Libertarian for President; Former Democratic Senator (AK)
No monitoring domestic communication; no military tribunals
Q: Do you support using military tribunals to try suspected terrorists when ordinary civilian courts are deemed inappropriate or impractical?
A: No.
Q: Should law enforcement agencies have greater discretion to monitor domestic communications, to
prevent future terrorist attacks?
A: No.
Q: Should the United States hold foreign states accountable for terrorists who operate in their country?
A: No.
Q: Do you support the creation of a federal identification card system?
A: No.
Source: Presidential Election 2008 Political Courage Test
Apr 22, 2008
No additional homeland security funding; no missile defense
Q: Should the federal government increase funding to states and cities for homeland security?
A: No.
Q: Do you support pre-emptive military strikes against countries deemed to be a threat to US national security?
A: No.
Q:
Do you support long-term use of National Guard troops to supplement the armed forces in assignments overseas?
A: No.
Q: Should the US expand its missile defense shield?
A: No.
Gravel adds, "We should be decreasing our military, not increasing it.
Source: Presidential Election 2008 Political Courage Test
Apr 22, 2008
1960s: Wept openly in Senate because US is dragged in mud
It could be argued that Gravel's so-called tirades, especially on the Iraq War, result not from naivete, but from a kind of experience that none of the other candidates share.
Until the debates, Gravel's low-budget campaign may have been nearly
invisible. Yet to older progressives, Gravel is hardly an unknown. During the 1960s, he was often in the news as one of Congress's fiercest opponents of the Vietnam War. In his most famous act, Gravel helped make public the Pentagon Papers by carrying
them into the Senate in two suitcases and reading them into the record--for a time, with tears streaming down his face.
In a television interview he said, "I wept because it hurts to see our nation dragged in the mud... to be part of a nation that is
killing innocent human beings." Gravel is also credited with mounting filibusters and cutting legislative deals that helped stop the draft, and later with fighting nuclear testing and nuclear power.
Q: What recommends you to them, in terms of experience, change, leadership?
A: I'm the fellow that ended the draft. I'm the one that stopped the nuclear testing in the north Pacific. I'm the one that brought about the Alaska pipeline.
I'm the one that released the Pentagon Papers and had to go to the Supreme Court because Richard Nixon was trying to throw me in jail. That's what I did 30 years ago.
That was leadership then. And I was excoriated by the media at that point. I was a loose cannon. Well, right today, I've had the good fortune to live this long, and people look back and say, "My
God, were you a courageous leader." Well, that's the leadership you'll get when I become president of the United States. Now, can the American people stand that kind of leadership? That remains to be seen.
Terrorism is not a war; treat it as a criminal act
Q: What would you do that hasn't already been done to capture bin Laden, which hasn't been done previously?
A: Well, the first thing that you would do is to realize that terrorism is not a war. Our war on terrorism makes no sense. We've had terrorism
since the beginning of civilization, and we'll have it to the end of civilization. It must be treated as a criminal act for what it is. The US should now interface with Interpol and with other countries to bring these people to justice, but our
government has done just the opposite. We had the help of Iran to do away with the Taliban three years ago, then we called them an "Axis of Evil." We had the help of other countries, and now they do--our government doesn't need them.
We have a database of 7 million stolen passports at Interpol and it's headed up by an American, and not one American intelligence agency has ever accessed that database. We can't even put the dots together here little more than can we do it globally.
Q: [to Edwards]: Is Obama right or wrong to rule out nukes against Al Qaeda?
EDWARDS: As president, I would not talk about hypotheticals in nuclear weapons. I think that effectively limits your options. What I would do as president, is to lead an
international effort over time to eliminate nuclear weapons from the planet. That's the way to make the planet more secure.
GRAVEL: That's very good but, under the last 25 years, this nation has continued to expand its nuclear capability.
Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on "This Week"
Aug 19, 2007
US has nothing to fear; fear sustains the military complex
If you look a little deeper at & the human psyche, there's only two divisions. There's love and fear. Love implements a whole beneficial area of our psyche. But fear is what we've been living under for the last 50 years in order to sustain the military
complex--stop and think; we're afraid of everything in the US . There's nothing to fear. There's nothing at all. And as president, I will call upon the courage in the people to step forward and express themselves with what counts, and that's love.
Source: 2007 HRC/LOGO debate on gay issues
Aug 9, 2007
Filibustered to end the draft; but women should register
Q: Do you think women should register for the draft like men do currently?
A: Well, of course I want to take credit and admit that I'm the guy that filibustered for five months, all by myself, in the Senate to end the draft in the United States of
America. And I'm very proud of that because George Bush does not have the boots on the ground to invade Iran.
Q: Should women register?
A: Of course women should go into the draft if we're going to have a draft, and should register also.
Cut Pentagon by more than 15%; we're squandering money
KUCINICH [to Gravel]: Spending up to $2 trillion on this war, that is money out of the educational lives of our children. I'm ready to see at least a 15% reduction in that bloated Pentagon budget, stop funding war, start funding education.
GRAVEL:
Dennis, you're a little too modest on that. I think we can cut a little more than 15%, very much so. You have heard these nostrums before. You've heard it 10 years ago, you've heard 20 years ago--why doesn't it change? The Democratic Party hasn't done
appreciably better than the Republican Party in solving these problems. It has to be solved the people, not by your leaders. When he's talking about the money we're squandering--21 million Americans could have a four-year college scholarship for the
money we've squandered in Iraq--7.6 million teachers could have been hired last year if we weren't squandering this money. Now, how do you think we got into this problem? There is linkage!
FactCheck: Yes, Iraq money could fund 21M scholarships
We found that the candidates' claims checked out, even some of the more conspicuous ones. We confirmed Gravel's dramatic claim about what could have been purchased with the money spent on the war. Gravel said, "21 million
Americans could have a four-year college scholarship for the money we've squandered in Iraq."
Whether the money has been "squandered" is of course a matter on which opinions differ.
But we calculate that the cost of covering all tuition and fees for 21 million students, based on the average charges for public colleges and universities for each of the past
four years, would have come to $443 billion, which is just under what CRS says has been appropriated for the Iraq war so far.
When you have mainline candidates that say that there's nothing off the table with respect to Iran, that's code for using nuclear devices. I got to tell you, when I'm president of the
United States, there will be no preemptive wars with nukes--nuclear devices. To my mind, it's immoral, and it's been immoral for the last 50 years as part of American foreign policy.
Source: 2007 South Carolina Democratic primary debate, on MSNBC
Apr 26, 2007
Fighting terrorism with a war doesn't work
We are mischaracterizing terrorism. Terrorism has been with civilization from the beginning. And it will be there to the end. We're going to be as successful fighting terrorism as we are fighting drugs with a war. It doesn't work.
What you have to do is to begin to change the whole foreign policy. This invasion brought about more terrorists. Osama bin Laden must have been rolling in his blankets how happy he was over our invading Iraq.
Source: 2007 South Carolina Democratic primary debate, on MSNBC
Apr 26, 2007
US is the greatest violator of the non-proliferation treaty
OBAMA: I think it would be a profound mistake for us to initiate a war with Iran. But, have no doubt, Iran possessing nuclear weapons will be a major threat to us and to the region.
GRAVEL: With respect to Iran, we've sanctioned them for 26 years.
We scared the bejesus out of them when the president says, "They're evil." Well, you know something? These things don't work. They don't work. We need to recognize them. And you know something? Who is the greatest violator of the non-proliferation treaty
The United States of America. We signed a pledge that we would begin to disarm, and we're not doing it. We're expanding our nukes. Who the hell are we going to nuke? Tell me, Barack.
Barack, who do you want to nuke?
OBAMA: I'm not planning to nuke anybody right now, Mike, I promise.
Filibustered the draft in '71, causing its expiration in '73
In 1971, the same year that he placed more than 4,000 pages of the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional record, he embarked on a one-man filibuster against a bill renewing the draft.
Using various parliamentary methods, Gravel was able to block the bill for five months before President Richard Nixon and Senate Republicans agreed to allow the draft to expire in 1973.
Source: Wikipedia.org article, "Mike Gravel"
Jan 1, 2007
Raze Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib prisons to the ground
The Gravel Agenda: When elected President by the American people, I will:
Raze Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib prisons to the ground;
End the war against America's veterans; and
Organize and leading an intelligence and police organization of willing nations, similar to NATO, to root out terrorism and addressing its causes through aggressive diplomacy.
Source: Campaign website, www.gravel2008.us, "Issues"
Dec 25, 2006
Cut US nuclear arsenal from 10,000 to a couple hundred
The critical problem with nuclear proliferation is that more and more nuclear bombs are added to the world's stock pile. There are already too many nuclear devices on earth today--regardless of who owns them.
I propose we cut the number of our nuclear
devices from the more than 10,000 we have to a couple hundred. Such a unilateral action would establish the United States' credibility to then ask other nations, including our "enemies" who would then feel less threatened, to join our efforts in ridding
the world of unneeded and dangerous nukes. This would set the stage for us to convene a global conference to write a new nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
What I propose is to jumpstart what was agreed to in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in
1970 and extended in 1995 by all five permanent members of the UN Security Council, the original Nuclear Club (the US, Russia, China, Great Britain, and France) -- they agreed to reduce and eventually eliminate their nuclear arsenals.
Source: Speech at the N.H. Institute of Politics, Manchester NH
Nov 1, 2006
War on terror will fail like war on drugs & war on poverty
Solving the Israeli- Palestinian problem and the energy problem will set the stage to crush terrorism, its advocates and its financiers. Characterizing the effort to control terrorism as a "war" is grossly misleading and leads us to believe
the only solution is a military one. It promotes a never-ending culture of war. A "war" on terror will be no more successful than the war on drugs, or the war on poverty.
Source: Speech at the N.H. Institute of Politics, Manchester NH
Nov 1, 2006
Fight terrorism with dogged global police work
Terrorism is fought best by thoughtful, honest intelligence and dogged police work, and by building economic opportunities for those who feel hopeless. The U.S. should lead an effort of willing nations to create a global intelligence institution and a
global police organization, similar to NATO. Terrorism is a global problem that requires a coordinated global response, not just with intelligence and police work, but with creative economic and humanitarian programs.
Source: Speech at the N.H. Institute of Politics, Manchester NH
Nov 1, 2006
Remove power to declare war from Congress-they've abdicated
Pledging to pursue aggressive diplomacy and not war, the senator said, "I will remove our troops from Iraq expeditiously and without contingency, President Bush's mistake is not worth the life or maiming of one more American soldier."
The senator promised to place before the people an amendment to the Constitution, removing the power to declare war from Congress who, in any case, has abdicated their responsibility to the President, and making it the responsibility of the people.
Source: Press release "Announces Run for President"
Apr 17, 2006
Fought & beat Nixon White House on Pentagon Papers in 1971
Gravel came to national prominence in 1971, during the struggle over the Pentagon Papers, the secret official study that detailed how missteps & manipulations by successive US administrations and their agents had created the quagmire that was the Vietnam
War. Daniel Ellsberg, a military analyst, provoked a national uproar when he put the report in the hands of the New York Times. The Justice Department moved to punish newspaper publishers who revealed the contents. At that point, Gravel stepped in.
The senator tried to read the contents of the study into the Senate record and to release them to the public, arguing that he had the authority to do so as a senator communicating with his constituents. When Justice Department went after the senator and
his publisher, Gravel fought the case all the way to the Supreme Court. The high court rejected his claim. Fortunately for Gravel, publicity surrounding the case was so damning to the Nixon administration's position that it finally backed off.
Source: The Nation, "Pentagon Papers Figure Bids for Presidency"
Apr 14, 2006
Bush administration's secrecy is worse than Nixon's
A scrappy former speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives, as senator Gravel had little patience with the secrecy and compromises of official Washington. As a presidential candidate, Gravel will highlight his passionate opposition to the Iraq War,
which he frequently compares to Vietnam, and to the secrecy and dishonesty of the Bush administration, which he suggests is worse in many senses than what he saw during the Nixon years.
After the indictment last fall of Scooter Libby, as part of
the ongoing investigation of moves by the Bush-Cheney administration to punish former Ambassador Joe Wilson for revealing that the president's arguments for going to war with Iraq were unfounded, Gravel said. "This is much more serious [than many of the
fights over Nixon's wrongdoing]. What we are talking about here is actually a conspiracy of elements of the Bush administration to lie to the American people, so that they could go to war in Iraq."
Source: The Nation, "Pentagon Papers Figure Bids for Presidency"
Apr 14, 2006
Cut military budget in half--we don't need such "readiness"
This country has been maintaining its military forces on a wartime basis since the late 1940s. Our overseas forces are ready to move instantly to repel an attack, and the "strategic reserves" in the continental US are ready for deployment overseas within
30 days. The difficulty is that neither we nor our allies believe a war is imminent.
Those who refuse to reexamine our purposes in keeping this vast army deployed around the world must accept responsibility for the snowballing disintegration of our
armed forces--disintegrating as their reason for coming together disappears. I believe our military budget need be only half as large as it is to achieve the valid purposes for which we need military force.
The actual defense of the US takes only a
small portion of what is called the "defense" budget. We are in the fortunate position of requiring almost no defense at all from conventional attack on our shores. The cost of operating our strategic forces can and should be drastically reduced.
During the past quarter century we have witnessed a growing separation of the state apparatus--including the presidency, the Department of Defense, the CIA, FBI, the Department of State, and associated agencies--from the people it is supposed to be
protecting. It is axiomatic that the custodians of the state will attempt to preserve it and to advance its interests. But when the state surrounds itself with the structures of secrecy, creates a loyalty system to ensure that those who serve it possess
its values, and maintains a surveillance network to detect and apprehend citizens who oppose its purposes, then we are far along toward a 1984-style state when which suppresses citizens and only serves its own interests.
In such a system, policy-makers
act on the international scene to advance their own interests and those of the state, rather than those of the citizens they are supposed to represent or the people in other lands affected by their policies.
National security is no need for government secrecy
There must be an end to national decision-making in secret and policy implementation by executive fiat. This requires easy access to virtually all information by the public and, with rare and defined exceptions, the removal of all limits on the
information available to its elected representatives. The government's shrill claims of a "need" for secrecy must give way to the higher priority of the citizen's right to know.
At present, the scales are tipped heavily in favor of the government. Information is systematically classified and withheld from the public for vaguely determined reasons of "national security" and denied to
Congress by the imperious assertion of "executive privilege." These two ridiculously flexible tools of secrecy provide self-appointed decision-makers with a protective shield against public accountability.
