Clinton Cash: Khizr Khan’s Deep Legal, Financial Connections to Saudi Arabia, Hillary’s Clinton Foundation Tie Terror, Immigration, Email Scandals Together

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: 2016 elections, Clinton character, Clinton cover ups, Clinton e-mails, Clinton Foundation, Corruption, Democrat National Convention, Democrat Party, Department of State, Donald Trump, Foreign policy, Hillary and media, Hillary Clinton and immigration, Hillary Clinton and Islam, Islamic immigration, Islamic terrorism, Khan-Gate, Saudi Arabia
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Clinton Cash: Khizr Khan’s Deep Legal, Financial Connections to Saudi Arabia, Hillary’s Clinton Foundation Tie Terror, Immigration, Email Scandals Together, Breitbart, Matthew Boyle, August 1, 2016

Khizr Khan, father of fallen US Army Capt. Humayun S. M. Khan waves as he stands near the podium before speaking during the final day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia , Thursday, July 28, 2016. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

Khizr Khan, father of fallen US Army Capt. Humayun S. M. Khan waves as he stands near the podium before speaking during the final day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia , Thursday, July 28, 2016. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

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.

Trump, of course, has called on Hillary Clinton to have the Clinton Foundation return the money.

“Saudi Arabia and many of the countries that gave vast amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation want women as slaves and to kill gays,” Trump wrote in a Facebook post back in June, according to Politico. “Hillary must return all money from such countries!”

“Crooked Hillary says we must call on Saudi Arabia and other countries to stop funding hate,” Trump posted in a separate Facebook posting at the time. “I am calling on her to immediately return the $25 million plus she got from them for the Clinton Foundation!”

Of course, to this day, Hillary Clinton and her Clinton Foundation has kept the money from the Saudi Arabian government.

Schoffstall’s piece in the Washington Free Beacon also notes how Hogan Lovells lobbyist Robert Kyle, per Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, has bundled more than $50,000 in donations for Clinton’s campaign this year.

Khan’s connections with the Hogan Lovells firm run deep, according to a report from Law.com written by Katelyn Polantz.

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

Polantz wrote that Khan worked at the mega-D.C. law firm for years.

“Khan spent seven years, from 2000 to 2007, in the Washington, D.C., office of then-Hogan & Hartson,” Polantz wrote. “He served as the firm’s manager of litigation technology. Although he did not practice law while at Hogan, Khan was well versed in understanding the American courts system. On Thursday night, he described his late son dreaming of becoming a military lawyer.”

But representing the Clinton Foundation backing Saudi Arabian government and having one of its lobbyists bundle $50,000-plus for Clinton’s campaign are hardly the only places where the Khan-connected Hogan Lovells D.C. mega-firm brush elbows with Clinton Cash. 

The firm also handles Hillary Clinton’s taxes and is deeply connected with the email scandal whereby when she was Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton set up a home-brew email server system that jeopardized classified information handling and was “extremely careless” according to FBI director James Comey.

“A lawyer at Hogan & Hartson [Howard Topaz] has been Bill and Hillary Clinton’s go-to guy for tax advice since 2004, according to documents released Friday by Hillary Clinton’s campaign,” The American Lawyer’s Nate Raymond wrote in 2008, as Hillary Clinton ran for president that year. “The Clintons’ tax returns for 2000-07 show combined earnings of $109 million, on which they paid $33 million in taxes. New York-based tax partner Howard Topaz has a broad tax practice, and also regularly advises corporations on M&A and executive compensation.”

Breitbart News’ Patrick Howley, in a deep investigative piece on Hillary Clinton’s email scandal, late last year uncovered how Topaz’s firm—which employed Khan while Topaz did Hillary Clinton’s taxes—is also connected to the email scandal.

“Topaz was a partner at Hogan & Hartson, which later merged to become known as Hogan Lovells, where Topaz continues to practice. The firm’s lawyers were major donors to Hillary Clinton’s first presidential campaign,” Howley wrote.

For her private email system, Clinton used a spam filtering program MX Logic.

“Hogan & Hartson handled the patent for MX Logic’s email-filtering program, which McAfee bought the small company for $140 million in 2009 in order to acquire,” Howley wrote. “The MX Logic company’s application for a trademark for its SPAMTRAQ program was filed in 2004 on Hogan & Hartson stationery and signed by a Hogan & Hartson attorney. Hogan & Hartson has been responsible for MX Logic annual reports. The email company’s Clinton links present more evidence that Clinton’s political and legal establishment was monitoring her private email use.”

If that all isn’t enough, that same Hogan & Hartson law firm—now Hogan Lovells—employed Loretta Lynch, the current Attorney General of the United States. Lynch infamously just a few weeks ago met with Bill Clinton, Hillary’s husband and the former president, on her private jet in Phoenix just before clearing Hillary Clinton of any wrongdoing when it came to her illicit private email server system.

Khan’s own website for his own personal law firm KM Khan Law Office shows he represents clients in the business of buying visas to enter the United States. One of his specific areas of practice, according to the website, is “E2 Treaty Investors, EB5 Investments & Related Immigration Services.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Committee, has detailed how the EB5 immigration program is “riddled with flaws and corruption.”

“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.”

From there, Sen. Grassley listed out several of the “flaws” with the EB5 immigration program that Khan works in:

– Investments can be spent before business plans are approved. 

– Regional Center operators can charge exorbitant fees of foreign nationals in addition to their required investments.  

– Jobs created are not “direct” or verifiable jobs but rather are “indirect” and based on estimates and economic modeling.

– Jobs created by U.S. investors are counted by the foreign national when obtaining a green card, even if EB-5 money is only a fraction of the total invested.

– Investment funds are not adequately vetted. 

– Gifts and loans are acceptable sources of funds from foreign nationals.

– The investment level has been stagnant for nearly 25 years.

– There’s no prohibition against foreign governments owning or operating regional centers or projects.

– Regional centers can be rented or sold without government oversight or approval.

– Regional centers don’t have to certify that they comply with securities laws.  

– There’s no oversight of promoters who work overseas for the regional centers.

– There’s no set of sanctions for violations, no recourse for bad actors.

– There are no required background checks on anyone associated with a regional center.

– Regional centers draw Targeted Employment Area boundaries around poor areas in order to come in at a lower investment level, yet the jobs created are not actually created in those areas.

– Every Targeted Employment Area designation is rubberstamped by the agency.

– Adjudicators are pressured to get to a yes, especially for those politically connected. 

– Visas are not properly scrutinized. 

– Visas are pushed through despite security warnings.

– Files and applications lack basic and necessary information to monitor compliance.

– The agency does not do site visits for each and every project.

– There’s no transparency on how funds are spent, who is paid, and what investors are told about the projects they invest in.

That’s not to mention the fact that, according to Sen. Grassley, there have been serious national security violations in connection with the EB5 program that Khan works in and around already. In fact, the program—according to Grassley—was used by Middle Eastern operatives from Iran to attempt to illicitly enter the United States.

“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.”

Maybe all of this is why–as Breitbart News has previously noted–the Democratic National Convention made absolutely no mention of the Clinton Foundation or Clinton Global Initiative. Hillary Clinton’s coronation ceremony spent exactly zero minutes of the four nights of official DNC programming talking about anything to do with perhaps one of the biggest parts of her biography. 

Comments: Be the first to comment

Report: Recruitment of Child Terrorists by Palestinians Ignored by U.N.

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Israel, Palestinian child terrorists, Palestinian heroes, Palestinian incitement, United Nations
Tags: , , , ,

Report: Recruitment of Child Terrorists by Palestinians Ignored by U.N., Washington Free Beacon,  , August 1, 2016

At least 42 Palestinian child terrorists have attempted 36 attacks from the second half of 2015 until May 2016, according to a new report obtained exclusively by the Washington Free Beacon that criticizes the United Nations for omitting these statistics from its official records on the use of child soldiers.

The U.N. is slated to discuss its annual report on Children and Armed Conflict this week. Its section on Palestinian children states, “Limited information is available about the recruitment or use of children.”

However, a counter-report issued by a leading human rights organization calls this finding into question by detailing at least 36 instances in which Palestinian children have attempted to carry out terrorist attacks.

Insiders apprised of the findings say the U.N.’s omission of these statistics calls into question the integrity of its report and provides further evidence of a deep anti-Israel bias at the organization.

“The preferred method of murder and attempted murder by Palestinian child terrorists are stabbings or knifings, the modus operandi in 34 of the 36 attacks,” according to the report, authored by Human Rights Voices, an anti-discrimination group that monitors the U.N.

Male and female children ages 11 to 17 have perpetrated terrorist attacks over the past year, according to the report.

Boys carried out at least 14 of the attacks while girls committed 11, according to the report. The terrorist’s gender was not identified in 17 cases.

Anne Bayefsky, a lawyer who heads Human Rights Voices and directs the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust, said the U.N. is covering up Palestinian crimes and skewing official records on child terrorists.

“Obviously, information on these incidents is readily accessible,” Bayefsky wrote in the report. “And the Palestinian U.N. Ambassador publicly supported child terrorism at the U.N. itself. Moreover, videos, photographs, television programs, and social media outlets—from Palestinian and Israeli sources—provide a multitude of evidence both of Palestinian children engaged in armed conflict and Palestinian adults (from the political sphere to the education system to the family unit) promoting such behavior.”

“Shockingly, however, the U.N. Secretary-General’s most recent annual report on Children and Armed Conflict, released in May 2016, contains the following statement specifically about Palestinian children: ‘Limited information is available about the recruitment or use of children,’” she added, noting that “the Secretary-General’s claim is manifestly untrue.”

The omission of these statistics raises questions about the U.N.’s integrity and ability to objectively record the number of Palestinian child terrorists, according to Bayefsky.

“The United Nations is not merely engaged in a feeble cover-up,” she wrote “The U.N. is now an active enabler of the violation of the rights of Israelis and Palestinians: the basic rights to life and security of the person of the Israeli victims of Palestinian children engaged in terrorism, and the rights of Palestinian children not to be recruited or engaged in terrorism in the first place.”

The report further disclosed that senior Palestinian officials have encouraged and praised the recent wave of terrorism against Israel.

During a speech at Turtle Bay, the Palestinian representative to the U.N. publicly celebrated a string of 16 attacks in 2015 in which “Palestinian child terrorists had murdered two and injured nine.”

“We are so proud that in this popular uprising that has started almost two months ago, that the backbone of this uprising are the youth of Palestine,” Riyad Mansour said at the U.N. headquarters on Nov. 23, 2015.

“Since that time, Palestinian child terrorists have attacked Israelis at least another 20 times,” according to Bayefsky’s report.

Comments: Be the first to comment

Hillary ‘Really Proud’ of Clinton Foundation — but Hid It Completely from DNC

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: 2016 elections, Clinton Cash film, Clinton character, Clinton Foundation, Corruption, Democrat National Convention, Department of State, Donald Trump
Tags: , , , , , ,

Hillary ‘Really Proud’ of Clinton Foundation — but Hid It Completely from DNC, Breitbart, Ezra Dulis, July 31, 2016

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton told Fox News’ Chris Wallace that she is “really proud” of her family’s charity the Clinton Foundation — after spending the past week hiding its existence from viewers of the Democratic National Convention.

The glaring contradiction prompted a video comparison, which you can watch above.

Wallace, in an exclusive sit-down interview, asked Clinton about allegations first made in Clinton Cash, the book and now film/graphic novel, that Clinton used the multi-billion-dollar charity for international “pay-to-play” deals while she served as Secretary of State. Author and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer says that Clinton Foundation donors were on the receiving end of corrupt deals approved by Hillary’s State Department — including the sale of U.S. uranium to Russia and a rare, lucrative mining permit in Haiti.

Clinton retorted that she is “really proud of the Clinton Foundation,” yet not a single speaker at the DNC last week — not even Bill or Chelsea Clinton — mentioned the Foundation or its spinoffs such as the Clinton Global Initiative. A dramatic documentary clip on Hillary’s record of service, narrated by acclaimed actor Morgan Freeman, failed to mention the Clinton Foundation or its work around the world. The omission left the clip feeling oddly scant, as only two non-politicians appeared on camera with stories to praise Clinton’s record from over 40 years in political life.

This week, news broke that the IRS is investigating the Clinton Foundation. Earlier this month, FBI Director James Comey would not confirm or deny whether the bureau is investigating the Foundation during congressional testimony. Just days later, The Globe and Mail reported that “The Canadian affiliate of the Clinton Foundation is spending an astounding 78 percent of the money it raises on administrative costs.”

Read the transcript of Wallace and Clinton’s exchange:

WALLACE:  Let’s talk about the Clinton Foundation and allegations of pay-to-play, the argument, the allegation that foreign companies and foreign countries either donated big money to the foundation, or paid your husband for big money for speeches in order to influence your work as secretary of state.  In the first 12 years after he left the White House, President Clinton made 13 speeches for which he got $500,000 or more.  Eleven of those 13 were while you were secretary of state, and they were all paid for by foreign interests.

Are we to believe that’s just a coincidence?

CLINTON:  Well, there’s no truth to any of these allegations.

(CROSSTALK)

WALLACE:  Well, I mean, it is true that they gave — that they did make these speeches.  They are all (ph) by foreign interests, and he was getting much bigger speaking fees.

CLINTON:  He got — he gave speeches as soon as he left the White House all the way up until the last year, and he spoke all over the world, as well as throughout America, to all kinds of groups.

But let’s get to the nut of your question.  I’m really proud of the Clinton Foundation.  I am proud of the work that it does.  Thanks to the Clinton Foundation, 9 million more people in our world have access to HIV/AIDS drugs because they negotiated contracts that made them affordable.

And there is absolutely no connection between anything that I did as secretary of state and the Clinton Foundation.  So, people can say that, but I’m proud of our philanthropic work, our personal/family philanthropic work, the work of the Clinton Foundation.

I’d like to see Donald Trump’s tax returns to find out how much philanthropy he’s ever done.

Comments: Be the first to comment

Pope Francis: “It’s not fair to identify Islam with violence. It’s not fair and it’s not true.”

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Islam and terrorism, Pope Francis, Religions and terrorism
Tags: , ,

Pope Francis: “It’s not fair to identify Islam with violence. It’s not fair and it’s not true.” Jihad Watch, , August 1, 2016

The Pope is once again ignoring a simple distinction: while people of all faiths and backgrounds commit acts of violence, Islam is unique among world religions in having a developed doctrine, theology and legal system mandating warfare against unbelievers. Unless and until that is confronted, Muslims will continue to commit acts of violence against non-Muslims, including Christians. The Pope is betraying the Christians of the Middle East and the world, and all the victims of jihad violence, by repeating palpable falsehoods about the motivating ideology of attacks upon them, instead of confronting that ideology and calling upon Muslims to renounce and reform Islam’s doctrines of violence.

“The pope said that when he reads the newspaper, he reads about an Italian who kills his fiancé or his mother in law. ‘They are baptized Catholics. They are violent Catholics.’” Does Catholicism teach the murder of fiancés or mothers in law? No. Does Islam teach jihad warfare against unbelievers? Yes.

“The pope said that in every religion there are violent people, ‘a small group of fundamentalists,’ including in Catholicism.” There have been 28,923 violent jihad terror attacks worldwide since 9/11. How many violent attacks have there been in that span by violent Catholic “fundamentalists” doing violence in the name of Catholicism?

Pope Francis kisses the foot of a man during the foot-washing ritual at the Castelnuovo di Porto refugees center, some 30km (18, 6 miles) from Rome, Thursday, March 24, 2016. The pontiff washed and kissed the feet of Muslim, Orthodox, Hindu and Catholic refugees Thursday, declaring them children of the same God, in a gesture of welcome and brotherhood at a time when anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant sentiment has spiked following the Brussels attacks. (L'Osservatore Romano/Pool Photo via AP)

Pope Francis kisses the foot of a man during the foot-washing ritual at the Castelnuovo di Porto refugees center, some 30km (18, 6 miles) from Rome, Thursday, March 24, 2016. The pontiff washed and kissed the feet of Muslim, Orthodox, Hindu and Catholic refugees Thursday, declaring them children of the same God, in a gesture of welcome and brotherhood at a time when anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant sentiment has spiked following the Brussels attacks. (L’Osservatore Romano/Pool Photo via AP)
The kiss didn’t help.

“Pope Francis denies that Islam is violent,” by Inés San Martín, Crux, July 31, 2016 (thanks to Matt):

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE – Pope Francis on Sunday defended his avoidance of the term “Islamic violence” by suggesting the potential for violence lies in every religion, including Catholicism.

“I don’t like to talk about Islamic violence, because every day, when I read the newspaper, I see violence,” Francis said, when asked about why he never speaks of Islamic terrorism or fundamentalism when condemning attacks such as the murder of a French priest last week, who had his throat slit by an Islamic terrorist as he was celebrating Mass.

The pope said that when he reads the newspaper, he reads about an Italian who kills his fiancé or his mother in law.

“They are baptized Catholics. They are violent Catholics,” Francis said, adding that if he speaks of “Islamic violence,” then he has to speak of “Catholic violence” too.

The pope made his remarks in a wide-ranging news conference with journalists travelling with him back to Rome after a five-day visit to Poland in which Francis presided over World Youth Day, a gathering of Catholic youth from all around the world in Krakow, Poland.

The pope said that in every religion there are violent people, “a small group of fundamentalists,” including in Catholicism.

“When fundamentalism goes as far as murdering … you can murder with your tongue and also with the knife,” he said.

“I believe that it’s not fair to identify Islam with violence. It’s not fair and it’s not true,” he continued, adding that he’s had a long conversation with the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, the Cairo-based Islamic university often described as the Vatican of the Sunni world.

“I know how they think. They look for peace, encounter,” he said.

Francis added that in the case of European youth, many have been left “with no ideals, no work, that end in the hands of drugs and alcohol, and then go over there [didn’t specify] and enlist.”

He did acknowledge that ISIS is an “Islamic state that presents itself as violent.”

“It’s a fundamentalist group that calls itself ISIS, but it can’t be said, it’s not true, and it’s not fair, that Islam is terrorist,” Francis said.

Although clarifying that he didn’t know if he should say it because “it’s dangerous,” the pope then admitted that terrorism grows when “there’s no other option.”

“As long as the god of money is at the center of the global economy and not the human person, man and woman, this is the first terrorism,” he said, defining it as a “terrorism at the bases,” against the whole of humanity….

Comments: Be the first to comment

What the Arab League Meeting Reveals

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Arab League, Impotence, Iran, Islamic terrorism, Palestinian issues
Tags: , , , ,

What the Arab League Meeting Reveals, Gatestone Institute, Lawrence A. Franklin, August 1, 2016

♦ The most significant aspect of this year’s Arab League conference was the downgrading in significance of Palestinian issues on the agenda.

♦ The community of Arab states is bereft of the confidence to act collectively in its own interests, and has a fearful inability to meet the challenge of either Iran or radical Islamic terrorism, which threaten the very existence of their regimes.

The Arab League concluded its 27th annual summit on July 28 in Nouakchott, Mauritania. The sessions exposed the deep divisions in the Arab world, the bloc’s decreased influence in regional affairs, and the declining importance of Palestinian issues in the Middle East.

The annual affair apparently failed to make progress on last year’s Saudi proposal to establish an all-Arab, multinational force in response to Iran’s aggressive policies in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. The Nouakchott-hosted sessions also seem to have made no progress toward developing a unified anti-terrorist agenda. The growth of the Islamic State presence in Libya and elsewhere in North Africa was evidently a prime motivator for the perceived need for an anti-terrorism policy.

1739The Arab League concluded its annual summit on July 28, which was held this year in a tent in Nouakchott, Mauritania. (Image source: CCTV News video screenshot)

The Arab League’s precipitous decline in political clout was symbolically exposed by the failure of many key national leaders to attend the conference. The leaders of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Tunisia did not attend. Only eight national leaders from the 22-member organization attended the conference.

However, the most significant aspect of this year’s conference was the downgrading in significance of Palestinian issues on the agenda. Perhaps aware of this development, Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas also decided not to attend. However, PA Minister of Foreign Affairs Riyad al-Maliki explained that Abbas could not attend due to the recent death of his brother. Later, Maliki, somewhat quixotically, called upon the Arab League to help sponsor a UN Resolution to initiate a lawsuit against the United Kingdom for having embraced the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which made it official London policy to support the creation of a national home for the Jewish People.

Nevertheless, when the representative of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hectored delegates that they no longer seem to treat the depressed state of the Palestinian people as the overriding issue that should unite all Arabs, his pleas seemed to fall on deaf ears. The PFLP gave public evidence of the Palestinian issue’s fall from priority, stating on their website that “this year’s resolutions are no more than a carbon copy of the resolutions of the Arab Summits made in previous years. It reflects the situation too of the Arab League which long ago lost the Arab peoples’ confidence.”

Hamas also ruefully expressed similar frustration with the Arab League delegates, saying the summit “reflects the status of decline which the Arabs are suffering, even at the official level.”

Ironically, the only commentator who assessed that the Palestinian issue remains paramount in Arab minds was the French Consul General in Jerusalem, Herv Magro, who commented that “the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is the central issue in the Middle East.”

Arab and Islamic states traditionally give lip service to the Palestine issue and Israel’s “occupation” of Arab lands. However, from the substance discussed at the Arab Summit, it seems apparent that Palestinian affairs and the so-called Arab-Israeli peace process are not currently the primary concerns of Arab states. Certainly, there was little evidence at this year’s annual meeting that Palestine was any representative’s principal concern, except that of the PFLP delegate.

The tenor of this year’s conference demonstrates the politically reality of a divided Arab world, a community of Arab states that is bereft of the confidence to act collectively in its own interests, and its fearful inability to meet the challenge of either Iran or radical Islamic terrorism, which threaten the very existence of their regimes.

Comments: Be the first to comment

How Hillary Helped U.S. Investors Fund Russian Research for Military Uses

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: 2016 elections, Clinton Cash film, Clinton character, Clinton Crime Family, Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton and Russia, Technology transfer
Tags: , , , , ,

How Hillary Helped U.S. Investors Fund Russian Research for Military Uses, Power Line,  Paul Mirengoff, August 1, 2016

Clinton is responsible for helping create a Russian “Silicon Valley” that has enabled the Kremlin to boost its military and surveillance capacity. And let’s not forget her role in enabling Russia to gain control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.

Russia has been well-served by Hillary Clinton’s cluelessness and greed.

******************************

Clinton is responsible for helping create a Russian “Silicon Valley” that has enabled the Kremlin to boost its military and surveillance capacity. And let’s not forget her role in enabling Russia to gain control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.

Russia has been well-served by Hillary Clinton’s cluelessness and greed.

Russia has become a major issue in this year’s presidential campaign. It should have been a major issue in the last one, but President Obama countered Mitt Romney’s attempt to inject Russia into the debate with his sophomoric quip that “the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back.” Whether it’s ISIS (aka “the jayvee”) or Russia, Obama sure knows how to spot trouble.

This year, both parties agree that Russia poses a serious threat. In this respect, and perhaps only this respect, the 2016 campaign is an improvement over last time.

With attention now being paid, Peter Schweizer’s latest piece on the Clinton Foundation will perhaps make a mark. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Schweizer shows that under Hillary Clinton’s leadership, “the State Department recruited and facilitated the commitment of billions of American dollars in the creation of a Russian ‘Silicon Valley’ whose technological innovations include Russian hypersonic cruise-missile engines, radar surveillance equipment, and vehicles capable of delivering airborne Russian troops.”

Here’s how it happened. As part of Hillary’s Russian reset, the Kremlin committed $5 billion over three years to fund Skolkovo, an “innovation city” on the outskirts of Moscow billed as Russia’s version of Silicon Valley. Clinton’s State Department worked aggressively to attract U.S. investment partners and helped the Russian State Investment Fund identify American tech companies worthy of Russian investment.

Dozens of U.S. tech firms, including top Clinton Foundation donors like Google, Intel, and Cisco, then made major financial contributions to Skolkovo. According to Schweizer, by 2012 Skolkovo had 28 Russian, American and European “Key Partners.” Of the 28 key partners, 17 have made financial commitments to the Clinton Foundation, totaling tens of millions of dollars, or sponsored speeches by Bill Clinton.

Russian money also flowed to the Clinton Foundation. Schweizer reports that Andrey Vavilov, the chairman of SuperOx, part of Skolkovo’s nuclear-research cluster, donated between $10,000 and $25,000. Skolkovo Foundation chief and billionaire Putin confidant Viktor Vekselberg also donated through his company.

As the Slolkovo project gained momentum, U.S. defense experts became alarmed. The U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Program at Fort Leavenworth warned:

The Skolkovo Foundation has, in fact, been involved in defense-related activities since December 2011, when it approved the first weapons-related project—the development of a hypersonic cruise missile engine. . . . Not all of the center’s efforts are civilian in nature.

Similarly, Lucia Ziobro, an assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office, stated that “the FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by their government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology. . .” Ziobro added, “The [Skolkovo] foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application.”

Hillary Clinton knew about the dual-use problem while she was Secretary of State. Schweizer notes that a State Department cable sent to then-Secretary Clinton (and obtained via WikiLeaks) mentioned possible “dual use and export control concerns” related to research and development technology ventures with Moscow.

Clinton ignored the problem. Was this due to the millions of dollars in Clinton Foundation donations by Skolkovo’s key partners?

Only Hillary knows for sure. But the burden should be on her to provide a more convincing explanation.

In any event, Clinton is responsible for helping create a Russian “Silicon Valley” that has enabled the Kremlin to boost its military and surveillance capacity. And let’s not forget her role in enabling Russia to gain control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.

Russia has been well-served by Hillary Clinton’s cluelessness and greed.

Comments: Be the first to comment

Lashing and Flogging: Islam and Iran

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Iran - human rights, Iran and international law, Iran scam, Iranian Islam, Iranian penal code, Islam and human rights, Sharia law
Tags: , , , , , ,

Lashing and Flogging: Islam and Iran, Front Page Magazine, Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, August 1, 2016

happy times in Iran

[D]espite all the [international] laws banning flogging, the Islamic Republic of Iran continues to use these kinds egregious punishments without feeling any pressure from the media or from international organizations. This highlights the fact that Iran is actually widening its crackdown as it is receiving sanctions relief and gaining more revenue.

********************

The ruling clerics of Iran are increasing their reliance on public flogging not only for punishing people, but also for threatening those who are violating minor Islamic and Sharia laws. 

Public lashing is orchestrated for several reasons, including to punish the person who has violated Sharia laws, impose fear in the society, humiliate the victims and cause psychological harms to the individuals.

Holding a girlfriend/boyfriend’s hand, kissing in public (even for a married couple), listening to music, drinking alcohol and wearing non-Islamic dress can all be grounds for flogging under the Islamic law of Iran. As an Iranian prosecutor, Esmail Sadeghi Niaraki, who recently arrested people for “dancing and jubilating,” said, “We hope this [flogging] will be a lesson for those who break Islamic norms in private places.”

Yesterday, according to Iran’s state-owned news agency, Tasnim, Iranian officials arrested 150 young people for being at a mixed-gender birthday party in the city of Islamshahr, close to the capital of Tehran. Young people who are arrested for attending mixed-gender parties are often fined, flogged, beaten and sometimes raped.

According to Colonel Mohsen Khancherli, Iran’s police commander for the west of Tehran Province:

“After we obtained a report about a mixed-gender party in a garden in the vicinity of Islamshahr in the west of Tehran Province, an operation was carried out by the police and another organization, leading to the arrest of dozens of boys and girls.”

He added:

“Some 150 boys and girls had gathered at the mixed-gender party under the guise of a birthday party in this garden which is situated next to a studio where unlawful music was produced and recorded. Upon arrival of the police, all those present were arrested and sent before the judiciary.”

A few weeks ago, more than 30 college students were arrested, and within 24 hours the judge ordered each to receive 99 lashes for attending a graduation party. In the last two months, approximately 600 people have been arrested, fined and lashed for celebrating.

In this video, a teenager is being lashed for helping a girl whom the moral police were attempting to arrest for wearing bad hijab. He can be heard begging for mercy.

According to Ismaeil Sadeqi Niaraki, a top Iranian cleric, Iran will not tolerate “freedom” or “having fun.” He praised the moral police for arresting and punishing those who break the Islamic laws: “Thanks [sic] God that the police questioning, investigation, court hearing, verdict and implementation of the punishment all took place in less than 24 hours.”

According to Chapter III of the Iranian Islamic constitution, Enforcement of Sentences of Flogging, Article 27:  “Flogging will be administered by a woven leather belt of approximately one meter in length and one-and-a-half centimeter in width.” The penal code goes on detailing how one should be flogged:

Article 32: Enforcement of hadd for female convicts will be carried out while the convict is in a sitting position with her body fully covered by clothing.

Article 33: Flogging for male convicts will be administered while the convict is in a standing position.  For adultery, sodomy, and consumption of alcohol, there will be no clothing other than coverage of private organs, and for qazf or pandering, flogging will be administered over regular clothing.

Flogging is banned according to international law. The Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention Against Torture prohibit torture and “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.” Various organizations within the United Nations, such as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights) and the UN Human Rights Committee, equate flogging with inhumane and cruel punishments.

Nevertheless, despite all the laws banning flogging, the Islamic Republic of Iran continues to use these kinds egregious punishments without feeling any pressure from the media or from international organizations. This highlights the fact that Iran is actually widening its crackdown as it is receiving sanctions relief and gaining more revenue.

Comments: 3 Comments

Humor |Navy to build USS Thanks Obama for deployment to every disaster

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Humor, Obama and leadership, Obama's foreign failures, U.S. Navy
Tags: , , ,

Navy to build USS Thanks Obama for deployment to every disaster, Duffel Blog, , August 1, 2016

USS Obama

WASHINGTON — The Navy announced today it would build and commission the USS Thanks Obama, a new frigate that will be used solely for rapid deployment to disasters around the world.

“We want to honor our president and thank him for all his hard work,” said Navy Secretary Ray Mabus. “While at the same time, fielding a ship that is more than capable of deploying to hotspots he has sternly tweeted about.”

The planned ship will be an updated design of the Littoral Combat Ship — which many view as one of the best ships in the Navy — though it will have integrated solar panels as its main power source. The USS Thanks Obama will also be put on the water long before its ready and will be billions over budget, in keeping with both Obama administration and Navy tradition.

The Thanks Obama will also have a more modern galley filled with vegan options, a gym that plays “Let’s Move” videos on repeat, and a medical facility with state-of-the-art waiting rooms.

Mabus also said it would be the first ship equipped with a magazine of six auxiliary captains onboard, for rapid firing and replacement.

 

Comments: Be the first to comment

Khizr Khan, Servant of the Global Umma

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: 2016 elections, Caliphate, Democrat National Convention, Democrat Party and media, Donald Trump, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic immigration, Islamic terrorism, Media and Donald Trump, Media and Hillary Clinton, Media and Islam, Quran
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Khizr Khan, Servant of the Global Umma, Front Page Magazine, Robert Spencer, August 1, 2016

(Please see also, The Disingenuous Outrage Over Khan-Gate. — DM)

kahn

The mainstream media is wild with enthusiasm these days over Khizr Khan, the father of a Muslim soldier, Humayun Khan, who was killed fighting in Iraq in 2004. Khizr Khan, brimming with self-righteous anger, spoke at the Democratic National Convention, where he delivered what the Washington Post dubbed a “brutal repudiation of Donald Trump.” Trump responded, elevating Khizr Khan to the status of full-fledged flavor-of-the-moment media celebrity. There’s just one catch: Khizr is using his son’s memory not to advance the cause of the United States, as his son apparently died trying to do, but to advance a quite different cause: that of the global umma.

The well-heeled and powerful backers of the global jihad – those who have enabled the Islamic State (ISIS), al-Qaeda, and other jihad groups to grow as powerful as they have today — are enraged at Donald Trump. They are deeply worried by his call for a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration into the United States, as that will make it much more difficult for jihadis to get into this country. They are anxious to stigmatize any and all resistance to jihad terror – and so, happily enough for them, is the Democratic Party, which has eagerly signed on to the longtime strategy employed by Islamic supremacist advocacy groups in the U.S., to demonize all effective measures against jihad terror as “bigoted” and “Islamophobic.”

So it was that Khizr Khan, in the full fury of his indignation at the DNC, trotted out a straw man, falsely claiming that Trump wanted to “ban us from this country.” Trump has said nothing about banning Muslim citizens of the U.S. from the country, only about a temporary moratorium on immigration from terror states. Even worse, all the effusive praise being showered on Khizr Khan in the last few days overlooks one central point: he is one man. His family is one family. There are no doubt many others like his, but this fact does not mean that there is no jihad, or that all Muslims in the U.S. are loyal citizens.

Khizr Khan is enraged at Donald Trump, but is Trump really the cause of his problem? Jihad terrorists, not Donald Trump or “Islamophobes,” killed his son in Iraq. And if Donald Trump or anyone else looks upon Muslims in the U.S. military with suspicion, it is with good reason: does any other demographic have as high a rate of treason as Muslims in the U.S. military? In 2003, a convert to Islam, Sgt. Hasan Akbar, murdered two of his commanding officers in Kuwait. In 2009, Major Nidal Malik Hasan murdered 13 Americans at Fort Hood.

Other than those attacks, a Muslim in the U.S. Navy discussed sniper attacks on military personnel. A Muslim U.S. naval engineer allegedly gave an Egyptian agent information on how to sink a U.S. carrier. In 2015, a Muslim National Guard soldier in Illinois planned an Islamic State jihad attack against a U.S. military base. Last February, a U.S. Army enlistee who vowed to “bring the Islamic State straight to your doorstep” pleaded guilty to attempting to detonate a car bomb at Fort Riley military base in Kansas. Just days ago, a U.S. Air Force veteran was convicted of trying to join the Islamic State.

Then there is the U.S. Muslim who gave the Islamic State U.S. military uniforms, combat boots, tactical gear, firearms accessories, and thousands in cash. Where are those uniforms now?

It is good that there are Muslims in the U.S. military who are loyal. But can we have a discussion about those who aren’t, and why they aren’t, and what can be done about it? Such a discussion is vitally necessary, but it wouldn’t serve the classic objective of the global umma, to increase the dar al-Islam (house of Islam) at the dar al-harb (house of war). Nor would an open discussion of Khan’s Sunday morning assertion on Meet the Press that terrorists “have nothing to do with Islam.”

We constantly are told this, but the repetition doesn’t make it true. In the first place, jihadis repeatedly make clear that they think what they’re doing has everything to do with Islam:

“Jihad was a way of life for the Pious Predecessors (Salaf-us-Salih), and the Prophet (SAWS) was a master of the Mujahideen and a model for fortunate inexperienced people. The total number of military excursions which he (SAWS) accompanied was 27. He himself fought in nine of these; namely Badr; Uhud, Al-Muraysi, The Trench, Qurayzah, Khaybar, The Conquest of Makkah, Hunayn and Taif . . . This means that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) used to go out on military expeditions or send out an army at least every two months.” — Abdullah Azzam, co-founder of al-Qaeda, Join the Caravan, p. 30

“If we follow the rules of interpretation developed from the classical science of Koranic interpretation, it is not possible to condemn terrorism in religious terms. It remains completely true to the classical rules in its evolution of sanctity for its own justification. This is where the secret of its theological strength lies.” — Egyptian scholar Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd

“Many thanks to God, for his kind gesture, and choosing us to perform the act of Jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims. Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you, responding back to your attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion.” — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his fellow 9/11 defendants

“Allah on 480 occasions in the Holy Koran extols Muslims to wage jihad. We only fulfil God’s orders. Only jihad can bring peace to the world.” — Taliban terrorist Baitullah Mehsud

“Jihad, holy fighting in Allah’s course, with full force of numbers and weaponry, is given the utmost importance in Islam….By jihad, Islam is established….By abandoning jihad, may Allah protect us from that, Islam is destroyed, and Muslims go into inferior position, their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligation and duty in Islam on every Muslim.” — Times Square car bomb terrorist Faisal Shahzad

“So step by step I became a religiously devout Muslim, Mujahid — meaning one who participates in jihad.” — Little Rock, Arkansas terrorist murderer Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad

“And now, after mastering the English language, learning how to build explosives, and continuous planning to target the infidel Americans, it is time for Jihad.” — Texas terrorist bomber Khalid Aldawsari

All of these, of course, may be dismissed as “extremists,” although they were also all devout Muslims who were determined to follow their religion properly. And then there are the many passages of the Qur’an exhorting Muslims to commit acts of violence:

2:191-193: “And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.”

4:89: “They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.”

5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.”

5:38: “And the thief, male and female: cut off the hands of both, as a recompense for what they have earned, and a punishment exemplary from Allah; Allah is All-mighty, All-wise.”

8:12: “When thy Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!”

8:39: “Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s entirely; then if they give over, surely Allah sees the things they do.”

8:60: “Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to terrify thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; Allah knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of Allah shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.”

9:5: “Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.”

9:29: “Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden — such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book — until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.”

9:111: “Allah has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill, and are killed; that is a promise binding upon Allah in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than Allah? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph.”

9:123: “O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you; and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing.”

47:4: “When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads. So it shall be; and if Allah had willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them; but that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will not send their works astray.”

To be sure, there are some tolerant verses in the Qur’an as well — see, for example, sura 109. But then in Islamic tradition there are authorities who say that violent passages take precedence over these verses. Muhammad’s earliest biographer, an eighth-century Muslim named Ibn Ishaq, explains the progression of Qur’anic revelation about warfare. First, he explains, Allah allowed Muslims to wage defensive warfare. But that was not Allah’s last word on the circumstances in which Muslims should fight. Ibn Ishaq explains offensive jihad by invoking a Qur’anic verse: “Then God sent down to him: ‘Fight them so that there be no more seduction,’ i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. ‘And the religion is God’s’, i.e. Until God alone is worshipped.”

The Qur’an verse Ibn Ishaq quotes here (2:193) commands much more than defensive warfare: Muslims must fight until “the religion is God’s” — that is, until Allah alone is worshipped. Ibn Ishaq gives no hint that that command died with the seventh century.

The great medieval scholar Ibn Qayyim (1292-1350) also outlines the stages of the Muhammad’s prophetic career: “For thirteen years after the beginning of his Messengership, he called people to God through preaching, without fighting or Jizyah, and was commanded to restrain himself and to practice patience and forbearance. Then he was commanded to migrate, and later permission was given to fight. Then he was commanded to fight those who fought him, and to restrain himself from those who did not make war with him. Later he was commanded to fight the polytheists until God’s religion was fully established.”

In other words, he initially could fight only defensively — only “those who fought him” — but later he could fight the polytheists until Islam was “fully established.” He could fight them even if they didn’t fight him first, and solely because they were not Muslim.

Nor do all contemporary Islamic thinkers believe that that command is a relic of history.

According to a 20th century Chief Justice of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Humaid, “at first ‘the fighting’ was forbidden, then it was permitted and after that it was made obligatory.” He also distinguishes two groups Muslims must fight: “(1) against them who start ‘the fighting’ against you (Muslims) . . . (2) and against all those who worship others along with Allah . . . as mentioned in Surat Al-Baqarah (II), Al-Imran (III) and At-Taubah (IX) . . . and other Surahs (Chapters of the Qur’an).” (The Roman numerals after the names of the chapters of the Qur’an are the numbers of the suras: Sheikh ‘Abdullah is referring to Qur’anic verses such as 2:216, 3:157-158, 9:5, and 9:29.)

How does Khizr Khan explain all that? He doesn’t — and he knows that no one in the mainstream media will ask him to. All this disinformation and obfuscation he is perpetrating serves the interests of the global umma – but not in any sense those of the United States.

Comments: Be the first to comment

The Disingenuous Outrage Over Khan-Gate

Posted August 1, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: 2016 elections, Democrat National Convention, Donald Trump, Khan-Gate, Media and Donald Trump, Media and Hillary Clinton
Tags: , , , ,

The Disingenuous Outrage Over Khan-Gate, Daily Caller, Scott Greer, July 31, 2016

While claiming that Khan is above any criticism due to his loss, they had spent the prior week attacking Pat Smith — the mother of a Benghazi victim — for being exploited by the Republican National Convention. Her crime? Sharing the story of how she believes Hillary Clinton is responsible for her son’s death, which clearly has more basis in fact than Trump being responsible for Khan’s death.

***********************

Our incredibly objective media has moved on from declaring Donald Trump an agent of the Kremlin and gushing over every moment of the Democratic National Convention to fixating itself on another unbiased story.

Namely, Trump hates the families of dead veterans.

On the final night of the DNC, Khizir Khan — a Muslim father who lost his son, Captain Humayun Khan in Iraq 12 years ago — took the stage with his wife in Philadelphia and delivered arguably the most notable speech of the entire convention. Khan condemned Trump for being un-American and sacrificing nothing for the country. It was a powerful speech, and it fully won over America’s chattering class — both in its conservative and liberal elements.

While obviously heartfelt and genuine, the reason the Democrats put Khan on stage and the media celebrated him was, in part, to bait Trump into responding. Trump did just that in an interview with ABC host and former Bill Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos.

As far as Trump putdowns go, The Donald’s response was relatively mild. For one, he said he expressed condolences for the family’s loss and their son’s service. On the negative side, he wondered why Mrs. Khan didn’t speak at the convention, which gave the impression he was implying it was due to her faith. The New York businessman also said in his characteristically humble fashion that he has made sacrifices in developing successful companies.

The comments were inartful, yet they were hardly the stuff of vicious denigration. Trump did not attack the service of the Khans’ son and the issue, as later campaign statements pointed out, dealt with the father’s criticism of the Republican nominee’s policies.

Apparently, that’s “inhuman” and “barbaric,” according to the Washington consensus. Thus, we’re in the midst of the most disingenuous Trump outrage story yet.

Here’s a few things to take away from this scandal.

One, Trump and his proposals have zero responsibility for Captain Khan’s death. The same cannot be said of Hillary Clinton, who authorized the Iraq war and continue supporting it long after it was abundantly clear it was a major disaster. Moreover, her hawkish foreign policy would lead to more unnecessary interventions into the Middle East and other parts of the world and sadly create more Gold Star families like the Khans.

To criticize Trump for his lack of sacrifice, but overlook Hillary’s lack of sacrifice and tacitly endorse her policies forcing more American families to lose their children on behalf of fuzzy ideological objectives is ridiculous.

Two, Khizr Khan is draping himself in his son’s death to attack Trump on an issue unrelated to his son’s death. A moratorium on countries where radical Islamists (whom, by the way, killed Capt. Khan) are abundant is about national security. Same goes for the proposal to secure the U.S.-Mexico border. The elder Khan claims it is unconstitutional and un-American to do both, when, in fact, legal scholars argue the measures fit very much within the precedents of American immigration law. (RELATED: Law Professors: Trump’s Muslim Moratorium Is Constitutional)

To denigrate or undermine the Khan family for their sacrifice is wrong and we should honor their son’s service. However, that does not mean the father is immune from criticism on political issues after he decided to take them up in the public arena. Upholding the standard that the families of fallen soldiers should not be criticized for anything is illogical and asinine. We certainly didn’t apply the same standard to Cindy Sheehan and her crusade against George W. Bush — a leader who was actually responsible for her son’s death.

Three, the impression given by the media that Captain Khan is reflective of all Muslims who may want to enter in the United States is just as faulty as claiming all Muslims are terrorists. It is true that 14 Muslims have lost their lives in service to this country since 9/11. It is also true that over 5000 Muslims are currently serving in our armed services. Various outlets love to report these facts with the hope it transmits the notion that Muslims are incredibly patriotic and are indispensable to our national security. While these individuals are unquestionably devoted to America, as a community, Muslims are very underrepresented in the military.

Muslims constitute one percent of the U.S. population, yet comprise a little under .3 percent of the armed forces. In contrast, whites are 62 percent of the population, yet make up 71 percent of the present military. Moreover, whites comprise over 83 percent of those who have died in the line of duty since 9/11, while Muslims constitute .2 percent of the fatalities.

With that in mind, declaring Trump’s policies on Middle Eastern migration as a barrier to the military getting the personnel they need to protect this country is not at all accurate.

Finally, it’s 100 percent certain the mainstream media is an unofficial arm of the Clinton campaign. After a whole week of trying to downplay the Wikileaks DNC scandal and cheering on every moment of the convention, they created a top-down outrage story for the sole purpose of shaming Trump and his supporters.

(Several social media posts, which I could not copy, are here in the linked article — DM)

While claiming that Khan is above any criticism due to his loss, they had spent the prior week attacking Pat Smith — the mother of a Benghazi victim — for being exploited by the Republican National Convention. Her crime? Sharing the story of how she believes Hillary Clinton is responsible for her son’s death, which clearly has more basis in fact than Trump being responsible for Khan’s death.

Additionally, the media entirely ignored the stories of the families at the Republican convention who lost loved ones to illegal immigrants. Their children died as a direct result of policies supported by the Democratic Party, but the media plays by a double standard when it comes to who gets to use their tragedy to highlight a policy issue.

The Khan affair is another demonstration that the media is deadset against Trump and will blow any story out of proportion in order to gin up resistance to his candidacy. The journalists hyperventilating over Trump’s response to Khan don’t care about Gold Star families or veterans — they just see it as a good opportunity to derail The Donald.

It’s barely August, and we already have papers of record insinuating Trump is Vladimir Putin’s Manchurian Candidate. We can only imagine what they’ll come up with next as he continues to compete with Hillary in the polls and the public forgets about the Khan fracas.

 

Comments: 2 Comments

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »