Khizr Khan has no shame

There is no comparison between Khizr Khan and Mrs. Pat Smith.  Mrs. Smith has consistently spoken out that Hillary lied to her by blaming the Benghazi attack on a video when Hillary knew it was a terrorist attack.  Further, Hillary told her they would "get" the video maker.  Thus, Mrs. Smith has a justifiable complaint that Hillary lied about the cause and failed to provide the requested security prior to the attack, and the failure to do anything to help the Americans at Benghazi.  There is a clear connection between Sean Smith's death and Hillary's conduct.

Mr. Khan's son was killed in 2004.  There is absolutely no connection between his death and Donald Trump.  Trump did not lie to Khan about how his son was killed or who was responsible.  It appears that Khan was recruited to the Democratic convention simply to attack Trump's immigration policy of proposing to suspend immigration from Muslim countries during the current war on terror.

It is Mr. Khan who should be ashamed for using his son's death to make a political statement about immigration.  It does not even make sense.  Khan said that if Trump's policy of suspending immigration was in effect prior to 2004, then his family could not have immigrated, and his son would not have been able to serve the USA.  But his son would be alive.  What is more important: that his son would be alive, or that he can use his son's death to make a political statement?

Khan is pushing a political agenda to oppose the suspension of immigration from Muslim countries and supports the election of Hillary.  And worse, he chose to use his son's death in 2004 to make a political statement in 2016.  No doubt Mr. and Mrs. Khan are sad and upset and mourn their son, but why are they using his death for their politics?

There is no comparison between Khizr Khan and Mrs. Pat Smith.  Mrs. Smith has consistently spoken out that Hillary lied to her by blaming the Benghazi attack on a video when Hillary knew it was a terrorist attack.  Further, Hillary told her they would "get" the video maker.  Thus, Mrs. Smith has a justifiable complaint that Hillary lied about the cause and failed to provide the requested security prior to the attack, and the failure to do anything to help the Americans at Benghazi.  There is a clear connection between Sean Smith's death and Hillary's conduct.

Mr. Khan's son was killed in 2004.  There is absolutely no connection between his death and Donald Trump.  Trump did not lie to Khan about how his son was killed or who was responsible.  It appears that Khan was recruited to the Democratic convention simply to attack Trump's immigration policy of proposing to suspend immigration from Muslim countries during the current war on terror.

It is Mr. Khan who should be ashamed for using his son's death to make a political statement about immigration.  It does not even make sense.  Khan said that if Trump's policy of suspending immigration was in effect prior to 2004, then his family could not have immigrated, and his son would not have been able to serve the USA.  But his son would be alive.  What is more important: that his son would be alive, or that he can use his son's death to make a political statement?

Khan is pushing a political agenda to oppose the suspension of immigration from Muslim countries and supports the election of Hillary.  And worse, he chose to use his son's death in 2004 to make a political statement in 2016.  No doubt Mr. and Mrs. Khan are sad and upset and mourn their son, but why are they using his death for their politics?