Surprise! Khizr Khan Has Ties to Saudi Arabia and Possibly Clinton Cash

“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,” reports Breitbart.com.

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 [of] 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.

So let me get this straight. Democrats find a Muslim whose son died in a war brought about by Muslims to intimidate critics of Islam into not speaking their minds.

Donald Trump takes the bait and questions the wisdom of refusing to blame terrorism on Islam. People gasp and shriek, “How can you attack grieving parents like that!” Down goes Trump in the polls.

Now it turns out that Khizr Khan, the Muslim who insists Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism, has deep financial and business ties to some of the world’s richest Muslim enclaves of terrorism.

This is what happens when critical thinking goes by the wayside. If you think with your emotions, all you can see are two grieving parents. You don’t consider the reality of what they’re saying, what they represent and who actually pays their bills. It never occurs to people to wonder, “Who are these people whose conclusions we’re supposed to unconditionally and uncritically accept?”

It’s one thing to express grief and loss over your son’s death in a war. It’s another thing to exploit that tragedy as a means of promoting surrender to an enemy against whom your own son died fighting. We shouldn’t let this family’s contradiction become our national contradiction – claiming to love Islam while its advocates hack us to death. Instead, we should learn from their errors and refuse to make those same errors as a country.

Just because the Khans refuse to believe Islam killed their son, and it’s probably a good idea to renounce this savage theology based in war and destruction, doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be so willfully evasive. If we take their path, as a country we will end up like their son: tragically dead.

Just because you’re grieving a loss doesn’t make you automatically right. The fact that these parents still cling to Islam – ideologically as well as financially – does not make it rational or true that Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with the rise of violence in the world. In fact, it’s absurd to suggest such a thing.

When you think critically, you have to separate irrelevant factors. “Grieving parents” is a completely separate issue from whether what the parents are saying is right.

Grief, like any other powerful emotion, has a way of interfering with identification of the truth. It’s not unkind to point out that grieving parents who lost their son to Islam are wrong when they say Islam is actually a force for peace in the world. It’s also wrong to claim that our present policy, advocated by their candidate Hillary Clinton, of doing virtually nothing to fight ISIS and Islam is the right way to go.

Again, we continue to feel sorry for the perpetrators of evil while never considering evil’s victims. That includes potentially every one of us who does not believe in Islam’s nihilistic creed of destruction.