.S. spotlight was an unfounded accusation, published in a 2011 WND report, that the FBI was threatening Carvalho. This accusation proved fruitless because the FBI, when contacted by WND, denied any contact or threat to Carvalho, who had not recorded the alleged threat or even recorded the name and identification of the alleged FBI agent who made the threat.
In spite of the WND report six years ago, IAI was not catapulted into national fame in the U.S. and no major or small communist, socialist, progressive and left-wing organization in America noticed Carvalho’s or IAI’s existence to blacklist them.
Even I, with no post of president of any conservative group in America, have had my name blacklisted by major left-wing organizations in America and my articles have been directly attacked by major U.S. media outlets.
With no prominence in the U.S., Carvalho depends on the prominent U.S. names Haskins has recruited to give Carvalho some prestige in the U.S.
IAI members are aware of my substantiated articles refuting Carvalho’s controversial views.
Haskins’s reaction to my private communication to IAI members has been to publish open tantrums and slanders against me through Carvalho’s Facebook. So he has no right to complain that his unconservative attitudes are being publicly addressed here.
Haskins has been wordy in this text, and his abundant words express, as Jesus said, the abundance of his heart — the very heart behind the creation of IAI.
If you want to understand IAI’s heart, this report is for you. If you have no interest in IAI, just do not lose your time with the textual debris from an oppressed and spiritually damaged heart at the service of an astrologer’s heart.
Be patient if my defense is sometimes repetitive, because my accuser has been overly repetitive in his abusive words and descriptions.
This article contains Haskins’s latest public accusations and my own answers.
John Haskins: What drives Julio Severo to this rabid vengeance?
Julio Severo: In his unbalanced mental condition, Haskins has spent almost one decade accusing U.S. Christian leaders much better than he is, including Pat Robertson, Scott Lively, Matt Barber and Mike Heath, and now does he accuse me of the very revengeful feelings he has amassed for years?
He is able to accuse excellent U.S. Christians while at the same time he embraces and excuses a Brazilian occultist who openly reviles U.S. Christians. This is not a Christian behavior. This is an apostate behavior. This is rabid vengeance.
What is Haskins’s problem? Does he think that with a baseless accusation against the messenger he can deflect the attention from substantiated and real accusations? Carvalho has been reviling me and lying about me since October 2013 when, as an evangelical, I contested his strident advocacy of the Inquisition. Immediately after my polite refutation, Carvalho began to pour out a torrent of profanities against me — day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. Four years later, he keeps reviling me. Last October, he reviled me every day — perhaps to celebrate exact 4 years of his attacks on me. His Facebook and Twitter have plenty of his comments containing, against me, words as “psychopath, criminal, swindler and scoundrel.” This is just a small sample of the collection I have made of his attacks against me that began merely because of my polite disagreement with his view on the Inquisition.
There are lawsuits of 20 years ago against him by his former students of astrology over swindle. Even so, in the communist style, he has been accusing me of what he had already been formally accused.
And if the victim reacts, is “rabid vengeance”? How much is Haskins paid to lie? How much is he paid to slander?
In the actual world of the Inquisition, Jewish and Protestant victims were tortured and killed for disagreeing with the Catholic Church. In the world of a modern advocate of the Inquisition, I am called a “psychopath, criminal, swindler and scoundrel” just because I disagreed with him. I came to expose his view as a direct answer to his torrent of name-calling during years.
What Haskins calls “rabid vengeance” is my effort to make available in English what usually Carvalho says in Portuguese — never in English. Some of Carvalho’s Portuguese comments translated by me into English are:
“Protestantism was born from hatred and blood thirst. Its Christian inspiration is ZERO.”
“Luther and Calvin were hatred-filled souls. The former was guilty of genocide, the latter the creator of totalitarian government. Their followers are on the way of Hell, and if it is necessary to revile them using all the curse words to take them from this mess, I will do it pitilessly.”
“One of the favorite myths of the American culture is that the Protestant Reformation was one of the main sources of religious freedom, individual rights and protections against abuses from a central government. Add to it the Weberian (or semi-Weberian) false belief that the ‘Protestant ethics’ created capitalism, and the only possible conclusion is that today’s citizen is indebted to Luther and Calvin, after all, for virtually all the legal, political and economic benefits of living in a modern democracy. But all of this is propaganda, not History.”
“Freedom of opinion is the last refuge of idiots.”
“I kneel down before the priest to receive the communion, but if after the Mass I feel necessary to tell him ‘f**k you,’ I will do it with full tranquility: Look, you fool. There you were Jesus Christ, but here you are just a little shit.”
“As far as I know, only Portugal, Spain, Hungry and Poland had brave Christians. The remaining world has a multitude of faggots.”
“If I had a cunt, I would sexually blackmail all congressmen and destroy the whole political class.”
“I repeat: there was never an entity called ‘the Inquisition’ and much less ‘Holy Inquisition.’”
“Bergoglio should be kicked out with our feet from Peter’s throne as soon as possible.”
“After someone is raped, he/she can find some retroactive consolation in the idea that a cock had always been his/her secret wish.”
“I am not a right-winger or a left-winger.”
“The Catholic Church was born offering martyrs, the protestant church was born killing.”
“Herod saved many souls: he killed little children before they could sin.”
“Do you think that it is sheer coincidence that the brutal growth of criminality and especially political corruption have happened at the same time that Liberation Theology destroyed internally the Catholic Church and makeshift ‘evangelical’ churches, filled of swindling ministers, had a widespread growth?”
“Stupid evangelicals listen with so much naivety to ministers who are semiliterate, junkies, thieves and prostitutes that it is the world’s eighth wonder.”
“In the Hollywood movies, for each three words, two are ‘fuck.’ This is what isolates and debilitates American conservatives.”
“Lenin knew that, in politics, he who reviles the most always runs ahead.”
“While I have strength left, I will systematically profane all rules of good verbal behavior that I come to know of.”
“Without the black legend of the Inquisition, the Protestant churches would never have achieved the success they did. Who does not want to flee from the torturers’ bloody hands to the arms of Our Lord? Legend is an integral component of the Protestant prestige and, if the legend falls, the Protestant prestige falls together.”
“The myth of the Inquisition was the vastest and lasting campaign of slander and defamation of all time, until today, with multi-million dollar funding, and it seems that it is going never to run out. This myth was not concocted by Illuminists and communists. It was concocted by Protestants, who continue promoting it until now, and their irradiant center are U.S. churches.”
“Five centuries of fierce and constant (even today) anti-Catholic lies make Protestants the ultimate champions of character assassination — much above, in this respect, to Illuminists and communists.”
“Read, for example, ‘Knowledge and the Sacred’ or ‘Man and Nature’ by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, who was the minister of culture in Iran in the time of Reza Pahlevi. Books like these bring back to us, in the reflow of a historic tide launched by a big lie, truths that were betrayed and forgotten in the process’ beginning. ‘Ex Oriente lux’: the light coming from East. It should be of little importance that it has been brought smuggled in the baggage of thieves, genocidal murders and Stalinists. This is not enough to eclipse it. Today, dependent on it is largely the reconquest of the Western ideals forsaken by the immanentist culture of the last two centuries.”
“For a time, [Olavo de Carvalho] devoted himself to Islamic studies — learned Arabic and recites the Koran passages — and won an award in Saudi Arabia in 1985 for a 200-page book (unpublished) about Muhammad, wherein he used knowledge of medieval symbolics to interpret episodes from the life of the prophet. He practices Christianity, but he says he would be comfortable to profess Islam. This is because, in his view, Christianity, Islam and Judaism have basically the same goal. The existence of God is to Olavo the supreme obviousness, the founding basis of everything.”
“So when I am introduced as a ‘conservative philosopher,’ the only answer coming to my mind is: ‘Conservative is ‘puta que o pariu’ (an offensive Brazilian expletive which means “son of a bitch” or “fucking hell,” but the real translation is: “a prostitute who gave birth”), who preserved you in her belly for nine months instead of dropping you in the toilet.’”
“In the U.S. only the Left utters profanity. This is enough to explain why U.S. conservatives, even when they are the majority, are always disadvantaged.”
Each one of these comments by Carvalho is interpreted by Haskins as my own slander “invented” against Carvalho.
Haskins’s nonsense is akin to accusing a Jew of defamation against Nazis for showing photos of Nazi crimes against the Jews.
A courageous Haskins, instead of saying of Carvalho would say: “Carvalho is too effeminate to say in English the nasty things he says in Portuguese.” For someone as Haskins who just loves to accuse everyone of “effeminacy,” he is too effeminate to say the necessary truth about Carvalho.
For someone as Haskins who alleges that his function in the Inter-American Institute is legal understanding of issues, he speaks too much, he accuses too much. This is effeminacy. People with real legal understanding do not waste their time with a multitude of complains of “slanders” and “lies.” They take legal action. They immediately press charges.
Carvalho has also the same problem: he speaks too much, he accuses too much. He just loves to accuse and revile Brazilians from far away in his condition of immigrant in the United States.
Carvalho also loves to revile American Protestants in Portuguese — a language far away from their reach and understanding. He does not expose in English his abundant and prolific nasty words and behavior in Portuguese because he is afraid to lose the chance of getting the U.S. citizenship. This is also effeminacy. After getting the U.S. citizenship, will he be courageous to revile in English the U.S. Protestants in the same way he has being doing in Portuguese for years? Or will he continue his effeminate behavior?
Anyway, at last Haskins has found a Brazilian who is as effeminate as he is in accusing far away.
Haskins: It’s been proved in detail how Julio Severo has lied multiple times to slander Olavo se Carvalho, who had done much to help him. Yet, ignoring all the proofs, Severo has neither recanted nor removed from circulation on various sites the falsehoods he’s been spreading.
Severo: It has been proved in detail that the multiple comments mentioned above were personally written by Carvalho. If they are multiple lies, the responsibility is of the author. If they are multiple lies and slanders, they are Carvalho’s multiple self-lies and self-slanders.
So who is blatantly ignoring all proofs is the accuser, not his victim. Besides, if my articles are “slander,” Haskins and Carvalho have a manly obligation to sue me and all American websites that have published my articles, including BarbWire.
Recant? That was a Catholic term applied to heretics. That was a Catholic term applied to the victims of the Inquisition. Has Haskins become an esoteric Catholic? Am I before the tribunal of the Inquisition? If I do not recant Carvalho’s self-slanders, am I going to be burned at the stake?
I am very sure that the Jewish and Protestant victims who did not recant were labeled “psychopath, criminal, swindler and scoundrel” and much more. I know such slanderous labels. I do not know only what is to be burned at a stake.
I have defended Protestant America against Carvalho’s attacks portraying American Protestants as liars for their “propaganda” against the Inquisition — which Carvalho insists it brought “human rights.” As far as America is concerned, this fight is solitary, because the U.S. public cannot understand Carvalho’s attacks on U.S. Protestants in Portuguese and my fight to counter these attacks.
Carvalho’s usual profanities, including against me, evangelicals and Luther and Calvin are unknown in English, and even Haskins said in 2013: “He would never dare say these things in English.” I have, for the first time ever, translated his own public profanities, including his advocacy of the Inquisition, into English. It is dishonest to accuse of slander when Carvalho’s comments are sheer self-slander. Why has Haskins lied multiple times to defend Carvalho and slander me?
To revile a Christian who politely disagreed with Carvalho over the Inquisition cannot be interpreted as him having “done much to help him.” It is impossible to interpret as “much help” slanders like “psychopath, criminal, swindler and scoundrel” just because the victim did not accept the pro-Inquisition view of the slanderer.
Pharaoh was a good guy to Israel and Moses. But when Pharaoh began to behave as a bad guy, Israel and Moses forgot the former good guy. In fact, Moses began to confront the former good guy. I have behaved just like Moses.
I have exposed Carvalho’s own public and published words. Haskins has never been able to disprove any of Carvalho’s comments I have mentioned. If Haskins and Carvalho insist Carvalho’s own public and published words are not his, there are courts, and they can sue me. In this case, the courts can judge who has been honest and dishonest in these issues. Press your charges!
Haskins: In fact, ignoring the proof to the contrary, Severo has again asserted, for example, that Olavo practices astrology, though Olavo infuriated the astrologers by showing decades ago that the practice of astrology is fraud.
Severo: There is abundant evidence and information, strengthened by bibliographical proofs, that Carvalho has a long history of astrology. He has several published books on astrology — ignored by Haskins. He founded the first school of astrology in Brazil — ignored by Haskins. He founded other astrological associations in Brazil. Haskins was unable to disprove it.
One Brazilian astrologer, Lígia Prado, has her name in an international astrologer directory, with this credential: “Studied Astrocharacterology with Olavo de Carvalho.” Sociedade Brasileira de Astrocaracterologia (Brazilian Society of Astrocharacterology) was founded by Carvalho in 1989.
Today, Carvalho is known for his ability to be perceived, especially by his adherents, as a man whose predictions came true, even though for each one of these cases he can actually have been recorded signalizing in several directions, but only the sign that eventually worked is later emphasized by him and repeated by his adherents as a mantra. For such predictions, his adherents are taught to chant “Olavo has reason,” meaning that he always has reason, basically the same slogan fascists used to promote Mussolini, saying that Mussolini always had reason.
In the basis of his long history, I can call him an astrologer, which is much honest than what he does to me by calling me “psychopath, criminal, swindler and scoundrel.”
If you cannot call him an astrologer because of his long astrological history and his present main activity as man who makes predictions (which is what astrologers do), how can he use a single citation to characterize me? How can he use less to accuse of more? I will show it more ahead.
For Haskins, a single small citation is enough to mischaracterize me. But a long history of astrology is not enough to properly characterize his boss.
If Carvalho, as Haskins alleged, shows that “the practice of astrology is fraud,” why do not his several books on astrology show that astrology is a fraud?
In his 1986 book “Astrologia e Religião” (Astrology and Religion), Carvalho said, “O esoterismo é a ciência universal por excelência” (Esotericism is the universal science par excellence), page 11.
Lately, he has been recorded as saying that “astrology is a CIENTIFIC problem.” So only can esoterism, which is a “universal science par excellence,” solve astrology’s “scientific” problem?
Astrologers, spiritualistic mediums and psychics are immensely popular in Brazil. Paulo Coelho, a Brazilian esoteric author who is seen as a “mystic Catholic,” has books published around the world, including in the United States. Even Bill Clinton, when he was the U.S. president, had his books as favorite reading. Coelho’s Facebook page has about 30,000,000 followers. Carvalho has less than 2 percent of it.
Astrologers, spiritualistic mediums and psychics in Brazil have a history of meetings with prominent politicians and artists, who consult them for spiritual solutions. So it would be very uncommon if Carvalho had not also met important individuals in Brazil.
The Brazilian syncretic Catholicism just loves esotericism with its astrologers, spiritualistic mediums and psychics.
Haskins: It’s extremely unlikely that Severo, foaming at the mouth, even read any of the writings by Olavo from decades ago, when Olavo did not even see himself a Christian in any orthodox sense. Nor would Severo comprehend them if he attempted to read the.writings on the basis of which he spreads his scattershot accusations.
Severo: What does Haskins understand about orthodox Christianity? He has abandoned his Protestant church many years ago and attends no church today. He is in apostasy, but he sees apostasy everywhere — except in the astrologer. If I cannot understand what is available in Portuguese on Carvalho and his occult involvement, what can Haskins understand if he is unable to speak and read Portuguese? How many did Carvalho’s books he read? Of course, he has never read any book of Carvalho. If I mentioned Carvalho’s book “Astrologia e Religião” (Astrology and Religion) it is because I have read it. Has Haskins read it? Of course, he has not! Foaming at his mouth against undeniable truths in Portuguese that he is unable to read, he attacks the messenger and victim. He makes baseless accusations in a lost hope to deflect attention from the truth.
Haskins: Worse, Severo is blatantly guilty of some of the very things of which he falsely and ineptly accuses Olavo. I’ve pointed to the heretical (and in some sense gnostic) and occult-magical nature of Severo’s book of pseudo-Pentecostal incantations.
Severo: So to say the obvious truth of past and present occult elements in Carvalho’s history is to “ineptly accuse” him. But to see alleged “occult” and “gnostic” problems in my book, which Haskins has not, is not accusation and slander. Haskins sees problems in me, my book, his former evangelical wife, his former evangelical church, his family, all the churches in his city. Where does not Haskins see problems? Usually, I would recommend a deliverance service in a charismatic church for him. But because he sees apostasy in all Protestant, evangelical, Pentecostal and charismatic churches, nothing is left for him except an atheistic psychiatrist. Perhaps psychiatric drugs could give him some peace of mind.
In the past, seeing his history of broken relationships with Christians and even with his own family, I encouraged often Haskins to attend a charismatic church in his city. He has not attended a church for many, many years. His answer was that he could not attend any church, because all churches in his city are “apostate.” I have no doubt that, as in every city, his city has some apostate churches. But to say that all churches are “apostate” is a malicious generalization.
A sick mind has sick eyes that see sickness in every place and in every human being. This is Haskins’s case: He sees “sickness” in every individual, including his former wife, he has met — except in a Brazilian occultist.
I told Haskins years ago that if he has not a good relationship with his wife, he should not establish or be a member of a conservative Christian organization that intends to be a moral model and example for America. His participation in the creation and membership of IAI is a moral and biblical contradiction.
Only a sick Protestant, or former Protestant, would help a Brazilian occultist. Haskins’s condition fits both cases.
A spiritually sick and bitter man has founded IAI and now he recruits Americans for the Brazilian occultist and their bitter and suspicious project.
Haskins: I’ve pointed out that Severo openly admires and imitates pseudo-Protestant cult leaders like Joyce Meyer who’ve been exposed for years as propagating popularized doctrines of Hinduism and other cults. How ironic that Severo boasts of “exposing” Rev. Moon, whose cult has done infinitely less damage to Christianity than the pseudo-Protestant cult of religious narcissism so dearly loved and practiced by Severo.
Severo: Haskins has been dishonest by saying that “Severo openly admires and imitates pseudo-Protestant cult leaders like Joyce Meyer.” There is a bibliography of several books on astrology by Carvalho. Even so, Haskins diminishes their importance and shamelessly denies that Carvalho is an astrologer. There is just ONE quotation, made by my publisher (which is originally Calvinist) using Meyer, and Haskins interprets it as a vast bibliography of Julio Severo on Meyer.
So in Haskins’s perverted view, the Brazilian man with a proven history of witchcraft is not a sorcerer. But the evangelical man exposing the sorcerer is the real sorcerer. Can such attitude be defined as honesty?
Haskins has been a false witness, and the Bible is clear that “A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.” (Proverbs 19:9 ESV)
He likes to use abundantly the Bible as a hammer against sins of his family and Christian leaders, but he does not use it to correct his own sins and the astrologer’s sins.
A whole bibliography of Carvalho on astrology and occultism proves nothing, according to Haskins. But a single citation by my publisher, with no bibliography and no single book or article by me on the citation’s author, proves that I am involved in a “cult.”
On several Skype calls in the past, Haskins complained a lot of alleged injustice of judges against him and that a judge banned him from seeing his children after his wife separated from him. Haskins saw his actions as unjust. Yet, if he were a judge, he clearly shows that he would be dishonest, by acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent.
In 2011, 2012 and 2013 when I talked to Haskins on Skype, I thought that his bitter attacks on evangelical ministers and leaders were excused because of his personal trauma of having a wife not wanting to see him, her family not wanting to see him and his own relatives not wanting to see him.
But his bitterness marches on! It is relentless. The 2011, 2012 and 2013 Haskins who called evangelicals “apostate” keeps his bitter attacks. His sharp vision to see evangelical apostasies is unable to see any past and present occult problems in the Brazilian astrologer he chose to head IAI.
IAI was founded on Haskins’s bitterness. IAI was his idea, as he told me and as he told other men he invited to IAI.
Haskins seems to have become disgusted with Protestant churches when his former Protestant church sided with his former wife during his separation. Haskins knows that all his and her families sided with her. Now I can perfectly understand their reasons.
IAI is a bitter project of a bitter man.
Haskins would be capable of turning the victims of the Inquisition or the Holocaust in guilty and the authors of these two institutions in “innocent.” At least in the case of the Inquisition, Carvalho has been very successful in this in his prolific comments in Portuguese.
Even though I am not against Meyer, there is no article in my blog written by her. Yet, there are many articles written by Pat Robertson, Scott Lively, Matt Barber and other whom Haskins falsely accuse of being “apostate” and “effeminate.” Haskins told me that he cannot attend any Protestant church in his city, because they are “apostate.” So Haskins’s issues are not only against Meyer. They are also against Pat Robertson, Scott Lively, Matt Barber and all the Protestant churches in his city.
Can Haskins be considered an evangelical or Protestant or any similar title? Of course, not. He accuses Protestant, evangelical, charismatic and Pentecostal churches of “apostate” because he is an apostate. Haskins, who is very trigger-happy to label “apostasy” in all churches in his city, is too dishonest and haughty to see his own sin of apostasy.
My suspicion about Haskins’s traumatic experiences, besides his separation, is that he contacted prominent Protestant leaders to help him in some big project of his mind and they rejected him. So it accounts for his bitter, effeminate and non-public attacks on them.
After Don Hank introduced Carvalho to Haskins, there was the presentation of the big project, with Carvalho assuring that the Brazilian adherents of his cult would fund it (they fund anything Carvalho tells them), and so IAI was born.
Hank, who knew Haskins wanted a money-making institution, avoided membership in IAI.
Haskins only came to know Carvalho through Hank, who had already promoted Carvalho in the U.S. Eventually, as usual in his relationships, Haskins disagreed with Hank, who is now blacklisted as “un-Christian” and “apostate” together with Pat Robertson and many other Protestant leaders. A strong disagreement with Haskins warrants you such labels and put you in his long list of non grata persons. In no way I am his last addition. There will be many more.
For the time being, there are no quarrels and accusations between Haskins and Carvalho because both desperately need to take advantage of one another. When quarrels come up and both lose their mutual usability, Haskins will see the opportunistic astrologer and sorcerer and Carvalho will see the effeminate apostate Protestant.
Haskins: Severo’s defense against this embarrassing revelation is that he was once loosely associated with Dr. Walter Martin, an author on cults. Would Severo accept such an absurd defense from a Moonie? On his logic a corrupt policeman must be found innocent once he protests: “I can’t be a criminal. It’s impossible. I’m the police!”
Severo: “Loosely associated”? What is this? Does Haskins mean that my association with the Brazilian Christian Research Institute as a member of its consultant board and an author of several articles in its magazine, including cover reports, is not enough? Only a post of president of the Christian Research Institute would qualify me as not “loosely associated”? So if Haskins is not the president of the Inter-American institute, can readers interpret that he is “loosely associated” with IAI? How can a reader understand the logic of “loosely associated” and other phrases and even the whole text by Haskins?
Haskins: Severo has been proved to be a serial, liar, slanderer and a heretic. And to these virtues must be added hypocrisy.
Severo: This is sheer slander! If Haskins actually believes in what he just said, why does he waste his time and my time accusing me if he has allegedly “legal understanding” and can take legal action? Where is Haskins’s courage to put into legal action what he just said?
Haskins who has accused all Protestant churches in his city of being “apostate,” now adds me to his list. Whether he likes it or not, Haskins self-described himself perfectly and wants, in his tantrums, to throw his own personal label in others. Haskins have been a serial liar, slanderer and a heretic for many years by accusing Scott Lively, Mat Staver, Pat Robertson and Mike Heath of what HE IS. Now does he want to include me in his list?
Jesus said, “And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me remove the speck that is in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the plank that is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck that is in your brother’s eye.” (Luke 6:41-42 NKJV)
Haskins: Since the one-man Severo Inquisition claims competence to excommunicate, what about those whom Severo now flatters, like Matt Barber and many others who were silent about or covered up the radical homosexualist and abortionist schemes of Mitt Romney and the lies of his Mormon and “Christian” allies — some even quietly accepting money from them?
Severo: So my actual quotations of Carvalho advocating the Inquisition are “lies” and “slander,” but now Haskins insists that I am promoting the Inquisition against Carvalho. Haskins has decorated the communist slogan: Accuse them of what you do!
How did Barber cover up these “schemes”? Clarification, please! Haskins has condemned me and reviled me for exposing the self-lies and self-slanders of his astrologer-boss, but for a long time he has been lying and slandering Barber, Pat Robertson, Mat Staver, Scott Lively and Mike Heath behind their backs, including by saying that they and many other fine U.S. Protestants are “apostate” and “effeminate.”
Since Haskins has added Matt Barber in his attack, he can sue us at BarbWire. If he accuses that my exposés on Carvalho as published in BarbWire are “slanders,” he should waste no time. He should stop being effeminate and go ahead with his lawsuit.
Why does Carvalho need Haskins to defend him when Haskins cannot understand a single dot in Portuguese? Carvalho should also stop being effeminate and go ahead with a lawsuit, instead of using Haskins to slander me.
Haskins insisted, several times, that Pat Robertson, Matt Barber, Mat Staver, Scott Lively, Jay Sekulov and Mike Heath are “apostate” and “effeminate” and quietly accepted money from Rev. Moon and other sorcerers.
The largest media organization of Moon officially invited me for a post of journalist, and I refused the post, even though Moon did not revile U.S. Protestants and he was not a rabid propagandist of the Inquisition. But as soon as Haskins was informed by me that his astrologer-boss did exactly such things, what did he do? He kept accusing U.S. Protestant leaders and excusing his astrologer-boss. Have Haskins been quietly accepting money from him?
Haskins has as a nasty way of maligning U.S. Protestants. Always behind their backs. By the way, probably I am the first Brazilian to enter his list filled of American victims. The big advantage is that no one in America pays attention to Haskins, except the astrologer. So Haskins has to flatter his one-man audience. The flattery includes fantastic lies as: Carvalho is not a Brazilian propagandist of the Inquisition; he is a victim of the one-man Severo’s Inquisition!
Haskins has abandoned all Protestant churches because no one of them wants to give him audience. Unfortunately, with this article, I am giving him audience, albeit negative.
Haskins is trigger-happy to call, behind their backs, Barber and others of “effeminate.” But the real effeminacy is his behavior of attacking them behind their backs.
Could such usual accusations of effeminacy be hiding Haskins’s insecurities regarding his own manliness?
Could his accusations of apostasy regarding everybody else be a sign of his own apostasies?
How can I excommunicate anyone if I have no cult? Carvalho has a political esoteric cult and he is a cult leader, with a vast history of esotericism to prove it. Any individual disagreeing with his radical views is excommunicated from his cult. Yet, Haskins is accusing me of what his astrologer-boss does! He has actually decorated the communist slogan: Accuse them of what you do!
Haskins: Severo has known for years that self-styled “Christian conservative” leaders, toward whom Severo is embarrassingly sycophantic, have committed the above outrages. Why did he not immediately feel a burning indignation and use his private Inquisitionist operation to expose those hypocrites and mercenaries, whose betrayals send countless babies to Planned Parenthood, and deliver many children to adoption by homosexuals? Nearly a decade has passed and Severo continues to flatter many false Christians who’ve permanently harmed America and the world.
Severo: By “Severo has known for years that self-styled ‘Christian conservative’ leaders” Haskins mean that for years I have been hearing him, personally on Skype, accusing Pat Robertson, Matt Barber, Mat Staver, Scott Lively, Jay Sekulov and Mike Heath of being “apostate” and “effeminate” and quietly accepting money from Rev. Moon. Yes, I heard it for several years and several hours.
My conclusion after years of such experience? The accuser is what he says: He is effeminate, apostate and is quietly receiving money. Haskins is accusing others of his own reality.
Why has Haskins never written an article clearly and openly accusing Matt Barber, Pat Robertson, Scott Lively, Mat Staver and Mike Heath of “effeminate”? In his own effeminacy, is he afraid of being sued by them?
If I had such effeminacy (as Haskins accuse me of), I would complain of Carvalho behind his back, just as Haskins does regarding prominent U.S. Protestant leaders, and I would not expose in English his dirty behavior in Portuguese. If Haskins and Carvalho insist that my public articles on Carvalho are “slander,” there are U.S. courts, and I repeat: Press your charges! Stop behaving as effeminates who slander and accuse their victims of slander.
If I were fearful of exposing individuals for their wicked behavior, I would never criticize Obama (I have been doing it since 2008). Even though I was never sued by the Obama administration, there are signs that my blog was under surveillance by the Obama administration.
I do not understand why, behind their backs, Haskins insists on calling Matt Barber, Pat Robertson, Scott Lively, Mat Staver and Mike Heath “self-styled ‘Christian conservative’ leaders.” He has been doing it for a long time. Since I began to talk to him in 2011, he insisted on this speech. I had much patience with him (as many other Protestant ministers had patience with him) because his wife had left him and the judge banned him from seeing his children. (By now, it is not hard to understand the judge’s reason.) I took pity on him. But five long years have passed, and he should have prevailed over his bitterness against everyone and everything.
His bitterness has led him to see Inquisition feelings in me and non-Inquisition feelings in Carvalho, who is openly a supporter of the Inquisition — only in Portuguese, never in English! I fear that if Haskins meets Jews who were victims of the Holocaust he will see Holocaust feelings in them and will not see Holocaust feelings in Nazis!
Even with the multitude of Carvalho’s pro-Inquisition comments, Haskins tries to transform my stance against the Inquisition in a fanciful “private Inquisitionist operation” against an actual advocate of the Inquisition! The first individual I informed in 2013 about Carvalho’s radical pro-Inquisition stances was Haskins. He cannot complain that he was misled, because I gave him the links of Carvalho’s views on the Inquisition. If, as he has admitted recently, he has no difficulty to read Carvalho in Portuguese with the assistance of Google Translate, it would be childish to think that he did not know how to use Google Translate in 2013.
Haskins has amassed an insane rage against good evangelicals, and this is the same ancient rage exploding now against me. He has been hypocrite for treating good U.S. evangelicals as “apostate” and for treating a Brazilian occultist as a real Christian.
His serious condition proves that only a very troubled man could work to promote Carvalho in the U.S. and recruit evangelicals for IAI.
If evangelicals are “apostate,” why does Haskins work so hard to recruit them?
Haskins: It comes down to Severo’s motives, which mock his pretense of principled “Christian” activism.
Severo: What are Haskins’s real motives to defend so much Carvalho, whom he chose to head IAI?
Haskins: For some years Olavo helped Severo by directing his huge audience to send money to support him, and by publishing his writing at Olavo’s popular website beside far more qualified writers.
Severo: For over ten years (over a whole decade!), I directed the evangelical audience in Brazil to Carvalho’s website, Mídia Sem Máscara, which one decade ago had a traffic of 8,000 visitors a day, with the assistance of many columnists. My blog alone, with no team of columnists, produced about 2,000 visitors a day. If Carvalho’s website had far more qualified writers than me, as Haskins accuses, then each of one of these “far more qualified writers” would have had a traffic far higher than mine, producing for themselves some 8,000 visitors a day. The total result, compounded by Carvalho’s cosmic prestige, would produce some 100,000 visitors a day. But they were just 8,000 visitors a day for Mídia Sem Máscara, as told to me by its own director.
In that time, I was the only evangelical columnist in Mídia Sem Máscara. I never asked to write in his website or to be a columnist. I was invited. If Carvalho’s website was so popular, why did he need me? If his website was so popular, why Brazil’s Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus (with almost 100 congressmen), where I was a spiritual adviser, did not know anything of Carvalho? Why did Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus need my persistent encouragement, by email and personally, to convince all of them to visit daily Carvalho’s website?
If Carvalho’s website was so popular, why just days ago a prominent female minister in Brazil told me that she and a vast network of evangelical ministers in Brazil only came to know Carvalho through me? She told me if now Carvalho is promoting his right-wing New Age stuff among evangelicals, I am the responsible.
If Carvalho’s website had far more qualified writers than me, why did it invite me? Did Haskins know these writers? What is very evident is that some American members of the Inter-American Institute whom he recruited (as he admitted in an email) are far more famous than Carvalho, who desperately needs them. Even though Carvalho is living as a self-exiled Brazilian immigrant in the United Sates for over 12 years, he has never achieved any success in the U.S. by his own merits. Even the premiere of his recent movie in English this year had no impact among Americans, conservatives or otherwise. His only hope of any possible future prominence in America are IAI members that are more famous than he is. They are being used by him and his chief recruiter, Haskins.
Even though Carvalho’s website has received financial sponsorship (and its fiscal documents can show it) from Brazilian private shops, I worked as a columnist free of charge — always. That is, I wrote for his website without a single payment — for over a whole decade.
When I needed support, Carvalho voluntarily helped — just as evangelical ministers, including some from the U.S., also helped. No one of them had any connection to Carvalho. And no one of them told me: “Now that I have given you a donation, you are my slave and you are obliged to defend me even if I come up with the lunatic idea that the Inquisition brought human rights!”
This did not happen regarding to them. It happened regarding to Carvalho! Haskins makes it look like as any donation to me automatically puts me under a contractual obligation not to contest donors if they come up with the advocacy of the Holocaust or the Inquisition. Well, I can assure if any donor introduced such contract for me to sign, I would gladly renounce the donation.
I doubt that even Haskins would be willing to receive donations under such contractual obligation. But I have never signed any contract. So I am not under any obligation to support the advocacy of the Inquisition of anyone.
God can use strange creatures to support us. He used Pharaoh to “sponsor” Moses when he was a baby, a child, a teenager and a young man. Later, God used Moses to confront his former sponsor. Even though Carvalho has never sponsored me as a baby, a child, a teenager and a young man, I have to confront him over his advocacy of the Inquisition.
Carvalho behaved very well as a Pharaoh. In a minute, he was “sponsoring” me, a columnist who worked free of charge to him, and the next minute, he was persecuting me over the Inquisition as the Pharaoh persecuted the children of Israel.
Why, before 2013, was not Carvalho so strident and fanatical about the Inquisition? He knows I was privately questioning his sporadic defense of the Inquisition and I have private emails to prove it. When his stridency increased in a crazy pace, my only choice was openly and politely to refute his new strident defense of the Inquisition in 2013.
Haskins: Another glaring question comes to mind: if (as Severo falsely asserts) Olavo believes homosexuality is acceptable, why did Olavo publish so many of Severo’s articles, which are mostly “exposés” of the homosexual movement? This false accusation reminds me of the Pharises accusing Jesus of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub. Jesus answered: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” So is Olavo mentally retarded that on a major issue he published views so contrary to his own? Or is Severo a manipulator and a liar, like the homosexual activists and the Pharisees?
Severo: Haskins said, “Or is Severo a manipulator and a liar, like the homosexual activists and the Pharisees?” Haskins should stop from following the communist slogan: Accuse of what you are!
Privately, Carvalho already kept the view that homosexuality is natural. I have messages from his private group to prove it. In 2003 Carvalho’s website asked for a copy of my book “O Movimento Homossexual” (The Homosexual Movement), which addresses homosexuality from a Christian and Protestant worldview. Even though columnists in his website promoted their books in his website, Carvalho did not approve my book, because he disagreed with it. My book was published by the Brazilian branch of Bethany House Publishers, a prominent Protestant publisher. My book explains that the homosexual behavior is sin.
Carvalho had a communication with several American conservative writers on the topic homosexuality in 2012. I was included in this communication and I have its copy. He confirmed his stance that homosexuality is natural. He opposes homosexual and heterosexual tyranny, this is, homosexuals imposing homosexuality on heterosexuals and vice-versa. So he could keep my articles against the homosexual tyranny and tolerated other points — because he needed me drawing evangelicals for his website, to exploit, as you would say, my usability. But his view is that homosexuality is natural. By now, there are public articles by him on this perverted view. He was openly refuted by a Catholic psychologist and a Catholic priest in Brazil who wrote articles showing that homosexuality is not natural.
Haskins: Severo benefited from Olavo’s media and his personal kindness for years. Now Severo wants people to excommunicate Olavo, supposedly on grounds of principle. He began to attack Olavo only after he became offended at him. “Hell has no fury like a woman scorned,” Shakespeare wrote. And this touches upon the awkward but obvious spectacle of Severo’s effeminacy, styled after the false perception of Christ as androgynous. But perhaps one should leave that can of worms for another day.
Severo: This is extreme bitterness and slander. It makes the writer appear incapable of objectively criticizing based on facts. The whole letter is too wordy and there is an attempt to use infrequent and technical terms so as to dazzle rather than convince. This is some really bad writing.
Haskins said, “Severo benefited from Olavo’s media and his personal kindness for years.” This seems to suggest that for the time I wrote for Carvalho’s website (over one decade, from 2003 to 2014), I received a monthly salary. Is this true? I worked for Carvalho for more years than the few years he sent donations.
Haskins could have accused Moses and the children of Israel: “You benefited from Pharaoh’s media and his personal kindness for decades! You have no right to expose or confront Pharaoh!”
If Carvalho’s “benefits” were so important to me, I would do just as Haskins is doing: I would keep my mouth shut and I would not object to any radical stance of Carvalho to keep receiving the “benefits.” I would never object to his advocacy of the revisionism of the Inquisition. Just because Haskins is selling himself and selling out others for benefits, this does not mean I should imitate him.
The Bible says that the love of money is the root of all evil. When a real Christian sees someone, even a former sponsor, advocating evil (the advocacy of the Inquisition and its revisionism is as sheer evil as is the advocacy of Holocaust and its revisionism), he exposes and confronts the author of the evil. In contrast, when a lover of money sees a sponsor advocating evil, he shuts his mouth. Love of money also involves the quiet acceptance of money and a silent and indifferent attitude when the correct behavior is to expose evil.
There are only two kinds of Christians who promote Carvalho:
1. Christians who do not know his vast occult history and smooth talk using politics to cover his ulterior motives.
2. Christians who have apostatized their churches. This is Haskins’s case, who abandoned his church years ago and today he attends no church.
Option number 1 was my own case for many years. But now at least I can use my very bad experience to alert many other Christians in this same hard situation.
Haskins is only repeating that I benefited without mentioning that Carvalho benefited from all my powerful contacts in the evangelical media in Brazil, including the powerful Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus in the Brazilian Congress.
Even Haskins benefited from my work. Years ago, he insisted very much with me to have his most prominent article translated into Portuguese, and I asked one of my former collaborators to do it. Here is the translation, published in my blog in 2011. Even though he is a defender of Carvalho, his boss never cared about translating it. I have also translated the WND report on Carvalho being “threatened” by the FBI.
So if Haskins insisted so much for the translation, he wants greater spotlight for his articles. Why is not he getting any spotlight for his articles and his name in English? Have Americans concluded that Haskins does not deserve to be taken seriously?
Then, because my picture has a semblance with Christ, does Haskins think he can call me “androgynous” and “effeminate”? I cannot be blamed if people choose to see my personal picture as resembling Christ, but what would Haskins say of the original Christ? “You are a ‘androgynous’ and ‘effeminate’ Messiah”?
Because Haskins has been repetitive in his accusations, I will repeat my answer: Effeminacy is to slander and accuse innocent people behind of their backs.
I tolerated his slanders against U.S. Protestants in their backs because his mind was sick of bitterness over his separation and I took pity on him because he had been banned by courts to see his children. By now, he should be healed. But his sickness of mind got worse.
True effeminacy is to accuse behind the backs. This I am not doing. Each Carvalho’s self-slander I have published and made available is an evidence that I have the manly courage to make public in English the same nasty things Carvalho makes public in Portuguese.
Yet, even though Haskins has, for many years, accusations against fine Protestant leaders in America, he repeats them only in private. Is this a manly behavior?
Haskins said, “Now Severo wants people to excommunicate Olavo.”
I have no post of bishop in the Catholic Church to excommunicate anyone. How does Haskins expect me to excommunicate Carvalho if I am not a Catholic? Only a Catholic bishop can take this decision. As far as I know, Carvalho has no friends among Catholic bishops!
Haskins: But this, among other things, remains: why did Severo associate with Olavo and his work while it conferred upon him benFefits to his prestige and his purse?
Severo: In a sign of good-will to foster the culture of life, I associated with many Catholics, with whom I disagreed on my doctrinal points. My association with them was on the basis of pro-family and pro-life principles. My association with Carvalho was not exclusive or different: It was on this same basis. When his website, under his direction, invited me to be a columnist, he had NO prestige among evangelicals in Brazil. I had. Before Carvalho inviting me, I had already been interviewed by major evangelical magazines in Brazil. Look for evangelical magazines interviewing Carvalho before 2002, when I first had contact with him. There was NO such interview. Look for evangelical magazines interviewing Julio Severo before 2002. There are several interviews, including in Revista Show da Fé, Eclesia, Enfoque Gospel, Defesa da Fé, etc. I conferred on Carvalho my prestige among evangelicals. As a voluntary columnist in his website for over ten years, I could not complain that I was not being paid, because I chose to donate my work to him. And he cannot complain if he also voluntarily chose to donate to me. This is very clear to intelligent people.
Fact: Carvalho invited me because of my prestige among evangelicals.
Fact: Carvalho used my FREE work for over ten years.
Fact: Carvalho built a name for him among evangelicals at my expense. If he has today some prestige among Brazilian evangelicals, it is not because of his own efforts and merits. It is because he used me to achieve his purposes. It is because of my merits.
Fact: I was an excellent investment for Carvalho advancing his political occult agenda among evangelicals.
Fact: The most powerful Brazilian political evangelical institution, the Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus, had me as their spiritual adviser because I was a writer with a book published in a major evangelical publishing house. In this capacity, I propagandized Carvalho’s website among these great leaders. How much would you pay for such propaganda? I did everything free of charge.
Fact: When Carvalho reviled me since 2013 because I did not accept his radical pro-Inquisition stance, he abused me and my good-will. He abused my free service of propaganda for him.
Lesson: Never try to use a real evangelical to serve Satan’s plans. God will use the evangelical to spoil the plans of Satan and his minions.
If Carvalho’s prestige is so great as indicated by Haskins, his English movie, which premiered in July 2017 in New York, would have drawn the U.S. public. It did not draw. The American public did not attend it. In fact, no IAI member attend it. Even Haskins did not attend it.
No IAI member put his name to recommend Carvalho’s movie. They did very well, because, as I have exposed, there are New Age elements in it.
Perhaps IAI members wanted the movie to be successful by the sheer power of Carvalho’s reputation. It made no success in America.
Carvalho has lived for 12 years in the United States, and his name is not attacked by the U.S. Left. Even in Brazil, where he and the adherents of his cult say that he is the biggest threat to the Left, Brazilian evangelicals are recognized as this threat, as reported by The Nation magazine in its August issue.
The Brazilian Left and the American Left openly recognize that evangelicals, especially charismatics, are the biggest threat to the Marxist agenda. Read this article: Amid Crisis in Brazil, Evangelicals Emerge as the Main Conservative Power.
Julio Severo, who, according to Haskins, depends on Carvalho’s prestige, has had his name blacklisted for years in U.S. leftist websites and magazines.
Right-Wing Watch, of People for the American Way, has blacklisted me for years. Here is my name in his official blacklist. Search, please, Carvalho’s name there. No, his name has never been blacklisted by Right-Wing Watch.
The Advocate, the most prominent homosexual magazine in the world, has attacked me in several reports. Search, please, if Carvalho’s name has been also attacked.
Even CNN has attacked recently one of my articles. Where is Carvalho and his alleged prestige in the cultural war? Even if CNN or another American left-winger media notices now that there is a self-exiled Brazilian immigrant in the U.S. who heads an institute whose objective is actually to fight anyone disagreeing Carvalho, why was not he, with his prestige, noticed much earlier?
Many other magazines and websites have attacked me. Search, please, Carvalho’s name in any left-wing publication in the U.S., since he is so prestigious that Haskins chose him to head IAI and recruit naïve evangelicals to this hole of his eternal personal bitterness.
Allegedly, I am under attack in America because, in Haskins’s words, Carvalho gave me prestige in America. Haskins can also allege that if Brazilian evangelicals have for decades been the main threat to the Left is because Carvalho gave them prestige.
If Carvalho has so much prestige in America, why does Haskins work so hard to recruit Americans to IAI? Cannot his prestige draw and recruit American by the sheer power of his own merits and fame?
If Carvalho has so much prestige in America, why does he need the prestige and reputation of Americans recruited by Haskins to give Carvalho prestige and reputation in America?
If Carvalho has so much prestige in America, why does he need Haskins, a man without prestige in America, to give Carvalho prestige and reputation in America?
Perhaps, in the illusion of “prestige,” Haskins told Carvalho to post his diatribes against me in Carvalho’s Facebook, because his cult has many adherents in Brazil. Even so, I could verify that many likes and shares in Haskins’s post in Carvalho’s Facebook are merely robots. When you examine the authors of these likes and shares, most of them have no friends and history. They are phantom profiles, with robotic and vague activity, with no interactivity.
If someday IAI and Carvalho achieve some success in America, investigative reporters will investigate Carvalho’s methods of robotically simulating that their nasty posts advocating profanities and the Inquisition are popular — among a mass of mostly unknown and suspicious profiles.
Perhaps Haskins should advise Carvalho to pay left-wing websites in America to blacklist him. So, at last, after 12 long years, Haskins could say: “Carvalho has prestige in America!”
Carvalho has money to do it. It has been reported in the Brazilian press that he received much money from a Brazilian contractor to buy his house in the United States. The company of this contractor is being investigated for corruption in Brazil.
In 2015 I presented a public challenge, and Carvalho did not answer. My challenge is for a commission of international investigative officials to examine our bank accounts (of me and Carvalho) to reveal to the world our financial sources.
Since bitter Haskins is working so hard to recruit “apostate evangelicals” to IAI, he should be also included in this challenge. The American public deserves to know if his hard work is free of charge.
Let us open our financial books. Let such a commission investigate us.
Only in this way will everybody know who is really being paid to lie.
Haskins: Because I know Julio Severo personally only too well, I know the answer: Julio is one of many self-promoting religious narcissists of the type who traffic in pseudo-Pentecostal magical occultism and effeminate pseudo-spirituality. And for having warned others, I now will bear his indignation again. “Hell hath no fury like...”
Severo: For Haskins, my spiritual experiences are “Pseudo-Pentecostal magical occultism” and Carvalho’s astrological and occult experiences are “true Christianity.” For Haskins, my public Christian warnings are “effeminate pseudo-spirituality” and his attacks on U.S. Christian leaders behind their backs are manly spirituality! Only the slave of a sorcerer would have such thoughts.
Haskins is only able to see a Brazilian occultist as his last hope of relationship because his life is a trail of broken relationships with other Christians.
I know Haskins personally only too well. Sometimes I listened to him and his personal complains for hours and hours. Constant complains of his family, his “unsubmissive” wife, the “apostate” U.S. ministers, etc. He is very troubled and bitter. Carvalho has exploited him in his troubled and bitter condition and has been using Haskins’s recruiting skills for his own advantage.
Haskins’s bitterness is eternal. It already existed years ago, while I unsuccessfully tried to helped him. Many other ministers tried to help him. His bitterness seems incurable. So in his bitter, perverted mind evangelical Severo is the occultist and Carvalho, with his long occult history, is not an occultist.
Effeminacy is his cowardice to confront Carvalho. Effeminacy is Carvalho’s cowardice to say in English the nasty things he says in Portuguese.
Haskins is flashy and fussy to accuse U.S. Protestant leaders of “effeminacy,” always behind their backs, but he himself is effeminate regarding to Carvalho. In 2013, when I presented to him Carvalho’s controversial stance on the Inquisition, Haskins sent me material and compared the Inquisition to Planned Parenthood, the largest U.S. network of abortion clinics. But he asked me for not to mention his name. Here is the article: http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/2013/10/can-pro-life-activist-defend-inquisition.html
My article on the Inquisition had not Haskins’s name because he was too effeminate to confront Carvalho in this important issue. So “courageous” to attack Pat Robertson and so effeminate to confront a cult leader!
Haskins is flashy and fussy to accuse U.S. Protestant leaders of “apostate,” always behind their backs, but he himself has been an apostate by accepting Carvalho as a real Christian.
Haskins is flashy and fussy to accuse U.S. Protestant leaders of “quietly accepting money from Rev. Moon,” always behind their backs, but he himself is under the suspicion of quietly accepting Carvalho’s money, not to mention that Carvalho is the suspicion of quietly accepting money from corrupt individuals and blind adherents of his political esoteric cult in Brazil.
Haskins: So, now we have a full inventory: multiple instances of lying, slander, anti-Christ heresies and gross hypocrisy, all compounded by failure to recant. Correct, Julio?
Severo: Haskins just made another self-description, with tantrums. As to a failure to recant, I do not live in the Catholic Europe of the Middle Ages. I do not live under the threat of torture and death of the Inquisition. To recant just because have I translated Carvalho’s profanities and self-lies and self-slanders? To recant just because Carvalho is too effeminate and Haskins is too effeminate to show in English the nasty things Carvalho says in Portuguese? No way! Just because Haskins, who helped me to write an article against the Inquisition, recanted to Carvalho, this does not mean that I will follow his slavish and effeminate decision.
For exposing Carvalho’s nonsense, he slanders me as “psychopath, criminal, swindler and scoundrel,” Haskins defends his slanders and, in the communist style compounded by his habitual anti-Pat Robertson tantrums, accuses me of what he and his astrologer-boss do.
Haskins’s tantrums make my articles to look like very big serious “slanders” against a Carvalho that the U.S. public does not know. If my “slanders” are so serious as Haskins says, what is he waiting? He and Carvalho should sue me and let the U.S. courts judge my “slanders” and their complaints. There are sensible judges in America, and hopefully they would be able to solve these issues very fast.
Haskins’s pompous title in IAI “Senior Fellow for the Public Understanding of Law” is a big joke! No true legal expert would produce such an ill-written and wordy text with frivolous, effeminate and baseless accusations. Only people without legal experience do it. A real legal expert takes action and loses no time with empty words.
By the way, is there at least one prominent evangelical leader in the U.S. not labeled “effeminate” and “apostate” by Haskins?
Of course, for Haskins the astrologer-boss is not “effeminate” or “apostate” and he does not quietly accept money.
Haskins’s accusations against me are published here as originally posted by Olavo de Carvalho in his personal Facebook. The accusations were signed by John Haskins with the pompous title of “Senior Fellow for the Public Understanding of Law, Propaganda and Cultural Revolution,” The Inter-American Institute.
With this article, I hope that the U.S. public may have acquire some measure of understanding that under a Brazilian astrologer, Haskins created the Inter-American Institute that he expects someday to achieve a propaganda to accomplish a “cultural revolution” in America.
Jesus said that the mouth speaks from the abundance of the heart. Haskins’s many words gushed publicly here are more than just nonsense. They offer an exclusive glimpse of his heart and IAI’s heart.
Haskins’s revolution, if the torrent of baseless and lunatic slanders by him and confirmed by Carvalho in his Facebook are a sign of their real intents, seems eventually to involve:
1. To slander prominent U.S. Protestants as “apostates,” “effeminates” and even “occultists,” not to mention as bribed.
2. To sanitize profanities, which are a daily prolific behavior of Carvalho in Portuguese, among U.S. conservatives.
3. To sanitize the horrors of the Inquisition, just as Carvalho has been doing in Portuguese.
4. To mislead and exploit American evangelicals for the benefit of Carvalho’s image in the U.S.
5. To sanitize the IAI director’s occult history and political esoteric influences and activism, portraying him as a non-astrologer and a non-occultist.
6. To use the reputation of IAI’s prominent American members for the benefit of the IAI director, who needs to achieve prominence in America, at the expense of others.
7. To sabotage any true expression of Christian conservatism and portray a political occult ideology as Christian ideology.
The question is: Are Carvalho and Haskins too effeminate to implement in English these objectives, which have been implemented in Portuguese?
Both cannot complain, again, of my exposés, because both have legal understanding and they do not need to waste my time and their time with endless baseless effeminate accusations: They can press charges. They can sue. But they will never do it because both of them know that no U.S. court will take seriously their crazy accusations.
Recommended Reading:

No comments :

Post a Comment