On a side note: Imran Khan in D.G. Khan

Imran Khan is the only leader in which Taliban and pseudo-liberals see some hope.

Related article: Imran Khan will sweep next elections – by Abdul Nishapuri

Apparently, the PTI wallas lured poor people to Imran Khan’s jalsa in D.G. Khan through a false promise of the distribution of ration to the flood affected people. The situation turned ugly when the only thing the people got from Imran Khan’s public meeting was his oft-repeated commitment to creating a welfare state in Pakistan:


According to Express Tribune, Imran Khan’s welfare state is ‘coming soon’:

Intellectuals dream of transformation and the general Pakistani public just wants something – (anything!) – that is different. Thanks to the media, or some of the more responsible parts of it, there is a prospect that future elections will be issue based.

“Change is imminent” says PTI leader Imran Khan, though granted that he has been saying this for a while.

He is suggesting an upcoming campaign of civil disobedience to drag in the change that should have happened eons ago.

According to Imran Khan, now that the media and judiciary are independent, the next step is for the election commission to become autonomous. It has to be linked up with the Nadra database.

Each year 4 million youth reach the hallowed age of 18, where in a country of few rights, they, as well as other nameless members of society can vote. It would eradicate crimes that are committed anonymously by those who dodge the system…A CNIC should be compulsory.

Fortunately though, in these unfortunate times, political parties are mobilizing at the grassroots level. In the end who to vote for is a very personal choice, but voting gives us a fresh start in terms of ideas, causes and systems -independent of any personality.


6 responses to “On a side note: Imran Khan in D.G. Khan”

  1. Imran Khan’s criticism of two most popular political parties of Pakistan (PPP and PML-N) echoes the typical pseudo-liberal rhetoric:

    Nation paying price of electing Zardari: Imran

    Updated at: 2100 PST, Wednesday, October 27, 2010

    BUREWALA: Chief of Tehreek-e-Insaf Imran Khan has Wednesday said that the nation is paying the price of electing Asif Ali Zardari as President of Pakistan while the current push and pull being witnessed among various blocs of Muslim League is only aimed at getting into power.

    Addressing a public meeting in Burewala and a gathering at Vihari District Bar Association, Imran Khan said the dependence on foreign aid can be eliminated by setting the system in order.

    “Relentless plundering by the rulers has pushed the country to the brink of bankruptcy,” he maintained.

    He said the turncoats are now facing humiliation and insult and that the innocent people are being killed in return for a few dollars


  2. This hilarious news reminds me of a message on Tanga Party’s website, it invited the people to see off the convoy carrying relief goods for flood victims. What was interesting in that message was that that ‘Breakfast would be served to all workers’ :)))

  3. Imran’s revolutionary road

    The writer is a barrister and a public policy graduate from Harvard University mahreen.khan@tribune.com.pk

    Mahreen Khan

    Imran Khan claims that his party, currently without any seats in the assemblies, will lead an electoral revolution in 2013. Although I respect and admire Imran Khan for the cricketing hero he once was, for the philanthropist he still is and for the revolutionary leader he aspires to be, his personal and political life is rife with grave contradictions.
    Khan has u-turned on every major decision in his life.


    In his autobiography, All Round View, he wrote of his promise to his mother to never bring home ‘a foreign wife’. Yet, he married English heiress Jemima Goldsmith. Then there was the Sita White affair, where Imran denied paternity of his illegitimate daughter until he was forced to accept it by a US court.

    Personal life aside, even in politics, Imran Khan has been glaringly inconsistent.


    In the 1997 elections he was scathing about Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, accusing them both of massive corruption. When a bomb went off at his Shaukat Khanum hospital in 1996, he even refused to meet Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, implying that she was to blame.

    He always seemed more comfortable with the religious conservative, dictator Zia, than the elected moderate Benazir Bhutto. In his book he affectionately recalled yielding to Zia’s request to take back his resignation in 1987. In 1999, he supported General Musharraf’s coup, until the 2002 elections and then did a u-turn. One version is that he wanted to be nominated prime minister and turned bitter when he was told his party was not strong enough. He went on to wedge himself right of centre, often appearing at rallies second billing to theocracy loving, Taliban-sympathiser Qazi Hussain. He then performed another u-turn, joining hands with both the ‘corrupt’ Bhutto and Sharif in trying to unseat General Musharraf.

    So where does he stand politically? He refuses to unequivocally condemn the ‘Taliban’.


    He talks of repelling American influence like an 18-year-old student, high on university polemic and activist zeal. His understanding of international affairs is more suited to Vanity Fair magazine than the Foreign Policy Journal. At the time Asif Zardari was elected president, Imran Khan remained silent. Sensing the tide of public opinion now against the president, he has become vitriolic in his statements, displaying a tendency to jump onto the bandwagon, rather than originality of thought. He rallies against western influences and ‘brown sahibs’ yet, both his children are being brought up in the height of western society.

    He claims democratic credentials yet, most people would be hard-pressed to name even one other office-bearer of his party. The PTI is run like a personality cult even after 15 years of its inception. Without him — it would be nothing.

    Many of his supporters agree that Imran Khan would have been better off had he devoted the past 15 years to philanthropy alone — by now he would have had a hospital in every major city as well as schools and universities.


    He would have had popular support, credibility and cross-party political support for any social reform agenda. He would have been untainted by a relish for personal power. That is the final nail in the coffin of Imran’s hopes. Those close to Imran speak of his hefty ego — the need to be the centre of attention. It is understandable for a superstar who was mobbed wherever he went for two decades. That kind of fame is addictive. Remember the 1992 World Cup victory speech where he claimed the win as his achievement alone, forgetting to mention his team?

    Although, he may be patriotic, untainted by financial corruption and charismatic, Imran Khan is not worthy of leading the revolution. The road to revolution is not paved with fundamental contradictions, u-turns and half-baked theories. It is forged, inch by inch, by a sterling character, self-sacrifice, unswerving principles and passion for the people. If Khan really wants to prove he can deliver results, then perhaps he should offer to manage and mentor the Pakistan cricket team in preparation for the 2011 World Cup. It would be a test case for his promise to tackle mismanagement and corruption. If he succeeds — well, that would be a mini revolution in itself.

    Published in The Express Tribune, October 30th, 2010.

  4. request to admin

    i often participate in forum discussion with my id “truthseeker” but now i can see that someone else has same id to post here..

    it is creating some confusion

  5. I do believe that revolutions cannot be engineered inch by inch by any one personality, whatever be his/her credentials. It is a totally random event as can be seen in the history of revolutions, where an idea or personality is well placed to take advantage of the chaos that ensues when the pillars which maintain a civilization is totally decayed to give direction to the ire of people. There was Rousseau’s philosophy during French revolution, Lenin well placed when the Russian masses where disillusioned, Gandhi when the Indian masses were ripe with anger and martin Luther king when blacks started to break the shackles. Similarly there are negative ideas like that of Hitler, Mussolini who will create a fascist revolution. His political statements and stands show lot of confusion and immaturity which made me as one of his big fans for more or less three decades distance myself from being his fan.