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