Khan Job-Who is Suhail Kahn, why does Grover Norquist want him on the American Conservative Union?

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | February 20, 2007 | Frank J Gaffney Jr.

[PDR]

Yes. Is it yours?

[AmishDude]

Indeed. This is disturbing.

I was hoping English was not your first language because the fact that you couldn't understand my comment leads to only one other conclusion and I was really hoping it wasn't that you were stupid.

[PDR]

You are free to believe whatever you like. And -- safe, comfortable and fat in your armchair -- you shall continue to pronounce judgment on us all.

[PDR]

PING! Being called stupid by this fellow is like being called ugly by a pig....

[Little Ray]

The enemy is in the gates, and he brought a mule load of gold.

[AmishDude]

you shall continue to pronounce judgment on us all.

[PDR]

and things debate into name-calling.... you have nothing serious to say, you cannot back up your statements, so you try and bait me into a mud-flinging contest.

the point here is that Suhail Khan, a loyal and patriotic American by anyone's standards, was nominated and elected to the ACU board despite Frank Gaffney's campaign of slurs and innuendo and associative guilt... Norquist got dragged into the discussion because he rose to Khan's defense -- and earned Gaffney's ire.

[AmishDude]

and things debate into name-calling

Are you absolutely sure English is your first language?

Suhail Khan, a loyal and patriotic American by anyone's standards,

I'm not asserting that he's not, I don't know the man. Why are you asserting with such certainty that he is?

Gaffney's point is not that Khan cannot be trusted but that Norquist, who pushed the nomination, cannot be trusted because of associations I outlined in #32...

...which you still have not addressed.

I do find it interesting that, instead of dealing with anything substantive, you immediately put on the cloak of victimhood. You see, by complaining about being called a drama queen, you make yourself more of a drama queen. Ironic, no?

[PDR]

Yes - English is my primary language but I sometimes think faster than I type, leading to errors... for debate in my last posting read descend. Now, it is EXACTLY Gaffney's point that Khan cannot be trusted. That is the whole point of the original article from which this thread evolved. And you apparently know even less about the English language than you suggest I do -- where irony is concerned, you are as well-versed as Alanis Morrisette. And isn't that ironic, "Doncha think?"

[AmishDude]

I sometimes think faster than I type,

Somehow I doubt that.

for debate in my last posting read descend.

You wanna run that through Babelfish again.

English is my primary language

Let us go into Clintonian parsing, shall we? What is your native language? What is the first language that you learned? I am not interested in which language is "primary" for you.

Oh, and you still have not addressed post #32.

[PDR]

I'll type slowly so you can understand me better... It is EXACTLY Gaffney's point that Khan cannot be trusted. That is the whole point of the original article from which this thread evolved.

And you apparently know even less about the English language than you suggest I do -- where irony is concerned, you are as well-versed as Alanis Morrisette. And isn't that ironic, "Doncha think?"

[ozzymandus]

I used to like ol' Grover, but he lost me a long time ago.

[AmishDude]

It is EXACTLY Gaffney's point that Khan cannot be trusted.

Because of his association with Norquist. But why are you so affirmatively convinced he can be?

Now you have not addressed two things that I asked: You have not addressed post #32 and you have not addressed the specifics of my question about your first language without weasel words. Trust me, if you say that English is not your first language but it is the one you use most often now, this whole conversation will go much better for you.

I await your next attempt to change the subject.

[PDR]

I thought you were kidding. English is my native tongue. It is the language I use more than any other.

And no, it is not "because of his association with Norquist." Gaffney's point, in this and other columns, is that it is Khan's association with Norquist - among others - that renders him suspect. In fact the original article is a hit piece on Khan, not Norquist.

[AmishDude]

I thought the article was about Khan. Now you are saying it's about Norquist? I'm confused.

What about post #32?

[PDR]

Now you are just being silly.

[AmishDude]

And you still don't address post #32. That says more than anything I could say.

[Kenny Bunk]

Thanks for the post.

Never could figure this Norquist kid out.

[PDR]

Oh that.... there is more than one inaccuracy in your posting... now, explain to me why you think that Gaffney's article is an attack -- personal or otherwise -- on Suhail Khan.

[PDR]

Oh that.... there is more than one inaccuracy in your posting... now, explain to me why you think that Gaffney's article is not an attack -- personal or otherwise -- on Suhail Khan.