Introduction: Goa Livre Online Edition
Nehru's Aggression Condemned!
© 2003, A.D., P.J. Mascarenhas, Goa Livre Organisation
"What matters is not the size of the man in the fight but of the fight in the man."
A friend and compatriot, Senhor Agnelo Gracias, has kindly given me the book, Nehru's Aggression Condemned by the Goan Freedom Movement, 1964. This book has moved me so much and strengthened immensely my resolve to secure truth and justice for Goa, that I have sat down and transcribed, over several days, the entire 170 page book.
Mr. Gracias also provided me with another book, Goan Petitioners In The UN, and with several newspaper cuttings, besides his notes from an official briefing given by the Government of Goa in 1955 on the acts of terrorism committed against Goa by the agents of the Indian Union. (See here)
In transcribing the book, I have remained faithful to the text for the most part, except for a few editorial corrections which I could not resist. The most significant change that I have made is to replace in most places, the English and Indian form of the name of one of the Goan territories, Diu, with the Portuguese name, Dio.
While working on the book and on other literature provided by Senhor Gracias, I was struck by several facts.
Our troubles began with the Salazarists. The world was and is being swept by deliberately engineered winds of revolutionary change, intended to subvert mankind to Antichrist, to pervert mankind and to destroy from his mind and heart the appreciation of the Kingdom of God.
In response to these anti-social mischiefs, Italy, Lebanon, Spain and Portugal, among others, — all Catholic dominated countries — responded with the Phalangist or Fascist movement. The Italians allowed themselves to be seduced by Nazism and to be coopted, and the Lebanese movement, under Amin Gemaliel, is still striving to secure Lebanon, so we will discuss neither.
In Spain and in Portugal, however, what happened was that the Counter-Revolution was hijacked by unimaginative men, and allowed to degenerate into personality cults of the leaders, Salazar and Franco. In a world of constant change and subversion, when the soldier of Christ needs to be on the constant counter-offensive to pre-empt and negate the initiatives, successes, etc., of the sons of Belial, Spain and Portugal were ossified and fossilized by sycophants who fell down and worshipped, bordering on idolatrous worship, Salazar and Franco as God's gifts to Spain and Portugal, even as these leaders forgot the overall picture, which is world-wide and global, not restricted merely to one state or country, and permitted themselves to be flattered, worshipped and lulled into a false complacency.
Everywhere, unimaginative men unthinkingly undermined their own efforts at the counter-revolution. In Mexico, they, the Cristerois, put themselves blasphemously in the hands of a Freemason, Gorrostiega, and were abandoned by God and His Church. In Ecuador, the otherwise saintly Catholic, the President Moreno Garcia permitted himself to be deluded as to his own indispensability, which became a self-fulfilling prophecy, ending in his tragic martyrdom for Christ.
In the face of the Perpetual Revolution, aimed at finally ushering the Antichrist, we, the Counter-Revolution must always remember that we are not about institutions but about people. We need to broadbase the Counter-Revolution and to educate and democratise, and to train a cadre of popular leaders. Leaders who reign as if from God are doomed to failure. Again, such ideas of a "divine mandate" for a particular leader, is un-Christian. No merely human leader is indispensable and no merely human leader, excepting the Pope, posses a "divine mandate."
Every personality cult borders on heresy.
Turning to Goa, one is more amazed, not over Nehru's constantly aggressive brazen chicanery and hypocrisy, but over the Salazarists and Goan social leadership's failure to counter his intrusive, offensive pretensions of rights over Goa, right from even before 1947, but certainly and officially from 1947.
It was this failure, a failure that extended to the failure to take the urgently necessary pre-emptive measures of militarizing the Goan population, of broadening and popularising the Counter-Revolution, and even more, that of going on the military pre-emptive counter-offensive against the Gargataum Amalecites of the Indian Union, that tragically subverted us in the face of the constant verbal, ideological, intellectual, propagandic, etc., aggression and barrage of unprovoked and unwarranted intrusion and invasion from the Indian Union and its behind-the-scene masters and comrades — the Jewish Project of World Domination and of ushering their "Messiah", the Antichrist, in opposition to Christ; their dupes and agents - the Noahide Freemasons; the Communists of the Soviet Union, controlled by the Russian Jews; the Protestant, Homosexual, Agnostic/Secularist and Freemasonic, etc., Cabal of Babylon, ably led by Mother England, the modern Ohola, and its faithful daughter, Mother U.S.A., the Modern Oholiba, together constituting the Caucus of New Sodom and New Gommorra; the premier Freemasonic institution established to subvert and pervert mankind, the United Nations; their military organisations such as NATO; the European Community established to finally de-Christianise the peoples of Europe, etc.
On the contrary, lulled by its complacency and delusion of invincibility and grandeur, the Salazarist Regime permitted itself and the Portuguese Commonwealth to be lead by the nose up the Garden Path, to the slaughter house of the UN, where the Freemasonic butchers gleefully fell upon it and dismembered the Portuguese Commonwealth, severing Goa, and perpetrating monstrousities on the constituent peoples, Goans and others.
Even when Salazar saw all this mischief being done in broad daylight, and with the open sight of the Amalecites, the Indian Union and its comrades, sharpening their butchers' knives to dismember the Portuguese Commonwealth, by enacting the infamous, immoral and hypocritical "Resolutions 1514, 1541 & 1542" among other measures, Salazar did not pull out of the UN and of NATO but allowed himself to remain, until the enemy were strong enough to fructify their malice!
We are Christians, and Christianity must guide is all things, over all in Politics. In the Bible, we see the spectacle of the King of Judah seeking the aid of the Babylonians against the depredations of Syria, instead of relying upon Yahweh, and the King even entertained a Babylonian delegation and showed them around the Palace and the Temple, showing off to them the treasures. In reply, God told the King that because he had relied on the pagan Babylonians rather than on Him, and had even conducted the Babylonian delegation on a tour of the Palace and Temple, He would deliver Judah and Jerusalem to Babylon, and those very treasures would be carried off to Babylon.
There is a lesson here for us. We, Christians, must not ally with the sons of Belial, even with one son of Belial against another. We must ally and submit only to God, Yahweh. Otherwise, as then, He will not aid us, and will rather deliver us unto our enemies.
We know the results of Salazar's follies. We Goans have personally seen the results — The Rape of Goa by the Amalecites under the monstrous beast Nehru!
It is apparent that Salazarist censorship stiffled Goan society and more especially the Goan press. If the Goan press had been free, it would have stirred up Goan society in the same jingoistic manner as the lying anti-Goan propaganda of the Indian press, and thus mobilized Goans to fight for their motherland!
The attitude of "Revolutionary" Portugal to the EIP and its citizens is anomalous. It still recognises the right of EIP citizens to be citizens of Metropolitan Portugal - a "Salazarist" concept. But, even further than mere this much, it actually adheres to the "Salazarist" legal prescription, that EIP citizens even those resident for generations extra-territorially, are still EIP citizens and thereby of Metropolitan Portugal!
It is not too difficult to see the fundamental roots of the Goan Difficulty, and why those Goans who seek to compromise with the Hindus are surrendering to a persistent enemy. The Grunerite, John Vennari, in his recent commentary on the desecration of Fatima, tells us:
While serving his missions, Saint Francis Xavier found particular delight in his small pupils. He was impressed that these young ones showed a great attachment to their faith, and a great zeal to learn the prayers and to teach them to others. The young pupils "also had a great abhorrence for the idolatrous practices of the pagans", in other words, for the practices of Hinduism. The pupils frequently "reproached their father and mother if they engaged in pagan ceremonies and came to tell the priest about it."
When Saint Francis Xavier heard that "outside the village someone was practicing idolatry, he gathered together all the boys, and this was something which he did later also in the other villages that he visited, and went with them to the spot where the idols had been erected. His pupils smashed the clay figures of the demons to dust and spit and stamped upon them." Saint Francis Xavier's biographer explains that these children "thus gave more insults to the devil than their parents had shown honor to him."[19]
Vennari's source is Francis Xavier, His Life and Times, Volume II, India, 1541-1545, George Schurhammer, S.J. (English translation copyrighted 1963. Published by the Jesuit Historical Institute, Rome, 1977), p. 310.
In my writings, I have had occasion to counter the long reiterated lies of the Hindus against the Portuguese Conquest of Goa, the Evangelization of Goa, and the expulsion of the Hindus from Goa. It would take too much time and space to repeat my counterarguments here, but I still need to repeat them in precis:
- It was the Goans, who went in a Delegation to Vijayanagar asking for liberation from Bijapur, who sought urgently the aid of Portugal to liberate Goa.
- The relationship between Goans and Portuguese were cordial and affectionate.
- A small minority of Caste Hindus objected to Christian evangelisation, which began under Portuguese auspices, and stirred up a climate of anti-Christian hysteria, terrorizing and intimidating neophytes to revert to paganism, and indulging in sedition. It was this miniscule minority that was expelled, for obvious reasons.
- That this expulsion affected only a very miniscule proportion of the Goan population, is proven by the fact that shortly thereafter, some of these expellees came back to Goa to recruit emigrants to colonize and farm the Kingdom of Bednore's forests, on the King's express command. It there had been a population problem, the Portuguese would have striven to prevent this seepage of population, that would have rendered Goa economically barren. On the contrary, the Portuguese did not see this emigration as a threat, but as a welcome opportunity to expand its influence into Bednore — and as an opportunity to reduce the population burden in Goa!
- The genuineness and integrity of the Goan converts was proven by the Goan emigrants in Bednore, who though now free of Portuguese "compulsion" did not abandon Christianity, except for a few individual renegades who apostasized because they took to themselves pagan concubines.
- On the contrary, Christian missionaries, not only Europeans, but also Goans, followed the first wave of Goan emigrants, the expellees and made numerous converts even from among them and the local Hindus, Jains and Muslims in Bednore and in the Malabar! These facts are beyond controversy!
- The emigrants were reinforced by two latter waves of migrants, fleeing the invasions and anti-Christian depredations, respectively, of Shivaji and of Sambaji Bonsale...
Perhaps the most important thing that escapes mention is a detailed investigation into Nehru's motives for seeking to invade and occupy Goa.
We have seen recently how the Hindus' campaign of 'irredentism' of religious places resulted in the destruction of the Babri Mosque. Nehru, it is said, was unlike the protagonists of this demolition, a 'liberal.' Yet, in fact, the motive is the same!
Nehru and the Indians hated and hate Goa — Christian Goa, where the majority community, the Christians, were assimilated culturally and religiously to Portugal and Christ, and sought to destroy it because it jarred on India's projection of Hindu superiority, and because, like the destroyers of the Babri Mosque, Nehru too wished to do away with this symbol that 'denigrated' Hinduism and Hindus...
Thus, Nehru was striking, not so much at Goans as such, at least directly, but he was striking out at the spiritual and cultural legacy of Vasco da Gama and the two great, noble and illustrious founders of Goa: St. Francis Xavier and Afonso de Albuquerque.
It is exactly precise to describe Albuquerque and Xavier as the moral and spiritual fathers of the Goan nation! We owe these two moral giants everything that we cherish and hold precious as Goan, as constituting the Goan identity!
On the contrary, the Hindus despice both Xavier and Albuquerque as vile persecutors and destroyers of the satanic and misanthropic Satanic Hindu Raj that obtained in Goa before their advent.
Xavier and Albuquerque, from their perspective, where the perpetrators; Christian Goa, the product of their efforts, an insufferable affront that had to be eliminated...
Thus, Goa was Nehru's Babri. The destroyers of Babri have a worthy champion and prototype — Nehru! Goans tend to overlook this fundamental aspect of the Rape of Goa.
None of the speakers at the Paris Conference nor the GFM mention some immensely important and material facts. As a result, they were challenged and they were not able to reply.
These, I believe, are the true reasons why the GFM failed and became defunct. The GFM did not have a clue of what it was up against, the new forces sweeping the world. It was grandly swept away, just as Portugal was grandly swept away.
If we, on the contrary, are to succeed, then we need to correct these fundamental ideological mistakes...
The first and most important error of the GFM and its members was their misunderstanding of the position by which they could claim a locus standi to be interested and to claim an interest in the affairs of Goa.
The Basic Premise of the EIP National Resistance is that the EIP remains as it were - that its Constitution has not changed due to
- the occupation,
- the Portuguese "Revolution" or
- the "Indo-Portuguese Treaty" of Soares-Chavan.
Therefore, the EIP remains under the same laws as before.
The first result of this is that all those who were recognized by EIP constitutional law as EIP constituents or citizens, even those resident or born etc overseas or extraterritorially, are recognized and continue to remain and retain their status and rights as EIP citizens.
Even Dom Mirabeau, the GFM's president, mentions the Indians stressing this point or claim, which is a mere pretension without basis in EIP law: the contention that only Goans on the spot, i.e., only those actually resident in Goa had a right to be interested or to claim an interest, etc.
Dom Mirabeau recounts: Dinesh Singh, the Secretary to the Ministry of External Affairs of the Government of India said the following: He once again stressed that Goa was a matter primarily for the people of Goa on the spot and the Government of India to be concerned with and the Goans in East Africa would be best advised to stay clear of such affairs."
This false, Indian, contention is contrary to Goan law and is actually a projection of Indian law, which admittedly does not apply, no more than Bolivian law, in Goa!
And it is precisely this false understanding that is nowadays frequently repeated by even Goans!
This is the point on which the GFM was challenged by the pro-Indian states at the UN, when Goan delegates went there to protest the inaction against India, and demand the application of the relevant UN resolutions. They were told point-blank that they had no locus standi as they were not Goan citizens, but were citizens of Pakistan, Kenya, Uganda, etc.
The GFM delegates failed to reply to and refute this point. That was a fatal mistake. Yet, when perusing the deliberations of the GFM's Paris conference, one quickly learns, to one's dismay, that these Goans had actually missed this most essential of points and laboured under a confusion as to their exact rights and standing in the matter! This, at least, is my understanding of the texts.
It is evident that, without expressly stating it, the Paris Conference deliberately refrained from instituting a Provisional Resistance Government of Goa, precisely because they thought that that should be the sole prerogative of the Goans in Goa!
Turning to the 2nd. GFM book, Goan Petitioners In The UN, on page 19, we see Achkar Marof, of the Republic of Guinea, the pro-Indian Union Chairman of the 4th. Committee, reply to Dom Leo de Sousa:
The Chairman (Achkar Marof) pointed out that the petitioner had been heard as a citizen of Pakistan. He could not therefore claim to possess Goan citizenship, and he should refrain from mentioning Territories not on the list sent to him.
Dom Leo de Sousa, in his reply to Marof stated:
What he had said was that he was "of Goan origin." He had been born at Karachi and was proud to be a citizen of Pakistan.
Dom Leo is wrong. This is/was the fatal mistake, the fatal error that undermined the GFM initiative.
We have the right to be involved, not merely because of some nostalgic ties with Goa, although that too would be valid, but because more importantly, we are actually CITIZENS OF GOA even if we reside elsewhere, and even if we also hold citizenship subsequently of other States — the Indian Union, Pakistan, Kenya, Uganda, etc., and because we continue and remain CITIZENS OF GOA until we expressly renounce it in accordance with EIP law!
India is an artificial "nation" fabricated mainly by the Hindus of the old British India Empire in 1947. It was a covenant among the Hindus to set up a new, fabricated "nation". Therefore, it could not bind those who had not joined the covenanteers. Specifically, it could not make any moral claim of irredentism over the EIP as the people of the EIP were never party to this covenant!
Mr. Jha claimed that Goa was a COLONIAL Question. It was NOTHING of the sort. Goa was never a COLONY, no more than India was a colony, whether of the ENGLISH, the PORTUGUESE or the MARTIANS.
But even more precisely, Goa had not been taken by the Portuguese, in whatever manner, from the Indians. The state, the Sultanate of Bijapur, from whom the Portuguese liberated Goa at the urgent and pressing request of the Goans themselves, cannot in any way be projected as a predecessor state of the Indian Union!
I always stress the fact that modern language is erroneous when it speaks of "Colonialism". This term is a misnomer. And tolerating this misnomer has fatal results - such as India�s RAPE of Goa, which is enslavement and true Colonialism!
The mistake over "Colonialism" has historical reasons rooted in English history. England established colonies in North America, which broke away to form the United States. The administrative affairs of these colonies were handled by what was designated as the "Colonial Offices" of the English Government. When, instead of these colonies, England began to seize or gain otherwise territories here and there worldwide, they were now handled by the same "Colonial Office" - which name was carried on, although they were no longer actually administrating Colonies per se, but merely and factually imperial dependencies.
As a matter of fact, a territory that is merely conquered and ruled by others is not a "colony" but a dependency. A colony is a territory where people from the conquering people settle, displace the aborigines, and become the majority social body.
I would remind the reader that at one time, England was called Britain, Roman Britain. However, when the Teutons (or Germans), fleeing the Hun invasions of their homelands, overran the Roman Empire in their turn, Britain was colonized by the Teutonic Angles, Saxons, Danes and Northmen. The aborigine, Celtic Britons fled to Armorica, modern Britanny, on the mainland or "Continent", which they colonized, and into West Britain or Cymri, modern Wales. (Cymri is the idiomatic name of the Britons. It is the source of such names as "Cambria", "Cumberland", etc).
When the English rebelled against Catholicism and federated with the Protestant rebels of Scotland, they revived the name "Britain" for their new, and fabricated "nation" resulting out of the merger of Protestant England and Protestant Scotland. This is the reason why they use the name "British". The "British" of course, famously do not speak British but English! "British", if such a language is still spoken, would be the language of the Bretons of Britanny and of the Welsh or Cymri!
Australia, New Zealand, Quebec (or Franco-Canada), Anglo-Canada, the English Colonies of New England, Jesso-Hokkaido, Formosa, Yunnan - these are properly colonies.
Siberia, North Mongolia (Buryatska), etc forms a vast contiguous colony for the Russians. Manchuria, Inner or Southern Mongolia, Uighuristan (Eastern Turkistan) and "Inner" and "Outer" Tibet, Yunnan, Guangzhou and Hainan forms a vast contiguous colony for the Chinese.
East Germany was colonized by the Germans over the last thousand years, at the continuous expense of the Slavic Wends or Lusatians, today reduced to a small and insignificant minority in their own country!
Japan has commenced the conquest and colonization of Hokkaido, formerly Jesso, over only the last 150 years, under American auspices, to the detriment of the Ainu aborigines.
Formosa is inhabitated by aborigines who call the island Pakan. The Portuguese conquered it, lost it to the Dutch, who lost it to a Chinese pirate, from whom the Japanese conquered it and ruled it for more than three hundred years or so. However, the Japanese permitted the Chinese to continue to colonize Formosa so that today it is predominantly Chinese in population.
As with Formosa, so with Singapore. The English permitted the Chinese to colonize Singapore, displacing the native Malays.
Chaldea, Assyria or Athour, collectively known now as Iraq, Aram or Syria, Phoenicia now known as Lebanon, the Cis-Jordan or Palestine (Philistia) and Trans-Jordan, Egypt, Nubia now known as the Sudan, Lybia now known as Libya, Africa now known as Tunisia, Numidia now known as Algeria, Mauretania now known as Morocco: all these are Arab colonies.
In the island of Ceylon, the Sinhalese, post-Independence, famously practised colonialism by attempting to transplant Sinhalese into the Tamil North and to reduce the Tamils into a minority even there, which was one of the provocations for the Tamil War of Independence, that still rages under the LTTE!
Among the Spanish states of the New World, Costa Rica and Argentina are the sole countries which actually qualify to have been Spanish colonies. The rest were merely Spanish dependencies!
India was never a "British" colony, nor an English one — rather it was an English dependency. Goa was, likewise never a Portuguese colony, but merely a dependency. Of course, Brazil was a Portuguese colony.
It is no one's contention, I believe, that in the Indian Union, as in the former English colonies of the USA, Australia, New Zealand, and Anglo-Canada, the dominant and majority social group is descended from English immigrants / colonists. (Perhaps, the Anglophile Nehru may have been secretly obsessed with some such delusion — of an illicit English ancestry — but it cannot have any basis in legal fact — and certainly not for the vast majority of the socially dominant classes of modern India!)
It is no one's contention, I believe, that in Goa, as in the former Portuguese colonies of Brazil, the dominant and majority social group is descended from Portuguese immigrants / colonists.
Objectively seen, imperialism and colonialism has been practised by every people on the face of the earth, not merely by the Europeans.
Till the end of World War II, Europeans tainted with the heresy of John Calvin, believed in the "superiority of the white race", and consequently, on something they defined as the "White Man's Burden" — which apparently consisted in dragging the rest of mankind, willy-nilly into a blind aping of their customs and cultures.
Today, however, those ideas are dead, though there are a few insignificant holdouts.
This heresy, however, has been replaced by another, just as iniquitous heresy, which blames the white man for all the ills of the world — apparently, the rest of mankind all lived in peace, harmony and uninterrupted bliss until the White Man came in and inflicted himself upon them!
The adherents of this "idea" have substituted "the White Man's Burden" with "the Bogey of the White Man"!
But, in fact, there is no scientific or historic basis to such an idea. When the history of any people is examined, it is seen that they have gone through a process of ups and downs. During their periods of triumphs, they have conquered and subjugated other peoples, reducing them to an inferior status. Rather than not, the members of any ethnic group look to such periods as their Golden Ages, even as they look to the times when the situation were reversed as tragedies!
Take the case of the Malays. The Malays are a far-flung family of nations inhabitating most of Farther India: the Sunda Archipelago, the Philipine Islands, the Indo-China region, etc. Yet they too are not the aborigines. They came in sometime about a thousand to a fifteen hundred years ago, displacing the previous peoples, of Negrito stock, who are reduced to insignificant minorities populating insignificant pockets.
The same can be seen in Sub-Saharan Africa. There was a great movement of peoples from the region of the Cameroons who moved in waves spreading all over the region, overwhelming the Pygmoids. The last Bantu immigration into the Far South of Africa, into the Cape Region was about simultaneous with the Boer Settlements — about 450 years ago!
When we turn to pre-Colombian America, we see the same pattern as elsewhere in the world. Peoples were displaced, empires were established by one people over another, one people afflict another. The Americas saw the rise of two huge empires — those of the Aztecs out of Mexico and of the Incas out of Peru. It was precisely for this reason that, as elsewhere on earth, victim peoples eagerly turned to the newcomer for a hoped for succour and liberation from their oppressors. It is for this reason that many ethnic groups native to the New World freely aided and assisted the Spanish in their campaigns of Conquest against the two dominant Empires of the Aztecs and of the Incas.
In constrast to the pretension of the "White Man Bogey" the Bible tells us, "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God!"
That is: All mankind has sinned. It is not that some have sinned and others are sinless.
Out in the forefront of the hypocritical pretension that only the White Man has sinned, are the Hindus. Muslim Asians are a close second. Recently, the Press and Media has been inundated by the "protests" by Indian emigrants in England rejecting awards or returning awards. Hari Kunzru, Alibhai-Brown, etc. These immigrants are haughty and arrogant and ungrateful, and look down with condescension upon the peoples who have graciously welcomed them into their homes, provided them with opportunities and freedoms that they most usually than not can only dream of in their native lands! They lecture the Europeans for objecting to being flooded by immigrants illegally pouring in, and who subvert their native cultures and traditions, their very societies! Then they object and reproach their host peoples for upbraiding them for their ingratitude!
Impressed and flattered by the "conquest" and accession of degenerate, deprogrammed Europeans to the "civilizations" of Asia - Hinduism et al, Kunzru and Company are annoyed that all of Europe does not fall down in awe and worship these "superior civilizations" of Asia!
By his Blockade of Goa, 1954-1961, intended to blackmail and terrorize the Goans into submitting to be slaves of India, Nehru and the Indian Union demonstrated that they were fully capable of an efficient, ruthless control of the traffic of people between Goa and India. Yet, when it came to the "Satyagrahis" expressly motivated by India with a false, fabricated "Hindu, Indian/Bharati irredentism," the Indian government claimed that it was not able to stop these criminals from trespassing into Goa in their campaign to terrorise and intimidate Goans into sedition!
It is necessary to understand exactly the international background situation that led to and facilitated the Rape of Goa:
Particular countries of the world, including India, specifically committed mischief, with the assent of the majority of UN members states and made it official UN policy to interfere unjustly and without justification or warrant in the internal affairs of particular states such as Portugal with the specific intention of bringing about their dismemberment. The particular UN Resolutions 1514, 1541 & 1542 were designed towards this end.
The basic presumption of the people who moved such measures is that it is only the White Man who has sinned and perpetrated Imperialism and Colonialism: These (Imperialism and Colonialism) are purely European phenomena!
I found it particularly pathetic how the GFM and its members allowed themselves to be deluded as to the true nature of the UN and hypnotized themselves that the UN was the one true, great white hope. Then, in contrast their shabby treatment by the UN hypocrites... as reflected in the second GFM book, Goan Petitioners In The UN... It makes my blood boil!
The only exception to the GFM's blindness is Romeo da Silva, who makes the astute observation of the bad faith of the UN: "Irrespective of the deliberation of the UNO, a body which seems rapidly to become a reservoir of ineptitude, sanctimony and humbug, it scarcely needs to be said that our right to self-determination does not derive from any government or institution. It is our birthright, our inalienable birthright." (Emphasis added).
The scientific study of the organisation of mankind into nationalities by birth, as against political allegiances, is called Ethnology; a branch of Anthropology. From the ethnological viewpoint, mankind constitute far more than a mere hundred or even two hundred nations... The real figure is between 5,000 to 20,000...
Any sane man will admit that if it is to be posited and claimed that every such nation should have the right to self-determination, applying the principles of the UN Resolutions in their spirit, then the world would be fractured into a bewildering nightmare of an immense multitude of independent, sovereign polities.
Yet, if we are to take the principles of the UN Resolutions in a honest spirit, then that is exactly what must need happen!
From the logical viewpoint, it is unreasonable that people should claim a right to secede and constitute themselves a separate state merely because they consitute a distinct nationality.
In the history of the world, many different people, and not specifically only the Europeans, seized bits and parts of territories here and there, and integrated contiguous conquests for administrative convenience.
It is the height of absurdity to claim and to pretend that while the people of these empires do not constitute "nations" in the political sense, nevertheless, the peoples of such contiguous territories, homelands of different ethnological nations combined within one political circumference for administrative convenience, constitute a political nation, and one for which it is claimed, that it possesses "inviolable territorial integrity" — the very same which the UN hypocrites refused to recognise in the empires!
The only legitimate reason for secession is that a people are in an incontrovertibly intolerable situation which cannot be reformed except by their secession...
But, again, such a right to secession in such situations cannot be restricted merely to peoples who form distinct ethnic groups only, to the exclusion of communities which are part of the same, homogenous ethnic community as the rulers of the current dispensation. The right to secession, rather, rests on the situations and circumstances in which these movements arise.
In the case of Switzerland, we see that Germans of Helvetia rebelled against their German government and seceded on grounds of an intolerable situation. In the case of the United States of America, we see that Englishmen — Anglo-Saxons — seceded from Englishmen on grounds of an intolerable situation. There are many such instances in the history of mankind.
This is the true progressive, humane attitude to the proposition of the rights of peoples to secede, rather than the principles propagated by the UN.
These principles have been known from ancient times - being famously used in the Greek Commonwealth, and on which the Roman Civilization and the post-Roman European Civilization has been consistently based.
Thus, the UN principles, constituting as they do, a rejection and negation of these ancient, tested, well thought out and well founded principles, constitute a regression into barbarism and chaos, anti-civilization!
These UN "Resolutions" do not, in fact, reflect morality but actually reflect and promote hypocrisy. They interfere and seek to dismember integral, albeit territorially non-contiguous states, fused into integral peoples over centuries. Conversely, and illogically, they fail to address the issue as to rights of people in colonies contiguous to the colonial homeland.
Siberia is contiguous to Russia. Siberia is, however, a vast Russian colony. The aborigines, under UN law, do not gain the same rights as the aborigines of Angola, Mocambique and other territories.
There is no moral reason why the right to self-determination, that the UN imposed against the wishes of the Portuguese Commonwealth on its member territories of Angola, Mocambique, etc., should not apply to the Buryat Mongols, the Tuvans, the Shakas — an ancient race in Yakutia, the Nenets, the Aleuts, the Navajos, Sioux or Seminoles, etc.
Rather, as a matter of fact, there is a more urgent need to extend this right to these unfortunate, victimised peoples rather than to those upon whom the UN maliciously and gratuitiously, without just cause, imposed!
From yet another viewpoint, the UN's position is definitely hypocritical, immoral and militantly misanthropic. The territories of India, Angola, Mocambique, etc., were collected by foreign powers and politically integrated, for administrative convenience, into single units. However, the anthropological realities are something else.
In many cases, ethnic groups are divided by the frontiers of these artificial states into two or more different political allegiances.
In the case of Angola, we have the BaKongo or Kongo nation, whose homeland is partitioned between Angola and the Belgian Congo. There is no logical or moral reason why the Kongo should worship either of the fabricated "gods" or "nations" of Angola and of Zaire/Congo, and refrain from claiming their rights to reclaim their homeland and integrate it as a third separate state, separate from both Angola or Congo.
The same situation holds worldwide. In India, the Nagas and Mizos are famously partitioned by England between Burma and India. This is immoral. Yet, the UN recognizes as if divinity, the "territorial integrity of Angola, India" etc, even when it refuses the same rights to the Portuguese Commonwealth. Conversely, the UN refuses the same rights to the Siberian aborigines, the Buryat and Southern Mongols, the Ainu or Manchu, etc!
What is this if not outright hypocrisy? But it is more than hypocrisy — it is sedition. It is intolerable that the UN should actively and openly seek to subvert the loyalties of peoples upon patently false bases and to dismember states.
Pointedly, let us recall that when Portugal refused to play patsy with the hypocrites who run the UN, the UN venomously and poisonously acted unilaterally, with India being one of the main instigators, to list the overseas provinces of the Portuguese Commonwealth as "Colonies" and to insist on their "right" to secession...
It is this venomous, poisonous cultivation of sedition without moral basis or provocating cause, based on nothing more than sheer and unadulterated hypocrisy, that caused so much of unnecessary bloodshed.
Let us not forget, even more pointedly, that without these shenanigans by the UN, this duplicity, this unmitigated hypocrisy and sedition, India would not have been given the license by the UN to invade and bludgeon Goa into slavery.
That is, the invasion happened, NOT despite the UN, but precisely BECAUSE of the UN. Even more pointedly, it is the UN more than India which has committed wrong, terrorism and genocide against us.
Many Goan patriots have failed to recognize this diabolical fact. They, therefore, ignorantly seek the intervention of the UN in Goa, to act as honest broker, to take over the interim administration and to prepare Goa for its tryst with destiny.
I want none of it. The UN is the principal criminal in the Rape of Goa.
I am convinced that the UN was aware of the Indian Union's plans regarding Goa and not only connived, but also conspired and abetted the Indian Union. But even otherwise, when we turn to the actions and behaviour of the UN after the Rape of Goa, we see it betray is malice and misanthropy.
The draft Resolution moved to condemn the Indian Union and demand the restoration of the status quo ante was vetoed by the Soviet Union. Yet, in addition to this, the UN betrayed where its sympathies lay by 'delisting' Goa from the list of territories that it had maliciously drawn up, insisting that the peoples of these territories be given freedom.
Suddenly, Goa did not figure! Suddenly, Goa no longer needed this freedom! And, pray why this sudden change? The Republic of Ghana, acting as the mouthpiece of Indian and UN malice and misanthropy, supplies us the answer.
According to the records of the 4th. Committee on De-Colonisation, Mr. Yomekpe of the Republic of Ghana, said, attacking Dom Antonio da Fonseca, the General Secretary of the Goan Freedom Movement for insisting on bringing the Rape of Goa to the attention of the Committee: Ghana... indeed found it intolerable that the Fourth Committee should be used as a forum for propaganda. The United Nations was not discussing the question of Goa. The people of that country had gained their independence by joining India. (sic!)
(Emphasis added) The Ghanians apparently enough echo the UN attitude and position on Goa.
That the UN has officially adopted this attitude is evident by the actions of the 4th. Committee, which removed "Goa and its dependencies" previously unilaterally listed as a "Non-self-governing territory" from the list of such territories subsequent to the invasion and occupation of Goa by the Indian terrorists. This was again underlined by the 4th. Committee's insulting misbehaviour with and towards the Goan Petitioners who had come to request it to act on Goa, aggravated by the African delegations' brazen hypocrisy, in broad daylight, which the UN has not thought fit to repudiate and correct. One must bear in mind, that these actions, though voted in by these African delegations, is now the official record and policy of the UN!
Secondly, the UN has taken the 1974 "treaty" between the Indian Union and the Communist brigands of Portugal on its record, among the listed international treaties, whereby these Portuguese brigands: Spinola, Mario Soares (a Goan Communist), etc., "recognized" that Goa had become an "integral" part of the Indian Union as a result of its (the Indian Union's) brigandage!
Both these actions certify that the UN is a criminal and misanthropic organisation!
I see the UN as my, as Goa's, primary, main and most dangerous and fearsome enemy. The UN exists to de-Christianize human society and to break up Christian states and to enslave Christian peoples.
Timor would not have happened without the active collaboration of the UN and of the US.
The Rape of Goa would not have happened if the UN had been honest and not hypocritical in its fundamental principles.
I am very clear in my mind on this point: The blood of many millions, besides the misery that ensued and which still ensues, in the territories of the former Portuguese Commonwealth or Novo Estado, which state was in perfect and legal succession from its predecessor states of Portugal, lies principally upon the UN, yesterday and today. The UN has to, must answer and pay for these crimes!
Crimes of Genocide, Terrorism, Sedition, Secession! Crimes of Rape!
Thus, when seen logically, and when cultivated, emotionalist blindness, which fatally puts us into the power of our enemies, is eschewed, we can see that the UN is not only far from being the Great White Hope of victim peoples, but that it is an vicious enemy of man and of God!
The UN is thus the chief perpetrator of the Rape of Goa. It and those who joined and aided and abetted the Indian Union are culpable and must pay for their mischief. We may be small, but our God is not. We can take on these big and powerful enemies and win!
It would be wrong and foolish of Goa to forget and to overlook the crucial part played in the Rape of Goa by the Africans. The deliberations of the 4th. Committee demonstrates this unprovoked malice unmistakeably, with only Liberia not being party to this crime...
It is conventional wisdom not to kick sleeping dogs. It is conventional wisdom that every worm has its day. Indeed, we do not sit and wait for our day to come. Rather, we go out and seek it actively. You, of Africa, will rue having betrayed us, having gloated upon us and our tragedy when we had done you no ill...
We, the people of Goa, are neither blind nor stupid. We have our eyes open and we see all your mischief. We note the promiscuous, adulterous relations between Africa and the Indian Union, and how Africa, with the sole exception of Liberia, cheered on India in the Rape of Goa. We see that Africa relies on Indian military might to protect it and to pull its chestnuts out of the fire: "In June this year, the African Union held its summit in Mozambique and India was approached to provide security cover which was extended by way of deploying ships in Maputo..." (C. Uday Bhaskar, No Longer At Sea: Smooth Sailing For Indian Navy, Times of India, Bombay, 3rd. Dec., 2003).
On behalf of the Goan patriots, I speak plainly and tell the UN and all these criminals — the great and noble Africans: Tanzania, Ghana and others who connived in and applauded and aided in the perpetuation of the Rape of Goa, instead of fulfilling the moral and legal obligation of coming to the aid and succour of an inoffensive people being victimised and brutalised in broad daylight, that we remember and that we will repay.
We will give you ample cause to recall and remember "National Reunion". We promise you: We will force-feed you "National Reunion" until you are bloated and engorged upon "National Reunion" and can have no more, and then we will stuff you with twice as much... This is our sacred promise — So help us God!
However, these contemptible subhuman vermin were not our only betrayers - they were merely the visible ones.
But, of course, besides the UN, there was the Cabal of Babylon, the not-so-secret union of anti-Christian states, led by the Protestant, Homosexual, Agnostic/Secularist and Freemasonic states of the USA and England, ably aided and abetted by their Jewish masters, Israel, and by the Antichurch, etc., which played vital, crucial roles in the Rape of Goa.
These states ensnared Portugal into the "Western Alliances" and conveniently subverted Portugal behind its back, even as they made pious and false promises, which they never did keep — or ever intend keeping, of aiding Portugal in its defence needs. Need I say more?
Nehru, it is reported by one of the speakers (Minguel de Sousa) had said, '...even if they (the Goans) want the Portuguese, he would not tolerate this.'
This is insufferable arrogance, malice and hypocrisy.
But it is true. It is true, as I can now see it clearly enough, that the Goans had become thoroughly assimilated into Portuguese society, so that we could be truly described to have become an integral unity, one community, even though we spoke different languages!
It is true that Goans, if given a free choice, would rather prefer to maintain an integral political relationship with Portugal, as an overseas province, rather than as a cutoff, castoff "independent state or republic of Goa"!
It is precisely this why Nehru sedulously refused to permit Goa even a pretence of a free plebiscite or referendum, unlike in Hyderabad, Junagad, Manavadar or Mangrol before Goa, and in Sikkim after Goa.
It is of course typical of Nehru that he should play one of his usual jokes upon us Goans. In response to the Kenya Goans' petition, he says:
"The Government of India fails to understand your reference to a plebiscite in the context of self-determination. Democracy does not envisage that parts of an integral nation should resort to such processes. Goa, Daman and Diu are not different countries despite their past occupation by a foreign power...."
This is the same hypocrite who, after invading and occupying four independent kingdoms — the States of Hyderabad, Junagad, Manavadar and Mangrol — had so happily staged "referendums" in them, when he knew that the Hindu majorities of these Muslim ruled states were guaranteed to vote for annexation to the Indian Union!
Another thing seems to be inexplicably not discussed: Nehru�s speech of 1954, that "Goa will be �liberated� and integrated with the Indian Union".
This actually supplies the key. It was not democracy, nor even "anti-colonialism" or some mythical common ethnicity, but merely his arrogant territorial aggrandisement, augmented with a desire to avenge perceived Hindu slights.
What are these 'slights,' and who 'perpetrated' them? Albuquerque and Xavier!
Antonio da Fonseca tells us: "Thus we will achieve true liberty and the brotherhood of mankind, under God." - . But modern man, both then and now, does not want to be "under God"! They hate and abhor God! They want it under their daemons! This is a fundamental reason why God has permitted this catastrophe to overcome us!
Again, Antonio da Fonseca says: "Let us face the fact that we were challenged to a fight right from 1954. We must accept the challenge fully and with all its implications in mind. All is at stake: faith, family, property, liberty, life and above all, our native land." But the challenge was from 1947 explicitly and from and in Gandhism, implicitly, before that!
It is evident that the members of the GFM had not yet reached the point where their brainwashing had been lost: They had not yet been detoxified of Gandhism. All of them happily pay homage to Gandhi!
What they failed to realize, and which mistake we must not do, is to understand that Gandhism is based not on morality but on hypocrisy. Moreover, Gandhi is above all the apostle, more than of the pretentious Gandhian "Non-Violence" which Nehru perpetrated upon Goa, but of Anti-Christ. That is, Gandhi stands, more than anything else, for the rejection and denial of Christ and of his Gospel, of his uniqueness and centrality in the Economy of Salvation.
The Core Message of Gandhi is not his pretensious "Non-Violence" which, in fact, is a type of violence, sedition, hypocrisy and above all, a gratuituous intrusion into other people's affairs and an insistence on one's right to violate another's privacy and to inflict oneself on others; the Core Message, rather, is that Christianity (and therefore Christ) is simplistic, inadequate, inferior and pedestrian Belief Systems, in contrast to which, Coprolatric Hinduism, etc. is sophisticated, appropriate for all mankind, an infinitely superior and sublime Belief System that all men ought to adopt! Gandhianism is all about a not-so-subtle subversion and perversion of Christians and of a program to get them to contemn and abandon Christ and Christianity and to adopt instead Hinduism!
Fonseca astutely recognized this threat, pointing out that we must go deeper into the implications, and naming one affected area as being of the faith!
Let me make this one thing clear to my fellow Goans: We are Goans because Albuquerque and others took us in hand, and lovingly re-educated us, making us clones of the Portuguese. This is not something that we see as shameful but as our joy, our pride and privilege, and we are right in that, for it has improved and humanized us, when previously, under the Hindu dispensation, we were misanthropic monsters.
Therefore, it is Christianity, more than anything else that defines us. We can lose Portugal, and not die out. But if we lose our Christianity, we will not remain the same people. We will lose our essential identity.
Dom Mirabeau said: By some we are condemned as pseudo-Europeans and by others scored as westernised Asians. Gentlemen, we are neither one nor the other. We are simply Goans or Damanenses or Diuenses, and very proud of it.
Unlike the "Westernisation" which the adherents of White Supremacy inflicted upon their victims, which was meant to underline their superiority and the inferiority of the subject peoples, Catholic peoples sought to assimiliate with respect the peoples of their conquests, following the Roman Imperial tradition.
What was the Roman Tradition? The Romans came to be by absorbing the peoples of Central Italy, of different racial stocks —Etruscans, Sabines, Latins, Romans, etc. into one people. (The Latins and Romans were originally different peoples. The Romans proper were immigrants from Alba Longa proximately, and from Ilia or Troy remotely. The Latins have a different ancestry.)
In this the Romans followed the traditions of the Greeks who themselves did the same thing earlier. Later, the Roman Empire absorbed once again peoples of different racial stocks — Asians from Syria, Asia Minor, Arabia, Phoenicia; Africans from Egypt, Lybia, Africa and Carthage, Numidians, Maurs; Europeans such as the Dacians, Illyrians, Celts and Gauls, Iberians, etc.
Jovianus, a German, Philip, an Arab, etc. attained to the highest honour of the Empire, becoming Caesar and Imperator. Constans Chlorus and his son, Constantinus Chlorinus, were Britons. Titus and Domitianus, I believe, were Illyrian. There was even a Syrian from Palmyra, though his name fails me.
The Portuguese did the same with the Goans. Goans were freely absorbed into Portuguese society and treated on an equal footing — something that could not be said of the Protestant Europeans who laboured under Calvinistic ideas.
Goans, even Hindu Goans, had, therefore, over the last 450 years of Union with Portugal, become thoroughly assimilated and integrated into the new society that developed by the absorption of the native peoples of the Conquests with Metropolitan Portugal. The Hindus even named their religious headquarters in Goa, the Partagali Math, a name which still persists, despite the effort to exterminate Lusitanian cultural influences!
Therefore, I will not either be ashamed or allow myself to become ashamed of being assimilated to Portugal, to Lusitanian culture. I do not apologise nor am I ashamed to be "westernised". I am, on the contrary, proud of it. I contemn those who contemn me and my people for these characteristics, as brainless philistines, lovers of paganism and of hypocrisy and ignorant of history, geography, anthropology, ethnology.
I am Portuguese, and proud of it!
It is therefore necessary for us to be stubbornly recalcitrant about the core values of our identity - Christ, Christianity, our Lusitanian culture. That necessarily involves a rejection of the malicious perversion of Christ's gospel, the rejection of Gandhi's anti-gospel!
(See here for more information against the heresy of Gandhianism).
Therefore, we reach the inevitable conclusion that we were integrated freely and peaceably into the Portuguese Commonwealth, that we were forcibly dismembered thereof, and against our express will. Therefore, what we need is not merely "self-determination", which is playing into the hands of our detractors, but unequivocally and unconditionally the restoration of the status quo ante. That is, we must be restored as an integral part of the Portuguese Commonwealth.
But of course, Portugal too has been subverted and overthrown. Therefore, following our logic, we will need to join up with the Counter-Revolution in Metropolitan Portugal and restore it before we can restore the Portuguese Commonwealth.
There is no other option before us. If we compromise on this, and constitute Goa a seperate, independent state, it will still be a victory of sorts for the malefactors of the UN and the Indian Union. This we cannot permit. This we cannot let be. Therefore, we are obliged to such a course.
"What matters is not the size of the man in the fight but of the fight in the man."
©P.J. Mascarenhas; Goa Livre Organisation.