Trump Responds To Slain Soldier's Father, Who Appeals To GOP Leaders

[MomentsofSanity]

Hey way to show that superior liberal intellect.

Its almost like you guys fall back on personal attacks and insults when debating facts doesn't turn out right for you.

Really gets that point across and sells the message, right?

Your post was not factual. It was refuted with citations by several posters. DrDoug being one of them. you might need to come down from the high horse and back to reality.

 

[DrPizza]

You just don't get it. I do NOT want anybody to stop Trump from self-destructing. He is doing a great job at it.

You on the other hand, are trying to prevent him digging himself in.

Tell me, do you want Trump to relent and pretend to be sane person?

I wonder why??

I just want a decent human to be our leader. Ditto to Hillary. Why couldn't she have simply said, "I sent 10's of thousands of emails. A few turn out to be classified. I'm sorry. It's a mistake I won't make again."

 

[Jhhnn]

I just want a decent human to be our leader. Ditto to Hillary. Why couldn't she have simply said, "I sent 10's of thousands of emails. A few turn out to be classified. I'm sorry. It's a mistake I won't make again."

As if that vaguely compares to Trump's shameless attack on the Khan family & his sycophants' lame justifications.

 

[brycejones]

Hey way to show that superior liberal intellect.

Its almost like you guys fall back on personal attacks and insults when debating facts doesn't turn out right for you.

Really gets that point across and sells the message, right?

Says the guy who obviously didn't read the damn thread.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

0/06699949400440440444447444444444/0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000009000490.) "" =0"')
11,,*

I'm using the Internet! Yeah!

 

[DrDoug]

I read that people were waving pocket constitutions at a Trump rally yesterday. The response? They were booed and escorted out.

Now conservatives are booing people waving the Constitution...lol!

 

[zinfamous]

Hey way to show that superior liberal intellect.

Its almost like you guys fall back on personal attacks and insults when debating facts doesn't turn out right for you.

Really gets that point across and sells the message, right?

when were facts debated in any honest way here by the Trumpfluffernutters?

When Trumpfluffernutters toss out innuendo, assumption, and fantasy as their version of facts, such individuals deserve no respect and their ideas deserve no attention.

Here's a tip: it is not a fact simply because you believe it to be. It is not a fact simply because you sifted through dozens of sources to find the one that agrees with your biases.

It seems like conservatives are still stuck in the compuserve days of the internet--they haven't yet learned to separate the chaff from the relevant information. Or, at least, those that want to tickle their flaccid ganglions with instant gratification and non-challenging information are ready and waiting to feed that need.

 

[Meghan54]

If you wont' read the source, you can read a summary of some of the evidence against him.
https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/khan-thinks-sharia-trumps-u-s-constitution/
He does not say in the essay that "sharia should not be tolerated here".

Sheesh.....that's wrong and the entire "summary of evidence" you linked is factually incorrect at best, totally twisting the facts for political gain or sheer ignorance at worst.

First, your linked "summary" said this:

In a 1983 piece, Khan wrote a review for a book compiled from speeches held at a “Human Rights In Islam” seminar in Kuwait, in which he expressed his admiration for an address given by Allah K. Brohi.

Don't see any admiration for any address given by Brohi. Possibly you could give the page number and paragraph from Khan's essay? In fact, Brohi's name does NOT appear anywhere in the essay. You'd think someone writing in admiration of an address given by Brohi would at least use his name ONCE. Yet, it appears nowhere in the essay.


Now, let's examine one of the most used "quotes" from Khan's essay that's been used as justification to condemn him, as represented here:

The invariable and basic rules of Islamic law are only those prescribed in the Shari'ah. All other juridical works … must always be subordinated to the Shari'ah.

(This is taken from 0roo0roo's linked "summary of evidence". It even was given a huge text box with the sentences in italicized bold lettering.)


Ever wonder what was left out by the ellipses in these "sentences" that everyone is using for justification for condemnation of Khan? Let's look at the original text in its entirety:

The invariable and basic rules of Islamic law are only those prescribed in the Shari'ah. All other juridical works which have been written during more than thirteen centuries are very rich and indispensable, but they must always be subordinated to the Shari'ah and open to reconsideration by Muslims.

(Pg. 25, just above Section A)


My, my , my.....looks vastly different, esp. when you take the context of Khan's essay into account, which was JURISTIC CLASSIFICATION OF ISLAMIC LAW. And I know you, amongst others, hate context, but again, context is important.


First, here's a link to the original essay: https://www.scribd.com/document/320016152/Khizr-Khan-Juristic-Classification-Islamic-Law
You might try reading it, first, before you speak one more time.


Now,for the context.I know this is hard to understand, but the essay is about divisions within Islam about legal authority, how it was derived, why several legal "schools" came into being--each with a slightly different take on law,

Most jurists are in the habit of classifying the sources of Islamic
law into two main categories...

But this classification of sources is by no means a decisive or authoritative
one. With the exception of the Quran and Sunnah, every other source, chief or supplementary, has been a matter of controversy as to its validity or definition.

A careful examination of those sources, and of the extensive
researches relating to them, would further distinguish the line that separates the first two sources from the rest of the sources.

Pretty much everything in your linked "summary of evidence" is a sham, a lie, a twisting of facts. The article depends upon one never critically reading the article nor investigating the source article, which apparently you never read either. If you had, you wouldn't be touting the bullshit being spewed by websites like your "summary of evidence" site.

 

[zinfamous]

This is an analogy of the sum total evidence against Khan that these sub-human illiterate conservative pussbags like orroararoorrooo are parading about:

In 1993, I wrote an essay about Hitler for my 8th grade world history class:

"The "final solution" as perpetrated by the Nazi party resulted in the extermination of more than 6 million Jews, Arabs, Gypsies and various other "undesireables" as defined by Hitler. ....was an effective means to their goal of national Aryan purity."

--"OMG! zin is a Nazi! he supported the Nazis and the Holocaust! Here he is praising the effectiveness of the Nazis.!"

--What I wrote, in context:

"The "final solution" as perpetrated by the Nazi party resulted in the extermination of more than 6 million Jews, Arabs, Gypsies and various other "undesireables" as defined by Hitler.

This was the most horrific example of state-sanctioned genocide at any point contemporary and classical human history. While the Nazi deployment of their final solution was an effective means to their goal of national Aryan purity, the sheer number of casualties suffered by the allied forces, the axis forces, and non-combat citizens during WWII stands as an enduring testament to the cost of freedom for everyone and as a message to those forces that would seek such terror again, that world will not stand idly by to allow this to happen, and that no price is too high to prevent such from occurring again."


---
It fascinates me that the conservatives that would support such a hollow pumpkin as MicroMussolini by disparaging the grieving family of this war hero through outright lies and character assassination have absolutely no qualms about doing so. I wonder if they can sleep at night? I can't imagine that they do not have utter contempt for themselves every day of their waking lives.

Is it that people like orroooroo have such horrible lives that they feel the world is somehow responsible for the depression and hate that fills their dark souls, that they must project blame onto the "others" that have obviously wronged them so?

More than fascinating, it's a bit frightening that such people today exist in great enough numbers that a wholly formless turnip like Casino Mussolini can rally and sway them on monosyllabic tirades alone. Such people are so thoroughly susceptible to the practiced, known and highly formulaic propaganda of fascist tyrants like The Great Orange-atang, and in such alarming numbers, that it concerns me how fragile our liberties are, even today. That such vile can so easily trump honesty, reality, pragmatic thought and the careful defense of liberty and personal freedom, should frighten everyone.

If we can owe one thing to MicroMussolini, it is that he has exposed this vile contingent of fascist, bile-filled rabble and shown us all that they exist among us. The real difficulty, now, is in what to do with such filth when their Great Orange hope is so roundly defeated.

 

[bshole]

It fascinates me that the conservatives that would support such a hollow pumpkin as MicroMussolini by disparaging the grieving family of this war hero through outright lies and character assassination have absolutely no qualms about doing so. I wonder if they can sleep at night? I can't imagine that they do not have utter contempt for themselves every day of their waking lives.

Well they swiftboated John Kerry didn't they? This would be par for the course.

 

[MongGrel]

I just want a decent human to be our leader. Ditto to Hillary. Why couldn't she have simply said, "I sent 10's of thousands of emails. A few turn out to be classified. I'm sorry. It's a mistake I won't make again."

The only problem I could see with that is Hillary would probably have caught even more flack if she had acknowledged anything whatsoever.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Well they swiftboated John Kerry didn't they? This would be par for the course.

The stink of that attack is still around. Amazing they got away with that.

 

[Jhhnn]

Well they swiftboated John Kerry didn't they? This would be par for the course.

In this case, Trump swiftboated himself by smearing the family of the fallen. It's beyond dishonorable. No politician can survive that.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

he would have been safer going after clinton's grandchildren.

 

[stlc8tr]

I know that it won't change any minds but the NY Times had a good article on the Khans and their background.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/us/khan-soldier-convention-iraq.html

 

[sm625]

Quoting Khan:

“to Muslims, the Quran being the very word of God, it is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

To the dumbed down liberals with zero reading comprehension skills, this is a statement that says, for muslims, Sharia law stands above all else, including the Constitution. That statement makes him a radical islamist and he is fair game for all criticism. Trump is 100% dead on for standing up to him.

 

[jackstar7]

Quoting Khan:

“to Muslims, the Quran being the very word of God, it is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

To the dumbed down liberals with zero reading comprehension skills, this is a statement that says, for muslims, Sharia law stands above all else, including the Constitution. That statement makes him a radical islamist and he is fair game for all criticism. Trump is 100% dead on for standing up to him.

Fear will keep the local systems in line.

 

[ivwshane]

Quoting Khan:

“to Muslims, the Quran being the very word of God, it is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

To the dumbed down liberals with zero reading comprehension skills, this is a statement that says, for muslims, Sharia law stands above all else, including the Constitution. That statement makes him a radical islamist and he is fair game for all criticism. Trump is 100% dead on for standing up to him.

Do you have a link to that quote in its full context?

 

[Aegeon]

Quoting Khan:

“to Muslims, the Quran being the very word of God, it is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

To the dumbed down liberals with zero reading comprehension skills, this is a statement that says, for muslims, Sharia law stands above all else, including the Constitution. That statement makes him a radical islamist and he is fair game for all criticism. Trump is 100% dead on for standing up to him.

You're missing among other things this is Khan basically saying what other people believe in the context of the article quote and what he is writing about. This was in an article basically explaining the schools of Islamic jurisprudence and their backgrounds including for lawyers who didn't come from a Muslim background and might not know much about it. He also followed this up by saying "It has to be admitted, however, that the Quran, being basically a book of religious guidance, is not an easy reference for legal studies. It is more particularly an appeal to faith and the human soul rather than a classification of legal prescriptions. Such prescriptions are few and limited."

In other words if you look at the rest of what he wrote, a major point is that allot of what many Muslims's often claim is Sharia law is not actually truly backed by the Quran. As a result there is an awful lot of room for secular law to take precedence on its own without any real issue of conflict with secular law in his view.

(Note regardless that plenty of Christians do think biblical law should take precedence over secular law or that the laws should be changed to reflect what they believe are the biblical commands in various areas.)

 

[Jaskalas]

Not that we'd vote for him, but a lot of us would like for Donald to somehow redeem himself, to become worthy of his position as the Republican candidate for President of the United States. To be somebody we can at least respect, so that we can have faith in the judgement of our fellow Americans who put him there.

You're thinking I'm crazy, right?

I'm a proponent of the general "America first" policies.
I too wish there wasn't an apparent blowhard egotistical maniac at the helm.
Makes it difficult to vote for what I want this November, and I remain undecided. Precisely because of... Donald being Donald.
What I'm saying is... as disappointed as I am, I'll still be watching the debates for any ray of... respectability to be found.

TL;DR, Deer in Headlights.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Quoting Khan:

“to Muslims, the Quran being the very word of God, it is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

To the dumbed down liberals with zero reading comprehension skills, this is a statement that says, for muslims, Sharia law stands above all else, including the Constitution. That statement makes him a radical islamist and he is fair game for all criticism. Trump is 100% dead on for standing up to him.

But that quote in full context has been explained over and over. Maybe not to your satisfaction, but it has been. i think drumpf may have hit his bottom. People that support him through this, well they'll be there til the end for sure.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm a proponent of the general "America first" policies.
I too wish there wasn't an apparent blowhard egotistical maniac at the helm.
Makes it difficult to vote for what I want this November, and I remain undecided. Precisely because of... Donald being Donald.
What I'm saying is... as disappointed as I am, I'll still be watching the debates for any ray of... respectability to be found.

TL;DR, Deer in Headlights.

All it would take to vote for Donald is a ray of hope? Really? After this shameless attack on a gold star family? After all the other shameless shit he's said & done in his life?

Has well indoctrinated Hillary hate eaten away your cognitive functions?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

This has been debunked for any reasonable person but lets assume its true. How does this change the heroism of the Khans Son, how does this make Trump a better man for belittling the Khans. Exactly what does it change?

 

[zinfamous]

Quoting Khan:

“to Muslims, the Quran being the very word of God, it is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

To the dumbed down liberals with zero reading comprehension skills, this is a statement that says, for muslims, Sharia law stands above all else, including the Constitution. That statement makes him a radical islamist and he is fair game for all criticism. Trump is 100% dead on for standing up to him.

Critical thinking and analysis were never a skill of yours.

You probably just got mad about all of those Ds on your papers and rather than trying to learn why, just assumed the teachers were wrong, or just liberals, right?

 

[zinfamous]

Do you have a link to that quote in its full context?

he doesn't need context. binary thinkers require only talking points. This is what happens when such people confuse the concept of traditional liberal education to something that has a political component. The GOP have been effectively dogwhistilng people like sm625 into abject ignorance for more than 5 decades now.

The effects are profound.