Home > Uncategorized > Articles: John Brennan’s Spooky Swearing-In… “But there was little notice of the fact that the First Amendment provides for No Establishment of Religion. This was conspicuously not a part of the Constitution that Brennan chose to swear to uphold… The Constitution of 1787 did not afford that guarantee, but “

Articles: John Brennan’s Spooky Swearing-In… “But there was little notice of the fact that the First Amendment provides for No Establishment of Religion. This was conspicuously not a part of the Constitution that Brennan chose to swear to uphold… The Constitution of 1787 did not afford that guarantee, but “

By Ken Blackwell and Bob Morrison

 

President Obama’s choice to be Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) was approved by the Senate on a vote of 63-34, with thirteen Republicans voting to confirm him. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) created quite a stir with his 13-hour filibuster against the Brennan nomination.

 

realobam

realobam (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

 

 

 

Not until he received written assurances from Attorney General Eric Holder that U.S. citizens would not be targeted for killing by drones on U.S. soil would the doughty Kentuckian stand down. Good for him.

 

John Brennan then proceeded to take the Oath of Office, as administered by Vice President Joe Biden. Director Brennan then did something no other officer has done, something that occasioned its own measure of controversy. Brennan was sworn in on an original copy of the Constitution. It was a very august occasion, to be sure, but it was also a mysterious one.

 

 

 

For the man who will be America’s spymaster, it was an odd move for him to stir up trouble. If spies are said to be “spooks,” our top spy’s action was, well, “spooky.”

 

 

 

 

Civil libertarians left and right were quick to point out that the 1787 Constitution did not include a Bill of Rights. Critics were right to be vigilant , especially when our spymaster has been so intimately associated with choosing targets for drone attacks. The Fifth Amendment says “no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” That guarantee should certainly apply to Americans here at home. Similarly, the Fourth Amendment’s safeguards against unreasonable searches and seizures need to be underscored.

 

gophum

gophum (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

 

 

 

But there was little notice of the fact that the First Amendment provides for No Establishment of Religion. This was conspicuously not a part of the Constitution that Brennan chose to swear to uphold.

 

The Constitution of 1787 did not afford that guarantee, but it did give all Americans protection from religious tests for office. Thus, even without a Bill of Rights, Article VI, Sec. 3 provides that: “…no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

 

rprprprp

rprprprp (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

 

 

 

 

As a result, Brennan’s opponents on Capitol Hill scrupulously avoided questioning him about his religion. That was as it should be. We have consistently opposed such religious tests when applied to men and women of our faith.

 

Still, John Brennan fueled rumors when he defended jihad as a legitimate expression of Islam. He has spoken of “our Saudi partners.”

 

If they are our partners, then he should have been asked why the Crown Prince Abdullah refused Vice President Al Gore‘s personal request in 1998 for U.S. access to al Qaeda’s financial chief, Madani al Tayyib. According to the official 9/11 Commission Report, “U.S. never gained this access” to the man who might have unraveled the plot against the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.

 

Here’s something else very spooky about the Brennan Oath: How can you take an oath on the Constitution to defend the Constitution? Normally, one takes an oath with his hand on a Bible, or a Koran, on some other Scripture one holds sacred. Taking an oath to defend the Constitution by putting your hand on the Constitution is a skyhook. It is supported by nothing else. It neatly avoids the central question: Is this a valid oath? Can we rely on a person who creates such a stir by the simple act of taking an oath of office?

 

John Brennan speaks eloquently of “the Majesty of the Hajj.” This is the pilgrimage taken by devout Muslims to Mecca. It is a pilgrimage in which no non-Muslim is allowed to take part.

 

Paging Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) During a series of judicial confirmation hearings nearly a decade ago, Schumer pursued Catholic and Evangelical nominees of President Bush. He wasn’t subjecting them to a religious test forbidden by the Constitution, he averred. He was simply probing the nominees’ “deeply held personal convictions” which he said might disqualify them from sitting as federal judges.

 

Where was this constitutional watchdog during the Brennan hearings? The watchdog didn’t bark. If any Catholic nominee had spoken of the Majesty of a pilgrimage to Medjugorje, where millions of Catholics believe the Blessed Virgin Mary has appeared, if any………….

 

EXCERPT!!!!!

 

via Articles: John Brennan’s Spooky Swearing-In.

 

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,196 other followers