This is no attempt at sanitizing. It is history as you'd read it anywhere. I did not mention the Acto Colonial of 1930 because that was exactly the issue I was attacking - that the fact that Goa was part of the Estado da India Portuguesa and that Goans had full Portuguese citizenship predates the Acto colonial and the "overseas province" status by 200 years. The Acto colonial in its entirety covered a period of less than 20 years. If you look at postage stamps and the currency, you'd see "Republica Portuguesa- Estado da India". It is no imagination that Nirvana sells T-shirts with a similar logo, in Pangim. By your comments, do you insinuate that Lourdes Bravo da Costa is also sanitizing history?
>________________________________ >From: Santosh Helekar <chimbel...@yahoo.com> >To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" <goanet@lists.goanet.org> >Sent: Wednesday, 16 January 2013 6:08 PM >Subject: Re: [Goanet] Goans forced to be bharatis > >This is a good attempt to sanitize purtugez history, avoiding the mention of >Acto Colonial of 1930, giving us proud Indians of Estado da India the status >of second class citizens, etc, etc.. This revisionist business is getting >pretty old now, but nonetheless is a veritable clown show. > > >Cheers, > >Santosh > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Gabriel de Figueiredo <gdefigueir...@yahoo.com.au> >> Dear Victor, >> >> In 1757, King Joseph I of Portugal issued a decree penned by his prime >> minister, >> the Marquês de Pombal, granting the Portuguese citizenship and >> representation to >> all subjects in the Portuguese Indies. The enclaves of Goa, Damão, Diu, >> Dadra >> and Nagar Haveli became collectively known as the Estado da Índia >> Portuguesa, >> and had representation in the Portuguese Corte (later, parliament). As you >> probably know, Dr. Francisco Luis Gomes, whose staute you will find at a >> park in >> Campal, was one of the representatives for Estado da India Portuguesa in the >> Potuguese Cortes from 1861 to 1869. The last ones to represent Goa in >> Portuguese >> Parliament were Purxotama Quenim and Sócrates da Costa. Thus the residents >> of >> the Estado da India Portuguesa had full citizenship of Portugal, much, much >> before Antonio Oliveira de Salazar was a twinkle in his parents eyes. And >> Goans >> had elections much before the Indians in the Indian Republic had, going from >> an >> article "The >> First Elections in Goa" by Lourdes Bravo da Costa, published last Jan 13 on >> Navhind Times Panorama >> (http://www.navhindtimes.in/panorama/first-elections-goa ). >> >> Also, bear in mind that the decree granting full citizenship of Portugal to >> the >> residents of the Estado da India Portuguesa ("Portuguese State of >> India") was a couple of decades before the "Boston Tea Party" of >> 1773. And what was furore in America about? Does "No taxation without >> representation" ring a bell? >> >> What you are spouting, is the Nehruvian assumption. Because British India >> never >> had such privileges of parliamentary representation in Britain, Nehru >> assumed >> that Goans were only "ayahs, butlers, and cooks" (I believe he made >> such a statement to a newspaper reporter when asked why the majority of >> Goans >> were not protesting against the Portuguese). He ignored the hundreds of able >> administrators, judges and doctors who were serving Portugal in the >> Metropole >> and all overseas territories. The term Salazar used, Overseas Province, >> would be >> much the same that the British would use with relation to the Falklands, and >> the >> US with Hawaii and Alaska. >> >> I reiterate that Salazar had nothing to do with the fact that Goans are >> Portuguese citizens, or that Goa was an "overseas province". Goa was >> the Estado da India Portuguesa since 1757; the Republic of India was >> "born" in 1947 (really speaking, the Republic was formed in 1950), >> when the ancient Bharat was split in 3 (could be 4, if Lanka is taken into >> account). >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gabriel. >> > > >
