<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 13px"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>----- Forwarded Message ----<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> shane que hee <squehee@ucla.edu><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Fri, December 2, 2011 1:29:15 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> RELEASE Green Pres. candidate Stein calls on Obama to veto Defense Authorization<BR></FONT><BR><BR>>Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 16:15:57 -0500<BR>>Subject: RELEASE Green Pres. candidate Stein calls on Obama to veto <BR>>Defense Authorization<BR>>From: Green News - DC <<A href="mailto:dcsgpnews10@gmail.com" ymailto="mailto:dcsgpnews10@gmail.com">dcsgpnews10@gmail.com</A>><BR>><BR>>(Forwarded)<BR>><BR>>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ~ Jill Stein for President<BR>>http://www.jillstein.org<BR>><BR>>Contact: Ben Manski, Campaign Manager, <A href="mailto:Ben@Manski.org"
ymailto="mailto:Ben@Manski.org">Ben@Manski.org</A>, 608 239-6915<BR>><BR>><BR>>Stein calls on Obama to veto Defense Authorization as "expensive, un-American"<BR>><BR>><BR>>Jill Stein said today that if she were president she would veto the<BR>>pending National Defense Authorization Bill as needlessly expensive<BR>>and because it violates civil liberties by restricting the<BR>>constitutional right to a fair trial. Stein is running for president<BR>>as a Green Party candidate.<BR>><BR>>"Our constitutional liberties have been under attack over the past<BR>>decade, a victim of this unending war on terrorism. Congress wants to<BR>>authorize the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens, without<BR>>charge, and that is wrong - and the very definition of un-American. If<BR>>elected, I will restore our political and civil liberty protections,"<BR>>said Stein.<BR>><BR>>The National Defense Authorization
Act would eliminate protections<BR>>against the use of the military against our own citizens on American<BR>>soil, as articulated by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. It would also<BR>>empower the president and our armed forces to detain U.S. citizens and<BR>>others without trial based on unsubstantiated suspicions that such<BR>>persons have been involved in the attacks of September 11, 2001, or<BR>>have supported Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or "associated forces that are<BR>>engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition<BR>>partners."<BR>><BR>>Individuals could also be tried before a military court or transferred<BR>>"to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any<BR>>other foreign country, or any other foreign entity."<BR>><BR>>An amendment by Senator Udall to modify this section was rejected by<BR>>the U.S. Senate on Tuesday.<BR>><BR>>Jill Stein also supports major
cuts in the "massive, bloated military<BR>>budget." The Senate is voting this week on the full $682.5 billion<BR>>Defense Authorization Bill. Passage of the bill would mean that the<BR>>amount the U.S. spends on its military would nearly be the same as the<BR>>rest of the world combined.<BR>><BR>>"America needs a peace dividend to invest in jobs, rebuild our<BR>>nation's infrastructure, pay off student loans, stop foreclosures on<BR>>homes, and invest in renewable energy and conservation needed to stop<BR>>the growing problem of climate change. The military budget needed<BR>>major cuts ten years ago, and since then Congress has doubled it,"<BR>>said Dr. Stein.<BR>><BR>>Even if Congress permits the 10% automatic defense reductions required<BR>>in the wake of the deficit reduction super-committee failure, defense<BR>>spending would actually continue to increase since the reductions are<BR>>only cuts in
reference to the rate of growth.<BR>><BR>>Stein pointed out that her views -- unlike those of most of the<BR>>Republican presidential contenders -- are similar to traditional<BR>>conservative beliefs that oppose a large military and the use of our<BR>>defense forces as the world's policeman. Stein noted that fifty years<BR>>ago, President Eisenhower, the commander of the Allied Forces in WWII,<BR>>warned the American people to be careful of the growing power of the<BR>>military-industrial-Congress complex. The U.S. did not have a large<BR>>permanent army or arms industry before then, always scaling the<BR>>military back after a war.<BR>><BR>>"We need to bring our troops home not only from the Middle East but<BR>>from most of the more than one hundred countries where we have bases.<BR>>Our massive military budget actually increases the security threat to<BR>>the American people by undermining economic security
at home and<BR>>distorting our foreign policy. It leads to the use of the military<BR>>where it is an inappropriate and ineffective response that exacerbates<BR>>hostilities better addressed by diplomatic means. Right-sizing the<BR>>military would not only lead to a healthier economy at home but would<BR>>also move us towards real security around the world."<BR>><BR>><BR>># # #<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></div></body></html>