Big Media, Democrats, Republicans, and Generals – Using dead warriors for political or any gain.

The Khans
The Khans


WASHINGTON 2 AUGUST 2016 -Khizr and Ghazala Khan are demonstrably loving parents, and even after twelve years, they weep over their 27-year-old son, Army Captain and hero Humayun Khan’s death in Iraq a dozen years ago.

Anyone who reads American Politics Journal opinion regularly knows that I do not acknowledge – in any way – bringing in former ‘generals’ and other retired military to appear on television as talking-heads for one candidate or another.

They should remain retired, and tell their friends and neighbors what they think.
The military answers to the President of the United States and therefore could find themselves being called up (which happens) and taking orders from someone they insulted could they not?

This is why the new appearance of once-powerful men and woman all over the campaign charts is not only selfish, but also an insult to the military itself.
In the case of Mr. and Mrs. Khan things become a bit muddled:

1. Mr. Kahn, by coincidence makes his living as a lawyer representing buy-you-way-in clients who legally take advantage of more quiet opportunity to leave their own countries and gain a quick slide to green cards and future citizenship merely by investing five hundred thousand dollars in America.

2. Captain Khan, depending on his thoughts prior to death, might be in great distress over his parents appearing increasingly on television news, in newspapers and publicly, realizing they are at least a news-worthy commodity, as well as being outstanding American Citizens as they seem.

3. Assuming that the Khans are what they appear to be (and I do), they yet continue to bait and insult Donald Trump who may very well become the Commander and Chief of the United States military.

Trump has been a frequent and avid supporter of our military and our veterans – something that Mrs. Clinton has not yet equaled because at least some percentage of Democrats are not blindly approving of our military fighting, it sometimes seems, everywhere around the globe. I do approve of this, because terrorism has become a worldwide problem that seems quite impossible to stop.

Yet I continue to lament 58,000 or my American peers who were drafted into the service and murdered at war in Vietnam – for what no good reason has ever been explained, nor I have ever accepted.

Added to this are the hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, Laotians, and others in that region who we killed – including children, moms with no weapons, and others who were not part of that misguided war.

That aside, it’s number the first reason for which I criticize Mr. Khan. He earns as least part of living by billing wealthy middle eastern clients that want to live in the United States and that spoils the Khan- feast for me.

Today, Mr. Khan is only now a world-recognized expert on unusual visas and residency structures that are legal but not well known except by the bar specializing in First Class- defined immigration.

Prior to his first appearance with his wife looking pitiable, as she well is, Mr. Khan was not the most famous American immigration lawyer on the face of the earth. This begs a question of whether he spoke or speaks only from the heart, or also for the purse.

This also puts his objectives at question. Was he really so terrified of Donald Trump, or was he out to make himself wealthier by gaining not only a global reputation as a lawyer, but now as the most recognized supporter of ‘good’ Muslims in America who don’t mind ratting on other Muslims that
dabble with or otherwise support Muslim terrorists.

In addition, the Kahn’s are recognized as A-List guests for all kinds of feasts, dinners, preferences and the like.

As a consequence, Mr. Khan will be asked to speak, for fees, or not – all over the USA and beyond should he be able and willing – which it appears, at leapt this week, he is – in spades.

On the other side of this messy coin is the potential for the Khan family here to be in grave danger from any terrorists in hiding that are told, or simply do, harm or murder them. I hope that Mr. Khan thought out his outburst, delivered by a practiced orator as almost all lawyers remain. I mention this only to be
balanced – The Khans may have also shown great bravery in putting themselves in harm’s way.

The Khan question is fraught with complexity. Certainly Mr. Khan enjoys free speech as we all do – he is an American. However, the first amendment does not guarantee free speech knowingly aimed at tens of millions from all over the world nor to take a negative stance against Donald Trump or any candidate for President including a positive one for Secretary Clinton.

I am an independent – and I have not made up my mind who to vote for. My background is heavily anti-Republican since we went to war in Iraq, but I am well known for presenting in writing thousands of articles in favor of Democrats and Republicans as well.

I made my start in policy and politics through Ronald and Nancy Reagan, both of whom I venerated. I was trained at the highest level by the Republican National Committee while running the US Senate Campaign of Republican Senator Ed Howard (PA) a great man and progressive Republican. I made an agreement with the RNC to provide them with my office’s services as well.
I try to be fair to all sides, but not in some stealthy manner. I do decide what is real and what is not – and I have no conclusions on this situation except to say that such a deduction is impossible today – something our news editors should think about with some enthusiasm.

I do not believe that Muslim-based terrorists are maiming and killing because of Quran teachings – but form unholy ignorance and poverty. Far too many middle eastern youngsters can look forward to a life other than so- filled with poverty and without chances that it makes all Americans look like millionaires
in comparison.

I think that educated Muslims that have their private agendas are luring the younger into their armies and terror cells for the reason that most of these boys and girls perceive, at a very early age; that they have little or nothing to look forward too but the ignoble lives.

I have little problem with any group, anywhere, rising up against those who are responsible for their situations, lack of democracy, and insisting on rules designed to make certain they cannot know about even legal peaceful revolt. Muslim men and women are put to death because they dare to speak out in

It may be that we chose are allies inartfully, or that we used their alliances to perpetrate our own gains. This is why, perhaps, the young neo-terrorists are attacking the West today. After all, western powers are the original colonists of many nations including those dominated by Muslim beliefs.

Could today’s young and uneducated Muslims believe or be taught we Americans are at least partially at fault for their current problems?
In conclusion, I believe that intentionally or not, the Khans have bared their grief to exercise their freedom, but the grim shadows that will follow them, were not the sole or most important intention of the First Amendment – Free speech is here like nowhere else because it was meant to guarantee the ability to speak against, as well, to  lesser extent, to support our governments.
Was Mr. Kahn speaking against our government – No. Will Mr. Kahn benefit from his original and following presentations? – Yes.  Kahn had every right to speak against Donald Trump who is stubbornly against any Muslims entering the
country until the terror can be confronted successfully and terror groups are erased.

Donald Trump is also entitled to speak out against what Mr. Kahn said. He has abandoned his plans to ban all Muslims from travel to the US. He has supported, more than any Republican candidate our troops and our veterans. He has read the Constitution, probably more than once during his excellent opportunities for education.

I think the Kahn’s should be respected for the feelings, but I also think that the DNC should not have allowed him to speak at last week’s DNC Convention for fear that it would appear that the Democratic Party could be using the death of a fine American – to feather Secretary Clinton’s nest and help the down-ballot Democrats running for the House and Senate.
I continue to believe it is wrong to use the excuse of the heroic death of a soldier, who is after all trained to kill, as the excuse to attack others – especially because we have no draft and everyone in the services is a volunteer and paid – though regrettably too little – to serve their country when and if the Pentagon
order is such.
It is unfortunate for the Khan’s to have used the terrible loss of their son, and just as disgraceful for the Generals that appear on Fox News et al, and write op-eds against Democrats or Republicans, and for both political parties to spin the
military dead to their own gains.

_ _

Leave a Reply

Translate »
%d bloggers like this: