Consumer Boycotts

The meaning of the bulldozer is quite clear

Starbucks have done nothing wrong

I hate their coffee but in this case they are right

No need to shout @flashbac

The vast majority of casualties are women and children FFS. CHILDREN.

How de we know how many of the Palestinian deaths are Hamas and how many any are innocent civilians?

Oh here we go. "The IDF are angels, their shit smells of roses blah blah, if anyone says otherwise it's because they are antisemitic"....ad nauseum

Yawn.

"Shortly after October 7, Workers United posted a statement with an image of a bulldozer tearing down part of the Israel and Gaza border, reflecting their support for violence perpetrated by Hamas."

But it was Hamas that bulldozed the border and came through and raped and murdered people. If you’re suggesting that an image of a bulldozer tearing down the border on 7th Oct doesn’t represent Hamas and is actually pro-Palestinian, then do you think it was Palestinians who bulldozed the border? Or that the picture with a statement of support doesn’t imply support of the action contained in the picture?

@JaneBirkinsNose I do see why Israel would want to smear and attempt to delegitimise human rights organisations stance when they are calling attention to war crimes.

You have to wonder if you're standing on the right side of history when you're trying to refute every single organisation that calls out war crimes including the UN, human rights organisations etc. Now even the Red Cross are being smeared and so on. Madness.

Not biting sorry, all these sources you’ve listed are bunk.

Al Jazeera - known antisemitic news outlet run by Qatar and is a frequent mouthpiece for Hama.

Human Rights Watch - antisemitic and anti-Israeli organization' with no moral basis that failed to condemn Hamas's October 7 massacre. In fact, This November, an outgoing Human Rights Watch senior editor named Danielle Haas wrote an email to her coworkers, lambasting HRW for its biased and unethical approach to the Israel, claiming that the organization’s approach to Israel “violated basic editorial standards related to rigor, balance, and collegiality.”

Amnesty International - Also known for anti-Israeli bias and own internal antisemitism problems.

And so on.

Try harder.

@JaneBirkinsNose

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/12/26/classroom-massacre-survivors-say-israel-executed-innocents-in-gaza-school

https://www.newarab.com/news/israeli-forces-round-abuse-palestinians-gaza-stadium

https://time.com/6548632/israel-hamas-war-civilians-hostages-killed/

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/damning-evidence-of-war-crimes-as-israeli-attacks-wipe-out-entire-families-in-gaza/

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/israel-starvation-used-weapon-war-gaza

The IDF are not “executing civilians”. Nor are they “running people over”.

Up to this point, the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health claims that over 18,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza. These figures cannot be independently verified, and per Israel, at least 7000 of those killed are members of Hamas or other terrorist groups. Hamas does not distinguish between combatant and civilian casualties and also does not distinguish between deaths caused by Israeli air strikes and deaths caused by misfired Palestinian missiles.

In past wars, around 20 percent of Palestinian missiles misfired and landed within the Gaza Strip, killing Palestinian civilians.

If the Israeli numbers are accurate, (if) this means 11,000 Palestinian civilians have been killed since the start of the war. 11,000 innocent deaths is too much. 1000 innocent deaths is too much. 500 innocent deaths is too much. In fact, even one innocent death is too much. War is disastrous, devastating, and heartbreaking.

But acknowledging this heartbreak should not give us free reign to disregard history and facts. Acknowledging this heartbreak should not give us free reign to ignore, deny, distort, or justify the October 7 massacre that started this war.

Acknowledging this heartbreak should not give us free reign to parrot the propaganda and talking points of an antisemitic, openly genocidal terrorist organization. See, it is textbook terrorist propaganda to extort the emotions of well-meaning observers.

None of this is conjecture. We know, for a fact, that Hamas appeals to a western audience by exploiting the deaths of their own population. We know this because they’ve said so themselves. We also know that there is historical precedent for this, a glaring example being Nazi Germany.

Oh thank you. I always appreciate when other posters go out of their way to be helpful

It's a fine line between between being pro Palestine and pro terrorism so I expect the ensuing court case will clarify everything.

Thanks again for your help 😀

@backtowinter they wrongly implied their workers supported Hamas' violent acts (they did not) then apparently decided to sue them. hope this helps.

Yes @sailingdriving * * I saw that. Not sure what Starbucks did wrong there

No, if you read the thread the main reason seems to be their statement and implication the union supported Hamas violence and because Starbucks were suing them for a pro Palestine tweet.

"Shortly after October 7, Workers United posted a statement with an image of a bulldozer tearing down part of the Israel and Gaza border, reflecting their support for violence perpetrated by Hamas."

https://theintercept.com/2023/10/17/starbucks-suing-union-israel-palestine/

The main reason to boycott Starbucks is that the coffee is muck.

A few people here are acting as though BDS is a fad or some crazy fringe opinion.

Some governments won't invest in Israeli companies etc who operate illegally in occupied territory. Ireland, for example.

https://www.thejournal.ie/mcgrath-companies-operating-in-occupied-territories-6230521-Nov2023/

@TriOptimim Fair enough - I'm not an expert on Starbucks history but was providing information on why some people are boycotting it, as referenced from Reddit.

Some people on this thread seemed to imply they were boycotted because of the use of the logo in a tweet, and I was trying to clarify there are a number of reasons SOME people are boycotting. Not my personal reasons.

I copied the quote from Reddit trying to clarify some of the reasons they are being boycotted by some people, as you had asked. This was not my personal statement about him being "zionist" nor a personal reason for boycotting. Please feel free to pop over to reddit to argue with them though.

All I'm seeing are reasons not to boycott Starbucks

Is that really the reasons that people are boycotting

People are batshit.

Howard Schultz is the former CEO of Starbucks. Not the founder. I thought you'd know that since you hate the evil 'zionist' so much you're boycotting the company he used to work for.

@TriOptimim I'm not sure why you mentioned CEO or former CEO in your earlier post though. Was there something about them?

What did the founders do?

If your requitement for boycotting a company is because the former CEO once invested in an Israeli company there aren't going to be many companies left for you to buy from. The new CEO isn't even Jewish so I'm not sure why the BDS crowd have a problem with him.

@noblegiraffe and BTW I said nothing about Starbucks closing down in "contested areas". Please re-read my posts as you are misrepresenting what I said.

I was talking about other companies that see what is going on with Zara and Starbucks and choosing to think twice before aligning themselves with any action that could be interpreted as being in support of the Israeli govt.

"On a side note I guess what campaigns against Starbucks, Zara etc will do, with companies seeing what is going on withthem, is make them think twice before doing business with Israeli govt, or pursuing financial ventures in disputed regions, or even think twice before aligning with Israeli govt policy in Palestine, for example on social media."

Here is the official starbucks message about the tweet, as copied from the reddit post.

official message from starbucks website: “Shortly after October 7, Workers United posted a statement with an image of a bulldozer tearing down a part of the Israel and Gaza border, reflecting their support for violence perpetrated by Hamas. Unfortunately, as violence against the innocent in the region continues to escalate, some people are mistakenly tying these remarks to us, because Workers United and its affiliates and members continue to use our name, logo and intellectual property. Starbucks unequivocally condemns acts of terrorism, hate and violence, and we strongly disagree with the views expressed by Workers United, including its local affiliates, union organizers and those who identify as members of “Starbucks Workers United” – none of these groups speak for Starbucks Coffee Company and do not represent our company’s views, positions, or beliefs.”

To imply the workers supported Hamas' violent acts is misrepresenting the workers with a nasty smear. No wonder people are boycotting.