No on John O. Brennan for CIA director..!

ALERT: Senate members must block John Brennan's confirmation as CIA Director on March 5. Take Action - Fax the Senate!

Conservative American,

With Hagel's confirmation behind us, it's high-time to take action against next bad nominee: John O. Brennan as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Senate GOP members agree that John Brennan, Obama's counterterrorism advisor, is not the man to take lead of the CIA - already a number are preparing to do the right thing and block his confirmation. (The Senate Intelligence Committee will be voting to confirm first on March 5.)

While some Republican Senators are threatening to block the nominee for bargaining purposes - they want the Obama Admin to hand over more Benghazi documents before they consent to confirm Obama's pick - others are planning to block Brennan over his commitment (or lack thereof) to the rule of law.

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, for example, vowed to oppose the Brennan confirmation over constitutional concerns; namely, whether or not the nominee - a major player in Obama's lethal drone program - believes "that the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil."

(The Kentucky Senator, so far, has yet to receive a single response from Brennan after having dispatched to him a total of three letters.)

While both causes for blocking Obama's nominee are wise on the part of Republican Senate members, we believe that there is greater issue that is being overlooked...

John Brennan's intimate relationship with Islam.


John Brennan is a self-admitted friend of Islam.

This is not only fact, but also a major red-flag, considering that he is votes away from becoming - borrowing the words of CIA.gov - "the principal adviser to the President for intelligence matters related to the national security."

Brennan has come to the defense, and even praised, Islam and its most radical tenets throughout his government and non-government career at home and abroad.

On February 13, 2010, for example, Mr. Brennan delivered a speech at the Islamic Center at New York University - at an event sponsored by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) - where he overtly applauded Islam and his personal experience with the religion while he was a college student.

In his address, see video below, he calls Islam a system of "goodness and beauty" and a religion of "peace, and tolerance, and diversity." (In other words, he spouts out the typical liberal propaganda that is as accurate as calling apples "oranges.")



Brennan's stint defending Islam at NYU was by no means an isolated event -

On May 26, 2010, acting as Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security, Brennan openly came to the defense of Islam and one of its most radical tenets - jihad.

Brennan said,

"[President Obama's] strategy is absolutely clear about the threat we face. Our enemy is not "terrorism" because terrorism is but a tactic. Our enemy is not "terror" because terror is a state of mind, and as Americans we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as "jihadists" or "Islamists" because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one's community, and there is nothing holy or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women, and children."

Brennan's belief that jihad is a "legitimate" tenet of Islam that is not associated violence is flat-out wrong.

Brennan is alone in his attempt to divorce jihad and the use of violent force - ideological leaders of Islam themselves disagree with him!

Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood's founder, for example, claims that violent jihad is "sound" doctrine. In his pamphlet entitled "Jihad," he writes,

"Many Muslims today mistakenly believe that fighting the enemy is jihad asghar (a lesser jihad) and that fighting one's ego is jihad akbar (a greater jihad). The following narration [athar] is quoted as proof: "We have returned from the lesser jihad to embark on the greater jihad." They said: "What is the greater jihad?" He said: "The jihad of the heart, or the jihad against one's ego."

This narration is used by some to lessen the importance of fighting, to discourage any preparation for combat, and to deter any offering of jihad in Allah's way. This narration is not a saheeh (sound) tradition ..."

In addition to al-Banna, the very group that hosted Brennan at NYU - the ISNA - published a 1986 article, obtained by theinvestigativeproject.org, which states:

"jihad of the sword is the actual taking up of arms against the evil situation with the intention of changing it ... anyone killed in jihad is rewarded with Paradise."

The article also notes that "a believer who participates in jihad is superior to a believer who does not."

Is Brennan simply naïve or is he trying to "clean up" - through false propaganda - the general perception of jihad to serve a separate purpose?

The fact is: this radical Islamic tenet has been a cause for terrorism. And that he, as the nominee for CIA director, doesn't acknowledge this simple and apparent truth is incredibly disturbing.

The Middle East Quarterly correctly notes,

"To speak of jihad exclusively as a means of purifying oneself or one's community reveals either ignorance or deliberate obfuscation on Brennan's part. Jihad through war against unbelievers is rooted in the Qur'an and the Hadith (reports on the sayings and acts of Muhammad). Historian Michael Bonner in his authoritative study of jihad, Jihad in Islamic History, as well as other writers, has shown that throughout history there has been an inordinate emphasis on armed jihad, in the context of invasions and conquests and, in our day, terrorism."

No Director of the CIA has any business whatsoever in covering-up for radical Islam or any of its principles - especially those that inspire and encourage violent acts of terror.



There is a possible explanation as to why Mr. Brennan is so much in favor of Islam: he himself is a Muslim.

There are allegations claiming that he is - allegations made by former FBI agent and author of the first counterterrorism manual, John Guandolo. Even more striking, to this day Brennan has not once come out to counter the statements.

The claim of Brennan's conversion broke earlier this month when Guandolo told-all on the Tom Trento Radio Show. (Watch the interview here).

Guandolo said:

"Mr. Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia. ... His conversion was the culmination of a counterintelligence operation against him - to recruit him - and, the fact that foreign intelligence officers recruited Mr. Brennan when he was in a very sensitive and senior U.S. Government position in a foreign country, means either that he is a traitor ... or he did it unknowingly and unwittingly."

"[M]y contention," said Guandolo, "is he's wholly unfit for government service in any national security capacity ... specifically unfit for the director of Central Intelligence for the United States."

The former agent also said that Brennan had "interwoven" his life with terrorist individuals and was often the pathway for Islamic radicals - including members of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas - to enter positions in the National Security Council, the National Security Staff, and other places in government.


If Brennan is, in fact, a Muslim, then his many defenses and overt misrepresentations of radical Islam make complete sense - they are in-line with the Shi'a principle of taqiyya.

Taqiyya - a word that translates to mean "conceal" or "guard" - is the doctrine that gives Muslims license to lie in order to protect themselves or their religious goals.

David Pryce-Jones, in his book The Closed Circle: An Interpretation of the Arabs, comments:

"Lying and cheating in the Arab world is not really a moral matter but a method of safeguarding honor and status avoiding shame, and at all times exploiting possibilities, for those with the wits for it, deftly and expeditiously to convert shame into honor on their own account and vice versa for their opponents. If honor so demands, lies and cheating may become absolute imperatives."

This Islamic doctrine goes hand-in-hand with former CIA counterintelligence officer Michael Scheur's observation of Brennan's character - Scheur called him an "excellent liar."

If all of this is true -- and we think it is -- then John O. Brennan will use the high government post to defend not the Constitution, but Sharia Law; as director of the CIA he will act to further Islam and its global advance.

We know this because the followers of Islam recognize only one law -- Sharia Law.


Constitutional Republic or Sharia Theocracy?

While religious beliefs are protected under the First Amendment, and no religious tests are required to hold public office, we must still consider Islam as far as its view of government and law.

In America under the Constitution, our law is based upon Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian tradition. Our law recognizes that the individual is above the state, and, traditionally, sought to minimize state interference in areas of human behavior as much as possible so far as the behavior doesn't violate Natural Law - what the Declaration of Independence calls "the law of nature and nature's God." This is why our founders specifically created a limited government.

Natural law guarantees three main inalienable rights: life, liberty, and property:

1. God creates individuals in His own image and endows them with life;
2. As God is perfectly free so the individuals created in His image should be free;
3. Individuals, being free, are property of no-one: every individual belongs only to himself. Likewise, every individual is entitled to the fruits of his own labor -- as labor is an extension of the body which he owns -- except in cases where he would choose to consensually relinquish them.

Under Natural Law the individual is also entitled to freedom of conscience, which includes his right to practice or not practice religion.

Islamic Law - Sharia Law - on the other hand is quite the opposite.

Sharia requires a large and powerful religious state, unlike the limited government created by the Constitution. Simply, Sharia Law creates and requires theocracy.

Sharia grants no liberties except those that are in accordance with Islam, and "freedom of conscience" as we know it in the West is not permitted under institutional Islam.

In Islamic theocracies, Islam is the religion of the state and the source of all law - no piece of legislation can stand that is not in accord with Islam.

Consider the Constitution of Afghanistan as an example:

"The religion of the state of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam.... In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam." (Afganistan, Const. Chapter One -- The State, Art. 2, 3)

Simply put: Sharia Law and Constitutional Law are incompatible. As Muslims have only one law the Constitution takes "second place" -

Right now we are already seeing Sharia take hold at local levels in the West - there are "Sharia Zones" in England and Norway, and similar enclaves popping-up in the United States.



Former GOP presidential candidate, Rep. Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota had done work last summer examining the infiltration of radical Muslims into the U.S. Government - Mr. Brennan, to no-one's surprise, spoke against her efforts to do so.

If John Brennan is voted-in as director of the Central Intelligence Agency, his ascendance may be the biggest proof of Bachmann's statements to date!

Not only has Brennan come to the defense of Islam time and time again throughout his career, he has also remained completely silent in regards to former FBI agent John Guandolo's allegations that Brennan had converted to the Islamic religion while in Saudi Arabia.

As the Senate is faced with the decision to vote in favor of or against the confirmation of John O. Brennan to the post of CIA Director, they must consider his history.

Yes, Senators are right in using their votes as collateral to get papers on Benghazi - Yes, Senator Paul is right is raising the question about Brennan's involvement with the lethal drone program - but more than anything, this is a question about allegiance: is Brennan a man who will uphold American Constitutional Law, or will he uphold Islamic Sharia Law?

We must take action and tell our elected servants to block John Brennan's from taking the top-post at the Central Intelligence Agency!

Take Action! Fax the U.S. Senate and tell them to OPPOSE the confirmation of Brennan as CIA Director! Select here.


For America,
Conservative Action Alerts
www.ConservativeActionAlerts.com

P.S. Take a minute and send free messages to your Senators - tell them to oppose Brennan as CIA Director. Select here. Also, use our Congressional Directory to call Senate offices! Select Here.

P.P.S. Members of government have sworn-in to office by taking their oath on a Koran. It's true; Congress obtained the book when they purchased from Thomas Jefferson his personal library. It is not true, however, to say that Jefferson was a supporter of the Mohammedans, as Muslims were formerly called. No; he purchased their religious book to learn about them in order to better combat their pirates in the "Barbary" states of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Tripoli.

Conservative Action Alerts (CAA) is a media outlet protected by the first amendment; no financial contribution to support our efforts is tax-deductible. Diener Consultants, Inc., 10940 S Parker Rd Ste# 763, PARKER, CO 80284-7440