I am posting the online book I came across about Maratha-Rajput relations from 1720 to 1795. The book is written by a Maratha named D. Acharya so there is bound to be some bias but it has a lot of valuable information, particularly the letters exchanged between the Hindu rulers of the time which show us how important a role religion played in their alliances and opposition to the Mughals. I will highlight what I think are important points. The book has convinced me that if history is taught as it is today in India, it will not be long before Hindu identity will be diluted in the name of secularism and assorted nonsense, it is no wonder that I never read these original letters between Hindu rulers which stress how important religion was to them and stress the idea of the restablishment of a Hindu Raj, these letters show us that the idea of Pan-Hindu identity cutting across regional barriers was present even 3 centuries ago.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->PREFACE

The present thesis " Maratha-Rajput relations from 1720 to 1795 A.D." begins with the career of Peshwa Bajirao I and ends with the death of Peshwa Madhaorao in 1795 A.D. The work 'Rajput' refers to the Rajput States of Rajasthan in the 18th century and particularly to the former States of Jaypur, Jodhpur and Udaypur as of the 15 States the leading Houses were three-the Sisodias of Mewad, the Rathods of Marwad and the Kachawahas of Ambar, History of other smaller States like Bundi, Kotal Alwar, Kishangadh or Bikaner, comes into picture wherever it touches the main theme. (1)

Again, there is no intention to give internal history of any individual State, that has no bearing on the main topic. Even then, it will be seen that the continuity is maintained, so far as it was possible.

Taking the 'Sanads' of 'Chauth' and 'Sardeshmukhi' as a base for expansion, the Maratha-Imperialism spread towards all directions from their base in Maharashtra. Their main object was 'territorial conquest for the regeneration of religion and the Gods' (2), in the words of Chimaji Appa. Their movements in Rajasthan were not isolated raids for mere plunderbut were a part of their general policy of expansion towards the North (3) . Maratha hold on Malwa was complete even in 1732 A.D. and Hastinapur (Delhi) was their target as early as 1736 A.D. Rajasthan came naturally under the sphere of the Maratha expansion. The treatment of of some of the eminent scholars to Maratha Invasions, creates an impression that the Marathas had no other business than to wake one fine morning and move on to raid the peace-loving territories of Rajasthan (4).

There is no use in saying "Whatever might have been the objects of the Maratha expansion there is no doubt that their penetration into Rajasthan and their domination of Mewad was a great calamity. As their power grew and states after states lay prostrate before them, plunder, rapine and ravages became the order of the days. (5) "

Activities of any political power, in the past (or even in the present) have been hardly without objects. Hence treating the political activities excluding the objects of the party involved will scarcely be a complete picture in itself. A scholar who has deliberately selected a particular topic for study is obliged to take all the aspects of the topic into consideration. Hence while dealing with the Maratha-Rajput relations of 18th century, one has to take the Maratha aims and objects into account along-with their faults, otherwise the whole campaign carried on by the Marathas incessantly, year after year, ceases to have any meaning other than the raids of the plunderers.

The present work, I hope, presents a through picture of the changing relationship of the Marathas and the Rajputs, in the 18th century, from mutual friendship to bitter enmity.

The long period of seventy five years is divided into three phases as they appear to me. The first phase (1720 to 1743 A.D.) ends with the death of Sawai Jaysing, the second phase (1743 to 1766 A.D.) ends with the death of Malharrao Holkar and the third, and the last one, ends with the accidental death of the young and promising Peshwa Sawai madhaorao. These three phases constitute the main body of the thesis. At the end I have given my reflections over the Maratha-Rajput relations during 1720 to 1795 A.D.

The first chapter in every phase explains the significance of the particular phase, summarizes the activities during the phase and in short serves as an introduction to the phase.

Before actually starting with the topic, a survey of the past history of the Marathas and the Rajputs has been taken into the introductory first chapter. As I started with origin of the Marathas, I had to give the same treatment in the case of the Rajputs too and hence, I could not avoid the questions of the origin of the Rajput. This introductory chapter, in two parts, serves as a background of the meeting of the Marathas and the Rajputs in first quarter of the 18 century.

The third factor of the Nizam' in the Malwa affair (first phase) so distinctly put up, is a new thing in the Indian History, Dadorao Bhimsen's letter (S.P.D. 13-10) wrongly interpreted by eminent scholar like Dr. Raghuvir, has been given here due treatment for the first time. It has been adequately supplemented by other sources. It was the Nizam, who was aimed at, in calling the Maratha-help in Malwa in 1728 A.D. This work will also clear the objects of Sawai Jaysing in forming friendship with the Marathas. The treatment of Bajirao's Northern expansions gets here a new light in comparison to the works of others who have handled the same topic before me.

The second phase (1743 to 1766 A.D.) opens with the reasons behind the changed attitude of the Rajputs towards the Marathas. It is altogether a new attempt to state the underlying meaning of the political activities concerning Rajasthan after the death of Sawai Jaysing. The second phase covers everything relating to the topic. Particularly I have to draw the attention to the explanation of Malharro's individuality in handling the Northern politics in general and Rajput politics in particular.

During the third phase (1766 to 1795 A.D.) the Maratha Rajput relations reached the highest pitch of rivalry. This phase relates the initial errors of Mahadaji (with reasons) towards the Rajputs in general and Jaypur in particular, the entrapment of Mahadaji, the Lalsot campaign, the miraculous recovery of Mahadji, the comparatively late coming of Tukoji to the scene and the final triumph of Mahadaji over all his rivals. The whole episode resembles the third battle of Panipat (1761 A.D.). I have not given long descriptions of the battles (that are available in Poona residential Correspondence Vol. I) but given as much as was necessary. Sir Jadunath's descriptions of the battle of Patan" (6) and Medta would give one an impression that these battles wre won by De Bolgne alone and that the famous Maratha cavalry, as if, was doing nothing but standing aloof. He nearly omits the part played by the forces (though smaller in number) of Holkar and Ali Bahadur. I have taken all the available accounts of these battles into consideration and described the battles in brief. In fact the descriptions are hardly mine. They are base mainly on the news-reporters, the sources of which have been stated in footnotes.

A historian ought not to be too loose in his language? (7) While criticizing the personalities of the past, because it has come fortunately to his lot to pass judgments on their actions. No body can boast of knowing all the aspects of a particular case. By the end of the third phase we see Tukoji-Patra were exchanged) (8) acting against Mahadaji. Tukoji's actions but I do hope that my exertions will be of use in forming a balanced view in viewing the actions of these two Maratha Sardar. Namely Tukoji and Mahadaji with reference to the Maratha Rajput relations. I do claim that I have been impartial, as far as possible, in dealing with all these intricate polities. One should never forget that Ahillyabai and Tukoji had their own case like Mahadaji. It is for the impartial historian to pass the final remarks.

As for Ali Bahadur, he was simply unfortunate. He had no hand in the Gosawi episode. Once he took the charge of the latter, he defended him against the might of Mahadaji. History does not prove any treachery committed by either Tukoji or Ali Bahadur against Mahadaji at the time of the battles of Patan and Medta in 1790 A.D., even though, the latter is emphatic in placing such a charge against the two. In fact Mahadaji was too shrewd to build his case against Tukoji and Ali Bahadur from the first. Lakheri depicts the tragic end of the House of Holkars brought at the hands of Mahadaji.

The present work goes a long way to prove that the Maratha-Rajput relations is not the story of "plunder, rapine and ravages" but the story of continuous political relationship between the two political powers namely the Rajputs of the North, collectively, and the Marathas of the South. It is neither the history of any 'dark age' nor the history of the factual accounts of the raids and the doubtful accounts of the money exacted. It is in short the political history of the period. I do submit most humbly that the present work tries to approach the problem with a balanced view. It rejects the tradition of the followers of Tod of looking to the Marathas as some-thing free-booters coming from the foreign lands.

Of the dates of letters that I have corrected, I would draw attention to the latter No. 27 of S.P.D. 10. Sardesai gives it to be of 1724 A.D. whereas Dr. Raghuvir states it to be of 1737 A.D. In fact it belongs to 1730 A.D. I have givent the reasons in detail (Appendix to first phase). But the only fact besides others that goes against the date being 1737 A.D. is the mention of Kanhoji Bhosle in the particular letter. Kanhoji was taken a prisoner to Satara by Raghuji Bhosle in 1730 A.D. and he remained in prison after that at Satara till his death (9) How could, under the circumstances, he come in 1737 A.D. to the Nizam as has been Stated in the letter ? I have corrected the dates of other letters too, and stated the reasons for the same in the foot-notes.

In his preface to 'Madhava Rao Sindhia' p.s.H.G.Keena writes, "the omission to cite Tod's Rajasthan may be thought to demand explanation. It is a noble book, full of priceless information and inspired by a fine enthusiasm. But this every inspiration renders the author an unsafe guide in regard to the relations and dealings of the Rajputs with other tribes". I agree fully to this statement and hence have omitted Tod, excepting where he has cited the origined sources. I value the opinion of Rajwade, the famous historian of Maharashtra, that "one cannot believe in a mass of native or foreign Bakhars (10) (cronicles) as he can rely on a single scrap of original material". Hence I have not relied on any of the Marathi or Rajasthani Bakhars. The text of the thesis is based only on original Marathi and Rajasthani sources, and on standard books based on original material.

Regarding the spelling of the proper nouns, I have to state that, as far as possible they are nearer to the original pronunciations. Hence I have written Medta (and not Merta), Shinde (and not Sidhia), Vijaysing and Jaysing (and not Bijesing and Jaising), Mewad (and not Mewar), Marwad (and not Marwar) and so on. I have done this mainly because I see no justfication in writing 'Marwar' when we call it 'Marwad'. But while quoting the extracts from other writers, I have retained the original spellings given by them of these proper nouns.

I have utilized all the Marathi as well as Rajput sources for this work. I have visited for the purpose of study, different libraries and stayed at places like Poona, Jaypur and Bikaner. I have made full use of the University Library of the Nagpur University, Nagpur. The library of my college, - The Sitabi Arts College, Akola, was always at my disposal. I am obliged to all those who have been useful to me in my studies. I also express my sincere gratitude to the Education Officer, University Grants Commission, New Delhi - 1, for the sanction of grant, which made the publication of this book possible.

In the introduction to Marathi Riyasat (Vol. V, Punyashlok Shahu) G.S. Sardesai says, "I have been doing this work of the interpretation (of history) for the last so may years". In the same way I put up this work, most humbly, as a sincere attempt to interprete the dealings of the two brave peoples of India namely the Marathas and the Rajputs with each other, spread over the span of seventy five years.

'Vijayadashmi'
 

Akola
K.A.Acharya

11th October 1978.


Descrption of Foot Notes

(1) 'Later Mughals' Vol. I, p. 42, Mar, Riya. Vol. V (Punya Sholke Shahu) p, 128.

(2) 'Hingne Daftar' I-15.

(3) "The aim behind the activities of these people is simple this. To decrease the income of the Mujahids (Moslems), to inflict injuries on the strength of the Moslems through these off and on harassments, and to deprive the Moslems of the strength to wage jihad." - From the letter of Nizam-ul-Muk (1737 A.D.), Eighteenth Century Deccan, pp, 146 and 147.

(4)"These Marathas, who did not like any other way but looting, were the greatest source of destruction for Mewad" - Veer Vinod, p. 1704. "In Samvat 1792, the Emperor granted the Subhadari of Malwa in the name of Bajirao Peshwa thus the robbers became the masters of the territory." - ibid, p. 1151.

(5) "Mewar and the Maratha relations" K.S.Gupta, in preface, p. viii.

(6) Fall of the Mughal Empire, Vol. IV. pp. 23 to 25 and 31 to 36, respectively.

(7) See the way how Sir Jadunath Sarkar writes about Tukoji - "Like a vulture which which sees a dying cow from a far, Tukoji Holkar, who had been hovering close the Mathura border without coming to Mahadaji's side, inspite of orders from Poona, now hastened to that city in order to stiffen Ali Bahadur's deflunce of Shinde's authority" . Fall IV p. 11.

(8) Jaypur Draft Kharitas 21 - 54.

(9) 'Nagpur Prantacha Itihasa' by Y. M. Kale, p. 64., Ahwal -I- Khawaquin in "Studies in mAratha History, Vol II , P. 101.

(10) 'Aitnhasik Prastavanas' by V. K. Rajwade p. 4.

http://www.maratharajputrelations.com/preface.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Review - Sri Ramadasu </b>
sify.com/movies/telugu/review.php?cid=2430
Movie -
Sri Ramadasu
Director
K Raghavendra Rao
Producer
Aditya Productions
Music
MM Keeravani
Cast
Nagarjuna, ANR, Sneha, Suman, Sujatha, Sameer, Nasseer, Nagababu

Many decades back, films in the mythology genre was popular in Telugu and NTR became the Chief Minister due to the halo around him created by doing the role of Gods! Today our heroes would not dare to do a mythology, can’t blame them as times and audiences preferences have change drastically.
Nagarjuna and veteran director Raghavendra Rao had the guts to come out with a film like Sri Ramadasu which not only touches your heart but also proves the fact that true devotion towards God and your hard work can move mountains. Nothing is impossible and miracles do happen at times. Sri Ramadasu is brilliantly presented by Rao and Nag within the commercial parameters.

Gopanna (Nagarjuna) is a nice guy who is in love with Kamala (Sneha) his uncle’s daughter and later marries her though her father wanted his daughter to get married to a Tahasildar. But after marriage, Gopanna impresses the Nizam (Nasser) who appoints him as the new Tahsildar of Husnabad against the liking of his begum who is not happy with the decision. The reason is that her brother (Jaiprakash Reddy) has to give way to Bopanna and they hatch plans to frame him.

Bopanna is beaten and he is later rescued by Dammakka (Sujatha) who nurses him and he is inspired by the lady’s deep devotion to Lord Rama and the way she protects the idols of Rama, Seeta and Lakshmana. Bopanna is haunted by his duty to build a temple as he becomes a great devotee of Lord Rama. He even gives away all pleasures in life and comes to stay in the forest with Kamala until the temple is constructed.

He collects money from the public and constructs the famous Rama temple in Bhadrachalam with the guidance of his guru Kabir Das (ANR). Kabir Das confers Gopanna the title of Sri Ramadasu on the insistence of Lord Rama. But the machinations of his detractors ends him up in jail for misusing government funds until Lord Rama and Lakshmana comes down to help him.

It is indeed amazing to see Nagarjuna slip into the role of Ramadasu with so much of ease. He has lives the role and so is Sneha who has lost weight and looks pretty. ANR and Sujatha the two veterans are in top form while Suman as Rama and Veda as Sita look too artificial in their gaudy make-up. In these days of blood soaked revenge dramas and mindless love stories Sri Ramadasu is a path breaker with a subtle message.

The last 20 minutes of the film is as good as any racy masala movie with extraordinary performance by Nagarjuna who is simply superb. Technically too, the film is the best mythology made in recent times- the sets, period ambience, camera work, locations and costumes. And what with outstanding music by Keeravani which whips up the right fervour.

Verdict: Good
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I started this topic to post exclusively about this great man, these days efforts are being made by commie traitors and morons like James Laine to portray Shivaji as a looter looking for adventure and nothing more (same thing with Maharana Pratap, Banda Singh and other national heroes). So I thought I would post some interesting stuff about Shivaji with supporting evidence that he fully aimed at an independent Hindu empire, to start this off an article by Sandhya Jain:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Demeaning Shivaji, denigrating dharma
Author: Sandhya Jain

Publication: The Pioneer
Date: January 27, 2004

Having purchased and read James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India only after it was officially withdrawn by the publishers, I cannot view the events at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) as totally unjustified. Certainly, attacks on centres of learning have no place in Hindu ethos and must not recur. Yet, having gone through 105 pages of shoddy polemics posing as historical research, I am constrained to state that Oxford University Press needs to re-examine its commissioning policy if it hopes to retain credibility as a publishing house.

Moreover, the BORI scholars acknowledged by Laine must honestly inform the nation of the extent to which they are responsible for the unwarranted assertions - we cannot call them conclusions, as no evidence has been adduced or offered - in the impugned book. Far from being a meticulous scholar who has uncovered unpalatable truths about a revered historical figure, Laine is an anti-Hindu hypocrite determined to de-legitimize India's ancient civilizational ethos and its grand rejuvenation by Shivaji in the adverse circumstances of the seventeenth century. BORI is not generally associated with substandard scholarship, and should explicitly declare its position on the actual contents of the book.

Laine exposes his agenda when he foists the unnatural concept of South Asia upon the geographical and cultural boundaries of India; this is awkward because his discussion is India-centric and specific to the Maharashtra region. He is also unable to disguise his discomfort at the fact that Shivaji withstood the most bigoted Mughal emperor, Aurangzeb, and established political agency for the embattled Hindu community, amidst a sea of Islamic sultanates. This has so unnerved Laine that he repeatedly makes inane remarks about Hindus employed under Muslim rulers and vice versa, to claim that the two communities lacked a modern sense of identity, and could not be viewed as opposing entities. What he means, of course, is that Hindus of the era cannot be ceded to have had a sense of 'Hindu' identity.

Reading the book, I was struck by the fact that it did not once mention Shivaji's famed ambition to establish a Hindu Pad Padshahi. This is a strange omission in a work claiming to study how contemporary authors viewed Shivaji's historic role, and the assessment of his legacy by subsequent native and colonial writers. The most notable omission is of the poet Bhushan, who wrote: "Kasihki Kala Gayee, Mathura Masid Bhaee; Gar Shivaji Na Hoto, To Sunati Hot Sabaki!" [Kashi has lost its splendour, Mathura has become a mosque; If Shivaji had not been, All would have been circumcised (converted)].

Bhushan's verse has immense historical value because the Kashi Vishwanath temple was razed in 1669 and thus lost its splendour, and the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple was destroyed and converted into a mosque in 1670. Bhushan came to Shivaji's kingdom from the Mughal capital in 1671, and within two years composed Shiv Bhooshan, a biography of Shivaji. It clearly states that Shivaji wanted to set up a Hindu Pad Padshahi.

Hence the view that Shivaji had no ideological quarrel with Aurangzeb and was only an adventurer in search of power and resources is juvenile. Laine obviously subscribes to the secularist school of historiography that decrees that Hindus must forget the evil done to them, a phenomenon Dr. Koenraad Elst calls negationism. But history is about truth, and Hindu society's long and painful experience of Islamic invasions and the subsequent Islamic polity has been so well documented in standard works like Cambridge History of India, that it is amazing a modern historian should claim there was no tension between Muslim rulers and their Hindu subjects.

Shivaji strove consciously for political power as an instrument for the resurrection of dharma (righteousness), a quest he termed as "Hindavi Swarajya," a word having both geographical and spiritual-cultural connotations. When still in his teens in 1645 CE, Shivaji began administering his father's estate under a personalized seal of authority in Sanskrit, an indication that he envisaged independence and respected the Hindu tradition. A 1646 CE letter to Dadaji Naras Prabhu refers to an oath that Shivaji, Prabhu, and others took in the presence of the deity at Rayareshwar, to establish "Hindavi Swarajya."

Shivaji was aware of the economic ruin and cultural annihilation of Hindus under the various sultanates. He desired to end this suffering, but was personally free from bigotry, as attested by contemporary Muslim chroniclers, notably Khafi Khan. It is therefore galling when Laine smugly proclaims: "I have no intention of showing that he was unchivalrous, was a religious bigot, or oppressed the peasants." A.S. Altekar (Position of Women in Ancient India) has recorded how Shivaji, in stark contrast to Muslim kings and generals of his era, ensured that Muslim women in forts captured by him were not molested and were escorted to safety. It is inconceivable that Shivaji would not know that Hindu women similarly situated would have to commit jauhar. It is therefore incumbent upon Laine and BORI to explain what "unchivalrous" and "bigot" mean.

The insinuation about "bigot" is especially objectionable in view of Laine's insistence that Shivaji had no particular interest in Hindu civilization and no proven relationship with the revered Samarth Ramdas or sant Tukaram. A Maharashtrian friend suggests that Laine has probably not read the references cited in his book! What the reader needs to understand is that Ramdas' historical significance lies in the fact that he openly exhorted the people to rise against oppression and hinted in Dasbodh that Shivaji was an avatar who had come to restore dharma. By denying that he was Shivaji's spiritual mentor, Laine seeks to disprove that the great Maratha wanted to establish a Hindu Pad Padshahi.

Ramdas, a devotee of Rama (Vaishnava sampradaya), visited the Khandoba temple at Jejuri, Pune; apologized to the god (Shiva) for boycotting the temple due to the practice of animal sacrifice there; and built a Hanuman temple at its entrance. I mention this to debunk Laine's pathetic insistence that devotion to a personal god divides Hindu society. This is alien to our thinking; we see no conflict between Ramdas and the Bhavani-worshipping Shivaji.

Then, there is Laine's tasteless allegation that Shivaji may possibly (whatever that means) be illegitimate, simply because Jijabai, who bore many children while living with her husband in the south, gave birth to Shivaji on her husband's estate near Pune and continued to live there. Maharashtrians point out that Shahaji had to send his pregnant wife to safety in Shivneri due to political instability. Shahaji was on the run with the boy king Murtaza Nizamshah, in whose name he controlled the Nizamshahi. After its fall in 1636, service in the Adilshahi took him to Bangalore (his remarriage produced the distinguished Thanjavur-Bhonsle dynasty); he administered his Pune lands through Dadaji Konddev.

My response to Laine's profound Freudian analysis is that he has thanked his wife and children and dedicated his book to his mother; I couldn't but notice the absence of a father. Is one to deduce something from the omission? Laine can relax: since the Vedas, Hindus have placed only proportionate emphasis on biological bloodlines; there is no shame if a man cannot mention his father; a true b@st@rd is one who does not know the name of his mother.

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0104/159.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Can somebody educate mew on the bestway to


1.type in a text in Telugu script

2.convert english transliterated text into Telugu

Kaushal

<b>Twin blasts rock Delhi's Jama Masjid, many injured</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A Red Alert has been sounded in the national Capital following the explosions on Good Friday.

While <b>no casualties have been reported, TV reports said that five injured people had been rushed to the Lok Narayan Jai Prakash (LNJP) Hospital</b>.

The first explosion took place at around 5 pm when devotees were preparing for 'Asar' (evening) prayer near a pond used by them for ablution.

Fifteen minutes later another blast rocked the place, eye witnesses said.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->



Inside work or Karachi effect?
Low grade explosion means either warning to someone (Bukhari) in mosque or takeover push by Deaoband?

Hello,

Do you know the text called manasollAsa ?

This text was written by Somesvara Bhulokamalla in 1130 AD.

I know that one section describes a dice game called "golakakrIDane" or
"pasakakrida".

But I don't have this text. I just know that this section corresponds to verses from 634 to 712.

Do you have this text (or just this section) ? or a translation ?

Thank you for you help,
Frederic

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What is there it enjoy? BC has put all his fears in one article and is spouting bile. He is missing the forest while he is stomping on the bushes.
Whenever a news article comes one shuld read it. See what it confirms and what new info it brings. Then look for point of view of the writer.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This article is from Commie mouthpiece, so now you know where they stand. They are getting ready for showdown. Soon you will see more article on same line from U-Know-Who in US media. We should know what otherside is thinking and their road map to sabotage India's interest.

Regarding B Chellany and B Karnad, not sure do they really know inside out of whole deal, but it may just scare tactics to get more info from government.

India might have won her freedom over 50 years ago, but we are still ruled by police following british imperial rules. Time after time, we come across instances where the police , either in concert with the politicians or on their own have simply refused to treat indian citizens with respect.

A suspect in police custody does not have any rights and third degree interrogation techniques, that put Abu Gharib abuse to shame, have been used with impunity. Worse, the indian cinema and the TV serials seems to reinforce this image. The potrayal of police in all our movies and TVs is of a cop who beats on the suspects to get out a confession or the truth. Not only does the bad cop does that, but even the do-gooder cop also do it. The only difference being, good cop tortures a gooda (against whom there is absolutely no evidence) and gets him to fess-up.

This bad behaviour of the cops can be seen in real life too. Worse, nothing happens to these bad cops. In this latest instance, the cops in navi mumbai fired at rioters and killed 3 people. Why did they not use teargas or lathicharge? Was the crowd that violent? In that case how come the only deaths have been as a result of police firing?



<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Kadam blames police inaction for Navi Mumbai riots     

Mumbai, Mar 17: Leader of Opposition in Maharashtra Asembly Ramdas Kadam today launched a scathing attack on the "initial inaction" of the police during the group clashes in Navi Mumbai, that killed three persons, two in police firing, and injured 76 yesterday.

"The way police acted yesterday to control the mobs at Ghansoli in Navi Mumbai makes me wonder if the Home Minister had given orders to the police to kill people on the spot," Kadam said during a discussion on an adjournment motion on the Navi Mumbai riots.

Kadam said he visited the spot after the group clashes between Ghansoli villagers and Mathadi workers. "I can say from what I gathered that had the local police inspector Pathan promptly acted to diffuse tension after the eve-teasing incident, the deaths of three people in police firing later could have been averted," he said.

Kadam alleged that Pathan opened fire without following due procedures like preceding it with a lathi-charge and also violated the norm which stipulate firing below the waist. "He did not fire in the air but aimed directly at the chest," Kadam said.

He demanded that Pathan be suspended immediately and a murder case be registered against him.

Kadam said he had visited "eight to nine people injured in the firing" admitted to local hospitals. "I found out that except for one person, all others had bullet injuries above the waist", he said.

Of the 76 injured, 22 were policemen, Kadam said. The stone-pelting was so intense that even a DCP (Amar Jadhav) sustained serious injuries although he was wearing a helmet, he said.

<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Chili's Heat Kills Prostate Cancer Cells

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter 2 hours, 8 minutes ago

THURSDAY, March 16 (HealthDay News) -- Capsaicin, the component that gives jalapeno peppers their heat, may also kill prostate cancer cells, a new study suggests.


Initial experiments in cancer cells and mice show that capsaicin causes prostate cancer cells to undergo a kind of suicide. Researchers speculate that, in the future, pills containing capsaicin might be used as therapy to prevent prostate cancer's return.

According to their report, capsaicin caused almost 80 percent of prostate cancer cells in the mice to die. In addition, prostate cancer tumors treated with capsaicin were about one-fifth the size of tumors in untreated mice.

"Capsaicin inhibits the growth of human prostate cancer cell in Petri dishes and mice," said lead researcher Dr. H. Phillip Koeffler, director of hematology and oncology at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and a professor of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles. Based on the findings, Koeffler believe the next step is a trial to see if it works in patients with prostate cancer.

The report appears in the March 15 issue of Cancer Research.

Capsaicin probably has several effects, Koeffler said. Most noticeable is its effect in blocking NF-kappa Beta, a molecular mechanism that promotes cancer cell growth, he noted.

In addition, capsaicin also was effective against leukemia, and might be effective in slowing or preventing the growth of other cancers as well, he added.

But it's still too early to reach for the chili sauce, Koeffler said.

"I am not recommending that people increase their consumption of peppers," he said. "Our calculation is that you would have to eat 10 habanera peppers three times a week, which would be equivalent to the amount of capsaicin we gave to the mice."

The researcher believes capsaicin could someday gain a place in adjuvant prostate cancer therapy. For example, it might be used after prostate surgery to kill cancer cells in patients whose blood PSA levels start to rise, indicating the presence of tumors too small to be seen, he said.

The study does highlight the crossover that can occur between conventional and alternative therapies. "We should take note of herbal medicines and then use modern-day techniques to find what the active compounds are and bring them into clinical trials," Koeffler said.

One expert thinks it's too early to know if capsaicin will ever be an effective prostate cancer treatment, however.

"Since large amounts of capsaicin have never been given to people, we don't know what the side effects might be," cautioned Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the
American Cancer Society. "We don't know about the right dose or anything."

Lichtenfeld believes that any trial should be done in patients who are not responsive to other standard therapies. "We are ways away from a clinical trial," he said. "We need more basic research before we start treating patients."

Another expert concurred.

"This study does not prove that capsaicin will prove effective in the treatment of prostate cancer in humans," said Dr. David L. Katz, an associate professor of public health and director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine. "Nor does it tell us that eating peppers rich in the substance will help prevent such cancer, or forestall its growth. But it provides a compelling argument for clinical study of capsaicin in human prostate cancer to put these questions to the test."

"This paper should serve to remind us that herbal remedies and pharmacotherapy are often of common origins, differing only in our capacity to identify, purify and package the active ingredients," Katz said. "This work suggests that the conventional medical community should turn a discriminating eye, rather than a jaded eye, toward time-honored herbal treatments. Many will doubtless prove ineffective when put to the test of high-quality research. But some will pass that test, and we must meticulously distinguish between them."

The Spread of myth of
“Doubting Thomas” by South Indian Historians!

Now, it is evident that a vested group inside SIHC works faithfully to spread “the Doubting Thomas” myth through their proceedings, which is reportedly meant for secular and scientific history. When Dr. B. Maria John, Reader in History, Manonmaniyam Sundaranar University, Tiruynelveli read a paper on January 21, 2005, he was asked by another participant delegate many questions for which he could not answer.

The sectional President Prof A. R. Ramachansdra Reddy was clearly convinced about the motivated attempt of the paper presenter. But, what is surprising is that the unhistorical paper containing only myth, trash etc., has been appearing in the proceeding volume distributed during the 26th session of SIHC held at Bangalore during conference held from March 3rd to 5th 2006.

“St. Thomas, the Indian Apostle” has been printed in the pages 680-683. Interestingly, the volume has been edited by the Chief Editor Dr. B. S. Chandra Babu with members of the Editorial Committee –

Prof. B. Narasingaraja Naidu, Bangalore.
Prof. G. Sethuraman, Madurai.
Prof. Yenadhi Raju, Tirupati.
Prof. K. Gopalan Kutty Calicut.

Therefore, even if A. R. Ramachandra Reddy was reluctant to recommend considering the dubious nature of the paper, these professors of history from their respective universities must have impressed upon him to recommend for publication or otherwise, as the paper is appearing in the volume as noted above. Why these professors being historians and all want to support and spread the myth of doubting Thomas in India? Why they want to accommodate such blatant lies and thereby become “liars of Indian history”? To know the facts, the conduct of the 25th session of SIHC has to be analyzed.

There has been a “historical fight” between the historians Dr. D. Daniel and Dr. D. Janaki and the reasons are not known. See the version of Dr. D. Daniel appearing in the proceeding volume reproduced below for convenience.

As Dr. D. Daniel has been the General Secretary, the Christians decided to support and save his face. The Pillar Guest House came forward to provide food and accommodation to the delegates. Of course, though food was common to everybody (it is entirely a different story that some of the delegates could not get lunch daily), accommodation was restricted only to the coterie of the SIHC. Many delegates openly accepted that but for the Christian support, Daniel could not have conducted the session. Having helped, the co-called “Silver Jubilee Session” was conducted with the Christian help. Thus, the Church must have dictated the editorial committee to accommodate the Christian supporting articles / papers with its vested interests through Dr. D. Daniel. A close study of 154 papers selected for publication shows the following trend:

Papers published under different sections Total papers Presented by Christians Christian supporting papers
Political 35 9 4
Social 44 12 10
Economic 19 4 2
Cultural 45 5 3
Hist. & Matritime 10 1 -
Total 154 31 19

Thus totally 50 out of 154 papers have been thus presented by Christians and Christian supporting writers. Of course “against non-Christian category” might be also clubbed together, but not done. In any case, the Christian bias and the influence are clearly noted and recorded.

It is unfortunate that the scholars proclaiming themselves historians have stooped down such level to support and spread unhistorical lies, deceits and fabrications. It is well known fact that as to how the former Archbishop Arulappa was involved in such fabrication with the engaged self styled Professor Dr. Acharya Paul only to spread the “Thomas myth”. It is a fact that Archbishop Arulappa took Professor Dr. Acharya Paul to the then Pope through Cardinal Retzinger, the present Pope! It is better historians to keep away from this type of “history fabricators”, as otyerwise, the involved historians have to held responsible for their “unhistorical activities and alliances”.