Dirty harry aka General Faisal Naseer is an animal :Imran khan

Olympus81 · Mar 7, 2023

Raja.Pakistani said:
Imran and Ptians were defender of army and institutions when PML(N) was bashing army General and judges (Muje kyoon nikala part 1)

Now PML(N) is so called defender of army and their leadership when PTI is insulting and demoralising them(after muje kyoon nikala part 2)?

Sisyat is second name of munafiqat

When Nawaz was cursing Bajwa and the institution, Shahbaz was hiding under the hood of a car to meet Bajwa.

While Hussain Haqqani was a traitor, Bajwa tried to lobby to get him to become a lobbyist in US.

Bajwa is on record saying he was involved in political engineering until Feb ‘22.

Munafiqat doesnt end with politicians.

xyxmt · Mar 7, 2023

non of the top brass is clean they are all dirty herry and worst, they have been trained to enslave people of Pakistan. they have sold this nation!!

Do we hear any word from U.S. and there allies about human right abuses, free speech etc
nothing, non, nada....because they paid for it

Imran Khan · Mar 7, 2023

Screenshot 2023-03-07 at 06-45-28 Home _ Twitter.png

https://twitter.com/x/status/1632881736232124421

TheDarkKnight · Mar 7, 2023

VCheng said:
Yes, but there are multiple investigating agencies, many international, and there are volumes and volumes of such evidence, meticulously documented, usually over a period of time. Making a few allegations which may appear, to some, to be politically motivated, does not rise to that level.

Investigative agencies? Reports? Are you not going to hold the same standard which is “IK alleged victim should present his proof, and the accused must have a fair chance of defense against the allegations. Merely believing one side or the other is not correct.” The reports, the meticulous documents is merely accounts of victims - there is no due process or a proof that the abuses were actually committed by the said accused party. Take the example in Russia Ukraine conflict, there was a massacre of civilians done in a city - it was said to be done by Russian forces; you know what the Russians said? The nazis did it to blame Russia etc. All we had was a collection of mutilated bodies and no clear way to tell who shot who etc. But we all know Russians are BSing.
Political motivation is there in pretty much every conflict, so don’t know why you want to mention it - even the Uyghur genocide has political angles.

The issue is we all have political biases and based on which side we sympathize, their accounts are believed- for the opposite side we demand way more proofs and evidences. Although in reality you need to see enough hints and connect the dots - not every crime against humanity will or can be brought court of law.

VCheng · Mar 7, 2023

TheDarkKnight said:
Investigative agencies? Reports? Are you not going to hold the same standard which is “IK alleged victim should present his proof, and the accused must have a fair chance of defense against the allegations. Merely believing one side or the other is not correct.” The reports, the meticulous documents is merely accounts of victims - there is no due process or a proof that the abuses were actually committed by the said accused party. Take the example in Russia Ukraine conflict, there was a massacre of civilians done in a city - it was said to be done by Russian forces; you know what the Russians said? The nazis did it to blame Russia etc. All we had was a collection of mutilated bodies and no clear way to tell who shot who etc. But we all know Russians are BSing.
Political motivation is there in pretty much every conflict, so don’t know why you want to mention it - even the Uyghur genocide has political angles.

The issue is we all have political biases and based on which side we sympathize, their accounts are believed- for the opposite side we demand way more proofs and evidences. Although in reality you need to see enough hints and connect the dots - not every crime against humanity will or can be brought court of law.

There is simply no equivalence between atrocities in a war zone compared to mudslinging by participants of a routine internal political circus in a country known to be corrupt to the core. You are entitled to connect the dots any way you wish, but it will never create the equivalence that your analogy wishes to create.

An ex-PM makes serious allegations against a serving officer. Those must be investigated by available mechanisms within the country. That is all.