Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Jangladesh

Comments moved from the project page. utcursch | talk 11:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Ravi Chaudhary
RESPONSE:

JANGAL DESH Land of the Jangal(a)s( a tribe /people) is well documented in the written and oral traditions of the Indian people since ancient times.

Mr Burdak has provided many references in English and Hindi to this.

To delete references to ancient names and places would be to stifle research.

That is not what an Ebcyclopedia should be all about

Mr Hill is obsessed by his failure to find this reference in any European language, and refuses to accept the translation of the Hindi texts.

An Encycopedia cannot be based simply on European languages. Mr Hill should be banned from editing on any jat history related page.

Ravi Chaudhary 21:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * People don't get banned from editing unless there's vandalism involved, and there's no need to mention anyone by name simply because you disagree with him. 65.207.127.12 22:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

To: 65.207.127.12

Actually, we are suggesting that Mr Hill is engaged in Vandalism, by his constant, baseless, deletions of material on the [Jat]  and Jat related pages and his perosnal attacks on the various contributors

He has no knowledge of Jat history or culture or any  knowledge of any Indian language.He suggest that unless something is in a European language it is not valid!!!!

He makes ridiculous claims, such as that he knows the Jat people because he claims to once have dated a Jat girl. He also claims to have lived among the Jat people. When put to test, he can come with no information as to where and when?

See discussions on those and his user page.

For some unknown reason he has become obsessed with the Jat page, and spends his time deleting referenced material.

If that is not Vandalism, one wonders what is?

His request for deletion of this article, is one such act of Vandalism, forcing us to spend time on preventing his deletions, rather than being able to devote our time to research and to expand the contents of the various articles.

He should be banned from editing on any Jat related page

Ravi Chaudhary 15:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

More discussion
Following is the English translation of History of Punias mentioned by Thakur Deshraj pages 617 and 618 from the Book ‘Jat Itihas’ (History of the Jats), 1992 edition: Publisher: Maharaja Surajmal Smarak Shiksah Sanstha, C-4 Janak Puri, New Delhi 110058.

"The Puniyas are Naga clans, and Punia is derived from Naga. The Hissar Gazetteer says that they consider themselves to be of the Shiva Gotr (clan) and there is reference to them being descended from Mahadev (Shiva)’s locks. Shivi and Takshak people lived contagiously- side by side. These two evolved into being followers of Shaivism.

Following the invasion by Sikandar(Alexander) some of the Shivi and Takshak clans came down below Punjab. Some out of these established their hold on Jangal Pradesh. The Puniyas too arose of such Jat groups who established their hold on a country and utilized for a very long time. They reached Jangal Pradesh by the time of commencement of the Christian era, current era. They governed this land upto the 15th century CE.

At the time of the arrival of the group of the Rahtors under Bika and Kaandal, the Punia Sardars or chieftains had 300 villages under their sway. They had been independent from many generations. In addition they had six other republics of the Jats in Jangal Pradesh.

Ram Ratan Charan in his “History of Rajputana” in Hindi, refers to these six realms as ‘Bhumiyachare” i.e. republics. Reference to these republics is also found in 'Bharat ke Desi Rajya’, 'Tarikh Raajgahn Hind’, ‘Vakaye Rajputana’, and many other history books. We(Thakur Deshraj) have written our account on the basis of these historical Texts.

At that time, the capital was Jhansal, which is on the boundary of modern Hissar. Ram Ratan Charan calls this capital as Luddhi in his book.

Theeir Raja was Kanhadev at that time. Kanhadev was a great leader and a fearless warrior who could never be defeated. His Punia clan brethren followed his wishes. Republics are defeated by internal dissent. His Puniya society had unity. He did not have a large standing military force, but he had no shortage of young warriors, who lived at home, and who rose to arms as soon as the call came from their leader. Every Puniya citizen considered the whole republic as of his own. They were ready to bear all hardships. They however would not tolerate a person from another community to rule over them. Their mental makeup made them refuse to accept rule by Bika. They kept fighting for their independence as long as they had young men who could come to the force. The Rahtors managed to take control of their homesteads one at a time. In the end the Rahtors constructed forts in the middle of their lands. The Rahtors would make these forts in the day, and in the night the Puniyas would break them down. The folk traditions state that some Puniyas were buried alive in the walls of some of these forts.

After much struggle the Puniyas were defeated. Some of them then migrated towards the United Provinces (modern Uttar Pradesh). The Rahtors had a big army, the Godara Jats also gave them their assistance. That is why the Puniyas lost.

It was, however, a matter of pride, that seeking to protect their Independence, they never showed cowardice. Rivers of blood were flowed by them. In revenge for the ill treatment of the leaders by the enemy, they defeated and took prisoner and killed the Rathor King Rai Singh. Reference to this act of revenge by the Puniyas is found in the book – ‘Bharat ke Desi Rajya’ (Eng- Indigenous Kingdoms of India).

The republic of the Puniyas spread from Jhansal (on the boundary of Modern Hissar, to Marod. Marod is 12 kos south of Rajgarh. The folk legends tell us, that one Sadhu told a Puniya leader, that whatever land he could cover on a mare, that will be governed by the Puniyas. The Mare was let loose and at Sunset, she reached Marod and died. At that time the Puniyas Sardar (chieftain) said:


 * “The journey from Jhansal ended at Marodh. The mare died but no regret.”

Traces of the old capital of the Puniyas, Jhansal where there was their fort, can still be found. Such traces are also still found in Balasmad.

The Rathor Raja would pay an annual fee to some of the Puniya chieftains to keep them peaceful and quiet. Even until recent times, there was a tradition of receiving clothing and some money from Raja annually by these Puniya leaders as a tribute." --burdak 04:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thakur Deshraj's History of the Jats, self-published in the 1920s, is full of apocryphal stories and legends and is not a reliable source.Hornplease 06:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

More on "Jangladesh" or "Bagar"
I see Mr. Burdak has given some more material in support of his claims. In reply, I would like to make a quote from: Forming an Identity: A Social History of the Jats (1999. Oxford University Press, New Delhi. ISBN 019-564719-X), pp. 11-12, by Nonica Datta from Delhi University. This gives a rather different view (and dating) of some of the events and places discussed above. It also apparently provides another name for the region Mr. Burdak is calling "Jangladesh", that is, "Bagar". I would be interested to hear others comments on this passage in particular:


 * "Hissar, Rohtak, Gurgaon and Panipat, with their bhaiachara (cosharing) tenures and the khudkasht (peasant-proprietor), were part of the Jatiyar or Jatiyat, the country of the Jats. Here lived the Deswali or Hele and the Dhe or Pachchade Jats. The Deswali claimed to be the descendants of the 'original' Jats settled in India about a thousand years ago, while the Dhe were late arrivals who extended their sphere of influence following the disintegration of the Mughal Empire. In Rohtak, situated on the right bank of the Yamuna river, the Deswali Jats appear to have settled some seven hundred or eight hundred years ago while the Dhi Jats, probably the descendants of immigrants from Bagar, a tract just beyond the border of Bikaner, moved into the western parts of the Hissar district around 1783 and took up the lands abandoned after the terrible Chalisa famine of that year. Some of them came from Bikaner and Nabha in the early nineteenth century. The areas adjoining Bikaner and to the west of Bhiwani, such as Hissar and Fatehabad, were called Bagar, a term meaning 'dry country' in common parlance. Those living in the region were descendants of the itinerant Bagri Jats and the and the Bishnois."

It is also, I believe, worth noting that the "Bhumiyachare" (=bhaiachara) which are called "republics" by Thakur Deshraj are referred to as "(cosharing) tenures" here which, to me at least, would seem to be a better translation of the term. A "republic" conjures up the notion of an established "state" of some considerable size and importance in everyday English (think of the "Republic of India", for example).

There is, of course much more of relevance in this book. I leave it to the readers to consider all the evidence carefully and decide which sources are the most accurate and plausible. Whoever rewrites the article should, I believe, take into account Nonica Datta's very interesting and, it seems to me, more sober and reliable history. John Hill 06:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

RESPONSE:
On the contrary.

It seems you are determined that the area should be known as anything other the Jangal Desh.

The border is also known as Bagri or dry. And people from that region are also referred to as Bagri and Jats from that area are also called Bagri Jats on occasion, so what point are you really trying to prove?

This is one of many reasons why we are asking you to study Indian History, not just just look for " a nail to hang your hat on".

This area, as has been pointed out, was under Jat sway for over 1,500 years. That is a fair amount of time and during that period it was known as Jangal Desh.

The term Bikaner got prominence only after that( 16th century with Muslim and British rule). Bikaner too was simply a name set up jointly by Bika and a Jat leader of the Nehr(a) clan, who jointly gave the name to the town, later capital of the Rahtor princedom, aftre the teaties were broken.

That being the case, it does not stand to reason why a name that lasted so long and still lives in the Indian languages and in Indic literature, ,and is referred to in current Indian government documents, should be obliterated under your sort of revisionist writing, which reminds one of revisionist histories which gained flavor at the time of the Stalinists, who sought to rewrite history by elimination of what did not suit them.

If your flawed logic is a followed then even the term Bagri should not be used, for that is another name for part of what is now North Western Rajasthan.

As for the area not being republican. Again you need to do some basic reading. .

Your lack of knowledge of Indian History comes to fore unnecessarily, and which a little reading would have avoided. . Indian history shows that society down the ages was made up both Republican and Feudal states, which existed side by side at time, and in succession at various times.A brief glance at any basic Indian History text books will show that.

Your problem becomes, as you put it,

“ It is also, I believe, worth noting that the "Bhumiyachare" (=bhaiachara) which are called "republics" by Thakur Deshraj are referred to as "(cosharing) tenures" here which, to me at least, would seem to be a better translation of the term. A "republic" conjures up the notion of an established "state" of some considerable size and importance in everyday English (think of the "Republic of India", for example).”

Bhaichara- is not co tenure, but sharing of the resources- that is what would happen in a republic.

The other problem you have, and this has been pointed out to you before, is that you consider unless something is in The English Language, it does not deserve the same place in an Encyclopedia as something that is not in English.

If you wish to learn about Republics in Ancient India, since all Indian sources, except those who agree with your narrow view, see paper by a Canadian Historian,( since Indian historias are not valid authorities in your mind.)

Democracy in Ancient India by Steve Muhlberger, Associate Professor of History, Nipissing University.

http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/history/muhlberger/histdem/indiadem.htm

Some Extracts:

“this article will examine one important case of government by discussion -- the republics of Ancient India. Although they are familiar to Indologists, these republics are hardly known to other historians. They deserve, however, a substantial place in world historiography. The experience of Ancient India with republicanism, if better known, would by itself make democracy seem less of a freakish development, and help dispel the common idea that the very concept of democracy is specifically "Western."

“evidence for non-monarchical government goes back to the Vedas, 12 republican polities were most common and vigorous in the Buddhist period, 600 B.C.-A.D. 200. “ Such an organization, of whatever type, could be designated, almost indifferently, as a gana or a sangha; and similar though less important bodies were labeled with the terms sreni, puga, or vrata. Gana and sangha,

Perhaps the most useful Greek account of India is Arrian's Anabasis of Alexander, which describes the Macedonian conqueror's campaigns in great detail. The Anabasis, which is derived from the eyewitness accounts of Alexander's companions, 18 portrays him as meeting "free and independent" Indian communities at every turn. What "free and independent" meant is illustrated from the case of Nysa, a city on the border of modern Afghanistan and Pakistan that was ruled by a president named Aculphis and a council of 300. After surrendering to Alexander, Aculphis used the city's supposed connection with the god Dionysus to seek lenient terms from the king:

"The Nysaeans beseech thee, O king out of respect for Dionysus, to allow them to remain free and independent; for when Dionysus had subjugated the nation of the Indians...he founded this city from the soldiers who had become unfit for military service ...From that time we inhabit Nysa, a free city, and we ourselves are independent, conducting our government with constitutional order." 19 Nysa was in Greek terms an oligarchy, as further discussion between Alexander and Aculphis reveals, and a single-city state. There were other Indian states that were both larger in area and wider in franchise. It is clear from Arrian that the Mallian republic consisted of a number of cities.20 Q. Curtius Rufus and Diodorus Siculus in their histories of Alexander mention a people called the Sabarcae or Sambastai among whom "the form of government was democratic and not regal." 21 The Sabarcae/Sambastai, like the Mallians, had a large state. Their army consisted of 60,000 foot, 6000 cavalry, and 500 chariots.22 Thus Indian republics of the late fourth century could be much larger than the contemporaneous Greek polis. And it seems that in the northwestern part of India, republicanism was the norm. Alexander's historians mention a large number of republics, some named, some not, but only a handful of kings.23 The prevalence of republicanism and its democratic form is explicitly stated by Diodorus Siculus. After describing the mythical monarchs who succeeded the god Dionysus as rulers of India, he says:

At last, however, after many years had gone, most of the cities adopted the democratic form of government, though some retained the kingly until the invasion of the country by Alexander.24

What makes this statement particularly interesting is that it seems to derive from a first-hand description of India by a Greek traveler named Megasthenes. Around 300 B.C., about two decades after Alexander's invasion, Megasthenes served as ambassador of the Greek king Seleucus Nicator to the Indian emperor Chandragupta Maurya, and in the course of his duties crossed northern India to the eastern city of Patna, where he lived for a while.25 If this statement is drawn from Megasthenes, then the picture of a northwestern India dominated by republics must be extended to the entire northern half of the subcontinent.26

It is clear from Panini that egalitarianism was an important element in the fifth century B.C.: he preserves a special term for the gana where "there was no distinction between high and low." 62

Republicanism now has a place in every worthwhile book about ancient India, but it tends to be brushed aside so that one can get back to the main story, which is the development of the surviving Hindu tradition.74 Historians, in India as elsewhere, seem to feel that anything which could be so thoroughly forgotten must have had grievous flaws to begin with.75 Most historians still cannot discuss these republics without qualifying using the qualifiers "tribal" or "clan."76 Long ago Jayaswal rightly protested against the use of these terms: "The evidence does not warrant our calling [republics] 'clans.' Indian republics of the seventh [sic] and sixth centuries B.C...had long passed the tribal stage of society. They were states, Ganas and Samghas, though many of them likely had a national or tribal basis, as every state, ancient or modern, must necessarily have." 77 He was equally correct when he pointed out that "Every state in ancient Rome and Greece was 'tribal' in the last analysis, but no constitutional historian would think of calling the republics of Rome and Greece mere tribal organizations." 78

The terminology of even Indian historians demonstrates the survival of an ancient but inappropriate prejudice in the general evaluation of Indian republicanism.

Once that prejudice is overcome, Indian republicanism gains a strong claim on the attention of historians, especially those with an interest in comparative or world history.

END Quote”

One his references used is :

Bibliography on the Evidence for Very Early Democracy in India Provided by Joelle Brink

Dahiya, B. S. Jats, the ancient rulers : a clan study (New Delhi : Sterling, 1980).

The Late B S Dahiya was a Jat.

Would one be amiss in gathering that Mulberger's ( a mere assistant Professor of History in Nipissing University, Canada) article would now suddenly dimish in value.

Your prejudice against the Jats, and evidence based on that provided by Jat writers, Jat Sources, and Indian Sources which do not agree with you is quite apparent. – Your looking for support in a blatantly anti Jat writer is one of them.

An excellent book on Indian Republics in Ancient India is “ Republics in Ancient India – 100 BC to 600 BC” by. J P Sharma., Leiden 1968.

To someone prepared to read with an unprejudiced mind, it contains much knowledge- for one it shows that the republican form of society existed in since Vedic times. Vedic times are now thought be from 3300 BCE down to 1800 BCE. Republics have continued to be in India down to modern Times. The last Republic in India, pre 1947 was that of the Jats which held sway in Northern India, and fought the Islamic invaders and the British invaders to 1857.

For further reading see:

“ The Political and Social History of the Jats- Dr Bal Kishan Dabas, 2001, Sanjay Prakashan, New Delhi, ISBN 81-8453-045-2

This book, based on the PH.D. thesis of Dr Dabas, and is based on his extensive research of, among other sources, the records of the Haryana Sarv Khap, who crowned the Jat Emperor Harsha a Raja or leader, in the year 664 of the Vikram Samvat era, ( 606 AD).

He confirms that Harsha united the small republics in North Indian from The Punjab to modern Western Up to Central India. They were source of his power

It has been suggested to you earlier, and it is repeated, that you go and study Indian History, before passing (prejudiced) comments, and seeking to have your comments enshrined in an Encyclopedia.

If you had lived among the Jats, and studied India History as you claim, all this would have been quit e obvious to you. It is quite apparent that you have not done either.

You need to go beyond some superficial knowledge, before passing comments o the History of the Jats.

In summary: Jangal Desh is an ancient name for a territory which was occupied and where there were a number republics of the Jats for over 1500 years.It is still used today in the local languages and in Indian Publications, Government and non Government publications.

The name is important to Indian History and to Jat history.

Ravi Chaudhary 19:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Chaudhary's "Response"
I will do my best to ignore the usual barrage of outrageous rudeness and unsubstantiated lies and accusations made above by Mr. Chaudhary, and stick to the issues he raises.

First, I will repeat again what I stated clearly in my last post (as Mr. Chaudhary seems to be promoting a distorted view of what I am proposing):


 * "I leave it to the readers to consider all the evidence carefully and decide which sources are the most accurate and plausible. Whoever rewrites the article should, I believe, take into account Nonica Datta's very interesting and, it seems to me, more sober and reliable history."

Is this not a reasonable suggestion?

Further, he seems to be under the false impression that I know nothing about the fascinating early history of Indian republics and republicanism. I am, indeed, well aware of the very ancient and very impressive history of such republics in India.

What I am saying is that the term “republic” is usually employed for a well-defined political entity of some size and standing – not for small villages or “itinerant” (or “mobile pastoral and peasant”) groups who travel from place to place, as was the case in this barren region according to Dr. Datta (see pp. 12 and 14 of her book).

Then there is the matter of how long the Jats were settled in this region – Dr. Datta says “about a thousand years ago” (ibid, p. 11), while Mr. Chaudhary (above) claims 1500. Who should we believe?

I could go on and on, but what is the point?

The main problem with Mr. Chaudhary’s claims is that he is very selective in whom he chooses to believe, while viciously attacking, and frequently making completely unsubstantiated lies, about anyone who disagrees with him – as I have had the sad misfortune of learning first hand.

Here are just a few of his comments on Dr. Datta and her work taken from the “Jatland” website (see: http://www.jatland.com/forums/showthread.php?p=34233&mode=threaded :


 * ". . . (Feb 11, 2003 09:38 a.m.):
 * even if you take her (Dutta's ) words on this. Still I do not find anything wrong doing in Smt Subhashini Devis work. Is there anything wrong in
 * --- Traning womens for self defence
 * --- what is wrong in hating muslims, after knowing their past 100 year of history in India and world. If somebody still takes seculiar view on this, I feel he is not doing justice to his/her next generations.
 * --- Sudhi sangthan
 * --- In heling/uniting jat community against the muslim agressors


 * I personally feel that in Haryana and Delhi our ancestors have done good job during partition. Otherwise in rest of the country you riots every now and then."


 * ". . . (Feb 11, 2003 01:17 a.m.):
 * Why give such importance to ignorant people like her? [i.e. Dr. Datta] She obviously has some axe to grind wrt to Jats.


 * Ignore her totally - no need to read her writings or borrow her books from the library. It is about time some Jat historian wrote a book in a scholarly and balanced manner. Don't expect much sympathy from people who are ignorant and have been brought up fearing and hating us.


 * Rajiv"


 * ". . . (Feb 11, 2003 02:56 p.m.):
 * I think as of portrayal of jats as a community is concerned it has always been biased, But the fact remains does anyone care, I mean I wrote to editor of Indian Express after that article and he didnt even care to publish let alone any apology or clarification.
 * There was another article in Times of India in which author resorted to jat bashing, I again wrote to editor and and again nothing happened.
 * I dont want to sound pessismistic or like the one who has given up( a very unJat type attitude) but I am sorry I dont know how to go about this. This is indeed a SERIOUS issue I mean this woman cant be left to blabber on.
 * SHE MUST BE STOPPED!"

I contend that a person so filled with anger and hatred (someone who could say: "what is wrong in hating muslims, after knowing their past 100 year of history in India and world. If somebody still takes seculiar view on this, I feel he is not doing justice to his/her next generations"), is not worthy of serious consideration and should not be allowed to peddle his hateful and divisive prejudices on the Wikipedia. Yours sincerely, John Hill 02:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Corrections and apologies
I must apologise to Mr. Chaudhary and all the readers of this list. I have just become aware that in my note above: "Mr. Chaudhary's Response" I wrongly read the notices on the Jatland site so that I have quoted people who had written in and labelled them as the comments of Ravi Chaudhary when, in fact, he replied underneath each of the quotes. For this I unreservedly apologise.

To correct the record I will list below Ravi Chaundary's replies to each of these three points:

1. Reply to the note of Feb, 11 2003 by Mr. Chaudhary:


 * "Ranvir


 * I do not wish to belabor the point.


 * Nonica Datta is spewing hate, under the guise of Academic scholarship.


 * Whta she and people like her write becomes the accepted academic truth, and that is what must be stopped.


 * The Brahmical Jats shudras etc. The people who stufy them then also accept that the Jats are low class, robbers, servile, sleazy thiefs.


 * This is the kind of stuff the Nonica Datta writes.


 * Thus when your kids grow up and go the school and college, they will be taught by a generation of historians who learnt their history and view of Jats form the academic text books of Nonica Datta


 * Her books are now becoming part of the curriculum in the Universities in the West.


 * That is what Students in the world will learn about Jats.


 * So you cannot simply accept what she writes and say, "Oh it does not affect me,, It affects you and your family directly"


 * When you child comes home and says, Daddy, Mummy, are we sudras, are we robeers and thieves, and you asky why?


 * The child will say this is what I was told in School.


 * You canot simply ignore them, for then their hate filled views get accepted.


 * You have to counter this at every turn at every corner.


 * She does not dare to write such stuff about the Jat Sikhs !


 * We must organise and stop her.


 * Ravi

..........................

2. to the note written on Feb 11, 2003 01:17 a.m. Mr. Chaudhary replied:


 * "Her work is becoming part of the academic curriculum.


 * So if we ignore her we do so at our own peril.


 * She is getting her message out through every history and social department in every university in the West.


 * This next generation of undergratuate students, who will then become professors, lawyers, diplomats in their turn, will teach what they have learnt- that Jats a low class sudhra, servile thieves.


 * So whern you child goes for admission to Harvard, they will know that they are dealing with a low class chamar/ shudra.


 * It is in tis manner that thye call the Jat emperor Chadragupta Muarya- Sudras, and have wiped out your history, so we Jats do pot know our past, and some Jats even think that they are descendents of a Raput, who married a jatni concubine.


 * This sort of thing is accepted OFFICIAL history today, and that is how the world thinks of us.


 * To change this, takes effort.


 * Please take this seriously, for ourselves and our children to come.


 * Ravi

.............................

3. Reply to the note of Feb 11, 2003 02:56 p.m. by Mr. Chaudhary:


 * REPLY


 * Perception is realty


 * Abhishek writes we used to be rulers. That is true, and your roots go back to the composers of the Rig Veda.


 * Today however thanks to a casteist society and a more complacent Jat society, we are being marginalized into low caste and shudraism., where we Jats are ashamed of our identity.


 * In south India, there are only two categories Brahmins and Shudras. The great rulers of old, and their descendants, the cholas, Solankis, the Pandyas, are all called Shudras.


 * How does this happen and take hold.


 * In the last few centuries, the economic power shifted to Industry and beuracracy, those who took up education, and served their British Masters became the rulers of India and propagated their hold on society.


 * In was only in Haryana, Punjab, and UP that the Jats managed to retain their identity, which is now fast being lost due to a number of factors.


 * Landholdings declining, education not being available, and the Kisan being squeezed.


 * The environment has changed, and simply owning land is not enough.


 * The castist society has successfully marginalized us, and unless we do something about it, our society will decline to the status of landless shudras in a few generations.


 * 1. The first step to marginalizing a people is to deny them education. -


 * "Look at rural India, no schools, While the Baniya. Brahmin combine sent their children to English medium schools; they passed laws and denied the study of English in Rural India, along with resources- teachers, schools, and equipment.


 * "This had made your rural Jats, unfit for modern society, for which knowledge g English is a must, as all you well know.


 * "2. The second is to deny them their History.


 * "Our history is depicted as the History of the Rajputs and Brahmins. This is not true but show me a History book, which says otherwise.


 * "There is no mention of Jats in our history books. They are supposed to miraculously appear in the 7th century AD, noticed first only by the Muslim invaders !!!


 * "Once you have done this, target group will fall further and further behind , first economically, then socially.


 * "That is why People like Nonica Datta, must be stopped.


 * "How should that be done?
 * "BY ORGANIZING OURSELVES


 * "Not by verbal abuse, but by activism.


 * "Use the Internet; it is a powerful medium and a great equalizer.


 * "Start an Online petition. See how successful India cause is.


 * "Send E mails to Delhi University, Miranda House, the newspapers who print such hate mail, and watch things change.


 * There is need for the Great Jat Talent for war. This war does not bows and arrows, it requires Brainpower.


 * We have that, and we have the Internet. There a thousand members on this list. Let us organize this thousand first.


 * As Delhi University, Miranda House, Nonica Dutta, and the Indian Express get one thousand E Mails in protest, watch the change happen.


 * But first we have to clean up our act.


 * We must correct what our OWN website says about us.


 * If we present a negative image about us that is what we will be.


 * For starters:


 * I wrote to Nithin Dahiya that the Ghazni Naval victory story is wrong, and I have posted on the History section, and in the Jat History Group, URL below, discussion, my analysis from original Muslim sources, does not support the official Jatland version.


 * My question then is what Jat would write negative things about his people – out of ignorance, well OK, but when he knows that it is an untruth, then why would he write such negative portrayal of his people.


 * This is not something I can do single handedly. I need help.


 * Feed back


 * Ravi Chaudhary

So, I apologise unreservedly - Mr. Chaudhary did NOT say he hated Muslims, as I reported - he was replying to someone who said they did.

However, I am still awaiting his apology to me - requested many months ago - for some of the ugly, unnecessary and baseless lies he spread about me personally. John Hill 06:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Do not equate Bagar with Jangladesh
Mr John Hill has equated Jangladesh with Bagar. I quote from his earlier comment:
 * "It also apparently provides another name for the region Mr. Burdak is calling "Jangladesh", that is, "Bagar"."

It is false statement and misguiding. James Tod and Thakur Deshraj and many other authors have clearly mentioned the places which were in Jangladesh. These places are still existing. These cover the districts of Bikaner, Churu, Ganganagar,and Hanumangarh in Rajasthan state of India. The people of these places speak Rajasthani language. Where as Bagar is separate region of Haryana which includes Hissar, Rohtak, Gurgaon and Panipat as has been quoted by Mr John Hill with reference to Nonica Datta. People of these districts speak Haryanvi language also known as Bagri or the Jatu language. --burdak 07:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)