Homeland Security

Sterling T. Clifton on the Issues Here on this page I will be giving you a bullet list of basic beliefs I have on several issues that face us today. Each section will have a link to a page of a more detailed explanation.

Click on a topic » {| class="wiki_table" ! ! ! !

The War on Terror
As President, I will be willing to authorize the use of nuclear firepower on the enemies of the United States in the event that there is a direct threat of our enemy(ies) using nuclear power against us, or as its current usage of deterrent.

Whether or not the current, or previous Pakistani government is purposely harboring or supporting Al Queda or other terrorists, is irrelevant. Why is this so? Simply put, the terrorists are in Pakistani territory, in a region were there government has either refused and/or is impotent to control and/or regulate. This region might as well be a separate country. As President, I will make Pakistan aware that either they get this region under control and work to destroy the terrorist element there, or we will.

Energy security and stability is a necessity for national security and defense. As President, I will use everything within my power to uphold, support, and defend any and all domestic energy sources, and we will become totally independent of foreign energy sources. If we still use foreign energy, it will merely be as a redundant or surplus source.

The current "War on Terror" is a war of the United States of America and her allies, the allies of freedom and democracy and self-determination... against those who would work to destroy us, our way of lives, freedom, democracy, and self determination; some of whom are doing so for social, some for political, and other for religious reasons.

The United States constitution list the rights of the American citizen and the States, and the roles and responsibilities of government. The 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution limits the federal government's power and authority to those areas enumerated within. The 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution states that all other powers are specifically the realm of either the States, and/or the people. State government are bound in the scope of their authority as completely sovereign States, which have all authority not specifically given to the federal government and given to them by their State Constitutions. No matter what previous Supreme Courts may have said, it is not within their power to change the constitution. It is the job of the United States Supreme Court to A, determine if laws derived from other sources than the constitution, is in violation of the constitution; And B, the justices, individually oversea federal court districts.

That being said, Foreign nationals are NOT guaranteed civil rights by the United States Constitution, and if given such treatment, it is only as a privilege, a pleasantry, a courtesy. As any other government issued privilege that is NOT a right, it may be revoked at the government's choosing.

The Fourth Geneva Convention already states how we are allowed to treat the terrorists and Insurgents we have captured on the battlefield. This is war, not a policing action.

The Third Geneva Convention, created in 1929, and updated in 1949 states in Part I: General Provisions, that it applies to nation states that are members, aka signatories to it. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, are while Hamas, and Syria are not. That means captured citizens of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, are eligible to be considered as protected by it and citizens of Hamas lead Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), and Syria are not.

The Third Geneva Convention, created in 1929, and updated in 1949 states in Part I: General Provisions, that Signatories are bound to treat non-signatories by its provision, until that non-signatory acts in opposition to the provisions therein.

The Third Geneva Convention, created in 1929, and updated in 1949 states in Part I: General Provisions, Article 4, that Prisoner of War (POW) status is only granted to: Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict and members of militias of such armed forces;
 * Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:

​ What is the conclusion of all of this? Unless the captured person is: a citizen of the belligerent parties, carries arms openly, is defending against an initial invasion, or is a part of an officially recognized militia or armed force of the belligerent party, which is usually signified by a uniform, but may be any form of unifying identification that is visible form a distance, is part of a unit that has a defined command and control structure, and is abiding by the official rules and laws of land warfare agreed upon by international agreement, then they are not eligible for the rights, privileges, and protection of the Geneva Convention's POW status.
 * that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
 * that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
 * that of carrying arms openly;
 * that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
 * Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
 * Civilians who have non-combat support roles with the military and who carry a valid identity card issued by the military they support.
 * Merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favorable treatment under any other provisions of international law.
 * Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
 * 4.3 makes explicit that Article 33 takes precedence for the treatment of medical personnel of the enemy and chaplains of the enemy.

Letting the military wage war
As President, I will allow the military command and control, and foreign intelligence service of the United States of America loose to use all of their techniques, tactics, technology, and skills to defeat the enemies of America in every way possible short of Nuclear strike.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Peace through strength
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As President I will wholeheartedly uphold the theory and practice of "Peace Through Strength," and "Walk Softly, and carry a big stick." As Mr. Alan Keys has said before:


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">"Our friendship should be a sought-after possession of all men & women of good will everywhere in the world. Our enmity should be something that all rightfully fear." 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Don't Ask, Don't Tell
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I believe that homosexuals can be patriots as well. While they may not live according to traditional American values in some aspects of their lives, they, like any other American may be patriotic, and loyal citizens, and thereby should be allowed to serve their country in uniform. I think the don't ask, don't tell policy is good in the sense that it encourages them to keep their sexuality and practice personal and private. I think ALL military personnel and indeed all professionals, heterosexual, homosexual , bisexual , pansexual or asexual , to keep their sexuality and practice both personal and private and not be excessively open and flaunting about it.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Defense Department Jobs
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I would only appoint those to civilian national security and/or defense offices and positions who have both military leadership experience, and display a keen understanding for government operations and a willingness to uphold and enforce executive policy.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Women in the services
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I believe its a great idea for women to be allowed into combat roles and function in the United States military as long as the women can meet the same skill and physical requirements of men in combat roles.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Missile Defense
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As, President, I will totally throw away the ABM treaty and end mutually assured destruction. The United States of America will live up to its constitutional mandate to provide for the common defense of its people in every way possible.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Victory or not at all
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As President, I will NEVER, EVER send our troops to any battle or war that we are not dedicated to win. We will not send US men and women into battle unless we are dedicated to victory. From now on, that shall always be our exit strategy. TOTAL AND COMPLETE UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER and/or DEFEAT OF THE ENEMY IS OUR ONE AND ONLY EXIT STRATEGY IN COMBAT in a Sterling T. Clifton admiistration.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">You're with us, or you're with the terrorists
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As President, any commercial entities that harbor, fund, train, equip or support terrorists activities and/or organizations will be treated nation-states that do the same.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sky, Bus, Rail, Boat/Ship, And Other Marshals
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As President I will make sure that any commercial passenger or freight transport will have on-board a federal sky-marshal, rail-marshal, road-marshal (for buses), river-marshal, or sea-marshal, OR they shall receive no federal money what-so-ever. This shall apply to all forms of modes of transport that cross interstate or international borders.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">States should do the same for all forms and modes of transportation that cross inter-county boarders. Counties should do the same for all forms and modes of transportation that cross inter-city boarders. Cities should do the same for all forms and modes of transportation that stay within their municipalities.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">National IDs
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As President I would be 100% against the National ID card program. The only time this would be logical or right is federal government employees and military personnel. Both of which already have nationally recognized IDs.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Religious Freedom in the service All military personnel, ESPECIALLY those in religious duties should be allowed to practice their faith as they see fit, it is a founding principle of this nation, and should be definitely respected for those who wear the uniform to defend this nation and our way of life.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Religious duty personnel are in the military for the SPECIFIC job of both serving God however they see God to be, and also to help other military members in their service, devotion, dedication and worship of God. It is a direct violation of the religious duty member's rights to make him perform acts that violate their religion or punish them for not doing so. It is a dis-service to any military person to force a cleric who is not of their faith to perform acts of their religion for them.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The Academies
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As I've stated before all military academies and training facilities should include both genders with isolated dormitory facilities, and all combat functions, jobs and units should have the same requirements for all member. Anyone who can pass them should be allowed.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: Is water-boarding torture?
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: Lets' take a look at what torture actually is. Torture is “the act of inflicting harm and or damage as way to inflict excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.” Since water-boarding does not cause damage or harm to the subject in and of itself, it is therefor not torture. I see nothing wrong with using such methods of coercion, or the threat of torture as a tool for interrogation. I would not however, sign any law or policy that bans the use of torture. Why you ask? Its simple, our enemies on the field of battle and abroad should have no idea what we are willing to do and what we are not willing to do to our enemies for the purpose of waging war or nation defense.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: What would you do as president to repair the image of America in the eyes of the Muslim world?
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: There is a fundamental truth, no matter what you do or what you say, there will always be at least one person who speaks ill of you, who chooses to not like you for whatever reason, no matter how right or wrong you behave. This true of the individual scale, organizational scale, and the international scale as well. I cannot and will not in good faith determine national policy and practices based on who the other kids in the neighborhood are going to think of me. I must therefore determine national policy by determining and then acting in what is the best policy for my nation, then my nation's friends and allies, and then the rest of the world. As a matter of fact, EVERY leader of EVERY government and nation should be making decisions on the same formula.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">So the answer to your question is this; Winning the global war against "Muslim" terrorists and their ideology is the first and foremost priority. Second to that, is fixing the economic problems of this nation and rebuilding it the economic superpower that it once was. Third to that is securing our national borders and returning to constitutional government. And after that are several other things, and then finally down the list we get to being friends with our Muslim brothers in the realm of nations. If an only if they choose to be our friends and stop harboring terrorists, allowing them train or teach in their countries, turn over all persons in their countries wanted by the US for crimes, and to stop oppression and violations of the natural God given human rights within their own nations.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Use every method you can think of to interrogate terrorists
==='''<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: Let’s say terrorists mounted three successful suicide attacks in the US, and a 4th attack was averted and the terrorists captured. How aggressively would you interrogate those being held about where the next attack might be? '''===

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: If we know there’s going to be another attack and these people know about it, I would authorize any method, device, or technique necessary that does not violate the constitution, constitutionally supported federal laws, constitutionally supported local laws, or congress-ratified treaties we happen to be a signatory of.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Terrorists can’t be accommodated, appeased, and compromised
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Terrorists learned they could intimidate the world community and too often the response, particularly in Europe, was “accommodation, appeasement and compromise.” They also learned that their cause would be taken more seriously, almost in direct proportion to the barbarity of the attack. Terrorist acts became a ticket to the international bargaining table. How else to explain Yasser Arafat winning the Nobel Peace Prize when he was supporting a terrorist plague that undermined any chance of peace.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Under a Clifton administration, the United States of America will NEVER, EVER, EVER, negotiate with terrorists. There are only two things we would ever give terrorists for their efforts. Firstly, a life in jail, if they surrender unconditionally. Secondly, death, if they do not unconditionally surrender.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: Regarding declining minority enlistment, what do you say to minorities who are overwhelmingly opposed to the continuation of this war?
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: I agree with Mike Huckabee when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“One of the tragedies is that our military veterans have kept their promises to us; we have not kept all of our promises to them. Many of them have come back to be told to wait in line for their health care, to be told that mental health would be something that might be rationed out. That’s not acceptable. And, if I were president, I’d like to see us have a very plainly written, simple-to-understand veterans’ bill of rights that would make sure that every single thing that these veterans have been promised is delivered. And it’s delivered as the first fruits of the federal Treasury before anyone else gets their nose in the trough, the veterans get their benefits paid--not on the basis of a limited budget, but on the basis of making sure that we keep promises to the people who have kept us free. That, I believe, will help people want to be a part of the military.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">No student visas to citizens of terrorist states
'''<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: US policy of extending student visas to foreign students has been much too lenient. Many of the 9/11 hijackers received student visas. Would you support continued issuing of student visas to nationals of countries that are state-sponsors of terrorist groups? '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T Clifton: No. Heck no. We should hold this as a sanction over those nations' heads. If they continue to operate in that manner, their citizens will not be welcome here for more than a tourist visit.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Strength is more effective deterrent to war than weakness
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Mike Huckabee when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“True greatness is revealed by humility rather than hubris. Fear can be obtained by a gun, but true respect can only be earned by using one’s strength for unselfish service. Jesus reminded us that if we really want to be great, we must be willing to serve rather than to be served, and that the spirit of our actions is as important as the actions themselves. 


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I would never want to sacrifice one particle of America’s power. Ronald Reagan had it right when he led this country to unprecedented military strength. Our best defense is a military so well equipped and so well trained that no one wants to challenge it. Strength is a far more effective deterrent to war than is weakness, and the US should never be apologetic for the development of the strongest military forces on the face of the earth. But with the development of strength and unprecedented power there must also be unprecedented restraint.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Peace through strength: supremely strong & prepared military
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Alan Keyes when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“We believe in a supremely strong, prepared, & well-equipped civilian-controlled military, and a bold, visionary & intelligent program of principled constructive engagement with the rest of the world. For us, “peace through strength” is not a mere slogan. It is the means of survival for our country in a very dangerous & often hostile world. Our friendship should be a sought-after possession of all men & women of good will everywhere in the world. Our enmity should be something that all rightfully fear.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Stand Unalterably Opposed To All Who Commit Terrorist Acts
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Alan Keyes when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“As Ronald Reagan opposed and defeated the designs and desire of the Soviet Union to dominate the world and place it under the tyranny of their Evil Empire, we stand unalterably opposed to all who approve of, plan or commit terrorist acts. Since the first principle of America is the protection of innocent human life, any who would use acts of terrorism targeted at innocent civilians to forward their political, ideological or religious aims incur our effective and determined enmity.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Killing Innocents By Terror Is Same Evil As By Abortion
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Alan Keyes when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“The first thing we have to understand, and we often forget it, is that the effort against terrorism isn’t isolated from the fundamental principle, that innocent human life must be respected. The first thing that we need to do in making sure that we have the firmness and the confidence to prosecute the War on Terror is to make sure that we understand that as we fight against the killing of innocents abroad and on 9/11 in New York, we must fight against the killing of innocents in the womb! The principle is the same, the evil is the same, and we must stand the same against them! And in doing that, we must enlist the aid of every human being of conscience. Islam is no excuse for abandoning that which we have agreed upon throughout the world that every nation must respect the claims of innocent human life and every group.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Doctrine Of Terror Is Killing Innocent People
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Alan Keyes when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“We’re fighting for our own survival against this doctrine that, in the name of whatever, you can go around killing innocent people. That doctrine of terror is the utter opposite of the moral principle our country is based on, that our rights come from God, and must be exercised with respect for the authority of God--beginning with the right to life, which no one, for the sake of any agenda, has the right simply to disregard, where innocent lives are concerned.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Keep Some Forces Abroad, But Avoid Globalism
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Alan Keyes when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“We obviously are a global power, we have interests all over the world. And I think that in many regions of the world, we do have forces deployed where their deployment makes a definite contribution to regional peace and stability and to the defense of our own interests. I wouldn’t suggest that we withdraw forces from Korea or from Europe or elsewhere, where I think that they do serve a useful purpose in both maintaining our presence and defending our interests. On the other hand, I think our principle ought to be very clear. It ought to be that when we are using those forces, deploying them, it serves our interests, not some abstract agenda of globalism, global sovereignty, global left-wing interventionism.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Supports Missile Strikes Against Terrorists Abroad
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Alan Keyes when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“I believe that the [missile strikes against Sudan and Afghanistan] last week does serve the best interest of the country. Terrorism is not just a threat to our physical lives; it is also a threat to our way of life. We can already see this threat in the security that must surround people in our government, and the increasing presence of physical barriers in our public places. The real nature of the terrorist threat is the gradual shutting down the processes of an open society.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">No Women In Involuntary Combat
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Alan Keyes when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“Though I believe strongly in the equality of the sexes, I resist with similar conviction the idea that equality means that the sexual difference makes no difference. I would restore fully the exemption of women from involuntary service in land combat units, and institute an in depth review and re-examination of the policy of assigning female volunteers to combat duty. Our military forces are not fit subjects for questionable social experimentation. Military preparedness should be the top priority.” 

What I mean by this is that I think women should never be placed in combat roles, as a matter of my personal opinoin. However, IF we are going to have women in the military... ALL military personal should have to meet the same psychological, mental, biological and physical requirements, no matter the gender, ethniocity, regilion, or sexuality.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">We Can’t Fight For Freedom If We Impose Patriot Act
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Ron Paul when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“We must remember initiating force to impose our will on others negates all the goodness for which we profess to stand. We cannot be fighting to secure our freedom if we impose laws like the Patriot Act and a national ID card for Americans. 


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Unfortunately, we have lost faith and confidence in the system of government with which we have been blessed. Today too many Americans support the use of force to spread our message of hope and freedom.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">A powerful bureaucratic military state negates all efforts to preserve those conditions that have served America so well up until recent times. That is not what the American dream is all about. Without a change in attitude, the dream dies: a simple changes the restates the principles of liberty enshrined in our Constitution will serve us well in solving the problems we face. The people are up to the task; I hope Congress is as well.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Reassess “Mutual Security” Treaties; Our Allies Never Aid Us
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The odds of getting assistance from our allies to protect our security if we are threatened are infinitesimal, as compared to the possibility of our sons dying for someone else’s security.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">We should reassess all our military treaties. They are called “mutual security” treaties, but no one expects our allies to come to our assistance if we are attacked. We have been forced to stand alone and bear all the cost of our defense and most of the cost of the defense of our allies.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Not Wise For Us To Describe Our Interrogation Techniques
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Mitt Romney when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“I do not believe that as a presidential candidate, it is wise for us to describe precisely what techniques we will use in interrogating people. I want to make sure these folks are kept at Guantanamo. I don’t want the people that are carrying out attacks on this country to be brought into our jail system and be given legal representation in this country. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed went to Guantanamo and he met G.I.s and CIA interrogators. And that’s just exactly how it ought to be.” 

America’s #1 Threat - Jihad

 * The defeat, death and destruction of this radical and violent faction of Islam must be achieved through a combination of American resolve, international effort, and the rejection of violence by moderate, modern, mainstream Muslims.

"Radical" Islam’s Plan

 * Many of us still fail to comprehend the extent of the threat posed by radical Islam. Jihad is much bigger than any one nation. For radical Islam, there is one conflict and one goal--replacing all modern Islamic states with a caliphate, destroying America, and conquering the world.

Strength Against Jihad

 * We need a stronger military. I propose that we sharply increase our investment in national defense. I want to see at least 250,000 more troops. I want to see us finally make the long overdue investment in equipment, armament, weapons systems, and strategic defense.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Build Larger, More Capable, And More Modern Military
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I agree with Fred Thompson when he said


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">“The first responsibility of government is to protect the American people, the homeland, and our way of life. The president must ensure the US has the means to achieve victory. Presidential leadership requires talking to the American people about these stakes, mapping out a clear vision for success, and devising a comprehensive strategy for achieving it. I am committed to a larger, more capable, and more modern military that can defeat terrorists, deter adversaries, and defend the US and our interests.” 

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Enemies Do Not Doubt Our Strength, But Our Determination
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I have great hope for such a new understanding among NATO allies. We would never want to look back on a campaign we’d undertaken to realize we’d fallen short for lack of commitment or material support. Today our enemies do not doubt our military strength. They do question our determination. Our efforts will require ongoing dialogue based upon mutual respect and mutual interests.
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }