Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim, Assalam o Alaikum,
00:26We would like to know some information from the Central Translator of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf.
00:32You were saying that the biggest development in Pakistan's political scene is that
00:41Donald Trump had appointed Richard Grinnell as a special representative for some areas.
00:49He had tweeted a few times in the name of Imran Khan,
00:54then there was a debate that this could be a fake Twitter account.
00:59He spoke in the name of Imran Khan in an interview with the international media.
01:08How is the PTI looking at all this?
01:10How far has the matter of negotiations reached?
01:12Does the PTI feel that the matter is right or not?
01:15And we have to talk to two or three people from the Civilian Military Court.
01:21First of all, take a look at the part where Richard Grinnell says in clear words
01:28that he had good relations with Imran Khan when Donald Trump was president.
01:33And Imran Khan is a non-traditional politician.
01:35Donald Trump is a poor politician.
01:37He is an outsider.
01:38He speaks in terms of common sense.
01:40And he faces the same cases as Donald Trump faced in our country.
01:47And he even targeted a member of his current administration.
01:51He has given a statement in round words.
01:53So, I tell him to speak clearly.
01:55Speak freely, Imran Khan.
01:56So, this is the whole situation.
01:58Mr. Sheikh Waqas Akram is with us.
02:00Huzoor, Assalam-o-Alaikum.
02:01Yes, Waalaikum-as-salam, Mr. Basim.
02:03Sir, thank you for your time.
02:04We have received a call from the United States.
02:06We have received fresh news.
02:07You have welcomed this statement.
02:11You have thanked us.
02:12But you have said that this does not mean that we want to intervene.
02:15Sir, how is this not an intervention?
02:17This does not mean that Imran Khan is not going into a debate.
02:20I am not saying that what is happening with him is right or wrong.
02:23Or that human rights are not being violated here.
02:25I am not saying that.
02:26But if any country says about a prisoner of any other country,
02:30that let him go, release him.
02:32If this is not an intervention, then what is it?
02:35This is not an intervention at all.
02:37First of all, I want to clarify this, Mr. Basim.
02:40Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf and its leader Imran Khan
02:43With regards to the release of thousands of prisoners,
02:48they only have faith in Allah.
02:51They only have faith in Allah.
02:54That Allah will help them.
02:56Allah will create ease.
02:58We have expectations from this public.
03:01We have trust in them.
03:03We want to get out of Pakistan's judicial system.
03:05As far as Dintouiche is concerned, you told me this interview.
03:10We have been talking about this since morning.
03:12And I want to make it very clear to you.
03:15We have thanked every person.
03:17We thank every person who supports the establishment of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf
03:21with regards to the release of Imran Khan,
03:23with regards to the military courts, with regards to human rights.
03:29Number one. Number two.
03:31And this is not an intervention.
03:33If you read the charter of the Commonwealth,
03:35if you read the charter of the Commonwealth,
03:37if you read the charter of the United Nations,
03:39three things are very important in the charter of the Commonwealth.
03:41Human rights, rule of law.
03:43If you read the charter of the United Nations,
03:45the three most important things are democracy, human rights, and rule of law.
03:50In Pakistan, democracy? No.
03:53Human rights? How are human rights violated?
03:57How are thousands of people imprisoned without a case and in false cases?
04:01And how are people kidnapped from the Member National Assembly to the MPA,
04:05to the common worker?
04:07Human rights are violated.
04:08Rule of law? Which rule of law?
04:10Here, the judges of higher judicial are writing letters.
04:14Here, the judges of 86 courts are writing letters.
04:17We should not even thank them.
04:20This is a compulsion of all these countries,
04:23which are signatories of the Commonwealth,
04:25which are members of the Commonwealth,
04:26which are members of the United Nations,
04:28that in whichever country in the world such violations take place,
04:31they are supposed to raise voices.
04:33This is their responsibility.
04:36They have signed in the world.
04:38There are agreements in which Pakistan is also a signatory,
04:42in which all the people of all countries should raise their voices.
04:48And secondly, I will tell you something.
04:50Overseas Pakistanis live there.
04:52They have voted for their own people.
04:54Their rights are being violated.
04:55Their family members are being harassed here.
04:57Their family members are being kidnapped.
04:59They are being forced there,
05:00how will they face you?
05:02So if they tell their representatives there
05:04that you raise your voice in Pakistan,
05:07that you are a global citizen,
05:09that you are not sitting in your own country,
05:11that you sit here and talk about Bosnia,
05:13that you sit here and talk about Palestine,
05:15that you sit here and talk about Israel,
05:17that you sit here and talk about Chechnya,
05:19then tomorrow we will say,
05:21because there are oppressors there,
05:23we should not say this,
05:25that there is interference there.
05:27The world speaks.
05:29So this means that if there is any government,
05:31whether it is your political party,
05:33So this means that if there is any government,
05:35whether it is your political party,
05:37they feel that their mandate has been stolen
05:39and is being violated.
05:41And if there is a statement from the US or anywhere,
05:43then you will not object to it.
05:45The context of this is that
05:47in the past,
05:49even an Indian or US TV channel
05:51commentator used to say two things
05:53in support of a government.
05:55So there was a campaign going on here
05:57that take this, hence proof,
05:59look, the Americans are assholes.
06:01The world is one.
06:03Look, we are all talking about the same thing.
06:05The world is one.
06:07Look, Barkha Dutt wrote.
06:09He is a thief.
06:11I am just saying that this is not interference.
06:13And I am saying that we do not expect
06:15any interference from anyone
06:17or have written a letter to anyone for interference.
06:19The world is watching.
06:21The world is speaking.
06:23You or I can make them quiet.
06:25Nobody can make anyone quiet.
06:27These days,
06:29You can't get them shocked, you can't stop anyone from going out.
06:32So I think that Mr. Tariq Khan has faith in his God,
06:36he has faith in his people,
06:38that God willing, Imran Khan and all his associates will come out of this without any guilt.
06:42And this stance is being supported in every country in the world.
06:46And I think that all the world organizations,
06:49from the UN to the Commonwealth,
06:51these are all signatories of the country,
06:53it is their compulsion to talk about this.
06:56Everyone in Pakistan should talk about this.
06:58There is no interference in this.
06:59We have not asked for anyone's help,
07:01nor are we asking for anyone's help.
07:03We only need help from God and have faith in our people.
07:06So, this is the extent of the statements.
07:08Do you expect them to play any practical role in the release of Imran Khan?
07:17I think that someone's tweets,
07:21who is looking at the violations of human rights,
07:24or is looking at the trials of the military courts,
07:27the countries, the organizations, even the European Union have talked about this.
07:30To think that Pakistan is asking for help for human rights is not appropriate.
07:38Okay.
07:39Do you expect or hope that in the future, Donald Trump will…
07:41With God.
07:42With God.
07:44I have hope in God.
07:45God will make things better.
07:47I have been fighting here with the same hope.
07:48The tweets…
07:49You are a witness, Hussain bhai, you are a witness.
07:52These tweets started a week or two ago.
07:54The people who have been fighting from 9th May till now,
07:57and have been standing,
07:58were they standing on the hope of someone's tweet or statement?
08:02At that time, there were no tweets or statements.
08:04Are people not fighting at that time?
08:06No, they are standing on the hope of God.
08:09I think…
08:11I will say this again.
08:12Those who support our position, it is their blessing.
08:14But we are not…
08:15I mean, we are not getting overexcited about this.
08:18We are saying that things have to be solved in this country according to the laws of this country.
08:23You are saying that you are not getting overexcited.
08:25Of course, I will accept what you are saying at face value.
08:28That this will happen.
08:29But do you think there is a general sentiment?
08:31Because the general sentiment is that they are making a hero out of him,
08:35by tagging the old statements of the political opponents.
08:39The thing that started from here,
08:40that who is America?
08:41Are we its slaves to listen to it?
08:43There, the same American officials are being tagged with the statements of their political opponents.
08:47Sir, you take action on this too.
08:48Look, he said this too.
08:49You know about it, right?
08:50And look, people are like this.
08:51There are millions and crores of people on social media.
08:54And every person who is on social media,
08:58you should not expect that he will give a statement in accordance with your expectations.
09:04It will be a party policy.
09:05People are free.
09:06People in the world, wherever they see light, people walk towards that.
09:12If someone is doing this,
09:13then I will not consider him a criminal or a criminal.
09:16People have their own nature.
09:17People express their anger,
09:19their love,
09:21everyone does it according to their own nature.
09:22You are saying that if someone is doing this,
09:24then neither is he doing it in accordance with our party policy,
09:26nor will I condemn him.
09:27Is that right?
09:28Look, the chairman of the party,
09:30the secretary general of the party,
09:32our Qaid Imran Khan Sahib and me,
09:34all four of us,
09:35have you seen anyone who has said that Aseem Govind Dada has written a letter from there?
09:38Or Aseem Dada is writing from there or saying that Aseem Dada has written a letter from there?
09:43I have not seen such a person yet.
09:44Okay, moving forward,
09:46Civilian trials,
09:47Sir, tell me,
09:48Mr. Atta Talhar has said this today,
09:50and you have also condemned him,
09:51that he says that the military trials in your time,
09:54if I ask the same question,
09:56that the military trials of civilians in your time,
09:59in your opinion,
10:01were they also wrong?
10:02Or do you think that,
10:03what kind of comparison is this?
10:04These are normal people,
10:05and they are hardcore terrorists.
10:07Sorry, they were not wrong.
10:09So, do you understand the meaning of this?
10:10No, no, why were they not wrong?
10:11Ask him, why were they wrong?
10:13Sir, I am asking the same thing.
10:14In fact, I am framing the question,
10:15please answer me.
10:16Lashkar-e-Waseem-e-Haramisa,
10:17Lashkar-e-Jhangri,
10:18Tariq-e-Taliban-Pakistan,
10:20Al-Qaeda's people,
10:23you have tried their military,
10:26terrorist organizations,
10:28terrorist organizations that were declared,
10:29you brought an amendment for that,
10:31you changed the law,
10:32after that you tried them.
10:34Are there people in this country who have become so blind,
10:37that they consider Pakistan's Tariq-e-Insaf,
10:39Lashkar-e-Jhangri,
10:41Al-Qaeda,
10:42or terrorist organization workers?
10:45So, I am saying the same thing,
10:46you are saying that,
10:47civilians have nothing to do with military trials,
10:49if they are hardcore terrorists,
10:51they are related to these people,
10:53whom you have named,
10:53Lashkar-e-Jhangri,
10:54then there should be no military trials.
10:56Yes, but don't drag political people into this.
10:59Sir, civilians, political people,
11:01political workers,
11:02they are also civilians,
11:03terrorists are also civilians.
11:05So, what do you mean by that,
11:06the trial of that civilian?
11:07They have made their own military organizations,
11:10they have formed their own army,
11:13and they brought an amendment on it,
11:14you will remember.
11:15Yes, of course, everyone remembers.
11:16They arrested a lot of terrorists,
11:18who had nothing to do with civilian trials.
11:21Institutions kept telling different governments,
11:24that you should legislate on this,
11:26so that they can be arrested in stadiums,
11:29in police stations,
11:30there was no place for such big terrorists.
11:31And the previous governments did not dare to do anything.
11:34They brought an amendment,
11:35and then their problem was eased,
11:37the institutions wanted the terrorism to end,
11:39and the terrorism ended.
11:40And I think that for terrorists,
11:43if they brought an amendment,
11:44and it was done on it,
11:45there was no harm in it.
11:46Right.
11:47If someone tells Waseem Badami,
11:48or Waqas Akram,
11:49that you are also terrorizing,
11:50if you also go to the military court,
11:51then that is fine,
11:52then the whole country,
11:53I mean,
11:54Imran Khan has got crores of votes,
11:56then tomorrow you will also tell them,
11:57that they are also terrorizing.
11:59So, Mr. Waqas,
12:00then it is a matter of each other,
12:01then you feel like at least saying this,
12:03if you want to say it,
12:04it is obvious,
12:05it cannot be forced,
12:06that at least,
12:07the statement was not correct to that extent,
12:09that now Nawaz Sharif is there,
12:10Tariq Fatemi is there,
12:12you have a political disagreement with him,
12:13he is not a terrorist,
12:14he does not come in the category of Al-Ashkara Jangdiwali.
12:16The statements of your people
12:17are on record on Don Leaks,
12:19who while telling the benefits of the military court,
12:21said that Nawaz Sharif should be tried in the military court,
12:24because of Don Leaks.
12:25Tariq Fatemi should go to the military court,
12:26because of Don Leaks.
12:27This was wrong.
12:28In my mind,
12:29in my mind,
12:30there is no such thing.
12:31Murad Saeed,
12:32I am taking the name,
12:33Murad Saeed's statements,
12:34I am taking the name.
12:35With whom?
12:36Murad Saeed.
12:37Okay,
12:38it is not in my mind,
12:39what was the context of it,
12:40but I have shared my and my party's line with you.
12:42Sir,
12:43whatever the context of Don Leaks is,
12:44it is said that Nawaz Sharif did not pick up the gun,
12:46nor did he blow himself up,
12:48nor did Tariq Fatemi.
12:49Sir,
12:50civilians should not be tried in the military court.
12:53Let it be anyone,
12:55let it be Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif.
12:57Okay,
12:58and sir,
12:59towards the end,
13:00this is about the negotiations,
13:01as we speak,
13:02was the negotiation committee told that
13:04you can meet Mr. Khan tomorrow,
13:06day after tomorrow,
13:07the commitment that was given,
13:10that we will facilitate your meeting.
13:12Absolutely,
13:13they were told that we will facilitate this,
13:15and they told me,
13:17that they are facilitating it.
13:19See,
13:20the facilitation is done before 2,
13:22otherwise there is no use of meeting before 2.
13:24So,
13:25as we speak,
13:26there is no date that you are meeting tomorrow,
13:28meeting on the 28th,
13:29meeting on the 29th.
13:30As of now,
13:31this has been discussed,
13:32most probably in the morning,
13:33but if it is not in the morning,
13:34then it should be done before 2.
13:35Okay,
13:36have you thought of any time frame so far,
13:39because Mr. Khan also said in the tweet
13:41that there should be a time frame.
13:43Time frame,
13:44sir,
13:45it is very important,
13:46there can be no free floating,
13:47it is not possible,
13:48that in Pakistan,
13:49at the national and international level,
13:51if someone talks to you,
13:53then you say,
13:54that we have started the negotiations,
13:56then the negotiations,
13:57you go for 6 days,
13:58then 6 days,
13:59then make it long,
14:00then pressure,
14:01it is not like that,
14:02there is no such thing.
14:03So,
14:04what is the time frame in your mind,
14:06a few weeks,
14:074 weeks?
14:08It should be done by 15th January.
14:10So,
14:11it should be conclusive,
14:12whatever is decided,
14:13it should be done by 15th January.
14:14Roughly?
14:15I mean,
14:16at least,
14:17there should be a commission,
14:18what is it called,
14:19there should be a formation,
14:20there should be 15 days,
14:21it is not a difficult task for them,
14:22sir,
14:23when someone comes,
14:24then the barista,
14:25the barista goes to the lab,
14:26then there is a meeting,
14:27after that,
14:28what kind of work is there?
14:29We found out,
14:30after 2 days,
14:31the date of the next meeting
14:32was 14th January,
14:3316th January,
14:34then what happened?
14:35So,
14:37God will do good,
14:38and what God has brought here,
14:39will be sent back.
14:40You have mentioned about
14:41the meeting with Mr. Saif,
14:42so,
14:43yesterday,
14:44in our program,
14:45a person,
14:46Mohsin Beg claimed,
14:47that the meetings
14:48that took place,
14:49in those circumstances,
14:50there was a foreigner
14:51among them,
14:52you lied to him?
14:53No,
14:54I saw,
14:55I saw the program,
14:56I was watching you,
14:57no,
14:58I,
14:59maybe,
15:00they do not have
15:01the right information,
15:02I,
15:03I,
15:04I,
15:05I,
15:07I,
15:08I completely deny this,
15:09I condemn it,
15:10I have spoken to both barristers,
15:12barrister Gauhar and Mr. Saif,
15:14what work would a foreigner
15:16have with Mr. Imran Khan?
15:17Why would a foreigner
15:18go into a jail,
15:19to meet Mr. Imran Khan?
15:21It was a,
15:22it was a,
15:23it was a discussion
15:24regarding mobilization,
15:25there were some dates,
15:26and some,
15:27in terms of information,
15:28and back and forth,
15:29talks were taking place,
15:30so, what would a foreigner
15:31have to do with it?
15:32It is a wrong thing,
15:33it is not a thing of that sort.
15:35And,
15:36Why would I give this credit to somebody about whom there is no such thing?
15:43Correct.
15:44Why shouldn't we believe in God?
15:47Why shouldn't we believe in God?
15:49Why shouldn't we believe in God?
15:51Why shouldn't we believe in God?
15:53Why shouldn't we believe in God?
15:55Why shouldn't we believe in God?
15:57Why shouldn't we believe in God?
15:59Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:01Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:03Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:05Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:07Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:09Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:11Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:13Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:15Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:17Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:19Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:21Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:23Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:25Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:27Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:29Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:31Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:33Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:35Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:37Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:39Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:41Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:43Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:45Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:47Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:49Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:51Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:53Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:55Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:57Why shouldn't we believe in God?
16:59Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:01Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:03Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:05Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:07Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:09Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:11Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:13Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:15Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:17Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:19Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:21Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:23Why shouldn't we believe in God?
17:25You are right.
17:27My primary question in this regard is
17:29that do you have any reservations?
17:31For example, if I tell you that
17:33all the tweets of Mr. Khan so far
17:35by and large reflect Mr. Khan's stance
17:37or you will say that
17:39Mr. Khan himself is not sitting on Twitter
17:41so his Twitter account at times may
17:43and at times it may not reflect
17:45what Mr. Khan's opinion is.
17:47It is not like that, right?
17:49His Twitter account reflects Mr. Khan's opinion correctly, right?
17:51Look, sir, his Twitter account
17:53is owned by Mr. Khan
17:55so he can say
17:57that he can change it
17:59or he can make it retweet.
18:01It is Mr. Khan's.
18:03So it means it is being operated correctly, right?
18:05Whatever Mr. Khan says
18:07will be happening.
18:09If someone makes a mistake or does it
18:11then it will be reflected.
18:13Right.
18:15The last question.
18:17Yesterday, Mr. Hamid Raza was saying
18:19that civil disobedience has begun.
18:21The Pakistanis are telling him
18:23to reduce his tweets.
18:25Civil disobedience has begun, sir.
18:27We will not be able to return his call.
18:29But as far as the overseas Pakistanis are concerned
18:31Mr. Khan has given a direct call to the overseas Pakistanis.
18:33In that, neither me nor the party
18:35has given any land to anyone else.
18:37Mr. Khan has given a direct call to the overseas Pakistanis
18:39and
18:41they are acting on it.
18:43They have heard it back so far
18:45and it is also about limiting tweets.
18:47Our people here
18:49do not have any responsibility or role.
18:51Thank you, Mr. Sheikh.
18:53Thank you very much.
18:55From where we started,
18:57how important is it
18:59that tweets are coming from the USA?
19:01We have seen the political aspect of it.
19:03Diplomatically, let's see.
19:05Mr. Shehri Rehman, of course,
19:07is the famous political leader of Pakistan.
19:09He is a member of the People's Party.
19:11He is a senator.
19:13He is not even a Pakistani ambassador in the USA.
19:15So he will be able to give us this perspective.
19:17Mr. Shehri Rehman,
19:19significant development
19:21is unusual.
19:23You are a little surprised
19:25that one person
19:27is not running an election campaign.
19:29He is not saying that if we win,
19:31he will be elected.
19:33He has already tweeted 50 times.
19:35He has beaten up the political opponents.
19:37He has beaten up his own people
19:39in a TV interview.
19:41He has said that our foreign office
19:43says in obscene words
19:45to let Rehman Khan go.
19:47Are you a bit surprised?
19:49Is it unusual?
19:51Absolutely.
19:53I think it is extraordinary.
19:55It is a strange thing.
19:57You said that
19:59the campaign is not running.
20:01It is a personal agenda.
20:05I think it is being overstepped.
20:09Any institutional
20:11or governmental
20:13mandate
20:15and you can say
20:17that it is a personal wish
20:19is not the reality.
20:21I think
20:23you can be right in your place.
20:25I am just surprised
20:27that he said so much
20:29and there was not even
20:31an appointment.
20:33In the support of one person,
20:35in another country's
20:39justice system,
20:41you are being
20:43processed
20:45and you are
20:47interfering.
20:49I think
20:51it is very
20:53strange and
20:55extraordinary.
20:57It is a personal
20:59issue.
21:01I think so.
21:03If it was personal,
21:05he would have
21:07got a supporter.
21:09I don't know what to say.
21:11If it was personal,
21:13it would have been limited to one person.
21:15The person we are talking about
21:17has tweeted 500 times.
21:1940 other people have also tweeted.
21:21It has become 40 people.
21:23You can see
21:25the situation
21:27of those tweets.
21:29If you do the diagnostics,
21:31you will know how it happened.
21:33You can see
21:35how it happened.
21:37You mean it happened
21:39as a result of lobbying?
21:41Yes, it is obvious.
21:43You can also see
21:45how many are real
21:47and how many are fake.
21:49You can do the diagnostics.
21:51Tweets mean the same.
21:53It has become a different world
21:55in which you and I joined Twitter.
21:57Isn't it right?
21:59It is not like that.
22:01My request is that
22:03I will definitely say
22:05that I am surprised
22:07that Mr. Grenell
22:09has put so much
22:11of his personal political capital
22:13on this.
22:15My last question is
22:17that if this was his personal opinion
22:19and if this opinion
22:21was in contradiction
22:23with Trump's opinion,
22:25then he would not have
22:27tweeted so many times.
22:29He is moving forward every day.
22:31He has come on TV for the first time.
22:33At least,
22:35Trump is not minding it.
22:37Otherwise, he would have stopped it.
22:41I don't think so.
22:43To be honest,
22:45this was a small interview
22:47in which he spoke about Pakistan
22:49for 3-4 minutes.
22:51You saw the rest.
22:53We give more importance
22:55to the US.
22:57If we talk about something
22:59for 3 minutes,
23:01it is not like that.
23:03I don't think that Donald Trump,
23:05the President-elect of the US,
23:07would have heard it.
23:09It was not broadcast on CNN.
23:11It was not broadcast on all channels.
23:13It was not a press conference.
23:15Thank you very much for your time.
23:17We will take a break.
23:19After the break,
23:21we will ask Mr. Rakeel Malik
23:23and Mr. Irshad Bhatti.
23:27Welcome Mr. Rakeel Malik,
23:29MNA,
23:31and Mr. Irshad Bhatti.
23:35Mr. Bhatti,
23:37apart from your personal life,
23:39do you think there has been
23:41any major development in the world?
23:43Do you think that
23:45what has started to have an impact
23:47will continue to have an impact
23:49in the future?
23:51Or is it just a small development
23:53that will not have a major impact?
23:55First of all,
23:57I was expecting
23:59my brother to congratulate me,
24:01but you turned out to be very stingy.
24:03I didn't know
24:05if you would be comfortable
24:07talking about it on television or not.
24:09I would like to stop the program
24:11and congratulate Mr. Irshad Bhatti
24:13and his family.
24:15May God fill their lives
24:17with happiness.
24:19I would like to congratulate them
24:21as well.
24:23I would like to congratulate
24:25Mr. Bhatti on behalf of the government
24:27and the media.
24:29You didn't invite us,
24:31but I would like to congratulate you.
24:33Secondly,
24:35I would like to tell Mr. Rakeel
24:37and the government
24:39that I have been married for a long time.
24:41In fact, I didn't need to get married for a long time.
24:43Therefore,
24:45I don't want to file a case
24:47against me.
24:49Think of some other story
24:51in the future.
24:55Let me ask you something.
24:57You were married for a long time,
24:59but you didn't get married
25:01in a violent manner, did you?
25:03Well,
25:05Mr. Rakeel and I
25:07were in a program
25:09where Mr. Hafiz Abdullah was the host.
25:11Let me repeat what he said.
25:13He said that he got married in a violent manner
25:15by the Muslim League and the People's Party.
25:17He said that he got married
25:19by force.
25:21I see.
25:23He said that he got married
25:25by force by the People's Party
25:27and the Muslim League.
25:29He said that he got married
25:31by force out of love.
25:33Well,
25:35Mr. Rakeel,
25:37I don't want to be a morning show.
25:39Let's talk about Richard Grenell.
25:41Mr. Bhatti,
25:43what do you think?
25:45It was a great show.
25:47Let's go back.
25:49First of all,
25:51today is 25th December.
25:53It is the birthday
25:55of Qaid-e-Azam.
25:57It is an important day
25:59for the Christian community.
26:01Congratulations to him as well.
26:03I have already congratulated Mr. Rakeel
26:05that today is the birthday
26:07of my beloved Qaid Nawazshir.
26:09His grandson is getting married
26:11as well.
26:13Double congratulations to him.
26:15It is the birthday
26:17of Qaid-e-Azam.
26:19He is the only politician
26:21of 77 years
26:23with whom I am happy
26:25as a leader.
26:27I am sorry to Qaid
26:29that we have
26:31broken his country.
26:33I am sorry to Qaid
26:35that we have made
26:37Jira-e-Baledo, Banarasi Thugs
26:39Qaid-e-Azam.
26:41I am sorry to Qaid
26:43that he is only on notes,
26:45speeches, references,
26:47that his Pakistan is Kashkulistan,
26:49Fakiristan, Ujjadistan,
26:51Gulistan.
26:53I am sorry to Qaid
26:55that today there is no freedom of speech,
26:57no sanctity of parliament,
26:59no respect for votes,
27:01no protection of Chahar-Diwari,
27:03no human rights,
27:05no tradition of speaking the truth.
27:07Now let's come to Richard
27:09Garnell.
27:11Mr. Bhatti,
27:13my precise question is
27:15there are two situations
27:17that this is a big development,
27:19it is unusual,
27:21but will it create a problem
27:23for the government in the coming days
27:25or will it just be
27:27light music?
27:29This is the question.
27:31Brother,
27:33in the first segment,
27:35I was listening to
27:37Shereen Rehman's
27:39innocent speech.
27:41I was very surprised
27:43that she was speaking in Urdu
27:45and her innocence
27:47was being
27:49expressed.
27:51I am surprised that she is
27:53an ambassador of Pakistan
27:55and an old parliamentarian.
27:57What was she saying?
27:59This was not a press conference.
28:01This was not an interview.
28:03I don't know
28:05whether Mr. Trump
28:07saw this or not.
28:09I don't know
28:11whether he saw this or not.
28:13Shereen Rehman,
28:15we have history in front of us.
28:17History tells us
28:19how Mr. Nawaz Sheikh
28:21went to Jeddah from jail
28:23because of Bill Clinton.
28:25How did Benazir Bhutto
28:27come to power?
28:29Because of America and Britain.
28:31A call came from America
28:33to call Mr. Pervez Musharraf
28:35and after 9-11 we became
28:37an ally of America.
28:39The murder of Raymond Davis
28:41was a murder of two people.
28:43At that time,
28:45Shereen Rehman's government
28:47was in the center,
28:49Mr. Aqeel's government
28:51was in Punjab,
28:53and the establishment
28:55was in Punjab.
28:57All three of them
28:59came to the same page
29:01for the first time.
29:03All three of them
29:05were sitting representatives
29:07of America.
29:09America should only tell
29:11the IMF to step back
29:13so that you can afford
29:15this.
29:17And do you think
29:19there is a good chance
29:21of this happening?
29:23No, no, I am coming to that.
29:25The second thing is
29:27who is Richard Grenell
29:29who is a close associate
29:31of Trump,
29:33a special agent
29:35of the United Nations,
29:37a working group of
29:39representatives of the
29:41US Congress,
29:43who killed Biden.
29:45Now I will be surprised
29:47if there is no pressure
29:49from the US.
29:51I will be surprised
29:53if the government
29:55does not agree
29:57and I will be surprised
29:59if the US does not
30:01release Imran Khan.
30:03As Trump's speech
30:05is getting closer,
30:07these things will be more serious.
30:09And Trump is a non-traditional
30:11politician, a non-traditional
30:13president. He can do anything.
30:15Mr. Aqeel,
30:17the situation is very different
30:19than it was 25 days ago.
30:21You can disagree with this
30:23that nothing will happen.
30:25Do you know what I am saying?
30:27No one can disagree with this
30:29that whatever happened
30:31is very unusual.
30:33I don't remember a single example
30:35where a person is nominated
30:37and he is talking about one thing
30:39and he is trolling the opposition.
30:41He is retweeting.
30:43Now Mr. Bhatti is right
30:45that after all this,
30:47if Trump stays quiet
30:49and does not do anything
30:51about Imran Khan's release,
30:53then you will be surprised
30:55what happened.
30:57Thank you very much.
30:59Mr. Bhatti
31:01is my elder brother.
31:03I wish he would have said
31:05how the founder of PTI,
31:07the then Prime Minister,
31:09Imran Khan was brought.
31:11This should have been
31:13kept in front of the people.
31:15I will say that
31:17there is a lot of talk about Richard Grenell.
31:19It's nothing more than
31:21tweets and retweets.
31:23Will he be included
31:25in the administration?
31:27No.
31:29Trump has taken the oath.
31:3120th is after a long time.
31:33It cannot be said
31:35that this is his personal opinion
31:37or his government's
31:39administration
31:41or the party
31:43that will come in his power
31:45or the roles that people will get.
31:47This is his state policy
31:49because there is a clear difference
31:51between these two things.
31:53It cannot be said that
31:55Imran Khan or
31:57whatever release he is doing
31:59in the name of Imran Khan.
32:01In the same way,
32:03the entire American people,
32:05including all the Muslim countries
32:07of the civilized society,
32:09have also tweeted
32:11about free Gaza and free Palestine.
32:13The ears of America
32:15did not even budge.
32:17And the other countries
32:19that are teaching us
32:21about human rights,
32:23compare them
32:25and see how much
32:27genocide is taking place
32:29in Gaza and Palestine
32:31and how much
32:33human rights violations
32:35are taking place.
32:37But if they have done
32:39it to some extent,
32:41then the government
32:43of Pakistan
32:45will respond to America?
32:47Absolutely not.
32:49Look,
32:51the Prime Minister of Pakistan
32:53has already said
32:55in the meeting of the
32:57North Cabinet
32:59that it does not matter
33:01that we are imposing sanctions.
33:03I met a few people
33:05from the US embassy
33:07at an event.
33:09I expressed my opinion
33:11and told them
33:13that when Resolution 901
33:15was presented,
33:17through precise lobbying
33:19by senators,
33:21house of representatives
33:23and congressmen
33:25on the request of the PTI,
33:27they passed a resolution
33:29and its counter-resolution
33:31was passed in the parliament.
33:33I asked them
33:35if this was a state policy
33:37or if they wanted to
33:39ruin relations with Pakistan.
33:41They said that a resolution
33:43was passed in the parliament
33:45without checking the facts
33:47and without thinking about it.
33:49So what do they say?
33:51Their answer was
33:53that we cannot impose sanctions
33:55on our politicians
33:57just as you cannot
33:59impose sanctions
34:01on your politicians
34:03in your own country.
34:05Politicians have their own
34:07mindset.
34:09But this is not
34:11a state policy.
34:13I don't think
34:15the US has such a policy
34:17as a state
34:19to interfere in
34:21foreign affairs
34:23of a self-governing country
34:25and say that
34:27you are a prisoner.
34:29Mr. Akhil,
34:31it may differ
34:33between you and Mr. Bhatti
34:35but no one in the world
34:37will say that the US
34:39does not interfere.
34:41The US has been
34:43saying that
34:45the US does not
34:47interfere.
34:49It is a political history.
34:51But if you look at
34:53the mindset of this party
34:55they used to say
34:57when they were removed
34:59from the vote of no confidence
35:01and said that the US has
35:03interfered.
35:05But you are saying
35:07that the US does not
35:09interfere.
35:11But you are saying
35:13that the US does not
35:15interfere.
35:17But you are saying
35:19that the US does not
35:21interfere.
35:23But you are saying
35:25that the US does not
35:27interfere.
35:29But you are saying
35:31that the US does not
35:33interfere.
35:35But you are saying
35:37that the US does not
35:39interfere.
36:09But you are saying
36:11that the US does not
36:13interfere.
36:39But you are saying
36:41that the US does not
36:43interfere.
36:45But you are saying
36:47that the US does not
36:49interfere.
36:51But you are saying
36:53that the US does not
36:55interfere.
36:57But you are saying
36:59that the US does not
37:01interfere.
37:03But you are saying
37:05that the US does not
37:07interfere.
37:09But you are saying
37:11that the US does not
37:13interfere.
37:15But you are saying
37:17that the US does not
37:19interfere.
37:21But you are saying
37:23that the US does not
37:25interfere.
37:27But you are saying
37:29that the US does not
37:31interfere.
37:33But you are saying
37:35that the US does not
37:37interfere.
37:39But you are saying
37:41that the US does not
37:43interfere.
37:45But you are saying
37:47that the US does not
37:49interfere.
37:51But you are saying
37:53that the US does not
37:55interfere.
37:57But you are saying
37:59that the US does not
38:01interfere.
38:03But you are saying
38:05that the US does not
38:07interfere.
38:09But you are saying
38:11that the US does not
38:13interfere.
38:15But you are saying
38:17that the US does not
38:19interfere.
38:21But you are saying
38:23that the US does not
38:25interfere.
38:27But you are saying
38:29that the US does not
38:31interfere.
39:01But you are saying
39:03that the US does not
39:05interfere.
39:07But you are saying
39:09that the US does not
39:11interfere.
39:13But you are saying
39:15that the US does not
39:17interfere.
39:19But you are saying
39:21that the US does not
39:23interfere.
39:25But you are saying
39:27that the US does not
39:29interfere.
39:31But you are saying
39:33that the US does not
39:35interfere.
39:37But you are saying
39:39that the US does not
39:41interfere.
39:43But you are saying
39:45that the US does not
39:47interfere.
39:49But you are saying
39:51that the US does not
39:53interfere.
39:55But you are saying
39:57that the US does not
39:59interfere.
40:01But you are saying
40:03that the US does not
40:05interfere.
40:07But you are saying
40:09that the US does not
40:11interfere.
40:13But you are saying
40:15that the US does not
40:17interfere.
40:19But you are saying
40:21that the US does not
40:23interfere.
40:25But you are saying
40:27that the US does not
40:29interfere.
40:31But you are saying
40:33that the US does not
40:35interfere.
40:37But you are saying
40:39that the US does not
40:41interfere.
40:43But you are saying
40:45that the US does not
40:47interfere.
40:49But you are saying
40:51that the US does not
40:53interfere.