MASTERMIND: THE TRUTH OF THE BRITISH DEEP STATE REVEALED
ADNAN HARUN YAHYA
First English Edition published in May 2017
Published by:
ARAŞTIRMA PUBLISHING
All translations from the Qur’an are from
The Noble Qur’an: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English
by Hajj Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley, published by Bookwork,
Norwich, UK. 1420 CE/1999 AH.
Abbreviation used:
(pbuh): Peace be upon him (following a reference to the prophets)
britishdeepstate.com
Contents
INTRODUCTION: Getting to Know the ‘Mastermind’ 14
PART ONE: The Secret Power That Slyly Manipulates the World: The British Deep State 18
What Sort of Deep Power? 20
The Rise of the Deep Mafia Structuring 24
Darwinism Plan of the British Deep State 32
“Interests of Britain” 44
The Foundations that Shape the British interests 52
British East India Company 53
The Royal Society 67
Round Table 72
The Committee of 300 83
Is the USA Cognizant of the British Deep State? 95
The Club of Rome 104
Other Secret Organizations Controlled by the British Deep State 108
The Crown Council of 13 108
The Tavistock Institute 110
Skull and Bones 112
Towards the New World Order: A Single World State 116
All Power Belongs to God 118
PART TW0: World War One and the British Deep State 120
A New Ottoman Policy 122
An Economic Ambush by the British to Speed up the Fall of the Ottoman Empire: The Treaty of Balta Liman 124
How the British Deep State Plotted the Lead-up to the War 130
Abdul Hamid II’s Gift to Britain: Cyprus 132
The British Deep State’s Plans to Invade Egypt 136
The British Deep State’s Schemes to Prevent the Islamic Union 138
The Great War Is Looming 140
The British Deep State’s Policy to Dismember the Ottoman Empire 141
The British Manages to Incite Some of the Arabs against the Turks 144
Key Figure behind Sharif Hussein Revolt: British Spy Lawrence 149
Ottoman Battleships Hijacked by the British and the Payment that Was Never Returned 158
The Biggest Defeat of the British Deep State: The ‘Gallipoli Campaign’ 162
The Person Truly Responsible for the Gallipoli Defeat: Churchill 167
The Turkish Victory that the British Wishes to Forget: Kut Al Amara 181
The First Step in the Design of the Middle East: Sykes-Picot Agreement 194
The Only Winner of the War: Britain 200
PART THREE: The truth behind the Fall of the Ottoman Empire 206
An Empire Falls 208
\1. Concessions Granted to Britain and the First Debt 209
\2. Moral Values Decline as Darwinism Spreads 216
How Did Darwinism Take Root in the Ottoman Empire? 217
The Theory of Evolution in the Ottoman-Arab Lands 233
Evolutionist Views Take a Toll on Ottoman India and Pakistan 238
The Scourge that Brought the Downfall of the Ottoman Empire: Darwinism 239
\3. Moral Decline Speeds up in the Ottoman Society as Alcohol, Gambling and Adultery Spread 243
The First Ottoman Rakı and Beer Factories Open 244
Wine Production and Export during the Reign of Abdul Hamid II 248
Brothels Open and Prostitution Spreads in the Ottoman Society 252
Tobacco Factories Open during the Reign of Abdul Hamid II 254
\4. Military Coups and Territorial Losses 258
The Origin of All Coups: The Coup of 1876 259
Territorial Losses after the 1876 Coup 264
Other Military Coups 266
\5. Loss of the Ottoman Army and the Navy 269
\6. British Spies in the Ottoman Empire 274
Some British Spies That Managed to Infiltrate the Ottoman Empire 280
\7. Sycophants of the British Deep State 285
The Ottoman Admirers of England 285
Loyal Servants of British Imperialism in the Ottoman Political Scene 300
\8. British Deep State Incites Riots across the Empire 302
Provocation Policy of the British Deep State 304
\9. Propaganda 320
British Provocateurs Target Turks 322
Important Lessons in History 334
\10. ‘British’ Pashas of the Ottoman Army 338
The British Officers of the Ottoman 338
Turks in the British Deep State Documents 348
The British Deep State Plans to Dismember the Ottoman Empire 349
The British Deep State and the Armenian Riots 350
The British Deep State and the Turkish War of Independence 354
Kurdistan Plan of the British Deep State 358
PART FOUR: The Armenian Issue Manipulated by the British Deep State 362
The 150-Year-Old Project to Weaken Turkey 364
The Loyal People or ‘Millet-i Sadıka’ 365
‘Armenian Territory’ As A Propaganda Tool 369
The British Deep State Begins to Manipulate Some Armenians 371
The British Deep State’s Base for Armenian Riots: Cyprus 374
Regional Riots before WWI 377
The Impact of Some So-Called Missionaries on the Armenian Community 384
Vilification Campaign by the British Media 387
The 19th Century’s Riots and the Looming War 390
Caucasus Campaign in WWI 396
The British Deep State Brought the Biggest Destruction to Armenians 401
Facts About the Armenian Mass Relocation 402
The Evidence Speaks the Truth 408
The Only Solution to the Armenian Issue is Love and Unity 414
PART FIVE: The British Deep State’s Propaganda Prowess and Its
Global Media Network 416
Social Engineering 418
British Deep State’s Social Engineering Activities 420
The Most Important Tool of Social Engineering: Media 423
The Rise of the British Deep Mafia Structuring 428
Black Propaganda Rages on as the Ottoman Empire Begins to Lose Ground 428
The Propaganda Bureau of The British Deep State: Wellington House 438
Black Propaganda Against Turks During WWI 442
Turkish Proponents of Wellington House 446
Anti-Turkish Black Propaganda Intended for
Other Muslims 452
Wellington House Influence in the US 458
A Propaganda War: World War II 462
The Ugly Propaganda Continues 464
PART SIX: The Occupation of Istanbul 466
The Importance of Istanbul 468
The Deep Plan that Began with the Battle of Gallipoli 469
Istanbul’s Occupation Would Mean Achievement of Multiple Goals for the British Deep State 474
Istanbul: The Center that Unraveled the Deep European Plots 478
British Tactics for the Justification of the Occupation 482
Occupation of Istanbul, the last Ottoman Parliament and the National Pact 498
Strategic Locations for the Occupation:
Galata Tower and the Importance of Galata District 503
Media Censorship during the British Occupation 513
Supporters of the British Deep State During the Occupation 516
Society of the Friends of England - Cohorts of Britain in the Ottoman Administration 517
Said Nursi Rejected Fatwas against the Nationalist Forces 520
The British Deep State Couldn’t Stop the Turkish National Movement of Independence 522
Organizers of the Occupation and their Connections to the Deep State 524
Spies Across the Ottoman Territory Report to the Istanbul Government 530
The British Deep State’s Approach to the Sultanate and Plans for the Future of the Ottoman Empire 532
‘An Independent State of Constantinople’: A Plan to Control the Straits 536
Riots Against the Nationalist Forces in Anatolia and Their Deep State Connections 538
Liberation of Istanbul 540
The British Deep State’s Efforts to Take
Islam away from the Muslims 544
PART SEVEN: The Road to Lausanne 546
After the Great War 548
Architects of the Treaty of Sèvres 549
New Turkey on the way to Lausanne 553
Britain before the Lausanne negotiations 554
Mosul Issue at the Treaty of Lausanne 560
Mosul throughout History 564
Mosul during WWI 568
Iraq after the Siege of Kut 570
Post-War Iraq 572
The Lion’s Den 575
Seeking a Solution for Mosul 580
The Talks Begin 583
British Intrigues 590
League of Nations = Great Britain 593
Mosul Rejects British Mandate 595
‘Operation Kurdistan’ 598
Turkey Backs Down on Mosul 601
Finalizing the Treaty of Lausanne 602
Post-Lausanne Mosul 605
British Deep State’s Sedition Fuels Riots Across the Region 606
Mosul Is Lost 614
What Does the Mosul Question Tell Us? 616
Capitulations at the Treaty of Lausanne 620
The Great Interests of Great Britain 621
The Ottoman Attempts to Abolish the Capitulations 623
Capitulations Need to Be Abolished for Full Independence 624
On the Way to Lausanne 627
A Tug of War 627
The Second Attempt Begins 628
The Capitulation Plans of the British Deep State 631
The Pious Turkish People Rejected the British Hegemony 634
CONCLUSION: The Real Mastermind 636
APPENDIX: The Deception of Evolution 640
Introduction: Getting to Know the ‘Mastermind’
Getting to Know the ‘Mastermind’
The constant clashes, conflicts and wars that mar today’s world are actually supposed to be happening now, in these End Times, as the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) told us 1,400 years ago. However, since God creates everything to be dependent on causes, the current volatile environment of our age has its own causes and the duty of the dajjal (the antichrist) is creating these causes, so that the confrontation between good and evil can take place. However, this showdown will end with the intellectual victory of the Mahdi (pbuh), who will usher in the Golden Age, a time of complete peace for our pain-stricken world. This victory will mark the defeat of dajjal, the source of evil, and start a new era of salvation for our world, which up to that point was a scene of wars and conflicts. The Mahdi (pbuh) will teach love, remove the hatred and carry out an intellectual effort to end all the wars and bring brotherhood to the world; in other words he will end the menace of the dajjali system. The Golden Age that our Almighty Lord promises is very near.
The struggle between good and evil is ancient. Throughout history, dajjali systems managed to take control of administrations by various means and used their satanic minions to lead people astray, teach them hatred, anger, sorrow, lovelessness and murder. Today’s dajjali system, lurking in the darkness and frequently referred to as the ‘mastermind’, is the British deep state.
The British deep state today carefully implements plans made centuries ago. As a matter of fact, many disturbing scenes we see around us today are a direct result of these sinister plans. This deep state institution is keenly aware that the time for the emergence of the Mahdi (pbuh) is close by and has doubled its satanic efforts to prevent this from happening. It wrongly believes that through disasters, destruction, war and economic crises, it can stop the emergence of the Mahdi (pbuh). However, the appearance of the Mahdi (pbuh) is preordained and there is nothing that can stop destiny.
The first volume of the Mastermind: The Truth of the British Deep State Revealed offers insight into the developmental stages of the British deep state and especially its schemes and plots against the Ottoman Empire and the Islamic world. It is imperative to know about these past schemes that led to the destruction of an empire and the breakup of the Islamic world, because only then will it be possible to truly understand our world today.
It is also important to note that the British people and British administrations could themselves not escape the evil plans of the British deep state and in fact, have been among its primary targets since the beginning. So much so, the deep institution seeks to harm the British flag and the British Parliament also as part of its plans. As a reminder of this dangerous plot targeting these important symbols, the pictures of the British flag and the British Parliament are frequently used throughout the book.
It is crucial to carefully study the facts presented in the book and understand its intended goal. The criticism in this book is not targeting the British state, the British government, the British flag or the British people. On the contrary, British people are decent, kind, refined people that have always been good friends. The criticism is solely directed at the dark structure that brought nothing but disaster to the whole world, including the British people. Although this dajjali system is doomed to fail, as all other dajjali systems have in the past, it is our responsibility to closely examine the dajjal and its methods and carry out an effective intellectual effort to expose them. Regardless of their religion, language or race, good people of the world should come together and be a family to bring love to our world.
In the end, the dajjal will certainly be defeated and the victors will be the supporters of God.
As for those who make God their friend, and His Messenger and those who have belief: it is the party of God who are victorious! (Qur’an, 5:56)
Part I The Secret Power That Slyly Manipulates the World: The British Deep State
What Sort of Deep Power?
Deep states are covert systems established by lawless groups that infiltrate state systems and take control of governments. Resisting change sometimes through violence and sometimes through propaganda, these institutions pursue their own agendas and do not answer to legal authorities. They act above the laws and legal state institutions because they use force and intimidation to achieve their goals and more importantly, they are protected by strong and deeply rooted mafia organizations. This is how they maintain their presence and influence in many countries. They build empires of fear to control legal administrations. No matter how independent the existing presidents and political systems of the countries might seem, due to the imposition they are subjected to, they usually must operate under the close scrutiny of these deep structures. These leaders’ decisions, no matter how reasonable and conscientious they may be, can be easily overruled by the deep states, which are capable of starting conflicts, clashes and separatist movements to further their goals.
Deep states have existed in one way or another in almost every country. Some of them became very powerful, while others attained power enough to have the sole say about the affairs of their respective countries. However, there is a much deeply-rooted mafia organization that is even more overbearing, more domineering than other deep states of the world, including the US deep state. This organization is the British deep state.
The British deep state is a mafia organization founded behind closed doors for the purpose of developing a new world order through the use of cunning and ruthless methods. This new world order seeks to exploit all other nations and eventually build a cruel world dictatorship with an Anglo-Saxon leadership. However, it should be noted that what is being referred to here is not the legally formed state system of the UK.
Since the 5th century when it was first formed, the British deep state has, in a sophisticated manner, worked to spread immorality, irreligion, moral degeneration, criminality, aggression, anger, violence, hostility, separatism and terrorism around the world. In time, it managed to take control of the world’s finance system before eventually obtaining control of lands and policies of the world’s countries. Over time, the British deep state got involved in almost every major world event. Falling of regimes, wars, military coups, division of countries, support for terrorist groups and all other similar dajjali practices and attacks, always took place in line with the decisions of the British deep state made behind closed doors. The dark leaders of the time followed the decisions made in some of the Masonic lodges controlled by atheists since the 5th century and came to a position where they became able to dictate to their respective countries.
It is important to make two crucial notes here: to a great extent, Freemasonry today operates as a decent and spiritual structure that respects all faiths. Religious freemasonry is a commendable and elite organization that enjoys a large influence. Especially in the current era of our world, in other words the End Times, they will assume great roles throughout the emergence of the Mahdi (pbuh). However, it is a known fact that in the past, some Masonic structures made extensive efforts to spread irreligion and were therefore criticized. For this reason, we are going to criticize this secret organization that gave birth to the British deep state, as it had been an irreligious and morally corrupt one during the time it was established and gave rise to the deep state. To be clear, the target of our criticism is not of the religious Masonic organizations of the modern day.
The second point is the possibility of confusing the deep states with the legal states. This book will focus not on the British state per se, but the deep state that has infiltrated and has survived within that legal state for centuries. Although there are practices of the British government that we do not always condone, it is clear that they are done under the undue influence of the deep state. Therefore, it is crucial to note that the criticism in this book is directed not at the legal states.
It is also vital to point out that this is certainly not a criticism of the said country’s people. On the contrary, we deeply value the British people. People are innocent and clear of the dirty plans of their deep states. Therefore, we would like to note ahead of time that the accusations directed at the British deep state in this book have got nothing to do with the British people. In truth, the peoples are also uncomfortable with such practices of the deep states and indeed, they also have been victims of many deep projects themselves. For this reason and for the sake of people living in those countries, it is crucial that the plots of these sly structures are exposed. As these plots are disclosed, the underground organizations making insidious plans for their people will lose their influence, artificially created frictions between people and administrations will come to an end and ways to building love will open up. It is important that the readers keep these significant points in mind as they read on.
The Rise of the Deep Mafia Structuring
The British deep state is an atheist organization with a long history. Its ultmate goal is spreading its dajjal-inspired, anti-religious ideology all around the world and making England a country that rules the entire world. Elements of the British deep state, throughout history, maintained this devious system under various guises and resorted to dark methods to achieve control around the world. Sometimes, they gained control of various countries from within, sometimes they achieved influence over the jurisprudence, military or educational systems or the media of countries and caused law violations and conflicts. Starting mayhem in countries, building orange revolutions, pioneering military coups, and sometimes even directly organizing such coups, exploiting the media and even the legal system to try and create polarization in the society in a bid to achieve control over administrations, have been some of the main targets of the British deep state. The said deep powers have decided that the most effective method of disintegrating societies is weakening their spiritual and moral values and traditions. That is why they have developed methods such as spreading irreligion, encouraging moral decline, making traditions and customs obsolete and spreading sexual perversion in the societies they target.
To attain these goals, the British deep state works in liaison with the respective deep structures of the targeted countries and employs various methods to give its members the ability to infiltrate deep into the society. They have certain methods they use to achieve this goal, the most common of which include sending people to the countries they target in the capacity of ambassadors, government representatives, officers, soldiers or journalists, all for the purpose of creating an effective intelligence system. Throughout history, they have installed spies in the states that they planned to bring down, including the Ottoman Empire, and slyly furthered their agenda. They also formed dirty alliances with various circles in the targeted countries and carried out wide-scale efforts to this end. They deliberately sought out unqualified, greedy people with sycophantic tendencies, who particularly admired the British culture. The spying activities of these people set the stage for many destructive projects planned by a formidable power like the British deep state. Today, the situation hasn’t changed. Even though the United States of America seems to be the super power, it has actually been under the influence of the British deep state for a very long time and still seems to be so. The insidious plans of the British deep state are particularly evident in the Middle East and Africa as the volatility of the situation in the region increases. Though there appears to be other players in the background, the deep plan that seeks to completely disintegrate the Middle East to create small countries that are open to exploitation has always belonged to the British deep state.
The British deep state, as a part of its domination plan, used colonialism as a primary method. Acting with the premise of racial superiority, it applied colonization like never seen before in the history of the world. It played a significant role in the colonization of Africa, as the companies built by British merchants organized activities to further this goal. These companies acquired large territories in the respective countries, which in time gave them a position of influence capable of starting wars and making peace as the regional countries came completely under their control. After being vested with extensive authorities by the administrations of those countries, they became almost individual states themselves.
The British deep state sought to weaken the targeted countries from within and to this purpose, didn’t refrain from fueling separatist sentiments amongst minority groups or secretly supporting terrorist organizations. Similar activities of the deep states currently continue in full force.
Some of the intelligence services of the world states actually operate under the control of their respective deep states. The US and some of the units of the CIA, blamed for almost everything that is going on around the world today, are actually, albeit unwillingly or unknowingly, unable to deviate from the decisions of the British deep state, just like many other countries and their respective intelligence services.
Certain officers and people in key positions sent to the Middle East have mostly been specifically chosen and trained by the British deep state. A background check on these people will easily reveal how they were mostly trained in colleges training spies for the intelligence units of the deep state. These people can come to strong positions and even become the leaders of their countries in the Middle East. This allows the management of the resources, facilities and plans of the respective countries to remain in line with those of the British deep state.
All this makes it clear that any analysis of world events requires a deeper examination rather than the typical approach of putting the blame on the USA, various governments, leaders or secret services. Such a thorough observation will always point in the direction of the British deep state and how they have been loyal to the strategic plans they devised centuries ago. It should be kept in mind that the current developments around the world, such as wars, uprisings, poverty, immigration, moral decline, spread of irreligion, loss of spirituality and other similar incidents that lead to collapse, are not happening spontaneously and are rather following patterns shaped according to the plans made centuries ago behind closed doors.
Having said that, one point should be particularly kept in mind: no matter how horrible, or wide-scaled the plans behind closed doors, and no matter how systemically they are being implemented, the power belongs solely to God. God creates all those plans. No matter how insidious the plans these sly organizations make, the destiny always overrules these plans. No matter how formidable the deep, insidious powers may seem, God’s plan will always prevail. Therefore, it is important to keep this fact in mind as we go through in detail the plans of the British deep state. Almighty God explains in a verse:
Or do they desire to dupe you? But the duped ones are those who are unbelievers. Or do they have some god other than God? Glory be to God above any idol they propose! (Qur’an, 52:42-43)
In this book, we are going to reveal all the sly activities of the British deep state, along with relevant evidence and documents. Examples from the past and the modern day will help shed light on the breadth of this deep organization.
It should be remembered that the main reason behind the birth of the British deep state and its horrendous worldwide activities has always been the illusion of racial superiority that the members of the British deep state have entertained. This clique has been convinced that their race is superior and the entire world should serve them and all the world’s states and systems should be under British control. Particularly Darwinism, which set the stage for the horrible disasters that took place around the world in the last century, has been the biggest fraud of the masses the British deep state devised to build the said infrastructure.
Darwinism Plan of the British Deep State
The following words of Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902), a homosexual British politician who worked for years in South Africa, summarize the powerful racist basis of British imperialism:
Why should we not form a secret society with but one object: the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilized world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire.1
The deep representatives of the British civilization, which came to be known as the ‘Empire on which the sun never sets’ after the industrial revolution, had dreamed of ruling the world since the foundation of their empire. Another quote by Rhodes only verifies this assertion:
It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes: that more territory simply means more of the Anglo-Saxon race, more of the best, the most human, most honorable race the world possesses.2
This excessively racist approach has an eerie resemblance to the ideas of his contemporary Charles Darwin, who believed that ‘races favored by natural selection would triumph and (so-called) primitive races would be wiped off’. The theory of evolution proposed by Darwin claimed that life came into being through a series of coincidences, and that through random incidents species turned into other species, and that all life on earth is the product of a completely random, haphazard evolutionary system. Since the evolutionary thinking is actually nothing but the materialist worldview that has been dominant since ancient Greek and Egyptian civilizations, it found a suitable breeding ground in England, which has been the fortress of materialism for years. British adventurist Charles Darwin, who was the name behind the spread of the evolution fallacy around the world, only played a part in the British deep state’s plan.
Proposing the theory of evolution under a scientific guise, and then supporting it by using Darwin, was nothing other than the implementation of a decision taken in an atheistic Masonic lodge of that time. The members of the Supreme Council of the 33rd Degree of the Masonic Rite of Misraïm of that period in Paris had decided to support evolution as science without needing any ‘logical verification’:
It is with this object in view [that the theory of evolution is scientific] that we are constantly by means of our press, arousing a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals… will puff themselves up with their knowledge and without any logical verification of them will put into effect all the information available from science, which our agentur specialists have cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction we want. Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism.3
As this secret decision makes it clear, plans to use the media, intellectuals, experts and academicians were conspired to ensure a blind acceptance of the theory of evolution and a cunning tactic was devised to shape people’s minds. Not long after, the atheistic system in the US embraced the decision of the Rite of Misraïm.
Following this plan, the decision-makers built a Darwinist dictatorship that controlled most of the key positions around the world. The influence of this dictatorship spread to the government agencies, media, universities, schools and even art institutions as this plan was put into action, sometimes openly, sometimes secretly. Despite wide rejection by the public, the theory of evolution was presented as science, and by means of various suggestion tactics, people were made accustomed to this deceit. At the same time, scientific evidence against evolution, including living fossils, were kept from the view of the public, while those who didn’t accept it were made outcasts in their social and professional circles. Most of them were bullied into silence through media or peer pressure.
The Darwinist dictatorship operating under the auspices of the British deep state is today still active and influential. Today, there is almost no country in the world, including the Muslim states, that does not teach evolution at its schools. Certain media organizations of some countries are almost forced to publish the so-called ‘evolution news’, prepared by the British deep state, as if they were real. Even in Islamic countries, the lie of evolution that clearly denies God and that lacks any scientific basis, is now an ‘imposition’ that academicians are forced to support. The pressure of the British deep state is so strong, the Church of England recently apologized to Darwin4, and the Pope hosted conferences in support of Darwinism in his own hometown.
The British deep state systematically implemented its decision to spread Darwinism like a religion. Thomas Huxley, who was known as the greatest supporter of Darwin when he was still alive, and was even called ‘Darwin’s bulldog’ by some, was a member of the Royal Society. Just like other members of this institution, one of the most influential scientific organizations of the United Kingdom, he was an atheist.5 The Royal Society, or The Royal Society of London for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge, was an academy founded in 1662. Most of the members of the institution were atheists and homosexuals.6 (You can find more detailed information on the Royal Society in the following pages.)
What made Thomas Huxley – made a member of the Royal Society at a fairly young age – so important, even though he had no personal achievements, was the fact that he was close to Darwin and was his biggest supporter. Other members of the Royal Society also helped Darwin greatly before and after the publication of his book. Indeed, they have championed Darwin and Darwinism so much that they have started handing out an annual ‘Darwin Medal’ to scientists in a way similar to a Nobel Prize.
In other words, Darwin was not alone. From the moment he proposed his theory, in a very ‘organized’ manner, he was directed by the British deep state. This organized support came directly from the British deep state, which was very keen for the acceptance of the theory of evolution around the world. They believed that it could help them lead the masses away from religion and all moral values, and turn them into weakened, fragile societies that could easily come under British control. They were aware that such societies would create self-interested, greedy individuals. According to the plan, once the societies have reached that point, it would be easier to exploit and abuse them, to direct and spread the propaganda.
Furthermore, since Darwinism gives rise to the erroneous concept of ‘superiority of races’, and since the propaganda tools would show British as the most advanced version of the white race, they thought that the spread of the theory would help convince other societies to accept the so-called superiority of the British. This would have made it easier for the representatives of the deep state to make claims over other societies and exploit the communities in the Middle East and Africa. This claim of superiority gave rise to a desire to dominate. They believed that any means for the sake of world domination were justified. For this reason, the British deep state, without caring about what happened in the rest of the world, or considering the number of people killed in wars started unnecessarily, without caring for the separation of countries, continued to further its agenda and will continue to do so.
However, no one will be asked about his or her lineage or ethnicity on Judgment Day. Those that are deluded with claims of racial superiority, and who cause troubles as a result, will be terrified on that day. However, the representatives of the said deep state are unaware of this fact:
Then when the Trumpet is blown, that Day there will be no family ties between them; they will not be able to question one another. (Qur’an, 23:101)
“Interests of Britain”
‘Interests of Britain’ is perhaps the most important concept for the British deep state. Many might think it normal that countries work to protect their best interests. However, it should be remembered that the British deep state is a power above most of the other states. Therefore, when it is British interests in question, a mafia-like power rises, capable of doing anything without any accountability. In this respect, the ‘best interests of Britain’ can be very costly. Indeed, to promote those interests, sometimes peace is abandoned, countries are divided, terror groups are started and even wars are declared.
Some British leaders openly referred to this eerie interest-oriented approach.
Lord Palmerston who served as the British Prime Minister in the mid 19th century, explained this point of view in a speech he made in 1856:
When people ask me, …, for what is called a policy, the only answer is that we mean to do what may seem to be best, upon each occasion as it arises, making the Interests of Our Country one’s guiding principle.7
Palmerston also said:
We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual.8
Edward Grey, the then Foreign Minister of the UK, supported this view with the following words:
British Foreign Ministers have been guided by what seemed to them to be the immediate interest of this country, without making elaborate calculations for the future.9
Ambassador Davies, the special advisor to former US President Truman, said the following about former British Prime Minister Churchill:
Whatever Churchill’s greatness, he was ‘first, last and all the time a great Englishman, more interested in preserving England’s position in Europe than in preserving the peace.10
The mentality that chose British interests over peace influenced many British leaders throughout the course of history. The main reason behind this tendency is the fact that those leaders could never stray far from the effect of the British deep state, for which the most important thing was persuading the entire world to accept so-called British superiority, stemming from the faulty ideas about evolution.
Because of this mentality, Britain has always been the one country that had the greatest say in occupation policies around the world. Indeed, there are only 22 countries in the world it hasn’t occupied at some point in history. The territories once occupied by the British amount to 90% of the world’s entire lands.11 Currently, 22 countries are still a part of the United Kingdom, and 14 of them are overseas. The Queen of England, Elizabeth II, is the queen of these 22 countries, plus an additional 16 countries. These countries are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadine Islands, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, and Fiji. Even though those countries gained their independence, Queen Elizabeth II is still considered their queen.
The Queen, considered the head of the Commonwealth of Nations, appoints a governor-general to those countries as representatives. She usually appoints retired politicians or other elite names, on the advice of the Prime Minister of the respective country. The governor-general gives royal assent to legislation passed by parliament, signs official documents, officially opens and closes parliamentary sessions, revokes the parliament before the elections, and carries out other similar functions.12 In other words, Britain still enjoys serious power – and in many cases sole power – in these countries.
A prime example is the constitutional crisis of Australia that took place in 1975. Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam adopted a clear stance against the British deep state and exposed its sinister plots against his country to assert Australia’s independence. Three years after his election in 1972, Whitlam was saying Britain’s MI6 was operating against his government: ‘The Brits were actually decoding secret messages coming into my foreign affairs office.’
The bold attitude of Whitlam wasn’t left unanswered by the British deep state. The Queen of the UK, acting under the influence of the British deep state, dismissed Australian Prime Minister and dissolved the Parliament in 1975. According to the Guardian, after this incident, ‘Australian politics never recovered, nor the nation its true independence.‘13 Today, Australia is still a Commonwealth realm. This example alone is enough to show how strong the British deep state hegemony can be on other countries.
Under the influence of the deep state, Britain, on the lands it occupied throughout history, has usually worked to emphasize the differences between various ethnical and religious groups. The deep state has indoctrinated them to believe that they are enemies and the concept of ‘superior race’ has always been a part of this policy. The British deep state chooses one ethnical group amongst a multitude of groups that have lived together for maybe centuries and tells them ‘you are the superior race’, and then pits them against each other. It is convinced that such a strategy will make ruling these societies easier, as fighting groups cannot come together ‘to form a single, joint power’. History is full of examples of this policy.
For instance, the horrible genocide that took place in Rwanda was not a random, regional occurrence. It wasn’t independent of the British deep state either.
The policies of the British deep state usually focus on creating division, fueling existing division or creating artificial divisions. With regards to other nations, the deep state has always sought to ‘maintain sharp clashes, make up divisions if none exist, and fuel the existing but insignificant disagreements’. The ones that fail to conform to these policies are eliminated through various methods if necessary, because as explained above, the most important thing for the ones behind these plans is the ‘interests of Britain’.
The Foundations that Shape the British Interests
The British deep state has always sought to impose the dominion of British ethnicity, British interests and power since the inception of the British Empire. The deep state, which is in truth an underground organization, worked to pursue this goal and tried to access various administrational roles under a legal guise. These efforts sometimes came from within the government agencies themselves, and most of the times through various covert organizations and foundations. These organizations and foundations tried many methods to uphold the best interests of Britain in other countries. They primarily used the media, shaped the policies of politicians, and sometimes used spies to infiltrate the policies of other countries. They manipulated the leaders, determined policies and strategies for countries and sought to make every country work in line with the British interests.
These organizations and foundations are particularly good at propaganda methods in the societies they live. Using various means, they can propagandize any idea. Universities, schools, academicians, scientific publications, media and even the governments were used for such propaganda efforts and helped spread Darwinism. The moral decline in society is also due to widespread use of these methods. For instance, the presentation of a perversion like homosexuality as normal behavior is another outcome of the wide-scale efforts of these organizations.
Let us remember one important point here; the mentioned organizations are in essence legally incorporated establishments with good and honest people working for them, who are unaware of the said activities of the deep state and the original purpose of the organizations. Our criticism is surely not directed at the legal works or the people doing honest things in these organizations. Our criticism is directed at the wrong mindset that formed the basis for a multitude of insidious acts carried out through these organizations. There is no doubt that people, even if they make mistakes, can change. The reason why we are revealing the secrets of the deep state is to show the harmful consequences of the actions of people who had been involved in these affairs, to warn them and to encourage them to change for the better. The goal is constructive, not destructive. It is therefore important to bear this in mind, as the reader learns about these facts.
Furthermore, this book mainly focuses on the years when these organizations were first set up. Although some of these organizations still act under the supervision and guidance of the deep states, it is possible that they have adopted a different vision and ideas. However, during the first years they were set up, they inflicted extensive damage because they directly operated under the British deep state and led operations that would have harmful repercussions even for future generations. We are going to be focusing particularly on this aspect of the matter.
British East India Company
East India Company [East India Co.] was made official with the approval of Queen Elizabeth I in 1600. The British control in India started when this company was established in London and seized the government revenues of the Bengal region of India. After this milestone, the British deep state started slowly building its dominion in India. Soon after, the Indian Civil Service, also known as the Imperial Civil Service, was set up that allowed the British to control not only sovereign princely states, but all of India. It also made sure that British officers could obtain all the key positions.
This marked the beginning of the colonization of India – ‘the jewel in the crown’– by the British deep state. India was now divided into classes: noble families seeking to preserve their rights and a new middle class that owed their existence to Britain.
East India Co. transferred ‘fractional reserve banking’, inspired by the Babylonian banking system and which was the first step towards the modern central banking practice, from India to Britain. (Fractional reserve banking refers to the practice where banks keep a certain amount of the deposits they receive, and offer the rest to the investors and the market as loans, etc. It is based on earning interest on money that does not practically exist.) This finance system brought along a string of interesting practices. The said system played an important part in many notorious conflicts and wars like the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, the Anglo-Boer War [the war between the British Empire and the two Boer states in South Africa], WWI and the Bolshevik Revolution. Even the Bolshevik Revolution was in truth planned and financed by secret organizations controlled by the British deep state. Lenin himself admitted in March 1922 that the revolution hadn’t been an independent movement. He clearly stated during the 11th Party Congress that the party was being run by ‘a huge bureaucratic machine’.14
Today, it is a widely known fact that wars are considered as an important revenue source for reserve banking systems. Dr. John Coleman, a retired intelligence officer, explains this truth with the following words:
It is estimated by war historian Alan Brugar, that the international bankers made a profit of $10,000 from every soldier who fell in battle. Life is cheap when it comes to the Committee of 300-Illuminati-Rothschild-Warburg-Federal Reserve bankers, who financed both sides of the war.15
The committee of 300 referred to here will be explained in detail in the following pages.
East India Co. was first founded with the purpose of exploiting countries with rich natural resources, most notably India, China and the South African Republic. As explained above, fractional reserve banking was used by Britain and the United States to finance the WWI. In 1661, British King Charles II granted East India Co. the right to make war and peace with independent countries. This was the first time a private company, engaged in financial activities, was given such rights. These rights were used to seize agricultural areas and produce in various countries as this financial company achieved a position where its members could meet with princes and as it dominated the fractional reserve system that increased the money supply in the market. By 1830, the whole of India was practically under East India Co.’s control.16
In 1702, the company was renamed to British East India Co. (BEIC), and the reserve system used in India was exported all around the world. This system is also the origin of the modern Federal Reserve banking practice that controls all the markets today; in other words, the system that gave rise to central banks.
One of the first things British East India Co. did was use spies to weaken the influence of Sikhs that stood up to the caste system. A part of Indian customs, the caste system turned frighteningly racist after the British input. As a result of the efforts of British deep state, deep divides also ensued between Muslims and the Sikhs.
In 1813, the British government renewed the charter of British East India Co. for a further 20 years. In 1833, the Parliament decided to extend the duration of the charter once again for another 20 years. However, voices began to rise in India against the rule of the British East India Co. The Rebellion of 1857 (also known as the Sepoy Rebellion) resulted in India coming under the direct control of the British Empire and Queen Victoria officially took the title of Empress of India in 1876. The famine that happened that same year caused the death of more than 2 million Indians, who were considered lower class. In addition, during the entire reign of British East India Co., more than 6 million lower class Indians lost their lives due to famine.
After that time the control of the British deep state in India increased even more. Individuals trained in the top British schools were placed in key judicial and administrative positions of India as well as media roles that had a profound effect on the society. Since the British deep state had control over not only the country in general, but also over the princely states, it was able to exert its influence everywhere. One British commissioner was appointed to work with every prince. It was a widely known fact that those commissioners took the princes under their control, and watched their every move. The country didn’t have any military freedom, just like they didn’t have much say in their domestic or foreign policies. With the British rule, everything India possessed came under the rule of the British deep state.
It is also known that the opium trade thrived with the input of the British deep state and became one of the most important means of the exploitation of India. Robert Clive, a famous figure in the British occupation of India, took under his control the most fertile opium lands until 1765.17 Drug trade became a part of the already frightening, racist situation in the region. The British deep state took control of the administration in India, which it considered a good market, caused division amongst the people, used racism as leverage, seized control of the country’s resources and started managing the drug trafficking, which helped solidify its control over the country.
From that day on, India became a central hub, through which the British deep state managed its various propaganda projects. The most important administrative role in this project was assumed by British East India Co. This company, an umbrella organization for all covert organizations built to shape world affairs, constituted the first step of the British deep state in the 19th century towards its goal of world reign.
The Royal Society
Britain had only just come out of a bloody civil war in 1660 and therefore had started a complicated restoration process. The Royal Society was founded during this hectic period. King Charles II was fond of experimental physics and therefore paved the way for the foundation of this institution. As the readers will recall, the Royal Society had Thomas Huxley, ‘the so-called Darwin’s bulldog’ amongst its members, where he was fervently working to spread Darwinism. As explained before, the basic goal of this institution was propagating atheism using the most effective methods possible. Spreading Darwinism was one of those methods.
The beginnings of the Royal Society go back to the unofficial and secret meetings named ‘Invisible College’ organized by London scientists to debate ‘natural philosophy’ in 1645. Those scientists that were admitted to the Operative Masonic Lodges under Cromwell’s rule used to attend the secret meetings of atheist Masonic lodges and were thus acquainted with each other. (Operative Masonic lodges built cathedrals, castles, and palaces in the Middle Ages.)
‘Invisible College’ was founded by these people. This group, founded by Rosicrucians (a secret organization founded in Europe in the 16th century), inspired by British philosopher Sir Francis Bacon, would later transform into the Royal Society.
It is a known fact that the Royal Society was founded after homosexual philosopher Sir Francis Bacon selected other homosexuals and that the institution harbored homosexuals of the 17th century.18 Although the modern Royal Society doesn’t wish to admit this fact, many historical records will testify to this information. Indeed, another co-founder of the Royal Society, clergyman Dr. John Wilkins, was also homosexual. Wilkins held the first meetings in his home and in Wadham College (Wadham College is a constituent college of the University of Oxford) and laid the foundations of the Royal Society. Another co-founder, Sir Robert Moray, was a Scottish homosexual, whereas Robert Boyle, another member and who would later be elected president of the Royal Society, was an Irish homosexual.19
The fact that the Royal Society recently awarded Bruno Perreau, PhD, a research associate at the University of Cambridge, for his work “What’s a family? Social work and gay adoption in France and in the United Kingdom”, shows that the institution still supports similar views.20
The meetings that were held in Wadham College at Oxford in 1648 played a great role in the shaping of the Royal Society. The most important reason behind the foundation of this society in the guise of being scientific was helping build the idea of evolution. These secret organizations and groups provided the basis of the evolution deceit, which would not be officially promoted until the 1800s. This movement that started as a secretive debate society for natural philosophy was actually intended to produce a lie under the guise of science. At the onset of this lay the aforementioned invisible colleges, which were then institutionalized under the lead of the said homosexual administrators and were named the Royal Society.
The mechanical universe understanding of Isaac Newton, who was elected the president of the Royal Society in 1703 and remained in this position until his death in 1727, was used to develop the anti-religion philosophy of the Royal Society. All members of the Royal Society lent great support to Darwin both before and after the publication of his book and offered their own contributions.
The first foundations of Chatham House, listed amongst the supporting institutions of the deep state activities, were also laid by the Royal Society. Chatham House and other institutions that the British deep state exploits for intelligence and various other purposes will be dealt with in more details further on.
Round Table
British politician Cecil Rhodes, as explained before, was a homosexual and held racist views favoring the idea of Anglo-Saxon reign in the world. He wanted this ethnicity to grow and rule the world. In his last will, he said the following:
I contend that we are the finest race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race… I contend that every acre added to our territory means the birth of more of the English race who otherwise would not be brought into existence.21
Championing the idea of an Anglo-Saxon dominance through more territorial occupation, Rhodes proposed the idea of building a Round Table that would later work to build a world state to be ruled by the British. Rhodes was a politician stationed in South Africa, and was responsible for forcefully seizing the lands of the indigenous peoples in line with the brutal domination plans in the region. To ensure this, he pitted native tribes against each other and pioneered many uprisings. With these revolts, he managed to ensure full British control of South Africa. Following chapters will be dealing with the practices of Rhodes in more detail. However, these words perfectly summarize the brutal suppression of Rhodes: ‘I prefer land to niggers.’22
The other statements of Rhodes in his will, regarding the indigenous African people and Anglo-Saxons are as follows:
Africa is still lying ready for us, it is our duty to take it. It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes: that more territory simply means more of the Anglo-Saxon race, more of the best, the most human, most honorable race the world possesses.23
This racist frame of mind was, in fact, a summary of the basic thinking of the then British deep state. During the same period, when it became clear that North America was not going to be taken with military methods, the deep state decided to use racial differences as leverage. To this end, the British deep state started focusing on eugenics policies. (Eugenics: the idea of improving a human race by eliminating the weak and the disabled, and encouraging breeding of healthy individuals.) Cecil Rhodes and Lord Alfred Milner’s ‘Round Table’ became the top promoter of this policy.
The Round Table movement created a ‘eugenics’ society in the 1880s and 1890s. The goal of the eugenics society was based on the sick thought of ‘reconditioning the society by eliminating the races considered inferior’. This horrific social Darwinist thinking was very popular among the circles of these foundations long before Darwin came up with his idea, but was implemented openly as a policy only after Darwin. At this point, it will be sensible to remember that Darwin himself was another engineered project devised by these very institutions. It should also be noted here that the pioneer of eugenic ideas in Britain was Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton. Darwin’s son Leonard Darwin was an advocate and implementer of this violence. Winston Churchill was also one of those who supported the eugenics movement.
To these people, the true race was the Anglo-Saxon represented by the British, while the others were the ones that should be eliminated. As a part of the efforts carried out to this end, North America, with its roots mostly based in the British Empire, had been planned as a part of the Anglo-Saxon world state, and the assets of the states would be controlled by the British.24
Round Table executives believed that to reach this goal, they had to seize control of all the production materials, financial industries and scientific organizations of the respective countries. They wanted to build a structure, a sort of ‘police state’, which would build a single world state by making Anglo-Saxons the rulers, eliminating other races, and colonializing the remaining ones.
The Round Table movement of Rhodes considered South Africa as the center of the empire. Apartheid, which was shaped in South Africa and gave rise to horrific massacres, is an outcome of the horrible racist policies of this person.
The Illuminati structures that pioneered the foundation of Round Table, later prepared the way for organizations like Bilderberg Group, the Royal Institute of International Affairs aka Chatham House, CFR, the Trilateral Commission and the Club of Rome. All these organizations were supported by the British deep state and were essentially set up to help carry out the international activities of the British deep state. (Illuminati: A secret society founded on May 1, 1776. It is alleged to practice mind control in line with its goals of taking over governments and corporations to establish a New World Order where monarchies would be destroyed, religious influence eliminated, nation-states and patriotism ended and social order destroyed.)
The Committee of 300
The Committee of 300, founded in 1727, serves as the hub of all secretive organizations working for the deep state, including the Round Table. Although currently it mainly works for the American interests, it was originally founded by the British aristocrats. It is a known fact that this institution shapes politics, commerce, banking, media and the military. The Committee of 300, which has been kept a secret for a long time, generally manages and controls many organizations and associations such as Chatham House, CFR, Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, Freemasonry, Rosicrucian, the Club of Rome, RAND Corporation, PNAC (The Project for the New American Century – a neo-conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C.), the 13s and the Royal Society. In order to keep the big financial institutions such as central banks and governments under control, it uses a network that incorporates all Round Table groups, think tanks and other covert organizations.25
It is known that many US presidents, including George H. W. Bush, made decisions influenced by Chatham House, while Chatham House gets its instructions from the high administrative circle of the Committee of 300, also known as the Olympians.26 The name Olympians symbolizes the desire of this said group to see themselves as powerful as the so-called Olympus gods, and is important in that it shows how highly the committee thinks of itself.27 It is no longer a secret that in the Gulf War of 1991, the US army was used in line with the decisions of the Committee of 300 to bring Kuwait under British control.28
According to the research done by Dr. John Coleman, the Committee of 300 is directly connected to British East India Co. It is widely accepted that many senior officers of British East India Co. were communists. As explained in the previous pages, the opium trade that got a boost in India under the auspices of British East India Co., greatly helped and strengthened first the company and then the Committee of 300 that was set up as a part of the company. As it grew with the influx of money, this institution in time obtained power enough to regulate the world’s affairs.
Both British East India Co., and the deep state-linked leaders of the Committee of 300 that followed in their footsteps were known for their deep hatred of the Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Illuminati particularly was a secret organization set up as a power against these religions. The following words of Adam Weishaupt, founder of the Illuminati, on May 1, 1776, are noteworthy in that they help us understand the policies of the said deep state institutions:
Behold our secret: … If, in order to destroy all Christianity, all religion, we have pretended to have the sole true religion, remember that the end justifies the means, and that the wise ought to take all the means to do good, which the wicked take to do evil… This can be done in no other way but by secret associations, which will by degrees, and in silence, possess themselves of the government of the States, and make use of those means for this purpose which the wicked use for attaining base ends… The express aim of this Order was to abolish Christianity, and overthrow all civil government.29
British deep state organizations, centering around this mentality, developed their causes accordingly. Since the time they were first set up, their main goal has been undermining the influence of the Abrahamic religions in societies, eliminating civil governments through coups and replacing them with governments reporting to them. Journalist Jacob de Haas, a British Hasidic Jew and an early leader of the Zionist movement in the United States, stated that three hundred men governed the world events, they even selected presidents such as Wilson and the delegates who attended the League of Nations conference in Paris.30
German statesman Walther Rathenau wrote the following in a column on December 24, 1921:
Only three hundred men, each of whom knows all the others, govern the fate of Europe. They select their successors from their own entourage. These men have the means in their hands of putting an end to the form of the State, which they find unreasonable.31
Because of these statements, both Jacob de Haas and Walther Rathenau were mysteriously assassinated.
We have to remember at this point that the Committee of 300 also acts with the premise of so-called Anglo-Saxon superiority just like Round Table and other organizations controlled by the British deep state. To them, a smaller world is an easier one to rule. To them, the resources of the world are precious and should not be consumed by ‘surplus’ people. To them, the absolute existence of their own race is the sole solution to this ‘problem’. Dr. John Coleman explains the targets of the secret organizations of the British deep state as follows:
The command to multiply and subdue the earth found in Genesis had to be subverted. This called for an attack upon Christianity; the slow but sure disintegration of industrial nation states; the destruction of hundreds of millions of people, referred to by the Committee of 300 as ‘surplus population’, and the removal of any leader who dared to stand in the way of the Committee’s global planning to reach the foregoing objectives.32
The Committee of 300, to attain this goal, adopted a growth and expansion policy similar to other institutions reporting to the British deep state. That policy requires certain actions. The plans for the future made by the Committee of 300 when it was first set up are still valid today and are brought into motion step by step. These steps can be summarized as follows:
* The Committee of 300, which leverages financial power to further its policy of exploiting the weak, desires a new world order where all religions and monetary policies are governed by a single hand. This should be a world order led by and ruled by the British. They believe that to attain this goal the religions must be taken under control. Representatives of the deep state built their plans for Christianity back in 1700s, and as of 1920s they devised a plan where all the churches would be one. This way, they wouldn’t be wholly rejecting religions at once, which they feared could cause intense reaction. They wanted to be able to control all faiths from a single source through a single church that would represent their utterly made up religion.
* Gaining control of the governance of independent countries can be possible only after gaining control of their social systems. However, this can be done only when peoples are taken under control as well as their leaders. In order to achieve this, the Committee of 300 devised a strategy that would end all the nationalist and patriotic sentiments in targeted countries. They believed that once the nationalist values were gone, there would be nothing left for the people to fight for and it would be fairly easy to control these people, especially after their leaders were reined in. This is exactly what happened in countries like Iraq.
* Spreading homosexuality and making it an acceptable behavior in society is an important target for them. To this end, homosexuality is glorified in talk shows, concerts, sports games; homosexuals are particularly brought to the forefront in TV shows; homosexuals purporting to be priests and imams are publicly praised; homosexuality is portrayed as a reasonable and even admirable life style in movies and TV series, and media keeps spreading the wrong idea that homosexuality is an undeniable ‘fact of life’. Furthermore, for years, there have been systematic efforts to shut out and silence anyone rejecting the notion of homosexuality due to his moral or religious convictions, as well as constant efforts to justify this act. This idea is heavily propagandized at schools, homosexuals are positively discriminated at school clubs and students not approving of homosexuality are made outcasts; all as a part of the same social engineering effort.
* The said committee also seeks to increase the amount of drugs on the market, make them legal and heighten the level of moral decline in the society. The institution of the family is the number one target, because everyone knows that societies deprived of their family values will be more prone to decline. Making youth feel hopeless and aimless is the most important part of this plan. They surmised that unemployment would fuel the sentiment and, just like the Committee of 300, the Club of Rome administrators determined that increased unemployment would lead the youth on a downward spiral. They concluded that young people in such a state of mind would be more inclined to drug use and degeneration, and the institution of family would come down as a result. It should be noted that destroying the institution of family has also been the top priority of communist movements. The communist-socialist leaders of the Committee of 300 targeting families as a top priority should therefore be no surprise.
* The Committee also sought to depopulate especially the big cities. Massacres carried out during the time of Pol Pot and Stalin were methods applied to this end. It should be noted that the plans of the Pol Pot’s massacre were overseen by Thomas Enders, a member of the Club of Rome and a high-ranking official in the US State Department. It is also an interesting fact that the Committee of 300 is seeking to reinstate those responsible for the massacre in Cambodia.33
* All scientific researches other than those serving the purposes of the Committee were halted. This was true particularly with regards to the theory of evolution. Today, scientific evidence clearly invalidates the theory of evolution. However, as explained before, this theory is a lie developed by this committee and the associated organizations, all as a part of the British deep state plans. For this reason, it is crucial to them that evidence refuting the theory of evolution doesn’t come to light, or is taught at schools or brought up in any manner. That is why more than 700 million fossils unearthed so far have been kept under cover because none of these fossils had gone through any changes. In other words, it is apparent that these fossils belong to species that had not gone through any evolutionary process. Indeed, no fossil suggesting that a Darwinian change took place has ever been found. Furthermore, the theory of evolution is facing a big dilemma on a molecular level. That is why the evolutionist camp is trying to associate latest developments in molecular science with their evolutionary views, although these developments completely refute the notion of evolution. For instance, it has yet to be explained by the evolutionists how a single protein can come into being by itself, as the evolutionists like to claim. It is impossible for them to provide any explanation, because in order for a single protein to come into being, 100 different types of proteins have to be present and help with the production of that single protein. This dilemma is one of the most important pieces of evidence completely destroying the idea of evolution. Although the theory of evolution is a collapsed theory, there is a massive effort to keep it alive. This is yet another example of intense social engineering: the present Darwinist dictatorship, holding schools, universities, academic positions, media, scientific publications and even governments under its control, is a product of the Committee of 300 and its affiliates.
* Depopulation has always been the main target of the said deep state institutions and the Committee of 300 has devised its strategies in line with this goal. According to this strategy, with controlled wars to be started in developed countries, populations would be decreased but the situation would be even more severe in third world countries. In those countries, epidemics would be started reminiscent of the horrifying depopulation project of Thomas Malthus, the hunger policies applied by Stalin would be repeated and this way, the British deep state would have gotten rid of the population it considered ‘surplus’ (people targeted by such policies are surely above these claims). Their goal was getting rid of that ‘so-called surplus crowd’ by 2050, as mentioned by the members of the Round Table.
* Another method is causing unrest in various countries by means of encouraging uprisings and disorder, using mostly the media and some of their sycophants in those respective countries. Although the crises usually start for small and trivial reasons, the purpose is using various propaganda methods to cause public indignation and start unstoppable riots. With this policy, they aim to create a perception that the countries are unable to rule themselves and that it is necessary for those countries to be brought under the rule of the said Committee. We can see the insidious implementation of these methods in the Middle East, South America, Africa, some European countries and even in the United States. World states are, secretly or explicitly, governed by the British deep state while their public is completely unaware of the existence of that ruling power and they are made to become indifferent over time. The leaders and the respective peoples pay the highest price for this.
British philosopher and historian Lord Bertrand Russell, a member of the Committee of 300, explains this policy he devised for Africa with the following words:
If a world government is to work smoothly, certain economic conditions will have to be fulfilled. Various raw materials are essential to industry…I think we should include in undesirable ownership, not only ownership by individuals or companies, but also separate states. The raw material without which industry is impossible should belong to the international authority and granted to separate nations.34
This plan mentioned by Russell is being implemented today to a great extent. The natural resources of the Middle East and particularly Africa are mostly under the control of various other nations and all these companies, despite seemingly representing other nations, are in fact controlled by the British deep state. The raw material in Africa requires industries, and without those industries they aren’t able to extract and process it. The system in Africa was deliberately left in such a primitive and weak state. With this mechanism, the rich resources of Africa will be under constant control of the British deep state.
* There are many ‘teachers’ and ‘leaders’ in the Committee of 300 and their sole duty is convincing masses that major changes ‘just happen’ and therefore have to be accepted.35 Each one of the uprisings, wars and coups staged in countries are a consequence of these insidious ‘familiarization’ policies.
* The uprisings, conflicts and crises to be started in the countries should be done in the name of democracy. The Arab Spring, which promised ‘democracy’, didn’t start on its own or independently, it was not a sudden uprising by communities that got more informed and aware. The Arab Spring was a stage in the plan to take over the Middle East, which was shaped by the said committee years ago. The current state of Syria, the never-ending conflict in Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and the Middle East struggling with constant conflicts, is an outcome of the carefully devised plans of the British deep state and right now their plans are working just as they drew them up.
* Cooperating with various terrorist groups, forcing legal states and independent national governments to start negotiations with these terror groups, is another duty of this committee. However, to achieve these goals, care is taken to use those words that are deviated from their true meanings: ‘democracy’, ‘human rights’, ‘basic rights and liberties’. These phrases, which are naturally important to the countries of the world, are now widely used for terror groups. A very clear example of this was experienced in Turkey. Efforts were made to force the Turkish government to sit at the table with the terror organization PKK, but not long after that, the Turkish government realized the mistake and due to the resolute stance of the Turkish government and the President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, a direct struggle was launched against the terror group. However, since this new stance of the government didn’t at all sit well with the British deep state, Turkey was constantly pressured by Europe and particularly the UK with casual and frequent threats of never being admitted to the European Union. At the same time, the PKK was taken under the wings of those people and institutions which were under the sway of the British deep state. Following pages will be dealing with the plots relevant to the PKK and the sycophants assisting the deep state.
Is the US Cognizant of the British Deep State?
British leaders mostly didn’t refrain from clearly referring to the policies of the British deep state. For instance, according to the former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli ‘Governments do not govern but merely control the machinery of government, being themselves controlled by the hidden hand’.36
This is also true for the US. It has been the constant goal of the Committee of 300 to take over the entire US system, from the economy to the political scene. The following remarks of Theodore Roosevelt, who was also a member of the Committee of 300, can be considered a confession stating that governments are usually ruled by deep states:
Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of today.37
Roosevelt is no doubt referring to the British deep state, which has no accountability to the people. A member of the Committee of 300, Roosevelt was intimately familiar with this deep structure. Although he said to his public that ‘this invisible government had to be destroyed’, he perfectly knew that under the circumstances, it would be very difficult to destroy such a structure.
Woodrow Wilson, the 28th US President, said the following regarding the matter:
The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy.38
This invisible empire ruling over all forms of democracy is the British deep state operating with its institutions and its insidious policies.
John F. Kennedy, the 35th US President, and who was assassinated, was another president who was aware of the control of the British deep state over the United States and didn’t refrain from pointing to it frequently. This candid attitude and efforts to expose the British deep state were the most important reasons behind his assassination. Kennedy worked hard to pacify the Federal Reserve banking system during his administration, and that put him directly in the crosshairs of the deep state. The Committee which put a lot of ‘misguided efforts’ in building the reserve banking system didn’t like at all that the system was eliminated completely independent of their approval.
Dr. John Coleman maintains that the Kennedy assassination was an MI6 operation and the FBI and CIA helped. It should be noted that there are true patriots and honest people in the British Intelligence Service performing important duties. However, it should not be forgotten that just like many world leaders and intelligence services, British intelligence service MI6 is also under the influence of the British deep state.
Coleman explains that Kennedy was completely deprived of all security services and his bodyguards prior to the assassination. He also reveals documents that provide evidence that the application by the US Armed Forces to protect the President was turned down by the Secret Service. Today it is a known fact that the Kennedy assassination was a Secret Service job that had all the typical characteristics of the deep states. The relevant evidence will be further examined in the following chapters regarding the UK-US relations.
The most important point is the horrible treatment the presidents that defy the system have been subjected to. Kennedy frequently complained about the control of the deep state and didn’t hesitate to express it at every turn. The following words of Kennedy in his address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association in Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York City, on April 27, 1961, are especially noteworthy in that they reveal how much influence the deep state has on legal governments:
The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. … [W]e are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence—on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no secret is revealed. … I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. … confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.39
This very accurate analysis by Kennedy had horrible consequences for him. This is a very important example of how the leaders working to expose the deep state are intimidated. Many leaders were suppressed with similar methods and bullied into submission. In other words, even the superpower America cannot protect itself from being a slave of this horrible system.
The Ultimate Goal: ‘Communist USA’
We have seen how the British deep state has also taken control of the USA, as they have the rest of the world. The above statements by various US Presidents only confirm this truth. The British deep state’s influence in the US will be examined further in following chapters.
However, it should be particularly noted that the Committee of 300, and other similar committees reporting to the British deep state, are only small parts of the effort to ‘make the US a communist nation’. The wide-scaled efforts to this end have continued until today and have become even clearer with the two-term presidency of the closet socialist Barack Obama.
The organization of the Committee of 300 is identical to the organization of the oldest British trade organization which in time transformed into East India Co., and later became British East India Co. This covert organization always sought to make the US a socialist-communist state, because they believed that once a communist order and British control was deeply settled in the US, taking control of other developed countries would be easier.40
British East India Co. was a deep state institution that introduced and installed communism around the world. As a result of their efforts, communism spread deeply in various societies and countries. They believed that the communist system should also take root in the US, because only then would the US go back to its roots and come under the British rule. The way to do that was by eliminating state and federal constitutions. The British deep state has long worked to achieve this.
Dr. John Coleman, by means of his extensive researches, revealed that it was the British East India Co., and the Institute of Pacific Relations reporting to the Committee of 300, that financed the Pearl Harbor attack which was carried out on December 7, 1941.41 As the readers will recall, this very attack was the reason why the US entered the WWII as a British ally. This attack gave Roosevelt the necessary leverage in his quest to join the war with the British. Furthermore, after this attack it became easier to disseminate the propaganda that Germany had been seeking to occupy the US. Thus, all the artificial impetus needed for the US participation in the war had been provided.
Secret documents reveal that Roosevelt had known about the Pearl Harbor attack one month before it took place. Following the attack, rumors spread that the Japanese were planning even more attacks, which eventually led to the bombardment of Tokyo, where hundreds of thousands of people lost their lives, and ultimately to the two atom bomb disasters. This ‘US support’ in the war ensured the victory of British alliance in the war.
It is clear that the US, despite its power, could not shake off the effect and control of the British deep state. The plan to make the US a communist country is a ploy the British deep state has pursued for a long time and which it has implemented in gradual steps. There have been times when this plan for the US became more evident. First, the anti-communist identity of the US was emphasized and the country even fought in Korea and Vietnam to live up to this expectation. This was a part of the deep state’s plan, which sought to cement the idea that the world’s imperialist power was definitely against communism. However, as this took place, the stages designed to lead the US to communism were also put into practice in a gradual manner. Today, as a result of this careful strategy, the US is currently closer to communism than ever.
The Socialist Leader of the Anti-Communist USA
Barack Obama served as the US President for two terms. When he was first elected, his anti-war rhetoric, racial background and Muslim ancestral roots had won him great support with the anti-war league and religious people. With his term over, however, it became clear that he failed to keep his promises such as withdrawing US soldiers from the Middle East, or shutting down the Guantanamo facility. Indeed, the US Air Force is still present in the Middle East. What is particularly noteworthy is the socialist-communist tendencies of Obama, which only recently became clear.
When Obama won a seat in the Senate, the Communist Party USA made an official statement and said: ‘This was a historic victory. It was a victory for political independence’. When Obama’s presidency was declared, the said party wrote on its website: ‘Our Party actively supported Obama during the primary election.’ Indeed, the Communist Party USA leader John Bachtell admitted in 2015 their support in all states for Obama’s first presidential bid.
When Obama won the Iowa caucuses in 2004, the newspaper of the Communist Party USA celebrated with the following words:
Obama’s victory was more than a progressive move; it was a dialectical leap ushering in a qualitatively new era of struggle. Marx once compared revolutionary struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This is the old revolutionary ‘mole,’ not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through.42
Obama explained during the interview he gave to David Mendel that when he was younger he used to attend communist conferences and sympathized with them. It is also noteworthy that the main supporters of Obama in his presidential bid were usually people with communist and Marxists backgrounds. For instance, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who started and managed the campaign for Obama’s Senate race, were the two most radical Marxists of the Vietnam war. Alice Palmer, a politician who introduced Obama to politics and who is also known as his mentor, is the first African-American journalist that was allowed to enter the Soviet Union and attend the 27th Communist Congress. Families of Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod, the two closest aides of Obama, are famous communists. Obama’s church is known as the church that follows the neo-Marxist Libertarian theology. Addie Wyatt, one of the pastors of the church, who is also one of the mentors of Obama, is a member of the Communist Party USA.
The economic program implemented by Obama is considered a Marxist-Leninist program.
The Club of Rome
By the 1940s, Elizabeth, Queen of England, was ruling over 31 countries. She owned one sixth of all the lands in the world, which had a total value of 28 trillion US dollars. With the shifting balances in the post-WWII world, the British deep state was forced to turn to various other organizations. The Club of Rome was one of them.
Many people surmise that the Club of Rome is an autonomous organization because it is based in Rome and is affiliated with the Catholic Church. The truth is, The Club of Rome is an important part of the Committee of 300 and a branch of the British deep state, only it operates under a different name.
The Club of Rome and Bilderberg Group are the most important foreign policy institutions of the Committee of 300. ‘A single world state’ that was briefly mentioned while examining the goals of The Committee of 300 was intended to be put into practice by the Club of Rome. The single world state refers to a world order led solely by the British deep state where all the resources will be at their disposal. According to this plan, there would be a ‘single religion’ completely different than Abrahamic religions that would gather people around a fake faith. They planned this pseudo religion because they knew it was impossible to make people lose their faith in a sweeping manner. They hoped that this approach would gradually make people stray away from Divine religions and come to a point where they would readily obey the British deep state.
The plan for this single world order became more clearly shaped especially after the 1990s, but its roots go back centuries. From the foundation of the United States of America to its civil war, all details were carefully planned to ensure the existence of the said structure. Dr. John Coleman writes that Americans are the one people that have been fooled the most by the British deep state throughout world history. He maintains that the current moral degeneration in American society is a direct outcome of this influence and says that for the first time in their history Americans feel the decline vividly. To Coleman, all this is the direct result of the activities of the Committee of 300 and its affiliation with the Club of Rome, both of whom report to the British deep state. This is a very accurate conclusion.43
The duty of the Club of Rome is developing and spreading anti-industrialization ideas, especially in the United States. Making societies poor, driving people away from their religious beliefs, leading people and especially young people to depression in a bid to create easily impressionable, weak, feeble generations and aimless masses have been amongst the goals of this group. Spreading drug use, making homosexuality an acceptable act and spreading it, spreading satan-worship, witchcraft and other similar perverted faiths, and building non-religious sects have been their other goals.
In the book entitled Time, Perspective and Morale published by the Committee of 300, the author Bernard Levin talks about the following goals of the Club of Rome:
One of the main techniques for breaking morale, through a strategy of terror, consists in exactly this tactic: keep the person hazy as to where he stands and just what he may expect. In addition, if frequent vacillations between severe disciplinary-measures and promise of good-treatment, together with the spreading of contradictory news, make the structure of the situation unclear, then the individual may cease to know whether a particular plan would lead toward or away from his goal. Under these conditions, even those individuals who have definite goals and are ready to take risks are paralyzed by the severe inner-conflict in regard to what to do.44
Today, many people are suffering because of this insidious plan. Struggling with massive confusion, these people have now lost their moral values, goals, and joy of life. Therefore, their societies in time turn into masses via inculcations, almost controlled by the British deep state. Looking at the current situation, this plan seems to be working in many parts of the world, including the US.
But one thing should be remembered: God will always negate evil plans:
Do you not see what your Lord did with the companions of the Elephant? Did He not bring all their schemes to nothing? (Qur’an, 105:1-2)
Other Secret Organizations Controlled by the British Deep State
The British deep state infiltrated these said organizations, but also spread around the world through other family associations, royalty councils, and other organizations. These are important parts of the world reign policies started with the British East India Co., and continued with Round Table and the Committee of 300. Let’s go over these briefly:
The Crown Council of 13
Among the groups that rule the world as a part of the British deep state, there is a group called the ‘The Crown Council of 13’. This group consists of the most powerful and wealthiest families in the world and can give instructions even to the Committee of 300 as it decides the world affairs around a table.
The Illuminati is the oldest term used to refer to the 13 bloodline families. No one can question the powers or limits of these 13 families, who are also the senior members of many secret organizations and state bureaucracies.
The 13-step pyramid on the dollar bill is the organizational diagram of these powers that wish to rule the world. The Illuminati decided to use this mark as a symbol on May 1, 1776, and to refer to this date they put the date MDCCLXXVI (1776) at the bottom step of the pyramid (which appears on the US one-dollar bill). Many people wrongly believe that this was a date referring to American Independence. On top of this pyramid, there is an eye, known in their words as ‘the eye of the Great Architect of the Universe’. Going down, the Crown Council of 13 is followed by the Council of 33 and the Committee of 300. No one really knows who comprises these councils and committees.
The Tavistock Institute
The Tavistock Clinic was founded in 1921 by John Rawlings Rees, a medical officer in the Royal Army Medical Corps. The Tavistock Clinic, which operated as a psychological warfare organization during WWII, was reconstructed and enlarged in 1946 with funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, and initiated as the Tavistock Institute. Rockefeller assigned Tavistock the duty of carrying out and implementing wide-scale war researches. The main area of practice, though in various locations around the world, was in the US. The institute and its works continue to be the best-kept secret of the US.
The Tavistock Institute is particularly inspired by the famous psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud’s research on ‘controlling human behavior’. The institute sought to control human behavior and shape the communities in line with their interests. This was planned as a method to take the society under control by use of psychological means.
Today the institute has a wide cooperation network including the University of Sussex, Stanford Research Institute, Esalen Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Hudson Institute, the Heritage Foundation, Center for Strategic and International Studies of Georgetown University (CSIS), Air Force Intelligence, the RAND Corporation, the MITRE Corporation, the Mont Pèlerin Society, the Trilateral Commission, the Ditchley Foundation and the Club of Rome. All OSS (Office of Strategic Services) and CIA programs are developed under the supervision of Tavistock Institute.
Today Tavistock Institute operates a 6 billion US dollar per year network of foundations in the United States45 and describes its strategic mission as transformation from industrial nation-states to a post-industrial global world state and transferring the rule to a few oligarchs. In plain words, the purpose of the institution is building the ‘single world state’ under the supervision of the British deep state, as it is the ultimate goal of all secret organizations.
The duty undertaken by Tavistock Institute to achieve this goal was approaching people through psychological means and weaken their power with psychoanalytic effects. The main method was to develop ways to influence people. This way, they hoped, people wouldn’t oppose the dictators of the deep world state appointed by the British deep state as the world moved towards the single communist world state. To this end, the scientists at Tavistock Institute worked for years on developing ways to weaken family bonds, destroy values like religion, honor, and patriotic feelings and to replace them with morally degenerating behavior such as sexual perversion and homosexuality.
Tavistock Institute constantly works on mass brainwashing techniques and frequently puts them to the test on various societies. They design incidents that will leave people afraid, concerned and worried, study the results and work to change their psychological and neurologic states. When worry becomes a part of a society, it becomes much easier to manipulate the masses. It should be remembered that one of the biggest goals of the British deep state has always been taking societies under their control.
Skull and Bones
The Society of Skull and Bones, founded in Yale University in 1832 by William Huntington Russell and Alphonso Taft, is a student community that is particularly interesting due to its secret structure and the way its students are selected. Although it is based at Yale University, it is connected to the British deep state. Yale University is named after Elihu Yale, who had gone to school in Britain and worked as a British East India Co. governor. It was explained before how the British East India Co. was, in many ways, a center that gave birth to many covert organizations and which originally helped carry out the secret activities of the British deep state. Elihu Yale, after making hefty sums of money within the company, returned to Britain and continued his covert operations there. Because of the donations he sent to a school in Connecticut, the college was renamed Yale in 1718.46
Conditions to becoming a member of Skull and Bones are represented with the phrase WASP, which stands for: W=White, AS=Anglo-Saxon and P=Protestant. In other words, Anglo-Saxon origins and Protestant faith are requirements of membership. Leaders take care that new members have been Anglo-Saxons and Protestant for the past 6 to 7 generations. In other words, their origins must be in England and people from other origins and faiths are not admitted.
This institution is also working for the so-called idea of the single world religion. Therefore, the Protestant faith is only a pretense to guarantee Anglo-Saxon origins, because as with other similar organizations, this group is not religious and, on the contrary, seeks to spread atheism.
No one has access to the members list, including the university administration. Only 15 people are admitted to this group every year and these people are later brought to key positions in the country. The families and friends of the members also benefit from this membership. Admission is possible only by invitation and inauguration is very similar to that of the Masonic organizations. Their rites are secret and no information can be leaked outside.
This covert organization is usually considered as the US branch of the Illuminati. The only difference is that the said organization usually focuses on young people.
Skull and Bones enjoys a lot of influence. It has direct connections with Rosicrucians, the Trilateral Commission and the CFR. It has had more than 2,500 members in the past 150 years and is considered as one of the most basic ideologists of the new world order. The British deep state uses this organization as an important leverage to keep the US under control. By means of this and other similar organizations, it runs all operations from Europe and has a direct influence on US domestic and foreign policies.
Towards the New World Order: A Single World State
In addition to the foregoing, the British deep state has operated through sub-organizations such as the Mont Pèlerin Society, Bohemian Grove, and Rosicrucians. It sought to attain its goal of ‘single world state’ through these organizations and as explained by Cecil Rhodes, set up a roadmap focused on the existence and rule of the Anglo-Saxons. These operations that were carried out through foundations starting in the 1700s, and led to the horrible scenes we see today by various means like weakening powerful countries, or even destruction as in the case of Ottoman Empire, exploiting resource-rich but weak countries, dragging peoples to despair and uncertainty in a systematic manner.
Today, the British deep state is able to pursue its goals freely and comprehensively like never before. For this reason, the covert operations of the said mafia organization have never been more effective. Darwinism is now taught all around the world as was originally planned, while drug use and moral degeneration have reached unprecedented levels, homosexuality is imposed on society as an undeniable ‘life style’ and any leaders daring to oppose the instructions of the British deep state are immediately removed from their posts. Therefore, at the moment, all world countries including the United States, are acting under control of the British deep state as originally planned in the 1700s.
Many world leaders attend the secret meetings held in organizations like Chatham House that are generally under the influence of the British deep state. The roadmaps of the leaders are always shaped following those meetings and the sudden and important decisions are always taken by these secret organizations. The hearts of these institutions had been the original secret organizations, as explained above. At the moment, every development in the world, from economic fluctuations to political crises, war decisions to military coups, happens in line with the decisions taken in these deep state bases.
It is time that this strong organization, which managed to evade exposure to a large extent until now – even when it was exposed it was too strong to be countered by those who discovered it – is exposed and rescinded. This covert operation that keeps leading the world to more racism, disbelief, communism, homosexuality, hunger, famine, and poverty, should be exposed in every way. It should be known that the real perpetrator has never been found until now, and there had always been a diversion. What has to be done next is to become aware of the ploy of this secret organization seeking to rule the world in line with their desires, and seeing the conspiracy for what it is.
It should be noted that the real goal in this book is helping the people involved in the British deep state and relevant structures to correct their ways. Hopefully, they will realize the errors of their ways by means of the concrete evidence provided here and be inspired to correct their mistakes. It should also be noted that the world is a place for the struggle between the supporters of the Mahdi and the dajjal. This needs to be an efficient struggle carried out by intellectual means. By the grace of God, it is certain that the supporters of the Mahdi, who are on the side of peace and love regardless of their faith, will be triumphant in the End Times that we are living through. For this reason, uncovering the people that unintentionally became supporters of the dajjal and helping them correct their ways should be the goal of the supporters of the Mahdi.
Be patient. But your patience is only by God. Do not be grieved by them and do not be constricted by the plots they hatch. God is with those who fear Him and with those who are good-doers. (Qur’an, 16:127-128)
All Power Belongs to God
Throughout this chapter, a secretive dajjal movement that has managed to exert influence over the world through various means has been described. Despite all these facts, the readers should keep one thing in mind: this life is a test. This is why good and evil were created. Good and evil will always be engaged in conflict and therefore, supporters of good and supporters of evil must pick their sides. But most importantly, God creates good and evil. Neither of them is independent from God. Therefore, both the goals and ambushes of the evildoers are under God’s control. No matter how much they try, they cannot do anything other than what God wills.
The entire power, authority and rule belongs to Almighty God, the Lord of all worlds, Who has control over all worlds, Who is aware of everything and Who has infinite power.
Therefore, no matter how strong and invincible the secret powers that build these traps might seem, they are insignificant and worthless in the Sight of God. They are servants of God that need Him every moment. As God explains in the following verse, even if their plots are as strong as to make the mountains vanish, they are bound to fail in the face of His infinite power.
They concocted their plots, but their plots were with God, even if they were such as to make the mountains vanish. (Qur’an, 14:46)
The contents of this book are intended to expose the dajjal system that became deeply seated as a part of the trial in this world, and also to show the ways to counter it intellectually. Good people should carry out a counter operation to show their goodness and to intellectually end the tyranny. This is a way for an individual to prove himself to God. It should not be forgotten that God also created the plots of the dajjal, but as plots doomed to fail. They will fail, but God wants reasons and means for that failure to take place. Those who make an intellectual effort towards that goal will be the means for the failure of those plots.
It should also be remembered that there are countless people in this world who are persecuted. In the face of this grave situation, most people choose to stand by only to be able to stay out of harm’s way. They think that they are helping themselves if they keep quiet in the face of tyranny. However, God wants us to help the oppressed and persecuted. There is no doubt that God will remove all tyranny in the world and will do justice for the oppression of the weak. However, the situation in this world is ‘our’ time to make an effort, as a part of our test. It is our duty to do everything we can intellectually and scientifically and ally with our Christians and Muslim brothers to end this tyranny by trusting God, by seeking refuge in Him, and by asking His help.
We are now living in the End Times, the time when we will witness the appearance of Hazrat Mahdi and the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon them both). As God gave us its glad tidings in the Qur’an, Torah, Gospel, and the hadiths [sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)], this will be a time when oppression and bloodshed end and are replaced with peace, love and compassion. We know that no matter how powerful the plans or the supporters of the dajjal, they will be defeated by Mahdi and the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon them). No tyranny will be left in the End Times as everyone, with the guidance of Mahdi and the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon them), will move towards the good and beautiful. It is our duty to God to do our part in changing humanity for the better and preparing it for this blessed era.
God confirms the Truth by His words, even though the evildoers hate it. (Qur’an, 10:82)
PART II World War One and the British Deep State
A New Ottoman Policy
World War I was both the final and the military phase of the British deep state’s century-old policy to maintain and expand its global exploitation system, and to eliminate any threats to its reign. The first steps of the strategy was economic, political as well as diplomatic, and mostly targeted the two big empires that Britain considered rivals during the 19th century. The first was the German Colonial Empire. Germans had been getting stronger in Europe as well as in world’s colonial markets, emerging as Britain’s primary rival. The second one was the Ottoman Empire, which had long been the target of British fascination.
The case of Germany wasn’t really complicated. The progress and growth of the Empire had to be stopped one way or another.47 However, it was a different story when it came to the Ottoman Empire. The British deep state benefited from its continuance but, at the same time, was worried about it. It was because the Empire was strategically and economically important for Britain. The Middle East, which then belonged to the Ottomans, incorporated rich lands like the Eastern Mediterranean, Egypt, Suez and Palestine, and sat on the way to India, thus carrying huge significance for the British hegemony. For this reason, the British deep state felt obliged to carefully manage and control any scenario that involved the Ottoman Empire.
If the Ottoman Empire, which at the time was going through difficult days, found a way to get back on its feet, it would have been the undisputed leader of an unrivalled world-wide power; the Islamic Union. But the British deep state considered such an Ottoman-led Islamic Union as a great threat and a potential rival. On the other hand, if the Ottoman Empire fell, there was little doubt that Tsarist Russia or the German Empire, the other two important powers of the time, would make claims on it. This would be an abrupt end to the ambitious British deep state’s dreams for the Middle East.
For these reasons, following the Treaty of Berlin in 1878, the British deep state made significant policy changes towards the Sublime Porte, in other words, the Central Government of the Ottoman Empire. Although it had already seized the control of Cyprus and Egypt –which were Ottoman territories– it still didn’t want the Empire to come down in an uncontrolled manner. The British deep state didn’t want any development that could threaten its interests, and the preservation of Ottoman territorial integrity suited its interests most. Meanwhile, it stepped up its economic and political pressure on the Ottoman Empire to make it more dependent on the British deep state, which was a part of its multi-staged control-building process. During this time, it continued to maintain its friendly façade towards the Ottomans, but nevertheless continued with its sly and nefarious policies behind closed doors.
By the end of the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire had enough of the oppressive policies, deceits and tricks of the British deep state and chose to form friendly ties with the Germans instead. This move changed everything. Not wanting to let go of its dreams for the Ottoman lands, the British deep state dropped the pretense of wanting to preserve the Ottoman Empire’s territorial integrity.
Systematic dismemberment and invasion of Ottoman lands now seemed the only acceptable option to the British deep state. This was the only way to reach its ultimate goal of world rule. However, only a massive war, carefully planned and devised from beginning to the end, including its belligerents and outcomes, could justify military occupation and help achieve this goal. In other words, World War I was the final resort of the British deep state when it saw that all other means, the strategic, economic and political, to reach its century-old goal, had been exhausted.
Now let’s see from the start the infamous steps that led to this military campaign.
An Economic Ambush by the British to Speed up the Fall of the Ottoman Empire: The Treaty of Balta Liman
By the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire was struggling under the heavy weight of military, political and economic pressure from the European states. In 1827, as the Greek uprising was raging on, the British, French and Russian fleets attacked and heavily defeated the Ottoman navy in Navarino, while Russians annexed Edirne and came dangerously close to Istanbul during the Russo-Turkish war of 1828-29. In the face of these developments, Sultan Mahmud II decided to end the war with the Treaty of Edirne of 1829. The independence declaration of the Greeks changed the course of events. During the Greek uprising, Mahmud II promised to give the governorship of Mora to Egypt’s then governor Muhammad Ali Pasha if he helped suppress the uprising. However, when the Greeks declared their independence the deal was broken. When Mahmud II also refused to give the governorship of Damascus to Muhammad Ali Pasha, the so-called ‘Egypt problem’ ensued. French sided with Egypt, while British remained neutral. These developments prompted the Ottomans to sign a pact of non-aggression and alliance, the Treaty of Hünkar İskelesi, with the Russians in 1833.
Concerned that it might be losing the Ottomans to the Russians, the British deep state enlisted the help of France to protest the treaty. It even went as far as sending one British fleet to Izmir. With Austria’s help, it managed to convince the Tsar to withdraw from the treaty and promised the Ottomans its support against the Russians and Muhammad Ali Pasha. Surely, this service wouldn’t come for free. The British deep state’s service was offered in exchange for a new ‘free trade agreement’ (the Treaty of Balta Liman) to expand the capitulations previously granted. The anglophile grand vizier Mustafa Reşid Pasha also played an important role in talking the Sultan, who was on his deathbed at the time, into signing the treaty.
This treaty, which was devised as a fait accompli by the British amidst slogans of ‘westernization’, ‘liberalization’ and ‘development’, in truth proclaimed the downfall of the Empire. With this treaty, Britain was basically dragging the Ottoman Empire, which was already half way to becoming a colony, into an economic pit from which it would not be able get out again. With the Treaty of Balta Liman, the Western states, particularly Britain, were given many privileges and concessions that went well beyond the limits of capitulations. This effectively made the Ottoman Empire an open market for the British and other Europeans.
The treaty was full of one-sided and binding clauses against the interests of the Ottomans. In addition to existing capitulations, subjects and ships of Great Britain were given new privileges, which would be effective ‘forever’. The situation was so odd that while the Turkish merchants paid 12% taxation, British merchants paid only 5% for their domestic trade. If a British merchant or his agent bought a Turkish product for export, that merchant or agent would not be subjected to any trade limitations and could trade for free.
Henry Palmerston, the then British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, called the treaty Capo d’Opera (a masterpiece) due to the unheard-of advantages it offered to the British.48 In the meantime, the British deep state continued with its classic hypocrisy and friendly façade towards the Ottoman Empire, praised the country, which it had slyly pushed to the brink of collapse, with compliments like ‘the country that applies free trade in the broadest manner among all countries in the world’. Therefore, considering what happened in the past, it is crucial to adopt a cautious approach to similar praises, or promises made by modern representatives of the British deep state.
With the Treaty of Balta Liman, tariff walls against foreign markets were removed and all registrations and records in domestic trade were lifted without any protective measures. This development dealt a serious blow to young Turkish industry, unready yet for foreign competition. Industries that depended on local production like cotton, silk, wool, angora products, leather processing, mining, and agriculture were seriously affected and couldn’t help but disappear. After a while, these products were no longer processed and were sold to foreigners as raw materials for very low prices. Many local industry products, which prior to 1838 easily met the domestic demand and were also exported, could be obtained almost only through import by 1850.
On the other hand, the falling tax revenues from foreign trade due to new privileges given to Westerners, coupled with the effect of deficits in the state budget, placed a heavy burden on the Ottoman Empire, leading to a major economic crisis. Already struggling with the crippling costs of the Crimean War of 1854, the Ottoman Empire for the first time in its history resorted to foreign debts in a bid to get its economy back on its feet. Britain enthusiastically supported the move. As a result, the Ottomans borrowed a total of £3 million from Palmer in London and Goldschmidt in Paris on August 24, 1854. The loan was secured against the Egyptian taxes.
This move marked the beginning of intense borrowing, which couldn’t be paid off even long after the Ottoman Empire came down. In only twenty years after the first loan in 1854, the Empire declared a total default and bankrupted. In the run-up to WWI, the Ottoman Empire had borrowed 243 million Ottoman Liras, which made the total amount of foreign debt 409 million Ottoman Liras.
The inability to pay back the loans allowed the creditors to gain control of the biggest revenue sources of the Empire. The Ottoman Public Debt Administration (Düyun-u Umumiye) was established during the rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II. Even though the name suggests that it was an Ottoman institute, it had a completely foreign administration that consisted of seven people representing the creditors: British, Dutch, French, German, and Italian among others. This commission monitoring the foreign debt of the Ottoman Empire seized the entire revenues from tobacco, salt, silk, stamp and fish taxes, which comprised more than one third of the state’s budget. Another reason for the selection of these particular items was that these taxes were the easiest to collect, not to mention the most dependable.
Officers from the Ottoman Public Debt Administration under British control would go and seize the produce of farmers and collect taxes with the help of the gendarme forces. Numerous cases of cruel treatment at the hands of the Ottoman Public Debt Administration officers that used gendarme for their purposes can be found in historical accounts.
The Republic of Turkey that was born out of the ashes of the Ottoman Empire took over these massive debts that spelled the end of the Empire. However, it was only one century later when the young republic was able to completely pay them off. It should be noted that in 1838, when the Treaty of Balta Liman was signed with the British, the Ottoman Empire had no foreign debts. However, the sinister British deep state plans made the Ottomans not only heavily indebted, but turned its many previous allies into adversaries, most notably Russia.
The first foreign debt the Ottomans obtained from Britain by means of British deep state ruses marked the beginning of the end. The free trade treaty imposed on the Ottoman Empire, and the subsequent crisis and bankruptcy, clearly point to the sinister, intricate, multi-staged and long-term plans of the British deep state when it wishes to bring countries to the brink of collapse.
How the British Deep State Plotted the Lead-up to the War
According to many historians, the true date of the fall of the Ottoman Empire was December 20, 1881, the date when the Ottoman Public Debt Administration was founded. Strangely, even though it could have, the British deep state didn’t take any military action against the Ottoman Empire for 37 years, until WWI broke out. The only reason for not doing so was its reluctance to share the Ottoman lands with other powers of the time like France, Germany and Russia, which were also hungrily eyeing the prospects.
For this reason, the British deep state chose to wait until a more convenient time, when it could get rid of its competitors and start an invasion process for the Ottoman lands, which would be exclusively under its control. The date set was WWI. In the lead-up to the Great War, the British deep state managed to get the Germans into the Central Powers and financed the Bolshevik Revolution to keep the Russians out of its way. It was no coincidence that British Lord Alfred Milner was one of the biggest financers of the Bolshevik Revolution. As the readers will recall from the previous chapter, Milner was the head and organizer of the ‘Round Table’ group, one of the deep powers of the British deep state. Lord Rothschild also supported this group.49
As previously mentioned, prior to WWI, almost every country in the world considered the Ottoman Empire as a failed state. The British deep state, however, considered it more useful to British interests to preserve the Ottoman’s territorial integrity until the final blow was dealt. To this deep structure, a slow and gradual breakdown, as well as continued dependence of the Empire on Britain, was preferable because the Ottoman territories were crucial to Britain’s strategic and economic interests. On the other hand, discovery of rich oil reserves in Mesopotamia and Iran by the end of 19th century was stoking the hunger of Britain even more, which had an advanced industry.
When the Russians seized the Balkans and dangerously came down to Yeşilköy, leading to the subsequent Treaty of Berlin on July 13, 1878, the British policy to preserve the territorial integrity suddenly changed. From that point on, Britain dropped its mask of ally and friend, and started its military campaign, not wanting to miss any part of the Ottoman lands. It started by invading the island of Cyprus on May 25, 1878, with the pretense of using it as a base against the Russians and helping the Ottomans in the process, deployed its troops to the island and obtained control of it. Sultan Abdul Hamid II, under pressure from the British deep state, without hesitation, obliged and presented Cyprus to the British, who used the excuse of helping the Ottomans against the Russians.
Abdul Hamid II’s Gift to Britain: Cyprus
A British officer, Captain J. M. Kinneir wrote about the importance of Cyprus for Britain after he paid a visit to the island in 1814:
The possession of Cyprus would give to England a preponderating influence in the Mediterranean, and place at her disposal the future destinies of the Levant. Egypt and Syria would soon become her tributaries, and she would acquire an overawing position in respect to Asia Minor, by which the Porte might at all times be kept in check, and the encroachments of Russia, in this quarter, retarded if not prevented. It would increase her commerce in a very considerable degree; give her the distribution of the rich wines, silks and other produce of that fine island; the rice and sugar of Egypt, and the cotton, opium and tobacco of Anatolia.50
Former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli voiced similar thoughts and said Cyprus was “the Key of Western Asia”51 and continued saying that any state that wished to control the Middle East should have controlled Cyprus.
The British deep state has always wanted Cyprus, an island with a significant strategic position, and waited for the decline era of the Ottoman Empire to take action. It was sure that Abdul Hamid II, a sultan that it kept under pressure, would give in to its demands. So when the right time came, it put its devious gradual plans into action.
On May 10, 1878, Lord Salisbury, British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, instructed Ambassador Austen Henry Layard in Istanbul to start the process for Cyprus. Layard, in response, met Grand Vizier Mehmed Rushdi Pasha on May 23 and assured him that Britain would ignore the Treaty of San Stefano and a new treaty would be prepared in favor of Turkish interests where British would prevent any new Russian attempts to invade any places other than Kars, Ardahan and Batum. However, there was a catch: British wanted to be in charge of Cyprus’ administration.52 Ambassador Layard met Abdul Hamid II on May 25 and claimed that the Treaty of San Stefano was against the interests of the Ottoman Empire, that Britain wanted to help the Porte but had to send supplies to the Navy from Malta and London, for which Cyprus should be temporarily left to the British.53 The persistence proved useful for British deep state and on June 4, 1878, before the Treaty of Berlin was signed, the Cyprus Convention was signed between the British and the Ottomans. According to the agreement, Great Britain would occupy the island and control it on behalf of the Sultan. Revenues -after the costs incurred by the British were deducted- would be annually sent to the Ottoman treasury, while the Ottoman authorities would continue to be in charge of justice, religion and educational institutes. This agreement allowed Britain to obtain the control of the island, which could be compared to a battleship in its quest to secure the Suez Canal and the vital route to India.
Abdul Hamid II allowed the British Army to invade the island and rule it during that period. However, over time three more additions were made to the agreement. The first additional agreement dated July 1, 1878 gave the Sultan the right to sell the lands on the island he owned, and obligated the British to buy them if the lands were nationalized. This way, the money for the lands sold was sent directly to Abdul Hamid II. The subsequent additions required the British to send the taxes collected in Cyprus to the Ottoman Empire, after necessary administrational costs were deducted. Many historians interpret this practice as the rental of Cyprus by Abdul Hamid II. However, British never paid the money and said they were offset against the Ottoman debts to Britain.
When WWI broke out, Britain declared that it officially annexed Cyprus. At the Conference of Lausanne, Turkey had to officially accept the situation on Cyprus. In other words, the Cyprus ‘gift’ of Sultan Abdul Hamid II to the British could be considered the first step in the British plan to physically invade the Ottoman Empire.
Interestingly, before and after the failed coup attempt in Turkey on July 15, 2016, the British deep state heavily increased its military presence at its South Cyprus base. When asked, the British explained their reasons for sending warplanes, helicopters, landing ships and special forces to the region as ‘rescuing British citizens if Turkey suffers a second coup attempt’. The British authorities also claimed that ‘if found necessary’ the British forces entering the Turkish land would also be authorized to fire.54 Both the Turkish public and the Turkish media considered this as ‘an invasion plan’.
As this example also shows, the usual tactic of the British deep state is first instigating unrest in a country through coup attempts, riots or civil wars in a bid to financially, politically and militarily weaken the country. The second stage is a military campaign with the pretense of ‘protecting its citizens’, ‘humanitarian aid’, ‘humanitarian intervention or ‘peacemaking’. A quick look at the historical events will clearly reveal examples of this British deep state strategy.
Strangely enough, one hundred years later Cyprus was once again the central point of the British deep state’s plans to invade Turkey. This is more reason to suspect that the next stages of their secret plans will be similar to those of the past. Indeed, this is exactly what happened when the British deep state took over first Cyprus and then Egypt in 1882.
By the grace of God, on July 15, the President of the Turkish Republic, the government, security forces and most importantly the Turkish people have effectively blocked this sinister British deep state plan. However, this doesn’t mean that the danger is gone and the plan is no longer there. The British deep state is seeking new ways to carry out its nefarious plans. For this reason, it is crucial that we are aware the threat still exists and are on our guard at all times. By God’s leave, the British deep state will never be able to achieve its dark plans for Turkey.
The British Deep State’s Plans to Invade Egypt
During those early days, the Suez Canal became not only a very important path that connected Britain to its colonies in the Far East; it also multiplied the trade value of the Eastern Mediterranean. For this reason, after the canal was opened in 1869, the British dragged Egypt into a pitfall of debt through economic and political games, caused it to bankrupt and then used the bankruptcy as a justification for invasion. This was another British deep state invasion plan against an Ottoman territory.
Britain knew all along that Russia advanced on Ottoman lands to capture Egypt so that it could gain control of the Eastern Mediterranean. Indeed, Tsar Nicholas had proposed to British Ambassador Hamilton Seymour that they share the Ottoman Empire, calling the Porte a ‘sick man’ and he wanted Crete and Egypt to be left to them. For this reason, the British deep state knew that it had to act quickly and make the first move. So it began to sow seeds of sedition and separation among the people of Egypt and by means of provocation and propaganda, managed to convince some Egyptians to riot against the Ottoman Empire. The ostensible leader of the riot was Colonel Ahmed ‘Urabi, also known as Arabi Pasha, who was a member of the British deep state.
Arabi Pasha laid siege to Alexandria, which was also home to hundreds of British people, and at the instigation of the British deep state, massacred thousands of people in the city and burned their houses down. This was a part of the plan though, because the British deep state needed a justification to invade the country. Following the planned massacre by Arabi Pasha, Britain and France sent fleets to Egypt ‘to save their citizens’, and relentlessly pounded the city of Alexandria for six and a half hours, completely destroying the city. The British deep state didn’t refrain from killing its own citizens, although the campaign was supposedly initiated to save them.
The British deep state played an intricate game of control for the Suez Canal and didn’t even flinch when it had to sacrifice its hundreds of citizens to win it. In the end, having suppressed the rebels, which were already under its control, the British army carried out a formal parade in front of the former governor. On the surface, Egypt was still Ottoman, but in truth, it was under complete British control. When the Porte raised objections, the British deep state instigated riots in Serbia, Montenegro, Bulgaria and finally provoked the Armenians in a bid to bully the Ottoman Empire into silence.
The British Deep State’s Schemes to Prevent the Islamic Union
The biggest fear of the British deep state was Germany supporting the Ottoman policy of ‘Pan-Islamism’.55 If this spirit of unity that the Ottomans sought to rekindle in Islamic countries came to be, the centuries old plots of the British deep state would be ruined. The goal of the British deep state has always been preventing the rise of an Islamic Union, which it knew would be the biggest threat to its interests.
The system of dajjal that currently manages the global tyranny and exploitation system of the British deep state considers an invincible Islamic Union, the representative of the Divine truth and justice, the biggest threat to its survival. It is well aware that the Mahdi (pbuh) will establish and then lead the Islamic Union to intellectually destroy the system of dajjal. Fourteen hundred years ago, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) told how the Mahdi (pbuh) would emerge from Istanbul along with all the portents of this blessed event. This is why the British deep state has been focusing on the region for the past two centuries and why breaking apart Turkey and capturing Istanbul has become a crucial goal and a Megali Idea for it. However, it should be known that no matter how complicated, intricate and multi-staged the plans and strategies of dajjal supporters might be, they cannot escape from being a part of the destiny that leads to the emergence of the Mahdi (pbuh). In the end, by the grace of God, all these developments will serve the Mahdi (pbuh), whose arrival will bring peace and justice to the entire world.
Although the supporters of the dajjal system act with impressive skills and immense resources, as well as direct support from satan, they display an equally high level of idiocy. Because of that, they cannot see the infinite wisdom of God and that God’s plans will overrule all other plans. For this reason, the dajjal system is doomed to fail every time. Falsehood has always been defeated by the truth and it will always be so.
He [God] sends down water from the sky and river-beds fill up and flow according to their size, and the floodwater carries with it an increasing layer of scum; a similar kind of scum comes from what you heat up in the fire, when you desire to make jewelry or other things. That is how God depicts the true and the false. As for the scum, it is quickly swept away. But as for that which is of use to people, it remains behind in the ground. That is a metaphor, which God has made. (Qur’an, 13:17)
The Great War Is Looming
Prior to WWI, the British deep state stepped up its pressure and threats towards the Ottoman Empire and in an atypical fashion, deliberately created tension. British Prime Minister Lord Salisbury, known for his hatred of the Turks, was frequently heard saying to people in his immediate circle how the Turkish lands should be shared. He would attempt to insult the Ottoman Empire with statements like ‘too rotten to survive’ and suggested that its territories should be shared by big states, particularly Britain.
His letter to Ottoman Grand Vizier Said Pasha on June 28, 1895, was full of threats:
Every day the opinion grows that the Ottoman state will not endure.56
General feeling [in Britain] is increasingly to the effect that the Ottoman Empire will not continue to exist.57
With the start of the 20th century, the British deep state reassessed its friends and foes according to the plans it made for the post-war era. Russia was no longer a rival, but Germany was. It was carefully avoiding a friendly attitude towards the Ottoman Empire and pursued a passive policy. Accordingly, Edward VII of Britain and Nicholas II of Russia met at the Bay of Reval on June 8-9, 1908 and signed a treaty. These developments were clear signs that the British deep state was making good on Salisbury’s threat in his letter that read ‘What contributes to the existence of the Ottoman Empire, is the fact that Britain is not allied with Russia. If an alliance comes out, the Ottoman Empire will perish.’58
All these pre-war strategies of the British deep state were designed to establish who would be on its side, and who would be against it during the war. The only thing left was writing the script for the events that would start the war.
The British Deep State’s Policy to Dismember the Ottoman Empire
The British deep state slyly set the stage for the Great War, creating small but irritating reasons for tension between the European countries and empires. In the end the situation turned into a ticking time bomb. Finally, through a vile assassination by a hit man, the British deep state started WWI.
The Ottoman Empire always believed that the Allied Powers would win if the war started. Therefore, it made its best efforts to reconcile with Britain, France and Russia and ally with them. The Ottoman government of the time made numerous contacts and attempts through the triumvirate of Enver, Talat and Cemal Pashas. However, Britain would never agree to it, as one of the most important goals of the war was taking the Ottoman territories. Naturally, these efforts came to nothing. Britain declined each and every time the Ottomans offered alliance or non-aggression pacts.
Running out of options, the Sublime Porte had to forge an alliance with the Germans and joined the war on their side, exactly as the British deep state had planned. As soon as the Ottoman Empire joined the war, the British deep state quickly began its project of dismembering the Empire. Two days before Britain officially declared war on the Ottoman Empire, on November 3, 1914, it announced that it annexed Kuwait. On November 5, it announced that it invaded Cyprus and on December 18, 19, it announced that it annexed Egypt. These moves not only bolstered its control over Egypt and the Mediterranean, they also enabled it to control the seaways to the Middle East.
In the meantime, as a part of its plan to destroy the Ottoman Empire from within, it began to provoke Indians, Arabs and other minorities against the Ottomans. This way, it hoped, the dissolution of the Empire would be faster, easier and with the least casualty for its side.
The members of the British deep state began their sedition by spreading nationalist sentiments among the Ottoman constituents and inciting riots. The primary goal of the propaganda was preventing Indian Muslims and Arabs from joining the fight on the side of the Ottoman Empire when the Caliph declared ‘Call to Arms’. It also wished to stop a potential Islamic army from forming. The notorious deep state agents of the time, like Captain T. E. Lawrence and Gertrude Bell, were used to provoke Arabs against the Ottoman Empire.
Accordingly, the British deep state signed treaties with Sheikh Sayyid of Sabya in Yemen on April 30, 1915, with Saudi Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Saud on December 26, and with the Qatar Sheikh on November 3, 1916. As a result of the British deep state’s Arab sedition, the ‘Call to Arms’ of the Ottoman Empire dated November 23, 1914 was left largely unanswered.
The British arguments intended to undermine the ‘Call to Arms’ reflected a very sly and divisive strategy. A memorandum handed out by a British cruiser that came off shore of Jeddah on June 4, 1915, included the following perfidious allegations:
- The Call to Arms of the Ottoman Empire was invalid, because it was cooperating with a Christian country (Germany),
- Germany, taking advantage of the difficult position of the Porte, fooled the Turkish government with promises and money and pushed them into a wrong war,
- Germans made the Ottomans declare war to provoke millions of Muslims living under British rule against Britain, because it was Germany’s archenemy,
- If Muslims accepted the call for the greatest struggle, they would be sacrificing themselves for the interests of Germany,
- Muslims living under British, French and Russian rule were against the wrong policies of the Turks.
Aga Khan, one of the religious leaders of India at the time and who was also an avowed anglophile, acted as an advocate for British deep state interests and made the following accusations towards the Ottoman Empire:
Now that Turkey has so disastrously shown herself a tool in German hands she has not only ruined herself but has lost her position as Trustee of Islam and evil will overtake her.59
Through such provocative arguments, many Arabic and Muslim communities that were subordinate to the Ottoman Empire were turned against the Ottomans and prevented from answering the Sultan’s Call to Arms. This development enabled the British deep state to more easily manipulate these minorities and cause them to riot and declare independence. Now no longer a part of the Empire, these former Ottoman lands couldn’t protect themselves from coming under British deep state’s control.
The British Manages to Incite Some of the Arabs against the Turks
The first step in the plan of the British deep state was preventing the Islamic Union from forming by undermining the Ottoman Empire’s Call to Arms and separating the Arabs from the Ottomans so that it could add new colonies to its rule. Arabs were living on lands that were not only the most strategic passage points in the world; their lands were also home to rich oil reserves.
The representatives of the British deep state first made contact with Hussein, the Hashemite Arab leader and Sharif of Mecca, who was appointed in 1909 and was infamous for his rebellious and threatening attitude towards the Ottoman Empire. The British deep state promised him full support and a big kingdom after the war, if he started a riot against the Ottomans. Of course, this promise was nothing other than another British deep state trick used for temporary pawns. In truth, the British had already shared these regions with France with the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement signed in April 1916. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 also said that there would be a Jewish state in Palestine. Neither of those plans made any references to the so-called ‘Great Arab Kingdom’ promised to Sharif Hussein.
Nevertheless, Sharif Hussein, with dreams of being the king of a ‘Great Arab Kingdom’, made a deal with Sir Henry McMahon, the British High Commissioner in Cairo, and started the riot on June 27, 1916. The uprising was financed with British gold, amounting close to £1 million.60
British Ambassador Reader Bullard to Jeddah called Sharif Hussein a ‘cunning, lying, credulous, suspicious, obstinate, vain, conceited, ignorant, greedy, cruel Arab sheikh’.61 He was indeed an anglophile that didn’t refrain from betraying his own people and country for his personal dreams of gaining important positions. He had all the typical characteristics of the hypocrites the British deep state has picked from among Muslim communities throughout history for purposes of causing sedition.
It should be stated here that contrary to general belief, not all the Arabs joined in this betrayal and revolt. The official British records refer to this riot as the ‘Great Arab Revolt’ and state that all Arabs participated in it. This is a deliberate misinformation, an anti-propaganda intended to fuel Turkish-Arabic animosity in the long term. According to British author Robert Lacey, it was nothing but a joint British-Hashemite betrayal staged against the Ottoman Empire.62
Unsurprisingly, the British deep state didn’t have any trouble locating hypocrites and sycophants amongst the Arabs to serve the British deep state interests. These hypocrites that betray their nations and countries for petty gains, in truth gain nothing, because the British deep state never keeps its promises to them once they are done with them. Moreover, these people can’t even realize that they make themselves miserable by sacrificing their dignity and honor, and eventually cannot escape becoming outcasts. Such people are described as follows in one verse of the Qur’an:
… Anyone who takes satan as his protector in place of God has clearly lost everything. He makes promises to them and fills them with false hopes. But what satan promises them is nothing but delusion. The shelter of such people will be hell. They will find no way to escape from it. (Qur’an, 4:119-121)
In his book Fahreddin Paşa’nın Medine Müdafaası (Fahreddin Pasha’s Defense of Medina), Feridun Kandemir explains why it would be wrong to attribute the Sharif Hussein revolt to the entire Arab society:
Throughout the entire war, Arabs fought alongside the Turks in every frontier, starting with Gallipoli. Indeed, even during our War of Independence, many Arabs fought Greeks together with Turkish soldiers at the Aydın front and were martyred as a result. In WWI, there was not a single Arab that revolted against Turks in Arab majority areas, like Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen or Palestine. The only one that revolted was Hussein, the Sharif of Mecca… The Arabs that Sharif recruited for this revolt were impoverished Bedouins that lived as nomads in the deserts of Hejaz that used to live on looting; they were Urbans. Not only did the Arabs in cities and towns like Mecca, Taif, Jeddah hadn’t participated in the riot; Sharif Hussein didn’t even attempt to recruit them. However Urban and its relevant sheikhs were poor and only looked for finances. The British was aware of this just like Sharif Hussein and used the power of money to tempt and use them until the revolt achieved its purpose.63
This fact is also mentioned in the British resources. A British diplomat, Sir Henry McMahon, also said that the reason why he provoked Sharif Hussein into rising up was to shake the loyalty of Arab soldiers fighting on the side of the Ottomans:
At that moment a large portion of the [Turkish] forces at Gallipoli and nearly the whole force in Mesopotamia were Arabs, so that the Arabs were between the two. Could we give them some guarantee of assistance in the future to justify their splitting with the Turks? I was told to do it at once and in that way I started the Arab movement.64
As McMahon clearly admits, the British deep state carried out intense propaganda and made false promises to tear the Arabs away from the Ottoman Empire. Despite that, they managed to influence only a small group of Arabs. However, the British deep state’s support allowed this minority to gain the upper hand against the Ottoman Empire.
It is important to note one historical fact: When WWI broke out, Egypt was under British control. However, the British deep state was well aware that Egyptians would seek to join the Ottoman ranks in the war, and therefore excluded Egypt from their war efforts. In other words, the British deep state knew full well that a major part of the Arab subjects of the Ottoman Empire would remain loyal to the Ottoman Empire.65
Key Figure behind Sharif Hussein Revolt: British Spy Lawrence
Despite the massive financial and logistic support of the British, the revolt failed to turn into a movement that represented the entire Arabic world and was rather limited to the participation of four to five thousand armed people. During the riot, one person played an especially key role by helping Mecca Sharif Hussein. He was a British intelligence service agent and an archeologist: Thomas Edward Lawrence. As a British deep state representative, Lawrence collaborated with the Mecca Sharif Hussein and one of his sons, Faisal, to organize the Hashemite Arab uprising against the Ottomans.
British author David Garnett, who wrote a biography of Lawrence, says that he was an arrogant person with a victim complex.66 According to Richard Aldington, Lawrence had ‘pretentious egotism’, was ‘faked, boastful’ and a ‘homosexual’.67 In other words, Lawrence displayed the typical characteristics of the British deep state members.
At this point, it is important to remember that the British deep state takes care to choose homosexuals to do its bidding and especially for risky missions.
Born on August 16, 1888, in Tremadog, Wales as an illegitimate child, Lawrence began to take an interest in Arabs in 1909. Two years later he went to Tripoli for excavations, and began to live with the Arab tribes, dressing and acting like them. Despite his fascination with the Arabs, Lawrence harbored an immense hatred for the Turks. In a letter he sent to Ms. Reider in Oxford on April 5, 1913, he told of his dislike of them:
As for Turkey, down with the Turks! But I am afraid there is, not life, but stickiness in them yet. Their disappearance would mean a chance for the Arabs, who were at any rate once not incapable of good government.68
In another letter he sent to Ms. Reider on September 18, 1914, he voiced his thoughts on the prospect of Turks entering the war:
I have a horrible fear that the Turks do not intend to go to war, for it would be an improvement to have them reduced to Asia Minor, and put it into commission even there.69
After WWI broke out, Lawrence was stationed at the British intelligence office in Cairo as a lieutenant in December 1914. He would interrogate the prisoners of war, draw maps, assess the intelligence reported by agents operating beyond the Turkish lines and build strategies with the input of the Arabs in a bid to destroy the Ottoman Empire.
He later took over the ‘Arab Bureau’ newly set up in Cairo. His unbridled Turkish hatred could not be contained and would show itself on many occasions, including in a letter he sent to his archeologist friend D. G. Hogarth on April 20, 1915:
Poor old Turkey is only hanging together. People always talk of splendid show she has made lately, but it really is too pitiful for words. Everything about her is very very sick…70
After a short while, sent to Iraq on a secret mission by the British War Office, Lawrence re-emerged in April 1916 to help save the 13,000 British troops under General Townshend’s command, who were held under siege by the Turks at Kut Al Amara. Together with Colonel Beach and another British officer named Aubrey Herbert, he met the Turkish General Halil Pasha with the intention of offering him first £1 million hoping that Halil Pasha would release the British garrison. According to the plan, if he rejected, they would double the amount and offer £2 million instead. Halil Pasha, completely disgusted, not only flat out refused the offer, but also exposed their attempted bribery, humiliating them.
In the meantime, the representatives of the British deep state were deep in negotiations with the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein, for his riot against the Ottoman Empire. And Lawrence was trying his best to convince the Iraqi Arabs to join and cooperate with the British army, promising Shia leaders the caliphate. He failed.
After Sharif Hussein started the revolt, Lawrence went to Arabia in October of the same year, this time as a captain. There he met Abdullah, Ali and Zaid, the sons of Sharif Hussein, and Faisal, whom he would later greatly help in his ascension to throne in 1921 in Iraq. Together with other British officers, he helped supply weapons and money to the revolt, which was in its initial stages, and also gathered together and organized the rioting tribes and staged attacks on pre-determined targets.
After joining the forces of Faisal as a communication officer, Lawrence continued his spying activities and participated in the actual fighting against the Turks. With hit-and-run tactics, he inflicted damages on Ottoman units and supply lines and captured Aqaba Port, which won him a medal and the title of lieutenant colonel. He staged attacks on Hejaz railway. Hundreds of Ottoman soldiers were martyred in the ever-intensifying attacks, and the British won the battle. Lawrence didn’t refrain from revealing his twisted state of mind as he boasted about his success:
And we were casting them by thousands into the fire to the worst of deaths, not to win the war but that the corn and rice and oil of Mesopotamia might be ours. The only need was to defeat our enemies (Turkey among them), and this was at last done in the wisdom of Allenby with less than four hundred killed, by turning to our uses the hands of the oppressed in Turkey. I am proudest of my thirty fights in that I did not have any of our own blood shed. All our subject provinces to me were not worth one dead Englishman.71
Lawrence was the principal driving force behind the Arab revolt against the Turks72, and he would also admit that his duty was based on hypocrisy and deceit:
My people have probably told you that the job is to foment an Arab rebellion against Turkey, and for that I have to try and hide my frankish exterior, and be as little out of the Arab picture as I can. So it’s a kind of foreign stage, on which one plays day and night, in fancy dress, in a strange language…73
In the attack staged against the 4th Ottoman Army in September 1918, Lawrence ordered his men to not take any prisoners. As a result, upon the orders of Lawrence, 5,000 Ottoman soldiers were beheaded in a shocking massacre.74 By the end of the same year, together with his entourage of murderers, he entered and terrorized Damascus.
In October 1918, Lawrence set out for Britain, before which he would write the following lines to Major R. H. Scott on October 4:
We were an odd, small group but I believe we changed the course of history in the Middle East.75
In the preface of his Seven Pillars of Wisdom, Lawrence explains how the British deep state, with him as their representative, deceived Arabs with false promises so that they would be convinced to riot against the Turks:
The [British] Cabinet raised the Arabs to fight for us by definite promises of self-government afterwards. Arabs believe in persons, not in institutions. They saw in me a free agent of the British Government, and demanded from me an endorsement of its written promises. So I had to join the conspiracy, and, for what my word was worth, assured the men of their reward… It was evident from the beginning that if we won the war these promises would be dead paper, and had I been an honest adviser of the Arabs I would have advised them to go home and not risk their lives fighting for such stuff: but I salved myself with the hope… I risked the fraud, on my conviction that Arab help was necessary to our cheap and speedy victory in the East, and that better we win and break our word than lose.76
Emir Faisal, the son of Sharif Hussein, who started the riot against the Ottomans and shed Muslim blood, eventually saw through this deceit when he saw that none of the promises given to him were kept and belatedly said:
I’m not going to be able to face the Muslim world. I asked them to fight the Caliph, and to sacrifice. But now I see that the European countries, whose purposes we served, are dividing the Arab countries.77
The Sharif Hussein-Faisal-Lawrence alliance inflicted one of the greatest damages to the Islamic world. The policy of making Muslims fight each other first started with this alliance and now represents the pivotal point of the British deep state’s carefully engineered plans. This example shows the presence of hypocrites that have always existed in Muslim communities. These people fall for the lies of the British deep state and do not refrain from betraying their own countries for petty gains. The British deep state will be a risk for the Islamic world only when it uses hypocrites. For this reason and for the sake of the Islamic world, it is vital that Muslims are extremely careful and wary of the hypocrites that fall for the satanic games and ploys of the British deep state.
Shia Muslims fought alongside the Ottoman Caliph
Britain presumed that the Shia Muslims of Iraq - which it had just occupied - would be on her side and made its plans accordingly. However, Shias answered the ‘call to arms’ of the Ottoman Caliph and fought alongside the Ottoman Empire. The telegram that announced the start of the British occupation and that the Islamic world was under threat was read in all Shia mosques across Iraq. Al-Sayyid Muhammad Kazim al-Yazdi, the top Shia authority called on all Shia to defend Al Kaaba Al Musharrafah, Al-Masjid an-Nabawī and the tombs of the imams. He also sent his son Sayyid Muhammad to war. Shia Sheikh Ash-Shariati al-Esfahani supported the call and said ‘those who are being too lazy to chase the British away are committing a great sin’. Furthermore, in the city of Kadhimiya, Sheikh Mahdi al-Khalissi issued a fatwa and said that Muslims should ‘spend everything they had for defending Islam until the threat of disbelief was completely gone’. The Shias announced that ‘they would join forces with the Ottoman Empire to drive the infidels out of the Islamic geography and that Turks were their brothers in religion and that they would help Turks to drive the British out of those lands’. Kuwait’s Emir Muhammara was about to send troops to support the British, but decided not to, when he saw this commendable bravery of the Shia. Shia tribes fearlessly went to the battlefield with the Ottoman forces, proceeding along the Tigris and the Euphrates in ships and on foot.
Shia scholars who fought on the Qurna front: Syed Mustafa al-Kashani, Syed Mahdi Khaydari, Sheikh Ash-Shariati al-Esfahani, Syed Ali al-Damad
Shia scholars who fought on the East Basra front: Sheikh Mahdi al-Khalissi, Syed Muhammad, Sheikh Jafar Radi, Sayed Kamal al-Khilli
Shia scholars who fought on the Ash-Shuaybah front: Sayyed Mohammed Said, Sheikh Abdul Karim al-Jazairi, Sheikh Abdul Ridha Radi, Sayyid Muhsin al-Hakim.
50,000 Shia brothers were martyred at the battle in Ash-Shuaybah front. Three thousand troops from Shia were martyred there. Furthermore, Shias played a great role in the Ottoman victory at Kut Al Amara, which was the most important Ottoman victory of WWI, and the biggest defeat of the British deep state. This victory became possible only because Muslims stood united.
Ottoman Battleships Hijacked by the British and the Payment that Was Never Returned
In the early stages of WWI, the Ottoman Empire hadn’t yet joined the war and commissioned three big dreadnoughts from Britain and paid for them in advance. These dreadnoughts, named ‘Sultan Osman’, ‘Sultan Reşadiye’, and ‘Fatih’, had revolutionary technology for the early 20th century. They could move quickly, and were almost like fleets on their own. They were crucial for the improvement of the Ottoman navy and to keep it from suffering defeats on the seas. In early 1900s, land transportation wasn’t as advanced and military prowess was determined by power at sea.
The Ottoman Empire was having financial difficulties and the administration started large-scale donation campaigns to fund the battleships. Fundraising stands were erected in public places and even schoolchildren contributed with their pocket money. Large donations would be rewarded with a ‘Donanma İane Madalyası’ (Navy Donation Medal). Similarly, the ‘Donanma-i Osmanî Muavenet-i Milliyye Cemiyeti’ (Association for the Ottoman Navy) was set up in 1909 and organized fundraising campaigns, parades and even sold products to help raise the required amount for the ships.
The dreadnought ‘Sultan Osman’ was originally called ‘Rio de Janeiro’, because it had been previously commissioned by Brazil. However, when Brazil failed to make payment, the British manufacturer Armstrong put the battleship on sale and the Ottomans purchased it. Even the commander was decided: Hamidiye’s legendary captain, Rauf Bey.
On July 27, 1914, Rauf Bey, on behalf of the Ottoman Empire, went to Newcastle, England to take delivery of the ‘Sultan Osman’ battleship. However, things took an unexpected turn. Having already decided that the Ottomans should be with the Central Powers, the representatives of the British deep state didn’t want to give such an advanced battleship to a country that would fight against them soon.
Churchill was perfectly aware that requisitioning the battleship would cause an immense diplomatic scandal; nevertheless on August 3, 1914, Britain officially declared that it requisitioned the ‘Sultan Osman’ and ‘Reşadiye’. In other words, the British hijacked the battleships of the Ottomans, before even the Turkish flag could be raised. Not only did they confiscate them, they also –completely illegally and unlawfully– refused to return the gold paid for them, which amounted to £12 million. The money had been paid in advance. To put it more accurately, they unabashedly stole the money.
Rauf Bey (Orbay), who was nicknamed the ‘Hero of Hamidiye’ and who would later become the 3rd Prime Minister of the Turkish Republic, recalled the incident with the following words:
The final installment, seven hundred thousand liras had been paid. We wanted to get things done quickly, so decided to skip some tests and agreed with the factory that the ships would be delivered to us on August 2, 1914. However, half an hour before the flag raising ceremony, which was the day after we paid the money, the British requisitioned the Sultan Osman. Although we vehemently protested in line with the procedure, no one stirred…78
The ‘Sultan Osman’ battleship was immediately made a part of the British navy and was renamed ‘Agincourt’. ‘Reşadiye’ was renamed as ‘Erin’ but on the day of her test on August 22, it was seen that her firing equipment was not functioning well. Since it couldn’t be fully repaired and no one would buy it after that development, it was taken apart in 1922.
Rauf Orbay explains:
At the onset of the World War, there was the issue of getting back our gold worth of £12 million, which we paid for our dreadnoughts Sultan Osman, Sultan Reşad and Fatih. They were built before we entered the war, but the British requisitioned although we had fully paid for them. That was clearly the debt of the British…79
That was indeed the debt of the British, but according to the 58th article of the Treaty of Lausanne, the Turkish side surprisingly waived this right, probably under pressure from the British deep state. The 58th article of the treaty reads as follows:
Turkey, on the one hand, and the other Contracting Powers (except Greece) on the other hand, reciprocally renounce all pecuniary claims for the loss and damage suffered respectively by Turkey and the said Powers and by their nationals (including juridical persons) between the 1st August, 1914, and the coming into force of the present Treaty, as the result of acts of war or measures of requisition, sequestration, disposal or confiscation.80
As a matter of fact, this article didn’t apply to the confiscation by the British. The act of theft was carried out in full view of the world and took place before the Ottomans entered the war. It was nothing more than a usual trade activity between the two countries and was therefore not a war-related loss. For this reason, this article of the Treaty of Lausanne didn’t in truth cover the said sequestration. Despite this fact, the British deep state was able to make this hijacking look like it was a war loss. In the end, the Turkish side waived the money paid in full for the dreadnoughts, which were illegally and unlawfully requisitioned by the British government. The person that was in charge of the fraud operation was none other than Winston Churchill; one of the most zealous and loyal members of the British deep state.
The Biggest Defeat of the British Deep State: The ‘Gallipoli Campaign’
As explained previously, WWI was a carefully engineered project of the British deep state and went as planned. Even before there were any talks of a war, Britain had already completed its preparations. It traded its steamships for those running on oil, commissioned 18 new tankers and set up its submarine and aircraft fleets. Even as early as 1911, it began wide-scale drills and made its navy ready for war. It secured French support through diplomatic means. By the time WWI broke out, the British navy -fully renovated- was more than ready.
The planner of these preparations was Winston Churchill, the first Lord of the British Admiralty. A famous Turcophobe and an Islamophobe, Churchill was a loyal member of the British deep state and was the head designer of the Gallipoli Campaign. Before the Ottoman Empire joined the war, Churchill had submitted a project to then British Prime Minister Herbert Asquith on September 1914, and stated that the British navy should pass the Dardanelles Strait and invade Istanbul. Churchill was convinced that as soon as Istanbul was taken, the Ottoman Empire would fall.
In line with the plan, a large Allied naval fleet consisting of 16 battleships led by Admiral John de Robeck on March 18 tried to pass the Dardanelles Strait. However, the mines previously placed by the Turkish minelayer Nusret inflicted serious damage on the ships. Coupled with constant Ottoman shelling that rarely missed, the British dream of passing Gallipoli came to an abrupt end. The defeat on March 18, 1915 caused great shock in Britain.
Although British, French and Anzac troops managed to gain a foothold after landing, the unyielding resistance and constant attack of the Ottoman forces prevented them from taking the Gallipoli Peninsula. Not only did they fail to get through the Turkish defense, they also sustained heavy losses. As a result of this big disappointment in both sea and land fights, the Allied Powers decided to close the Gallipoli front. British Major General Charles Monro sent a report to London following his inspections on site and recommended the evacuation of Gallipoli. Consequently, the British, French and Anzac forces evacuated Gallipoli Peninsula in December 1915. On December 7 the decision to close the front was made, on December 10 the evacuation began and by December 27, 1915, there were no Allied troops left in Gallipoli.
The horrible loss of the Gallipoli massacre carried out by the British is detailed as follows in British sources:
In nine months of bloody slaughter, about 58,000 allied soldiers – including 29,000 British and Irish soldiers and 11,000 Australians and New Zealanders – lost their lives during the ill-starred operation to take the Gallipoli peninsula; a further 87,000 Ottoman Turkish troops died fiercely defending their homeland, and at least 300,000 more on both sides were seriously wounded.81
The Person Truly Responsible for the Gallipoli Defeat: Churchill
As one of the most fervent supporters of British imperialism, Winston Churchill believed that Russians would advance to Istanbul and claim the Straits as soon as they got the opportunity. Therefore, he wanted to act first, believing that he would go down in history if he took Istanbul.
However, Churchill overlooked the spiritual strength of the Turks and thought that as soon as the formidable British ships with modern weapons were seen in the Bosphorus Strait of Istanbul, the Turks would surrender. This was a big mistake and Churchill had to pay for it with a shocking defeat, first at sea, then on land.
Jon Henley from the Guardian pointed out the irrationality of Churchill’s acts in his piece ‘Remembering Gallipoli: Honoring the Bravery Amid the Bloody Slaughter’ and called Churchill the ‘ambitious’ conceiver of the ‘badly planned and appallingly executed’ Gallipoli Campaign.82 Even if he was right about Churchill’s futile ambitions, Henley must have known that the Gallipoli Campaign resulted in a defeat for the British, not because it was appallingly executed, but because of the faith and determination of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and the passion of the Turkish people, resulting from their unshakable faith in God.
Following the fiasco, Churchill resigned as the person primarily responsible for the loss of the British army in Gallipoli (December 1915). When Lloyd George took over as the Prime Minister in 1917, Churchill was appointed as the Minister of Munitions and continued his political career despite minor interruptions. It is interesting that, even after the Gallipoli defeat, Churchill could make a come-back on the political scene. This was possible because he was a loyal –as the British put it– ‘British bulldog’. As a matter of fact, during WWII, instigated by the British deep state, Churchill was again on the scene.
After the British navy and army sustained a heavy defeat in Gallipoli, many criminal investigations were started against Churchill. While before the defeat, he was confident in his skills and made arrogant remarks saying that he would soon be sitting in the center of Muslims, Istanbul, in his navy uniform, he completely changed his tone following the defeat, especially in the face of accusations directed at him. One day, backed into a corner by the criticism, he said: “Don’t you understand? We didn’t fight the Turks at Gallipoli. We fought God and of course we lost.”83 (Certainly Almighty God is above such remarks).
British General Sir Ian Hamilton, who led the Allied forces during the Gallipoli Campaign, would make a similar remark:
We lost not to the physical strength but to the spiritual strength of the Turks because they didn’t even have any gunpowder left. But we fought powers descending from heavens. It was as if, even before we came here our destiny was set and it was being implemented.84
Poisonous Caltrops Used against Turkish Soldiers in the Battle of Gallipoli
The British deep state committed a war crime by using poisonous caltrops during the Gallipoli Battle, which it had produced specifically for Turkish soldiers.
These weapons were made of four sharp nails, each smeared with poison and were constructed to make sure that no matter how they landed, one sharp nail would always point upward.
Thousands of Turkish soldiers, who were wearing only rawhide sandals at the Gallipoli front, unknowingly stepped on these caltrops thrown from airplanes and got gangrene as a result. Because of these poisonous nails, 12,000 soldiers had their legs cut off with saws. The British deep state knew perfectly well that it was a war crime and a crime against humanity, but still didn’t refrain from resorting to this vile method against Turkish soldiers, because due to its sick Darwinist mentality, it didn’t consider Turks as human beings. (The noble Turkish nation is above such claims)
Churchill Planned to Use Chemical Gas on the Turks in Gallipoli
According to the documents at the Churchill Archives Center, Churchill, then Secretary of State for War, claimed that the Turks were not human, but barbarians, and therefore poisonous gas could be used on them.85 Churchill criticized his colleagues for their squeamishness in using chemical weapons, saying: ‘I am strongly in favor of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes.’86 (The noble and respectable Turkish nation is above such remarks) When he faced objections that such an act would be a crime against humanity, he would claim that the only way to gain victory in the Gallipoli battle was through chemical warfare.
At the end of WWI, he pushed for the use of poisonous gas. Despite the horrible casualties that chemical warfare caused on the Western Front, where Churchill himself had seen active duty for six months between 1915 and 1916,87 records showed that he stressed the ‘military value’ of chemical warfare despite the horrific injuries it caused. In fact, ‘he wanted to gas the Turks at Gallipoli.’88
To Churchill, chemical gas was just another advanced weapon British possessed. He told his political colleagues that mustard gas could have a destructive effect and help reach a breakthrough in the Gallipoli war, and hoped that ‘the unreasonable prejudice against the use by us of gas upon the Turks will cease.’ He even took into account the season and claimed the high wind ‘would afford a perfect opportunity for the employment of gas.‘89
One document in the archive penned by Churchill himself, reveals that Churchill requested ‘gas masks’ for the British troops in Gallipoli. In May 1915, at the height of the Gallipoli battle, Churchill told British General Kitchener to send a gas-making outfit to the Dardanelles, as ‘the use of gas on either side might be decisive.‘90 Churchill was arguing with Kitchener that gas should be used on the Gallipoli front as the Turks were without gas masks.91
With this approach, Churchill supported the twisted views of British politician and former Prime Minister William Ewart Gladstone, who vilified the Turks by calling them an ‘anti-human specimen of humanity’ not only because of their religion but because of their race: ‘Let me endeavor very briefly to sketch … what the Turkish race was and what it is… They were, upon the whole, from the black day when they first entered Europe, the one great anti-human specimen of humanity.‘92 (The noble and respectable Turkish nation is above such remarks)
The Ottoman archives also show in great detail how the British used chemical gas during the Gallipoli battle. The Ottoman Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that ‘Allied forces used poisonous gas that caused choking’ and called for an explanation from Britain.93
Famous writer Noam Chomsky also denigrates Churchill for his enthusiasm for using poison gas and quotes him saying, ‘Poison gas would be a fine weapon against uncivilized tribesmen and recalcitrant Arabs.’ (Arabs are certainly above such remarks) He argues Churchill considered chemical weaponry to be simply ‘the application of Western science to military warfare’ and that he had approved the use of it as experiments on Afghans and Arabs.94
After the First World War, David Lloyd George appointed Churchill as the Secretary of State for War and Air. In May 1919, Churchill gave orders for the British troops to use chemical weapons during the campaign to subdue Afghanistan.95
‘The 10 greatest controversies of Winston Churchill’s career’ as detailed by BBC’s website revealed how Churchill used poisonous gas against his enemies: Churchill has been criticized for advocating the use of chemical weapons - primarily against Kurds and Afghans. ‘I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas’, he wrote in a memo during his role as minister for war and air in 1919. ‘I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes‘96, he continued.
The piece continues to reveal the inhumane, sadistic character of the British deep state that Churchill so well represented:
And it’s important to note that he was in favour of using mustard gas against Ottoman troops in WW1, says [Warren] Dockter [a research fellow at the University of Cambridge and the author of Winston Churchill and the Islamic World] …97
The British Deliberately Blinded Turkish Prisoners of War in Egypt’s Sidi Bashir Prisoner Camp
The Ottoman Empire fought on multiple fronts during WWI and the British took many Turkish soldiers as prisoners in these regions. One prisoner camp where the British kept Turkish prisoners of war was Sidi Bashir, situated 15 km northeast of Alexandria, Egypt.
The commander of the camp was the British Lt. Col. Coates. Under the supervision of the military doctor Captain Gillespie, an Armenian physician, one British corporal and 5 British nurses were in charge of the prisoners’ health.
This camp held the Ottoman troops of the 48th regiment of the 16th division that were taken as prisoners in Palestine in 1918. For two years until June 12, 1920, these soldiers were subjected to constant torture, mistreatment, insults and humiliation. One source reveals how the captive Turkish soldiers were martyred due to the inhumane treatment of the British:
Beginning from August 1, 1919, the British started to give horse and donkey meat to all Ottoman prisoners. Forced to eat rotten horse and donkey meat in the scorching heat of Egypt in the middle of August, many couldn’t escape catching dysentery, while some others got a horrible disease resembling mange, which the British doctors called Pellagra, before they died.98
However, this wasn’t the only appalling treatment that the Turkish prisoners encountered at the camp. Historical sources report that British deliberately blinded around 15,000 Turkish soldiers in the camp. This shocking violence caused great outrage during the time and was widely debated at the Turkish Parliament and in the Turkish media throughout 1919, 1920 and 1921. These claims were based on two significant documents. The first is the Turkish Parliament’s decision of June 28, 1921, which was signed by Mustafa Kemal, the Chairman of the Turkish Parliament, and eleven ministers. The decision reads as follows:
Edirne MPs Şeref and Faik Bey presented their notice of motion regarding the troops held captive in Malta, as well as about the British doctors, garrison commander and officers in Egypt who deliberately disabled fifteen thousand prisoners of war, to the Cabinet of Ministers, which submitted the same to the Turkish Parliament on 29.5.337 with number 354/706. The message was read during the meeting of the Cabinet on 28.6.337 and it was decided that scientific investigation is required and the findings shall be presented to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs along with the copy of the notice of motion. June 28, 1337.99
This document is the Turkish parliament’s decision to initiate a criminal investigation into the actions of the British doctors, garrison commander and officers that deliberately disabled 15 thousand prisoners of war in Egypt. Another document is the motion presented by Edirne MPs Faik and Şeref Bey during the 37th session of the Turkish Parliament on May 28, 1921. The last part of the motion refers to the Turkish prisoners of war who were deliberately blinded in Egyptian camps:
In Egypt, the British has deliberately blinded the 15,000 sons of our nation by making them enter baths, which contained cresol more than necessary, with the pretense of disinfecting them. We hereby ask the premeditators of this murderous crime, who are the British physicians, the garrison commander and officers, be declared as criminals…100
After the motion was read at the Turkish Grand National Assembly, Mehmet Şeref Bey took the stage and explained the horrible events:
… When the British took prisoners the sons of our nation from Anatolia and Rumelia, who fought for the dignity and honor of this country, they were directly transferred to Egypt. They were forced to enter baths that had a specially formulated, smelly solution up to their necks… When the Turkish soldiers didn’t want to immerse their heads, British soldiers would come by and force them in with their bayonets. When the helpless dear ones put their heads in the solution, both eyes would go blind. This is how the British blinded 15,000 Turks…101
At the onset of the Turkish War of Independence, the news that the British deliberately blinded Turkish prisoners of war had been widely covered by Istanbul and Anatolian media. People of Konya especially reacted very strongly and a newspaper of Konya, Öğüt covered the news with bold headlines.
As a result, a serious anti-British sentiment spread across Anatolia. It was not long until, upon the orders of the British General Milne, one of the Allied Powers commanders in Istanbul, Öğüt was forced to stop its news about the blinded prisoners of war. Not only did they stop this news; the newspaper was shut down permanently.
This incident drew the attention of Mustafa Kemal, who went to Ankara to organize the War of Independence. As soon as he found out why Öğüt was shut down, he sent a telegram to the Konya Governor on behalf of the Representative Committee, where he condemned the British pressure and attacks on the Turkish media and said that the development should be strongly protested by a rally.102
Another source that details the events is Eyüp Sabri Bey’s book entitled Bir Esirin Hatıraları (Memoirs of a Prisoner of War) written in 1922. Eyüp Sabri Bey was a Gaziantep resident who had previously worked in the Defter-i Hakanı (Directorate for Title Deeds). In his book, he gave a detailed account of how the Turkish prisoners of war were tortured and mistreated under British supervision. Eyüp Sabri Bey recalls his personal experiences when he was in British-controlled Heliopolis prison camp in Egypt and explains the ‘deliberate blinding procedure’ that the Turkish prisoners of war were subjected to:
However, since they [the doctors at the hospital] were given extensive powers, these horrid people felt free to act as they wished and gouged the eyes of our helpless, innocent sons that were prisoners of war there, amidst painful screams. Who is responsible for these murders? I think every conscientious person will agree that in addition to the actual perpetrators, the entire British government is to be held responsible for being the cause of these crimes.
In Abbasiye hospital… the doctors, with metal bars in their hands, sleeves rolled up to elbows, continuously operated on the Turkish soldiers and gouged their eyes out. According to the accounts of many Egyptian brothers and local prisoners, these eye surgeries took place in the past as well, but it intensified especially after the armistice, as the British felt proud with their victory. When we went there, I personally saw that it was going on at full speed.103
These examples of violence and brutality directed at the Turks once again show that the British deep state is the center of the dajjali system. Although this violence caused outrage among both the Turkish public and government, all their time and energy had to be used for the survival of the state and the nation. Therefore, it wasn’t possible to take real action about these outrageous crimes.
Regrettably, this oppression and violence were later denied and swept under the rug, just like countless other crimes of the British deep state throughout history.
Although there were talks about exchanging prisoners of war during the Conference of Lausanne, there is no indication that the situation of the 15,000 Turkish soldiers deliberately made blind was ever discussed. This shows the skill of the British deep state to hide its crimes and its true face and how it employs various threats, intimidation and pressure tactics to achieve its goals.
The Turkish Victory that the British Wishes to Forget: Kut Al Amara
The defeat the British suffered at Kut Al Amara was the second biggest defeat of the British during WWI after the Gallipoli battle. The Kurdish tribes in particular, as well as some Arabic and Shia Arabic tribes, contributed greatly to this phenomenal victory. Many leading Shia families cooperated with the Ottomans during the fight.
As the British were attempting to invade Gallipoli with their formidable military prowess, their plans to invade other parts of the Ottoman territory were also underway. However, after their humiliating defeat at Gallipoli, they shifted most of their focus to the Middle East, North Africa and Iraq fronts and particularly to Baghdad, the heart of the region.
In 1914 they invaded Basra and opened up the Iraqi front. On July 24, 1915, the army led by General Townshend began advancing on Baghdad. To counter the advance, Ottoman units under the command of Nurettin Bey, the commander of Iraq forces, retreated to Kut Al Amara on September 28, 1915. The British troops laid a siege to the city of Kut.
Soon after, the British troops resumed their advance on Baghdad, this time through two different routes. They were forced to stop at Salman Pak by the units led by Nurettin Bey, and had to retreat to Kut Al Amara. The Ottoman troops on their heels arrived at Kut Al Amara on December 5. Now trapped in Kut, the clashes between the British troops and Ottoman troops continued throughout December, until the Ottoman troops completely besieged the former.
Despite numerous relief expeditions coming to the aid of the British, the efforts failed. Since the ammunition and food supplies were running out and supplies transported through the rivers were insufficient, the British army sustained heavy losses both due to hunger and disease. The British launched another attack on March 8, 1916 in Dujaila (Sabis) on the 13th Division of the Ottoman army led by Colonel Ali İhsan Bey, but lost 3,500 soldiers in the Battle of Dujaila and had to withdraw.
On April 22, the British units staged another attack under the command of General Townshend with 5,000 troops but once again failed at the expense of 3,000 soldiers. As the events continued to unfold, the British deep state members were trying everything they could to end the siege and even shamelessly attempted to bribe Halil Pasha. They were perfectly aware that if the siege continued any longer, the British army, already exhausted and drained, would perish completely.
Townshend offered to give Halil Pasha a cheque for one million pounds in addition to their weapons only so that he and his army could walk free. Halil Pasha responded that the British weapons would be of no use to them and dismissed the one million pound bribe offer as ‘a joke’. When the Turks captured a food and ammunition ship the British army sent to resupply their besieged troops, the British had no choice but to surrender. If the ship had reached its intended destination, the siege could have continued for another two months. Turkish soldiers renamed the aid ship to ‘Kendi Gelen’ (literally meaning ‘the one that comes itself’). The ship had three operational machine guns and joined the Ottoman transport fleet.104
After Townshend surrendered, Enver Pasha graciously hosted him and made sure that he lived in a villa in picturesque Heybeli Island until the war ended.
In an article on The Telegraph’s website on December 2, 2015, Patrick Sawer published extracts from the diary of Lieutenant Henry Curtis Gallup who was at Kut Al Amara at the time and later taken as a prisoner of war by the Turks. Sawer explains at the beginning that the British had the intention of invading Iraq, as well as other Ottoman lands, and summarized the sly and double-faced policy of the British deep state and its outcomes:
What had begun as a mission to safeguard oil and liberate Iraq from the Turks ended in ignominy, with hundreds of British and Indian soldiers dying in captivity.105
As this statement makes clear, the British deep state never refrains from deceiving innocent masses and starting large-scaled wars by means of ploys and ruses. In that period of history alone, 9 million people died, 30 million went missing or became disabled, due to the actions of the British deep state. Even today the British deep state maintains the same mentality. The ‘mastermind’ today, that martyrs and disables millions of Muslims in particularly the Middle East by dropping bombs on them, that creates millions of widows, orphans, refugees with the pretense of ‘safeguarding’ and ‘liberating countries’, introducing democracy and peace to them, is the British deep state.
The article goes on to elaborate the Kut Al Amara defeat of the British based on the diaries of Lieutenant Henry Curtis Gallup:
It [Kut Al Amara] was one of the British Army’s worst defeats of the First World War, with starving troops forced to eat their own horses and thousands more killed during an ill-fated rescue attempt.106
The piece reveals the existence of one of the most sinister British deep state methods: making Muslims kill one other:
Gallup’s diary entries detail how the continuous Turkish offensives, and the appalling conditions endured by his comrades, eventually wore down the exhausted British forces. By December 1915 food supplies were desperately low and the prospect of starvation was looming – forcing the soldiers to begin eating their horses. Attempts to relieve the beleaguered troops ended in disaster, with two Indian divisions dispatched by the British halted by the enemy [Turks], with more than 23,000 Indian losses.107
Referred to as the ‘Indian losses’ by the British, those people were all Indian Muslims. In other words, the British hadn’t risked their own soldiers, but used instead unaware Muslim subjects from British colonies, which they made soldiers at gunpoint. This cruel and perfidious strategy of the British deep state is why tens of thousands of Indian Muslims were told to attack their Muslim Turkish brothers at Kut Al Amara and lost their lives. Finally, conceding defeat, the British surrendered to the Ottoman army, after a 6-month siege, on April 29. This historic victory, welcomed with jubilation at all Ottoman fronts, provided a great moral boost to the Turks, while causing great shock in Europe. The British newspapers would cover the Turkish victory on their front pages calling the incident ‘the biggest humiliation for the British after Gallipoli…’
British historian James Morris would call the defeat at Kut ‘the most abject capitulation in Britain’s military history‘.108 Christopher Catherwood, another British historian calls this defeat ‘the worst defeat of the Allies in World War I.‘109
Halil Pasha’s words in the army diary of April 29, 1916 beautifully summarizes the Kut Al Amara victory:
To my army;
Lionhearts!
1- Today the spirits of our martyrs are ascending happily and joyfully in the sunny skies under which Turks achieved a glorious victory while the British suffered a heavy defeat. I kiss you on your pure foreheads and congratulate you all.
2- Praise be to God Who helped us achieve a success, which has been unprecedented for the last 200 years. And God the Almighty gave you the glory to be the ones who for the first time recorded such a defeat in 1,500 years of British history.110 There has not been a similar achievement in the World War, which has been going on for two years now.
3- My Army has given its 350 officers and 10,000 privates as martyrs in both Kut and when facing the armies marched on to save Kut. But, in return, today in Kut, I am taking 13 generals, 481 officers and 13,300 under captivity. English forces, which came to save this now surrendered army, returned with losses of 30,000.
4- Looking at these two numbers, what one can see is an astonishing difference. History will have a great difficulty to find words in recording this episode.
5- We saw the first victory in Gallipoli and the second victory here where the Turkish have broken the stubbornness of the English.111
6- This victory that we achieved only by the means of our bayonets and hearts is the beginning of our future successful ventures.
7- I declare this day the ‘Kut Day’. May every member of my army recite prayers of blessings, Ya Sin and Fatiha for our martyrs and celebrate this day every year. As our martyrs live on in the Heaven, may our gazhis (injured heroes) stand guard for our victories in the future.
Brigadier General Halil
Commander of the 6th Army
29/April /1916- Baghdad112
Interestingly, until 1952 when Turkey became a NATO member, the Turkish Army celebrated ‘Kut Day’ on every 29 April. The British deep state must have not liked to be reminded of it though, because the Victory of Kut was suddenly removed from school curriculums upon the request of the British and the festival was no longer celebrated after that year. It was an attempt to keep the new generations from learning about this victory. This clearly shows how important it is to constantly remember and talk about Kut Al Amara, a massive defeat of the British deep state, and similar victories, with great zeal and determination.
Interesting Details in General Townshend’s memoirs
The commander of the British forces at Kut Al Amara, General Townshend, wrote My Campaign in Mesopotamia, in 1920 to offer his view of the war in Mesopotamia.
According to Townshend, more than one million Indian soldiers –some combatants, some reinforcements- fought for the British army during WWI and of them, 74,000 lost their lives and 67,000 thousand were injured. The 6th British Division included Indians, Sikhs, Bangladeshis, Gurkhas, and Muslim Pashtuns. Townshend explains how the Muslim soldiers amongst his troops didn’t want to fight the Turks during the ‘Battle of Qurna’. In his book he writes that in other battles Muslim troops in the Indian battalions acted in a similar way.1
The historical sources reveal why the Indian Muslims were reluctant to fight Muslim Turks, whom they considered the soldiers of the Caliph. After the Iraq front was opened, Indian Muslims including Shia Indians, refused to fight the Turks. So much so, three Indian regiments refused to participate in the fight near Ctesiphon and instead chose to rebel against the British en masse.2
However the biggest Indian revolt against the British took place in Singapore. Refusing to fight the Ottoman Muslims with the British, Indian Muslims started a riot on February 15, 1915 in the 5th Light Infantry Regiment that consisted of Pashtun, Moghul and Rajput Muslims. Muslim soldiers didn’t want to be taken to Europe under the British flag and forced to fight against Ottoman soldiers. However, the riot proved ineffective, as the officer in charge wasn’t experienced. As a result, the British colonial administration in Singapore clamped down on the rioters with the support of their French and Japanese allies in the region. A ‘court-martial’ was set up which gave its verdict with shocking speed. In the end, half of the Muslim regiment, which included 850 troops and more than 200 officers, were executed either by a firing squad or by hanging. The rest were either sentenced to penal servitude or dispatched to Cameroon and German East Africa to fight the Germans. In 1917, these units were forced to fight the Ottomans in Aden together with the Malay States Guides, who were known with their pro-Turkish stance. This grim incident alone is enough to show how the British deep state doesn’t refrain from using force to make Muslims fight each other. Brave Indian soldiers who didn’t want to fight Muslims preferred martyrdom rather than commit such treachery.3
At this point, it is important to note that many historical details have been carefully covered up by the British deep state. It is known that during WWI, many Muslims that were subordinated to the Caliph refused to fight the Turks and accepted martyrdom instead. However, the documents available today pertaining to those days are usually limited to the British sources. Therefore, riots against the British that took place during those days were carefully hidden in an attempt to erase the memory of Muslims’ alliance and brotherhood.
\1. “İngiliz General’in Kut Anıları” (British General’s Memories of Kut), Al-Jazeera, https://appsaljazeera.com/interactive/kutul-amare/tr/ingilizin-anilari.html
\2. İsmet Üzen, “Türklerin Kut’ül Amare Kuşatması Sırasında İngiliz Ordusunda Bulunan Hintli Askerlerin Tutumu (December 1915 - April 1916)” (The Behavior of Indian Soldiers within the British Army during the Turks’ Kut Al Amara Siege), Akademik Bakış Magazine, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2008, p. 81
\3. Emre Gül, “Hintli Askerler Singapur’da Osmanlı İçin İsyan Etmişti” (Indian Soldiers Revolted in Singapore in favor of the Ottoman), Dünya Bulletin, July 25, 2014
The First Step in the Design of the Middle East: Sykes-Picot Agreement
Seventeen days after the Kut Al Amara humiliation of Britain, while WWI was still raging on, the Sykes-Picot Agreement was signed secretly between Britain, France and Russia, on May 16, 1916, to determine how the Middle Eastern territories of the Ottoman Empire should be shared between Britain and France. The deal was exposed to the public when Russia withdrew from WWI and the agreement in question, as a result of the Russian Revolution in 1917. In other words, with the onset of the communist revolution that the British deep state had been working to start for years through provocations, spying and social engineering, Russia, one of the biggest powers to claim rights on the Ottoman lands, was left out.
According to the Sykes-Picot Agreement, the Eastern Mediterranean, the coastline of modern Syria and Lebanon, Adana, Antep, Urfa, Diyarbakır and Mosul provinces, would be given to France. Britain would take the Haifa and Aqqa ports in the Eastern Mediterranean along with Baghdad, Bara and South Mesopotamia. An international administration would be set up in Palestine because it was a holy site. A major part of modern Iraq and Syria would also be handed over to British and French mandates.
However, this sharing scheme with France didn’t sit well with Britain, due to its aspiration of becoming the sole power in the region. Leaving Mosul to France and losing out on Palestine wasn’t in line with the interests of the British deep state. Since the early 1900s, the British had been sending technical teams to Mosul and were keenly aware of the rich oil reserves of the region. Furthermore, they were convinced that if the British took Mosul, the region could be an important leverage against a potential Islamic Union. The British deep state also considered it important to take Palestine under its control to secure the route to India.
Having already captured the Arabian Peninsula in 1915, however, the most important goal of Britain at the time was building a Britain-dependent Arab state on the lands of Iraq and Palestine by supporting Sharif Hussein of Mecca, who they had already provoked to rebel against the Ottomans. There was already a secret deal between Sharif Hussein and McMahon, the British High Commissioner in Egypt. Strangely enough, the British were also secretly talking to Hussein’s rival, Suud, the Emir of Wahhabis. As the British deep state was pursuing its agenda with multiple back up plans, France saw that it was being slowly left out of the game. This is why it pressured Britain to accept the Sykes-Picot Agreement: so that the lands could be shared equally.
However, in the past, when Britain took Cyprus and Egypt, it didn’t need France’s permission and the French even didn’t think of asking for a share in those territories. So much so that even though the French opened the Suez Canal in 1869, the British took the canal under its control when it took Egypt in 1882 and the French response was nothing more than subdued resentment.
Things changed when the British were heavily defeated at Gallipoli and Kut Al Amara. Britain was now facing a bolder France, one that was protesting, reacting and pressuring. Britain didn’t want to defy France at Sykes-Picot, as it wouldn’t be good to have French as an enemy, especially after the loss of considerable prestige and power.
For this reason, it humored France, since Britain needed France on its side, albeit temporarily. This is how the Sykes-Picot Agreement was drawn up on the basis of an equal sharing principle. A more British-oriented sharing of the former Ottoman lands could be postponed until later. Although Sykes-Picot was never officially implemented, as it was a secret agreement that somehow became exposed, it was still largely used as a basis in the partition process of the Ottoman lands. The part of the secret agreement that involved Anatolian territories could never be implemented because Mustafa Kemal had started the Independence War in Anatolia. Even today, the British deep state wants to compensate for what it gave up on during those days, and by using the communist terror group PKK and coup plots, is seeking to achieve its century-old goals.
With the Sykes-Picot Agreement, the British deep state was throwing away its previous promises to rebel Sharif Hussein. In the new sharing plan, no land was given to Sharif Hussein. Hussein, thus, is an important example of how the British deep state fools the hypocrites it locates in the Islamic world with crafty but empty promises and disposes of them after it is done with them.
It didn’t take long for the British to compensate themselves for what they had lost with Sykes-Picot Agreement. On November 15, 1918, British invaded Mosul by using the 7th article of the Armistice of Mudros as a pretense. Its so-called justification included the usual excuses like ‘ensuring the safety of the Christians in the region’ and that ‘British POWs were mistreated’. During the San Remo Conference in Italy on April 24-25, 1920, the British managed to persuade the French with ‘its usual tactics’ and obtained the French rights in Mosul and Palestine in exchange for Syria.
The basics of the modern borders in the region were determined by Sykes-Picot Agreement. However, after 1919, they were slightly revised with various agreements (such as the ones made in Paris and San Remo). The leading figure in the determination of the borders was once again the British deep state, and the region was divided into small parts in line with the future plans of the dajjal system.
This is how the British deep state tore apart Muslim communities that had for centuries lived together on those lands in peace. The process that started with Sykes-Picot and sped up after the Balfour Declaration introduced artificial borders that completely ignored the political and cultural sensitivities in the region. As a result, mandate states like Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Kuwait, and the Kingdom of Hejaz were set up.
The British deep state always knew that the Islamic world would be an immense power, would enjoy unrivalled influence and become a deterrent force if it united as one. Therefore, throughout its history, the British deep state considered such a prospect as the biggest threat to its existence. It used nationalism, sectarian divides, and tribalism for sedition and carefully created a volatile atmosphere of conflicts, clashes, wars and pain that continues today.
Over time the countries of the region, almost half-colonies, became scenes of constant oppression, persecution and poverty under the rule of British-controlled dictators. Nevertheless, the British deep state and its affiliates continued to exploit the richness and diverse natural resources of those countries.
To sum it up, the road to the Greater Middle East Project which was first mentioned in the early 21st century as a plan to divide the Islamic world into even smaller pieces before eventually destroying it, and which amounts to handing over the region unconditionally to the British deep state, started with Sykes-Picot Agreement.
The Only Winner of the War: Britain
WWI ended largely in the way originally planned by the British deep state and Britain was the one party that profited the most. By the end of the war, Britain had formidable economic power, not to mention the fact that it was now the most powerful European country. The Ottoman Empire and the German Empire, which Britain had seen as its biggest rivals and the greatest threats to its global rule of exploitation, had been dissolved. Other big empires, like Austria-Hungary and Russia, had also come down, replaced by weak, national states.
The sly British deep state policies, plans and strategies that span decades to ensure that Russians and Germans never get anything out of the former Ottoman lands were successful. In the end, the British deep state managed to obtain the control of the most strategic points of the former Ottoman lands.
At the same time, the British deep state replaced its old colonial system with ‘mandates and protectorates’, which were cheaper and more practical versions of colonialism. This also allowed the emergence of ‘secret colonialism,’ a system shaped in line with the circumstances of the 20th century, but one that persists today.
In the early 20th century, Britain no longer wanted to be dependent on coal for its industry, army or navy and focused on oil instead. However, for this transformation to be possible, it had to achieve control over Middle East oil. The bloody world war helped it achieve this goal.
In the aftermath of WWI, Britain shaped the political setting of the Middle East, now under its control, to be in line with its colonial interests. It made sure that the new design of the lands effectively prevented Muslims from coming together and forming a union.
The British deep state sought to divide the Muslim world through artificial borders so that it could easily pit them against each other should the need arose, through differences in ethnicities, sects and tribes. It built a suitable setting so that it could easily instigate clashes and conflicts, which enabled it to lay the foundation for an ‘absolute and complete control of the Middle East’, in other words the ‘Greater Middle East Project’.
The British deep state’s support for the State of Israel in Palestine during WWI wasn’t because it was fond of the idea of Israel or of Jews. It supported Israel, because this was also a part of the Greater Middle East Project. There is no doubt that the Jewish people should live on these lands, according to the commandments in the Qur’an and the Torah. However, it should be known that the British deep state helped the cause only because helping suited its interests.
In the end, the British deep state was the side that profited the most out of WWI, as the party that carefully devised all its stages. However, as has always been the case, the price had to be paid by other countries and other peoples of the world.
For centuries, satan and the dajjal system have inflicted the greatest damage and destruction on humanity by means of the British deep state. This did not change during WWI. This British deep state-led war left behind millions of dead, tens of millions of sick, disabled, impoverished people, destroyed countries, collapsed economies, torn families, lost generations, nations struggling with poverty, hunger and misery for decades to come.
Joined by a total of 65,038,810 troops from all countries, the Great War had an official number of deaths of 8,556,315, 21,219,452 injured, 7,750,945 missing or taken as prisoners of war. Particularly heavy compensations that the losing sides were forced to pay caused massive economic crises in these countries, which in turn triggered crises in other countries that culminated in 1929’s Great Depression. Not only have the political problems between the nations not been solved, the tension caused by agreements laden with heavy sanctions caused new conflicts and polarization. Ideologies such as fascism, national socialism and communism got stronger and began to affect large geographies. All these developments led to WWII, which proved even more destructive.
The British deep state is a system that is capable of dragging the entire world into complete destruction and war through satanic plans. Considering the British deep state, the architect of such a big war, unrelated to today’s civil uprisings, conflicts and wars, would point to a failure to understand the scope of this insidious institution. When it was planning WWI, the British deep state was also making plans for today and dreamed of a Middle East that would be embroiled in constant war and conflict. This is happening today. Indeed, when one closely examines the horrible destruction and tragedy unfolding in the Middle East, one will easily see that it fully suits the British deep state interests and is indeed the outcome of its 100-year-old plan. All the historical developments occur as a result of its deeply-rooted plans and are interlinked. The designer of this sinister plan and the architect of tragedies like the world war is the British deep state, the dajjali system that rules the world.
PART III The Truth Behind the Fall of the Ottoman Empire
An Empire Falls
By 1683, the Ottoman Empire had reached the zenith of its power with a vast territory that stretched for 24 million square kilometers. People in different corners of the world were happily living under the Ottoman rule that was based in Istanbul, which was at the time the center of the Caliphate.
They were speaking different languages, practicing different faiths and belonged to different ethnicities, but maintained a harmonious co-existence. However, the British deep state wasn’t comfortable with this picture. The Ottoman Empire’s impressive dominion around the world - and more importantly, its status as the representative of the Islamic community - wasn’t something it was willing to accept.
When the Ottoman’s stagnation period started, the British deep state took action. As a matter of fact, it was the British deep state that prepared the stages leading up to this point. With a series of strategic maneuvers, it managed to seize control of the Empire. In the end, the Ottoman Empire lost not only its vast territory but also, to a large extent, its religious and spiritual values. In a way, the British deep state applied its strategy of ‘creating degenerated societies’ to the Ottoman Empire and step-by-step led the Empire to its ruin.
It is important to carefully examine the reasons behind the fall of the Ottomans, because only then will the involvement of the British deep state become visible and the steps that led to the Ottoman collapse be truly understood. It will also show how a religious society was turned materialist and how a dajjali movement brought upon destruction through the use of hypocrites.
Now let’s see what led the Ottoman Empire to its end:
1. Concessions Granted to Britain and the First Debt
The British deep state’s fascination with the Ottoman Empire began during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I of England. When the Queen sent the Privy Council member William Harborne to Sultan Murad III as an envoy in 1579, and Harborne took a permanent residence in Istanbul in 1583, diplomatic relations officially started. (Privy Council is a formal body of advisors in England, whose members are appointed by the prime minister and acts under the influence of the British deep state). Harborne played an important role in diplomatic relations and secured permission for two English traders to conduct business on Ottoman lands. Upon the request of the Queen, the permissions were later extended to cover all English citizens. This was the first capitulation given to the British by the Ottoman Empire, and marked the first step towards British control over the finances of the Ottomans. The Ottoman Empire’s promise to grant capitulations to the British for as long as the two states continued to exist marked the beginning of the end. From that point on, the British deep state maintained a one-sided relationship with the Ottoman Empire, which worked only to the advantage of the British, impoverishing the Ottomans and making the British even wealthier.
To put things into perspective, during the reign of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, the budget of the province of Sivas alone was 20 million gold coins, while France had a total budget of only 4 million and England 6 million. Despite its impressive wealth, after the concessions granted to the British, Ottoman began to suffer great losses and by the 19th century its financial system had hit a major roadblock. The privileges given to the British citizens reached their peak with the Treaty of Balta Liman. Interestingly enough, Sultan Mahmud II signed this treaty at his deathbed, at the instigation of the anglophile Mustafa Reşid Pasha, who was the Minister for Foreign Affairs at the time.
Twenty years later, the Crimean War broke out and though seemingly being among the victors, the war had devastating results for the Ottomans. When the British deep state-controlled Ottoman Public Debt Administration was founded during the rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II, the Empire came under the complete financial control of the European powers and lost its economic independence.
A close examination of the underlying causes of the Crimean War will reveal the input of the British deep state, like urging the Russians to start the bombardments, and more specifically how it set the stage for the conflict. During the Ottoman-Russia crisis in the run-up to the war, Alexander Menshikov, head of the Russian delegation in Istanbul, clearly stated that Mustafa Reşid Pasha prevented peace because he was under pressure from the British Ambassador Lord Stratford de Redcliffe. This scenario sounds strangely familiar because the British deep state has always been involved in every Russian-Turkish disagreement that took place throughout history. Therefore, one shouldn’t be surprised to find that British military advisors were in the Ottoman army during the Crimean War and during the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78. In fact, it was these advisors that convinced the Ottoman administrators and commanders to enter the war. These advisors plunged the country into war, making commitments which only furthered the interests of the British deep state.
The only reason why the British sided with the Ottoman Empire after the Crimean War was their desire to receive a satisfactory payback for their ‘assistance’. Indeed, that is exactly what happened: British obtained its greatest concessions after this calamitous war.
With the Reform Edict of 1856, that the Ottoman Empire enacted at the end of the Crimean War, liberal Western thoughts entered into the Ottoman Empire. However, among these thoughts was Darwinism too. So, when the Crimean War ended, the British deep state had achieved its goals: it was now easier to financially and ideologically exploit the Ottoman Empire. This meant that the Empire was one step closer to its downfall.
During the reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid II, the Ottoman Empire’s financial troubles reached their peak. On November 10, 1879, Ottoman treasury taxes collected for salt, tobacco, alcohol and fishery were handed over to Galata bankers and British-French banks, which were under British deep state control at the time. On December 20, 1881, with the Decree of Muharram, Abdul Hamid II opened Ottoman finances to international auditing, which marked the first time that foreigners obtained control over the way Ottoman finances were handled.
How the British Deep State Used Religion
When Queen Elizabeth I of England wrote a letter to the Ottoman Sultan regarding capitulations, she was aware that she was corresponding with the Caliph of the Muslims. Therefore, she made sure to distance herself from Catholic Europe and declared that she ‘worshipped the true God, Who punished idolatry’ and claimed that she was the archenemy of the Catholics whom she viewed as ‘pagans’.
Even though the Queen and the British envoys claimed in the letter that they were close to Muslims, that closeness was nothing but an act. In their personal letters sent to London, the ambassadors described Islam as an evil and barbarous religion (the glorious religion of Islam is above such claims). Their Muslim-friendly attitude was only a lie told in the name of God and, in their letters, they wrote they believed God would forgive them for those lies.
This fake friendly attitude of the British deep state towards Muslims continued for 450 years and persists even today. Sayyeed Abdulhakim Arvasi, an Islamic scholar who lived in late Ottoman period, eloquently explained this aversion to Muslims:
British is the greatest enemy of Islam. If we compare Islam to a tree, other disbelievers will chop it off at the first opportunity and Muslims will know they are the enemies. However, that tree might grow back one day. British are not like that. They serve this tree, water it and Muslims like British as a result. However, at nighttime, when no one is around, British come and inject poison into the root. The tree dries so bad, it won’t be able to grow back ever again. And then the British will come and say: ‘Alas, I’m so sorry’ and fool the Muslims. The British inject poison into Islamic world by purchasing local hypocrites and traitors in exchange for worldly pleasures like money, position or women and destroy Islamic scholars, books and information.1 [The British state and nation are above these statements.]
This is an accurate analysis. Needless to say, Abdulhakim Arvasi was not referring to the innocent British people, but the British deep state. As explained before, British administrations and the British people are completely innocent of such crimes.
\1. M. Sıddık Gümüş, ““M. Sıddık Gümüş Sözleri ve Alıntıları””, Alıntısöz, https://www.alintisoz.com/sozler/bu-kitab%C4%B1-dikkat-ile-okuyan-islam%C4%B1n-en-b%C3%BCy%C3%BCk-d%C3%BC%C5%9Fman/49194;
2. Moral Values Decline as Darwinism Spreads
In the first part of the book, readers have seen how the theory of evolution, the biggest scientific blunder in history, was molded by members of the British deep state before being imposed on the people of the world. It was also explained that the desire to erase moral, spiritual, familial and patriotic sentiments all around the world in a bid to create open societies inclined to conflict was the real reason why Darwinism was so intensely supported. The British deep state hoped that the theory would help spread its dajjali system around the world, help disintegrate the Islamic community and degenerate Christian and Jewish communities. It considered this an easy way to drag societies into conflicts and moral decline.
The British deep state made sure to choose the right time to introduce the scourge of Darwinism to the Ottoman Empire. By the late 19th century the Empire had largely lost its power and influence. Disguised as ‘enlightenment’, the scourge entered and spread sinisterly in the Ottoman lands with the help of certain people who imagined that subscribing to materialism was equivalent to being modern. Associations, institutions and schools that were opened under British deep state’s supervision worked to indoctrinate the people into Darwinism. As a result, the noble Turkish nation that represented the Caliphate, as well as all Muslim nations, fell into the clutches of a movement that maintained ‘there is no God’ (God is above such remarks).
After the poison was injected, the rest came easy for the British deep state. As Darwinism spread in the body, the goal of an Islamic Union was forgotten, the Muslim world was divided, and people lost their religious and patriotic values, which were most often replaced by hypocritical behaviors. From that point on, the British deep state was able to easily manipulate the Ottoman society by means of its spies and propaganda tools. In fact, at one point, it was able to dictate to statesmen and sultans like Abdul Hamid II whom they kept under pressure.
For these reasons, it would be an accurate conclusion to say that the first main contributing factor to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire was Darwinism.
How Did Darwinism Take Root in the Ottoman Empire?
By the early 19th century, Westernization had become the top trend among the Ottoman intelligentsia and diplomats. First scientific and technological developments, and then political and economic models of the Western world made their way into the empire to renovate the Ottoman state system. Even the Ottoman army went through a thorough reformation that included detailed changes in uniforms and equipment.
Although this Westernization trend was useful in some areas, it also negatively influenced the social order and mindset of the Ottoman public. Many people began to believe that the Western world was ‘absolutely better’ in everything, including philosophy and science. Atheistic ideologies like materialism, positivism and Darwinism, already prevalent in Europe, affected many Ottoman intellectuals. As a result, many came to believe that being an atheist, supporting unscientific claims of Darwin and having a materialist worldview meant being modern and Western-like. Some politicians of the time built their policies on social Darwinism, which claimed that only strong societies could survive in the fight for life. Ultimately, this Darwinist trend that denied the existence of God became the downfall of the Ottoman Empire. Starting in the second half of the 19th century, materialist views of Ernst Haeckel, Herbert Spencer, Auguste Comte etc. proliferated among some of the Ottoman intellectuals. During this time, more than two hundred materialist and Darwinist books were translated into Turkish and Arabic.
During this time, materialist books were widely circulated at the Ottoman medical, law, political science and military schools, which trained many officers and administrators. A 19th-century traveler named Mac Farlane wrote what he saw after he paid a visit to the medical school in the Ottoman Empire in 1847:
[Referring to the medical library] It was long since I had seen such a collection of downright materialism. … A book was lying open on the divan. I took it up. It was a copy of a recent Paris edition of the Atheist’s manual, “Système de la Nature”, with the name of the Baron d’Holbach on the title-page as the author. The volume had evidently been much used; many of the striking passages had been marked, and especially those which mathematically demonstrated the absurdity of believing in the existence of a God and the impossibility of believing in the immortality of the soul.113 [Certainly, Almighty God is above such remarks]
In other words, Darwinist thoughts that dragged students into atheism quickly proliferated in the medical schools. Abdülaziz Khan ordered that Darwinist education be stopped at once as soon as he ascended to the throne, and dismissed from their duties those who were arguing in favor of a Darwinist/materialist education.
Spread of the Theory of Evolution in the Empire during the Reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid II
The Darwinist indoctrination that came to a standstill during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz reached its height during the rule of Abdul Hamid II. Darwinist/materialist papers, books and journals spread across the Empire’s lands, and mostly in Istanbul, Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. Even more worryingly, Darwinism was incorporated into the school curriculum in many places. Darwinist/materialist officers that were removed from their duties by Abdülaziz were not only reinstated, they were promoted to key positions in the Ministry of Education, the State Publishing House and even to grand viziership.
Abdul Hamid II himself ordered that 20,000 copies of the Hamidian Treatise by Lebanese writer Husayn al-Jisr be printed and distributed in Istanbul. The book was full of materialist and Darwinist claims and was intended to sow the seeds of atheistic philosophy in Ottoman society. Interestingly enough, the book was named the Hamidian Treatise, as a tribute to Abdul Hamid II. When the book became popular, al-Jisr was invited by Abdul Hamid II to Istanbul and was received in the Malta Mansion and was given the Fourth Class Order of Osmanieh, in addition to various other gifts. Abdul Hamid II praised him on numerous occasions. He was invited three times by Abdul Hamid II to Istanbul and stayed as the Sultan’s guest.
Abdul Hamid II instructed the translation and publication of the Hamidian Treatise in Turkish and asked al-Jisr to compile a book on religious principles for schools.114
Abdul Hamid II indeed showed support for al-Jisr but the truth was al-Jisr and his book were among the main reasons that led to the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Under the personal orders of Abdul Hamid II, the book was widely disseminated across the Empire. In the book, which he dedicated to Abdul Hamid II, al-Jisr claimed –despite the complete absence of scientific evidence to back his point- that mutations could help organisms evolve and that there were many transitional forms. According to al-Jisr, Darwin’s theory did not contradict the religion of Islam.
The truth is mutations are deformations that are harmful 99% of the time and neutral the remaining 1% time. As a matter of fact, recent scientific studies showed that even the 1% accepted to be neutral become harmful over time. For this reason, they are now called silent mutations. In other words, science has proven that mutations are 100% harmful. Furthermore, the claim that ‘there is a sufficient amount of transitional forms’ is one of the biggest deceptions of the theory of evolution. More than 700 million fossils have been unearthed so far and not even one of them belongs to a transitional form. Not even one single transitional form fossil has been found so far showing that living things evolved from another, and it is impossible that any will be found in the future. Each and every one of the hundreds of millions of fossils unearthed so far belongs to complete, perfect, flawless creatures that hadn’t gone through any changes. Even Darwin himself admitted in his book that unless transitional form fossils are found, his theory would collapse:
…why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined…? But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth…? Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.115
Al-Jisr went as far as claiming that this theory, which denied the existence of God, did not contradict the Qur’an. His Hamidian Treatise was full of unscientific and non-Qur’anic explanations like the mistaken claim that Darwin’s theory did not contradict with belief in God and that theory of evolution could be interpreted in line with religion and that some verses could be construed that way. He provided an example of those writers and scholars of the time, who sought to spread this lie among religious people. Indeed, his book was translated into many languages, particularly Turkish and Urdu, and quickly became popular among many scholars in modern Syria and Turkey. Some of the scholars in Al-Azhar University, in particular, paid close attention to the book. Al-Jisr was himself a graduate of that university.
Hasan Tahsini, also known as Hoxha Tahsin, was the first rector of the Darülfünûn –the original Istanbul University-, founded by Sultan Abdul Hamid II. Hasan Tahsini was among the first Darwinists in the Ottoman Empire and was appointed to the post of rector of the University by Abdul Hamid II. Grand Vizier Reşid Pasha had personally sent him to Europe to study, from where he returned as a materialist. In his article ‘Tarih-i Tekvin’ (History of Creation), he was talking about the so-called ‘new levels of change that the universe would achieve in the future as a result of the rule of evolution that dominated the entire universe and existence’.116
Hasan Tahsini famously tried to explain the origin of the universe and the creation of man as well as other life forms through the theory of evolution in his book Varoluşun Tarihi veya Yaratılış (History of Being or Creation). He also worked vehemently to spread the Darwinist theory. His staunch devotion to the materialist theory earned him the nickname ‘Monsieur Tahsini’. He brought Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, an evolutionist Al-Azhar graduate, to Istanbul and allowed him to carry out evolutionist propaganda at Istanbul University. Afghani was another fervent supporter of al-Jisr’s book. Hasan Tahsini raised many students before he was dismissed from his duty on the grounds of ‘impairing the faith of the young people he taught’. However, many of his students now were materialists, were already working across the Empire’s lands and teaching other young people Darwinism, which made the theory spread like wildfire.
Books and articles of Ahmed Midhat Efendi, another evolutionist, were also widely used as reference texts in the university. Dağarcık (Repertoire) magazine published by Ahmed Midhat Efendi in 1871 heavily propagandized the erroneous idea of evolution while its tens of thousands of copies were widely circulated throughout the Empire. He claimed that ‘humans had inherently violent qualities as humans were also sort of animals’ as he defended the violence of social Darwinism as follows:
Revenge is a sort of justice, is a violent justice. Evil is done rarely for pleasure, but rather it is pursued for greed, reputation and interests. Then how do we know that the evil behavior, a part of our nature, will harm us? If teazel hurts, it’s because it’s created that way.117
Similarly, the ‘Ottoman Society of Science’ founded by Münif Pasha, who was the Minister of Education during the reign of Abdul Hamid II, aimed at spreading materialism and evolution through scientific journals. Their first journal, Mecmua-i Fünûn (Journal of Sciences) was filled with evolutionist propaganda. Sultan Abdülaziz had previously dismissed Münif Pasha due to propagandizing evolution but when Abdul Hamid II ascended to the throne, Münif Pasha was again made the Minister of Education.
Darwinist and materialist inculcation worked, with results becoming quickly visible as the Ottoman intelligentsia began gathering around the so-called New Literature Movement and its publication Servet-i Fünûn (Wealth of Knowledge), which acted as the hub of materialism and positivism. Abdülhak Hamid Tarhan and Recaizade Mahmud Ekrem, the leading poets and authors of the movement, entertained following twisted views that would no doubt impair the moral values of the society:
Islamic civilization had reached the end of its lifetime.
A new civilization rose in the West, with new thoughts, sociology and techniques.
This civilization will, sooner or later, destroy the Ottoman Empire.
Sami Frashëri (authored under the name of Şemseddin Sami Efendi), and Ahmed Cevdet, the editors-in-chief of dailies Sabah (Morning) and Ikdam (Effort) respectively, were also leading evolutionists during the reign of Abdul Hamid II. Sami Frashëri’s book Njeriu (Human Being) that he wrote in 1878, Ethem Necdet’s Tekâmül Kanunları (Laws of Development) and Celal Nuri’s Tarih-i Tedenniyat-ı Osmaniye: Mukadderat-ı Tarihiye (History of Ottoman Empire’s Decline: Dialectics of History) are only few of the Darwinist books published during Abdul Hamid II’s reign. Together with Tercüman-i Hakikat (Interpreter of Truth) and its lead writer Ahmed Midhat Efendi, the three major newspapers of the time were under evolutionist influence. Furthermore, Ceride-i Havadis (Journal of News), another popular newspaper of the time, and its lead writer Beşir Fuad also had evolutionary views. These people are usually considered the first people to spread atheism in the Ottoman Empire. Ceride-i Havadis (Journal of News) was published by the British journalist William Nosworthy Churchill as the first semi-official newspaper of the Ottoman Empire. Although from the outside it appeared as a journal of science and literature and thus gathered the writers of the time under its roof, its true purpose was shaping public opinion in favor of the political and economic interests of the British. This point becomes even more interesting considering the fact that David Urquhart, who had served as the secretary of the British embassy at Istanbul between 1835 and 1837, reported to the Royal Family that he found the Ottoman Empire, which had rich natural sources and a wide market, beneficial for British interests.
With Ceride-i Havadis, William Nosworthy Churchill tried subtly to make the Ottoman public accept what was in favor of the British interests. Indeed, a couple of years later, the Ottoman Empire began to meet the raw material needs of British industry, and the sales of British products increased at the expense of Ottoman industry. Turkish Cypriot scientist Niyazi Berkes speaks of how the situation baffled the British and how they mocked the Ottoman statesmen for being so gullible.118 (The statesmen of the time are above such remarks)
Moreover, many other publications during the era of Abdul Hamid II such as İçtihad (The Opinion), Piyano Mecmuası (Piano Journal), Envar-ı Zeka (Light of Intelligence), Yirminci Asırda Zeka Mecmuası (Intelligence Journal in Twentieth Century), Güneş (Sun), Havran, Mecmua-ı Ulüm (Journal of Knowledge), Saadet (Happiness), Afak (The Horizon) and Felsefe (Philosophy), contributed to promulgation of the evolution lie in the Empire. Consequently, the Ottoman society suffered a swift moral decline.
The education system of Abdul Hamid II’s reign raised many materialists that worked to disseminate the lie of evolution. Some of them, and some from the years that followed, and their anti-Islamic views can be listed as follows:
Ahmed Midhat Efendi: One of the first defenders of the theory of evolution in the Ottoman Empire. Despite being previously removed from his duties by Sultan Abdülaziz, he was invited back to Istanbul when Abdul Hamid II ascended to the throne. Abdul Hamid II ordered him to found the newspaper Tercüman-ı Hakikat (Interpreter of Truths), which became the semi-official publication of the Palace. The newspaper was published until 1921, with famous Darwinist writers of the time like Ahmed Cevdet and Ahmed Rasim as its regular columnists. Abdul Hamid II also appointed Ahmed Midhat as the director of the State Publishing House.
Some of the titles of Ahmed Midhat Efendi’s pieces were, “Adem ve Orangutan” (Adam and Orangutan), “Hayvanatın Hissi” (Feelings of Animals), “İnsan Tenha Yaşasa Ne Olur” (What Would Happen if Humans Lived Alone). The last-mentioned piece claimed that humans had a completely animalistic past and that they supposedly evolved in time to reach their current state in addition to other outlandish notions, such as if a human baby lived among animals, he would have behaved like an animal.
Another piece by Ahmed Midhat, “Dünyada İnsanın Zuhuru” (The Appearance of Man on Earth) which was taught in schools, started with the following sentence: ‘Since humans are sort of animals, of course we are curious how they might have come into being in this world’. The article was full of Darwinist tales.
Another article by Ahmed Midhat entitled “İntikam” (Revenge) - once again taught in schools - wrongly claimed that violence was a part of human nature; in other words, he was promoting social Darwinism:
Revenge is a sort of justice, is a violent justice. … Then how do we know that the evil behavior, a part of our nature, will harm us?
Mehmed Esad Saffet Pasha: Ahmed Midhat was a close friend of Saffet Pasha, a Minister of Education during the rule of Abdul Hamid II. Upon orders from the Sultan, Saffet Pasha appointed Hasan Tahsini as the rector of Istanbul University, who was another evolutionist. He was one of the people who completely changed the Ottoman educational system and supposedly brought European standards to education (to put it more accurately, he incorporated Darwinism into the education system). He was one of the founders of Galatasaray High School, one of the centers of Darwinist education at the time. Sedat Simavi, the founder of the Hürriyet newspaper, is Saffet Pasha’s grandson. Saffet Pasha was also one of the plotters of the coup against Sultan Abdülaziz in 1876.
Ahmed Rıza: Supported the ‘world citizen’ view of positivism. Due to his anglophile character and emulation of English style in the way he dressed, he was also known as the English Ahmed Rıza.
Salih Zeki: Defended the materialist views of Auguste Comte in Robert College, Darüşşafaka and Darülfünûn, where he lectured.
Rıza Tevfik: Considered Herbert Spencer and Charles Darwin as his teachers and promoted Darwinism in his articles.
Hüseyin Cahit Yalçın: Became a materialist while studying at the School of Political Sciences. He considered the theory of evolution as a requirement of materialism and rejected Creation.
Ahmet Şuayb: Worked as a lecturer at the School of Law and Istanbul University, and supported the views of Comte.
Abdullah Cevdet: After being introduced to evolutionist ideas at the Medical School, Abdullah Cevdet proselytized his materialist, evolutionist and atheist views for the following 28 years through his magazine İçtihad (The Opinion). His destructive ideas created a deep wound in Ottoman society. He was a social Darwinist that went as far as suggesting that European men should be brought for breeding so that Turkish race could be improved.119 According to Abdullah Cevdet, the superiority of the races could be determined by the size of their skulls. He was a member of the Society of the Friends of England, which was founded by anglophiles during the occupation of Istanbul. He published Fünûn ve Felsefe (Science and Philosophy) that sought to reconcile the ideas of Islamic scholars with those of materialist philosophers and biologists.
A staunch propagandist of Darwinism and atheism through his numerous articles and books, Abdullah Cevdet was appointed to the Vienna Embassy by Abdul Hamid II. Many people wrongly believe that Abdullah Cevdet was a dissident against the Sultan. The truth was different however, because Abdullah Cevdet was one of the informers working for Abdul Hamid II. Abdul Hamid II provided him with the necessary funding so that he could settle in Vienna. Strangely enough, he was also one of the people behind the 1908 coup that saw the deposition of Abdul Hamid II.
Physician Hayrullah Efendi: “İnsanın Satıhı Arzda Sureti İntişarı” (The Spread of Man on the Face of Earth) by Hayrullah Efendi was one of the most popular evolutionist pieces that circulated at schools during the reign of Abdul Hamid II. He claimed that in addition to the account of human history that started with the Prophet Adam (pbuh), the origins of humans had to be explained from an evolutionary perspective.
Ziya Gökalp: A protégé of Abdullah Cevdet, Gökalp spread materialist views in Turkish society and played a big role in the moral decline that affected a large part of the community.
Süleyman Hüsnü Pasha: Commander of the military college and one of the coup plotters that organized the deposing of Sultan Abdülaziz.
Süleyman Pashazade Sami: The son of the coup plotter Süleyman Hüsnü Pasha, he served as the Minister of Education and as the rector of the Istanbul University. He prepared guidelines for primary schools, and worked on children’s education with a project named ‘Education and Training of Children’.
Beşir Fuad: Had a materialist worldview. As the mentor of Abdullah Cevdet, Baha Tevfik, Ahmet Nebil and Celal Nuri, he was responsible for their materialist views. He introduced social Darwinism to the Ottoman Empire, which was one of the basic ideologies of Young Turks during the Abdul Hamid II rule. Beşir Fuad was heavily influenced by evolutionist/materialist thinkers such as Claude Bernard and Ludwig Büchner. He committed suicide at the age of 35 and wrote down how he felt as he slipped away. He said that he did this to leave a scientific understanding as to what one feels at time of death. This suicide created shock waves in the Ottoman society, which up to that point was quite unfamiliar with the concept of suicide, and triggered a suicide trend in Istanbul.
Baha Tevfik: Became an evolutionist at the School of Political Sciences during the reign of Abdul Hamid II. He argued for unconditional Westernization. In an article he wrote for the journal Felsefe (Philosophy), he claimed that a philosopher had to be a scientist and definitely a materialist. To him metaphysics was ‘empty and negative’ and contradicted science. In his book Hassasiyet Bahsi ve Yeni Ahlak (Issue of Sensitivities and New Morality), he rejected religious moral values. His so-called solution for the future of the humanity was communism and anarchy. He believed that the future could be revived with scientific anarchy.
Hüseyin Hilmi: It is reported that he got his communist ideals from Baha Tevfik. In the journal İştirak (The Participation) that he published in 1910, he wrote several pieces on Marxism.
Subhi Edhem: A teacher of history of nature, he was also an author at Servet-i Fünun (Wealth of Knowledge). Taught Lamarckism and Darwinism during his lectures.
Ethem Nejat: Became an evolutionist together with Baha Tevfik. He was also writing for İçtihad (The Opinion) magazine of Abdullah Cevdet. He was the founding general secretary of the Communist Party of Turkey.
Memduh Süleyman: Translated Eduard von Hartmann’s book Wahrheit und Irrtum im Darwinismus, and co-authored Nietzsche’nin Hayatı ve Felsefesi (Nietzsche’s Life and Philosophy) with Baha Tevfik. He was one of the ideologues of Ottoman Socialist Party.
Celal Nuri İleri: Believed that matter didn’t have a beginning or an end. After reading Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet’s Discours sur l’histoire universelle (Discourse on Universal History), he became an evolutionist and argued in his book Tarih-i İstikbal (History of Future) (1915) that Islam should be reformed by means of materialism and evolution. According to Celal Nuri, matter was everywhere, every moment and could not have possibly gone bad. He believed that power was an inherent part of matter, that the two were interlinked and could not be separated. He made a feeble attempt to reconcile Islam and the theory of evolution. The truth is, he rejected belief in God right in the beginning of his book, making his intentions clear that, as an evolutionist, he was only trying to spread an atheistic ideology in the Empire.
The Theory of Evolution in the Ottoman-Arab Lands
Before 1876, which was the year Abdul Hamid II ascended to the throne, no books or articles had ever been written in the Arabic world about Darwin or his theory of evolution. The first time something about Darwin was ever written was in 1882. It should be noted that when the British deep state invaded Egypt in 1881, Al-Azhar University became a haunt of the evolutionists.
Darwin’s theory was first mentioned in the Arab world in a series of three articles published in the monthly Arabic magazine al-Muqtataf. This magazine was founded by Yaqub Sarruf and Faris Nimr in Beirut in 1876. All three pieces were penned by Rizq-Allah al-Berbari and ascribed human origins to so-called evolutionary mechanisms. He referred to Lamarck and praised Darwin. Vol. 2 had three more articles written by Bishara Zalzal Efendi on anthropology.
Bishara Zalzal published a 368-page book in Alexandria, Egypt in 1879. This book, which was dedicated in both prose and poetry to Sultan Abdul Hamid II, was entitled Tanwir al-adhhan (The Enlightenment of Minds). In the book, Lord Cromer was praised as “a typical example of the Anglo-Saxon people”. Obviously, Zalzal was an evolutionist that had a deep admiration for Abdul Hamid II, British Lord Cromer and the whole Anglo-Saxon people in general.120
These supposedly ‘scientific’ magazines quickly proliferated in Egypt, Lebanon and Syria between 1865 and 1929. The most popular three of the evolutionist magazines were as follows:
Al-Muqtataf (Anthology, Harvest, or Selection) (1876-1952)
Al-Hilal (The Crescent) (1892-1930)
Al-Mashriq (The East) (1898-1930)
The so-called enlightenment movement in the Arabic world called ‘al-Nahda’ originated in Egypt and possessed largely evolutionist views. Unsurprisingly, its founder, Rifa’a al-Tahtawi, was an evolutionist who deeply admired Britain. Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Muhammad Abduh were among the leading figures of this movement.
Jamal al-Din al-Afghani was a social Darwinist. He claimed that the Islamic world could progress only if Islamic nations fought each other. Many violent radical organizations were built on this premise and the vicious cycle of violence that continues even today in the Islamic world was based on his Darwinist ideas.
In the meantime, evolutionist Christian Arabs began to spread social Darwinism, which quickly resulted in the popularity of a racist form of nationalism among Arabs. Young Turks were also embracing social Darwinism at the time, and began to pursue the Turkish version of the same racist understanding. These two clashing ideas drove a wedge between Muslims that had lived together peacefully for more than a thousand years, and civil unrest began erupting across the lands of the Empire. Over the next 20 years, the entire empire came crashing down. The social Darwinist indoctrination and propaganda under Abdul Hamid II’s administration had taken its toll and tore a vast Empire into pieces.
Darwinism’s Fortress: Al-Azhar University
Al-Azhar University in Egypt is an important educational institute. However, there is a lingering British deep state influence, which started when Egypt came under British rule. Some of its famous graduates have been tasked with doing the bidding of the British deep state.
It was Al-Azhar University that helped the theory of evolution make its true entry into the Muslim Arab world. As a matter of fact, it is where evolutionists such as al-Jisr have been taught. Darwinist Lord Cromer made changes in the university and appointed evolutionist Muhammad Abduh as the Grand Mufti of Egypt. A graduate of Al-Azhar, Abduh was one of the first Muslim evolutionists and the founder of the so-called Islamic modernism.
Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, appointed by the British as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921, also was a graduate of Al-Azhar, not to mention a fan of Muhammad Abduh. The British deep state set up armed Jewish units while simultaneously supporting radical Palestinian nationalist movements in Palestine. The goal was turning two nations against each other when they had co-existed peacefully for centuries before. On the other hand, Ahmed ‘Urabi (known as Ahmad Arabi), who was the leader of the unrest which resulted in the invasion of Egypt by the British, was also a graduate of Al-Azhar. Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani, the founder of the Hizb ut-Tahrir party, was also an Al-Azhar graduate. Furthermore, Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was held responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, also graduated from Al-Azhar University. Most of these people are also evolutionists.
This entire evolutionist group was trained by Evelyn Baring, known as Lord Cromer, who was British controller-general and Consul-General in Egypt between 1878 and 1907. Cromer was a racist and an ardent evolutionist. He was convinced in the superiority of Western societies and claimed that the Islamic world and Egyptian people were inferior, and that those societies could never govern themselves (Turkish- Islamic societies are above such claims). He claimed that all races should be ruled by the supposedly ‘superior’ races, and maintained that Anglo-Saxons were superior and, just like parents, had to rule the world. Claiming that Western societies should discipline Eastern people, Lord Cromer elaborated why he appointed Muhammad Abduh as the Grand Mufti of Egypt:
They are the natural allies of the European reformer. Egyptian patriots –sua si bona norint– will find in the advancement of the followers of Mohammed Abdu the best hope that they may gradually carry out their programme of creating a truly autonomous Egypt.121
Today, many of the radical groups that shed blood supposedly in the name of Islam are the products of this creed. The British deep state presents these people, who in truth have nothing to do with Islam and who are indeed diametrically opposed to Islam with their evolutionist and therefore racist views, as the ‘main players of radicalism’ and plays out its own scenario with the help of these actors. These Darwinist spies, who were raised with the inculcation of the British deep state, are charged with bolstering instability and carrying out terror attacks in countries, all in line with the orders of the deep state.
Evolutionist Views Take a Toll on Ottoman India and Pakistan
It was Syed Ahmad Khan, an Indian Muslim, that introduced the theory of evolution to the Muslims of India and Pakistan. Heavily influenced by Muhammad Abduh, Syed Ahmad Khan was deeply loyal to Britain and was knighted by the British government. Once he explained his thoughts on the British rule as follows:
We are loyal and dedicated to the British government. We don’t answer to the Islamic caliphate. Instead of reporting to a distant caliph, we will rather report to the British administrators in our country.122
The Aligarh Muslim University, founded by Syed Ahmad Khan, served as the center of Darwinism in the region and raised many evolutionists - and it had a multitude of Indian and Pakistani politicians among its graduates. This university played a significant role in the systematic spread of Darwinism and set the stage for Pakistan’s and India’s departure from the Ottoman Caliphate. It also helped introduce certain individuals with an inferiority complex to the British deep state, and created a front in India and Pakistan against the Ottoman Empire.
The Scourge that Brought the Downfall of the Ottoman Empire: Darwinism
Turkish historian Süleyman Kocabaş eloquently explains the methods of the British deep state when it wishes to gain control over a region:
British colonization policy since the 18th century has been based on principles of degenerating moral values, spying, plots and dividing indigenous people to eventually pit them against each other.123
The British deep state achieved its goals - first by building the stage for moral degeneration across the lands of the Empire. The initial step was spreading Darwinism through pivotal points like media, schools and universities. It should be remembered that this had been the goal of the British deep state all along, since the first time it molded and began spreading the lie of Darwinism. Societies, deprived of their moral values and harboring hatred for each other, would inevitably destroy their countries. The British deep state always prepares this setting and the rest follows as planned.
In the case of the Ottoman Empire, everything certainly went as planned by the British deep state. A couple of evolutionist intellectuals, deliberately placed in strategic positions, were presented as very important people supposedly bringing ‘enlightenment and science’. Proponents of evolution had no qualms about producing false evidence to support the theory, which was in fact devoid of any scientific evidence. Then Darwinist dictatorship - controlled by the British deep state - stepped in to provide full protection to the lie of evolution in the Empire. As a result, all who dared to reject evolution were ostracized and denied jobs at schools and in business life. The British deep state’s plan was to quickly spread Darwinism, hoping that it would erode moral values. Regrettably, their predictions came true and civil unrest, clashes and riots began breaking out across the Empire. Soon after, the entire Empire began falling apart.
However, it should never be forgotten that if a society says, ‘there is no God’, God will never allow them to continue their presence. The real reason behind the fall of the Empire was not the deep plans and plots. It was because of the spread of this horrible system of disbelief that said, ‘there is no God’ (Almighty God is above such remarks). This is true for every other country and system that makes the same mistake. No system or state can succeed if they think promoting evolution will make them ‘modern and progressive’. The fact that God sometimes gives some countries time to change and correct their behavior shouldn’t make anyone believe otherwise.
By the grace of God, when the Mahdi (pbuh) emerges, people and states will see the immensity of their mistake and abandon the scourge of Darwinism. Sensible people should see the fall of the Ottoman Empire as an important lesson from God and engage in an intellectual effort against the deceit of Darwinism.
Almighty God explains that every destroyed country met that end because they insisted on their mistakes even though they knew the truth:
Company of jinn and men! Did not messengers come to you from among yourselves relating My signs to you and warning you of the encounter of this day of yours? They will say, ‘We testify against ourselves.’ The life of the world deluded them and they will testify against themselves that they were unbelievers. That was because their Lord would never have destroyed the cities unjustly while their people were unaware. (Qur’an, 6:130-131)
That is because God is the Real and what you call on apart from Him is false. God is the All-High, the Most Great. (Qur’an, 22:62)
The Coat of Arms of Abdul Hamid II Was Commissioned by Queen Victoria
Abdul Hamid II was one of the Ottoman sultans that ruled under intense pressure from the British deep state. The effect was so palpable, even his coat of arms was commissioned by Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom, who hired the Briton Charles Young for the job. After some additions made to the design by Abdul Hamid II himself, the emblem became the official coat of arms of the Empire in 1882.
In the design, the tughra (signature) of the Sultan at the top was encircled by a sun, which represented the control of the British Empire –the empire upon which the sun never sets- over the Ottoman Empire. The banners of the Caliphate and the Ottoman Empire were placed under the British Sun. The figure in the middle was the diamond on the British Royal scepter, in other words, a nod to the British Kingdom. The sword, spear and other similar figures on the design are also found on the British imperial state crown.
3. Moral Decline Speeds up in the Ottoman Society as Alcohol, Gambling and Adultery Spread
In previous pages it was mentioned how Abdul Hamid II was one of the Ottoman sultans that had to rule his lands largely under the pressure of the British deep state. This is why his rule saw one of the sharpest declines the Ottoman Empire had ever experienced, both physically and spiritually. Sultan Abdul Hamid II was, in a way, a prisoner confined to Yıldız Palace. He couldn’t escape being ensnared by the British deep state plots. During his rule, the British deep state did everything in its power to spread not only the Darwinist propaganda but also to accelerate moral degeneration. During his reign;
The first rakı (a Turkish alcoholic drink) and beer factories in the Ottoman Empire were opened,
The number of brothels skyrocketed, which caused a sharp increase in adultery,
The Ottoman Empire began to export wine to European countries,
Gambling became widespread.
Furthermore, during his rule, the Empire became completely reliant upon the West, especially after the establishment of the Ottoman Public Debt Administration. More importantly however, the Islamic world was divided. Many riots broke out across the Ottoman lands during this time, for which the primary reason purported by the British deep state was that the Caliphate had strayed away from Islam and that the center of Caliphate was degenerating Muslim societies.
The First Ottoman Rakı and Beer Factories Open
Bomonti Brothers opened the first beer factory of the Ottoman Empire in Istanbul during the reign of Abdul Hamid II. Olympus Brewery was also set up in Thessaloniki. Abdul Hamid II personally signed the licenses of these facilities. Bomonti beer factory produced seven million liters of beer every year, which later reached ten million liters. ‘Bomonti Beer Gardens’ were built along the way that stretched from Thrace to Eskişehir, so that local people could drink beer.
An advertisement of Bomonti beer read as follows:
If you wish to quench your thirst, and don’t wish to drink the germy water, drink Bomonti beer instead. Home delivery is available in Istanbul.124
The advertisements even went as far as claiming that beer, a harmful drink, could cure ailments. It was recommended to those wishing to put on weight and even to nursing mothers.125
During the reign of Abdul Hamid II, beer consumption in Istanbul and its vicinity increased so much that trains began to carry fresh beer from as far away as Vienna. Abdul Hamid II imposed taxes on alcohol and issued the Alcoholic Beverage Regulations. This regulation dated April 7, 1886, stipulated the taxes to be collected for alcoholic drinks, while another regulation dated July 14, 1890, set the quality standards and the taxes for the wine to be exported.
Abdul Hamid II’s involvement in alcoholic drink regulations and the corresponding taxes is important because he was the ‘Islamic Caliph’. His role in such practices was a clear indicator of the grim situation the Ottoman Empire found itself in, not to mention the intense pressure of the British deep state. The expense ledgers of the Yıldız and Dolmabahçe Palaces show wine, champagne and other drinks were bought for the palace, too.
The first rakı factory of Turkey was opened during the rule of Abdul Hamid II at Umurca Farm in Çorlu. This farm belonged to the Sarıcazade Ragıp Pasha, the head chamberlain of the Sultan and the Minister of Finance. Umurca Rakı quickly became very popular and taxes collected from the sales of this rakı became the most important item in the tax class called Rüsum-u Sitte (‘The Six Indirect Taxes’, named so because it consisted of six different taxes designated to pay off the debts of the Sublime Porte).
The aforementioned weren’t the only rakı factories opened during Abdul Hamid II’s rule. The town of Fertek in Niğde was producing Fertek Rakı. Brands like Boğaziçi, Ruh and Alem were competing to get the top spot in the rakı market. During Abdul Hamid II’s rule, which was a time even the palace staff was producing rakı, Deniz Kızı Rakı, also known as Tenedos Rakı, became very popular. Üzüm Kızı Rakı was another popular rakı brand and was usually known as ‘the rakı with the girl’ due to its advertisement posters.
Abdul Hamid II issued another decree and permitted the production of the Greek version of rakı, known as ‘ouzo’, in Pergamum.
Wine Production and Export during the Reign of Abdul Hamid II
In 1889, vineyards were set up on a land in Erenköy, Istanbul on a 70-hectare land. During the rule of Abdul Hamid II, the Sultaniye vineyards in the Aegean region were used to produce grapes for wine production, which would later be exported to Europe.
When European vineyards started going bad, the whole of Europe, particularly France, turned to the Ottoman Empire, to meet the demands for wine. During Abdul Hamid II’s reign, wine exports skyrocketed to 340 million liters by 1904. Wine advertisements were to be found in the Ottoman newspapers, while promotional signs for Martel cognac could be seen all around Istanbul.
Ottoman cognacs distilled by Kotroni Efendi of Erdek entered competitions in Paris and won awards. Again, the first champagne factory was opened in the Ottoman Empire when Abdul Hamid II was the Sultan.
Alcohol production and consumption increased so much during Abdul Hamid II’s time, the 34th chapter of Ayşe Fahriye Hanım’s famous cookbook Ev Kadını (The Housewife), which was first published in 1883, gave recipe for homemade rakı. The readers were given detailed descriptions of the production methods for two different types of rakı (seasoned with mastic and regular rakı) with a side note that fermented grape juice and wine could also be produced using the same setup.
According to journalist Ahmet Cemaleddin Saraçoğlu, ‘… the rule of Abdul Hamid II provided a massive tavern to citizens’.126
Alcohol is a very harmful substance, not to mention that Muslims are forbidden from drinking it. God says in a verse:
O you who have believed, indeed, intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than God], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of satan, so avoid it that you may be successful. (Qur’an, 5:90)
Of course, every individual has the right to live their lives the way they wish. The above historical details are in no way to be construed as interfering in people’s choices. However, they are important in that they show how the production, sales and export of alcoholic beverages in a Muslim country, with the permission of the Islamic Caliph, set the stage for the moral decline in society and shook the trust of the Islamic world in the Caliph. Even though certain circles maintain that alcoholic drinks were produced for non-Muslims at the time, it is clear that not as many non-Muslims were living on Ottoman lands at the time that would be able to consume millions of liters of alcoholic drinks. In any case, many photographs taken during those days clearly show Ottoman Turks drinking alcohol at beer houses.
Brothels Open and Prostitution Spreads in the Ottoman Society
One of the least-known facts about the reign of Abdul Hamid II is that it is when the first official brothel in the Ottoman Empire was opened upon a letter of instruction by the Caliph Abdul Hamid II. There is no doubt that prostitution was among the principal factors behind the moral decline that took place in the Ottoman society, laying the groundwork for the Empire’s fall. At this point, we should remember that Sultan Abdul Hamid II was under intense pressure from the British deep state, as a result of which he put into action the British deep state’s plan regarding brothels.
With a letter of instruction by Abdul Hamid II in 1884, the first brothel was opened on Abanoz Street, and was followed by other brothels in Zürefa Street. The brothels that are still active today in Zürefa Street were opened during Abdul Hamid II’s rule. In a short period of time, the number of brothels in Galata alone reached a hundred.
The situation became so grim that at one point, ships started to bring patrons for brothels from Europe and Russia to Istanbul. Most of the time, an important duty of the tour guides would be taking the patrons to Zürefa Street.
According to Ottoman archives, during this time, 2,125 prostitutes operated with official licenses; however, the number of those without official licenses was much higher. Brothels were not only in Galata and Karaköy, but also in Üsküdar. Bursa and Izmir also had their own brothels. Furthermore, during the reign of Abdul Hamid II, prostitutes were also brought from Poland, Romania, Austria and Galicia.
During the rule of Abdul Hamid II, prostitution became so widespread, Samuel Cohen, Secretary of the Jewish Association for the Protection of Girls and Women, wrote the following grim lines about the situation:
Behind the line of docks there runs a long street called Galata Street. … Most of the alleys were dedicated to brothels. I thought that the sights I witnessed in Rio de Janeiro were bad, but these brothels in Constantinople beggar description. The inmates of the brothel are seated on low stools or on boxes or on low couches, with almost nothing on in the way of clothes. … Some [prostitutes] stood at the doors or walked about in the rooms in a semi-naked condition, others had dressed themselves somewhat and were walking about the streets paying visits to other houses. … In the vicinity of these houses are cafes and drinking saloons, and in almost every one gambling is going on incessantly. … Everything appears as free and as licentious as possible. There are no hindrances and no difficulties from the authorities. … At one house in particular where the performance commences near midnight and goes on till 4.30 in the morning, the scenes are really disgraceful.127
The opening of brothels upon the instruction of Abdul Hamid II, in a way, turned the Ottoman Empire into a center of prostitution in a short amount of time and adultery spread like wildfire. This allowed the British deep state to achieve its goal to a large extent, which was morally degenerating the Ottoman Empire in order to hasten up its destruction.
Tobacco Factories Open during the Reign of Abdul Hamid II
Tobacco entered Ottoman society in the 1600s. However, almost every Sultan showed considerable effort to block its spread. The measures they took against this substance, which has been shown by medical research to be highly toxic to human body, were necessary and rational. However, things changed when Abdul Hamid II took over. Since he was under intense pressure from the British deep state, he stopped the anti-tobacco measures. Many tobacco factories were opened during his reign. Before his reign, only small shops were producing tobacco, but as soon as the new factories were opened, tobacco use spread quickly. The increased consumption sped up the physical and spiritual breakdown of the Ottoman Empire, especially after the aforementioned mistakes made during Abdul Hamid II’s reign.
During his reign, the Cibali and Samsun tobacco factories were opened in 1884 and 1887 respectively. Samsun tobacco factory produced 60,000 kg of cigarettes and 400,000 kg of tobacco every year between 1887 and 1897. By 1905, the production capacity of the factory has reached one million kg. After a while, Izmir, Adana, Samsun and Istanbul became the most important tobacco production and processing centers.128
Instead of fighting to prevent the production and use of this substance, which is lethal for humans, which caused physical and spiritual degeneracy in Turkish youth and wasted away the energy of the nation, Abdul Hamid II continuously encouraged its use. He himself was a tobacco addict. This harmful habit of his is a well-known historical fact, confirmed by many accounts. So much so, his infamous smoking habit was known in even as far away as America. His favorite cigarette was the American ‘Ateshian’. This prompted the company to use in its advertisements the slogan ‘The cigarret smoked by His Imperial Majesty Abdul Hamid II, Sultan of Turkey’.
İbrahim Peçevi, one of the most prominent chroniclers of the Ottoman Empire, explained how the British introduced tobacco to the Ottoman Empire in his two-volume book Tarih-i Peçevi (Peçevi’s History):
The British brought [tobacco] to the Ottoman Empire around 1900 [1600 in Gregorian calendar] and sold it with the claim that it could heal some ailments. Some pleasure-seeker friends became addicts. However, in time, even those people who weren’t pleasure-seekers started to consume it. Even many great scholars and statesmen got addicted to smoking… Coffee houses were thick with smoke because all the wasted people and womanizers were there chain-smoking. Even on the streets and marketplaces, they were smoking.129
As one can see, it was the British deep state that first introduced tobacco and spread its use in the Ottoman Empire. The members of the deep state made the people addicted to this poison with lies that it would help cure ailments. When the rule of Abdul Hamid II started, another step was made that would help the British deep state. Abdul Hamid II transferred the tobacco revenues to the ‘Régie Company’, owned by French and British for 30 years, starting in 1883. So, not only were tobacco factories were opened to produce products that would poison Turkish people, the profit from the poison sold went to the British deep state. Again in his reign, the Régie Company was allowed to have its own armed guards, who heavily oppressed the Turkish people.
4. Military Coups and Territorial Losses
Many of the military coups that took place in the past 200 years bear the hidden marks of British deep state intervention. This dark structure changes administrations by means of coups, which it considers a quick, cheap and covert way to further its policies.
Coup plotters are arrogant and usually impressionable people who are not held to account for their actions. They fall for the games of the British deep state for their personal petty gains. They never deserve the positions they gain through coups, as it is only violence and guns and definitely not their knowledge, talents, expertise or experience that brings them to such positions. As such administrations are only transitional regimes, the true names behind the decisions made during those times remain usually unknown and the corruption and problems are usually blamed on a few. This way, the true perpetrators, most notably the British deep state, are kept away from public eyes.
This was the case with the Ottoman Empire too. When her fall began, she was in possession of an impressive 500-year-old experience in running an empire. She had powerful, well-functioning systems in the military, the economy, and education, among other aspects of life. For this reason, the British deep state was in need of a transitional regime because that was the only way to control this powerful Empire. Such intermediate regimes, laden with corruption and misconducts with no visible culprit, gave these elusive powers the opportunity they needed to bring the Empire closer to destruction. For this reason, it is important to carefully analyze the driving power behind the coups in the Ottoman Empire: the British deep state, just as in many other coups around the world.
The Origin of All Coups: The Coup of 1876
The first modern coup in Turkish history is usually considered the one that saw the deposition of Sultan Abdülaziz in 1876. The coup plotters, i.e., Midhat Pasha (head of the Committee of the New Ottomans), Hüseyin Avni Pasha (Chief of Staff), and Süleyman Pasha (Minister of War), deposed the Sultan and brought Murat V to power instead. As would be the case throughout the Republican period, military students were used for the coup. Ten days later, Sultan Abdülaziz was martyred, which was clumsily made to look like a suicide.
As the British deep state spread the lie that the Ottoman Empire was losing its influence and became a ‘sick man’, the Empire was in truth enjoying one of its powerful eras under the leadership of Sultan Abdülaziz.
In 1876, the Ottoman Empire was the world’s most powerful fourth state; it had the world’s fourth biggest army and the third biggest fleet. In 1876, it encompassed a territory of 12 million sq. km with a total population of 64 million people. The 1876 territory of the Ottoman Empire included what are today 35 different countries. During those days, Istanbul was the world’s fifth biggest city.
Sultan Abdülaziz was a brave sultan that took a clear stance against the British deep state. He didn’t allow the spread of Darwinism, and removed the British deep state spies from his immediate circle. He removed Hüseyin Avni Pasha from his duties for being a Darwinist and for his pro-British stance, who would in return act as one of the plotters of the coup against Sultan Abdülaziz. Hüseyin Avni Pasha prepared the assassination plan against the Sultan.
Abdülaziz also immediately shut down Mecmua-i Fünûn (Journal of Sciences) as it started Darwinist propaganda. His order to dismiss pro-British Ahmed Midhat, one of the most fervent Darwinist propagandists in the Ottoman Empire, was as follows:
From now on, no printing house will ever print anything about Midhat Efendi’s monkeys.130
Sultan Abdülaziz was a devout Muslim, who desired a united Islamic world. During his rule, he made the Ottoman Army a formidable power with the state-of-art weapons, which included 25 ironclads and 175 regular warships. As soon as he ascended to the throne, he tripled the length of the previously 450 km railways. The last Caliph of Islam Abdulmejid II described his father Abdülaziz with the following words in the booklet he wrote in 1920s:
Thank God, my father Abdülaziz Khan was not addicted to any moral weaknesses. In fact, not only did he never drink any alcohol throughout his life, but also he didn’t smoke. Even coffee was something he drank only on rare occasions. That’s why he had a very strong build. He never got ill during his fifteen-year rule. However, he was martyred after facing the disaster of being deposed because he didn’t have a single person that could help him with the great works he initiated.131
The plotters of this vile coup tried to slander Abdülaziz Khan with claims that he committed suicide. However, the examination of his body revealed that both of his wrists had been slit, one side of his beard had been completely ripped off, his teeth had been knocked out and there was a large bruise on his chest.
Hüseyin Avni Pasha, the instigator of the murder, went to the Palace to see how his murder plan went. When he saw that Abdülaziz Khan was still alive after the scuffle, he ordered that the Sultan be taken to kitchen of the police station on palace grounds. This is why medical help was delayed for the Sultan, and why he bled to martyrdom.
To conceal the traces of a fight, Hüseyin Avni Pasha tore off the curtains in the station and covered the Sultan’s body with the exception of his arms. He asked physician Marko Pasha, the director of the Military School of Medicine, to examine his wrists only and write a report of suicide. However, Marko Pasha declined. Then another military doctor, Colonel Dr. Ömer Bey, was summoned, but when he refused to sign the report as well, his medals were ripped off his uniform on the spot and he was exiled to Libya.
Sultan Abdülaziz was buried hastily the same day in the Sultan Mahmud II Shrine at Divanyolu.
Turkish historian İsmail Hami Danişmend, in his five-volume İzahlı Osmanlı Tarihi Kronolojisi (A Detailed Chronology of Ottoman History), listed thirty one pieces of evidence proving why the Sultan did not commit suicide. The physician of the British Embassy also said that no one would be able to cut one’s wrists like that, after seeing the body himself.132
The account of Nazime Sultan, Sultan Abdülaziz’s daughter, leaves no room to doubt as to what happened:
Any claims that my father committed suicide are deceitful. I saw it with my own eyes that they murdered my father.133
No one believed the suicide lie, because one of the wrestlers that committed the murder confessed after a while:
Fahri Bey went from behind and held back his [Sultan Abdülaziz’s] arms. Haji Mehmet and Algerian Mustafa sat on his knees. And I cut his veins in his left arm as deep as I could with a pocketknife. I even pierced his right arm at several places with the knife …134
When an investigation was launched after the bloody attack, anglophile Midhat Pasha sought refuge in the British Consulate, predicting how events could unfold against him.
Historians report that prior to the coup, Midhat Pasha was constantly over-praised by the European media, most notably by the British papers. Indeed, during his first term as grand vizier before the coup, which lasted eighty days, Midhat Pasha allowed Egypt and Tunisia to borrow independently, which caused Egypt to come under British - and Tunisia under French - rule. After the coup, he was again appointed grand vizier and he convened the ‘Constantinople Conference’ (aka the Shipyard Conference), together with the participation of British officials. This conference was a milestone because Midhat Pasha, primed by the British deep state, decided to drag the Ottomans into war with the Russians, which played a big part in the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
Territorial Losses after the 1876 Coup
The rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II, who was brought into power under pressure from the British deep state after the 1876 coup, saw the biggest territorial losses in the Ottoman Empire’s history. A total of 1,592,896 sq. km were surrendered in only thirty-three years, that was the Abdul Hamid II rule.135 The Empire also lost 5 million of its 24 million population as a result.136 Tunisia, Egypt, Somalia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bulgaria, Kars, Ardahan, Batum, Thessaly, Cyprus were only some of the lands surrendered during this time.
Below is the chronological order of the losses of 1.6 million sq. km Ottoman territory during this time:
1878 – Montenegro and Serbia declared independence after the Treaty of Berlin.
1878 – Bulgaria became an autonomous principality after the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78, and came largely under German and Austro-Hungarian control. Bosnia-Herzegovina was granted independence in its domestic affairs. The territories of Serbia, Montenegro and Romania were expanded. Kars, Ardahan, Batum and Doğubeyazit were ceded to Russia. Thessaly was ceded to Greece.
1878 – Bosnia and Herzegovina and Yenipazar were occupied by Austria.
1878 – Abdul Hamid II gave Cyprus to Britain, in exchange for supposed protection by Britain against Russia. British troops landed on Cyprus on July 12, 1878, lowered the Ottoman flag and raised their flags instead.
1881 – France invaded Tunisia. On June 8, 1883, Tunisia became a French protectorate after the La Marsa Convention.
1882 – Britain occupied Egypt.
1884 – Somalia came under British control.
1885 – The Ottoman Eyalet of Jeddah and Habesh was invaded by Italy.
1898 – Crete was granted autonomy.
1899 – Kuwait was granted autonomy.
1908 – Bulgaria declared independence.
1908 – Bosnia-Herzegovina came under the control of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
1908 – Crete decided to join Greece.
A careful observation of the developments that took place after this British deep state coup will reveal how these surrendered lands came either under British control, or to those of her allies, or turned into small, weak countries that could be easily controlled. With this treacherous plot, the British deep state not only broke apart the Ottoman Empire, but also set the stage it needed for its global rule ambitions.
Other Military Coups
Military coups and territorial losses of the Ottoman Empire have always been closely linked. The instability that followed coups largely contributed to the further weakening of the Empire, as riots broke out across the Empire’s lands and major territories were ceded. Clearly, these were carefully planned incidents by the British deep state. Let’s see what territories the Ottomans lost after coups:
* After the Janissary Revolt in 1808, Selim III was deposed and was succeeded by Mustafa IV. It was anglophile Mahmud Raif Pasha, also known as English Mahmud Raif, who incited this revolt. In the subsequent Russo-Turkish war, Ottomans were defeated and ceded various areas, while Serbia gained autonomy.
* After Edward VIII, King of the United Kingdom, and Emperor Nicholas II of Russia reached a deal on June 9, 1908, the Committee of Union and Progress staged a bloodless coup and forced Abdul Hamid II to restore the constitutional monarchy (Second Constitutional Era). Right after this development, the 31 March Incident and a military coup took place. In fact, spy Gerald Fitzmaurice, who had been disguised as an interpreter working for the British Embassy, carefully devised these developments. After the coup, Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia Herzegovina, and Italy annexed Libya, Rhodes and the Dodecanese islands. Albania declared independence while Greece annexed Thessaloniki, Crete and Ioannina, and Bulgaria seized Kavala and Alexandroupoli. This marked the end of Ottoman rule in Europe.
* On January 23, 1913, Enver Pasha and Talat Pasha of the Committee of Union and Progress raided the Sublime Porte (central government building of the Ottoman Empire) and overthrew the government with a coup. This duo plunged the Ottoman Empire into WWI, which became her death sentence and caused the loss of all Arab territories.
Clearly, all military coups in the history of the Ottoman Empire have been extremely destructive and in all of them, spies of the British deep state were used. Each of those coups was meticulously planned by the British deep state and the subsequent wars and territorial losses were determined a long time before they actually took place. The British deep state encouraged the coup plotters –the sycophants of the deep state– to plunge the country into wars. It was perfectly aware how destructive these wars would be, especially at such vulnerable times. And sinister plans have been schemed accordingly.
5. Loss of the Ottoman Army and the Navy
Even though the Ottoman Empire had the world’s fourth biggest army and third biggest navy during the rule of Sultan Abdülaziz, it quickly lost power when Sultan Abdul Hamid II ascended to the throne. Let us recall one more time that Abdul Hamid II was kept under intense pressure from the British deep state when he was the Sultan. The intimidating military prowess that was built during Sultan Abdülaziz’s reign greatly concerned the British deep state. When another sultan came into power, whom they kept under pressure, the British deep state was able to get what they wanted. Using his own throne concerns and coup rumors as an excuse, Sultan Abdul Hamid II withdrew the impressive Ottoman Navy from use. He ordered that the ships be anchored at the Golden Horn, and left them there to rot.
The British First Lord of the Admiralty, the Second Earl of Selborne, who had inspected the condition of the Ottoman fleet during those days reported that ‘There was no Navy!’.137 The Ottoman submarine, the first in history to fire a torpedo while submerged, was left to rot in the Golden Horn. The Ottoman Empire, once the leader of the submarine race in the world, was now facing the prospect of entering WWI without a single one. An Empire that had written history ruined its own fleet at the instigation of the British deep state and entered the dreadful decade of constant wars that started with Balkan Wars of 1912 and ended with the Turkish War of Independence in 1922, without an army or a navy.
The appalling state of the navy became clear only when the Greco-Turkish war broke out in 1897. At the onset of the war, the officers planned a passage of the navy from the Golden Horn to Dardanelles as a tour de force. However, as soon as the movement started, three out of the eight boilers of the ironclad Mesudiye exploded, and the engine room of Hamidiye was flooded. The ships were supposed to meet off the shore of Yeşilköy, but a mere light drizzle was enough to cause them to get lost. Hamidiye went to Lapseki instead of Dardanelles, while the ironclad Hizber got lost. Two days later, she was found beached on the island of İmralı.138
Already without a navy at the onset of WWI, the Ottoman Empire once again fell for the games of the British deep state and never received the dreadnoughts Sultan Osman and Reşadiye from Britain, although it had fully paid for them. Clearly, the British deep state had long before plotted with detail how the Ottoman Empire should have been destroyed with WWI.
Turkey-Russia Rapprochement and Military Coups
After the start of normalization between Turkey and Russia, and the subsequent coup attempt on July 15, 2016, the Turkish and Russian governments stepped up their efforts to solidify their alliance. Both countries began working on common strategies with respect to regional issues, most notably those surrounding the Black Sea region and Syria.
This alliance, based on the fact that only indigenous nations can find solutions to regional problems, was a valuable step forward and had a real potential to bring the peace longed for by the entire world. This is certainly not the first time the two nations cooperated: in 1833, the Treaty of Hünkar İskelesi brought expansive military security to both nations. Ottoman Sultan Mahmud II and Emperor Nicholas I of Russia realized that such a treaty could block the plots of third party countries, especially of Britain. According to the treaty, if one side requested military assistance, the other would offer that help with all its resources. Furthermore, according to the classified clause of the treaty, in case of a war waged against Russia by a Western country, the Ottoman Empire would close the Dardanelles to all warships except for those of the Russian Navy.
Although classified, the European states acquired the classified details with the help of John Ponsonby, the British Ambassador at Istanbul. The European threats of war and heavy political pressure resulted in the treaty being revoked by the London Straits Convention of 1841.
Another example of the historical Russian-Ottoman rapprochement took place during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz. The son of Mahmud II, Abdülaziz considered Russia a close ally and friend and started an alliance process. The Russian Ambassador to Istanbul, Nikolay Pavlovich Ignatyev, played a particular role in this process. However, once again, a group of pro-British officers staged a coup and ousted Sultan Abdülaziz. Unsurprisingly, the policies of the new Sultan, Abdul Hamid II, as well as Midhat Pasha and ‘English’ Said Pasha, caused another war between the Ottoman Empire and Russia, which ended with the death of 250,000 people.
Similar plots and schemes continued throughout the 18th and 19th centuries and gave rise to a total of six wars. During these wars, European countries, led by the British, sometimes sided with the Ottomans and sometimes with the Russians. But they always prevented the two countries from being allies.
The British deep state that incited, provoked and instigated wars, sometimes acted as the mediator in peace negotiations. Of course, the only winner of those peace negotiations was always the British deep state. Innocent people lost their lives, cities were destroyed and, as a result of British deep state plots, the two great empires, the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Empire, were lost to the pages of history.
In the 20th century, Turkey once again received a helping hand from her northern neighbor Russia. For instance, it was the Russians that revealed the existence of the Sykes-Picot Agreement. And during the Turkish war of independence, Turkey enjoyed military and financial support from the Russians. Indeed, as a gesture of appreciation, statues of two Russian generals, General Mikhail Frunze and Marshal Kliment Voroshilov, were erected in Taksim Square, the heart of Istanbul, along with others that helped win the independence war. Russians once again helped Turkish industrial efforts during the first years of the Republic and contributed to the recovery of war-torn Anatolia. The young Turkish Republic, however, again fell victim to deep state plots, because whenever Turks started focusing on the friendship with Russia, civil unrest and military coups would ensue. Clearly, the British deep state didn’t like the friendship between Russian and Turkish people.
In the 21st century, under the leadership of President Putin and President Erdoğan, both countries started an unofficial era of alliance in areas of policy, economy and trade. Mega projects were announced one after another as Russians and Turks enjoyed the comfort of this fruitful friendship. Even the regrettable plane-downing incident of December 2015 was not able to eclipse the solid friendship. In any case, it shortly became clear that sycophants used by the British deep state were behind the incident. Both nations greatly reaped the fruits of this friendship as they made sure that the countries continued alliance and were not fazed by outside provocations during that time. The leaders of the two countries, exercising sound judgment, strengthened their alliance and foiled the plots of the British deep state.
Now, our biggest advantage is the awareness that the plotter is the British deep state. Knowing the identity of the so-called ‘mastermind’ will completely render ineffective any plots planned against the two countries.
It should be remembered that empires that built great civilizations will never completely disappear. Indeed, today both countries enjoy sizable influence and power in their regions. As a matter of fact, with a Muslim population of 20 million, Russia today hosts a Muslim community that is larger than many Islamic countries. Considering the current power potential, it is obvious that only the Russian-Turkish alliance can bring real peace to conflict zones in the region. Therefore, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that some circles that feed on wars are targeting this alliance. Yet, the 230 million people of Russia and Turkey have the power to reinforce this alliance and further their common goals.
6. British Spies in the Ottoman Empire
British ambassadors, consuls and diplomats merit special consideration in any study regarding the activities of the British deep state in the Ottoman Empire. These officers, who were in the Ottoman lands supposedly to serve as diplomats, were most often working as spies. Indeed, they immensely helped the British deep state achieve its goals. Some of them befriended Turkish bureaucrats, some tried to sway Turkish politics. Some of them incited and offered logistic support for riots among minorities living peacefully until then on Ottoman lands. When acts of friendship or promises of economic assistance didn’t work, they didn’t hesitate to resort to threats or blackmail.
The British deep state used professional spies, too. These people could be disguised as archeologists or travelers, and worked to incite anti-Ottoman sentiments among minorities living under Ottoman rule. One notorious example is the British archeologist/agent Gertrude Bell, who planned and put into action the riots in Iraq, Syria and Jordan. Bell, with her spying activities, impressed the British deep state so much that she was later referred to as ‘daughter of the desert’ or ‘the uncrowned queen of the desert’. Speaking fluent Arabic, Persian and Turkish, Bell befriended local people and merchants in Ottoman-ruled Jerusalem, Syria and Iraq. With the pretense of carrying out archeological studies, she drew maps of the regions and sent them to the British Royal Geographical Society. She contributed to the Ottoman losses of Mosul, Baghdad and Basra.
At the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, Bell helped Churchill, one of the most prominent members of the British deep state, draw the borders of Iraq with a ruler.
The British spy T. E. Lawrence was responsible for the Arab riots in Hejaz, as the readers have seen in the previous chapter. The British deep state used Lawrence for sedition and provided money and arms to Arabs, to be used against the Ottoman administration. After the riot, the region came under British control.
The order that ‘Lawrence of Arabia’ gave to Arab rebels as the Turkish army was withdrawing clearly showed his hatred of Turks: “The best of you brings me the most dead Turks! No prisoners!”139
Bell and Lawrence attended the Cairo Conference held in 1921, with Churchill as the chairman. Churchill nicknamed the participants of the gathering ‘Forty Thieves’ for plundering the Ottoman territory. At the conference, it was agreed that Britain should maintain its mandate over Palestine and Abdullah from the Hashemite house should be the king of Jordan, while Faisal from the same house should be the king of Iraq. It was also decided that Husain, the Sharif of Mecca, should control the Hejaz, while the House of Saud should control the Arab peninsula and the Nejd. Britain would provide financial assistance to all of these people, while the Royal Air Force would be responsible for the security in the area. In line with the decisions, the British bombed thousands of settlements and martyred tens of thousands of civilians. All those lands shared at the conference were former Ottoman territories. The zigzag shape on the Jordan-Saudi Arabia border is known as ‘Winston’s Hiccup’. Years later, Churchill said that he had created Transjordan “with the stroke of a pen, one Sunday afternoon in Cairo”.140 It was this easy for the British deep state to play with countries, states and peoples.
A Report on How the British Deep State Influenced the Ottoman Statesmen
The ambassadors of the British deep state were able to make the Ottoman Empire enter war at will, made it sign peace treaties that worked to the British advantage, deposed Ottoman sultans, and had grand viziers executed. They achieved this power by means of certain Ottoman statesmen that were under their control. These people were hypocrites who betrayed their country and chose to serve the British deep state. For this reason, the British deep state has kept a close watch on Turkish statesmen throughout history. One report that G. Barclay, a British embassy officer, sent on January 18, 1907 is a good example of this trend. The report, which provided information about senior Ottoman officers to the British deep state institutions, included characterizations and even derogatory remarks about these people and even their wives. Some of the examples from the report can be found below:
Grand Vizier Kamil Pasha: Cypriot Jew. Talented and honest. Exiled to Rhodes and sought refuge in British Consulate.
Said Pasha: Former grand vizier. Also known as Little Said Pasha. Extremely energetic and ambitious. He deeply loves his country. Extremely intelligent. Very impatient. He was pro-British before, but now he supports Russians.
Tevfik Pasha, Minister of Foreign Affairs: Lacks diplomatic skills. Although his wife is German, he suspects the Germans.
Memduh Pasha, Minister of Internal Affairs: Very narrow minded, hostile to Christians. From time to time, he worked in line with the British interests. Notorious for his shameless acceptance of bribe.
Ferid Pasha: Grand Vizier. Supported by Germans. He always supports Germany.
Ragıp Pasha, Chamberlain: One of the top people that can influence the Sultan. Made a huge wealth by using Palace’s influence. Close to British interests.
Mehmet Nuri Bey: Son of a French man named Chateauneuf. Studied in France. A spy for the Palace. Despite his good looks, he is a degenerate.
The British Foreign Office continued to gather systematic information about Turkish statesmen. (The most recent example is the archives disclosed by WikiLeaks). Other arrogant diplomatic language was found in the archives of 1933-1939, in the form of classified information sent by Percy Loraine to London, who was British ambassador to Turkey, with the note ‘on Leading Turkish Personalities’. The letter had unofficial information about 96 administrators, journalists and intellectuals of the newly founded Republic of Turkey:
Yunus Nadi Abalıoğlu: Journalist. Short, fat. Wears butterfly glasses. Can change his mind quickly according to the circumstances. A heartless, spineless man.
Celal Nuri İleri: Journalist. Extremely pro-Western. Smart. Sly. Probably has communist tendencies.
Ahmet Ağaoğlu: Son of a Jewish man of Caucasia who embraced Islam. Worked for Russian secret service. After 1926, he sort of softened his stance against Britain.
Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu: Small stature. Mediocre in looks. Nice wife, speaks English.
Ahmet Ferid: Pro-Bolshevik. Opportunist, has no principles. His attractive wife helped him with his achievements in London Embassy.
Kazım Özalp: Most possibly anti-German and anti-Bolshevik. Poker addict.
İbrahim Tali Öngören: Physician. Ox-headed, short.
Hasan Saka: Was a Bolshevik sympathizer. Unattractive. Rowdy.
Ali Çetinkaya: While he was the Minister of Public Works, worked to nationalize foreign companies.
Fethi Okyar: Has a Mongolian face. Modest man. Has a very attractive wife who speaks English.1
\1. Soner Yalçın, ‘İngiliz ‘WikiLeaks’inde Ünlü Türkler’, (Famous Turks in the British WikiLeaks), Hürriyet, 04.12.2010, https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ingiliz-wikileaks-inde-unlu-turkler-16452176
Some British Spies That Managed to Infiltrate the Ottoman Empire
Ármin Vámbéry
Hungarian Ármin Vámbéry, who had multiple titles before his name, like traveler, explorer, dervish, lecturer, author and international negotiator, was a professor of oriental languages at the Royal University of Pest. He came to the Ottoman Empire to study Turkology in Central Asia and spied on the Ottoman Sultans for the British deep state. He was raised Jewish, but later converted twice. He first became a Christian, then a Muslim. He spoke five languages.
Despite having lost his faith at a young age, he disguised himself as a dervish traveling around Central Asia. He subscribed to Darwinist/materialist thinking. In 1857, he arrived at Istanbul and began giving private lessons at the Palace. He was constantly by the side of Sultan Abdul Hamid II and gave private French lessons to Midhat Pasha. He was the only person that could gain the trust of Abdul Hamid II in a very short amount of time.
According to Richard Norton-Taylor of The Guardian, ‘His putative usefulness for the British was that he had the ear of the sultan of Turkey, “your friend in Constantinople”, as his controller in London described him.‘141
Sultan Abdul Hamid II called Vámbéry to Turkey in the 1880s. Consequently, he stayed at Yıldız Palace as the Sultan’s special guest. When Lord Salisbury saw that Vámbéry was able to enter the Palace, he invited him to the Foreign Office and tasked him with the duty of spying on the Sultan.
Owing to his linguistic abilities, Vámbéry was hired as a translator by the Ottoman Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Recognizing the potential Vámbéry represented, the Western media also hired him as Istanbul correspondent, hoping to benefit from his intelligence and observations. He was received with great enthusiasm particularly in Britain, and dinners were held in his honor; he even received an invitation from Queen Victoria.
The House of Commons raised the question whether there was any truth to the rumors that Vámbéry went to Abdul Hamid II on a special mission assigned by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and if the rumors were true, what the mission involved. The answer was clear in stating that the rumors were completely baseless. However only one month prior, Vámbéry had gone to Istanbul upon instructions from Lord Salisbury and submitted a long, confidential report to the Foreign Office on Abdul Hamid II and the Ottoman Empire.
Sultan Abdul Hamid II said, ‘I also wish very much to reach a deal with the British; I will not hesitate to offer the necessary compromises, as long as they are willing, too.’ He even offered an alliance to the British by means of Vámbéry.142
Charles Arbuthnot
Charles Arbuthnot was the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire between 1804 and 1807. He was also behind the failed operation of the British navy attack on the Dardanelles Strait and its coming to the offshore waters of Prince Islands to threaten Istanbul.
Prior to the Dardanelles Operation of 1808, Russia invaded the Turkish lands of Moldavia and Wallachia without any declaration of war. Urged by the French ambassador Horace Sébastiani, the Ottomans began war preparations against Russia. However, British ambassador Arbuthnot, who was working in liaison with the Russians, issued an ultimatum to the Ottomans, demanding that Sébastiani be removed from Istanbul, a peace treaty be signed with Russia, an alliance treaty with the British be renewed, and British and Russian navy fleets be allowed to freely pass the Straits. Following this ultimatum, the British supported the Russians when they entered Moldavia and Wallachia, and then demanded that Dardanelles forts be surrendered to Britain. Ambassador Arbuthnot said that unless those demands were met, he would go to Bozcaada and come back with the British fleet to start bombarding Istanbul.
Arbuthnot on board, the British navy in Dardanelles sank four Turkish ships, with ten large galleys, and entered the Sea of Marmara to advance towards Istanbul. When the British fleet anchored at Istanbul, there were new demands on the list and the British insisted the Turkish navy be entrusted to the British. This attitude sparked immense outrage, first in the military and then among madrasah students. The people of Istanbul and, finally, the government decided to fight back. Key positions along the shore were arranged as defensive positions and some 300 cannons were placed. At the same time, people of the Prince Islands and fishermen were waging guerilla warfare on the British. This entire defense effort forced the British fleet to retreat. When their final attempt of a threat failed, the British navy withdrew completely. Artillery defense at Dardanelles did not let the British fleet pass through.
Henry Elliot
Another notorious spy who worked for the British deep state was Sir Henry Elliot, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire. He was a close friend of Grand Vizier Midhat Pasha, who helped dethrone Sultan Abdülaziz Khan, and caused Egypt to come under British rule by issuing the edict that allowed Egypt to borrow money from foreign creditors. Elliot was one of the architects of the coup of 1876 and the Russo-Turkish War (1877-78).
When Midhat Pasha became Grand Vizier after the coup, he held the ‘Constantinople Conference” (aka the Shipyard Conference) in Istanbul with the participation of the British. In this conference, which was meant to prevent war, the Ottomans were pressured to give independence to Serbia and Montenegro, as well as autonomy to Bosnia Herzegovina. Britain knew perfectly well that the Ottomans would never accept such conditions and that they would declare war instead. Indeed, when the agreement requirements were disclosed, it was again Britain that urged Midhat Pasha to resist, promising that in case of war, he could trust Britain. Finally, what Elliot (in other words, the British deep state) wanted came true, and the Ottoman Empire and Russia declared war against each other. This war caused the Ottoman Empire one of its greatest territorial losses. Once again, those familiar tactics were in play and the ‘peace’ agreement was signed with the mediation of the British.
One of the most notorious tactics of the British deep state is egging on two sides, making them fight and then mediating a peace agreement between them. Similarly, the Treaty of Karlowitz of 1699, with the Ottoman’s first major territorial losses in the West, was signed under pressure from British Ambassador William Paget, 6th Baron Paget. The Treaty of Passarowitz, signed after the Ottoman-Venetian and Austro-Turkish Wars of 1715-1718 and which also saw Ottoman territory losses, was also signed with British ambassadors as the mediators. All of these treaties were actually the result of British deep state policies. This shouldn’t be surprising - it has always been the British deep state that secretly set the stage for the conflicts and provoked the wars. The real winner after these treaties has always been the British deep state. The Ottoman Empire, on the other hand, came one step closer to destruction every time it was forced to sign a treaty at the instigation of the British deep state.
Austen Henry Layard
Henry Layard, who succeeded Henry Elliot as the British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, was another spy that worked disguised as an ambassador. Having been appointed as a Privy Council member by the Gladstone government, Layard is considered the person that ensured British control over Cyprus via the Cyprus Convention of 1878. Even though he seemed to be pro-Turkish, his main policy was making Russians and Ottomans fight and weaken each other, thus playing into the hands of the British deep state. Abdul Hamid II granting certain facilities to the British deep state, which would make it easier for Britain to gain control of Cyprus, made Layard’s job much easier.
Layard informed Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, the then British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs that, according to Islamic tradition, for an administrator to be removed from the position of Caliph and dethroned, he had to be mentally ill. A scheme based on this information brought about the dethronement of Sultan Murad V, to be succeeded by Abdul Hamid II, who had to give into the pressure of the British deep state. This was a grim example of how the British deep state could change even the Ottoman Sultans using its spies.
7. Sycophants of the British Deep State
Throughout its history, the British deep state has seen hypocrites as its most effective tool in its never-ending quest of gaining control over different regions, of inciting riots, staging coups, of overthrowing governments and spreading perverted ideologies. After identifying a country as a target, the British deep state actively seeks out greedy individuals with self-esteem problems for its following of sycophants. These people, due to their inferiority complex, are usually ready to adopt an anglophile character to the extent of obsequiousness. Most of the time, promises of insignificant positions, money or other assurances to be later forgotten, are enough to convince these people to do anything. These people are hypocrites, who sell their countries, abandon their religion and are capable of committing inconceivable evil for personal gains.
In the process of gaining control over India and provoking Arabs against the Ottoman administration, these minions proved most useful for the British deep state. Not surprisingly, they played an important role in the fall of the Ottoman Empire. However, the threat of traitorous hypocrites didn’t end with the fall of the Empire. On the contrary, such hypocrites are still present today and continue to be handpicked by the British deep state for their greedy, impressionable and obsequious characters. These people are the main reason behind the horrible developments that took place in countries like Iraq and Syria. It should be remembered that Turkey is certainly not immune to this threat. There are many hypocrites in Turkey that seek to build ties with and serve the British deep state, at the expense of their countries. Therefore, it is crucial to take lessons from the past and correctly identify people with such traitorous characters.
The Ottoman Admirers of England
The British deep state has actively supported the movements in the Empire that it believed could weaken the unity of the Ottoman society. For instance, it set up and supported the famous ‘Young Turks’ and ‘Committee of Union and Progress’. In addition, many destructive developments in the Empire, such as the uprising of Ali Pasha of Ioannina designed to weaken the central government, and the coup staged by Midhat Pasha on March 31, were also planned and directed by the British deep state.
The British deep state has used local elements as well. Certain ‘anglophile’ Ottomans considered their personal interests above those of the Islamic world and the Empire, and turned into implementers of sly British deep state plots concocted in dark London dungeons and cisterns. Throughout its history, the British deep state has never encountered any difficulty sourcing such traitorous hypocrites in the targeted countries and then manipulating them. The situation was no different in the Ottoman Empire.
Let’s have a look at some spies that worked for the British deep state in the Ottoman Empire:
‘English’ Said Pasha
Known as ‘English’ Said Pasha for his deep admiration for everything English, Said Pasha played significant roles in wars that proved devastating for the Empire in the 19th century.
After returning from his navy training in Britain, he rose through the ranks quickly and became the Minister of Navy. He was responsible for the Ottoman navy during the Russo-Turkish War (1877-78). However, because of gross negligence by the command of the navy, the capital came face to face with the risk of invasion in only five months. The war ended with disastrous results for the Ottomans, who had to cede Bulgaria, North Greece, Macedonia and Serbia to Russia and its allies.
Major mistakes made by the Turkish fleet in the Danube River also played a role in the Ottoman defeat. Interestingly, a British officer, Hobart Pasha, was in charge of the fleet at the time, while ‘English’ Said Pasha was the vizier. The Danube stretch was the only defensive line that could stop the Russian army from getting to Istanbul. However, the Ottoman army in Danube was heavily defeated because the British admiral was serving not the Ottoman Empire but the British deep state.
As a result, the Russian army reached Yeşilköy (San Stefano), coming very close to capturing Istanbul. In the meantime, Romania and Serbia declared their independence and the kingdom of Bulgaria was founded. The Russians annexed Kars, Ardahan and Batum, which brought the Turkish rule in Caucasus to a definitive end. As a result, some 1.5 million Circassians had to flee to Turkey. Britain also secured Cyprus as a protectorate, which later would be used as a logistics hub for the Armenian riots.
English Said Pasha was also assigned the task of reconstructing the region following the Zeitun (Armenian) rebellion. The developments in the region will be explained in more detail in the chapter on the British deep state and the Armenians.
Abdullah Cevdet
Abdullah Cevdet was possibly the most ardent supporter of Darwinism and its promulgation in the Empire. Although religious when he was young, he was introduced to materialist-Darwinist ideology at the Medical School. During those days, biologic materialism was spreading fast among the medical students, and affected Cevdet as well. With his articles, he tried to prove his erroneous idea that ‘biologic materialism would in time take the place of religion’.
Cevdet was also one of the founders of the ‘Society of the Friends of England’. During the years when Istanbul was under occupation, he informed on many patriots involved in the independence movement and led to their arrest by the British. He also played a significant role in the Society for the Rise of Kurdistan, which worked closely with the British authorities. Abdullah Cevdet maintained that Kurdish people should have seceded from the Ottoman Empire, and is therefore usually considered as one of the architects of the idea of ‘autonomy for the Southeastern Anatolia’. He was manipulated by the British deep state for its plans to divide the Ottoman Empire and create conflict between Kurds and Turks.
It was Abdullah Cevdet who started the practice of giving license to women to work as prostitutes in brothels. About the Battle of Gallipoli, he shockingly said, ‘civilization came to our doorstep, but we turned it back’.143
During his education at the medical school, following the advice of Ibrahim Temo and acting together with Hikmet Emin of Konya, İshak Sükuti of Diyarbakır and Mehmet Reşid of Caucasus, Abdullah Cevdet founded the Committee of Ottoman Union, which would later transform into the Committee of Union and Progress. In 1908, he translated and published Reinhart Dozy’s two-volume book entitled Essai sur l’Histoire de l’Islamisme in Egypt, which was then under the control of the British evolutionist Lord Cromer. This book, which was full of slanders about our religion and our beloved Prophet (pbuh), caused a huge uproar in the Ottoman society [our beloved Prophet (pbuh) is above such slanders]. In the articles he wrote in the early 1900s, he maintained that the Ottoman Empire should be ruled by the British and claimed that Britain had the world’s most civil and honest government.144
Journalist and publisher Zekeriya Sertel said that Abdullah Cevdet was a British spy and he once informed on Sertel and his friends due to a meeting they had.
Abdullah Cevdet, citing the relationship of British imperialism with Spain, said: ‘since it is going to be inevitable to be incorporated by spheres of influence that great states are trying to create, it will be expedient to choose British among the options’.145
Furthermore, he propagandized the Bahá’í faith supported by the British (the Kurdistan newspaper was being printed in a Bahá’í printing house supported by certain circles in Cairo).
Midhat Pasha
Midhat Pasha, influenced by the British deep state, plunged the Ottoman Empire in a war with Russia. He was also one of the three plotters of the coup that dethroned and caused the martyrdom of Sultan Abdülaziz. Interestingly, he was also behind the riot that led to the coup. It is also known that he had planned the coup with the British ambassador Elliot.146
During his first term as the grand vizier, he signed a decree that allowed Egypt to receive foreign loans, which ultimately caused Egypt to come under British rule. Ármin Vámbéry, known as a British spy of the Abdul Hamid II era, was the French tutor of Midhat Pasha.
It is also known that during his time as the governor of Baghdad, he sought to bring the Kuwait Emirate under British rule.
Kamil Pasha
Having spent 9 years as grand vizier, Kamil Pasha was another Ottoman officer that was called ‘English’ for his anglophile nature. His visit to London in 1851 for an exhibition left him with a lifelong admiration for England. This admiration was such common knowledge, from spies’ reports to embassy notes, that the matter was discussed everywhere. When he was assigned to Rhodes while he was the governor of Izmir, he sought refuge in the British Consulate. Only after the Sultan gave a personal assurance, he returned to Istanbul.
When he was the Izmir governor, Kamil Pasha worked with the British to create an autonomous region in Izmir, just as in Egypt. Many historians believe that Abdul Hamid II secretly supported him in this endeavor.
His final term as the Grand Vizier ended when he had to resign at gunpoint by Enver Pasha. He then sought refuge with his close friend Lord Kitchener, British Consul-General in charge of Egypt at the time.
Damad Ferid Pasha
Damad Ferid Pasha rose through the ranks very quickly, and secured a post in the Ottoman Embassy in London despite his relatively insignificant previous positions in the Foreign Office. As one of the signatories of the Treaty of Sèvres on behalf of the Ottoman Empire, he ordered the destruction of 90,000 containers of ammunition kept in Ottoman military warehouses in Istanbul, in line with the instructions of the British. He then sent an army of thugs consisting of people like Ahmet Anzavur to Anatolia to fight the Nationalist Forces of the Ankara government.
One of the co-founders of the Society of the Friends of England, he had Dürrizade Abdullah Efendi issue a fatwa for the execution of Mustafa Kemal and his comrades on April 11, 1920.147
According to the last grand vizier Tewfik Pasha, Ferid Pasha was more loyal to Western world then the Westerners themselves. An article in the daily Tevhid-i Efkâr described him as follows:
After he returned from London, he became a Westerner and almost turned hostile to Islam. He would always quote Greek and Latin proverbs, superstitions and mythology in his speeches, lectures and writings. (…) To sum it up, he turned completely Western, but remained a cosmopolite man devoid of any sense of patriotism.148
Mahmud Raif Efendi
He was the first diplomat to serve as chief clerk in the Ottoman Embassy in London. Due to his anglophilia, he gained the nickname ‘English Mahmut’. He instigated the Kabakçı Mustafa Rebellion of 1808, which brought death to him as well. This rebellion caused the deposing and subsequent murder of Sultan Selim III, after which Istanbul became a lawless city controlled by thugs for almost one and a half years. During this time, the Wahhabi riot broke out in Arabia but the Ottomans failed to quickly suppress it because of its domestic problems. The effects of this rebellion are felt to this day. Raif Efendi’s book on his trip to Britain clearly demonstrates his deep admiration of that country.
Young Ottomans or the New Ottomans
Sultan Abdülaziz’s opponents organized as Young Ottomans, under the leadership of Midhat Pasha, who was behind the coup of 1876. Ali Suavi, who attempted another coup a couple of years later, did so with his wife, who was also a British spy. This group was the beginning of Young Turks and the Committee of Union and Progress. Young Ottomans believed that the Ottoman Empire could only be saved with the help of the British.
Young Turks, İsmail Kemal Bey and Damad Mahmud Celaleddin Pasha
As a continuation of Young Ottomans, this group later turned into the Committee of Union and Progress. Most Young Turks were supported by the British deep state. When in 1899, İsmail Kemal Bey, Damad Mahmud Celaleddin Pasha and their sons fled to Europe, the Young Turk movement began to assume a pro-British stance. Those Young Turks that believed in the necessity of British intervention in Ottoman lands later split from the core society and founded the ‘Ottoman Society of Promoters of Freedom’, and tried to stage a coup with the help of the British, but failed.
Prince Sabahaddin, who was considered one of the names behind the 31 March Incident, was the son of Damad Mahmud Celaleddin Pasha. He argued that the Ottoman state system should be modeled on the British system. Another Young Turk, Ahmed Rıza, who was the son of ‘English’ Ali Rıza Bey, one day came across a British ambassador who was going to Sarayburnu; he untied the horses drawing the ambassador’s cart and tied himself in their place. That was the shocking extent of the anglophilia of those sycophants.
Nevertheless, when the Committee of Union and Progress finally came into power, it failed to secure the support it expected from Britain. Because the real intent of the British had been supporting the opposition and radical anti-state movements to create an atmosphere of conflict around the empire, which, to a large extent, it achieved.
Dervish Vahdeti and the 31 March Incident
Dervish Vahdeti, who was one of the significant leaders of the 31 March Incident, was in truth a Cypriot spy working for the British. Prior to the riot, he was making provocative claims like ‘religion was being lost’ in his newspaper Volkan. It should be noted that Grand Vizier ‘English’ Kamil Pasha was also a writer at the same paper. During the riot, Vahdeti gave long, fiery speeches to provoke people in the Sultanahmet Square. Chanting the slogan ‘we want sharia’, Vahdeti split the country into two and caused a military coup. The truth is, he had never been a religious person.
In his newspaper, he frequently spoke of his fondness of the British and said that Cyprus under British rule had become a little Switzerland.
Ahmet Yemin (Yalman), a young Turkish journalist back then, wrote about Dervish Vahdeti’s relations with the British and the role Britain played in the 31 March Incident:
… The Cypriot petitioner named Dervish Vahdeti was in truth handpicked by the British intelligence service, was trained as a riot agent and was tasked with founding Volkan Newspaper, the Committee of Union of Mohammedians and provoking people. Although Volkan seemed to pursue an Islamist, liberal, humanist policy, it was a front to conceal its pro-British line, which had been its main task all along. That was a classical method used by the British spies.149
Vahdeti was, in truth, a Darwinist who wasn’t religious at all. However, he had a duty given to him by the British deep state and, true to his duty, he managed to gain influence using religion, led a pro-sharia movement and incited a wide-scaled riot. Author Sina Akşin explains the basic qualities of Vahdeti with the following words:
Islamist qualities, liberal views, pro-constitution approach, humanist and Western-leaning opinions… Vahdeti was knowledgeable about Western scholars to the extent of quoting Dreyfus, Zola and Darwin in his pieces. He was protective of old fugitives and exiles, was vehemently against the civilian leaders of the Committee of Union and Progress, most notably Ahmed Rıza. Nevertheless, he was supporting Sabahaddin Bey and Kamil Pasha. Therefore, he had a pro-British stance. Dervish believed that the best policy would be the British policy.150
The 31 March Incident was co-planned by Vahdeti and his British allies. The true goal was creating turmoil in the country in an attempt to further weaken the Ottomans. One account of British agents’ support to Vahdeti can be found below:
Dervish Vahdeti, who played an active role in starting the riot, did everything in his power to inflame the rising, and his Committee of Union of Mohammedians and its publication Volkan newspaper, acting together with other opposition parties, managed to provoke the media against the Committee of Union and Progress. In his sedition, he enjoyed support from Cypriot Kamil Pasha and British spies.151
Friends of England during the Occupation of Istanbul
The Society of the Friends of England represented the zenith of the pro-British attitude some Ottoman statesmen adopted. This organization was founded while Istanbul and Anatolia were under occupation and helped the British efforts against the independence movement. The book will examine later the particular activities of this society. However, for now, let’s see the politicians that were members of this group and the roles they played in the political arena of ‘occupied Istanbul’.
Tewfik Pasha, who succeeded another co-founder, Damad Ferid Pasha, as a grand vizier, was also an anglophile. In his first remark in office, he made it clear that his goal was ‘rebuilding our old friendship with Britain’.
On November 22, 1919, when he was in London as the Ottoman Ambassador, he explained his plan to build an Ottoman-British alliance on defense issues and continued saying that, ‘Turkish nation, from the Sultan to the people trust Great Britain and wouldn’t be able to show that trust to any other nation.’ As he was uttering these words, Britain was drawing up the Treaty of Sèvres at the Paris Peace Conference and making plans to share the Ottoman lands.
Tewfik Pasha even once said to Lord Curzon, the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, “His Imperial Majesty [the Sultan] was deeply convinced that the only hope for his country and his throne lay in a revival of the old relations between Turkey and Great Britain, to which he was ready to agree in any manner that might be thought best….“152
Tewfik Pasha’s peace offer was as follows:
Britain and the Ottoman Empire will sign a treaty, according to which, Ottomans will leave the protection of the freedom of the Straits to Britain, to be in favor of all nations. For this purpose, Britain might use her own soldiers or Turkish security forces. Turkish government will put the Turkish gendarme at British disposal. Furthermore, it will transfer the management of the required land strip for the protection of the freedom of the Straits, to Britain.
Such an alliance will dispel for good any thoughts prevalent in India and in other regions that Britain is hostile to the caliphate and that it wishes to destroy Turkey. The agreement will be strong proof that the opposite is true and will show to the whole Islamic world that Britain is the defender and ally of the caliphate.153
Ahmed Izzet Pasha, who formed the first government in Istanbul after the Armistice of Mudros, couldn’t provide necessary support to the Nationalist Forces, and despite his previous promises to Ankara government, he continued to serve in the Istanbul government. During his meeting with John Godolphin Bennett, one of the officers of the British occupying forces in Istanbul, he said that if he was convinced that Britain had friendly intentions towards Turkey, he could make Mustafa Kemal meet with the British commander in chief and would do everything in his power to find a common ground regarding the evacuation of Anatolia by the Greeks and that he would try to persuade Mustafa Kemal. It is clear that the occupation of Anatolia by the Greeks was a plan of the British deep state, and its members could have stopped it if they wished. This fact will be examined in greater detail in the chapters regarding the Treaty of Sèvres and the Treaty of Lausanne.
Loyal Servants of British Imperialism in the Ottoman Political Scene
During the years leading up to the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Istanbul government consisted mainly of politicians that thought salvation lay in an alliance with Britain. These people believed that their future depended on the mercy of the British imperialism. For instance:
* Mustafa Resid Pasha, who was the Minister of Foreign Affairs, claimed that he was speaking not only for himself, but also for his colleagues in the government, the Sultan and most of the people, and told the British High Commissioner Webb that the general desire was towards a British rule.154
* Ali Kemal, the Minister of Internal Affairs, said to British Admiral Calthorpe that he believed that salvation lay in British rule, regardless of how it happened.
* Ahmed Reşid (Rey), who briefly served as the Minister of Internal Affairs as well as a member of the Peace Committee, wished for the acceptance of the British leadership on behalf of Damad Ferid Pasha and said that the policy of the current government was based on the trust of Turkish government in the British support.
Ali Kemal, who served as the Minister of Education and Minister of Internal Affairs in Damad Ferid Pasha government, was the great-grandfather of Boris Johnson, the incumbent UK Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Ali Kemal was being paid by Abdul Hamid II to spy on the Young Turks. Clearly, it wasn’t enough to stop him from conspiring the 31 March Incident, which led to the deposition of Abdul Hamid II.
Ali Kemal argued that Turkey should have accepted a British mandate. A sworn enemy of Atatürk, he also actively worked to stop the Nationalist Forces. Some of the remarks he uttered about Atatürk and the Nationalist Forces were as follows:
Shaking hands with Mustafa Kemal is tantamount to reaching out to thugs. They keep fighting with a makeshift army [referring to Nationalist forces]. These crazies keep saying they want independence. Remember that old Arab proverb: ‘What the victor wants, what the victor gets’. That’s it.
[Referring to the Turkish army fighting the war of independence] They are being blocked in every way, they have low spirits, most of them are barefooted, they lack weapons, they have a couple of trucks but all of them are useless. They have neither fuel nor spare parts. They only have oxen for transportation. [People like] Mustafa Kemal never do anything useful. Thankfully, they are rare. They should be cut off like sick limbs.155 (Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and his brave companions are above such remarks)
Ali Kemal was also a founder of the Society of the Friends of England.
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, in his famous Nutuk (The Great Speech), wrote the following about the Society of the Friends of England that had Shaykh al-Islam Mustafa Sabri Efendi, who was opposed to the nationalist movement, as their Honorary President:
One of the most important of these, the ‘Society of the Friends of England’ is worthy of special mention. It does not follow from its name that its members were necessarily friends of England. In my opinion, the founders of this society were people who thought, before anything else, of their own safety and their own particular interests, and who tried to secure both by inducing Lloyd George’s Government to afford them English protection. I wonder whether these misguided persons really imagined for a moment that the English Government had any idea at all of maintaining and preserving the Ottoman State in its integrity?
At the head of this Society were Vahdettin, who bore the title of Ottoman Sultan and Caliph, Damat Ferit Pasha, Ali Kemal, Minister of the Interior, Adil Bey, Mehmet Ali Bey and Sait Molla. Certain English adventurers, for instance a clergyman named Frew, also belonged to this Society. To judge from the energy the latter displayed, he was practically its chairman.156
Clearly, Atatürk was keenly aware of the British deep state spies and anglophiles within the Ottoman Empire and immediately recognized their true aim as dismembering the Empire. Realizing the magnitude of the danger, Atatürk began to build his plans to defend and save the country together with true patriots, and launched the war of independence.
8. British Deep State Incites Riots across the Empire
Many people claim that Israel and the Jewish state caused the Empire to lose its lands in the Middle East. The truth is, such rhetoric is nothing but a diversion created by the British deep state. A quick look at the post-Ottoman era will reveal who profited the most out of the situation. It is the British deep state, and just like in the past, it is still taking advantage of the current fragmentation in the Middle East. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Palestine, Iraq, Qatar, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Jordan came under the direct control of Britain. Though being under the rule of France, Lebanon, Syria, Libya and Algeria were indirectly under Britain’s sway. Yet, out of millions of square kilometers, the Jews got only 14,000 km2 where 800,000 people lived. That was smaller than the total area of Kuwait, and a little bigger than Qatar. After the three big Arab-Israeli wars, this territory increased to 20,000 km2, however is still smaller than the city of Ankara. Clearly, it was only the British deep state that was behind the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
The Arab Peninsula, Iraq, Syria and the Gulf regions, which the British deep state captured in WWI in a bid to obtain the remaining riches of the Ottoman Empire, are home to half of the world’s oil reserves. For this reason, by the end of the 19th century, Britain’s appetite for the Middle East had only increased.
Indeed, after the British deep state secured control of this region, it exploited the riches of the indigenous Muslims for years. Even after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, it got the lion’s share of the oil in countries like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates.
The developments of the time should be a lesson for the Muslims of the 21st century and help them to better understand the developments of the modern day. Those who consider their own brothers and sisters in religion as enemies because of sectarian provocations should look at what happened a hundred years ago and see the plot. They should know that with this attitude, albeit unknowingly, they are only helping projects developed in Chatham House and the Privy Council in London. The Islamic world has been suffering from these projects for a century, and only Muslims can prevent these dark plans from coming to fruition.
Today Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen are grappling with civil wars. Sectarian clashes continue to claim Muslim lives every day. The British deep state and the Sykes-Picot Agreement, secretly implemented over time, brought only destruction and death. The only way to bring back peace is identifying the dajjali system in action. Unless the British deep state is spiritually and intellectually defeated, peace and prosperity will be impossible for the Middle East.
Therefore, the goal should be correctly identifying the dajjali ideology of the British deep state and offering a proper intellectual response, all the while knowing that God will give victory to the supporters of the Mahdi movement.
Or do those who do bad actions imagine they can outstrip Us? How bad their judgment is? (Qur’an, 29:4)
Provocation Policy of the British Deep State
When the British deep state decided to dismember the Ottoman Empire, its first step was inciting regional riots. Its spies and minions as mentioned in the previous chapter played important roles in these riots. One shouldn’t think that minorities living under Ottoman rule actually participated in these risings. On the contrary, those riots were organized by hypocrites and sycophants in various ethnical groups who chose to betray their country for petty personal gains.
By the end of the 19th century, the British deep state managed to tear Serbia, Bosnia Herzegovina, Romania, Bulgaria, and Montenegro from the Ottoman Empire, and then Macedonia, Salonica (modern Thessaloniki) and Manastır (modern Bitola) in the early 20th century. The same ‘minority’ provocation was once again active, the same provocative British spies were once again on the scene, and nations that had harmoniously co-existed for 600 years under Ottoman rule were presented as people opposed to the Ottoman Empire. By means of their spies and mercenaries, they created civil unrest and riots in these regions. During this time, close to 5 million Balkan Muslims were martyred, while another 5 million were forced to flee to Anatolia. The British deep state carried out a wide-scaled massacre.
Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro and Romania, which declared independence with the help of the British deep state, couldn’t escape becoming puppets. Despite having lived in peace for centuries in the Ottoman Empire, these nations, on behalf of the British deep state, attacked the Ottoman Empire in the Balkan Wars. Similarly, Greece occupied Anatolia prior to the War of Independence.
The riots that had the most deadly effect on the Empire were the Arab riots. Directly instigated by British spy Lawrence, these riots achieved their goal due to the support of anglophile sycophants.
Armenian riots, another factor that contributed to the fall of the Empire, will be examined in further detail in the next part of the book.
British deep state policy is based on pitting nations against nations. Within a matter of one hundred years, Balkan nations fought the Ottoman Empire, the Armenians fought the Turks, the Kurds fought the Armenians, the Arabs fought each other and the Turks, the Caucasians fought each other and the Armenians. The British units that attacked the Ottoman Empire consisted of provoked colonized nations. During this process, the British deep state never directly took part, instead used its spies, propaganda tools and the media outlets and provoked poor people.
While Darwinism and moral corruption were eroding the moral values of the Ottoman society, debts were crippling its economy and the hypocrites were working on destroying the patriotic consciousness. This loss took a disastrous toll not only on the Ottoman Empire, but on the nations mentioned as well. From that point on, these regions were ensnared by the British deep state and were turned into pawns, and civil unrest still continues.
The Greek Uprising and Lord Byron
During the Greek uprising, the Ottoman army fought not only the Greek troops, but the British deep state, too. Strangely enough, British homosexual poet Lord Byron fought alongside the Greeks, almost more enthusiastically than they did. He even set up a mercenary unit called the ‘Byron Brigade’, and died heading it. He also persuaded Ali Pasha of Ioannina, with whom he had a homosexual relationship, to start an insurgency against the Ottoman Empire, forcing the Ottoman army to fight on two fronts at the same time.
The Ottoman army was about to suppress the Greek insurgency, but under the leadership of the British deep state, the British, French and Russian navies attacked the Ottoman navy in Navarino and sank more than 70 vessels of the Ottoman and Egyptian fleets. (The British deep state’s role in the Navarino attack will be explained further in the following pages.) However, even the destruction of the Ottoman and Egyptian fleets wasn’t enough to secure a Greek victory. The Greek state couldn’t be established until after the Russo-Turkish War (1828-29). All these developments took place through careful manipulation by and under the watchful eyes of the British deep state. In the end, the Greeks gained independence through the help of the deep state.
Greek commander Kolokotronis wrote in his memoir how they martyred 32,000 Turks in the city of Tripolitsa. British historian Walter Alison Phillip said the following about the massacre:
For three days the miserable [Turkish] inhabitants were given over to lust and cruelty of a mob of savages. Neither sex nor age was spared. Women and children were tortured before being put to death. So great was the slaughter that [Greek guerilla leader] Kolokotronis himself says that, from the gate to the citadel his horse’s hoofs never touched the ground. His path of triumph was carpeted with corpses. At the end of two days, the wretched remnant of the Mussulmans were deliberately collected, to the number of some two thousand souls, of every age and sex, but principally women and children, were led out to a ravine in the neighboring mountains and there butchered like cattle.157
William St. Clair wrote the eyewitness accounts and descriptions of the officers present during the massacre:
Upwards of ten thousand Turks were put to death. Prisoners who were suspected of having concealed their money were tortured. Their arms and legs were cut off and they were slowly roasted over fires. Pregnant women were cut open, their heads cut off, and dogs’ heads stuck between their legs. From Friday to Sunday the air was filled with the sound of screams… One Greek boasted that he personally killed ninety people. The Jewish colony was systematically tortured… For weeks afterwards starving Turkish children running helplessly about the ruins were being cut down and shot at by exultant Greeks… The wells were poisoned by the bodies that had been thrown in.158
The Greek insurgency that the British deep state instigated to further her own interests didn’t benefit the Greeks, either. After an independent Greek state was founded, a reverse migration – one from Greece to the Ottoman territories – began and 60,000 people left Greece between 1834-36, and many chose the Island of Crete, which was then ruled by the Khedive of Egypt, Mehmed Ali Pasha (aka Muhammad Ali of Egypt).
The Truth behind the Greek Uprising
The main motive behind the Greek uprising was driving Turks out of Europe. Indeed, the project that started with these riots continued for another 100 years until it completely put an end to the 500-year Turkish presence in the Balkans. As a result, the Muslim population declined significantly. American historian Justin McCarthy estimates that between 1821 and 1922, close to 5.5 million Muslims were driven out of Europe and another 5 million were martyred directly or indirectly as a result of diseases or hunger while fleeing.
Bulgarian Uprising
The British Prime Minister of the time, William Ewart Gladstone, based his full-fledged smear campaign against the Ottoman Empire and the Turks on the developments that took place in what is now modern Bulgaria. Together with The Times, he organized wide-scale anti-Turkish campaigns across London for days, while his book Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East, printed in 200,000 copies, offered grossly overstated accounts of incidents intended to fuel Turkophobia. In truth, he was only using the Bulgarian riots, which had been instigated by the British deep state in the first place, to support the black propaganda campaign he was going to launch against the Ottoman Empire.
The Bulgarian uprising was only one in a series of insurgencies started with the provocation of the British deep state as the Ottoman Empire entered its era of decline. Strangely, after centuries of peaceful co-existence on Ottoman lands, minority groups suddenly began to turn against the Empire. However, a closer look reveals the origin of these riots and sedition to be the spies, soldiers, officers, and ambassadors of the British deep state. Rebels in these minorities were personally armed by the British deep state, encouraged to adopt an anti-Turkish sentiment and rise against the Empire. The uprisings started with horrible incidents where hundreds, and in some cases, thousands, of Muslim Turks were martyred. When the Ottoman army offered the necessary response, the provocateurs of the British deep state started smear campaigns along with shouts of ‘murderous, genocidal Turks’. This was the main method of the British deep state when it wished to incite riots and conflicts within the Ottoman Empire.
Historian author Süleyman Kocabaş wrote about the British deep state’s sedition aimed at causing a Bulgarian insurgency:
Britain repeated its actions at Greek insurgency to incite Bulgarian riots. Britain, which in the past had opposed Slav uprisings to maintain Ottoman’s territorial integrity, started to defend Bulgarians in 1870s for the so-called purpose of saving them from the Russian influence. It allowed [Panslavists] to set up committees in London, allowed these groups to provoke gang attacks against Turks and objected to Turks’ prohibition of those violent gangs.159
These British-deep-state-backed riots brought Ottoman communities, which had co-existed in peace for centuries, into conflict with each other. Unsurprisingly, the ensuing political circumstances served only the British deep state interests. Once again for its sake, millions of Muslims, Christians, Jews, Turks, Bulgarians, Armenians, Greeks, Bosnians, Arabs, Circassians and Albanian civilians - women, children or elderly - were slaughtered indiscriminately.
The Bulgarian casualty during the uprising was 1,400 according to official Ottoman reports. Some 1,000 Muslim Ottoman citizens were slaughtered during the same time. However, the European media was quick to inflate the deaths, citing it as high as 200,000. However, today even the Bulgarian authorities’ claim is 30,000. The reports prepared by neutral Belgium authorities on the other hand, put the number at 4,500. Needless to say, civilians lost their lives and this is far more important than any debate over numbers. The important point is that the British deep state once again caused the loss of innocent lives. Having said that, the surprising gap in numbers is another sign of British deep state’s involvement. It is a known fact that the British deep state usually overinflates numbers when its wishes to create an uproar.
One of the main reasons behind the Bulgarian uprising was the desire to set the stage for the coup of 1876 that marked the beginning of the end for the Empire. Only one and one-half months after the Bulgarian uprising, a pro-British group staged a coup, martyred Sultan Abdülaziz Khan, declared Murat V insane, and brought Abdul Hamid II to the throne by force. All these developments took place in line with the British deep state plans. Subsequently, the British deep state put pressure on Abdul Hamid II and convinced him to act in line with its demands. Interestingly, the anti-Turkish remarks of the British Prime Minister Gladstone suddenly stopped after Abdul Hamid II ascended to the throne.
The April Uprising has been the main factor behind the incidents that culminated in the coup. From April 20, 1876, when the uprising started, right until August 31, when Abdul Hamid II was made the Sultan, the British deep state unleashed a relentless campaign of hatred on Turks. Mysteriously, many circles that accused Turks of carrying out non-existent massacres at the time kept strangely quiet in the face of very real British deep state massacres in Africa (Zulus), Australia (Aborigines), the US (Indians), and the Far East (Indians and Chinese), despite the clear evidence.
Yemen Uprising
The first serious military confrontation between Britain and the Ottoman Empire took place when the British deep state bought a few greedy sheikhs in order to gain a foothold in the city of Aden, Yemen, an important and valuable Ottoman province. Seeking to further solidify its presence, the British deep state began to search for a reliable fortress in northeast Yemen. Historian Süleyman Kocabaş describes the furtive steps that led to the invasion of Yemen:
After Britain entered Aden, it continued to advance in the northeast direction and resorted to all imaginable methods to achieve its goal of seizing the fertile lands ahead. They wore Arab clothes, spoke Arabic, deceived Arabs with promises of independence; all for the sake of interests of their island.160
This was the reason behind the notorious Yemen uprisings that took place while it was under Ottoman rule. The Empire dispatched corps and even small armies to suppress the riots, but despite suffering massive casualties, it lost Yemen. Once again, a few sheikhs, who viewed their personal interests over those of their country, preferred to be pawns of the British deep state. Their horrible betrayal caused the martyrdom of thousands of people.
Developments in North Africa
In the 16th century, the Ottoman Empire – a strong naval force – conquered North Africa. The Empire reached the coast of Italy in the north, controlled the entire Eastern Mediterranean and seized Egypt and Morocco in the south. In other words, the Mediterranean became a Turkish lake. The colonial powers of France, Spain, Britain and Holland had to pass the Atlantic Ocean to reach South and West Africa.
Once again, Britain wasn’t ready to accept the situation. To the leaders of the British deep state, the lands that had to be under British control were controlled by a Muslim empire. Due to their deep-seated hostility towards Islam and the Turks, this wasn’t something they could accept. As a result, over the course of the 18th century, the British deep state severed Muslim lands in Africa from the Ottoman Empire, one by one, and it used usual tactics and provocation methods in the process.
Morocco
The relations of the British deep state with Morocco started in the 16th century. Just as with the Ottoman Empire, Queen Elizabeth I of England managed to get trading privileges from the Moroccan Emperor and started trade in the region on behalf of England. The English Barbary Company, with the charter granted by the Queen, purchased a part of the annual Moroccan sugar produce in exchange for English weapon and cloth. It must be remembered that the Turkey Company operated in a similar fashion and conducted business with the Ottomans for 300 years as a privileged monopoly.
In the early 20th century, the British deep state covertly instigated two incidents in Morocco, in 1906 and 1911, known as the Moroccan Crises. Using the power struggle in the country as a pretense, France deployed its troops to the country. Germany didn’t want to be left out and sent its navy to the region. As a result, Germany and the British-France alliance came close to war twice. These two crises are usually seen as substantial contributing factors to WWI.
The truth is, all of those were ‘planned’ developments. This way, Britain was able to make France more dependent on her and managed to turn British public against Germany. All these developments sped up the start of WWI, which had been planned and orchestrated by the British deep state. Furthermore, as the rivals of Britain were spending time in Morocco, Britain was busy taking Egypt under its control. In the end, thousands of Moroccan Muslims that were martyred in the crises had to pay the price of this power game of the British deep state.
The crises resulted in France establishing a full protectorate over Morocco in 1912, and for the next forty years.
It was crucial for Britain that Morocco was under the control of one of her allies, because it allowed the British deep state to control one side of the Gibraltar Strait, the gate to Mediterranean.
British-supported Conflicts in Western Sahara
Morocco has been at war with the separatist Polisario Front in Western Sahara for the last thirty years. Britain, on the other hand, has been covertly supplying weapons to both sides in the conflict. In Western Sahara, where only 500,000 people live, there is a Moroccan army of 100,000 people. Britain sells armored vehicles, sniper rifles, land-to-land missiles, missile launchers and howitzers to Morocco for use in this region. In the past two years, it has delivered light weapons worth more than $1 billion. Due to the competition between Algeria and Morocco, Algeria also supports and supplies weapons to the separatist movements in Western Sahara. Recently, Morocco has signed a new deal with the US for 150 tanks.
The British deep state certainly doesn’t want peace in the region. Not only does the UN not recognize the independence of Western Sahara, but it also doesn’t recognize the sovereignty of Morocco, over which the region has been embroiled in war for a long time. As one would expect, this was a part of the British deep state plans concocted 100 years ago to dismember the Ottoman Empire. The plan seems to work without a problem.
Tunisia
In the 1850s, Tunisia was being ruled by Ottoman-appointed ‘Beys’. However, it later initiated a so-called ‘modernization’ movement, which was in truth an imperialist policy of the British deep state in disguise, designed to paralyze countries economically, socially and culturally. As a result, Tunisia paid huge sums to Britain for her defense expenses and the rest followed, as it always does whenever the British deep state is involved. Economically crippled, the country became more dependent on Britain, borrowed more money and inevitably bankrupted. Due to astronomical interest rates, the Tunisian government, which had borrowed only 30 million Francs, had to pay it back after a short while with interest in the amount of 70 million Francs. In fact, the Turkish people are very familiar with this interest trap. It was among the reasons for the collapse of the Empire, not to mention this trap was a project of the British deep state. A similar method was being employed for Egypt almost simultaneously, just as in India in the past.
After receiving its first loan in 1863, the Tunisian government had to introduce new taxes the following year. People, who were already very poor, couldn’t endure the pressure and rebelled in 1864. Although a government clampdown worked, new debts brought new taxes, which caused new riots. This vicious cycle continued until Tunisia became a French protectorate.
Tunisia, already with poor agricultural production, was forced to export most of its produce to pay back her debts, which caused famine and cholera. 10,000 Tunisians lost their lives as a result.
When the state bankrupted, an institution similar to the Ottoman Public Debt Administration was set up, and the Tunisian economy was entrusted to the British and French. Ultimately, Tunisia was left to France in exchange for Cyprus, seized without a military effort. This was neither the first nor the last deal in which the British deep state was sharing the Ottoman lands.
Only 18 years after the first foreign debt was acquired, France, with its 36,000 troops, invaded Tunisia in 1881. When the Bey of Tunisia Muhammad III as-Sadiq understood that he wouldn’t be able to fight back, he signed a treaty that made Tunisia a French protectorate.
From that date until 1956, when they gained their independence under the leadership of Habib Bourguiba, Tunisia was embroiled in constant conflicts, civil wars and terror. Occupation by Nazis was followed by Allied victory. The French applied strict measures to suppress Tunisian nationalism, and during this time, tens of thousands of Muslims were martyred by the French.
In those years, Britain had the sole say in the distribution of power in the world. No country could invade a place unless permitted by Britain. As previously explained, France was able to capture regions only in line with the plans of the British deep state. This allowed Britain to control vast lands through its allies and keep in check an important power like France.
Algeria was another country that suffered from similar endeavors of the British deep state.
Algeria
For 300 years, Algeria was the principal center of Ottoman power in the Maghreb. Governors appointed by the Ottoman Sultan ran the province until France invaded it in 1827, using a petty argument with the French Consul as an excuse. When a meeting between Algeria’s governor Hussein Dey and the French Consul got heated, the dey struck the Consul three times with his hand fan. French immediately made this incident an excuse for invasion, after which Hussein Dey was exiled.
Now a French colony, the educational system of the country was changed, local administrators were stripped of their powers and social order came to a breaking point. Rich lands of Muslims were taken from them and handed over to French colonialists. Algeria became the administration center of the French colonies in Africa. Throughout the years, Muslims of North Africa witnessed the horrible face of European imperialism as Muslims were martyred en masse. French rule brought nothing but death to Muslims of Algeria. 175,000 Algerians fought for France during WWI, but 40,000 of them never returned. During the Algerian War of Independence, 1,000,000 Muslims lost their lives, while 3,000,000 were imprisoned in camps.
However, even after the declaration of independence, the violence in Algeria didn’t end. On the contrary, the country plunged into a bloody civil war at the end of the 20th century, and following a coup against the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) in 1991, 150,000 Muslims were martyred at the hands of other Muslims. The Armed Islamic Group of Algeria (GIA), founded in 1993, began to martyr Algerians of all backgrounds, including FIS-linked Muslims. The British deep state was once again behind GIA, which had a London-based magazine named Al-Ansar, intended to recruit Muslims that could be made guerillas. Britain allowed these activities, lent its support at times, and sometimes helped prepare the setting for such activities.
The Favorite Arms Market of the British Deep State: Africa
With the world’s biggest natural gas reserves and its large fertile lands, Algeria is a blessed country. However, due to the ongoing conflict, a major portion of its revenues is spent on weapons. So much so, Algeria alone accounts for 30% of Africa’s arms import, followed by Morocco with 26%. Between 2011 and 2015, Algeria bought 4 warships, 190 tanks, 42 helicopters, 14 aircrafts and 2 submarines. And Morocco seems to be the only intended target of this military preparation.
In truth, the British deep state is once again involved, carrying out sinister plans as always, which usually target Muslims. As a result of these plots, Muslims are brought to a position where they spend their valuable resources on fighting each other. And once again, the only party that truly benefits from the situation is Britain. The British deep state continues today its efforts to exploit Africa, by using its resources and creating conflicts.
Egypt
The most important reason leading to Egypt being transferred to British rule was the foreign debt that Midhat Pasha endorsed during his first term as the grand vizier. In the next 15 years, the economy collapsed and Britain invaded Egypt exactly as planned by the British deep state.
Egypt used loans with heavy penalties to build the Suez Canal in 1869 with the French. Six years later, unable to pay the interest, it had to transfer its share in the Canal to the British. Three years later, auditors of the creditors, France and Britain, began to assume positions in the Egyptian government. In a matter of nine years, the British seized the control of Egypt and then physically invaded the country four years later.
The events that led up to the invasion of Egypt weren’t completely different from what we saw in other Ottoman territories. Instigated by the British deep state, anti-Christian riots began in Alexandria, during which British and French navy ships were conveniently present in the harbor of Alexandria. The British used the riots as an excuse to attack the city, and then proceeded to a full-scale invasion of Egypt, and made it a de facto protectorate, which became official in 1914. The British deep state then instigated a similar insurgency in Sudan, which at the time was a part of Egypt. The Egyptian army under the command of British General Herbert Kitchener suppressed the riot, which led Sudan to be effectively administered as a British colony. Sudan remained so until 1956.
9. Propaganda
Propaganda has always been one of the most effective tools of the British deep state. Following chapters will be covering in detail its propaganda methods and media dominion; however, let’s first briefly review how propaganda was used to speed up the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
When Darwinist ideology became widespread in the Ottoman Empire, the British deep state found it easier to carry out its propaganda. As explained in the beginning of this chapter, Darwinist ideology caused not only spiritual erosion, but impaired the patriotic consciousness, as well. Naturally, spreading propaganda in a society largely deprived of its patriotic consciousness, shaping the public opinion through misinformation and causing anger and resentment was made easier.
The situation was not different in other parts of the world. Fueled by Darwinist ideology and relentless propaganda of the British deep state, Turkophobia spread in a world that was already embroiled in wars and clashes. Hateful speeches, racist commentaries and books created a formidable front against the Ottoman Empire, particularly in Europe. British diplomats, most of whom were actually spies, misled the European states with lies that the Ottoman Empire was nothing but ‘barbarous Turks massacring Christians’ (Turkish nation is above such remarks).
In the 19th century, the British deep state targeted not only the Ottoman Empire, but also the religion of Islam. Its provocations included attacks on our religion because the British deep state considered it crucial to weaken the Islamic world. As explained before, the biggest fear of the British deep state has always been an influential Islamic union based on the unconditional alliance of Muslims. The said deep powers did everything in their power to prevent such an alliance and targeted the Ottoman Empire to this end. They were positive that an Islamic Union could well be accomplished by the spiritual initiative of Turks.
British politicians, writers, poets, historians, journalists and newspapers were widely used for the anti-Turkish and anti-Islamic propaganda. Some examples of that trend can be found below. (Our exalted religion and noble Turkish nation are above these ugly lies.)
British Provocateurs Target Turks
Edward Augustus Freeman
Edward Augustus Freeman, an English politician, started spreading the lie that Islam was a restrictive and intolerant religion and went so far as to make such ungrounded atrocious claims that Islam blessed despotism and slavery and that it declared war on other faiths. Freeman also entertained twisted views, like Muslims always needed enemies, and that if left without enemies, they would attack their brothers from different sects.
An Oxford University lecturer, Freeman, enlisting the help of his student Arthur Evans, became the most fervent English supporter of the Balkan uprising of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Furthermore, after the April Uprising by the Bulgarians, he has been one of the most vocal names in anti-Turkish propaganda.
Freeman was in truth a murderous racist who once said the following of the US:
This [America] would be a grand land if only every Irishman would kill a negro and be hanged for it.161
Charles Dickens
Charles Dickens, a British writer of the 19th century, also contributed to the spread of Turkophobia. In his ‘A Word in Season’ poem that he wrote in 1844, he, in his own way, accused Turks of mercilessly destroying God’s living image. In his poem, he claimed that Turks were living in barbarous ignorance and poverty and for that, they were very different from the English nation that built a high civilization.
Cardinal Newman (John Henry Newman)
Cardinal Newman, of the Catholic Church in England, was one of the most zealous Turkophobics and Islamophobics. One of his slanders about Turks was as follows:
…the barbarian power [Turks] which has been for centuries seated in the very heart of the old world, which has in its brute clutch the most famous countries of classical and religious antiquity, and many of the most fruitful and beautiful regions of the earth; … and, which, having no history itself, is heir to the historical names of Constantinople and Nicaea, Nicomedia and Caesarea, Jerusalem and Damascus, Nineveh and Babylon, Mecca and Bagdad, Antioch and Alexandria, ignorantly holding in possession one-half of the history of the whole world.162 (Noble Turkish nation is above such remarks)
Charles Darwin
Charles Darwin, who introduced the lie of evolution to the world and spread social Darwinism, thus providing an ideological basis for WWI and WWII, was a typical Turkophobic and anti-Ottoman figure. The following quote is important in that it shows the true face of Darwin:
I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilisation than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risk the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is!
The more civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world.163
Edwin Pears
Pears spent 40 years in Istanbul before having to return to London, where he immediately became famous for his hatred of Turks. He must have done his job well; the job given to him by the British deep state, because when he returned to his country, he was knighted. Unsurprisingly, his article published in Daily News in 1876 on the alleged massacres in Bulgaria, caused wide anti-Turkish protests.
Pears was also made an honorary knight both in Greece and Bulgaria. In his book entitled Turkey and its People, Pears said of the Armenians, “They are an ancient people of the same Indo-European race as ourselves…” In his book, he went so far as to tell lies such as, “The penalty for speaking it [the Armenian language] was to have the tongue torn out.” The truth is Armenians lived in the Ottoman Empire for more than 500 years in peaceful co-existence and spoke their own language freely. For instance, by 1897, the number of Armenian schools in the Empire had reached 922.
Edwin Pears’ following remarks in his 1918 article for Daily News entitled ‘Constantinople, Romance of the City’, clearly showed the deep-seated hostility he harbored for Turks:
Well, it looks as if the Turk will be got rid of, and if it be so there will be a song of triumph which should go up from every Christian race in the World, a Te Deum in which all lovers of civilisation should take part. For centuries the Christians in the Ottoman Empire have been sustained by hope, holding to the faith that though life was long and weary, rest would come: the darksome night of persecution would pass and day would dawn.164
William John Hamilton
English geologist William John Hamilton travelled Anatolia between 1835 and 1842 before writing his book Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus and Armenia. The book studied everything within the borders of the Ottoman from its geography to history, topography to vegetation and geology from an intelligence point of view. Hamilton wrongly believed that due to the religion of Islam, the future achievements of the Turkish people would be restricted and didn’t hesitate to display his aversion to Islam at every opportunity.165 In truth, Hamilton was just another British deep state spy tasked with studying Anatolia to provide reports to his superiors for use against the Turks.
Stratford Canning
Stratford Canning spent a long time in the Ottoman Empire as an ambassador. Being another British deep state spy capable of influencing the Ottoman foreign policies, he became close friends with anglophile Mustafa Reşid Pasha, and managed to be the most powerful foreign statesman in Istanbul during the Reform Edict Era. When the Ottoman-Russian conflict broke out in 1853, he prevented peace and contributed to the start of the Crimean War.
Civinis Efendi was the chief intelligence officer reporting to Canning. Born on the island of Mykonos, he lived in St. Petersburg and managed to be in the service of the Russian Empress. After marrying the daughter of an officer working in the palace, he stole some of the jewelry of the Empress and fled. After spending time in Anatolia disguised as an imam lecturing at mosques, Civinis Efendi was later seen as a rich Italian, sailing the Aegean Sea in his yacht, with a new name: ‘Comte de Rivoroso’. This conman, with his Greek roots and fluent French, English and Russian, managed to attract a lot of attention and was introduced to Grand Vizier Mustafa Reşid Pasha by Canning. The grand vizier made him a colonel, and made him the head of the Ottoman intelligence unit. It should be noted that, at the time, the Ottoman intelligence service had to operate under the close scrutiny of the British deep state. In a short amount of time, he set up his team and began to spy on the private lives of famous merchants and pashas and turned the gossips he gathered into reports. In other words, a British deep state spy was made the head of the first Ottoman intelligence unit, which was founded by the members of the British deep state in the first place.166
Another British citizen, William Nosworthy Churchill, published the first semi-official newspaper in the Ottoman Empire during the commission of Canning. This free market promoting newspaper, called Ceride-i Havadis (Journal of News), defended policies intended to bring Ottoman finances under British control.
Canning was made a Privy Council member in 1820, when he was only 34. There were even talks of making him the Greek King as a tribute to the active role he played during the Greek uprising. In the Battle of Navarino, in which the Ottoman/Egyptian fleet was set on fire, he ensured the cooperation of the British and Russian navies. Prior to the Crimean War of 1851, Canning had persuaded the Ottoman officers to decline the peace offer of Russia. British Prime Minister Gladstone dedicated his Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East to Canning, where he argued that the Turks should be driven out of Europe.
Canning went so far as to say that the source of evil in the Ottoman Empire was Islam (our exalted religion is above such remarks). According to Canning, Islam was the basis of injustice and weakness, and the Ottoman Empire had to leave Islam to develop and prosper.
Richard Cobden
English statesman Richard Cobden maintained that it was impossible for the Ottoman Empire to preserve her independence and territorial integrity in a speech he gave at the House of Commons after a visit to Turkey. He claimed that Britain would be better off having Christian constituents of the Empire as her allies, rather than Muslims, whom he claimed were headed for destruction:
… Mahommedanism (surely the religion of Islam and our Beloved Prophet (pbuh) are above such statements) cannot be maintained, and I should be sorry to see this country fighting for the maintenance of Mahommedanism … You may keep Turkey on the map of Europe, you may call the country by the name of Turkey if you like, but do not think you can keep up the Mahommedan [Islamic] rule in the country.167
150 years on, contrary to Cobden’s expectations, Anatolia is home to millions of Muslims and the number keeps growing steadily. Calls to prayer haven’t stopped and will never stop. Muslims rush to fill mosques with joy and faith, destroying the biggest dream of the British deep state, which has been and always will be impossible. All the current efforts of the British deep state to achieve this goal will once again come to nothing and these lands, where Islam is deeply entrenched, will be crowned with a great, peaceful Union of Islam.
God confirms the Truth by His words, even though the evildoers hate it. (Qur’an, 10:82)
They desire to extinguish God’s Light with their mouths but God will perfect His Light, though the unbelievers hate it. (Qur’an, 61:8)
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill, who served as the Home Secretary, First Lord of the Admiralty, Secretary of State for War, Secretary of State for the Colonies, Chancellor of the Exchequer and finally the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, uttered many derogatory remarks, if not downright insults, about the religion of Islam and Muslims. His remarks are significant in that they clearly show the scale of the anti-Islamic stance of the British deep state and the outlook of Churchill, who was a prominent member of this structure. Some of his statements can be found below (our exalted religion Islam and our beloved Prophet (pbuh) are above all these statements):
The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.168
Lord Cromer
Evelyn Baring, also known as Lord Cromer, acted as the Consul-General of British-ruled Egypt between 1883 and 1907. His following words clearly show imperialist British dreams of ruling the Muslim world:
Notably, the Moslems of India should recognise that, with the collapse of Turkish power in Europe, a new order of things has arisen, that the change which the attitude of England towards Turkey has undergone is the necessary consequence of that collapse….169
Lord Cromer’s Opinions on Islam and Muslim Societies
Lord Cromer was a notorious example of the British deep state officers that turned the world into a colony in the 19th century through most barbarous methods. He was an arrogant Darwinist with racist thoughts, entertaining twisted views such as being the representative of a supposedly superior race. Let’s hear from Cromer himself to better understand the mentality that seeks to destroy the Muslim world1 (our exalted religion of Islam is above such remarks):
Britain would not allow Egypt to govern itself according to Islam
It is absurd to suppose Europe will look on as a passive spectator whilst the retrograde government based on purely Muhammadan principles and oriental ideas, is established in Egypt. The material interests at stake are too important …the new generation of Egyptians has to be persuaded or forced into imbibing the true spirit of Western civilization.
His real thoughts on women’s rights
As Lord Cromer tried to lecture Muslims on women’s rights, he was a member and one-time president of the UK ‘Men’s League for Opposing the Suffrage of Women’ campaigning against giving British women the vote. The perfect answer to such people, who wrongly considered themselves to be in a position to lecture Muslims, came from Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Atatürk granted women’s suffrage in 1934, long before some European countries did.
Lord Cromer explained what he meant by ‘autonomy for Egypt’:
Consider what is generally meant by Europeans when they talk of Egyptian self-government. If they meant that the Egyptians should be allowed to govern themselves according to their own rude lights, the task of educating them in the art of self-government would not merely have been easy; there would have been no necessity that it should have been undertaken. … What Europeans mean when they talk of Egyptian self-government is that the Egyptians, far from being allowed to follow the bent of their own unreformed propensities, should only be permitted to govern themselves after the fashion in which Europeans think they ought to be governed.
The British Creation of a new Elite class of Secular ‘Muslims’ to govern Egypt
The truth is that, in passing through the European educational mill, the young Egyptian Moslem loses his Islamism…
But inasmuch as Egyptian society is in a state of flux, the natural result has been to produce a class of individuals many of whom are, at the same time, de-moslemised Moslems and invertebrate Europeans.
In dealing with the question of introducing European civilisation into Egypt, it should never be forgotten that Islam cannot be reformed; that is to say, reformed Islam is Islam no longer; it is something else.
Muslims that receive ‘British training’ looking down on Islam and Islamic scholars
Nominally, the Europeanised Egyptian is in the majority of cases a Moslem. In reality, he is generally an Agnostic. … a thoughtful European will not only look with interest at the “Alim” as the representative of an ancient faith, which contains much that is highly deserving of respect; he will, if the “Alim” is a worthy specimen of his class, sympathise with him because he is religious, albeit his religion is not that of Christ. The Europeanised Egyptian, on the other hand, will often look on the “Alim” with all the pride of an intellectual parvenu. From the pedestal of his empirical knowledge, he will regard the “Alim” as a social derelict, who has to be tolerated, and even occasionally, for political purposes, to be utilised, but who need not be respected.
New ‘Muslims’ intolerance of Christians
Although the Europeanised Egyptian is no true Moslem, he is often as intolerant, and sometimes even more intolerant of Christianity than the old orthodox Moslem, who has received no European education. He frequently hates Christians with a bitter hatred, and he does so partly because many of the Christians with whom he has been brought in contact deserve to be hated, and partly because the Christian, in his capacity of being a European, is a rival who occupies positions, which the Europeanised Egyptian thinks he should himself occupy.
\1. Abdullah Al Andalusi, “Lord Cromer on the British Colonial Project for Egypt”, 23 December 2013, https://abdullahalandalusi.com/2013/12/23/a-brief-word-by-lord-cromer-on-the-british-colonial-project-for-egypt/
Important Lessons in History
The aforementioned individuals were definitely not ignorant, uneducated or deceived. They were carefully picked up by the British deep state, lived amongst the Turks for years, travelled across Anatolia, received respect and friendship from Turks, but as soon as they returned to their homeland, they spearheaded the anti-Turkish, anti-Islamic efforts. Furthermore, they are only a small part of the people that represented British deep state’s strong aversion to Islam and the Ottoman Empire. Bankers, scientists, journalists, politicians, soldiers, diplomats and academicians of the British deep state have waged a full-fledged war for 200 years. Agent provocateurs that were granted permission to enter the Ottoman lands disguised themselves with various titles and played the biggest part in the influence that the British deep state achieved. Provocations of these agents and the hypocrites they used in the process became the most important contributing factor to the dissolution of the Empire.
This covert policy of the British deep state against the religion of Islam continued until the Ottoman Empire completely fell apart. However, it does not mean that the threat is gone. As a matter of fact, similar plans are still very much alive for Turkey and the Middle East. There are still plenty of agent provocateurs on active duty and through their supporters and hypocrites, they continue to spread their propaganda.
Only an Islamic Union can effectively block such insidious plans. As long as Muslims join their forces within a union of love, it will be impossible for those sly plans to be effective for the Muslim world. Needless to say, the British deep state is also very well aware of this fact, and that’s why it relentlessly pushes her efforts to target Islam.
God loves those who strive in His way in ranks like well-built walls. (Qur’an, 61:4)
Hold fast to the rope of God all together, and do not separate. Remember God’s blessing to you … (Qur’an, 3:103)
The Mouthpiece of the British Deep State in the 19th Century: The Times
”‘The Times’ is one of the biggest powers in the world. As a matter of fact, I don’t know anything that is more powerful.” Abraham Lincoln, Former US President
The 19th century was a period when the effect of the media on the world’s policies was at its height and Britain got the fair share of it. However, The Times was even more influential than other newspapers of the time, and was effectively used by the British deep state to shape the public opinion and to influence political decisions.
Since its inception, The Times displayed a surprising ability to discover developments before everyone else. Many international developments were announced by The Times, sometimes as far as 48 hours prior to their official announcement by the British government. Lord Lyndhurst, the then Lord Chancellor of Great Britain, defined Thomas Barnes, the editor of The Times as ‘the most powerful man in the country’. In 1855, The Times had reached a circulation of 70,000, which was three times more than all the other London newspapers combined.
The international news network of The Times made it the most important newspaper of the time in Europe, and the European leaders began to follow it to catch up with the latest developments. The French Prime Minister François Guizot many times engaged in open debates with The Times. Emperor Nicholas I of Russia, by reading The Times, found out about the ultimatum of Britain 48 hours before the notice was officially served. On June 21, 1861, the newspaper had 24 pages, with 144 columns, and 4,000 advertisements. 57 out of 64 clauses of the Treaty of Berlin, which cost the Ottoman Empire huge lands, were published in The Times before the treaty was signed.
The Times supported all uprisings in the Ottoman Empire for 100 years. In every international problem, it adopted an anti-Turkish, anti-Ottoman stance. Readers will see more of this attitude in the following pages under the heading ‘Bulgarian Uprising’.
One final note regarding modern developments: Today, The Times is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who received condemnation from the Islamic world following the comment he made after the Charlie Hebdo attack where he said: “Maybe most Moslems [are] peaceful, but until they recognize and destroy their growing jihadist cancer they must be held responsible”. Furthermore, the advertisement that was penned by journalist Claire Berlinski, notorious for her anti-Turkish stance, during the Gezi incidents was also published in The Times. In this advertisement, Berlinski compared the Turkish government and President Erdoğan to Nazis and Hitler, and the ‘Respect for National Will rallies’ to the Nuremberg Rally organized by the Nazis.1 (Our respectable government and President Erdoğan are above such remarks).
\1. “So-called Celebs, Who Signed the Times Gezi Letter Were ‘Deceived’: PM Erdoğan”, Hürriyet Daily News, 26 July 2013, https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/so-called-celebs-who-signed-the-times-gezi-letter-were-cheated-pm-erdogan.aspx?pageID=238&nID=51487&NewsCatID=338
10. ‘British’ Pashas of the Ottoman Army
The concessions granted to the British and pro-British administrations came with a blind trust in the British, not only in trade, but also in politics and military matters as well. It was explained in previous pages how the British deep state approached other countries and leaders under a friendly disguise. This tactic became very dominant, especially in the late Ottoman period. Primed by the British deep state, Ottoman administrations declared wars, signed treaties detrimental to the Empire and brought members of the British deep state to important positions. Indeed, particularly in the last period of the Ottoman Empire, the army and the navy were entrusted mostly to British pashas, as another sign of this reckless attitude.
Many British officers were given important positions in the second half of the 19th century while most achieved the rank of ‘pasha’. Most them, under the pretense of ‘modernizing the army and training the soldiers’, played active roles in Ottoman failure in many wars. The officers who were supposed to serve the Ottoman army were in fact nothing other than the agents of the British deep state.
The British Officers of the Ottoman
Hobart Pasha
Augustus Charles Hobart-Hampden, widely known as Hobart Pasha, was a naval captain who served in the Royal Navy. He worked as a midshipman in Brazil. Upon retirement, he joined the American Civil War and commanded a blockade runner, which conveyed British weapons to the South in exchange for cheap cotton. After the American Civil War, he joined the Ottoman army and was made rear-admiral.
Hobart Pasha was in charge of the Ottoman navy during the Russo-Turkish war (1877-78). During the conflict, the only position from which the Ottomans could block a Russian ground attack was the Danube River in Romania. The Ottoman navy was perfectly capable of preventing the Russian army’s passage through the Siret River. However, Turkish ships under the command of Hobart Pasha, arrived too late to gain control of the river. Four to five days had already passed before four vessels could reach the critical points, allowing the Russian army to easily cross the river. The Ottoman army, which was on the verge of gaining control of the Balkans after defeating the Serbian and Montenegro armies, was stabbed in the back. From that point on, there was nothing that could stop the Russian navy from coming as far as Yeşilköy in Istanbul.
The Ottoman navy under Hobart Pasha’s command was, in fact, a more powerful army than that of the Russians, but strangely wasn’t used to defend the Balkans. Hobart Pasha sent the vessels from the western Black Sea to the Caucasus and left the ground troops in the Balkans without support. At the end of the war, the Ottomans had to cede both the Balkans and the Caucasus.
Vere Henry Hobart, Lord Hobart, who was the older brother of Hobart Pasha, was at the time the director-general of the Ottoman Bank. He later started working in the Ottoman Public Debt Administration that brought about the bankruptcy of the Empire.
Arnold Burrowes Kemball
During the Russo-Turkish war, Abdülkerim Nadir Pasha headed the Balkan forces of the Ottoman army. After the Russians passed the Danube River without incident, they advanced on Svishtov and Nikopol and easily won two battles. Since the main Balkan forces couldn’t get to the region in time, the Turkish forces proved insufficient and in a matter of one week, two battles were lost.
British general Arnold Kemball was a part of the general staff of Abdülkerim Pasha. Kemball had previously fought against Muslims during the Afghan wars with the British army.
Valentine Baker or Baker Pasha
Valentine Baker was a felon that received a dishonorable discharge from the British army for rape. During the Russo-Turkish war, he served in the Ottoman army as a Brigadier General in Mehmet Ali Pasha’s staff. Mehmet Ali Pasha, on the other hand, was a German who had converted to Islam and become an Ottoman citizen. His real name was Ludwig Karl Friedrich Detroit. The units commanded by Baker Pasha withdrew from the Tashkessen village, leaving even the injured behind in their fear. Bulgarian villagers killed all the remaining survivors. After that, Baker Pasha sent back some of his troops and set ablaze all the villages in the vicinity.
After this war, he returned to the British army and took over the newly established police force in Egypt and began to train their gendarme units.
Douglas Gamble and Hugh Pigot Williams
Five years before WWI, Douglas Gamble was hired as an advisor for the Ottoman navy and made the head of the 6th fleet under the pretense of ‘reforming the fleet’. Gamble was also a former British navy intelligence officer. Unsurprisingly, when he returned to his homeland one year later, he fought with the British against the Turks.
British admiral Hugh Pigot Williams replaced Gamble as an advisor, and served in this position eight months before returning to his country. The next time he came back to Ottoman waters, he was the captain of the British battleship Irresistable in the Gallipoli campaign. In other words, right before WWI, the Ottoman navy had been entrusted to two British officers, who would soon turn against and fight the Ottomans.
Adolphus Slade or the Mushaver Pasha
After serving thirty years in the Royal Navy, Adolphus Slade joined the Ottoman navy as an admiral. Renamed ‘Mushaver’ (meaning ‘consulting’), Slade was intricately involved in the Ottoman maritime force. When the Russians burnt the Ottoman fleet in Sinop during the Crimean War and sank twelve Ottoman ships, the only surviving ship was the one carrying Slade. As the Turkish fleet was being attacked, her so-called allies at the time, the French and British ships stationed in the Bosphorus, just watched.
In his memoir, Slade displayed the shocking hatred he harbored for Turks and Muslims (Turkish nation and Islamic world are above his remarks). He claimed that all Ottoman constituents, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, shared a common trait despite their differences and that was ‘a total want of conscience’ and continued, “A pasha slays his confiding guest; a kadi bastinadoes an innocent man; a banker cheats his patron; a servant robs his master; —all swearing on the Koran, or on the Talmud, or on the Testament, to their respective faith…“170
… nowhere, perhaps, has corruption in Turkey been more hideously displayed than in the Mekhemés, (courts of law,) where justice is sold to the highest bidder, and witnesses stand, almost within sight and sound of the mollah’s cushions, ready with their stock in trade—their consciences.171
Three English line of battle ships and as many frigates, would prove an overmatch for it [the Ottoman naval force].172
Baldwin Wake Walker (Yavir Pasha) and Traitor Ahmet Fevzi Pasha
British Baldwin Wake Walker, or Yavir Pasha, joined the Ottoman navy in 1838 and served for seven years. In 1840, Ahmet Fevzi Pasha, using an insignificant incident as an excuse, handed over the fleet under his command to Muhammad Ali of Egypt, who had previously rebelled against the Ottoman Empire. For this reason, he has gone down in history as the ‘Traitor Ahmet Fevzi Pasha’. While the navy ships were anchored in Alexandria, Yavir Pasha, or Baldwin Walker, claimed that if he laid a siege on Egypt with the entire Ottoman navy, he could get back the ships. His true intentions were to make the Ottoman ships fight each other to weaken them in the process. However, the crisis came to an end when Muhammad Ali of Egypt agreed to return the ships on his own volition. It must be noted that Yavir Pasha had for years worked as the advisor of Traitor Ahmet Fevzi Pasha.
Henry Felix Woods or Woods Pasha
British Henry Felix Woods, also known as Woods Pasha, served more than 40 years in the Ottoman navy, most of it under Abdul Hamid II’s reign. Woods was the main reason why the Ottoman navy completely rotted away during Abdul Hamid II’s reign in the Golden Horn, despite the fact that it had been recently rebuilt under Sultan Abdülaziz’s orders. According to the British Naval Forces policy, a British officer could not occupy a position for more than two years in a foreign country, but Woods spent 42 years in the Ottoman navy.
Engineers, captains and other technicians that Woods Pasha transferred for large sums, deliberately refrained from teaching their skills to the Turkish personnel and ensured that the true control was always with the British. As Woods described it in his memoir, Turkish mechanics, despite having worked for years, couldn’t become head mechanics because British mechanics blocked their way to ascension. Particularly, the British mechanics enjoyed special privileges with respect to their duties.173
Woods Pasha was also a negotiator between key figures at the capital and Sultan Abdul Hamid II. He took special care to introduce British journalists to the Sultan and secretly provided intelligence to the British regarding the Sultan and the administration.174
The Battle of Navarino
The Battle of Navarino is known as one of the most ruthless naval fights in history. Led by the British deep state, the British, French and Russian navies launched a full-fledged attack on the Turkish fleet anchored at Navarino, located to the south of Greece. Muhammad Ali of Egypt also sent a fleet from Egypt to aid the Ottomans, which were at the time trying to suppress the Greek riot that was also instigated by the British deep state. There wasn’t an official declaration of war; instead the allied naval forces of Britain, France and Russia suddenly began firing at the Turkish ships. Caught off-guard, 70 ships sank and more than 3,000 sailors were martyred. In a matter of three hours, the Gulf of Navarino became a bloodbath. One very important element in the battle was the presence of British and French sailors in the Turkish fleet. One day prior to the raid, French sailors in the fleet of Muhammad Ali of Egypt, fighting for the Ottomans, and British sailors in the Ottoman fleet switched sides. Not only did they desert their posts but they also deprived the Ottomans of important captaincy skills, because during that time, this important duty was given only to the people of the British deep state.
The British Deep State and the Caliphate
At the onset of the 17th century, many European states decided to follow in the footsteps of Portugal and Spain and began pursuing their own imperialistic desires. Britain proved the most ambitious.
The readers will recall how Britain had already set up East India Co. in the 1600s as the first step towards British imperialism. The company first directed its attention to the Indian subcontinent and established numerous trading posts across the region. After expanding rapidly, it began to build colonies before eventually taking control of territories.
By the 19th century, Spain and Portugal had begun to lose their colonies and entered their respective eras of decline. This meant that the South American countries, once colonies of Spain and Portugal, were now independent, but also available to British aspirations as open markets. In the meantime, having successfully completed the Napoleonic Wars in Europe (1800-1815), the British had gained new lands in the East.
Now, securing the main route to India –the jewel in the crown– was the top priority on the British imperialistic agenda. When the French completed the Suez Canal in 1869, the road to India became even shorter but its security became an even more sensitive issue. Britain had begun to build spheres of influence along the Red Sea and Arabian shores despite Ottoman protests. Furthermore, by promising to supply weapons to the Ottoman Empire should Russia obtain control of East Anatolia, Britain gained control of Cyprus in 1878, which was a strategically important island much like Gibraltar Strait or Malta. Similar methods were used by the same deep organization to gain control of areas in the Far East.
All these developments turned Britain into a massive empire with colonies all around the world, where millions of Muslims were living, making the control of this population a critical point for Britain. However, there was a problem: those Muslims, due to their Islamic identity, were loyal to the Ottoman Caliph, who was the spiritual and political leader of the world’s Muslims. He had the power to bring millions of Muslims together within a strong alliance with just one word. For this reason, the biggest threat to the British deep state in its quest of gaining control over Muslim lands was the Ottoman Empire and the Caliph.
British Deep State Provokes Arabs against the Caliph
Muslims all around the world deeply revered the Ottoman Sultan, who was their caliph. In the beginning, the British deep state sought to use this loyalty to its advantage. For instance, in a conflict with the Kingdom of Mysore in South India, Britain asked Ottoman Sultan Selim III to write a letter to Tipu Sultan of the Kingdom of Mysore to advise him to not fight the British.1 Selim III indeed wrote this letter in 1798.
When wide-scaled riots broke out in India in 1857 against British occupation, Britain once again asked for the help of the Sultan. At the same time, this impressive influence of the Caliphate was worrying the British deep state. What if the circumstances changed, and the religious and political influence of the Caliphate became a threat to Britain? For this reason, they came up with a multi-layered caliphate policy, which would involve gradual undermining of the Caliphate’s authority among the Muslim population living under British rule.
George Percy Badger, an adviser to the British Foreign Secretary, prepared a report in January 1873 on the Ottoman Caliph. He claimed that since the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was an Arab, the caliphate had to be an Arabic institution. However, Ottoman sultans were viewed and revered especially by Asian Muslims as the true caliph. Using the ‘ethnicity’ card as a deception, the British deep state sought to rally Arab Muslims against the Ottoman Empire. According to their deep plans, this tactic would prevent Arabs from recognizing Ottoman sultans as their caliph and thus diminish the influence of Ottoman caliphs in the Islamic world.2
Five months after this report was penned, the Foreign Office instructed all the British consuls in Asia to investigate the religious and political developments in the Muslim world.3 In other words, Britain began its efforts to turn sixty million Muslims living under British rule against the Ottomans and the Caliph.
Wilfrid Scawen Blunt, a diplomat of the British Foreign Office, was known as an expert on Arabs and the Middle East. As one of the prominent supporters of the Arab independence movement during his visits to the region, Blunt devised plans to break off the Arabs from the Ottoman Empire. In his book The Future of Islam, he made serious accusations against the Ottoman Caliphate:
… that the House of Othman has been and is the curse of Islam, and that its end is at hand. … They know that as long as there is an Ottoman Caliph, whether his name be Abd el Aziz or Abd el Hamid, moral progress is impossible, that the ijtahad cannot be re-opened … Abd el Hamid’s rule is neither juster nor more in accordance with the Mussulman law than that of his predecessors. … A return, therefore, to Medina or Mecca is the probable future of the Caliphate.4
Blunt also claimed that the culprit behind the backward state of the Arabs, who had built great civilizations in the past, was the Ottoman Empire. He believed that Britain was now an empire with millions of Muslim constituents and that instead of supporting a caliphate sitting in Istanbul, it would be more strategic and logical for Britain to invest in an Arab caliph that is under British control and who could be easily manipulated. He was convinced that if independent Arab kingdoms were set up and the Caliphate was transferred to Mecca, Ottoman control in the region could come to an end.
Graat, the British Foreign Secretary for India, in his letter to Kitchener, the British Consul-General in Egypt, revealed the kind of Arab state the British deep state wished to see:
Britain never desires to see a powerful Arabic Caliphate. We don’t want a united Arab state. Arabs must be in a fragmented, weakened situation. If they become emirates under our control, as small as possible, they shall have little resistance to British, but will still serve as a buffer zone against other big countries of the West.5
Another Western source reveals the status the British planned for the Arabs and Caliphate during WWI:
Sticking to their old policies of creating division and dissension to maintain their control easily, the British never wanted a united and powerful [Arab] empire, no matter what the consequences, because the ruler of such an empire would want to remain independent. The British instead wishes political unions made up of smaller states, which would require British arbitration in case of disagreements. British also didn’t have any intentions of giving up on their sovereignty claims over the governorates of Kuwait, Bahrain, Muscat, Hadhramaut in favor of a big Arab empire. On the other hand, caliphate was a sensitive issue for Britain as it had to take into consideration the sentiments of Indian Muslims. Indian Muslims, however, tended to side with Turks, rather than the Arabs. They wanted to remain loyal to the Caliph in Istanbul.6
In the end, the Arab world of 100 million people divided into sixteen separate countries was fraught with conflicts. The only winner was the British deep state.
Throughout the end of the 1800s and early 1900s, the main policy of the British deep state has been fragmenting the Arab world and breaking them apart both from the Ottoman Empire and each other. As the following pages will be covering in more detail, the British deep state has made numerous attempts during and after WWI to make those ambitions come true. Through their spies disguised as ‘archeologists’ such as Gertrude Bell, and Lawrence of Arabia, they carried out this policy and provoked Arab tribes against the Ottoman Empire, sometimes offering incentives in form of money and weapons.
Homosexual British spy Lawrence of Arabia explained this fake victory that he achieved by pitting communities against each other, saying that he created an Arab ‘brown dominion’ within the British Empire by rallying Arabs and making them rebel against the Turks.7
Clearly, the true aim has never been an Arab independence or a big Arab state, because Arabs were always considered by the British deep state as their colony. Regrettably, the same state of mind still prevails and the insidious colonial ambitions of the British deep state regarding the Arab countries are still underway.
However, it must be remembered that the British deep state failed in its plots against the Caliphate. No matter what it did, the last stop of the Caliphate remained in the Ottoman Empire and when the Empire collapsed, the Caliphate hadn’t been abolished. On the contrary, instead of vesting the power in a single person, the Caliphate was entrusted to the Republic and the title is still waiting for its true owner. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk knew very well that in the End Times, the Mahdi (pbuh) would appear and take over as the spiritual leader of Muslims at a time of intense conflicts. Mustafa Kemal built the Republic regime and its institutions based on this knowledge. We know from the hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that the Mahdi (pbuh) will appear in Istanbul in the current era, put an end to the wars, terror and conflicts and bring true peace and love to the world.
\1. Azmi Özcan, “İngiltere’de Hilafet Tartışmaları 1873 – 1909”, İslam Araştırmaları Dergisi (Journal of Islamic Research), Issue 2, 1998, p. 49
\2. Memo by G. P. Badger, “Respecting Turkey and Russia in Their Relations with Arabia and Central Asia”, enc. to Frere to Granville, 26.11.1873, F. O, 424/32
\3. Azmi Özcan, Pan-Islamism, Indian Muslims, the Ottomans & Britain (1877-1924), Leiden: Brill, 1997, p. 40
\4. Wilfrid Scawen Blunt, The Future of Islam, The Project Gutenberg EBook, 2005, pp. 55, 62
\5. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, Bir İmparatorluk Nasıl Parçalandı?, (Foreign Intrusion in Ottoman Riots, How An Empire Was Dismembered), Vatan Yayınları, October 1992, p. 96
\6. Ibid., pp. 96-97
\7. Ibid., p. 102
Turks in the British Deep State Documents
In the final section of this part on the reasons that led to the fall of the Ottoman Empire, readers will see some of the quotes documented by researcher Erol Ulubelen in his book İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye (Turkey in the Secret British Documents). The remarks of certain British politicians, soldiers and statesmen controlled by the British deep state clearly show that similar sinister plots are still underway.
(The noble Turkish nation is above such remarks)
British would treat anti-Turk Christians kindly and say all whips to beat the Turkish dog would be good.175
US President Wilson: Having studied the question of the Turks in Europe for a long time, it is my opinion that they ought to be cleared out of Constantinople …176
Lord Curzon: Turks must be thrown out of Europe. As the American Senator Lodge said, Constantinople should be totally taken from Turks, this nest of pestilence, creator of wars and blasphemy for neighbors, should be wiped off from Europe.177
Lloyd George: Turks have betrayed us. We have lost thousands of people in Gallipoli. Who cares that Turks die now?178
The British Deep State Plans to Dismember the Ottoman Empire
Various British diplomats’ and politicians’ views and suggestions to dismember the Ottoman Empire in the documents of the British deep state can be found below:
Mr. Marling: The concessions to be made to the Albanians, they say, must eventually be made not only to the other Balkan provinces but also to the Arabs, Kurds, Armenians and other nationalities, a policy which must entail the dismemberment of the Empire.179
G. Buchanan: Entire Turkish-controlled Europe should belong to the Christians… The issue of Crete should be solved in favor of Greece.180
Lord Kitchener: Turkish collapse seems to be complete… Everything that Turks claim to be theirs in Sudan must pass to Britain.181
A. Nicolson: …The British … held that the only way to avoid a repetition of the Cretan question was for Greece to hold all the Islands other than Tenedos and Imbros….182
Mr. Erskine: …unless they can destroy the Turkish fleet the position in the future will be much the same as now. Admiral Kerr tells me in confidence that some time ago he submitted a rather bold plan of action, which he thought offered good prospects of success…183
A meeting in the British Foreign Office: …Conclusion: Financial matters can never be entrusted to Turks. Also, Turks will pay all occupation expenses and the price for the collected commissions… Senior Litti said: ‘Turks will want Izmir, and we’ll say ‘pay us all that we spent for occupation. Since they are not going to do that, we’ll keep Izmir.’ Then Lloyd George said, ‘our units in Syria will leave, so are we going to pay for it? How nonsensical is that? Turks should pay all of it. British taxpayers paid 750 million sterling for that. We’ll get it back from the Turks in gold coins. We have to gain control of the gold stocks of Turks.’… Mr. Cambon said ‘we should first destroy their patriotic leaders.’… Lloyd George said: ‘We’ll tell the Sultan [Vahdettin], we’re getting all the flesh, you can keep the bones’.184
The answer to the Turkish government: We carefully examined the message of the Turkish government. Turks, … by entering the war, caused casualties and poverty… They caused the deaths of millions of people and loss of billions of sterling. Turkey has to pay a very big price so that freedom in the world can be rebuilt… Non-Turk ethnic groups will become independent states. Izmir and Thrace will be taken from Turks and a free Armenia will be set up within the borders determined by the US President [W. Wilson]… Strict measures will be taken to ensure that Turks don’t betray the civilized world again. For this reason, Turkish lands will be turned into a small state… Imperialist desires of the Turkish people will be erased.
As to the autonomy of the Straits:
1. All military facilities along the Straits will be demolished and all coasts and islands will be arms-free.
2. Disarmament costs will be borne by Turks or Greeks.
3.No soldiers other than Allied soldiers can be present on the islands.
Turkish gendarme will report to us and all debts of the Turks will be paid by the Turks. If you don’t sign the treaty, you will be driven out of Europe for sure. We are giving you ten days for your perusal.185
The British Deep State and the Armenian Riots
Official and classified British documents reveal a great deal about the thoughts of British politicians on Armenian riots:
Mr. O’Beirne: The Armenian riot is the best way to declare war against the Turks… German armies being on the side of the Turks will strengthen the triple treaty, lead to these reforms and will be followed by an Armenian uprising.186
E. Grey: …Breaking off six provinces for a united Armenia will make other ethnicities in Asian Turkey to follow suit.187
Harbord: …We travelled all regions from Istanbul to Mardin…. We haven’t seen any indication that Turks wanted to kill the Armenians… Three months ago, we heard that all Armenians were slaughtered down to the last man. But none of it was actually true. The French wanted to make Ottoman a French mandate, and to this end, they felt they had to make the world suspicious of the Turks.188
Mr. Kitson: …I have no doubts about the will of Armenians about killing their Muslim neighbours. Armed Armenian Dashnak gangs are working with extraordinary savagery.… Although we don’t trust them, it is in our interests to use the Kurds. As to the Eastern provinces, we cannot separate those regions and make them Kurdistan and Armenia without fighting the Turks first.189
London Conference: …Trabzon and Adana should also be given to Armenia, in addition to those six provinces. The US will help Armenia… Some people say “There is not even one Armenian in Trabzon. So isn’t it ridiculous to have an Armenia without Armenians?’‘… A small Turkish state should be set up, the capitulations can be extended to cover jurisprudence as well. We had to lift the capitulations in Japan, because they were strong. We had no other option. Turkish mind was far less precise than the Japanese.190 [Noble Turkish nation is above such statements.]
A meeting in the British Foreign Office: … Lloyd George: ‘We have to drive Turks out of Istanbul’… Mr. Cambon: ‘Mustafa Kemal Pasha is the source of all problems and the Sultan has a hard time keeping him in check’…. 1/3 of the French groups are French soldiers and the rest is indigenous Armenians… If our commissioner in Istanbul cannot prevent these, he should threaten the Sultan by saying ‘otherwise we’ll kick you out of Istanbul’. If at the time, when Erzurum was supposed to be taken by the new Armenian State, Mustafa Kemal wasn’t around, the Armenians could have a chance… Mustafa Kemal’s troops are not paid, it is their love for their country that drives them.191
A British report: Ardahan, Batum and İmer valley will be given. Armenian borders with Kurdistan and Turkey will be as follows: Yanbati River in Blacksea … Western border of Erzurum, Bitlis river.192
San Remo Conference: …The borders of Turkey: Erzurum will be given to Armenians and thus the Great Armenian State theory will become true. Italian Nitti, ‘…Since Turks are the majority in Erzurum, we have to find a way to kick them out. Lately Erzurum has been the center of the nationalist movement.’ Mr. Berthelot, ‘Mustafa Kemal and his forces can be eliminated through bribery or by other means’… Mr. Aharonian said, “Mustafa Kemal’s army is much smaller than you think and is undisciplined.”193 [Noble Turkish nation is above such statements.]
Lord Curzon (regarding his meeting with Boghos Nubar and Avetis Aharonian in London, April 11 1920): I scolded them for their stupid actions. I explained [to] them the stupidity of wasting on the Azerbaijanis, the weapons that we gave them to use on the Turks.194
Admiral F. de Robeck: I have talked to Mr Khatissian. He informed me that, they received 25,000 rifles, Armenian army has 30,000 Russian made rifles and one million bullets. When the Greek advance starts, Armenians will instantly join the attack.195
The British Deep State and the Turkish War of Independence
Classified British documents contain the following statements about the Turkish War of Independence:
British Foreign Policy Documents: 1919-1939
Turks think that it is only the Greek invasion they are facing, and are getting ready to fight them. But Greeks are only a part of the allied plan.196
Let’s not stir the Turks, and let’s make them feel that the war is over… Greeks and Italians are deciding where they will occupy… We have to make Turks think that this is going to stop.197
Admiral F. de Robeck: … Sultan asked the British authorities to stop the nationalists by using force. … The Grand Vizier and the Minister of Internal Affairs accept the severity of the situation and ask an Allied permission to suppress the insurgency… Grand Vizier Ferid Pasha’s government declared war on the nationalists and decided that nationalists cannot be reasoned with… Although the British played the main role in the fight against the Turks, Britain is in a better position today in Turkish newspapers and even in nationalist papers.198
A speech on American radio: …Mustafa Kemal told me: ‘Our government was weakened through foreign plots and interventions. It is a lie that the nationalists received aid from the British and the French. British capital is destroying Turkey. We know that Adil Bey, the former President of the Society of the Friends of England, who is now in England, received 200,000 sterling, while Konya governor got 150,000 sterling and possibly Ankara governor got a similar amount, as well.’199
Mr. Ryan’s report: … Since the nationalist forces [in Turkey] were getting stronger, it was requested that a government force of 40,000 troops be used against the nationalists. Grand Vizier immediately accepted this request.200
During the meeting in Villa Belle: … Lloyd George said ‘Mustafa Kemal’s success might rub on the Arabs, for this reason he definitely has to be crushed… We improved Greek’s fight abilities, and diminished Turks.201 [Noble Turkish nation is above such statements.]
During the meeting in Villa Franeuse: … Istanbul administration can help us suppress the Turkish nationalist movement, which is a threat not only to us, but for the entire world…We cannot show any mercy to Turks that caused the war to last for two years. Mr. Venizelos said, ‘If there was a possibility, we could use something other than guns against Turks, but Turks won’t understand anything other than guns.’202
Admiral F. de Robeck: … All the Anatolian movements belong to Mustafa Kemal’s nationalist movement. Damad Ferid wishes to send troops to stop the nationalist movement… Only Turks don’t respect the decisions we made.203
Admiral F. de Robeck: … Turks won’t accept to be ruled by Greeks, especially after the disgrace Greeks caused in Izmir… British officers and our people are cooperating to kill the Turks… Turks are great fighters, they have little ammunition and no transportation… Turks will have no rights in Kurdistan under the peace treaty to be signed with them. We have to be sure of the situation with regards to Kurdistan. Even Kurds don’t know what they want… Erzurum is one of the most powerful fortresses of Turks, they won’t accept that a big Turkish land is given to Armenians… British Empire has seized all the lands that once belonged to the Turkish Empire.204
Admiral F. de Robeck: … The reason for the Anatolian movement is the Greek invasion and their horrible actions. The foundation of the great Armenia and Pontus states also contributed to it.205
Admiral F. de Robeck: … We received a letter from the Prime Minister [grand vizier] condemning Mustafa Kemal. He declares them as rebels that defy the orders of the government and says that people should be loyal to the government, instead.206
Admiral F. de Robeck: … Damad Ferid [grand vizier] is worried about his personal security and the security of his people. Would you allow me to say to him that should the nationalists take over the administration in Turkey, his life and the Sultan’s life will be under our protection? Ferid claims that he is the only person that can influence the Sultan and that he created the pro-British stance. If Damad Ferid resigns, we must guarantee that he and the Sultan can leave the country in a dignified manner. … If the Sultan steps down, I will help him leave Turkey.207
H. Rumbolt: … the British Vice-Consul reported that lack of discipline in army is beginning to be admitted even by Greek G.H.Q. Kondylis, Officer Commanding Third Regiment, was mobbed by troops at Salihli and only escaped by hiding under coal in tender of train. It seems that the Greeks won’t be able to pull this off by themselves.208
Kurdistan Plan of the British Deep State
Confidential British documents reveal the British deep state plans to break up the Turkish territory and build a Kurdistan in its place:
Admiral A. Calthorpe: … Major Noel says that if he can reach an agreement with Kurdish chiefs, that will be useful. (Sayyid) Abdülkadir and Bedir Khan, the Kurdish chiefs in Istanbul, are less important people. They will go to Kurdish regions separately from Noel, so as to not rouse suspicion… Kurds haven’t yet risen up against Mustafa Kemal but Noel is sure that he can make it happen.209
Mr. Hohler: … My problem is KURDS. Noel came here from Baghdad… He wishes to be the prophet of the Kurds… I am afraid Noel may turn out a Kurdish Lawrence.’. Since Mesopotamia is going to belong to us now, we can make him found a KURDISH STATE and defend the northern mountains. I spoke to (Sayyid) Abdülkadir and the likes of him. I made it as clear as words five times repeated can make things clear that we were not out for intrigues against the Turks, and that I could promise nothing whatsoever as regards the future of Kurdistan. [The Kurds] are like a rainbow of every shade of colour. Since the aim of her Majesty’s government is weakening the Turks as much as possible, it is not a bad idea to mobilize Kurds like this.210
Admiral Webb: Kurdish nationalists were probably aware by spring 1919 that the Allies were thinking of partitioning eastern Anatolia between an Armenian state in the vilayets of Erzerum and Trabzon under American auspices, and a Kurdish state in the remaining four vilayets of Bitlis, Van, Diyarbakir and Elazig, presumably under British auspices. The prime minister was very impressed with the idea…211
Mr. Hohler: … I don’t care about the situation of the KURDS AND ARMENIANS. We pay attention to the Kurdish problem only because of Mesopotamia. On the other hand, Wilson is scaring me, his agents are always making mistakes. But he [Noel] is another fanatic … I agree with you that the BORDERS OF ARMENIA AND KURDISTAN ARE NOT DEFINITE. KURDISH PROBLEM exists to create a satisfactory border in Mesopotamia… 212
Admiral F. de Robeck: … Mr. Hohler talked to Kurdish leader Sheikh Said Abdülkadir Pasha for the Kurdish problem. Kurds have pinned their hopes on the British. In the meantime, Mustafa Kemal is getting more dangerous. Forces are ready to spend whatever is necessary to use the Kurds against Mustafa Kemal.213
Meeting notes: … Kurdish tribes will be placed under British and French protection, NO TURK will be left at all in KURDISTAN. It will be decided if it is going to be a SINGLE KURDISH STATE or multiple small KURDISH STATES. Weapons will be supplied to Armenians via Americans… A secret organization was set up in Istanbul and is declaring nationalists traitors…214
Admiral F. de Robeck: … Kurdistan must detach from Turkey completely and gain autonomy. We can reconcile the Kurdish and Armenian interests. Sayyid Abdülkadir, the head of the Kurdish club in Istanbul and Şerif Pasha, the Kurdish delegate in Paris, are at your service.215
Admiral F. de Robeck: … [Grand Vizier] Damad Ferid came to me and said, ‘According to the peace treaty, Kurds will have their separate state. Kurdish leaders don’t like Mustafa Kemal. You hate Mustafa Kemal because he doesn’t accept the treaty you prepared. Then let’s all together, mobilize Kurds against Mustafa Kemal.’216
PART IV The Armenian Issue Manipulated by the British Deep State
The 150-Year-Old Project to Weaken Turkey
Before we begin to study the Armenian issue in detail, which has been a controversial issue since WWI, it is important to keep in mind that everything that happened during those years took place in the course of an all-encompassing world war that cost the lives of millions of people. Both parties suffered immensely as a result.
Turkey’s official position on the matter is demanding an examination of historical archives, and commissioning an independent international committee, which will examine the accuracy of the allegations based on historical records. Needless to say, going back to the historical records is important so that the truth can be known, baseless allegations can be eliminated, and justice can be established. However, the most important goal should be leaving behind the past and working to rebuild our friendship and brotherhood. There is no doubt that both Armenians and Turks suffered heavy losses during the war but holding grudges and calling each other to account for events of centuries ago is not the right course of action. Today’s generations should focus on building a union of love, which will bring happiness to everyone.
Armenians are honest, bright and decent people. For centuries, we have lived together as a family; they have been great assets to our nation and made great contributions with their trustworthy, artistic, educated and talented characters. They held top administrative positions not only in the Ottoman government, but also in the Ottoman Army. However, the British deep state worked relentlessly to tear this beautiful people away from us, to break our bond. Such aspirations continue even today. This deep organization has always used the Armenian issue as leverage in reaching its goals. As we examine the history of the Armenian problem, it is important to carefully study these points.
We are dedicating this whole chapter to the Armenian problem in the Ottoman Empire, because it was mostly incited, planned and orchestrated by the British deep state. The mistaken beliefs that ‘radical nationalism and conflicts between races would bring about improvement’, which originated and spread to the rest of the world from Britain, caused serious problems in Anatolian communities, like they did among many Middle Eastern peoples. Particularly after oil was discovered in the region, the increasing geopolitical and geostrategic importance of the region gave even more of an incentive to the British deep state and it sped up its plots involving the regional people including Armenians, Assyrians, Kurds, Arabs, and Turks among others. By numerous plots, the British deep state drove a wedge between us and our Armenian brothers and sisters. Therefore, it is crucial to keep this point in mind and carefully consider the evidence offered in the following pages.
The Loyal People or ‘Millet-i Sadıka‘
The first interaction between the Muslims and Anatolian Armenians took place during the reign of the four caliphs. Muslims under the command of Uthman ibn Affan arrived in Caucasus in 640 and took full control of the region in 653. Muawiya, the then Syrian governor and the first ruler and founder of the Umayyads, refrained from Arabization or Islamization policies and instead offered broad autonomies to the indigenous Nakharar families.
When Sultan Alp Arslan defeated the Byzantine army at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, the doors of Anatolia were opened to Turks. From that point on, Turks and Armenians have lived together side by side on these lands. It should also be noted that after the fall of the Seljuks, the Armenian Church maintained its presence under Turkish, Iranian and Mongol rules until the Ottoman Emirate built the Anatolian union.
When Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror took Istanbul in 1453, a sort of golden age for the Armenians began. Sultan Mehmed II, completely of his own accord, invited Hovageem to Istanbul and established an Armenian Patriarch next to the Greek Patriarch in 1461. Hovageem was the spiritual leader of the Armenians at the time. Following this development, the Patriarch was declared the leader of the Armenian community by the Sultan’s decree and the Armenians were entrusted to his care. This development prompted Armenian populations around the world to come to Istanbul and form Istanbul’s strong Armenian community. After Eastern Anatolia and South Caucasia were conquered during the reigns of Sultan Selim I and Sultan Suleiman I, the Armenian population in the newly taken areas was also incorporated in the Istanbul community and bonded to the Istanbul Patriarch. Throughout the history of Ottoman rule, Armenians enjoyed great freedoms in religion, politics, economy and culture.
Armenians, as the trusted, reliable and friendly non-Muslim constituents of a Muslim country, were known as the ‘Loyal People’ (Millet-i Sadıka). They formed a precious and indispensable part of Ottoman society. Just as every other Ottoman citizen, they enjoyed many rights and liberties in the Ottoman Empire, practiced their religion freely and without any inhibition engaged in business and social life. This is the path to which the Qur’an guides us.
Among the people of the Book there are some who believe in God and in what has been sent down to you and what was sent down to them, and who are humble before God. They do not sell God’s signs for a paltry price. Such people will have their reward with their Lord. And God is swift at reckoning. (Qur’an, 3:199)
The Speech of Mesrob II Mutafyan of Constantinople, the 84th Patriarch of Turkey’s Armenians
Mesrob II Mutafyan, the 84th Patriarch of Turkey’s Armenians expressed his feelings during a speech given at the reception held in Hilton Hotel on May 22, 1999:
… In 1461, only eight years after Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror took Istanbul, he issued an edict and established the Istanbul Patriarchy. This was a clear indication of Sultan Mehmed II’s and other Ottoman Sultans’ visionary characters and their embracing attitude towards other faiths. Indeed, Sultan Mehmed II was the first and last ruler in history to establish a spiritual leadership institute for the members of another religion… As we enter the new millennium with all the wars and conflicts going on around the world, we can better appreciate the importance of this incident that took place 538 years ago and better understand the importance of love and respect for different faiths and cultures.
The Writings of Mateos of Edessa [Urfa]
Famous Armenian historian from Urfa, Mateos described the Seljuk approach to Armenians: ‘Malik-Shah’s heart was full of compassion and goodness for the Christians. He treated the children of Jesus very kindly. He brought peace, wealth and happiness to the Armenian people.’
Mateos also wrote the following after the death of Sultan Kilij Arslan:
The death of Kilij Arslan deeply saddened the Christians. This Sultan had a noble character and loved to help.1
These examples clearly show the peaceful atmosphere that Armenians enjoyed for centuries of their harmonious co-existence with Turks.
\1. Matthew of Edessa, Urfalı Mateos Vekayi-namesi (952-1136), The Chronicle, no.129, p. 146
‘Armenian Territory’ as a Propaganda Tool
The Armenian issue, which is today used by the British deep state as a propaganda tool, is based on the allegation that Eastern Anatolia has always been a land that solely belonged to the Armenians. Before we elaborate why the claim is baseless, we must note that the modern state of Armenia with its current borders is a friendly neighbor of Turkey and its citizens have been the brothers and sisters of the Turkish people for almost 1,000 years. Turkey respects the existence, borders and international rights of Armenia, as is the case with its other neighbors. More importantly, Turkey desires all these countries to be lasting and strong.
However, the above allegation made by certain circles that the Eastern Anatolia region of Turkey is Armenian’s only, contradicts historical facts.
According to this allegation developed by the British deep state, the Turks have been an occupying force on the Armenian lands starting with the Seljuks and followed by the Ottomans, and even persecuted them. These allegations suggest that the so-called oppression continues even today. However, a close examination of the common Turkish-Armenian history will reveal the baseless nature of these allegations. It should also be noted that Armenians did not have such claims until WWI, when the British deep state started its black propaganda on this matter.
First of all, the allegation that the Eastern Anatolia region of Turkey is exclusively an Armenian homeland does not reflect historical facts. The region in question, where Armenians once lived in large groups, was a Persian province from 521 until 344 B.C., before becoming a part of the Macedonian Empire from 344 to 215 B.C., and then a part of the Seleucid Empire. It was later transferred to and fro between the Rome Empire and the Parthian Empire, then became a Sasanid province and finally a Byzantine land. After the 7th century, the region was controlled by the Umayyad Caliphate, followed by the Abbasid rule that continued until the end of the 10th century, when the Byzantine Empire retook the lands. After the 10th century, the Turks arrived in the region.
Armenians are an ancient, civilized people that have existed in the region since antiquity. Throughout history though, they either lived under the rule of various other nations, or their own states acted as a buffer zone between the big empires of the time and were subjected to frequent interventions. The Armenians will certainly continue to live in Eastern Anatolia, which will always be their home. However, as the historical data indisputably shows, it would be incorrect to assert that Eastern Anatolia is an exclusively Armenian region where no other nation’s people ever lived.
Armenian historian Kevork Aslan confirms this truth with the following words:
Armenians lived as feudal states. They don’t have a bond based on a sense of a shared land. Neither do they have political bonds. They answer only to feudal states where they reside, and therefore their feelings of patriotism are regional. Their bonds are not based on politics, but are rather due to their shared religion and language.217
Adnan Oktar Says
Adnan Oktar: Let’s rebuild our brotherhood with the Armenians. Let’s open borders with Armenia, let’s hug each other. They were one of us, our brothers in the Ottoman era. It’s still the same; nothing has changed. They are the ‘loyal people’. They are good, well-mannered people. [Anything to the contrary] is wrong; is a sin. We won’t allow anyone to drive a wedge between us.
(Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar’s interview on A9 TV on December 18, 2011)
Adnan Oktar: They [the officials of the two countries] have reached an agreement on visas and then after a while, there won’t be any need for passports as well. They’re discussing the final details. But of course, it is important to avoid a language that might embarrass them [the Armenians]. They are good people that expect compassion and love. They want the good old times to come back. Armenians are ‘the loyal people’, ‘millet-i sadıka’. We entrusted our soldiers to Armenian pashas, and gave them key positions in the administrations. It is important to have a compassionate approach. Comparing bones, counting bones and skulls, these are very dangerous things. It’s good that after we drew attention to how wrong this was, they stopped this attitude. Thank God, that’s a good development. We should focus only on love. I said that they would retreat from Nagorno-Karabakh and indeed they are doing it. I also said that ‘Insha’Allah they will open the Lachin corridor’ and indeed it is being opened now. It will ensure connection between Turkey and Azerbaijan. For example, when our President went to Armenia, on that day, they put out the eternal fire on the memorial. So they are thinking about it, they know and I believe they will do whatever is necessary. They want only sincere love and compassion. It is crucial to strictly avoid any harsh, accusatory statements. Personally, when I witness such language, it embarrasses me. They are a few people, trapped in a small country. Of course, we will save them from there. By the grace of God, our union of love will incorporate Israel, China, Azerbaijan, Turkistan, Kazakhstan, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria among others.
(Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar’s press conference on September 17, 2009)
The British Deep State Begins to Manipulate Some Armenians
A close examination of the British policy of the East in the second half of the 19th century will reveal the close links Britain built with indigenous people. Needless to say, these ties were not built to help these people, but rather to make sure that they could be manipulated to serve the British policies in the most ‘efficient’ ways. Hundreds of Britons were sent to the region for this purpose, and carried out activities disguised as ‘archeologists, religious scholars, historians, or teachers’. Some planted and nourished divisive thoughts in the society, while others provoked the leading figures of communities against the central administration. Armenians, which are one of the ancient communities of Anatolia, became a primary target of the numerous spies dispatched to the region by Britain at the time.
The Treaty of Berlin, signed on July 13, 1878 under pressure from the British, forced the Ottomans to introduce reforms in Rumelia (Ottoman lands in Europe) and regions where Armenians lived. These reforms, which on the surface were bringing additional rights and liberties to the regional people, in truth marked the beginning of the control of the British deep state over the Armenians, an Orthodox Christian community. However, it wasn’t an easy task to convince Orthodox Armenians to ally with the Protestant British. Indeed, the conversion in question took many years, took many British spies, sectarian missionaries and intense propaganda through the Western media.
Emilius Clayton, who was at the time British Vice-Consul at Van, sent a report to London on November 29, 1879 that argued the Armenian state should either not be founded at all, or if it was going to be established, Russian control over it should not be allowed. The Vice-Consul believed that the Ottoman Empire would collapse and so reforms should be guided to allow the establishment of a British-controlled Armenian state. He wrote, ‘Armenians would first prosper and get strong as a British or European protectorate, and get ready politically. Then, Armenians in other regions would be transferred to Eastern Anatolia to increase the total Armenian population. However, no matter the size of migration they would always remain a minority. So, as a secondary step, the Turkish population would gradually be driven out of Eastern Anatolia. Only Kurds and Assyrians should be left. Assyrians would set aside their sectarian differences with the Armenians and mingle with them. Kurds, on the other hand ‘would be forced to behave at gunpoint’, and compelled to live together with the Armenians. All of this would be undertaken under Ottoman rule, as a part of the enforcement of reforms. And when the time comes and Ottoman Empire collapses, an independent state would be founded for Armenians. But since this makeshift state could not survive on its own, it would have to live under ‘strong British hegemony’.218
The plan seemed to work. With the pretense of overseeing the Ottoman efforts to improve the rights of Christian constituents, Britain sent consuls to various Ottoman provinces. Usually selected from high-ranking soldiers, these consuls stepped outside the boundaries of their duties and carried out intelligence work in the region. Even worse, upon false information, they provoked, organized and armed some of our Armenian citizens, before blatantly inciting them to rebel.
In the beginning there were serious trust and communication issues between the British consuls and the Armenian community due to sectarian differences. In order for the said consuls/spies to win over the Armenians, the Armenians first had to be made Protestants. To this end, certain American missionaries were sent to the region, mostly to Mardin. These efforts angered the local people and the Eastern Orthodox Churches. British consuls, on the other hand, offered protection to both these missionaries and the new Protestant converts. Needless to say, this protection wasn’t offered out of respect for their faith, but rather due to strategic concerns regarding the region.
This certainly wasn’t the first time that this strategy was applied on Ottoman lands. Ahmed Hamdi, the then Tekirdağ district officer, made the following warning about the imminent danger:
The Protestant community in Tekirdağ stated that they were British protégés. British Consul, in the meantime, continues to meddle in everything, claims that Protestants are under his country’s protection and wishes to have them under his control. Since his attitude is causing problems and confusion in the city, it can be said that unless a precaution is taken, the Armenian community will come under the British rule after being converted to Protestantism. Since the desire of the Consul is to make the Armenian community loyal to himself and since such a development will be harmful to our country in every way, we are strongly in need of the Prime Ministry’s urgent instructions as to how we should proceed about the issue. Please kindly advise us how to proceed with regards to the Protestant community.219 (August 21, 1858, Tekirdağ District Officer, Ahmed Hamdi)
The British Deep State’s Base for Armenian Riots: Cyprus
Before the secret Cyprus Treaty of 1878, which supposedly temporarily transferred Cyprus’ rule to the British, 45,000 Muslims and some 100,000 non-Muslims were living on the island. Armenians, Greeks, Jews and a small number of Nazarenes constituted the non-Muslim population. Some British people, supposedly missionaries, actively worked on the island to influence this Christian population. When the British managed to obtain the control of the island, they opened a school for Armenians to gain favor with them. This marked the first step towards the British deep state ambition to use Cyprus as a base for the Armenian issue. So much so, Dashnak and Hunchak resistance movements –that were behind many riots– were organized in Cyprus. The Society for the Friends of Armenia and Committee of Armenian Refugees Foundation were based in Cyprus, while certain Anatolian Armenian groups who were provoked into rioting were being increasingly directed and managed from Cyprus. Sivasliyan, who was the head of Hunchakian Revolutionary Party based in Britain and a lawyer located in Famagusta, was enthusiastically rallying the Armenians of the island against the Ottoman Empire and tried to convince them to participate in the riots taking place on the mainland.
Cyprus wasn’t only a cultural and social center used to incite certain Armenian groups; it was also an important logistics hub for the insurgency. Ottoman Armenians and European Armenians that sympathized with the riots were communicating via Cyprus. Similarly, pro-riot Armenians who fled abroad or who planned to return to Anatolia could do so secretly by way of Cyprus. After taking part in riots in Aleppo, Diyarbakır, Bitlis, Hakkari and Van, the Armenian rebels would board ships in Iskenderun and Mersin and sail to Cyprus. They easily changed identities, taking advantage of British rule, and then left for Europe or the US.
Weapons purchased by certain Armenian groups in Europe were also dispatched to Armenian insurgents via Cyprus. The entire operation was masterminded, controlled and guided by the British deep state. Cyprus wasn’t only close to Anatolia; it was also a threat to various Ottoman cities in modern Syria and Lebanon’s borders, due to the presence of some Armenian rebels, who used the island as a base. However, the Ottomans lacked the infrastructure to prevent this traffic or even to monitor developments.
Let us note one more time that the people mentioned here were Armenian insurgents that were operating under the control of the British deep state. It is true that some of our Armenian citizens were swayed by the influence of the British deep state and chose a wrong path. However, most of our Armenian citizens at the time remained loyal to their country, the Ottoman Empire, and refused to fall for the lies of the British deep state. These decent people continued to live in Turkey in peace and safety after the foundation of the Republic of Turkey and are still a valuable part of our country.
Regional Riots before WWI
The British deep state’s protection of its interests in Eastern Anatolia hinged on a strategy of mobilizing some groups from the Armenian community against the Ottomans. This is a fact confirmed today by many Western and Armenian historians. Initially, the British deep state’s efforts failed because the Armenians had no complaints about the Ottoman administration, as they had lived for centuries in peace. Therefore, many organizations set up for provocation purposes failed and disappeared in time. They became active and sought success in countries other than the Ottoman Empire.
Louise Nalbandian, a modern leading propagandist of the Armenian issue, described the goal of such rebel groups with the following words: “Agitation and Terror were needed to ‘elevate the spirit of the (Armenian) people’… The people were also to be incited against their enemies and were to ‘profit’ from the retaliatory actions of these same enemies…. The party aimed at terrorizing the Ottoman government…” 220 In other words, a group of Armenians that the British deep state provoked into starting riots in Anatolia chose ‘terror’ as their method. Indeed, following the establishment of such rebel groups, riots broke out across Anatolia and consequently many innocent local people - Turks, Kurds, Assyrians and Armenians - lost their lives while Anatolia lost its peace.
Armenians were a free people that were mostly occupied with arts and trade under the Ottoman rule. They enjoyed full religious freedom, had their own churches, worshipped the way they wanted and had their monasteries where they trained their own clergy. They didn’t have to serve in the military. In other words, the Ottoman Empire had provided them centuries of unprecedented peace and security. However, as the Ottoman Empire entered its decline period, a role was also cut out for them by the British deep state. Certain groups from the Armenian community were supposed to rebel against the Ottoman Empire. The British deep state was well aware that the Armenian people had no intentions of rebelling, and so it had to find a way to provoke them.
George H. Hepworth, an American journalist who travelled in East Anatolia, remembers in his memoir what the Armenians told him:
Ah, we were a happy people once. We … had large business interests, we were contented and prosperous. But the Treaty of Berlin! And the interference of England! If Europe would let us alone, we might still have a future…221
As the Empire began to lose strength, the peaceful atmosphere began to dissipate and left in its place an environment of hostility and riots nurtured by the British deep state. The Armenians, who have never been affected by rebellious and nationalist movements up to that point, were provoked by the British deep state, which played on their different faiths and ethnicities. In order to provoke the Christian Armenian community against Muslims, the British deep state began to spread the propaganda that Armenians were being oppressed and that their riot would be the rising of the so-called ‘downtrodden people’. Clashes and bloodshed would look like the natural outcome of this insidious plan.
General Mayewski, Russia’s General Consul in Van and Bitlis, recalls the shameless sedition and provocation by the British deep state:
Europe had to see that Christians of Turkey – this time Armenians – were being oppressed and tyrannized by the Turks. This is what happened with Serbia and Bulgaria before and the plan was to use Armenians in the same way… Propaganda was like this: ‘Only with blood, Armenians can be free. Shed blood, Europe will protect you.’ They were convinced that there had to be bloodshed. They were positive that once Armenian blood was shed, Europe would rush to protect Armenians. If this hadn’t been the case, there wouldn’t have been this much violence. If the desire for autonomy hadn’t been strong, would thousands of lives be sacrificed upon the orders of London?222
The divisive sedition policy of the British deep state became more clear and visible over time. British Prime Minister Gladstone, who took office in 1880, declared that ‘to serve Armenians is to serve civilization’ and hinted at the British deep state’s policy when he stated that Armenians should be given independence for the East to progress and achieve enlightenment. It shouldn’t be surprising that the Gladstone government gathered Armenians together, helped them organize and egged them on by promising British support for their new state.223 However, their concern was neither protecting the Armenians nor bringing ‘enlightenment’ to the East. The true goal was dividing the Middle East into smaller parts, hoping that it would then be easier to control.
Historian Süleyman Kocabaş described this well-known fact with the following words:
Armenian violence erupted in Eastern Anatolia. According to the foreign witness accounts, Armenian rebels were secretly communicating with the British consuls in the region. General Mayewski, who was Russia’s Consul in Van, wrote about this. American journalist George H. Hepworth, who travelled to Eastern Anatolia in 1896, which marked the height of Armenian riots, also mentions about British-Armenian links in his memoir. He writes that the main reason behind the bloody confrontations between Muslims and Armenians in the region had been the Armenian rebels that came from other countries and says: “In the meantime, the revolutionists are doing what they can to make fresh outrages possible. That is their avowed purpose. They reason that if they can induce the Turks to kill more of the Armenians, themselves excepted, Europe will be forced to intervene, and then the Armenian kingdom will re-establish itself… England has eulogized them, has incited them to new effort. They steal their way into a village under cover of night, stir up those who will listen, declaring that if the people engage in open revolt the Powers will rush to their assistance.”224
Indeed, the Armenian rebels in question organized a large rally in 1896 in Liverpool, where Gladstone gave another fiery speech sowing more seeds of sedition among the Armenians.225
According to William L. Langer, who was a former chairman of the history department at Harvard University, “England is more responsible for the cold-blooded murders [in Turkey] which have come near exterminating the Armenians than all other nations put together“.226
Armenian riots managed and supervised by the British consuls in Anatolia reached their peak in July and August 1895. The Armenian riots that broke out in the year 1895 were as follows: September 29 in Divriği, October 2 in Trabzon, October 6 in Eğin, October 7 in Develi, October 9 in Akhisar, October 21 in Erzincan, October 25 in Gümüşhane, October 25 in Bitlis, October 26 in Bayburt, October 27 in Maraş, October 29 in Urfa, October 30 in Erzurum, November 2 in Diyarbakır, November 2 in Siverek, November 4 in Malatya, November 7 in Harput, November 9 in Arapgir, November 15 in Sivas, November 15 in Merzifon, November 16 in Antep, November 18 in Maraş, November 22 in Muş, December 3 in Kayseri and December 3 in Yozgat.
The Impact of Some So-Called Missionaries on the Armenian Community
British consuls were constantly telling lies about Ottoman administration to our Armenian citizens and were showing British as their savior. To this end, they would tour Armenian villages and spread their propaganda. One telegram sent from the province of Adana to the Minister of Internal Affairs described such separatist activities of the consuls very clearly:
Captain Cooper, the British Deputy Consul in Adana, is given this assignment only for overseeing the issues of British citizens like a normal deputy consul according to the imperial edict issued by the British State. However since the first day he arrived here, he has been portraying himself as a defender of the downtrodden. He has been asking people who have lost in courts to go to him, accepts the petitions and suggestions of tradesmen and complainants, promising to help them. He then goes and questions the prosecutors about their decisions and says, ‘why did the court make this decision’, slanders the Ottoman Empire before the complainants and tries to win their hearts by praising the justice of Britain. His actions have passed the borders of being tolerable… Rumors have begun circulating around here that this place will be left to the British like Cyprus has been handed over to them and that’s why the consul came in the first place, and that Kozan, Zeytun, Dersim and Van would be entrusted to the autonomous management of an Armenian governor that would be called Armenia like in Bulgaria. There is no need to explain how dangerous this development is for the independence and jurisdiction of the Ottoman Empire and how it will damage the order and safety of the country. If the situation continues, the opinions of the citizens will completely change and things will get even more dangerous. Not having any instructions as to how we should proceed with regards to these developments leaves me in a state of confusion and trouble as my sense of duty and my desire to protect the dignity of the government require me to take action. Please kindly send me your detailed instructions as to what should be done.227 (December 15, 1879)
After a while, the activities referred to in the above telegram began to affect some Armenians. While many of our Armenian citizens remained loyal to the state, some of them -albeit few- were swayed by the British deep state. For its plan to break up the Ottoman Empire, the British deep state required intelligence from Anatolia. These Armenian rebels working under the British deep state’s control acted as the fifth branch of the British intelligence operations between 1890 and 1922. During the Gallipoli Campaign, as well as the Armenian incidents in Adana and the 1915 riots, the British intelligence and Armenian rebel groups worked closely together, because those Armenian rebels, having lived in Anatolia for a very long time, were as knowledgeable of Anatolia as the Turks. In other words, the Armenian insurgency provided the much-needed intelligence to the British deep state for its full-fledged war on the Ottoman Empire. This exploitation and recruitment of some Armenians that the British deep state managed to deceive was nothing other than the implementation of a plan that had been elaborately developed over a course of almost 100 years.
Vilification Campaign by the British Media
The first stage in the artificially manufactured problem between Turks and Armenians, who had lived brotherly together for centuries, was provoking the Armenian community against the Ottoman Empire. During the 1878 Berlin Congress, the parties discussed defending Armenians as leverage against Russia, and Lord Salisbury proposed securing the rights of Armenians and an urgent improvement of their situation. These suggestions were made the 61st clause of the Treaty of Berlin. Needless to say, improvement of all communities, not just the Armenians, is and should be the wish and ambition of every conscientious person. However, the British deep state is not concerned with the well being of Armenians or any other people. It is concerned about its own interests only.
At the same time, lobbying efforts sped up in Britain, and Armenian writers were encouraged to write against the Ottomans and join in the anti-Ottoman propaganda.
For instance, an Armenian named Agopyan, acting upon instructions of Lord Salisbury, started publishing a newspaper in London called Haiasdan, while famous papers like the Truth, which was owned by Henry Labouchère, started spreading the false news that Armenians were oppressed by the Ottomans due to their Christian identity. Although the Ottoman government applied to local courts to prevent such news, the defamation campaign continued under the pretense of freedom of speech.
These were deliberate actions intended to build negative public opinion in Europe against the Ottoman Empire in a bid to increase pressure on the Government. Certain British politicians, particularly Gladstone, made inflammatory speeches in the House of Commons against Ottomans, and claimed with no real evidence that ‘Christians were being persecuted’. So much so, the Times began disseminating lies like Christians being killed, churches and other Christian buildings being looted and things getting more dangerous by the day.
Ottoman diplomat Salih Münir Pasha, in his report sent to His Majesty’s Administration Office in Yıldız Palace, described the propaganda as follows:
When the current developments are carefully examined, it becomes clear that Britain is working hard to achieve certain goals that will be detrimental to Ottoman Empire’s interests. Gladstone’s party’s actions and the publication of newspapers linked to Salisbury group are deliberately designed to make their evil intentions acceptable in the public eye.228 (London, September 4, 1889, Salih Münir)
The British deep state also used the Sasun riot started by some Armenians in 1894 to bolster its black propaganda. Suddenly, the European media was flooded with articles spreading the lie of the alleged massacre of Armenians at the hands of the Turks. Anti-Ottoman and anti-Muslim rallies began breaking out in various European cities, as a result of this one-sided, inaccurate news. The European public was being familiarized with the so-called idea of ‘saving the Armenians from the Turks’. However, the facts were shielded from the public eye: the British deep state was planning to bring down the Ottoman Empire and divide Anatolia and the Middle East into smaller parts that it hoped would be easier to control. All these efforts were designed to help the cause.
The British deep state propaganda machine made sure to benefit from every incident. Small incidents were grossly overstated, and every issue was turned into news with exaggerations and inaccurate interpretations. British newspapers like the Times, the Standard, Daily Telegraph, and Daily Chronicle were full of biased commentaries and articles against the Ottoman Empire and the Turks. Gladstone on the other hand, with his fiery yet empty speeches, continued to rally British politicians and the public against the Ottomans.
The reports of Gerald H. Fitzmaurice, who worked as an interpreter in the British embassy of the time, were allegedly based on his observations during his journey across Anatolia and were used as the imaginary ammunition for the black propaganda war. His reports, -most of which were fictitious- published in the name of British diplomacy, were influencing some other foreign ambassadors as well. Now the British deep state was gaining the support of not only its own public, but other European countries too, making them players in the implementation of its plans. A century later, similar fake evidence methods would re-appear in the occupation of Iraq, as a way of forming public opinion in favor of mobilization of international military forces.
The chapter regarding “the British deep state’s propaganda prowess and its global media network” will examine further how the British deep state turned the artificial Armenian issue into media propaganda.
The 19th Century’s Riots and the Looming War
Armenian riots in the Ottoman Empire were essentially organized by three rebel groups: Armenakan Party founded by Mekertich Portukalian in 1885, Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnak Party) and Social Democratic Hunchakian Party (also known as Hunchak Party) founded by Avetis Nazarbekian. The Dashnak and Hunchak parties were leftist groups, and the Hunchaks especially based their principles on Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. While the Armenakan and Dashnak parties were based in the Ottoman Empire, the Hunchak was headquartered in London.
With a cold-blooded revolutionist mentality, the Dashnak Party directly instigated the Armenian riots. It was also responsible for the Sasun and Van riots, the Ottoman Bank raid in Istanbul as well as numerous massacres in Eastern Anatolia. They also founded the notorious ‘Black Cross Society’ to kill any Armenian that didn’t support their riots. The name was chosen because after the gang members killed their victims consisting of the peace loving Armenians, they would make a cross mark on the victim’s forehead. After the blood dried, it would look dark; hence the name. Furthermore, it was the Dashnak Party which organized the four brigades of Ottoman Armenians that fought for the Russian Army during WWI. After the Red Army took control of Soviet Armenia, upon Stalin’s orders, tens of thousands of Dashnakist Armenians were either killed by firing squads or exiled. As the readers have seen many times throughout the book, the British deep state brought death to whomever it touched and Armenians were no different.
The first Armenian riot that was started by British deep state sedition was the Zeitun riot of 1879. The selection of Zeitun as the location was particularly noteworthy as it was a mountainous area notorious for its gangs. It is important to note that the said gangs were lawless criminals, and definitely did not represent the peaceful Armenians that lived in the Ottoman lands.
Thomas Davidson Christie, an American missionary, wrote in his letter dated January 1879 that most of the Armenians that lived in Zeitun area were gangsters:
Zeitun has a population of 8–10 thousand. People in Zeitun are known for their brutality and ruthlessness… and they hate Turks. Twelve years ago (1867), when Mr. Montgomery first went to Zeitun, the Zeitun priest provoked people and missionary Montgomery and his companion were pulled down from their horses, beaten up and stoned. There was also another man in Zeitun who was beaten up because he converted to Protestantism. Zeitun thugs didn’t show good manners under Turkish rule either. Eventually they did surrender, but until that there have been times when they forced the Turkish soldiers to retreat. However, those riots were not for freedom. They didn’t want lawful freedom. Their leaders were crude gang leaders. They looted both Turkish and Christian property. They would always fight amongst each other as well, and these fights were always very bloody.229
Clearly, these rebellious thugs didn’t represent the pious and loyal Armenians who lived peacefully under Ottoman rule for centuries and were happily engaged in their arts and trade. Rather, these lawless and armed criminals provided the mercenaries the British deep state needed to use against the Ottoman Empire.
Zeitun witnessed two big riots, one during the Russo-Turkish war (1877-78), and one right after the war in 1879. Izmir Armenian Church’s Pontiff claimed that an Armenian church was going to be established in Zeitun based on Berlin Congress resolutions and that the British would send them money and weapons for this purpose. This rhetoric played a role in the second riot. English Said Pasha, who was the Minister of the Navy at the time, wrote in his memoir that Patrick Henderson, British Consul at Aleppo, had been behind the riot.
During the Zeitun riot, armed gangs targeted Muslim villages and news of massacres kept coming regularly from the region. Some 600 local Muslims, who had enough of these attacks, set out to confront the rebels in an attempt to defend the Muslims in Zeitun. Seeing that a civil war was brewing, the Sublime Porte dispatched troops to the region to suppress the riot. To better understand what happened, let’s see what the thugs’ leader Babek wrote to Henderson, the British Consul at Aleppo. Maraş Governor Mazhar Pasha intercepted the letter, a valuable evidence.
To the British Consul at Aleppo,
His Excellency Consul, who came to Zeitun for exploration,
We are ready to rub our faces on the soil on your feet, and kiss your feet from here until there… Only God in the Heaven, and us on Earth know about the meeting we had with you. We are yet to benefit from the meeting minutes we have given to you in the chamber of Patriarch Serkis. We’re still waiting. We did everything you ordered. You also know that we never disobeyed your commandments. You said to us: ‘After I leave, let the gang members come and sit here freely, and not suffer in the mountains. If any government official comes and dares to catch them, you should resist and let me know so that I can inform others of your resistance.’ But as soon as our men leave Zeitun, they are being killed. Please send us an urgent reply. What should we do?…
In your letter, you informed of the commissioning of a Christian district officer and that government officers would be chosen among us. However, according to what we heard, the new officers are going to be Muslims. If that is true, we shall make our preparations accordingly. We shouldn’t be left in the blind like before. Let us live according to your orders. May you live long. Please do something to get our arrested members released as soon as possible. We accept to pay whatever costs you will incur. All our surrounding villages and we are on the side of your nation… As you ordered, we have delivered the weapons that we got from the government to Patvili Effendi… Should we act like we did before, or keep a low profile? Please let us know urgently.230
English Said Pasha’s measures effectively ended the Zeitun riot. Furthermore, a general amnesty was declared to cover all Armenians, including leaders of the riot, while the state compensated all personal losses. It is noteworthy that the Pasha, responsible for the measures that led to the amnesty even for those that killed many people, had the nickname ‘English’. However, Said Pasha correctly guessed that it wasn’t going to be the end of these riots:
The Zeitun people are acting rebellious like this because Europeans constantly favor Christians and especially because British protects Armenians and sees Muslims at fault. It is clear from the letter that Mr. Henderson, who is the British Consul at Aleppo, sent to Zeitun gangsters that he encouraged the rebels. The Armenians around Van and in Aleppo rebelling and making complaints to foreign ambassadors; no doubt this is clearly for the purpose of building an autonomous Armenian province in the future. This is not going to happen overnight. However, if we don’t do something to prevent it now, Europe will ask us to appoint an Armenian governor to Van. Then, we will have to assign an Armenian governor there like we did in Lebanon and Crete.231
Pasha’s predictions came true. Bedros Kapamajian became the first Armenian mayor of Van in 1912, and in 1915 the Russians appointed Armenian Aram Manukian as the governor.
Let us remember one more time at this point: We are always proud to have had Armenian governors. We have had many Armenian pashas and grand viziers throughout our history. The valuable members of our nation -Armenians, Kurds, Bosnians, Circassians among others- took important positions in the administration and Turkish people have always been proud of this. However, in this case, it was just a sly tactic employed by the British deep state, and this is the reason why they are being criticized here. (It should be noted that the Russians’ incitement of Armenian gangs was also a British deep state’s plan). Most of the appointed governors were employed as agents in an operation to tear away certain regions from the Ottoman Empire. This was a blatant plot and a trap. In addition, the Armenian rebels in question have never been loyal citizens of the Empire, but chose to be sycophants of the British deep state. Apparently, the British deep state had no trouble finding minions among the Armenian community, just like it didn’t within the Ottoman Empire.
Caucasus Campaign in WWI
Although completely wrong, during wartime, most belligerents consider every means to an end acceptable, which is usually for protecting their people. Wars can make reasonable and rational people unreasonable and irrational, while greed for victory or the quest to protect one’s own people can drive them to commit atrocities. This is what happened to the Turks and the Armenians as the two fraternal nations made a tragic mistake and turned against each other amidst the horrible background of WWI.
American historian and demographer Justin McCarthy reports that between 1821 and 1922, five million European Muslims were driven out of their homelands, and a similar number of them were massacred in the so-called independence wars, sponsored by Europe. This ethnical massacre of Muslims took place during the Serbian and Greek independence movements, during the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78, the Balkan war in 1912, the Armenian riots in Central Anatolia, the Greek invasion and finally the Turkish War of Independence. In his report for Carnegie Endowment, Michael Mann writes that the ethnical massacre of the time was so shocking nothing of a similar magnitude had ever taken place before in Europe.232 Historian Maria Todorova similarly states that more than one million Muslims left the Balkans during the last three decades of the 19th century and relocated to Turkey.233 Many of those Ottoman martyrs are not even known today. The British deep state’s plan to drive the Turks out of Europe into Asia brought about such shocking cruelty and savagery.
Some Armenians deceived by the British deep state became an important part in the plan to banish the Turks. Historian Justin McCarthy puts the number of Muslim deaths of the time at 260,000, while Kemal Karpat reports that the number of martyrs reached 300,000. Some Armenians supported by the British deep state became the biggest supporters of the campaign of the Russian army of the time in the Caucasus. The British deep state considered the breakup of the Ottoman Empire more beneficial for their interests, and therefore ‘got out of the Russians’ way’ before turning Turks-Russians and Turks-Armenians against each other. At the end of these horrible, brutal wars and massacres, the British deep state was always the only one that won.
As British and French battleships launched their attack on Gallipoli in 1915, the Russian army had begun invading Eastern Anatolia. Collaborating with the Russian army, some Armenian groups were encouraged by the British deep state to attack the Ottoman soldiers. As a result, the Ottoman army had to fight not only regular armies, but also Armenian guerillas. When 80,000 soldiers of the 3rd Army became martyrs in Sarıkamış Erzurum in the winter of 1915, the Turkish defense weakened, enabling the Russian Army and the Armenian rebels to advance. The Dashnak, Armenakan and Hunchak parties, which were operating under direct control of the British deep state, were organizing the Armenian riots. According to New York Times report of November 14, 1922, the number of Armenians who fought on the side of the Allies reached almost 200,000.
The following instruction of the Dashnak’s leadership to its followers sheds a light on the policy some rebellious Armenians pursued during the war:
As soon as the Russians have crossed the borders and the Ottoman armies have started to retreat, you should revolt everywhere. The Ottoman armies thus will be placed between two fires: if the Ottoman armies advance against the Russians, on the other hand, their Armenian soldiers should leave their units with their weapons, form bandit forces, and unite with the Russians…234
The Armenian riot in February 1915 resulted in the martyrdom of almost the entire Muslim population of the city of Muş. According to the records of the Turkish Army, the number of martyrs reached 20,000. After this and many other big and small riots, the Ottoman Empire summoned the Armenian Patriarch, Armenian parliament members, and the leading figures of the Armenian community and asked them to make necessary efforts to end the riots.
However, instead of slowing down, things got worse. Especially in March 1915, the Mahmudiye, Saray and Perakal massacres in Van, as well as the Zeitun and Bitlis riots, made the situation in the region extremely volatile. However, what happened in Van was the final straw. In April, some 30,000 Armenians rebelled in the region and when the Ottoman soldiers failed to suppress the rebellion, the rebels handed the key of the city to Russian General Yudenich in May.
Nurse Käthe Ehrhold describes the incidents of Spring 1915, during which she was working at the orphanage run by Father Johannes Spörri and his wife Irene Spörri:
20 thousand people were then living in Van. As the Russian approached (April 20, 1915), the Armenians took up the arms they were hiding and started to fight. A big civil war, a war of brothers, burst out in the town. Street fights took place for days. When the Russians approached to the town further, the Turks decided to evacuate the city; both civilians and military had to leave the town in one night. Only women, elderly and diseased people remained. The other day, when the Armenian gangs and Russians seized the town, the Armenians massacred the women, elderly and diseased Turks, who were unable to escape. As devoted Christians, they had to thank God first for His granting them that victory day. But they did not do that; I regard the murders they carried out on the first day of independence as big sinfulness.
The Armenians seized the remaining properties of Turks and started to use them as if they were their own properties. Now, instead of Armenian villagers, Turkish women from the neighboring villages started to come to my orphanage. We took those women gathered by Russians under protection in our orphanage. Otherwise those poor women would have been victimized by the first who encountered them. We were not able to help those women sufficiently, because maltreated and raped by the gang members, they were terribly trembling in fear.235
Hans Freiherr von Wangenheim, Germany’s Ambassador to Istanbul, reported the incidents to the German Foreign Ministry:
Armenians living in the Van province rioted and attacked Muslim villages and the fortress. The Turkish unit in the fortress lost 300 soldiers and days-long street fighting resulted in the loss of the city to the rebels. On May 17, 1915, Russians occupied Van, Armenians switched to enemy side and began slaughtering Muslims. At the moment, 80,000 Muslims are fleeing in the direction of Bitlis.236
The British Deep State Brought the Biggest Destruction to Armenians
Before we begin examining the mass Armenian relocation that took place after these riots, let’s briefly remember what happened in the century before:
When the Greek riot broke out in 1826, the Sublime Porte assigned Armenian politicians, military officers and bureaucrats to positions vacated by the Greeks. So much so that by the 19th century, nineteen Armenian ministers were in the Ottoman government, and twenty-nine Ottoman Armenians served as pashas, which was the highest rank in bureaucracy. Thirty-three Armenians were elected as Parliament Members, while seven Armenian ambassadors and eleven Armenians consuls represented the Ottoman Sultan in various parts of the world. Hundreds of Armenian bureaucrats occupied key positions in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Foreign Affairs, the Chamber of Accounts, the Mint and the Post Office. They were Christians who lived in the Ottoman lands, freely known and recognized as Armenians. They enjoyed comfortable lives without any oppression, pressure or assimilation threats, and were able to ascend through the ranks to the highest positions in the administration. Most of the time, the Turkish troops were entrusted to Armenian pashas.
During those years, the Armenian Church in the Ottoman Empire had vast power. Their schools and immovable properties were under state protection. However, Armenians that lived in Russia during the same time didn’t enjoy such rights. On the contrary, Tsarist Russia had shut down 320 Armenian schools, while the Russian government seized all the properties of the Armenian Church. In 1909, up to 4,000 Armenians were languishing in tsarist prisons on political charges, and some 3,000 more were exiled.237
Before the British deep state commenced implementing its sinister plans, the Ottoman Empire for centuries had been a land of peace and security for our Armenian brothers and sisters. They freely practiced their faith and led affluent lives through their trade. They were the Christian constituents of the Ottoman Empire and were not different from the other Ottoman citizens. However, the ‘persecuted minorities’ lie that the British deep state propagated after it decided to bring down the Ottoman Empire, managed to influence our Armenian brothers due to intensive propaganda and provocation. As the readers will see in the next chapter, the British deep state, as a skilled master of manipulation and propaganda, managed to deceive masses to a large extent by using the media around the world. During those years, the Ottoman Empire had no power to counter this black propaganda, as it was falling apart. This weakened state provided necessary opportunity to those seeking to break us apart from our Armenian brothers and sisters.
Facts About the Armenian Mass Relocation
The basic goal of the –largely socialist– Hunchak and Dashnak resistance movements founded around 1890 was to gain independence for Armenians through revolution. When the Ottoman Empire decided to enter WWI alongside Germany in 1914, some Armenians under the influence of these movements, allied with the Russians, British and French. As a result, these Armenians started riots in thirty-three different regions, during which thousands of Turks, Kurds and Assyrians lost their lives. These riots plunged the empire into an atmosphere of complete disorder and turmoil.
Having just lost the Balkans in 1912, the Ottoman Empire during those days was facing numerous problems at different fronts: massacres and mass deportations were underway in Bulgaria and Caucasus and only in 1914, more than one million Turks were forced to leave Yerevan and Tiflisi. Only 702,000 would return.
On April 24, 1915, the Sublime Porte ordered the arrest of 253 leaders of the Armenian gangs who were responsible for the riots. 180 of them were sent to various jails. The Ottoman administration decided that the Armenian population should be relocated to various distant areas that were not connected to conflicts. While the rationality of the decision to relocate the Armenian population revealed questionable judgment in the way national security was handled, it is quite clear that the decision was based on a desire to ensure the safety of the innocent Armenian civilians that had already suffered due to the situation. Many women, children and elderly living in conflict zones had trouble accessing food, clean water or medical assistance due to the riots, while many others lost their lives in gang attacks. For this reason, Armenians living close to the conflict zones were relocated to Syria, a southern Ottoman territory.
The Ottoman Council of Ministers’ decision of May 30, 1915 is a testament to the Ottoman administration’s just approach to the issue. So much so, the decision introduced strict measures to help the relocated citizens, including careful protection of their lives and properties, allocations from the refugee fund for their needs, granting of property and lands depending on their circumstances, government-built homes, supply of humanitarian aid including food, equipment, medical supplies, daily medical checks, transportation by train for women, children and sick individuals, among others. Furthermore, it was declared that any attempt to attack the Armenians on their way would be punished in the most severe manner in court martial.
The Armenian issue was manufactured as a British deep state propaganda, which was at war with the Ottoman Empire at the time. Today, for similar political reasons, the lie is still being kept alive. Such propaganda and lies propagated by means of media and secret agents will be covered in more detail in the next chapter.
Armenians are our brothers, sisters, friends; they are our citizens. The British deep state played a very sinister game during wartime and pitted brother against brother, and tore them apart. We were never happy with the fact that Armenian people had to leave these lands even if was a requisite of the status quo. At this point, it is both important and desirable that the grandchildren of our brothers and sisters who had to leave during those days, return back to Turkey to once again live happily with their fraternal people, the Turks. We long to see the days when the Turkey-Armenia border is opened and our long-lost brothers and sisters come back to resume their lives in Turkey as their own country whenever they wish, and continue to display their excellence in arts and trade as before. When this happens, not only we will be reunited, but the ongoing nefarious games of the British deep state will be foiled.
‘Regulation of June 10, 1915 on the Resettlement and Subsistence of Armenians and Other Relevant Details’ as a Part of the Relocation and Resettlement Law Passed on May 27, 1915
This regulation governs the issues regarding the accommodation and provisions of Armenians that were relocated to other regions due to wartime conditions and other extraordinary political circumstances.
Article 1:
The local officers shall be in charge of the transportation of those considered necessary to be relocated.
Article 2:
Relocated Armenians shall be free to take all their movables and livestock with them.
Article 3:
Local officers stationed at posts on the way to the destinations shall be responsible for the protection of the lives and properties of the relocated Armenians, as well as their accommodation, provisions and for helping them get the necessary rest. Should any negligence or lax behavior is discovered with regards to such assistance, all officers shall be held responsible.
Article 4:
Depending on the situation, the Armenians that arrive at the specified locations shall either be settled in the houses in the existing villages or in the towns or villages to be built for them in the areas designated by local authorities. Particular attention must be paid to ensure that villages have good sanitary conditions and are built in places suitable for agriculture and development.
Article 5:
If there are no empty, unclaimed areas suitable for villages in areas owned by the state, villages and towns owned by the state can be designated as settlement areas.
Article 6:
The villages and towns where Armenians will settle and the villages to be built for Armenians must be at least 25 km away from Baghdad railway joints and other railways.
Article 7:
Armenians to be settled in existing villages and towns and the Armenians to be settled in newly built villages, must be registered properly for the purposes of the state register. The registers must include family names, age, occupation, origin and new location as well as all other relevant details of the household.
Article 8:
Individuals settled in designated areas are not allowed to travel to other places without the permission of the relevant commission and the local security authorities.
Article 9:
The local authorities shall cover all the expenses of the Armenians until they obtain their permanent residences and also any expenses that they might incur, until houses are built for those who need it, shall be paid through the refugee fund.
Article 10:
Refugee commissions, represented by senior civil administrators and directors in relevant areas shall be responsible for meeting the needs of the Armenians, be it regarding the resettlement or subsistence. They shall also be responsible for protecting their health and ensuring their comfort. For areas, where there are no refugee commissions, they should be established in conformity with the Refugees Communiqué.
Article 11:
Provided that permits are obtained from the Ministry, the tenants and governors shall be responsible for carrying out settlement procedures, providing provision in a speedy manner, and also for the appointment of officers in charge of resettlement and subsistence.
Article 12:
All families that are relocated shall be granted sufficient lands considering their previous financial standing and current needs.
Article 13:
Refugee commissions shall be responsible for the selection and distribution of the lands.
Article 14:
After the area and borders of the designated lands are determined, they shall be delivered to their new owners in return for a temporary document, and shall be registered in the title deed in an orderly fashion.
Article 15:
Farmers and skilled workers, who need it, shall be given suitable amount of capital or equipment.
Adnan Oktar Says
Adnan Oktar: The enmity between Armenians and us, the Turks, is very unnecessary. Those events happened years ago. Both sides suffered immensely. People have been through a lot. It is God’s destiny. No one should approach each other with vengeful feelings and grudge. We don’t want revenge. We don’t want compensation. We just want to be brothers, to be friends. It is now history. Past is past. It is now a new generation; there are young people around. Talking about the past will hold us back. We will embrace them with compassion. We want them to be rich and peaceful. This [loving approach] is going to solve the problem once and for all. .
(Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar’s interview on APA News Agency, August 16, 2008)
The Evidence Speaks the Truth
There are many historians and politicians who tell the truth about what happened during the Armenian relocation. Especially, many unbiased observers who were present in the region during the time, revealed how the Ottoman government acted extremely sensitively and carefully about the issue. Edward Nathan, the US Consul in Mersin stated, “Although there are some problems due to the crowd, the government is undertaking this matter very carefully, in a systematic manner, doesn’t allow violence or disorder, provides sufficient tickets to the migrants, and helps the ones that need aid”.238 However, the news that was served to the Western public was very different from the truths. Despite these unbiased accounts of witnesses, Henry Morgenthau, US Ambassador to Istanbul, reported the events to his country in a completely distorted manner and some American media outlets used this against the Turks.
Clearly, the Armenian riots and events leading up to the relocation of the Armenians were orchestrated by the British deep state. Many sensible people are aware of this fact and made clear statements in response to the baseless allegations against the Ottoman Empire:
Renowned British Historian Norman Stone
Leaders of the Dashnak and Hunchak parties are responsible for all of these incidents. They plotted conspiracies like lead character in Dostoyevsky’s “Demons” in an attempt to secure political interests. However, they only brought destruction to Armenian people.
However, the following truth must be kept in mind: there were seven million Turks in Caucasus, Crimea and the Balkans and most of them lost their lives. We don’t remember them at all. Because of that, we are being accomplices to racism.239
British Ambassador Sir Philip Currie’s Letter to the Foreign Office, March 28, 1894
The aim of the Armenian revolutionaries is to stir disturbances, to get the Ottomans to react to violence and thus to get the foreign Powers to intervene…
The aims of the revolutionary committees are to stir up general discontent and to get the Turkish government and people to react with violence, thus attracting the attention of the foreign powers to the imagined sufferings of the Armenian people, and getting them to act to correct the situation.240
Admiral Mark Lambert Bristol, American High Commissioner to Turkey and Battalion Commander in US Navy between 1919-1927
…I see that reports are being freely circulated in the United States that the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in the Caucasus. Such reports are repeated so many times it makes my blood boil. The Near East Relief has the reports from Yarrow and our own American people which show absolutely that such Armenian reports are absolutely false. The circulation of such false reports in the United States, without refutation, is an outrage and is certainly doing the Armenians more harm than good. I feel that we should discourage the Armenians in this kind of work, not only because it is wrong, but because they are injuring themselves…241
Hovhannes Katchaznouni, the First Prime Minister of the First Republic of Armenia, and the Leader of the Dashnak Party
… We had embraced Russia whole-heartedly without any compunction. Without any positive basis of fact we believed that the Tzarist government would grant us a more-or-less broad self-government in the Caucasus and in the Armenian vilayets liberated from Turkey as a reward for our loyalty, our efforts and assistance. We had created a dense atmosphere of illusion in our minds. We had implanted our own desires into the minds of others; we had lost our sense of reality and were carried away with our dreams. …
However, it is important that we couldn’t find suitable measures to improve our situation from inside and outside before and after the War we participated with the promises given to us (World War I.)… We couldn’t take the administrative measures to establish order in the regions we occupied, and obliged to take up arms. We sent armies, set on fire and demolished, and massacred…242
H. A. Arslanian
Demonstrably, British pledges regarding Armenia, like those given to Arabs regarding Syria, Mesopotamia and Palestine, were primarily a device to encourage the Armenian war efforts, favorably impress the neutral countries and ensure that the enemy, the Ottoman Empire, fell from within by appealing to the national aspirations of ethnic minorities living under its control.243
The Statement by American Scholars and Historians Addressed to the US House of Representatives (May 19, 1985)
The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direct of serious inter communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question, the region has been the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebanon for the past decade. The resulting number of deaths among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region is immense.244
The Message of Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on the events of 1915 (April 23, 2014)
Millions of people of all religions and ethnicities lost their lives in the First World War. Having experienced events which had inhumane consequences - such as relocation - during the First World War, should not prevent Turks and Armenians from establishing compassion and mutually humane attitudes towards one another.245
The Message of Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Archbishop Aram Ateshian, the General Vicar of the Armenian Patriarchate of Turkey (April 23, 2016)
In the lands of Anatolia, where humanitarian duties are never neglected and happiness and grief are sincerely shared, the sense of conscience and justice are held above all.
In accordance with this understanding, as well as our sense of history and humanistic vision, we will continue to embrace the memories of the Ottoman Armenians.
We will always remind and remember the culture of cohabitation between Turks and Armenians which has a history of almost one thousand years.
We will never give up working for amity and peace against those who try to politicize history through a bitter rhetoric of hate and enmity and strive to alienate the two neighboring nations, who are bound with their common history and their similar traditions.246
The Speech of the Israeli Researcher Tal Buenos at Australia’s New South Wales State Parliament (November 24, 2014)
Going by my own growing familiarity with the facts, what happened may be characterized as a tragedy because the Armenians were set up for a big painful fall by the British, and by presumptive Armenian leaders, the so-called Armenian representatives who met with British officials – headed by Bryce – in London hotels, and acted irresponsibly toward the many innocent Armenians who were – as a result – fated to suffer the consequences of the actions of these so-called Armenian representatives. These representatives were fed by British hubris as they strove to advance the political quest for an Armenian independent state on Ottoman land, their personal ambition to be leaders of this state, but mainly on behalf of British imperialist agenda. There is no question that these actions, namely colluding with the British and agreeing to lead an intensified riot, meant selling out the safety of the Armenian people in eastern Anatolia who were not the majority in any of the provinces there, and would be subject to an escalation in violence similar to what followed Bryce’s previous campaigns to excite Armenian riot in the 1890s.247
Adnan Oktar Says
Adnan Oktar: It is important that Azerbaijan and Armenia open their borders on the same day and at the same time. For example, on one Friday, after one Friday prayer, the two gates should be opened at the same time, saying ‘Ya Allah, Bismillah’. That’s it. No passports. No visas. Only ID should be enough.
(Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar’s interview on Azerbaijan’s Yeni Musavat Newspaper, February 11, 2009)
An Armenian with a Medal of Independence: Berç Keresteciyan Türker
After the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, the British deep state furthered its policy on an independent Armenian state in East Anatolia. This propaganda led some Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Empire to aspire to a nation-state and to rebel against the Ottoman Empire. However, many other Ottoman citizens of Armenian origin understood that this was only a plot of the British deep state and refused to be a part of it. Berç Keresteciyan, who later obtained the surname Türker upon suggestion from Atatürk, was one of the heroes of the Turkish War of Independence.
Prior to Mustafa Kemal’s departure on SS Bandırma for Samsun, Keresteciyan went to Sadettin Ferit, who was Mustafa Kemal’s lawyer and said: “I believe you are his attorney and a close associate. A British torpedo will sink the steamer of the Pasha outside the Bosphorus. I’m warning you. Please tell Pasha and keep to the coastline.” With this very important message, he displayed an exemplary loyalty to his country and people, and became almost as important as those people that ignited the fire of the Turkish War of Independence.
Moreover, as the Vice Chairman of the Hilal-i Ahmer Society (now known as the Turkish Red Crescent), he personally took care of sending medication to Anatolia using small sailing boats. It is also a recorded fact that during one of the most critical points of the Battle of Sakarya, upon the request of Mustafa Kemal, he withdrew 15 thousand Lira from his personal account and donated it so that cannon firing equipment could be purchased. For these exemplary services, he was later awarded with a White Stripe Medal of Independence.1
\1. Fehmi Akın, Afyonkarahisar milletvekilleri: yaşam öyküleri ve meclisteki faaliyetleri [Afyonkarahisar MPs: Life Stories and Parliamentary Works], IQ Kültür Sanat Yayıncılık, 2009, pp. 107-108
The Only Solution to the Armenian Issue is Love and Unity
Quite possibly, no one can appreciate better the destruction caused by the incidents that took place during WWI, or the horrible aftermath of the fraternal fight, than the Armenians and the Turks. Both sides suffered great losses. Indeed, mass graves still exist in the region. It is because these two fraternal nations, because of the sinister plots of the British deep state, were forcefully and perfidiously turned against each other.
Certain disagreements that continue even today cannot be solved with the interventions and manipulation of self-interested individuals supported by the British deep state, who have no knowledge of the pains suffered during WWI. Only Turkey and Armenia can solve this problem. Many tragic incidents took place, and there is no doubt it affected both sides profoundly. The best course of action now is leaving behind the pains of the past, and bandaging our wounds together with our bond of friendship and brotherhood. The two countries should unite, set an example to the rest of the world, open their borders, lift the visas and passport requirements. They should stand by each other with love. This is the only way to solve this problem.
When the two countries unite with a bond of love, without any foreign intervention, the plots of the British deep state and its sinister affiliates will be foiled. Furthermore, they will be given a great lesson and the world will see that love is possible and will always triumph.
Our Armenian brothers and sisters must come to Turkish lands as they wish. We should have more Armenian citizens here; they should open schools in Turkey, spread their culture and strengthen the already existing common culture that we have. The Turkish government’s recent initiatives regarding the Armenian churches are commendable. Such efforts must be intensified and our Armenian brothers and sisters must be able to practice their religion comfortably when they come back to this country. There should be more business opportunities provided for them, including initiatives for trade and crafts, and they should comfortably maintain their presence in Turkey as our own citizens. This is going to be the best answer to those seeking to create animosity between the two peoples. The past plots of the British deep state shouldn’t be allowed to prevent this beautiful and strong unity. The losses of the two sides should be commemorated together, the past should be left behind and the two peoples should set an example to the whole world in the establishment of peace. However, this bond of love cannot be forged with prerequisites, political maneuvers, or a self-centered approach. Union of love should be the sole priority. This can be possible only with the messages of love by peaceful and reasonable people. When this happens, those hungry for hatred will no longer be heard, as their voices will be muffled by the voice of love.
In order to achieve this, there should be no conditions or pre-requisites. If the language of politics is based on a self-centered attitude, policies will inevitably be territory and interest-oriented. However the bond that must be built with Armenia is not a purely political one, but rather one of love and friendship. We owe it to our thousand-year-old co-existence.
Everything can be solved in a loving, friendly atmosphere. As long as there is love, territorial problems will not be an issue. However, presenting conditions, without offering any assurance of love, will inadvertently portray a selfish picture, and hurt the mutual trust. For instance, maintaining an inflexible attitude in regard to the Nagorno-Karabakh issue can cause a stalemate. Similarly, it is important that the Armenian side abandons all the conditions and prerequisites, as well. The world is built on love. Therefore, we must focus on love. There is no problem that love cannot solve.
That is the good news which God gives to His servants who have faith and do right actions. Say: “I do not ask you for any wage for this –except for you to love your near of kin. If anyone does a good action, We will increase the good of it for him. God is Ever-Forgiving, Ever-Thankful.” (Qur’an, 42:23)
PART V The British Deep State’s Propaganda Prowess and Its Global Media Network
Social Engineering
Deep states, in their quest to exploit countries, mold public opinions and establish their influence around the world, consider wars, military campaigns, civil unrest and political interventions as useful methods. However, they believe that for these methods to be truly effective and have lasting results, they need to be coupled with the mental and psychological preparation of the relevant societies. To them, shaping and winning public opinion is essential for the achievement of imperialist goals. Social engineering efforts, which consist of extensive propaganda methods and perception operations, are considered vital to this undertaking.
Social engineering is a multi-faceted and comprehensive effort designed to influence the thoughts and behaviors of masses and to manipulate and control their emotions, desires, ambitions, reactions, and resentments.
Perception operations employed to this end serve the purpose of establishing global power and imperialist rule, of removing obstacles in their path, and of indoctrinating societies into accepting pre-determined ideas, notions, rules and principles. Showing friends as foes, or vice versa, or presenting invasion and manipulation of a country or even an attack against the country as a ‘helping hand’ are the most common examples of these efforts.
In the world of black propaganda, trickery, deceit, lies, slander and plots are all considered legitimate methods. Black propagandists twist truths, produce fake evidence and launch defamation campaigns and disinformation against alleged enemies in a bid to weaken and build public opinion against individuals, societies, administrations or countries. Spreading false news, slander and gossip are common methods they use to create an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust. For instance, using such propaganda methods, occupational forces and imperialist powers can be presented as reliable friends, saviors and representatives of peace and democracy.
Societies brought under the influence of such perception operations, are urged to support, like, trust and join the deep powers that are behind the propaganda. At the same time, deep states seek out and enlist the help of certain individuals of obsequious, hypocritical character who have an eye for spying. Taken under the wings of deep structures, these treacherous sycophants will be promoted as reliable people and will be financially compensated, and promised security, power and prestige. In the meantime, brave, loyal and patriotic people who act against the wishes of deep states are subjected to defamation campaigns, and at times will even be depicted as rebels or enemies of democracy. This is one way these deep institutions use black propaganda methods to undermine such brave people in the eyes of the public. Furthermore, the deep states will seek to justify the persecution, unfair treatment, torture and even murder these brave people might suffer, in the hopes of deterring them from resisting imperial powers.
This is a brief outline of the social engineering policies that deep states employ in the countries they target. This method has been widely used throughout history and has even enabled some deep states to gain control over others. The British deep state, which has taken all other deep states under its control, has outdone all others in implementing their sinister stratagems.
British Deep State’s Social Engineering Activities
The British deep state has been explicitly or secretly using social engineering methods since the 16th century. This allowed it to make many countries of the world its colonies and in some cases, to gain full control of countries.
From the middle of the 19th century until the early 20th century, the British deep state has focused its social engineering efforts on the Ottoman Empire. During and after WWI and WWII, its focus was once again largely on the former Ottoman territories in the Middle East, North Africa and the Islamic world in general because it believed that it would be these areas that would challenge their global interests.
In addition, there was the added benefit of controlling the world’s richest natural resources, labor force, trade routes, intersection of faiths and civilizations, holy lands and most importantly, the lands, countries and nations of the Muslims, the arch-enemy of the dajjal movement. They always knew that, left to its own devices, an Islamic Union would emerge from this region, which would mean the definitive end of the British deep state’s imperialist reign and global network of interests. For these reasons, controlling the region seems a matter of life and death for the British deep state and the dajjal movement hiding behind it.
This is the reason behind the British deep state’s fascination with the region for centuries. Directing its entire propaganda power over the region, it resumed its ‘divide and rule’ strategy for the Middle East, which had been initiated but left unfinished by the Sykes-Picot agreement. This strategy worked for countries like Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Libya and made those countries dependent on the deep state. Continuous civil unrest in these states caused their division, which was the original deep plan. In the meantime, black propaganda against countries that held the potential to lead the Islamic Union intensified. Turkey and Iran were the main targets.
The British deep state clearly declared its position as the primary supporter, backer, promoter, and defender of the terror group PKK, which is its most important weapon in its quest to divide Turkey. The media empire of the deep state, which in the past largely contributed to the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, played the biggest role in the fragmentation of many countries and acted as a prominent supporter of terror groups like the PKK.
The Most Important Tool of Social Engineering: Media
Many people already know that global communication technologies, particularly the media, are the most important means of social engineering operations. Media is the visual-audio transmission of information and ideas to a wide range of people through various communication tools. It includes printed media (newspapers, books, magazines, etc.), TV channels, movies, radio, Internet and social media platforms. Due to its potential to influence masses, media has been frequently used as an important tool in propaganda and perception operations. Naturally, it is one of the most effective weapons of both global imperialist powers and the world’s deep states.
The British deep state has also used some media channels for similar purposes and offered misleading information even to its own people, subjecting them to social engineering. It went so far as to overthrow legal governments in its own country. Therefore, it is important to state once more that the British people and the British government are in no way responsible for the activities of the British deep state or its respective media outlets. On the contrary, the British government, government officials and British people have often been on the receiving end of these sinister plots. British governments and her people have always been the victims of such social engineering operations and are completely innocent of deep state practices.
Deep structures that rule over super powers of the world, like the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia and China, in their quest to manipulate both their societies and the world’s people in general, have frequently used social engineering. For instance, Hitler’s Germany greatly used it in the run up to WWII and in its aftermath. In a similar fashion, the Cold War era witnessed the widespread application of similar strategies.
The Vietnam War offers one of the most striking examples of how social engineering was used to twist the truths. By 1975, the war had ended with a devastating outcome for Vietnam. The number of deaths reached 3 million, 300,000 people were missing and 4 million were injured. The casualties were almost equal to 17% of the country’s total population. The USA, on the other hand, had a total loss of 60,000.
However, the wide-scaled vilification campaign against Vietnam by the US media not only exonerated the US even after it tore a country thousand miles away into pieces and slaughtered millions of its citizens, it also gave the necessary justification for an 18-year US embargo on Vietnam. Leslie H. Gelb, a foreign policy analyst with the New York Times even called the Vietnamese ‘outlaws’ for killing Americans.248
It must be known that the only way to combat communism is through an intellectual effort. The USA failed to see that Vietnam and the Far East in general had fallen into the clutches of communism due to faulty education, and couldn’t see that only by correct education could they be saved. Today, the USA and the rest of the world continue to maintain this faulty approach towards communism and other harmful ideologies. Violence is still considered as the only response to harmful ideologies, which causes even more violence and troubles. Needless to say, this is exactly what the British deep state wants. As explained earlier, the intention of the British deep state is to create unrest and turmoil around the world, create crises -sometimes even supporting terror groups to this end- to divide the world and easily establish its hegemony.
The wide-scaled loss of Muslim lives during the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11 by the Bush administration was misrepresented to the world public with the help of the media’s social engineering efforts. The so-called ‘war on terror’ caused the martyrdom of millions of innocent Muslim civilians while it was portrayed as an American effort to bring human rights, freedom and democracy to those countries. The media was the main player in this perception operation. The real plan had been to divide Iraq all along and to enable the British deep state hegemony over the region. However, the myth of ‘bringing democracy to Iraq’ deeply affected the world public opinion and as a result, many found the attacks acceptable.
The Chilcot Report of July 2016, published by the ‘Iraq Inquiry’, which was organized to investigate the role of the UK in this war, can be considered a report of confessions. Tony Blair, the then Prime Minister of the UK, admitted that the intelligence regarding the so-called presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq -the alleged reason for invasion- had been faulty, but the invasion took place nevertheless. He also said that after the intervention, the situation became more hostile, bloody and prolonged than imagined. This confession after so many years and after so many lost lives is no doubt significant. We will understand in the coming days if these words reflect true remorse, or if they are just a move in another British deep state game.
The USA and similar world powers have always been only instruments in the plans of the British deep state, which chooses to stay behind and manage the affairs covertly; the true mastermind has always been the British deep state.
The Rise of the British Deep Mafia Structuring
` `(The noble Turkish nation is above all these accusations and allegations.)
Black Propaganda Rages on as the Ottoman Empire Begins to Lose Ground
In the beginning of this chapter, it was explained how the British deep state chose the Ottoman Empire and the Turks as its primary targets beginning in the mid 19th century. During those years, the British deep state started a systematic propaganda war against the Ottoman Empire. Vilifying the Ottoman army with imaginary tales of violence, and insulting Sultan Abdul Hamid II with disrespectful names like the ‘Red Sultan’ were among the methods employed.
However, the longest and fiercest propaganda targeted the Turkish people, the main body of constituents and the rulers of the Ottoman Empire. The leading British figures of the time sought to prepare the background for their goal of colonializing the Turkish people and therefore called the Turkish nation ‘backward, barbarous and primitive’ as a part of their plan.
According to Cyrus Hamlin, the founder and first president of the American Robert College in Istanbul, the anti-Turkish propaganda of the British began prior to WWI. A ‘propaganda bureau’ was set up in 1870 in London, with the duty of spreading news against Turkey in other countries and managing the relevant propaganda.249 This propaganda was the first step toward the British deep state’s dream of ‘a divided Ottoman Empire’.
William Ewart Gladstone, who served as the British Prime Minister from 1880 to 1885, was among the inventors of this policy. Gladstone uttered numerous insults against the Turkish nation and sought to use those insults to support his imperialist projects that involved aspirations such as to drive the Turks back to the steppes of Central Asia for the continuation of their civilization. Once he said that the so-called evil actions of Turks can be eliminated only when they are eliminated.250 (The Noble Turkish nation is above such words)
Ahmet İhsan, a member of the Committee of Union and Progress, also mentioned Gladstone’s approach in his memoir:
Notorious Gladstone held up a Qur’an in British parliament and said that as long as Turks walk with this Book, they are harmful to civilization.251 (The Qur’an is above such remarks)
In addition to such outrageous remarks, Gladstone didn’t refrain from producing propaganda material against the Turks. In his book Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East that was widely disseminated in London, he actively sought to provoke the British people against the Turkish nation. For instance, he said, “Let the Turks now carry away their abuses in the only possible manner, namely by carrying off themselves.”
The anti-Turkish propaganda was so intense, even the Conservative government that had previously been amicable to Turkey, changed its stance. André Maurois writes in his book A History of England, “Gladstone kindled British opinion against them [the Turks] by pamphleteering and speech-making…“252
Gladstone remained in power between 1880-1885 as Prime Minister and, during his term of office, the anti-Turkish sentiment spread immensely. The media, in particular, carried out an intense indoctrination with regards to the Turkish and Ottoman identities. Fake news of ‘Turkish barbarity’ and ‘Turkish violence’ spread like wildfire. Sir Ellis Ashmead-Bartlett, the British MP who observed the Turkish-Greek war of 1897 at the battlefield, mentions the hostile policy that the British suddenly unleashed against the Turks in his memoirs:
The most violent denunciations and the most vituperative epithets were indulged in during the ten months after December, 1894, and were based upon journalistic fictions… These stories either had no existence whatever in reality, or rested on the most slender basis of fact.
By atrocity-mongering and sham sentiment, I mean two things: first, the charge against a nation or power of atrocities which do not exist… For nine months the Sultan, the Turkish Government, the Turkish army, and the Turkish people were vilified and attacked in England for alleged atrocities… which never had any existence at all. … These horrible atrocities never existed; the stories were absolute fiction…253
While the British tried to show Ottomans as a barbarous, backward, primitive and violent society using absurd lies, they were also giving the subliminal message that the Ottoman Empire had to be brought down. Prime Minister Herbert Henry Asquith said in a speech that the Ottoman Empire was on its deathbed and maintained that the sick man would not revive again.254
This entire propaganda operation was carried out in tandem with the British deep state’s operation to dismember the Ottoman Empire. In 1898, the British Prime Minister Lord Salisbury sent a telegram to the British ambassador at St. Petersburg suggesting a ‘partition of preponderance’255 between Russia and Britain in the Ottoman Empire confirming the existence of this strategy.
Underneath this relentless anti-Ottoman propaganda of the British deep state lay the glaring truth that they promoted enmity towards the Turks. The leaders of the British deep state, as a reflection of their imperialist way of thinking, sought to justify their actions by labeling the nations they targeted as “backward, primitive and barbarous”. A letter written by British Sir Edward Grey on August 11, 1908, following the declaration of the Second Constitutional Period, reflects this sentiment clearly:
What has happened already in Turkey is so marvellous that I suppose it is not impossible that she will establish a Constitution, but it may well be that the habit of vicious and corrupt government will be too strong for reform and that animosities of race … will again produce violence and disorder.256
Lord Salisbury wrote the following about the Turks in a confidential document of 1911:
Even Mr. Buxton seems to recognize the absurdity of a nation in this state of barbarism claiming to be treated as a European State and to abolish capitulations and so on.257
The British deep state wanted faster results, and stepped up the psychological pressure on the Ottoman Empire and the Turks and extended the scale of its black propaganda against them. For that they turned to the US administration and the US media for support, and rubbed their anti-Turkish sentiment on to the American people. The following words of US senator Henry Cabot Lodge clearly display this hatred and fanaticism:
In the days of their success [the Ottoman Turks] were a scourge to Europe and Christendom. In the long centuries of their decay they have been the pest and the curse of Europe, the source of innumerable wars, the executioners in countless massacres…Such a… government as this is a curse to modern civilization. … My earnest hope is that among the results of the war… one of the great results I pray for will be the final extinction of the Turkish Empire in Europe.258
When Colonel House suggested Henry Morgenthau as ambassador to Turkey in 1912, the US President Woodrow Wilson said, “There ain’t going to be no Turkey,” to which House replied, “Then let him go look for it”.
Wilson revealed the prevalent anti-Turkish stance in the USA during those days when he said that what the American public will approve would be the defense of Armenians or any other nations against Turks.259
French historian Albert Sorel, on the other hand, said the following:
This is the policy some civilizations pursue in the East. They snatch parts of Turkish, Indian, Chinese lands, seize their wealth, kill them and then tell them ‘don’t get angry, we’re not fighting with you. We are your best friends.’260
Ahmed Rıza in his book La Crise de L’Islâm (The Crisis of Islam) explained the black propaganda of the British deep state against the Turks in the words of a Westerner:
Enduring the presence of Turks in Europe, who maintain their classic barbarous and tyrannical character, is a stain for the European civilization; Turks must be kicked out of Europe.261 (The Noble Turkish nation is above such words)
Let’s remember at this point that prior to WWI, the British deep state had heavily focused on the United States and easily manipulated it into alignment with its goals. The Turkophobia that developed in the United States during this time was due to the efforts of the British deep state and the relevant media propaganda in the country.
However, there were many sensible people at the time who refused to give into this racist trend in Britain and Europe, and could appreciate the Turkish people. For instance, the British officer Frederick Gustavus Burnaby who travelled to Turkey at the end of 19th century is one of those rare personalities. His descriptions in his book On Horseback Through Asia Minor give an unbiased and accurate account of the Ottoman Empire at the time. At a time when Turkophobia was at its peak in Britain, this British officer was in Anatolia and explained what he saw:
People in this country who abuse the Turkish nation, and accuse them of every vice under the sun, would do well to leave off writing pamphlets and travel a little in Anatolia… many writers who call themselves Christians might well take a lesson from the Turks in Asia Minor.262
Likewise, many unbiased foreign war correspondents who had been in Turkey during the Balkan wars, wrote the truth about the Turks:
Since there are in Europe armchair philosophers who write that the Turkish soldiers are looters and murderers, it is our duty to protest with energy. We have always found the Turks showing great endurance and restraint; we have never witnessed any act of cruelty.263
The Propaganda Bureau of The British Deep State: Wellington House
The British deep state used its propaganda tools most effectively and extensively during WWI. War was being fought not only in battlefields, but also in newspaper headlines. So much so that the black propaganda operations to malign the enemy and exonerate the allies contributed greatly to the British success in WWI. The sinister propaganda campaign probably dealt one of the deadliest blows to the Ottoman Empire. It is important to reveal the sinister policies the British deep state followed during WWI, because only then can we understand the current strategies used today. The British deep state continues to carry out intense propaganda using media and various organizations to bring the countries they target closer to downfall, to spread lies easily and to add new countries to its empire of colonies. Needless to say, the said propaganda network is more effective and widespread today than ever before.
Britain’s propaganda bureau, under the guidance of the British deep state, carefully designed the anti-Turkish propaganda during WWI. American institutions and leaders also joined in the process, urged on by the same deep organization. Let us reiterate that the similar propaganda efforts of American institutions during those days were largely carried out at the instigation of the British deep state. During the two world wars, the USA got its information and intelligence solely through British sources. This enabled the British deep state to carry out its provocation using such propaganda and to determine the friends and foes of the USA for her.
During WWI, the British Foreign Office was responsible for the British deep state’s propaganda operations. So much so, the Foreign Office set up a ‘War Propaganda Bureau’ in Wellington House building at Buckingham Gate, London in 1914, and appointed Charles Masterman from the House of Lords as its director. From that point on, although its institutional structure and leaders changed, British deep state propaganda continued through ‘Wellington House’.
Since then, many people and agencies have worked according to the instructions and directives of Wellington House, including politicians, businessmen and even leaders of media outlets. The people who carried out the propaganda behind closed doors were called the ‘invisible government’. The goal was to manipulate the masses in line with the desired direction by means of propaganda. To achieve this, words, phrases and rhetoric were carefully developed to appeal to the emotions, beliefs and expectations of people. Lies were repeated as if they were simple truths.
Wellington House didn’t only manipulate British public opinion during WWI, but carried out projects for the people of other countries, as well. On September 19, 1916, the British PM Lloyd George confirmed this truth with the following words:
The public know only half the story. They read of the victories; the cost is concealed.264
During WWI, Wellington House propaganda bureau published 400 articles weekly, printed in 17 languages, and produced countless books, booklets, and brochures. By June 1915, the number of materials printed and distributed reached some seven million. When the war ended, the bureau had distributed 106 million pieces of material. Wellington House never had any budget problems as the British deep state sufficiently provided it with funds. While the initial budget was only £ 10,000 when the office was first established, it swiftly went up and reached £ 145,000 by 1917.265
Towards the end of the war, some British MPs began to criticize this exploitation of the media. For instance, British statesman Austen Chamberlain said that press lost its freedom and with its freedom, it also lost its power.266
During WWI, the main targets of this ugly propaganda were Germans and Turks. After the war ended, both British and Belgium authorities denied the reports that German soldiers had hung priests by church bells in Holland, or that they had stabbed babies with bayonets.267 The source of this wartime propaganda was once again Wellington House.
Wellington House wasn’t only disseminating propaganda-laden publications. It was also acting as a censorship authority overseeing the information offered by the media. For instance, the news from the battlefield could reach the public only after it was filtered by Wellington House’s censorship system. It assigned two official photographers and a few painters to depict the situation at the fronts. Their work had to strictly comply with the directives of Wellington House. No other photographer or painter was allowed to provide material; Wellington House had banned it.
Certain British journalists and newspapers were chosen and were given the duty to report the news in line with the instructions of the propaganda bureau. Naturally, these people wrote as requested, presenting only the approved photos. Anyone daring to stray out of these lines to interpret and photograph the war in any other way was sanctioned.268 In other words, the British media presented the world in the way the British deep state portrayed it. Today, the situation is not very different except that the media influenced by the British deep state has expanded and spread around the world, with more journalists doing its bidding.
Wellington House’s anti-Turkish activities represent a broad network of black propaganda that continues even today. The so-called ‘Armenian genocide’ this institution fabricated during WWI, was particularly used to provoke the American public opinion against the Turks and to ensure US participation in the war as a British ally. These claims and Wellington House propaganda are still used as leverage against Turkey.
Now, let’s examine the reasons why a fiction like ‘Armenian genocide’ was made up in the first place:
The British alliance with Russia during WWI wasn’t something the USA was willing to accept. Russia was notorious at the time, and the American public was mistrustful of it. However, Britain needed to keep Russia’s support while getting the USA to join the war. For that, it had to find a commonality that could bring these two giants together. According to the plan, a new enemy was going to be forged and that enemy must have looked like it had committed even bigger crimes than Russia. This common enemy was chosen as the Ottoman Empire. Turkish politician Onur Öymen explains the situation:
This was one of the most important reasons why British propaganda bureau Wellington House used the so-called claim of Turkish genocide of Armenians as one of its main propaganda points. In fact, Turks were held with great esteem in the Islamic world at that time. The British decided to use this allegation of genocide to tarnish the image of the Ottoman Empire in the world and in the Islamic world. What country would follow a leader that supposedly massacred more than one million people? This is what the British had planned.269
This black propaganda that Wellington House initiated against Turkey did produce the results the British deep state longed for. As a result of a systematic campaign, the propaganda managed to build an anti-Turkish public opinion in the US. Strangely enough, just like today, some people from Turkey lent their support to this black propaganda, trading their country for petty gains offered by the British deep state, not caring at all if they became traitors or not in the process.
Black Propaganda Against Turks During WWI
Wellington House launched an intense propaganda war against Turkey, as it had done so many times before against others. Many famous writers and politicians were mobilized to this end and numerous books, articles and brochures were written, including the one by the famous British historian and expert on international relations, Arnold J. Toynbee. The goal was showing Turks as cruel, oppressive, evil people and accusing the Ottoman Empire with completely baseless allegations.
The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915-1916, also known as The Blue Book co-written by Toynbee and James Bryce, another British historian and politician, was pure propaganda material laden with lies and defamation against Turkey. Designed to elicit feelings of hatred and anger in the reader, the book consisted of imaginary stories of how the Turks supposedly massacred Armenians.
However, no evidence was offered for the said allegations and stories and there was no solid proof for the claims. Onur Öymen writes the following about the people, alleged to be the sources of many claims in the book:
The people mentioned [in the book] are named X, Y, Z etc. Who are these X, Y, Z? The detailed investigations of American researcher Prof. Justin McCarthy finally gave a satisfactory answer to this question. Most of them were American missionaries that were active in Turkey during those years, who badmouthed Turkey in every opportunity they got. Some others were the members of violent Armenian rebel groups. 59 out of 150 accounts were penned by the missionaries, 52 of them were sent by Armenians. Armenian Dashnak party’s reports, which considered Ottomans as their arch-enemies, were also used in the book. The rest were taken from Dashnak-sympathizing or Armenian cause sympathizing newspapers. In other words, Armenian newspapers of the time were also used as a propaganda weapon.270
Another book published by Wellington House during the same days was a book called Martyred Armenia claimed to be written by Faiz El-Ghusein. El-Ghusein was presented as a bureaucrat and district officer that worked in the Ottoman Empire. However, historians found no trace of a person with that name and title in any period of Ottoman history.271 This book, written by an imaginary name, was just more propaganda material of the British deep state.
As explained in the previous chapter, it is true that some Armenians were provoked by the British deep state during WWI against the Ottoman Empire. Consequently, some assumed an anti-Turkish stance due to such incitement. However, it would clearly be a mistake to ascribe this approach to all our Armenian brothers. As a matter of fact, Hovhannes Katchaznouni, who was a member of the Dashnak Party and the first prime minister of the Republic of Armenia, said during a speech in Dashnak Party Congress in 1923 that Dashnak party was directly responsible for the disaster that befell the Armenians. He said that Armenians, primed by the Russians, massacred Muslim populations during those days and the Dashnaks built a dictatorship in Armenia while Armenian terrorism was set in motion to win over Western public opinion. He also mentioned that in the face of all these developments, Turkey acted with a justified sense of self-defense. According to him, there was no one to blame other than the Dashnak administration.272
The British deep state repeatedly used the fake accounts of alleged genocide that it fabricated against the Turks. This plot that was devised in the beginning of WWI is still being used as leverage against the Turks in the first quarter of the 21st century. The most effective weapon to counter this plot is ‘love’. If we love and stand by our Armenian brothers more than ever, if we make sure that they feel at home in Turkey and build close relations with the Armenian State, this sinister British deep state plot will be foiled once and for all.
Another important point is the danger of confusing the missionaries mentioned here with the true clergy tasked with spreading Christianity. True Christians are kind-hearted and sincere people full of love. They will never allow themselves to be used as pawns in such filthy propaganda, which is meant to sow seeds of hatred. The said missionaries were in truth spies directly linked to Wellington House. They entered Ottoman lands in the guise of missionaries and carried out spying and provocation activities. The statements in the reports prepared by these so-called missionaries clearly prove this fact:
In all of the writings of the missionaries, … The Turks hated education and always persecuted the educated. No Christians had ever been part of the Ottoman government. Turks needed Christians because the Turks were racially incapable of being “doctors, dentists, tailors, carpenters, every profession or trade requiring the least skill.” And the missionaries wrote that, now that the Turks had killed the Armenians, Westerners who were going to have to govern the Ottoman Empire, because the Turks had rid themselves of the only people with brains, the Armenians, and the Turks could not run the country themselves.273
These missionaries sent a dozen reports with similar content to Toynbee, which were then sent to the US via Wellington House. It must be noted that the reports contained the instruction, “Under no circumstances reveal source.“274
Turkish Proponents of Wellington House
Oddly enough, the hateful anti-Turkish rhetoric developed during WWI found support among some Ottoman journalists known for their anglophile nature. These people accepted serving the British deep state and betraying their country in exchange for petty gains, which sometimes were nothing other than being linked to the British deep state. Such people have always existed throughout the history of this structure and they still do today. For instance, a Turkish journalist Refi Cevat Ulunay from Alemdar wrote the following shocking lines in his piece dated April 21, 1919: “We are waiting for the British. Turks cannot straighten themselves up on their own.” And on July 14, 1919 he made the following outrageous remark:
It is imperative that Turkey leans its back to a foreign country. And that cannot be any other than Britain. There is no danger for the Islamic world in delivering the keys of Islam to the reliable hands of the British.275
A couple of years after the publication of The Blue Book and other anti-Turkish books of Wellington House, certain media organizations that supported the Armistice of Mudros began shouting in unison that handing over the country to the British is the best thing to do. During the years of Istanbul’s occupation, they continued to praise the British. Today, some media groups and journalists with a similar mindset and acting under the wings of the British deep state continue this mission.
Provocation of the so-called missionaries and some violent, rebellious Armenians was based on the unfounded allegations that Armenians and Christians were persecuted by the Ottoman Empire and that they were treated as second-class citizens. However, it is a well-known historical fact that the non-Muslim population of the Ottoman Empire enjoyed completely the same rights as Muslims, particularly after the Edict of Reforms. By the end of the 19th century, non-Muslims were given voting rights, represented in the Parliament and came to hold important administrative positions. For instance, during the term of Ali Pasha as the Grand Vizier, the Minister of Public Works was an Armenian named Krikor Agaton, and Ohannes Gümüşyan was another Armenian who was assigned the same office. Many Armenians served as Ministers in charge of Trade, Forestry and Mining. After the constitution was declared in 1876, the Ottoman Parliament had 46 non-Muslim MPs and 9 of them were Armenians. In the parliament set up after the declaration of the second constitution, 11 Armenian MPs served while 12 served in the Parliament of 1914. Four of those Armenian MPs were members of the Hunchak and two members of the Dashnak parties. Similarly, Parliament of 1908 had 13 Greek and 5 Jewish members.276
Furthermore, more than 25% of the staff in the Foreign Ministry and more than 10% of the staff in the Ministry of Justice of the Ottoman Empire were non-Muslims. In addition, between 1880 and 1912, 7% of the students of the School of Political Sciences, known to be the school of future administrators, were again non-Muslims.
Historian Justin McCarthy exposes Wellington House
Famous American history professor Justin McCarthy, who is an expert on the Ottoman Empire, Turks and the Middle East, offers the following important details about Wellington House and its anti-Turkish propaganda activities:
Wellington House drew on some of the best minds in the British government. The historian Arnold Toynbee was an adviser to Wellington House from 1914 and sat until 1917 on the committee that met daily and set propaganda policies. … Other private and public figures and members of ostensibly non-governmental patriotic organizations cooperated with or acted under the direction of the official propagandists.1 British Universities provided propaganda pamphlets and expertise.
By the standards of the time, the British propaganda effort was a major undertaking. By 1917, Wellington House had a staff of 54 and could call on help from other departments and ministries. …
The first report (June, 1915) of Wellington House listed distribution of approximately 2.5 million copies of books, pamphlets, and other written propaganda in 17 languages. The second report (February, 1916) listed 7 million copies circulated. In 1914, British Propaganda distributed 45 different publications; in 1915, 132; in 1916, 202; in 1917, 469.2 Unfortunately no record of distribution beyond 1917 exists. It can be assumed that the numbers continued to grow. All was done in secret and was done creatively.
The Wellington House brief was simple, the same brief as that of all propagandists. They were to make the enemies look as bad as possible and make their friends, and especially British themselves, look as good as could be. Their main focus was, naturally, Germany, but much effort was expended against the Turks…
… they destroyed all the records of the Propaganda Office immediately after the war. This has made it difficult to reconstruct the activities of the wartime propaganda office. [However], some Wellington House records were sent to other offices in the British Government. Although the originals were destroyed, copies were sometimes kept in relevant Foreign Office departments, especially in the Foreign Office records for the United States. The number of documents is modest, but they indicate some small part of Wellington House operations against the Turks.
Despite the effort to blot out the historical record, a good source on the actual publications of Wellington House exists: The record of the propaganda books distributed by Wellington House was kept in a hand-written ledger book, carefully bound. … These books were sent off to the Foreign Office Library, which was eventually opened to researchers. … the ledger affords a picture of British propaganda office activities. …
The publications listed in the ledger are only books or large pamphlets. They do not include press releases, articles, and other materials. The general themes of the propaganda are consistent from work to work: [Noble Turkish nation is above such remarks]
- Turks are illegitimate rulers who have destroyed all lands in which they have ruled. European rule over the Middle East would be far preferable.
- Turks are Muslims who hate all other religions, particularly Christianity. They have always treated Christians badly.
- Turks are guilty of inhuman atrocities against Christians, including mass murder and awful sexual crimes.
- The Germans stand behind Turkish evil deeds, either because they ordered the deeds or because they had the power to stop them and refused to do so.
- The mass of the people of the Ottoman Empire look to the British for salvation. This includes Muslims, who appreciate the good government the British have given Muslims in Egypt and India.
British propaganda made special efforts to tie the Germans to the Turks. This was an intelligent ploy, especially in the United States, where there was much pro-German sentiment but Muslims were held in disdain. British propaganda “proved” that the Germans could not be true Europeans, because they consorted with evil Muslim [Muslims are above such remarks] and Asiatic Turks. …
The list of publications in the ledger is long, but for the Middle East there are a more limited number of books. The table gives only those volumes, but it provides an idea of the breadth and the scope of the Wellington House interests. They include Palestine, Jews and Zionism, and especially the Turks.3
\1. George G. Bruntz, Allied Propaganda and the Collapse of the German Empire, New York: Arno Press, 1972, p. 42
\2. M. L. Sanders and Philip M. Taylor, British Propaganda During The First World War, 1914-18, London: Palgrave, 1982, p. 108
\3. Justin McCarthy, “Wellington House and the Turks”, Louisville University, Department of History/USA
Anti-Turkish Black Propaganda Intended for Other Muslims
Efforts to show Toynbee’s The Blue Book as a realistic source continued for a long time. Bryce claimed that the people presented as sources in this book were unaware of each other, and tried to prove that independent sources provided reliable information. However, the researches of American historian Justin McCarthy showed that the so-called missionaries compared notes before they sent them to Wellington House, or to put it more accurately, they made them up together. In other words, The Blue Book was nothing other than a script prepared by special agents.
Another anti-Turkish book published by Wellington House told the lie that Turks had massacred 2 million Armenians. However, during that time, the total number of the Armenian population living in the Ottoman Empire was only around 1 million.277
Anti-Turkish propaganda spread not only in Britain and the US, but in other countries as well. The propaganda intended for Indian Muslims was particularly noteworthy. Up to that point, Indian Muslims regarded Turkey as a friend and a leader country. However, the British deep state viewed this sympathy as a serious threat to its interests. It knew that in case of a war with the Turks, these people would without a doubt choose to side with the Turks. Also, Indian Muslims would never accept British pressure on the Turks and the British deep state would lose its influence in this important region. This was a grave risk that the British deep state could not take, especially in India, which had been a long-time colony. Therefore, Indian Muslims and Arabs needed to be convinced that Turks were ‘bad Muslims’. The subsequent propaganda efforts were designed accordingly.
Tonybee summarized the British deep state’s view of the Islamic world saying that South Islam (from Morocco to Arabia), or the Ashari school, was no longer a threat as one could just buy a sheikh and control them all. But he considered North Islam (the Turkish region from Istanbul to Bukhara), or the Maturidi school, a threat because they were at peace with science and therefore, a revolutionary like Atatürk might come up any time, for which reason, he said, precautions should be taken in advance.278
Clearly, Atatürk completely dashed the sinister plans of the British deep state for Turkey.
After the end of WWI, all the evidence exposing the facts about the Wellington House propaganda efforts was destroyed. This is very suspicious, especially considering that Britain keeps a very systematic archive on history, which is commonly used for research purposes. However, the Wellington House publications had to be destroyed in a mysterious fashion. Nevertheless, Wellington House had sent certain documents to various ministries and institutions during the war for propaganda purposes. Currently, the only information about the Wellington House activities consists of these very limited documents. However, even this limited information reveals that around forty books were published, which included false claims that Turks exterminated Jews, Slavs, Albanians, Arabs and particularly Armenians.279
After the war, Arnold Toynbee travelled to Turkey as a journalist, studied the region and witnessed Turkey’s losses due to war. What he saw made him change his mind completely and he admitted that The Blue Book was a book of deception written for propaganda purposes. This time, he wrote books with favorable views of Turkish people. However, The Blue Book that is full of lies is still popular today.
In 2005, the Turkish government, with support from the main opposition party, demanded that Great Britain apologize to Turkey for The Blue Book. The Turkish government emphasized the following points in making this request:
* this book included baseless allegations and was used for black propaganda during WWI,
* it was produced by the Bryce commission,
* many people including Toynbee himself later admitted that it was deliberately produced as an anti-Turkish propaganda.
Interestingly, the British government did apologize for its black propaganda against Germany, but never extended the same courtesy to the Turkish government. The apology to Germany amounted to an admission that Wellington House had been a propaganda institute, but such an apology wasn’t made to the Turkish government, which should have been the first one to receive it.280 Despite all the efforts, this apology never came and The Blue Book kept its popularity amongst certain circles.
As previously explained, the Armenian issue was an extensive plot of the British deep state prepared as leverage against the Turks. It is important to remember that the plans of the British deep state to divide the Ottomans haven’t fully succeeded yet, and the Turkish lands are still being targeted with similar policies. For this reason, the British deep state, in its bid to weaken, divide and control Turkey, will never retract its respective scenarios nor will it end its respective black propaganda. The best way to thwart such plans will be reinforcing and strengthening our bonds of brotherhood and friendship with the Armenians.
Many brave people who witnessed the events that took place during this era of intense black propaganda fearlessly spoke the truth. For instance, a French officer who was present in the region during the incidents involving Armenians, gave the following account:
They fooled us with stories of gangs. In truth, there had never been an Armenian genocide… Turks, in self-defense position, had to take some precautions… For a warring nation, the noblest cause is the effort to save the country and that cause required Turks to take action. We were fooled. Turks are good people. Talks of genocide are just myths invented to lure us and to provoke us against the Ottomans.281
Another French author, Claude Farrére, criticized the French press that quickly passed judgments under the influence of the British deep state and sent the following message to Turkish youngsters:
Turks don’t fear bullets… But I’m calling on to the Turkish youth. They should know that they are not fighting the enemy only on the battlefield. Sometimes there is a far more important war than that is fought by the armies. It is the political war. The enemies of Turks are trying to deceive, trying to fool the European public… Open your eyes and beware of this propaganda.282
It is a pleasant surprise that there were sensitive foreigners that told the truth for what it was when there were people even in the Ottoman Empire that chose to back anti-Turkish British deep state propaganda. This shows that the criticism here is not directed at the mentioned countries or their peoples, but only the mafia-like deep states present in those countries. Nations are innocent, guiltless and have always and will always be our friends. The criticism of the British deep state is only intended to unmask the said plots, to show the irrationality of what was done and to urge those people and institutions to do the right thing.
Wellington House Influence in the US
During WWI, the British deep state cut the telegram cable that linked Germany to the US. For this reason, the American public was getting all its news from British sources and through a British filter. Similarly, the British heavily censored the accounts of the American journalists in Europe. Even though the American administration was partly aware of the censoring, the American people were completely unaware that all of this was a part of British deep state propaganda effort. The propaganda bolstered by such methods lent serious support to the deep state.
This is how Sir Gilbert Parker, the head of the propaganda campaign, explains the effects of his efforts:
We have an organisation extraordinarily widespread in the United States, but which does not know it is an organisation. It is worked entirely by personal association and inspired by voluntary effort, which has grown more enthusiastic and pronounced with the passage of time… Finally it should be noticed that no attack has been made upon us in any quarter of the United States, and that in the eyes of the American people the quiet and subterranean nature of our work has the appearance of a purely private patriotism and enterprise…283
Clearly, the deceitful -as much as deep- propaganda of the British deep state created the desired effect on the American public. Well-meaning Americans failed to see the nefarious plans behind the propaganda and were guided in the direction shown by the British deep state.
Viscount Bryce’s reports, one of the co-authors of the notorious The Blue Book, was prepared with the specific purpose of creating an anti-Turkish sentiment in the American public. Here are some of the outrageous remarks of Bryce against Turks in the Bryce Report:
Turkish government has been the very worst which has afflicted humanity during the last fifteen centuries. The Turks have always been what a distinguished European historian of the last generation called them—”nothing better than a band of robbers encamped in territories which they had conquered and devastated.” They have never become civilized, they have never imbibed or tried to apply any of the principles on which civilized government must be conducted. So far from progressing with the progress of the years, they have gone from bad to worse. Savages they were when they descended into Western Asia from the plains of Turkistan, savages they were when Edmund Burke [British statesman and author] so described them one hundred and thirty years ago, and their government still retains its savage and merciless character.284
Bryce then penned a book entitled The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and continued his defamation campaign through this book. Historian McCarthy explained that the real author of the book was Toynbee. According to McCarthy, all the techniques visible in the said Armenian report were identical to the later falsified report that detailed the German violence in Belgium. This report also included anonymous information gathered from unreliable sources but there was no conclusive evidence that the people mentioned in the report had really said or written those things.285
In time, it was revealed that none of the accounts of violence that Bryce’s report on Germans included were true. This is what author H. C. Peterson writes about the said report:
His [Bryce’s] report is one of the most extreme examples of the definition of propaganda as “assassination by word.” It was in itself one of the worst atrocities of the war.286
The very same method was used against the Turks; the very same black propaganda campaign was directed at them using the same methods by the same people. Germany years later received an apology from Britain for the injustice done, but Turks still had to deal with the same defamation campaign.
The British deep state sent highlights from the Bryce Report to American newspapers for publication. This is what McCarthy writes about it:
Gilbert Parker reported “The New York Times, Philadelphia Public Ledger, and the Chicago Herald … devoted much space to the advance sheets of ‘these Armenian horror stories’.” Current History a monthly magazine feature of the New York Times made the Bryce Report the centerpiece of a series on anti-Turkish articles, quoting the entire lengthy introduction of the Bryce Report and summarizing supposedly the most ghastly portions of the book. The New York Times itself devoted three pages to extracts from the Bryce Report. The New Republic praised Bryce on his selection of sources and evidence, without mentioning that most of the sources were anonymous, then went on to summarize the material and condemn the Turks. Other papers and magazines did the same, summarizing or quoting directly from the report.287
In other words, no sources were provided in the British deep state publications, and the Turks were unfairly targeted as these fake allegations were blindly served to the American public. It must be remembered that the true target of the British deep state propaganda was the masses that were unaware of the truths about WWI and the Middle East. Almost all news reports read by the American and British public during those days were penned by the British deep state propagandists. British and American people were deceived with these untrue accounts. This is how the American historian McCarthy, who exposed the unfair treatment of Turks, expresses his astonishment that the said deceitful propaganda continues today:
More astonishing is the fact that British propaganda against the Turks has been ignored in scholarly publications on wartime propaganda. Every serious scholarly study of British propaganda during World War I rightly labels British propaganda against the Germans as a carefully constructed attack on the truth in the interests of victory. The same studies do not even consider British propaganda against the Turks, except when it also was an attack on the Germans. What British propagandists did to the Germans they also did to the Turks, yet no one has seemed to care. Propaganda against the Germans has been condemned while the calumnies against the Turks live on. The infamous Bryce Report on the Armenians is republished and quoted … It has acquired a patina of respectability as an “Accepted and Reliable Source,” while the Bryce Report against the Germans properly lies unread on dusty library shelves. Annotated bibliographies on World War I or on genocide as a topic prominently feature the Report and other British propaganda publications directed against Turks, without any identification of them for what they were. The common rules of historical criticism, which include verification of sources, have not been applied. In fact, the Bryce Report on the Ottoman Armenians should be consigned to the same historical dustbin as the Bryce Report on the Germans. It is only a reliable source on the history of propaganda, not on the history of the Middle East.288
A Propaganda War: World War II
As in the case of WWI, the propaganda skills of the British deep state had a huge impact on the course of WWII. Such efforts made the greatest contribution to Britain’s success. The deep British media, particularly its extensions in the BBC, played their part skillfully during and after the war. Interestingly enough, the BBC still continues its task today almost as a propaganda machine of the British deep state.
Even the German Nazi Party, that set up a propaganda ministry and effectively used propaganda methods laden with lies, couldn’t come close to matching the British deep state’s skills in black propaganda. Joseph Goebbels, who was the propaganda minister of Hitler, described Prime Minister Churchill, an important member of the deep state of the time, with the following words in his article ‘Churchill’s Lie Factory‘:
The astonishing thing is that Mr. Churchill … holds to his lies, and in fact repeats them until he himself believes them. … They made good use of the trick during the World War, with the difference that world opinion believed it then, which cannot be said today.… The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.289
Needless to say, it is important to keep the public morale high during wartimes. However, the effective propaganda policy and the manipulation of the press by the British deep state during the First and Second World Wars is important in that it shows how it is able to control the media and present lies as facts, whenever it deems fit. As a matter of fact, even after the war ended, the British deep state influence on the media persisted, especially with respect to vilification of certain countries. As a result, unrest, civil wars, and coups took place in many independent countries.
The British deep state thus managed to establish its influence over other countries, and mainly due to this black propaganda policy, many countries’ administrations became indebted to deep structures. The propaganda weapon, which was the main contributing factor to Britain’s last minute victory in WWII, has been and still is one of the most prominent and destructive forces of the British deep state.
The Ugly Propaganda Continues
British deep state propaganda, which reached its peak during the world wars, continues, albeit through different methods. The effects of Wellington House propaganda haven’t been limited to that period but rather persist even today. Propaganda publications of Wellington House during WWI were systematically reprinted, and many books and researches referred to them for citations. Many of those books were posted on the Internet and spread around the world.
Today, Wellington House books are still suggested as textbooks for history classes in American and European colleges and universities. The issue of Turkey and Armenia has been a topic of particular interest to Wellington House and its many publications, including those of Toynbee and El-Ghusein (an imaginary person), are used by many historians and certain Armenian scientists as basic historical reference books. New editions of deceitful propaganda material from WWI, like The Blue Book, are printed and distributed around the world as if they are historical facts. The sinister British deep state propaganda continues as if nothing has happened, as if its plots were never revealed. The goal is trying to deceive those that haven’t heard and are not aware of this black propaganda.
A major part of world public is currently brainwashed with these made-up stories. Everything that the people learn from these sources is not fact, but what the propaganda office of the British deep state likes them to believe.
The breadth of the British deep state’s lies and defamation during that time was so extensive, even some British figures rose in protest:
British Foreign Minister Chamberlain admitted in his speech at House of Commons in December 1925 that all of those were propaganda lies. Four years after the war, the Belgians announced that all the claims in the said publications were untrue. British MP Arthur Ponsonby gave a detailed account of false news reports prepared by the British propaganda offices during WWI… In 1938, British author and diplomat Harold Nicolson said the following during his speech at the Parliament: ‘We lied damnably during the war’.290
Most information in The Blue Book came from Henry Morgenthau, who had stayed only 26 months in Istanbul during WWI as the American ambassador. In his book, Morgenthau told the lie that Ottomans were persecuting Armenians. Years later, the Associated Press declared these claims in Morgenthau’s book untrue. American Professor Heath W. Lowry said the book was a record of “crude half-truths and outright falsehoods“.291
PART VI The Occupation of Istanbul
The Importance of Istanbul
The first book ever written by the British deep state on their plans regarding the Ottoman and Turkish lands was William Ewart Gladstone’s Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East, published on September 5, 1876. This book was particularly important because its author had served as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom four separate times, for a period of 15 years in total. That wasn’t Gladstone’s only notable position though. He also acted as a member of the Privy Council -one of the key institutions under the influence of the British deep state operating as a body of advisers to the Queen- and spent 57 years in that position. Lord Curzon, Lloyd George and Horace Rumbold, about whom more will be told in the following chapters, were also members of this Council. In his notorious 64-page book, Gladstone laid out his plan to break the Ottoman Empire into pieces and presented his plan with the pretense of examining “the Question of the East”.
In his book, Gladstone provided secret tactics to disintegrate empires from within. Indeed, shortly after the book was published, British politicians developed a sudden fondness for the minorities living under Ottoman rule. Supporting those with independence ambitions, they provoked the minorities against the Ottoman rule. Gladstone sided with the Bulgarians, Lloyd George with the Greeks and the Armenians, Lord Curzon with the Kurds and Winston Churchill sided with the Arabs. It should be noted that there is nothing wrong with politicians and leaders forming friendly relations with ethnical groups. On the contrary, this forms a desirable picture. Regrettably, however, these new friendships were not real and were only intended to further British interests and break apart the Ottoman Empire. Unsurprisingly, as soon as British interests ceased to exist, so did those so-called friendships.
Gladstone’s book was the epitome of black propaganda (the honorable Turkish Nation is above all the ill-natured remarks made by Gladstone). In this book, he referred to Turks as ‘the one great anti-human specimen of humanity’ and hoped that they would clear out from the lands they ruled. Gladstone didn’t refrain from defaming Turks and said, ‘No Government ever has so sinned; none has so proved itself so incorrigible in sin, or which is the same, so impotent in reformation‘.292 The only reason behind all this defamation and slander was that Gladstone was one of the most powerful names in the British deep state, which wished to dismember the Ottoman Empire completely.
The Deep Plan that Began with the Battle of Gallipoli
The British deep state considered the Gallipoli campaign as the final stage of its plan to break apart the Ottoman Empire. However, the battle that took place in Gallipoli went down in history as an epic example of true heroism. The army of the Ottoman Empire, which the Europeans dismissed as ‘the sick man’, bravely defended the Gallipoli Strait at the expense of their lives, despite the full-fledged attack of the Allied Powers. As a result, the Allied Forces, which consisted of Anzacs, British, North Africans, Indians and French, had to retreat amid a humiliating defeat. This incredible military feat forced the British deep state to postpone its plans for the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire until 1918, when the Armistice of Mudros was signed.
This military success was particularly important because only four years previously, the armies of the Balkan states, which were previously the Ottoman Empire’s, had heavily defeated the Empire. Indeed, had it not been for typhoid fever and the cholera epidemic, the Bulgarian army would have occupied Istanbul. Naturally, the Allied armies were confident that their success would be quick and easy in Gallipoli. However, the Turkish army, by the valor of her 250,000 martyrs, did not open the doors of Gallipoli. Military school students from Istanbul volunteered to join the fight, willingly accepting the prospect of martyrdom. Indeed, in the years 1915 and 1916, the Galatasaray High School didn’t have any graduates because each and every student had been martyred in the battlefield. In 1917, there were only 5 students to graduate. 50 students of the Istanbul High School had been martyred in just one battle, which took place on May 19, 1915. Vefa High School and Çapa Teaching School for Boys also didn’t have any graduates during those same years. Balıkesir High School and Balıkesir Teaching School for Boys had only 2 graduates from 1914 to 1918. Students in many schools in Thrace, after previously having their fathers martyred in the Balkan wars, didn’t hesitate to volunteer to fight in the Battle of Gallipoli and become martyrs themselves. Even schools from distant cities such as Sivas, Trabzon, Konya, Erzurum and Kastamonu lost their 1916-1917 graduates as honorable and noble martyrs of Gallipoli. The effects of the loss of this educated generation would be severely felt both during the Turkish War of Independence and the first years of the Republic. Yet, it had been the bravery and the blood of those martyred innocent Turkish youngsters no older than 18 that thwarted the sinister plans of the British deep state. Today, the situation is not very different. Once again, due to the terrorist PKK, we have many martyrs that had been soldiers, officers, police, and teachers. God blessed our country with many martyrs; Anatolia is our homeland because its soil is soaked with the blood of our honorable martyrs.
The Armistice of Mudros that was signed following WWI ended the war for the Ottoman Empire. This Armistice also enabled the British deep state to put its dismemberment plans into motion. Using the clause ‘The Allies to have the right to occupy any strategic points in the event of any situation arising which threatens the security of the Allies’ as a pretense, they started implementing their dismemberment plan, which the British dubbed as the ‘solution to the Question of the East’. The most important target in the plan was the occupation of Istanbul. Not surprisingly, only Istanbul amongst the capitals of the defeated Central Powers was occupied after the WWI. And it was Lord Curzon’s idea.293
Istanbul’s Occupation Would Mean Achievement of Multiple Goals for the British Deep State
Turkish bravery during the Battle of Gallipoli completely humiliated the British deep state in the international arena. They were convinced that if they occupied the capital of the Islamic world, they would have taken their revenge. The truth is, all the politicians involved in the planning, declaration and implementation of the Gallipoli campaign, were following the orders of the British deep state and naturally, after the defeat, they fell from grace with the public. They hoped that the occupation would gain them their lost influence and power. This had been their main goal.
Istanbul was not only the capital of the Ottoman Empire, but also the capital of the Islamic world. It was a city where the Caliph of the Muslims lived. To the British deep state, an occupied capital would be a tour de force of British prowess, especially in terms of influencing the Muslims living under British rule, most notably in India. They hoped that the occupation would stem any potential anti-British sentiment or independence movements, as well as preventing Muslims from uniting under a single flag, and that British rule would be further cemented.
The decision to occupy Istanbul involved the control of two straits, the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. The British navy anchored in the Bosphorus Strait supervised exits from Marmara, and the Dardanelles Strait was also kept under the control of the British. In other words, the British had the control of the entrance and the exit to the Marmara Sea, and consequently to the Black Sea. Thus, they could keep the Russian warships under control and impose taxes on Russian trade. This meant having the upper hand of the newly established Bolshevik Russia. St. Petersburg, or Leningrad as it was known during Soviet times, was the only Russian port close to Europe. It was frozen for 6 months of the year and lacked the geographical or strategic infrastructure wanted by the Russian navy. The Russians always wanted to have access to warmer waters. Although the Black Sea was under Russian control, any state that controlled the Straits could easily override that control. The British, through the occupation of Istanbul and the Straits, also wanted to keep post-revolution Russia under control.
The British deep state was anxiously watching the growing affinity between the Bolsheviks and the Turkish independence movement. They feared the Russians could get stronger again and pursue an imperialist policy and believed that if it could control the Straits and Istanbul, it would be able to prevent such an expansion.
Another objective of the British occupation of Istanbul was undermining the authority of the Caliph over British colonies to give the impression that British rule had now taken the place of the Sultan; the Caliph and the entire Ottoman Empire was now under British control. The British hoped they could dishearten the Muslim subjects and intimidate the regional tribal leaders, religious leaders and minority leaders. They wanted to give a clear message to everyone that there is no coming back for the Ottoman Empire. The occupation marked the peak of the British Empire. Through occupation, they wished to suppress the Islamic awakening and find new prospective colonies.
The most important symbolic message of the Istanbul occupation was the removal of the Turks from Europe, whereby the Ottoman Empire would no longer be considered a part of Europe. Istanbul had always been the ‘Eastern Capital’ of Europe. Ancient Greeks, Venetians, Romans, Genoese and Byzantines had chosen this beautiful city as their home. The 600-year Ottoman rule in Istanbul made the Ottoman Empire European. An occupation would, therefore, mean the removal of the Turks from Europe.
The British public considered the Ottoman alliance with Germany in WWI as a betrayal and wanted this ‘betrayal’ to be punished. However, as reviewed in the previous pages, this alliance was somehow forced by the British deep state, but various circles voiced that this so-called betrayal should not be left unpunished. The British deep state was convinced that the occupation of Istanbul would give the Ottoman Empire the harshest punishment and would make the Turks pay the heavy price of betrayal. Indeed, many believed that Istanbul being taken from the Turks would be the surest sign of their defeat and the Islamic world would stop viewing the Turks as the ‘victorious soldiers of Islam’. According to the British deep state, this occupation had to be extremely humiliating and conclusive so that everyone would be convinced that the Turks were irreversibly defeated. The British deep state believed that this was essential for the purposes of its domination policy, yet another display of its twisted mentality regarding the Ottoman Empire.
However, the British plans wouldn’t work because they didn’t take Anatolian people into account. The Anatolian independence movement led by Mustafa Kemal and his colleagues reminded the whole world once again why the Turks were considered the victorious soldiers of Islam. Over the next three years, the victors of the WWI completely retreated from Ottoman lands, having suffered a humiliating defeat. French, Italians, Greeks and British, one by one, conceded defeat, signed peace treaties and sent their troops back home.
Istanbul: The Center that Unraveled the Deep
European Plots
The British deep state knew that Istanbul was an important center that effectively disturbed balances in Europe. They also believed that as long as the Turks controlled it, they would continue to disrupt their plans, and so they wanted to remove Istanbul, the Straits and Thrace from the possession of the Turks. They were convinced that the Turkish administration without Istanbul would no longer have a say in matters concerning Europe.
However, the British deep state has always chosen to hide its plans to dismember the Ottoman Empire behind various disguises. During WWI, the pretense this imperialist project used was the supposed goal of protecting minority rights. They spread the wrong notion to the British public that the Ottoman Empire was being ruthless to its Christian subjects, and that Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians and Christian Arabs in the Ottoman lands were under threat. They built these claims on the false allegations that Christians were the real owners of Anatolia and that the Turks had taken it by force. For instance, a member of Parliament Viscount James Bryce said during a speech at the House of Lords, “Asia Minor, Syria, Armenia, and Arabia—have been the homes of ancient civilisations; some of them enjoyed under the Governments which they lead a thousand or fifteen hundred years ago a real national life and prosperity, and had a sense of their place and mission in the world which they have lost under the desolating tyranny that has brooded over them for the last six centuries.” Very conveniently, he maintained that Britain should extend help to those ancient civilizations so that they could regain their freedom. The British deep state claimed that once Istanbul was occupied, the so-called ‘unjust’ policies would come to an end. British newspapers kept claiming that Istanbul wasn’t the national capital of the Turks and that a majority of the population was non-Muslim. However, according to the census of 1919, 67% of the residents of Istanbul were Muslims. The number had been higher, but most Muslims had already been martyred in the Balkan wars and WWI that closely followed it.
Contrary to the rumors the British deep state sought to spread, minority policies of the Ottoman Empire were impressively liberal and generous. The Ottoman Empire had protected minority rights for 600 years and minorities lived as important parts of the Ottoman nation. As a matter of fact, the members of the minority communities had no trouble ascending the social ladder to achieve administrative positions. Most were engaged in art and commerce and had lived relatively affluent lives in the most beautiful parts of Istanbul and the Ottoman lands in general, and they enjoyed robust support from the Ottoman government. Even after the breakup of the Empire, they continued their presence in Turkey and offered their support for the new Turkish state. The rumors that were spread regarding the minorities were nothing other than black propaganda. Even some of the British spies that came to Istanbul during those years to gather intelligence later admitted that Turkish minority policies were admirable.
Nevertheless, the British deep state continued to spread its black propaganda using the minorities as it was convinced that false claims of ‘persecuted groups, faiths’ would be an effective leverage for influence. They were right. The occupation policies of the British deep state found support in some minority representatives. The Greek Patriarch of Istanbul stated in a letter sent to the Paris Peace Conference that the Question of the East (the plan to break apart the Ottoman Empire) would never be solved until Istanbul was Greek again.
Similarly, the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire like the Copts in Egypt, Maronites in Lebanon and Christian Assyrians in Syria, considered Istanbul’s occupation as a step towards their independence and backed the plan. Only the Jews amongst the Ottoman subjects, most notably the Chief Rabbi Nahum Effendi, stood with the Turks against the greedy European occupiers.
British Tactics for the Justification of the Occupation
The British deep state used various methods to occupy Istanbul and similar practices can be still spotted across the world today. Unmasking these tactics is crucial to understanding the danger the world is facing. The plan of removing the Turks from Anatolia, still underway even after 100 years, reached its height with the occupation of Istanbul. To attain this goal, the British deep state didn’t refrain from deceiving even its own public and allies. Millions have been used in this scheme, by a few deep state actors. Let’s see how.
The British Deep State Initially Claimed that It Didn’t Want Anatolia
British Prime Minister Lloyd George, during his speech to Parliament on January 5, 1918, reassured Parliament’s Members that there wouldn’t be a war for Istanbul, Anatolia or Thrace. In these lands, the Turkish population was the majority. The truth is, Lloyd George was only trying to cause a diversion and tried to convince his people and the Ottoman Empire that it would not claim these territories.
Furthermore, there was no suggestion of the occupation of Istanbul in the Armistice of Mudros that marked the end of WWI for the Ottoman Empire. On the contrary, Admiral Calthorpe, who signed the Armistice on behalf of the Allied Powers, gave his verbal assurance that the British didn’t intend to occupy Istanbul and terminate the Ottoman administration or seize the control of the Ottoman military forces. The Ottoman delegation that returned to Istanbul after the Armistice brought along the personal letter of Calthorpe with them. In this letter, Calthorpe reassured that French and British soldiers would be stationed only at the Straits and a small unit from the Turkish army would be allowed to remain there as a sign of Ottoman sovereignty.
However, only thirteen days after the Armistice, the British and French troops entered Istanbul. Calthorpe, who had personally promised that Istanbul wouldn’t be occupied, was appointed as the British high commissioner and the first thing he did was arrest two hundred people from Tevfik Pasha’s government and exile thirty of them to Malta. All those who were arrested were Turkish and Muslim administrators. With this move, Calthorpe gave a clear message that Istanbul was under occupation and that anyone refusing to cooperate with the occupational forces would be punished in the harshest manner. He later sent a message to Foreign Office, assuring them that the arrests were “very satisfactory” and intimidated the leaders of a potential insurgency in Istanbul.294
Many officers, who were previously blacklisted during the war, were also exiled. When the British set foot in Istanbul, they started a manhunt not only in Istanbul, but all of Turkey. Their first demand was the capture and punishment of nine Turkish commanders: Ali Ihsan Pasha (Commander of the Sixth Army), Fahrettin Pasha (Commander of V Cavalry Corps), Nuri Pasha (Commander of the Islamic Army of the Caucasus), Mürsel Bey (Commander of the 5th Caucasian Division), Yakub Shevki Pasha (Commander of the Ninth Army), Nihat Pasha (Chief of Staff of the Second Army in Pozanti), Galip Pasha (Commander of the 40th Yemen division) and Tewfik Pasha (Commander of the Seventh Corps in Yemen). It was clear that these Turkish commanders were specifically selected for their outstanding performance against and/or defeat of the British as they bravely defended their country. However, the British deep state failed terribly in its judgment of Turkish patriotism as it believed that targeting commanders would work. As the following days would make clear, capturing and exiling 100-150 people of a deeply patriotic nation who had always lived independently would do nothing to cause them to falter in their fight for independence.
Yakub Shevki Pasha, who refused to dissolve the Ninth Army, ignored the British order to hand over arms and ammunition and instead moved his food stocks to the West. Naturally, he was on top of the ‘to be exiled to Malta’ list of the British. Like him, all the members of the Kars Parliament would be exiled to Malta. Halil Pasha and Mehmed Djemal Pasha from the Caucasian Army, and many Turkish officers like Ali Rifat and Mürsel Bey, who were division commanders, were blacklisted by the British in the first months of the Armistice. Meanwhile, the plans to capture, try and exile these commanders were underway in the occupation headquarters.
Many pro-British intellectuals and diplomats considered the promises made prior to the occupation as guarantees. However, after the Armistice, British Prime Minister Lloyd George claimed that his previous statements weren’t a guarantee for the Turks, but were rather intended to reassure his own public and particularly the Indian Muslims who didn’t want to fight other Muslims. He hoped that this would justify the occupation.
It is important to keep one thing in mind: the British deep state might make statements to create a diversion, they might pretend to be friends, make promises or sign official letters. However, all these promises have absolutely no effect on the representatives of the deep state and their determination to carry out their original plans. They will never stop trying to realize their sinister plans made centuries ago behind closed doors. Therefore, falling for deceptive words could prove disastrous for the future.
The British Deep State Assured Its Allies that Anatolia Would Be a US Mandate
In the aftermath of WWI, maps were redrawn in the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Representatives from 32 countries attended the conference. It started on January 18, 1919 and a total of 1646 sessions took place in the months-long event. However, this wide attendance was only to keep up appearances. The real decisions in the conference were made by the so-called ‘Big Four’: British Prime Minister Lloyd George, US President Woodrow Wilson, French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau, and Italian Prime Minister Vittorio Emanuele Orlando.
The five treaties that ended the war were drafted in the Paris Peace Conference: The Treaty of Versailles that was signed with Germany the same year, the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye with the Republic of German-Austria, Treaties of Neuilly-sur-Seine with Bulgaria and Trianon with Hungary, and the Treaty of Sèvres with the Ottoman Empire were all outlined during this conference.
Before moving on to examining the plans to break apart the Ottoman Empire, we should briefly touch on the Treaty of Versailles. Prior to Versailles, the German public was assured that the principles known as Wilson’s Fourteen Points would be the foundations for the treaty. However, once the time for signatures arrived, a heavy colonization plan appeared that was a complete insult to Germans in every way. The harsh conditions forced the German economy to work for the Allied Powers for years. Many historians agree that the harsh terms of this treaty led to the rise of Nazi regime and vengeful sentiments in the German public.
Britain and France made a deal during the Paris Peace Conference to share the Ottoman lands in Arabia, Thrace, the Mediterranean and the Aegean amongst themselves. They wanted to make Turkey a small Asian country trapped inside Anatolia. According to their plan, little Turkey trapped in this piece of land would be placed under US mandate.
In other words, the plan of the British deep state for the Paris Peace Conference was placing countries they considered incapable of ruling themselves under the mandate of developed countries. The Middle East was distributed according to this plan. Britain presented a proposal to the Conference on May 21, 1919 and suggested that Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine be placed under French and British mandate, and the Ottoman Empire under US mandate. Let’s find out about the truth of this plan from the telegram Halide Edip Adıvar sent to Mustafa Kemal Pasha on August 10, 1919:
The situation in Constantinople relating to foreign affairs is this:
Although France, Italy and England have offered a mandate over Turkey to the American Senate, they are trying by all possible means to prevent them from accepting it.
There is no doubt that each of these Powers wants to make certain of their share when the country is divided up.
France, having met with disappointments in Syria, wants to compensate herself in Turkey. Italy, being frankly and openly imperialistic, declares plainly that she has entered the war with the sole object of getting a good share of the Anatolian booty.
The part played by England is rather more complicated.
With an eye to the future, England has no desire that Turkey shall remain united or become modernised or enjoy real independence. A Turco-Mohamedan State, powerful and equipped with all modern requirements and ideas, and particularly with a Caliph at its head, would be an exceedingly bad example to the Mohamedan subjects of England.
If she could get power over Turkey without being interfered with at all, she would soon decapitate and dismember her without any compunction, and would try within a few years to convert her into a loyal colony.295
Clearly, the plans of the British deep state have always been more sinister and more complicated. Supporting a US mandate was just an act. The true desire of the British deep state, for a long time, had been a completely disintegrated, weakened, devastated Turkish state.
In order to accurately analyze the plans of the British deep state, it is important to look a couple steps ahead. We shouldn’t forget that although intended for Churchill, the statement “he was ‘first, last and all the time a great Englishman, more interested in preserving England’s position in Europe than in preserving the peace“296 actually applies to every member of the deep state because for the British deep state, there are no allies or friends. Everyone in the plan is a means to get to an end. Their existence serves the deep state plans. This is true even for the seemingly most powerful leaders of the world as they have no option other than playing along according to the script they have been given.
Italians Weren’t Spared the Deep Strategies of the British Deep State, Either
As the WWI raged on, the Allied Powers had secret meetings to agree on a plan for the partition of the Ottoman Empire. The first secret agreement, known as the Treaty of London, was signed in 1915. According to this secret pact between the Triple Entente (Britain, France, Russia) and Italy, Italians were promised Antalya and surrounding Mediterranean regions in exchange for joining the war on the side of the Allied Powers. Due to the Bolshevik Revolution, this treaty was replaced by the Agreement of St.-Jean-de-Maurienne of 1917, which was signed by only Italy, France and Britain. According to the new plan, Italians would also be given Western Anatolia including Izmir, in addition to the coastline of the Mediterranean.
Once again, the post-war scene wasn’t playing out according to the expectations of the Italians, but was very conveniently going according to the original plans of the British. Eleftherios Venizelos-Lloyd George cooperation resulted in the Greek forces’ occupation of Izmir on May 15, 1919, and Western Anatolia remained under Greek occupation until September 9, 1922, when they were forced to retreat by the Turkish army. The British deep state, taking advantage of the imperialist Greek dreams, built an army in Anatolia that would do its bidding. This also effectively prevented Italy from having the sole say in the region. The whole occupation plan was based on the propaganda that local Christian people needed protection from the so-called Muslim gangs and this sinister plan was thus given international legitimacy. However, it was clearly established with the following report of the Inter-Allied Commission of Inquiry, based in Istanbul, on October 12, 1919 that those allegations were complete lies:
The inquiry has proven that the general situation of Christians in the vilayet of Aydin has been satisfactory since the armistice and that they have not been in danger. – Security in the vilayet of Aydin, and in Smyrna [Izmir] in particular, in no way justified the occupation of Smyrna’s forts by application of Article 7 of the armistice. Furthermore, the situation in the vilayet did not justify the landing of allied troops in Smyrna.297
Even this report wasn’t enough to stop the British deep state plans.
The British deep state used Italians when it needed, with the pretense of being a reliable ally and with a couple of promises. But when it no longer needed Italy, it left it alone. Needless to say, Italians themselves had nefarious occupation plans regarding the Ottoman lands just like other Allied powers, and in this regard, Italy then was just as guilty as others. The point is, even towards its own allies, the British deep state always follows a self-centered and double-faced policy.
Mustafa Kemal, the leader of the Turkish War of Independence and the savior of the Turkish people and Turkey, took advantage of this double-faced policy of the British: After 1920, the Italian government began to provide weapons, logistics and intelligence to the Turkish nationalists.
A Claim of Upholding Minority Rights is a Typical British Deep State Method for Justification of Its Occupations
According to the Armistice of Mudros signed after the war, the Allied armies should have stayed in their current positions and no occupation would take place unless there was a threat. However, as explained previously, the British nevertheless occupied Istanbul and the Greek landed and took over Izmir. The only so-called justification for these occupations was the false claim that the Christian minorities were in danger. The 7th clause of the Armistice of Mudros gave the Allied Powers the right to occupy strategic locations in case of a security threat. By combining the occupation right granted under the 7th clause with the so-called threats the minorities supposedly faced, the occupation of Anatolia was cunningly made compliant with the international law.
However, the air in the capital in the first few days after the Armistice was signed was very different. The Ottoman Parliament unanimously ratified the Armistice. The Ottoman Postal Office printed stamps for the Armistice, as if celebrating good news. Only ten days after the optimistic statements of the Ottoman Minister of Marine Affairs Rauf Bey, on November 13, 1918, the 55-unit enemy fleet passed through the Dardanelles Strait and anchored in Dolmabahce. This huge fleet consisted of 22 British, 17 Italian, 12 French and 4 Greek warships.
This occupation represented the pinnacle of the centuries-old British deep state plans to disintegrate the Ottoman Empire and remove the Turks from Europe. The capital was occupied, the army was dissolved, and commercial vessels, shipyards, ports, railways and communication channels were made available for the sole use of the occupation forces. This entire plan was carried out with a legal pretense and was supported by military force. Furthermore, black propaganda was used widely to stem any potential public support for the Ottoman administration.
The anti-Ottoman sentiment that was propagated in Europe and the United States for years through newspapers, novels and theatrical plays were all intended to make this occupation easier. Hundreds of books, pamphlets and brochures printed with caricatures depicting Turks as savage people served the purpose of building a Muslim Turk image that supposedly massacred Christians. The propaganda machine raged on to convince the world opinion, most notably the US and British public, that the Ottoman Empire had to come down for the sake of Christianity, freedom and human rights. Any opposing voices that might have stood up for the rights of the Ottoman and for justice were silenced in advance. The British deep state made sure that there were no loopholes in the plan. Even though this sinister plan came to a staggering 100-year-old halt with the Anatolian War of Independence, today it is still on the agenda. Currently, the Anatolian lands are surrounded from every direction, and the spirit of solidarity and patriotism is the only power that can stand up to this conspiracy.
If God helps you, no one can vanquish you. If He forsakes you, who can help you after that? So the believers should put their trust in God. (Qur’an, 3:160)
A journalist with the British deep state: Walter Lippmann
According to many sources, Wilson’s Fourteen Points, which were supposed to be the basis of the treaties to be signed after WWI, were prepared by the British government with the input of Walter Lippmann, a Harvard graduate who worked as an adviser to the US President Wilson. These principles were supposed to be used for the peace negotiations. However, it later became clear both at Versailles and Sèvres that the document didn’t have a trace of a peaceful approach or the signature of Wilson. Journalist Lippmann, who drafted the Fourteen Points, later became an executive in CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), the American sister organization of Chatham House, which is known as an institute under the influence of the British deep state. He worked as a non-official adviser to eight US presidents. With the book he wrote in 1946, he was the first to introduce the concept of ‘Cold War’. Today, many call Lippmann the ‘most influential journalist of the 20th century’, or ‘the founding father of modern journalism’. Presidents, prime ministers, ministers might change; but the members of the deep state, deeply embedded, do not change.
Occupation of Istanbul, the last Ottoman Parliament and the National Pact
The occupation of Izmir further sped up the Anatolian independence campaign and provided it with more supporters. The Erzurum Congress of July-August 1919 and Sivas Congress of September 1919 were the first platforms where the representative groups for the Turkish Nation first appeared. In almost every Anatolian city, resistance groups were forming, which later converged under a single organization called The Union for the Defense of the Rights of Anatolia and Rumelia. The independence campaign, in the meantime, gained a new name: the Kuva-yi Milliye (National Forces). In December 1919, elections were held for the Chamber of Deputies of the Ottoman Parliament, in line with the Amasya Protocol of October 22, 1919. People supporting the ideas of the National Forces were elected as Parliament Members while Mustafa Kemal became a MP for Erzurum.
On January 12, 1920, the newly elected Parliament convened in Istanbul, which would be the last gathering of the Ottoman Parliament. Following the occupation of Istanbul on March 16, the Parliament announced the Misak-i Milli (National Pact), which was previously accepted at the Erzurum and Sivas Congresses.
The elections of the Ottoman Parliament and the subsequent announcement of the National Pact clearly showed how deeply the British deep state underestimated the Turkish Nation. Self-satisfied European approaches and the sick mentality of seeing Turks as second-class citizens have always been the weakest point of the 100-year-old plan of the British deep state. The deep state wrongly thought that Turkish Nation would surrender to power in a display of a weak character. It would take a heavy defeat and subsequent removal from Anatolia for the representatives of the deep state to understand their mistake.
The British weren’t uncomfortable with the elections to be held for the Ottoman Parliament; they were sure that the new Parliament would side with the Sultan. However, as a result of the election, pro-National Pact figures entered the Parliament. The deep state representatives then insisted that the Parliament convene in Istanbul, which they hoped would increase the influence of the Sultan on the Parliament and only decisions that suited the interests of the deep state would be taken. They were wrong again. The freedom lovers in the new Parliament established a group and called themselves Felâh-ı Vatan (Salvation of the Homeland). The National Pact was drawn up in Ankara and sent to Istanbul for announcement. All these developments were unacceptable for the occupying Allies.
The Parliament passed its final resolution, which was the announcement of the National Pact, and then the Parliament closed itself.
The occupation of Istanbul triggered massive rallies across the country and as a retribution for the arrested Parliament Members, officers of Allied Powers in Anatolia were arrested. After the occupation, communication with Istanbul went underground. The railway connections between Anatolia and Istanbul were cut off around Geyve and Ulukışla, and sending money or valuable assets to Istanbul was no longer allowed.
While the occupation of Istanbul led to a nationwide sense of unity and solidarity, the sycophants of the British deep state were welcoming British forces with vigor. For this they will always be remembered with shame. Sirkeci Shore, Galata Bridge and Galata Pier, Tophane, Salıpazarı and Dolmabahçe Shores were filled with these sycophants of the British deep state. Some of the buildings at the coastline had British, French and Greek flags hanged. The soldiers of the occupation forces were being welcomed with applause by those sycophants.
Patrick Balfour, known as Lord Kinross, wrote about these anglophile Turks that were around during days of occupation:
Some even pretended they were not Turks at all, shed their fezes and tried to get jobs with the Allied forces which had moved into the city.298
The only independent movement left capable of representing the Turkish people was the Kuva-yi Milliye (National Forces). The first thing the Ankara administration did was to start the Anatolian News Agency on April 6, 1920 so that the whole world could be accurately informed about the rightful resistance in Anatolia. Then, on April 23, 1920, the first Parliament that would constitute the foundations of the new Republic was set up in Ankara in an old school building.
Now, the only legislative power to represent the Turks was in Ankara. The blueprint for the War of Independence, that would last more than two years, was prepared and then implemented there.
The National Pact and Its Significance
The National Pact is a set of six clauses, which briefly read:
* The future of the territories inhabited by an Arab majority at the time of the signing of the Armistice of Mudros will be determined by a referendum. On the other hand, the territories which were not occupied at that time and inhabited by a Turkish majority are the homeland of the Turkish nation.
* The status of Kars, Ardahan and Batum [which voluntarily and swiftly rejoined the homeland as soon as they were liberated] may be determined by a referendum.
* The status of Western Thrace will be determined by the votes of its inhabitants.
* The security of Istanbul and Marmara should be provided for. Transport and free-trade on the Straits of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles will be determined by Turkey and other concerned countries.
* The rights of minorities will be issued on condition that the rights of the Muslim minorities in neighboring countries are protected.
* In order to develop in every field, the country should be independent and free; all restrictions on political, judicial and financial development will be removed.
In line with the Erzurum and Sivas Congresses, the National Pact declared the targeted borders and the goal of the independence campaign. The National Pact was the second document, after the Amasya Protocol, to legitimize the independence campaign.
Strategic Locations for the Occupation: Galata Tower and the Importance of Galata District
Throughout the British occupation, the British deep state was fixated on one notion: Turks have stayed in Europe for centuries, and caused troubles in Europe. Istanbul is not Turkish, it is Greek. Turks must be removed from there. As a matter of fact, the modern-day plans that the British deep state carries out for Turkey are not very different; the policies shaped 100 years ago are still pursued through various methods. Today, with the imposition of the deep states, the US and EU are the implementers of this plan. There are also efforts to make Russia a part of it.
Around 100 years ago, with the occupation of March 16, 1920, the plan reached its peak and the British entered Istanbul with 27,419 soldiers.299 Istanbul coming under Allied occupation delighted the deep circles in London. This delight would soon usher in a policy of violence to maintain the occupation of the city.
The Allied Powers decided that old Istanbul would be controlled by the French, while Beyoğlu and the Straits would be controlled by the British. Italy would maintain control over Kadıkoy and Üsküdar. However, the British soon claimed rights over those areas because they didn’t find the Italians reliable enough. In any case, the British High Commissioner was in charge of the control and supervision of the city.
French forces in Istanbul had only one prison, in Kumkapı, whereas the British built a total of 5 prisons; underneath the Galata tower, in Arabian Han, Sansarian Han, Hotel Kroecker and Şahin Pasha Hotel. This area was the center where thousands of people were blacklisted, tortured and where the nationalist movement was spied on. Galata Tower had become the symbol of the British deep state, as it proved highly useful for observational purposes. It was also used both as an intelligence headquarters and a torture center.
During the occupation years, all spots in the Galata district were used like individual British posts. For instance, British forces used the street of the Galata Tower for their constant spying efforts targeting nationalists, while the Galata Tower proved very useful as a watchtower. With a British flag on it, the tower at the time had a shed on its layered roof. British had added this part for intelligence purposes as the British soldiers constantly watched the city. The top of the tower had a wide view that overlooked the Golden Horn and a large part of Istanbul and therefore helped the British spot any suspicious movements.
The building next to the Galata Tower, named the Galata House and built in 1904, was also used as a British post. This building witnessed horrific scenes of torture inflicted by the professional interrogators of the British deep state on the supporters of the Turkish War of Independence. The intelligence brought in by the cowards working for the British occupation forces were assessed here and people in key positions were interrogated and tortured here for information. Many patriots were martyred in the building and buried underneath the tower. Years later, many pits were found deep inside the Galata Tower in addition to human skulls and bones discovered in the canals of the tower. The space in the middle of the tower was used as a dungeon. During the occupation years, thousands of people were blacklisted and subsequently tortured there.
Galata Tower was very central to the operations of the British deep state. It was known both as the center of Mawlawiyah, and the hub of British intelligence and British violence and torture. The region was also used as a British court. In other words, Galata district was used as a base, a torture center, a prison, a court, not to mention as the meeting point of the British spies. Just like Pharaoh did with his watchtower, the British deep state watched the Turkish people from the Galata Tower. The first Mawlawi House of Istanbul in Galata was also used by the British for intelligence purposes.
The second important base that the British used to oppress the Istanbulians during the occupation was Hotel Kroecker (which is currently used as a teachers’ local). The rooms in the basement were used as torture chambers and hundreds of nationalists defying the occupation were tortured in there. John Bennett, a British intelligence officer, used Hotel Kroecker as a headquarters, because the hotel enjoyed a very central location in Beyoğlu. With a whip in his hands, Bennett would interrogate people in torture chambers in the dead of the night. Bennett, also a Sufi and Mawlawi, never relinquished his ties with the Ottoman Empire and Islamic world, even after the occupation. As it happens, he opened the first Mawlawi/Sufi house in Britain and became a shaykh himself. Using this new character, he worked to inflict harm on the Turkish people and Muslims using Mawlawiyah as a disguise. As a result, many people failed to see the deception in his rhetoric and instead of Islam, mistakenly adopted Rumi’s philosophy, which is actually against Islam. The British deep state’s plans to spoil the Islamic world from within, after that point, would continue largely in a Rumi-oriented manner.
Let us note here that the major intelligence sources of the British during the occupation had been the Mawlawi houses. Traitors in the Ottoman Empire, who were fans of Rumi and the British culture, used to frequent the said Mawlawi Houses and gave the message that they could be used as loyal collaborators of the British.
The occupation forces that wanted to keep Istanbul under control didn’t refrain from exerting pressure on civilians as well. In addition to the occupation fleet anchored in the Bosphorus, a British submarine was stationed in front of the Galata Tower. The weapons of the fleet were turned towards the city, ready to fire. The occupation troops would march around the city with their tanks and squadrons, as a tour de force. Tanks were placed around strategic points in Taksim Square. Ottoman officers had to salute the soldiers of the Allied forces regardless of their rank yet not expect to be saluted back. The Sultan was forced to enact a decree that endorsed the occupation, in a bid to prevent the rise of any nationalist consciousness in the people, and similar fatwas (authoritative legal opinions on issues pertaining to the Islamic law) were issued by the Shaykh al-Islam (the Grand Mufti) and some other religious scholars. Boxes of alcoholic drinks brought from Britain were filling the taverns of Istanbul, which was another attempt to debilitate people and impair their morality.300
British spies were everywhere in Istanbul. One spy, with the alias RV5, opened a tailor shop in 1921 and managed to be the tailor of the Unionists (usually called ‘Young Turks’ in the West) and those people close to Mustafa Kemal. He was even able to visit the Turkish Foreign Ministry. He would hand over all the intelligence he gathered to the British. Another spy, with the alias JQ6, was running a coffee shop in Istanbul, which was usually frequented by people close to Mustafa Kemal. His supporters would hold all their meetings in this shop and all the secret information they discussed would be immediately forwarded to the British. In the meantime, Istanbulians had to continue their daily lives under the siege of the British deep state.301
Important Note about Mawlawiyah
Rumi is a 13th-century mystic. He wrote Masnavi and although this book contains commendable statements regarding faith and Islam, it also contains serious contradictions with Islam and the Qur’an. Masnavi and the Mawlawiyah culture shaped around it, due to parts of Masnavi that are in contradiction with the Islamic faith, in time turned into a lifestyle promoted by certain circles seeking to inflict damage on Islam in a very sinister manner. In fact, this culture has been widely praised and promoted by atheists, anti-Islamic circles, homosexuals and Darwinists. Most particularly, certain people that wish to spread acts that are banned in the Qur’an, like homosexuality, or unbelieving systems, such as Darwinism, amongst Muslims, have always used Mawlawiyah and Rumi’s philosophy to achieve their goals. Unsurprisingly, the British deep state has repeatedly used this dangerous culture as leverage against Muslims.
It should be borne in mind that the criticism here is not directed at Rumi, the author of Masnavi, considering how Masnavi could have been significantly altered since the 13th century. It is quite possible that the remarks in question were added to Masnavi only later, in an attempt to hurt the Islamic societies. Therefore, our criticism here is directed not at Mawlana Jalal ad-Din Rumi, but the odd Rumi philosophy developed based on the contents of Masnavi.
Following chapters will be dealing with Rumi’s philosophy to a greater extent.
Media Censorship during the British Occupation
Turkish Historian and author Atilla Oral explains the days of occupation as follows:
The enemy fleet that anchored in Bosphorus Strait had very important duties. They didn’t stay in Istanbul for five years only to keep up the appearance. It was a part of a sinister and strategically devised plan of intimidation.302
The intimidation tactics were meant to suppress people and to break their spirit. The propaganda targeting the people was considered important, because the British deep state wanted to stop people’s support for the nationalist movement.
As explained previously, the British deep state sought to impair the ‘nationalist and patriotic values’ of the peoples since the beginning. The main reason was because when a society strays away from such values, its downfall comes very quickly. The British deep state surmised that a movement unsupported by the public would no longer be ‘national’ and therefore concentrated on psychological anti-propaganda.
For the British deep state, one of the ways to do that was censorship of the media. Therefore, during the occupation, the Turkish press was heavily censored. The newspapers were first examined by the censor officers working for the British deep state before they were published, and any content or picture not found suitable was not allowed to be printed. If the British deep state didn’t approve a certain photograph or writing, it would be removed. As a result, many newspapers during that time had to be printed with empty columns. It was a major crime to publish pictures not carrying the remark “Censored by Allied Authorities - The Censor”.
The entire visual evidence of the crimes committed by the British deep state against humanity was thus almost completely obliterated. For a long time, it wasn’t possible to locate any pictures proving that Istanbul was ever occupied, due to the British deep state’s systematic move to collect all war photos. When these photos were later retrieved from the British archives, the Turkish people were taken aback. Atilla Oral explains how he got a hold of those pictures:
British archives have an abundant number of important, visual evidence regarding the Turkish War of Independence and the occupation years. It is said that the British state makes available its archive to the researchers after a while, but it is true only for written documents. It is different for visuals or audio recordings. I have collected documents and photographs for the past 20 years to be able to write this book. Almost all of the pictures I used came from British sources and auctions. Photographs kept by the occupation forces for decades are now sold by their great-grand children, effectively revealing many parts of history kept under shadows until now.303
The censorship effectively prevented the Turkish people from seeing the tyranny of the British deep state, their dirty secrets, which were revealed only after the war, and the injustice and torturous side of the occupation. Only in the 21st century are we now able to see the extent of the violence and tyranny that took place. Nevertheless, and despite all the efforts to curb it, the nationalist campaign thrived in a way that completely shocked the British deep state. Spies and censors couldn’t hinder the foresight of the Turkish people, and the plots of the British deep state failed one by one.
Supporters of the British Deep State During the Occupation
The previous pages dealt with how the British deep state implemented its plan to occupy Istanbul: how they managed to secure public support with their anti-Turkish propaganda, forged military alliances with other countries, manipulated governments and the clauses of the agreements to make them compatible with occupation, suppressed potential dissension and eventually launched the occupation on March 16, 1920. For the occupation to continue, there had to be not only military, economic or political power, but also local supporters as well. This section will be revealing some names and organizations that actively got involved in the occupation, wittingly or otherwise.
Said Molla, who was the editor of Yeni Istanbul, a pro-British daily published during occupation years, wrote a piece on November 9, 1918 entitled, ‘Britain and Us’, in a clear display of the approach of certain Ottoman authorities to the British:
… Since our people across Anatolia has developed extensive admiration and respect for the British, it is clear that any small British aid to Turkey will be extremely successful. … Ottomans, old Turks can find prosperity and welfare only with the earnest help of the noble British people.304
In the aftermath of the occupation, the British deep state built a huge network of spies, all harboring anti-Muslim feelings, in an attempt to curb the Anatolian resistance. While some of these spies were on the British payroll, others volunteered. Apparently, the power of the British mesmerized some.
Occupation officers used some dervish lodges for intelligence purposes and Galata’s Mawlawi House was the most frequently used one. John Bennett, the head of Military Intelligence “B” Division, as previously mentioned, usually frequented this Mawlawi House. He writes about his days as follows:
I was instructed to find out what the dervishes were doing. … Any dervish might be a secret agent in disguise, or he might be a fanatical missionary on behalf of some politico-religious fraternity. Another important factor was the dervish fraternities, of which the most influential was believed to be the Mevlevi Brotherhood.305
The British deep state would pick and train intelligence operatives one by one to ensure their loyalty. For certain Istanbulians, flattery, little money and promises of a good future seemed to have been enough. Apparently, to them, petty gains were more important than the salvation of their country. As the British occupiers later detailed, there were some Istanbulians who consorted with the British deep state, pretending to be fond of the British. Nevertheless, none of these can change the fact that evil plots and the treachery of spies are always doomed to fail and God’s destiny will always prevail. This is exactly what happened.
I will give them more time. My strategy is sure. (Qur’an, 7:183)
Society of the Friends of England - Cohorts of Britain in the Ottoman Administration
The Society of the Friends of England was an organization with people such as Damat Ferid Pasha and Said Molla, and fervently supported the idea of the British mandate. It was founded on May 20, 1919 with the main purpose of inciting unrest in Anatolia to stop the nationalist movement of independence, and received financial support of the British to this end. Every local protest started against the Turkish War of Independence was somehow linked to this society. Another method of this group was to use various publications to discredit the Ankara government in the eyes of the Istanbul public, while building public opinion in favor of the British deep state.
Said Molla, one of the co-founders, launched a full-on propaganda war in Istanbul with his daily Yeni Istanbul. Later it became clear that he was paid 300 Lira a month from the British Embassy.306 The founding declaration was penned by Dr. Abdullah Cevdet, who had peculiar ideas like improving the Turkish race with stallion men from Europe because Turks were supposedly primitive (the noble Turkish Nation is above such statements). The society managed to obtain 53 thousand members in the first three months after its inception. On May 23, 1919, Said Molla sent a telegram to all Mayors claiming that the only way of salvation was accepting the British mandate.307
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk mentioned the purpose of this society and their members in his famous Nutuk (The Great Speech):
One of the most important of these, the “Society of the Friends of England” is worthy of special mention. It does not follow from its name that its members were necessarily friends of England. In my opinion, the founders of this society were people who thought, before anything else, of their own safety and their own particular interests, and who tried to secure both by inducing Lloyd George’s Government to afford them English protection. I wonder whether these misguided persons really imagined for a moment that the English Government had any idea at all of maintaining and preserving the Ottoman State in its integrity?
… Certain English adventurers, for instance a clergyman named Frew, also belonged to this Society. To judge from the energy the latter displayed, he was practically its chairman. The Society had a double face and a twofold character. On the one hand, it openly sought the protection of England by methods inspired by civilisation. On the other, it worked in secret and showed that its real aim was to incite the people to revolt by forming organisations in the interior, to paralyse the national conscience and encourage foreign countries to interfere. These were the treacherous designs underlying the work of the secret section of the Society. We shall see later how Said Molla played just as active a part, or even a still more important one, in this secret work as in the public enterprises of the Society. What I have just said about this Society will become much clearer to you when I enter into further particulars later on and lay before you certain documents which will astonish you.308
Clergyman Frew, whom Atatürk mentions in his Great Speech, was the chief of British intelligence in Istanbul. He held British communication codes, which Ali Rıza Bey from the Karakol Society (a secret society within the Istanbul government of the Ottoman Empire whose purpose was to assist the efforts of nationalist forces) stole and broke. This unraveled the planned uprising in Diyarbakir by the Bedirhan tribe under the auspices of Damat Ferid Pasha. Mustafa Kemal Pasha, after being informed directly about the details, which were all in Frew’s file, was able to take necessary precautions.
The British propaganda in Istanbul wasn’t only from the Society of the Friends of England. Refi Cevat Ulunay’s daily Alemdar printed an editorial on the day Atatürk arrived at Samsun, entitled ‘Who We Want’. It read: “Instead of getting another limb torn every day, let’s surrender our skin to a doctor and let’s save ourselves. Anglo-Saxons are able to breathe such strong life to wherever they are that they bring that community to a position where it will be a strong candidate for the future.”
Grand Vizier Ahmet Tevfik Pasha, who succeeded Damat Ferid Pasha, as soon as he took up his position on November 11, gave an interview to The Daily Mail and said that ‘their purpose was bringing back the old friendship with England and that it was essential the Allied Powers placed the Ottomans under the disposal of experienced people’.309
Novels Were Written about the Collaborators with the British During the Occupation of Istanbul
Sami Bey, in the famous novel of Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu titled Sodom ve Gomore (Sodom and Gomorrah), was a cosmopolitan character who had lost touch with his national values, forgotten his identity and who surmised that fraternizing with the foreigners would elevate his status. Sami Bey was convinced that the British were capable of doing anything and therefore opposed the nationalist movement in Anatolia. Grand Vizier Damat Ferid and journalist Ali Kemal were among the leading figures represented by Sami Bey in the novel.
Clearly, many people consorted with and ingratiated themselves with the British during the occupation. They caused immense difficulties for the people of Istanbul and Anatolia with their spying and the intelligence they provided. The Independence War started amid this difficult background but nevertheless resulted in an epic victory.
Said Nursi Rejected Fatwas against the Nationalist Forces
The British deep state, right after the occupation of Istanbul, appointed certain so-called clerics as their henchmen. These so-called clerics who collaborated with the British issued a fatwa in 1920 maintaining that the British occupation was rightful and that the Nationalist Forces were not compatible with Islam. Muslim scholar Bediüzzaman Said Nursi was the first to refuse to accept this fatwa:
A fatwa issued by a government and Şeyhül-İslam’s Office in a country under enemy occupation and under the command and constraint of the British is defective and should not be heeded. Those operating against the enemy invasion are not rebels. The fatwa must be rescinded.310
Said Nursi also gave important details about the British deep state:
The distinctive quality of British [British deep state] politics is causing discord and unrest, benefitting from conflicts, orchestrating all sorts of evil conceivable to further their goals as well as lying, destroying, and negativity. Since they use corruption and degeneration for their politics, they encourage degeneration everywhere.311
Said Nursi, with his powerful intellectual stance against Istanbul’s occupation and relevant black propaganda, was the most important cleric of the time. Hutuvat-i Sitte, which was secretly printed in Arabic and Turkish and circulated underground, was an important publication that boosted the nationalist spirit against the British. It is not surprising that following this publication, the British ordered that Said Nursi be killed. However, by the grace and protection of God, despite their extensive searches in Istanbul, the deep state couldn’t locate him.
Abdul Hamid II Orders that Bediuzzaman Said Nursi Be Sent to A Mental Asylum
Bediüzzaman Said Nursi was a brave servant of God, who noticed and drew attention to the evil plans of the British deep state since he was a young man. It didn’t take long before the British deep state members saw this dedicated man’s intelligence and talent, and tried to stop him. One of those attempts happened when Said Nursi came to Istanbul to visit Sultan Abdul Hamid II.
In 1907, Said Nursi requested an audience with Sultan Abdul Hamid II to tell him about his ideas on the foundation of a university in Van, which he called ‘Madrasah al-Zahra’, and where Islamic and physical sciences would be taught together. However, when he went to the Palace, he was arrested for the so-called ‘crime’ of wearing traditional clothing and a turban, and was sent to Üsküdar Toptaşı Mental Asylum. This unfair practice, carried out upon Abdul Hamid II’s instructions, was a clear example of the fear and concern Said Nursi invoked in the British deep state with his unprecedented bravery.
Dr. Hamid Uras, one of the most esteemed doctors of Gaziantep, was at the asylum at the time Said Nursi was brought in. He recalled the incident with the following words:
It was during the Second Constitutional period and we were students in the Medical School. Nursi was also in Istanbul at the time. … He was very well known, his fame had spread everywhere. … they sent him to be examined by a government doctor, a Greek. The doctor interviewed Said and in the course of their conversation Said took a textbook on anatomy from the bookcase and read four or five pages, then asked the doctor to test him on it. The doctor did so and was left in amazement as the patient read the pages back to him from memory word for word. He apologized to Said and wrote a favorable report to be sent to the palace by means of the police chief.1
Following the report stating that Said Nursi had no mental problems, he was discharged and sent back to the police headquarters. This prompted Abdul Hamid II to offer Said Nursi money to go back to his city, which Said Nursi immediately declined.
\1. Şükran Vahide, Islam in Modern Turkey: An Intellectual Biography of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, State University of New York Press, New York, 2005, p. 39
The British Deep State Couldn’t Stop the Turkish National Movement of Independence
Some people that were trying to get in the good graces of the British deep state informed on brave patriots that supported the independence movement by supplying arms and aid to Anatolia. Those patriots who were caught were ruthlessly martyred by the British firing squads without any trial. Before the execution, they would be brought to the torture chambers of John Bennett in Hotel Kroecker and tortured in the cruelest ways for information.
Needless to say, such traitors made up only a minority within the Turkish nation. Most of the Istanbulians risked torture and death by secretly carrying weapons and ammunition inside haystacks, feedbags and large vegetable baskets up to the outskirts of the Black Sea Strait and loading them onto barges to be sent to Inebolu. These patriots, fully aware of the prospect of imminent martyrdom at the hands of a firing squad if captured, fearlessly emptied the arsenals of Selimiye and Maçka. Occupation forces had previously seized all the boats in Turkish ports, therefore barges in sea and ox-driven carts on land were the only means available for transportation.
People of Istanbul were impoverished during the occupation years because the cities that fed and clothed Istanbul were no longer functioning. Despite all these difficulties, selfless Turkish people sent everything they had to Anatolia to support the independence movement. Ladies used the wool in their beds and pillows to knit clothes and socks for the soldiers in Anatolia.
Organizers of the Occupation and their Connections to the Deep State
Churchill, the then British Prime Minister said: ‘The one who cannot see that on Earth a big endeavour is taking place, an important plan, on which realisation we are allowed to collaborate as faithful servants, certainly has to be blind.‘312
Öcalan, the leader of terrorist PKK, also explains how the British deep state is actually controlling the terror group that he started, and that such basic policies are always planned by these deep powers:
Britain is the country that has the wisest approach to our issue. They granted license to MED TV. Britain builds the policies and makes US implement them. I think Britain is the one building the main policies and gets its collaborators in Europe, but most particularly the US implement these policies. There are no documents proving this, which is impossible anyway. But one has to see that everything in Europe all comes down to Britain. It has a very deep attitude with regards to the issues.313
In April, 2008, Öcalan made the following statement in İmralı, pointing to the British deep state:
Since the 16th century, [the British] have been planning in London what will happen in the rest of the world.
They manipulate the public opinion, too. Marx was living in London; they deliberately kept him there. Marx shaped his ideas there, and spread them around the world from there. … Queen Elizabeth kept Marx under close watch. Marx, Lenin, Mao; they were all duped by the British.314
The British deep state needs people to implement and manage its plans. In the following pages, the readers are going to get acquainted with those that managed and implemented the plan to partition the Ottoman Empire, based on the occupation of Istanbul.
Lloyd George
Lloyd George was the British Prime Minister when the plan to partition the Ottoman Empire was being implemented. This is how Churchill described Lloyd George’s outlook and his plans for the future of Turks and Turkish territory:
The Greek [Lloyd George asserted] are the people of the culture in Eastern Mediterranean. … A greater Greece will be an invaluable advantage to our British Empire. … they will possess all the most important islands in the Eastern Mediterranean. These islands are the potential submarine bases of the future; they lie on the flank of our communications through the Suez Canal with India, the Far East and Australia.
In December 22, 1920, Lloyd George stated the importance of friendship of the Greek people in Asia Minor as, ‘vital to Great Britain, more vital than to any other country in the world.’315
What Lloyd George meant was a so-called ‘Greater Greece’ incorporating Anatolia, one that would be safeguarding the borders of the British Empire. To this end, George helped Greeks launch an offensive in East Thrace and Izmir. The British supposed that this way, they wouldn’t be risking British soldiers as they tried to defeat Turks at their homeland, and use Greek Prime Minister Venizelos instead, who entertained dreams of a ‘Greater Greece’. By means of the Greek offensive, George wanted to destroy the remaining vestiges of Turkish resistance and facilitate the process of distributing the Turkish lands amongst the Allies. He indeed put this plan into practice, and completely abandoned the Greeks after their humiliating defeat, in a volte-face from his previous unwavering support for the Greeks.
The British Prime Minister didn’t refrain from clearly displaying his racist approach to Turks with statements like, “You cannot trust them,… and they are a decadent race“.316 In order to get the necessary approval from his Cabinet and the British parliament to start the occupation of Istanbul, he claimed that Turks could be brought to reason only by using a power they could not resist.317
The remarks of Lloyd George about Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, made in the House of Commons on October 19, 1922, clearly displayed who foiled the plots of the British deep state:
The centuries rarely produce a genius. … the great genius of our era was granted to the Turkish nation..318
When his plans to dismember Turkey failed, Lloyd George had no option but to step down. By the 1930s, he had already sunk into oblivion and had no more public support or political influence.
Lord Curzon
George Curzon, known as Lord Curzon, was the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the Lloyd George government. He was the one who came up with the idea that “The Euphrates forms the western border of India“.319 He was convinced that to uphold the British deep state policies, and to ensure full control of India, Arab and Kurdish regions within Ottoman borders should have been placed under British mandate.
Whatever we want, you reject. Now we are putting them into our pockets but you are a poor country that just came out of war. You will need money for development. When you come to us for this in the future, we will bring them in front of you and we will get them.320
Lord Curzon said these words to İsmet İnönü during Lausanne negotiations. Even today, all the rights won back in Lausanne are brought up on different occasions in an apparent attempt to take them back. As a matter of fact, EU persistence that Turkey change its anti-terror laws in exchange for visa-free movement is nothing other than the reincarnation of Curzon’s threat.
Curzon expressed his deplorable views about our honorable people on his notes dated February 4, 1920:
Turks must be thrown out of Europe. As the American Senator Lodge said, Istanbul should be totally taken from Turks, this nest of pestilence, creator of wars and blasphemy for neighbors, should be wiped off from Europe. Turks are the redskins of Asia and so will their end be like them.321 (The Honorable Turkish Nation is above such statements)
Somerset Arthur Gough-Calthorpe
British High Commissioner Admiral Calthorpe, stationed in Istanbul, wrote in many of his telegrams to London that one way to weaken the Ottoman Empire was pitting the Kurds and Turks against each other.
During the negotiations for the Armistice of Mudros, Admiral Calthorpe promised that everything would be done to make sure Turks are not offended. He said that he believed Greek ships would not be sent to Istanbul or Izmir, but added that a clause stating that ‘Istanbul would not be occupied’ could not be included in the armistice.322 Only 13 days after these statements, Greek and British navy ships anchored in the Bosphorus Strait.
It also fell on Calthorpe to tell about the impending Greek occupation of Izmir. On May 14, 1919, at 09:00 AM, he sent a diplomatic note to Ali Nadir Pasha, Commander of the XVII Corps, informing him that Izmir forts and the territory with defense measures would be occupied by the Allied Forces in line with the 7th clause of the Armistice. On the same day, he sent a second note, saying that Izmir would be occupied on May 15, 1919 by the Greeks on behalf of the Allies and the fleet in the port would be the highest authority to ensure order during occupation.
John Michael de Robeck
Admiral Robeck was convinced that Kurdish-Armenian alliance would be politically beneficial for the respective parties and Britain. In his telegram to Lord Curzon on December 11, 1919, he reiterated that such an alliance would be in the best interests of Britain in the region and the demands of Kurds and Armenians should be carefully supported and promoted. In his reply dated December 20, Lord Curzon ordered the Commissariat to encourage and embolden the parties.323
It is perfectly normal that the demands of the Kurdish and Armenian people are fulfilled. What is noteworthy here, however, is the fact that the British deep state members wanted it only to further their own agenda. As soon as the conditions that suited their interests ceased to exist, they did not refrain from bombing Kurdish villages, as in the aftermath of the Treaty of Lausanne.
De Robeck, one of the names behind the occupation of Istanbul, tried to justify the occupation maintaining that if the Allies were to force peace, they had to overcome Turks in Istanbul and weaken their resistance.324
George Francis Milne
George Milne, a senior British army officer, was made the commander in charge of the occupation of Istanbul. He said the following of the Caucasian people and the Turks:
I am fully aware that the withdrawal of the British troops would probably lead to anarchy but I cannot see that the world would lose much if the whole of the inhabitants of the country cut each other’s throats. They are certainly not worth the life of one British soldier. The Georgians are merely disguised Bolsheviks …. The Armenians are what the Armenians have always been, a despicable race. The best are the inhabitants of Azerbaijan, though they are in reality uncivilized.325 (All the peoples mentioned here are above these remarks)
George Milne was extremely uncomfortable with the nationalist movement Mustafa Kemal started in Anatolia and wrote to the Ottoman Ministry of War on June 6, 1919 asking the authorities to call him back to Istanbul:
I consider the presence of General Kemal Pasha and his Staff in the provinces to be undesirable. It is unsettling to public opinion at this juncture that a distinguished General and Staff should be traveling about in the country, and I see no necessity for their labours from a military point of view. I request that you will order the immediate return to Constantinople of General Kemal Pasha and his Staff.326
Mustafa Kemal was indignant at Milne’s condescending tone towards the Turkish people and Istanbul government, and the desperate answers of the Ministry of Defense. He explained his feelings with the following words:
… yet this does not seem to wound the pride of the Minister of War, who, in all his transactions with the national organisation, is ever referring to questions of self-respect and scarcely every mentions the dignity of the Government who accepted the responsibility of safeguarding the independence of the Ottoman Empire. They will not allow that their dignity is already assailed and the independence of the State jeopardised. They do not even protest against this attack; they do not even venture to assert that they decline to make themselves the instrument for this blow against our independence.327
The truth is, the quoted disdainful statements are only a small part of those individuals’ remarks against Turks. Their hearts were full of hatred and a grudge for the Turkish people and didn’t refrain from clearly displaying this hatred before and after the Turkish War of Independence. They took every opportunity to crush and humiliate the Ottoman nations, which, in their own feeble mind, were inferior races. Today, the same mentality lives on. Some people, who wrongly believe that they can find friendship or a future in an alliance with the deep states, would do well to remember that.
Spies Across the Ottoman Territory Report to the Istanbul Government
The spies that were all over the Ottoman territory played a significant role in the implementation of the plan for the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. Spies founded states, divided countries, appointed kings and drew up borders. This wide network of spies was managed by the British, through the operation center in Istanbul that reported to the military intelligence. The occupation of Istanbul therefore offered much-needed logistics to this spying network. Scores of spies were dispatched to Anatolia, disguised as ‘occupation officers’.
As the national movement of independence gained momentum, this spying network shifted its focus to Turkish military plans. In 1921, Sir James Marshall-Cornwall was appointed as the special intelligence officer reporting to Sir Charles Harington Harington, the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied occupation army based in Istanbul. Marshall-Cornwall built a small but operational team to keep tabs on Mustafa Kemal Pasha and the nationalist movement. Speaking fluent Turkish, he was sent to Istanbul once again in 1941 to convince Ismet Inonu to join WWII as a British ally, but returned empty-handed.
The British Deep State’s Approach to the Sultanate and Plans for the Future of the Ottoman Empire
During WWI, British Prime Minister Lloyd George said that all Arabic speaking lands should be taken from the Ottoman Empire and placed under mandate and that Turks should have certain parts of Anatolia, but no European territory at all. He maintained that Turks should be given no part in the Straits or in the seas.328 This is the plan of the British deep state for the future of the Ottoman Empire and was built centuries previously.
What he meant was keeping the Turks in a small territory around Ankara, Konya and Central Anatolia. This plan was voiced explicitly by Lord Curzon, the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in Lausanne. In fact, even that plan was just a temporary stop on the way to their ultimate goal. The British deep state planned to oppress the Turkish Nation until all Turks were driven to Central Asia. This is the deep policy of the British deep state. Today, the circles that seek to give away Southeast Anatolia to the terrorist organization PKK, that desire a federal government in the Black Sea region after it is divided as West and East, that wish to separate the Mediterranean region and Antalya as federal areas, and that print maps depicting Istanbul as an international territory and Izmir and its vicinity as an independent state, are that very same deep state.
The report of the Committee on Asiatic Turkey, under the chairmanship of Sir Maurice de Bunsen, issued on June 30, 1915, made the dismemberment plan of the British deep state quite clear. The report recommended that the Ottoman territory be divided into five main regions/autonomous provinces: Syria, Palestine, Armenia, Anatolia/Turkey and Iraq. The report also said that the strategic locations along the line stretching from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf should be directly or indirectly placed under British control. The only way to do that was complete occupation of Palestine and Iraq. This way, they surmised, the British would be able to seize the entire economic privilege, oil incomes being the foremost, in Asiatic Turkey (including Mosul) in the post-war era.
British High Commissioner Admiral Webb wrote the following in a letter he sent to a friend on January 19, 1919:
Although we haven’t occupied their countries in full view, we are still appointing and dismissing their governors. We manage their police, control their media, enter their dungeons and release Greek and Armenian prisoners without caring about what crimes they committed. We keep their railways under our control and seize anything we want. Our policy is supported by the sharp edge of the bayonet… As long as we have the caliph under our control, we have extra control over the Islamic world.329
These words were uttered at a time when the British deep state thought that they were at the height of their control over the Ottoman Empire…
This arrogance and delusion of grandeur was the reason why the British deep state underestimated the Anatolian independence movement. The British, at first, didn’t believe in the national resistance. Renin, a daily of the time that was known with its views opposing Atatürk’s independence movement, explained it as follows:
Mustafa Kemal Pasha is trying to build a national movement in Anatolia. What a childish dream! How can the poor, downtrodden Anatolia, already lost in the war, stand up to the whole world? What is left in Anatolia, what is there so they can resist?330
The Treaty of Sèvres, signed after the Armistice of Mudros, was the final stage of the plan. It was one of the most surprising examples of the British deep state imperialism. Statesmen, who were supposedly the most civilized, most modern and liberal of the time, were ravenously making plans on conference tables to play with nations and build new power balances in the world. They planned not only to dissect the Ottoman Empire, which they wrongly dubbed the ‘sick man’, but also to occupy important regions and ports and thus take away its vital organs. The British deep state was confident that Turks, which they dismissed as defeated and despondent, would not object to all these occupation and dismemberment plans.
The British deep state planned to keep the Caliphate and sultanate as symbolic titles operating under their control. According to their plans, Istanbul would be made a separate state, and the Sultan would reside in Kocaeli or Bursa.331 However, Almighty God didn’t let Istanbul and Turkish lands, the place of the Mahdi’s (pbuh) emergence, fall into the hands of dajjali circles. These arrogant people, who considered themselves as the masterminds, made a big mistake and didn’t take into account the plan of Almighty God. They forgot that He controlled and ruled over all minds and plans.
They [unbelievers] plotted and God plotted. But God is the best of plotters. (Qur’an, 3:54)
‘An Independent State of Constantinople’: A Plan to Control the Straits
The post-war plan of the British deep state for Istanbul was to make it an independent state. The new state would straddle the Bosphorus Strait and would stretch to Çatalca in Europe and Izmit in Asia. This state was intended as a satellite-state that would secure British control over the straits. For this reason, the Dardanelles Strait and the Marmara Islands were also going to be included within the borders of this state. They planned for this state to be under the auspices of the League of Nations (the United Nations today) and there would be arms-free buffer zones between this state and its neighbors. The government would be run by British and French delegates in turns. According to the plan, it would be completely independent of the Ottoman Empire but independent of the Allies ONLY in terms of finance, justice and gendarme forces.
Today the same project is brought up on different occasions under various disguises. There are different models suggested such as making Istanbul a unique autonomous region, or its accession to EU apart from Turkey, with a different status. In a map published by The New York Times on May 14, 2016, Turkey is shown divided into different states, where Istanbul is shown as an independent state. As mentioned before, the plans of the British deep state are never shelved, they are only suspended or the players are changed. All their plans are put into motion as soon as the right time comes, even when that right time is centuries later.
However, the important thing is the fact that no one will ever be able to divide Turkey. There is no division or separation in the destiny of Turkey. Therefore, no matter how formidable or fool-proof the plans of the British deep state might seem, it will never be able to surmount the destiny created by Almighty God.
The problem of the British deep state during those days was their underestimation of the independence campaign and the patriotism of the Turks. The current representatives of the deep state are making that very same mistake today. These deep structure representatives with their mafia-like mentality fail to grasp the love of Turks for their country, nation and flag. They wrongly believe that they can achieve their goals by publishing in various media organs maps of an imaginary divided Turkey, making sinister connections with terror groups to this end or by using local spies/sycophants. They fail to understand that the Turkish Nation will never ever allow this to happen. They will soon understand that their plans will come to nothing and that there is no division in the destiny of Turkey.
In fact, the real problem of the British deep state is their inability to understand that God’s plan supersedes all other plans because God’s infinite power will overrule all insidious plans. God’s plan for destiny will definitely take place. Almighty God will never allow sincere, honest, righteous and pious people to fail:
God will not give the unbelievers any way against the believers… (Qur’an, 4:141)
Riots Against the Nationalist Forces in Anatolia and Their Deep State Connections
While the occupation of Istanbul continued, the British deep state was simultaneously making plans to suppress the independence campaign that was gaining momentum fast. First, they set up a unit, and trained and armed their soldiers. This small army was called Kuva-yi İnzibatiye (Forces of Order) and Süleyman Şefik Pasha was appointed as its commander. They also supported those gangs in Anatolia that rebelled against the Ankara government, and provided them with money and arms. These gangs, most notably Ahmet Anzavur, consisted of Caucasian refugees that fled the Russian civil war. During the first years of the independence campaign, on top of all the difficulties of forming a new state, Mustafa Kemal had to deal with these gangs.
The British deep state tried to turn Kurds in Anatolia against the Nationalist Forces. Lieutenant-Colonel Edward William Charles Noel, also known as the Lawrence of the Kurds, was an intelligence officer and was assigned the task of making the Kurds rise and secede Southeastern Anatolia from the Ottoman Empire.
Let’s hear what Mustafa Kemal Atatürk said about Noel in his Great Speech:
For the purpose of creating a fraternal fight between Turks and Kurds and helping build an independent Kurdistan under British control, they provoked Kurds. They spent huge sums of money to this end, spied endlessly… A British officer called Noel worked a long time in Diyarbakır to achieve this goal and resorted to all sorts of deceit and lies in his efforts.332
Noel, who argued that Kurds belonged to the Arian race and therefore were closer to Europeans than Turks, suggested the establishment of an autonomous Kurdish entity in Southeast Anatolia under British control.
Liberation of Istanbul
After the Turkish troops saved Izmir from enemy occupation on September 9, 1922, they turned north, to the Dardanelles Strait. As the Turkish and British armies engaged each other between September 15 and 23, discussions raged on in the British Parliament. Some wanted peace, while others pressed on to continue fighting. Finally, on September 23, it was decided that East Thrace and Istanbul be given to the Turks and right after that, on October 11, 1922, the Armistice of Mudanya, which officially ended the Ottoman Empire and certified the end of the Turkish War of Independence, was signed. Thus, the 100-year-old plan of the British deep state on Anatolia came to a complete end by means of the Anatolian independence movement led by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. The deep state held Prime Minister Lloyd George responsible for this failure and forced him to step down. George, from that point on, would never be influential again in British politics.
British troops did retreat from Istanbul, but kept their military presence intact in Mosul, Iraq, Arabia and Kuwait. The British deep state didn’t abandon its efforts of producing an Israel and Palestine issue. It never stopped interfering in Suez and Egypt, Syria or Jordan, never gave up on provoking the Kurds. The system the British deep state built in the Middle East after destroying the Ottoman Empire brought nothing but conflict and death to Muslims. In the 20th century, more than 100 coups and 30 civil wars took place in the Middle East and North Africa, and as a result, more than 15 million Muslims lost their lives. Assassinations, uprisings, massacres, chemical weapons and bloody wars where Muslims martyred other Muslims became part of daily life. The onset of the 21st century has been even bloodier.
Similar incidents happened not only in the Middle East, but also in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. As the members of the deep state enjoyed themselves in their duchies, and their country estates in Northern islands, Muslim blood soaked vast lands. Strangely enough, the British deep state didn’t win those wars using its own soldiers. Muslims were forced to fight other Muslims.
Going back to the conflict atmosphere that the British deep state created in the Middle East, Kurds were deceived with promises of having their own state, as a result of which, they were heavily suppressed and oppressed by the Iraqi and Syrian governments. Shias were provoked against their Sunni neighbors and vice versa. Conservatives, patriots, liberals and leftists were pitted against each other. While the Kuwait occupation was underway, the agents of the British deep state were telling Saddam Hussein that Kuwait belonged to him and that he needed to claim what belonged to him. As Hafiz al-Assad was massacring people in Hama, his so-called advisors told him that if he didn’t kill them, they would kill him. Arab armies, before collectively launching an attack against Israel, got the green light from the British diplomats. The British deep state of course knew that Arab armies would be defeated by Israel. Egypt, nationalizing the Suez Canal, supposedly for its own interests, only helped the British and no one else.
One point should be noted here: it wouldn’t be realistic to put the entire blame on the British deep state for everything that goes wrong in the Middle East. There is no doubt that the British deep state schemes are ruthless and sinister. However, falling prey to all the plots of the deep state is actually one of the biggest mistakes and failures of some of the Muslims in the Islamic community. Some Muslim societies that forgot to trust God and follow the Qur’an, that treated superstitions as religion, that got used to viewing themselves as inferior and helpless after believing in the ‘superior race’ lies and deceptions produced by the British deep state, suffered such heavy defeat as a result. Believing in the ‘superior race’ nonsense, they became vulnerable to the deep state propaganda. For this reason, they paid a heavy price for this mistake and are still paying it. If they continue to stay away from the Qur’an and distance themselves from their fellow Muslims, they will continue to be pawns in the plots of the deep state. It is crucial that this very real danger is recognized and that the Muslim community comes together around Islam –only around Islam based on the Qur’an. It is crucial that the Islamic community joins forces to lead the world in terms of quality, love, peace and justice.
Those who are irreligious are the friends and protectors of one another. If you do not act in this way [be friends and protectors of one another] there will be turmoil in the land and great corruption. (Qur’an, 8:73)
The British Deep State’s Efforts to Take Islam away from the Muslims
The followers of the former British Prime Minister William Ewart Gladstone, who said 200 years ago, “For as long as there were followers of that accursed book [surely the Qur’an is above such remarks], Europe would know no peace”,333 are today doing everything in their power to keep the Islamic world away from the Qur’an. As a matter of fact, they have been successful to a certain extent. To a large extent, the Qur’an was taken away from the Muslims, and in its place, a radical philosophy fraught with superstitions was introduced. It shouldn’t be forgotten that the modern policy of the British deep state is taking the authentic Islam, in other words Islam as defined in the Qur’an, from the Muslims. The deep British powers are perfectly aware of the fact that Qur’anic Islam is the epitome of civilization, modernism, and is the true source of peace, love and democracy. They are also cognizant of the fact that such an excellent system will triumph over the pseudo socialist, truly communist-anarchist-imperialist system they are trying to build. This awareness is the reason why the British deep state has always targeted true Islam.
In its relentless efforts to end and dismember the Ottoman Empire, the British deep state has always resorted to this dirty method. Some Ottoman pashas and leaders who didn’t know the Qur’anic Islam, who couldn’t find any faith-powered strength in themselves and who were unable to think properly under the influence of superstitions, prepared this destruction almost with their own hands. It should be kept in mind that as the British deep state continues to shatter the Middle East countries today, it uses the very same method. Knowing through experience that the best way to destroy is ‘pitting brother against brother’, the British deep state seizes every opportunity to do so, over and over again. Since this plot is now exposed, it is crucial that the Muslim community sees the trouble here and identifies the mistake.
Division and conflicts will not end by making more Muslims enemies. On the contrary, everything should be done to bring Muslims together. This can be done only and only by holding fast to the Qur’an. Therefore, the Muslim world should quickly rectify this situation by correcting their mistakes and adhering to our noble book the Qur’an.
[Believers are] Those who respond to their Lord and establish prayer, and manage their affairs by mutual consultation and give of what We have provided for them; those who, when they are wronged, defend themselves. (Qur’an, 42:38-39)
They desire to extinguish God’s Light with their mouths but God will perfect His Light, though the unbelievers hate it. It is He Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth to exalt it over every other religion, though the idolaters hate it. (Qur’an, 61:8-9)
PART VII
The Road to Lausanne
After the Great War
When Sir Adam Block, the British delegate and President of the Council of the Ottoman Public Debt Administration, was preparing to leave Istanbul after war was declared in 1914, he made the following strange remark:
If Germany wins, you will be a German colony. But if Britain wins, you will perish!334
The devastating WWI that started with the firing of a pistol on July 28, 1914 came to an official end on November 11, 1918. Around two months after the finalization of hostilities, the Paris Peace Conference was convened. On January 18, 1919 some of the parties began to enforce the secret deals they had previously drafted while the war was still raging on. Britain and France, to avoid complete violation of Wilson’s Fourteen Points, but not willing to give up on their colonial aspirations, proposed ‘war reparations’ instead of ‘war indemnity’ and ‘mandates’ instead of ‘colonialism’.
The Paris Peace Conference witnessed heated discussions on the laws of war and on the sharing of territory; but these weren’t the only topics debated. Secret steps were being taken to shape a new world order. With a session held on May 30, 1919, it was decided to make an elusive organization official, which the world’s deep state would later use to shape the world. To better understand this structure, which is today known as the ‘Chatham House’, let’s first learn some facts about its founding father, Lionel George Curtis.
Architects of the Treaty of Sèvres
Lionel Curtis first came to prominence during his activities in the British colonies in South Africa between 1899-1909. Appointed by Sir Alfred Milner to carry out various duties in the region, Curtis was accompanied by other Oxford graduates, who were also sent by Milner.
Known as ‘Milner’s Kindergarten’, this was a close-knit group of people with similar educational backgrounds, lifestyles and shared values. They spent their time together in South Africa, and had frequent debates on social and political matters. The Kindergarten consisted of the following people:
George Geoffrey Dawson: Director and Editor of the Times magazine
Richard Feetham: Lawyer, Judge of Appeal on the South Africa Court of Appeals, member of the Transvaal Legislative Council
William Lionel Hitchens: Chairman of the English Electric Company
Robert Henry Brand: Managing director in Lazard Brothers Co.
Sir Patrick Duncan: Governor General of South Africa
John Dove: Journalist, editor of the Round Table journal
J. F. (Peter) Perry
Geoffrey Robinson
Hugh Wyndham
After 1905, Philip Kerr (British ambassador to the US, 1939-1940), Lord Selborne and Sir Dougal Orme Malcolm also became a part of the group.
The activities of the Kindergarten group continued long after these particular members left South Africa.
The goal of Alfred Milner was uniting the South African colonies under the British flag. He helped transfer money to the Kindergarten from the ‘Rhodes Scholarship’, which was previously set up in line with Cecil Rhodes’ will. The readers will recall from the first chapters of the book that Cecil Rhodes was one of the prominent Darwinist and racist members of the British deep state, who became rich in South Africa through diamond trade and mining.
In the meantime, Lionel Curtis began to be called ‘the prophet’ within the Kindergarten (Certainly prophets are above such remarks). Curtis managed to unite South Africa on May 31, 1910, through his pursuit of a global ideal. To Curtis, South Africa was a ‘microcosm’ and what was true for the British Empire was equally true in South Africa. After the unification was completed on the continent, he believed that the Kindergarten could “begin some work of the same kind” on the scale of the Empire.335
In 1909, Alfred Milner met with potential sponsors and supporters helping Lionel Curtis with one more task: enabling him to organize a Round Table meeting in the residence of Lord Anglesey at Plas Newydd in Wales, Great Britain on September 4-5, 1909. In addition to the Kindergarten team, Lords Howick, Lovat, Wolmer and F. S. Oliver were also in attendance. Shortly after, another exclusively British lineup joined, which included Leo Amery, Lord Robert Cecil, Reginald Coupland, Edward Grigg and Alfred Zimmern.
Lionel Curtis published an article in December 1918 in the Round Table publication, where he proposed that a League of Nations should be built after WWI to oversee a worldwide mandatory system. He believed that a British-American alliance in the management of the system would ensure international balance. Consequently, he was invited to the Paris Peace Conference. Then, he attended the League of Nations session chaired by Robert Cecil from the British Ministry of Information, who was also in the cadres of the Round Table. In 1919, the American-British Institute of International Affairs was founded, which would later transform into CFR (the Council on Foreign Relations) in New York, and the Royal Institute of International Affairs, a.k.a. Chatham House, in London.
First presidents of Chatham House:
Robert Cecil
Arthur James Balfour
John R. Clynes
Edward Grey
Interestingly, this lineup was also behind the dismemberment plans made for the Ottoman Empire in the Paris Peace Conference as well as the Treaty of Sèvres.
Furthermore, again during the conference, the British-led commission decided to build the League of Nations.
New Turkey on the way to Lausanne
The defeat of the Greek army in Anatolia on August 30, 1922 by the Turkish army led to the Armistice of Mudanya on October 11, 1922. This cease-fire agreement stipulated that occupation forces leave Turkish territory and a final peace treaty be signed. Accordingly, the Allies sent a notice on October 27, 1922 to the Ankara government and invited it to the peace conference that would start in Lausanne on November 13, 1922.
Turkey fought 10 years to be able to reach the road to Lausanne. From the Balkan Wars that started in 1912 until the end of the Turkish Independence War in 1922, 5 million people lost their lives. Compared to other countries that fought in WWI, this represented the biggest casualty. The Turkish nation emerged battered, tired and impoverished from this horrible war and it lacked a state. However, despite all the setbacks, the Turkish people never gave up and made a comeback with a new state through the Treaty of Lausanne. This treaty is the sole peace treaty that is still in effect since WWI. All other treaties signed in the post-war era were revoked by WWII. In other words, Turkey is the only country that has spent the last 93 years without a war.
The Conference of Lausanne was an arduous, tense and strenuous negotiation process that saw hard bargaining. The negotiations started on November 20, 1922 but only on July 24, 1923 were the parties able to reach an agreement and sign the treaty. Furthermore, matters like Mosul, the Straits and Hatay could not be solved and were postponed to a later date. From time to time, talks hit a dead end and were halted or suspended. However, the new Turkish state was resolute on the National Pact (Misak-ı Milli) and would not budge on its stance on the Straits or the capitulations. Therefore, when the negotiations came to an end, the National Pact borders were preserved to a large extent despite minor surrender of some lands.
Britain, which proved to be the main source of difficulty for the new Turkish state during the negotiation process, due to its deceitful policies and ruses - even intercepting telegrams of the Turkish delegation - intensely employed deep state policies during the Lausanne negotiations and did its best to try and ambush the Turkish side.
Britain before the Lausanne negotiations
It will be helpful to understand the British approach to Turkey before the Lausanne negotiations, and how it shaped its relevant strategies under the influence of the deep state. This point is important because this section of the book will focus mainly on the British deep state ruses against Turkey during the negotiations. To do that, one should first understand how the then British leaders viewed Turks and young Turkey.
Most British leaders, as previously explained, are selected among people that will risk almost everything for the ‘interests of Britain’ and the selection is almost always made by the British deep state. Because of this strategy, all the Conservative leaders that took office throughout history saw Russia as a big threat and opted to support the Ottoman against this threat. Needless to say, Ottoman being a powerful empire played a huge role in that policy. However, it should be well remembered that the British deep state inherently chooses to side with the might and not the right.
When the Ottoman Empire began to lose its power, and became vulnerable as ‘a rich source ready to be exploited’, the policies of the British deep state changed. This shift in attitude was marked by the Liberal Party’s Gladstone assuming power in 1880 and his sudden hostile attitude towards the Ottoman Empire. Gladstone’s East policy, as explained before, was largely built on hatred that reveals itself in the following baseless claims (Noble Turkish nation is above such claims):
No government ever has so sinned, none has proved itself so incorrigible in sin, or which is the same, so impotent in reformation.336
Let the Turks now carry away their abuses, in the only possible manner, namely, by carrying off themselves.337
Surely, it is not a coincidence that these remarks were uttered at a time when the British deep state started propagating the lie of Darwinism and when Darwin particularly singled out the Turks as a ‘primitive race’ (Noble Turkish nation is above such remarks). Superior-inferior race concepts, developed by means of the false theory of evolution, are nothing but a deceit and a curse introduced to the world by, again, the British deep state. The policy of hostility towards Turks was developed in line with that strategy.
The anti-Turkish policy of Lloyd George, who was another Liberal Party Prime Minister of Britain during the Lausanne negotiations, should be studied as a phenomenon not separate from the said strategy. The following 1914 remarks of Lloyd George clearly show his ill-natured outlook on the Turks:
The Turks are a human cancer, a creeping agony in the flesh of the lands which they misgovern, rotting every fibre of life. And now that the great day of reckoning has come upon the nation, I am glad. I am glad the Turk is to be called to a final account for his long record of infamy against humanity in this gigantic battle between right and wrong.338
At the end of the war, Lloyd George was boasting about having defeated the Ottoman Empire, supposedly the best thing Britain had ever done. However, he was unwittingly revealing the 500-year-old insidious plan of the British deep state. He wanted to take control of Anatolia, deprive the Turks of land to live on and even wanted to completely annihilate them. No one was able to do that before. George, being among the victors of WWI, must have believed that he finally had done it. His words during a speech given at the House of Commons on October 29, 1919, suggest so:
Practically the whole of the conquest of Turkey was the achievement of British arms. There were 1,500,000 men put into the fight with Turkey. It was the achievement of Great Britain, and we have got to hold it now. That is our doing. We have accomplished one of the finest tasks for civilisation this country has ever set its hand to—the emancipation of a vast country, one of the richest in the world, from the blighting influence of the Turk. After civilisation has failed for hundreds of years to accomplish it, Britain has done it.339
The Treaty of Sévres was so destructive for the Turks, it could well have been the dream of Lloyd George. The British deep state didn’t come up with such a destructive treaty even for Germany, which started the war in the first place. Even though all the defeated countries had to surrender some territory, the treaties signed with them didn’t make their entire countries open to occupation, like Turkey did. Lloyd George was convinced during the war that the ones that really needed to be ‘punished’ were the Turks. He believed that the goal of the ‘Question of the East’, a project of centuries, had to be achieved. The British deep state was never comfortable with the Turks continuing their presence strongly in the middle of that ‘question’. It must have seen the outcome of WWI as an opportunity for a true solution to this ‘problem’, because Lloyd George didn’t hesitate from voicing his intentions after the war (Noble Turkish nation is above such remarks):
When peace conditions [of Sévres] are announced the Turks will see what heavy punishment will be meted out to them for their madness, their blindness and their crimes… The punishment will be such it will satisfy even their greatest enemies.340
Sévres was indeed the death warrant of the Ottoman Empire, drawn up with this hatred, and it was built on the centuries-old plans of the British deep state. The Istanbul Government, affected by defeat, signed this death warrant without hesitation, and the Allied Powers, acting under the directions of the British deep state, one by one, began to invade our beautiful country.
It should be remembered that the destiny created by our Almighty Lord will always be in favor of the good and the innocent. Once again, this is what happened with Turkey. Even though Turkey lost in WWI, it didn’t really lose. Lloyd George, the Turkophobe, made a big mistake. He underestimated Mustafa Kemal, his comrades, and the brave and pious Turkish people. The victors will always be the supporters of God.
As for those who make God their friend, and His Messenger and those who have faith: it is the party of God who are victorious! (Qur’an, 5:56)
The Turkish militia force led by Mustafa Kemal put up a great fight and pushed back the arrogant invasions of the Allies to rewrite the history of bravery. Lloyd George’s plans failed one after another as the Turkish state and nation weren’t made history, and didn’t leave Europe. The so-called Sévres ‘punishment’, in the words of George, was thrown away unrealized. The British deep state was heavily routed by the new Turkish state and was forced to sit down at the table at Lausanne, following an epic Turkish victory.
The Lausanne negotiations have been analyzed and studied so many times before. However, this book focuses on the sensitivities of the British deep state, which came to light during the negotiations: Mosul and capitulations. Understanding these points is crucial because the unyielding attitude of the British regarding these topics during the talks gave away its future plans for the Middle East and Turkey. Indeed, they were the reason why the Lausanne negotiations came to a halt and even at one point, the resumption of the war preparations. Today, we can better understand the large-scale plans behind these two points, which the British side so adamantly pushed during those days.
To better understand this plan, first let’s look at the root causes of the scourge of the PKK and the so-called ‘Kurdish issue’ that certain parties try to show as a problem for Turkey. The Mosul talks at Lausanne reveal a lot about it.
Mosul Issue at the Treaty of Lausanne
Mustafa Kemal sent İsmet Pasha (İnönü) as the chief negotiator for Turkey to the Lausanne Peace Negotiations. However, for that to be possible, İsmet Pasha had to be in the Council of Ministers. In a quick succession of events, he was made the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and was appointed as the head representative for the Turkish side. Turkish Parliament appointed a Board led by İsmet Pasha and consisting of Hasan Bey (Saka), MP for Trabzon, and Dr. Rıza Nur Bey, MP for Sinop. This Board, in turn, set up a delegation of experts to help them at Lausanne.
The chief negotiator for the Lausanne negotiations, İsmet Pasha, in his speech on November 3, 1922, assured the Parliament that they would not deviate from the National Pact. The resulting discussions and proposals were later handed to him by the Speaker of the Parliament as the decision of the Parliament.
* The general headlines to be discussed at Lausanne were as follows:
* Border issues (Iraq border-Mosul, Southern border-Syria, Wester border- Greece and Western Thrace)
* Capitulations,
* Minorities and foreign schools,
* War indemnity,
* Public debts,
* The Straits,
* The Dodecanese Islands,
* Ecumenical Patriarchate.
During the Peace Conference of Lausanne, Great Britain was represented by the then Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon. It is important to note that Lord Curzon was no different than Lloyd George in terms of his anti-Turkish sentiment. And just like George, he was one of the architects of the Treaty of Sévres. Never hesitating to voice his aversion to the Turks even during those years, he frequently said that Turks must definitely be driven out of Istanbul. What Curzon really had in mind was confining the Turks to a small Asian country with Konya as the center, taking control of Istanbul, Thrace, and the Aegean and Mediterranean coastlines and creating Britain-dependent countries like ‘Kurdistan and Armenia’ in East and Southeast Anatolia. What is particularly interesting is the fact that this horrible scenario advocated by Curzon is still one of the most basic goals of the British deep state.
This goal explicitly spelled out by Curzon was found risky by some circles. As a result, the British Cabinet instead suggested that the Turks and the Caliph remain in Istanbul, but that Istanbul should be further weakened. However, Curzon wasn’t ready to give up on his impossible dreams:
We are losing an opportunity for which Europe has waited for nearly five centuries, and which may not recur. The idea of respectable and docile Turkish Government at Constantinople, preserved from its hereditary vices by a military cordon of the Powers —including, be it remembered, a permanent British garrison of 10,000-15,000 men— is in my judgment a chimera… But beyond all I regret that the main object for which the war in the East was fought and the sacrifice of Gallipoli endured —namely, the liberation of Europe from the Ottoman Turk— has after an almost incredible expenditure of life and treasure been thrown away in the very hour when it had been obtained, and that we shall have left to our descendants —who knows after how much further sacrifice and suffering?— a task from which we have flinched.341
Heavily influenced by the Darwinism scourge created and propagated by the British deep state, Curzon mentioned the so-called ‘hereditary vices’ of the Turks, referred to races and almost admitted that the real goal behind WWI was ‘the liberation of Europe from the Ottoman Turk’.
As mentioned above, the Mosul question proved to be a highly disputed topic between the Turks and the British during the Lausanne negotiations. It should be remembered that the British deep state had the plan of building a ‘Kurdish state’ in southeast Turkey as part of the Lausanne talks. The establishment of the Turkish-Iraqi border ruined the British deep state plans, but at the same time made Mosul the center of debate. Two countries, which previously had many encounters on battlefields, had to prove their skills on a diplomatic level. The British side, under the auspices of the British deep state, didn’t hesitate to resort to many insidious methods.
In order to fully understand the details of this diplomacy war over who would win Mosul, let’s have a brief look at the history of the region.
Mosul throughout History
Mosul has been a Turkish land since the Seljuks captured it in 1055. After Sultan Selim I’s Chaldiran victory in 1514, it became a part of the Ottoman Empire and then a state in 1534, following Sultan Suleiman I’s campaign in Baghdad. This made Mosul the center of a province (vilayet) that consisted of Sulaymaniyah, Kirkuk and Mosul sanjaks.342 This province was surrounded by Iran in the east, Diyarbakır in the north, Baghdad in the south, Damascus in the west, Aleppo and Zor Sanjak in northwest.
However, an imperialist power with sly goals was emerging in the 1800s with dirty plans for this region, which had remained under Turkish rule for around 1000 years and 400 years under Ottoman rule: it was the British deep state…
Mosul was important to Britain due to the latter’s imperialist exploitation policies. In the early 19th century, Britain had the highest number of Muslim colonies, and saw Iraq and Arabia, en route to India, strategically crucial to its Middle East policy. The British colonial empire believed that the safety of its borders and transportation routes, as well as the future expansion of its hegemony across the world, depended on being able to get to the open seas, maintain the power balance in Europe and control the world’s oil policy.343 Mosul, naturally, was a crucial part of this plan due to its strategic position.
In addition to its geo-strategic location, Mosul was extremely valuable because underneath its virgin soil laid millions of barrels’ worth of oil.
These were indispensable factors for the British deep state. More important was coming up with a strategy to end the Turkish presence in Europe and Anatolia for good. Mosul was at the heart of this strategy, which following pages will be focusing on in more detail.
In 1890, the investigation ordered by Sultan Abdul Hamid II revealed that Mosul and Baghdad were home to rich oil resources. As a result, the Sultan, by decrees issued in 1890 and 1898, declared these regions ‘Magnificent Lands’ (Memalik-i Şahane) and made them his personal property.344
However, when the Young Turks dethroned Abdul Hamid II on April 27, 1909, the ownership of Mosul and Baghdad were transferred to the Ministry of Finance. This development suited the interests of the British deep state and influenced their later strategies.
In 1909, Britain signed a deal with the Ottoman Empire and founded a bank named ‘National Bank of Turkey’, with 100% British capital, to create capital for its oil surveys and most importantly, to keep a look-out for British interests. In 1912, a group led by Sir Ernest Cassel started the ‘Turkish Petroleum Company’, once again with complete British capital, and to search for oil in Ottoman lands and run the oil business.345 At this point, it will be useful to remember how the British deep state first uses financial systems to build its hegemony. Once again, this strategy was in place as a means to strengthen the British deep state domination of the already weak Ottoman Empire. The scenario was oddly similar to what happened in India.
Mosul during WWI
When WWI broke out, the Ottomans didn’t have a significant military presence in Iraq. On August 2, 1914, general mobilization was declared throughout the entire empire346 and in the days following, the Turkish army was reconstructed on the Iraq front. However, it didn’t look very likely for this army to be able to fight off the regular armies of Europe. It was very difficult to replenish uniforms and equipment or transfer weapons to the area.347
Moreover, the number of troops in Iraq was very low. Ostensibly due to the Italo-Turkish war, the Balkan riots and the Balkan wars, the Ottoman army had to shift its focus away from Iraq. However, according to Ahmed İzzet Pasha, one of the Ottoman grand viziers, the real reason was different. The Ottoman Empire never contemplated the prospect that British could launch an attack in the region. In his memoirs, he explains the dilemma:
Even the kids know that the British have had plans for Iraq since a long time ago. Owing to the impressive cultural legacy and history of civilization of Iraq and Mesopotamia, and its reputation that, with good management and utilization, it could rival the fertility of Nile, Punjabi, Sindh and Ganges basins, these places proved their worth for their owners but also stoked the hunger of big occupying states. The tombs and families of Imam al-A’zam, extremely sacred to Muslims and particularly dear to Shia and very sacred to Sunnis, and the tomb of Abdul-Qadir Gilani, very beloved to Indian Muslims are located in Iraq. Therefore, it could be easily seen that Britain, with already a sizable Muslim subject population and with hopes of being defender of Hejaz, would benefit greatly, in terms of its Islam policy, from capturing this region. It was only natural that the British would set its eyes on Iraq, also for the purpose of preventing this strategically important place from being captured by a strong enemy that could pose a future threat against India. Separating Iraq region from local forces is the same as provoking and inviting the British government to invade this property of ours. Therefore, it is a great mistake that more troops are not dispatched to these regions, before the ultimate need arises.348
Although Ahmed İzzet Pasha clearly pointed to the severity of the situation in the region and the sinister plans of the British deep state, sufficient troops weren’t stationed at Mosul. Needless to say, the fact that the Ottoman Empire was fresh out of the Balkan Wars at the time played a great role in this.
Plans to partition the Ottoman Empire
When the Ottoman Empire entered the First World War, Britain revised its strategic and political plans. In 1915, under the chairmanship of Sir Maurice de Bunsen, the ‘Committee on Asiatic Turkey’ was set up, began its work on April 8, 1915 and submitted its report on June 30, 1915. The commission suggested in its report that Ottoman lands be divided into five big regions/autonomous provinces: Syria, Palestine, Armenia, Anatolia/Turkey and Iraq.1 It also stipulated that the strategic points along the line from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf be taken under control, directly or indirectly. This could be achieved only by complete invasion of Palestine and Iraq.2 According to Lord Curzon, the western borders of India lie along the Euphrates and could be taken under control only by means of Mosul vilayet. Thus, the British would be able to obtain all manner of economic privileges, most notably oil, in Asiatic Turkey, including Mosul.3
\1. Selçuk Ural, “Mütareke Döneminde İngiltere’nin Güneydoğu Anadolu Politikası”, Ankara Üniversitesi Türk İnkilap Tarihi Enstitüsü Atatürk Yolu Dergisi, p. 39, May 2007
\2. David Fromkin, Barışa Son Veren Barış (Peace That Ended War), translated by Mehmet Harmancı, Istanbul, 1994, pp.137-140; M. Kemal Öke, Musul Meselesi Kronolojisi (1918-1926) (Chronology of Mosul Issue), Istanbul: Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı, 1987, p. 15
\3. İhsan Şerif Kaymaz, Musul Sorunu Petrol ve Kürt Sorunları ile Bağlantılı Tarihsel ve Siyasal Bir İnceleme (Mosul Issue, Historical and Political Analysis In Terms of Petroleum and Kurdish Issues), Istanbul: Otopsi Yayınları, 2003, p. 49; Ersal Yavi, Kürdistan Ütopyası (Kurdistan Utopia), vol. 1, Istanbul: Yazıcı Basım Yayın, 2006, p. 63
Iraq after the Siege of Kut
Despite all its shortcomings and previous defeats, the Ottoman army was still successful on many occasions on the Iraq front, which was very important for the Ottoman Empire. On November 22, 1915, the British were heavily defeated at Kut Al Amara. This unexpected defeat shook them greatly. The Kut Al Amara victory by the Turkish army is a very significant achievement that should be remembered as well and as often as the Gallipoli victory.
The British forces couldn’t accept this unexpected defeat and made a particular effort after that point not to leave Iraq to the Ottoman Empire. To achieve their goals, they employed tactics to divide from within. After the Kut Al Amara rout, the British deep state increased the number of spies in the region, who were very knowledgeable about the fabric of Iraq, speaking better Arabic than Arabs and better Kurdish than Kurds. British also took advantage of people of Middle Eastern origins, who lived in Britain and who thought that they were indebted to Britain.349 The use of Britons of Middle Eastern origin against the Middle East is known to be a deep state policy that is still in use. Many nations, put under obligation to Britain throughout history, were seen to be potential agents willing to serve the deep British policies and were used thus.
Even in October 1918, when WWI came to a conclusion, the British soldiers continued to advance towards Mosul. The Iraq front became a place where the Ottoman 6th Army suffered great losses.
Post-War Iraq
At the time of the signing of the Armistice of Mudros on October 30, 1918, marking the end of WWI for the Ottoman Empire, the positions of Ottoman and British forces in Iraq were as follows:
The British had advanced up to Al-Hazar, Al-Qayyarah oil wells, Altun Kupri, As-Salahiyah and Kirkuk line. Ottoman forces were dominant over Raqqa, Deir Ez-Zor, Al-Mayadin, Sinjar, Tal Afar, Hamam al-Alil, Sulaymaniyah and Halabja line.350
The Turks optimistically hoped that the places under Turkish control at the date of the signing of the armistice would be considered the ‘Armistice Line’. Even though according to the armistice conditions the forces in the region should stay put in their current positions, the British forces didn’t oblige. Continuing to advance, the British entered Hamam al-Alil on November 1 and after declaring that they would invade Mosul, asked Turkish forces to retreat to 5 km north of the city of Mosul.
Ali İhsan Pasha reported this demand of the British to the grand vizier and, as a result of a series of telegram exchanges, the grand vizier ordered Ali İhsan Pasha to evacuate the city on November 15. Complying, the Pasha left Mosul to the British on November 10 and retreated to Nusaybin, where he established his headquarters.351 As a result, British occupied Mosul after WWI, in violation of armistice and international war rules.
This occupation, though, didn’t help the British initially, because they couldn’t achieve domination in the region. The tribes and people in the region didn’t want the British. People of Kirkuk and Sulaymaniyah refused to pay tax to them, and frequent street fights became a familiar sight. The majority of the indigenous people sided with the Turks. People of Mosul supported the Turkish independence movement that got even stronger with the opening of the new Parliament in Ankara. Even the Arabs in the region considered cooperating with Mustafa Kemal Pasha against the British. Based on British documents, Mim Kemal Öke explains that the Arabs and Kurds in Mosul preferred to trust Anatolia, rather than Faisal supported by the British.352 There were multiple reasons behind this choice and İsmet Pasha explained these as follows:
1- The residents of Mosul vilayet insistently demanded to be annexed by Turkey; because they knew that only that way they could be part of an independent country, and not a colonized people. Furthermore, those people have considered themselves Turks since 1055 and Ottomans since 1514.
2- Geographically and politically, this vilayet was a part of Anatolia. The British deep state felt it had to get to Anatolia to benefit from the Mediterranean trade and saw Mosul as a key that would unlock the doors.
3- In legal terms, since Mosul is still a part of the Ottoman Empire, any agreements or treaty Britain signs for Mosul are invalid.
4- In terms of Turkey’s trade relations and the safety of the region, it is imperative that Turkey controls Mosul, which sits at the crossroads of the paths that join the south of Anatolia.
5- Most importantly, Mosul is a Turkish vilayet. For centuries, it had existed as a part of a Turkish state, and the Kurds, Arabs and Turks living on those lands are still a part of the Turkish state. Accepting the rule of another country is impossible for the indigenous people, who call themselves Turks.
6- After the end of the war, the Mosul vilayet, like other occupied regions of the Ottoman Empire, was taken from Turks in violation of the rules of the armistice. For this reason, it is necessary that Mosul, like other occupied regions, are returned to Turkey.353
The Lion’s Den
After WWI ended, the British deep state was trying to conclude its occupation of Istanbul and Anatolia through spying operations, and was forging alliances with other European countries in a bid to solidify its steps towards its greater goals.
Allied Powers, the victors of the world war, shared mandate regions and oil at the San Remo Conference in Italy on April 25, 1920. Britain obtained 75% of Mosul’s oil revenues, and received the control of the oil companies. France, on the other hand, settled for 25%. Further, British showed the ‘election’ of King Faisal in Iraq as the acceptance of the British mandate by the local people and persuaded the League of Nations in San Remo to accept it. Strangely, although the mandates could be placed only by the League of Nations at the time, at the instigation of Britain, the rule was applied in reverse order.354
One of the important purposes of the San Remo Conference was the founding of an autonomous Kurdish state in the southeastern part of Turkey. Britain suggested that an independent Kurdish state or a federation of tribes should be built and should be free from any official control of other powers. However, due to the reservations of France, the proposal was rejected, which prompted to make the British to make another move. This strategic move would allow the Kurds to not only gain local autonomy but also apply to the League of Nations for full independence within a year.355 This development clearly revealed the true intentions of the British deep state. The aspiration of building an independent Kurdish state had always been their true goal, and a major reason for the Mosul issue. The British deep state viewed such a British-controlled state including southeastern Turkey as a crucial goal and hoped that it would weaken the Turks and even help expel them from Anatolia.
British Prime Minister Lloyd George said on May 19, 1920 during the San Remo Conference that the Kurds would not be able to survive unless they were supported by a major state power and revealed the approach of the British deep state to the matter:
It will be difficult to convince all the Kurds to accept a new protector, as they are used to the Turkish rule… Mosul, of which mountainous areas is home to Kurds and South Kurdistan, which contains it, are of concern to British interests. It is believed that Mosul region can be separated from other regions and join a new independent Kurdish state to be established. … However, it will be very difficult to solve this problem through an agreement.356
When the victors forced the defeated countries to sign treaties, the Turks proved an exception. Although the now ineffective Istanbul government had signed the Treaty of Sévres, the new Turkish state flat out refused to recognize it. Thus began a long war of independence for the Turks, even if they had just emerged battered from the devastating WWI. Nevertheless, the Turks managed to drive the enemy out of their country, and were now getting ready to sit down at the negotiation table at Lausanne in a stronger position compared to other defeated countries of the war. The Allied Powers, having to end their occupation of Anatolia after facing the epic heroism and bravery of Atatürk’s forces, tried to defeat the Turks at the table in Lausanne. The British deep state’s main goal at Lausanne was making the Turks accept the Sévres. What they failed to take into account was that this time there was a different Turkish administration. This Turkish state represented an altruistic, passionate, unconquerable nation, who fought tooth and nail under the leadership of the great Turk Mustafa Kemal, and secured a phenomenal victory. All the sides at Lausanne, most notably Britain, would soon realize this.
Efforts to provoke the Kurds of Anatolia
The Society for the Rise of Kurdistan was established on the day Armistice of Mudros was signed, which was October 30, 1918. The particular attribute of this society was its close ties to the authorities of the British deep state and that it served almost as the center of British spying efforts. Mustafa Kemal himself made it clear that the society aimed to build an independent Kurdish state under foreign protection.1 The British deep state used such organizations as fronts to devise its plans for building a Kurdish state in Anatolia. British High Commissioner Admiral John de Robeck, made this plan very clear on March 26, 1920.
“Kurdistan must completely secede from Turkey and gain independence. We can reconcile the interests of Armenians and the Kurds. Seyid Abdülkadir, the head of Kurdish Club in Istanbul (Society for the Rise of Kurdistan) and Şerif Pasha, the Kurdish delegate in Paris, are at our service.”2
The aforementioned Şerif Pasha is the person who started the separatist movements in Anatolia under the direction of the British deep state. Together with Sheikh Abdülkadir, he made sure that the Treaty of Sévres had an ‘independent Kurdish state’ clause.
However, this plan of the British deep state came to nothing.
In April 1919, the tribes that Major Noel worked to draw to British side, vowed to fight on the side of the Ottoman Empire against the occupiers until their last breath. A telegram sent by the British High Commission to London reveals that 30,000 Kurds would fight along the side of Mustafa Kemal Pasha as soon as the Turkish War of Independence started. Around the same time, Kurdish tribal leaders were attending the Erzurum Congress and were elected to the Representative Committee.
Şerif Pasha and Sheikh Abdülkadir, spies and minions of the British deep state, carried out propaganda claiming that Kurds wanted to leave the Ottoman Empire. This propaganda led Kurdish leaders all over the country to send countless telegrams swearing allegiance first to the Ottoman Parliament and then to the Turkish Parliament in Ankara.3
One telegram sent to the Turkish Parliament on February 26, 1920 read as follows: “We learned about the separatist efforts of traitor and heretic Şerif Pasha, targeting Kurds. Turks and Kurds are one. Kurds and Turks are true brothers in blood and religion. They share the same land. Kurds never consider leaving the Ottoman community or the Islamic Union. They wish to live within the Islamic Union until the end of the world. We hereby declare to the whole world that we strongly disavow the activities of Şerif Pasha and other similar efforts and that we are loyal to our government.”
The telegram was signed by the following:
Mayor Ali Riza, Yusuf the head of Keçel Tribe, Seyit Ali the head of Abbasi Tribe, Hüseyin the head of Kelani Tribe, Paşa Bey the head of Balanlı Tribe, Çiçek the head of Baratlı Tribe, Yusuf the head of Aşranlı Tribe. From religious scholars: Sheikh Saffet, Sheikh Hacı Fevzi, Mufti Osman Fevzi. From business circles: Arapzade Ahmet, Ruhzade Halis, Tavşanzade Recep, Hacı Eşbehzade Şükrü, Müftüzade Hakkı. From the gentry; Hacı Mehmet, Çapıkzade Münir, Ahmet Paşazade Şemsi, Beyzade Sami.4
After the Turkish Grand National Assembly was opened in Ankara, similar telegrams were sent there, too. The parliament records make it clear that telegrams were received from the residents of Solhan, Çemişkezek, Hasankeyf, Kangal, Palu, Bitlis, Adıyaman, Kahta, Ahlat, Hizan, Şirvan, Şırnak protesting the separatist movements and that swore allegiance to the Parliament. These telegrams were read in the Parliament. The following joint telegram of the tribal leaders clearly demonstrate the unity decision of the Kurds:
“Please be informed that we will assist and aid our government with all our might to ensure peace within the National Pact and that we never wish to hear that Kurdish identity is treated as separate within the Grand National Assembly of the Republic of Turkey.
Wishing success, we present our deepest regards.”
Signatories:
Hacı Sebati head of the İzoli Tribe, Mehmet the head of the Aluçlu Tribe, Halil the head of the Bariçkan Tribe, Hüseyin the head of the Bükrer Tribe, Halil the head of the Zeyve tribe, Hüseyin the head of the Deyukan Tribe and Mehmet the head of the Cürdi Tribe. From religious scholars: Bekir, Sıtkı, Rüştü, Avni, Halil, Hafız Mehmet. From the gentry: İzdelili Fehim, Hüseyin, Bulutlu İbrahim, Nail, Zabunlu Halil, Sadık.5
Apparently as soon as WWI was over, the British deep state was seeking to stoke problems not only in Mosul and within the borders of Iraq, but also in Anatolia between Kurds and Turks. However, the greatest answer to this insidious plan came from our Kurdish people again. Members of the Turkish Parliament in Ankara and the Kurdish people declared to the entire world - and especially to the British deep state - that Kurds and Turks are one and a whole. The British deep state, having failed with its plans with Şerif Pasha, would make another attempt after Lausanne and seek to use Sheikh Said this time.
\1. “Kürdistan Teali Cemiyeti” (Society for the Rise of Kurdistan), Wikipedia, https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCrdistan_Teali_Cemiyeti
\2. Ibid.
\3. Van Bruinessen, Ağa, Şeyh ve Devlet (Tribal Leader, Sheikh and State), translated by Banu Yalkut, Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2004, p. 27
\4. Meclis-i Mebusan Zabıt Ceridesi (Parliament Minutes of Proceedings), Session LV, vol. 1, p. 208
\5. Sibel Özel, “Anayasa M. 66/I Hükmünde Yer Alan Türk Tanımı Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme”, Baro Dergisi, vol. 86, no. 2012/6, 2012, p. 48
Seeking a Solution for Mosul
The Turkish government demanded that the conference be held in Izmir, because communication between Lausanne and Turkey would be difficult. The real reason behind this request was their desire to closely follow the progress of the conference and prevent the loss of battlefield gains at the negotiation table. However, according to international traditions, the conference had to be held on neutral ground. Therefore, the invitation to Lausanne was accepted following a meeting at the TBMM (the Turkish Parliament) on October 29, 1922.
Some of the proposals and suggestions discussed at the Turkish Parliament concerning Mosul before the delegates left are as follows:
Iraq border:
Delegates will request that Sulaymaniyah, Mosul and Kirkuk are returned to Turkey. If any unexpected situation arises during the conference, the instructions of the Council of Ministers should be awaited. Certain economic privileges, for instance, privilege in oil operations, can be offered to Britain.
Syrian border:
The border with Syria should be pushed further south and southeast. Best efforts will be made to correct this border. The border should start at Re’si ibn Hayr, continue along Harm, Al-Muslimiyah, Maskanah and Euphrates road, Deir Ez-Zor and finally end at Mosul for the south border.
The desired Syrian border would be connected to Mosul, Sulaymaniyah and Kirkuk and would complete the southern border of the National Pact. This short but definitive instruction was essentially based on the National Pact, and demanded that certain land issues that remained unsolved with the Armistice of Mudros be solved (the Straits, Istanbul and Eastern Thrace).357
Mustafa Kemal made it clear on many occasions that he considered Mosul as a Turkish land and that he wouldn’t accept the British mandate. For instance, on December 25, 1922, he explained his clear stance on Mosul during an interview he gave to Paul Herriot of Le Journal at Çankaya:
We declared many times that vilayet of Mosul is a part of the land within our national borders. The parties opposing us at Lausanne are perfectly aware of this. We made great sacrifices to build the borders of our country. We adopted a peaceful attitude although it was against our interests. From now on, trying to take apart even the smallest part of our national land from Turkey would be highly unfair. We will never accept it.358
During the independence war, Mustafa Kemal’s plan had always been making Mosul a part of Turkey again and he made his intentions clear on numerous occasions. When the special correspondent of the newspaper Tanin sent a telegram to Mustafa Kemal and asked him about the Mosul vilayet,359 Mustafa Kemal answered in Amasya on October 22, 1919 and said, “Mosul vilayet is within the borders that were effective on the day the ceasefire was signed, which is October 30, 1918. It is a Muslim majority province and will never leave the Ottomans.“360
Mustafa Kemal, on December 28, 1919, the day after his arrival in Ankara, gave a speech to his visitors and counted Mosul, Kirkuk and Sulaymaniyah among the places under Turkish control on the day of the signing of the ceasefire and reiterated that those places constituted national borders.361
When the United Telegraph correspondent asked Mustafa Kemal about how the Turkish nationalists saw the US and Britain, in an interview on January 17, 1921 he said that the US was friendlier and continued: … As to Britain, our nation is offended by their imperialist and exploitative attitude.362
Mustafa Kemal also explained why Mosul was important for the British:
Mosul is very important for the British as it is the region closest to Kurdistan. British desired to keep Mosul for various reasons because Mosul is the closest route to Soviet Union, to Iran and the most convenient region to exert pressure on Turkey.363
In other words, Mustafa Kemal was perfectly aware that the British deep state focused on Mosul for the purpose of being able to corner Turkey, and he knew that Mosul was going to be one of the most challenging topics in Lausanne.
Winston Churchill, the then Secretary of State for the Colonies, said on September 12, 1922, ‘If Britain and Ankara are forced to fight, it seems inevitable that Kemalist forces will march to Mosul. In such an event, even if the British loses these lands at war, it has to take it back not by military means, but in the Peace Conference.‘364
Given that Churchill operated under the auspices of the British deep state for his entire political career, his words clearly demonstrate the British deep state’s approach to the issue. Unsurprisingly, his instructions were followed precisely.
The Talks Begin
The new Turkish state had won the battle for its independence and was thus recognized by the Western states - except for one: Britain.
This attitude of the British continued throughout the Lausanne negotiations. London’s administration was determined not to treat Turkey as an equal or a sovereign state, and because of this attitude the negotiations risked suspension on more than one occasion, and even came to a halt in February 1923.365
Unsurprisingly, the sessions on Mosul witnessed some of the most heated and tense exchanges.
British Prime Minister Bonar Law and the Secretary of State for the Colonies instructed Lord Curzon -who was the representative of Britain at Lausanne- that the negotiations should continue without suspension and the Turkish side should be persuaded. At the time, the Secretary of State for the Colonies wrongly believed that the Turkish government would waive its claims on Mosul in exchange for 20% of the oil revenues.366
İsmet İnönü and his aide Rıza Nur, who represented the Turkish side, maintained that Mosul was a Turkish vilayet and that all the Kurds living there were Turkish citizens. The delegation of the Turkish Parliament explained in detail the Turkish case with political, historical, ethnographical, geographical, economic and military evidence.
İsmet Pasha clarified his point with the following words:
The Grand Assembly of the Turkish Republic is the government of Kurds as much as it is Turks’. Kurds also have representatives in the Grand National Assembly. Kurdish people and their representatives in the Assembly do not accept the separation of their brothers in Mosul vilayet from the mainland.367
However, Lord Curzon, in an attempt to rebut the argument of İsmet Pasha, claimed that the Kurdish representatives at the Turkish Parliament did not represent the Kurdish people, that they had been appointed by Mustafa Kemal, did not have rights to representation and even implied that their election was dubious: ‘As to the Kurdish representatives of Ankara, I ask myself how they were elected‘.368
Yusuf Ziya Bey, who was a Kurdish MP representing Bitlis, gave the perfect answer to this allegation during his speech at the Parliament on January 25, 1923:
Apparently, our delegates in Lausanne didn’t give the necessary answer to these accusations. We are the true representatives of the Kurdish lands, and we are here not by appointment, but by election. We took part in the elections under no pressure. If Kurdish people wanted separation, they wouldn’t have participated in this election. Kurdish people participated in these elections despite all the efforts of British with their offers of gold. Kurds share the same goal as their Turkish brothers.369
Statements of the other Kurdish MPs that gave speeches at the Parliament should also be remembered. One notable example is Diyab Ağa, the 70-year-old Dersim representative, who was also one of the symbolic names of the Turkish Independence War. He said:
We all know and say that our religion, our religious affairs, origins and ancestors are all one. We have no differences or quarrels. Our name, religion, our God is One.
When the MPs asked Diyab Ağa what he said to the delegation that went to Lausanne, he responded as follows:
May God help them. May God give the best result. Thank God, the ones that went there are good people, pious and devout… We are all one. There is no question of Turkish or Kurdish identity. We are all one; we are brothers (interrupted by applause and ‘bravo’s). A man might have five, ten sons. One might be called Hasan, another Ahmed, Mehmed, Hüseyin. But they are all one. This is how we are. There is no difference between us (chants of ‘bravo’). But enemies are plotting to turn us against each other. They are trying to sow animosity by saying ‘you are like that, I’m like this etc.’… We are brothers. Our religion, culture is one. Some people don’t know this. They say a lot of things, but they do not know. It is not how it is. La ilaha illa Allah Muhammad ar-Rasul Allah [God is One and Muhammad is His Messenger]. That is it. (Deafening applause and bravos).370
Süleyman Necati (Güneri) Bey, an Erzurum MP who later took the stage, said the ‘majority of the people that voted for him were Kurdish’, emphasized the concept of ‘brotherhood of land’ and reiterated that Turks and Kurds had the same history, that they weren’t different people, that there weren’t racial minorities in Turkey.
Yusuf Ziya Bey, a Bitlis MP, during another speech, said the following about minorities based on language and racial differences:
Europeans say, ‘The biggest minority in Turkey is the Kurds’. I am a true Kurd. And as a Kurdish member of the Parliament, I can assure you that Kurds do not want anything. They only want the welfare and safety of Turks, their big brothers (Loud applause). We, Kurds, gladly trampled all the rights Europe wanted to give to us with that excuse of a treaty, called Sévres, and returned it back to them. Remember how we fought in Al Jazeera (Arabian Peninsula) (Another round of applause). Remember how we sacrificed ourselves and joined the Turks, we didn’t leave them, and didn’t want to leave them. We don’t and won’t want to leave them (Another round of applause). As I finish my words, I’m kindly asking our delegates [in Lausanne], to make sure that when the minority issue comes up, they make it clear that Kurds have no claims or demands and that they repeat my words here as a spokesperson for the Kurdish people… 371
Durak (Sakarya) Bey, who was an Erzurum MP, said that throughout the history of Islam, Turks and Kurds mingled and families became one in Anatolia.372
In a motion submitted on behalf of Mardin MPs, the Turkish delegation at the Conference of Lausanne was asked to declare that Turks and Kurds were one and a whole. Van MP Hakkı Ungan Bey said that it should be made clear in Lausanne that Kurds cannot be differentiated from Turks.373
Without doubt, neither the Kurdish population in Mosul, nor those in Anatolia, saw themselves any different than the Turks nor it was possible to separate them from each other.374 The indigenous people wanted to live under the same roof as the Turks and Kurds just like before, in other words they wanted to continue to live under Turkish rule. Even Arabs didn’t want the British mandate and declared ‘it is either Turkish rule or independence’. So much so, it became a common occurrence for the Kurds conscripted by the Iraqi government to switch to Turks’ side.375
Before the war, in the region covering Mosul, Kirkuk, Sulaymaniyah and Erbil, the languages used for writing had been Turkish, Arabic and Persian. However, the British in the region took it on themselves to develop the Kurdish language and its written form. After a while, the British authorities turned Kurdish into a communication tool. Although the local people insisted using Arabic and Turkish in their daily lives and correspondences, the British deep state was adamant on Kurdish. They stipulated that even the newspapers be printed in Kurdish. Again, the British deep state worked to remove Turkish as the written language and introduced a ban on its use in private correspondences. The British deep state also sought to cancel Turkish as the official language in the region and pursued a deliberate policy of annihilation targeting Turks and Turkish in the vilayet of Mosul.
Academician and author İhsan Şerif Kaymaz explains the state of affairs as follows:
It is clear that Britain, having understood that Kurdistan will not be established any time soon, is making long-term plans in a bid to create a national Kurdish identity so that Kurdistan can be built. The fruits of these efforts will be reaped in a couple of decades and a process that will create serious problems for the future of both Turkey and the region will thus be started.376
Two people that lived together for almost a thousand years, that mixed and built families together, were forcefully torn apart according to a deep plan amidst the background of war. The architect of the plan was the British deep state, the perpetrator of all separations and divisions. For the sake of its interests, it accepted dividing a nation, and indeed as following pages will study further on, threatened and slaughtered them in a bid to make them indebted to itself. The British deep state has been the architect of divisive policies throughout history. No one could stand up to them and this mafia structure was never held to account for its activities. That’s why this horrible policy continues today. Today, the plots around Southeastern Anatolia are the same as those concocted for Mosul in the early 20th century. The British deep state has been behind each and every one of them.
The strategy that the British deep state pursued in Lausanne to drive a wedge between the Turks and Kurds must be well studied, because the games of those days are once again being played in Southeastern Anatolia through the PKK.
British Intrigues
İsmet Pasha, the head of the Turkish delegation in Lausanne, sent a telegram to Turkey on December 28, 1922. He was convinced that the British had absolutely no intention of leaving Mosul. Only a small border correction in North Mosul would be made and the issue would be discussed amicably.
Shortly thereafter, British General Townshend made a surprising statement to İsmet Pasha. He said that Britain would give up on Mosul, that they would not be the cause of another war. He added that within a year British forces would withdraw from Mosul and following that, the Arabs would riot against King Faisal and the Turks would be able to enter Mosul without a problem.377
Clearly, the British deep state had a secret agenda. The members of the deep state would employ every tactic to gain the upper hand in the tense negotiations and resorted to all methods to bewilder and put the Turkish delegates on the wrong track. Indeed, in another telegram, İsmet Pasha said the British sought to remove the Mosul issue from the scope of Lausanne; it was to be discussed later and turned into an issue between the two states.378
Nevertheless, İsmet Pasha saw through their plans, didn’t find their suggestions convincing and resorted to the assistance of the French government as a first step. However, France said that the Mosul issue should be resolved between the Turks and the British.
At the same time, dissidents were getting louder in British parliament. Although Curzon claimed that it was because of İsmet Pasha’s obstinacy that the Mosul issue was still a problem, it was viewed as a failure of Curzon at the British Parliament and a campaign against him started. On December 8, 1922, former Prime Minister Bonar Law wrote a letter to Curzon and made his stance on the issue very clear:
… There is a great campaign started here against you. Most recently, the letter Gounaris wrote to you on February 15 was publicized. The claim that you were the reason behind the Greek failure and not Lloyd George is being used as a weapon against you. A parliamentary question was submitted to investigate whether the Cabinet was aware of those letters. And I said, yes. The issue was investigated but no conclusion could be reached. It is very important evidence for us that your name is not mentioned not only in the Foreign Office list, but also in the lists that Horne and Austen left to their successors. So, rest assured. They can never blame you at all for this issue.379
It appears that Curzon was under immense pressure by the British deep state and was forced not to compromise on the Mosul issue. Because of this pressure, Curzon did his best to not give away Mosul at Lausanne, as it was an important leverage for the British deep state.
Seeing that there was no agreeing with Lord Curzon over Mosul, İsmet Pasha sent Turkish economist Rüstem Bey and Şeref Bey, the former Minister for Trade and Railways, to Bonar Law, the British PM who didn’t wish for the negotiations to be suspended. This move angered Lord Curzon to no end. He wrote a stern letter to the British diplomat Sir Eyre Crowe on January 11, 1923 and said that unless the talks with the Turkish representatives were ended, he would withdraw from the negotiations about Mosul.380
Later Curzon sent another letter with the same harsh tone on January 17, 1923 to Walter Hulme Long, the Secretary of State for the Colonies.381 He said:
As a former colleague and friend of yours, can I ask you, how can you stick your nose in matters that I’m dealing with here? The other day, Rickett, with whom you are also acquainted, was here. Going behind my back and deceiving İsmet Pasha, he convinced him to send three representatives to London, with whom I’m sure you are familiar with.382 These representatives went to London to offer oil concessions in exchange for the return of Mosul to Turks. I, on the other hand, had made it clear that I was adamantly against the idea and that I would do anything to defend Mosul and with the policy I pursued, I aimed to make sure that Turks would have no dreams about those lands not today, not in the future. Rickett must have convinced Turks that he had a big influence on you and Bonar Law, and Turks thought that if they went to London, they could somehow take back Mosul. Of course, I cannot know how much you know about what’s going on. The only thing I know is that you wouldn’t deliberately try to make my job more difficult and harm the interests of your country. Please stay away from this oil adventure. Many disgraceful acts are involved in this matter that you are unaware of and which can stain an innocent person sooner or later. Rickett is most certainly an unreliable person. I know what he has been saying to Turks and what he has been saying to Sir G. Armstrong.383
The many disgraceful acts that Lord Curzon referred to were the dirty tricks that the British deep state staged behind closed doors.
Another important detail was that British intelligence had illegally intercepted the Turkish telegrams. With a special radio-telegram decoding system that the British installed in Istanbul, they could intercept and decode the telegrams sent by the Turkish government to Lausanne and sent them to London before the Turkish delegation could get them in Lausanne. After they got their instructions, they would sit down at the table, fully aware of the leverages the Turks had. Rumbold, head of the British delegation at Lausanne, was happily announcing this to his friend Lancelot Oliphant in the Foreign Office on July 18:
The information we obtained at the psychological moments from secret sources was invaluable to us, and put us in the position of a man who is playing Bridge and knows the cards in his adversary’s hand.384
This allowed Lord Curzon and his assistant Rumbold to know when Turks could afford to be more flexible. Closely monitoring their future strategies, based on this knowledge they would either insist on a condition, or give up knowing that there would be no point pressing İsmet Pasha. This information also enabled the British deep state to identify points which the Turkish side would be more willing to discuss. Evidently, the British deep state didn’t hesitate to apply its sinister intelligence policies even at the peace negotiations and tried to win Mosul through plots and tricks. This was more than a desire to obtain control over oil revenues and trade routes. Mosul was the first step in a 100-year-old plan against Turkey.
League of Nations = Great Britain
As previously mentioned, discussions on Mosul had been the longest and most heated ones during the Conference of Lausanne. Neither side wanted to compromise, but the mad grip of the British deep state on the Mosul issue, at certain points, brought the two countries back to the brink of war. Lord Curzon made maneuvers intended to bring the negotiations to a dead-end and demanded that the issue be resolved by the League of Nations. However, Turkey was not a member of the League of Nations at the time and was perfectly aware that Britain had the necessary lobby to ensure the passing of decisions to Britain’s heart’s content.
To overcome the impasse, İsmet İnönü proposed a new way. A ‘referendum’ could be held in the region so that Kurdish people could make their decision. However, knowing for certain that the outcome would be against Britain, Lord Curzon refused the proposal. Historian Sevtap Demirel explains why Lord Curzon rejected the idea:
Lord Curzon says a referendum can never be accepted. Why? Because it is a painstaking process. You have to find donkeys, you have to find papers, load the papers onto the donkeys, send them up to the mountains, go to the Kurds there and ask them ‘do you want to stay in Turkey? Do you want to stay under British mandate in Iraq?’ ‘These Kurds’, I’m repeating the exact words in the document ‘These Kurds will eat those papers’. That’s why they say, just forget about the referendum. Do you know why they are doing that? Do you know the reasons behind that? That region sends regular intelligence to the Foreign Office and therefore to Lord Curzon. I have read hundreds of intelligence reports. They all underline one truth: If under the circumstances of the day, a referendum was held and Kurds in Mosul were asked ‘who would you wish to join?’ 99% would choose Turkey. These are in British intelligence reports. British said ‘we’ll lose Mosul, so we can never let Turks carry out a referendum here and ask the Kurds what they want’…385
Academician, historian and author İhsan Şerif Kaymaz explains how Curzon, in his own mind, tried to insult the Kurdish people:
Curzon argued that it wasn’t the issue of choosing to whom Mosul was going to join, and that the border was just a simple technical issue and therefore no referendum could be held there. Therefore, he said referendum was out of the question there and that population and culture wasn’t suitable for it anyway, as people were illiterate and had never seen a ballot box in their lives. He even used certain insulting, offensive words to prove his point and claimed that it could lead to conflicts and even bloodshed. Therefore he said that instead of that, the League of Nations should be resorted to.386
These offensive claims about the Kurds show that the view of the British deep state of the Kurds wasn’t different from its horrible views today. The Kurdish people are above these statements that certainly cross a line. These remarks of Curzon reveal that Curzon knew the British deep state could have no influence over the people of the region. These illogical and tasteless remarks uttered in a bid to prevent a potential referendum almost proved that the British deep state could never win over the Kurds and Arabs of Mosul. The British deep state might have taken control of the region through deceitful politics and violence, but never was able to win over the people of the region.
Mosul Rejects British Mandate
The people of Mosul are Turkish people that include Arabs, Turks and Kurds, who lived together under Turkish rule for 700 years. Breaking them apart from Turkish rule is tantamount to tearing them apart from their homeland. Fully aware of this, in order to ‘convince’ the public the British deep state resorted to its usual method: violence.
Ankara government, in an effort to balance the power shift against Britain with respect to Mosul, signed a deal with the US company Chester and gave it vast privileges in building railways and exploring mines, and when the Turkish Parliament endorsed the deal, the British got furious. No matter what it did, the British deep state just couldn’t achieve the control it desired over Mosul. When the people rose against the British mandate and the British-appointed King Faisal of Iraq, the British violently clamped down on the protestors.387 British forces pressured Turkish-siding tribes and arrested tribal leaders. Especially the people of Kirkuk and Sulaymaniyah continued to reject a British mandate despite the violent suppression tactics of the British.388
In Mosul, Kurds started a riot against the British mandate and British jetfighters violently suppressed the protest. İhsan Şerif Kaymaz tells about this massacre with following words in his valuable book, based on the British archives:
To sum it up, Churchill scaled down the land forces to make savings in defense budget and reinforced the air forces stationed in Mosul. British decided to use the Iraqi army and Assyrian militia as the ground troops. The purpose was giving the message that even the slightest move by the Kurds in Mosul would be punished in the harshest manner possible. The method was cruel but successful. After a while, even hearing the approaching jetfighters was enough to ‘tone down’ the tribes…
Cities, towns and villages were relentlessly hit with airstrikes and then were burnt down to ground by Assyrian militia. The animals and crops of the tribes believed to support Turks were exterminated. Cities and towns like Köysancak, Raniye, Revanduz, Biraz, Kapra, Kale, Diza, Barzan, Derbet and Merga were largely destroyed… Barzan tribe was forced to choose between starvation and surrender. But the real horror started when they surrendered. Barzan town and villages were destroyed by Assyrian militia…389
On February 4, 1923, the Lausanne talks were suspended. Only two days later, Mustafa Kemal said in Izmir, “They are trying to take away by force Mosul and the region south of Mosul from us, from our mainland.“390
This horrible massacre carried out in Mosul is a clear indication how savage the British deep state can get to obtain control of a region it targets. In fact, this strategy is not different than the genocide policies practiced in South Africa and India. The British deep state massacred the noble Kurdish people that it wrongly considered inferior. To the British deep state, these people could be used in a valuable geography through various pretenses. However, since it was the British deep state in question, no one could object to this ‘illegality’ and no one could call these massacres ‘genocide’ after WWI, just as had happened so many times before.
‘Operation Kurdistan’
Historian Sevtap Demirci notes that the Chester project and the proposal of referendum were also among the reasons why the British so violently quelled the Kurdish riot:
There was an ‘O.K.’ in the archive that no one knew or wrote about. I stumbled upon it unexpectedly during my research. So I started looking to find out what that ‘O.K.’ meant. I thought to myself that it couldn’t mean ‘okay’, because the reports were intricate. If that was an okay, they wouldn’t have put dots in between. It was ‘O’ dot, ‘K’ dot. It was in a small place. So days, months passed, and I caught it not in the documents of the Foreign Office, but in the documents of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. Turns out, it was short for ‘Operation Kurdistan’… Britain had put into motion the ‘Operation Kurdistan’ project. If you ask, what is this operation, there is no detail. No information, no documents, just O.K.…
Within the scope of Operation Kurdistan, the British heavily bombarded the area. It was a very covert operation, no one knew about it. One person from the British army headquarters and one person from the Prime Ministry… No one was privy to this. Not the parliament, not the allies, no one. For two straight days, British ceaselessly pounded Mosul, Kirkuk and Sulaymaniyah. The second round of negotiations in Lausanne was supposed to start on April 23, 1923. The operation ended at 12.00 pm on April 22. The next day, when the second round of talks started in Lausanne, Turkey no longer had people in the region that could participate in a referendum. That operation completely ended the possibility of a referendum. If you ask, how many people died, I don’t know, too many civilians died. What did Britain want to say? You give these privileges to the USA, but you cannot make these decisions on these lands without my involvement. And the second outcome was, in a sort of, taking captive the Turkish-supporting Kurdish tribes and the indigenous people that wished to join Turkey. So when the second round started, Turkey was no longer able to suggest that there should be a referendum.391
The British deep state was aware that, only if it martyred everyone in the region, would it have control over Mosul. For this reason, it stuck to its centuries old tradition and didn’t refrain from brutally slaughtering thousands of innocent people, the indigenous population of a region. Clearly the massacre had a purpose other than the oil or trade routes. ‘Operation Kurdistan’ was the reason behind the Mosul persistence of the British deep state. Indeed, that’s why it was so secret, why there were no official documents proving that it ever existed. As the Lausanne talks were underway, the British deep state was carrying out its Kurdistan plan, devised a long time ago. At the center of it was Mosul, which had to be taken from Turkey. Kurds coming under British rule marked the first step towards building the artificial Kurdish issue, which would continue for another hundred years. The British deep state was convinced that Gladstone’s dream of ‘driving Turks back to steppes of Central Asia’ could be realized that way. Even destroying a whole people seemed trivial if it meant goals were achieved.
Turkey Backs Down on Mosul
Up to that point, the Turkish delegation was determined to take Mosul back, but with the new development, it was forced to adopt a new strategy because the British deep state wasn’t hesitant about carrying out horrible massacres, and they were slaughtering in plain sight our people in Mosul, Kirkuk and Sulaymaniyah. The only way out seemed reconciliation.
Another important reason why Turkey didn’t risk war at Mosul and settled on reconciliation with the terms proposed by the British was the fact that Ankara had no air forces to fight the British air forces stationed in Iraq. After the war, Britain deployed its entire air force to Iraq. This also clearly demonstrated that Mosul was not a negotiable topic for Britain. However, it must be kept in mind that the Turkish side had just emerged from a ten-year of period of constant wars that included the Balkan Wars, WWI and the Independence War. Turkey, during those years, was a tired, battered and impoverished country struggling to remain strong amidst the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. Not only did it have no air force to defend itself, it had very limited military capabilities.
Furthermore, it should be kept in mind that, during the Lausanne talks, Istanbul was still under occupation. Under the circumstances, the Turkish side was clearly at a disadvantage with limited flexibility. All these factors forced the Turkish side to agree to a compromise on the Mosul issue.
Mustafa Kemal, until the time the Lausanne talks were suspended, said on many occasions that Mosul was a Turkish land and that he would ensure it stayed that way, by using military force if necessary. However, later he shifted his tone significantly. He began to say that it would be wrong to be persistent in Lausanne for the resolution of the Mosul issue and that it could be resolved later. One British intelligence report dated March 15, 1923 explains the reason behind this change of rhetoric. The report stated that in the next couple of years, not only Mosul, but Iraq, Basra, Arabia, Syria and possibly other Islamic countries, could unite under Turkish hegemony and that it would be done as the Islamic Union project and that the project had a high likelihood of success.392
Islamic Union indeed will definitely happen, all Islamic countries will unite, the borders will be removed and even countries such as Russia, USA, Israel, China and all the other world countries will join this union. It will happen with the appearance of the Mahdi (pbuh) when all the sinister plots of the British deep state, the wars and conflicts end, when not even a single drop of blood is shed. Mustafa Kemal, no doubt, knew that time would come. He was aware that, sooner or later, Turks would get back the lands that once belonged to them. He was sure that, even though it didn’t happen at the time, it would happen with the coming of the Mahdi (pbuh). For this reason, he didn’t push the envelope and kept his hope alive with the dream of Islamic Union in his heart.
Finalizing the Treaty of Lausanne
With the 3rd clause of the Treaty of Lausanne signed on July 24, the frontier between Turkey and Iraq was regulated. This clause, where Mosul was not mentioned, stipulated that Turkey and Britain would continue negotiations for another 9 months to determine the frontier and that the Mosul issue would be taken to the Council of the League of Nations unless an agreement was reached. However, the clause had been unclear about the methods of the League of Nations or just what the decision would be about. As mentioned before, taking the issue to the League of Nations would in any case be in favor of the British interests. Turkey would clearly have no say in an organization that it wasn’t even a member of. The British deep state, which had maintained a strong grip over the League of Nations back then, pushed with all its might to make illegitimate claims over Mosul.
When the issue was eventually referred to the League of Nations, Turkey asked that the League establish ‘the will of the people of Mosul’, but Britain asked for the establishment of the ‘frontier between Turkey and Iraq’. The fact that the respective clause in the Treaty of Lausanne didn’t make reference to Mosul, but only mentioned the ‘frontier’, gave the British argument the upper hand.393
Post-Lausanne Mosul
Controversial issues that the Treaty couldn’t solve dominated Turkish foreign policy in the wake of the Conference of Lausanne, while the disagreement over Mosul with Britain was the most heated foreign policy issue between 1923-1926.
Upon the application of Britain, the Mosul dispute was referred to the League of Nations on August 6, 1924, which started discussing it on September 20, 1924, one year after the Treaty of Lausanne was signed. During the talks, the Turkish side repeated their offer of a referendum in Mosul, but Britain, just like before, rejected the idea with insolent excuses like ‘locals being ignorant and not understanding about border issues’.394 (The Kurdish people in the region are above such remarks). On September 30, 1924, a decision was made to set up an investigative commission, which defined the borders on October 28, 1924 and established a status quo Turkish-Iraqi border named ‘Brussels Line’. The highlights from the report of the commission that was submitted to the League of Nations on July 16, 1925 were as follows:
1- Brussels Line should be determined as a geographical border,
2- Kurds with their population of 500,000, consisted the majority in Mosul vilayet,
3- Kurds were more populous than Turks and Arabs,
4- Mandate in Iraq that was supposed to end in 1928, be extended for another 25 years,
5- Mosul be left to Iraqi administration provided Kurds in the region are given administrational and cultural rights,
6- If the League of Nations decides that the region is shared between the two countries, the Little Zab river line be accepted as border,
7- If the League of Nations doesn’t consider it suitable that the mandate in Iraq is extended and that the region is left to Iraq with certain privileges to Kurds, then Mosul be left to Turkey,
8- Britain’s claims and demands with regards to Hakkari be rejected.
When Turkey raised objections to this report, the Council asked the Permanent Court of International Justice in Hague on September 19, 1925 to submit its opinion. This opinion was in line with the wishes of the League of Nations, and despite Turkish protests the Assembly of the League of Nations announced on December 8, 1925 that it adopted the resolution of the Court of Justice. Only a couple of days later, on December 16, 1925, it approved the report of the Investigative Commission and decided that the lands lying to the south of Brussels Line be left to Iraq.
British Deep State’s Sedition Fuels Riots Across the Region
Nestorian Riot
Nestorianism and Missionary Activities Targeting Nestorians
Nestorianism is a Christian sect with members in various parts of Asia. Between 1915-1924, a significant Nestorian population lived in Nusaybin, Siirt and Hakkari in Turkey,395 with most settling around Hakkari and considering it as their center (there are currently no Nestorians in Turkey).396
When the word spread in the West of the Nestorian presence in Ottoman lands, many missionaries came to the region as various countries sought ways to turn this Christian minority on Ottoman lands into an advantage for them. Britain was the most ardent and determined one.
The British “Royal Geographical Society” and “Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge” were particularly active in missionary activities. Before we delve further into these historical facts, let us remember one more time a very important truth: being a missionary is a holy activity that people carry out to spread their faith and communicate the religion they believe in. However, the missionaries that will be mentioned here were not seeking to carry out such a duty; on the contrary, they were spies of the British deep state charged with carrying out its dirty tasks, but disguised as missionaries. So much so, those so-called missionaries sent by the said organizations functioned just like intelligence officers on Turkish lands and studied the social order and the power of state authority in the region. They determined the methods that could be used to provoke this community that had a different ethnical background against the state administration.
Nestorian Riots and the British Deep State Efforts
Nestorians had rioted twice against the Ottoman Empire, in 1843 and 1846, but they were suppressed. During WWI, they clashed with the Kurdish tribes in Southeast Anatolia and East Anatolia. The Ottoman archives mention the rivalry between Protestant British and American missionaries and Orthodox Russians to win over the Nestorians during these years397 and that the problems between Nestorians and Kurds escalated due to these supposedly missionary activities.398 Indeed, after having lived together peacefully, tensions began to arise between these two communities which later turned into bloody clashes when the British deep state came onto the scene and started its activities in the region under the guise of missionary activities in the 19th century.399
During the Kurdish-Nestorian clashes in 1843, British missionaries led by George Percy Badger used clothes, food, and money to curry favor with the Nestorians while the Nestorian Patriarch sought refuge in the British Consulate.400 This is an indication of how the members of the British deep state considered Nestorians as an ideal means to help them gain a foothold in the region. As soon as British missionaries like Dr. William Henry Browne gained the trust of the people in the region, they immediately said that the problem concerned internal policy401 and took a stance against the Ottoman Empire.
John George Taylor, the Consul of Britain in Erzurum at the time, began his letter to Earl of Clarendon in 1868, with the following statements: ‘Please find attached two reports which include my observations and the experiences about the country and the people. This data is based on my six years of duty in the country’. The attachment of the letter included, in addition to the demographic details of Nestorians, the following comment:
Nestorians are the second largest Christian community after Armenians. They are not important because they are rich or smart. It is because they live on a mountainous terrain close to Iranian border and can be fighters when necessary. It is also because in practice they are almost independent… They always complain about Kurds and Turks and they are so pitiful, they are willing to accept rule of foreigners at the cost of their faiths and lands.402
In other words, the members of the British deep state once again applied its usual tactics, tried to show Nestorians as an ‘oppressed people’, when they have been living in peace for centuries, and saw them as pawns that could be used with the pretense of ‘protection’. (Nestorianism and Nestorians are above his remarks). They didn’t hesitate to clearly voice their thoughts.
Riots during WWI and the Subsequent Clashes
Nestorians that rioted during WWI were defeated by the Ottoman army, and as a result started moving towards Hamadan with guidance and help from British aircraft. Subsequently, Britain set up a 3000-tent settlement in Baquba, 50 km from Baghdad, for 40,000-50,000 Nestorians.403
This made Nestorians more vulnerable to exploitation by the British. Living in tent camps dependent on the British, they couldn’t help but turn into potential mercenaries for future British claims in the region, rather than being ‘oppressed’ people protected by the British.
Promising a muhtar (self-governing) state to Nestorians in Hakkari and Urmiye region, British wanted to build a buffer zone between the Ottoman Empire and its lands in Iraq and set up four battalions of Nestorians called ‘Levy forces’ as the armed force of this buffer zone.404
Identical to British forces in their uniforms and equipment, these forces staged attacks against people living in Hakkari, Şırnak and Van provinces, and particularly worked to drive the Kurdish population living along the Zab valley out of the region. In retaliation, Kurdish tribes began attacking British units in various areas starting in March 1919.405
Even though the British responded to these attacks with counter-attacks, they had to give up on their ‘buffer zone’ plans based on the use of these ‘Levy forces’. Nevertheless, the British deep state continued its efforts to build a Nestorian state in Anatolia. During the conference held in San Remo, Italy from June 18 to 26, 1920, convened for the purpose of sharing Ottoman territory, Lord Curzon demanded a special settlement area for Nestorians. After this development, Nestorians decided to launch a military attack on Hakkari and then settle there.406 The attack that started on October 27, 1920 failed due to harsh winter conditions.
1924 Riot
Three years later, Nestorians rioted one more time and again, their supporters were the British deep state. The British deep state continued to use Nestorians as mercenaries against Turkey until the Mosul issue was resolved in its favor.407
Hakkari governor Halil Rıfat Bey, who was taken a prisoner in the beginning of the 1924 Nestorian riot and later released, said that he saw uniformed and armed British soldiers among Nestorians, and British planes flying over Hakkari (Çukurca) hills. Based on his observations, he said: ‘There is no doubt that the British have been recently provoking these people against our government’.408
Halil Rıfat Bey was spot on with his analysis that the riot was backed by the British deep state. This fact is further verified in an article published by The Times during the same time. This article depicted the Turkish lands, planned to be taken for Nestorians, as the Assyrian State, and referring to the incident in Hakkari, used a threatening tone and said if the region were left to Turkey, more incidents would follow. In the same article, the Turkish land of Çölemerik (Hakkari) was called ‘lands that belonged to no one yet’. Governor Halil Rıfat Bey, who went to investigate the area, was portrayed as a person that violated the region.409
Indeed, Turkey has declared on several occasions that the British had armed Nestorian tribes that staged attacks against Turkey.410
In truth, the British deep state was planning to build autonomous Kurdish and Nestorian regions within Mosul vilayet, which according to its plan would later join the Arabic state that would be founded under the British mandate. This would give Britain the buffer zone that would protect its oil reserves in the Middle East and enable it to push the Kurdish and Nestorian regions northwards to expand its sphere of influence.411
Cafer Tayyar (Eğilmez) Pasha, the 7th Corps Commander, was given the task of leading the military operation to suppress the Nestorian riot412 and the campaign started on September 11, 1924.413 Kurdish tribes also supported the military campaign against Nestorians.414
On the morning of September 14, a Turkish cavalry unit that passed the border between Hakkari and Mosul was bombed for three straight hours by three British planes that took off from Zakho. Forced to retreat, the Turkish units moved northwards.415 However, when the British began to violate the Turkish land using Nestorians, Turkey sent a diplomatic note to the League of Nations on September 17, 1924, informing it of the violation of the Treaty of Lausanne.416
The campaign reached a conclusion when the Turkish units reached the Hezil Suyu river line on October 11, 1924 and drove the rebels to the north of Iraq.
Sheikh Said Rebellion
Turkey was certainly not pleased with the resolution of the League of Nations dated December 16, 1925 that left Mosul to Iraq. Indeed, according to British intelligence, Mustafa Kemal was getting ready for another round of fighting. As preparations were underway for a military campaign for control of Mosul, the Sheikh Said Rebellion in Southeastern Anatolia broke out. This riot, that saw the participation of some Kurdish and Zaza tribes, was quite suspicious in terms of its causes and timing. The truth is, the riot started for no real reason other than it had been planned years ahead by the British deep state. It was a backup plan to be used should Turkey decided to act – militarily or otherwise – about Mosul. This phony riot would also accentuate the imaginary ‘Turkish-Kurdish divide’, another British deep state production, and bound Turkey hand and foot.
French historian Jacques Benoist-Méchin made the following remarks regarding the support of the British deep state to the riot:
The Sheikh Said riot was a challenge to the unitary structure of the new state and the applicability of the laws across the entire country… Hoping that it could prevent the Kemalist regime from getting stronger, Britain was provoking a Kurdish riot that would create unrest. It was keeping the wound open for Turkey, by providing food and ammunition to the rioters.417
Britain was closely monitoring the Sheikh Said Rebellion. This incident took place at the most critical point of the Mosul dispute, under the supervision of the British deep state, and just as planned by the British deep state, gave British important leverage. This forged riot gave the international public the message that ‘Turks and Kurds were unable to live peacefully together on Turkish lands’.418 This incident allowed Britain to say: “Let alone the Kurds in Mosul, you are fighting even your own Kurds.”419
In the first days of the riot, the French Commissariat in Baghdad sent Paris a 40-page report. The report mentioned conflicting French-British interests in the Middle East as well as the Kurdish-British relations. It also included the following statements about Sheikh Said:
Since 1918, Sheikh Said has been working for the Istanbul Kurdish Committee, which seeks to build a Kurdish state under British mandate. In 1918, Abdullah Bey, the leader of Turkey’s Committee for Kurdish Independence introduced Sheikh Said to Major Noel, who was one of the fundamental elements of Britain’s Kurdish policy …420
Let us reiterate one important fact: Neither Kurds nor Assyrians wished to rebel on Turkish lands. On the contrary, most of these communities objected to these riots. The truth is, the riots were organized and orchestrated by the British deep state spies. The goal was to facilitate British intervention on Turkish lands, portraying Turkey as a weak country intolerant of its minorities, and of course, ensuring definitive dominion over Mosul. The ruses of the British deep state succeeded and the Investigative Commission set up by the League of Nations issued its report in favor of the British case and the League made its decision accordingly. Erzurum MP Hüseyin Avni Bey’s following words were proven right once more: ‘League of Nations is nothing but a British council’.421
Mosul Is Lost
The League of Nations made Mosul a part of Iraq under British mandate, and its duration was extended to 25 years while originally it was to last only 5 years. It was also decided that the economic matters should be resolved between the two countries through various agreements.
The main reasons why the Mosul dispute was resolved against Turkey’s argument can be listed as follows:
1- Turkey was not a member of the League of Nations,
2- Great Britain was the most influential member of the League (indeed, many called the League a British council),
3- The Estonian general who went to the region to carry out examinations wasn’t allowed to go to the north of the Brussels Line that defined the Turkish-Iraqi border, which made it impossible to carry out an unbiased investigation,
4- Turkey couldn’t send a representative to Permanent Court of Justice,
5- Sheikh Said Rebellion, which was provoked by the British deep state, put Turkey in a difficult position.
Although Turkey objected to the decision, to maintain the newly emerged ‘peace atmosphere’ and to not violate the former resolutions accepted, she was forced to recognize the decision. The Turkish administration had serious difficulty during that time because the British deep state, which was very influential, fought tooth and nail for Mosul and was adamant on making no compromises on that issue during the negotiations. This was important for the British deep state because in the following years, the British deep state widely used Kurds to carry out its sinister plans for the Middle East and Turkey. The fabricated Turkish-Kurdish divide that was started with the Mosul issue marked the beginning of this exploitation of Kurds.
Although Turkey maintained that the decision about Mosul was unjust, due to its foreign policy of pursuing peaceful means to resolve problems, it refrained from further escalating the issue and voiced its protest through diplomacy in line with the circumstances of the day. As a part of this strategy, it signed a Treaty of Friendship and Neutrality with the Soviet Union on December 17, 1925. This treaty was a ‘natural agreement’ based on the rapprochement of two countries, which started during the Turkish War of Independence. However, it is noteworthy that it was signed the day after the League of Nations’ decision on Mosul. In that sense, it was a continuation of the Soviet-Turkish Treaty of Friendship signed on March 16, 1921, the Treaty of Kars signed with Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan on October 13, 1921, which were Soviet Republics then, and finally the Treaty of Friendship and Brotherhood signed with Ukraine on January 2, 1922. It was also a reaction against the Mosul decision.
What Does the Mosul Question Tell Us?
While studying the Mosul negotiations at Lausanne, it is important to understand why the British deep state was so adamant. The so-called ‘Kurdish problem’, which had never existed before, suddenly started after Mosul was forcefully brought under British control with the Lausanne negotiations. The century-old plan of the British deep state included fabricating the non-existent ‘Kurdish problem’ for Turkey, which lingers even today. ‘Separation of Turks and Kurds’ was first brought up during those days, almost building the infrastructure for a plan that would be used in the future by terror groups. Even though the Kurds of Turkey and Mosul repeatedly stated that they were ‘Turks’ and ‘loyal to Turkey’, and although the Kurdish members of the Turkish Parliament shouted out clearly that there was no discord or problem between Turks and Kurds, the British deep state continued its relentless propaganda that said otherwise.
Just like its artificial beginning, the ‘Kurdish problem’ is still artificial today, when we look at its causes. It should be noted that those people who claim today that such a divide exists and who assume a racist language accordingly, are in truth either agents or sycophants that serve the British deep state. Such people with that state of mind have been a part of deep state structures throughout Turkey’s history; they have followed an oppressive policy towards Kurds and even resorted to violence, and they have created a divide in Turkey. Today it is well known that such people created polarization and an artificial hatred for minorities. A careful analysis of the current situation will reveal how the provocation of these people is supported by the familiar publications under the control of the British deep state.
Surprisingly, even though the Stalinist terror group PKK rejects all national identities, it uses Kurdish nationalism as a propaganda tool for its ultimate goal of building an anarchist-communist state in Southeast Anatolia and imposing a communal system on our Kurdish brothers. This propaganda is a frequently used method of the British deep state to influence the masses. Indeed, it was the British deep state that gave the idea to the PKK in the first place. Therefore, it doesn’t come as a surprise that the PKK is kept under extreme protection by the British deep state. It was mentioned previously how Mosul was used to fabricate the previously non-existent Kurdish issue and how that plan was stretched into the next century. A careful examination of the current PKK problem reveals that Mosul had indeed been the starting point of the Kurdish card that is still being played by the British deep state.
At the time of the Lausanne negotiations, Kurds were our family, our people, a part of us; and still are. Providentially, our Kurdish brothers and sisters, especially in Southeastern Anatolia, have now realized the sly plans of the British deep state through our relentless efforts. For years, these great people weren’t influenced by any provocation, and neither are they now, despite the nefarious traps of the British deep state and of the PKK. The British deep state will never break us from our Kurdish brothers and sisters, no matter how much it has tried since its Mosul games; never will it achieve this.
Capitulations at the Treaty of Lausanne
The word ‘capitulation’ usually refers to a country granting various concessions and privileges to the citizens and consulates of another country on her lands, which might be financial, commercial, legal, administrative, etc.
When the Ottoman Empire began to give these concessions to the European states and their citizens in the 16th century, the circumstances and the purpose were different. The Empire was on the rise; it was believed that such privileges, granted in line with the circumstances of the time, would contribute to the economy. The Empire failed to see the repercussions of this risky move.
Capitulations were first given to Venetians during the reign of Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror, then to the French during the reign of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, followed by other states, most notably Britain. In the beginning, the capitulations were limited to the lifespan of the Sultans who granted them, but with an agreement signed with France in 1740, became permanent. After this date, capitulations granted to the great powers, most notably Britain, created severe issues in the Ottoman economy, industry, and justice system, among others. Over time, commercial and legal privileges increased and caused major problems in the 19th century. While in the beginning, the privileges were unilateral and served the interests of the Ottoman Empire, they later completely changed into a system where some rights of the Ottoman Empire were entrusted to foreign states through bilateral agreements.
The British deep state led the others in managing and controlling these privileges, sometimes explicitly and sometimes behind closed doors.
The Great Interests of Great Britain
By the 1820s, Britain had completed its industrial revolution and became unrivalled in world markets after defeating France in the Napoleonic wars. However, during the same years, other European countries in the midst of their own industrial revolutions were blocking British products from entering their markets with protective measures. This caused British capital to turn to non-European countries; thus between 1820 and 1840, Britain signed numerous free trade deals with countries in Latin America and China among others.422 These deals were sometimes secured through gaining the support of local powers, and sometimes by use of military power. For example, when China banned Britain from selling opium in her lands in 1839, Britain waged war against China in return. When the British came out victorious from this war, they forced the Chinese government to allow for extensive capitulations through various agreements.
However, all this intense effort didn’t yield the results the British deep state was hoping for.
In the first half of the 19th century, customs taxes in Europe rose and British foreign trade entered a period of stagnation between 1819 and 1835.423 This stagnation could have seriously impaired the young industry of the country, and urgently necessitated the discovery of new markets. Even in its period of decline, the Ottoman Empire was still one of the richest countries in the world, with its vast territory and affluent people. This appetizing, potentially profitable market suddenly made it the center of the British deep state’s attention. Britain did everything in its power to sign a free trade deal with the Ottomans, in an attempt to exert its influence over this market.424 The Treaty of Balta Liman signed between the Ottoman Empire and Great Britain as a trade agreement on August 16, 1838, was the enactment of this desire.
The highlights of the agreement were as follows:
1- New capitulations will be added to the existing ones.
2- Britain will be allowed to freely buy and sell their agricultural and industrial products.
3- The Ottoman Empire will abolish all monopolies over domestic trade as well as bans on export.
4- Foreign merchants will enjoy the same rights and privileges as the local merchants of the Ottoman Empire.
5- Taxes on export will be 12%, and import 5%.
The Treaty of Balta Liman of 1838 removed all the restrictions on domestic and foreign trade, and facilitated the entry of foreign merchandise into the country. It also made it easier to export domestic products. Ostensibly, it brought the Ottoman industry and trade under European control, but in fact, it was under British control.
The most significant aspect of this trade system was the irrevocable and significant loss of Ottoman sovereignty over its own foreign trade. Additional taxes previously levied on export and import, which had been a main source of revenue for the state, were restricted, and the Ottoman Empire was no longer able to collect additional taxes from these sources in extraordinary situations such as war.425
In the aftermath of the Treaty of Balta Liman, the British trade volume in the Middle East increased dramatically. For instance, in 1837 only 432 British vessels had come to Istanbul and unloaded merchandise of 86,253 tons, but by 1848, these numbers increased to 1392 vessels and 358,422 tons respectively. The increase quickly sped up and in 1856, Britain sent 2,504 vessels with a total 898,753 tons of merchandise.426 Britain was getting complete control of the Ottoman market, while Ottoman merchants lost strength.
The Ottoman Attempts to Abolish the Capitulations
The great powers of Europe were competing fiercely to get more out of the failing Ottoman Empire. As the capitulations incapacitated the Ottomans, the state wasn’t even able to regulate its own taxes. The Turks were levied, but foreign merchants were exempt from taxes. Foreigners who lived on Turkish land weren’t subjected to Turkish law, and couldn’t be taken to Turkish courts. In other words, these people were living in a completely isolated manner in the country; in an incredibly privileged status, they were practicing their own laws in the Ottoman Empire. They made more money out of the same trade as the local merchants did but still didn’t pay tax. Even the health-care sector offered extraordinary concessions to them.
Capitulations turned into a bleeding wound for the Ottomans, and naturally many Ottoman administrators undertook initiatives to stop the bleeding.
The first debate in the Ottoman Cabinet on the abolishment of the capitulations took place on September 2, 1914, which resulted in the decision to draw up a memorandum to do away with these concessions.
As a result, a commission led by Nazır Pirizade İbrahim Bey was set up in the Ministry of Justice.427 The Commission drafted the official communication to be sent to the Grand Vizier on September 4, and sent it the next day. The government, during the meeting of the Council of Ministers on September 5, decided to abolish all capitulations, economical and judicial alike.
On September 8, the government reconvened, read the official communication and decided that the approved text be sent to the ambassadors in the capital on September 9. The Sultan approved the abolishment of the capitulations on September 8. The text read as follows:
Upon the agreement of the Parliament Members, various financial, administrative, economical and judicial concessions and all privileges, previously granted to foreigners residing at the Ottoman Empire, known as the ‘capitulations’, as well as their associated permits and privileges are hereby abolished. This resolution, upon the orders of the Sultan, will come into effect on September 18, 1330 [October 1, 1914 in the Gregorian calendar].428
Capitulations Need to Be Abolished for Full Independence
The decision of the Ottoman administration to unilaterally abolish the capitulations was a rational, albeit a delayed one. Almost two months prior to the decision, world war had broken out in Europe and could have spread to the Ottoman territory at any moment. The states that had been given capitulations previously were too busy to object to the decision. Indeed, the declaration to eliminate capitulations received joyous welcome from the vast majority of the Ottoman Empire. The Empire was finally getting rid of this heavy burden on its shoulders.
Even though European ambassadors particularly raised objections to the abrogation of the capitulations, the Ottoman Empire didn’t back down. Of course, certain new regulations were made in line with the requests of the ambassadors, but they were not like the capitulations. This was an important milestone for the Ottoman Empire as it began to be released from her chains. However, the joyous atmosphere didn’t last long. The Empire had to enter WWI, was subsequently defeated and on October 30, 1918, once again had to endure the imposition of other states. Unsurprisingly, the victors immediately brought back the capitulations.
During the years of the Turkish War of Independence, Mustafa Kemal took the issue of capitulations very seriously and showed his clear stance in favor of full independence during the congress meetings. During National Pact sessions at the Ottoman Parliament (January 22-28, 1920) capitulations were once again on the agenda. The 6th article of the decisions made there was briefly as follows:
… Ensuring full freedom and independence to complete our national and economic development, like every other country, is essential for our future. For this reason, any factors that hinder our political, judicial, commercial or financial development should be eliminated…429
For this reason, Mustafa Kemal strictly instructed the delegation that went to Lausanne that there could be no compromise on capitulations.
Of course, European countries were preparing to reinstate the capitulations at Lausanne. That’s why the new Turkish Republic was well prepared to deal with the issue without any compromise of its independence. Yet once again Britain, the only country that didn’t recognize the independence of the new Turkish Republic, proved the biggest obstacle.
On the Way to Lausanne
The instruction given to the national delegation headed to Lausanne was brief and concise: ‘Capitulations can never be accepted. If necessary, we can walk out of the negotiations.’430
In fact, everyone knew that immense difficulties would arise in reaching a solution in this matter. Many countries, present or not present at the conference, had a stake in the continuance of the said privileges. Furthermore, the Western world had been used to these privileges for at least 400 years and all mutual relations were based on them. Therefore, other countries, as they reached an agreement on the subject, wanted the concessions to continue, which made the prospect of completely abolishing the capitulations at Lausanne especially difficult.
İsmet Pasha, the head of the Turkish delegation, was aware of the problem and said, “All the Allies and the US were against us in this matter. But we considered it one of our most crucial issues.“431
A Tug of War
On November 27, 1922, the Finance and Economic Affairs Commission convened to discuss the capitulations and İsmet Pasha demanded that all the limitations that hindered the economic independence of Turkey be removed. He explained that a country cannot be independent with capitulations and that the situation of the foreigners in Turkey were already guaranteed with general laws that were in place as is the case in all civilized and independent countries, and that Turkish delegation would only accept being in a commission in line with these principles.432
The French delegation, coming from a country that had made great profits out of capitulations, insisted that capitulations be replaced with another system. İsmet Pasha refused the offer, completely aware that the new and unknown system could jeopardize the security or independence of the state.
Lord Curzon claimed that capitulations were based on rights given by the treaty and that even the Germans, the ally of the Ottomans, opposed the abolishment of the system. He also said that capitulations could not be abrogated unless they were replaced by a new system agreed upon by the parties.433
However, capitulations were non-negotiable for Turkey, no matter what happened. On December 28, 1922, the talks reached a dead-end. The proposals of the other side were rejected on the grounds they violated Turkish sovereignty. İsmet Pasha defended the Turkish case and said that “the Turkish justice system would be on par with the best justice systems in the world”. He considered the replacement of the system with a similar one, or assignment of foreign judges in Turkey and all other similar proposals, an assault on Turkey’s independence.434
Nothing came out of the discussions carried out under such circumstances. İsmet Pasha and the Turkish delegation refused to give into the demands of new restrictions, no matter under what guise they were presented, and fought off the pressure and oppression. The conference ended on February 4, 1923 without reaching an agreement.435
The Second Attempt Begins
As the Lausanne negotiations hit a dead-end and were suspended, Mustafa Kemal gave a speech at Izmir Economic Congress on February 17, 1923 and made it clear that there would be no concessions on the capitulations:
Ottoman Empire was deprived of its independence physically and effectively. If a country cannot levy taxes on foreigners on its lands as it does on its own citizens, if a country is banned from regulating its own customs… And, if a country is not allowed to practice its rule of law for foreigners living on her lands, then that country is not independent…436
These words clearly manifested how the abolishment of the capitulations was crucial for the Turkish side. So much so, the suspension of the talks due to the capitulations disagreement did nothing to weaken the determination of the Turks. The Turkish side, having just endured a war that continued for ten straight years, and having lost almost everything, didn’t hesitate for a moment to start preparations for war again. When the Lausanne negotiations came to a halt due to the issue on capitulations, Mustafa Kemal ordered the Turkish army to start war preparations.
The truth is, the Allied Powers didn’t want the Lausanne negotiations to be suspended either. Having fought in WWI, that caused immense destruction, none of them were willing to resume hostilities; especially after the horrible war of four years destroyed both the victors and the losers. Furthermore, European countries couldn’t afford to be ‘not on the side of peace’. The Western public, weary and battered, wanted peace and therefore, the Allied Powers had to yield and not be persistent on capitulations. Being the side that stopped the peace negotiations was equal to being the side that did not want peace and it was clear that such an administration would be punished by not only its own public, but other countries as well. Europe wouldn’t risk that.
Furthermore, the Soviet Union, which had signed a treaty of friendship with Turkey in 1921, declared that if a new war broke out, it would fight alongside Turkey. This situation completely tipped the balance.
Seeing the decisive stance of Turkey, the Western countries took action to resume the talks and thus the second part of the Conference of Lausanne began on April 23, 1923. Lord Curzon and former ‘celebrities’ didn’t attend this time. Horace Rumbold, the High Commissioner to Istanbul, was heading the British delegation and the conference.
Capitulations represented the biggest obstacle to concluding the Conference of Lausanne. The Westerners didn’t want to give up on them, especially under heavy pressure from various economic groups. On the other hand, Turkey was adamant on refusing all sorts of limitations on its independence. Therefore, no agreement could be reached in the negotiations, and talks continued until May 4. Other financial issues continued to be a source of difficulty, as well.
After long discussions, it was decided to add the following clause to the treaty with regard to the capitulations:
Article 28: Each of the High Contracting Parties hereby accepts, in so far as it is concerned, the complete abolition of the Capitulations in Turkey in every respect.437
In the meantime, the other parties demanded that health capitulations should continue in Istanbul in the form of a commission of physicians, but the Turkish side rejected this, too. In the end, it was decided that for five years, three European doctors would be allowed to work in quarantine works in the capacity of consultants. This ended the health capitulations, as well. Five years later, these three foreign doctors were dismissed and the health-care industry was made completely domestic. Atatürk mentioned in his famous Nutuk (the Great Speech), ‘this wasn’t a capitulation. We agreed that a couple of foreign doctors serviced for five years’.438
In other words, the unyielding stance of the Turkish delegation saved the new Turkish Republic from capitulations, the shackles of the past. This way, Turkey not only achieved its full independence, but also completely dashed the British deep state’s dreams of ‘colonization’. The British deep state failed to repeat its scheme of slyly infiltrating states and building its economic and legal hegemony in new Turkey. That is why the capitulation concession on the part of the British delegation in the Lausanne negotiations was seen as a major defeat. Time, in its issue of April 14, 1924, made the following comment on this development: “The Treaty of Lausanne was the first conspicuous failure of the British diplomacy in more than a century.” The piece continued with the following interesting remark that showed how the outrageous plans of the British deep state backfired: “In effect, the Lausanne Settlement turned Europe bag and baggage out of Turkey instead of turning Turkey bag and baggage out of Europe.“439
The Capitulation Plans of the British Deep State
While studying the capitulations, we must keep in mind that the British deep state makes deep plans that extend well into the next centuries. This is what happened with the capitulations and the British deep state managed to extend the scope of the original concessions granted to Britain over time, abusing the Ottoman Empire’s kindness and weakness to build a separate structure within the Ottoman Empire. In the end, foreign courts were operating on Ottoman territory, foreigners were parceling out, buying, and selling the Ottoman lands; and even the best medical service was given by foreign doctors to foreigners. These foreigners in question who became more privileged than Turks on Turkish lands, were in fact looting the state and led lives fully independent of Ottoman laws. Since these people had more rights than Turkish merchants, they began to dominate the trade in the country. This system was the application of the sly plan of the British deep state concocted over a long time. This insidious system, that one still can see in many colonized countries or in other countries infiltrated by the British deep state, deeply penetrated the Ottoman Empire, took control of its system, and built its own hegemony. This infiltration also allowed the British deep state to easily deploy its agents in the relevant countries. The process is so systematic, the new Turkish Republic fought tooth and nail to get rid of this virus.
Today, in the Middle East and particularly in Africa, the British deep state continues to exploit some countries and gets wealthier as the people of the respective countries starve and are poor. This is the usual policy of the British deep state. This was also what was planned for the Ottoman Empire with the capitulations. But Almighty God didn’t allow this plan to work and made the Great Commander Mustafa Kemal Pasha and the brave Turkish people the reason for the end of the British deep state’s hegemony. The capitulations were just another way invented to exploit the Ottoman Empire from within. The end of this scourge, which had to be fended off, represented an important victory at the Lausanne negotiations.
Do they feel secure against God’s devising? No one feels secure against God’s devising except for those who are lost… (Qur’an, 7:99)
ADNAN OKTAR SAYS
Adnan Oktar: We are in the End Times, the period of the Mahdi. God designed the world according to it. The world is created to be a place of trial for people. It is created for us to be the servants of God, for us to pray. God has given life to the world so that Islamic Union can be established, which is the reason for the current life of it. The time for the Day of Judgment has in fact come, but it has been prolonged to allow Hazrat Mahdi (pbuh) to appear and the Islamic Union to be established. The thing they now call the “New Ottoman Empire” or the Ottoman model in fact refers to the movement of the Mahdi. Islamic Union is one of the names of the Mahdi movement. The names make no difference. The resulting system will produce independent states, independent in domestic affairs, independent in foreign affairs; but it’s a system where brotherhood, love, friendship and peace reign; one in which enthusiasm, good intentions, charity, art and science reign over the world, and in which the world will be like a family connected by a single bond. Everybody loves everybody; there is no oppression, no intimidation, no violence, no war, and no armament race. The whole world will become wealthy. Imagine what would happen if arms factories were converted into factories to manufacture household goods, like refrigerators and washing machines. Imagine that they manufacture prefabricated houses. The world would turn into paradise. What use is there for weapons? They are trying to improve the destructiveness of weapons. But we wish for a world where no defense, no defensive rockets, no rockets which can shoot down lethal rockets in mid air are needed. We wish the resources spent on these weapons to be instead spent on health, food, water and shelter.
(Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar’s interview on A9 TV on November 29, 2012)
Adnan Oktar: Muslims always have an ideal: It is the Islamic Union. The greatest ideal is the reign of Islamic moral values over the world. It is the ideal, the dream of every Muslim that the whole world will be free from war, terror, anarchy, turmoil, oppression, weapons and horror, that everyone will be brothers and live in peace, and the world will be like paradise. Paradise is presented to us as the main goal. We will aim for paradise on earth too, and we will aim for it also in the hereafter. Therefore, we embrace everyone who is on the true path with love and profound affection.
(Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar’s interview on A9 TV on February 3, 2013)
The Pious Turkish People Rejected the British Hegemony
British leaders, reeling from the shock of the Turkish victory at Lausanne, made several comments to feel better about their loss, while the British deep state took every opportunity to state its dream that Turkey would eventually be destroyed even if it hadn’t happened at Lausanne.
Lord Curzon, the British Foreign Secretary who headed the Lausanne talks for a long time, sent an instruction to Paris and Rome ambassadors of Britain only nine days after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne. He stated that Turkey was a small country and that the Allies shouldn’t send ambassadors to Turkey, as a low-level officer like an acting ambassador would be more appropriate.440
Only 21 days after the treaty was signed at Lausanne, Sir Nevile Meyrick Henderson, the British diplomat in Istanbul, made the following comment in his letter sent to London:
Turkey has lost land, grown poor and depopulated. It would be more than necessary to send an ambassador to an insignificant country like Turkey in terms of her size, wealth and population… If the current Turkish government cannot persist – I believe they won’t last long – then the Turkish Government will come to that city where the British Embassy is located. It will inevitably drift with our support. In this setting of anarchy the current government will topple down and another government that will ally with us shall come to power.441
There was, of course a reason why Henderson sounded so confident. The British deep state had successfully applied the same strategy on many countries before. And as Henderson pointed out, those countries eventually began to move in the direction shown by the British deep state. However, Henderson wasn’t taking into account the unshakable determination and faith of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and the Turkish people. No one had the power to put the Turkish state into shackles when they had such a great leader and such a pious nation. The representatives of the British deep state, who were making these arrogant comments before and after Lausanne, over time understood that they wouldn’t be able to defeat this devout nation. In fact, Gladstone’s comment in the 1800s that the Qur’an had to be taken away from the Turks if they were ever to be defeated showed that since the 19th century the British knew this faithful nation could never be defeated.
Turkey is a sacred country from where the Mahdi (pbuh) will emerge, and Istanbul is a holy city that will see this blessed appearance. Both the Mahdi (pbuh) and this sacred location will always be under God’s protection. Therefore, it is not in Turkey’s destiny to fall for the plots of sly deep states, or to be divided or to fall apart. No insidious plot against Turkey succeeded in the past, and none will in the future. The members of the British deep state that devise plans against Turkey should keep this truth in mind for good and all.
God will defend those who believe. God does not love any thankless traitor. (Qur’an, 22:38)
Conclusion The Real Mastermind
Throughout history the British deep state has been in command of the dajjali system as a power above governments, laws, state policies, and elected leaders. While true leaders worked for peace, the British deep state ignited wars; while countries worked to develop and prosper in peace, the British deep state hindered their efforts, divided them and caused instability through riots and military coups. It sowed seeds of animosity between communities that had previously lived together in peace. The mastermind behind the real decisions, wars, unrest and disturbance has always been this deep structure. No one and no system have ever been able to defy or stop the British deep state. Until now.
The British deep state is about to come face to face with an undeniable truth; one it has prepared itself against for years: the appearance of the Mahdi (pbuh). For centuries, the British deep state has worked relentlessly to prevent this emergence; it changed borders, brought down empires and pitted brothers against brothers. It wrongly assumed that through sly plots, it could thwart the inevitable. However, its ostensible success is not enough to stop the Mahdi’s (pbuh) emergence. Right now the Mahdi (pbuh) is present in the world and very soon the world will witness his appearance.
Perhaps for the first time in its history, the British deep state is defeated. It is because it failed to understand that there is a Mind above all masterminds. The true Mastermind, the One Who controls all other minds, the One Who plans all plans, is our Almighty Lord, God. No power can prevail over God’s plans. The plans of God supersede all plots.
The ostensible victories of the British deep state should not fool anyone. The truth is no plan is independent of God. This source of menace is only a tool used by God to reveal the dajjal. Now, after for so long wrongly believing that it had absolute power, the British deep state will see that Almighty God has the sole control and power. It will not be able to stop the flow of destiny and will come to understand that there will be no room for plots or conspiracies in a world where the influence of the Mahdi (pbuh) prevails. The peaceful and loving winds of the Mahdi system will sweep away the violence of the British deep state, introduce peace to the world and correct the minds that had previously surrendered to the dajjali influence.
For this reason, hearts can be at ease. Any careful eye can discern that the obstacles in the path of the Mahdi system are being removed one by one. The threat of the British deep state will end soon. God will surely make the believers and the good people victorious.
God has written, “I will be victorious, I and My Messengers.” God is Most Strong, Almighty. (Qur’an, 58:21)
APPENDIX The Deception of Evolution
Darwinism, in other words the theory of evolution, was put forward with the aim of denying the fact of Creation, but is in truth nothing but a failed, unscientific nonsense. The theory of evolution has its origins in pagan superstitions dating back to the time of ancient Egypt and Sumeria. Like these superstitions, the theory of evolution explains the origin of the universe and life through coincidences, and it has nothing to do with science. This theory, which claims that life emerged through coincidences from inanimate matter, was invalidated by the scientific evidence demonstrating the miraculous order in the universe and in living things, as well as by the discovery of about 700 million fossils revealing that evolution never happened. Furthermore, the theory of evolution is incapable of explaining the formation of even a single protein, the main building block of life. Science has proven that it is impossible for a protein to come into existence through coincidences. In this way, the fact that God created the universe and the living things in it has been confirmed by science as well. The worldwide propaganda carried out today to keep the theory of evolution alive is based solely on the distortion of scientific facts, biased interpretation, and lies and falsehoods disguised as science.
Yet this propaganda cannot conceal the truth. The fact that the theory of evolution is the greatest deception in the history of science has been expressed more and more in the scientific world over the last 20 to 30 years. Research carried out after the 1980s in particular revealed that the claims of Darwinism are totally unfounded and this fact has been stated by a large number of scientists. Many scientists from such different fields as biology, biochemistry, paleontology, genetics, zoology and archeology recognize the invalidity of Darwinism and explain the origin of life through the fact of Creation.
We have examined the collapse of the theory of evolution and the proofs of Creation in great scientific detail in many of our works, and are continuing to do so. Given the enormous importance of this subject, it will be of great benefit to summarize it here.
Challenges That Devastate Darwin
As a pagan doctrine going back as far as ancient Egypt and Sumeria, the theory of evolution came to the fore most extensively once more in the nineteenth century. The most important development that made it the top topic of the world of science was the publication of Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species in 1859. In this book, Darwin in his own way opposes the fact that God created different living species on Earth separately, for he erroneously claimed that all living beings had an imaginary common ancestor and had diversified over time through small changes.
Darwin’s theory was not based on any concrete scientific finding; as he also accepted, it was just an “assumption”. Moreover, as Darwin confessed in the long chapter of his book titled, “Difficulties on Theory,” the theory failed in the face of many critical questions.
Darwin invested all his hopes in new scientific discoveries, which he expected would solve these difficulties. He indicated this expectation again and again in his book. However, contrary to his expectations, scientific findings expanded the dimensions of these difficulties and refuted the basic assumptions of the theory one by one.
The defeat of Darwinism in the face of science can be reviewed under three basic headings:
\1) The theory cannot explain how life originated on Earth.
\2) There is no scientific finding that indicates the “evolutionary mechanisms” proposed by the theory have any evolutionary power at all.
\3) The fossil record proves the exact opposite of what the theory suggests.
In this section, we will examine these three basic points in general outlines:
The First Insurmountable Step: The Origin of Life
The theory of evolution posits that all living species evolved from a single living cell that emerged haphazardly on Earth 3.8 billion years ago, supposedly having appeared as a result of coincidences. How a cell comprising a wide range of organelles such as vacuoles, mitochondria, lysosomes and Golgi apparatus could come into existence in a puddle of mud, how a single cell could generate millions of complex living species and, if such an evolution really occurred, why traces of it cannot be observed in the fossil record are some of the questions that the theory cannot answer. However, first and foremost, we need focus on the first step of the supposed evolutionary process. How did the aforementioned “first cell” originate?
Since the theory of evolution ignorantly denies Creation, it maintains that the “first cell” originated as a product of blind coincidence within the laws of nature, without any plan or arrangement. According to the theory, inanimate matter must have haphazardly produced a living cell out of nowhere. Such a claim, however, is inconsistent with the most unassailable rules of biology.
“Life Comes from Life”
In his book, Darwin never referred to the origin of life. That is because the primitive understanding of science in his time rested on the assumption that living beings had a very simple structure. Since medieval times, spontaneous generation, which asserts that non-living materials came together to form living organisms, had been widely accepted. In that period, it was commonly believed that insects came into being from food leftovers, and mice from wheat. Interesting experiments were conducted to prove this theory. Some wheat was placed on a dirty piece of cloth, and it was believed that mice would originate from it after a while.
Similarly, maggots developing in rotting meat were assumed to be evidence of life originating from inanimate materials. However, it was later understood that worms did not appear on meat spontaneously, but were carried there by flies in the form of larvae, invisible to the naked eye. At the time Darwin wrote The Origin of Species, the belief that bacteria could come into existence from non-living matter was widely accepted in the world of science.
However, five years after the publication of Darwin’s book, Louis Pasteur announced his results, after long studies and experiments, which disproved spontaneous generation, a cornerstone of Darwin’s theory. In his triumphal lecture at the Sorbonne in 1864, Pasteur said: “Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment.“ (Sidney Fox, Klaus Dose, Molecular Evolution and The Origin of Life, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1972, p. 4.)
For a long time, advocates of the theory of evolution resisted Pasteur’s findings. However, as the development of science unraveled the complex structure of the cell of a living being, the idea that life could come into being coincidentally faced an even greater impasse.
Futile Efforts in the Twentieth Century
The first evolutionist who took up the subject of the origin of life in the twentieth century was the renowned Russian biologist Alexander Oparin. With various theses he advanced in the 1930s, he tried to prove that a living cell could originate by chance. These studies, however, were doomed to failure, and Oparin had to make the following confession:
Unfortunately, however, the problem of the origin of the cell is perhaps the most obscure point in the whole study of the evolution of organisms. (Alexander I. Oparin, Origin of Life, Dover Publications, New York, 1936, 1953 and 2003 (reprint), p. 196)
Evolutionist followers of Oparin tried to carry out experiments to solve this problem. The best-known experiment was carried out by the American chemist Stanley Miller in 1953. Combining those gases he alleged to have existed in the primordial Earth’s atmosphere in an experimental set-up, and adding energy to the mixture, Miller synthesized several organic molecules (amino acids) present in the structure of proteins.
Barely a few years had passed before it was revealed that this experiment, which was then presented as an important step in the name of evolution, was invalid, for the atmosphere used in the experiment was very different from the real Earth conditions. (“New Evidence on Evolution of Early Atmosphere and Life,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. 63, November 1982, 1328-1330)
After a long silence, Miller, himself confessed that the atmosphere medium he used was unrealistic. (Stanley Miller, Molecular Evolution of Life: Current Status of the Prebiotic Synthesis of Small Molecules, 1986, p. 7)
All the evolutionists’ efforts throughout the twentieth century to explain the origin of life ended in failure. The geochemist Jeffrey Bada, from the San Diego Scripps Institute, accepted this fact in an article published in Earth magazine in 1998:
Today as we leave the twentieth century, we still face the biggest unsolved problem that we had when we entered the twentieth century: How did life originate on Earth? (Jeffrey Bada, Earth, February 1998, p. 40)
The Complex Structure of Life: Not Even a Single Protein can Come Into Existence by Chance
The primary reason why evolutionists ended up at such a great impasse regarding the origin of life is that even those living organisms Darwinists deemed to be the simplest have outstandingly complex features. The cell of a living thing is more complex than all our man-made technological products. Today, even in the most developed laboratories of the world not even a single protein of a cell, let alone a living cell itself, can be produced by bringing non-living materials together.
The conditions required for the formation of a cell are too great in quantity to be explained away by mere coincidence. However, there is no need to explain the situation with too many details. Evolutionists are at a dead-end even before reaching the stage of the cell. That is because the probability of just a single protein, an essential building block of the cell, coming into being by chance is mathematically “0”.
The main reason for this is the need for other proteins to be present if one protein is to form, and this completely eradicates the possibility of chance formation. This fact by itself is sufficient to eliminate the evolutionist claim of chance right from the outset. To summarize,
1. Proteins cannot be synthesized without enzymes, and enzymes are all proteins.
2. Around 60 proteins assuming the task of an enzyme need to be present for a single protein to be synthesized. Therefore, proteins are essential for proteins to exist.
3. DNA manufactures the protein-synthesizing enzymes. Proteins cannot be synthesized without DNA. DNA is therefore also needed for proteins to form.
4. All the organelles in the cell have important tasks in protein synthesis. In other words, for proteins to form, a complete and fully functioning cell needs to exist with all its organelles.
Evolutionist science writer Brian Switek admitted that the origin of life remains to be unaccountable by evolutionists as follows:
How life began is one of nature’s enduring mysteries. (Brian Switek, “Debate bubbles over the origin of life”, Nature, February 13, 2012)
Harvard chemist George Whitesides made the following confession in his acceptance speech of the Priestley Medal, the highest award of the American Chemical Society:
The Origin of Life. This problem is one of the big ones in science. … Most chemists believe, as do I, that life emerged spontaneously from mixtures of molecules in the prebiotic Earth. How? I have no idea. (George M. Whitesides, “Revolutions In Chemistry: Priestley Medalist George M. Whitesides’ Address”, Chemical and Engineering News, 85: 12-17, March 26, 2007)
The DNA molecule, located in the nucleus of a cell and which stores genetic information, is a magnificent databank. If the information coded in DNA were transcribed on paper, it would make a giant library consisting of an estimated 900 volumes of 500 pages each.
A very interesting insurmountable predicament emerges at this point for the evolutionists: DNA can replicate itself only with the help of some specialized proteins (enzymes). However, the synthesis of these enzymes can be realized only by the information coded in DNA. As they both depend on each other, they must exist at the same time for replication. This razes the scenario where life originated by itself to the ground. Prof. Leslie Orgel, an evolutionist of repute from the University of San Diego, California, confesses this fact in the September 1994 issue of the Scientific American magazine:
It is extremely improbable that proteins and nucleic acids, both of which are structurally complex, arose spontaneously in the same place at the same time. Yet it also seems impossible to have one without the other. And so, at first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have originated by chemical means. (Leslie E. Orgel, “The Origin of Life on Earth,” Scientific American, vol. 271, October 1994, p. 78.)
No doubt, if it is impossible for life to have originated spontaneously through blind coincidence, then it must be accepted that life was created. This fact explicitly invalidates the theory of evolution, whose main purpose is to deny Creation.
Imaginary Mechanisms of Evolution
The second important point that negates Darwin’s theory is that both concepts put forward by the theory as “evolutionary mechanisms” were understood to have, in reality, no evolutionary power.
Darwin based his evolution allegation entirely on the mechanism of “natural selection”. The importance he placed on this mechanism was evident in the name of his book: The Origin of Species, By Means of Natural Selection…
Natural selection holds that those living things that are stronger and more suited to the natural conditions of their habitats will survive in the struggle for life. For example, in a deer herd under the threat of attack by wild animals, those that can run faster will survive. Therefore, the deer herd will be comprised of faster and stronger individuals. However, unquestionably, this mechanism will not cause deer to evolve and transform themselves into another living species, for instance, horses.
Therefore, the mechanism of natural selection has no evolutionary power. Darwin was also aware of this fact and had to state this in his book The Origin of Species:
Natural selection can do nothing until favourable individual differences or variations occur. (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, The Modern Library, New York, p. 127)
Lamarck’s Fallacy
So, how could these “favorable variations” occur? Darwin tried to answer this question from the standpoint of the primitive understanding of science at that time. According to the French biologist Chevalier de Lamarck (1744-1829), who lived before Darwin, living creatures passed on the traits they acquired during their lifetime to the next generation. He asserted that these traits, which accumulated from one generation to another, caused new species to be formed. For instance, he claimed that giraffes evolved from antelopes; as they struggled to eat the leaves of high trees, their necks were extended from generation to generation.
Darwin also gave similar examples. In his book The Origin of Species, for instance, he said that some bears going into water to find food transformed themselves into whales over time. (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 184.)
However, the laws of inheritance discovered by Gregor Mendel (1822-84) and verified by the science of genetics, which flourished in the twentieth century, utterly demolished the legend that acquired traits were passed on to subsequent generations. Thus, natural selection was left ‘alone’ and consequently rendered completely ineffective as an evolutionary mechanism.
Neo-Darwinism and Mutations
In order to find a solution, Darwinists advanced the “Modern Synthetic Theory,” or as it is more commonly known, Neo-Darwinism, at the end of the 1930s. Neo-Darwinism added mutations, which are distortions formed in the genes of living beings due to such external factors as radiation or replication errors, as the “cause of favorable variations” in addition to natural selection.
Today, the model that Darwinists espouse, despite their own awareness of its scientific invalidity, is Neo-Darwinism. The theory maintains that millions of living species were formed through a process whereby numerous complex organs of these organisms (e.g., ears, eyes, lungs, and wings) underwent “mutations”, that is, genetic disorders. Yet, there is an outright scientific fact that totally undermines this theory: Mutations do not cause living beings to develop; on the contrary, they are always harmful. The horrific images that appeared after the nuclear explosions in Chernobyl, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the exact results brought about by mutations. The organisms with proper structures either died or were severely damaged by mutations.
The reason for this is very simple: DNA has a very complex structure, and random effects can only harm it. The American geneticist B. G. Ranganathan explains this as follows:
First, genuine mutations are very rare in nature. Secondly, most mutations are harmful since they are random, rather than orderly changes in the structure of genes; any random change in a highly ordered system will be for the worse, not for the better. For example, if an earthquake were to shake a highly ordered structure such as a building, there would be a random change in the framework of the building which, in all probability, would not be an improvement. (B. G. Ranganathan, Origins?, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1988, p. 7.)
According to the claims of Darwinists, mutations must produce proportionate and coherent changes all over the body. For example, as per the claims of Darwinists, if an ear is formed on the right side as a result of chance mutations just as they claim, chance mutations should also form a second ear on the left side that shares the same symmetry and properties, and hears just as well. The hammer, anvil and stirrup must each come into existence in the same perfect and equal state. Random mutations must form heart valves on both sides in the same way; the valves and auricles produced by random mutations must be formed simultaneously and equally compatible with one another; they must be flawless, in their proper places. Huge discrepancies would appear if this symmetry and order could not be maintained in every organ of the body. Bizarre structures with its one ear upside down, one unusual tooth, one eye on the forehead while the other on the nose, would appear. But living organisms do not possess such imbalances. According to the claims of the Darwinists, everything formed by mutations must be symmetrical and compatible. However, all mutations are harmful. In the past, it was assumed that 99% of the mutations were harmful while the remaining 1% was neutral. Yet new researches revealed that those 1% of mutations that take place in those regions of the DNA that do not code proteins and were thus assumed to be harmless, are in fact harmful in the long run. That is why scientists named these mutations as ‘silent mutations’. It is impossible for mutations that are absolutely harmful to form rational, compatible, symmetrical organs at the same time.
Mutations can be likened to shooting at an intact structure with a machine gun. Shooting at an intact object will completely ruin its structure. One of the bullets proving ineffective, or curing a pre-existing infection in the body by cauterizing it, does not change the result. The organism would already be ruined by the remaining 99 bullets that hit it.
Lynn Margulis, a member of the US National Academy of Sciences, has made the following confession regarding the evident harmful effects of mutations:
New mutations don’t create new species; they create offspring that are impaired. (Lynn Margulis, quoted in Darry Madden, UMass Scientist to Lead Debate on Evolutionary Theory, Brattleboro (Vt.) Reformer, February 3, 2006)
Also in an interview in 2011, Margulis emphasized the fact that “there is no evidence” indicating that mutations modify organisms and thus give rise to new species:
[N]eo-Darwinists say that new species emerge when mutations occur and modify an organism. I was taught over and over again that the accumulation of random mutations led to evolutionary change-led to new species. I believed it until I looked for evidence. (Lynn Margulis quoted in “Lynn Margulis: Q + A,” Discover Magazine, April 2011, p. 68)
As Margulis stated, there is not a single evidence showing that random mutations lead to evolutionary changes, which in turn lead to the emergence of new species.
Indeed, no beneficial mutation – one that would advance the genetic code – has ever been observed. All mutations have proved to be harmful. It is now understood that mutation, which is presented as an “evolutionary mechanism”, is actually a genetic occurrence that harms living things, and leaves them disabled. (The most common effect of mutation on human beings is cancer.) Of course, a destructive mechanism cannot be an “evolutionary mechanism”. Natural selection, on the other hand, “can do nothing by itself”, as Darwin also accepted. This fact shows us that there is no “evolutionary mechanism” in nature. Since there is no evolutionary mechanism, no such imaginary process called “evolution” can take place.
The Fossil Record: No Sign of Intermediate Forms
The fossil records constitute the clearest evidence showing us that the scenario suggested by the theory of evolution did not take place.
According to the unscientific supposition behind this theory, every living species has sprung from a predecessor. A previously existing species (evolutionists have yet to offer an explanation on how this species came into existence) turned into something else over time and all species have come into being in this way. In other words, this imaginary transformation took millions of years and proceeded gradually.
If this were the case, innumerable intermediary species should have existed and lived within this long transformation period.
For instance, some half-fish/half-reptiles would have lived in the past, which had acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they already had. Or there should have existed some reptile-birds, which acquired some bird traits in addition to the reptilian traits they already had. Since these would be in a transitional phase, they should be disabled, defective, crippled beings. Evolutionists refer to these imaginary creatures, which they believe to have lived in the past, as “transitional forms”.
If such animals ever really existed, there would be millions and even billions of them in number and variety. More importantly, the remains of these strange creatures should be present in the fossil record. In The Origin of Species, Darwin explained:
If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed… Consequently, evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains… (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, New York: D. Appleton and Company. p. 161)
However, Darwin, having written these lines, was also well aware of the fact that no fossils of these intermediate forms had yet been found. He regarded this as a major difficulty for his theory. That is why, in one chapter of his book titled “Difficulties on Theory,” he wrote:
Firstly, why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?…. But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, New York: D. Appleton and Company. p.154, 155)
Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, New York: D. Appleton and Company. p. 246)
Darwin’s Shattered Hopes
However, although evolutionists have been making strenuous efforts to find fossils since the middle of the nineteenth century all over the world, no transitional forms have yet been uncovered. All the fossils, contrary to the evolutionists’ expectations, show that life appeared on Earth all of a sudden and fully-formed.
Renowned British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this fact, even though he is an evolutionist:
The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find – over and over again – not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another. (Derek V. Ager, “The Nature of the Fossil Record,” Proceedings of the British Geological Association, vol. 87, 1976, p. 133.)
This means that in the fossil record, all living species suddenly emerge as fully formed, without any intermediate forms in between. This is just the opposite of Darwin’s assumptions. Furthermore, this is very strong evidence that all living things are created. The only explanation of a living species emerging instantaneously and completely in every detail without any evolutionary ancestor is that it was created. This fact is admitted also by the widely-known evolutionist biologist Douglas Futuyma:
Creation and evolution, between them, exhaust the possible explanations for the origin of living things. Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence. (Douglas J. Futuyma, Science on Trial, Pantheon Books, New York, 1983, p. 197)
Today, there are 700 million unearthed fossils. All these fossils reveal that living beings emerged fully developed and in a perfect state on the Earth. It is as if the fossils are saying “We did not evolve through evolutionary processes.” That means, contrary to Darwin’s supposition, “the origin of species” cannot be explained by evolution, but is explained by Creation.
The Tale of Human Evolution
The subject most often brought up by advocates of the theory of evolution is the subject of the origin of man. The Darwinist claim holds that man evolved from so-called ape-like creatures. During this alleged evolutionary process, which is supposed to have started four to five million years ago, some “transitional forms” between man and his imaginary ancestors are supposed to have existed. According to this completely imaginary scenario, four basic “categories” are listed:
1. Australopithecus
2. Homo habilis
3. Homo erectus
4. Homo sapiens
Evolutionists call man’s so-called first ape-like ancestors Australopithecus, which means “Southern ape”. These living beings are actually nothing but an ape species that has become extinct. Extensive research done on various Australopithecus specimens by two world famous anatomists from England and the USA, namely, Lord Solly Zuckerman and Prof. Charles Oxnard, shows that these apes belonged to an ordinary ape species that became extinct and bore no resemblance to humans (Solly Zuckerman, Beyond the Ivory Tower, Toplinger Publications, New York, 1970, 75-14; Charles E. Oxnard, “The Place of Australopithecines in Human Evolution: Grounds for Doubt”, Nature, vol. 258, 389).
Evolutionists classify the next stage of human evolution as “homo”, that is, “man.” According to their claim, the living beings in the Homo series are more developed than Australopithecus. Evolutionists devise an imaginary evolution scheme by arranging different fossils of these creatures in a particular order. This scheme is imaginary because it has never been proven that there is any evolutionary relationship between these different classes.
By outlining the chain’s links as Australopithecus > Homo habilis > Homo erectus > Homo sapiens, evolutionists imply that each of these species is another’s ancestor. However, recent findings of paleoanthropologists have revealed that Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and Homo erectus all lived at different parts of the world at the same time (Alan Walker, Science, vol. 207, 7 March 1980, p. 1103; A. J. Kelso, Physical Anthropology, 1st ed., J. B. Lipincott Co., New York, 1970, p. 221; M. D. Leakey, Olduvai Gorge, vol. 3, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1971, p. 272.).
Moreover, a certain segment of humans classified as Homo erectus have lived up until very modern times. Homo erectus and Homo sapiens co-existed in the same region and era. (Jeffrey Kluger, “Not So Extinct After All,” Time, 24 June 2001).
This situation indicates the invalidity of the claim that they are ancestors of one another. The late Stephen Jay Gould explained this deadlock of the theory of evolution, although he was himself one of the leading advocates of evolution in the twentieth century:
What has become of our ladder if there are three coexisting lineages of hominids (A. africanus, the robust australopithecines, and H. habilis), none clearly derived from another? Moreover, none of the three display any evolutionary trends during their tenure on earth. (S. J. Gould, Natural History, vol. 85, 1976, p. 30)
Put briefly, the scenario of human evolution, which is “upheld” with the help of various drawings of some “half ape, half human” creatures appearing in the media and textbooks, that is, frankly, propaganda, is nothing but a tale with no scientific foundation.
Lord Solly Zuckerman, one of the most famous and respected scientists in the U.K., who carried out research on this subject for years and studied Australopithecus fossils for 15 years, finally concluded, despite being an evolutionist himself, that there is, in fact, no such family tree branching out from ape-like creatures to man.
Zuckerman also made an interesting “spectrum of science” ranging from those he considered scientific to those he considered unscientific. According to Zuckerman’s spectrum, the most “scientific” – that is, depending on concrete data – fields of science are chemistry and physics. After them come the biological sciences and then the social sciences. At the far end of the spectrum, which is the part considered to be most “unscientific”, are “extra-sensory perception” – concepts such as telepathy and a sixth sense – and finally “human evolution”. Zuckerman explains his reasoning:
We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man’s fossil history, where to the faithful [evolutionist] anything is possible – and where the ardent believer [in evolution] is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time. (Solly Zuckerman, Beyond the Ivory Tower, New York: Toplinger Publications, 1970, p. 19)
The tale of human evolution boils down to nothing but the prejudiced interpretations of some unearthed fossils by certain people who blindly adhere to their theory.
Why a Muslim Cannot be an Advocate of Evolution
Based on the knowledge of the 1940s and 1950s, some Muslims imagine that evolution is a theory supported by science, and try to reconcile it with Islam employing a strange logic which suggests that ‘Muslims knew about evolution long before Darwin.’ This logic is a product of serious lack of knowledge. Science has proven the invalidity of evolution. The fact science reveals is the fact of Creation.
The fact that Muslims believe in, and the Qur’an clearly states, is that God created everything. Therefore, it is impossible for a Muslim to advocate the same things with the theory of evolution, which is a pagan superstition dating back to the time of the ancient Egyptians and Sumerians, explaining everything with coincidences.
God surely could have created the living organisms through evolution if He had wished so. However, the Qur’an does not contain any such information or any verse supporting the gradual formation of life forms as claimed by evolutionists. Had such a manner of creation existed, we would have seen it in the verses of the Qur’an with its elaborate explanations. But on the contrary, God informs us in the Qur’an that life and the universe is created miraculously with God’s commandment, ‘Be’.
He is the Originator of the heavens and earth. When He decides on something, He just says to it, ‘Be!’ and it is. (Qur’an, 2:117)
The fact God heralds in the Qur’an is that mankind was created out of nothing, in the finest form:
We created man in the finest mold. (Qur’an, 95:4)
He created the heavens and the earth with truth and formed you, giving you the best of forms. And He is your final destination. (Qur’an, 64:3)
The Prophet Adam (pbuh) and All Mankind Existed in the Spiritual Realm Before the Universe Was Created
In the Qur’an, God informs us He created mankind in the spiritual realm even before the creation of the Universe and called everyone to testify:
When your Lord took out all their descendants from the loins of the children of Adam and made them testify against themselves ‘Am I not your Lord?’ they said, ‘We testify that indeed You are!’ Lest you say on the Day of Rising, ‘We knew nothing of this.’ (Qur’an, 7:172)
As it is seen, God informs us in the verse that mankind was brought into being before the universe, that they were created flawlessly and were fully developed, and that they testified and promised that God is their Lord. According to the information imparted by the verse, fully developed, talking, hearing, promising, testifying human beings existed with all their organs and all their physical characteristics even before the universe was created.
The original Arabic verse is as below:
Wa iz akhaza rabbuka mim bani a_dama min zuhu_rihim zurriyyatahum wa asyhadahum ‘ala_ anfusihim, alastu bi rabbikum, qa_lu_ bala_ - syahidna_ - an taqu_lu_ yaumal qiya_mati inna_ kunna_ ‘an ha_za_ ga_filin(a).
!
Wa iz akhaza: And when (He) took out
(iz: you know, remember, then, at that time, … when… because, as, hence)
rabbuka: your Lord
mim bani a_dama: from the children of Adam
min zuhu_rihim: from their loins
zurriyyatahum: their descendant, their lines, their lineage
wa asyhadahum: and made them testify
‘ala_ anfusihim: against themselves
alastu: am I not?
bi rabbikum: your Lord
qa_lu: they said
bala: yes
syahidna: we testify
an taqu_lu: lest, so that you say not
yaumal qiya_mati: the Day of Rising
inna: certainly we, genuinely we
kunna: we are, … we were
‘an ha_za: of this
ga_filin(a): unaware, knew nothing
The Arabic word ‘zurriyyat’ (descendant) used in the verse, is used 18 more times in the Qur’an. The meaning of this word in all the verses it is used in is ‘mankind’ or ‘human generation’ as all the Islamic scholars unanimously agree. In this verse, there is a reference to the descendants of Adam - the line of the Prophet Adam (pbuh)- meaning all human beings that have lived and will live on Earth. That is because, had that been a promise taken only from the person of the Prophet Adam (pbuh), the verse would have read ‘When your Lord made Adam testify.” As the verse states ‘When your Lord took out all their descendants from the loins of the children of Adam’, there is a reference to all the descendants of the Prophet Adam (pbuh), meaning all mankind.
The Arabic word ‘iz’ (meaning; remember that time, when) refers to the time when this address was made to the descendants of the Prophet Adam (pbuh), meaning to all mankind. The word ‘iz’ is a preposition used while talking about an incident that took place in the past. It means ‘remember this incident that took place in the past’. What is meant here is the testimony, the promise all humankind gave in the past, even before the universe was created.
In another verse of the Qur’an, it is stated that people will die twice and will be given life twice:
They will say, ‘Our Lord, twice You caused us to die and twice You gave us life. We admit our wrong actions. Is there no way out?’ (Qur’an, 40:11)
The first death and life mentioned in this verse is the way people -in a sense- die after they gave this promise in the spiritual realm, and then are given life by God using their parents as instruments and are sent to this world. The second death is the physical death that we know of in this world. After that, people will be given life for the second time in the Hereafter.
When this is the case, the ‘gradual formation of mankind’ claims of those who assert that creation through evolution is mentioned in the Qur’an become utterly invalid. Humans did not come into existence in a gradual manner. The whole of mankind, the Prophet Adam (pbuh), and all the other prophets existed in the spiritual realm even before the whole universe was created. The claim that the Prophet Adam (pbuh) and the rest of mankind turned into modern man through a set of evolutionary processes does not hold any truth.
The Prophet Adam (pbuh), just like the rest of humanity, existed in the spiritual realm even before the universe was created, and then was created in Heaven, later to be sent to the Earth:
Your Lord said to the angels, ‘I am going to create a human being out of clay. When I have formed him and breathed My Soul into him, fall down in prostration to him!’ (Qur’an, 38:71-72)
But satan made them slip up by means of it, expelling them from where they were. We said, ‘Go down from here as enemies to each other! You will have residence on the earth and enjoyment for a time.’ (Qur’an, 2:36)
In another verse of the Qur’an, God informs us about the promise given by all mankind in the spiritual realm as follows:
Remember God’s blessing to you and the covenant He made with you when you said, ‘We hear and we obey.’ Have fear of God. God knows what the heart contains. (Qur’an, 5:7)
Those who gave their promises to God in the spiritual realm were not part human and part other creatures, with incomplete forms and undeveloped limbs. They were complete and conscious humans. This is a clear proof that creation through evolution does not exist in the Qur’an.
Those Muslims Who Advocate Evolution Are Unable To Explain the Creation of Angels and the Jinn
When those who claim that mankind developed through an evolutionary process are asked about how angels and the jinn were created, their answer will be, ‘God created them out of nothing’. It is quite forbidding that these individuals, who are aware of and acknowledge the fact that angels and the jinn are creations of God, fail to realize that God created mankind in the same manner. It is highly surprising that they fail to see that Almighty Lord, Who created angels with His command ‘Be’, created mankind in the same manner. Likewise, God creates angels in human form, instantaneously. The angels who visited the Prophet Abraham (pbuh) had the appearance of fully developed and flawless human beings and were created instantaneously.
God informs in the Qur’an that the jinn, unlike mankind, were created from fire:
He created man from dry earth like baked clay; and He created the jinn from a fusion of fire. (Qur’an, 55:14-15)
As God reveals in the Qur’an, the creation of angels is also quite different from the creation of mankind. In the following verse, God informs us about the creation of angels:
Praise be to God, the Bringer into Being of the heavens and earth, He Who made the angels messengers, with wings – two, three or four. He adds to creation in any way He wills. God has power over all things. (Qur’an, 35:1)
As clearly understood from the statement in the verse, angels also have a very distinct appearance, very different from that of humans. Additionally, God informs us in the Qur’an that both angels and the jinn were created before mankind. It is very easy for God to create. Our Lord is the One Who creates out of nothing and without cause. Just as He created the jinn and angels out of nothing and in distinct forms, so did He create mankind as a separate creature out of nothing, without any need for evolutionary processes. The same is also true for other life forms such as animals and plants. Here is the explicit truth explained in the Qur’an: God created all beings instantaneously and out of nothing without subjecting them to evolution; in other words, without turning them into other species.
Muslims Who Advocate Evolution Cannot Offer Any Explanation for the Miracles Mentioned in the Qur’an
God informs us in the Qur’an that when the Prophet Moses (pbuh) threw his staff to the ground, by God’s will, it turned into a living snake.
As we are informed in the verses, when the Prophet Moses (pbuh) throws his staff to the ground, an inanimate tree branch turns into a living snake, and when he takes it in his hand, it reverts back to an inanimate tree branch, and when he throws it once more to the ground, it again comes to life. In other words, an inanimate matter comes to life and then becomes lifeless, and then comes to life again. With this miracle, God shows us the constant Creation. God commands in the verses:
He threw it down and suddenly it was a slithering snake. He said, ‘Take hold of it and have no fear. We will return it to its original form.’ (Qur’an, 20:20-21)
‘Throw down what is in your right hand. It will swallow up their handiwork. Their handiwork is just a magician’s trick. Magicians do not prosper wherever they go.’ (Qur’an, 20:69)
‘Throw down your staff.’ Then when he saw it slithering like a snake he turned and fled and did not turn back again. ‘Have no fear, Moses. In My Presence the Messengers have no fear.’ (Qur’an, 27:10)
When the Prophet Moses (pbuh) threw his staff to the ground, as a blessing of God, an inanimate piece of wood turned into a very much alive creature that slithered and swallowed the conjurations of the others; in other words, a creature with a functional digestive system. This transformation took place instantaneously. Thus, God showed people an example of how living organisms are created out of nothing. An inanimate matter came to life by God simply willing it, in other words, with His command ‘Be’. This miracle that God granted to the Prophet Moses (pbuh) shattered the superstitious evolutionary beliefs of the Egyptians at the time with a single blow, and even those who were against the Prophet Moses (pbuh) realized the truth at that very moment, renouncing their superstitious beliefs and believing in God.
Furthermore, God informs us in the Qur’an about how the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) made a clay object in the shape of a bird and breathed into it, and how the bird came to life by God’s Will:
Remember when God said, ‘Jesus, son of Mary, remember My blessing to you and to your mother when I reinforced you with the Purest Spirit so that you could speak to people in the cradle and when you were fully grown; and when I taught you the Book and Wisdom, and the Torah and the Gospel; and when you created a bird-shape out of clay by My permission, and then breathed into it and it became a bird by My permission…’ (Qur’an, 5:110)
A bird came to life without being bound to any cause, by God’s leave and miracle. A living bird emerging from inanimate matter is one example of Almighty God’s peerless, causeless and sublime creation. Through this miracle bestowed upon him by God, the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) also reveals the illogicality and invalidity of evolutionist thinking. It is impossible for those who try to arbitrarily reconcile Islam with evolution to offer an explanation of these miracles of our Lord.
Just as God did not create the jinn, angels, the women of Heaven (houris), the male servants of Heaven (gillmans), the children of Heaven, palaces and gardens of Heaven, hell and its guardians through evolution, so did He not create mankind through evolution. God created every detail in Heaven; the high palaces, ornaments, gardens, birds, foods and infinite blessings instantly and out of nothing without any evolutionary process. The mansions in the Heaven, rivers of milk, thrones and jewels of Heaven were all created by God’s command “Be”. No cause is needed such as foremen, tailors or craftsmen for those to appear. Just as the fruits of Heaven such as date palms and figs or the jewels of Heaven such as pearls and mother-of-pearls were not created by means of evolution in Heaven, they are not created by means of evolution in this world either. Creation is not through evolution, neither in this world, nor in Heaven. (For further information, refer to: Why Darwinism Is Incompatible with the Qur’an, Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar))
Darwinian Formula!
Besides all the technical evidence we have dealt with so far, let us now examine what kind of an irrational belief the evolutionists have with an example so simple as to be understood even by children:
The theory of evolution claims that life is formed by chance. According to this irrational claim, lifeless and unconscious atoms came together to form the cell and then they supposedly formed other living things, including man. Let us think about that. When we bring together the elements that are the building blocks of life such as carbon, phosphorus, nitrogen, and potassium, only a heap is formed. No matter what treatment it undergoes, this atomic heap cannot form even a single living being. If you like, let us formulate an “experiment” on this subject and let us examine what evolutionists really claim about the “Darwinian formula”:
Let evolutionists put plenty of the materials present in the composition of living things, such as phosphorus, nitrogen, carbon, oxygen, iron, and magnesium, into big barrels. Moreover, let them add in these barrels any material that does not even exist under normal conditions, but that they think is necessary. Let them add in this mixture as many amino acids and as many proteins - not a single one of which can by any means be formed by chance - as they like. Let them expose these mixtures to as much heat and moisture as they like. Let them stir these with whatever technologically developed device they like. Let them put the foremost scientists beside these barrels. Let these experts wait in turn beside these barrels for billions or even trillions of years. Let them be free to use anything they believe to be necessary for a living being’s formation.
No matter what they do, they cannot produce from these barrels a living being. They cannot produce giraffes, lions, bees, canaries, horses, dolphins, roses, orchids, lilies, carnations, bananas, oranges, apples, dates, tomatoes, melons, watermelons, figs, olives, grapes, peaches, peafowls, pheasants, multicolored butterflies, or any of the other millions of other living beings such as these. Indeed, they could not obtain even a single cell of any living being.
Briefly, unconscious atoms cannot form a cell by coming together. They cannot make a new decision and divide this cell into two, then make other decisions and create the professors who invented the electron microscope and then examine their own cell structure under that microscope. Life only comes with God’s superior creation. The theory of evolution, which claims the opposite, is a total fallacy, completely contrary to reason. Thinking even a little bit on about the claims of evolutionists discloses this reality, just as in the above example.
Technology in the Eye and the Ear
Another subject that remains unanswered by the theory of evolution is the excellent quality of perception in the eye and the ear.
Before passing on to the subject of the eye, let us briefly answer the question of how we see. Light rays coming from an object fall upside down on the retina in the eye. Here, these light rays are transmitted into electrical signals by cells and reach a tiny spot at the back of the brain, the “center of vision”. These electrical signals are then perceived in this center as an image. Given this brief technical explanation, let us do some thinking.
The brain is insulated from light. That means that it is completely dark inside the brain, and that no light reaches the place where it is located. Thus, the “center of vision” is never touched by light and may even be the darkest place you have ever known. However, you observe a luminous, bright world in this pitch-black darkness.
The image formed in the eye is so sharp and so distinct that even the technology of the twenty-first century has not been able to attain that clarity and sharpness. For instance, look at the book you are reading, your hands with which you are holding it, then lift your head and look around you. Have you ever seen such a sharp and distinct image as you now see, with any other device? Even the most developed television screen produced by the greatest television manufacturer in the world cannot provide such a sharp image for you. For more than 100 years, thousands of engineers have been trying to achieve this sharpness. Factories, huge premises have been established, much research has been done, plans and designs have been made for this purpose. Again, look at a TV screen and the book you hold in your hands. You will see that there is a big difference in sharpness and distinction. Moreover, the TV screen shows you a two-dimensional image, whereas with your eyes, you watch from a three-dimensional perspective which adds depth.
For many years, tens of thousands of engineers have tried to make a three-dimensional TV and achieve the vision quality of the eye. Yes, they have made a three-dimensional television system, but it is not possible to watch it without putting on special 3-D glasses; moreover, it is only artificially three-dimensional. The background is more blurred, the foreground appears like a paper setting. Never has it been possible to produce as sharp and distinct vision as that of the eye. In both the camera and the television, there is a comparative loss of image quality.
Evolutionists claim that the mechanism producing this sharp and distinct image has been formed by haphazard events. Now, if somebody told you that the television in your room was formed as a result of coincidences, that all of its atoms just happened to come together and make up this device that produces an image, what would you think? How can unconscious atoms do what thousands of people cannot?
If a device producing a more primitive image than the eye could not have been formed by chance, then it is very evident that the eye and the image seen by the eye could not have been formed by chance. The same is valid for the ear as well. The outer ear picks up the available sounds by the auricle and directs them to the middle ear, the middle ear transmits the sound vibrations by intensifying them, and the inner ear sends these vibrations to the brain by translating them into electrical signals. Just as with the eye, the act of hearing is finalized in the center of hearing in the brain.
The situation of the eye is also true for the ear. That is, the brain is insulated from sound just as it is from light. It does not let any sound in. Therefore, no matter how noisy the outside is, the inside of the brain is completely silent. Nevertheless, the sharpest sounds are perceived in the brain. In your completely silent brain, you listen to symphonies, and hear all the noises in a crowded place. However, if the sound level in your brain were measured by a precise device at that moment, complete silence would be found to prevail there.
As is the case with sharp imagery, decades of effort have been spent in trying to generate and reproduce sound that is faithful to the original. Sound recorders, high-fidelity systems, many electronic devices and music systems sensing sound are all the results of such efforts. Despite all this technology and the thousands of engineers and experts who have been working on this endeavor, no sound has yet been obtained that has the same sharpness and clarity as the sound perceived by the ear.
Think of the highest-quality, highest-fidelity systems produced by the largest company in the music industry. Even with these devices, when sound is recorded, some of it is lost; or notice how when you turn on a hi-fi you always hear a slight interference or static even before the music starts. However, the sounds that are the products of the human body’s technology are extremely sharp and clear. A human ear never perceives a sound accompanied by a hissing sound or with static as does a music set; rather, it perceives sound exactly as it is, sharp and clear. This is the way it has been since the creation of man. So far, no man-made video or audio recording apparatus has been as sensitive and successful in perceiving sensory data as are the eye and the ear. However, as far as seeing and hearing are concerned, a far greater truth lies beyond all this.
To Whom Does This Consciousness That Sees and Hears within the Brain Belong?
Who watches an alluring world inside the brain, listens to symphonies and the twittering of birds, and smells the rose?
The stimulations coming from a person’s eyes, ears, and nose travel to the brain as electro-chemical nerve impulses. In biology, physiology, and biochemistry books, you can find many details about how this image forms in the brain. However, you will never come across an answer to the most important question: Who perceives these electro-chemical nerve impulses as images, sounds, odors, and sensory events in the brain? There is a consciousness in the brain that perceives all this without feeling any need for an eye, an ear, and a nose. To whom does this consciousness belong? Of course, it does not belong to the nerves, the fat layer, or neurons comprising the brain. This is why Darwinist-materialists, who believe that everything is composed of matter, cannot answer this question.
For this consciousness is the spirit, the soul created by God, which needs neither the eye to watch the images nor the ear to hear the sounds. Furthermore, it does not need the brain to think.
Everyone who reads this explicit and scientific answer should reflect on Almighty God, and fear and seek refuge in Him, for He fits this entire universe into a pitch-dark place of a few cubic centimeters in a three-dimensional, colored, shadowy, and luminous form.
A Materialist Superstition
The information we have presented so far shows us that the theory of evolution is incompatible with scientific findings. The theory’s claim regarding the origin of life is inconsistent with science, the evolutionary mechanisms it proposes have no evolutionary power, and fossils demonstrate that intermediate forms the theory necessitates have never existed. So, these certainly require that the theory of evolution be pushed aside as a disproven theory. This is how many ideas, such as the geocentric model of the universe, have been taken out of the realm of science throughout history.
However, the theory of evolution is persistently kept on the agenda of science. Some people even try to represent criticisms directed against it as an “attack on science” and to suppress adversatives. Why?
Because this theory is an indispensable dogmatic belief in some circles. These circles are blindly devoted to a materialist philosophy and adopt Darwinism because it is the only materialist explanation that can be put forward to explain the workings of nature.
Interestingly enough, they also confess this fact from time to time. A well-known geneticist and an outspoken evolutionist, Richard C. Lewontin from Harvard University, confesses that he is “first and foremost a materialist and then a scientist”:
It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, so we cannot allow a Divine [intervention]… (Richard Lewontin, “The Demon-Haunted World,” The New York Review of Books, January 9, 1997, p. 28)
These are explicit statements demonstrating that Darwinism is a dogma kept alive just for the sake of adherence to materialism. This dogma maintains that there is no being except for matter. Therefore, it argues that inanimate, unconscious matter brought life into being. It claims that millions of different living species (e.g., birds, fish, giraffes, tigers, insects, trees, flowers, whales, and human beings) originated as a result of interactions between matter, such as pouring rain, lightning flashes, and so on, or out of inanimate matter. This is a precept contrary to both reason and science. Yet Darwinists continue to ignorantly defend it just so as not to acknowledge, in their own eyes, the evident existence of God.
Anyone who does not look at the origin of living beings with a materialist prejudice sees this evident truth: All living beings are works of a Creator, Who is All-Powerful, All-Wise, and All-Knowing. This Creator is God, Who created the whole universe from non-existence, in the most perfect form, and fashioned all living beings.
The Theory of Evolution: The Most Potent Spell in the World
It should be openly stated first and foremost that anyone free of prejudice and the influence of any particular ideology, who uses only his or her reason and logic, will clearly understand that belief in the theory of evolution, which brings to mind the superstitions of societies with no knowledge of true science, is quite impossible to embrace.
As explained above, those who believe in the theory of evolution think that a few atoms and molecules thrown into a huge vat could produce thinking, reasoning professors and university students; such scientists as Einstein and Hubble; such artists as Frank Sinatra and Charlton Heston; antelopes, lemon trees, and carnations. Moreover, as the scientists and professors who believe in this nonsense are educated people, it is quite justifiable to speak of this theory as “the most potent spell in history”. Never before has any other belief or idea so taken away peoples’ powers of reason, refused to allow them to think intelligently and logically, and hidden the truth from them as if they had been blindfolded. This necessitates an even worse and unbelievable blindness than the totems worshipped in some parts of Africa, the people of Saba worshipping the Sun, the tribe of the Prophet Abraham (pbuh) worshipping idols they had made with their own hands, or some among the people of the Prophet Moses (pbuh) worshipping the Golden Calf.
In fact, God has pointed to this lack of reason in the Qur’an. In many verses, He reveals that some peoples’ minds will be closed and that they will be powerless to see the truth. Some of these verses are as follows:
As for those who do not believe, it makes no difference to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe. God has sealed up their hearts and hearing and over their eyes is a blindfold. They will have a terrible punishment. (Qur’an, 2:6-7)
… They have hearts with which they do not understand. They have eyes with which they do not see. They have ears with which they do not hear. Such people are like cattle. No, they are even further astray! They are the unaware. (Qur’an, 7:179)
God informs us in the Surat al-Hijr that these people are under a spell that they do not believe even if they see miracles:
Even if We opened up to them a door into heaven, and they spent the day ascending through it, they would only say: “Our eyesight is befuddled! Or rather we have been put under a spell!” (Qur’an, 15:14-15)
Words cannot express just how astonishing it is that this spell should hold such a wide community in thrall, keeping people from the truth, and remaining unbroken for 150 years. It is understandable that one or a few people might believe in impossible, illogical scenarios and claims full of stupidity and illogicality. However, “spell” is the only possible word to use when people from all over the world believe that unconscious and lifeless atoms suddenly decided to come together and form a universe that functions with a flawless system of organization, discipline, reason, and consciousness; a planet named Earth with all its features so perfectly suited to life; and living things full of countless complex systems.
In fact, in the Qur’an God relates the incident of the Prophet Moses (pbuh) and Pharaoh to show that some people who support atheistic philosophies actually influence others by use of spells. When Pharaoh was told about the true religion, he told the Prophet Moses (pbuh) to meet with his own magicians. When the Prophet Moses (pbuh) did so, he told them to demonstrate their abilities first. The verses continue:
He said: “You throw.” And when they threw, they cast a spell on the people’s eyes and caused them to feel great fear of them. They produced an extremely powerful magic. (Qur’an, 7:116)
As we have seen, Pharaoh’s magicians were able to deceive everyone, apart from the Prophet Moses (pbuh) and those who believed in him. However, his evidence broke the spell, or “swallowed up what they had forged,” as revealed in the verse:
We revealed to Moses: “Throw down your staff.” And it immediately swallowed up what they had forged. So the Truth took place and what they did was shown to be false. (Qur’an, 7:117-118)
The Prophet Moses’ throwing his staff of inanimate wood and then that staff coming to life and instantly overthrowing the deceptions of the Pharaoh and his followers is like breaking the spell of evolution. When people realized that a spell had been cast upon them and that what they saw was just an illusion, Pharaoh’s magicians lost all credibility. In the present day too, unless those who, under the influence of a similar spell believe in these ridiculous claims of evolution under their scientific disguise and spend their lives defending them, abandon their superstitious beliefs, they also will be humiliated when the full truth emerges and the spell is broken. In fact, world-renowned British writer and philosopher Malcolm Muggeridge, who was an atheist advocating the theory of evolution for some sixty years, but who subsequently realized the truth, reveals the position in which the theory of evolution would find itself in the near future in these terms:
I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books in the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has. (Malcolm Muggeridge, The End of Christendom, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980, p. 43)
That future is not far off: On the contrary, people will soon see that “coincidences” are not a deity, and will look back on the theory of evolution as the worst deceit and the most terrible spell in the world. That spell is now rapidly beginning to be lifted from people all over the world. Many people who see its true face are wondering with amazement how they could ever have been taken in by it.
They said, ‘Glory be to You! We have no knowledge except what You have taught us. You are the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.’ (Qur’an, 2:32)
NOTES
\1. Frank L. Kinder, Maria Bucur, Ralph Mathisen, Sally McKee and Theodore R. Weeks, Making Europe: The Story of the West Since 1300, Massachusetts: Wadsworth Publishing, 2009, p. 718
\2. Frank L. Kinder, p. 718
\3. John Daniel, Two Faces of Freemasonry, Longview: Day Publishing, 2007, p. 121
\4. “Charles Darwin to receive apology from the Church of England for rejecting evolution”, The Telegraph, September 13, 2008, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/2910447/Charles-Darwin-to-receive-apology-from-the-Church-of-England-for-rejecting-evolution.html
\5. Albert G. Mackey, “Charles Darwin and Freemasonry”, An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, Vol. III, New York: The Masonic History Company, 1921
\6. John J. Robinson, Born in Blood, M. Evans & Company, 2009, p. 285
\7. Palmerston to Clarendon, July 20, 1856, quoted in Harold Temperley and Lillian M. Penson, Foundations of British Foreign Policy from Pitt (1792) to Salisbury (1902), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938, p. 88
\8. Dominic Raab, “Time for a foreign policy that puts Britain first,” in After the Coalition, (Biteback Publishing, 2011), The Telegraph, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/87714/Time-for-a-foreign-policy-that-puts-Britain-first.html
\9. R.W. Seton-Watson, Britain in Europe, p. 1.; Henry Kissinger, Diplomacy, pp. 95-96
\10. Robin Renwick, Fighting with Allies: America and Britain in Peace and War, Palgrave Macmillan, 1996, p. 89
\11. Jasper Copping, “British have invaded nine out of ten countries - so look out Luxembourg”, The Telegraph, November 4, 2012, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9653497/British-have-invaded-nine-out-of-ten-countries-so-look-out-Luxembourg.html
\12. “Governor-General of Australia”, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor-General_of_AustraliaDocument1
\13. John Pilger, “The British-American coup that ended Australian independence”, The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/23/gough-whitlam-1975-coup-ended-australian-independence
\14. V. I. Lenin, Eleventh Congress of the R.C.P.(B.), March 27- April 2 1922, https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/mar/27.htm#fw01
\15. Dr. John Coleman, Diplomacy by Deception: An Account of the Treasonous Conduct by the Governments of Britain and The United States, Bridger House Publishers, 1993, p. 1
\16. https://history1800s.about.com/od/1800sglossary/g/East-India-Company.htm
\17. Dr. John Coleman, Diplomacy by Deception, p. 233
\18. “Pink Humanist: the role of ‘some smart 17th-century gays’ should not be overlooked in the history of science”, https://iheu.org/pink-humanist-role-some-smart-17th-century-gays-should-not-be-overlooked-history-science/
\19. Archives of the Royal Society; Record of the Royal Society; Dictionary of National Biography; Henry Lyons, History of the Royal Society inside Matt Cook (Ed), A Gay History of Britain; and John Gribbin, The Fellowship; https://iheu.org/pink-humanist-role-some-smart-17th-century-gays-should-not-be-overlooked-history-science/
\20. “Leading International Researchers to Begin Fellowships in UK”, The Royal Society, October 26, 2010, https://royalsociety.org/news/2010/third-round-newton-fellowships/
\21. John E. Flint, Cecil Rhodes, Boston: Little Brown, 1974, pp. 248-252
\22. Matthew Sweet, “Cecil Rhodes & De Beers: Genocide Diamonds”, The Espresso Stalinist, https://espressostalinist.com/genocide/cecil-rhodes-and-de-beers-genocide-diamonds/
\23. Matthew Ehret, “Cecil Rhodes, the Roundtable Movement and Eugenics”, The Canadian Patriot, April 11, 2015, https://canadianpatriot.org/cecil-rhodes-the-roundtable-movement-and-eugenics/
\24. Matthew Ehret, “Cecil Rhodes, the Roundtable Movement and Eugenics”
\25. “Committee of 300”, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_of_300
\26. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p. 6
\27. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p. 22
\28. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p.11
\29. https://ia800206.us.archive.org/18/items/TheNewWorldOrder_342/TheNewWorldOrder.pdf A. Ralphy Epperson, The New World Order, September 1st 1990, Publius Press, pp.16- 17- 106
\30. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p.43
\31. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p.46; Walter Rathenau, The Wiener Press, December 24, 1921
\32. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p.24
\33. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p.16
\34. Dr. John Coleman, Diplomacy by Deception, p. 45
\35. Dr. John Coleman, Diplomacy by Deception, p. 24
\36. https://www.azquotes.com/quote/816925
\37. “Theodore Roosevelt Quotes”, Goodreads, https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162686-behind-the-ostensible-government-sits-enthroned-an-invisible-government-owing
\38. “Invisible Government”, Goodreads, https://www. goodreads.com/quotes/364426-the-government-which-was-designed-for-the-people-has-got
\39. John F. Kennedy Speeches, “The President and the Press: Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association”, April 27, 1961, https://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Research-Aids/JFK-Speeches/American-Newspaper-Publishers-Association_19610427.aspx
\40. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p.40
\41. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300, p. 93
\42. Cliff Kincaid, “Obama’s Communist Mentor”, Accuracy in Media, February 18, 2008, https://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/
\43. Dr. John Coleman, The Story of the Committee of 300
\44. Kurt Levin, Time Perspective and Morale, 1941; cited by Daniel Estulin, Tavistock Institute: Social Engineering the Masses, 2015, p. 10
\45. Clyde Brewer, “Russia or China…Whats your choice?”, January 10, 2017, https://cb75948.com/tag/tavistock/
\46. Kris Millegan, “The Order of the Skull and Bones: Everything You Always Wanted to Know, but Were Afraid to Ask”, Conspiracy Archive, https://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Skull_Bones.htm
\47. Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, pp. 199-201
\48. Sir Henry Lytton Bulwer, “Palmerston to Bulwer, 13 September 1838”, The Life of Viscount Palmerston, vol. 2, 1870, p. 250
\49. Gary Allen, None Dare Call It A Conspiracy, New York: Buccaneer Books, 1971, pp. 92-93
\50. John MacDonald Kinneir, Journey through Asia Minor, Armenia and Koordistan in the years of 1813 and 1814, London, 1818, p. 185. Also quoted by George Francis Hill, The History of Cyprus, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2010, p. 270
\51. Ed Rooksby, “Cyprus and the West”, Beyond a Divided Cyprus: A State and Society in Transformation, Edited by Nicos Trimikliniotis and Umut Bozkurt, p. 85
\52. Mehmet Nabi-Fahri Rumbeyoğlu, Kıbrıs Meselesi [Cyprus Issue], State Publishing House, Istanbul, 1334, p. 6; Nejla Günay, “Kıbrıs’ın İngiliz İdaresine Bırakılması ve Bunun Anadolu’da Çıkan Ermeni Olaylarına Etkisi” [Leaving Cyprus to British Rule and Its Impact on Armenian Incidents in Anatolia], Akademik Bakış Dergisi [Academic Outlook Journal], vol. 1, no.1, 2007, p. 117
\53. Mehmet Hocaoğlu, Sultan Abduülhamit Han ve Muhtıraları [Sultan Abdul Hamid and His Memorandums], Türkiye Publishing House, Istanbul, 1987, pp.166-167; Nejla Günay, “Kıbrıs’ın İngiliz İdaresine Bırakılması ve Bunun Anadolu’da Çıkan Ermeni Olaylarına Etkisi” [Leaving Cyprus to British Rule and Its Impact on Armenian Incidents in Anatolia], Akademik Bakış Dergisi [Academic Outlook Journal], vol. 1, no.1, 2007, p. 117
\54. Jason Reed /Reuters, “British special forces poised to rescue UK citizens if Turkey suffers 2nd coup attempt”, Russia Today, 25 July 2016, https://www.rt.com/uk/353114-sas-turkey-evacuation-britons/
\55. Sean McMeekin, The Berlin-Baghdad Express, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge, 2010, p. 14
\56. Taner Akçam, From Empire To Republic, New York: Zoryan Institute, 2004, p. 77
\57. Prof. Dr. Ömer Kürkçüoğlu, An Evaluation of the Ottoman Empire’s Entry Into the World War, p. 29; Grand Vizier Said Pasha, Sait Paşa’nın Hatıratı (Memoirs of Said Pasha), Vol. 1, Dersaadet: Sabah Press, 1328, p. 271
\58. Prof. Dr. Ömer Kürkçüoğlu, “An Evaluation of the Ottoman Empire’s Entry Into the World War”, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. XXXVIII, no. 1-4, 1983, pp. 227-243
\59. Eugene Rogan, The Fall of the Ottomans: The Great War in the Middle East, 2015, iBooks
\60. Ronald Storrs, The Memoirs of Sir Ronald Storrs, Van Rees Press, 1937, p. 167
\61. Hassan S. Abedin, Abdul Aziz Al-Saud and the Great Game in Arabia, 1896-1946, King’s College London, 2002, p. 138
\62. Robert Lacey, The Kingdom: Arabia and the House of Sa’ud, London: Avon Books, 1983, p. 119
\63. Feridun Kandemir, Fahreddin Paşa’nın Medine Müdafaası: Peygamberimizin Gölgesinde Son Türkler [Medina Defense of Fahreddin Pasha: Turks on Path of the Prophet], Istanbul: Yagmur Yayınevi, 2007; https://www.dunyabulteni.net/tarih-dosyasi/301594/ odoguda-yuzyil-suren-bir-paylasim-sykes-picot-anlasmasi
\64. Gary Troeller, The Birth of Saudi Arabia: Britain and the Rise of the House of Sa’ud, London: Frank Cass, 1976, p. 79
\65. Eugene Rogan, The Fall of the Ottomans: The Great War in the Middle East, 2015, iBooks
\66. David Garnett, The Letters of T.E. Lawrence of Arabia, New York: Spring Books, 1964, pp. 351-353
\67. Richard Aldington, Lawrence of Arabia a Biographical Enquiry, London: Collins, 1969, pp. 312, 331-332, 380
\68. T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom, 1922; Garnett, p. 15; Richard Aldington, Lawrence of Arabia, A Biographical Enquiry, London, 1955, p. 99
\69. Geoffrey Miller, Straits, University of Hull Press, 1997, p. 303
\70. T. E. Lawrence, “To D. H. Hogarth April 20, 1915”, The Collected Works of Lawrence of Arabia, 2015
\71. T. E. Lawrence, “Introductory Chapter”, Seven Pillars of Wisdom, 1922;* T. E. Lawrence, The Evolution of a Revolt, 2014
\72. Simon Anglim, Orde Wingate and the British Army, 1922-1944, p. 49
\73. “T. E. Lawrence to V. W. Richards”, T. E. Lawrence Studies, 15 July 1918, https://www.telstudies.org/writings/letters/1917-18/180715_richards.shtml
\74. Malcolm Brown, T. E. Lawrence in War and Peace, Greenhill Books, London, 2005, p. 173; Arab Bulletin, No. 106, 22 October 1918
\75. Toby Thacker, British Culture and the First World War: Experience, Representation and Memory, Bloomsbury Academic, p. 222
\76. T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom, London: Manning Pike and H. J. Hodgson, 1926
\77. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, Bir İmparatorluk Nasıl Parçalandı? [Foreign Intrusion in Ottoman Riots, How An Empire Was Dismembered], Vatan Publication, October 1992, p. 103
\78. “Alınamayan Gemiler: Sultan Osman I ve Reşadiye” [Battleships Not Taken: Sultan Osman I and Reşadiye], https://www.canakkale.gen.tr/bilinmeyenler/b1.html; NTV Mag, January 2001, pp. 136-137
\79. Feridun Kandemir, Hatıraları ve Söyleyemedikleri ile Rauf Orbay [Rauf Orbay In His Memoirs and Things He Could Not Say], Istanbul: Sinan Matbaası, pp. 103-104
\80. Article 58, “Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne”, July 24, 1923, 81. 81. 81. https://sam.baskent.edu.tr/belge/Lausanne_ENG.pdf
\81. Jon Henley, “Remembering Gallipoli: Honouring the Bravery Amid the Bloody Slaughter”, The Guardian, April 24, 2015
\82. Jon Henley, “Remembering Gallipoli”
\83. Yavuz Bahadıroğlu, İnancın Zaferi Çanakkale (The Victory of Faith at Dardanalles), Nesil Yayınları, 2015
\84. Mustafa Turan, Destanlaşan Çanakkale [Legendary Gallipoli], Istanbul: Cihan Publication, 2012
\85. Gökşen Keskin, “Barbar Türklere Karşı Zehirli Gaz Kullanalım” [Let’s Use Poisonous Gas Against Barbarous Turks], Sabah, March 20, 2007, https://arsiv. sabah.com.tr/2007/03/20/gnd116.html; Tuncay Yılmazer, Gelibolu’yu Anlamak [Understanding Gallipoli], 2009, https://www.geliboluyuanlamak.com/204_populer-bir-muamma-canakkale-de-kimyasal-silah-kullanildi-mi-2-ozan-bodur.html
\86. Winston S. Churchill, editor Martin Gilbert, “WSC, minute from the War Office, 12 May 1919”, The Churchill Documents, Volume 8: War and Aftermath, December 1916-June 1919, Hillsdale: Hillsdale College Press, 2008, p. 649, https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/churchill-and-chemical-warfare/
\87. Phil Mason, How George Washington Fleeced the Nation, Skyhorse Publishing, 2010
\88. Boris Johnson, The Churchill Factor, Riverhead Books, New York, 2014, p. 161
\89. Martin Gilbert, Winston S. Churchill: Companion, Volume III, p. 1230; Jeremy Havardi, The Greatest Briton: Essays On Winston Churchill’s Life and Political Philosophy, London, 2009
\90. Jeremy Havardi, The Greatest Briton: Essays On Winston Churchill’s Life and Political Philosophy
\91. Andy Thomas, “The minutes from the Dardanelles Committee and the War Committee Papers”, Effects of Chemical Warfare, London: Taylor and Francis, 1985, pp. 18-20
\92. William Ewart Gladstone, Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East, NY: Lowell, Adam Wesson & Company, 1876, p. 10
\93. Tülay Alim Baran, “Çanakkale Savaşı’nda Hukuk İhlalleri” [Violations of Law in Gallipoli War], Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, vol. 73, https://www.atam.gov.tr/dergi/sayi-73/canakkale-savasinda-hukuk-ihlalleri
\94. Noam Chomsky, “U.S. Middle East Policy”, Columbia University, April 4, 1999, https://chomsky.info/19990404/
\95. Warren Dockter, Churchill and the Islamic World, I. B. Tauris & Co. Ltd., 2015, p. 193
\96. Martin Gilbert, “Churchill papers: 16/16, 12 May 1919 War Office”, Winston S. Churchill: Companion, Volume IV, London: Heinemann, 1976, https://www. globalresearch.ca/articles/CHU407A.html
\97. Tom Heyden, “The 10 Greatest Controversies of Winston Churchill’s Career”, BBC, January 26, 2015
\98. Eyüb Sabri Akgöl and Nejat Sefercioğlu, Esaret Hatıraları: Bir Esirin Hatıraları ve Matbuat Ve Istihbarat Müdüriyet-i Umumiyesi: Yunan İllerinde Zavallı Esirlerimiz [Memoirs of Captivity], Istanbul: Tercüman, 1978
\99. “Türk Esirleri”, Akın Tarih, https://www.akintarih.com/turktarihi/osmanli/turk_esirleri/turk_esirleri.html
\100. Cemalettin Taşkıran, Ana Ben Ölmedim / 1. Dünya Savaşı’nda Türk Esirleri [Mother I Did Not Die / Turkish Prisoners of War in WWI], Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2001, pp. 143-147
\101. Cemalettin Taşkıran, Ana Ben Ölmedim, pp. 143-147
\102. Cemalettin Taşkıran, Ana Ben Ölmedim, pp. 143-147
\103. Eyüb Sabri Akgöl and Nejat Sefercioğlu, Esaret Hatıraları
\104. “Battles from Basra to Kut”, Al Jazeera, https://interactive.aljazeera.com/ajt/2016/kutul-amare/en/kut-siege.html
\105. Patrick Sawer, “Rarely Seen WWI Diaries Reveal Agony of Ignominious British Defeat”, The Telegraph, December 2, 2015
\106. Patrick Sawer, “Rarely Seen WWI Diaries Reveal Agony of Ignominious British Defeat”
\107. Patrick Sawer, “Rarely Seen WWI Diaries Reveal Agony of Ignominious British Defeat”
\108. Russell Miller, Uncle Bill: The Authorised Biography of Field Marshal Viscount Slim, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, UK, 2013, chapter 4
\109. Christopher Catherwood, The Battles of World War I., Allison & Busb, 22 May 2014, pp. 51-52
\110. “Memoirs of Khalil Pasha”, Al Jazeera, https://interactive.aljazeera.com/ajt/2016/kutul-amare/en/ khalil-pasha-memoirs.html
\111. Pat Walsh, “Centenary of Kut Al Amara”, History and Politics, April 3, 2016, https://drpatwalsh.com/2016/04/03/centenary-of-kut-al-amara/
\112. Furkan Düzenli, “Kızgın Kumlarda Kazanılan Büyük Zafer: Kûtü’l-Amâre” [Great Victory Won on Hot Sand], Haber10, April 30, 2016, https://www.haber10.com/tarih/kizgin_kumlarda_kazanilan_buyuk_zafer_kutul_amare-629101
\113. Charles Mac Farlane, Turkey and its Destiny, Vol. II, London, 1850, pp. 270, 301
\114. “Hüseyin Cisri Hazretleri ve Kitabındaki İşaretler” [Husayn al-Jisr and the Signs in His Book], Risale Online, https://www.risaleonline.com/soru-cevap/huseyin-cisri-hazretleri-ve-kitabindaki-isaretler
\115. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1859, p. 172.
\116. “Hoca Tahsin” [Hodja Tahsin], Ülkücü Dünya, July 3, 2012, https://www.ulkucudunya.com/index.php?page=haber-detay&kod=5827
\117. Ahmed Midhat, “İnsan-Dünyada İnsanın Zuhuru” [Emergence of Man in the World], Dağarcık, Issue 4, 1288, pp. 109-116
\118. Niyazi Berkes, Türkiye’de Çağdaşlaşma [Modernization in Turkey], Yapı Kredi Yayınları, Istanbul, 2002; “Ceride-i Havadis”, Wikipedia, https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceride-i_Havadis)
\119. Burhan Bozgeyik, Meşhurların Son Anları [Final Moments of the Celebrities], TÜRDAV Publishing, pp. 310-311
\120. “Darwin’s Shadow: Context and Reception in the Muslim World”, https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Darwin’s+shadow%3A+context+and+reception+in+the+Muslim+world.-a0201086403
\121. Abdullah Al Andalusi, “Lord Cromer on the British Colonial Project for Egypt”, December 23, 2013, https://abdullahalandalusi.com/2013/12/23/a-brief-word-by-lord-cromer-on-the-british-colonial-project-for-egypt/
\122. Kenan Alpay, “Hindistan ve Pakistan’da Modernizm ve İslam” [Modernism and Islam in India and Pakistan], https://www.islamdusuncesi.net/hindistan-ve-pakistanda-modernizm-ve-islam-308h.htm
\123. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, Bir İmparatorluk Nasıl Parçalandı?, [Foreign Intrusion in Ottoman Riots, How An Empire Was Dismembered], Vatan Publication, October 1992, p. 94
\124. Prof. Dr. Ercan Eren, Geçmişten Günümüze Anadolu’da Bira [Beer in Anatolia, From Past to Present], Tarih Vakfı, 2005
\125. Prof. Dr. Ercan Eren, Geçmişten Günümüze Anadolu’da Bira
\126. Ayşe Hür, “Meyhaneye Gel, Kim Ne Riya Var Ne Mürai…” [Come to the Tavern, No Hypocrisy, No Trickery], Radikal, May 26, 2013, https://www.radikal.com.tr/yazarlar/ayse-hur/meyhaneye-gel-kim-ne-riya-var-ne-murai-1134981/
\127. Sal Cohen, Report of An Enquiry Made in Constantinople on Behalf of the Jewish Association for the Protection of Girls and Women, London, 1914, pp. 6-9
\128. Filiz Dığıroğlu, “Selanik Ekonomisinde Unutulmuş Bir Alan: Tütün Üretimi, Ticareti ve Reji (1883-1912)” [A Forgotten Field in the Economy of Salonica: Tobacco Production and Trade, and the Régie (1883-1912)], p. 235, https://www.isam.org.tr/documents/_dosyalar/_pdfler/osmanli_arastirmalari_dergisi/osmanl%C4%B1_sy43/2014_43_filiz_digiroglu.pdf
\129. Fehmi Yılmaz, “Tütünün Macerası II” [The Adventure of Tobacco], Tombak, p. 34, (October 2000), p. 25; İsmail Arslan, “İngiliz Konsolos Raporları Işığında XIX. Yüzyıl Ortalarında Drama Sancağında Tütün Yetiştiriciliği ve Ticareti” [According to the British Consulate Reports Tobacco Cultivation and Trade in the Sanjak of Drama during the Mid 19th Century], 2009, p. 115, https://www.turkishstudies.net/sayilar/sayi16/arslanismail1061.pdf
\130. Fatih Bayhan, “İlk Osmanlı Darwinisti hangi ünlüydü?” [Which celebrity was the first Ottoman Darwinist?], Haber 7, https://www.haber7.com/yazarlar/fatih-bayhan/387493-ilk-osmanli-darwinisti-hangi-unluydu)
\131. Murat Bardakçı, “Osmanlı’yı Dedelerimin İçkisi Yıktı” [The Drinking of My Grandfathers Became the Downfall of the Ottoman Empire], Habertürk, https://www.haberturk.com/polemik/haber/841565-osmanliyi-dedelerimin-ickisi-yikti
\132. Erdal Şimşek, “Sultan Abdülaziz’in Katledilmesi” [The Murder of Sultan Abdülaziz], Yeni Söz, https://www.yenisoz.com.tr/sultan-abdulaziz-in-katledilmesi-makale-4579
\133. Ömer Faruk Yılmaz, “Abdülaziz Han’ın kızı: Babamın katledilişini gördüm” [Abdulaziz Khan’s daughter: “I saw the murder of my father”], Timetürk, https://www.timeturk.com/tr/2011/09/27/sultan-abdulaziz-in-kizi-babamin-katledilisini-gordum.html
\134. Ahmed Mithat Efendi, Mirat-ı Hayret [Mirror of Astonishment], p.262; Erdal Şimşek, “Sultan Abdülaziz’in Katledilmesi” [The Murder of Sultan Abdülaziz], Yeni Söz, https://www.yenisoz.com.tr/sultan-abdulaziz-in-katledilmesi-makale-4579
\135. Murat Bardakçı, “Tarihin Arka Odası” [Backroom of History], Habertürk, March 2017; “Abdülhamidçileri çıldırtan konuşma” [The speech that infuriated Abdul Hamid supporters], Odatv, https:// odatv.com/abdulhamidcileri-cildirtan-konusma-2503171200.html
\136. A. Ferouz, İttihat ve Terakki 1908-1914 (Committee of Union and Progress 1908-1914), Sander Publishing, Translated by Nuran Ülken, Istanbul, 1971, p. 226; Dr. Ahmet Yücekök, 100 Soruda Türk Devrim Tarihi [History of Turkish Revolutions in 100 Questions], 1984, p. 34
\137. Michael Korda, Hero: The Life and Legend of Lawrence of Arabia, HarperCollins Publishers, New York, 2010, p. 246
\138. Nejat Gülen, Şanlı Bahriye: Türk Bahriyesinin İkiyüz Yıllık Tarihçesi 1774-1973 [Honorable Navy: Two-Hundred-Year-Old History of the Turkish Navy, 1774-1973], 2001, Kastaş Publishing
\139. Matthew Eden, The Murder of Lawrence of Arabia, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1980, p. 180; T.E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom, Wordsworth Editions, 1997, p. 628
\140. Frank Jacobs, “Winston’s Hiccup”, The New York Times, March 6, 2012, https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/winstons-hiccup/?_r=0
\141. Richard Norton-Taylor, “From Dracula’s nemesis to prototype foreign spy”, The Guardian, April 1, 2005, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/apr/01/highereducation.artsandhumanities1
\142. Mim Kemal Öke, Saraydaki Casus: Gizli Belgelerle Abdülhamid Devri ve İngiliz Ajanı Yahudi Vambery [The Spy in the Palace: Documents Tell About the Rule of Abdul Hamid II and the British Spy Jewish Vambery] Istanbul, November, 1991, p. 252
\143. Bekir Hazar, “Aramızda Çok Cevdet Var” [A Lot of Cevdet Among Us], Takvim, November 12, 2015, https://www.takvim.com.tr/yazarlar/bekirhazar/2015/11/12/aramizda-cok-cevdet-var
\144. Sinan Tavukçu, “Dr. Abdullah Cevdet’le İstiklal Harbi Üzerine 1922 Yılında Yapılan İlginç Bir Mülakat” [An Interesting Interview with Dr. Abdullah Cevdet on Turkish War of Independence in 1922], SDE, February 6, 2012, https://www.sde.org.tr/tr/authordetail/dr-abdullah-cevdetle-istiklal-harbi-uzerine-1922-yilinda-yapilan-ilginc-bir-mulakat/1043
\145. “Çok Okunanlar” [Popular Pages], Açık İstihbarat, 12 October 2011, https://www.acikistihbarat.com/Sayfalar/haberdetay.aspx?id=9783
\146. George Washburn, Fifty Years in Constantinople and Recollections of Robert College, 1909, p. 106
\147. Baki Öz, Atatürk’ün Anadolu’ya Gönderiliş Olayının İç Yüzü [Low-Down on Ataturk’s Being Sent to Anatolia], Can Press (Ali Adil Atalay), 1995
\148. “Damat Ferit Paşa”, Wikipedia, https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damat_Ferit_Pa%C5%9Fa#cite_note-8
\149. “Derviş Vahdeti”, Wikipedia, https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dervi%C5%9F_Vahdeti
\150. Cihan Dura, “Bir Dincinin Portresi: Derviş Vahdetî” [Portrait of a Religionist: Derviş Vahdeti], March 1st, 2011, https://www.cihandura.com/tr/makale/-BIR-DINCININ-PORTRESI-DERVIS-VAHDET
\151. Cihan Dura, “Bir Dincinin Portresi: Derviş Vahdetî”
\152. Gotthard Jaeschke, Kurtuluş Savaşı ile ilgili İngiliz Belgeleri I [British Documents regarding Turkish War of Independence I], Yeni Gün Haber Ajansı Basın ve Yayıncılık, April 2001, p. 95
\153. Baki Öz, Atatürk’ün Anadolu’ya Gönderiliş Olayının İç Yüzü
\154. Baki Öz, Atatürk’ün Anadolu’ya Gönderiliş Olayının İç Yüzü
\155. Yılmaz Özdil, “Ali Kemal’in Oğlu Boris” [Boris, the son of Ali Kemal], Sözcü, July 15, 2016, https://www.sozcu.com.tr/2016/yazarlar/yilmaz-ozdil/ali-kemalin-torunu-boris-1314618/
\156. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Nutuk [The Great Speech], Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2015
\157. Justin McCarthy, The Ottoman Turks: An Introductory History to 1923, p. 338
\158. Justin McCarthy; William St. Clair. That Greece Might Still Be Free The Philhellenes in the War of Independence, London: Oxford University Press, 1972, p. 43
\159. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, pp. 81-82
\160. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, pp. 91-92
\161. Freeman to F. H. Dickinson, 4 December 1881, in Stephens, The Life and Letters of Edward A. Freeman, Vol. 2, p. 242
\162. John Henry Newman, Historical Sketches, vol. 1, London: Aeterna Press, 2014
\163. Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, vol. 1, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1888, pp. 285-286
\164. “The Telegraph (Brisbane, QLD), 18 January 1919”, Myheritage, https://www.myheritage.com.tr/research/collection-10450/avusturalyali-gazeteler?itemId=56619410&action=showRecord#fullscreen
\165. William John Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus and Armenia, vol. 1, London: John Murray, 1842
\166. Soner Yalçın, “Osmanlı İstihbarat Teşkilatı İngiliz Elçisinin Israrıyla Kuruldu” [Ottoman Intelligency Agency was Founded Upon British Consul’s Urging] , Hürriyet, March 10, 2010, https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/osmanli-istihbarat-teskilati-ingiliz-elcisinin-israriyla-kuruldu-6102121
\167. Doğan Gürpınar, “The Rise and Fall of Turcophilism in Nineteenth-Century British Discourses: Visions of the Turk, ‘Young’ and ‘Old’”, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 39, no. 3, 2012
\168. David Mikkelson, “Winston Churchill on Islam”, Snopes, January 8, 2015, https://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/churchillislam.asp
\169. Evelyn Baring, Political and Literary Essays, 1908–1913, London: Cambridge University Press, 2010, pp. 412-413
\170. Adolphus Slade, Records of Travels is Turkey, Greece, &c., 2009, p. 312
\171. Adolphus Slade, Turkey, Greece, and Malta: Volume 1, Adamant Media Corp., 2003, p. 208
\172. Adolphus Slade, Turkey, Greece, and Malta: Volume 2, Adamant Media Corp., 2003, p. 15
\173. Sadık Ilgaz, “Osmanlı Donanması’na Dair İki İlginç Anekdot” [Two Interesting Anecdotes on Ottoman Navy], İlim Dünyası, 2012, https://www.ilimdunyasi.com/dun-bugun-yarin/osmanli-donanmasi8217na-dair-iki-ilginc-anekdot/?imode
\174. Fatih Erbaş, “Osmanlı Donanmasında Yabancı Müşavirler” [Foreign Advisors in Ottoman Navy], Academia, https://www.academia.edu/13440260/OSMANLI_DONANMASINDA_YABANCI_M%C3%9C%C5%9EAV%C4%B0RLER
\175. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye [Turkey in British Secret Documents], Istanbul: Cumhuriyet Books, 2010
\176. “Session of the Council of Four on 25 June 1919 at 4 pm, no 194 (C.F. 92p), in NA, CAB 29/39, 1103 (in the volume)”; cited in Volker Prott, The Politics of Self-Determination: Remaking Territories and National Identities in Europe, 1917-1923, Oxford University Press, 2016, p. 93
\177. “What did they think about us”, November 8, 2016, https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2006/11/1219-what-did-they-think-about-us.html
\178. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye, p. 249
\179. G. P. Gooch and Harold Temperley, “The Balkan Wars, The Prelude, The Tripoli War,” British Documents on the Origins of the War, 1898-1914, 1933, p. 674
\180. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye, p. 122
\181. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye, p. 125
\182. Joseph Heller, British Policy towards the Ottoman Empire 1908-1914, Frank Cass and Company Limited, 1983, p. 116
\183. https://archive.org/stream/britishdocuments101grea/britishdocuments101grea_djvu.txt
\184. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 230-231
\185. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 247-248
\186. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 165
\187. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 176
\188. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 212
\189. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 215
\190. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 227
\191. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 230
\192. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 237
\193. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 242
\194. Ermeni Meselesi - 1774-2005 [Armenian Issue – 1774-2005], September 2005, p. 331
\195. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 255
\196. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 188-189
\197. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye
\198. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 211-212
\199. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 212-213
\200. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 213
\201. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 244-245
\202. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 246
\203. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 257
\204. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 261-266
\205. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* pp. 267-268
\206. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 269
\207. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 281
\208. Michael Llewellyn Smith, Ionian Vision: Greece in Asia Minor 1919-1922, p. 175
\209. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 202
\210. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 202
\211. David McDowall, A Modern History of The Kurds, p. 124
\212. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 206
\213. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 217
\214. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 218
\215. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 269
\216. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye,* p. 272
\217. Kevork Aslan, L’Arménie et les Arméniens [Armenia and the Armenians], Istanbul: Librairie Weiss, 1914
\218. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, pp. 85-86
\219. T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü, Osmanlı Belgelerinde Ermeni İngiliz İlişkileri (1845-1890), [Turkish Republic Prime Minister’s Office, State Archives General Directorate, Armenia-English Relations in the Ottoman Documents] Ankara: State Archives General Directorate Publishing, 2004, p. 10
\220. Louise Nalbandian, Armenian-Revolutionary Movement, Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1963, p. 110
\221. George H. Hepworth, Through Armenia on Horseback, New York: E. P. Dutton, 1898, p. 32
\222. General Mayewski, “Van - Bitlis Vilayetleri Askeri İstatistiği Matbaa i Askeriye” [Van-Bitlis Provinces Military Statistics], Istanbul, 1330, p. 134 (32)
\223. İhsan Ilgar, “Bir Asır Boyunca Ermeni Meselesi” [Armenian Issue for a Century], Hayat Tarih Magazine, p. 10, October 1975, p. 68
\224. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, p. 87; George H. Hepworth, Through Armenia on Horseback, p. 342.
\225. Halil Halit, Türk Hâkimiyeti ve İngiliz Cihangirliği [Turkish Domination and Britain as a World Conquerer], Istanbul: Yeni Publishing, 1341, p. 26; Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, p. 87
\226. Süleyman Kocabaş, Osmanlı İsyanlarında Yabancı Parmağı, p. 88; William L. Langer, The Language of Imperialism (Alfred A. Knopf, New York 1960), pp. 157-160.
\227. T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü, p. 31
\228. T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü, p. 197
\229. ‘Papers of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions Reel Listing’, Reel 644, No: 241, https://microformguides.gale.com/Data/Download/3041000R.pdf
\230. T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü, p. 28
\231. Burhan Çağlar, İngiliz Said Paşa ve Günlüğü (Jurnal) [English Said Pasha and His Journal], Istanbul: Arı Sanat Publishing, 2010, pp. 58-59
\232. ‘Mann, Michael, “The dark side of democracy: explaining ethnic cleansing”, Cambridge University Press, 2005, p. 113.
\233. Maria Todorova, Imagining the Balkans, Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 175
\234. Mehmet Hocaoğlu, Tarihte Ermeni Mezalimi ve Ermeniler [Armenian Atrocity in History and Armenians], Istanbul, 1976, pp. 570-571, https://www.mfa. gov.tr/data/dispolitika/ermeniiddialari/armeniangenocidefactsandfiguresrevised.pdf; ‘Ermeni Gerçeği’ [The Truth of Armenian], Gözlemci, https:// www.gozlemci.net/921-ermeni-gercegi.html
\235. Kathe Ehrhold, Flucht in die Heimat (Escape to Homeland), Ungelenk, 1937, https://nacikaptan.com/ ?p=30329; Avni Özgürel, ‘Van’da Gördüklerimi Saklayamam’ [I can’t hide what I saw in Van], Radikal, 26.04.2009, https://www.radikal.com.tr/yorum/vanda-gorduklerimi-saklayamam-933029/
\236. Ömer Aymalı, ‘Van İsyanı, 24 Nisan 1915 ve Ermeni Tehciri’ [The Van Riot, 24 April 1915 and the Armenian Deportation] Dünya Bülteni, 26.04.2014, https://www.dunyabulteni.net/tarihten-olaylar/296379/van-isyani-24-nisan-1915-ve-ermeni-tehciri
\237. Michael A. Reynolds, Shattering Empires The Clash and Collapse of the Ottoman and Russian Empires 1908–1918, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011, p. 71.
\238. “Tehcir Kanunu ve Bu Kanunun Tatbiki” [The Law of Deportation and Its Implementation] Gerçek Tarih, 08.08.2012 https://gercektarih1a.blogcu.com/ tehcir-kanunu-ve-bu-kanunun-tatbiki/12865279
\239. ‘İşçi Partisi Genel Başkanı Doğu Perinçek: Sözümüzde Durduk Bu İşi Bitiriyoruz’ [Chairman of the Workers’ Party Doğu Perinçek: We Fulfil our Promise], Vatan Party Website, 20.11.2016
\240. British Blue Book Nr. 6 (1894) pp. 87, 222-223, https://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/dispolitika/ermeniiddialari/armeniangenocidefactsandfiguresrevised.pdf; ‘Ermeni Sorununa İlişkin Uluslararası Beyanatlar’, Soykırım Gerçeği, https://www.soykirimgercegi.com/ htmlpages/ulusbeyan/ulusbeyan1.htm
\241. Excerpts from correspondence of Admiral Mark Bristol, U.S. Library of Congress: “Bristol Papers” – General Correspondence Container #34 (Bristol to Barton Letter of March 28, 1921), p. 2, https://www. mfa.gov.tr/data/dispolitika/ermeniiddialari/armeniangenocidefactsandfiguresrevised.pdf; ‘Ermeni Sorununa İlişkin Uluslararası Beyanatlar’, Soykırım Gerçeği, https://www.soykirimgercegi.com/htmlpages/ulusbeyan/ulusbeyan1.htm
\242. Ovannes Kacaznuni, The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnagtzoutiun) Has Nothing To Do Anymore, New York, 1955
\243. H. A. Arslanian, ‘British Wartime Pledges, 1917-1918’, Journal Of Contemporary History, Vol. 13, Nu. 3, 1978; War Cabinet Minutes, 171, 27 June 1917, CAB. 23/2.
\244. New York Times on May 19, 1985, https://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/dispolitika/ermeniiddialari/armeniangenocidefactsandfiguresrevised.pdf; Şükrü Elekdağ, ‘Bakış’, ‘Amerikalı Bilim Adamlarının Açıklamaları’ [Statements of the American Scientists], 19.05.1985, https://sukruelekdag.wordpress.com/1985/05/19amerikali-bilim-adamlarinin-aciklamasi/
\245. The message of Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, on the events of 1915, April 23, 2014 https://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkish-prime-minister-mr_-recep-tayyip-erdoğan-published-a-message-on-the-events-of-1915_-23-april-2014.en.mfa; ‘Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Başbakanı Sayın Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’ın 1915 Olaylarına İlişkin Mesajı’, [Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Message about 1915 Incidents], Turkish Republic Prime Minister’s Office, 23.04.2014, https://www.basbakanlik.gov.tr/Forms/_Article/pg_Article.aspx?Id=974ccd3b-fb77-499a-ab6a-7c5d2a1e79c9
\246. Message Sent By President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, To The Religious Ceremony Held In The Armenian Patriarchate Of Istanbul On 24 April 2016, https://washington.emb.mfa.gov.tr/ShowAnnouncement.aspx?ID=265258
\247. The address delivered by Mr. Tal Buenos at NSW Parliament, New South Wales Parliament, 24 November 2014, https://www.ata-a.org.au/tal_buenos_speech/; ‘Tal Buenos Tarafından Nsw Parlamentosu’nda Yapılan Konuşma’, ATA, 24.11.2014, https://www.ata-a.org.au/tal_buenos_konusma/
\248. Leslie Gelb, “When to Forgive and Forget: Engaging Hanoi and Other Outlaws”, New York Times, April 15,1993, https://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/15/opinion/foreign-affairs-when-to-forgive-and-forget.html
\249. Salahi Sonyel, The Great War and The Tragedy of Anatolia, TTK, 2000, pp.170-182
\250. Süleyman Kocabaş, Hindistan Yolu ve Petrol Uğruna Yapılanlar: Türkiye ve İngiltere [All that was done for the Route to India and Oil], Istanbul: Vatan Publication, 1985, p. 231
\251. Ahmet İhsan, Matbuat Hatıralarım [My Press Memoirs], Istanbul: A. İhsan Publishing, 1931, p. 57
\252. Andre Maurois, A History of England, Translated from the French by Hamish Miles, Thirty Bedford Square, London, p. 457
\253. Sir Ellis Ashmead-Bartlett, The Battlefields of Thessaly: with Personal Experiences in Turkey and Greece, Elibron Classics, 2001, pp. 4-5 (https://archive.org/details/battlefieldsthe00bartgoog)
\254. Ragıp Üner, “Tarihte Türk-İngiliz İlişkileri” [Turkish-British Relations in History], Hayat Tarih Mecmuası, vol. 2, p. 9, 1975, p. 26
\255. British Documents on the Origins of the War, 1898-1914, Vol. I, Edited by G.P. Gooch and Harold Temperley, London, 1926-1930, No. 9
\256. Grey to Lowther, private, 11 August 1908, BD, V, no. 207, p. 266; https://www.flamboroughmanor.co.uk/straits/chapter2.htm#_ftn74
257. The Saturday Review of Politics, Literature, Science and Art, Volume 111, 1911, p. 292
\258. John M. Vander Lippe, “The Other Treaty of Lausanne: The American Public and Official Debate on Turkish-American Relations”, The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations, vol. 23, 1993
\259. Doğan Avcıoğlu, Milli Kurtuluş Tarihi [National Independence History], 4th ed., Istanbul: Tekin Publications, 1996, p. 285
\260. Onur Öymen’in Kıbrıs Yakın Doğu Üniversitesi’nde Yaptığı Konuşma – 19 Nisan 2014 [Onur Öymen’s Speech at Cyprus Near East University – April 19, 2014], https://www.onuroymen.com/arsiv/3113
\261. Enver Ziya Karal, Birinci Meşrutiyet ve İstibdat Devirleri 1876-1907 [First Constitutional and Autocracy Periods, 1876-1907], VIII. ed., Atatürk High Institution of Language and History, Turkish Institution of History Publications, pp. 122-126
\262. Frederick Burnaby, On Horseback Through Asia Minor, Cosimo, Inc., 2007, p. 81
\263. Pierre Loti, Turkey in agony, Translated from the French of Pierre Loti, Published for the Ottoman Committee, London p. 66
\264. David Lloyd George to Sir George Riddell (managing editor of the News of the World and the man responsible for liaison between government and press), Riddell, George A.: War Diary 1914-1918, London 1933, p. 210; https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/war_correspondents
\265. Gökçe Fırat, “100 Yıl Öncesinden Bir Örnek: Yandaş Medya Nasıl Yaratılır?”, Turksolu, https:// www.turksolu.com.tr/100-yil-oncesinden-bir-ornek-yandas-medya-nasil-yaratilir/
\266. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın [Media as a Propaganda Weapon], Istanbul: Remzi Publications, 2014, p. 122
\267. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 118
\268. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 341
\269. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 126
\270. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 127
\271. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 337
\272. Onur Öymen, Bursa Konferansı Konuşma Metni 25.01.2015 [Bursa Conference Script January 25, 2015], https://www.onuroymen.com/arsiv/3039
\273. Justin McCarthy, Wellington House and the Turks, Louisville University, Department of History/USA; https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2005/ 07/0004-wellington-house-and-turks.html
\274. Justin McCarthy, Wellington House and the Turks
\275. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 80
\276. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 132
\277. Stanford J. Shaw, “The Ottoman Census System and Population, 1831-1914”, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 9, No. 3, Cambridge University Press, (Oct., 1978), pp. 325-338, https://psi424. cankaya.edu.tr/uploads/files/Shaw,%20Ott%20Census%20System%20and%20Pop,%201831-1914%20(1978).pdf ; Servet Mutlu, “Late Ottoman Population and Its Ethnic Distribution,” https:// www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/nbd_cilt25/mutlu.pdf
\278. Yalçın Koçak, Tiran: Toynbee’nin Kayıp Kitabı [Tyrant: Toynbee’s Lost Book], Wizart Publications, 2015, p. 45
\279. Justin McCarthy; https://armenians-1915.blog spot.com/2005/07/0004-wellington-house-and-turks.html
\280. Taner Akçam, “Anatomy of Genocide Denial: Academics, Politicians, and the “Re-Making of History”, https://chgs.umn.edu/histories/occasional/Akcam_Anatomy_of_Denial.pdf
\281. Michel Paillares, Le Kémaliste devant les alliés, p. 75; Yves Bénard, Ermeni Soykırımı: Ya Bize Yalan Söylenmişse? Türk-Ermeni Trajedisi Konusunda Düşünceler [Armenian Genocide: What if we have been lied to? Thoughts on Turkish-Armenian Tragedy], Smashwords, 2015
\282. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, p. 158
\283. Peter Buitenhuis, The Great War of Words: British, American, and Canadian Propaganda and Fiction, 1914-1933, Vancouver: Univ of British Columbia Press, 1987, p. 18
\284. James Bryce, “The Future of Armenia”, Contemporary Review, December 1918
\285. Justin McCarthy, The Bryce Report: British Propaganda and the Turks, https://www.ataa.org/reference/british_carthy.html
\286. H. C. Peterson. Propaganda for War: The Campaign Against American Neutrality, 1914-1917, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press, 1939, p. 58
\287. Justin McCarthy, The Bryce Report: British Propaganda and the Turks, https://www.ataa.org/reference/british_carthy.html
\288. Justin McCarthy, https://www.ataa.org/reference/british_carthy.html
\289. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, pp. 210-211; Joseph Goebbels, “Churchill’s Lie Factory”, January 12, 1941; https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb29.htm
\290. Onur Öymen, Bir Propaganda Silahı Olarak Basın, pp. 268, 269; Eugene Davidson, The Making of Adolf Hitler: The Birth and Rise of Nazism, 1997, p. 97
\291. Winter, J.M., America and the Armenian Genocide of 1915, p.302. Cambridge University Press, 2003, ISBN 0-521-82958-5
\292. W.E. Gladstone, Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East, New York and Montreal, Lovell, Adam, Wesson and Company, 1876, p. 39
\293. Ş. Can Erdem, “İtilaf Devletlerinin İstanbul’u Resmen İşgali ve Faaliyetleri” [Allied Powers’ Official Occupation of Istanbul and Their Activities], Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi (ATAM), https://www.atam.gov.tr/dergi/sayi-62/itilaf-devletlerinin-istanbulu-resmen-isgali-ve-faaliyetleri
\294. Gary Jonathan Bass, Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals, Princeton University Press, p. 121
\295. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Nutuk [The Great Speech]
\296. Robin Renwick, Fighting with Allies: America and Britain in Peace and War, Palgrave Macmillan, 1996, p. 89
\297. Documents of the Inter-Allied Commission of Inquiry-Appendices: Documents of the Inter-Allied Commission of Inquiry into the Greek Occupation of Smyrna and Adjoining Territories, https://www.ataa.org/reference/iacom.pdf
\298. Patrick Kinross, Atatürk: The Rebirth of a Nation, Phoenix Press, London, 2003, p. 134
\299. Gary Jonathan Bass, Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals, Princeton University Press, s. 121
\300. “Yeşilay Tarihçesi”, Yeşilay, https://www.yesilay.org.tr/tr/kurumsal/tarihce
\301. “İngiliz casuslar terzi ve kahveci ile Atatürk’ü izledi” [British spies monitored Atatürk with tailor and coffee maker], T24, 22.09.2010, https://t24.com.tr/haber/ingiliz-casuslar-terzi-ve-kahveci-ile-ataturku-izledi,100045
\302. Ali Dağlar, “90 yıllık sır perdesini kaldıran kitap: İşgal altındaki İstanbul” [The book that removes the 90-year-old mystery: Istanbul under occupation], Hürriyet, 07.10.2013, https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/90-yillik-sir-perdesini-kaldiran-kitap-isgal-altindaki-istanbul-24859602
\303. Ali Dağlar, “90 yıllık sır perdesini kaldıran kitap: İşgal altındaki İstanbul”
\304. Kerrar Esat Atalay, “Milliyetçiler İngiliz taraftarlığı propagandalarını nefretle karşılıyordu” [Nationalists received British propaganda with hatred], Yeniçağ, 24.01.2014, https://www.yenicaggazetesi.com.tr/milli-mucadelede-zararli-dernekler-ve-isyanlar-93885h.htm
\305. John Bennett, Witness: The Story of a Search, USA: Bennett Books, 1997
\306. Mehmed Demiryürek, “Kıbrıs’ta Bir 150’lik: Said Molla (1925-1930)” [150 in Cyprus: Said Molla], Mustafa Kemal Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, No. 57, Vol: XIX, November 2003
\307. “Ankara Milletvekili Mustafa Kemal Paşa’nın Ateşkesten Meclisin Açılmasına Kadar Geçen Süre İçindeki Siyasi Durum Hakkındaki Meclis Konuşmaları” [Parliamentary speeches of Mustafa Kemal Pasha, Ataturk delegate, from ceasefire to opening of the parliament regarding the political situation], Atatürkiye, https://www.ataturkiye.com/nutuklari/1d1yy.html
\308. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Nutuk [The Great Speech]
\309. Nurullah Çetin, “Harici ve Dahili Bedhahları Tanımak [Knowing the internal and foreign vicious]”, Öncevatan, https://www.oncevatan.com.tr/m/?id=29925&t=makale
\310. Şükran Vahide, Islam in Modern Turkey: An Intellectual Biography of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, p. 140
\311. Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, Eski Said Dönemi Eserleri [Works of the Old Said Period], Istanbul: Yeni Asya Neşriyat, 2010, p. 537
\312. “New World Order”, https://www.littlebookofjohn.com/quotes/n/new-world-order/8
\313. Arslan Tekin, İmralı’daki Konuk [Guest at Imrali], Istanbul, Bilgeoğuz Yayınları, 2009, pp. 57-435
314. Komünar, Nov. 2008, no. 36, https://www.arsivakurd.org/images/arsiva_kurd/kovar/komunar/komunar_36.pdf
\315. Isaiah Friedman, British Miscalculations: The Rise of Muslim Nationalism, 1918-1925, p. 233
\316. Isaiah Friedman, British Miscalculations: The Rise of Muslim Nationalism, 1918-1925, p. 233
\317. Gotthard Jaeschke, Kurtuluş Savaşı İle İlgili İngiliz Belgeler [British Documents regarding Turkish War of Independence], trans. Cemal Köprülü, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 2011, p. 8
\318. Shelly Culbertson, The Fires of Spring, p. 92
\319. Habibollah Atarodi, Great Powers, Oil and the Kurds in Mosul, University Press of America, 2003, p. XV
\320. Hasan Saygın and Murat Çimen, Turkish Economic Policies and External Dependency, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, p. 48
\321. https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2006/11/1219-what-did-they-think-about-us.html, “George Curzon”, Wikiquote, https://tr.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Curzon
\322. Mustafa Turan, “İzmir’in İşgali Üzerine” [On the occupation of Izmir], ATAM, https://www.atam.gov.tr/dergi/sayi-36/izmirin-isgali-uzerine
\323. Selçuk Ural, “Mütareke Döneminde İngiltere’nin Güneydoğu Anadolu Politikası” [England’s Southeastern Anatolia Policy in Armistice Period], Ankara Üniversitesi Türk Inkılâp Tarihi Enstitüsü Atatürk Yolu Dergisi, no. 39, 2007, pp. 425-463
\324. Gotthard Jaeschke, Kurtuluş Savaşı İle İlgili İngiliz Belgeler
\325. Artin H. Arslanian, Britain and the Transcaucasion Nationalities During the Russian Civil War, Conference on “Nationalism and Social Change in Transcaucasia”, 1980, pp. 10-11, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/op104_britian_transcaucasia_arslanian_1980.pdf
\326. Stanford Jay Shaw, From Empire to Republic: The Turkish War of National Liberation, 1918-1923: a Documentary Study, Vol. 3, Turkish Historical Society, 2000, p. 670
\327. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Nutuk [The Great Speech]
\328. Erol Ulubelen, İngiliz Gizli Belgelerinde Türkiye, p. 185
\329. Mustafa Albayrak, “Atatürk ve Anti-Emperyalizm” [Ataturk and Anti-Imperialism], Ankara Üniversitesi Türk İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü Atatürk Yolu Dergisi, Vol.5, no.20, 1997
\330. Gotthard Jaeschke, Kurtuluş Savaşı ile ilgili İngiliz Belgeleri 2, p. 72
\331. Hakan Özoğlu, “İşgal Altındaki İstanbul [Istanbul Under Occupation]”, https://www.aljazeera.com.tr/gorus/isgal-altindaki-istanbul
\332. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Nutuk [The Great Speech]
\333. Humayun Ansari, The Infidel Within: Muslims in Britain since 1800, Hurst & Company, London, 1988, p. 80
\334. Falih Rıfkı Atay, Çankaya, Doğan Kardeş Publishing, Istanbul, 1969, p. 127
\335. Andrea Bosco, The Round Table Movement and the Fall of the ‘Second’ British Empire (1909-1919), Cambridge Scholars Publishing, UK, 2017, p. 160
\336. John Murray, Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East, Albemarle Street, p. 31
\337. Michael Partridge, Gladstone, Routledge, New York, 2003, p. 158
\338. From a speech by British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, 1914: H. W. V. Temperley, ed., A History of the Peace Conference of Paris, Oxford 1969, VI, 24; Silent Capitulations: The Kemalist Republic Under Assault, p. 119
\339. Parliamentary Debates (Commons), Vol. CXX (October 30, 1919), pp. 977, https://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1919/oct/30/finance
\340. Alex J. Bellamy, Massacres & Morality, Mass Atrocities in an Age of Civilian Immunity, p. 67
\341. A. L. Macfie, The Eastern Question 1774-1923, Longman, London, pp. 66-67; Curzon of Kedleston, Foreign Office, January 7, 1920, CABINET, Conclusions of meetings of the cabinet. Jan. 6-Mar. 31, 1920. Nos. I (20) 17 (20)
\342. Semih Yalçın, “Misâk-ı Millî ve Lozan Barış Konferansı Belgelerinde Musul Meselesi” [The National Pact and Mosul Issue in Lausanne Peace Conference Documents] Tarih Araştırmaları, [Historical Studies], https://www.tariharastirmalari.com/musulmeselesi.html
\343. Zülal Keleş, “Musul Meselesi” [The Mosul Issue], Türk Tarihi Araştırmaları [Studies on Turkish History], https://www.altayli.net/musul-meselesi.html
\344. Kemal Melek, “Türk-İngiliz İlişkileri (1890-1926) ve Musul Petrolleri” [Turkish-British relations (1890-1926) and Mosul Oil]; Esat Çam, Türk Dış Politikasında Sorunlar [Problems in Turkish Foreign Policy], Der Publishing, Istanbul, 1989, p. 28; Zekeriya Türkmen, Musul Meselesi Askeri Yönden Çözüm Arayışları (1922-1925) [Seeking a Military Solution to Mosul Issue], Atatürk Research Center Publishing, Ankara, 2003, p. 7
\345. Esra Sarıkoyuncu Değerli, “Lozan Barış Konferansı’nda Musul” [Mosul at Lausanne Peace Conference], Balıkesir University, Journal of the Institute of Social Sciences, vol.10, issue 18, December 2007, pp. 127-140
\346. İsmet Görgülü, On Yıllık Savaşın Günlüğü, Balkan, Birinci Dünya ve İstiklal Savaşları Orgeneral İzzettin Çalışlar’ın Günlüğü [Journal of a 10-year war, the Balkan War, WWI and Independence Wars, Diaries of the Air Chief Marshal İzzettin Çalışlar], Yapı Kredi Publishing, Istanbul, 1997, p. 89
\347. Alpay Kabacalı, Hatırat (1913-1922) Cemal Paşa [Memoirs, Cemal Pasha], Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Publishing, Istanbul, 2001, p. 180
\348. Yüksel Kanar and Süheyl İzzet Furgaç, Ahmet İzzet Paşa, Feryadım [Ahmet İzzet Paşa, My Cry], vol.1, Nehir Publishing, Istanbul, 1992, pp. 210-211
\349. Zafer Kaya, “Musul Meselesine Genel Bir Bakış” [A General Look at the Mosul Issue], Abant İzzet Baysal University, The Journal of the Social Sciences Institute, vol. 1, issue 8, 2004, p. 119
\350. Tevfik Bıyıklıoğlu, “Türk İstiklal Harbi 1, Mondros Mütarekesi ve Tatbikatı”, [Turkish War of Independence, the Armistice of Mudros and Its Implementation], Publications of the Turkish Armed Forces, 1962, pp. 78-79
\351. Ahmet Özgiray, “Türkiye-İngiltere Münasebetleri ve Musul Meselesi (1924-1930) [Turkish-British relations and Mosul Issue, 1924-1930], Turkish Culture, XXVI/299, Ankara, Institute for Turkish Cultural Studies, 1988, p. 131; https://www.vakanuvis.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/MUSUL-MESELESNE-KISA-BR-BAKI-VE-GNMZE-YANSIMALARI.pdf
\352. Semih Yalçın; Mim Kemal Öke, Musul Kerkük Dosyası [Mosul-Kirkuk File], Istanbul 1991, pp. 15-16, 31, https://www.atam.gov.tr/dergi/sayi-49/ozdemir-beyin-musul-harekati-ve-ingilizlerin-karsi-tedbirleri-1921-1923
\353. Semih Yalçın, p. 162, https://www.vakanuvis.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/MUSUL-MESELESNE-KISA-BR-BAKI-VE-GNMZE-YANSIMALARI.pdf
\354. Kemal Melek, p. 40; Yusuf Hikmet Bayur, Türkiye Devleti’nin Harici Siyasası [Turkey’s Foreign Policy], TTK Publishing, Ankara, 1973, p. 32
\355. Paul C. Helmreich, Sevr Entrikaları [Sevres Plots], translated by Şerif Erol, Sabah Publishing, Istanbul, 1996, pp. 221-222
\356. Osman Olcay, Sevr Anlaşmasına Doğru [Towards the Treaty of Sèvres], SBF Publishing, 1981, Ankara, p. 121; U. Mumcu, Kürt-İslam Ayaklanması (Kurdish-Islamic Riot), Tekin Publishing, 19th edition, 1995, p. 28
\357. “Fırat’ın doğusunda, neler oldu; neler oluyor; neler olacak?” [What happened, what is happening and what will happen to the East of the Euphrates?], Milliyet Blog, https://blog.milliyet.com.tr/firat-in-dogusunda—neler-oldu—neler-oluyor—neler-olacak—-17/Blog/?BlogNo=520475
358. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Söylev ve Demeçler [Speeches and Remarks], Vol.III, A. Ü., Publications of the Institute of Turkish History of Revolution, Ankara, 1981, p. 78
\359. Genelkurmay Başkanlığı Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı Arşivi [Archive of the Institute of Military History and Strategic Studies of the Turkish Armed Forces, ATASE], Ankara, Folder no 15, File no 38, Document no 38/1
\360. Genelkurmay Başkanlığı Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı Arşivi
\361. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Söylev ve Demeçler, p. 12; “Atatürk’ün Milli Dış Politikası” [Ataturk’s National Foreign Policy], Vol. I, Ministry of Culture Publications, Ankara, pp. 35-36
\362. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Söylev ve Demeçler, p. 24
\363. Sibel Turan, Türkiye’nin Coğrafi Konumunun Dış Politikasına Etkisi, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi [Effect of Turkey’s Geographical Location on its Foreign Policy, Unpublished doctoral dissertation], Istanbul University, Department of Social Sciences, Istanbul, 1992, p. 101
\364. Hikmet Uluğbay, İmparatorluktan Cumhuriyete Petro-politik [Petroleum-Politics from the Empire to the Republic], Turkish Daily News Publishing, Ankara, 1995, p. 179
\365. Ali Balcı, Türkiye Dış Politikası [Turkish Foreign Policy], Chapter 3, Etkileşim Publishing, Istanbul, 2013
\366. ‘BL/G/13/18 Colonial Office adına Bindsay’in 4 Ocak tarihli Curzon’a gönderdiği telgrafları’’ [Bindsay’s telegrams to Curzon on January 4 on behalf of the ‘BL/G/13/18 Colonial Office], The Parliamentary Archives, UK
\367. Seha L. Meray, Lozan Barış Konferansı, Tutanaklar Belgeler [Lausanne Peace Conference, Documents and Minutes], vol.7, TTK Publishing, Istanbul, 1993, pp. 346-347
\368. Seha L. Meray, Lozan Barış Konferansı, Tutanaklar Belgeler, p. 360
\369. TBMM [Grand National Assembly of Turkey], ZC, C. 26, pp. 505–506
\370. TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi [Turkish Parliamentary Journal], Period 1, Vol. 24, Day 3.11.1922, p. 347, https://www.marmaris.bel.tr/Files/PDF/her-acidan-lozan.pdf
\371. Yalçın Küçük, Sırlar [The Secrets], İthaki Publishing - 239, p. 334. TPT, Vol. II, November 2, 1922, p. 343
\372. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan [Unknown Lausanne], Doğan Kitap Publishing, Istanbul, 2014, p. 225
\373. İsmail Göldaş, Lozan “Biz Türkler ve Kürtler” [Lausanne, We the Turks and the Kurds], Avesta Publishing, Istanbul, 2000, p. 25
\374. Paul C. Helmreich, Sevr Entrikaları, p. 227
\375. Sezen Kılıç, “Musul Sorunu ve Lozan” [Mosul Issue and Lausanne], Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi (ATAM), https://www.atam.gov.tr/dergi/sayi-71/ musul-sorunu-ve-lozan
\376. İhsan Şerif Kaymaz, “Birinci Dünya Savaşı Sonunda Musul Vilayeti’nde İngiliz Yönetiminin Kurulması” [Creation of the British Rule in Mosul Province after the WWI], Politics/Administration Journal, vol. 5, 2010
\377. Bilal N. Şimşir, Lozan Telgrafları – 1 [Lausanne Telegrams-1] (1922-1923), TTK Publishing, Ankara, 1990, pp. 288-289 (telegram no: 149, 150, 151)
\378. Bilal N. Şimşir, p. 328 (telegram no: 180, 181, 182)
\379. UK The Parliamentary Archives BL/111/12/42; Esra Sarıkoyuncu Değerli, p. 133
\380. Salahi Sonyel, Gizli Belgelerle Lozan’ın Perde Arkası [Behind the doors at Lausanne],* UK The National Archive PRO, FO 371/9059, TTK Publishing, Ankara, 2006, pp. 95-96
\381. UK The Parliamentary Archives, BL/111/12/61
\382. Although Curzon maintained in his letter to Walter dated January 17, that the Turkish delegation consisted of three people, in the afternoon session that took place on January 23, 1923, Ismet Pasha said that two people were sent to London for the meeting. (Seha L. Meray, Vol. I, Book I, p. 369)
\383. UK The Parliamentary Archives BL/111/12/61; Esra Sarıkoyuncu Değerli, p. 134; UK The Parliamentary Archives, BL/111/12/61 (Letter sent by Curzon to Walter on January 25, 1923)
\384. Rumbold to Oliphant 18. 7. 23 Rumblod MSS De. 30 in the Bodleian Library, Oxford; K. Jeffrey and A. Sharp, “Lord Curzon and the Use of Secret Intelligence at the Lausanne Conference: 1922-1923, The Turkish Yearbook, 1993
\385. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, p. 231
\386. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, p. 232
\387. “National Goal”, March 29, 1921, p. 1
\388. Fahri Belen, Askeri Siyasal ve Sosyal Yönleri ile Türk Kurtuluş Savaşı [Turkish Independence War with Its Military, Political and Social Aspects], Nadir Books, Ankara: 1973, pp. 534-535; Mim Kemal Öke, p. 34
\389. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, pp. 264-265
\390. Haldun Eroğlu, Tarihten Günümüze Irak ve Türkiye, Dokuzuncu Askeri Tarih Semineri Bildirileri I [Iraq and Turkey: The past and the Present, Declarations from the Ninth Military History Seminary I], Turkish Armed Forces ATASE and Publications of the Supervision Department of the Turkish Armed Forces, Ankara, 2005, p. 92
\391. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, p. 265
\392. Salahi Sonyel, Gizli Belgelerle Lozan’ın Perde Arkası, pp. 321-322
\393. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, p. 266
\394. Mehmet Gönlübol ve Cem Sar, Olaylarla Türk Dış Politikası [Highlights of the Turkish Foreign Policy], (1919-1973), Vol. I, Ankara University, Publications of the Political Sciences Department, Ankara, 1982, p. 75
\395. Levent Ayabakan, ”Kürt-Nasturi İlişkileri ve Ağa Petros’un ’Özerk Asuri Devleti Projesi’” [Kurdish-Nestorian Relations and Aga Petros’ ‘Autonomous Assyrian State Project’], (1919-1923), Sakarya University, Journal of the Social and Cultural Studies, Vol.1, Issue.1, pp. 49-76
\396. “Nasturiler” [Nestorians], Wikipedia, https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasturiler
\397. Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi, Hariciye Nezareti, Tercüme Odası [Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Translation Room], (HR.TO.), 258/72, 03 April 1880 (1297.Ra.22); BOA, Sadaret, Mühime Kalemi Evrakı (A.}MKT.MHM.) [Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry, Grand Vizier’s Office, Important Documents, 613/14, 17 December 1895 (1313.Ca.29.)]; BOA, Dahiliye Mektubi Kalemi (Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry, Ministry of Internal Affairs) (DH.MKT.), 2087/7, August 05, 1897 (1315.B.06); BOA, Dahiliye, İdare [Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Administration] (DH.İD.), 116/57, August 1913 (1331.Ra)
\398. BOA, Yıldız, Yaveran ve Maiyet-i Seniye Erkan-ı Harbiye Dairesi, [Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry, Department for Yıldız, the Assistants, the Royal Household and Military College], (Y..PRK. MYD.), 7/115, 31 August 1888 (1305.Z.23); BOA, Yıldız, Başkitabet Dairesi Maruzatı (Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry, Yıldız, Office of the Head Clerk) (Y..PRK.BŞK.), 14/23, 13 October 1888 (1306.S.07)
\399. S. Aziz, Atiya, (1968) 2005, Doğu Hıristiyanlığı Tarihi [History of Eastern Christendom], Doz Publishing, Istanbul, p. 312
\400. Abdurrahman Yılmaz, Osmanlı Cumhuriyet Döneminde Nasturi Ayaklanmaları [Nestorian Riots in Ottoman Republican Period], Tarih Okulu Dergisi, Mart 2015, No. 21, pp. 107-129
\401. Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi (BOA), [Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry], İ.DH., 100258, 27 L. 1309. p. 1
\402. Taylor (1869), Bilal N. Şimşir, İngiliz Belgelerinde Osmanlı Ermenileri [Ottoman Armenians in British Documents], (1856-1880), Ankara, Bilgi Publishing, 1986, pp. 86-87
\403. Serdar Sakin and Zeki Kapcı, “İngiltere, Nasturiler ve İç Toprak Projesi (1919-1922)” [England, Nestorians and the Domestic Territory Project (1919-1922)], International Journal of History Studies, 2013, Vol. 5, Issue. 5, pp. 211-212
\404. Deniz Bayburt, “Milli Mücadele Döneminde Süryaniler” [Assyrians during the War of Independence], Gazi Akademik Bakış Dergisi [Gazi Academic Outlook Journal], Vol.3, Issue.6, Summer 2010, p. 48
\405. Sakin and Kapçı, “İngiltere, Nasturiler ve İç Toprak Projesi (1919-1922)”, pp. 212
\406. Deniz Bayburt, “Milli Mücadele Döneminde Süryaniler”, p. 59
\407. İhsan Şerif Kaymaz, Musul Sorunu [Mosul Issue], Kaynak Publishing, December 2014, pp. 179-182, 336
\408. Cihangir İleri, Türkiye’de Nasturi Sorunu (1830-1926), [the Nestorian Problem in Turkey (1830-1926)], (Ankara University Department of Social Sciences History (General Turkish History) USA, Unpublished Master’s Thesis), Ankara, 2000, pp. 71-72
\409. İkdam, 21 September 1924
\410. Ergün Baybars, İstiklal Mahkemeleri [Istiklal Courts], 1975; Mehmet Gönlübol and Cem Sar Atatürk ve Türkiyenin Dış Politikası [Ataturk and Turkey’s Foreign Policy], Istanbul, 1963; Ali Naci Karacan, Lozan [The Lausanne], Second Edition, Istanbul, 1971; Yusuf Hikmet Bayur, Yeni Türkiye’nin Harici Siyaseti [Foreign Policy of the New Turkey], Istanbul, 1935. Salahi R. Sonyel, Türk Kurtuluş Savaşı ve Dış Politikası [Turkish War of Independence and Foreign Policy], Ankara, TTK Publishing, 1986
\411. İhsan Şerif Kaymaz, “Birinci Dünya Savaşı Sonunda Musul Vilayeti’nde İngiliz Yönetiminin Kurulması” [Creation of the British Rule in Mosul Province after the WWI], Politics/Administration Journal, 2010, Vol.5, Issue.14, p. 114
\412. Suat Akgül, Musul Sorunu ve Nasturi İsyanı [Mosul Issue and Nestorian Riot], Berikan Publishing, Ankara, 2004, pp. 107-108
\413. Başbakanlık Cumhuriyet Arşivi (BCA), “Hakkari harekatının 15 Eylül’de başlayacağının Cumhurbaşkanı’na bildirildiği” [The Ottoman Archives of the Prime Ministry, Notification of the Start of Hakkari Campaign to the President on September 15], 1.6.8/28, 30..10.0.0., 14/09/1924
\414. Yonca Anzerlioğlu, Nasturiler ve 1924 Ayaklanması [Nestorians and 1924 Riot], (Hacettepe University, Institute of Ataturk’s Principles and History of Revolution, Unpublished Master’s Thesis), Ankara, 1996, p. 181
\415. Suat Akgül, Musul Sorunu ve Nasturi İsyanı, pp. 33-34
416. TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi [Turkish Parliamentary Journal], Term 2, 1st Meeting, 1st Session, 18.10.1340, C. IX, pp. 7-11
\417. Jacques Benoist-Méchin, Mustapha Kémal, Bilgi Yayınları, Ankara, 1997, p. 268
\418. Suat Zeyrek, “Milli Mücadele Sürecinde Türk – İngiliz Rekabeti: Kürt Sorunu” [Turkish-British Competition during the Turkish War of Independence], Turkey Journal, Vol.23/ Spring 2013, p. 134
\419. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, p. 267
\420. “Fransız Dışişleri Bakanlığı Gizli Belgeleri” [Confidential Documents of the French Foreign Affairs Ministry] E-Levant (1918-1929) Kurdistan Caucase Service, Vol. 101, p. 25; Uğur Mumcu, Kürt-İslam Ayaklanması [Kurdish-Islamic Riot], Tekin Publishing, 19th edition, 1995, Istanbul, p. 168
\421. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, pp. 267-268; Şevket Pamuk, 100 Soruda Osmanlı Türkiye İktisadi Tarihi [Economic History Ottoman-Turkish in 100 Questions], Gerçek Publishing, Istanbul, 1988, p. 200
\422. Şevket Pamuk, 100 Soruda Osmanlı Türkiye İktisadi Tarihi, p. 200
\423. Yerasimos, 1977: 547; Azgelişmişlik Sürecinde Türkiye [Turkey During the Development Process], Belge Publishing, Istanbul 1986, p. 462
\424. İsmail Özsoy, “1838 Balta Limanı Ticaret Antlaşması’ndan Gümrük Birliği’ne” [From the Treaty of Balta Liman of 1838 to the Customs Union], Çerçeve Journal, Issue 15, October 1995, p. 134
\425. Bilal Eryılmaz, Tanzimat ve Yönetimde Modernleşme [Reform Edict and Modernization in Administration], İşaret Publishing, Istanbul, 1991, p. 86
\426. Ali Nejat Ölçen, Karl Marx ve İngiliz Emperyalizmi [Karl Marx and British Imperialism], Ekin Publishing, Ankara, 1992, p. 114
\427. Tahir Taner, Kapitülasyonlar Nasıl İlga Edildi [How the Capitulations were Abolished], İsmail Akgün Publishing, Istanbul, 1956, p. 34
\428. “Düstur, Tertibisani 6. Cilt s. 1273 “naklen Ozan Arslan” (Dustur, Tertibisani vol. 6, p.1273) “I. Dünya Savaşı Başında Kapitülasyonların İttihad ve Terakki Yönetimi Tarafından Kaldırılması ve Bu Gelişme Karşısında Büyük Güçlerin Tepkileri” [Committee of Union and Progress Abolishes Capitulations during the WWI and the World Powers React], Sakarya University, Science and Literature Journal, Vol. 10 (1), 2008, p. 265
\429. Şerafettin Turan, Türk Devrim Tarihi II, İmparatorluğun Çöküşünden Ulusal Direnişe [History of Turkish Revolutions II, From the Fall of the Empire to the National Resistance], Bilgi Publishing, Istanbul, 1998, pp. 82-91; Zeki Arıkan, “1536 Kapitülasyonları ve Cumhuriyet İdeolojisi” [1536 Capitulations and Republican Ideology], Ataturk University, Journal of the Department of Language, History and Geography, Vol.24, Issue.37, 1963, pp. 11-28
\430. Mahmut Goloğlu, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti, V. Kitap [Republic of Turkey, Book V], Başnur Publishing, Ankara, 1971, p. 8
\431. Afet İnan, “Türk İstiklali ve Lozan Muahedesi” [Turkish Independence and Lausanne Treaty] Belleten, Vol. II/7-8, pp. 277-291; Salahi Sonyel, “Lozan’da Türk Diplomasisi”, Belleten, Vol. XXXVIII, Issue, 149, pp. 41-115; Yusuf Hikmet Bayur, pp. 116-130
\432. Salahi Sonyel, “Lozan’da Türk Diplomasisi”, p. 76
\433. Salahi Sonyel, “Lozan’da Türk Diplomasisi”, p. 77; Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, Tek Adam [One Man], Vol. 3, Remzi Publishing, Istanbul, 1966, p. 112
\434. Afet İnan, “Türk İstiklali ve Lozan Muahedesi”, p. 293; Ahmet Yavuz, Lozan Barış Konferansı Tutanakları [Minutes of the Lausanne Peace Conference], Vol. II, Foreign Ministry Publications, Ankara, 1972, pp. 48-50
\435. Şerafettin Turan, İsmet İnönü, Yaşamı, Dönemi ve Kişiliği [İsmet Inönü, His Life, Administration and Personality], Bilgi Publishing, Istanbul, 2003, pp. 59-73; Hamza Eroğlu, Türk İnkılap Tarihi [History of Turkish Revolutions], Savaş Publishing, Istanbul, 1981, p. 260
436. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Söylev ve Demeçler, pp. 99-112
437. Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, July 24, 1923, https://sam.baskent.edu.tr/belge/Lausanne_ENG.pdf; The Treaties of Peace 1919-1923, Vol. II, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, New York, 1924; L. Seha Meray, group II, Vol: I, Book, I, pp. 30-31; Tevfik Rüştü Aras, Lozan’ın İzinde 10 Yıl [10 years after Lausanne] Istanbul 1935, pp. 10-13; Tahir Tamer, “Lozan ve Kapitülasyonların İlgası” [Lausanne and the Abolishment of Capitulations], Journal of the Department of History of Istanbul University, Vol. VII, Issue.4, 1941, p. 730
\438. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Nutuk [The Great Speech]
\439. James Gerard, Time, 14 April 1924, https://mbarchives.blogspot.com.tr/2008/03/1924-time-article-on-lausanne-treaty.html
\440. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, p. 307
\441. Taha Akyol, Bilinmeyen Lozan, p. 308
RESİM ALTI YAZILARI
s.23
The British state and the British people are our friends and will always remain so. What this book focuses on is the British deep state, which is a secret organization. The British state and people are exempted from the accusations therein contained.
s.26
The British deep state acts on the premise of the ‘supremacy of races’, which gave rise to many disasters including racism and colonialism. However, the so-called ‘supremacy of races’ is nothing but a fabricated concept produced by the deep state and certainly has no validity in the Sight of God.
s.27
Convinced in the supremacy of its own race, the British deep state has always dreamed of gathering the entire world under a British kingdom.
The British deep state has always dreamed of a purely Anglo-Saxon world state, living under a single flag and a single empire.
s.28
No other power in history has used colonialism as extensively as the British deep state has.
s.29
The people of the exploited countries suffered many deadly famines.
s.30
The elephant has always been an important symbol of the British deep state and was extensively used in stamps of the colonies to represent the British monarchy.
s.34
A living example of a turtle
A 140-million-year-old fossil turtle
s.35
A 400-to-380-million-year-old fossil brittle star
A living example of a brittle star
A 152-million-year-old fossil halfbeak
A living example of the halfbeak
Despite all the efforts of the British deep state, fossils themselves refute evolution. Life forms have never changed in millions of years; in other words, they have never evolved.
A 354-to-290-million-year-old fossil fern
A living example of fern
s.36
The British deep state managed to influence the Pope as well.
The theory of evolution was produced by the British deep state behind closed doors. Churches were forced to apologize to Darwin while the Pope was forced to defend evolution.
s.37
The Royal Society began to award the ‘Darwin Medal’ to scientists every year in an effort to spread the evolution deceit.
(Top) The Royal Society members in 1888
s.38
Evolutionary Propaganda by Some Section of the Media
s.41
By means of Darwinism, the British deep state seeks to spread the lie of racial supremacy, hoping that it will make it easier to exploit other countries.
s.43
The British deep state started wars for artificial reasons and remained indifferent to the divided and fallen countries left in its wake as it continued to pursue its dreams of world rule. It never paid any attention to the ordeal or the pain of other nations.
s.45
Lord Palmerston, who served as the British Prime Minister in the mid 19th century
s.46
The British deep state has consistently tried to portray the British Monarch as a superhuman being in its propaganda methods.
s.47
The British deep state has systematically pursued its goal of obtaining control of trade routes -both West and East- and turned territories in different parts of the world into its colonies. Today, the same colonial system persists under different guises.
s.48
A Isle of Man
B Guensey
C Jersey
1 United Kingdom
2 Gibraltar
3 Akrotiri and Dhekelia
4 Bermuda
5 Turks and Caicos Islands
6 British Virgin Islands
7 Anguilla
8 Cayman Islands
9 Montserrat
10 Pitcairn Islands
11 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha
12 British Indian Ocean Territory
13 Falkland Islands
14 South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
15 British Antarctic Territory
The territories on the map are the current British Overseas Territories and the Crown dependencies. There is also another group of 15 countries (and the UK) that is called the Commonwealth realms. They also continue to be dependent on the British Monarch in various ways. These nations have the British Monarch as their Head of State.
s.49
Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam in 1975
s.51
The current British Monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, is considered the Head of the Commonwealth of Nations and appoints a governor-general to these countries as her representative. In other words, Britain still enjoys significant power over these countries.
(Background) The house of the British Parliament, Westminster, and Westminster Bridge
(Below) House of Lords at the British Parliament
s.54
(Above) Members of the Indian Civil Service, also known as the Imperial Civil Service. That institution made sure that British gained control of the rule of India.
(Left) Henry James Frampton, a member of the Indian Civil Service
s.55
The creation of the East India Company in India marked the beginning of India’s colonization by the British. The project was later extended to other countries.
(Far right) The roof of the Indian Civil Service building
s.56
G. J. Bryant’s The Emergence of British Power in India tells the story of the British dominion in India between 1600 and 1784.
s.57
An Indian coin from 1862 with a picture of Queen Victoria on it
The East India Company, established under the supervision of the British deep state, used its spies to spread racism across India. The first disagreements between Muslims and Sikhs surfaced during this time.
s.58
As a result of the British deep state’s seditious activities and the seeds of hatred and racism it sowed, clashes continued for a long time in India. The violent episode of 1984 was just another example.
s.59
The Sikh-Muslim conflict in India was only one of the many disasters the British deep state introduced to the region. Communities that had harmoniously co-existed before suddenly turned hostile to each other and began fighting.
s.60
In 1876, Queen Victoria officially became the Queen of the Indian Empire. This year marks the official beginning of the British deep state’s reign over India.
s.61
During the reign of the East India Company in India, more than six million supposedly ‘lower-class’ Indians lost their lives due to famine.
s.63
Indigenous Indians were turned into the slaves of the British after the British deep state managed to get control of the country.
s.64
For the Indians that lived during those years, life meant serving affluent British.
s.65
Elephants, a symbol of the British deep state, were extensively used in the service of British families in India.
s.66
The regions of India that were owned by the British East India Company between 1765-1805 (above) and between 1837-1857 (below) are shown in pink.
These regions were company rule areas.
Over the course of a century, the British deep state managed to take control of India. It is especially noteworthy that company rule areas were usually found along trade routes, in metropolitan areas, coastlines and in border regions.
s.67
(Above) Thomas Huxley, known as ‘Darwin’s bulldog’, and the coat of arms of the Royal Society, of which he was a member.
(Left) Robert Hooke, Curator of Experiments of the Royal Society
s.68
Secret and unofficial meetings known as an ‘Invisible College’ contributed to the formation of the Royal Society. A depiction of this school can be seen in the picture to the side.
s.69
(Top left) Homosexual priest John Wilkins
(Top right) One of the homosexual co-founders of the Royal Society, Robert Boyle
(Bottom left) Homosexual Sir Francis Bacon
(Bottom right) Homosexual Sir Robert Moray
s.71
Wadham College, home to first meetings of the Royal Society
The mechanical universe understanding of Isaac Newton was used to develop the philosophy of the Royal Society.
s.72
A Briton with racist thoughts, Cecil Rhodes wanted to start the Round Table movement to ensure Anglo-Saxon rule over the world.
s.73
Cecil Rhodes, pictured with the whole of Africa underneath his feet, was the first person to implement the British deep state’s plans for Africa.
s.74
The British deep state went as far as to cut off the limbs of the indigenous peoples of the lands it colonized and carried out experiments on them.
s.75
The British deep state admitted that it targeted Africa for its rich resources and Rhodes carried out brutal acts to this end.
(Above) A painting depicting Rhodes during a meeting
(Left) Lord Alfred Milner and his team in South Africa
s.76
Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton and the diagrams and tables he used for racial determination and eugenics
s.77
(Top) Darwin’s son, Leonard Darwin, and the stand of the British Eugenics Society. The perverse mentality of the alleged ‘superiority of certain races’ led to the massacre of millions of people in subsequent years.
s.78
The Round Table’s eugenics society was based on eliminating the disabled and the elderly. The horrible atrocities carried out in Africa clearly showed the brutality of the British deep state, which considered its race as superior to others.
s.79
The pains Africa had to go through clearly show the savage nature of the imperialist ideas of the British deep state. Horrible practices of colonialism and slavery continue even today under different guises.
s.80
COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION
UNITED NATIONS
USA
USA
EUROPE-JAPAN
THE ROUND TABLE
UK GLOBAL
EUROPE-USA GLOBAL
ROYAL INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
ENVIRONMENT EUGENICS
BILDERBERG GROUP
CLUB OF ROME
s.81
The racist mentality that believes in the so-called superiority of Anglo-Saxons has brought nothing but pain to the lands colonized by the British deep state. The skulls and skins of those people slaughtered for the color of their skin were later taken to Britain to be exhibited.
(Below) British Major General Horatio Gordon Robley, who believed that Aborigines were (supposedly) inferior, is posing with his collection of real Aborigine skulls.
s.82
#RhodesMustFall
The protest movement that started on March 9, 2015 to remove the Cecil Rhodes statue in Cape Town University’s garden received great support from all around the world. On April 9, 2015, the University decided to remove the statue. This reaction was an indication of the anger of the South Africans at Cecil Rhodes and the British deep state he represented. South Africans still remember the racist practices of the past. The traces of this twisted mentality can still be spotted in certain circles that strive to keep racism alive.
s.83
Many committees and organizations that shape world’s affairs today like Chatham House, the Bilderberg Group and the CFR are subordinated to the Committee of 300 –another secret organization- which goes back to the British East India Co.
s.84
This illustration on the left depicts a world ruled by Britain. According to the plan, other countries are supposed to maintain their presence only as British colonies.
s.87
The plan to make Britain the ruler of the world has been widely used as a theme in various paintings throughout the history. The British deep state prepared its plans and worked to get the masses ready to the idea.
s.89
The genocidal plans of the Pol Pot regime were overseen by Thomas Enders, a member of the Club of Rome and who held a senior position in the US State Department.
Tuol Sleng Prison was turned into a genocide museum after the fall of the Khmer Rouge regime in 1979. The torture equipment seen in the picture was used during their four-year reign of terror and is currently displayed at the museum.
s.91
FAKE
(Above) A 54-million-year-old fossil smooth juneberry leaf and a living specimen, showing no changes at all
A 50-million-year-old whitefly in amber and a living specimen
Through the constant use of fake pictures to support Darwinism, the British deep state seeks to affect the subconscious minds of people so that evolution becomes a readily-accepted idea. However, the theory of evolution is the biggest scientific deceit in history.
s.93
The raw materials of the Middle East and Africa are colonized and exploited by the British deep state.
s.94
Petroleum and petroleum products
Petroleum products and chemicals
Oil
Energy products
Gold
Aluminium
Vehicles
Pig iron
Apparel and foodstuffs
Oil and natural gas
Crude oil and gas
Opium
Citrus
Precious stones
Strawberries
Electronics and software
Clothing
Crude Oil
Petroleum
Oil
Oil
Oil
Crude Oil
Petroleum
Oil
Food / drink
Metals / minerals
Precious metals / minerals
Textile / apparel
Machinery / transportation
Electronics
Other
A map that shows the natural resources of the Middle East. Despite its vast richness and natural resources, the Middle East has never been able to escape from being a colony of the British deep state, even to this day.
s.96
Theodore Roosevelt, being a part of it himself, was intimately aware of the deep structure. He clearly explained how invisible governments ruled over the ostensible governments.
s.98
During the time he held the office, US President John F. Kennedy frequently complained about the control of the deep state and its sly games, and didn’t refrain from putting his discomfort into words.
However, his accurate analyses received a horrible retaliation and this American President was publicly assassinated in 1963.
s.100
Various documents provide evidence that the Pearl Harbor attack was a deliberate move financed by British deep state institutions. This attack caused the US to enter the war, and the two atom bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 marked the end of WWII in favor of Britain.
The US joined the Korean War also as a part of the British deep state’s plans. Although the US had an anti-communist policy, it still couldn’t escape being dragged towards communism under the influence of the British deep state.
(Bottom) A scene from the Korean War
s.102
When Obama won the Iowa Caucuses, the Communist Party USA declared his victory as a ‘dialectical leap’.
s.103
Bill Ayers (William Charles Ayers) and Bernardine Dohrn, who supported Obama’s campaign, were two radical Marxists who were in the past wanted by the FBI.
s.105
1945
UNITED KINGDOM
BRITISH DOMINIONS
FRANCE
PORTUGAL
SPAIN
NETHERLANDS
BELGIUM
UNITED STATES
The red sections in this map of the post-WWI era show colonies of Britain, while the pink sections show British dominions.
s.106
In the map published by the Club of Rome in 1973, the economic/political zones of the world were divided into ten areas and each were called a ‘kingdom’. This map represented the entire world coming together under a single leadership, which would be the British Kingdom.
s.107
The top of this pyramid, which symbolizes the world reign of the British deep state, represents the British Kingdom; a control system subordinated to the Crown Council of 13, the Committee of 300 and their associated think tanks is envisaged. These are meant to control the central banks, tax and interest revenues as well as the sources of the world. Control of the world’s population is supposed to be achieved through the control of religions, governments, media and the schools. In this scheme, military, police force and the judiciary will also be under the control of the said power.
s.109
The 13-step pyramid on the dollar bill is the organizational diagram of the powers that rule the world. ‘The Great Architect of the Universe’ is depicted to float atop the pyramid.
(Above) A diagram symbolizing the Tavistock Institute’s physical, emotional, mental and spiritual control
s.111
COMMITTEE OF 300
ZIONISM
COMMUNISM
FABIANISM
LIBERALISM
SOCIALISM
RIGHT WING PARTIES
UNITED NATIONS
MEMBER NATIONS
KINGS OF SAUDI ARABIA, SHEIKS OF DUBAI, KUWAIT, UAE
BRITISH INTELLIGENCE
INTERPOL
CIA
MOSSAD
OTHER INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES
ROYAL INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
RHODES / MILNER GROUP
ROUND TABLE
TERRORISM
PETROLEUM
BANKING
MINING
INSURANCE
COMMERCE
INDUSTRY
RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS
ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT CHURCH
FREEMASONRY AND OTHER SECRET SOCIETIES
9 UNKNOWN MEN
TAVISTOCK INSTITUTE OF HUMAN RELATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
CLUB OF ROME
CANADIAN INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
NATO
U.S. MILITARY
EXECUTE ARM OF THE RIIA
INSTITUTIONS
S.R.I.
M.I.T.
I.P.S.
RAND
HUDSON
WHARTON
TRILATERALS
BILDERBERGERS
COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
DRUG TRADE
BRITISH EAST INDIA COMPANY
HONG KONG / LONDON COUNCIL
OPIUM
COCAINE
U.S. GOVERNMENT
MEDIA
This diagram, based on Dr. John Coleman’s investigations and presented in his book, show the institutions supported by the British deep state, with the leading institution being the Committee of 300. This diagram clearly shows the hidden network that dominates the world.
s.113
The Skull and Bones emblem consists of a skull and crossbones. The number 322 denotes the Lamian War, which took place in 322 BC.
s.114
Skull and Bones, the Trilateral Commission, the CFR, the Rosicrucians and many other similar groups are connected. Using these groups, the British deep state is able to manage its activities from Europe and exert influence upon the domestic and foreign policy of the US.
The logo for the Trilateral Commission is a stylized version of 666; known as the number of the devil.
Trilateral Commission
Illuminati Pyramid
Number of the devil
s.115
The condition to be a Skull and Bones member is coming from an Anglo-Saxon and Protestant family for the past six or seven generations.
The picture above shows George W. Bush, a member of Skull and Bones, and the picture on the left shows David Cameron and Boris Johnson, members of Bullingdon Club, the British equivalent of Skull and Bones. Bush made the following remark about his membership: “[In my] senior year I joined Skull and Bones, a secret society; so secret, I can’t say anything more.”
s.124
(Above) Sultan Mahmud II
(Right) Muhammad Ali Pasha of Egypt
s.125
Pyotr Nikolayevich Gruzinsky’s painting depicts the Circassians as they leave their villages with Russian forces in pursuit. 1872. The State Russian Museum in Saint Petersburg.
s.127
(Left page) Valide Sultan Mosque
(Background) A view of the Golden Horn from the Galata Tower
s.129
The building of the Ottoman Public Debts Administration (Düyun-u Umumiye), which operated under British Deep State control
s.131
A painting that depicts the signing of the Treaty of Berlin on July 13, 1878
s.133
This document shows how Abdul Hamid II, under pressure from the British deep state, left Cyprus to British rule.
s.135
Under pressure from the British deep state, Abdul Hamid II allowed the British to take over the administration of Cyprus, which led to British occupation of the island. The picture at the side shows the raising of the British flag.
s.136
Tsar Nicholas
s.137
Opening of the Suez Canal on November 17, 1869. After this date, Britain began preparations for the invasion of the Canal.
s.138
(Left) Arabi Pasha
The British deep state didn’t even hesitate to kill hundreds of its own citizens, who were in Alexandria at the time, in its bid to gain control of the Suez Canal.
(Bottom left) Construction of the Suez Canal
s.142
(Above) Arab riots during WWI
(Left) Abdul Aziz bin Saud
s.143
Fatwa for ‘A Call to Arms’ urging communities of the Ottoman Empire to join the Ottoman army. The British deep state knew that Indians and Arabs would answer the call and used provocative agents to prevent it.
s.145
(Left) Sharif Hussein
\1) Sharif Hussein’s son Emir Abdullah
\2) T.E. Lawrence
Lawrence and Abdullah together in this photograph taken in 1931
s.146
A painting that depicts how some Arabs, under influence of the British deep state, betrayed the Ottoman Empire
s.148
British diplomat Sir Henry McMahon
s.149
Lawrence, the homosexual spy of the British deep state (second from right), with Emir Faisal (front row), who rebelled against the Ottoman Empire
s.150
Lawrence, the British spy (far left), together with Sharif Hussein’s son Emir Abdullah (second from left), Wyndham Deedes (the Chief Secretary to the British High Commissioner of the British Mandate of Palestine) (second from right), and British officers. Sharif Hussein and his sons, fooled by Lawrence for petty gains, rebelled against the Ottoman Empire and brought destruction to Arab lands.
s.154
North Africa and Egypt lived their happiest and most peaceful times under Ottoman rule.
s.157
When spy T.E. Lawrence provoked some criminal Arabs into rioting in Gulf of Aqaba, the British Navy came off the shore of Aqaba to support the riot.
s.159
(Right) Dreadnought Reshadiye followed by Sultan Osman.
(Left page) Dreadnought Sultan Osman. 1915
s.161
Reşadiye being launched. It was one of the dreadnoughts that Britain never delivered to Ottoman Empire, despite having received full payment for them.
s.163
The Ottoman minelayer Nusret stopped the allied naval advance through the Dardanelles.
s.164
(To the side) British and French scout planes flying over the Bosphorus to find out about the locations of Turkish bastions.
(Middle) The Battle of Gallipoli officially began after the British and French forces fired at Turkish bastions.
(Right) Volunteers headed for Gallipoli marching over the Galata Bridge before they are dispatched from Istanbul
s.165
Heroic Turkish troops during the Gallipoli battle
s.166
Enemy planes during the Battle of Gallipoli. Air and sea attack combined weren’t enough to overcome the determination of the Turkish soldiers.
s.167
Cannoneers that bravely defended our country during the Gallipoli battle.
s.169
Martyrs’ Memorial, built to commemorate the 200,000 Turkish soldiers martyred at the Battle of Gallipoli
s.171
Poisonous caltrops were among the foul methods of the British deep state. Because of these poisonous caltrops thrown from airplanes,12,000 Turkish soldiers had their legs cut off at the Gallipoli front.
s.173
Churchill claimed that it was justified to use chemical weapons in warfare and that it should be used especially against the Turks.
s.174
Churchill, when he was Secretary of State for War, ordered that chemical weapons be used against the Bolsheviks. The picture was taken in 1915 at Enfield Munition Works.
s.175
Some chemical weapons used during WWI
(From left to right) Mustard shell, white phosphorus shell, mustard bomb, mustard shell, the Livens phosgene projectile and portable chemical cylinder. (Photograph by Chemical and Biological Defense Command Historical Research)
s.177
Turkish soldiers taken prisoners by the British at the Iraq, Qarah Tapah Front during WWI
s.181
Kut Al Amara was a great victory of Turks against the British.
s.183
In the early stages of the Battle of Kut, British troops took Turkish soldiers as prisoners. However, in the end, it was the British that suffered a major defeat.
s.185
Turkish artilleries rewrote the history of bravery during the Siege of Kut.
s.187
Some of the Muslim Indian soldiers in the British army were brought to the battlefield at gunpoint.
(Bottom) An Indian soldier on duty in front of a British aircraft hangar
s.189
The British newspapers covered the British defeat at Kut Al Amara on their front pages calling the incident ‘the biggest humiliation for the British after Gallipoli’.
Brave Turkish soldiers who fought in the Gallipoli Battle.
s.190
The victory at Kut Al Amara was celebrated in Turkey as Day of Kut until 1952. April 29 should continue to be a day of celebration in the future.
(Above) A drawing depicting the defeated British commander’s surrender to the Turkish commander at Kut
s.191
After Turkey became a NATO member, the Kut Al Amara victory was no longer officially celebrated. However, just like every other one in our history, this victory should be remembered every year and our martyrs that made it possible should be proudly commemorated.
(Top) NATO members
s.192
(Right) General Townshend
(Bottom) General Townshend under arrest right after he surrendered
s.195
Lebanon was placed under French mandate with the Sykes-Picot Agreement.
(Bottom) The French army entering Beirut after the agreement
(Left) A caricature depicting how Sykes-Picot Agreement dismembered the Ottoman Empire
s.197
(Left) A picture representing the Battle of Gallipoli
(Above) Turkish troops during the Siege of Kut
s.199
(Left) French diplomat François Georges-Picot
(Right) British diplomat Sir Mark Sykes
The British deep state wanted to finalize its uncompleted plans to break up the Middle East, which it initiated through the Sykes-Picot agreement, this time through propaganda. This map shows the Ottoman Empire dismembered according to the Sykes-Picot plan.
RUSSIAN EMPIRE
TURKEY
ARMENIA
CASPIAN SEA
CYPRUS
MEDITERRANEAN SEA
PALESTINE
EGYPT
SYRIA
IRAQ
ARABIA
PERSIA
KUWAIT
PERSIAN GULF
QATAR
Sykes-Picot Agreement May 1916
British rule
French rule
Russian rule
Under British, French and Russian protection
Arab state under British protection
Arab state under French protection
s.202
(Right) A British propaganda poster during WWI
(Bottom) Throughout the history, the British deep state exploited countries with the promises of introducing ‘civilization’ and ending ‘barbarism’, but led the countries it wished to divide to clashes and wars.
s.203
British soldiers during WWI
s.204
George V of Britain, inspecting the British troops during WWI
s.205
When 13 million stocks changed hands on October 24, 1929 (Black Thursday), panic ensued in the markets triggering what is known as the Great Depression. All the economic crises including the Great Depression are among the dajjali activities planned by the British deep state.
s.210
A painting that depicts the invasion of Nicopolis by Russian forces during the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878)
s.212
A painting depicting the sick people being boarded on boats at Balaklava during the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) (William Simpson, April 24, 1855)
s.213
(Left) Turkish cavalry during the Crimean War, 1855
(Bottom) Turkish Artillery Unit during the Crimean War, 1854
s.214
Queen Elizabeth I of England
s.215
Abdülhakim Arvasi
s.219
The Hamidian Treatise, by Lebanese author Husayn al-Jisr, was a book intended to propagandize evolution theory in a religious disguise. This was a method to impose the lie of evolution on the religious people of the time by means of the said scholars and their books.
s.221
Hasan Tahsini, the first rector of Darülfünûn, established by Abdul Hamid II and considered as the beginning of the University of Istanbul, was one of the first Darwinists. His book is an example of Darwinist propaganda.
s.222
Mecmua-i Fünûn, which was published by Münif Pasha as ‘the first Ottoman scientific journal’, promoted Darwinism.
s.223
Servet-i Fünun (Wealth of Knowledge) magazine, known for its materialist and Darwinist articles, was only one example of the Darwinist publications during the reign of Abdul Hamid II. (1892)
s.224
Ahmed Cevdet (left) and Sami Frashëri (below), who were the editors-in-chief of dailies printed during the reign of Abdul Hamid II, were both evolutionists.
s.225
Ceride-i Havadis (to the side), published by British William Churchill during the reign of Abdul Hamid II, subtly tried to shift Ottoman public opinion in favor of British interests.
s.226
(Left) The evolutionist philosophy magazine Içtihad (The Opinion), disseminated in Istanbul and Cairo, was another Darwinist publication during Abdul Hamid II’s reign. (1904)
(Bottom right) Al-Muqtataf magazine, the first in the Arab world to mention evolution
(Bottom left) A piece in the magazine Bahçe, published in Thessaloníki, about the life of Darwin (1909)
s.228
Ahmed Cevdet
s.229
(Top left) Ahmed Rıza
(Bottom right) Salih Zeki
(Far bottom, left) Rıza Tevfik
(Far bottom, in the middle) Hüseyin Cahit Yalçın
(Far bottom, right) Ahmet Şuayb
s.230
Dutch historian Reinhart Dozy’s book Spanish Islam: A History of the Moslems in Spain, which sought to explain Islam with materialism and included sacrilegious remarks about the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the religion of Islam, was translated into Turkish and made its way into Ottoman lands and sped up the fall of the Empire.
Translated by: Abdullah Cevdet, 1908, during Abdul Hamid II’s reign
s.231
Ziya Gökalp (top left), Süleyman Hüsnü Pasha (top right) and Beşir Fuad (left), among the materialist and evolutionist writers of the Abdul Hamid II era
s.233
Baha Tevfik (top), Ethem Nejat (top right) and Celal Nuri İleri (bottom right), among the materialist and evolutionist writers of the Abdul Hamid II era
s.235
(Top) Rifa’a al-Tahtawi, the leader of al-Nahda movement that began in Egypt, embraced evolutionary ideas.
(Left) Mohammad Abduh, also from al-Nahda movement, was another evolutionist.
s.237
Al-Azhar University, the fortress of Darwinism in the Arabic world. Opened in 972 as a mosque, the building was later made a school in 989.
s.238
Syed Ahmad Khan
s.243
A carriage for Sultan Abdul Hamid II, who was confined to the Yıldız Palace
s.244
License to open the beer factory, 1894
s.245
Bomonti beer factory set up by Swiss Bomonti brothers in Feriköy in 1890
s.246
(Left) Bomonti beer factory in Istanbul
(Bottom) Commercial poster for Bomonti beer. Note Abdul Hamid II’s seal on the poster.
s.247
Beer advertisements that were very commonplace during the reign of Abdul Hamid II.
The above advertisement reads: “The tastiest, the most delicious beer: Bomonti beer. 1,800,000 liters of beer is produced daily in Feriköyü factory. Tasty, fun, thirst quenching”
s.248
Rakı advertisements that became widespread after the foundation of rakı factories during the reign of Abdul Hamid II
s.249
Advertisements for Üzüm Kızı rakı and other rakı brands produced in the Ottoman Empire
s.250
Wine production in the Ottoman Empire first started in 1889. By 1904, total export volume had reached 340 million liters.
s.251
Alcoholic beverage production increased so sharply during the rule of Abdul Hamid II, journalist Ahmet C. Saraçoğlu compared this period to ‘a massive tavern.’
s.253
In 1884, with instructions from Abdul Hamid II, the first brothel was opened in Abanoz Street, followed by others on Zürefa Street, which are still active today. In a short period of time, Galata alone became home to one hundred brothels.
s.255
(Left) Cibali tobacco factory
(Above) Factory workers
s.256
(Bottom left) Famous American cigarette brand Ateshian used the following slogan in its advertisements: ‘The cigarret smoked by His Imperial Majesty Abdul Hamid II, Sultan of Turkey’.
(Left) A cigarette advertisement from the Abdul Hamid II era
(Bottom) Cigarette paper from Ottoman times
s.257
In later Ottoman years, hookah use also increased just like cigarettes.
s.258
A French magazine that closely followed all the military coups that took place in the Ottoman Empire. The source of the coup-related news in Europe was always the British deep state.
s.259
Hüseyin Avni Pasha, who made the plans for Sultan Abdülaziz’s assassination during the coup of 1876, and the Ottoman fleet that turned its cannons towards the Palace upon his orders
s.260
The first modern coup in Turkish history is usually considered the one that saw the dethronement of Sultan Abdülaziz in 1876. During the coup, military school students were used, which would be a pattern throughout the Republican history. 10 days after the coup, Sultan Abdülaziz was martyred, which was made to look like a suicide.
s.262
Abdülaziz was a strong sultan who would never bow down to the British deep state. This is why the British deep state used some sycophants within the Ottoman state institutions to depose and martyr the Sultan. The bloody outfit of Sultan Abdülaziz is still kept in Topkapı Palace.
(Left) Sultan Abdülaziz, a couple of days before he was martyred
s.265
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Serbia
Montenegro
Romania
Bulgaria
Teselia
Tunisia
Crete
Cyprus
Kars
Ardahan
Batum
Egypt
Kuwait
Abyssinia
Somalia
ABDULAZIZ
1861-1876
The world’s fourth biggest army
The world’s third biggest fleet
12 Million sq. km
64 Million
ABDUL HAMID II
1876-1909
Army collapsed spiritually due to Darwinism
The fleet perished in 20 years
1,6 Million sq. km lost
23 Million
FLEET
LAND
POPULATION
DARWINIST EDUCATION
Strongly opposed to Darwinism
Darwinist publications not allowed but banned
Hundreds of thousands of Darwinist books distributed everywhere by ships and trains
The Ottoman Empire lost 1,592,896 sq. km of territory during the reign of Abdul Hamid II. This is twice the current size of modern Turkey.
s.266
As a result of the Janissary revolt in 1808, Selim III was deposed. It was the Mahmut Raif Pasha, also known as the ‘British’ Mahmut Raif Pasha, who provoked the rebellion.
s.267
(Top) Rioters captured after the 31 March Incident
(Bottom) The Movement Army in Taksim
s.268
(Top) January 23, 1913. People gathered in front of the main Sublime Porte building after the news of the coup came out.
(Bottom) Nazım Pasha, the Minister of the Navy, who was martyred during the coup
s.269
The British deep state has always been the secret power behind all the coups that took place in the Ottoman Empire.
s.270
(Top) The Ottoman Navy left to rot in the Golden Horn.
(Bottom) Submarines became useless after they were withdrawn to the Golden Horn and left to rot there. As a result, the Ottoman Empire had to join WWI without a single submarine.
(Right) The ironclad Mesudiye became a part of the Ottoman Navy during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz. However, it was left to rot during the reign of Abdul Hamid II.
s.274
British archeologist/spy Gertrude Bell at a picnic with Emir Faisal. In a couple of years, Gertrude would break Iraq away from the Ottoman Empire and Faisal would be its king.
s.275
(Top) From left to right, Wyndham Deedes, Emir Abdullah, Herbert Samuel, Gertrude Bell
(Left) T. E. Lawrence hand in hand with Emir Abdullah
s.276
The Cairo Conference held secretly in 1921, with Winston Churchill as the chairman. The picture shows spies Bell and Lawrence.
s.277
Mediterranean
Lebanon
Syria
Golan Heights
Iraq
Jordan River
West Bank
Gaza Strip
Dead Sea
AMMAN
Israel
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
The concave section in the Jordan-Saudi Arabia border, pointing towards Amman, is called Winston’s Hiccup.
s.280
Ármin Vámbéry became a spy for the British deep state after he gained the trust of Abdul Hamid II and earned a residence in the Palace.
s.282
General Sebastiani and French officers as they are showing Sultan Selim and senior officers defense plans for Istanbul.
s.283
Midhat Pasha, the Grand Vizier
s.286
‘English’ Said Pasha
s.287
Abdullah Cevdet
s.289
Kamil Pasha
s.290
Kamil Pasha, known as English Kamil, is visiting the King of the UK George V and Queen Mary before they travel to India.
s.291
Damad Ferid Pasha
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk warned pro-British Damad Ferid on many occasions and made it clear that British mandate would not be accepted.
s.293
A poster of the Young Turks, who were used by the British deep state.
A picture from the 1st Young Turks Congress held in Paris.
s.295
(Right) Dervish Vahdeti
(Top) The 31 March Movement Army
(Left) People gathered in front of the Palace during the 31 March Incident
s.296
The 31 March Incident was co-planned by Dervish Vahdeti and the British deep state.
s.298
(Top) The Society of the Friends of England– 1919, Istanbul Founders and Executives: Memduh Pasha, Former Minister of Internal Affairs, Şehremini Cemil Pasha, Ahmet Zülüfkül Pasha, Ali Rüştü Efendi
(Right) Membership card for the Society of the Friends of England
s.301
Boris Johnson, the incumbent UK Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, is the great-grandson of Ali Kemal.
(Bottom) Ali Kemal and his Anglo-Swiss wife Winifred Brun
s.303
A painting that depicts Greeks’ revolt against the Ottomans. (1820)
s.305
A serene scene from the Ottoman Empire when there were no riots.
s.307
(Left) The homosexual British poet Lord Byron took it upon himself to lead the Greek troops during the Greek insurgency.
(Below) A painting that depicts the assault of Greek soldiers on the common Ottoman people
s.310
Bulgarian rebels in the Ottoman Empire in 1800s. The banner in the back represents the Bulgarian rebels.
s.312
The gunboat SMS Panther that the Germans sent to Agadir, causing a crisis
s.313
(Above) The Strait of Gibraltar by the end of the 1800s
(Left) A castle with a British flag on Gibraltar
s.316
Arab riots were one of the driving forces behind the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
s.318
Occupation of Egypt by the British in 1882
s.319
Egypt after it was invaded by Britain in 1882.
The pictures below show Europeans drinking wine out of historical artifacts.
s.320
The people of the Ottoman Empire were strong and coated with patriotic and spiritual values. Knowing this, the British deep state played an insidious game and made the Ottomans suffer a moral decline by utilizing Darwinist propaganda.
s.321
An example of black propaganda against the Ottoman Empire. Pictures showing the Ottoman flag trampled under feet after the Balkan War.
s.322
(Top) Edward Augustus Freeman
(Bottom) Freeman’s student Arthur Evans
s.323
Charles Dickens
s.324
Cardinal Newman
Charles Darwin
s.325
Edwin Pears
s.326
William John Hamilton’s Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus, and Armenia
s.327
Stratford Canning
s.328
Richard Cobden
s.329
The insidious plans of the British deep state have never been successful on the Anatolian soil. The number of Muslims on this soil has increased day by day, the sound of the call for prayer has never ceased; and it never will.
Hagia Sophia Mosque in 1854
s.330
Winston Churchill was a member of the British deep state and had a clear stance against Islam. Churchill is pictured with Joseph Stalin and Harry Truman.
s.331
Lord Cromer
s.335
Istanbul in 1900s
(Above) Tophane Mosque
(Bottom) Valide Sultan Mosque
s.338
Augustus Charles Hobart-Hampden
s.339
Arnold Burrowes Kemball
s.340
Valentine Baker
Hugh Pigot Williams
s.342
Baldwin Walker
Felix Woods
s.351
A Greek woman from Istanbul in 1902
s.353
(Top and middle) Heroic Turkish people carrying supplies to the battlefield
(Bottom) Eastern Front during the Turkish War of Independence
s.354
Turkish War of Independence, under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s leadership, was an epic story of heroism that unfolded before the eyes of the world.
s.357
Turkish heroes at the War of Independence are praying at the front.
God gave a glorious victory to this pious army.
s.359
TURKEY
ARMENIA
AZERBAIJAN
IRAN
SYRIA
IRAQ
The British deep state has always had its eyes on Turkish lands and carried out many sinister plots to tear away Southeastern Anatolia in particular. However, they failed to appreciate the bravery of the Turkish nation that fought an epic fight like the Turkish War of Independence. We will never allow a Stalinist Kurdistan to happen.
s.361
The Ottoman Empire was a safe haven for various ethnic groups like Turks, Kurds, Circassians, Arabs among others for 600 years. These communities harmoniously co-existed for centuries.
s.366
(Left) An affluent Ottoman Armenian lady
(Bottom) An Armenian football team in Istanbul
s.367
For centuries, Armenians and Turks lived together in harmony and peace. They are two fraternal peoples of these lands.
s.372
A Muslim scholar is seen together with Patriarchs of Cyprus and Armenians in the 19th century. The British deep state sought to disrupt this union.
s.373
Guns the Armenian gangs used. These gangs were provoked by the British deep state into rebelling against the Ottoman Empire.
s.375
A Cyprus coin from 1890 with Queen Victoria’s picture on it
s.376
Armenians of Tomarza, Kayseri, as they are being trained at Cyprus, Monagra Armenian Legion Camp
s.378
Armenians in Cyprus (1878)
s.379
A view from Cyprus in 1800s
s.381
This magnificent Neo-Baroque mosque sits at Ortaköy, Istanbul. It was commissioned by Sultan Abdulmejid and was designed by Armenian architect Nigoğos Balyan in 1853.
s.383
Armenians and Turks lived peacefully side by side for centuries.
(Bottom) Kayseri Talas Armenian Pre-school – June 15, 1911
(Top) Ottoman Armenians engaged in art and craft.
(Left) An Armenian school training artists
s.385
Surp Boğos Armenian Catholic Church opened during the Ottoman Empire still exists and welcomes our Armenian brothers and sisters even today.
s.386
Some of our Armenian brothers, with whom we have lived peacefully together for centuries, participated in the riots against the Ottoman Empire upon the sedition of the British deep state.
(Left) A painting in a French magazine depicting the Armenian riot in the Ottoman Empire
(Right) An Armenian Church built in the Ottoman era in Izmir (1915)
s.389
PROPAGANDA PAINTINGS THAT DO NOT REFLECT THE TRUTH
The British deep state as a method of black propaganda made sure that the European media published provocative paintings suggesting that the Ottomans were persecuting the Armenians.
s.391
It is important not to confuse the Armenian gangs that rebelled against the Ottoman Empire with our Armenian brothers and sisters who were a part of the Empire. The gangs usually consisted of thugs that lived in mountainous areas and that fell for the lies of the British deep state.
(Below) Armenians living in Yeşilköy during the Ottoman era
s.393
(Top) Armenian rebels
(Left) A view of Zeitun where the Armenian riot took place
s.395
Armenian rebels
s.397
Armenian scouts leading the way to the Russian army in the Caucasus front. Armenian gangs joined the Russians and fought against the Ottoman army.
s.399
A picture that proves how Armenian gangs allied with the Russians to fight against the Ottoman Empire during WWI. Following their promise, Armenian gangs fought with the Russians during the Battle of Sarikamish.
s.400
Armenian gangs that joined the Bulgarian army during the Balkan War under the leadership of Antranik Ozanyan.
s.403
Garabet Amira Balyan, an Ottoman Armenian, was one of the Palace Architects during the reign of Sultan Abdulmejid I. His most important work is the Dolmabahçe Palace, which he built with his son Nigoğos Balyan.
s.404
Armenians are our brothers and sisters and with their artistic talents, made great contributions to the Ottoman economy for years.
s.405
(To the side) The Ottoman theater cadre directed by Armenian Mardiros Minakyan during the Ottoman era
(Below) Armenian artisans
s.409
Mark Lambert Bristol
s.411
Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan
s.420
The British deep state for the past two hundred years has been inciting and fueling conflicts and clashes in the Islamic world by means nationalism, tribalism or sectarianism. It is time that the Islamic world sees through the plot and unites and supports peace to foil the games.
s.422
BEFORE
The effects of the British deep state’s plan for the Middle East, i.e. ‘divide and destroy’, is palpable in Aleppo, as much as it is in many parts of Syria.
AFTER
BEFORE
AFTER
s.424
A scene from the Vietnam War. An estimated 17% of Vietnam’s population lost their lives during the war.
s.425
While the massacre of the Jews continued in the concentration camps of Germany, the public was being fed a completely different image. The main factor behind Hitler’s sudden rise in Germany was the relentless misleading propaganda.
The media propaganda was used in full force in Hitler’s Germany during WWII. The propaganda posters were painting a completely different picture than what was really going on.
s.426
The Vietnam War, which left three million people dead and another 300,000 people missing in its wake, witnessed the intense use of social engineering. Today, similar methods are used in the Middle East in the ‘war on terror’ to justify the attacks.
WAR ON TERROR
s.427
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry presented by Sir John Chilcot was in a way a report of admissions that clearly showed that there had been no reason for the invasion of Iraq.
s.430
PROPAGANDA POSTERS THAT DO NOT REFLECT THE TRUTH
The British deep state, in the process of dismembering the Ottoman lands, resorted to propaganda on a frequent basis. Black propaganda caricatures, intended to depict Muslims as supposedly savage and barbaric, was a commonly employed method.
s.431
Lord Salisbury
s.432
As anti-Turk propaganda raged on in the West, different ethnicities were living together in peace under Ottoman rule.
(Above) A painting of festival celebrations where people from different faiths were spending time together in the Ottoman Empire.
s.433
A PROPAGANDA POSTER THAT DOES NOT REFLECT THE TRUTH
s.434
Albert Sorel
s.435
Frederick Gustavus Burnaby
Rudyard Kipling’s poem “The White Man’s Burden”, published in The New York Sun on February 10, 1899, implied that John Bull –the symbol of Britain– and Uncle Sam –the symbol of the USA– ruled the non-white peoples of the Earth.
s.436
The British deep state’s influence on the US was referred to as the Great Rapprochement. There were propaganda posters everywhere, in which John Bull and Uncle Sam personifications- symbolizing the UK and the US respectively - were joining forces.
s.440
Wellington House was not only carrying out anti-Turkish black propaganda, it was also making sure that the British people got all the war news after they were heavily censored and presented in a highly-biased manner. There were many calls to arms, but no one knew what was really happening at the front.
s.443
The propaganda book The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire authored by Arnold J. Toynbee (top) together with James Bryce (bottom), the British historian and statesman. Toynbee later felt remorse for the false allegations he included in the book.
s.444
The propaganda book Martyred Armenia supposedly written by Faiz El-Ghusein. However, historians found no record in Ottoman sources of a person with this name that held an official position in the Ottoman Empire.
s.445
(Top right) An Ottoman Armenian family in 1906
(Top left) Vahram Papazyan, a successful Ottoman Armenian athlete who won many medals
(To the side) The Armenian football club, founded in 1908, was one of the first football clubs of the Ottoman Empire. The photo was taken in 1911.
s.447
Alemdar and Sabah newspapers, which desire British mandate [in Turkey], are condemned
Various newspapers in the Ottoman Empire exposed and condemned the propagandists who worked to make people accept British mandate.
The sole salvation is supposedly the British mandate!
s.448
(Top) Grand Vizier Mehmed Emin Ali Pasha, who enforced the Imperial Reform Edict of 1856. With the Edict of Reform in effect, non-Muslim constituents in the Ottoman Empire obtained the same rights as Muslim constituents. Following the edict, Armenians were assigned to the highest positions in the administration, became Ministers and Parliament Members and represented the Turkish people.
s.449
We are proud to have had Armenian statesmen and pashas.
(Left) Armenian members of the Ottoman Parliament
s.453
Wellington House propaganda managed to influence some Indian and Arab subjects of the Ottoman Empire. As a result, some Indians joined the fight on the side of the British.
s.454
PROPAGANDA POSTERS THAT DO NOT REFLECT THE TRUTH
The Armenian issue still highly debated today was first introduced to the world through propaganda posters, illustrations and systematic provocative efforts. The architect of this black propaganda was the British deep state.
s.457
Turks and Armenians have lived together in peace for centuries. They have mixed and become one. The British deep state broke that unity.
(To the side) An Armenian family in the Ottoman Empire
(Below) Armenian doctors in the Ottoman Empire
s.458
Propaganda illustrations that depict the world reign of Uncle Sam and John Bull were frequently used during WWI. The British deep state took the US under its control and managed it as it desired.
s.459
Sir Gilbert Parker
s.463
Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister
The British deep state used propaganda as a weapon also during WWII. By means of provocative news, it was able to goad the US into joining the war, which resulted in the victory of Britain.
s.465
The British deep state always claimed to act with the intention of ending barbarism, but brought only more savagery wherever it touched.
s.470
British and Anzacs at the Gallipoli peninsula. These troops, who dug trenches to gain a foothold on shores, weren’t allowed to pass through. (1915)
s.471
British and French battleships were sunk or disabled during the naval operations that took place on March 18, 1915.
(Above) Corporal Sayyid, one of the legends of the Battle of Gallipoli
s.472
The Turkish army, despite its 250,000 martyrs, fought hard and didn’t open the gates of Dardanelles.
s.473
The child heroes of the Battle of Gallipoli showed the whole world what it meant to be a Turk. The Galatasaray High School didn’t have a single graduate in 1915 and 1916 because they were all marytred on the battlefield.
s.475
(Top) The Allied Navy in the Bosphorus and a French plane inspecting the city
(Bottom) The British Navy in the Bosphorus during the occupation of Istanbul.
s.477
(Top) March of the Allied forces on Harbiye-Şişli road in Istanbul
(Middle and left) British soldiers parading in Beyoğlu
(Right) Allied forces on Istiklal Street, Istanbul
s.480
Istanbul in the 1900s…
s.481
(Top) Occupation forces in Taksim
(Bottom) British troops at the Port of Karaköy, Istanbul, during the years of occupation
(Top left) Occupation forces in Istanbul
s.483
Tevfik Pasha, commander of the Seventh Corps in Yemen, was exiled along with other patriot commanders, because he refused to give in to the demands of the British deep state.
(To the side) A Turkish soldier cleaning his shoe before going to the battlefield
s.484
Following the Armistice of Mudros, the Allied Navy anchored in the Bosphorus on November 13, 1918.
s.485
(Top) Louis Franchet d’Espèrey, the commander of French occupation forces, marching from Galata to Şişhane
(Bottom) French commander Louis Franchet d’Espèrey meets British marshall Edmund Allenby in Istanbul port
s.487
(Top) From left to right, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, Italian Prime Minister Vittorio Orlando, French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau, and US President Woodrow Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference
(Left) A picture from the Paris Peace Conference
s.488
A painting depicting the Treaty of Versailles signed with Germany. According to many historians, the harsh conditions of the treaty played the biggest role in the rise of the German Nazi Party.
s.490
An illustration depicting Greek ideals during the Greek occupation of Izmir. The British deep state took advantage of the imperialist ambitions of the Greeks. It was too late when the Greeks realized that they were deceived.
s.491
(Left) Occupation forces landing at Izmir
The British deep state promised to give Izmir to Greece.
(Above) Greek army at Izmir port
(Left) The picture shows a parade of Greek soldiers in Izmir, who believed in this promise.
s.493
(Top) The Armistice of Mudros was signed aboard this ship.
(Middle) Allied ships at the Bosphorus after the signing of the Armistice of Mudros
(Bottom) A map that shows the occupied territories after the signing of the Armistice of Mudros
GREECE
BLACK SEA
SOVIET UNION
AEGEAN SEA
MEDITERRANEAN
CYPRUS
SYRIA
IRAQ
Current borders
Lands occupied by Allied Forces
Greek
British
French
Armenian
Georgian
Italian
s.494
Italian soldiers drilling in front of the Dolmabahçe Palace
s.495
Rowdy British soldiers drinking and acting obnoxiously at Marmara shores during the occupation of Istanbul
s.497
(Top) Allied fleet off Dolmabahçe during the years of occupation
(Middle) Allied troops landing at Sarayburnu
(Right) The Saturday Evening Post, published in the US in 1910 depicts Turkish soldiers as savage barbarians. During those years, the US media obtained most of its intelligence about the Middle East through British, which resulted in a horrible perception of ‘Turks’. (Turkish nation is above such allegations).
s.499
(Top) A photograph taken during the days when the Nationalist Forces entered Adapazarı
(Bottom) Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and his fellow soldiers during the days of Sivas Congress
s.502
(Left) A 15 or 16 year-old Turkish youngster from the Nationalist Forces, arrested by the British (July 1920)
(Top) Nationalist Forces taken as prisoners by the British
(Bottom) The opening of the Turkish Parliament with prayers. Friday was deliberately chosen for the opening ceremony.
s.504
(Top) A view of the Golden Horn from Galata. Galata Tower was important for the British deep state because it served as a good vantage point for the city.
(Middle) French occupational forces on Galata Bridge
(Bottom) A British submarine deployed in front of Galata Bridge was intended by the British deep state as a display of power.
s.505
Allied forces’ military band on Galata Bridge
s.506
A British flag flies over the Galata Tower during the years of occupation as the occupying British troops stand in front of the tower’s entry
s.507
(Right) The British post office is right across the British Naval Hospital in Galata. This building was used for intelligence purposes by the British during the years of occupation.
(Left) A British police station on the Galata Tower’s street. During the years of occupation, thousands of Turks were blacklisted and tortured in this building, which was used for spying against the Nationalist Forces. Originally built as a British prison, it was later turned into a police station after the British forces occupied Istanbul.
(Right and bottom) The British Naval Hospital. The small tower, situated to the left of Galata Tower, was the observation tower of the British Naval Hospital. During Istanbul’s occupation, the British used the tower to spy on the ships that came to Istanbul and gather intelligence.
s.508
(Above) Dervishes at the Galata Mawlawi House
(Left) Hotel Kroecker was used as headquarters by the members of the British deep state. The lower floors of the hotel were used as torture chambers.
s.509
(Right) Galata Mawlavi House Museum
(Bottom) An illustration of the Galata Mawlavi House
s.510
(Top) British marines on Galata Bridge
(Bottom) Occupation forces on Galata Bridge
s.511
A British submarine kept in front of the Galata Bridge with the intent of intimidating people, an effort which failed.
s.514
Allied fleet sailing the waters of Istanbul
s.515
On March 16, 1920, occupying British forces raided the Mızıka Police Station at Şehzadebaşı and martyred four of our soldiers and injured many others.
s.517
(Left) British troops in Galata Tower
(Below) Damat Ferid Pasha, who wanted British mandate for the Ottoman Empire
s.522
Brave Turkish women carrying ammunition to the front on their backs and with ox-driven carts during the Turkish War of Independence
s.523
The British deep state spread ideas as sectarianism and tribalism to create division among Muslims.
s.525
Lloyd George
s.526
Lord Curzon
s.527
Somerset Arthur Gough-Calthorpe
s.528
John Michael de Robeck
George Francis Milne
s.530
(Right) Spies sent by the British deep state to organize riots in the Ottoman Empire: Gertrude Bell and T. E. Lawrence
(Bottom) Bell and Lawrence, seen with Churchill, in Egypt to attend the Cairo Conference
s.531
(Top) Sir Charles Harington Harington
(Middle) İsmet İnönü at the farewell party of Sir Charles Harington Harington, the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied occupation army Istanbul
(Far bottom) Sir James Marshall-Cornwall
s.534
BULGARIA
BLACK SEA
SOVIET UNION
AEGEAN SEA
MEDITERRANEAN
CYPRUS
SYRIA
IRAQ
IRAN
The map of the Republic of Turkey according to the Treaty of Sèvres of 1920. The War of Independence started by Atatürk destroyed this treacherous treaty.
Borders according to the Treaty of Sèvres
The Straits according to the Treaty of Sèvres
Under Greek administration - Treaty of Sèvres
Italian zone of influence - Treaty of Sèvres
British zone of influence - Treaty of Sèvres
French zone of influence - Treaty of Sèvres
Regions to be given to Armenia according to Wilson
Borders according to the Treaty of Lausanne
The Straits according to the Treaty of Lausanne
Demilitarized zone according to the Treaty of Lausanne
s.535
(Top left) The Ottoman delegation that signed the Treaty of Sèvres:
From left to right: Rıza Tevfik, Damat Ferid Pasha, Hadi Pasha, Reşid Halis.
(Top right) Damat Ferid Pasha getting off the train in Sèvres
(Bottom) Parties are signing the Treaty of Sèvres, which essentially delivered the Turkish lands to the Allied Powers.
s.537
200 Miles
International Constantinopolitan State
Turkey
Armenia
Kurdistan or joined to Mesopotamia
Smyrna: semi-autonomous within Turkey
Syria
Mesopotamia
Lebanon: semi-autonomous within Syria
Arabia
BULGARIA
Black Sea
RUSSIA
GEORGIA
ARMENIA
AZERBAIJAN
TURKEY
IRAN
Tigris
Mediterranean Sea
ISRAEL
SYRIA
IRAQ
JORDAN
KUWAIT
Nile
SAUDI ARABIA
Red Sea
The New York Times published this map, prepared by the former US President Woodrow Wilson, on May 14, 2016, the 100th anniversary of the Sykes-Picot Agreement. The agreement was signed secretly during WWI to dismember the Ottoman lands. The picture was intended to give the message that Sykes-Picot Agreement was still effective and that the British deep state was still intent on its dismemberment plans.
(Left) The map of the secret project of an ‘Independent State of Constantinople’, according to document number 867.00/883 from the US National Archives.
s.538
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
s.539
(Top) Forces of Order, that the Istanbul government set up to counter the Nationalist Forces during the War of Independence
(Top right) British intelligence officer Lieutenant-Colonel Edward William Charles Noel
(Bottom) Istanbul under occupation
s.541
(Top) Parade of the Turkish Army on the Galata Bridge after the liberation of Istanbul
(Below) Brave Turkish army, led by Şükrü Naili Pasha, marches over the Galata Bridge and greets the residents of Istanbul on October 6, 1923.
s.543
Children don’t deserve wars, conflicts, destruction or tyranny. However the nightmare that the British deep state has created around the world can be clearly observed on the faces of the children that have to live in this cruel system.
s.550
(Top) The final march of British soldiers in South Africa, following the Anglo-Boer War, started by the British deep state.
(Left) British soldiers in South Africa
s.551
(Top) The British deep state enrolled selected African youngsters into European universities, who would later go on to represent the deep state’s interests in Africa.
(Right) The British deep state brought Indian workers to South Africa. These people were identified only by the numbers they were carrying on them.
s.552
Zulu workers were forced to work as slaves at De Beers diamond mines, Kimberley, South Africa. In 1887-1888, racist British diplomat Cecil Rhodes, amalgamated the diamond mines which included De Beers, into Consolidated Mines based in the UK.
s.553
(Top left) The building where the Armistice of Mudanya was signed in 1922
(Bottom right) İsmet Pasha in front of the same building
(Bottom left) General Harington
s.555
Turkish delegation in Lausanne, Switzerland, where the negotiations took place
s.556
William Ewart Gladstone
s.557
(Top) Picture taken in Izmir, the day after the Treaty of Sévres was signed
(Bottom) Damat Ferid and Sèvres delegation
s.559
(Left) A caricature depicting the situation of the defeated countries after they signed treaties at the end of WWI
(Bottom) Venizelos signing the Treaty of Sévres
s.561
İsmet İnönü and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
s.562
Turkish soldiers at the Mesopotamian front (present-day Iraq), in front of the Mosul Central Command
s.563
Hamou Qado Mosque, the second oldest Ottoman mosque left in Mosul, was destroyed in a terror attack in 2015.
s.565
(Top) Baghdad under the Ottoman rule
(Left page) Ottoman Cavalry Regiment in Iraq
s.566
Mining facility controlled by private funds of Abdul Hamid II
s.567
(Right) Baghdad people under the Ottoman rule
(Bottom) Turkish military posts in Baghdad
s.569
(Left) Turkish soldiers in the Balkan War
(Bottom) Muslims who were forced to immigrate during the Balkan War
s.571
(Right) Newspaper Vorwärts printed in Berlin on April 30, 1916 covers the news of the surrender of British troops at Kut Al Amara.
(Bottom) A caricature by Germans, depicting the British defeat at Kut Al Amara
s.572
Turkish soldiers at the front at Kut Al Amara
s.573
(Top) British and Indian soldiers in Kut
(Bottom) British soldiers taken as prisoners of war at Kut Al Amara
s.574
Ali İhsan Pasha
s.576
The delegates at the San Remo Conference, where the parties discussed how the oil in the former Ottoman lands should be shared as well as the respective mandates.
s.577
Brave Turkish soldiers of the War of Independence
s.580
During the Mosul negotiations with Britain, the Turks in Berlin were protesting with the slogan ‘Mosul is going to remain a Turkish land’. (October 22, 1925)
s.581
Arriving at Ankara on December 27, 1919, Mustafa Kemal counted Mosul, Kirkuk and Sulaymaniyah within the National Borders in the speech he gave the next day.
s.584
(Top) İsmet İnönü and the Turkish delegation at the Lausanne talks
(Bottom) Lord Curzon during the Lausanne talks
s.585
The hotel where the Turkish delegation stayed during the Lausanne negotiations
s.588
KURD REŞO AWARDED WITH WAR OF INDEPENDENCE MEDAL
Kurds and Turks are two fraternal nations that lived peacefully together for almost a thousand years. The story of Kurd Reşo, who displayed incredible bravery during the Turkish War of Independence, is just one example of this unity.
s.589
(Left) A Kurdish woman with her child in the Ottoman Empire
(Bottom) Kurdish, Armenian and Turkish women in the Ottoman Empire
s.591
Scenes from Mosul at the time when it was a topic of intense debates at Lausanne negotiations
s.594
The British deep state insisted that the issue of Mosul be taken to the League of Nations because it was well aware that this institution, which it kept under pressure, would make decisions that conformed to its requests.
s.596
Pictures showing everyday life in Mosul in 1902, which was then a part of the Ottoman Empire.
The system of oppression introduced by the British deep state still persists in Mosul. Even today, the people of Mosul lovingly remember their peaceful days under Ottoman rule.
s.597
People from different faiths together during an Orthodox ritual in Mosul in 1920
s.599
(Right) Iraq after the British occupation
(Bottom) British soldiers in Iraq in 1914
s.600
The British deep state never wanted a strong Turkish presence that had any influence on Europe and the Middle East, and did everything in its power to prevent it.
s.603
(Top and middle) İsmet Pasha signing the Treaty of Lausanne (1923)
(Bottom) The meeting room where the Lausanne negotiations took place
s.605
The Castle of Ouchy, where the Lausanne talks were held
s.608
(Left) Nestorians at Mount Judi in 1899
(Top) A picture from the Nestorian riot. Nestorians were exploited by the British deep state in its bid to gain control over the region’s oil reserves.
s.611
Mosul is home to rich oil reserves. For this reason, it has always been a target of the British deep state throughout history.
s.613
(Right) Right after Sheikh Said and other rebels were arrested.
(Bottom right) Sheikh Said one hour before the execution.
Sheikh Said riot took place under British deep state’s control.
s.615
Baghdad in 1914 (above) and in 1918 (below)
s.617
An artificial Kurdish problem was slyly created in Mosul, a Turkish territory.
(Below) A painting of Mosul
TURKEY
MOSUL
IRAQ
IRAN
ISRAEL
EGYPT
SAUDI ARABIA
s.619
The first banner of the PKK was a red communist banner that had hammer and sickle on it.
Posters of Marx, Engels and Lenin cover the walls at PKK meetings.
s.625
Capitulations, which put an immense strain on the Ottoman Empire, were abolished in 1914. However, they threatened to be a problem once again after the Ottoman Empire was defeated in WWI.
(Bottom) A philanthropist is distributing bread to the impoverished Ottoman people in the year when WWI ended.
s.626
The Lausanne delegation
s.629
Lord Curzon and his wife are taking a tour on an ‘elephant’, one of the most important symbols of the British deep state even today.
s.632
As in the past, exploited countries, particularly those in Africa, are getting poorer while the exploiters are getting richer.
s.634
British Diplomat, Nevile Meyrick Henderson
s.635
Turkish people waiting in line to get water during the years of occupation
s.639
Istanbul in late 1800s
s.644
Charles Darwin’s book The Origin of Species published on November 25, 1859
s.645
French biologist Louis Pasteur
s.646
Russian biologist Alexander Oparin
Evolutionists rely heavily on American chemist Stanley Miller’s experiment as evidence regarding their claim stating that life was formed in primitive earth conditions. However, the experiment which was done more than half a century ago has long lost all its scientific meaning with new findings in the following years.
s.647
As accepted by renowned evolutionist sources, the topic about the origin of life poses the greatest predicament for the evolution theory.
s.649
The DNA in the nucleus of the living cell is a databank consisting of various sequences of four different nucleotide bases. The codes of all physical characteristics belonging to that living being are stored in that molecule. When human DNA is transcribed on paper it is assumed that it would make a library as large as 900 volumes of encyclopedias. Such an extraordinary amount of data completely renders the claims about coincidental formation invalid.
s.651
FALSE
Lamarck claimed that giraffes evolved from a species similar to antelopes and that their necks grew longer while they were trying to eat the leaves of high trees. However, this claim of Lamarck’s is refuted by scientific findings and took its place in history as a false assumption.
s.653
legs
antenna
eyes
Evolutionists have been trying to form an example of useful mutation by subjecting flies to mutations since the beginning of the century. All they attained as a result of decades of studies are crippled, diseased and defective flies.
On the left: Head of a normal fruit fly
On the right: A mutated fruit fly
mouth
s.656
LIVING FOSSILS REFUTE EVOLUTION
Fossil records demonstrate that living species came into existence instantaneously with all their physical characteristics and did not undergo the slightest change in time. Fish have always existed as fish, bugs have always existed as bugs, reptiles have always existed as reptiles. The claim asserting that species have evolved gradually has no scientific validity.
Sunfish
Period: Cenozoic era, Eocene epoch
Age: 54-37 million years
Sea Urchin
Period: Paleozoic Era, Carboniferous epoch
Age: 295 million years
Crane fly
Period: Cenozoic era, Eocene epoch
Age: 48-37 million years
s.657
Starfish
Period: Paleozoic era, Ordovician epoch
Age: 490-443 million years
Birch leaf
Period: Cenozoic era, Eocene epoch
Age: 50 million years
Froghopper
Period: Mesozoic era, Cretaceous epoch
Age: 125 million years
Sequoia leaf
Period: Cenozoic era, Eocene epoch
Age: 50 million years
s.660
FALSE
Evolutionist newspapers and magazines often print pictures of imaginary “primitive” man. The only available source for these pictures is the imagination of the artist. Evolutionary theory has been so dented by scientific data that today we see less and less of it in the serious press.
s.671
When we compare the eye and the ear with camera and sound recording systems, we see that our organs have much more complex and perfect structures than those mentioned technological devices.
s.672
A person looking out the window at scenery sees the image of the scenery inside his brain, not the one outside.
LIGHT
ELECTRICAL SIGNAL
The light reaching the human eye is turned into electrical signals by the cells in the eye and comes to the visual cortex behind the brain. A ‘consciousness’ inside our brains perceive these electrical signals reaching the brain as a scenery.
A SCENERY COMPRISED OF ELECTRICAL SIGNALS
s.674
The images in the brain are merely a collection of perceptions formed by electrical signals. No external world, no light or sound exists in the brain.
s.677
Today, the beliefs of Darwinists are as incomprehensible as the weird and unreasonable beliefs of those who worshiped alligators in the past. Darwinists ignorantly regard coincidences and inanimate, unconscious atoms as if they have creative powers. Moreover, they adhere to this superstitious belief as one would adhere to a religion.
ARKA KAPAK
A closer look at the last two centuries of the world will immediately reveal the presence of a ‘mastermind’ behind the radical changes around the world, building and falling of states, countless wars that caused millions of deaths, as well as scourges including communism, wild capitalism, anarchism, Darwinism and the widespread moral decline. Interestingly enough, this structure has been only very rarely named. The name of this covert system is the BRITISH DEEP STATE.
The British deep state is in fact a mafia organization that is a completely separate entity independent of the British people and the British administration. In fact, it is the biggest enemy of the British people and the British state, represented by the British flag and the British Parliament; it has and is still inflicting great damage on Britain. As a reminder of this fact, the pictures of the British flag and the British Parliament are frequently used throughout the book.
It should be remembered that criticism contained in this book is not targeting the British state, the British government, the British flag or the British people. On the contrary, British people are decent, kind, refined people that have always been good friends. The criticism is solely directed at the dark structure that brought nothing but disaster to the whole world, including the British people.
This book sheds light on the mentality and practices of this bloody organization that devised countless horrible events currently shaking the world, with a particular focus on its dirty plans for Turkey and the Turkish people in the last two centuries.
The End Times that we are living in now is a surprising time of increased atrocities by the said mafia structure. However, these insidious plans will surely be foiled with the appearance of Hazrat Mahdi (pbuh).