Tuesday April 26, 2022

It Was Strategy Of Imran To Put Opponents In Death Row Over Raising Questions: Marriyum Aurangzeb

ISLAMABAD: Minister for Information and Broadcasting Marriyum Aurangzeb said on Tuesday that Pakistan Tehreek-Insaf leadership should reply questions regarding prohibited foreign funding case.

In her reaction to Chaudhry Fawad ‘s statement, she said that Imran Khan abused and threatened to anyone who asked any question.

She alleged that Imran Khan wanted that everyone should believe in his lies and he should not be held accountable for corruption.
“They want questions of their own choice and answers of their own wish”, she said while taking a dig on PTI.
“Imran wants match of his choice, umpire and players of his choice where decisions are made on his will”, she remarked.

Imran Khan wanted judges of his choice, lawyers of his choice and verdicts of his will, she said.
The minister while denouncing the PTI chairman, said that Imran did not believe in the constitution or law,as he considered himself as the Constitution.
She said it was Imran’s mindset that if any court asked a question, it should be insulted and ridiculed and allegation of a conspiracy should be levelled.

Marriyum Aurangzeb said it was part of Imran’s policy that if the Election Commission asked any question,time should be wasted for 8 years and then threaten it to besiege it.
Similarly if media raised any questions on his government performance, his reaction was to close televison channels, programs and ban newspaper columns, he filed lawsuits against them and introduced black laws and put media persons in jails and they were physically attacked.

The minister said that if political opponents raised questions, it was strategy of despot Imran to put them in death row, violate the sanctity of the the four walls.
She said that Imran Khan used every institution, every authority for political revenge against political opponents, then started the slogans the state of Madinah.

For four years, despite all his efforts, he was not been able to prove one allegation against a single political opponent, and he has not been able to give a single proof, except making baseless allegations.

← Back>