[GPSCC-chat] Fw: RELEASE Green Pres. candidate Stein calls on Obama to veto Defense Authorization

[Caroline Yacoub]

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: shane que hee <squehee at ucla.edu>
Sent: Fri, December 2, 2011 1:29:15 PM
Subject: RELEASE Green Pres. candidate Stein calls on Obama to veto Defense 
Authorization


>Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 16:15:57 -0500
>Subject: RELEASE Green Pres. candidate Stein calls on Obama to veto 
>Defense Authorization
>From: Green News - DC <dcsgpnews10 at gmail.com>
>
>(Forwarded)
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ~ Jill Stein for President
>http://www.jillstein.org
>
>Contact: Ben Manski, Campaign Manager, Ben at Manski.org, 608 239-6915
>
>
>Stein calls on Obama to veto Defense Authorization as "expensive, un-American"
>
>
>Jill Stein said today that if she were president she would veto the
>pending National Defense Authorization Bill as needlessly expensive
>and because it violates civil liberties by restricting the
>constitutional right to a fair trial. Stein is running for president
>as a Green Party candidate.
>
>"Our constitutional liberties have been under attack over the past
>decade, a victim of this unending war on terrorism. Congress wants to
>authorize the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens, without
>charge, and that is wrong - and the very definition of un-American. If
>elected, I will restore our political and civil liberty protections,"
>said Stein.
>
>The National Defense Authorization Act would eliminate protections
>against the use of the military against our own citizens on American
>soil, as articulated by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. It would also
>empower the president and our armed forces to detain U.S. citizens and
>others without trial based on unsubstantiated suspicions that such
>persons have been involved in the attacks of September 11, 2001, or
>have supported Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or "associated forces that are
>engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition
>partners."
>
>Individuals could also be tried before a military court or transferred
>"to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any
>other foreign country, or any other foreign entity."
>
>An amendment by Senator Udall to modify this section was rejected by
>the U.S. Senate on Tuesday.
>
>Jill Stein also supports major cuts in the "massive, bloated military
>budget." The Senate is voting this week on the full $682.5 billion
>Defense Authorization Bill. Passage of the bill would mean that the
>amount the U.S. spends on its military would nearly be the same as the
>rest of the world combined.
>
>"America needs a peace dividend to invest in jobs, rebuild our
>nation's infrastructure, pay off student loans, stop foreclosures on
>homes, and invest in renewable energy and conservation needed to stop
>the growing problem of climate change. The military budget needed
>major cuts ten years ago, and since then Congress has doubled it,"
>said Dr. Stein.
>
>Even if Congress permits the 10% automatic defense reductions required
>in the wake of the deficit reduction super-committee failure, defense
>spending would actually continue to increase since the reductions are
>only cuts in reference to the rate of growth.
>
>Stein pointed out that her views -- unlike those of most of the
>Republican presidential contenders -- are similar to traditional
>conservative beliefs that oppose a large military and the use of our
>defense forces as the world's policeman. Stein noted that fifty years
>ago, President Eisenhower, the commander of the Allied Forces in WWII,
>warned the American people to be careful of the growing power of the
>military-industrial-Congress complex. The U.S. did not have a large
>permanent army or arms industry before then, always scaling the
>military back after a war.
>
>"We need to bring our troops home not only from the Middle East but
>from most of the more than one hundred countries where we have bases.
>Our massive military budget actually increases the security threat to
>the American people by undermining economic security at home and
>distorting our foreign policy. It leads to the use of the military
>where it is an inappropriate and ineffective response that exacerbates
>hostilities better addressed by diplomatic means. Right-sizing the
>military would not only lead to a healthier economy at home but would
>also move us towards real security around the world."
>
>
># # #
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20111202/c77f11d3/attachment.html>