Did you see what she was wearing?
That is the clothing of someone under control of their husband.
Ghazala Khan?s son, U.S. Army Capt. Humayun Khan, was killed in Iraq in 2004.
CHARLOTTESVILLE
Donald Trump has asked why I did not speak at the Democratic convention. He said he would like to hear from me. Here is my answer to Donald Trump: Because without saying a thing, all the world, all America, felt my pain. I am a Gold Star mother. Whoever saw me felt me in their heart.
Donald Trump said I had nothing to say. I do. My son Humayun Khan, an Army captain, died 12 years ago in Iraq. He loved America, where we moved when he was 2 years old. He had volunteered to help his country, signing up for the ROTC at the University of Virginia. This was before the attack of Sept. 11, 2001. He didn?t have to do this, but he wanted to.
When Humayun was sent to Iraq, my husband and I worried about his safety. I had already been through one war, in Pakistan in 1965, when I was just a high school student. So I was very scared. You can sacrifice yourself, but you cannot take it that your kids will do this.
Humayun Khan was an American Muslim Army soldier who died serving the U.S. after 9/11. His father, Khizr Khan, spoke at the Democratic National Convention and offered a strong rebuke of Donald Trump, saying, "Have you even read the United States Constitution?"
We asked if there was some way he could not go, because he had already done his service. He said it was his duty. I cannot forget when he was going to the plane, and he looked back at me. He was happy, and giving me strength: ?Don?t worry, Mom. Everything will be all right.?
The last time I spoke to my son was on Mother?s Day 2004. We had asked him to call us collect whenever he could. I begged him to be safe. I asked him to stay back, and not to go running around trying to become a hero, because I knew he would do something like that.
He said, ?Mom, these are my soldiers, these are my people. I have to take care of them.? He was killed by a car bomber outside the gates of his base. He died trying to save his soldiers and innocent civilians.
That is my son. Humayun was always dependable. If I was vacuuming the house and he was home, he would take the vacuum from my hand and clean the house. He volunteered to teach disabled children in the hospital how to swim. He said, ?I love when they have a little bit of progress and their faces, they light up. At least they are that much happy.? He wanted to be a lawyer, like his father, to help people.
Humayun is my middle son, and the others are doing so well, but every day I feel the pain of his loss. It has been 12 years, but you know hearts of pain can never heal as long as we live. Just talking about it is hard for me all the time. Every day, whenever I pray, I have to pray for him, and I cry. The place that emptied will always be empty.
I cannot walk into a room with pictures of Humayun. For all these years, I haven?t been able to clean the closet where his things are ? I had to ask my daughter-in-law to do it. Walking onto the convention stage, with a huge picture of my son behind me, I could hardly control myself. What mother could? Donald Trump has children whom he loves. Does he really need to wonder why I did not speak?
Donald Trump said that maybe I wasn?t allowed to say anything. That is not true. My husband asked me if I wanted to speak, but I told him I could not. My religion teaches me that all human beings are equal in God?s eyes. Husband and wife are part of each other; you should love and respect each other so you can take care of the family.
When Donald Trump is talking about Islam, he is ignorant. If he studied the real Islam and Koran, all the ideas he gets from terrorists would change, because terrorism is a different religion.
Donald Trump said he has made a lot of sacrifices. He doesn?t know what the word sacrifice means.
Isn't Trump the guy who speculated that the reason the mother didn't say anything was because she wasn't alowed" to have anything to say? "You tell me," he says.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ments-on-muslim-mother-fallen-us-soldier.html
And did you really just judge a woman based on her clothing?
As it happens, you are dead wrong.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...6e52ec-571c-11e6-831d-0324760ca856_story.html
And yes, if women are wearing a hijab. burka, niqab or whatever they are called, I do judge them.
Those types of clothing have specific meanings, and all of them involves the husbands control over their woman.
Dresses and skirts should be no shorter than the top of the knee (sitting or standing). Skirt slits should be modest; open slits should be no higher than the top of the knee, closed slits should be no higher than two inches from the top of the knee. Shoulder straps should be no less than two inches wide. Anything tight, scant, backless, see-through, low in the neckline or revealing the midriff (in any position) is immodest and unacceptable. Slips should be worn under thin material. Earrings and/or plugs are permitted in ears only with the exception of a stud nose ring. No other facial piercings or plugs are allowed, including tongue.
It's not that they are wearing some kind of traditional clothing... It's that they are wearing Islamic traditional clothing. It's an indicator that the individual is a devout believer, which, in turn, is an indicator of a particular set of beliefs. Russians, Jews, Bulgarians, and Hindus don't beat their wives legally, kill gays, hack off limbs as punishment, give out lashes for alcohol consumption (can you imagine if they started doing that in Russia or Bulgaria??), and so on.
I hear this a lot and it's a silly notion. Try getting a job by walking in for your interview in pajamas instead of a suit.That is to say: don't treat people one way or another -just- because they dress in a certain way.
It's not that they are wearing some kind of traditional clothing... It's that they are wearing Islamic traditional clothing. It's an indicator that the individual is a devout believer, which, in turn, is an indicator of a particular set of beliefs. Russians, Jews, Bulgarians, and Hindus don't beat their wives legally, kill gays, hack off limbs as punishment, give out lashes for alcohol consumption (can you imagine if they started doing that in Russia or Bulgaria??), and so on.
Not all, no. Just the devout ones that adhere to Sharia law.One must be really, ******* ignorant to believe that all Muslims think that it's fine to beat their wives.
It's just more lies and hypocrisy, that's all. Hillary has been telling us that the deleted emails are all personal in nature and are not relevant to the investigation - if that's the case, then why is it a national security issue all of a sudden if Russia has them? Is it a national security scandal if Putin knows where Hillary went to lunch on a random Tuesday? Either she is lying now and trying to make a big deal out of nothing, or, more likely, she was lying earlier and those emails are actually important, in which case Russia now has blackmail material on our potential next president.I don't find those two things contradictory.
It is a national security issue if a foreign country, or nationals of a foreign country, hack the private email server(s) of a presidential candidate from another country. The content only really determines the severity. Even if all they found was a message to Bill asking him to pick up a pint of milk on his way home. It's still a security breach.
It's just more lies and hypocrisy, that's all. Hillary has been telling us that the deleted emails are all personal in nature and are not relevant to the investigation - if that's the case, then why is it a national security issue all of a sudden if Russia has them? Is it a national security scandal if Putin knows where Hillary went to lunch on a random Tuesday? Either she is lying now and trying to make a big deal out of nothing, or, more likely, she was lying earlier and those emails are actually important, in which case Russia now has blackmail material on our potential next president.
Just more scumbag antics from a scumbag. More lies and deceit. And the voters are licking it up like a kitten drinking milk from a saucer.
I don't find those two things contradictory.
It is a national security issue if a foreign country, or nationals of a foreign country, hack the private email server(s) of a presidential candidate from another country. The content only really determines the severity. Even if all they found was a message to Bill asking him to pick up a pint of milk on his way home. It's still a security breach.
You seem locked in to the idea that it's only a security issue if the information obtained was classified.
A personal security issue, yes. A national security issue? Nope.
It would be like if she parked her personal car in a bad neighborhood and left the doors unlocked and it was broken into. She says there was nothing work related in the car, so... what's the big deal? Still a crime, but not something that should threaten national security. Now if she left classified information in the car, negligently, and the car was targeted specifically to obtain that information, then yes, it would be a national security concern.
That's basically what she did! She ignored cyber security protocols and set up an unsecured personal server that was easy to hack into. This isn't a case of "omg the Russians managed to hack us" but one of "omg the Secretary of State made it easy for the Russians to hack us".This x 1000. Unless Hillary used password as her password, someone should be worried.
Every country is spying on all the other countries. Is this news to you? Every country also sets up defensive parameters to try and prevent said spying. Then a rogue Secretary of State decides to ignore those defensive parameters and the spies get through... Hmm... See the problem yet?If the people who broke into the car were local thugs? Nothing to worry about
If it seems some special agents from a foreign government did it? Maybe you should be worried they're trying to get into other cars, parked in safer places...