Wednesday 28 January 2009

PUBLIC MEETING 1PM TODAY FB113

All are invited and encouraged to attend the meeting today in Francis Bancroft Room 113 at 1pm!!!

Tell everyone you know, see you at one!!
Posted by at

6 comments:

  1. Gary McFarlane28 January 2009 at 12:25

    Hi Queen Mary - well done with the occupation.

    Starbucks are a hiorrible company but they don't give money to the IDF. The rumour is based around a spoof letter from the CEO Howard Schultz.

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/israel/schultz.asp

    Howard Shultz does describes himself as an 'active zionist' but I think a better target to boycott would be Boots which is investing heavily in the pharmaceutical industry in Israel.

    We need to be absolutely clear we are not against Jewish-owned or run businesses but against ISRAELI ones or those doing business with Israeli companies.

    ReplyDelete
  2. more_adventures28 January 2009 at 13:26

    This explains starbucks involvement with israel - i think starbucks is a valid target

    http://www.inminds.co.uk/boycott-starbucks.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gary McFarlane28 January 2009 at 13:39

    Hi Vera -I'm not trying to put a dampner on anything but I think we just have to make sure we've got our facts right.

    I've read the stuff on that site - maybe you should change the bit about funding for the IDF as there is no evidence for this on the site you reference or anywhere else. Boycott Starbucks for having an 'active zionist' as their CEO.

    Well done again on the sit-in.

    Gaza Gaza don't you cry, we will never let you die!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unknown28 January 2009 at 14:02

    Starbucks is a publicly owned company. If you start boycotting companies whose employees have views, or in this case racial characteristics, you disagree with, you may end up going hungry.

    ReplyDelete
  5. david28 January 2009 at 17:02

    Canino. Wow, I realise Starbucks is a big corporation with an agressive monopolisation policy and extensive anti-labour rights laws, but its news to me they are in a position halt the entire food supply chain!

    By analogy and adopting your beautiful logic, I suppose just because the Palestinians are being ever so difficult by refusing to except they the terms of non-existance imposed by Israel since at least 1948, they deserve to go hungry? Hell, why not just go the full hog and say the Palestinians have no one to blame but themselves for the recent massacres. How inconsiderate it is of them to force this on the poor Israeli's and their supporters conscience.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Unknown29 January 2009 at 23:43

    Aside from the Starbucks issue, I thought the debate and talks to day were excellent and a high level of respect was evident amongst everyone present. On a roll...

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)