Who owns copy rights It appears that there were 4 groups fighting for non merger. What a blunder by omissions of individuals, who played stellar roles and are now in a select gallery of recognition. They were by far not confined to the narrow ideology of any group pre and post poll
Does it matter to express views for someone to be born before or after historical events ? History is distorted by coloured visions of partial and bias of individuals committed to their own goals and perspective .Just because some one has documented the event, that its gospel truth and sacrosanct History is like bones and interpretations that gives it flesh ,Such interpretations provide continuous scope and new perspectives .What history books, and authors may be quoted which are considered to be authentic and accepted without questioning in historical reporting of Opinion polls.? Is the writer spreading the discordant view on true opinion poll, seeking relevance to be treated as most reliable and infallible person ?. It appears that opinions are retrieved from the archives of decadent memory without any reference to books and authors. Remember that many more persons were witness to the situation then, though they have not written the events or just utter to be different and popular. Those that have perused such historical events are definitely competent to express their opinions .How the 4 disparate political groups coalesced under one banner without a leader and a common platform is difficult to fathom . It was indeed fact the Dr Jack was undisputed leader of the so called coalition, if there was one,.The groups therefore fought with a common cause and purpose and naturally the credit goes to the leader in forefront, That merger can be credited to one individual is a fallacy perpetuated spreading canards The other front leaders of merger are eclipsed to suit the bias of the writer.To chide about birth dates is the most hollow argument to be heard on views of merit and facts. I have never heard any the individual arrogating exclusive knowledge of the events as the sole author on the truth and history of opinion poll and subject it to the critics. Giving press reports to confuse and derail the popular thought does not qualify one to be and among counted great respected historians .M ere expressions of opinion cannot confer the title of a historian .There is no constitutional validity for the first and only poll, defined as referendum by legal luminaries .God forgive, if the opinion poll was lost there is never any legal remedy against such a move. The validity was also legally challenged ,There was strong resentment against the opinion poll not encompassing a separate state and language, leaving open agitation once again, instead of settling more important issues Rightly as history records fresh agitation for separate state and language, hence there was significant difference of opinions among the non mergerists Nelson Lopes Chinchinim