GOA AND ITS CONTRADICTORY SHIFTY PSEUDO—HISTORIANS By A Pereira

In which and what manner does a "rift" cause "unity"? Allow us to explain.

BJP very well sponsored this particular film;https://www.youtube.com/watch…

...to garner votes, unfortunately it didn't work out as how Manohar wanted it to be, it caused a rift amongst "beliefs". Goa Freedom Struggle is a C-grade cheap flick based on illiterate personal sentiments, and not based on the basis of "law". It does please uneducated individuals who have yet to understand their present situation, who are infact stuck in a time where Parasurama excereted in a river, and that he defecated to such an extent towards which a mound was formed that dried in the oh! so lovely, tropical weather, and he named it Goa!

What astounds us "sensible Goans" that how can this Mr. Pseudohistorian be proud of the same "C-grade film" and mumble on "Pesal Bhaji (Special Status)" for Goans on the same wavelength towards asking "unity" amongst us?

Mr. Pseudohistorian needs to hold an public apology towards acting in the film and calling it "true history", by damaging our sentiments. And even if he does it someday, we are sure it won't be enough to please the masses but only the foolish, as it'll only be carried out to provide another with their own "ulterior motives".

Even the book on the said Inquisition written by the Brotherhood of Happy Jewish Dicks of Priol (Anand Cockbhai Priolcar) too is extremely exaggerated and fabricated. One can take an account with a few what many have to say on the said book:-

1. It is a bit of a puzzle to understand the man and his ideas. It was he who played the most important role – at least in the subcontinent – in shaping our understanding of the Inquisition. Priolcar wrote around the 1960s, quite some time ago, and often in Marathi.

2. Priolcar’s book ‘The Goa Inquisition: The Terrible Tribunal for the East’ was published in 1961, and printed at the Bombay University Press (Fort, Bombay). It was reprinted in Goa this year. In between, the Hindutva-oriented Delhi-based Voice of India press also published a second impression in 1991.

3. Dr. Teotónio R de Souza mentions: Priolcar was a Bombay-based Goan Gaud Saraswat Brahmin who produced literary output as linguist and historian in the 1960s. His research served to buttress pro-Marathi and pro-Hindu interests. He emphasised the excesses of (the) Inquisition and the cultural backwardness of Goan Christians and their Concanim ‘dialect’. He reserved to Marathi the distinction of being the true literary and cultural language of Goa.... I wish to classify this type of writings as ‘Priolcar-Angle literature’.

4. Priolcar relies heavily on the accounts of Buchanan and Dellon, the latter who was caught up in the Inquisition. Claudius Buchanan (1766-1815) was “a Scottish theologian, an ordained minister of the Church of England, and an extremely ‘low church’ missionary for the Church Missionary Society.” Nothing wrong with that, of course, as every man has the right to hold his religious preferences. Buchanan apparently had a problem with anything that didn’t fit in with his own views on religion. Buchanan “resorted to a simple juxtaposition to demonstrate the superiority of rational Christian life to a morally repugnant Hindu culture. Christianity and Hinduism were [to him] inverse reflections of one another, but Christianity had demonstrated its effects and the civilising power to overcome all the crimes and superstitions that tormented India.” His “encounters” while touring India are interesting too. He meets native Syrian Christian communities along southwestern India’s coast, who trace their lineage to a legendary first-century visit by Jesus’s own apostle, Thomas. Buchanan wanted to see the Syrian branch transplanted on the Church of England. He visits Roman Catholic populations in the South, and is shocked to find priests “better acquainted with the Veda of Brahma than with the Gospel of Christ”. His encounter with the Inquisition is described from pg. 91 onwards of the book Was Hinduism invented? by Brian Kemble Pennington. As Priolkar mentions, he visited Goa at the time when British troops were stationed here. (Or, in Priolcar’s words, “The forts in the harbour of Goa, were then occupied by British troops (two King’s regiments, and two regiments of Native infantry) to prevent its falling into the hands of the French.” Author Brian Kemble Pennington says Buchanan’s “resulting account of Catholicism in India included not only clerical abuse, empty ritual, moral laxity, and papal tyranny, but even a hint of human sacrifice.” Interestingly, Buchanan was “not less indignant at the Inquisition of Goa, than I had been with the temple of Juggernaut” (sic). These are fine individuals through whose eyes we rely on to understand our past (or to play political games in the present).

5. David Higgs in The Inquisition in Late Eighteenth-Century Goa, in Goa; Continuity and Change, edited by Narendra K. Wagle and George Coehlo (sic), University of Toronto 1995, gives us another perspective when he acknowledges the role Priolcar’s 1961 study played in shaping the debate. Higgs writes: “Priolcar drew heavily on secondary sources in his sketch on the Goan Inquisition, especially on a late seventeenth-century Frenchman, Gabriel Dellon, arrested in Goa, whose case was made famous by the denunciatory account of his experiences published after his return from France.” He calls Dellon’s version an “exuberant account of his misfortunes”. Likewise, Higgs points out, Priolcar also used the “over-imaginative account of a British clergyman, C. Buchanan, who wanted to think that what he was not allowed to see in Old Goa in 1808 was what Dellon inveighed at more than a century earlier.”

Any educated versed historian will explain towards why was the Inquisition placed here in Goa, or better known as 'Orlem Gor'.

When we particularly questioned this Mr. Pseudohistoian, we were confound to understand that he had no "answer" at all for more than 24 hrs., this is an exact extract posted to the same:-

QUESTIONABLE SO-CALLED LIBERATION OF 1961

In concern of Art. 49 of the Geneva Conventions, this is how some Citizens of the Indian Union behave in Goa.

At Inst. Nsa. Sra. da Piedade em Nova Goa.

Mr. Sacordandó,

Nice of you to support Goa. But few stop at certain explanations and delve not much.

If you care for Goa, you should know that it was demarcated in 1788. British India, Portuguese India, Dutch and French India were all different entities. Indian Consulate was housed in Damodar Mangalji & Cia edifice in Pangim.

Before the history professor Mr. Prajal Sacordandó can enlighten us, please note that, we will only match our thoughts if the other comprehends with detailed facts of evolved homo sapiens and not bow/arrow theories.

Allow us for the "enlightenment" process, wherein you shall understand Goa's case in simple English.

1. Were you Mr. Prazal Sacordandó as an indigenous Goan consulted at any given time by a special "Visiting Mission" of the UN as per their Resolutions 1541/42 - A Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples?

2. Then Mr. Prazal Sacordandó, A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with ius congens of general international law. The number of ius congens is considered limited but not exclusively catalogued. They are not listed or defined by any authoritative body, but arise out of case law and changing social and political attitudes. Generally included are prohibitions on waging aggressive war, crimes against humanity, war crimes, maritime piracy,genocide, apartheid, slavery, torture. As an example, international tribunals have held that it is impermissible for a state to acquire territory through war. As per the Vienna Conventions. Hence the Treaty between Portugal (Soares) & India (Chavan) is nothing but a farce, a sham.

3. Are there any Treaty's signed by Regedores of the 223 Comunidades/Gãocarias of Goa with the Indian government?

4. Was a plebiscite ever held between 1961 - 74?

5. Article 49, 6th paragraph, of the Geneva Convention IV provides: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."

Additional Protocol I:- Article 85(4)(a) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides that “the transfer by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” is a grave breach of the Protocol.

ICC (International Criminal Court) Statute:- Under Article 8(2)(b)(viii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[t]he transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.

Nowadays we term people who have crossed the frontiers of Goa as "Ganttias".

So Mr. Prazal Sacordandó, what does the Indian Military Manual mention? And even if there is one! That to term Annexations as Liberation?

6. What is the exact meaning of "Satiamev Jaiate"?

Please note Mr. Prazal Sacordandó, Special Status or even the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of India is nothing but a "sham", others are only fooling indigenous Goans again and after, if Goans want to get fooled for ever and ever, then it is fine for them.

Kind Regards,
A. Lyndon Pereira.

So, who’s taking up this strong language of polemic and using it for today’s purposes? When you come across counter-views that challenge past perspectives and claims on the Inquisition, it’s time for a re-think. More so when we have ample documentation about the Black Legend created (for instance, by the Dutch about the Spaniards, their rivals) in centuries past, due to colonial and religious rivalries.

Is the Inquisition related to the International Court of Justice and or United Nation. One cannot relate Bows and Arrows to Mortars or Booby Traps or for say Missiles! The International Red Cross society too mentions how we as Homo Sapiens have evolved. Hence the conventions, resolutions et cetera. Speaking of Inquisition for the Freedom Struggle of Goa and or Speaking of Inquisition towards Special Status for Goa - is as good as watching the movie BACK TO THE FUTURE and a CAVE MAN starring in the same as "Doc" as Mr. Pseudohistorian.

What I personally witness is History based on personal emotions of cave man period, than based on the basis of international law and evolution of homo sapiens.

There’s no point getting defensive about the realities of the past. But what happens if these ‘realities’ are not quite accurate, and, in fact, based on a whole lot of myth?

The "Jews of the Indies" have traits to fool the masses as always and one has to be aware of such kinds. One may not agree with some of the categorisations above, but there’s hint enough about the interest-groups who give current-day fuel to the - Inquisition flame and Fake Liberation theory.

How we define History is like this. History is a record of events, most of which ought not to have happened, but did happen because some of those in power influence made them happen for their selfish benefit mostly by Subjugation of those powerless. Our immense interest in History is to find out the real causes behind those events based on and not to be called as a historian.