Answer to John
Haskins, the Creator of the Inter-American Institute
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.
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.
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, LÃgia 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.
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, MÃdia 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 MÃdia Sem
Máscara, as told to me by its own director.
In
that time, I was the only evangelical columnist in MÃdia 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.
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.
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.
Perhaps
IAI members wanted the movie to be successful by the sheer power of Carvalho’s reputation.
It made no success in America.
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.
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:
Posts
