Since you are adamant, and you want to deny historical facts, let me provide you some more.

She was educated at home. Her father Moropant Tambey traveled to the court of Raja Gangadhar Rao Newalkar, the Maharaja of Jhansi, when Manu was thirteen years old.[ambiguous] She married Gangadhar Rao, the Raja of Jhansi, at the age of 14.[1]
After her marriage, she was given the name Lakshmi Bai. The Marriage ceremony was performed in Ganesh Mandir, the temple of Lord Ganesha situated in the city of Jhansi. Rani Lakshmi Bai gave birth to a son in 1851, but unfortunately this child died when he was about four months old. After the death of their son, the Raja and Rani of Jhansi adopted Damodar Rao. Her husband, Raja Gangadhar Rao died on 21st November 1853 when the Rani was eighteen years old.

Using the doctine of lapse, the British government under Lord Dalhousie rejected the young Damodar Rao’s claim to the throne and annexed the state of Jhansi. In March 1854, the Rani was given a pension of 60,000 rupees and ordered to leave the palace at the Jhansi fort.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rani_Lakshmi_Bai” rel=”nofollow”>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rani_Lakshmi_Bai

it was Doctrine of Lapse of the fear of which, an old man married a girl of 14 while he was above 70.
Lakshmi Bai and Gangadhar Rao adopted Damodar Rao only to get rid of the fear of Doctrine of Lapse.
Why did not they fought before Lakshmi Bai was ordered out of her property?
Every single companion of her was fighting for same cause.

Nana Saheb and Tatya Tope were denounced their property rights and there states were annexed already. All gathered and revolted against British law to regain their property, that was the freedom.
it was as honorable as it is right now.

Property rights ACTUALLY defines freedom. People of Jhansi favored lakshmi bai and fought for her because they believed Rani lakshmi bai is better ruler than British rulers.

I mentioned the Awadhi spelling.

For more, refer the http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Ayodhya.html
Ayodhya or Ajodhya , former town, Uttar Pradesh state, N India, on the Ghaghara River.

So does that mean there was no taxation whatsover in regime of Chandragupta Maurya i.e. when he became king after death of king Dhanananda ( Nand is just short form of king “Dhanananda” which u mentioned in your article

Dhananand was the last king of Nand Dynasty. With death of dhananand,, Nand Dynasty ended. Nand is not short term for Dhananand.
I mentioned end of Nand Dynasty, not only of Dhananand.
get more of basic history on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanda_Dynasty

Second thing is, I never said Chanakya was libertarian, i said he was liberty proponent. he knew taxation is loot and he mentioned it too, and he was unable to find any possible way to stop looting, yet he suggested minimum taxation and that too in a way that may not hurt citizens in any way.

Even Ayn Rand and Ludwig Von Mises said so, Minimum government and Voluntary taxation.

The spelling in wiki link is wrong. it should be Nand Dyansty.

About Jhansi, it was properly a fight for legitimate property rights, the right of lakshmi bai and her adopted son Damodar Rao to rule over Jhansi and its people.

Even Gangadhar Rao and Lakshmi Bai adopted a son Damodar Rao, when British denied accepting Damodar Rao as legitimate heir, then only Lakshmi Bai revolted. If Britishers had accepted Damodar Rao as legitimate heir, there was no point to fight.
One more thing, I never said that it was not fight for freedom, along with fight for freedom, it was fight for legitimate property rights.
About people of Jhansi, even now Property right is not a fundamental right, and government can loot one’s property anytime.

That is how Nandigram and Singur incidences took place.

in 1978 during 44rth amendement, Fundamental right of property was repealed.

As of an observer of many people from India who have come to reside and become citizens of the United States I can say that their success, their happiness is based not on what socialism has done for them but rather their success is based on their hard work in an economic and social system that still rewards the one who works hard, has a better idea or talent in almost any area. Most immigrants to this country prosper precisely for the reason that the country they left usually has less economic freedom than here.

We as human beings have an inalienable right to life and to liberty and to the right to pursue our happiness. We should expect from our political institutions to only impede our freedoms minimally and only for the general good. We should ask only the minimum from it, for what it can give us it can also take from us. The  more we give it and ask of it the more powerful it becomes in our lives.