Obama's Counter Terror Czar Storms Out of Washington Times Office When Confronted On His Radical Positions (Video)

In February Barack Obama’s radical counter terror czar John Brennan said that 20% recidivism rate for Gitmo detainees was not that bad. In May adviser John Brennan called Jerusalem “Al Quds.” He also said that “jihad was a legitimate tenet of Islam.”

When confronted about his controversial positions at a meeting in June, John Brennan stormed out of the office.
The Washington Times and Yid With Lid reported:

Mr. Brennan had visited the Washington Times Editorial Board on June 24 as a result of a June 11 Washington Times editorial he objected to. It did not take long for the White House counter-terrorism adviser to lose his temper with our editorial board’s questions regarding what he previously said about individuals who become terrorists.

Mr. Brennan cut the meeting short and stormed out of our offices thereafter following a question posed by senior editorial writer Jim Robbins (transcript and video below). Referring to a quote Mr. Brennan said in May, calling jihad a “legitimate tenet of Islam,” Mr. Robbins looked to discuss the concept of jihad further with the Obama administration adviser.

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Stanley

    He said, he has to go. Shouldn’t he have grabbed his seeing eye dog?

  • Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and our Dear Leader’s government is full of pus and boils.

  • Pingback: Obama’s Counter Terror Czar Storms Out of Washington Times Office When Confronted On His Radical Positions (Video) | Liberal Whoppers()

  • Maybe Mr. Brennan will recognize jihad when his own head is sawed off with a scimitar to shouts of “Alahu Akbar”.
    Of course, we do not wish anything of the sort. But we wonder what it will take to allow liberals to see.

  • Typical weasel, when confronted, they don’t even bother to lie anymore….they just run away like the cockroaches they are when the light of truth turned on!

    What a bunch of scum this POS POTUS has assembled to ruin America.

  • aro5o75

    Just another Obowma putz.

  • Ladue Pundit

    Brennan is married to a Muslim woman. In Islam, women are forbidden to marry non-Muslims.

    So which it: is he sleeping with the enemy OR is he the enemy?

    My drachmas are bet on “both.”

  • JJuuk

    Iman Obama has called a Jihad on America.


    Ladue, how did you figure that out? I looked on Wiki and his personal was scrubbed clean. Very odd. I finally found a little info that he is married to Kathy Pudkuca(?) w/ no mention of her nationality.

  • Granny

    Remember those FEMA Camps everyone was in a roar about some months back? Wellll, maybe they weren’t quite so off the wall. Better take a gander at this –


    That’s right – the title is Obama’s US Assassination Program!

  • gus

    Brennan is married to a Muslim woman.


  • GGMac

    Another one with a Muslim wife is Grover Norquist. He and his wife were close advisors to George W. Bush, who was haplessly naive re: Islam, and it was because of their “tutelage” post 9/11 that GW got hooked on the fairy tale of Islam being a “religion of peace”. Norquist’s wife was the influence and push to have Muslim religious events observed within the White House and other government departments, such as State.

  • This one’s a real piece of work

    He doesn’t seem very bright, and is very unsettling to watch… is he a Crystal Methodist or something?

  • BurmaShave

    From one point of view, the interviewer was setting up a “gotcha question” in an area where John Brennan was over his head. Apparently he did not like it.

    It seems to me that Sarah Palin was a [much] better sport about this sort of [email protected] than John Brennan. Ya think? Will John Brennan get a pass from the Liberal Media about this? Well, Let’s see. This all happened more than two months ago… Yeah, I would say he got a pass. What a surprise. Would Sarah Palin get reamed for doing what John Brennan did? You betcha!

  • StrngernFiction


    Thanks for the link.

    Given what I know about them, I take the minority view that the zero admin/regime are more likely capable of mass murder and/or mass imprisonment than not.

  • WSG

    I may be wrong, but the question sure seemed like an amateur ambush to me. Maybe if the interviewer had thrown fewer facts at Brennan, he could have put Brennan in the expert chair and got him to reveal more. He just sounded like he was going to mock him (which would have been fun to see, but the interviewer obviously didn’t feed the czar’s ego enough).

  • Chippy

    Brennan comes across to me as a very angry man. A very strange administration. Is this whole administration on vacation? Who is watching the store?

  • Pingback: A question too far… « South Capitol Street()


    GGMAC, you are 100% correct about Norquist and is you do some research, there is another guy a don’t trust one bit. I don’t feel very safe with Brennan as a counter-terrorism advisor.
    Not one bit. One does the media bend over like this with this admin. It is very very scary.

  • bg


    that man is insufferable..

    he acted like so many others who have been
    caught with their head up their ass denial..

    just a sample:

    Taliban Spokesman ‘Paints’ a Troubling Picture of U.S. Islamists 4/28/09

    [But there is an even more troubling aspect to this scenario here at home. Where is the outrage and urgency among so-called “mainstream Muslim organizations” and Muslim “thought leaders” against the developments with the Taliban and hardening Islamism in Pakistan? CNN has an easy time finding CAIR and MPAC spokespersons to voice complaints of domestic victimization, but forgets to ask them about their opinions on the extreme Shari’a law being advanced by the resurgent Taliban. It forgets to ask them about the radicalization of individuals like Muslim Khan and what they represent — advocacy of the ideology of Islamism that seeks a theological mandate globally — a clear and present danger to the United States.]

    It’s not over until it’s over 8/13/09

    [According to John Brennan, head of the White House’s homeland security office, the war on terrorism is over. From now on, the administration will never use terms like “jihadists” and “global war” because doing so, as Mr. Brennan said, “risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve.” He insisted that the U.S. is at “war with al Qaeda” (“U.S. no longer at war with ‘terrorism’ ,” Page 1, Friday).

    Could we be more blind? Acts of terror are rooted in the aspirations
    of Islamists to create an Islamic state and impose their version of Shariah law.]

    Terror czar deserves honorary membership
    in the Muslim Brotherhood 2/18/10

    [“How can we possibly confront Islamist radicalization if the President’s principal advisor on counterterrorism cannot appropriately identify political Islam as the problem?” said Jasser. “Al Qaida is merely one of many tools of militant political Islam. It is the ideology that they adhere
    to that we must be at war with and counter frontally in the public sector, because it is at war with us.

    As we have seen over the past year, the common thread of theo-political Islam is what drives militants around the world. Mr. Brennan and the President must provide leadership in articulating the real threat and addressing the root cause of Islamist terror. The Muslim Brotherhood
    and Islamists can speak for themselves.”]

    more here & here..


  • bg


    re: bg #20

    On the Job Training 12/30/09

    [You cannot just stay hunkered down at your “beachhead” in Hawaii after another virulent byproduct of global political Islam attacked on our homeland. While no one was really hurt, you don’t exactly look like you are taking the issue seriously when your photo of the day captures a romp on the beach. It was not a coincidence that this was attempted on Christmas day, yet you ignore the religious struggles in this conflict. It is time that our commander-in-chief and the leader of the free world come to terms with the reality that this is the greatest conflict of the century and a battle of ideas between western liberal secular democracies and political Islam.

    While you and your colleagues are stymied by the question of whether
    to even use the term “terror,” the ideology of al-Qaeda (violent political Islam) is spreading exponentially. Your systematic failure to advance American security against ideologies that threaten us may turn catastrophic. In fact the Christmas bomber said so himself, telling an investigator that “there are more just like me who will strike soon.” By all means, Mr. President, fix the holes in our security that we know are there – but terrorists who are suicidal religious zealots and very creative will sadly very likely strike again soon. This year certainly proves that.]

    Failing at force protection: The misguided
    Pentagon report on the Ft. Hood massacre

    [These critical lines are completely missing from the Pentagon’s 84-page report reviewing the massacre of 13 U.S. soldiers and contractors at Fort Hood. Yet this is only one of many omissions that the Pentagon should pursue from this incident.

    Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire on Nov. 5 because his adherence to extreme Islamism overrode his allegiance to his country and his sworn oath to protect it against all enemies. While issues of post-traumatic stress will surely be pursued by his defense team, Hasan’s defense is not the job of the Pentagon. The Pentagon has a duty to honestly assess the root of the attack and to ensure that the military is adequately protecting our forces from the threat from within and without.


    The protection of our forces requires a better understanding of the enemy we face. An honest assessment of the Fort Hood massacre would not limit the scope of the review. It would also not allow the scapegoating of soldiers instead of fighting the root theo-political problems. Hasan’s victims deserve a full revision of how the United States military handles Islamist radicalization within its ranks. Without it we will see many more Nidal Hasans and in the end a weaker force and a weaker nation.]

    more @ links..


  • AuntieMadder

    Well, jihad is a tenet of Islam. It’s legitimacy just depends on who you ask.

  • bg


    and a kicker..

    MPAC/ISNA counterterrorism video deceptive

    [Analyzing the Realities of the MPAC Video

    What do the imams in the video actually say? What does the video not say that it should have said? Who are these imams and their organizations and who and what ideologies do they represent?

    Our American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) has provided a complete transcript of the MPAC 5 minute video online. Watch the video and read the entire transcript. What they say and do not say will become far more clear with this analysis.

    For starters, the video opens with the title “Believers beware: Injustice cannot defeat injustice”. The entire theme of this video is basically telling Muslims that their grievances are legitimate, just the means is immoral. It tells them basically that they are true victims of injustices against Muslims perpetrated by “non-Muslims” and just need to find other more moral means to achieve their ends. Nowhere do any of these leaders counter that dangerous anti-American, anti-Western narrative. Note in Zaid Shakir’s full video (excerpted on the MPAC video) on ISNA’s site, he spends the first few minutes blaming American foreign policy before he makes any message against terrorism. Very similar to what he did in his useless condemnation of the Fort Hood tragedy.]

    much more @ link..


  • xkaydet65

    Sad to know that Brennan wears the same college ring as the late great William Casey.

  • Not Likely

    Can you point me to the portion of the video where he storms out of the office?

  • Not Likely

    Jim Hoft: confused by weather.

  • bg


    Not Likely @ 8:05 pm #26

    what’s your excuse??


  • LimoLibsStink

    Democrat John Brennan:

    Islam is a wonderful religion and violent jihad is a legitimate tenet of Islam. A 20% to 30% recidivism rate of killing our guys after one year of release is not bad. You know sometimes I would like to cut-off my wife’s head when she talks back. I think the jihad is perfectly justified.

    Sure, jihad is real. No I can’t give specific examples… like the 9/11 attack. But, I will say that they build good cars with planned obsolesce – they explode at the dandiest times.

    Now, look at my two sheets of talking points. I think our leader Barack Hussein Obama wants to get these talking points out to the press.

    Fine! If I can’t give my Barack Hussein Obama talking points on how Islam invented everything thing from the printing press to political donations, I think we’ve finished. My limousine is running and I have to get going. Good day.

  • Andreas K.

    I remember that one saying about heat and kitchen… So fitting for these dems, so fitting.

    They can dish out, but they can’t take.

  • randyinrocklin

    correct me if I am wrong didn’t GW appoint Brennan?

  • Pingback: Is John Brennan only nice to terrorists? | Thinklets()

  • Radegunda

    Not Likely, can you point to the part of the video where he answers the question?

    And, what is it about jihad that tickles your fancy?

  • Radegunda

    randyinrocklin: not to his current position.

    If you’re trying to shame us all into withholding criticism of Brennan for partisan reasons, that won’t work here. We look at the substance of the issue. That’s why GGMac criticized the malign influence of Grover Norquist on GWB, and GWB’s naive view of Islam.

    Wrong is wrong, whichever party label it wears. At least some people see things that way.

  • Pingback: A question too far… | The Online Blog()

  • Pingback: Steynian 421rd « Free Canuckistan!()