Slanders On Muslims In History

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