------------------------------------------------------------------------ * G * O * A * N * E * T *** C * L * A * S * S * I * F * I * E * D * S * ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sangath, www.sangath.com, is looking to build a centre for services, training and research and seeks to buy approx 1500 to 2000 sq mtrs land betweeen Mapusa and Bambolim and surrounding rural areas. Please contact: [email protected] or [email protected] or ph+91-9881499458 http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2009-July/180028.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Must I say that George Pinto makes a very valid point i.e. Eddie Fernandes is a learned gentleman. That he absolutely is. Eddie (surely assisted by his access to published material and his zeal to read and publish) is well read and learned ......and he is an absolute gentleman. Anybody who has met him personally (like I have) will confirm this. Here are some of the Eddie's points with which I agree. 1: If there are properties which have been LEGALLY purchased under the prevailing (at the time of purchase) Indian Law by anybody (British citizens included), the said properties have been purchased legally. 2: It is illegal / unconstitutional / unethical (as per the Indian Constitution as it stands now) to pass laws in 2009 and make them retrospectively applicable for properties purchased antes Presidential Assent of the said law. 3: Unless ....the President in question is Mugabe. 4: In no democratic court of law - Is a person expected to prove his innocence. The burden to prove guilt is on the accuser. There are exceptions to this law - as in The Goa Children's Act 2003, certain GoaNet pronouncements by Aires Rodrigues, Mugabe, and now .....from the looks of it .....the uncharacteristic arguments of George Pinto. I personally believe that the issue of the short-fall of the UK tourists to Goa is irrelevant to the basic legality of what is being proposed with regard to the said properties. Every democratic country and its courts have a choice they can make: They can choose to be fair and equitable, or they can be like Mugabe. I suggest further that one can always find an 'clause' in the law to confiscate another man's rights and property. The question for the courts and the country is: Is it the reasonable, fair and equitable thing to do? Sure ...this principle is not applicable to the Mugabes of this world. As far as "they" are concerned: They are merely "liberating" the land. This is the standard operating procedure presently used by modern day gundas, even gundas who speak a variation of the English language. jc == 2009/7/27 George Pinto [email protected] I did not realize I had won the argument against a learned gentleman like Eddie, but when the smears start, I realize the opponent has turned in the towel. Nothing further to add.
