PTI News, Updates and Discussion

Do you think PTI has a future without Imran Khan?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 19.6%
  • No

    Votes: 80 71.4%
  • Only if senior leadership is released

    Votes: 10 8.9%

  • Total voters
    112
Status
Not open for further replies.
In desi mentality everyone is a cultist. If you try not to be one you will be bitten by each and everyone. Jahalat is number one issue. But Oscar bhai what if everyone is a cultist, then what can one person do. I faced islamist cultists, little gangs on corners trying to recruit, if not you they go after family, and will definitely get one person, the same way we have corrupt mangi cultist, each one backing each other lies. On politics i know people who used to scream Zardari Zindabad but when they saw youth going to PTI they screamed Imran Khan Zindabad all over social media, So if everyone is doing this they why should we not defend our military and their decisions. Normally the islamist speak against Pakistan army, but deep down they want military coup, to get their own man in power, the Khalifah or call for rebellion, they don't care if Pakistan is destroyed.
You’re right to see that cultish thinking runs deep, and it’s not confined to religion or politics. It’s bred from a culture where surrendering thought feels safer than standing alone. People confuse loyalty with blindness, and when someone refuses to chant in unison, they treat that as betrayal. This is how jahalat protects itself because it feeds on conformity, not understanding.

But when everyone joins a camp just to belong, the collective mind collapses. That’s when truth becomes someone’s propaganda and corruption becomes patriotism. The question isn’t whether one person can fix it; it’s whether one person can stay awake in a nation sleepwalking. Change begins with refusing to participate in the lie, even if it makes you a target. The alternative is accepting decay as destiny.

I openly tell the elders in my family who object to “new ideas” and so on.

Islam was borne out of “I will not follow the crowd” - and I use the example of entire history of Islam from Adam.

Be it Hazrat Ibrahim’s father lamenting why he objects to what his ancestors have done for generations.
To Hazrat Moosa’s derision of Bani Israel following the clout of the golden calf.
To our Prophet not listening to his elders.

The whole theme to me in Islam is “Say what is right, not what is popular”
 
That’s the true tragedy: not that corruption exists, but that it has numbed an entire society into accepting it as natural law.

I would say that Pakistani society has worked very hard and diligently to make the country exactly as they like it to be. This is not a tragedy. It is a choice.

Granted, the outcomes of that choice are a tragedy for untold millions, but it remains a choice.
 
Not true. Sheikh Mujeeb contacted General Yahya as the majority party leader and asked him to hold assembly session for the rightful transfer of power. Yahya instead sided with minority party leader Bhutto and kept delaying to hold such a session until eventually initiating a military crackdown in East Pakistan:
View attachment 165555View attachment 165556View attachment 165557View attachment 165558View attachment 165559View attachment 165560

I understand your point but what i mean is whatever relationship he had with the army it wasnt good enough for them, he wasn't their man so he got rejected. Pakistan is ruled by Punjabi and Sindhi elite, they don't want to share power, before Mujib East and West Pakistan had issues over resources, autonomousy, central power etc. East Pakistan wanted more share in power but despite being majority were rejected.

This is what Mujib wanted publicly, his election campain etc but army claims he had contacts with India RAW, after Independent he became pro India and his daughter till today is pro India. We never know he did this because he was pushed towards it or was actually working on pro Indian agenda from the beginning to stay in power for decades.

This video is important. If East Pakistan got their fair share then this would have meant they control the centre, control foreign policy and security, the army etc. Something unacceptable to West Pakistan rulers.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
ya walla ....bhoot he alla ... Asim Munir is following the same pattern

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

I remember this well. It's one of those jokes that circulated widely and really highlighted the absurdity of the entire 1984 referendum.

The punchline went like this:
The joke was that after Zia saheb went home following his speech—the one where he graciously thanked the people of Pakistan for "electing/selecting" him as President for the next 5 years—he was quite pleased with himself.
During the speech, he had made a grand gesture with one hand, holding all five fingers stretched out to signify his five-year term.
When he got home, Mrs. Zia was cross with him. She reprimanded him, saying: "Why did you only show five fingers? Next time, you must show all ten fingers!"
When he asked why, she replied, "Five years for yourself, and five years for me!"

It was a telling sign of how the public viewed the entire process—not as a democratic mandate, but as an assured continuation of personal, long-term rule.
 
What other choice did military establishment leave for him when they refused his legitimate right to govern Pakistan despite his party winning general elections in 1970? Sheikh Mujeeb kept calling General Yahya to end the martial law and hold the assembly session in Dhaka for the rightful transfer of power to the Awami League. Instead of doing that, military establishment went for the crackdown in East Pakistan and put Sheikh Mujeeb (who had won the election) in prison. The rest you know is history…

I agree but still i wouldn't go as far as breaking up your own country. Otherwise today Balochis, Pashtuns and others are also claiming they are been oppressed and no power/resources/autonomousy is given to them, so does this mean we should support succession movements. It is very difficult and unfair but we have to somehow work together and build a strong country, that is the challenge. It wasn't just Yahya but Pakistan military and Punjabi/Sindhi elite refused to give power to East Pakistan. As East Pakistan was the majority, this meant they control the centre, the foreign policy, international relations, resources, East Pakistan can build up a strong military force. The West Pakistani rulers refused but Mujiber stood his ground. But breaking up the country and forming alliance with India is not acceptable. The grievances are genuine, just like Balochs and KPK people are facing but the nation needs to work hard to solve these issues.
 
The PTI cultits are trying to invoke fears of Pakistan begin broken up, and hence that is why they want to bring up 1971, to support their claims.

Firstly, that Pakistan created by Jinnah is long dead and gone. This is Gen Zia's Pakistan, and the recent constitutional amendment has just about perfected it.

Secondly, IK was installed the same way he was deposed, and hence his stature never was that of a true popular politician, despite all the claims, but a mere pawn, used and discarded.

Fears of Pakistan's breakup just because one pawn got too big for its britches are greatly exaggerated, as they say.

@VCheng You must accept the 1971 situation is repeating, although the difference is its happening within borders and at less extent. Exact same issues of power struggle, autonomousy, royalties, ethnic issues, fixed elections, jailing of political leadership, fake cases, state brutality. Pakistan ruling elite of Punjab and Sindh refuse to share any power with others, you have to toe their line or else. If only our rulers work extra hard to bridge the gaps, bring people on board, work towards winning hearts and minds. Jahalat is high at all levels.

Why doesn't our ruling elite fix the current mess, de-escalate everything, hold free and elections and let the winner take governance, they refuse this and then claim we are democratic nation. It creates confusion and hatred. Just like before.
 
Last edited:
Exact same issues of power struggle, autonomousy, royalties, ethnic issues, fixed elections, jailing of political leadership, fake cases, state brutality.

.... have been a constant design feature of Gen Zia's Pakistan for over half a century already. None of it is anything new.

1971 was the death knell for Jinnah's Pakistan, which finally died in 1977. Your example simply does not apply.

Why doesn't our ruling elite fix the current mess, de-escalate everything, hold free and elections and let the winner take governance

Why would they? They have everything going exactly they want it to proceed, and this will continue as long as the population in general remains accepting of what is going on.

Just making claims endlessly of the type that are being made in this thread is not going to be enough to produce any change along the direction that many here are wishing for.
 
IK's sons are doing what they can by speaking out in West.

 
I would say that Pakistani society has worked very hard and diligently to make the country exactly as they like it to be. This is not a tragedy. It is a choice.

Granted, the outcomes of that choice are a tragedy for untold millions, but it remains a choice.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
413
 
IK's sons are doing what they can by speaking out in West.


They have every right to try to do whatever they think can help their father, of course. Let them.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
413


Yawn. Just another hollow claim. What people DO is far more revealing than what they SAY.
 
I agree but still i wouldn't go as far as breaking up your own country. Otherwise today Balochis, Pashtuns and others are also claiming they are been oppressed and no power/resources/autonomousy is given to them, so does this mean we should support succession movements. It is very difficult and unfair but we have to somehow work together and build a strong country, that is the challenge. It wasn't just Yahya but Pakistan military and Punjabi/Sindhi elite refused to give power to East Pakistan. As East Pakistan was the majority, this meant they control the centre, the foreign policy, international relations, resources, East Pakistan can build up a strong military force. The West Pakistani rulers refused but Mujiber stood his ground. But breaking up the country and forming alliance with India is not acceptable. The grievances are genuine, just like Balochs and KPK people are facing but the nation needs to work hard to solve these issues.

It is an established historical fact that when rights, liberties, and due process are trampled, people have an inalienable right to protect their inherent freedoms. The grievances of the Bengali people were legitimate and compelled them to assert their political rights. Their struggle did not arise suddenly but developed over a period from 1948 to 1971. The political and military actors in West Pakistan didn't hide their martial race theories regarding the Bengalis. What fool would want to live under such a house? At times, a divorce is what's needed in a poisonous, abusive relationship, and as history has shown, the West Pakistani's didn't learn till date.

As for the Baloch and KPK, it's for them to decide what's in their nation's best interest.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top