Ann Coulter: The Wrath of Khan

Khizr Khan, the Muslim “Gold Star Father” who harangued Americans at the Democratic National Convention, with a mute, hijab-wearing wife at his side, is just another in a long string of human shields liberals send out to defend their heinous policies. The “Jersey Girls” were the classic example, first described in that magnificent book Godless: The Church of Liberalism.

In order to shut down a debate they’re losing, Democrats find victims to make their arguments for them, pre-empting counter-argument by droning on about the suffering of their victim-spokesperson. Alternative opinions must be preceded by proof that the speaker has “sacrificed” more than someone who lost a child, a husband, or whatever.

Khan’s argument, delivered angrily and in a thick Pakistani accent at the DNC, is that “our” Constitution requires us to continue the nonstop importation of Muslims.

If the U.S. Constitution required us to admit more than 100,000 Muslims a year — as we do — we’d already be living in Pakistan, and Khan wouldn’t have had to move to get that nice feeling of home. So the “argument” part of Khan’s point is gibberish.

Luckily, Khan had Part Two: His son died in Iraq, whereas Donald Trump does not have a son who died in Iraq, so he can’t say anything.

Yes, a candidate for president of the United States is supposed to be prohibited from discussing a dangerous immigration program because Khan’s son was one of fourteen (14!) Muslim servicemen killed by other Muslims in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That’s why we’re obligated to import yet more Muslims – including, undoubtedly, some just like the ones who killed his son. Q.E.D.!

If you think that doesn’t make any sense, keep your yap shut, unless you lost a child in Iraq, too.

The truth about Captain Khan/Con’s motives is not known, but there has been valid speculation/skepticism on what happened in Iraq in 2004. Lame Cherry has been hot on the trail and presents some compelling information:

http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2016/08/now-it-is-captain-con.html

More about Daddy Khan/Con:

http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2016/08/khizr-khan-hillary-clintons-islamic.html

During WW II families hung a Maroon banner with a Gold Star on it for each family member in service. Now I guess that it has morphed into meaning a death in combat.

One blue star for each member in service. Gold star is for those who died in service. For the Gold Star lapel pin, things changed slightly after 1958:

(a) A lapel button, to be known as the gold star lapel button, shall be designed, as approved by the Secretary of Defense, to identify widows, parents, and next of kin of members of the armed forces— (1) who lost their lives during World War I, World War II, or during any subsequent period of armed hostilities in which the United States was engaged before July 1, 1958; (2) who lost or lose their lives after June 30, 1958— (A) while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States; (B) while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; or (C) while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict in which the United States is not a belligerent party against an opposing armed force; or (3) who lost or lose their lives after March 28, 1973, as a result of— (A) an international terrorist attack against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the United States, recognized as such an attack by the Secretary of Defense; or (B) military operations while serving outside the United States (including the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States) as part of a peacekeeping force.

More info: http://www.goldstarmoms.com/Members/GoldStarPin.htm

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.