Gary Johnson on Homeland Security Libertarian presidential nominee; former Republican NM Governor

No-fly lists subject to error; use airport security instead

JOHNSON: Keeping an open mind to this, how do you restrict guns from potential terrorists? I haven't seen or heard any proposals that would actually address this.

Q: What about the pending proposals to deny access to people on the no-fly list?

JOHNSON: Well, these government lists are subject to error. Really, do we care about no-fly lists? I mean, should it really matter when it comes to identity of anybody flying?

Q: Wait; explain that?

JOHNSON: Well, no-fly lists. I mean, security should exist at the airports, that identity really is not an issue. But why are there no-fly lists in the beginning?

Q: So it sounds like you're saying maybe we should do away with no-fly lists.

JOHNSON: Well, no, I'm not suggesting that. I'm just pointing out that they are subject to error, and ideally you'd have a system that identity would be a non-factor, that everybody gets dealt with equally and that it's safe to fly.

Turn NSA satellites away from United States

JOHNSON: Well, limited, yes; I'm not saying do away with the NSA, but turn the satellites away from U.S. citizens. And there is due process, which I do not think is exemplified by gathering metadata on 110 million Verizon users.

Q: You had said it was created by executive order and you would issue one to end the NSA--

JOHNSON: I would issue one to turn the satellites away from the US.

Q: You've also said you would disrupt financing to terrorist groups--don't you need some surveillance tools to do that?

JOHNSON: I would assume so, yes. I'm not saying that the NSA gets shut down, but that the satellites should be turned against our enemies--and enemies does not mean US citizens--and that there is due process, or should be due process, for allowing that to occur here within the United States. But I don't see due process currently with regard to the NSA--that it's blanket surveillance of US citizens.

Pardon Snowden; no one was harmed by what he released

JOHNSON: Well, prior to Snowden, none of us had any idea about what this is, on an overall contextual basis.

Q: Would you pardon Snowden?

JOHNSON: Initially, when the Snowden thing happened, my concern was, "Holy cow, has information been released that are going to put U.S. spies in harm's way?" [But] Snowden took all of this into account before he released this. So, yes, I would pardon Snowden, based on what I know. But what I know is that no one has had any harm done to them as a result of what was released by Snowden.

Q: Governor Weld, do you feel the same way?

WELD: I was relieved when Gary said yes, he would pardon Snowden.

Cut 20% of military bases in US and abroad

JOHNSON: Let's talk specifically about the Pentagon itself, which says we could reduce 20% of US bases. But none of it has happened, because members of Congress won't allow [closure of] bases that exist in their home states.

Q: How about military bases abroad?

JOHNSON: That same number would apply to military bases abroad, although I have not heard the Pentagon comment on that.

American military interventions made terrorist problem worse

Brains not bombs: cut off ISIS funding

A: Let's start with that idea: military intervention. Let's say that that's an option. That should be instigated by Congress. That's a mechanism that's been lost and Congress should modernize a mechanism for actually weighing in on military interventions. Right now, it's something that's become an executive prerogative, in conjunction with the military. Well, that's not right. The alternative is to cut funding off to ISIS to contain what's happening over there and make sure it stays over there. Brains not bombs. Cut off their funding and involve Congress for declaring war if that's what we're gonna do. If we're going to put boots on the ground that's war.

Q: So either fully go to war with Congressional approval or don't go at all?

A: Well, get Congressional approval. It would be a terrific dialogue for Congress to be having. Here are the reasons for, here are the reasons against, and see how the American public weighs in on it all.

Spying on U.S. citizens dismantles the 4th Amendment

Founding Fathers would be disgusted about spying on citizens

Imagine the disgust of the Founding Fathers if they were to see the national government spying on citizens' private communications, monitoring financial transactions, photographing license plates, and even demanding to know what a person is doing at a public library--all without warrants or due process of law.

Decades of ever-more-intrusive government has steadily eroded personal freedom in this country. Adults are no longer free to make their own decisions, and virtually no part of Americans' private lives are today safe from government scrutiny and regulation.

Gary Johnson believes government should be truly limited--limited in the way the Founders envisioned--without unconstitutional scrutiny by the NSA, the ATF, the DEA or any other government agency.

Overturn simplistic, chaotic, reactive military policies

As President, Gary Johnson will move quickly and decisively to refocus U.S. efforts and resources to attack the real threats we face in a strategic, thoughtful way. The U.S. must get serious about cutting off the millions of dollars that are flowing into the extremists' coffers every day. Relationships with strategic allies must be repaired and reinforced. And the simplistic options of "more boots on the ground" and dropping more bombs must be replaced with strategies that will isolate and ultimately neuter those who would, if able, destroy the very liberties on which this nation is founded

Reactive military policies allow real threats to flourish

Looking back over the past couple of decades, it is difficult to see how the wars we have waged, the interventions we have conducted, the lives sacrificed and the trillions spent on the other side of the globe have made us safer. The chaotic, reactive military and foreign policies of the past two Presidents have, if anything, created an environment that has allowed real threats to our safety to flourish.

As President, Gary Johnson will move quickly and decisively to refocus U.S. efforts and resources to attack the real threats we face in a strategic, thoughtful way. The U.S. must get serious about cutting off the millions of dollars that are flowing into the extremists' coffers every day. Relationships with strategic allies must be repaired and reinforced.

Drone strikes create more terrorists

A: The only way a libertarian will act military is by being attacked, and we've been attacked. I oppose boots on the ground, but you can't rule out military intervention categorically.

Q: What does that mean? Drone strikes?

A: When it comes to drones, I think it makes a bad situation even worse. We end up killing innocents and fueling hatred as opposed to containing it. It just hasn't worked. We need to educate ourselves on the root causes of this, which is Islamic terrorism and the ideology of sharia law. In this country, we've become so politically correct that in the name of freedom of religion we have allowed sharia law and its adherents to advance. We need to differentiate between freedom of religion and the politics of sharia law. Freedom of religion, absolutely. But if you're talking about allowing sharia law that runs contrary to the US Constitution, that is ideologically the war that we need to take on

We should not be Islamophobic, but be Shariaphobic

We must face the fact that ISIS is a murderous, violent movement driven by Sharia ideology, not by the religion of Islam. We need not & should not be Islamophobic, but all who are free and wish to be free should be Shariaphobic. In its determination to impose a "law" upon us and to kill, maim and terrorize in the process--ISIS must be stopped.

Let's be clear. Stopping ISIS and Sharia have nothing to do with religious freedom or the rights of Muslims--here or abroad. It has everything to do with protecting people who are free or wish to be free from murderous fanatics who will stop at nothing to establish a global caliphate under which no one would be free.

Government transparency on 9/11 secret reports

A: Government should be transparent, and this report is just another example of non-transparency that ultimately ends up being divulged. Look, whatever's out there, get it out there immediately. Get it out there immediately and let us all deal with it.

Drones may create more adversaries than they eliminate

Gary Johnson: Though we should leave all options on the table, drone strikes are a dangerous tool. There are unintended consequences from using them to kill targets in Pakistan and Yemen. We may get our target, but we can also create new enemies due to collateral damage. Drone strikes should be used with caution, and understanding that they may create more adversaries than they eliminate.

Why were we in Benghazi or Libya at all?

Pres. OBAMA: As soon as we found out that the Benghazi consulate was being overrun, I gave my national security team three instructions:

1. Beef up our security & procedures, not just in Libya, but at every embassy in the region.
2. Investigate exactly what happened, to make sure it doesn't happen again.
3. We are going to find out who did this and we're going to hunt them down.

Source: 3rd-party response to Second Obama-Romney 2012 debate , Oct 16, 2012

Should we have 100,000 troops on the ground in Europe?

On Defense: We shouldn't have gone into Iraq and Afghanistan. But should we have 100,000 troops on the ground in Europe? Because America has been willing to be the world's policeman, other nations can afford infrastructure projects that the US cannot. That doesn't make sense. The alternative is for the US economy to slide to 3rd-world status. And the danger of a fundamental collapse is real.

Patriot Act is a direct assault on privacy & due process

Torture has created millions of enemies we wouldn't have had

I don't believe our national security is being threatened in either Iraq or Afghanistan. I believe the torturing of individuals has created tens of millions of enemies for our country that we might not otherwise have had.

Cut spending by 43%, but not one penny from veteran benefits

A: I promise to submit a balanced budget, with 43% less spending in it, as an overall number. I am not going to cut pensions or benefits for veterans by a penny. When you look at the overall sacrifice that all of us are going to have to be a part of, if we're going to have a country going forward, I'm not asking veterans to sacrifice anything that they're currently receiving. Maybe there aren't any raises, but there certainly are no losses.

Let the PATRIOT Act expire; respect habeas corpus

The freedoms on which America was founded are now under attack from the very people charged with protecting and upholding them.
• The PATRIOT Act should be allowed to expire, which would restore proper judicial oversight to federal investigations and again require federal investigators to prove probable cause prior to executing a search.
• Habeas corpus should be respected entirely, requiring the government to either charge incarcerated individuals with a crime or release them.

Due process at Guantanamo; no torture of terrorist suspects

America can achieve our foreign policy goals without sacrificing American values.
• No criminal or terrorist suspect captured by the US should be subject to physical or psychological torture.
• Individuals incarcerated unjustly by the US should have the ability to seek compensation.
• Individuals detained by the US, at Guantanamo Bay or elsewhere, must be given due process via the courts or military tribunals, and must not be held indefinitely without regard to those fundamental processes.

Allies want more US military spending, but cut by 43%

43% reduction in military spending; cut foreign aid too

GINGRICH: I would replace virtually all government to government aid with some kind of investment approach. Our bureaucrats giving their bureaucrats money is a guaranteed step towards corruption.

Q: How do you balance foreign aid with other expenditures?

JOHNSON: I think the biggest threat to our national security is the fact that we're bankrupt, so I am promising to submit a balanced budget to Congress in the year 2013, and included in that is a 43% reduction in military spending. I think it's crazy that we have foreign aid to countries when we're borrowing 43 cents out of every dollar to do that. Military alliances are really key to other countries taking up the slack.

No physical or psychological torture of terrorist suspects

A: I just think that there's no end to that. Let's say we know there's a bomb ticking, so we have to torture this guy--that's the argument for the death penalty--but the law that gets written also is public policy which allows us to put someone who's innocent to death. The basis of our country is that we protect the innocent. Are we going to torture people to prevent nuclear briefcase bombs? It amounts to the ends justify the means.

Abolish the TSA; let Patriot Act expire

A: I would abolish the TSA.

No waterboarding under any circumstances

SANTORUM: Under certain circumstances or any circumstances?

Q: Under any circumstances that you could imagine.

SANTORUM: Sure.

JOHNSON: I would not.

PAUL: No, I would not, because you don't achieve anything.

SANTORUM: Well it's just simply not true, Ron. The fact is that what we found is that some of this information that we find out that led to Osama Bin Laden actually came from these enhanced interrogation techniques.

PAUL: Not true.

SANTORUM: And by the way we wouldn't have been able to launch a raid into Pakistan to get Osama Bin Laden if we weren't in Afghanistan.

CAIN: I heard Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu say it very clearly a few months after 9/11 2001 after the tragedy, the terrorist have one objective, to kill of us and so, yes, I believe that we should do whatever means possible in order to protect the people of this nation, that's their ultimate goal.

Deal with terrorism as a joint federal-state responsibility.

• Handling Information Needs.
  Many of the operational, programmatic, and funding activities associated with terrorism consequence management preparedness are classified because of national security. Thus, the sharing of critical information is hampered. State governments must be viewed as strong partners in the US’ national security efforts, particularly as related to terrorism.
• Managing Consequences.
  Managing the short- and long-term consequences of terrorism is among the responsibilities of state and local government supplemented by the resources of the federal government, coordinated by FEMA.
• Supporting Public-Private Cooperation.
  Terrorism preparedness efforts should be inclusive of key private sector entities such as defining the appropriate roles and responsibilities for public and private health and medical communities.
• Clarifying the Role of the National Guard.
  The role of the National Guard in terrorism response activities is to support federal, state, and local response agencies with equipment, facilities, and personnel. Any assignment of responsibility should enhance the nation’s terrorism consequence management capability and provide for the contingency of the National Guard being called to assist active and reserve components in dealing with a major military conflict.
• Federal Responsibility
  Governors recognize the need to coordinate programs among federal agencies to address domestic terrorism and appreciate the efforts of the National Domestic Preparedness Office. However, they encourage greater clarification of the currently fragmented structure of federal responsibilities and support increased cooperation among federal agencies to better enable states to plan for domestic terrorism responses. Governors urge appropriate funding, maximum coordination of program components, and coordinated service delivery within states and localities.

Include states in anti-terrorism planning.

The Issue

NGA’s Position

Study terrorist threats against nuclear waste repositories.

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) should reexamine the issue of terrorism and sabotage against spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste shipments in order to determine the adequacy of the current physical protection regulations, as part of the NRC licensing process for a geologic repository or an interim storage facility.
2. The NRC should conduct a comprehensive assessment of the consequences of attacks that have the potential for radiological sabotage, including attacks against transportation infrastructure used by nuclear waste shipments, attacks involving capture of a nuclear waste shipment and use of high energy explosives against the cask, and direct attacks upon a nuclear waste shipping cask using antitank missiles.
3. The NRC should conduct the comprehensive reassessment of terrorism/sabotage consequences in a forum conducive to meaningful participation by all affected stakeholders, including the creation of a stakeholder advisory group to assist the NRC in this task.
4. DOE should also fully evaluate the impacts of terrorism and sabotage against spent fuel and nuclear waste shipments in the Yucca Mountain and in any interim storage facility.
5. DOE should incorporate terrorism/sabotage risk management and countermeasures in all DOE transportation plans relating to operation of a repository, interim storage facility, and/or intermodal transfer facility, including liability for costs and damages resulting from terrorism/sabotage against nuclear waste shipments.
6. DOE is encouraged to expeditiously complete the Department’s guidance process for codifying the “Transportation Protocol Manual,” [with] review with the participating states and tribes prior to formal adoption.
7. The governors encourage NRC, DOT and DOE to use the “Transportation Protocol Manual” as the beginning point for requirements for the transport of both federal and commercial radioactive materials.