GOP Bill To Cut Embassy Security Unless US embassy moved to Jerusalem

You can't make this stuff up:

Some GOP senators want the U.S. to move its Israel embassy to Jerusalem. And they're willing to slash diplomatic security to do it.

Israel claims its capital city is Jerusalem. So does Palestine. The U.S., like most nations, keeps its embassy in Tel Aviv to avoid the issue.

Senators Dean Heller, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio want to change that with the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act. The bill would cut the State Department's embassy security and construction budget in half until a U.S. embassy in Jerusalem is opened.

Embassy security has been a big concern for these senators in the past.

www.theindychannel.com...

Interesting as how many conservatives whaled and whined about the security at Benghazi?

"Before the attack in Benghazi, what had we done specifically to help them build their security capacities?" Rubio asked then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a hearing.

And Cruz asked Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey, "If the State Department had requested additional security so that there was additional boots on the ground in Benghazi, is it your military judgment that would have prevented the loss of four lives, including our ambassador?"

But recognizing Israel's claim on Jerusalem apparently comes first.

www.theindychannel.com...

This was one of the main complaints about Benghazi was it not? The lack of security? The lack of response? But really we all know there wasn't any real concern about Benghazi. Just politics as usual. Why on earth are these members of congress so concerned with dragging America into foreign matters? How many more $billions wasted on all this support in Israel? Why is tax payer money being wasted on this religious nonsense? There's NO reason to move the embassy there other than to appease the evangelical nuts. Meanwhile we cause more tension in the ME.

Christ.

I hope it is vote down. I do not agree with it, and will write to Rubio to let him know. Thank you for bringing this to us. I feel like it will be voted down in the end.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

So put it in Jerusalem already. What is the big deal?

It is not like the U.S. have not diplomatically been on the side of Israel since forever with all her vetoes, with all the blocking of resolutions in the UN. I am generally not in favor of Israel, but it is perfectly legitimate the the U.S. is. So, what is the big deal?

a reply to: Southern Guardian


Your article is wrong this bill would create an embassy in Jerusalem. And who ever wrote the article didn't read the bill what it states is that for 2017 expenses on the new embassy is not to exceed 50 percent of the state departments budget for Embassy security and maintenance. What they are doing is capping the amount that can be spent in 2017 for the new embassy. They say they will not provide more than half there current budget so the state department cant spend anything they want that's all. In 2018 and 2019 the secretary of state will have to add it to there budget to get congressional approval.

This move is deliberate provoking violence backed by evangelicals . We are all in danger now with this new president.

The article seems too biased.

It's another fake story.

originally posted by: xuenchen
The article seems too biased.

It's another fake story.

Yes and reading the actual references to laws enacted and proposed show no correlation to the posting here.

The 1995 law requires the movement of the location; yet allows every 6 mos a sitting president to push it back....which has occurred. This 'reference' to the Senatorial action simply wipes away the ability by a sitting president to do so, and forces the move (via section 7)

Hardly new news since long before 1995 this activity began.

mg

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Unless Trumps plans to bring 'freedom and democracy' to Israel/ Palenstine.

The Benghazi comparison falls flat on it's face.

Actually, it kinda reminds me of the Omega Code.
"Who controls Jerusalem..." etc., etc.