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.

1. A photograph taken during the days when the Nationalist Forces entered Adapazarı 2. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and his fellow soldiers during the days of Sivas Congress

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 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.

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.

1. A 15 or 16 year-old Turkish youngster from the Nationalist Forces, arrested by the British (July 1920) 2. Nationalist Forces taken as prisoners by the British 3. The opening of the Turkish Parliament with prayers. Friday was deliberately chosen for the opening ceremony.

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.

1. 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. 2. A British submarine deployed in front of Galata Bridge was intended by the British deep state as a display of power. 3. French occupational forces on Galata Bridge

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.

Allied forces’ military band on Galata Bridge

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.

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

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.

(1) 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. (2) 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. (3 and 4) 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.

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.

(1) Dervishes at the Galata Mawlawi House (2) 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.

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.

Galata Mawlavi House Museum

An illustration of the Galata Mawlavi House

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 marines on Galata Bridge

Occupation forces on Galata Bridge

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

A British submarine kept in front of the Galata Bridge with the intent of intimidating people, an effort which failed.

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”.

Allied fleet sailing the waters of Istanbul

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.

On March 16, 1920, occupying British forces raided the Mızıka Police Station at Şehzadebaşı and martyred four of our soldiers and injured many others.

Supporters of the British Deep State During the Occupation

Damat Ferid Pasha, who wanted British mandate for the Ottoman Empire

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.

British troops in Galata Tower

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

Brave Turkish women carrying ammunition to the front on their backs and with ox-driven carts during the Turkish War of Independence

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

The British deep state spread ideas as sectarianism and tribalism to create division among Muslims.

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

1. Spies sent by the British deep state to organize riots in the Ottoman Empire: Gertrude Bell and T. E. Lawrence 2.  Bell and Lawrence, seen with Churchill, in Egypt to attend the Cairo Conference

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.

(1) Sir Charles Harington Harington (2) İsmet İnönü at the farewell party of Sir Charles Harington Harington, the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied occupation army Istanbul (3) Sir James Marshall-Cornwall

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.

Footnotes:

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, http://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, http://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, http://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, http://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, http://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, http://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”, http://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, http://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. http://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, http://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]