gone back on her word and lost our respect for ever. Henceforth we could be deceived no longer. We were cyphers, mere pawns, on the political chess-board of the Powers. The principles of Islam were distorted without hesitation to prove that no Christian peoples could live unmolested under Turkish rule. How could Great Britain be so blind to the unbounded respect she had earned from Islam by her fine tolerance of all religions in India? Now she has 'changed all that,' and the war in the Near East was a religious war."
When I attempted to frame some excuses for the pro-Greek attitude of the British Government, he reminded me of our "old pride in Moslem allegiance. You have more Moslem than Christian subjects. . . . Is not your Prime Minister, Mr. Lloyd George, a democrat? Where can he find more perfect democracies than in the East, under Moslem rule? It is a 'new' ideal in the West. When President Wilson began to preach it, he was derided as a Utopian, because he was three centuries ahead of his time! Every Moslem has always been equal before the law—the Sultan stands with his subjects."
"That does not quite 'explain' Abdul Hamid," I said.
"He was the exception we shall never repeat. You cannot argue from exceptions. . . . It is the English who have ceased to value the precepts of Islam. The Koran bids us obey those in authority. Rather than rebel, we leave the country."
"And M. Kemal Pasha? Has he not rebelled?"
"No, indeed. He simply defended his country, deposed the vassal-traitor-Sultan. . . . M. Kemal Pasha rules direct from the Koran. He will have strength to set aside the heresies of the Byzantines that have been grafted on to our Government. It is nonsense to say that the Koran has been found unfitted for the requirements of the twentieth century."
"There, I fear, I must plead guilty."
"You will see, when you have stayed among us a little longer, that it can be honestly interpreted to meet man's present needs."
