Slanders On Muslims In History

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 13^th 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 6^th 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 5^th 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, http://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 7^th 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 21^st 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 20^th century, but one that persists today.

In the early 20^th 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.


The Truth Behind the Fall of the
Ottoman Empire