OnTheIssuesLogo

Jill Stein on Homeland Security

Green Party presidential nominee; Former Challenger for MA Governor

 


Immediate weapons embargo to the Middle East

We are challenging the establishment parties' silence on crucial life-or-death issues.In foreign policy, only our campaign is calling for an immediate weapons embargo to the Middle East and an end to drone warfare. Only our campaign calls for ending financial support for governments violating human rights and committing war crimes, including Israel and Saudi Arabia. We are the only campaign to call for cutting U.S. military spending at least 50%. And leading on global nuclear disarmament.
Source: Green Party response to 2015 CNN Democratic primary debate , Oct 14, 2015

New 9/11 investigation, and public release of evidence

We deserve some answers and only Dr. Jill Stein has agreed to get to the bottom of this. She supports Cynthia McKinney's call for "a new investigation of the 9/11 attacks and for public release of important evidence and files related to 9/11." The corporate cons on both sides of the aisle are not interested in sharing the truth.
Source: The Peace Resource, "24 Facts About 9/11" , Sep 11, 2015

Military-industrial complex shows woes of privatization

OnTheIssues: What do you think about privatization of federal functions?

Stein: [We've tried privatization] in everything from prisons to the military--the military-industrial complex is a poster child against privatization--where contractors' needs become the prime mover of the budget.

OnTheIssues: I think you mean such as how in Iraq, support functions such as transportation and meals were provided by private contractors, while in Vietnam and earlier , those same functions were performed by uniformed soldiers, and that the numbers of soldiers were hence artificially reduced?

Stein: I agree completely

Source: Phone interview on 2016 presidential race by OnTheIssues.org , Jul 6, 2015

Disarm North Korea as part of worldwide nuclear disarmament

OnTheIssues: How to deal with North Korea?

Stein: That's a complicated problem in a society that has many issues and struggles but that also includes Korea's history of violence and imperialism, from both Japan and the US. There is a history of incredible distrust and aggression--it's important to understand that.

OnTheIssues: And what about their nuclear capability?

Stein: To build a nuclear free world--we've been addressing non-proliferation for a long time without address nuclear disarmament. Non-proliferation was supposed to be a phase through which we passed on the way to nuclear disarmament. They see nuclear weapons as essential, from their viewpoint, to defend their sovereignty.

OnTheIssues: So you mean we should lead by example?

Stein: We should lead by virtue of global agreements that also include us. We could get rid of MANY nukes as a first step because we're so far ahead [in possessing more nuclear weapons than the rest of the world].

Source: Phone interview on 2016 presidential race by OnTheIssues.org , Jul 6, 2015

Edward Snowden is a hero for exposing mass spying

OnTheIssues: What's your opinion of Edward Snowden? Hero or traitor?

Stein: Hero ; he has done the American people an incredible service by exposing the violations of the Constitution that have been perpetrated on us--which was taken very seriously around the world, where he has been vindicated. The kind of spying going on has not been protecting us--not one instance of a terrorist plot was found by these abuses--none, by mass spying. They initially claimed dozens of cases but it was found tat there were no none, in a Congressional investigation. Snowden should be treated as a hero---efforts to harass him and prosecute him should be declared over and done with. Charges should not be brought against him, and he should return with hero status--he could improve our national security if he were working for us

Source: Phone interview on 2016 presidential race by OnTheIssues.org , Jul 6, 2015

Bring troops home from 800 bases abroad

OnTheIssues: How would you apply the "Stein Doctrine," which you defined as focusing on human rights, international law, and diplomacy?

Stein: Foreign relations would be a whole lot more predictable if done by the Stein Doctrine, than when done by the current policy of military domination. For an example of a specific application, we need to bring troops home from 800 bases abroad.

Source: Phone interview on 2016 presidential race by OnTheIssues.org , Jul 6, 2015

700+ foreign military bases are bankrupting us

Peace and Human Rights: Establish a foreign policy based on diplomacy, international law, and human rights. End the wars and drone attacks, cut military spending by at least 50% and close the 700+ foreign military bases that are turning our republic into a bankrupt empire. Stop U.S. support and arms sales to human rights abusers, and lead on global nuclear disarmament.
Source: 2016 presidential campaign website, jill2016.com, "Plan" , Jun 25, 2015

End persecution of government and media whistleblowers

Justice for All: Restore our Constitutional rights, terminate unconstitutional surveillance and unwarranted spying, end persecution of government and media whistleblowers, close Guantanamo, abolish secret kill lists, and repeal indefinite detention without charge or trial.
Source: 2016 presidential campaign website, jill2016.com, "Plan" , Jun 25, 2015

Burden of fighting is borne by families of lesser means

GI and Veterans' Rights: Support for men and women in the armed forces must go far beyond the rhetoric used to discredit the peace movement in the U.S. today. We believe that the ill-advised and illegal actions of the U.S. administration have unnecessarily put our troops in harm's way. We further believe that the dangerous burden of fighting the unnecessary war in Iraq, and the wars that may follow, due to the administration's overly narrow and militaristic response to terrorism is disproportionately borne by families of lesser means. Those who are required to carry out militaristic policies, often with great hardship to themselves, their families, and even the risk of their lives, deserve our respect and our commitment to adequate compensation and benefits.
Source: Green Party of the United States National Platform , Jul 31, 2014

Torture creates enemies rather than eliminating them

As Rebecca Gordon notes in her new book, "Mainstreaming Torture," polls find greater support in the United States for torture now than when Bush was president. And it's not hard to see why that would be the case.

Fifteen years ago, it was possible to pretend the U.S. government opposed torture. Then it became widely known that the government tortured. And it was believed (with whatever accuracy) that officials had tried to keep the torturing secret. Next it became clear that nobody would be punished, that in fact top officials responsible for torture would be permitted to openly defend what they had done as good and noble.

Gordon's book, like most others, speaks of torture as being largely in the past -- even while admitting that it isn't really. "Bush administration-era policies" are acknowledged to be ongoing, and yet somehow they retain the name "Bush administration-era policies."

Source: Green Shadow Cabinet report, "Torture is Mainstream Now" , Apr 14, 2014

Eliminate nuclear weapons in Middle East & whole world

OBAMA: As long as I'm president, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon.

ROMNEY: The greatest threat of all is Iran, four years closer to a nuclear weapon. There's no question but that a nuclear-capable Iran is unacceptable to America. And of course, a military action is the last resort.

STEIN: They're both saber-rattling about Iran. We're not seeing what the American people really need and what international security really needs. In fact, Iran recently hosted the non-aligned nations. It's not just Iran. It was all the non-aligned nations with them--Brazil and Argentina and many others--that together put forward a proposal for eliminating nuclear weapons throughout the Middle East and, in fact, eliminating nuclear weapons throughout the world. That is the true solution that we should be getting behind.

Source: Democracy Now! Expanded Third Obama-Romney 2012 debate , Oct 22, 2012

Switch from bloated military to spending at home

ROMNEY: I will not cut our military budget by a trillion dollars, which is a combination of the budget cuts that the president has, as well as the sequestration cuts.

OBAMA: The sequester is not something that I proposed. It's something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen. The budget that we're talking about is not reducing our military spending; it's maintaining it.

STEIN: I think they both made the case for us, that the numbers just don't add up. We cannot continue spending a trillion dollars a year on this bloated military-industrial-security complex without having to really pay the price here at home. These are the ways that we should be spending our tax dollars, not on the military, but on what we need here at home. And by conserving those dollars instead of squandering them, we can actually spend them on the things that we need, on bailing out the students and on creating public higher education, which is free, tuition-free, the way that it should be.

Source: Democracy Now! Expanded Third Obama-Romney 2012 debate , Oct 22, 2012

Bush & Obama criminalized the right to protest

ANDERSON: More and more, United States citizens are worried about being safe from our government. Our Government is spying on us. The Patriot Act needs to be repealed.

STEIN: Yes, we certainly do need to hold government accountable. The attack on our civil liberties has been devastating. Under the Obama White House, which basically codified the violations of George Bush, the attacks on our privacy rights, on First Amendment rights, the criminalization of the right to protest, the National Defense Authorization Act in which the President has claimed the right to incarcerate us, basically, without charge or trial, and to do that at his pleasure without having to justify that in any way. So, yes, there are very serious problems. Things are not working under Democrats, under Republicans alike. We need a government that is of, by, and for the people, not sponsored and working for big money.

Source: Democracy Now! Expanded First Obama-Romney 2012 debate , Oct 4, 2012

Patriot Act ends the right to judicial review

Q: Do you support repealing the Patriot Act?

A: Yes. The Bill of Rights is on life support. The Patriot Act symbolizes the death of the 4th Amendment and the right to judicial review, and the right to a trial has just been sabotaged by Obama. It is as if a coup has occurred. Any one of these alone is bad enough, but when you add them all up, we are on some pretty thin ice right now as a free society. Our freedom is hanging in thin air right now. There is now a legal basis for curtailing that freedom.

Source: Interview with Steve Horn of Truthout.org , Jan 29, 2012

Bloated military budget enables knee-jerk military solutions

Q: Most Americans do not know how many military bases we have around the world, although people around the world definitely know when they have an American military base in their backyard.

A: Well, the bloated military budget is first of all, not good for our safety, and neither is the militarization of our foreign policy. Neither is a good thing and I think they enable a knee-jerk military solution to all problems and it is not a good thing for us to have this ready default to engage militarily. It's extremely expensive and we can't sustain it, and again, the more we create renewable, secure energy sources domestically, the less we need to do what we're doing internationally. Our program is to downsize our military by at least 50%, if not more.

Q: And you say use it more for defense, rather than offense?

A: Yes, and not make it the crux of our international relations and use international law and working through international governmental bodies to resolve conflicts.

Source: Interview with Steve Horn of Truthout.org , Jan 29, 2012

End Patriot Act; it surrenders freedoms in name of security

We must protect our liberty from those who would frighten us into surrendering our freedoms in the name of security. The Green New Deal will repeal the Patriot Act & those parts of the National Defense Authorization Act that violate our civil liberties. It will prohibit the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI from conspiring with local police forces to suppress our freedoms of assembly and of speech.
Source: Green Party 2012 People's State of the Union speech , Jan 25, 2012

PATRIOT Act is a flagrant violation of 4th Amendment

Q: Does the PATRIOT Act harm civil liberties?

A: Yes, but it doesn't stop at the PATRIOT Act--the National Defense Authorization Act is easily the equivalent of the PATRIOT Act.

Q: That's the NDAA which passed the House and Senate last week, which allows indefinite detention of terrorism suspects?

A: Yes; the PATRIOT Act is a flagrant violation of Fourth Amendment--and the NDAA does away with our right to trial by jury and a presumption of innocence. Put the two together--in addition to enormous sums into local security and militarizing the police--it's a very dangerous combination. In many ways it's far worse than the violations in prior wars--when civil liberties were restricted but only during the duration of the war. We now have a war without end--so this is a permanent strike against the Constitution. This is the makings of a disaster. It's outrageous to think that this charge is being led by a Constitutional lawyer who occupies the Presidential office.

Source: 2011 OnTheIssues interview with Jill Stein , Dec 21, 2011

Repeal National Defense Authorization; keep right to trial

Q: What do you mean by "militarized police"?

A: The National Defense Authorization Act does away with our right to trial by jury. Militarized police means personal liberties are no longer respected.

Q: What's the solution?

A: Repeal the PATRIOT Act and likewise repeal the provision of the National Defense Authorization that codifies the ability of the president to basically declare anybody he wants as an enemy of the state without ever accusing them of a crime nor letting them go to trial.

Source: 2011 OnTheIssues interview with Jill Stein , Dec 21, 2011

Cut military 50%; spend that $500B on economy

Q: What do you recommend regarding the Defense budget?

A: Downsize the military 50%; that would include the security apparatus. That would free up $500 billion per year to spend on things that would improve our economy and truly increase national security. A hyper-armed military distributed around the world makes us less secure, not more secure. We need to use diplomacy, international law, and human rights as the principles of international relations--not military might. That is a dead end.

Source: 2011 OnTheIssues interview with Jill Stein , Dec 21, 2011

Other candidates on Homeland Security: Jill Stein on other issues:
2016 Presidential Candidates:
Donald Trump(R-NY)
Gov.Mike Pence(R-IN,VP)
Secy.Hillary Clinton(D-NY)
Sen.Tim Kaine(D-VA,VP)
Gov.Gary Johnson(L-NM)
Gov.Bill Weld(L-MA,VP)
Dr.Jill Stein(G-MA)
Ajamu Baraka(G-VP)
Roseanne Barr(PF-HI)
Evan McMullin(I)
2016 Withdrawn Democratic Candidates:
Gov.Lincoln Chafee(RI)
Gov.Martin O`Malley(MD)
Sen.Bernie Sanders(VT)
Sen.Jim Webb(VA)
2016 Withdrawn GOP Candidates:
Gov.Jeb Bush(FL)
Dr.Ben Carson(MD)
Gov.Chris Christie(NJ)
Sen.Ted Cruz(TX)
Carly Fiorina(CA)
Gov.Mike Huckabee(AR)
Gov.Bobby Jindal(LA)
Gov.John Kasich(OH)
Sen.Rand Paul(KY)
Sen.Marco Rubio(FL)
Sen.Rick Santorum(PA)
Gov.Scott Walker(WI)
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families/Children
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Infrastructure/Technology
Jobs
Principles/Values
Social Security
Tax Reform
War/Iraq/Mideast
Welfare/Poverty

About Jill Stein:
Profile
AmericansElect quiz
MyOcracy quiz
Wikipedia
Ballotpedia
Search for...





Page last updated: Aug 18, 2016