Malala Yousafzai: The month of January in 2009 was the most dangerous of times in Swat. Every night the Taliban used to slaughter two or three people in Green Square in the center of Mingora. One day that month, my father told me that a BBC journalist was requesting a blog by one of our students. He asked me, 'Would you like to do it?' I told him, "Sure, I will do it because it is a good opportunity for us to tell the world what the people of Swat -- the children and, specifically, the girls here -- think." I was very happy and told my father that I would write the blog or would just dictate it over the phone.
RFE/RL: Some Pakistanis believe and publically say that you were not shot by the Taliban and you just made it up. How do you feel when you hear such comments?
Malala: People who say such things can be forgiven. There is extreme hopelessness in our country and people are even disappointed with politicians. The important thing to note is that it is not important whether Malala was shot or not -- Malala is not asking for personal favors or support. She is asking for support with girls' education and women's rights. So don't support Malala, support her campaign for girls' education and women's rights.
RFE/RL: Some of your critics say that Malala is not true to her cause but has merely turned into a brand. How do you respond to such criticism?
Malala: People say Malala's voice is being sold to the world. But I see it as Malala's voice reaching the world and resonating globally. You should think about what is behind Malala's voice. What is she saying? I am only talking about education, women's rights, and peace. I want poverty to end in tomorrow's Pakistan. I want every girl in Pakistan to go to school.
RFE/RL: Some clerics in Pakistan say that you are being manipulated by the West for their own objectives, and that your rise is part of a conspiracy against the country. Do you see any merit in such allegations?
Malala: Any talk of me engaging in a conspiracy against Pakistan is completely baseless. Pakistan is already in the midst of many conspiracies. The situation there has been deteriorating for a long time. We have not gone a day without hearing about a few people being shot in [the southern seaport city of] Karachi. We have not gone a day without people being murdered. I want people to remember that Pakistan is my country. It is like my mother and I love it dearly. Even if its people hate me, I will still love it.
RFE/RL: So you are not being used by the West?
Malala: In countries other than Pakistan -- I won't necessarily call them "Western" -- people support me. This is because people there respect others. They don't do this because I am a Pashtun or a Punjabi, a Pakistani, or an Iranian, they do it because of one's words and character. This is why I am being respected and supported there.
RFE/RL: After your speech to the United Nations some people in Pakistan said you were trying to please everyone...
Malala: I don't agree with my speech being seen as an effort to please someone. I wanted it to be seen as what I stand for. I thought that after recovering from the attack people everywhere wanted to hear what I had to say. They wanted to know whether I was intimidated by the attack. They wanted to know whether I still wanted to take my campaign for girls' education forward. I used the speech to spread the message that Malala is undeterred and that she is determined to take her campaign for girls' education forward.
RFE/RL: Adnan Rashid, a Pakistani Taliban commander, recently wrote an open letter to you. He alleged that your campaign was not aimed at promoting education and was really targeted against the Taliban. How would you respond to him?
Malala: It was his right to express his views. I think I have a right to live my life the way I like. I did not engage in propaganda against the Taliban, I only spoke about girls' right to education, and the Taliban had banned girls from going to school. So I am against some of the things that the Taliban has done and advocates. No doubt I am against banning children from education. I stand for every girl to be able to go to school.
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Malala's Interview: '' Even If Its People Hate Me, I Will Still Love Pakistan ''
Malala Yousafzai: The month of January in 2009 was the most dangerous of times in Swat. Every night the Taliban used to slaughter two or three people in Green Square in the center of Mingora. One day that month, my father told me that a BBC journalist was requesting a blog by one of our students. He asked me, 'Would you like to do it?' I told him, "Sure, I will do it because it is a good opportunity for us to tell the world what the people of Swat -- the children and, specifically, the girls here -- think." I was very happy and told my father that I would write the blog or would just dictate it over the phone.
RFE/RL: Some Pakistanis believe and publically say that you were not shot by the Taliban and you just made it up. How do you feel when you hear such comments?
Malala: People who say such things can be forgiven. There is extreme hopelessness in our country and people are even disappointed with politicians. The important thing to note is that it is not important whether Malala was shot or not -- Malala is not asking for personal favors or support. She is asking for support with girls' education and women's rights. So don't support Malala, support her campaign for girls' education and women's rights.
RFE/RL: Some of your critics say that Malala is not true to her cause but has merely turned into a brand. How do you respond to such criticism?
Malala: People say Malala's voice is being sold to the world. But I see it as Malala's voice reaching the world and resonating globally. You should think about what is behind Malala's voice. What is she saying? I am only talking about education, women's rights, and peace. I want poverty to end in tomorrow's Pakistan. I want every girl in Pakistan to go to school.
RFE/RL: Some clerics in Pakistan say that you are being manipulated by the West for their own objectives, and that your rise is part of a conspiracy against the country. Do you see any merit in such allegations?
Malala: Any talk of me engaging in a conspiracy against Pakistan is completely baseless. Pakistan is already in the midst of many conspiracies. The situation there has been deteriorating for a long time. We have not gone a day without hearing about a few people being shot in [the southern seaport city of] Karachi. We have not gone a day without people being murdered. I want people to remember that Pakistan is my country. It is like my mother and I love it dearly. Even if its people hate me, I will still love it.
RFE/RL: So you are not being used by the West?
Malala: In countries other than Pakistan -- I won't necessarily call them "Western" -- people support me. This is because people there respect others. They don't do this because I am a Pashtun or a Punjabi, a Pakistani, or an Iranian, they do it because of one's words and character. This is why I am being respected and supported there.
RFE/RL: After your speech to the United Nations some people in Pakistan said you were trying to please everyone...
Malala: I don't agree with my speech being seen as an effort to please someone. I wanted it to be seen as what I stand for. I thought that after recovering from the attack people everywhere wanted to hear what I had to say. They wanted to know whether I was intimidated by the attack. They wanted to know whether I still wanted to take my campaign for girls' education forward. I used the speech to spread the message that Malala is undeterred and that she is determined to take her campaign for girls' education forward.
RFE/RL: Adnan Rashid, a Pakistani Taliban commander, recently wrote an open letter to you. He alleged that your campaign was not aimed at promoting education and was really targeted against the Taliban. How would you respond to him?
Malala: It was his right to express his views. I think I have a right to live my life the way I like. I did not engage in propaganda against the Taliban, I only spoke about girls' right to education, and the Taliban had banned girls from going to school. So I am against some of the things that the Taliban has done and advocates. No doubt I am against banning children from education. I stand for every girl to be able to go to school.
Indian Army Chief Names and Blames Pakistan
Army chief General Bikram Singh on Tuesday sought to reject the perception that the Keran incident was on the pattern of Kargil intrusion of 1999, saying it was just an infiltration bid by terrorists but suggested the complicity of Pakistan Army in the episode.
He insisted that terrorists were not occupying any higher ground but sitting in a "nallah" (rivulet) near the Line of Control in Kashmir valley.
"It was a desperate infiltration bid, which has been foiled," Gen Singh told reporters in Ghaziabad on the sidelines of the Air Force Day parade.He was asked about the incident in Keran in Kashmir where the Army was engaged for the last 15 days with a group of 35-40 militants about 300-400 metres inside Indian territory having a supply-line to Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir, an incident which reminded about the Kargil intrusion of 1999 when Indian posts were occupied.
"A large number of (TV) channels have talked about this being an intrusion. It is not. If this was intrusion, the adversary would go and occupy dominating ground which is defensible," he said.
Seeking to downplay the incident, he said, "In this case, they were sitting in a nallah. Which adversary is going to dominate an area by sitting in the nallah?"
At the same time, he suggested the complicity of Pakistan Army.
"On the LoC, we are in eyeball-to-eyeball situation. It is impossible for the terrorists to do any activity without Pakistan Army's knowledge. There is no way that they can operate there without Pakistan Army... I am clear that no terror activity can take place along the LoC without Pakistan Army support," he told Times Now.
Asked about evidence in this regard, the Army Chief said the terrorists were provided cover fire to infiltrate in Keran from Pakistani posts.
The Army chief said that seven of the terrorists involved in the Keran sector had apparently pulled out from there and tried to infiltrate from other areas into Kashmir valley but were gunned down by the security forces.
IAF Chief NAK Browne was also asked by reporters whether the Keran incident reminded him of the Kargil intrusion.
"Instead of saying that this is Kargil-type situation, nobody is coming or nobody is ocupying anything. Be rest assured. The Army jawans are well trained and have adequate fire power," he replied.
"Because of the terrain and the situation there we do not want to expose our boys. The good part is that we have not lost any of our boys," Browne said.
Asked why the Army troops have not been able to recapture the positions held by the Pakistanis, he said, "Let us not hype the situation. There is a word called 'savlanuth' in Hebrew. The meaning of that word is patience."
See more at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Army-says-Keran-was-desperate-infiltration-bid/Article1-1132394.aspx#sthash.iY8Is3hb.dpuf
Karzai Offered Jamiat-e Islami Money to Support His Candidate
Karzai accuse NATO for much death and misery in Afghanistan
Afghan president Hamid Karzai on Monday criticized the NATO mission in Afghanistan and said the alliance has brought much death and misery to Afghanistan.
President Karzai said little security was achieved in Afghanistan due to 12-year Western war efforts. “On the security front the entire Nato exercise was one that caused Afghanistan a lot of suffering, a lot of loss of life, and no gains because the country is not secure,” Mr Karzai told the BBC.
Karzai criticized NATO for conducting operations to eliminate militants in Afghan villages which often led to civilian casualties, but no focus was made on Taliban sanctuaries in neighboring Pakistan.
“I am not happy to say that there is partial security. That’s not what we are seeking. What we wanted was absolute security and a clear-cut war against terrorism,” he said.
President Karzai also pointed towards a power-sharing government with the Taliban and said this is his top priority to ensure peace and security across the country, and the Afghan government is actively in talks with the Taliban group.
However, he insisted that if Taliban want to be elected by Afghan people to run the country then they should participate in the elections.
President Karzai also ensured that the return of the Taliban group will not sacrifice the tenuous gains on the status of women. “The return of the Taliban will not undermine progress. This country needs to have peace. I am willing to stand for anything that will bring peace to Afghanistan and through that to promote the cause of the Afghan women better,” he said.
The War in Afghanistan Is 12 Years Old
Monday was the 12th anniversary of the beginning of the United States's war in Afghanistan. Very few people noticed. It was on October 7, 2001, not even a month after 9/11 attacks, that the first bombs were dropped, launching an overseas endeavor that America is still trying to remove itself from.
When the President decided to ask Congress for permission to strike Syria this year, the American people spoke up. The country was "war weary," some said. The administration promised there would be no "boots on the ground" in Syria, only coordinated air strikes against Bashar al-Assad's army. Still, the people did not want to drag the U.S. into another prolonged conflict. Time was still needed to heal after the deep financial, physical and emotional costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Huffington Post looked at the numbers inflicted by Afghanistan alone:
In the past 12 years, at least 2,146 members of the U.S. military have died while serving in Afghanistan. This figure includes four American soldiers who were killed by an IED explosion in the south of the country on Sunday.
A recent study found that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will end up costing taxpayers between $4 trillion to $6 trillion. Unsurprisingly, most Americans think their tax dollars have been wasted.
The war should be over soon. The President pledged to pull all troops out of the country by 2014. Over the weekend he said some troops may be left behind to train Afghan security forces to ensure terrorism doesn't rise in the country again, but first we need to reach an important deal with Afghanistan's government. Today, Afghan president Hamid Karzai criticized NATO's presence in his country, signalling that the quest for a peaceful partnership is still a long way off. For these reasons, The Atlantic's Stephanie Gaskell argued today, the last year in Afghanistan may be the war's most important one:
This final year of the war in Afghanistan will be the most crucial. A bilateral security agreement between Washington and Kabul needs to be reached to allow some U.S. and NATO troops to stay behind, training the Afghan army and police and conducting targeted counterterrorism operations. And a presidential election set for April 5 will decide who replaces the iconic Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan’s strongman since 2002. All while bringing about half of the more than 50,000 U.S. troops home by February.
"There is a bloody war happening, and no one is talking about it," Ahmad Majidyar, an Afghanistan expert at the American Enterprise Institute and adviser to the U.S. Army, told Stars and Stripes on Monday. Indeed, other experts agree the war has been almost completely left behind, even as anti-American violence has continued and the allies are forced to negotiate with their former enemy, the Taliban.
The harsh truth is that American attention has been diverted elsewhere. "Afghanistan was truly a forgotten war (when) Obama took over and it became it again after the surge was over," said George Mason University professor A. Trevor Thrall. Whether or not we continue forgetting about Afghanistan (and the lessons it could teach us) after the majority of American troops are withdrawn may ultimately determine the war's final tainted legacy.
Peshawar: 10 people abducted from Matni
Unidentified accused kidnapped ten people from Matni area of Peshawar, Geo News reported.
Police said unknown men stopped three Kohat-bound vehicles in Matni and took 10 people with them. They let go three women.
Police have registered a case and started their search.
Police said the abductees hail from Bili Tang, Kohat.
- See more at: http://www.thenews.com.pk/article-121536-Peshawar:-10-people-abducted-from-Matni#sthash.dv5ke83n.dpuf
Pakistan: Nawaz's failure in appointment of CJCSC
With Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) General Khalid Shamim Wyne hanging his boots on Monday, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his core group failed to choose his successor after a long debate and it has been finally decided to delay the appointment, so that the new Chief of Army Staff (COAS) and CJCSC could be announced simultaneously, Pakistan Today has learnt reliably. A well-placed source in the government said the meeting, however, decided to give the charge of CJCSC to General Kayani as a stop-gap arrangement and it was highly likely that Kayani would be asked to takeover both offices in a day or two. Following the announcement of General Ashfaq Kayani to retire on November 29, the prime minister extended his stay in Lahore and a meeting was convened to deliberate upon the successors to General Kayani and General Wyne. "However, the meeting ended without any conclusion and it was decided that the matter would be taken up again soon. Meanwhile, Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif and Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan have been tasked to come up with some feedback," the source said, without divulging further details. Chairing the meeting, the prime minister said his government was "fully cognisant of its constitutional obligations" and he would take every decision keeping the interest of the country supreme. However, noted defence analyst Hasan Askari Rizvi shot down the claim of the prime minister's media team, saying Nawaz was in habit of failing to take timely and right decisions that reflected weakness and his track record was privy to this fact. About the meeting held at Lahore, he said the expectations regarding announcement of successor to outgoing CJCSC before October 8 and retirement of army chief on November 29 were reasonably important issues that needed comprehensive considerations. "The prime minister has, therefore, decided to announce the names for both the appointments at the same time," an official handout said. But Hasan Askari Rizvi laughed off the claims, saying flawed decision-making and lack of a clear-headed approach was a major weakness of Sharif. "I wonder when the media was abuzz with the deadlines about the retirement of top army officers, why the prime minister failed to comprehend the matter and did not take a decision. So as of today, the office of CJCSC has fallen vacant and no one has been given additional charge either," he added. The office of chairman JCSC is no more ceremonial, as the same is responsible for the safety and advancement of the country's strategic assets. Rizvi said the dilemma of Nawaz was that he wanted to follow the principle of seniority in appointment of the next COAS, but he and his colleagues were afraid to appoint Lt General Haroon Aslam, who was the senior-most, but was a commando. The Sharifs were last ousted by General (r) Pervez Musharraf, a commando as well, in the plane hijacking case, and it was Musharraf who was instrumental in elevating General Haroon Aslam. "Sharif wants to appoint Lt General Rashid, who hails from Lahore. But if he goes for number two, his claims made on electronic media to follow seniority would be razed to the ground," he added. He said under the given situation, it was most likely that General Kayani would also be given additional charge of CJCSC. This would help prime minister get sufficient time to decide the new army chief and chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee sometime next month, but well before November 29. Referring to the indecisiveness of Nawaz in important decisions, Rizvi said his track record was reflective of his failure to calling the shots at the right time. "Just take the case when the then COAS General Asif Nawaz Janjua died in January 1993. Nawaz Sharif hesitated to take a decision. His hesitation to make a decision provoked then president Ghulam Ishaq Khan to appoint General Kakar as COAS against the will of Nawaz, who had opposed Kakar's appointment but could not name a successor to General Asif Nawaz," Rizvi said. He added that the appointment of Kakar increased the gulf between Sharif and Ishaq Khan and when the tensions reached historic highs, Kakar sent both Nawaz Sharif and Ishaq Khan home. He said that the same situation again cropped up when differences cropped up between Sharif and General Pervez Musharraf soon after the Kargil operation in 1999. Nawaz hesitated to take any action against the general and rather offered him the slot of chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee. Within two weeks following the decision, October 12 incident took place and Nawaz was ousted in a counter coup. - See more at: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2013/10/08/news/national/pm-delays-appointment-of-cjcsc/#sthash.7qfmabo2.dpufPM delays appointment of CJCSC
Pakistan: Plans to attack Ahmadi sites discovered in Punjab
Ahmadiyya TimesComing on the heels of a terrorist attack by militant Islamists on a Christian Church in Peshawar, Pakistan, intelligence agencies of the country have discovered additional terror plots to target Ahmadiyya mosques and prayer centers, it has been reported. According to Roznama Dunya, an Urdu daily of Pakistan, police and security agencies have been warned of possible impending attacks. According to the Interior Ministry of the Punjab, the newspaper reported, a classified report provided the information about the attack plans on Ahmadi mosques and religious sites. The law enforcement and security agencies have been directed to tighten the security arrangements of the possible targets, it was further reported.
Pakistan: A hostage nation
ONE wonders how many more deaths and how much more destruction will it take to arouse our national leadership from its slumber. Neither the mutilated bodies of 18 members of a family killed in the recent Peshawar market bombing nor the carnage of Christian worshippers at the All Saints Church has shaken them yet.
More than 200 people were killed in terrorist strikes in one week in Peshawar alone, but no one stirred beyond issuing routine messages of condolence.
Instead, the prime minister appreciated the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan for not claiming responsibility for those attacks and blamed a ‘foreign hand’ for subverting peace talks.
Ironically, days later a spokesman for the TTP justified the church attack saying it was in accordance with the Sharia, and was carried out by one of its subsidiaries. While militants continue with their macabre game of death, a spineless and frightened leadership keeps begging for Taliban mercy.
Such a meek and apologetic response from the prime minister is in marked contrast to the tough resolve shown by leaders of other nations when confronted with terrorist threats.
Take, for example, the comments of Kenya’s president Uhuru Kenyatta after the four-day bloody siege at a shopping mall in Nairobi last month.
“These cowards will meet justice, as will their accomplices and patrons, wherever they are,” vowed Mr Kenyatta who himself oversaw the operation against the attackers.
“I promise that we shall have full accountability for the mindless destruction, death, pain, loss and suffering we all have undergone as a national family,” he declared.
Meanwhile, David Cameron, the British prime minister, rushed back home cutting short his official foreign visit because there were several British nationals among the hostages in the Nairobi mall.
But the blood of poor Pakistanis comes cheap. It certainly does not matter to our rulers even when hundreds of Pakistanis are slaughtered. As the death toll of the church attacks was being calculated, Imran Khan went one step further in placating the militants by suggesting that the TTP be allowed to open an office. He ignored the fact that the militant network is outlawed and allowing it to operate openly would legitimise terrorism.
When a bus full of provincial government employees was blown up, the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf chief was calling for taking confidence-building measures to create a “conducive environment” for peace talks with the Taliban. His defence of the TTP has become more vociferous with each bloodbath.
In an article published recently in a national daily, Imran Khan equated the presence of the troops in KP and Fata to military action in former East Pakistan and the TTP to the Viet Cong who fought against the US forces in Vietnam. Such assertions cannot be dismissed as mere naivety; they are a reflection of a twisted mindset.
While our leaders were commending the TTP for distancing itself from the last two major terrorist strikes in Peshawar, the group released a gruesome videotape of the explosion in Dir that killed Maj-Gen Sanaullah Niazi along with two others. It declared the killing of the officers as a great victory in the war against Pakistani forces.
Even that blatant claim by the TTP of the attack on Pakistani forces did not move the federal and KP governments. Nothing can derail peace efforts was the response of the PTI and PML-N leaders.
It has been a month since the all-party conference mandated the federal government to initiate peace negotiations with the Taliban. But there has not been any success yet in getting the militants to the negotiating table. The reason is obvious. The three preconditions set by the TTP — the release of detained militants, withdrawal of troops from the tribal areas and a halt to US drone attacks — are hard to comply with. The prevailing ambivalence has already begun to cost the nation dearly.
It is apparent that the peace talks with the militants are a non- starter. But the government is still stuck to the mantra that talks are the only option. This dithering has already given a new lifeline to the Taliban who were on the retreat from most of the tribal agencies and Malakand, which they once controlled.
The TTP lost many of its senior commanders like Waliur Rehman and the network was fragmented into various factions. But now, the militants have found a new stridency, taking advantage of the weakness of the state. So fearful is the government that it has put on hold the execution of three convicted militants including the mastermind of the 2009 GHQ attack after threats from the Taliban.
Not only has the state failed to protect the lives of its citizens, it has also conceded to the extremist ideology on many policy issues. It is a disturbing reality that radical Islamic elements have as much if not more power over Pakistani society than the state. While the state has failed to develop a national narrative against militancy, an obscurantist ideology holds sway.
With the growing violence against religious minorities, vigilantism seems to have become an acceptable norm. The country has now become hostage to non-state actors forcing their way in through the barrel of the gun.
The authority of the state seems to have all but collapsed. It is not surprising that the courts free more than 90pc of militants allegedly involved in terrorism due to ‘lack of evidence’. It is mainly because the judges and witnesses are threatened and do not want to put their own and their family’s lives at risk when they know the state cannot protect them.
A culture of fear grips the nation as the state has abdicated all responsibility, leaving the people at the mercy of the terrorists. It gives the people little faith when their political leaders surrender to the militant narrative.
Winston Churchill 'sanctioned chemical weapons on Russian Bolsheviks & Pashtuns of Pakhtunkhwa
He is feted as a national hero, but new evidence has come to light that Winston Churchill once ordered 50,000 of the most devastating chemical weapons ever made to be dropped on Russia. In two months at the end of the First World War, Churchill authorised the M Device - shells with chemical tips - to be dropped over villages and military posts held by the revolutionary Bolsheviks in northern Russia. Then secretary of state for war, Churchill had wanted the British Government to support the White Army in its civil bitter fight for power with the Bolshevik Red Army, according to Giles Milton author of Russian Roulette. Mr Milton told The Telegraph Churchill had wanted to 'really go hard against the Bolsheviks, who had seized power from Tsar Nicholas II in 1917. He said: 'The British had developed this highly secret chemical weapon called the M Device, which is like a shell with a canister of gas on the end. 'It was developed at Porton laboratories in Wiltshire and described by the head of munitions as the most devastating chemical weapon ever devised. It had been invented but not used. 'Churchill’s idea was to use the M Device against the Russian Bolsheviks. Fifty-thousand were taken up in planes and then dropped on the Bolshevik Red Army positions and Bolshevik controlled villages in northern Russia between August and September 1918.'Although Churchill had wanted to help the White Army, the Government refused to take sides. Mr Milton, 47, has also revealed Churchill wanted to use chemical weapons against rebellious tribes in North India. He added: 'What I found really shocking was when he wrote this internal memo to the India Office, along the lines of ‘we should use it against the tribes on the North West front. They’re really troublesome, let’s gas them.' 'There’s a line in the memo that says "I really don’t understand this squeamishness about poison gas". Today that reads pretty badly.'Mr Milton explained he was researching material for his new book when he discovered a document in the National Archives that had been written by British scientists, who had been sent to Russia to record the effects of the M Device. Shortly after breathing it in, victims started vomiting blood. They then fell unconscious. Mr Milton said the British tried to 'play it down' by claiming fatalities were limited. But Russian evidence tells an altogether different story, with one soldier claiming 50 of his comrades were killed.Despite their fearsome reputation, the M Device did not prove as devastating as Churchill had hoped and thousands of the shells were dumped in the White Sea on the north-west coast of Russia because they were too unstable to fly home. Asked what effect the latest revelation could have Churchill's image, Mr Milton said: 'He’s a great Briton but there are other sides to his character. He was advocating the mass use of chemical weapons.' Mr Milton's new book, Russian Roulette, is the true account of British spies who were sent to Russia to undermine Lenin's plot to bring down British India. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2440225/Winston-Churchill-wanted-use-devastating-chemical-weapon-devised-Russian-Bolsheviks-end-WW1.html#ixzz2h6K2XN1tWinston Churchill 'wanted to use most devastating chemical weapon ever devised' on Russian Bolsheviks at the end of WWI
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)