Posted on 08/02/2016 7:08:34 PM PDT by maggief
Notwithstanding his war-hero sons genuinely patriotic example, Khizr M. Khan has published papers supporting the supremacy of Islamic law over man-made Western law including the very Constitution he championed in his Democratic National Convention speech attacking GOP presidential nod Donald Trump.
In 1983, for example, Khan wrote a glowing review of a book compiled from a seminar held in Kuwait called Human Rights In Islam in which he singles out for praise the keynote address of fellow Pakistani Allah K. Brohi, a pro-jihad Islamic jurist who was one of the closest advisers to late Pakistani dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq, the father of the Taliban movement.
Khan speaks admiringly of Brohis interpretation of human rights, even though it included the right to kill and mutilate those who violate Islamic laws and even the right of men to beat wives who act unseemly.
As Pakistani minister of law and religious affairs, Brohi helped create hundreds of jihadi incubators called madrassas and restored Sharia punishments, such as amputations for theft and demands that rape victims produce four male witnesses or face adultery charges. He also made insulting the Muslim prophet Muhammad a crime punishable by death. To speed the Islamization of Pakistan, he and Zia issued a law that required judges to consult mullahs on every judicial decision for Sharia compliance.
Khan, who says he immigrated to the U.S. in 1980 to escape Pakistans military rule, nonetheless spoke admiringly of Brohi in his review of his speech. He praised his remarks even though Brohi advocated for the enforcement of the medieval Sharia punishments, known as hudood (singular hadd), that were later adopted and carried out with brutal efficiency by the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
"The invariable and basic rules of Islamic law are only those prescribed in the Shariah, Khan writes. All other juridical works must always be subordinated to the Shariah.
Does "all" really mean all there?
He explains that Sharia is derived from the Quran and Sunnah, and that the Quran is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.
Is he addressing all legal systems, or only Sharia?
It'll probably take a few more days before there has been a fairly thorough review of his past writings and statements.
The key question will be, does he believe the short and simple Islamic concept of law in general: "No man's law above Allah's law." Some columnists think he believes precisely that.
Everyones talking about the speech delivered by Mr. Khizr Khan, accompanied by his wife Ghazala at the DNC that focused on the loss of his son, U.S. Army Captain Humayan Khan.
It appears things have devolved into such a level of immaturity relating to the speech that I believe theres a need for a clear analysis of Mr. Khans address, and what he should have presented.
First, let me offer my condolences to the Khan family for their sacrifice, as they are now an American Gold Star Family. Their son and I share an unbreakable bond. We both served our nation and, along with three other generations in my family, took the oath to support and defend our Constitution and served in combat zones.
Yes sir, Mr. Khan, Ive read our Constitution and firmly recognize the preeminent responsibility of our federal government is to provide for the common defense. I also comprehend the relationship between the three branches of government you know separation of powers, checks and balances, coequal branches of government.
I would offer a simple recommendation to Mr. Khan. Perhaps you should have asked President Barack Obama if he had read the Constitution undoubtedly you would agree we have witnessed a few unconstitutional actions from him.
And while you were at it, Mr. Khan, perhaps you could have asked Hillary Clinton about handling classified information since Im quite sure your son, Captain Khan, had at a minimum a secret clearance.
I dont think your son would have been able to, well, have his careless mishandling of classified materials and information simply excused. Perhaps Mr. Khan, you could have addressed the necessity for high standards of honor, integrity, and character in a commander in chief.
Also, I found it interesting Mr. Khan, that you and your wife, an American Gold Star family, would take the stage to support a sitting president and one desiring to be president, who had abandoned Americans in a combat zone and lied about it.
I tend to believe that if alive, your son would consider that type of behavior abhorrent and deplorable. Or perhaps, as it seems, your speech was politically driven, and not based on principle? After all, you did take the stage before a crowd that disrespected a Medal of Honor recipient is that cool with you?
You see, I understand Mr. Khan, that your son and your family are Muslim and Muslims do indeed serve in our armed forces. But in the military I know, we do not celebrate that which divides, but rather that which unites. And what is it that unites us as Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines? It is service above self, commitment to something greater than the individual, and sacrifice for our country and comrades in arms.
Now, lets be honest Mr. Khan, those of us with knowledge could just as easily bring attention to SGT Hasan Karim Akbar and Major Nidal Hasan, both Muslims serving in the U.S. Army. Just as you celebrated your Muslim sons sacrifice, there are others who could give testimony to their loss due to those Muslim soldiers and I use lower case reference to them (soldiers) because they dishonored the oath and were traitors to our Code of Honor. Your son was not, but that had nothing to do with him being a Muslim: he was an American Soldier.
So, Mr. Khan, since you had such an immense stage, what should you have addressed? You should have taken the time to explain how humbled and thankful you are to live in America. You should have mentioned how honored your son was and the pride you felt knowing he was serving your adopted country. You should have explained to America, and the world, what killed your son the ideology of Islamism, Islamic fascism.
You could have told all of us why it needed to be defeated and that we need a commander in chief who would not abandon Americans in combat, but ensure they were supported in order to defeat this scourge.
Mr. Khan, you could have taken these words spoken by a proven courageous and resilient leader, Sir Winston Churchill, who has a U.S. Naval vessel named after him, and expounded upon them:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.
And now we can all understand why Barack Obama had Churchills bust removed from the Oval Office.
Those were the insightful, prescient, and relevant words of Sir Winston Churchill from the first edition of his book, The River War.
Mr. Khan, this is what you should have addressed; it would have been so very well received. You could have told the world and defined the enemy that killed your son instead my assessment is that you will be remembered as a political pawn.
You could have taken the time to explain the words written by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, dated March 28, 1786, to U.S. Minister of Foreign Affairs John Jay, reporting on their meeting with the Ambassador of Tripoli:
We [Adams & Jefferson] took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. [Note they clarify nations who have done them [i.e. Muslim Barbary States] no injury] The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of their prophet [i.e. Mohammed]; that it was written in their Koran; that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners; that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners; and that every Mussulman [Muslims] who was slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
Mr. Khan, you had a moment to speak on history and provide us clarity and truth from a Muslim man who lost his son, an American Soldier, to Islamists. You could have clarified the difference between your son and SGT Hasan Karim Akbar and Major Nidal Hasan. That sir, to me, was a missed opportunity.
Then again, maybe you had no intention of using the platform provided to you as a teachable moment but rather a politically-influenced opportunity for gain.
You, Mr. Khan, had the chance to be the face and voice of a Muslim family that stood with the fundamental principles and values of liberty, freedom, and democracy upon which this Republic was founded in which you have found a home.
You could have articulated how a 7th century savage and barbaric ideology inspired by a murderous warlord, psychopath, and, by modern day standards, a pedophile, was not a radical but the leader of a militant phase of Islam introduced after the 622 AD event referred to as Al Hijra.
Mr. Khan, I grieve for the loss of your son. However, I grieve even more that you used his sacrifice and loss as nothing more than a damn politicized stunt. May God forgive you for it.
~Col Allen West
2. How Does Shariah Define Jihad?
3. Civilization Jihad the Muslim Brotherhoods Potent Weapon
4. True Lies the Paradox of Debating Shariah
5. Taqiyya A Concept of Deceit that Security Professionals Must Know
6. Slander How it is Used and Abused Under Shariah
7. How Shariah Blasphemy Laws are Being Imposed On Us
8. What is the Muslim Brotherhood and How Does it Operate?
9. Genesis of the Muslim Brotherhood
10. Movement of the Muslim Brotherhood into the West
11. The Muslim Brotherhoods Westward Infiltration
12. The Muslim Brotherhood in America
13. The Holy Land Trial: On the Trail of the Muslim Brotherhood
14. The Muslim Brotherhoods Strategic Plan
15. Penetration of the US Government: A Case Study
16. Mapping the Muslim Brotherhood in America
17. Whos Who in the American Muslim Brotherhood
Feel free to copy this info and spread it to other forums.
Nobody who believes in Sharia Law should be allowed into the US of A because their first belief is to destroy America. That is a fact whether they will say it out loud or keep it hidden from public view. Refugees / immigrants who have no desire to learn English are saying they don't want to assimilate into our culture. Islam is an especially scary culture / religion for females, young boys and farm animals.
Would you go to a country where the people made you nervous? Why do these Muslims come to America when they are offended that the women here wear short skirts and have their hair exposed for all to see? If our culture offends you, why do you want to raise your children here? I'll tell you why. Because you intend on taking over the control of this country, that's why!
How do you integrate an ideology that is convinced that non-Muslim political systems are evil into Europe? What explanatory videos will you use to admonish Ahmed from Syria that he shouldnt set off bombs at the railway station even though his religion commands him to fight the infidels? Which job will you use to induce Abdul to abandon his fervent belief that everyone must live under Islamic law?
Islamic Sharia law goes beyond Islamic terror group ISIS, and the problem of massive migration by an assimilation-resistant Sharia supremacist culture will ensure radicalization for years to come. The problem with mass immigration from sharia enclaves is not merely that trained terrorists may infiltrate the immigrant population. It is that sharia-adherent, assimilation-resistant Muslims will form sharia enclaves in the U.S., as they have throughout Europe, where young Muslims will be radicalized under our noses in the years to come.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436505/mass-shooting-florida-anti-gay-violence-rooted-muslim-law
Very strange. Did anyone else die but him? And why would he get the MOH for that?
They have their own constitution which they follow which, incidentally, a copy of which I hear was what Khizr Khan was actually waving around on camera .... not a pocket version of the US Constitution.
So, to answer your question, where it says "all," it means "all", including the US Constitution, English common law, and common law as practiced in the sate courts of the US.
I'm open minded, but before I subscribe to a believe that Khan advocates Sharia be substituted for US law, I'd like to see something other than a scholarly dissection of Sharia followed by inference - that's CNN methodology, and it flat out doesn't work.
Challenge: go to google search engine
Type “prayer time “ and then type the time of any city or small town in the United States. For example “prayer time Dallas”
Report what comes up first. You will be shocked if you have not already tried this.
Try that goathumper shite around me, muzz boy, and your traitor ass will be subordinated to my boot.
Imho, the entire story has yet to be told.
Capt Khan is not a MOH recipient.
He was awarded a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star, posthumously.
.... OOOOPS .... I have since proven that it was indeed a pocket version of the US Constitution he was waving around ...... My Bad ....
And don’t forget — the Dems dragged this guy out to attack Trump. I guess they prefer Sharia law to the US Constitution too?
I don’t believe him, but I do believe he knows and practices “taqiyya” or lying to the infidels.
His son may have been a patriot, but this Islamic father is not.
Trump is a chess grand master.
Trump vindicated again - I hope he goes to every liberal propaganda outlet and rubs their nose in it.
Waving our Constitution while proving he didn’t understand it or had never read it. Nowhere does it say or imply anything about unlimited admission of Muslim immigrants.
His late son’s behavior on the battlefield is currently the subject of some controversy according to military personnel who served while in his presence. So whether or not he was a “true American” has yet to be conclusively documented.
Blast this everywhere and have it ready if some idiot leftist (redundant, I know) brings this jerk up and shove it down their throats. Too bad Trump can’t without keeping this ahole in the news and allowing the media to twist the narrative more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.