Since this is the Politics Forum...

[SassyIrishLass]

Tsk, tsk tsk....

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’

New York Post columnist and former Hoover Institution media fellow Paul Sperry appeared on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon to discuss his column for Breitbart News, “Khizr Khan Believes the Constitution ‘Must Always Be Subordinated to the Sharia.’”

“It turns out that we were conned by Khan,” Perry quipped. “His past Islamic writings reveal his support for sharia, and extreme sharia enforcers, which totally contradicts his support for the Constitution he waved in all our faces at the Democratic convention.”

“Specifically, in a book review I unearthed from the ’80s, Khan praises a Pakistani mullah — of course, Khan is an immigrant from Pakistan — he praises this Pakistani mullah who advocates for the enforcement of barbaric sharia punishments, like floggings, amputations, and beheadings, for those who violate Islamic laws,” Sperry said.

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’ - Breitbart

But but but the Leftists will say:

"It's Breitbart"

The same Leftists think nothing of posting articles from The Huffington Post etc of course.

I don't give two shits what a daffy leftist whines and bawls about

I know, I'm just saying they seem to have a thing about Breitbart.

They have a thing for anything that dares questions the narrative their media masters instruct them on.

 

[Tilly]

Tsk, tsk tsk....

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’

New York Post columnist and former Hoover Institution media fellow Paul Sperry appeared on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon to discuss his column for Breitbart News, “Khizr Khan Believes the Constitution ‘Must Always Be Subordinated to the Sharia.’”

“It turns out that we were conned by Khan,” Perry quipped. “His past Islamic writings reveal his support for sharia, and extreme sharia enforcers, which totally contradicts his support for the Constitution he waved in all our faces at the Democratic convention.”

“Specifically, in a book review I unearthed from the ’80s, Khan praises a Pakistani mullah — of course, Khan is an immigrant from Pakistan — he praises this Pakistani mullah who advocates for the enforcement of barbaric sharia punishments, like floggings, amputations, and beheadings, for those who violate Islamic laws,” Sperry said.

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’ - Breitbart

But but but the Leftists will say:

"It's Breitbart"

The same Leftists think nothing of posting articles from The Huffington Post etc of course.

It's far worse than that. Coyote uses the John L Esposito outfit - Team - The Bridge Initiative | A Research Project on Islamophobia. - supporters of Wahhabi Islam, and Hamas and its fundraisers.
John L. Esposito: Apologist for Wahhabi Islam

 

[Coyote]

The reason the Khans came came out now is that this is the first election where a presidential front runner and candidate has so broadly attacked Muslims and questioned their patriotism and loyalty- calling for a complete ban on ALL immigration of Muslims, a registry of Muslims, an ID card...

Considering the mortal threat Western nations face from Radical Islam, it's logical that there should be a ban on Immigration from Muslims, a registry of all Muslims and an ID card.

This is a proper threat, it's not something in a film, it's happened and it's happening and it's going to be an ongoing threat for a considerable amount of time.

That people say that not ALL Muslims are radicalised, is a straw man. This is because what are considered run-of-the-mill moderate Muslims can become Radical's in a short space of time, literally within months, that they can go from being a non-threat to an actual threat so quickly is very disturbing.

The other aspect is we don't KNOW who are run-of-the-mill Muslims and the already Radical ones, because the latter don't advertise this to their community and neighbourhood.

So it's an impossibility to separate the wheat from the chaff, as such they all have to be subject to the same measures.

People also say that this is "bigoted" because we're "singling" out Muslims, again this is another straw man.

99% of the terrorist attacks that Western nations are experiencing are committed by Muslims.

Western nations aren't under mortal threat from Christians, Jews, Mormons, Quakers etc.

Do you understand this?

Lucy....consider this statement very very carefully: ...a registry of all Muslims and an ID card....

Is history repeating itself here?

 

[Coyote]

Tsk, tsk tsk....

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’

New York Post columnist and former Hoover Institution media fellow Paul Sperry appeared on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon to discuss his column for Breitbart News, “Khizr Khan Believes the Constitution ‘Must Always Be Subordinated to the Sharia.’”

“It turns out that we were conned by Khan,” Perry quipped. “His past Islamic writings reveal his support for sharia, and extreme sharia enforcers, which totally contradicts his support for the Constitution he waved in all our faces at the Democratic convention.”

“Specifically, in a book review I unearthed from the ’80s, Khan praises a Pakistani mullah — of course, Khan is an immigrant from Pakistan — he praises this Pakistani mullah who advocates for the enforcement of barbaric sharia punishments, like floggings, amputations, and beheadings, for those who violate Islamic laws,” Sperry said.

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’ - Breitbart

But but but the Leftists will say:

"It's Breitbart"

The same Leftists think nothing of posting articles from The Huffington Post etc of course.

I don't give two shits what a daffy leftist whines and bawls about

I know, I'm just saying they seem to have a thing about Breitbart.

They have a thing for anything that dares questions the narrative their media masters instruct them on.

Breitbart is the rightwing Media Matters.

 

[Coyote]

Tsk, tsk tsk....

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’

New York Post columnist and former Hoover Institution media fellow Paul Sperry appeared on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon to discuss his column for Breitbart News, “Khizr Khan Believes the Constitution ‘Must Always Be Subordinated to the Sharia.’”

“It turns out that we were conned by Khan,” Perry quipped. “His past Islamic writings reveal his support for sharia, and extreme sharia enforcers, which totally contradicts his support for the Constitution he waved in all our faces at the Democratic convention.”

“Specifically, in a book review I unearthed from the ’80s, Khan praises a Pakistani mullah — of course, Khan is an immigrant from Pakistan — he praises this Pakistani mullah who advocates for the enforcement of barbaric sharia punishments, like floggings, amputations, and beheadings, for those who violate Islamic laws,” Sperry said.

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’ - Breitbart

Link to where this Mullah is being "praised" ? It's not in the article.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Tsk, tsk tsk....

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’

New York Post columnist and former Hoover Institution media fellow Paul Sperry appeared on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon to discuss his column for Breitbart News, “Khizr Khan Believes the Constitution ‘Must Always Be Subordinated to the Sharia.’”

“It turns out that we were conned by Khan,” Perry quipped. “His past Islamic writings reveal his support for sharia, and extreme sharia enforcers, which totally contradicts his support for the Constitution he waved in all our faces at the Democratic convention.”

“Specifically, in a book review I unearthed from the ’80s, Khan praises a Pakistani mullah — of course, Khan is an immigrant from Pakistan — he praises this Pakistani mullah who advocates for the enforcement of barbaric sharia punishments, like floggings, amputations, and beheadings, for those who violate Islamic laws,” Sperry said.

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’ - Breitbart

But but but the Leftists will say:

"It's Breitbart"

The same Leftists think nothing of posting articles from The Huffington Post etc of course.

I don't give two shits what a daffy leftist whines and bawls about

I know, I'm just saying they seem to have a thing about Breitbart.

They have a thing for anything that dares questions the narrative their media masters instruct them on.

Breitbart is the rightwing Media Matters.

I don't care about your feelings on Brietbart, address who said what in the article and your deflection is duly noted

 

[Coyote]

So?

Woooooosh! Have you wondered why all the sudden he wants to be left alone and why he deleted the website? The man is as dirty as they come

You don't think that perhaps it's because of all this uproar he might have been recieving threats, attacks etc on it?

I think he did because it exposed him for what he is. I've also read his writings on Sharia Law....tsk tsk tsk

What specifically did you read?

It was on some site I was linked to, something he wrote a few years back and how Sharia must be followed by devout Muslims. I'll see if I can find it but it's been a day or two

It's a scholarly article on Sharia - not advocating anything. Snopes talks about it: Khizr Khan Is a Muslim Brotherhood Agent? and there is a link in there to the actual article.

It's like someone writing a scholarly article on the history of Catholic law.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Woooooosh! Have you wondered why all the sudden he wants to be left alone and why he deleted the website? The man is as dirty as they come

You don't think that perhaps it's because of all this uproar he might have been recieving threats, attacks etc on it?

I think he did because it exposed him for what he is. I've also read his writings on Sharia Law....tsk tsk tsk

What specifically did you read?

It was on some site I was linked to, something he wrote a few years back and how Sharia must be followed by devout Muslims. I'll see if I can find it but it's been a day or two

It's a scholarly article on Sharia - not advocating anything. Snopes talks about it: Khizr Khan Is a Muslim Brotherhood Agent? and there is a link in there to the actual article.

It's like someone writing a scholarly article on the history of Catholic law.

Your boy is dirty, you can apologize, deflect, scream "It's Brietbart" or whatever...but sorry this is too out there.

Also, don't go whining about Brietbart then try and pull Snopes on me.....that was stupid

 

[Coyote]

But but but the Leftists will say:

"It's Breitbart"

The same Leftists think nothing of posting articles from The Huffington Post etc of course.

I don't give two shits what a daffy leftist whines and bawls about

I know, I'm just saying they seem to have a thing about Breitbart.

They have a thing for anything that dares questions the narrative their media masters instruct them on.

Breitbart is the rightwing Media Matters.

I don't care about your feelings on Brietbart, address who said what in the article and your deflection is duly noted

Shall we ignore your the prior 4 or 5 deflections above then...including yours?

Otherwise - I've already addressed the article...

 

[Coyote]

You don't think that perhaps it's because of all this uproar he might have been recieving threats, attacks etc on it?

I think he did because it exposed him for what he is. I've also read his writings on Sharia Law....tsk tsk tsk

What specifically did you read?

It was on some site I was linked to, something he wrote a few years back and how Sharia must be followed by devout Muslims. I'll see if I can find it but it's been a day or two

It's a scholarly article on Sharia - not advocating anything. Snopes talks about it: Khizr Khan Is a Muslim Brotherhood Agent? and there is a link in there to the actual article.

It's like someone writing a scholarly article on the history of Catholic law.

Your boy is dirty, you can apologize, deflect, scream "It's Brietbart" or whatever...but sorry this is too out there.

Also, don't go whining about Brietbart then try and pull Snopes on me.....that was stupid

Show me where in the article he is advocating for Sharia and where he is praising this mullah for doing these horrible things.

Does this mean anyone who attempts to write a scholarly article on the history of religious law automatically becomes an advocate for it's application and an extremist?

Let me know when you have rational answers

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I don't give two shits what a daffy leftist whines and bawls about

I know, I'm just saying they seem to have a thing about Breitbart.

They have a thing for anything that dares questions the narrative their media masters instruct them on.

Breitbart is the rightwing Media Matters.

I don't care about your feelings on Brietbart, address who said what in the article and your deflection is duly noted

Shall we ignore your the prior 4 or 5 deflections above then...including yours?

Otherwise - I've already addressed the article...

Your childish use of "funny" as an insult betrays your ability to properly debate. When you grow the fuck up (along with your fellow leftist hags who do it) get back to me. Good day

 

[Coyote]

I know, I'm just saying they seem to have a thing about Breitbart.

They have a thing for anything that dares questions the narrative their media masters instruct them on.

Breitbart is the rightwing Media Matters.

I don't care about your feelings on Brietbart, address who said what in the article and your deflection is duly noted

Shall we ignore your the prior 4 or 5 deflections above then...including yours?

Otherwise - I've already addressed the article...

Your childish use of "funny" as an insult betrays your ability to properly debate. When you grow the fuck up (along with your fellow leftist hags who do it) get back to me. Good day

If you don't like childish insults, I recommend you refrain from using them. I'm happy to debate without insults if you are.

 

[Tilly]

by PAUL SPERRY2 Aug 201612,114

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
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.”

As Pakistani minister of law and religious affairs, Brohi helped create hundreds of jihadi incubators called madrassas and 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.

Khan, who says he immigrated to the U.S. in 1980 to escape Pakistan’s “military rule,” nonetheless spoke admiringly of Brohi in his review of his speech. He praised his remarks even though Brohi advocated for the enforcement of the medieval Sharia punishments, known as “hudood” (singular “hadd”), that were later adopted and carried out with brutal efficiency by the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan.

“Divinely ordained punishments have to be inflicted,” Brohi asserted, “and there is very little option for the judge called upon to impose Hadd, if facts and circumstances are established that the Hadd in question has been transgressed, to refuse to impose the punishment.”

Of course, such cruel and unusual Sharia punishments, ranging from stonings and floggings to beheadings, would be a flagrant violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution....

Khizr Khan Believes Sharia Trumps the Constitution

 

[Tilly]

...
In his book review, Khan takes no issue with Brohi’s shocking interpretation of human rights. In fact, he claims Brohi “successfully” explains them and argues his points “convincingly.” (The review, which lists Khan as “director” of an Islamic center in Houston, was published in the Texas International Law Journal.)

“The keynote speech of Dr. A.K. Brohi, former Pakistani minister of legal and religious affairs, is a hallmark in this book,” Khan writes. “It successfully explains the Islamic concepts of ‘right’ and ‘just’ in comparison to their Christian and Judaic counterparts.”

Adds Khan: “Brohi argues convincingly for the establishment of a moral value system before guarantees can be given for any kind of rights. To illustrate the point he notes, ‘There is no such thing as human right in the abstract.’”

In context, Khan concurs that human rights can only be guaranteed through the establishment of Sharia’s moral and legal code....

Khizr Khan Believes Sharia Trumps the Constitution

 

[Tilly]

...
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.”...

Khizr Khan Believes Sharia Trumps the Constitution

 

[Tilly]

...

A devout Muslim, Khan also cites two notorious Muslim Brotherhood radicals as scholarly sources — Muhammad Hamidullah and Said Ramadan, whom he “gratefully acknowledged...

Khizr Khan Believes Sharia Trumps the Constitution

 

[Coyote]

by PAUL SPERRY2 Aug 201612,114

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
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.”

As Pakistani minister of law and religious affairs, Brohi helped create hundreds of jihadi incubators called madrassas and 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.

Khan, who says he immigrated to the U.S. in 1980 to escape Pakistan’s “military rule,” nonetheless spoke admiringly of Brohi in his review of his speech. He praised his remarks even though Brohi advocated for the enforcement of the medieval Sharia punishments, known as “hudood” (singular “hadd”), that were later adopted and carried out with brutal efficiency by the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan.

“Divinely ordained punishments have to be inflicted,” Brohi asserted, “and there is very little option for the judge called upon to impose Hadd, if facts and circumstances are established that the Hadd in question has been transgressed, to refuse to impose the punishment.”

Of course, such cruel and unusual Sharia punishments, ranging from stonings and floggings to beheadings, would be a flagrant violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution....

Khizr Khan Believes Sharia Trumps the Constitution

Did you actually read the book review or are you basing your opinion on the interpretation of others?

 

[Coyote]

...

A devout Muslim, Khan also cites two notorious Muslim Brotherhood radicals as scholarly sources — Muhammad Hamidullah and Said Ramadan, whom he “gratefully acknowledged...

Khizr Khan Believes Sharia Trumps the Constitution

And that indicates he believes Sharia trumps the Constitution how? He's citing scholars and writers usually "gratefully acknowedge" the work of those who are they are citing. Do you know anything about academic writing?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Tsk, tsk tsk....

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’

New York Post columnist and former Hoover Institution media fellow Paul Sperry appeared on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon to discuss his column for Breitbart News, “Khizr Khan Believes the Constitution ‘Must Always Be Subordinated to the Sharia.’”

“It turns out that we were conned by Khan,” Perry quipped. “His past Islamic writings reveal his support for sharia, and extreme sharia enforcers, which totally contradicts his support for the Constitution he waved in all our faces at the Democratic convention.”

“Specifically, in a book review I unearthed from the ’80s, Khan praises a Pakistani mullah — of course, Khan is an immigrant from Pakistan — he praises this Pakistani mullah who advocates for the enforcement of barbaric sharia punishments, like floggings, amputations, and beheadings, for those who violate Islamic laws,” Sperry said.

Paul Sperry: Khzir Khan Is a ‘World-Renowned Expert on Sharia, Not the Constitution’ - Breitbart

Breitbart is a home for the bewildered.

 

[Coyote]

...
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.”...

Khizr Khan Believes Sharia Trumps the Constitution

And this is an issue...why? It's a scholarly article on Sharia from which you are cherry picking out of context bits in an attempt to change the meaning.