You an antisemite like Tlaib
Netanyahu indicted
- Thread starter JimH52
- Start date
You an antisemite like Tlaib
- Banned
- #43
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 73,824
- 12,774
- 2,290
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 73,824
- 12,774
- 2,290
Netanyahu’s alleged crimes relate to decisions he made during his tenure as Minister of Communications. Netanyahu held that portfolio in addition to serving as Prime Minister and Foreign Minister from 2015 through 2017. His allegedly corrupt actions involve the Communications Ministry’s decision to approve the merger of Bezeq – Israel’s telecommunications giant and former monopoly — with YES, Israel’s satellite television provider.
Netanyahu is accused of approving the merger that allegedly gave a billion shekels – or some $300 million – in regulatory and tax breaks to Yes, enriching Bezeq owner Shaul Elovich. Elovich and his wife Iris are friends with Netanyahu and his wife Sara.
Elovich allegedly repaid – that is, bribed – Netanyahu for his allegedly preferential treatment by providing the prime minister and his wife Sara with positive coverage on Israel’s Walla Internet news portal, which is owned by Bezeq.
Neither the “quid” – that is, preferential regulatory and tax treatment – nor the “quo” – positive coverage on a website – stand up to scrutiny.
On the regulatory side, there are several problems with the claims against Netanyahu. First, as the Hebrew-language investigative journalism magazine Mida reported, he wasn’t involved with the Bezeq-Yes merger. It was handled by his then-director general Shlomo Filber. Filber, who signed a deal to serve as a state’s witness against Netanyahu in March, claims now that he was acting as Netanyahu’s errand boy in approving the merger.
Even if Filber’s claim is true, the fact is that there is nothing wrong with the merger from a legal or financial perspective. The deal was approved by all the relevant legal and regulatory authorities at the time. And one of the odd aspects of the criminal probe against Netanyahu is that the regulators who approved the deal were never called in for questioning by police investigators.
The second aspect of the “quid” part of the allegations against the Netanyahus is that that the tax and regulatory breaks that Yes received were standard breaks. As financial reporter Eli Zippori, from Israel’s Globes Hebrew-language business newspaper, noted, Yes received tax rebates because it was losing millions of shekels. Similar tax breaks were granted to Yes’s chief competitor, HOT cable television provider. And no one ever batted a lash.
The regulators’ decision to permit Bezeq and YES to merge was controversial. But it was also reasonable. It improved the lot of consumers. Zippori explained that the merger enabled the two firms to provide the public with discounted service bundles that included landlines, Internet service, and television service.
(full article online)
Caroline Glick: Israel's Deep State Takes Aim at Netanyahu | Breitbart
Netanyahu is accused of approving the merger that allegedly gave a billion shekels – or some $300 million – in regulatory and tax breaks to Yes, enriching Bezeq owner Shaul Elovich. Elovich and his wife Iris are friends with Netanyahu and his wife Sara.
Elovich allegedly repaid – that is, bribed – Netanyahu for his allegedly preferential treatment by providing the prime minister and his wife Sara with positive coverage on Israel’s Walla Internet news portal, which is owned by Bezeq.
Neither the “quid” – that is, preferential regulatory and tax treatment – nor the “quo” – positive coverage on a website – stand up to scrutiny.
On the regulatory side, there are several problems with the claims against Netanyahu. First, as the Hebrew-language investigative journalism magazine Mida reported, he wasn’t involved with the Bezeq-Yes merger. It was handled by his then-director general Shlomo Filber. Filber, who signed a deal to serve as a state’s witness against Netanyahu in March, claims now that he was acting as Netanyahu’s errand boy in approving the merger.
Even if Filber’s claim is true, the fact is that there is nothing wrong with the merger from a legal or financial perspective. The deal was approved by all the relevant legal and regulatory authorities at the time. And one of the odd aspects of the criminal probe against Netanyahu is that the regulators who approved the deal were never called in for questioning by police investigators.
The second aspect of the “quid” part of the allegations against the Netanyahus is that that the tax and regulatory breaks that Yes received were standard breaks. As financial reporter Eli Zippori, from Israel’s Globes Hebrew-language business newspaper, noted, Yes received tax rebates because it was losing millions of shekels. Similar tax breaks were granted to Yes’s chief competitor, HOT cable television provider. And no one ever batted a lash.
The regulators’ decision to permit Bezeq and YES to merge was controversial. But it was also reasonable. It improved the lot of consumers. Zippori explained that the merger enabled the two firms to provide the public with discounted service bundles that included landlines, Internet service, and television service.
(full article online)
Caroline Glick: Israel's Deep State Takes Aim at Netanyahu | Breitbart
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 73,824
- 12,774
- 2,290
Also in this instance the people screaming "PROTECT DEMOCRACY" are the ones
arguing that the judges should rule according to what the judges believe
serves the public interest rather than according to the written laws enacted
by the democratically elected Knesset.
A word about the charges raised against Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
I recommend reading Professor Ran Baratz's article in the 1 March edition of
Makor Rishon.
Baratz cites the "tunnel vision" employed in the prosecution of Netanyahu on
the basis of action he was associated with that favored someone when
Netanyahu was also associated with decisions that caused great financial
harm to the same person. This "tunnel vision" considerd favorable media
coverage by an internet news service as evidence of a pay-off when that
same news service, on average, was unfavorable to Netanyahu.
"Tunnel vision" has Netanyahu lobbying with American officials for a visa
for a friend in exchange for cigars while ignoring that the reason his
friend had a visa issue in the first place was that he was being punished
for helping Israel.
"Tunnel vision" prosecutes Netanyahu for talking with the owner of a major
newspaper openly devoted to destroying Netanyahu's political career when the
operative conclusion of these conversations was that the paper continued its
crusade against the prime minister and Netanyahu went to elections to stop
legislation that served the paper's interests.
(full article online)
IMRA - Saturday, March 2, 2019 Weekly Commentary: Who sets policy in a democracy?
arguing that the judges should rule according to what the judges believe
serves the public interest rather than according to the written laws enacted
by the democratically elected Knesset.
A word about the charges raised against Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
I recommend reading Professor Ran Baratz's article in the 1 March edition of
Makor Rishon.
Baratz cites the "tunnel vision" employed in the prosecution of Netanyahu on
the basis of action he was associated with that favored someone when
Netanyahu was also associated with decisions that caused great financial
harm to the same person. This "tunnel vision" considerd favorable media
coverage by an internet news service as evidence of a pay-off when that
same news service, on average, was unfavorable to Netanyahu.
"Tunnel vision" has Netanyahu lobbying with American officials for a visa
for a friend in exchange for cigars while ignoring that the reason his
friend had a visa issue in the first place was that he was being punished
for helping Israel.
"Tunnel vision" prosecutes Netanyahu for talking with the owner of a major
newspaper openly devoted to destroying Netanyahu's political career when the
operative conclusion of these conversations was that the paper continued its
crusade against the prime minister and Netanyahu went to elections to stop
legislation that served the paper's interests.
(full article online)
IMRA - Saturday, March 2, 2019 Weekly Commentary: Who sets policy in a democracy?
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 73,824
- 12,774
- 2,290
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 73,824
- 12,774
- 2,290
ForeverYoung436
Gold Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 6,050
- 1,228
- 245
Oh, a new conspiracy theory--the Israelis killed Kennedy. This, even though Kennedy was pro-Israeli! What stupidity! Actually, his brother Robert was assassinated by a Palestinian.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
-
Trump DOJ Expands Lawsuit Against DC: Now Targeting Suppressor Ban Too
- Started by Hollie
- Replies: 0
