Doc's Talk: Israel taking other steps to stop Iran

Thursday, May 01, 2008

Israel taking other steps to stop Iran

Law Prohibiting Investment in Entities Maintaining Commercial Relations with Iran 2008
(Passed by Knesset 2 Apr 2008 - Unofficial Translation)

1. Objective
The objective of this law is to prohibit investment by Israeli financial institutions in entities that maintain, direct or indirect, material commercial relations that facilitate the economy of Iran, as part of an international effort to prevent Iran from developing unconventional weapons that present a threat to the existence of the State of Israel.
2. Definitions in this Law –
"Iran" – The Islamic Republic of Iran
"Financial Institution" – include all of the following:
(1) Institutional Body, as defined in Financial Services Monitoring Law (Insurance) 1981
(2) Bank as defined in the Banking Law (licensing) 1981
(3) Fund Manager, as referred to in the Mutual Fund in Trust Law, 1994; "Committee" – the implementation committee established in accordance to article 4;
"Holding", "Purchasing" and "Control" – as defined in Securities Law 1968;
"Investment" – Includes Holding or Purchasing securities or other rights in entities, including loans, for a limited time of not less than five years, providing that the amount of the loan is not less than five percent of the entity's owner equity;
"Government of Iran" – Including entities controlled by Iranian Government;
"Securities" – Serial certificates issued by a company, cooperative or any other entity, that grant participation or claim rights, whether issued to a named holder or to a bearer, including bonds issued by the government of Iran, including options and future contracts as they are referred to in the Mutual Fund in Trust Law, 1994;
"Material Commercial Relations with Iran" – Commercial relations, monetary or economic with the Government of Iran or its beneficiary or in its jurisdiction, in general or through a transaction of the equivalent sum in New Shekels of at least twenty million United States Dollars or any other amount determined by the Finance Minister in accordance with article 10, including any energy related transaction or a transaction with an Entity related to the development of unconventional weapons by Iran;
"Entity" – Including an entity that controls or is controlled by any other entity, subject to it being included on the list in accordance with article 3;
"The Minister" – The Finance Minister
3. Prohibited Investment and Selling of Holdings
a) A Financial Institution shall not invest in an Entity included in the list published by the Committee (hereinafter – "The List")
b) Did a Financial Institution invest in an Entity, and the Entity is included thereafter on The List, shall notify the Committee and shall sell its Holdings in the Entity within ninety days of the Committee making public the inclusion of the Entity to The List; for the purpose of this article, "Investment" – does not include 'loan" as it is referred to in the definition of "Investment".
c) The Committee may extend the time limitation of selling the said Holdings as referred to in article 3 (b) by an additional sixty days, subject to exceptional considerations that shall be registered, in addition the Committee may, subject to the authorization of the Minister, extend it for an additional defined duration.
4. Implementation Committee
a) A committee shall be established to implement the provisions of this law, consisting of the following members:
(1) An employee of the Finance Ministry, appointed by the Minister, who shall serve as chairman and shall have the decisive vote in cases of equal votes;
(2) Two employees of the Prime Minister's Office, appointed by the Prime Minister;
(3) An employee of the Foreign Ministry, appointed by the Foreign Minister;
(4) An employee of the Defense Ministry, appointed by the Defense Minister;
(5) An employee of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, appointed by the Minister of Industry and Commerce;
(6) An employee of The Authority for the Prohibiting of Money Laundry and Terrorism Financing, appointed by the Head The Authority for the Prohibiting of Money Laundry and Terrorism Financing;
(7) An employee of the Securities Authority, appointed by the chairman of the Securities Authority;
(8) An employee of the Bank of Israel, appointed by the Chairman of the Bank of Israel.
b) Concerning Entities related to development of unconventional weapons by Iran, the authority of the Committee shall be subject to a sub committee consisting of an employee of the Prime Minister's Office, an employee of the Foreign Ministry and an employee of the Defense Ministry, appointed in articles 4(a) (2) to 4(a) (4); the authorities of the Minister in accordance to article 3, as they refer to Entities, are subordinate to the Prime Minister.
c) The Committee is authorized to set its working procedures that are not defined in this law.
5. List of Entities having Material Commercial Relations with Iran
a) The Committee shall administer a list of Entities having Material Commercial Relations with Iran.
b) Prior to the Committee's decision to include an Entity to the List, the Committee shall make public its intention to include the Entity to the List and shall notify the Entity as soon as possible.
c) Subsequent to the passing of sixty days from the day of publication as noted in article 5 b), the Committee shall make public a List of the Entities found conducting Material Commercial Relations with Iran, unless a claim is submitted in accordance to article 7 and before a decision is made concerning the matter.
d) When pleas are filed in accordance to article 7 as it refers to including Entities to the List, a Financial Institution shall not be obliged to sell its Holdings in the Entity, prior to a decision made concerning the plea.
e) The Committee shall update the List from time to time; the update may be made upon the Committee's initiative or subsequent to a referral of any other party.
f) Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the Prime Minister may, for the sake of the State and its security, exempt an Entity from inclusion to the List.

6. Foreign Authority Determines that an Entity has Commercial Relations with Iran
a) When determined by a foreign authority of a foreign state or a union of foreign states, subsequent to measures taken in accordance to their law, a list consisting of Entities having material commercial relations with Iran, The Committee may adopt the list, in its entirety or in part.
b) When determined by a foreign state's authority or a Union of Foreign States, subsequent to measures taken in accordance to their law, a limitation of investment in an Entity having commercial relations with Iran, on its behalf, or in its jurisdiction, The Committee may, subject to the Minister's authorization, to include the said Entity to the List.
c) An Entity included to the List in accordance to this article, shall be subject to article 7 as it refers to the right of claim
d) For the purpose of this article –
"Union of Foreign States" – In accordance to the Non Profit Organizations Law, 1980
"Foreign State" – Including States in the United States of America
7. Right of Plea
a) One that views himself harmed by the intention to include an Entity to the List or by adopting an Entity list, he is entitled to raise his plea before the Committee.
b) Pleas against intentions to include Entities on the List are to be submitted within thirty days from the day the name of the Entity is made public, in accordance to article 5 (b); a Entity is included on the List in accordance to article 5 (c) or 6, may object to inclusion in the List at any time.
c) The Committee may extend the time restriction noted in article 7(b), if it is of the opinion that it is justified.
d) The Committee may demand that the contesting party submit any notice, document or equipment it deems necessary in order to make a decision.

8. The Responsibility of an Official in a Financial Institution
a) An offence committed according to this law by a Financial Institution and by one who was a general manager or active manager of the Financial Institution or a senior official responsible for the same field at the headquarters of the Financial Institution, at the time that the Financial Institution committed an offence according to this law, and the sentence – one year incarceration, if one of the following two is not proven:
1. The offense was committed without his knowledge and his duty did not mandate him to be aware of the offence;
2. After learning that the Financial Institution is about to commit the offence, used all reasonable means in order to prevent the Financial Institution from committing the offence.
b) An offence according to this law –
1. Investment in Entity appearing on List, in contrast to provisions of article 3(a);
2. Not selling Holdings in Entity, in contrast to the provisions of article 3(b).

9. Implementation and Ordinance
The Minister is in charge of implementing this law, may after hearing the Committee's position, and subject to the approval of the Knesset's Foreign and Security Committee, install ordinance concerning any issue related to its implementation, inclusive of these issues:
1. Defining the amounts of various types of activities or market segments, deemed to be materially commercial related to Iran;
2. Ways and means of making public the Entity name that the Committee intends to add to the List prior to deciding on its inclusion;
3. Ways and means of notification of the Committee to the Entity concerning its intention to add it to the List, including circumstances in which an exemption of the said notification is permitted;
4. Procedure of making the List public;
5. Working procedure of the Committee.
10. Amendment to Court for Administrative Matters Law
Court for Adminstrative Matters Law - 2000, in first addition, after section 33 will come:
"34. Commercial Relations with Iran – Authority's decision in accordance with Law Prohibiting Investment in Entities Maintaining Commercial Relations with Iran 2008."

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk