I cannot and will not support any effort to denigrate the sacrifice of Captain Humayun Khan. I don't know whether or not the man is a hero (conflicting stories about the circumstances of his death) but he died in service to America and his memory deserves to be honored alongside every American who has made that selfsame sacrifice.
However, the actions of his father, Khizr Kahn, a Pakistani-born lawyer specializing in Sharia Law (which is unconstitutional) is another matter.
Capt. Khan joined the Army on his own volition, not his father's.
Capt. Khan was not drafted.
The actions that lead to Capt. Khan's death were not prompted by his father.
Capt. Khan's sacrifice was his and his alone to make. Mr. Khan can certainly share his grief, but not his son's sacrifice. It would be like taking an income tax credit for a charitable donation that his son made. It's not done, at least not legally nor in good taste.
That being said, there is an enormous political context which overshadows and envelopes the current controversy between Mr. Khan and the Republican Presidential candidate. This is fueled by the Democratic Party for obvious reasons. The Democrats also try to obfuscate the prevalence of Muslim initiation and participation in attacks on the United States as well as every other country on the planet. No continent is secure from Islamic terrorist incursions; no public assemblage is safe from homicidal designs inspired by the rantings of a long dead pederast.
There have been other actions by Muslims serving in America's armed forces that are not worthy of praise. Of course I am referring to despicable cowards who murdered their fellow soldiers. Such names as Hasan Karim Akbar and Nidal Hasan come readily to mind, not to mention the scores of American soldiers murdered by their so-called Muslim allies in Iraq and Afghanistan. These acts are conveniently forgotten by the current administration and the DNC,
Does one honorable death that occurred twelve years ago cancel the thousands of horrific deaths that Islam has celebrated? Do comments about this single death deserve all this contentious scrutiny?
Only if you're Donald Trump.
UPDATE (h/t iOTW):
However, the actions of his father, Khizr Kahn, a Pakistani-born lawyer specializing in Sharia Law (which is unconstitutional) is another matter.
Capt. Khan joined the Army on his own volition, not his father's.
Capt. Khan was not drafted.
The actions that lead to Capt. Khan's death were not prompted by his father.
Capt. Khan's sacrifice was his and his alone to make. Mr. Khan can certainly share his grief, but not his son's sacrifice. It would be like taking an income tax credit for a charitable donation that his son made. It's not done, at least not legally nor in good taste.
That being said, there is an enormous political context which overshadows and envelopes the current controversy between Mr. Khan and the Republican Presidential candidate. This is fueled by the Democratic Party for obvious reasons. The Democrats also try to obfuscate the prevalence of Muslim initiation and participation in attacks on the United States as well as every other country on the planet. No continent is secure from Islamic terrorist incursions; no public assemblage is safe from homicidal designs inspired by the rantings of a long dead pederast.
There have been other actions by Muslims serving in America's armed forces that are not worthy of praise. Of course I am referring to despicable cowards who murdered their fellow soldiers. Such names as Hasan Karim Akbar and Nidal Hasan come readily to mind, not to mention the scores of American soldiers murdered by their so-called Muslim allies in Iraq and Afghanistan. These acts are conveniently forgotten by the current administration and the DNC,
Does one honorable death that occurred twelve years ago cancel the thousands of horrific deaths that Islam has celebrated? Do comments about this single death deserve all this contentious scrutiny?
Only if you're Donald Trump.
UPDATE (h/t iOTW):
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 ]Khan currently runs a law firm in New York City called KM Khan Law Office. According to the website, the the law firm specializes in “immigration services.” Most likely Khan was working to bring Muslims into the country.
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 currently runs a law firm in New York City called KM Khan Law Office. According to the website, the the law firm specializes in “immigration services.” Most likely Khan was working to bring Muslims into the country.
[...]It is likely that Khan is a Muslim plant working with the Hillary Clinton campaign, probably for the interest of Muslim oil companies as well as Muslim immigration into the U.S.
Intelius reveals Khizr M. Khan used to work for Hogan, Hartson and Lovells, which has ties to the Clinton Foundation:
