August 3, 2016 – San Francisco, CA – PipeLineNews.org – By now everyone who cares about the matter knows about Khizr Khan’s stooge-like attack on Donald Trump at the hate-filled DNC last week.
While addressing the audience, much of which was paid to suffer through the interminable event, and brandishing what appeared to be a deliberately "aged" copy of the U.S. Constitution [no doubt courtesy of the DNC’s prop section] Khan waved it around as if it were a talisman, with the apparent intent of demonstrating that he [a puffed-up fraud] was, as opposed to Trump, the true American.
Though probing Khan’s MO was avoided by MSM as if it was hemlock, it took little time for the Alt Media to out him as an Islamic supremacist, believing that the Shari’a is the source of all rights and thus takes precedence over all considerations including America’s supreme law.
In a review of a paper, published in the Texas International Law Journal Khan wrote:
“One of the seminar’s conclusions is that “[r]egrettably enough, contemporary Islamic practice cannot be said to conform in many respects with the true principles of Islam. Further it is wrong to abuse Islam by seeking to justify certain political systems in the face of obvious contradictions between those systems and Islamic law.” Even though the seminar in its recommendations refers to these countries as “Islamic states,” after looking into the political, social and economic structures and becoming aware of Islam’s requirements for an Islamic state, one finds that all fall short of being known as “Islamic states.” More appropriately they should be called “Muslim countries.” “Islamic state” and “Muslim state” are terms which cause much disagreement among Muslim scholars and can be blamed for the confusion they created in the minds of students of Islam and those who see Islam as it is practiced in Muslim countries.” [source, Khizr Khan review of, Human Rights in Islam, Vol. 18:239, p. 240]
Continuing on Khan asserts, agreeing with a Taliban supporting Pakistani despot that “human rights” have no existence in the abstract [certainly counter to the Founder’s – those who wrote the Constitution - conception of natural law and rights as being part of man’s birthright irrespective of time, place, class or societal position] asserts the following:
“It is against this background that the contribution made by Islam fourteen hundred years ago can be seen as representing the manifestation of the Divine Element that somehow will not let man devalue man.”
Translated this means that it is only through Islam that man’s “rights” are secured, which makes Khan a triumphalist proponent of the ideology which is today best exemplified by the Wahhabists and Seyyid Qutb’s, Muslim Brotherhood, thus making him a classic Shari'a-centric, Islamic supremacist.
©2016 PipeLineNews.org LLC. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.