--- Joe "Blessed" Vaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Marlon, first of, you do not need the Governments > decision or permission to > protest thats why it is called protest -- nor > does it mandate a public > vote or poll - even a lone (individual) person has > the fundamental right to > protest. Do people in USA need permission from > their Government to protest? ---> No one is debating the right of people to protest. None of us disagree with that. The issue is that illegal treats were made to impose their religious beliefs on others! It is rather unfortunate that you have chosen to be on the side of the minority extremists who threated violence to impose their intolerant views.
> Marlon, the one thing you continually do on Goanet > is ridicule peoples > religious beliefs and thrive on religion bashing? ---> If I am so anti-catholic, why is it that I continue to support at no cost, your goan catholic network (www.catholic-goan-network.net), despite it containing individuals who have expressed some rather extremely biased views on non-catholic goanetters. I was also one of the few on goanet who strongly supported the right of Christians to prostelyze in India without government restrictions. Just because some of the issues I raise threatens the beliefs of some fundamentalists does not make me anti anything. All it does is that it exposes your insecurities with respect to your narrow minded beliefs. > Joe responds: > So, you agree that people are free to protest (sans > the permission of > Government, or public vote or poll). Now pray tell > us, what were the > causalities of the threat/violence you alluded to in > the protest above? ---> Perhaps you choose to ignore the fact that the Indian Supreme court did not impose any bans on this movie and neither did the Govt. of Goa. The movie was pulled out because of threats made by a goonish politician and his local thugs - in an attempt to pander to some fringe catholic groups. If this is your idea of democracy in action, you obviously have a serious problem! > Joe responds: > Good for you Marlon, you need to be commended for > being a very thoughtful > ex-admin team member. However, as you know even > your Goanet Admin Team > members did not agree with you. Your long > explanation above regarding > server quotas, lack of archival storage etc is > convoluted reasoning and an > attempt to camouflage facts. To the contrary, the > Yahoo-Groups always had > sufficient server space. --> Joe, you are obviously quite clueless or a terrible liar. For one thing, yahoogroups did have significant quotas on their mailing lists until a few years ago. That is why much of the discussions from the mid to late 1990s is missing - they were overwritten by newer files. If you are so confident about your claims, why dont you put your money where your mouth is? How about a $1000 US wager? We can send the money to a neutral third party in the US (Mario, are you interested?). Goanet Admin can then be contacted and it can be cross checked with Yahoo support. Please tell me if you are ready to proceed. Next, I am suprised you would be privy to dissent (if any) within the goanet-admin team! The drive to restrict posts originated from Goa and not from me in the US, so any action that I took was on behalf of the admin team. The reason for the controls was to reduce the financial and technical burdens on users in Goa who had to live with slow, expensive and unreliable connections. > It is worth mentioning that Marlon did not object to > two personal greetings > involving him (or his interests) on the same > Yahoo-Groups server. Isnt > whats good for the goose also good for the gander? > Or are we talking > double-standards? ---> Really? Please tell us what was posted, when it was posted by whom and approved by whom? Also can you give us a little more clarity on what "my interests" means. I am always open to learning something new! Marlon _____________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. Goanet mailing list ([email protected])
