Text Books Of Hypocrisy

The Mendacious Hypocrisy of the Indians

©Lucio João Mascarenhas, Patriota Goesa e Portuguesa.
On my recent trip to Goa, I went about seeking information on the events of 1954-1961, and the perpetrators - quislings, enemy agents, etc.

I have purchased two very valuable books, among others. These are Dr. Pracaxachandra P. Xirodcar's "Goa's Struggle For Freedom" and Custodio M. Estibeiro's "Goa Yesterday & Today". I sat down and read both in one day.

It would be precise to describe these two books as being Textbooks of Hypocrisy. It is the purpose of this article to demonstrate the basis on which I apply this epithet to these books.

Both books have been written from the traitors' viewpoint, to justify the treason perpetrated by certain persons against Goa, an integral part of the Portuguese Commonwealth.

Of these two works, Xirodcar's is, by far, more systematic, while Estibeiro's is mainly written sort of as a tourist guide.

I will refer to the two books by the abbreviated names of their authors: PPX & CME. My comments are in red.
PPX, pg. Xiv: "Portugal's success was mainly because of their armed ships seen for the first time in the Indian Ocean. Persia, Egypt, Vijayanagar Empires had only land armies and no naval forces." FALSE: The Arabs dominated the Ocean militarily and its trade until Portugal displaced them. The Muslim dominance was finally broken by the defeat Portugal inflicted on the combined navies of Turkey, Muscat, Iran, etc., at the Battle of Dio. From that date, until the intrusion of the Dutch, the Ocean was a Portuguese monopoly.

PPX, pg. xiv: PPX dismisses cavalierly the historical tradition that a Goan delegation had sought Portuguese aid to liberate Goa from Bijapur. "As such accounts come from the pens of Portuguese historians (sic!), it is but natural that they are biased. Secondly, in the past, under any monarchy, people or citizens had hardly any say in the takeover of the government or the affairs of the state." FALSE. This (second sentence) is the utterest garbage that a "historian" could have ever written! History is replete with very similar events throughout the world. It is only an ignoramus and a malefactor who forwards such pretentious rubbish!

PPX, pg. xv: "It ought to be noted that during the last World War Portugal allowed even her tiny colony of Timor to be used by the Dutch and Australian forces even without prior intimation."

PPX is a brazen liar, brazenly misrepresenting the facts. Later, at page 12, he mentions the facts that Portugal was not complicit in the Dutch-Australian occupation of Timor; that she sharply protested; that she sent forces to redeem Timor, which however were pre-empted by Japan's invasion of Timor. Nevertheless, the hypocrite masquerading as a historian will insist on misrepresenting Portugal as being in the know and amenable to the Allies' occupation of Timor!

PPX, pg. xvi: "It was a real test of India's foreign policy which proved that she abjured force till her security was threatened." Lies, sheer lies. Goa posed no threat to India. She had only about 4,500 troops, predominantly Goan; no tanks, military aircraft, etc. Portugal had rebuffed US attempts to lease a base in Goa, as that would have been construed by India as a security threat. Nevertheless, until the last day, India kept on harping on its brazen lies that there was militarization of Goa. When India invaded, there were only 4,500 Goan soldiers to withstand some 50,000 Indian army terrorists! This was Goan militarization!

PPX, pg. 23, para. 2: Pretensions that Goans were coerced to adopt Christianity and that they were "integrally Indian". Lies elsewhere and repeatedly disproven.

PPX, pg. 23. para. 3: "The Goans learnt Marathi and Modi as a prime necessity before pursuing studies in European languages�" Lies. It is true only partially, in that it applies only to the Hindu minority of Goa, and that it was a relatively modern trend, only about 150 years old, resulting from the agitation in British India and which spilled over into Goa, and thus not prevalent prior to the Portuguese entry into Goa.

From here on, PPX constantly pretends that Goa was an extension of the Marathi ethnic homeland, ignoring Indian history that Goa was integrally a part of the Concannim ethnic homeland, the Concan! The language of the Concannim is also called Concannim, and was never Marathi, which language came into being following the rise of the Maratha empire, evolving from the earlier Maratha language, Maharashtri, which PPX calls "Modi".

Modi is actually the Modi script devised by a Hemapanta Modi, a Prime Minister of the earlier Maratha State, the Devnagar Empire. For that reason it is more commonly called the Devnagari Script. It is now the official script of Marathi and of "Hindi".


PPX, pg. 25, para. 1: "Most of the Goan Catholics reconciled themselves to the European dress but could not do away with the age-old traditions, customs, habits and Hindu norms and principles."

Misrepresentation. Converts were never required to abandon their former traditions and customs, only those which were expressions of superstitions; the Goan Catholic retained much of his previous traditions and customs, but differed fundamentally from the Goan pagans in that they rejected categorically Hindu norms and principles, which rejection the Hindus themselves acknowledged and reacted with hostility to, considering that the converts had lost their caste status thereby; both in Goa and in British India, the converts were universally insulted with the spitting "chee chee" — a term that has gone down in the Oxford dictionary as a Hindu pejorative for Christians! Thus, the converts freely consumed cow's meat, which, above all, acted to sever ties between the Hindus and the Christians! So much for "retaining Hindu norms and principles"! Humbug!

PPX, pg. 32, paras. 1 & 2: PPX relates that the Portuguese, acting in violation of their own laws and Political Constitution, nevertheless imposed repressive measures which were in violation of this Constitution. In his footnote, this is the reference: "Political Constitution of the Portuguese Republic," 1st August 1935, as amended, in "Constitutions of Nations", by Amos J. Peaslee, Vol. 3, the Rumford Press, Concord, N.H., USA, 1950, p. 1 ff. This Constitution is the same one which, PPX informed us, (pages 4 & 5), was designed by Dr. Antonio da Oliveira e Salazar, and adopted by National Plebiscite in 1933!

Then, PPX goes on to cite "specific" instances of such violations. The very first "instance" is the Decree issued 27th June 1684 by the Viceroy, Dom Francisco de Tavora, Count of Alvor!
PPX, pg. 32, para. 2: "For instance the order of Viceroy Francisco de Tavora, Count of Alvora, on June 27, 1684 said: 'It is no less desirable that the natives of Goa abandon the use of their language and begin all to speak the Portuguese language, for thus shall cease the inconveniences of speaking both languages not to be understood; besides, it will be easier for the priest to catechise and instruct in the mysteries of faith concerning which they perhaps do not understand as they should either because the priest is not skilled in the idiom of the country or because the parishioners are not educated in the Portuguese language; in any case it is harmful both for political dealings and for the spiritual well-being of the souls� and to facilitate this interchange among all, the natives shall begin to speak the Portuguese language and the priests and school teachers shall teach the children in the same, so that in course of time it might become common to all without any further use of the native language; and for this reason in all practices and occasions they shall use the Portuguese language till they become fluent in it; for which I assign to them the time of three years within which all shall speak in the Portuguese idiom and shall use it in their dealings and contracts made in our lands, and on no account use the language of the country under pain of being proceeded with severe penalties as might seem befitting.' Ah, and so Tavora was violating the 1933 Constitution in 1684 — 249 years before this Constitution was even written! Talk of PPX' lunacy!

Instance No. 2: Edict of 14th April 1736! "Another legislative step, Edict of 14th April 1736 imposed severe restrictions. It said: 'We order the natives of India that on no occasion and under no pretext shall they sing in their homes the songs called Ovios (native songs) neither in public nor in private, in order to effectively extinguish the habit of the said songs among the Christian faithful.

'We order the aforesaid natives of India not to use in their food rice cooked without salt as done by the gentiles, mixing the salt after.

'We order the said natives of India, also all the inhabitants of its districts, even the Portuguese, not to have in their compounds nor in their properties and farms, the plant called tulsi (Indian Basil herb, used in Hindu idolatries) and to pull it out at once.

'We order the said natives of India and all the inhabitants of its districts, even the Portuguese, not to call any Christian by a Hindu name or surname.

'We order the said natives of India not to wear either in public or in private, the men the Dhoti worn by gentile men, and the women, the Cholli worn by the gentile women.'"
And so now, the enactors of this Edict in 1736 had, according to our brilliant idiot-savant, PPX, violated the 1933 Constitution 197 years before it was even written!

Instance No. 3: Pastoral of His Holiness, the Archbishop of Goa, Dom Lourenco da Santa Maria, of 1745! "Archbishop Dom Fr. Lourenco de Santa Maria, in an order issued in his Pastoral Letter in 1745 said: 'We are pleased to establish and apply again in these islands of Goa and in the two provinces of Bardez and Salcete, the prohibition to contract matrimony to any man or woman who does not know or is not used to speak the Portuguese language, which impediment will be in force for all the inhabitants and all Brahmin and Kshatriya individuals after six months following the publication of this. And the revered vicars should take special care to examine themselves whether the said parties know and are in the habit of speaking Portuguese; when they examine them in the Christian doctrine they should put all the questions in Portuguese ad the said examination should not be done through any other person but by the revered vicars themselves or by their curates; and they shall pass a certificate which shall be sworn on the Holy Gospels.'" [Incidentally, PPX designates Dom Lourenco as "Fr.", perhaps misinterpreting the term "Fray" as meaning "Priest" or "Father" rather than its actual meaning of Monk! The English equivalent is "Friar". The word "Fray" is derived from the Latin "Frater", which means Brother. The fruits of ignorance!]

Instances No. 4 & 5 are dated to 1937, which are the only ones that can be cited, in reference to the 1933 Novo Estado Constitution!

One must note that the Edict of 1736 was designed to eradicate lingering superstitions among Christians in a land where non-Christians practically no longer existed. Goa regained a substantial non-Christian population only when it began to expand into the new territories - the Novas Conquistas. The first of these was not till 1763, when the Raja of Sonda, who had no heirs, ceded his territories to Goa, by Treaty with the specific conditions that the restrictions against Hindus should not apply in these territories. These new districts were: Ponda / Antrus, Sanguem & Quepem, and were the first new acquisitions since the acquisition of the Island of Goa, and of the districts of Bardes and Sashti, the core of Goa! All the districts of the Novas Conquistas were predominantly non-Christians, although their populations were lesser as they were primarily forestlands compared to the Velhas Conquistas which were predominantly agricultural lands.

One must note that the Pastoral was a religious, not civil, order binding only on Goan Christians, and not on Hindus. It was not a civil law, enforced or enforceable by the civil authorities.

PPX makes no effort to show that these measures faced any opposition or reaction. There is an interesting directive issued by one of the Popes to the missionaries in Indo-China, wherein the Pope instructs them that they should not strive to uproot local traditions and customs, or strive to impose European traditions and customs, but that they should Christianise local customs, and eliminate all superstitions, which are, by their very nature, incompatible with Christianity, among the converts.

We are aware that there was a long-running feud and sharp disagreement — for more than 250 years - between the Papacy and the Portuguese authorities, with the Portuguese clergy supporting, by and large, their government against the Papacy. This was the Padroado-Propaganda Conflict. We remember that the Papacy circumvented Portugal by consecrating three Goans, Custodio Pinho, Tomas de Crasto and Mattias de Crasto as bishops outside Portuguese control in India�

Again, PPX fails to inform the reader that these measures, Tavora's Decree of 1684, the Edict of 1736 as also the measures imposed by the Archbishop in 1745, etc., were rescinded long before, generally under Pombal, latter under the Liberals under Queen Mary II and following liberal regimes, and only reversing the liberalisation to a slight degree under Salazar.

Pombal had in fact reversed the prohibition against the entry of Hindus into the Velhas Conquistas, and had even used State Power to force the peoples of the Velhas Conquistas to accept settlements by Hindus from the Novas Conquistas!


PPX, pgs. 33, para. 7, carried onto next page: "While the Portuguese resorted to such atrocities to curb the social, cultural and political activities�" It is usual for the pagans to make such stupid and idiotic misrepresentations and exaggerations! These measures were by no means intended or designed to "Curb" "social", "Cultural" or "Political" activities, which is self-evident from a reading of the texts involved! They were merely meant to impose the Portuguese language, for whatever purpose the Portuguese at that time saw fit.

At this moment, I do not possess any facts whatsoever to supply the background and the motives, etc., by which these actions of the Portuguese can be evaluated, and therefore, for that simple reason, I refrain from making any comment on these texts.


PPX, pgs. 33, 34, 35 & 36: PPX spends a lot of time whining about the restrictions imposed by Salazar. However, excepting for the "Colonial Act" of 1930, which was universally opposed by the Goans, and which was withdrawn in the face of this strong opposition, and the previous equality restored, in 1945, the rest of the measures were by no means Goa-specific, but applied to the entire Portuguese Commonwealth, even to Metropolitan Portugal!

PPX, pg. 37, para. 1: Dr. Rama Manohara Lohia, at the Largo de Margao: "A conspiracy has sought for decades to turn Goa into an island of imperialist safety where the law has proved inadequate, a whole chain of papers from Karachi over Bombay to Goa, and other agencies are instilling into Catholic Christians an unreasoning hatred and fear of Hindustani nationality�"3 Compare against this statement, the statements made by the leaders of the Goan Freedom Movement, of how if the Occupation would be permitted to continue, we Goans would be eaten out of our homes and our homes would become the homes of the invading locusts. Today, as I tour Goa, and look around me, I see how prophetic these warning have been! Which red-blooded Goan will deny that these very fears have now been largely fulfilled, and that they are being fulfilled even more?

Today, the Hindus, celebrating their triumph, are everywhere mocking the Christians and promising them further destruction, even absolute extermination. Unreasoning hatred and fear of Hindustani nationality�?


PPX, pg. 39, para. 1: Mohandasa Caramchand Gandhy, writing in the Harijan newspaper, "He (Lohia) has thereby (by his insubordinate and seditious behaviour in Margao, Goa) rendered a service to the cause of civil liberty and especially to the Goans (sic!).

"The little Portuguese Settlement, which merely exists on the sufferance of the British Government(sic!), can ill afford to ape its bad manners.

"In Free India, Goa cannot be allowed to exist as a separate entity in opposition to the laws of the free State."53


Later, in a letter to Dr. Jose Bossa, the Governor-General of Portuguese India, Gandhy wrote: "He (Lohia) has lighted a torch which the inhabitants of Goa cannot, except at their peril, allow to be extinguished. Both you and the inhabitants of Goa should feel thankful (sic!) to the doctor (Lohia) for lighting that torch." 54 Even Hitler and his minions could not have written a more arrogant and insolent, racist, imperialist and condescending Demarche!

And, ignorant of the true nature of Senhor Gandhy, the Devil Incarnate, so many Goans delude themselves that he is a champion of justice, truth, and the other virtues! Ignorance! Ignorance!

Allow me to quote to you, my dear fellow-Goans, with underlining to emphasize, the exact words of our "dear" Hypocrite-arch, Senhor Gandhy, himself: "In Free India, Goa cannot be allowed to exist as a separate entity in opposition to the laws of the free State." This is the same, very same hypocrite who wrote to the predominantly Muslim peoples of the Kingdom of Jammu & Kashmir — please note that Muslims have a tradition of violence — that they, subjects of a State that was vassal to England and to British India, "constitute" a nation and possessed the right to self-determination! And so, the various nations / ethnic groups of that Kingdom: Dogras, Kashmiris, Ladakhians, Shinakis, Baltitstanis, etc., all "constituted" one single, integral "nation" with rights to self-determination, but that same principle does not extend to Goa!

Talk of imperialist arrogance!

Talk of brazen, shameless hypocrisy, flaunted in broad daylight!


Para.2: "He (Gandhy) went a step further and suggested to the Governor-General to recall all the African policemen, declare himself wholeheartedly for civil liberty and, if possible, even allow the Goans to constitute their own Government and invite from the mainland India more matured Indians to help the Goans as well as him (Dr. Bossa, the Governor-General) in forming such a government.57"

We have seen how the Goan Freedom Movement leaders of 1963-64 have provide, for illustration, a long list of Goans who have risen to social, political, military, etc. eminence.

Yet, Senhor Gandhy blithely dismisses the long achievements of the Goans, immersed in modern culture, European culture for more than 250 years before the first British Indian could have acquired the equivalent, and insolently suggests that Goa needs Indian advisors and administrators!


PPX, pg. 40, para. 3: The Brahmin miscreant "Pandit" Jawaharlal Nehru: "Portuguese authority had existed in Goa not because of Portuguese power but because of British power in India."64

Ah, so now we know. All those histories which taught us that the Portuguese established Goa in 1510, and that the British established British India only from 1757 onwards were all wrong.

It seems that the British kindly and generously carried the Portuguese in, perhaps on palanquins, and gave them a little piece of their own conquests to inhabit, perhaps because they, the British, were enamoured with the Portuguese and could not live without their company in their neighbourhood!


PPX, pg. 48, para. 3: "Dr. Lohia made an attempt to enter Goa but was arrested, kept in custody of a week and expelled with an order prohibiting his entry for the next five years. The authorities had no legal right to keep him behind bars when he had not violated any law of the land." Ah! So, illegal entry and instigating sedition, dissatisfaction and alienation of the affections and loyalties of citizens from the State are not sufficient grounds for arrest of a foreigner! More hypocrisy from PPX!

PPX, pg. 49, para. 1: "Lohia expalined the goal set for them (his domesticated Goan traitors!) and asked: 'What are we fighting for? Basically, our aim is to create a new Goa, where every single Goan is a worthy and happy citizen who tries to acquire the dignity of full democracy and is willing to live and die for a free and united Hindustan'9 Wow! What a whole lot is telescoped and compressed in this!

So, the Goans who lived happy lives, in contentment and unity with Metropolitan Portugal, were actually deluded! It needed a foreigner with an ulterior motive of enslaving them as Hindu India's zamindari who alone was competent to instruct them in as to what is true happiness — slavery to the Indian invaders, subsumption into an alien Hindu culture, transfer of loyalty from the legitimate order obtaining to a foreign power — Hindustan, the Hindu Raj!

Transfer of our loyalties, without our consent, in opposition to our express will, from a willingness to live and die for a free and united Portuguese Commonwealth, to which our ancestors freely acceded, to a willingness to live and die for the invaders who do not even have the basic human courtesy to permit us even the figleaf of a pretended plebiscite in keeping with human norms!


PPX, pg. 52, para. 1: "At a meeting20 of the workers of the National Congress (Goa) held in Belgaum, presided over by himself (Lohia), he advised the Goans to establish their claim to Indian citizenship by writing to the Government of India. The meeting also passed a resolution which said: 'We affirm that we are and we have always been a part of the Indian people and declare our resolve to become Indian citizens. While Goa shall be an integral part of the Republic of Hindustan, the people of Goa shall on the basis of self-determination determine their status.'21"

A real mess of contradictions! These traitors, by affirming their resolve to apply for and attain to Indian citizenship, thereby abdicate Goan citizenship, and therefore cannot claim to be Goans anymore!

Again, there is a contradiction between their "pious" desire that "Goa shall be an integral part of Hindustan" on the one part and on the other part, that "Goans shall, on the basis of self-determination determine their status". If Goans are to determine their status by right of self-determination, Goa cannot be said to be an integral part of Hindustan, for the simple reason that it is only the Goans who can, by plebiscite, declare whether they want any part with Hindustan or not!

But, of course, all of this was merely some more pious humbug! The traitors were already agreed with the Invaders that Goa would be DRAGOONED into Hindustan! All the "pious promises" of the Lohians and the Nehruvians were blithely dispensed with, once Goa was militarily occupied by these bandits!


PPX, pg. 69, para. 2: "On January 26, 1950, India proclaimed itself a Republic. According to the Constitution (then adopted), the position was that a Goan who had his domicile in the Indian Union and had been ordinarily in India for not less than five years immediately prior to January 26, 1950, automatically became a citizen of India on the said date provided he had not voluntarily acquired the citizenship of any alien nation... Thus the Government of India treated Goans as Indians in a vague sense as it was of the view that in law their nationality was different, that is, Portuguese.32" And so India attempted to DRAGOON Goans into Indian citizenship, forcing it on the basis of domicile. And yet, the vast bulk of Goan expatriates in the Indian Union voluntarily continued to retain their Portuguese citizenship!

PPX, pgs. 76 & 77: "The National Congress (Goa) held its 6th Annual Conference in Bombay on May 19, 1951. It stressed that the primary responsibility of liberating the territories of India (huh?) from Portuguese rule must be mainly on the initiative and the efforts of the Goans themselves although the issue of the 'liberation' (sic!) of Goa was a part of the problem of India's complete freedom.

"It also categorically rejected any suggestion of a plebiscite� It held the view that the freedom was an inalienable fundamental right, and therefore to subject it to a plebiscite was to deprive it of its basic and essential character (
What was that again?)

"It also asserted that for their freedom to be complete and effective, these territories must be merged with the Indian Republic unconditionally and unequivocally (
huh?).

"It welcomed the assurance given by Nehru of a special arrangement of a democratic nature to run the government of these territories immediately after their 'liberation'.
81

"Upholding the ideal of secularism and that religious avocation should always remain the self-determined choice of an individual, the party demanded immediate abrogation of all types of religious discrimination and favour�
"

Some more pious humbug. Since Goa is not a natural part of the Indian Union as a political entity, India cannot have any claim upon it. Goans were not only free in the Portuguese Commonwealth, but they also possessed a superior lifestyle to that obtaining in the Indian Union.

It is pertinent to note Nehru's pious humbug in intruding into the internal affairs of the Goans and then gratuitously 'condescending' to give Goans the crumbs from their own table, which he is here proposing to steal from us, under the form of 'a special arrangement of a democratic nature to run the government of Goa' immediately after he has managed to perpetrate his banditry! All those 'pious' promises were blithely thrown into the dustbin once the banditry was accomplished!

It is pertinent to note that those 'Christians' who were collaborators of the bandits, were in fact, apostates; people who had abandoned Christ. That is exactly why they were moved by venomous hatred and fulminated against the EIP Constitutional Order which followed the concept of the Kingdom of God: the Co-Ordination of State and Church!

Secularism is the rejection of the Rights of Christ for the Rights of Satan. Man's rights are safe only with and in subordination to that of Christ Jesus. Too many Goans today ignore this elementary aspect of the Rape of Goa - that its prime motivating cause was the malice of the pagans to which was joined the malice of apostates; and that the prime target was to destroy the Catholic State, the Catholic Ascendancy!

As a matter of fact, the movement of "Indian Nationalism" was fabricated in the British Empire as a Hindu Racist and Superioritarian reaction to conquest by the European, designed to vindicate Hindu Racism and Superioritarianism. Having achieved its ends there, under the auspices of Ghandy, it was prevented from a full and complete victory by the presence of the inoffensive in itself Catholic Goa as a zone not in its domain, and where Hindu Racism and Superioritarianism was not Triumphant. Thus Goa was an 'ugly pimple' on the face of Indian Paganism! This was the source of the pagans' rage and hatred against Goa.

Of course, Pakistan is another such pimple, albeit much larger. The Hindu is not in a position to foist his superiority and triumphalism over that as yet, though he entertains the delusion of eventually achieving even this!


PPX, pg. 77, para. 3: "Dr. Salazar: 'Our times are apocalyptical ones, a period of regression or violent transition in which the ancient foundations are shaken before opening and consolidating those on which the New City is supposed to lie�'86" Ah, how much astute and honest Dr. Salazar was, given all his defects, than the Indian hypocrites!

PPX, pg. 79, para. 1: "It (the Indian Union) pointed out that those for whom these curbs were meant comprised barely two percent of the entire population in the areas." What is this supposed to mean? Who are these 'mere 2%' who were the only beneficiaries? And what business was it of the Indians?

PPX, pg. 79, para. 3: "Dr. B.R. Ambedkar bemoaned, '�if the Prime Minister had in the very beginning taken an active interest in the matter, I am sure about it that a small action on the part of the Government of India would have been quite sufficient to enable us to get possession of Goa, but he has always been shouting against them, only shouting and doing nothing.'101" Interesting, this evidence that the 'good' Dr. Ambedkar was also party to the crimes perpetrated on Goa, a willing and enthusiastic cheerleader... Interesting.

PPX, pg. 80, para. 1: "The Government of India requested Portugal again to agree to the opening of a dialogue for the direct transfer of the 'colonies' (sic!) to India. It condemned the wide-spread suppression of the 'nationalistic' (sic!) fellow-feeling in Goa and warned them that the 'political barriers artificially created by accident of history could no longer stem the rising tide of national urge for unity'." Some more arrogant meddling in the internal affairs of a foreign state, and a perfectly inoffensive one at that! And what is this mythical 'wide-spread suppression'? Or this mythical 'nationalistic' feeling? How can Goan traitors who suffer from obsessive-manic Indophilia be called Goan Nationalists? The hypocrites have no shame and no limits whatsoever!

PPX, pg. 89, para. 1: "Dr. Salazar further asserted that Portugal would stick to her 'calm and firm' course expecting Indian rulers, in accordance with their pacific pronouncements, not to try to sacrifice the rights of other people 'to the geometrical nature of their political conceptions.'. [para. 3] He reiterated that the demand of the Government of India was for the merger of Goa with the Indian Union and that there was no claim for the liberation of the people there.7 This avowal was to hoodwink the world and impress upon it that India was facing no colonial problem at all but that it was interested only in grabbing Portuguese territory." More penetrating insight from Dr. Salazar. Of course, the philistines can not appreciate such subtlety!

PPX, pg. 93, para. 3: "According to the present practice, a treaty though enforced by agents with full authority is deemed invalid until it is ratified. Now, the first treaty signed by Britain and Portugal in 1373 no doubt was ratified in various applications by latter treaties. But it is surprising that as to why the treaties signed by the two monarchs in the remote past be binding on the present-day Portugal which buried its monarchy in 1910 itself?"

So PPX pretends to play the part of the village idiot! Pretends to be ignorant of the understanding that change of regimes does not constitute change in the rights and obligations of the contracting States, and that Successor States succeed to such rights and obligations! Only an idiot will pretend ignorance of these fundamental principles of law!

PPX, pgs. 93 & 94: "On July 22, 1954, nearly 30 unarmed Goan volunteers entered the territory of Dadra where they became the target of gun-firing by a Portuguese police officer. The nationalist inhabitants of the enclave being furious at this violent incident supported the volunteers to overcome the police force, thirty-two in number. This resulted in the 'liberation' of Dadra.34"

PPX repeats this cock-and-bull story as fabricated by the Indian Government (ref. Footnote #34). As a matter of fact, a mixed bag of Indian terrorists and Goan traitors, reinforced by regular Indian troops, had attacked Dadra, and in the fighting that ensued, a police officer, Dom Aniceto Rosario, who was purely Damanese Goan without any Portuguese blood, was murdered by the bandits.

India denied the Portuguese version, based on eye-witness accounts of the Goan police personnel who were latter repatriated by the Indians to Goa, of the terrorists being armed and of their being reinforced by Indian regulars — police or military. However, today, India no longer denies this fact. See e.g., Bhatia's "Liberation of Dadra & Nagar Aveli" in the Indian Express, Bombay, which admits the involvement of armed terrorists sent in by the Indian Union and reinforced by Indian regulars.


PPX, pg 95, para. 2: "At the end of July, 1954, the Portuguese enclave of Nagar Aveli was occupied by two bands of volunteers — one belonging to the Azad Gomantak Dal46 and the other from the Goan People's Party. The Portuguese police resisted the sudden 'upsurge' of the 'nationalists' (sic!) till August 11 but it was of no avail." It was of 'no avail' because the terrorists, both armed 'volunteers' and Indian regulars outnumbered the small Goan garrison. Yet, despite that, the Goan Nationalists withstood the Indian terrorists for more than twenty days, conducting a guerilla war, which is eminently commendable!

PPX, pg 96, ff: PPX recites the Portuguese proposal that a Observation Team be constituted by representatives of three countries made by both Portugal and the Indian Union to investigate the violation of Portuguese India frontiers and territories by what India called 'unarmed volunteers', and India's counter-proposal, which changed the subject of observation to that of investigating the civil conditions in Goa, etc.

Portugal rejected India's claim to have accepted its proposal, because it had changed that proposal radically and in an unacceptable manner designed to compromise the integrity of the Portuguese Commonwealth and to foster sedition in Goa against Portugal.

PPX seeks to, in the usual and time-honoured tradition of the Indian hypocrites, confuse the reader, obscure the truth, and project the failure of this proposal as being due to Portuguese bad-faith rather than due to Indian chicanery and hypocrisy — its insistence on transforming a probe into the mischief it was fostering into a fishing expedition to provide a forum for the micro-miniscule minority of traitors and seditionists in Goa!


PPX, pg 98, para. 5: "As the 'satyagraha day' drew near, Portuguese authorities foreseeing the exodus (huh?) of the 'volunteers' and impending danger of the overwhelming support of the people in the territories, proclaimed a state of siege�"

Exodus? PPX is talking, I presume, of the planned invasion of bands that the Indian Union claimed was constituted of unarmed volunteers. An exodus is an outward movement. Here PPX is talking of a planned inward movement — invading into Goa, not moving outward from Goa. How does that become an EXODUS? Does PPX know what he is talking off?

And what is this 'overwhelming support' that this hypocrite is talking of? When was there any real, substantial public support for the Indian Union and its program of involuntary Anschluss directed against Goa? At that very time, Goans rallied to Governador-Geral Paulo Bernardo Guedes, to his call to volunteer to protect Goa from the terrorists. Goans volunteered en masse, and it was principally these Goan volunteers who stopped the invading Indians and forced them back over the frontiers.

Take again the pretension of overwhelming support. Despite the presence of over a hundred thousand Goans in the Indian Union, Portuguese citizens, and despite all efforts of blandishing or terrorising them to support and participate in the planned violations, invasions and occupation of Goa on August 15, 1954, far less than even five hundred Goans actually agreed to support India�

So much for 'overwhelming' support!


PPX, pg. 105, para. 2: "Taking note of some of its own difficulties, in September 1954, Lisbon declared through a decree that Goans residing outside Goa for more than five years ceased to be Goans68 presumably to claim later that the Goans who were and would be participating in the 'satyagraha movements', were Indians."

Malicious fabrications; lies and more lies. Portugal issued no such Decree. If it had, it would have been cutting off most of the hundred thousand odd Goan citizens resident in India.

If it had, Portugal would have scored a self-goal, and India would have had pounced on the opportunity and redoubled its efforts to gain the support and participation of the expatriate Goans in India... And the Goans would have seen that they had no other option but to fall in with India!

But as a matter of fact, no such thing ever happened. PPX cannot cite the exact Decree Number, and only cites a footnote in another book, an anti-Goan propaganda piece published by the Indians, as his authority for this claim!

The footnote PPX provides refers to a footnote in another book: 68. India in World Affairs, 1954-56, M.S. Rajan, Asia Publishing Hse., London, 1964. pg. 546 (footnote) Let us consider this matter from another angle. Despite the difficulties of Revolutionary Portugal with the Novo Estado of Dom Salazar, it nevertheless would have been bound to accept the validity and effect of this decree, if indeed it had been promulgated. Therefore, in continuing to recognize Goans as Portuguese citizens even till today, long after the infamous fraud that it has inflicted upon Goans, the Chavan-Soares Treaty of 1974, it extends the same indiscriminately to expatriate Goans in the Indian Union, regardless of this 'decree'. That is sufficient evidence in itself that this claimed 'decree' is either a forgery or that its contents are misrepresented!


PPX, pg. 106, para. 3: "It (the Indian Union) brought to the notice of Lisbon that the Governor of Damao entered Indian territory without any visa and without even informing the nearest police station and taking into Damao from the Indian Union certain persons who had been detained earlier by the Portuguese authorities in Damao for no plausible reason."

PPX is talking the utterest nonsense. If the detained persons were detained in one part of Damao and the Damao police merely transited over Indian territory from one part of Damao to another part, it was no business of India to ask about the detention of the persons who were so detained in Damao territory itself and the purpose therefore; it could legitimately only protest the violation, such as it could be, of its territory by such 'unauthorised' transit.

PPX, pg. 107, para. 2: "The assertion of Salazar that Portugal's right to sovereignity over its possessions in India was guaranteed by the Anglo-Portuguese Treaties� and of the NATO Agreement was vehemently disputed by Nehru. He asserted that India was not a contracting party to either of the treaties� and as a sovereign state India could not be bound by any international or regional accord to which it was not a party."

More brazen hypocrisy. The Indian Union was founded and established by England which was a contracting party with Portugal in the Anglo-Portuguese Treaties, and as such, unless the Indian Union had formally abrogated and nullified its part in these treaties as a Successor State of England and its territorial extension, the British East Indian Empire, it remained bound by these Treaties, and by the obligations thereby imposed.

PPX, pg. 107, para. 3: PPX states that 'Nehru was right when he argued that if Portugal, for instance today claimed the right to raise an army in England or Ireland, he had no doubt that the British Government would decline it permission to do so.' Nonsense!

There is no analogy between this hypothetical case and that of Goa. No one is pretending that either England or Ireland or parts thereof are part of the Portuguese State, so that there does not arise any question of Portugal seeking to raise armies there�

However, a more appropriate analogy is England's continuing occupation of a part of Ireland, the North or the bulk of the Ulster Province thereof, and where England, granted that this occupation or retention is lawful and moral, is fully within its rights to so raise armies therein! That is a true analogy of Portugal in Goa and of England in Ulster!


PPX, pg. 108, para. 1: "Expressing concern over the situation in the Portuguese 'colonies' (sic!), Colombo Powers — Burma, Ceylon, India, Indonesia and Pakistan - in their communiqu� of May 1954 stated 'the continuance of such a state of affairs was a violation of fundamental human right and a threat to the peace of the world."

More threats to World Peace have been perpetrated in the name of 'avoiding' them, than otherwise!

PPX, pg. 112, para. 2: "(The Indian Union) reminded Portugal that the world considered India as a country that respects friendly usage between peoples and that it did not encourage or permit unauthorised transit of persons across the frontiers and did not allow the violation of the borders."

More shameless lies! The Indian Union had self-admittedly fomented and fostered a campaign for the violation of the frontiers of Portuguese India by supposedly 'unarmed volunteers', who were found to be, by and large, neither unarmed nor volunteers; this campaign was part of its larger campaign which abused the courtesy, trust, human dignity and privacy of the Goan people to live undisturbed by its unwanted and unsought-for advances, as part of its UNCONSCIONABLE pretensions to 'own' Goa and Goans as its Chattels without reference to the wishes and assent of the Goan people.

This is what the Indian Union means when it puts forth its brazen lies that it 'respects friendly usage among peoples' and that it did not permit violation of the borders! India is such a practitioner of hypocrisy, that it has become the very personification of hypocrisy!

A few lines later, PPX himself explodes Nehru's pious lies. Indian terrorists and regulars had already violated Goa's borders at Dadra and at Nagar Aveli, and had seized those territories. Giddy with the victory attained by these acts of banditry, they proposed to launch a similar campaign aimed at the rest of Goa. And then, at pg. 113, para. 2, Nehru is quoted as stressing that it was not at all a hard task for the Indian armed forces to capture those invading Goa's borders from the Indian side, but that he had not done it so far and would not do it.117

This is how India 'did not permit violation of borders!' Wow! What hypocrisy!


PPX, pg. 127, para. 3: "Salazar also ruled out the demand for special alliances for organising an effective resistance against the possible military attack by the (sic!) India. According to him, there was no military solution to the problem...." It is indeed unfortunate that Dr. Salazar even refused to undertake any positive step that would have ensured a defence of Goa.

PPX, pg. 127, para. 3: "Salazar put forth a novel idea: To grant Goa complete independence within the framework of the federal Portuguese State so that it would be a sovereign state against which, in his opinion, India should bear no grudge. He opined that such a state would enjoy the same international guarantees as any other state would.16"

PPX, pg. 134, para. 2: "Nehru 'warned' the world, especially the Atlantic Powers, that the Indian Union would tolerate 'no nonsense' about Goa from wherever it came, from a big or small Power.59"

We, the Goans, point out the the chief source of any nonsense regarding Goa, was the half-breed and mamzer Nehru himself, and we promise that we will destroy all the nonsense of the Indian Union about Goa. This is a 'matter of faith' with us: As our God lives, so we shall inflict CONDIGN punishment upon the Indian Union, and secure fitting and complete reparations, restitutions; inflicting fitting retributions upon the "Nation of Hypocrites". So help us God!

PPX, pg. 140, para. 4: "The High Commissioner of the Indian Union in London refused to accept an invitation to attend the programmes and functions arranged in Lond in honour of the visiting Portuguese President, General Craveiro Lopes.113" Lies. The Indians were not, in fact, invited, as even the Statesman of London pointed out, given their miscreancies against the Portuguese!

PPX, pg. 209, paras. 2 & 3:PPX quotes from Nehru's 4th June 1956 speech at Bombay, but fails to restate fully and with its full implications, Nehru's solemn promise that it was the Goans alone who would decide the future of Goa, and that India would not forcibly annex it, without the approval of the Goans.

As a matter of fact, Nehru's entire speech is unacceptable, from the Goan viewpoint. The presence or toleration of the presence of the Portuguese was and is entirely an internal matter of the Goans as citizens of Goa, and which had, with the free consent of their ancestors, integrated with Portugal, and Nehru or any other foreigner had no right to object or comment upon it.

The offer of self-determination was trickery meant to hoodwink the Goans, for it was not for Nehru to offer or not to offer it, but his only duty towards Goa was to abstain from an undue interest and from his persistent interference in Goan affairs, and of stoking and fomenting unrest, dissatisfaction and sedition therein.

Admittedly, the Goans were in a state of contentment, without any real civil disturbance, except that attempted by some Goan and Indian radicals and terrorists at the behest of Nehru and other miscreants and anti-social elements based in the Indian Union.

It is hypocritical for Nehru to not only arrogate unto himself the right to interfere in the internal affairs of other peoples, but also to offer to them "self-determination" as if he were their owner, proprietor and master — their zamindar — even as he refused the same to peoples who were included in the Indian Union and who wished to be independent, and whom he brutally repressed — such as the Tamils or Dravidian Movement, the Nagas, the Khasis, etc. Utter and shameless hypocrisy!

At another time, Nehru had insisted that 'even if the Goans themselves wanted the Portuguese to remain, he would not permit it'!

Nehru was one of the instigators of those acts of Mischief that constitute the UN Resolutions 1514 (XV), 1541 (XV), 1542 (XV), etc. According to the principles set out, those designated as 'Non-Self-Governing Peoples', after being afforded a considered choice, had the right to either establish themselves as an independent state, or to establish themselves in a relationship of free association with any pre-existing sovereign state, or to merge themselves with any pre-existing sovereign state.

That implicitly meant that such peoples could, if they so choose, choose to remain in a relationship with the European power that had previously ruled them.

This has been already done in the cases of the Martinique, Guadaloupe, St. Helena, Reunion, etc., wherein those territories freely choose to continue with France, England, etc.

Goa too could have undergone the same procedure, the only hitch being that we, the Portuguese, have scruples against hypocrisy, which is why we refused to consent to the nonsense of these UN Resolutions!

And it is precisely for this reason that Nehru and the Indian brigands choose the route they did follow — a pretended and forced annexation of Goa, without any reference to the assent of the Goans, precisely because they were aware that while the Goans wanted no part with the Indians' humbug, if they were afforded a free plebiscite, they would have voted overwhelmingly for Portugal; which would have summarily destroyed all of India's hypocritical pretensions to moral uprightness and vindicated Portugal!


PPX, pg. 213, para. 4: PPX is shamelessly hypocritical, and refuses to admit anything good or positive in the Portuguese or any of their actions; he must misrepresent all actions as a failure or as out of bad faith. Here he now pretends that because of India's blockade on Goa, Goa became more dependent on India. As a matter of fact, due to laziness and ease of bringing in things from British India, Goa had become complacent and came to dependent too much on India. But the Blockade forced Goa to develop her own resources and to stand on her own feet; with so great a success that she went from being a net drain on the Portuguese economy to becoming an asset... The Goan Rupia became stronger than the Indian Rupee — the official Indian exchange rate being two Rupees to the Rupia, while the unofficial exchange rate was much higher — in the range of about ten Rupees or more to the Rupia!

PPX, pg. 217, para. 5: "Goan (sic!) freedom fighters urged the Government of India to adopt a pragmatic attitude regarding the grant of citizenship rights to Goans in India. But Nehru replied that the government had not though it necessary or desirable to alter the law or to relax the relevant rules in their favour.63 The Government of India in fact took it for granted that many Goans in India who required no registration were eligible for Indian citizenship under the provisions of the Indian Constitution or of the Citizenship Act by virtue of their stay in India for a long time, emplyment in the profession (sic!) and appointment to government services.64"

PPX, pg. 218, para. 2: "Portugal, through a new Decree, redefined Portuguese nationality as
  1. All those born in Portuguese territory
  2. ,
  3. Children of a Portuguese father
  4. Children of a Portuguese mother, if the father was stateless or of unknown nationality,
  5. Children of a foreign father, except when he was in the service of the State to which he belonged,
  6. Children of a foreign mother, if thefather was stateless or of an unknown nationality, unless she was in the service of the State to which she belonged.
Portuguese nationality would be forfeited on
  1. Voluntarily acquiring a foreign nationality,
  2. Accepting service from or rendering military service to a foreign State without the permision of the Government
  3. Not being also a subject of that State, not giving up the service within a period of time fixed by the Government
  4. A Portuguese woman, on marrying a foreigner, except if she did not acquire by marriage her husband's nationality or if she declared before the celebration of the marriage that she wished to maintain her Portuguese nationality
  5. Declaring either himself or through his legal representative, that he did not want to continue to be Portuguese, although he was born in Portuguese territory and that he was a national of another State."
PPX, pg. 219, para. 2, ff.: "Portugal claimed that its people by strength of spirit, not by force of arms, became one people on four continents maintaining a genuine feeling of community cemented by the same national faith. It contended that the Portuguese nation was a unitary republic with only one Supreme Court, one National Assembly and one and indivisible sovereignty and therefore she could not have any defined international status applicable to non-self-governing territories, which fell outside the Portuguese case. Lisbon gave two reasons for this. First, Article 73 did not apply to Portugal which being unitary politically, was in the same state as any other nation with underdeveloped populations. Besides, the Portuguese nation was and always had been a unitary state independently of the relative geographic situations of its Provinces. In Lisbon's view, the Charter did not authorise the UN to contradict such a unitary state when it found no article in the Portuguese Constitution detrimental to it when Portugal was admitted to it unanimously. It also asserted that all reforms of the Portuguese Constitution including the latest one on June 11, 1951, antedatd the entry of Portugal into the UN. Portugal futher belived that the creation of a universal type of State of Portugal with assimilated society was the historically correct cause for the times in which the Portuguese lived. It further asserted that its policy of assimilation was a policy of cultural integration and inter-penetration, and not the aggressive expansion of a dominant group."

PPX, pg. 222, para. 4: "Salazar disputed Nehru's premise that geography arrogated political rights and that it acreated, defined and legalized sovereignty. He said that if it was admitting that Goa formed a geographical part of India, other states around India would have to be unted with it. But here Salazar failed to distinguish between independent states and the Portuguese colonies which he branded as Portugal's provinces."

This has always been my standing challenge: Goa was never a Portuguese colony!

This is obvious to all except the most dense idiots, but of course, a great many people, such as Xirodcar himself, take pleasure in feigning to be idiots, so that they can benefit from the praise and benefices that their treasonable servility to foreign masters and interlopers can bring to them!

As I have already stated in my response to an Indian dog, Jadeo Naique, it is obvious that for a territory to qualify to be called a 'Colony', the following criteria must be found to be true:
  1. The territory subject to investigation must have been invaded and conquered by an alien people.
  2. There must have been a deliberate policy by the conquerors to settle the conquered land with Colonists immigrating in from the conquering society.
  3. There must be a deliberate effort to outnumber the aborigines, i.e. peoples inhabiting the land previous to the Conquest, and if that was necessary, even a deliberate policy to expel or perpetrate Genocide on these aborigines, so that the Colonists come to become the demographically dominant section of society inhabiting the land thenceforth.
It is beyond any dispute that these conditions were never applied to Goa, so that Goa could have become a Portuguese Colony.

If it had been true that Goa was a Portuguese Colony, then it must necessarily mean that the majority of the Goan population was made up of either direct Portuguese immigrants, settlers or colonists or descendants of these. But as a matter of fact, Luso-Goans and mixed race Goans with Portuguese blood formed a very small minority of Goa's population at any time, and there had never been at any time any effort to settle and colonize Goa with Portuguese colonists.

Under the circumstances, it is the highest idiocity to call Goa a Portuguese Colony. The use of such erroneous terminology demonstrates intellectual bankruptcy!


PPX, pg. 227, para. 4: "In fact, on its role in Angola, Portugal found one more powerful opponent, Indonesia, which even declared full support for the Angolan people's struggle till they attained freedom."

I have been told that Indonesia was a friend of the Goans, and that for that reasons, Goans, especially in Timor, turned to Indonesia for aid against the Communist traitors there.

Yet, it is a fact that Indonesia was party to the same hypocrisy that animated India and upon which the "Indian Union" was fabricated as a 'nation.'

Again, one sees that it too practiced the same opportunism and adventurism involved in the hypocritical 'anti-colonialism' based on a deliberately misrepresented notion of 'colonies' so that it, like India, bludgeoned unwilling peoples into submission and absorption into a fabricated new nation, Indonesia, which is elevated to the status of an unquestionable 'god'.

Thus, just as India did, Indonesia pretended to a right of irredentism against British Malaya and the British North Borneos, sent in 'volunteers' to invade, subvert and sabotage them with the intention of undermining them totally, so that they could be easily invaded and annexed as Indonesian colonies, a strategy it successfully followed again in the case of West Papua...

In this way, Indonesia demonstrated the same hypocritical idolatry of land and the consequent and integral contempt for the rights and dignities of the native nations and peoples inhabitating those lands as demonstrated by the Indian Union (in the cases of Travancore, Tamil Nadu, Khasi States, Manipur, Tripura, Nagaland, Mizoram, Goa, Sikkim, etc., etc.) and by its ideological mentor, the Soviet Union (in the cases of Outer Mongolia, Buryatian North Mongolia, Central Asia, the Caucasus, etc., etc.)!

Indonesia even went so far as to capitalize on India's Goa Precedent by applying the same mischief in West Papua shortly after December 1961 - as the GFM leaders noticed!


PPX, pg. 229, para. 4: "In its desperate attempt to give a legal, constitutional and sovereign tinge to her colonies, Portugal now conferred Portuguese citizenship on all inhabitants of its overseas territories under a statute of August 28, 1961. It repealed the Indegenato Law—first implemented in the African territories with a view to 'protect the traditional customs and political institutions of the overseas territories'—to establish 'complete and final equality between all Portuguese people without distinction of race, religion or culture.' It declared that since there had been an evolution and progress of the overseas population it would 'continue her policy of multi-racial integration without which there will be neither peace nor civilization in Black Africa.'"

PPX, pg. 231, para. 4: "The reaction (sic!) of the Government of India in regard to citizenship rights to Goans was rather unfair. According to it, all Goans who had their domicile in India and had been ordinarily residing in India for not less than five years immediately before January 26, 1950—the day on which India proclaimed itself a Republic—were eligible for registration as voters if they were qualified in other respects. The cases falling outside this category were expected to obtain naturalization certificates under the Citizenship Act. In fact, the Government of India which had the moral right (sic!) to consider all Goans on par with Indian citizens, and which had laid a moral claim that Goa was a geographical part of the Indian Union, hardly realized that it was meting unjust and unjustified treatment to Goans who took pride in calling themselves Indians in every sense of the term. The Government of India treated them only as 'de facto Indians for all practical purposes' and maintained that they did not suffer from 'any special disability'. It failed to realize that by denying Goans the right to franchise, it was indirectly helping Portugal to assert its alleged right to cling to Goa. As a result, the Goans residing in the Indian Union could neither have the right to franchise there nor could they have civic rights in Goa. Goan seafarers especially, found it extremely difficult to move around the world because some nations did not consider their identity certificates issued by the Government of India as valid."

PPX, page 235, para. 2: "M.C. Chagla asked (sic!) the Government of India that when 'brave' Indians were dying in the Congo to safeguard its integrity why Indian troops were not sent to Goa to safeguard the integrity (sic!) of India."

PPX, page 235, para. 3: PPX says that Chagla "was right because now Goa had been put virtually on war footing with tanks, armoured cars and troops parading throught the towns followed by dusk-to-dawn curfew in Panjim."

Really? Can the hypocrite PPX kindly inform us exactly how many tanks, armoured cars etc the Portuguese posssessed or abandoned, etc., when the Indian bandits invaded Goa?

Nehru and all his associated hypocrites kept on harping about Portuguese aggressiveness and provocations; the only actual 'provocation' that the Portuguese committed was to insist on old policy of a 'calm and firm' holding on to Goa and of remaining there, however inoffensive in itself that may have been. For these hypocrites, this was the provocation and nothing else!


PPX, pg. 241, para. 2 & 3: "The Government of India got timely non-verbal support from two nations. The United Arab Republic (Egypt) detained a Portuguese reinforcements ship and refused to it passage through the Suez Canal. The Ceylon government closed all its seaports and airports to prevent transport of troops, equipment and supplies to the Portuguese in Goa."

Thank you, PPX, for the information. We, the latter generation of Goans, need to know who are our enemies, who betrayed us, who aided our enemies against us... Once again, thanks!

PPX, pg. 241, para. 4: "The people of Goa, Daman and Diu cheered and welcomed the liberation army (sic!) with great enthusiasm and helped it to complete the unfinished part of the Indian revolution (sic!)."

Yes, but of course! The People of Goa were overjoyed to be raped, robbed and murdered, by these bandits who came to liberate them from their human dignity and of their rights as a human people to live in quietitude and to determine their destiny according to their own minds, and they came forward to welcome these bandits by volunteering to be raped, murdered and robbed! Hallelujah!

PPX, pg. 242, para. 2: PPX, after quoting a long list of Indian and quislinger parties and individuals who celebrated the Rape of Goa, tells us: "Cardinal Gracias observed that freedom to Goa opened vast potentialities for its economic development."

Apparently enough, more than merely 'economic development'. It now 'ended' the "offense of the Cross" and 'abrogated' the Rights of Christ, by the abolition of Catholic Goa, and the re-creation of pagan Goa, where the pagans, now emancipated could freely work to take revenge for the evangelisation of Goa! That was the stated progam of Bandodcar, the Occupation governor or 'chief minister' and his daughter, of the Hindu Bahujan Samaj or Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party.

PPX, pgs 242 & 243: Those who supported or approved of the Rape of Goa, besides the Goan traitor, Valeriano 'Cardinal' Gracias: Dr. Ram Subhag Singh, Gen. Secy., Congress Party; S.A. Dange of the Communist Party of India; the Praja Socialist Party; Balraj Madhok of the Akhil Bharatiya Jana Sangh, forerunner of the present ruling 'Hindu Nationalist' Bharatiya Janata Party; the quislinger National Congress (Goa); the quislinger Goan Political Convention; the quislinger Daman Praja Parishad; Leonid Brezhnev, President of the USSR; the People's Republic of China; Clovis Maksoud, envoy of the Arab League to the Indian Union.

Those who opposed or regretted the Rape of Goa: The Swatantra Party, of the Indian Union; the USA; West Germany; Canada; Pakistan ("The world now knows that India has double standards. It is loaded with principles—One set applied to India and another not to India").

Goebbelsianism: The Nizampir Incident

PPX, pg. 245, para. 1: "G.S. Jha, the Indian representative charged Portugal for pursing provocative acts, even on December 17, 1961—attack on police post at Nizampir, south Goa—with a view to capture Indian territory.

What happened at Nizampir? Nizampir is located well within the boundaries of Goa, and was manned by Goan police. Following the failure of the invasion of 1954, Nehru and the Indian Union had recoursed to a campaign of terrorist attacks by guerrilas to demoralise Goans, a campaign that was kept up till the last, when 50,000 terrorists, aided by another 20,000 for logistic purposes, of the Indian armed force regulars rushed into Goa at 0000 hrs, 18th December 1961, raping, robbing and murdering Goans in large numbers, and overwhelmed the small Goan State garrison, of some mere 4,500 Goan and Portuguese regulars.

Just before this, India attempted to take a leaf out of Hitler and Stalin's style by staging a raid on a Goan-manned, Goan police post, and blaming this incident on the Goans!

It is the height of absurdity that Goans would attack a post manned by Goans and located within Goa. It is the height of absurdity to portray that Goans would attack a Goan police post located in Goa in order to invade and annex Indian territory (located where? in and around the Goan police post?)

The absurdity of India's claim is too obvious to overlook. Yet, India never had any shame or limits to its hypocrisy!


PPX, pg. 258, note # 173: Leaflets dropped by the bandits from aircrafts over Goa, on 17-18 December 1961, stated: The Defence Forces (sic!) who are now with you are for your protection (sic!). It is their task to defend the honour and the security of our motherland from which you have been separated (sic!) far too long and which you largely by your own efforts (sic!) again made your own (sic!). They will take every step to ensure your safety (sic!), uphold your dignity (sic!) and honour (sic!) whatever the cost.

At this critical moment, however, Goans must remain watchful. The Portuguese will do everything to leave Goa in ruin and the Goan people in misery. They do not care what happens to Goa now, for they must and will depart. They have nothing to lose by sowing destruction in this land. Their Portugal is at a safe distance (
sic!). They will try to destroy our (sic!) bridges, our (sic!) railways, our (sic!) temples and churches, our (sic!) schools and public buildings, and fine and God-given harbour.

Crores of rupees and immense human endeavour will have to be re-spent to re-build all that is destroyed.

The Goans cannot and must not allow this to happen at any cost.

Be calm and brave. Rejoice in your freedom (
sic!) and help to safeguard it.

Suposto Rapto

This may be news to the hypocrite PPX, but the Portuguese title, Suposto rapto dos alemaes does NOT mean 'The Supposed Rape of the Germans', but should be translated as 'The Alleged Kidnapping of the Germans'. This much is obvious, even though I do not know Portuguese.

It is obvious that "suposto" is not to be translated as "supposed" but as "alleged". But of course, PPX will maliciously want to misrepresent the Portuguese!

As far as the word "rapto" is concerned, the meaning of the Latin root words used in Portuguese and English is the same. The sense of the Portuguese word is best reflected in the English word "Raptor", not in "Rape". Other associated words are "Rapt", "Rapture", "Enrapt", etc.


In the previous part, I have dealt with the bulky book by PPX. Now I shall turn my attention to the book by C.M. Estibeiro, entitled, Goa: Yesterday & Today
CME, pg. 38, 39 & 40: CME narrates the story of his grandfather, Lino de Melo, a Goan civil servant who was long suspected of being a collaborator of the Rane rebels. CME admits the fact of his grandfather's criminality and treason, as suspected. And that explains CME's own treason and collaboration with the invaders!

CME, pg 1, para. 1-3: Goa was never Gomanchala. Gomanchala, Gomantak, etc. are fabricated names. That they are fabricated is proven by the fact that they are not names of cities but of lands or territories. Goa was never a territory, but merely a city. The Portuguese conquered a city by that name, and then expanded around it. Because the capital was called Goa, over time, the area ruled from that city came to be called by the name of that city. This continued even after that city was abandoned and was reduced to ruins.

As a country, Goa was always a part of the Concan country, a territory historically recognized from hoary prehistoric times, with roots in the pre-Aryan past.

The name Gopaka-pattana is more probable. The correct form would have been Gopaka-patinama. The name Govapuri does not seem to be original, but a later fabrication.

Gopakapatinama would have been the name of a city, not of a territorial stretch. That city is what is now called Goa Velha, the ruined city that the Portuguese found to the south of the City of Goa, and from where the seat of Government had been shifted, probably during Bijapur times, to the City of Goa, now called Velha Goa.

Each of these fabricated names, Gomanchala, Gomantaka, Govapuri, betray, from their construction, that they have been invented to explain names used by the Portuguese, rather than the other way around.


CME, pg. 2: "Goa right from the formation of continents under the sky is an intgrated part of India. The native Nawabs and Rajahs had made themselves practically independent of the dissolving Moghul Empire. Timoja, the Governor in the Kingdom of Vijayanagar invited, convinced and helped Affonso de Albuquerque to seize the towns of Goa."

Goa was never part of the Mughal Empire. That Empire was founded after Albuquerque seized Goa. This much is elementary Goan history.

Again, CME confuses Physical Geography with Political Geography. Goa is no more an "integral" part of political India, than it is of Greenland.

CME exaggerates the part of Timoja. He ignores the fact that Timoja was a shifty character, who even fought against Albuquerque for a time, having had made his peace with Bijapur, between the first conquest of Goa, in February 1510, and the second, final, conquest of Goa, on 25th November 1510.


CME, pg. 18: 'Kudali' or 'Malwani' does not represent the northernmost Concannim dialects. Samvedi is spoken by a people of that name in the Vasai sub-district, north of Bombay. Further north, the Gamit tribals of Dadra & Nagar Aveli and of its vicinities speak a dialect of Concannim. Even further north, in the District of the Dangs, Dangi is a dialect of Concannim. In the center, Muslim communities—the Daldis, Navaiyats, etc., persist in speaking Concannim in the area between Bombay and the Malwan region. (See Prof. Dennis Curzon's letter on the subject, and my reply, in Navhind Times' Cybervoices).

At one time, all of the Concan, from the Gangaveli river south of Karwar (old Kadwad) to the Narmada (Narbada) spoke Concannim. Then, when the Marathas overran the region, under Chimajiapa, they partly colonized the land, and partly compelled the Concani peoples to take up Marathi. Thus, the "East Indians" came to speak a Marathi dialect which still retains traces of both Concannim and Portuguese...


CME, pg. 22: The historical background of the Conspiracy of the Pintos is not really mentioned by writers, and CME too repeats the same falsehoods. These priests, Joao Batista da Pinto, Francisco de Couto, Jose Antonio da Goncalves and led by Jose Custodio da Faria, the ringleader, were infected by the modernist heresies which were sweeping Europe at the same time, and which culminated in the French Revolution.

As a matter of fact, Da Faria actually acted as an agent for the Revolutionary Government of France, the Directory, in its program to subvert Portugal and Goa; by this time he was a Freemason and Satanist. At any rate, he was one of the "loyalist" priests in France, those who betrayed Christ and the Pope to side with the anti-Christian revolutionists. He had thus already ceased to be a practicing Catholic.

The excuse of being discriminated on the basis of race was bogus and contrived.

Sensible Goans ought to be grateful that the plot failed, for if it had suceeded, Goan Christianity would have been wiped out.

And let us not forget that Tipu Sultan, an ally of Revolutionary France, was waiting at the border to pounce and destroy Goan Christianity, just as he very nearly exterminated Mangalorean Christianity...

At this time, France overran most of continental Europe, including Portugal. England nearly singlehandedly defeated France. It is for this reason that the English occupied Goa in 1797, until the final defeat of the French, and until a final peace was agreed.


CME, pg. 37. Gen. Manuel Antonio de Vassalo e Silva, the Governador-Geral of the Estado da India Portuguesa at the time of the 1961 invasion, consented to be felicitated by the Indians and Quislings for having not put up any resistance and having thereby damaged the infrastructure of Goa, thus giving it on a platter to the bandits. By these acts, especially by consenting to be 'felicitated', he accepted as proper and, from his point, legitimised the Rape of Goa. As such, he has admitted himself to be what he was long suspected to be: A traitor!


©Lucio João Mascarenhas, Patriota Goesa e Portuguesa.
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1