An Open Letter to Khizr Khan [Archive] - Professional Soldiers ®

View Full Version : An Open Letter to Khizr Khan

Divemaster

07-31-2016, 18:53

This guy nailed it. Original source at the link below.

http://bit.ly/2aqFBAY

Dear Mr. Khan,

I want to preface this letter by stating that I respect your son’s sacrifice for this great nation. By all accounts, he is a true hero that sacrificed himself in service to our country. For that I am thankful.

As a veteran, I watched your comments at the Democratic National Convention with a mixture of sadness, and anger. The United States has a military comprised of volunteers. Every single member has made the conscious choice to join the military and serve. There is not a single service member who has been forced into service. It is important for all service members (and apparently, their families) to understand that service to this great nation does not imbue one with special privileges or rights. I found your comments troubling when you said: “Have you ever been to Arlington cemetery? Go look at the graves of brave patriots who died defending the United States of America. You will see all faiths, genders and ethnicities. You have sacrificed nothing and no one.”

Does it matter whether Mr. Trump has sacrificed “…nothing and no one?”…has Ms. Clinton “..sacrificed” for this nation? How about Mr. Obama? Your comment stating that Mr. Trump “…has sacrifice no one” is alarming. Are you intimating that YOU sacrificed? Sir, your son willingly sacrificed himself. As a father I cannot imagine the pain you must feel but his sacrifice is his own. He was not forced to serve.

I am troubled that you would allow a party that has little more than contempt for the US Service Member to parade you into the DNC to denounce Donald Trump. Did you watch when protesters at the DNC booed and heckled Medal of Honor recipient Capt. Florent Groberg? Did you notice your party interrupting the moment of silence for slain police officers? Your own hypocrisy in not denouncing these acts and instead using the DNC as a platform to make a political point is disgraceful. The simple fact is that whether one served or sacrificed does not give greater power to their statements. One vote is as valuable as another. That sir, is why our Country is great. Your condemnation of one person for a statement while standing idly as your party disparages veterans and police officers is the height of hypocrisy.

To conflate the need to prevent potential terrorists from entering our country with the belief that ‘all Muslims’ should be banned is simply wrong and disingenuous. As a reminder, Mr. Trump said: ” “Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life,” The irony of your son’s own death at the hands of these very people in Iraq should not be ignored. I have little doubt that your son would have recognized the need to protect our country from these very people. In fact, he held is own troops back so that he could check on a suspicious car. Your son understood sacrifice and how to protect “his people”…’his soldiers’….’his fellow Americans’…

As you continue to make the media circuit and bask in the glow of affection cast upon you by a party that has little regard for your son’s own sacrifice, and veterans in general, I would ask you to consider your comments and your position more closely.

Respectfully,

Chris Mark

US Marine and Navy Veteran.

Old Dog New Trick

07-31-2016, 19:22

BZ!

Hope it reaches the intended target.

Mustang Man

07-31-2016, 19:34

This Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer Saudi plant can piss off. This is probably the best example of Taqiya in action.

http://shoebat.com/2016/07/31/what-the-media-is-not-telling-you-about-the-muslim-who-attacked-donald-trump-he-is-a-muslim-brotherhood-agent-who-wants-to-advance-sharia-law-and-bring-muslims-into-the-united-states/

Khizr Muazzam Khan graduated in Punjab University Law College, as theNew 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. 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:

At the bottom of the page, Khan*shows his appreciation*for an icon of the Muslim Brotherhood: “The contribution to this article of S. Ramadan’s writing is greatly acknowledged.” S. Ramadan is Said Ramadan, head of the Islamic Center in Geneva and a major icon of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Said Ramadan, Muslim Brotherhood agent

Ramadan*was a writer who wrote material for the Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia, an organization that has been promoting Islamic revivalism and indoctrination to recruit young people in Malaysia to jihadism. It is actually a Malaysian branch of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Ramadan wrote a book called,*Islamic Law: Its Scope and Equity,*and a version of it was published for the Malaysian Muslim Youth Movement (a branch of WAMY):

World*Association of Muslim Youth (WAMY) was*created through the collaboration of the Wahhabist and Muslim Brotherhood led by Said Ramadan*who was the son-in-law of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood including Ahmad Bahefzallah, the boss of Huma Abedin (Hillary Clinton’s aid) and her parents*Mahmoud and Saleha Abedin. It was also*financed by the wealthy Abdullah Omar Naseef,*another boss*of the Abedin family.

Said Ramadan, Khan’s*source for his writing, was major leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt,*according to*the Islamic scholar, Kemal A. Faruki. We took a snapshot of Faruki’s statement on Ramadan:

Khan*wrote the paper in the eighties while he was in Saudi Arabia, the motherland of Wahhabism, which means that Khan*clearly had a Wahabist connection. We took a snapshot of the text:

According to a recent report,*Khan moved from Pakistan to the United Arab Emirates, a hotbed for the Muslim Brotherhood.

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.

To understand the inception of Muslim immigration one must study the Muslim Minority Affairs, a paradigm created by Saudi jurisprudence which sparked during the times Khan lived in Saudi Arabia while collaborating with the Saudi kingdom.

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:

“Hogan Lovells LLP, another U.S. firm hired by the Saudis, is registered to work for the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia through 2016, disclosures show. Robert Kyle, a lobbyist from the firm, has bundled $50,850 for Clinton’s campaign”

“Many lawyers at Hogan Lovells remember the week in 2004*when U.S. Army Capt. Humayun Khan lost his life to a suicide bomber. Then-Hogan & Hartson attorneys mourned the death because the soldier’s father, Khizr Khan, a Muslim American immigrant, was among their beloved colleagues”

Saudi interests with using Khan to advance Muslim immigration and advance Muslim Sharia is a lengthy subject. And it has ties to Hillary Clinton’s aid Huma Abedin as well. It will take hours of reading just to cover this topic on how it was*The House of Saud’s*“Muslim Minority Affairs”*and*the Abedins (Huma Abedin and family) that played a central role in using Muslim immigration to infiltrate*the west with Wahhbi agenda. The House of Saud had used Huma’s father Sayed Zaynul Abedin’s work regarding the*Muslim Minority Affairs in the West, published in 1998 as part of 29 works to construct a plan to conquer the U.S.*with Islam. It is obvious that Khan is upset, that a Trump victory will eliminate and destroy decades of hard work to bring in Islamic immigration into the United States which was spearheaded by agents in Saudi Arabia like Khan and Huma Abedin’a father (Sayed Z. Abedin).

You can study this here which includes links, evidences, photocopies, history … everything

In regards to his son, many were the ‘Muslim martyrs’ who joined the US*military. Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed, for example, enlisted in the Special Forces of the US Army; he was a double working for the US and Al-Qaeda. There is also the example of Hasan K Akbar, a Muslim American soldier who murdered and injured fifteen soldiers. There was Bowe Bergdahl, an American Muslim soldier who deserted his men to join the Taliban, a desertion which led to six*American being ambushed and killed while they were on the search looking for him.*And of course the example Nidal Malik Hassan, who murdered fourteen Americans in cold blood in Fort Hood. What about Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, a major Muslim thinker for the Muslim Minority Affairs who called on arming Muslims to fight America?*An IMMA (Institute of Muslims Minority Affairs) favorite, Taha Jaber al-Alwani, whom the Abedins say is the source for their doctrine is*an ardent anti-Semite*who by the way, runs the United States Department of Defense program (out of all places) for training Muslim military chaplains in the U.S. military. We translated some of his quotes on the issue of The Muslim Minority Affairs:

“… it [MMA, Muslim Minority Affairs] is a Jurisprudence for a group confned to its special circumstances which is allowed what others are not. Its exercise needs an understanding of social sciences, especially sociology, economics, political science and international relations… for the fundamentals of success for the Muslim Minority Jurisprudence it must adhere to the collective earth concept.” [link from Arabic here]

Alwani, a man commissioned by our government, even calls for a soon-to-be military conquest and provides an offcial fatwa in preparation for the use of force:

“Commitment to the Quranic concept of Geography:*The land belongs to Allah, his religion is Islam, and every country is already in the House of Islam—now in the present time—since*they will be in the House of Islam by force in the near future. The whole of humanity is a Muslim Nation: it is either ‘the religion of the nation’ which has embraced this religion [Islam], or a ‘proselyte nation’ we are obliged to conquer.” (Alwani, The Jurisprudence of Muslim Minority Affairs. No. 7, translated from Arabic by Shoebat.com)

What part of “they will be in the House of Islam by force in the near future” don’t these democrats understand? More dead Americans?

I can go on and on. Is it likely that Khan’s son was killed before his Islamist mission was accomplished? Only another type of investigation will determine that. *Do they ever mention how many soldiers have died because of Muslim traitors?*Do they ever bring up how many*Christians in the US military were killed? Yet the modernists and homosexuals continue to attack Christians. But soon everything we need to know will be uncovered. As we say in the Middle East:*the snow always melts and the sh*t*under it will soon be revealed.

Divemaster

07-31-2016, 21:14

BTW, Trump saying that he, too, has sacrificed shows how much of a douche he is. That's French.

Old Dog New Trick

07-31-2016, 22:33

Allen West has an impressive retort to add.

http://www.allenbwest.com/allen/personal-message-muslim-father-whose-son-killed-iraq

Team Sergeant

08-01-2016, 08:08

Yup lots of "sillyvilians" taking credit for what we veterans do or have done.

Khizr Khan you are nothing but a socialist/progressive tool and too stupid to realize it.

UWOA (RIP)

08-01-2016, 08:13

The response is poignant, and makes salient points ... but it does not belie the facts that Trump is a liar (made obvious by his contradictory televised statements), a con man (witness the Trump University lawsuit where he swindled hundreds, if not thousands, of middle class Americans seeking a better life through education), and a bully (he never apologizes for being wrong, but leverages his money to attack people who confront him with the truth). As a consequence, it is lost in the cacophony of noise that is Donald Trump.

Unfortunately, we have no better alternative in Hillary Clinton, who is an opportunist, a beyotch (altered spelling to protect innocent ears), and no leader.

Consequently, I agree with Divemaster. I will not vote for either, but that is my choice.

.

CloseDanger

08-01-2016, 11:24

Is there a backstory about Khizr Khan (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/08/is_there_a_backstory_about_khizr_khan_and_donald_t rump.html) and Donald Trump?

Team Sergeant

08-01-2016, 11:48

I take back the remark that he was a DNC tool........ he's a sunni piece of shit and mouthpiece for the shit-hole called Saudi Arabia.

Clinton Cash: Khizr Khan’s Deep Legal, Financial Connections to Saudi Arabia, Hillary’s Clinton Foundation Tie Terror, Immigration, Email Scandals Together
by MATTHEW BOYLE1 Aug 2016Washington, DC

Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that the mainstream media and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been using to criticize Donald J. Trump, has deep ties to the government of Saudi Arabia—and to international Islamist investors through his own law firm. In addition to those ties to the wealthy Islamist nation, Khan also has ties to controversial immigration programs that wealthy foreigners can use to essentially buy their way into the United States—and has deep ties to the “Clinton Cash” narrative through the Clinton Foundation.
Khan and his wife Ghazala Khan both appeared on stage at the Democratic National Convention to attack, on Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s behalf, Donald Trump—the Republican nominee for president. Their son, U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan, was killed in Iraq in 2004. Khizr Khan, in his speech to the DNC, lambasted Donald Trump for wanting to temporarily halt Islamic migration to America from countries with a proven history of exporting terrorists.

Since then, Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos—who served as a senior adviser to the president in Bill Clinton’s White House and is a Clinton Foundation donor as well as a host on the ABC network—pushed Trump on the matter in an interview. Trump’s comments in that interview have sparked the same mini-rebellion inside his party, in the media and across the aisle that has happened many times before. The usual suspects inside the GOP, from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to House Speaker Paul Ryan to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to Ohio Gov. John Kasich, have condemned Trump in one way or another. The media condemnation has been swift and Democrats, as well their friends throughout media, are driving the train as fast as they can.

But until now, it looked like the Khans were just Gold Star parents who the big bad Donald Trump attacked. It turns out, however, in addition to being Gold Star parents, the Khans are financially and legally tied deeply to the industry of Muslim migration–and to the government of Saudi Arabia and to the Clintons themselves.

Khan, according to Intelius as also reported by Walid Shoebat, used to work at the law firm Hogan Lovells, LLP, a major D.C. law firm that has been on retainer as the law firm representing the government of Saudi Arabia in the United States for years. Citing federal government disclosure forms, the Washington Free Beacon reported the connection between Saudi Arabia and Hogan Lovells a couple weeks ago.

“Hogan Lovells LLP, another U.S. firm hired by the Saudis, is registered to work for the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia through 2016, disclosures show,” Joe Schoffstall of the Free Beacon reported.

The federal form filed with the Department of Justice is a requirement under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, which makes lobbyists and lawyers working on behalf of foreign governments and other agents from abroad with interests in the United States register with the federal government.

The government of Saudi Arabia, of course, has donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation.

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has given between $10 and $25 million to the foundation while Friends of Saudi Arabia has contributed between $1 and $5 million,” Schoffstall wrote.

cont:
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/01/clinton-cash-khizr-khans-deep-legal-financial-connections-saudi-arabia-hillarys-clinton-foundation-connect-terror-immigration-email-scandals/

Sohei

08-01-2016, 12:19

I can't think of HRC doing anything political without thinking it out first -- up to and including -- him speaking at the convention. She isn't a rookie politician.

PRB

08-01-2016, 12:28

My comments..
As to Mr. Khan....what was his point....that all Muslims are not Jihadi's?
I think we all understand that...all Muslims are not violent nor do they practice full Islam, only the parts they cherry pick. Not all Muslims desire sharia. I wish all Muslims believed as that.

Are we to believe tho, that because Mr. Khans fine son was patriotic that all Muslims are so? Are we to believe from his sons sacrifice that all Muslims are not Islamists? I wish it were so.

The problem tho, that we have experienced, is that it is not so. Maj. Nidal Hassan killed how many of his fellow soldiers in the name of Jihad? Unarmed, waiting in a gym, in a pre deployment event.

How can we differentiate the Khan's from the Hassan's in an immigration venue? Maybe thru a proper vetting process? Is that unreasonable in light of today's events?

This emotional back/forth never really articulates the total issue...it is meant to be simply that.
Emotional non thinking reaction.

Sohei

08-01-2016, 12:32

cbtengr

08-01-2016, 12:56

Personally, I think he was unwittingly (personally) used as cannon fodder by Clinton to muddy the waters by his taking shots at Trump, his receiving Trumps return fire, and giving her new talking points.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Trump should have let this go. He does not need to respond to everyone he thinks slights him. In the end he will have been his own worst enemy, he needs to focus on the real problem which is HRC

Divemaster

08-01-2016, 12:59

I think you hit the nail on the head. Trump should have let this go. He does not need to respond to everyone he thinks slights him. In the end he will have been his own worst enemy, he needs to focus on the real problem which is HRC

Just wait until he gets the IRS to use as a weapon against his enemies. We've already gotten a taste of that under Obama.

DJ Urbanovsky

08-01-2016, 13:28

You forgot liar, thief, traitor, and murderer.

Unfortunately, we have no better alternative in Hillary Clinton, who is an opportunist, a beyotch (altered spelling to protect innocent ears), and no leader.

abc_123

08-01-2016, 14:43

And another (different) open letter.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/08/01/open-letter-to-mr-khizr-khan.html

Yeah Khan is an idiot and part of the problem.

ddoering

08-01-2016, 15:27

Just wait until he gets the IRS to use as a weapon against his enemies. We've already gotten a taste of that under Obama.

I look forward to it.

TWITCHY

08-01-2016, 16:16

Apparently, the political leadership in Texas hates Trump enough that they can't call a spade, a spade. It is vividly evident, even without reading Khan's back story that he is a political insurgent working to further his shitty Islamic agenda. And, after reading the above posts and links, Trump was probably right that The Khan's practice of sharia prevents his wife from talking in public.

http://m.amarillo.com/news/2016-08-01/amid-trump-attacks-abbott-defends-fallen-muslim-soldiers-family#

Golf1echo

08-01-2016, 16:44

And another (different) open letter.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/08/01/open-letter-to-mr-khizr-khan.html

Yeah Khan is an idiot and part of the problem.

Looks like he worked long and hard to be that tool, his son not the case....RIP with the Honor earned in the field, Hoah.

Badger52

08-01-2016, 16:56

Emotional non thinking reaction.ISIS seems to agree with you; (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/08/01/isis-details-why-hate-in-new-magazine.html) they're tired of not getting the respect they feel they deserve I guess.
:rolleyes:

frostfire

08-01-2016, 18:47

I saw Chris Matthew "hardball" interview with KK

He asked what did he think as a muslim of US campaign in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, all muslim nations.

I thought the interview was heading in the right direction. Instead, it became a fellatio session of Khizr placating Chris on his opinion of Iraq war.

I wished Chris had asked what do you think of our non-muslim soldiers, kuffar or infidel in your Islamic viewpoint, who kill muslims in service of this Nation. Do they deserve to be killed? Did Hasan do the right thing in your view?

He publicly attacked a man known to have only one tact, the bull in China shop variant, and now cry foul when he got the horn? Even saying on hardball that they did not expect a response from Trump? Seriously? His using the wife as a shield from Trump's "bullets" reminds me of jihadists' shooting behind their wives. As always, the bleeding-heart-emotion-driven Americans fall for the Маскировка :boohoo

Patrin

08-01-2016, 19:12

I look forward to it.

:D

Badger52

08-01-2016, 19:20

As always, the bleeding-heart-emotion-driven Americans fall for the Маскировка :boohooThe deception is one of the bleeding hearts' own making. There is no ambiguity about the evil ones at all.

Old Dog New Trick

08-01-2016, 20:51

abc_123

08-01-2016, 21:40

This thing has gone "beyond stupid" and as far as I'm concerned, now, fuck the Khan family. They stepped in it; now lick the poop off your shoes. HRC and more likely BHO brought you and your son into this but now, you own it! Live with the consequences.

I agree. Dad Khan is at best, a useful idiot. At worst, yet another in a long line of muslim apologists who is no more assimilated than Tokyo Rose.

tonyz

08-02-2016, 06:56

They must be hiding that whole religion of peace shtick...oh, and they state that ISIS is Islamic and at the very end of the article they also touch on the subject of this thread.

ISIS details 'Why We Hate You' in new magazine
Published August 01, 2016 FoxNews.com

In the new edition of its full-color, glossy magazine, ISIS mocks those who claim Islam is a peaceful religion, and even wades into the controversy surrounding Donald Trump and the parents of a dead Muslim U.S. soldier.

The 15th issue of Dabiq, published on July 31, is titled “Break The Cross” and appears to be primarily directed at those that ISIS considers its enemies, particularly Christians. One section is devoted to the words and actions of Pope Francis and is headlined “In The Words Of Our Enemies.” An editorial titled “Why We Hate You and Why We Fight You” takes aim at Westerners and “apostate ‘Imams’ in the West” who refuse to define ISIS’ motivation as being Islamic. ISIS calls this rhetoric purely political.

“Many Westerners, however, are already aware that claiming the attacks of the mujahidin to be senseless and questioning incessantly as to why we hate the West and why we fight them is nothing more than a political act and a propaganda tool,” the article says. “The politicians will say it regardless of how much it stands in opposition to facts and common sense just to garner as many votes as they can for the next election cycle.”

The ISIS author of the “Why We Hate You” piece aims to settle the argument, and “clarify” in “unequivocal terms” that ISIS is Islamic. The author says that those on the “social fringe” who identify Islam with ISIS are correct.

There are exceptions among the disbelievers, no doubt, people who will unabashedly declare that jihad and the laws of the Shari’ah – as well as everything else deemed taboo by the Islam-is-a-peaceful-religion crowd – are in fact completely Islamic, but they tend to be people with far less credibility who are painted as a social fringe, so their voices are dismissed and a large segment of the ignorant masses continues believing the false narrative,” the article says.

Showing just how quickly the magazine was produced – and how intently members of ISIS watch U.S. politics – an image in the publication shows the grave of Capt. Humayun Khan, who was killed in Iraq in 2004. Khan’s parents rebuked Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump during a speech at the Democratic National Convention last week, prompting Trump, in turn, to criticize their “right” to censure him in front of a national audience. Adding its own voice to the debate, ISIS declares in a caption below Khan’s grave that the soldier is an “apostate” of the Muslim religion and urges other Muslims to “beware” a similar fate.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/08/01/isis-details-why-hate-in-new-magazine.html

Team Sergeant

08-02-2016, 07:38

Using your military family members death for charity purposes, I get that.

Using your military family members death to protest a war, I can understand that too.

But using your "muslim" son's death for purely political purposes, to denigrate one political party while attempting to boost another, = bottom-feeding parents and a bottom-feeding political party.

This only demonstrates that the democratic national party, progressive socialists, are nothing more than bottom-feeding rats that know no boundaries.

A vote for the DNC is a vote for islam, screw all other beliefs.

Badger52

08-02-2016, 09:41

They must be hiding that whole religion of peace shtick...oh, and they state that ISIS is Islamic and at the very end of the article they also touch on the subject of this thread. Thanks for the text of the link I mentioned above (sometimes FNC moves their stuff around). They (ISIS) are what... feelin' like Rodney Dangerfield? I know... they got pissed when they got referred to as a JV team. Their magazine has more creds in their circle than any WH presser, with anyone, for-e-vuh.

Hand

08-02-2016, 11:57

My comments..

I found this to be a very well thought out post PRB. I found this:
As to Mr. Khan....what was his point....that all Muslims are not Jihadi's?
I think we all understand that...all Muslims are not violent nor do they practice full Islam, only the parts they cherry pick. Not all Muslims desire sharia. I wish all Muslims believed as that.

Are we to believe tho, that because Mr. Khans fine son was patriotic that all Muslims are so? Are we to believe from his sons sacrifice that all Muslims are not Islamists? I wish it were so.

to be an especially rich topic for discussion, and tastefully articulated as well.

Following in the same vein, all gun owners are not crazed, white, religious, racists, lone wolf militants, yet, one cannot assume that because most are, that all are.

I think it's also interesting to consider, how, if even possible, to apply a set of rules to a set of people, and without err, determine if they will, in the future, become dangerous.

Not only is this dangerous, but I believe it is probably unethical at some level and illegal as well (see Minority Report for the slippery slope side of the argument).

What are we left with other than completely outlawing guns, or outlawing the practice of a religion. While most here would completely disagree with the first (and rightfully so given the Second Amendment), doesn't the First Amendment protect the second just as fervently?

I would argue that immigrants/aliens/refugees etc, are not granted the rights of American citizens, and thus are eligible for whatever the government decides to do with them. But what about those who have completed the process legally, and have raised their right hand and sworn allegiance to the United States?

In becoming a citizen, and gaining the rights afforded by our Constitution, how can we restrict their First Amendment rights if we can't prove without any reasonable doubt that new citizen mohammed X will never become "radicalized"?

Sdiver

08-02-2016, 14:25

Hummm ... Looks like Hillary's "Khan Man" is attempting to cover his tracks.

It is being reported that he has deleted his Law Firm's Website, that specialized in Muslim immigration.

I'll bet ya he's deleting emails too .... :munchin

Panic Mode: Khizr Khan Deletes Law Firm Website that Specialized in Muslim Immigration

Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that Democrats and their allies media wide have been using to hammer GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump, has deleted his law firm’s website from the Internet.

This development is significant, as his website proved—as Breitbart News and others have reported—that he financially benefits from unfettered pay-to-play Muslim migration into America.

A snapshot of his now deleted website, as captured by the Wayback Machine which takes snapshots archiving various websites on the Internet, shows that as a lawyer he engages in procurement of EB5 immigration visas and other “Related Immigration Services.”

The website is completely removed from the Internet, and instead directs visitors to the URL at which it once was to a page parking the URL run by GoDaddy.

The EB5 program, which helps wealthy foreigners usually from the Middle East essentially buy their way into America, is fraught with corruption. U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has detailed such corruption over the past several months, and in February issued a blistering statement about it.

“Maybe it is only here on Capitol Hill—on this island surrounded by reality—that we can choose to plug our ears and refuse to listen to commonly accepted facts,” Grassley said in a statement earlier this year. “The Government Accountability Office, the media, industry experts, members of congress, and federal agency officials, have concurred that the program is a serious problem with serious vulnerabilities. Allow me to mention a few of the flaws.”

Grassley’s statement even noted that the program Khan celebrated on his website has posed national security risks.

“There are also classified reports that detail the national security, fraud and abuse. Our committee has received numerous briefings and classified documents to show this side of the story,” Grassley said in the early February 2016 statement. “The enforcement arm of the Department of Homeland Security wrote an internal memo that raises significant concerns about the program. One section of the memo outlines concerns that it could be used by Iranian operatives to infiltrate the United States. The memo identifies seven main areas of program vulnerability, including the export of sensitive technology, economic espionage, use by foreign government agents and terrorists, investment fraud, illicit finance and money laundering.”

Khan spoke alongside his wife Ghazala Khan at the Democratic National Convention last week in Philadelphia, and they were honoring their son U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan—a hero who lost his life to a suicide bomber in Iraq in 2004. On behalf of Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic nominee for president, Khizr Khan ripped into Donald Trump’s policies on immigration—specifically bashing his plan to bar Muslim migration from regions afflicted with rampant terrorism into America temporarily until the United States can figure out what’s going on.

Khan even brought out a pocket Constitution, claiming inaccurately that Trump’s plans were unconstitutional. That’s not true, as Congress has already granted such power to the president under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952—allowing the president to bar migration of any alien or class of aliens the president sees as a threat to the United States for any reason at any time. Such a class of aliens could be Muslims, or it could be people from a specific region of the world, or any other class—such as someone’s race, weight, height, age, national origin, religion, or anything else.

The media, along with Hillary Clinton and her supporters throughout the Democratic Party establishment, has pushed the line of attack against Trump for days. Now on Tuesday, President Barack Obama has said that Trump is “unfit” to serve as President over the matter. Even a group of anti-Trump congressional Republicans has gone after Trump on the matter.

But as Breitbart News and other new media have exposed Khan’s various deep political and legal connections to the Clintons—and to Muslim migration—the attack line has crumbled. Now, with Khan deleting his website in an apparent effort to hide his biographical information, the attack is falling apart even more.

What’s perhaps interesting is that also on this website that he has now deleted, Khan revealed that he spent nearly a decade working for the mega-D.C. law firm Hogan & Hartson—now Hogan Lovells LLP—which connects him directly with the government of Saudi Arabia and the Clintons themselves. Saudi Arabia, which has retained the firm that Khan worked at for years, has donated between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary Clinton, despite the repeated urging of Trump, has refused to return the Clinton Cash money to the Saudis. What’s more, Hogan Lovells also did Hillary Clinton’s taxes—and helped acquire the patents for parts of the technology she used in crafting her illicit home-brew email server that the FBI director called “extremely careless” in handling classified information.

What’s more, the entire mainstream has proven negligence with regard to this matter as none of them even thought to look into this Khan guy’s law practice before bandying him about as some kind of magic elixir that cures the country of Trump.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/02/khizr-khan-deletes-law-firm-website-proving-financially-benefits-pay-play-muslim-migration/

Old Dog New Trick

08-02-2016, 14:39

tonyz

08-02-2016, 17:25

Thanks for the text of the link I mentioned above (sometimes FNC moves their stuff around). They (ISIS) are what... feelin' like Rodney Dangerfield? I know... they got pissed when they got referred to as a JV team. Their magazine has more creds in their circle than any WH presser, with anyone, for-e-vuh.

Badger52...gentleman as always. Hat tip.

I skimmed over and did not actually open the link that you had previously provided above. My bad.

The press will hold on to this "Khan" issue like a dog on a bone - think "war on women" and Sandra Fluke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

Badger52

08-02-2016, 18:25

The press will hold on to this "Khan" issue like a dog on a bone - think "war on women" and Sandra Fluke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention. Right up until they are useless after November, either way. I get my shimstock at a friend's lumberyard; the Dems get their wedges for nuthin'.

frostfire

08-03-2016, 16:10

Right up until they are useless after November, either way. I get my shimstock at a friend's lumberyard; the Dems get their wedges for nuthin'.

Now that he has the media attention, I think he and the media will continue on to push the narrative and policies against Islamophobes :rolleyes:

Horrible

08-04-2016, 00:34

Hummm ... Looks like Hillary's "Khan Man" is attempting to cover his tracks.

It is being reported that he has deleted his Law Firm's Website, that specialized in Muslim immigration.

I'll bet ya he's deleting emails too .... :munchin

He's probably been getting a shitload of phone calls since that bullshit Shoebat article came out. These folks are so desperately trying to paint this guy as some sort of bizarro sleeper agent that it's getting patently ridiculous. Taqqiya? Really? It's ludicrous how often that phrase gets thrown around here. It's practically become shorthand for "A Muslim does something I don't like"

Sdiver

08-04-2016, 01:56

He's probably been getting a shitload of phone calls since that bullshit Shoebat article came out. These folks are so desperately trying to paint this guy as some sort of bizarro sleeper agent that it's getting patently ridiculous. Taqqiya? Really? It's ludicrous how often that phrase gets thrown around here. It's practically become shorthand for "A Muslim does something I don't like"

I'm sorry ... who are you again? :munchin

Your profile seems quite bare .... actually, it's nonexistent.

... and your into is, well, shall we say ... SUCKS.

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=434220&postcount=7

We like to know just who it is we're talking to. :munchin

Oh, and your, (ahem) profile and into, I've captured them on a screen shot and posted them below. In case you need help in figuring out what it is I'm referring to.

frostfire

08-04-2016, 06:34

Team Sergeant

08-04-2016, 08:05

He's probably been getting a shitload of phone calls since that bullshit Shoebat article came out. These folks are so desperately trying to paint this guy as some sort of bizarro sleeper agent that it's getting patently ridiculous. Taqqiya? Really? It's ludicrous how often that phrase gets thrown around here. It's practically become shorthand for "A Muslim does something I don't like"

I guess you didn't catch the part where Khizr Khan used the DNC podium to "upsell" his muslim immigration business on the back of his dead son and take pot shots at the opposing political party. Win Win for the bottom-feeding muzzies and the DNC.

Snopes.com is run by liberal/socialists so I'm hoping that's not where you're obtaining your info.

SF-TX

08-04-2016, 08:57

He's probably been getting a shitload of phone calls since that bullshit Shoebat article came out. These folks are so desperately trying to paint this guy as some sort of bizarro sleeper agent that it's getting patently ridiculous. Taqqiya? Really? It's ludicrous how often that phrase gets thrown around here. It's practically become shorthand for "A Muslim does something I don't like"

Horrible, please enlighten us knuckle-draggers with your insight into Islam. Apparently, the combined experience of members on this board with Muslims and Islamic countries is somehow lacking.

We are waiting.

It seems you have a common response to anything you disagree with.

http://professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=579601&postcount=4

Horrible

08-04-2016, 11:58

I appreciate your effort to break confirmation bias around here.
Opinion is like you-know-what. Provide counter citations and we go from there.

Fair enough:

First, the Muslim Brotherhood connection. Shoebat sees the citation of Said Ramadan, known MB member, in this thesis as some sort of support for his form of jurisprudence. If you read the entire thesis (it's only 13 pages), you see that the paper is not any sort of advocacy for any particular type of Shariah. Rather, it's a historical analysis that traces the teleology of various theories of Shariah since the period following Muhammad's death. In the section about Fiqh, jurisprudence, Khan merely cites an excerpt from one of Ramadan's texts on the history of Shariah. It's really innocuous:

From the 7th page:
Within two centuries after Umar's death, and throughout Muslim history ever since, his [Umar, the second Caliph] statement proved to be not only a sound intuition but also a shrewd anticipation of the basic defect of the Muslims' actual relationship with Islamic Law. This basic defect consists in confusing what God and His Prophet have described with the opinions of the jurists.

Keep in mind that, regardless of his status as a recognized douchebag, Said Ramadan was also a recognized authority on Islamic law (or his particular interpretation). Khan only cited a small bit of historical analysis, not some exegesis on the virtue of jihad or whatever. A person can cite Wagner's views on music without assuming his views on Jews. Indeed, the entire document reads more like a strictly academic primer in Shariah and some of the underpinning concepts. Hell, he doesn't even use any complimentary phrases (durood) when referring to god or Muhammad. If this were any sort of religious advocacy, you would see a liberal sprinkling of (SAW) and (PBUH) throughout the paper.

Seriously, read through the entire thing. It'll take like 20 minutes.

Secondly, on the "taqqiya" issue: we don't know what branch of Islam Khizr Khan follows. The majority of Muslims in Pakistan are Sunni, and most following the Hanafi school of jurisprudence, not Hanbali or anything crazy like that. We can readily assume that he's probably a Hanafi Sunni. I know that some people on this board believe that all Muslims are practicing taqqiya 24/7 like it's some sort of global conspiracy, but that flies in the face of most of Islamic law. The fact is that there is scant justification for taqqiya in Sunni jurisprudence; it's almost exclusively a Shiite practice. In Sunni practice, it's only allowed under extreme duress, i.e. you're about to be tortured or killed, not when you want to dunk on Trump in front of the DNC.

Here's an easy explanation: http://askimam.org/public/question_detail/28898
Unless you think this guy is also practicing taqqiya(!!!) :rolleyes:

tl;dr version
-Taqiyyah is only done when a person is amongst non-believers and he fears for his life or wealth. He may even utter words which show love/close friendship as long as his heart is clean of such beliefs.
-Taqiyyah is not permissible through actions which cause harm to others eg. killing, fornication, stealing, false testimony, circulate the secrets of the Muslims (usually at the time of war), etc.
-Taqiyyah is also permissible if one is threatened to be beaten (severely).
-Taqiyyah is only permissible if one actually fears some danger. If no danger is expected taqiyyah is impermissible.
-Taqiyyah should be used as a last resort.
-Taqiyyah is not permissible for gain of wealth, position, etc. (except in critical circumstances)

Lastly, this "controversy" is just deflection to avoid addressing Khan's remarks. Attack the messenger if you can't attack his message.

Have I done a fair job in explaining my objections?

Old Dog New Trick

08-04-2016, 14:28

Horrible,

Fair enough...

We know that not every Muslim is a radical Islamic terrorist and I doubt very much that Mr. Khan is supporting terrorism. I don't think that is the point of this thread.

His speech went off the rails when he used the death of his son and Trumps calls for an immediate ban on Muslims from terrorist producing countries to be halted until there is a better process of vetting them.

Instead of saying "I can help with that if you give me a chance to show you the error of your ways...and to honor the sacrifice my son and many others gave all to protect..."

But he didn't do that. He went on the attack and verbally berated the man, thus calling him out.

The question many of us have is, why? (money and his business?)

He took it way beyond the death of his son. He politicized it in a way that deepened the divide in this country in a bad way - depending on which side of the isle you stand.

I'm sure that was intentional and why the question of; "did the DNC writers help you with that" came from.

The comment about his wife was crude but fair game in the context of the religion.

All's fair in love and war when you introduce politics!

BTW - point out the constitution to a Democrat and you are likely to get, Meh, as a response. They simply don't care what the constitution says if it goes against their ideals.

Box

08-04-2016, 15:45

-Taqiyyah is only done when a person is amongst non-believers and he fears for his life or wealth. He may even utter words which show love/close friendship as long as his heart is clean of such beliefs.

So if I was a wealthy man, and my wealth was due in part to helping believers enter the USA illegally and an infidel was threatening to take steps that would prevent this from happening then would that include fearing for my wealth?

...and if I embraced religious law that was in diametric opposition to the constitution of the country that I am helping illegal immigrant enter into, would the act of uttering words which show love/close friendship with that same nations constitution even though my heart was clean and still focused on Sharia be enough to fit this particular definition? Mr Kahn is a founder of the Journal of Contemporary Issues in Muslim Law - a periodical that zealously defends Sharia law. (the law that I think we are suggesting may or may not include this odd concept of taqqiya)

So, Trump says no more illegal immigration:
...my wealth suffers and profits from my law journal go down
...because I espouse and defend Sharia, it is logical to think I might be the victim of Trump induced violence

As result:
...I connect the death of my son to Trumps political opinion to attack Trumps opinions
...I ingratiate myself to infidels that are part of a political party that generally smirk openly at Christianity
...I wave a copy of the US constitution to demonstrate my rage

Got it.
I'm satisfied. Trump is the devil.

...also in the news, the sun was seen rising in the east and setting in the west.

SF-TX

08-04-2016, 21:20

Raymond Ibrahim on Taqiyya:

Taqiyya about Taqiyya

...In short, the earliest historical records of Islam clearly attest to the prevalence of taqiyya—deception and betrayal, as in the case of the poet Ka‘b —as a form of Islamic warfare against the non-Muslim infidel. And this is still a legal strategy for Muslims vis-à-vis non-Muslims—especially if the lying is rationalized as a form of jihad to empower Islam or Muslims...

...Professor Mukaram states, “Taqiyya was used as a way to fend off danger from the Muslims, especially in critical times and when their borders were exposed to wars with the Byzantines and, afterwards, to the raids of the Franks and others.”[30] The widespread use of taqiyya was one of the main reasons that prompted the Spanish Inquisition: hundreds of thousands of Muslims who had feigned conversion to Christianity secretly remained Muslim, conspiring with North African Muslim tribes to reconquer the Iberian Peninsula...

...As for the idea that taqiyya is “an exceptional doctrine justified under circumstances of extreme duress,” it is well to remember that the premiere authority on taqiyya, Dr. Mukaram, asserts that:

Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era...

Read it all (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/2014/04/12/taqiyya-about-taqiyya/)

T-Rock

08-04-2016, 22:55

. The fact is that there is scant justification for taqqiya in Sunni jurisprudence; it's almost exclusively a Shiite practice. In Sunni practice, it's only allowed under extreme duress, i.e. you're about to be tortured or killed, not when you want to dunk on Trump in front of the DNC.

Not necessarily so, considering pg. vii, the introduction of “The Reliance of the Traveller” basically states: “The four Sunni schools of Islamic Law, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and HanbalI, are identical in approximately 75% of their legal conclusions..” and that “the field of Hadith, for example, who were Shafi’is are such scholars as Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Nasa’I, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, Ibn Kathir, Dhahabi, and Nawawi..”

From Islamic Law:

Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 – 8.2) – “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…

“One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.

From the Qur'an:

"Quran (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.

Quran (3:28) - Tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves" against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim should appear friendly to non-Muslims, even though they should not feel that way..

Quran (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Quran (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who had to "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.

Quran (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts" The context of this remark is marriage, which explains why Sharia allows spouses to lie to each other for the greater good.

Quran (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means 'deceit'. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same.

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose."

khayru al-makireena

PedOncoDoc

08-05-2016, 08:44

khayru al-makireena

Al-makireena - wasn't that a big dance craze in the early 90's? :D

Badger52

08-05-2016, 09:44

Al-makireena - wasn't that a big dance craze in the early 90's? :DIt's a better instrumental surf tune (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXN1icaRW0s) composed by Los Relampagos, here by The Madeira. Unfortunately the former is more suited to joy-juiced wedding receptions than the other.
:rolleyes:

pcfixer

08-07-2016, 12:13