Still a white man's burden?

BBC on Trial (Documentary; 2024)

Produced by: Global Hindu Federation

Remember when Malaysians depended on Radio Television Malaysia (RTM) for our news fix? If one remembers well, the headlines on each vernacular channel emphasised different topics to keep each ethnicity happy and give the illusion that their needs were being considered.

They would have picked this up from their colonial masters, who perfected the art of diplomacy and ruling with the doctrine of 'divide and rule'. Goebbels is not the person who invented the propaganda. It was the British and their propaganda machine, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). In fact, the Germans learnt it from BBC, which was incorporated into its current form in 1927.

In the 1930s, the BBC management was singing praises of the Nazi's attempt to clear off its enemies. BBC perfected the art of choosing the perfect word to sugarcoat a potential disaster. They broadcast 24/7 in 25 languages and three bandwidths to tell the right message that their audience wanted to hear. Like the Piped Piper leading the children of Hamelin into the mountain, BBC and its propaganda news drew and killed 100 million Indians in one way or another in 40 years. BBC drew in fiction writers and performers to seduce its crowd to believe their stories. George Orwell was recruited to write scripts for the news on India.

Of late, people worldwide have to realise the BBC's nefarious agenda. With its clever play with semantics, it managed to successfully demonise people and humanise terrorists. There is an overt anti-India bias. They were quick to paint India as a ridiculous nation of poverty, ignorance and sexual perverts.

A year before Modi's third-term election, BBC thought it appropriate to bring a 20-year-old squashed conspiracy linking Modi to the 2002 Gujerat Riots. Even though the Courts investigated and cleared Modi of any wrongdoing, BBC, in its self-professed role of the bearer of the white media's burden, released its controversial documentary, 'The Modi Question'. Elsewhere, it decided to vilify Indian social fibre; BBC made a hero of an accused rapist in the 'Nirbhaya Case' by having a one-on-one interview with him after paying him handsomely.

Pandit Satish Sharma,
Interfaith Speaker and Pandit of
Dharmic traditions
Brainchild behind the documentary.

The BBC has a very unique way of whitewashing crimes of a particular community of society when it comes to people of the Indian subcontinent. In the Leicester unrest recently, there is evidence of biased reporting, painting the Islamic aggressors as victims. Even Shamima Begum, who gave up her British citizenship to fight for ISIS, is portrayed as an innocent victim. Majid Freeman, an instigator of violence and a terrorist sympathiser, is labelled as a political activist.

BBC has been a prime mover of regime changes around the world. It is said they had assisted in 42 regime changes since 1945, starting with the assassination of Mosaddegh, the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran, when he nationalised British oil holdings in 1953. Their shenanigans continued with Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein and the non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).

Even though BBC is good at 'exposing' the shortcomings of third-world countries, even the post-colonial nations have leapt forward, surpassing their master; they have, within their establishment, people of questionable morals. Cases of BBC executives like Jimmy Saville and Stuart Hall getting mangled with child sexual abuse are no secret. In his capacity as the Public Prosecutor, Keir Starmer, the current PM, thought the case did not merit further action.

There are many sepoys, chronic victims of Stockholm Syndrome, who are still in awe of their former colonial masters and are under the impression the sun still has not set on the empire. They worked with local associated companies to churn out denigrating news of their own countries.

BBC has manipulated information to serve its agenda, creating division and mistrust among global audiences. It raises critical questions about the ethical responsibilities of media institutions and challenges viewers to consider whether the BBC should be held accountable for its actions. Impartial reporting is not in the equation. Their ultimate aim is to balkanise nations, making them weak and unsustainable. That is when the next wave of imperialism moves in. The concept of 'divide and rule' never left the table.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Heads you win, tails I lose?

At Charles III Coronation @ London

BBC is in the limelight again. All for the wrong reasons.

When the Bersih movement was on a roll in the streets of Kuala Lumpur and painting the town yellow, BBC was on a rampage screening the sea of yellow flood hourly, painting the idea that the whole country is in tatters. In reality, the following day, it was business as usual for Malaysians.

When interest parties protested against the cut in Indian farmer subsidies in Delhi, BBC again had a field day. They were lamenting that the Indian public was prevented from expressing their democratic rights. Even though India's internal politics did not affect the British or the rest of the world one tiny bit, it took itself as the vanguard of the oppressed and the champion of the downtrodden. It did not matter that the protestors were not farmers but middlemen who tended to lose from the Government's move.

Bersih Protest @ Kuala Lumpur

But now, despite all the austerity measures taken in the UK to combat recession following Brexit and Covid, the British Exchequer thought it made perfect economic sense to spend between £50 and £100 million of taxpayers' money to finance the coronation of their next monarch, King Charles III. Buckingham Place says that the events' festivities and tourism would finance themselves.

Many beg to differ. With the hashtag #NotMyKing, many express discontentments through peaceful demonstrations. We are told they had earlier informed the Metropolitan Police of their intentions. Still, the Police arrested them anyway as a threat to public peace and conspiracy to cause a public nuisance.

Nowhere their rights as citizens of a democracy to express themselves come out, surprisingly.
In the meantime, leaders of their former colonies shamelessly feted the monarch, who is no Prince Charming by any figment of imagination, whose ancestors brutally looted the colonies' national treasures and turned the native into subservient slaves.

Delhi Farmers' Protest

The world has moved on from a feudal system. Even the substitute for an authoritarian rule is found to be deficient, and we are still on the journey in pursuit of an ideological way to rule over humankind. Many empty promises had come their way and made equally quick exits.

 
To imagine that a King is ordained by God Himself with special powers by birth to rule legitimately over a piece of land is laughable. Even God is losing his shine in this increasingly Godless world. So, to accept a King as God's representative on God does not make sense. But we smirk when told that the Egyptian pharaohs were the mediators between the gods and men. Spot any difference?

Points to ponder. @RajivMessage (twitter)
The coronation of King Charles III is:
- a ritual (as distinct from something 'rational'),
- filled with idolatry,
- symbol of supremacy,
- birth-based privilege,
- built on centuries of loot/oppression of 100s of millions worldwide.
Yet, the millions of royal fans in the West have the hypocrisy to accuse my culture of having irrationality, idolatry, birth-based hierarchy, human rights violations, etc.
I respect their right to celebrate their tradition. But they ought to get off their high horses and respect others' traditions. And Wokeists sucking up to the limelight. Money & prestige can buy a lot. (And former colonies are sucking up to their slave owners under the Commonwealth. Err, the wealth is is not common. It is theirs!)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A recoil after the peak of civilisation?

Cunk on Earth (BBC Documentary S1, E1-5; 2022)

Creator: Charlie Brooker

If you find the following joke particularly funny, you will enjoy Philomena Cunk and her caustic below-belt deadpan British comedy.

FG asks X, “where have you been? ... haven't seen you in a while.”

X replies, “Oh, I have just been to Amritsar.”

“But why did you go there?” asks FG.

“...it was just on my bucket list. I always wanted to go there,” said X.

To which FG, with facial expressions a poker player would envy, blurted, “so now that you have fulfilled your bucket list, does that mean now you can happily kick the bucket?”

Diane Morgan appears as the persona of Philomena Cunk, a clueless TV comperè who interviews high-level scientists and academicians in this mockumentary. In a nutshell, it narrates the evolution of mankind and civilization as they progress from cave dwellers to their current status as the most successful species on Earth.

At the end of the five episodes, the viewers go off with the idea that humankind is actually regressing after all that leaps and bounds. Gone are the days when innovations, scientific discoveries and technological advancements were feted. Now we tend to reward people for mediocrity and for things that border on stupidity.

The highlights of this docuseries are the interviews between Cunk and the highly erudite guests of their fields. Cunk erroneously thinks very highly of herself. She is set on her ideas; her reference points are her ex-boyfriend, Sean, her flamboyant tarot card-reading aunt, and perhaps her intellectually challenged mates. She asks the most embarrassing questions to her guests and openly disagrees and argues with their opinion. The facial expressions of these guests are priceless. I am sure it is all part of showbiz, but how they responded to Cunk’s dumb statements is classic.

A light-hearted presentation with British dry humour laced with profanity. It may be interpreted as a swipe to the working class or the nouveau riche who climbed the social ladder, not by class and education but by their sheer ability to make money and command power.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence.

Follow

Follow

Follow

Follow

Follow

Follow

A propaganda piece

India. The Modi Question (2023)

BBC Documentary (2 episodes)

Around the late 1990s, when I was working in Johor Bahru, I enjoyed the BBC worldwide service radio transmissions from Singapore. At that time, what appears to be an alternate universe to think of it now, their discussions were fair and extensive and looked at topics from all angles. Undoubtedly, their fundamental role in modern society has been exposed over the years. Their reporting of the elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq and their many shenanigans are now open secrets. Their job is to be a tool of the US and a lap dog of the military-industrial complex.

A testimony of their rumour-mongering duty is this 2 part BBC documentary. It is an obvious case of biased reporting and ridiculing the choice of the citizens of the world's biggest democracy. Even though the BJP returned the votes with a more significant majority the second time around through what is deemed a fair election, the West cannot fathom the nation they once thought would disintegrate soon after its Independence.

At a time when Europe was in Dark Age, India and China ruled the world. The West stirred from slumber during the Era of Enlightenment, distorted the world order then, and exerted their will over the rest. With so many mischief and arm-twisting manoeuvres, they claimed dominance over the rest. They determined the world narrative and laid the foundation for how everybody should think. This was essentially the order of the day for a good millennium. At least, this is what the current generation is made to believe.

The 20th century saw the turn of the tide of the status quo. The colonised have been jolted off their ignorance. They are eager to reclaim their place in the world order. But the former colonial masters will not take this loss of stature lying down. They are going to put up a fight tooth and nail. BBC, CNN, Al-Jazeera, and other western media outlets quickly prance and sink their claws at former colonies where it hurts most.

2024 is an important year for India. It is when the nation goes to the polls. The world knows the sun has been shining bright on these so-called third-world countries. Economics is a zero-sum game. Profitability on one end means a loss on the other. A strong India is not healthy for the West. Hence, the rapaciousness to run down India and Modi, whose party is pipped to come out victorious in the next polls.

BBC selectively picks up internal problems within the world's most populous nation and puts a religious angle to them. It paints a picture of blood-hungry Hindus dying to sink their teeth into the jugular of the Muslims. The Muslims are portrayed as pitiful victims, never retaliating or casting the first stone in any calamity. An internal problem like the arbitration of Article 370 in India-controlled is made an international issue. The justice system is painted as tainted and working to the puppet strings of Modi. They make a mountain about the 2002 Gujerat riot, accusing Modi of being the master conspirator. To give legality to their presentation, the BBC had sourced the services of Indian sepoys like Arundhati Roy and leftist academicians from the UK.

Come to think of it, the Western Media is just doing what they had been doing all this while, bending public perception and skewing their way of thinking to benefit the West. Voice of America (VOA) was doing the same under the guise of being the voice of the free world.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A priceless gem

And Then There Was None (Miniseries, 3 episodes; 2015)
BBC

I heard about this book even way back in Standard 6. I remember that we, young pre-pubescent boys, were intrigued by its title, 'Ten Little Niggers'. That was, of course, its original title when Agatha Christie wrote the book in the UK in 1939 and was based on a rhyme from minstrel shows and children's games. The poem goes to tell how ten blacks end up dead in ten different ways. In the story, the 10 murders happen similarly as described in the poem, but not so a pretty straightforward way.

When the book was reprinted in the USA, due to the sensitivities of the word 'nigger' even back then, it was renamed with the last line of the poem when old the figures died - 'and there was none'. Later publications also used the title 'Ten Little Indians', an 1869 poem and 'Ten Little Soldiers'. This book has the reputation of being the best selling book, selling over 100 million copies.

Ten Little Niggers (Frank Green) 1869

Ten Little Indians (Septimus Winner) 1868

Ten little nigger boys went out to dine One choked his little self, and then there were nine. Nine little nigger boys sat up very late. One overslept himself, and then there were eight. Eight little nigger boys travelling in Devon One said he'd stay there, and then there were seven. Seven little nigger boys chopping up sticks One chopped himself in half, and then there were six. Six little nigger boys playing with a hive A bumblebee stung one, and then there were five. Five little nigger boys going in for law One got in chancery, and then there were four. Four little nigger boys going out to sea A red herring swallowed one, and then there were three. Three little nigger boys walking in the zoo A big bear hugged one, and then there were two. Two little nigger boys sitting in the sun One got frizzled up, and then there was one. One little nigger boy living all alone He went and hanged himself and then there were none.

Ten little Injuns standin' in a line, One toddled home and then there were nine; Nine little Injuns swingin' on a gate, One tumbled off and then there were eight. Refrain: One little, two little, three little, four little, five little Injuns boys, Six little, seven little, eight little, nine little, ten little Injuns boys. Eight little Injuns gayest under heav'n, One went to sleep and then there were seven; Seven little Injuns cutting up their tricks, One broke his neck and then there were six. Six little Injuns kickin' all alive, One kick'd the bucket and then there were five; Five little Injuns on a cellar door, One tumbled in and then there were four. Four little Injuns up on a spree, One he got fuddled and then there were three; Three little Injuns out in a canoe, One tumbled overboard and then there were two. Two little Injuns foolin' with a gun, One shot t'other and then there was one; One little Injun livin' all alone, He got married and then there were none.

ref: Wiki

Many versions of this murder mystery story have been out in many languages, in newspaper serials, books, plays, movies and miniseries. Essentially, eight guests are invited to spend the weekend on a secluded island by unknown hosts, Mr and Mrs Owen. The invitees (a mix of retired army men, surgeon, aristocrat, teacher, governess, judge) and the two helpers have a dark history behind their regular appearance. Their misdoings are announced, and slowly one by one, they drop dead like flies. Fear mounts as each suspects the other as the murderer, and the guessing game starts of who the next victim could be.

I had the chance to watch the 1945 movie version and this 2015 BBC miniseries version. The 1945 one, as the whole story had to be rushed through one and a half hour duration, it failed to create depth in its storytelling. I enjoyed the 2015 one as it shows through various flashbacks what mistake each character had done wrong in their lifetime. There is a kind of moral dilemma whether what they did was wrong or justified. There was also a Tamil version of this story - 1967 Athey Kangal done in Eastman colour. If the BBC version excelled in storytelling and characterisation, the Tamil version made up in terms of pleasing eye-catching costumes and the ear-worm inducing songs and dances that have lingered in Tamil moviegoers minds all this while.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

When you see the light, you may wish you did not!

Agatha Christie's Poirot (S13E05) Curtain: Poirot's Last Case
(Final Episode, 2013)

This must easily be the saddest of all of Hercule Poirot's episodes. Throughout this episode, the tone set is sombre, and a tinge of melancholy hung around every scene. Times have changed. Poirot is quite ill, arthritic and is wheelchair-bound. He is physically challenged, but his mind is not. His sidekick, Captain Arthur Hastings, is aged, recently widowed and has an adult daughter. 

Hastings is invited to the Styles, the place they had solved their first case together. Poirot needs Hastings to be his ears, eyes and legs to complement his razor-sharp 'grey cell' to 'prevent' an imminent murder. The identity of the murderer is only known to Poirot but is kept away from a frustrated Hastings.

David Suchet

Many deaths still happen during their stay, and together the identity is known only much later, after Poirot's demise! Yes, this is the last case of Poirot, and the fictional detective dies in a way that can be construed as suicide. 

Agatha Christie wrote this story during World War II and kept it safe for thirty years and was published in 1975. It was the last novel published before her death. The book was both anticipated and dreaded by fans for it contained Poirot's death. Many of Agatha Christie's fans refused to read it. For old time sake, this 2013 TV adaption brought in the initial duo of David Suchet and Hugh Fraser, who appeared as Poirot and Hastings respectively, when the first episode of the series came out on ITV in 1989.

This episode is heart wrenching one. Here, we see Poirot using his grey cells to crack the case and trying to answer some philosophical questions about life, death, and doing the right thing as he approaches the tail-end of his career and his life, which we will see at the end. Poirot puts himself in a precarious position in the end, but with the hope of forgiveness from the Almighty. In the end, he realises that a wrong must be done for the greater good. 

Au revoir, Poirot. Goodbye, till we meet again!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

It is our fault!

Years and Years (BBC, Miniseries; 2019)
Season 1, Ep 1-6.

It started with the £1 Tshirts in the mid-1990s. Everyone knew it was ridiculously cheap, but nobody saw the need to create a ruckus about it. The businessmen took the lion's share of the profit while the poor workers who put it together took home a few pennies. The buyers did not complain as it was a bargain. The workers did not either. They were thankful that they had a job to go to. After many years, they were able to see some money. That was the beginning of the divide - the divergence between the haves and the have nots. It went on to create obnoxiously rich conglomerates.

With the spread of the world wide web to all corners of the world, global netizens were hooked. They were lulled with the dopamine of social media influence and the lure of aimless spending. People were cooped in the comfort of their echo chamber, looking into the eyes of the fellow humans but into the abyss of their monitors. Perched in their armchair, they became opinionated about everything and feel superior to the surroundings. Unbeknownst to them, the Big Brother of the Web was busy mining their habits and idiosyncrasies and would one day be used against them.

These must be some of the thoughts that went through the scriptwriters as they envisioned a potential dystopic UK in the 15 over years after 2019. 

The United Kingdom is no longer the cradle of the world as it used to be. Many jobs which used to be done by people is redundant as AI can do it as well, if not better. Who needs accountants anymore? Unskilled works like the manual car wash are resurfacing after being phased out long ago by the automatic car wash stations. Despatch riders to deliver online orders made a comeback. People simply needed jobs.

The story revolves a matriarchal octagenarian and her four grandchildren as well as their partners and children. Trump had been re-elected and had authorised the launch of a nuclear missile to the man-made island owned by China. Theresa May is somehow still in the picture. Politics in the UK is still chaos as hatred and populist politics hog the limelight. Brexit had secluded the UK from the Continent, but it has to deal with an influx of refugees from Ukraine. Russia had invaded Ukraine and is after its enemies and the LGBTs. Gay marriages in the UK are the norm, hence the illegal immigrants.

Along the way, many British banks collapse. Political candidates become outrageous in their approach to convince voters to vote for them. Digital contents are regulated so much. Deep fake videos make nothing credible anymore. Frequent power outages are carried to continually erase and modify data. Information is controlled by the ruling regime. BBC is shut down. Once again, print media makes a comeback as it proved more credible. Housing shortage becomes acute. The long arm of the law becomes something to be feared as the process to wrangle out such legal entanglements becomes too easy and cumbersome.

On the other end, people get so obsessed with integrating themselves to the net that they go into great lengths into incorporating the human body with the digital world. In Transhumanism, man can implant chips into their hand to receive calls, plant cameras into their eyes to get their instant clicks (literally at the blink of an eye) and even to transfer our memories and consciousness to a digital format. 

Along the way, we do see advances in medical treatment. Macular degeneration (which may cause blindness) is reversed with stem cell technology. The 80-year-old, who later became 90, seems active as ever, celebrating birthdays after birthdays. There is even mention of in-utero correction of spina bifida.

If Consciousness is the common denominator that unifies all beings in the Universe, the ability to interpret Consciousness will put Man at the level of God, would you say?

History has shown that giving too much power to the ruling elite can be disastrous. In the same vein, the people in the 2030 UK realised this and garnered their resources to oust the ruling regime by exposing their concentration camps and take charge of the Government.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.