08-27-2006, 10:32 PM
What he says is true.Jats who rose in rebellion against muslim tyranny and tried to plunder the tyrrant army might have plundered others also.
This controversy is just political.But the issues are deeper than that .
The denial of the existence of a race that was one of the most ancient and single largest in nw and had one of the most fertile lands of world.
When he speaks about jats under surjmal than why don't he write about Ranjit Singh about jat state of Jind Naba Patial or muslim jat states Why didn't they mention about Balhara kings jats controling mansura and kimran ,possiblity of their being the authors of Indus valley Civilization etc if not to mention harsha tomars and moryas .Segregation of jat rulers were just to undermine their past .
Hope it will change soon.
This controversy is just political.But the issues are deeper than that .
The denial of the existence of a race that was one of the most ancient and single largest in nw and had one of the most fertile lands of world.
When he speaks about jats under surjmal than why don't he write about Ranjit Singh about jat state of Jind Naba Patial or muslim jat states Why didn't they mention about Balhara kings jats controling mansura and kimran ,possiblity of their being the authors of Indus valley Civilization etc if not to mention harsha tomars and moryas .Segregation of jat rulers were just to undermine their past .
Hope it will change soon.