Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Socialism, Islam and Hell

Socialism, Islam and Hell

Liberals and their paranoia

By Julio Severo
The same socialism condemning conservative Christians as “fundamentalists” and “fanatics” protects Islam by calling it a “religion of peace” — while its adherents persistently take away the peace and lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people yearly.
That protection is largely an effect of the effort of some Western liberal Jews, who managed to establish laws to protect minorities. Those laws are today exploited by homosexual and Islamic activists to protect their own interests and impose on the Western societies the homosexual and Islamic ideology. Christians eventually pay the bill, suffering pressures and oppressions from completely antagonistic groups.
By contrast, Christians are routinely persecuted in Islamic nations. But, incredibly, now Islamic groups demand an international law against “Islamophobia”, because they say that Islam needs protection from people that do not like terror and terrorists produced by the “religion of peace”. Muslims, with the support of socialists, have learnt how to exploit the Western paranoia against intolerance, prejudice and discrimination and they are being able to persecute and oppress Christians and Jews in their own turf.
When it comes to paranoia, the Islamic mind is not much different from the socialist mind.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran that denies the Holocaust and says that he wants do destroy Israel, has an administration that sees no problem in the torture and murder of homosexuals. But Ahmadinejad was never annoyed by the same socialist human right groups that routinely blame Christians for “crimes” against homosexuals. Those Christian “crimes” do not consist in acts of real violence, but exclusively in views that reflect the Bible condemnation of homosexual practices. That is the socialist reality: silence about what Islamic Iran does, and many coward charges against Christians. 

The visit of president of Iran to his friend Lula in Brazil

Speaking about Ahmadinejad, he visited Brazil November 23. He was warmly welcomed by his socialist friend Lula.
Ahmadinejad funds terrorist groups against Israel, because he ignores and rejects God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Lula has friendship with Ahmadinejad because… Why? Choose the reason:
Lula does not care about God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Lula does not care about the human rights abuses, torture and murder of Christians in Iran.
Lula does not care about the human rights abuses of Jews in Iran.
Lula does not care about torture and murder of homosexuals in Iran.
Lula does not care about the Iranian sponsorship of Islamic terrorist groups against Israel.
You could present a long list of problems in the Islamic Iranian Dictatorship, but Lula does not care. Socialists act this way: they do not care about God, about moral values, about hell and about their own socialist friends — unless they have significant personal interests involved. There is nothing more important for an ambitious socialist than to promote his own glory.

Socialist Shimon Peres visits Lula

Attempting perhaps to weaken the visit Ahmadinejad to Brazil, Israeli president Shimon Peres visited Brazil before Ahmadinejad, November 10. Yet, Lula does not also care about the fact that Peres has the same “democratic” socialist feelings regarding to abortion and homosexuality.
Nevertheless the ideological, moral, political and ethical affinity with Peres, Lula prefers friendship with Ahmadinejad, whose stances are opposed to the stances of Lula and Peres in the abortion and homosexual issues. Would Lula fail to hug Ahmadinejad only because socialist comrade Peres is not easy with the wish of Ahmadinejad to destroy Israel? For some reason, Lula sees in Ahmadinejad another expedient to promote his own glory.
In turn, Shimon Peres does not care much about the fact that, in his about eight-year administration and having visited several Islamic nations near of Israel, Lula has never had the least willingness to visit Israel. In response to the apparent disregard of Lula toward Israel, Peres said, “He has his agenda and priorities. I am not supposed to lecture him. We consider him a friend. We know one another for a long time. We began in the same socialist path. So I can say that I remember him ‘since his childhood’. He has his own way of priorizing things”.
Liberal mind lives hand in hand with paranoia — whether in Brazil, US and even in Israel. Liberal mind does not care about evil when it sees it. When a homosexual rapes a 6-year-old boy, liberal journalism sees only a generic “rape against a child”, without mentioning specific identifications compromising the gay agenda. When an Islamic terrorist murders innocents, liberal journalism applies the same measure, reporting only “the bomb that murdered several people” or the “terror that murdered several people”, leaving radical Islam completely untouched and protected.
Conversely, any crime against a homosexual is used as an opportunity to launch against Christians a specific and detailed blame for the crime, even though no Christian were involved and criminal circumstances suggested possibility of violence among homosexuals. This is part of the liberal paranoia.

Paranoia of the diversity and tolerance ideology

In nations where socialism controls everything, the enemies of the system are eliminated for any and every reason. See Cuba, North Korea, etc. In nations where the population is under gradual conditioning to embrace socialism, society is firstly led to paranoia. It is sheer paranoia to approve laws condemning Christians for the fictitious crime of “homophobia”, because Christians do not have a tradition of murdering homosexuals. But Obama and Lula act this way.
Homeland Security Department says that a true terrorist can be identified by some special characteristics: he can be an individual opposing abortion and homosexuality. Adherence to Islam cannot be considered as terrorist characteristic, because Muslims are minority and they deserve protection. Therefore, even though all the 9/11 terrorists were Islamic and even though all the terrorists attacking Israel are Islamic, liberal ethics orders the establishment to ignore this fact. Similarly, it orders the press to omit the word “homosexual” or “homosexuality” in all violent crimes where young boys were victims of a homosexual.
Recently, Islamic terrorist Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab tried to blow away a jet heading to Detroit. American service secret had information on him for at least two years, but they had a hard time to give exclusive attention to him, because the Muslim individual was in a politically-correct, broad security watch list containing more than 500,000 other threats: conservative Christians, abortion and homosexuality opponents, etc. How to sort out from this massive database the real threats without singling out the followers of the religion of peace?
Mutallab could not be halted months earlier because it would be very expensive to probe all of these “threats” together. Besides, he could not be screened by his Islamic name and religion, because — for the overjoyed followers of the religion of peace — profiling is a crime in the US. In their typical ideological paranoia, American liberals do not care if 100% suicide terrorists against the US have consistently been followers of the religion of peace.
In fact, Obama administration cannot profile people with Muslim names — because Obama is one of them. (Can you convincingly prove that some of the acts of Obama put America at risk?) But Obama administration can freely profile abortion and homosexuality opponents — because Obama is not one of them, being a fervent abortion and homosexuality promoter.
Yet, after this recent terrorist attack, Homeland Security Department is likely to launch more aggressive measures against all the other “threats” in its database without profiling any Islamic name and origin! This makes me wonder who will defeat America first, al Qaeda or PC paranoia? I certainly doubt al Qaeda is stronger than PC paranoia.
If the US had embraced PC ban on profiling in the World War 2, American military would be trying until this day to figure out their real enemies from some another PC massive database containing thousands of thousands of fictitious enemies, and World War 2 would be the perpetual, endless World War. PC paranoia is the best way to perpetuate criminals and their crimes.
In World War 2, Americans forgot only to profile communists, and for such negligence they — and the world — paid an excessively high bloody cost for the next decades. Liberal America creates her own nightmares.
The protection of diversity and tolerance toward perversion in Brazil, US and Europe while supporting Iran and other Islamic nations that hate diversity and tolerance is a trademark of the liberal paranoia. Liberals may criticize, condemn and revile God and his followers, but for them diversity and tolerance are sacred — only in Brazil, US and Europe, and never in Iran, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, etc. I know it for experience, because my blog has been targeted by federal prosecutors in Brazil for criticism of homosexuality and Islam. On March 2008, four Islamic journalists in São Paulo filed a complaint requesting federal prosecutors to shut down my blog for prejudice against Islam, because I denounced Islamic terrorists.
Right to free speech to criticize homosexuality and Islam? This is capitalist talk!
In July 2007, in the same time when Google interdicted my blog for some days because of charges and defamations of homosexual activists, I denounced the homosexual website ParouTudo for posting “Amando Garotos: Pedofilia e a Intolerância Contemporânea” (Loving Boys: Pedophilia and the Contemporary Intolerance), an article defending openly pedophilia. (See more information here: http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/2009/12/day-sex-between-men-and-boys-is-no.html) I had requested authorities to investigate and take action, but today, more than two years later, nothing was done. Is diversity and tolerance paranoia a free way for homosexuals to advocate pedophilia?
ParouTudo remains active on the internet, without any problem, but my blog has been under risk of being closed by federal prosecutors.
So if you think that it is paranoid for Lula to hug Ahmadinejad (whose administration hates Christians, Israel and homosexuals), this is socialism. If you think that it is paranoid for Obama to profile conservative Christians opposed to abortion and homosexuality and not to profile terrorists whose common identification is the “religion of peace”, this is socialism. If you think that it is paranoid for Shimon Peres to humble himself before a Lula that wants alliance with Ahmadinejad, this is socialism.
Modern Israel, dominated by socialism, has gay parades and legal abortion. But with all this incredible ideological affinity, Lula prefers Ahmadinejad, who does not allow abortion and homosexuality in the Islamic Iranian dictatorship. For the sake of his own glory, a socialist — whether atheist, Catholic, Islamic or evangelical — could deliver his own mother and homeland to the devil.
Rebel Jews in the old Israel, whose history of apostasy is found in the Old Testament, belittled hell, where they eventually ended. Today, even knowing in lesser or greater measure this account, Lula, Obama e Shimon Peres equally belittle hell and fall down before the same socialism that is selling their nations to the fatal deceitfulness of the homosexual, abortion and Islamic ideology.
Portuguese version of this article: O socialismo, o islamismo e o inferno
Spanish version of this article: El socialismo, el islamismo y el infierno
Read more articles by Julio Severo:

Thursday, December 17, 2009

The day sex between men and boys is no longer offensive

The day sex between men and boys is no longer offensive

Brazilian movie seeks to shatter “taboo” of incest and homosexual sex among boys by presenting both behaviors as “love”

By Julio Severo
Two men hugging and kissing one another. What kind of scenario is this? It is a scenario that, for the audiences, is objectionable, but for the media, with its disproportionately high number of gays, is beautiful.
Nevertheless the massive systematic indoctrination from government and media, this scenario still offends the Brazilian audiences. The omnipresent state propaganda of the federal campaign Brazil without Homophobia did not still achieve the level of total change in the people’s mindset. Shock still persists.
To avoid shock, gay activists are forced to embellish at the utmost this scenario, by utilizing everything calling to mind innocence and purity: children, angels, Jesus, etc. Nothing is exempt from exploitation when it comes to the gay agenda and its advance.
That was exactly the strategy of the producers of the Brazilian movie “Do Começo Ao Fim” (From Beginning to End), which opens using the scenario of two boys to achieve its greater objective to shatter all barrier and resistance against incest and homosexual sex. Its producers warn, “If the intent is to smash a taboo or to provoke impact, this movie is certain to achieve its aim”. Its preview, with English subtitles, is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DVa2DKSnU0
From Beginning to End” seeks to convey the idea that 6, 7 or 8 year-old boys look for homosexual experiences. Homosexual groups as NAMBLA have preached for many years that boys have interest in homosexual sex. “From Beginning to End” comes to confirm this ambition.
Sooner or later, a filmmaker will come, similarly abusing free speech, to promote a movie about “love between a man and a boy”. In fact, everything is ready to smash this “taboo”. The most important homosexual leader in Brazil, Luiz Mott, has been accused of defending pedophilia. But he is not the only Brazilian homosexual to do this. Years ago, Denilson Lopes, a homosexual university professor in Brasilia, wrote and published the article “Amando Garotos: Pedofilia e a Intolerância Contemporânea” (Loving Boys: Pedophilia and the Contemporary Intolerance). He is the author of the book “O Homem que Amava Rapazes e Outros Ensaios” (A Man that Loved Boys and Other Essays).
I denounced publicly this defense of pedophilia, but federal prosecutors — who always answer the call from gay militants to take action against my blog — have never taken any measure against the article “Loving Boys”, demonstrating that a “taboo” is being smashed. The looming homosexual pedophilic threat proves its inseparability from the entrails of the homosexual movement.
Brazil, in its current phase of high homosexual indoctrination, will not stay forever only in “From Beginning to End” of homosexual sex between a boy and another boy. This movie is only a preparation for a more advanced phase, where another opportunistic filmmaker will launch another taboo-smasher. This will be the “Beginning of the End”. In that darker future, the presentation of homosexual sex between a boy and another boy will be passé subject. The fad will then be to present the normalcy of the homosexual sex between men and boys.
Yet, do you think that homosexual activists are foolish to show the End at the very Beginning? Eventually, they will talk plainly, but only in the End. However, until that time, with all taboos smashed, nobody will care if the fad then is to think that 6, 7 or 8 year-old boys look for “sexual love” from homosexual adults.
From Beginning to End” is one of the first seeds for the building of this new way to think.
Read also:
Homosexual groups ask reforms in the children’s “rights” in Brazil

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Rick Warren attacks anti-homosexuality bill

Rick Warren attacks anti-homosexuality bill

Meanwhile, Evangelical Alliance Ireland supports pro-homosexuality bill

By Julio Severo
Gay activists, who despise the divine condemnation of homosexuality, do not hesitate to use and distort the words of Jesus Christ to teach Christians that the only way for Christians to be able to demonstrate love for homosexuals is by supporting the approval of anti-“homophobia” bills.
Without such support, homosexual militants insist that Christians deserve labels as “homophobic”, hypocrites, murderers of homosexuals, etc. Their insistence is steady throughout the media. Their charges against Christians are incessant.
If constant dripping will eventually wear away a stone, then it seems that homosexual dripping is wearing away the evangelical resistance.
In Ireland, a pro-homosexuality bill received the support from the Evangelical Alliance Ireland (EAI), which explained its stance by saying that if Jesus Christ did not discriminate, so Christians are not also supposed to discriminate. EAI declared,
“Co-habiting couples are a reality — this legislation seeks to deal with that reality from a legal perspective. We may disagree on the detail of the legislation but as followers of a just and compassionate God we can recognise the justice and fairness of providing some legal protection for the reality of both same-sex and opposite-sex cohabiting relationships”.
On the other hand, Rick Warren embraced similar stance to use God’s compassion to condemn a heavy anti-homosexuality bill in Uganda. This African nation, which formerly had homosexual kings that abused boys, still faces today sexual abuses against boys. Moreover, Uganda is under international pressure to support the gay agenda. But it was not to condemn vehemently homosexual abuses against boys that Warren meddled in Uganda.
Differently from Islamic nations as Iran, which executes homosexuals arbitrarily, the Ugandan bill condemns to capital punishment only men persistent in homosexuality, homosexuals that rape boys and HIV homosexuals that infect other people.
Warren explained his motives to meddle in Uganda,
“We are all familiar with Edmund Burke’s insight that, ‘All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.’ That is why I'm sharing my heart with you today. As an American pastor, it is not my role to interfere with the politics of other nations, but it IS my role to speak out on moral issues.”
Yet, Warren, whose experience includes meetings with religious Muslims leaders, does not use his role to speak out to Muslims that they should stop persecuting Christians. He also does not use his role to speak out against the Islamic laws that condemn homosexuals to death.
In his own nation, the United States, Warren has refrained from using his role to speak out against aggressive homosexual bills. He has also refrained from bothering Obama and his administration, which are explicitly pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality. Before the Obamanian majesty, instead of using his role to speak out on abortion and homosexuality, Warren limits himself to a smooth-tongued behavior.
The Ugandan bill is likely not to be approved, because international opposition — stemming from homosexual groups, UN and EU — has been massive.
In my view, the most problematic part of this bill is the imposition on Ugandan citizens to denounce to police homosexual practices. That imposition would harm Christian ministries that help homosexuals.
But Warren’s view is that the heavy Ugandan bill does not reflect the Gospel.
Yet, let’s talk plainly. What is the law that reflects the Gospel?
Does a law that condemns, fines, arrests or executes murderers reflect the Gospel?
Does a law that condemns, fines, arrests or executes pedophiles reflect the Gospel?
Does a law that condemns, fines, arrests or executes rapists reflect the Gospel?
Let’s be realistic: the Gospel does not condemn, fine, arrest or execute anyone. The Gospel did not come to condemn, fine, arrest or execute any criminal. The only kind of condemnation the Gospel mentions is eternal condemnation, making it clear that men that choose to live in sin shall be condemned to eternal death, being destined to suffer in Hell, eternally separated from God.
The Gospel came to save sinners. That is its exclusive occupation. So if because of the Gospel human laws cannot condemn homosexuality, then because of the same Gospel they cannot condemn murders, rapes and pedophilia
As far as the Gospel is concerned, we love homosexuals, pedophiles, murderers, rapists, etc. We love them because Jesus loves them and wants to save them. Yet, this does not mean that we should oppose laws that condemn homosexuality, pedophilia, murders, rapes, etc.
Twenty years ago, International Amnesty got in touch with me asking for my support against death penalty in Texas, because in the 1980s I was a member of a team that ministered, by correspondence, to prisoners in death row in Texas. My mission was to minister to Spanish-speaking prisoners. All of them had committed gruesome murders.
Can the Gospel save such criminals? Of course! For a long time I talked about Jesus’ love to them, sending Christian literature in Spanish, etc. Yet, whether they wanted to open their hearts to Jesus or not, my view is that they should pay their social debt.
Human laws were fulfilling their role, condemning a murderer with maximum penalty. My mission was only to lead the murderer to know the love of Jesus Christ.
There is a separation between law and Gospel. The State should fulfill its role to punish those that violate just laws. The role of the Gospel is not to destroy just laws, but only to fulfill another role: to reach out all the sinners with the message of salvation.
It is unfortunate that in his own country, Warren has refrained from using his role to speak out on behalf of Christian efforts to defend natural marriage against systematic assaults from the homosexual movement. Doubtless, Warren does not want to offend and infuriate homosexual groups or the liberal media, which does not praise of kind of defense.
Apparently, that same media, which does not condemn Islamic laws against homosexuality, is condemning the anti-homosexuality bill in the Christian Uganda. And, with all of these spotlights, Obama enters the stage.
Obama defends openly the murder of innocent unborn babies. If Warren, who in his public opportunities with Obama, has never used his role to speak out against such murderous inclinations, why is he now meddling in Uganda? Where is his consistency?
Is it fair for Warren to remember his “role to speak out on moral issues” only to Uganda, and not to Obama and his administration? Is it fair for Warren to be forceful and vehement only to Uganda, and not to Obama and his administration?
I like Warren when he says what is fair. But it is hard to appreciate when he and others, in the name of a smooth-tongued Christian love, seem to demonstrate more interest in getting media sympathy than challenging the unfair standards imposed by liberal trends.
As the Apostle Paul teaches in Romans, we have to transform ourselves by the renewing of the way we think. Without this regular transformation, we are inevitably dragged by the maelstroms, fads and traps of this world. Without this regular transformation, we get entrapped by the way the world thinks. Without this regular transformation, the Gospel becomes, instead a message of salvation and deliverance from sin, a creature in the image of human ideas and wishes:
In the hands of gay activists and liberal and progressive Christians, the Gospel is a tool to promote the acceptance of sinners with their sins. They use the Gospel to preach insistently that the only way for Christians to prove that they are as compassionate as their God is by supporting bills stemming from the entrails of the homosexual movement.
In the hands of Christians that want to please both sides, the Gospel is a tool of political, social and religious conveniences.
In the hands of the Holy Spirit, the Gospel is a tool distinct, but not opposed, from laws condemning sin. A fair law deals with misdeeds by punishing the violator. The Gospel deals with sinners to save them from eternal condemnation, without exempting them from paying their social and criminal debts here on the Earth.
Without this understanding of the separation between law and Gospel, you can easily stumble into the same delusions of the Evangelical Alliance Ireland.
May these examples help us to be balanced, impartial and fair on the law and Gospel.
Portuguese version of this article: Rick Warren ataca lei anti-homossexualismo
Read more:
Int’l Pressure on Uganda to Accept Homosexuality Caused Over-the-Top Sanctions: Christian Activist

Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Dividing land with Palestinians or returning it to Mexicans?

Dividing land with Palestinians or returning it to Mexicans?

Politically-correct justice of Obama wants violation of the territorial integrity of Israel, but no violation of the territorial integrity of the US

By Julio Severo
Barack Obama is the man of inclusivity, plurality and diversity. What does it mean? It means that he respects the politically-correct ideology above traditions, morality and Christianity itself, which is an inseparable and undeniable part of the founding of the United States.
PC ideology commands Obama to remind in his speeches the Islamic participation in the building of the US. Even though that participation was insignificant, the law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity commands their inclusion in full equality.
Were men that lived in homosexual vice discriminated against because the population in the past did not tolerate their behavior and obscenities? With Obama in the presidency, the order now is “change”. The law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity commands their inclusion also, and Obama is proud to appoint to high posts in his administration active and actively pornographic homosexuals.
Now, at last, Muslims and homosexuals can hug one another and say, “We are included by what were are and do!”
The law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity is today an important exportation commodity “made in USA”, largely scattered abroad by the United Nations. Obama, who knows how to pervert the Bible for his own interests and whims, is using the American experience in the Gospel exportation in the past to export now the “gospel” of inclusivity, plurality and diversity.
He wants to teach the world, in the new world order style, that the old barriers and “prejudices” should be broken. And those barriers do not refer only to homosexuals and Muslims. They refer to communist dictators too.
And they refer also to lands!
Do Muslim Palestinians reclaim lands to establish in the world another anti-Israel Islamic nation?
No problem. Obama knows that, in the 1847 war, the US defeated Mexico and forced it to sell and deliver Mexican territories, which included what today is California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas and other “American” states. What about to grant now those territories to Palestinians?
If he cannot treat as sacred the land God gave only to Jews, so why should He treat as US sacred property lands that formerly were Mexican?
After all, there is no God’s promise in the Bible saying that those territories are to be or remain exclusive American property forever. So if the law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity commands Obama to break old barriers and “prejudices”, what is the problem about giving those lands to Palestinians?
Yet, because of an issue of politically-correct ethics, Obama cannot do it. What he needs to do is to ask forgiveness from Mexicans and return to them California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas and other former Mexican lands.
That example would give the world the assurance that Obama is consistent and faithful to his own ideology, making his own country to pay the cost of his “change”. That act would show the world that Obama is willing to overcome any nationalist tradition for the building of a New World Order.
Yes, he will do sacrifices on behalf of his faithfulness to inclusivity, plurality and diversity — on the condition that only Israel and other nations pay the cost. Do Palestinians want half of Israel? Obama is determined to grant them their wish. Do they want also Jerusalem as the capital of their yearned Islamic nation? Obama will not hesitate to break the old tradition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel!
As far as it depends on Obama, “change” will be reality for the division of the land God gave only to the posterity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. “Change” will be, by the imperial will of Obama, the only option for the Jews.
His “change” would never sacrifice California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas and other “American” states to Palestinians. Similarly, Brazilian president Lula, the socialist friend of Ahmadinejad of Iran, would never sacrifice Amazon to Palestinians. But they will readily sacrifice the territorial integrity of Israel.
However, whether they like or not, by imposing the forced division of the land of Israel, Obama and other American leaders are investing in the division and destruction of the US. No nation and empire can impose itself on the small nation of Israel without going unpunished. There will be, sooner or later, “change” for the US — a “change” determined and decreed by the One that overthrew all the haughty empires that violated the territorial integrity of Israel.
By violating the territorial integrity of Israel in behalf of Islamic Palestinians, the US will never be able to preserve its own territorial integrity. The strengthening of the homosexual and Islamic minority in the Obama administration is evidence that the empire is collapsing.
In its long history, Israel saw the fall of several empires that wanted its territorial division. With Obama, now is the American turn to enter the list of the fallen empires.
Read more: