Re: India Pakistan Partition BBC Special Presentation
Anyone who watches the video can see:
The scenes, the narration and the testimonials are one sided.
The video is focused on mostly Punjab/Lahore.
The scenes of mob wearing cap is shown a few times but no chanting or slogans from other sides were shown.
The chanting of Allah o Akbar is is discussed but nothing from other sides.
Every time the riots were discussed, it was mentioned that 'after Muslims attacked, Hindus and Sikhs attacked. Or When Sikhs came to know they were going to be attacked, they prepared for counter attack. A cause and effect was created one sided.
Calcutta event was shown first and again Muslims were shown to be responsible for STARTING the riots.
Sikh person was shown to be in grief but NO MUSLIM was shown in video crying.
The Muslim narrators were not ‘allowed’ or shown to be saying Non Muslims attacked their areas.’
The Hindu person and Sikh person were shown to be narrating their sides of story and personal events but Muslims person were shown to be talking in general.
The Sikh person is shown to be sad for Muslims leaving for Pakistan.
The Sikh person is shown to justify killings with his sword.
There was a majority of non-Muslims interviews.
Gandhi, Nehru were shown for a long time. Jinnah was sidelined. (The movie “Gandhi” has shown Jinnah as an ugly person who cannot speak coherently also if anyone can recall)
The comment about Jinnah was negative and he was called “cold person”. Actually Mountbatten daughter showed hatred for Jinnah.
Well, Jinnah did not fall in love with Mountbattens…the love triangle.
Too much time was spent on Gandhi and his walk across the villages.
It was not until 1:30 and 1:36 when Muslims being killed was talked about only for a short time.
The narrator stopped short of talking about Amritsar train station massacre of Muslims and did not go further. Later it was shown that the train passengers were killed brutally but again it was not specified who committed the killings.
Mr. Khan was shown to criticize the change in Lahore.
Redcliff was defended of his wrong judgment and delay in announcing the much needed border division. It is said, that is how he was! A ‘decisive man’.
Premature removal of forces were defended by saying it was unexpected that there would be a huge loss of lives. In fact hasty decision to divide the country was made without proper planning. By that time it was very evident that there will be a chaos if there was no peace keeping force available.
Restored attachments:
