Dear Fred, Thanks for the colonial diarrhea.
No. I am no colonialist or a pussyfoot lover of the 'shaming' so called Goan freedom fighters. Neither have I fallen in 'love at first sight' with Fr. Chico Monteiro et al. I am just a 'GOAN INDIAN' where 'most' will say that they are Indian first and then Goan. Why I say this is because Goa existed before independent India as such came along. So believe you me, and for your kind information, even if I ever take that oath which you so glibly insinuate at, I will take that oath as a GOAN FIRST and then a INDIAN. Maybe the powers that be will have to modify the line in the oath statement appropriately. As far as the Goan freedom fighters go, if they (the genuine FFs) have any self-respect, then they will see to it that the rascals who have infiltrated their ranks are out. Until such time they will have to tag the branded name of 'RASCALS' themselves. And, I have gone to the extent of openly branding such a 'RASCAL'' in the open forum at the TB Cunha hall recently. You say Quote Most? You are citing one case and then moving to "most". Is there some > reason or evidence to make such a statement. Is it just your feeling? Unquote Just tell me if I have to carry a load of cases to prove my point where just one is not enough??? I have gone on record of asking a Police Inspector once if I required one thousand people behind me to claim my rights as a citizen of India. You have very cleverly skirted the subject of 'JUSTICE' which was my driving point in my post . If you think that you can fire your shots at the pro-colonialists from my shoulders, then you are sadly mistaken. You may take your Anti/Pro Colonial or Anti/Pro-Portuguese, Anti/Pro India Anti/Pro Goa mindset and do with it what you will. I'm not interested. One thing is sure as to what I am not interested in. I am clearly not interested in taking or dishing out bulshit. I follow my nose. And I have found out that this is the only way. I am not bothered about being knowledgeable in all this high fundas that you have dished out. I have no time for that either to confirm or to deny. At this stage I will make another statement here as a G.S. of the party I am leading. The Navy will have to shift to "Sea Bird" at Karwar and clear the Dabolim Airport. Or else the Central Govt. will have to use its power to acquire the Dabolim Airport for the Navy. Until such time Dabolim Airport will remain a Civilian Airport of Goa. FYI I am not in the business of becoming a power seeking politician that you are so succintly hinting at. In fact I shall never be a difined politician. And if you think that you can cow me down with these useless insinuations, again, you are sadly mistaken. My work has been and is transparent. And, my ultimate aim is to get GOANs of every shade into the mainstream of making Goa what we Goans want it to be rather than helping the hyenas from Delhi and Nagpur and their chamchas in Goa whether they are politicians, journos or plain mindless citizens, to make it what they want it to be. with kind regards floriano goasuraj Check-out the Road Map for Goa at www.goasu-raj.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Noronha (FN)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 3:09 AM Subject: [Goanet] Re: Re: Heinous crimes, Freedom Fighters & Missing Something . > Floriano Lobo wrote: > > > I can prove to you that at least one person who had been lodged in > > Aguada jail for mis-appropriating the neighbour's property came out to > > declared himself a freeeeeeeeeeeeeedom fighter. > > That's fine. I don't doubt that. Freedom fighters have themselves been > saying that (some) people who don't deserve the label have been > included in their ranks. The case of the RSS members being packed in by > the recent BJP government is a case in point too. That's political. > > But what I see as questionable is the attempt to by crypto-colonialists > to support Portuguese rule by delegitimising ideas of freedom or > pouring scorn on the entire class of freedom fighters (as if there was > no idealism among them). This is what some are aiming at. > > > This is just that you know that when I say 'most' it remains 'most and does > > not become 'all' . > > Most? You are citing one case and then moving to "most". Is there some > reason or evidence to make such a statement. Is it just your feeling?
