The following text examines Starbucks' activities as part of an international, but mostly US-based, pro-Israel lobby. The text includes references compiled by a UK-based think-tank known as Innovative Minds
I. Starbucks' Hidden Interests
Howard Schultz, an American citizen, is the chairman of Starbucks. In 2002, Schultz made a speech blaming the Palestinian people for failed Palestinian-Israeli negotiations and suggested that the Palestinian resistance against Israel was a "manifestation of anti-Semitism". [1]
In 1998, Schultz was honoured by the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah and presented with the "Israel's 50th Anniversary Friend of Zion Tribute Award." Aish HaTorah describes itself as an "apolitical international network of Jewish education centres." But, as shown below, the organization has ties to the Israeli military and advocates Zionist (pro-Israeli) interests in the Middle East:
Gideon Meir, the official in charge of the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s public relations efforts, had this to say about the Starbucks chairman:
II. Starbucks: "We support our troops"
In 2004, Starbucks' Chief Executive Officer Jim Donald announced that the company was planning to donate 50,000 pounds of free coffee to the American troops stationed in the Middle East. [4] Starbucks has said that it supports our troops in the Middle East because they are "protecting Americans and our values of freedom and democracy." That has a nice, catchy ring to it. But is there a different reason why Starbucks, with its ties to pro-Israel interest groups and personalities, might wish to support "our" troops in the Middle East?
III. Starbucks: part of a 'fifth column'
In addition to Starbucks, there are several corporations and company partnerships with leaders who advocate support for Israel and, in the US, donate to politicians who will take their demands to fund and arm Israel to Congress. The list of businesses includes: Coca-Cola (Fruitopia, Fanta, Sprite, Sunkist...), Revlon,McDonald's, Motorola, Dannon, Nokia, Estée Lauder, Intel, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, L'Oreal, Giorgio Armani, Vichy, Garnier, Siemens, Maybelline, Ralph Lauren, Nestle, Sara Lee (Hanes, Playtex, Champion, Leggs, Douwe Egberts, Bryan, DIM, Ambi Pur, Bali, Superior Coffee, Just My Size, Kiwi, Maison, Outer Banks, Wonderbra...), The Limited Inc. (Express stores, Structure, Victoria's Secret, Bath & Body Works...), Kimberly-Clark (Kleenex, Kotex, Huggies...), Apax Partners & Co. Ltd, Delta Galil (Barbie, Victoria's Secret, GAP, Banana Republic, Structure, J-Crew, JC Penny, Pryca, Lindex, DIM, DKNY, Ralph Lauren, Playtex, Calvin Klein, Hugo Boss...), Estee Lauder (Aramis, Clinique, DKNY, Tommy Hilfiger...), Marks & Spencer, Timberland and Home Depot.
AOL Time Warner, Disney and News Corporation, as well as their subsidiaries in broadcast media (Fox News, CNN, Sky, Star, Phoenix, Granada, CNBC) and print media (New York Times, The Sun, The Times, The Telegraph, Herald Sun, Independent, Sunday Mail, New York Post...), are also part of the pro-Israel lobby and help present an image of events in the Middle East that is friendly to Israel. But should we be surprised? News Corporation's owner, Rupert Murdoch, is a member of the Bilderberg Group, a major player in pro-Israel, neo-con planning. Murdoch is just as big of an Israel supporter as AOL Time Warner and Disney, which are both Jewish-owned.
Since 1954, the Zionist crowd also has the power of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) behind them. The organization collects funds from those who support Israel and uses these funds to support the campaigns of politicians who vow to follow a pro-Israel agenda. Coinciding with the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the effort to get the organization listed as a foreign agent came to a halt. Fortune magazine lists AIPAC as "the second-most powerful influence group in Washington." The New York Times has called AIPAC the "most important organization affecting America's relationship with Israel." Some of the biggest names in politics, including John McCain, John Kerry, the Clintons and the Bush family, have received support from AIPAC in their political campaigns. In return, these figures have all vowed to support AIPAC and the Zionists during their respective terms of office. Most of Congress also has its salaries padded by AIPAC - and AIPAC goes overboard to fund whoever will play to their game and run against those who are not financed by AIPAC.
Not surprisingly, U.S. tax dollars are being used to fund Israel's military. Thus, it is ordinary Americans who are paying the price to keep Israel armed and dangerous. Aside from footing the bill, ordinary Americans are also paying the price because - again - their blood is being spilled in the Middle East in wars which help preserve the current Middle Eastern balance of power.
So why do Schultz and Starbucks "support our troops"? Is it really because the company thinks the war is about "spreading democracy and freedom" and eliminating America's enemies? Can Americans trust that the pro-Israel crowd has the best interests of the United States in mind instead of Israel's best interests? Is it just a coincidence that some of the Iraq War's biggest supporters happen to be among the pro-Israel crowd? These are important questions that every American should be asking. Lives, sovereignty and well-being are all at stake.
IV. Endnotes and further information:
I. Starbucks' Hidden Interests
Howard Schultz, an American citizen, is the chairman of Starbucks. In 2002, Schultz made a speech blaming the Palestinian people for failed Palestinian-Israeli negotiations and suggested that the Palestinian resistance against Israel was a "manifestation of anti-Semitism". [1]
In 1998, Schultz was honoured by the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah and presented with the "Israel's 50th Anniversary Friend of Zion Tribute Award." Aish HaTorah describes itself as an "apolitical international network of Jewish education centres." But, as shown below, the organization has ties to the Israeli military and advocates Zionist (pro-Israeli) interests in the Middle East:
- Aish HaTorah has funded arms fairs chaired by the Israeli military general Shaul Mofaz. According to Israeli sources, the purpose of the fairs is to "strengthen the special connection between the American, European and Israeli defense industries" and "showcase the newest Israeli innovations in defense."
- Aish HaTorah funds honestreporting.com, a website that reports on the Middle East situation with a pro-Israel bias. [2]
- Aish HaTorah has produced a number of its own pro-Israeli propaganda videos. One video, entitled "The Islamic Connection to Jerusalem", begins with a declaration about the "original Jewish connection" to Jerusalem and downplays the city's non-Jewish past. Ostensibly, the goal is to convince the viewer that the 20th century mass-resettlement of Jews to Jerusalem, and Israel's attempted annexation of it in 1967 (after launching the Six Day War), was not any sort of invasion or taking. A second video produced by Aish HaTorah is entitled "The Occupied Territories - A Primer". It argues that the West Bank and Gaza should belong to Israel and, for now, these territories should be called "disputed territories."
Gideon Meir, the official in charge of the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s public relations efforts, had this to say about the Starbucks chairman:
"...the key to Israel’s long-term PR success is on the campuses of North America and Europe. Wealthy Jews like Howard Schultz, the owner of the Starbucks chain, are helping with student projects, including seminars held in both Israel and North America, in which students hear Israeli presentations on the crisis...." [3]
II. Starbucks: "We support our troops"
In 2004, Starbucks' Chief Executive Officer Jim Donald announced that the company was planning to donate 50,000 pounds of free coffee to the American troops stationed in the Middle East. [4] Starbucks has said that it supports our troops in the Middle East because they are "protecting Americans and our values of freedom and democracy." That has a nice, catchy ring to it. But is there a different reason why Starbucks, with its ties to pro-Israel interest groups and personalities, might wish to support "our" troops in the Middle East?
- told they were also "protecting Americans" and "fighting for our values", American soldiers invaded Iraq and fought and died to depose the ruling regime there, ending a government which just happened to be critical of and opposed to Israeli foreign policy. Shaping perception of the invasion, a Zionist Jew named David Frum had invented the cartoonish term "Axis of Evil" to describe Iraq and others. Arguably, the term implied collusion between these countries, and that they somehow were a threat to order/morals.
- the Iraqi military was crushed following the American-led invasion, thereby removing a counterweight to Israel's smaller, albeit more powerful military. Interestingly, Iraq's military being as large as it was had not been a problem when it was a wrecking ball against other prospectively-big players in the region, like Iran, and the US had even provided Iraq the means to build chemical weapons for this purpose; but, with the fall of the Soviet Union, Jews had begun fleeing from the Soviet Union to Israel en masse, so anything that could possibly challenge the subsequent enlargement and increased power of Israel was seen to be in the way. This included Iraq's army, especially because of its missiles which were thought to have a range that could reach Israel. There was also the convenient rumor, surfacing amidst all this, that Iraq still had its chemical weapons (which Iraq denied).
- the destruction of the Iraqi government and its military sent a message to the rest of the Middle East not to risk taking the same path as Iraq, whether in being perceived as a threat to Israel or put into the "Axis of Evil" category. Seeing this, the leaders of countries like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt would likely choose an alternative route - especially if pumped with the incentive of continuing to collect the ridiculous amounts of funding they receive from the US (and the UN) for playing along.
- without a strong neighbor to oppose Israel's actions in consequence, Israel has a carte blanche to do what it wants, including expansion of settlements into Palestinian territory. In turn, the resistance group there, Hamas, is less of an obstacle for Israel, because most countries will see supporting Hamas as a risky move that invites retaliation from Israel or turns off the goody faucet, and thus hesitate to give Hamas support. The same goes for supporting the resistance group Hezbollah, which counters Israel's expansion towards Lebanon.
- Without critical levels of help, Hamas and Hezbollah are more likely to be unsuccessful in their bid to stop Israel's expansion. Obviously, facing less opposition, Israel is at an advantage in its quest for expansion.
- if not held in check by its neighbors or a resistance group, Israel can escalate against its targets and enjoy the benefits of doing so.With regards to Lebanon or Gaza, Israel's brute force bombardments can reduce the size of the population left standing, decreasing the size of the potential opposition. It can perhaps also dissuade survivors from continuing the fight; after all, every sign outside of faith in Islam's glorious triumph would suggest that resistance is futile and can only bring more pain and suffering. In essence, what this means is Israel can use force to bully the Palestinian people and keep them "in their place" and, rather than come to the negotiation table after being attacked by resistance forces, that seems to be the plan. The status quo and balance of power assures that this can continue to be done, and the benefits of doing so will continue to be reaped.
- If the balance of power and status quo is preserved, nothing will change. Israel's weapons cache is far deadlier than anything Iraq possessed or was said to possess, and includes nuclear weapons purchased (or stolen) from the US. Along with missiles that pulverize, these capabilities are the key to Israel's regional power monopoly and strategy. Meanwhile, as we have seen, foreign troops - whether they are American, British or something else - are being sent to the Middle East to destroy any country that rises up to oppose this status quo. By no coincidence, it is thus primarily Goy blood being spilled in the process, while Jews are spared their own. As long as Americans can be manipulated to see Israel's enemies as their enemies, this will likely continue, and so will the finance and support of Israel - which, incidentally, goes far beyond just Starbucks...
III. Starbucks: part of a 'fifth column'
In addition to Starbucks, there are several corporations and company partnerships with leaders who advocate support for Israel and, in the US, donate to politicians who will take their demands to fund and arm Israel to Congress. The list of businesses includes: Coca-Cola (Fruitopia, Fanta, Sprite, Sunkist...), Revlon,McDonald's, Motorola, Dannon, Nokia, Estée Lauder, Intel, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, L'Oreal, Giorgio Armani, Vichy, Garnier, Siemens, Maybelline, Ralph Lauren, Nestle, Sara Lee (Hanes, Playtex, Champion, Leggs, Douwe Egberts, Bryan, DIM, Ambi Pur, Bali, Superior Coffee, Just My Size, Kiwi, Maison, Outer Banks, Wonderbra...), The Limited Inc. (Express stores, Structure, Victoria's Secret, Bath & Body Works...), Kimberly-Clark (Kleenex, Kotex, Huggies...), Apax Partners & Co. Ltd, Delta Galil (Barbie, Victoria's Secret, GAP, Banana Republic, Structure, J-Crew, JC Penny, Pryca, Lindex, DIM, DKNY, Ralph Lauren, Playtex, Calvin Klein, Hugo Boss...), Estee Lauder (Aramis, Clinique, DKNY, Tommy Hilfiger...), Marks & Spencer, Timberland and Home Depot.
AOL Time Warner, Disney and News Corporation, as well as their subsidiaries in broadcast media (Fox News, CNN, Sky, Star, Phoenix, Granada, CNBC) and print media (New York Times, The Sun, The Times, The Telegraph, Herald Sun, Independent, Sunday Mail, New York Post...), are also part of the pro-Israel lobby and help present an image of events in the Middle East that is friendly to Israel. But should we be surprised? News Corporation's owner, Rupert Murdoch, is a member of the Bilderberg Group, a major player in pro-Israel, neo-con planning. Murdoch is just as big of an Israel supporter as AOL Time Warner and Disney, which are both Jewish-owned.
Since 1954, the Zionist crowd also has the power of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) behind them. The organization collects funds from those who support Israel and uses these funds to support the campaigns of politicians who vow to follow a pro-Israel agenda. Coinciding with the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the effort to get the organization listed as a foreign agent came to a halt. Fortune magazine lists AIPAC as "the second-most powerful influence group in Washington." The New York Times has called AIPAC the "most important organization affecting America's relationship with Israel." Some of the biggest names in politics, including John McCain, John Kerry, the Clintons and the Bush family, have received support from AIPAC in their political campaigns. In return, these figures have all vowed to support AIPAC and the Zionists during their respective terms of office. Most of Congress also has its salaries padded by AIPAC - and AIPAC goes overboard to fund whoever will play to their game and run against those who are not financed by AIPAC.
Not surprisingly, U.S. tax dollars are being used to fund Israel's military. Thus, it is ordinary Americans who are paying the price to keep Israel armed and dangerous. Aside from footing the bill, ordinary Americans are also paying the price because - again - their blood is being spilled in the Middle East in wars which help preserve the current Middle Eastern balance of power.
So why do Schultz and Starbucks "support our troops"? Is it really because the company thinks the war is about "spreading democracy and freedom" and eliminating America's enemies? Can Americans trust that the pro-Israel crowd has the best interests of the United States in mind instead of Israel's best interests? Is it just a coincidence that some of the Iraq War's biggest supporters happen to be among the pro-Israel crowd? These are important questions that every American should be asking. Lives, sovereignty and well-being are all at stake.
IV. Endnotes and further information:
↸
1 "Starbucks CEO says anti-Semitism on the rise Howard Schultz warns American Jews against complacency," reported by Elisa Hahn. King 5 (Seattle), 04/04/2002 http://www.king5.com/localnews/NW_040402WABschultz.43d45a4b.html
Divisions within the Jewish community were on display Thursday in Seattle as Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz criticized Palestinian inaction in the Middle East while others protested the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands."If you leave this synagogue tonight and go back to your home and ignore this, then shame on us," Howard Schultz told a crowded temple of Jewish Americans on Seattle's Capitol Hill. Schultz warned other Jews against sitting back and doing nothing.
↸ 2 Israel 50th Anniversary Friend of Zion Tribute Award Howard Schultz was presented with "The Israel 50th Anniversary Friend of Zion Tribute Award" by the The Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah in August 27, 1998. According to the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah, "The Friends of Zion award salutes leaders who have played key roles in promoting close alliance between the United States and Israel."
"What is going on in the Middle East is not an isolated part of the
world. The rise of anti-Semitism is at an all time high since the 1930's," he
said. "The Palestinians aren't doing their job they're not stopping terrorism."
While reaction inside the temple to Schultz's remarks grew from a warm
reception to a standing ovation, the mood outside the temple was different. A
handful of Jews gathered there to protest the Israeli government's actions of
late and their occupation of Palestinian lands. There were similar sentiments
Thursday at Seattle's Westlake Center.
"We only get the side that talks about Palestinians as terrorists. As if all the civilians right now living in a state of siege and terror are terrorists and they're not," said protester Alethea Mundy, whose younger brother is in Bethlehem doing relief work for Palestinian refugees. She's worried about her brother, but realizes that everything is relative. "This is what the
Palestinians live with every day, two weeks is nothing for my brother.
↸ 3 "Losing the Media Battle," Jerusalem Report. April 22, 2002. http://www.jrep.com/Israel/Article-0.html
↸
4 "Starbucks, Red Cross 'Bring a Bit of Home' to Overseas Troops", by Gerry J. Gilmore, American Forces Press Service. Nov. 9, 2004. http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=24883
