It used to be anti-globalisation protectors who would target Starbucks, but with the Israeli move into Gaza strip things have turned more sinister as it is now anti-semitic thugs who are kicking in its windows.
After Saturday's London demo against Israel's invasion of the Gaza Strip Police were outside another Starbucks that had been smashed up. This time it was the branch on Rubert Street and Shaftsburry Avenue in Central London.
They also attacked the Starbucks in Picadilly Circus, which was smashed and looted. That's right looted because that's the way to help the people of Gaza by stealing coffee and (I'm guessing) mugs. Starbucks is being targeted like other stores because of its links to Israel and by links the moronic protestors mean that CEO Howard Schultz is Jewish. That's as brainless as it comes (oh there is some retarded rumour that Starbucks funds the IDF - but whoever heard such nonsense. I mean seriously, a coffee shop funding the army? lol).The attack follows one a few days earlier on Starbucks in Whitechapel (where a manager almost died after they set fire to it) and on January 10 the one in Kensington High Street was also smashed up after the demo that day.It isn't only Starbucks, the same anti-Semitic thugs are also targeting other stores including Tesco.Last week Asian youths hurled a brick at a Tesco delivery van half-a-mile away from the Starbucks in Whitechapel leaving the driver in need of seven stitches.That attack followed one on the new Tesco Metro supermarket in Stepney Green's Commercial Road where several windows were smashed and the words "kill Jews" was daubed in paint.Someone has launched a "Hands Off Starbucks!" group on Facebook. As a protest against the window smashing thugs.". Sign-up.
Follow me on Twitter
What a sad, sad state of affairs, thanks for ruining my day Gordon.
Ironically, it seems Starbucks closed down operations in Israel years ago: www.haaretz.com/.../ShArt.jhtml
archive.newsmax.com/.../170433.shtml
Kind of puts these peoples' into even sharper focus...
Yes this isn't nice but in the grand of scheme of things as bombs rain down on innocent Palestine children, this is not the time for singling out small isolated incidents. Just say if you support Israel's abominable action in the Gaza Strip but please don't make weaselly, sly arguments in support of their detestable war crimes.
www.freegaza.org
Your argument "this is not the time for singling out small isolated incidents" says its okay to turn a blindeye to a rising tide of antisemitism. That's just plain wrong. It isn't a sly argument it is highlighting the fact that a small minority of supposedly pro-Palestinian supporters are in fact antisemitic thugs who smash up show windows and beat up innocent people because they happen to be Jewish. There was a time when the left attacked this kind of activity, but now it seems to openly condone it.
This is where the 'branding' of the war has always had an issue. I am actually a member of freegaza.org and was on the march the other week (to Trafalgar Square not the later one to the Israel Embassy) and when I was trying to explain why to my friends people thought I was anti-semetic. There is a big difference between being anti-semetic and anti-Israel and their actions but this is seldom understood by individuals and, to their shame, many areas of the medai and politics.
Please let's try and ensure we kept the two things distinctly seperate. As marketing individuals we should be helping the Palestine-needs-help 'brand' distinguish itself from anti-semetism.
Hope that makes sense.
Gordon - I still don't see why these small, isolated incidents merit such attention when Israel is dropping bombs on Palestine children unless of course you are a terrorist/Israeli sympathiser.
A are a terrorist/Israeli sympathiser? Who talks like that. I'm in favour of two nation's two states and peace in the Middle East - as well as the East End for that matter.
And now we further cloud the argument by grouping Israelis and the Israeli State together.....
What's happening in Gaza is appalling but smashing windows of Starbucks is not going to do anything - it'll take the global community to stand up to the Israeli Government for anything to be done, but recent history has shown that no-one has the guts.
Unfortunately, you will always have a small minority of young antisemitic idiots who go over the top with their bottled up feelings. You put Muslims (or any other minority) in the limelight for so long and you're bound to get a reaction - it's called propoganda. . Demolishing Starbucks on the basis that the CEO is Jewish is just wrong and should be condoned by any normal civilised person - almost certainly the work of Anti-semtics opposed to a mob of angry consumers who feel ripped off at being charged £2.80 for a coffee.
There are however, some large chains, with the likes of Starbucks, who actively support Israel financially, can be seen to many, as support in arming Israel with some serious firepower.
With Israel not allowing any of the worlds media report on the actual carnage/atrocities in Gaza, there are Pro-Palestinians worldwide who would be helplessly outraged by this. Take into consideration the two points made above and that's when you get to hear about certain chains being demolished by thugs.
I'm not suggesting for one minute that I agree with it because it's wrong and bloody pointless. However, I understand how, and why, this situation occured in the first place.
In a nutshell.... I agree with Martin!!
Slight backtrack... I agreed with Martins initial post... The other posts in between seemed to be a little more heated
I don't want to get involved in any spitting wars although the point that I was trying to make indirectly was that any anti-semtic attacks on coffee shops, or any other chains supposedly 'financially' supporting Israel will never be condoned, nor will anyone turn a blind eye to it. You can however, begin to understand why the situation took place in the first place.
All I'm saying is why is there a post about the Israeli attack on the Gaza Strip on a marketing website? Gordon would argue because his post is about a global brand called Starbucks. But the post isn't about politics and brands. It's just a pro-Israel rant. The Starbucks incident is just an excuse to tar Israeli's enemies with the bitter taste of a very small number of isolated incidents in London carried out by a very small number of people - far away from the shameful atrocities being committed in Israel's name in the Middle East. Why bother mentioning it if that's all you are going to say? Because all it is without any insight or balance is Israeli propaganda on a marketing website - I don't get it. If that's what you want to concoct Gordon then just call it what it is but don't pretend it's a post about a global brand when you have nothing to say about public relations, marketing or branding other than ill-informed pro-Israeli propaganda.
Not really Martin, all you were saying earlier is that “this is not the time for singling out small isolated incidents. Just say if you support Israel's abominable action in the Gaza Strip but please don't make weaselly, sly arguments in support of their detestable war crimes”. Sounds rather aggressive and biased (perfect for democratic debate is it not?).
This website is about Brands and marketing, and Brands/marketing are intrinsically linked to politics and the events of politics (hell, nearly every political party, even ideal has a ‘corporate identity’ or logo even your free Gaza website and Amnesty International). Starbucks is a brand, the events of Gaza involve politics (1+1=2).
Let’s take a step back abit… Yes the events that are unfolding in Gaza are a sad state of affairs, haven’t they not been for a long time now anyway? (regardless of whose side you choose to take, as deaths are raking up on both sides and always have). As Ron mentioned earlier, Starbucks closed down chains in Israel (all of them I'm not sure), and making sweeping, fact-less statements like 'terrorist/Israel sympathiser' doesn't open this debate any further (every single Jew in the world isn't a terrorist I'm sure you'll agree). Comments made like ’Kill Jews’ seem to echo another sad time in history like Germany 1939 (where anti-Semitism was rife, again 1+1=2), pointing to radical fundamentalists or in this incident in question, a minority (and yes I gather that a lot more people are affected overall but let‘s not go off on a tangent)...
More importantly, the definition of 'Terrorism' is fundamentally different for every belief system (the ‘goodie vs' baddie‘ adage). What started out as a comment about the minority (who are present with every 'ism' and belief system remember), has turned into something that is best suited to a BBC News forum…..
I’m gathering by your quite one-sided oration in your post dated Jan 19 at 3.01pm and 6.12pm that you disagree with the events that are unfolding, who wouldn’t? Maybe you have relatives in Gaza or know someone there. But dealing with this very complex situation by smashing/looting/setting fire to stores and beating up the staff (any store for that matter) is certainly not the answer as Jeremy pointed out, I’m sure you’ll agree.
Also, just to nit-pick…
“The Starbucks incident is just an excuse to tar Israeli's enemies” - Do you have external evidence of this, say from a news website?
“..all it is without any insight or balance is Israeli propaganda on a marketing website” - Again, do you know Gordon’s religious/political viewpoints? No?
“If that's what you want to concoct Gordon then just call it what it is but don't pretend it's a post about a global brand” - Global brand Starbucks is a global brand.
After reading that essay... I'm back to siding with Martin just to keep it 'even Stephen'....
On a serious note, I get what Stephen's trying to say in a bid to defend his pal Gordon but the bottom line is, just because Starbucks is a global brand, there is no need for an indirect political debate on a marketing website about Starbucks being vandalised by anti-semtic thugs. The only reaction one would expect/hope to get is fellow marketeers agreeing that it was wrong and that it's just another crime committed by young british muslims. I cannot see what other debate could have arose about this global brand after reading this article.
I'm not saying that Gordan's intentions to report the vandalism were bad although it's clearly a delicate subject that has affected a lot of people around the world. Considering that a fraction of the actual devestation was televised, anyone who isn't quite so blind as to how the situation was handled by Israelis, would be outraged by something so trivial (in comparison) reported over here... even if it was carried out by anti-semtic thugs for the wrong reasons...
Moving forward, I heard that a bus crashed into a McDonalds the other day.... pure madness
I agree with most of your points there Omar. Thanks for clearing the fog and wrapping this debate up. Shame about that McD's tho heh.
Gordon Macmillan
Blogging for:
Member since: 03 Jun 2008
Last login: 23 Nov 2009
Total Posts: 1,617
