@arif786
When Imran speaks about Khilafat, he simply means that the governance system should be transparent, everybody should be equal before the law including the rulers, and a sense of responsibility among the rulers. Call these basic principles Khilafat or whatever, they are good.
Caliph Omar once said that if a dog dies out of hunger besides the Euphrates, Omar will be held responsible.
This is the glorious principle of democracy summed up in a single statement. Yet we have corrupt ruling elite here, whom you call "mainstream politicians", who claims innocence when a killer of two Pakistani is secretly released under the nose of their government(Raymond Devis and Punjab government).
This is the difference between the current crop of "mainstream politicians" or crooks compared to the basic principles of Khilafat or any genuine system. The above mentioned principle, for example, is much more implemented in western countries than any Muslim country.
This is simply what Imran stresses.
What confuses and baffles you about Imran Khan is precisely his golden quality. They say an honest man is loved by all (well, if not loved, at least respected).
Why should he pick sides according to someone's defitions? Why should he categorize himself and restricts himself in the definitions imposed on us by foreigners or misguided ones within our own society?
You might be confused but I am not when, for example, Imran calls himself a liberal and opposes military action against Taliban because maybe, just maybe, I have been better able to free my mind from the clutches of imperialism and slave mentality and have knowledge of the fact that people like Noam Chomsky, for instance, who is a Jewish American intellectual, a very respected intellectual world wide, whom critics call ultra-liberal, anarchist, communist, etc, stands also in opposition to the terrible Afghan war imposed by America. That's liberalism for you and had you known about it you won't be confused.
Imran, as a leader, is a uniting force, not a dividing one. His goal is to make a prosperous Pakistan where there is economic stability and growth, equal opportunities, prosperity and above all justice and rule of law.
This would be the aspirations of any normal thinking human being, be he a conservative or liberal, Muslim or non-Muslim, rich and poor. So why create division, why pick sides?
The side that mattered, he did pick - that of the "right". He had said the issue in Pakistan is not liberal vs. conservative, extremism vs moderation, right vs. left, BUT right vs. wrong.
The right outnumber the wrong by the many millions any given day. It's then an easy and a fruitful fight for the betterment of all rather than concentrating on other differences..
When Bulleh Shah said these lines...
"Na main moman vich maseetan
Na main vich kufar dian reetan
Na main pakan vich paleetan
Na main andar bed kitaban
Na main rehnda phaang sharaban
Na main rehnda mast kharaban
Na main shadi na ghamnaki
Na main vich paleetan pakeen
Na main aaabi na main khaki"
And
"Na main arabi na lahori
Na main hindi shehar Nagaori
Na hindu na turk pashauri
Na main bhet mazhab de paya
Na main aadam hawwa jaya
Na koi apna naam dharaya
Avval aakhar aap nu jana
Na koi dooja hor pacchana
Mai ton na koi hor syana"
And
"Na main moosa na pharoah
Na main jagan na vich saun
Na main aatish na main paun
Na main rahnda vich Nadaun
Na main baitthan na vich bhaun"
...was he confusing you or stressing a deeper human virtue of freeing oneself from barriers and identities imposed by the world and just be a human being, a citizen of the planet ?
If the above saint confuses you, Imran is a nobody to make you understand these concepts.
Just think out of the box and you just may get what Imran's politics is all about. And when you will do it, believe me you will be pleased with yourself that you did it.
Thus the statement, "Pick up sides" might sound good within the company of friends planning to bet on a certain outcome, it is a hollow and bravado type statement when talking about society and country.
And lastly, now old and discredited point you raised about Imran supposedly not criticizing ISI's supposed role in politics. Well, you must not have listened to his now famous interviews in India and one with Al Jazeera. You must also not have heard his many a interview in Pakistan. You are unaware how he is stressing all along that the SC should hear the Ashghar Khan's petition, and how the latter (Ashar Khan), who is the real anti-establishment stalwart, as opposed to the political dwarfs who are now claiming to be anti-establishment (but are actually the illegitimate products of the same) has lent his support to Imran Khan.
What would be a better refutation of his baseless propaganda than the support of PTI from a real anti-establishment stalwart like Ashghar Khan?
I hope this post clears some of your issues about IK.