What’s the difference between Khizr Khan and Patricia Smith? Well, Khan is Muslim for one, so he automatically gets a boost. And second, Patricia Smith’s son died in a terror attack that was directly caused by Hillary’s reckless foreign policy in the Middle East. Guess who the left, and the media, side with…
Sierra Marlee writes that Chris Matthews has said some fairly despicable things in his life, but this might be the very worst.
Sean Smith lost his life in Benghazi the night of the fatal attack that left three others dead. On Monday night, his mother, Pat Smith, took to the stage of the Republican National Convention to tell her story. She discussed how she feels Hillary Clinton is to blame for the death of her son, and boy did Matthews have a lot to say about that.
He called the woman’s claim that Clinton had anything to do with the deaths a “gross accusation.” He then went on to tell his audience that he “doesn’t care about what that woman up there” was feeling, stating that “her emotions are her own.”
Watch her heart-wrenching speech below:
How anyone could watch that and then dismiss her feelings is beyond me, but anyone can do it over at the intellectually-deficient group at MSNBC
Watch Chris Matthews’ disgusting reaction:
Matthews is absolute scum and should be ashamed of himself for what he said, but this is par for the course with him and liberalism in general. If you’re not on “their side” you don’t get to be graced with any of that “tolerance” they’re always preaching about.
It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
The mainstream media’s shameless pandering to the Clinton campaign has been on full display since the Muslim father of a fallen soldier gave a speech at the DNC, blasting Donald Trump for his stance on immigration and Islam.
According to MRC, In the four days following his speech, the network evening and morning news shows spent a whopping 55 minutes and 13 seconds covering the story….
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the news coverage for Pat Smith and her speech at the RNC.
Smith—who lost her son in Benghazi under Hillary Clinton’s watch—gave an emotional speech at the convention which was mainly ignored by the media.
In the 14 days after her speech, the network news shows dedicated just 70 seconds to her address.
ABC, CBS and NBC should be ashamed of themselves….
Thomas Lifson writing for the American Thinker reports that Khan was a Sharia Law Activist. He has also been reported to be a Muslim recruiter for admittance into the U.S>A. by selling VISAs.
Khizr Khan’s writings discovered subordinating US Constitution to Sharia law
He was presented to the nation as a Constitution-loving (he carries a pocket copy, doncha know!) immigrant who just happens to be from Pakistan, but it turns out that Khizr Khan is a recognized scholar on Sharia law. And in his published writings, he seems to approve of subordinating the Constitution to Allah’s own Sharia. Paul Sperry reports at Breitbart:
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 Brohi’s 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.”
Brohi has quite a few “accomplishments” for Khan to admire:
[Brohi] 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.
And as for Khan’s wife, the silent Gold Star Mother:
Brohi goes on to argue that human rights bestowed by Islam include the right of men to “beat” their wives.
“The best statement of the human rights is also to be found in the address delivered by the prophet [Muhammad] so often described as his last address,” Brohi said, quoting: “ ‘You have rights over your wives and they have rights over you. You have the right that they should not defile your bed and that they should not behave with open unseemliness. If they do, God allows you to put them in separate rooms and to beat them but not with severity.’”
Khan touted the supremacy of Shaira:
Khan provides his own advocacy for Sharia law in a separate academic paper titled “Juristic Classification of Islamic Law,”which he also wrote in 1983, while studying in Saudi Arabia.
“The invariable and basic rules of Islamic law are only those prescribed in the Shari’ah,” Khan writes. “All other juridical works… must always be subordinated to the Shari’ah.”
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.”
What if Sharia happens to conflict with the US Constitution? I’d like to see if Khan has addressed that point in further detail.