DNC Cover for Muslems - Khizr Khan

A rant about the artificial Khizr Khan kerfuffle, which is intended to silence conservatives *UPDATED*

JULY 31, 2016 BY BOOKWORM 6 COMMENTS

Khizr Khan was showcased to argue that Muslims are patriotic and, except when they’re defending America in the military, peaceful. I’m actually sure that’s true for the majority, although probably not the vastmajority, of Muslims in America. Khan’s little talk was meant to provide cover for the fact that Democrats are refusing to acknowledge that the Western world, including America, has been drawn into an existential war with Islam.

Even if America doesn’t want war, Islam does, leaving America with two options:  fighting the war or preemptively surrendering. The Democrats wish to do the latter, but they don’t want the American people to know, so they engage in the endless “religion of peace” charade. Trump wishes to do the former, and I’m with him on that point, primarily because I don’t want to be beheaded, stabbed, crucified, shot, blown up, burned alive, drowned, tossed from a building, torn apart, crushed, electrocuted, or anything else that the degraded jihadist imagination comes up with when it comes to destroying civilians.

Khan is now being turned into the Cindy Sheehan of the 2016 election. You remember her?  She was the whacked-out Leftist whose son was a patriot who died serving in America’s military. Sheehan traded on his death to become a spokesman for the Democrats’ hard-left “lose the war” movement. The media and the GOP ordered Republicans to back off of Sheehan’s pronouncements because, as Maureen Dowd insisted, bereaved parents of children who died serving in the military have “absolute moral authority.”

Those of us immune to Leftist Kool-Aid recognized that there is a difference between the child’s ability to speak and the parent’s. They recognized that Sheehan was a useful idiot for the Left. And they recognized — and resented — that they were once again being shut down on the ground that their position was “immoral.”

[Close it up again]

That “when it serves us” Leftist stance — i.e., a Leftist parent’s absolute moral authority when a child dies serving America — was abandoned when it came to the parents of those who died in Benghazi on Hillary’s watch. Hillary systematically lied to those parents and then, when called upon these lies, proceeded to lie about those parents, all without a peep from the press.

In September 2013, the Democrats, rather than ceding to the Benghazi parents’ absolute moral authority, walked out en masse when the parents testified before Congress. Just recently when Patricia Smith, whose son was one of those who died at Benghazi, spoke at the Republican convention, a representative of the MSM tweeted out that she disgusted him so much that he wanted to “beat her to death.” He reluctantly apologized. Overall, in the face of Hillary’s lies and insults, the Democrats’ walk-out, and various Lefties’ obscene, violent remarks, the MSM has been deafeningly silent.

Here’s the deal:  If Khan’s son had survived the war and spoken at the convention, he would have had the authority of his own patriotic acts. Khan is not his son. He did not enlist his son. Khan did not fight. He and his son are two different people, just the way wacky Cindy Sheehan and her patriotic son were two different people. Khan deserves our sympathy for his loss. That does not give him moral authority and, when he stepped on the stage in a public arena, he became, at least temporarily, a public figure whose views could rightly be attacked.

I totally agree with Trump that Khan is fair game. Sadly I also totally agree that Trump could not have gone about his attack with less finesse. Having said that, though, I am not going to pile on with the Progressives to say this proves Trump is unfit for office.

More than that, I cry shame upon those conservatives who, with their noses buried deep in Leftists’ derrieres, mumble their agreement.  When you step out on a world stage to state your opinions about a public matter, those opinions can rightly be challenged. And your child’s status does not, and should not, protect you.

UPDATE: And my instincts are spot on! Thanks to Libby_CO for this information:

The Muslim who attacked Donald Trump, Khizr Muazzam Khan, is a Muslim Brotherhood agent, working to bring Muslims into the United States. After reading what we discovered so far, it becomes obvious that Khan wanted to ‘trump’ Trump’s Muslim immigration. But not so fast. Trump we have your back.

Khizr Muazzam Khan graduated in Punjab University Law College, as the New York Times confirms. and he specialized in International Trade Law in Saudi Arabia. An interest lawyer for Islamic oil companies Khan wrote a paper, called In Defense of OPEC to defend the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), an intergovernmental oil company consisting of mainly Islamic countries.  Khan is a promoter of Islamic Sharia Law. Khan is also co-founder of the Journal of Contemporary Issues in Muslim Law (Islamic Sharia).  

Khan’s fascination with Islamic Sharia stems from his life in Saudi Arabia. During the eighties Khan wrote a paper titled Juristic Classification of Islamic [Sharia] Law. In it he elucidated on the system of Sharia law expressing his reverence for “The Sunnah [the works of Muhammad] — authentic tradition of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him).” A snapshot of his essay can be seen here:

Read the rest here.

It seems that, as with Cindy Sheehan, the son was cut from much better cloth than the parents. I guess that, while the children of upright conservatives who rebel become hippies and 1%ers, the children of Leftists and Jihadists when they rebel serve in the United States military.

Let me repeat:  We are being played and Trump, although his technique was bad, was spot on with his instincts.

UPDATE: From Weasel Zippers: