Lost in Occupation: Scarlett Johansson ends relationship with Oxfam to stick with SodaStream (Updated)

ActivismIsrael/Palestine
xx

“I know, I’m really proud of my Oxfam work. It’s just….I have this SodaStream gig to get to.” (Graphic: Stephanie Westbrook – photo:Oxfam)

Ever the optimist, a week ago as I wondered what choice Scarlett would make, knowing “something’s gotta break” between now and the Superbowl. Somehow I held out hope it wouldn’t turn out this way. Scarlett made her choice. She’s throwing in the towel, ending her relationship with Oxfam and staking her career, reputation, and god knows what else (morals come to mind) with the Israeli occupation and SodaStream.

Late Wednesday West Coast time the Associated Press broke the news. A statement released by a spokesperson for her cited  “a fundamental difference of opinion” about the issues raised by her recent decision to serve as “global brand ambassador” for SodaStream, a company that manufactures its home carbonation contraptions in an illegal settlement on the West Bank.

From the AP report, which was written by Derrik J. Lang

LOS ANGELES, Calif. – Scarlett Johansson is ending her relationship with a humanitarian group after being criticized over her support for an Israeli company that operates in the West Bank.

A statement released by Johansson’s spokesman Wednesday said the 29-year-old actress has “a fundamental difference of opinion” with Oxfam International because the humanitarian group opposes all trade from Israeli settlements, saying they are illegal and deny Palestinian rights.“Scarlett Johansson has respectfully decided to end her ambassador role with Oxfam after eight years,” the statement said. “She and Oxfam have a fundamental difference of opinion in regards to the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. She is very proud of her accomplishments and fundraising efforts during her tenure with Oxfam.”Earlier this month, “The Avengers” and “Her” actress signed on as the first global brand ambassador of SodaStream International Ltd., and she’s set to appear in an ad for the at-home soda maker during the Super Bowl on Feb. 2.SodaStream has come under fire from pro-Palestinian activists for maintaining a large factory in an Israeli settlement in the West Bank, a territory captured by Israel in 1967 and claimed by the Palestinians.In response to the criticism, Johansson said last week she was a “supporter of economic co-operation and social interaction between a democratic Israel and Palestine.”

The AP added that Oxfam had not immediately responded to a request for a comment, and so far there are no statements on the subject at the Oxfam International or Oxfam America websites.

Am I disappointed? yeah Heck no. It’s raining men. Scarlett is ‘proud of her efforts’ in behalf of Oxfam she claims they part ways over:

a fundamental difference of opinion in regards to the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.

Oh really? Truth aside, this exposure is a free-for-all PR bonanza for the BDS movement.

I read a scathing indictment of Scarlett yesterday (below). But for context, first read what Reuters reporter Noah Browning dug up and reported yesterday:

One mid-level Palestinian employee who spoke to Reuters outside the plant, away from the bosses, painted a far less perfect picture, however.

“There’s a lot of racism here,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Most of the managers are Israeli, and West Bank employees feel they can’t ask for pay rises or more benefits because they can be fired and easily replaced.”

….

Israeli labor watchdog Kav LaOved says a lack of oversight over enforcement of minimum wages and worker rights in West Bank factories reflects Israel’s pro-settler policies.

“The government wants incentives for Israelis to come and build and expand there. The government has demonstrated very clearly that companies in the West Bank will be allowed to have cheap labor,” Kav LaOved head Hanna Zohar told Reuters……

“Of course there are some (Palestinian) people who are gainfully employed by settlements,” said the European Union’s ambassador to Israel, Lars Faaborg-Andersen, when asked about the ethics of firms like SodaStream.

“But the alternative of being able to use more than the 40 percent of the territory which is now open for use for Palestinians could potentially give much, much, much more economic benefit to the people living in the area,” he said.

Amazing how a tenacious Reuters journo can blast a hole through colonialist lies and plummet a million bucks worth of PR efforts from world class professional hasbarists. (And note bloggers were on the story months ago.)

In his must read editorial, Palestinian American English professor Dr. Jamil Khader eviscerates Johansson in his essential decimation of her claims SodaStream is an example of “economic cooperation and social interaction between a democratic Israel and Palestine”. On  Al Jazeera picked up by Yahoo News:

Her ludicrous claims are nothing but a recycling of the same tired racist arguments that white slave owners in the American South circulated in order to justify their noxious antebellum regime. Slave owners even concocted perfectly outlandish claims about the rights, privileges and benefits their slaves enjoyed under slavery.

Indeed, for them, their slaves were much better off than many Africans or Blacks anywhere in the world. During the Jim Crow era, moreover, American businesses employed African-American workers, while upholding the oppressive segregation system in the American South.

Furthermore, new life is breathed into these narratives in a post-racial United States, where any struggle for political power in the republic is displaced onto other terrains that entertain and delight, but obfuscate the fundamental antagonism. Newt Gingrich, for instance, once used a basketball analogy to describe racial relations in a post-racial US. For him, a black basketball player passing the ball to his white teammate serves a shining example of racial harmony and cooperation.

The only thing these analogies do is de-politicise the brutality of a colonial or racist regime. They translate its contentious political realities into a spectacle of (athletic) entertainment or cultural festivities that celebrate our respect for the law and our common humanity. However, these flawed analogies do not only displace the actual oppressive structures of slavery and the Israeli occupation of Palestine. They also transmute the troubled relations between oppressors and oppressed, into opposed but equal teams who voluntarily accept to play by the same rules of the game.

…… to speak of cooperation in those terms is obscene.

Lost in Translation (graphic: Stephanie Westbrook)

Lost in Translation (graphic: Stephanie Westbrook)

Last but not least for diehards, Scarlett’s SodaStream’s stock is still on plunge mode. Analyst Andrew Marder, writing for the nationally syndicated investment online mag Motley Fool: Did SodaStream Get Lost in Translation?  (their bold)

In Lost in Translation, Scarlett Johansson plays an American newlywed who has followed her husband to Tokyo while he photographs a Japanese rock band. She meets Bill Murray, who’s playing a slightly sadder version of Bill Murray. The two wander through Tokyo, building a strong personal relationship even as their connection to the outside world remains loose and disconnected. SodaStream  (NASDAQ:SODA )  is apparently the new Bill Murray.

The carbonator announced a new partnership with Johansson, setting her up as the company’s first brand ambassador…Days after the announcement, SodaStream’s stock fell more than 25% when the company announced an update to its fiscal year results. It feels very much like SodaStream has wandered off into the night in a land it doesn’t understand, staring at Johansson’s face as the rest of the world moves on to new things……

After the update, SodaStream’s stock tanked, and it’s now down 25% on the year. Yesterday, Barclays piled on, cutting the stock’s price target from $100 per share to $55. Ouch.

Better options are out there
While SodaStream has been lumped in with growth stocks for some time now, it just isn’t growing. In Lost in Translation, Murray ends up with the wrong woman, because it seems like the right thing to do. That’s a short-term investment. To get beyond the ups and downs of SodaStream, consider reaching out to companies with stronger brands. SodaStream has said it wants to “normalize” the brand, making it a household name. If that happens, I’ll reevaluate the company’s strength. For now, though, I’m happy to leave Scarlett at the bar with Bill.

Dr. Khader says, “Let’s take it to the Super Bowl.” I’m geared up, it’s game on.

Update: Oxfam has accepted Scarlett Johansson’s resignation:

Oxfam has accepted Scarlett Johansson’s decision to step down after eight years as a Global Ambassador and we are grateful for her many contributions.

While Oxfam respects the independence of our ambassadors, Ms. Johansson’s role promoting the company SodaStream is incompatible with her role as an Oxfam Global Ambassador.

Oxfam believes that businesses, such as SodaStream, that operate in settlements further the ongoing poverty and denial of rights of the Palestinian communities that we work to support.

Oxfam is opposed to all trade from Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international law. Ms. Johansson has worked with Oxfam since 2005 and in 2007 became a Global Ambassador, helping to highlight the impact of natural disasters and raise funds to save lives and fight poverty.

 

(Hat tip Taxi,  AlGhorear and Eduardo Gonzalez)

About Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani

Other posts by .


Posted In:

103 Responses

  1. amigo
    January 30, 2014, 8:08 am

    Hi Annie, I just sent you an E.mail on this subject, so no need to reply.

    It would appear that she prefers to market Apartheid v Human Rights.

    Regards Amigo.

  2. Krauss
    January 30, 2014, 8:09 am

    Scarlett outed herself as a supporter of racial dominance over another group. She is a Jewish supremacist.

    This, in a sick and perverse way, could actually help her career in Hollywood even more. After all, considering how many people in Hollywood fundraise for IDF, why shouldn’t it?

    People 20 years from now will wonder in amazement how it was possible that a Jewish supremacist got away for so long and how she was not punished but indeed boosted in her career. Would a white nationalist be afforded the same privileges?

    Zionists are right that there is a double standard: Jews like myself are allowed to spew racism against non-Jews and support a racial supremacist state and get away calling ourselves “liberal”.

    Scarlett’s parting of ways is hopefully the signal that these bigoted double standards are slowly ending, but like I said, in the short and even medium term, her career in Hollywood – which has a Zionist concensus – will likely be boosted, giving ample evidence that this racial doublestandard is deep and structural.

    • Sycamores
      January 30, 2014, 3:08 pm

      mud sticks SJ is damage property now.
      her career in Hollywood is not necessary going to get boosted. Hollywood main agenda is to attract audiences to make profit, if a fair percentage of the public are disgusted by SJ performance of late they will leave Hollywood know.
      everytime SJ is mention over the next while it will be in the context of a BDS victory, Oxfam exposure or Sodastream supporting apartheid.

      even the zionist entity will have to play this one carefully. they definitely don’t want the public discussing israel’s apartheid.

      i don’t think this bad press will blow over anytime soon for SJ. only time will tell.

    • ziusudra
      January 31, 2014, 3:05 am

      Greetings Krauss,
      Chimo sabe? ( who knows?)
      We remember when awarness of Apartheid & the Sun City Resort was attacked, even Frank Sinatra thought twice about performing there.
      How much longer will future Hollywood stars & Atheletes ponder before accepting an offer for anything in Zionistan? The pendulum of Democlas swings on.
      ziusudra

  3. Cliff
    January 30, 2014, 8:19 am

    Its so shameful that Zionists were speaking for Palestinian workers – as if they ****ing cared.

    They are such racists and sociopaths that Palestinians – to them – can be used in any such way to prop up Brand Israel.

    Whether its Walid Shoebat or this.

    And going further, it can really be any non-Jew. The Ethiopian beauty pageant winner was promoted heavily by the hasbara brigade online and offline.

    Its like Zionist Jews do not know how to relate to non-Jews anymore. They are so transparent.

    Just yesterday, some Ziotroll was expressing concern for Palestinian refugees in Syria – as a talking point.

    And ever since this superficial actress who only cares about ‘economic cooperation’ since its Jewish nationalism and colonialism on the line – all the Internet Zionist trolls are barking up the same hasbara about Palestinian workers.

  4. just
    January 30, 2014, 8:21 am

    It’s a big, fat BDS win!

    As I’ve said before, thank you Scarlett! Sunlight is indeed the best disinfectant. Mirrors and sunlight, properly focused can create fire, too. Goodness knows, the zionists have provided us plenty of fuel for it!

    Annie– many thanks for your work on this!

    • seafoid
      January 30, 2014, 8:51 am

      Yes it is. Not even Wunderkind and tribal guru Peter ” I have a poster of Israel in my house” Beinart could have triangulated Ms Eyebrow out of that one.

      The memes are dying, baby

      Let the Mensch Jews choose.
      Set the Mensch Jews loose
      Otherwise all the Jews lose.

      • just
        January 30, 2014, 9:27 am

        Yessirree!

        And:

        “Norway drops Israeli companies from pension fund, again
        Foreign ministry puts Africa Israel and Danya Cebus in penalty box for contributing to ‘serious violations of individual rights’ in E. Jerusalem.”

        http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.571505

      • Walid
        January 30, 2014, 11:49 am

        Just, the fund already divested from Africa Israel/ Danya Cebus, both Leviev’s companies in 2012, but it was a ridiculous amount of $1.2 million for both Leviev that was a drop in the bucket for him and for the $800 billion sovereign fund. That same year, the fund also divested $5 million from Elbit Systems which was even more ridiculous in light of Elbit’s financial strength. Danya Cebus is building in Bi’ilin

        The news today is that these 2 companies are still in the Norwegians’ doghouse and I’m sure Leviev isn’t losing any sleep over the rejection. Other than these divestment which which were a PR show, the fund had invested in about 500 other Israeli companies.

      • adele
        January 30, 2014, 2:08 pm

        Walid,
        can you point us to where we can get this financial information. I am not challenging your statement. Genuinely interested in reading further on it. If accurate, it is a valuable contribution. Thanks.

      • seafoid
        January 30, 2014, 5:48 pm

        Walid

        The trend is your friend. I think the biggest sign for me that the citadel is getting worried was when the banks went to Netanyahu and asked him to cop on.

        This getting really serious now.

        Zionism is not going to make it.

      • Walid
        January 31, 2014, 1:53 am

        Adele, for list of divestments by Norway’s fund that shows Africa-Israel, Danya Cebus, Elbit and Shikun and Binui . BTW, the Swedish fund also divested from Elbit because it’s building electronic surveillance systems for the apartheid wall (Elbit also builds the Hermes drones):

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway

        Article that describes how divestment in Africa Israel, Elbit etc did not affect these companies (that I called drops in a bucket) and saying there are $320 million invested in Israeli companies’ stock by the Norwegian fund; I couldn’t find link to the article about the 500 companies but found this one about $320 invested in various Israeli companies:

        http://www.israellycool.com/2014/01/08/debunking-the-divestment-apocalypse/

        I think that the ones seriously into boycotting Israeli directly are the Dutch that announced their pension fund will be divesting from Israeli banks that have branches on the WB and other Dutch firms that were suspending cooperation with Israel’s national water company, Mekorot, given the latter’s operations in West Bank settlements. A few weeks earlier, another Dutch company canceled a contract to build a sewage treatment plant that it had signed with Jerusalem’s water company, Hagihon, because the plant was to be located over the Green Line. This is serious boycotting, not the few and insignificant millions that the Norwegians are divesting.

      • Walid
        January 31, 2014, 3:05 am

        Seafoid, the trend is there for sure, but the rich Arab states are working against it. The richest of the Arab princes is saying that the Israelis are not the bad guys, the Iranians are

        http://ww.w.haaretz.com/business/.premium-1.563778

      • seafoid
        January 31, 2014, 9:07 am

        Walid

        So the Saudi family are with the bots. Of course they are. They are as afraid of al sha’ab al ‘arabi as the guys in the Kirya are. The sheikhs are all parasites, complete Kuffar. Same as the IDF heads.

        History repeats itself- it is not so different to say 615 CE and the jahaliyeh

        The white goys are going to pull the plug on the Disneyland. The economy is the weak point.

        Trend out the online response to Scarlett 5 years and what do you see ?

    • Kathleen
      January 30, 2014, 10:57 am

      Yes

    • Chu
      January 30, 2014, 11:01 am

      Yeah and what’s good here is that the Hollywood Zionists and their Israeli business partners can’t even get a popular Hollywood actress to sell the rotten fruits of the Israeli occupation.

  5. seafoid
    January 30, 2014, 8:23 am

    Tribe versus humanity
    Short term thinking versus the Mensch inside

    Yesha
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lkKZ4G3j98

    versus

    A viable future for Jews in the region
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoXsxYf2UMA

    JBMHR is one of my all time favourite songs . What a buzz. But only if used carefully.

  6. Justpassingby
    January 30, 2014, 8:34 am

    BDS win indeeed! Good job Annie on bringing attention to this!

    She need a mental check up at the hospital after she chose SS (sodastream) bfore Oxfam.

    • Walid
      January 30, 2014, 12:02 pm

      Her contract with the bad guys was always referred to as a “multi-million dollar deal” so it may explain why she dropped Oxfam where she was probably paying for some of her own expenses.

  7. Talkback
    January 30, 2014, 8:45 am

    Congratulation to Oxfam for getting rid of this doublethink puppet.

  8. iResistDe4iAm
    January 30, 2014, 8:58 am

    THEN:
    “The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially” ~ Robert E. Lee, 1856

    “South Africa has achieved for its nonwhite people the best education and the highest standard of living among all the blacks of Africa” ~ James Kilpatrick, 1971

    NOW:
    “Of those 300 million Arabs, less than one-half of one-percent are truly free, and they’re all citizens of Israel!” ~ Benjamin Netanyahu, May 2011

    “SodaStream is … building a bridge to peace between Israel and Palestine, supporting neighbors working alongside each other, receiving equal pay, equal benefits and equal rights” ~ Scarlett Johansson, January 2014

    MORAL:
    If you want to know what the slaves think, DON’T ask the slave-owners …ask the slaves!

    • adele
      January 30, 2014, 2:37 pm

      iResistDe4iAm,

      Outing the oppressors and those who profit from oppression can’t get more succinct than this. Bravo!

    • MHughes976
      January 30, 2014, 2:37 pm

      I don’t deny that colonies and empires have done some good, even that they were a necessary engine of progress at some stages of history, ancient history mainly. Jewish immigration to Palestine did some good things for Palestinians and cooperation all round could do more very good things but that never was a reason for claiming non-existent rights for Jewish people or depriving Palestinians of extremely genuine rights.
      The Palestinians in their millions have been deprived of massive resources and it is preposterous to suggest that giving a few hundred of them a decent wage begins to make up for their loss, even if you are thinking in the strictest and driest economic terms. If I take your gold bar or your productive field and give you a year’s supply of wine and roses it isn’t a genuine compensation. The fact that the enterprise also flaunts Palestinian loss and deprivation simply by being situated where it is makes the pretended compensation look even more like the insult it really is.
      I suppose that I might swallow the insult if I were starving and might agree to blow bubbles for a Hollywood star but I would hate myself and the whole situation inwardly.
      I might look rather differently on an organisation that both in economic and symbolic terms was an equal enterprise, with Palestinians having as much chance as anyone else to be shareholders and managers and generally be promoted and with a few Palestinian flags flying.

      • Citizen
        January 30, 2014, 2:43 pm

        @ MHughes976
        Scarlett really needs to get your comment as a memo. She apparently has neither the smarts, education (Vassar) or imagination (All borrowed from movie makers) to get what you say on her own.

    • hophmi
      January 30, 2014, 4:06 pm

      Palestinians are not slaves. In fact, they’re so not slaves, that the ones who work at SodaStream support ScarJo, not the BDS movement. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/2014/0130/Palestinian-workers-back-Scarlett-Johansson-s-opposition-to-SodaStream-boycott

      • Woody Tanaka
        February 2, 2014, 12:28 pm

        yes, they support it because the devilish zios have destroyed the Palestians’s country and destroyed their economy to the point where working like a slave in sweatshop with little to no labor rights, in order to make a profit for the evil people who are the enemies of justice, humanity and the enemy of your people, seems to be a better option.

        Wipe the damned zios out of Palestine and let the build their own economy and things would be different.

  9. Citizen
    January 30, 2014, 9:34 am

    Oxfam has now published its happy acceptance of Scarlett’s resignation and has come out more strongly against the settlements: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/scarlett-johansson-steps-down-as-oxfam-ambassador-1.1673493#.UupeGMqMzBh.twitter

  10. Kathleen
    January 30, 2014, 9:48 am

    Good for Oxfam and all of those who put the pressure on. Lost my bets thinking would not happen until after SuperBowl. Scarlett loses to her deal with money and occupation.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      January 30, 2014, 11:41 am

      I’m sorry, but I can’t agree that Oxfam deserve any praise or congratulations. They allowed this sorry tale to rumble on for weeks, even when it became very clear that Johansson was sticking with Sodastream and the $. What might have been a minor internet story became a major scandal. And yes, I suppose you might say that’s good for BDS – tons of free publicity – but I still don’t think it reflects at all well on Oxfam. They should have had the b*lls to get rid of her on day one, even if by concocting some face-saving BS about ‘hectic schedules’. What’s happened now is that they’ve allowed Johansson to take the initiative and – incredibly – look almost like SHE is the one with ‘principles’ (whatever one thinks of said ‘principles’) while they were just passive and pathetic, far too scared to offend high-profile celebs or mysterious ‘pro-Israel donors’.

      I will be writing to Oxfam, in response to the cut and paste email they just sent me, to say the above (albeit in more polite language!). They have handled this incredibly poorly, and this ‘solution’ will please nobody – the pro-Israel types will see poor Scarlett as a bullied victim, and everyone else will wonder why a supposed humanitarian organisation seemed to prefer celebrity to principle.

      • eGuard
        January 30, 2014, 4:13 pm

        Agree, MDM. The Oxfam idleness tastes like lemon. The lemonade to be made from that is, that the stains have been rubbed well into Scarlett’s and SS’s cover, and that the boycott has penetrated MSM once again.

  11. Citizen
    January 30, 2014, 9:52 am

    I think her Sodascream commercial will broadcast during the last quarter of the Superbowl–the apex of primetime for US TV audience. Why did Scarlett make that choice? Why #ScarlettJohansson Chose #Sodastream’s Illegal West Bank Factory Over Oxfam by @bthsts http://mic.cm/1cyLDKB via @policymic

  12. talknic
    January 30, 2014, 9:53 am

    It would have been a bigger win had she told Soda Stream to stick their contract.

    • Woody Tanaka
      January 30, 2014, 9:59 am

      Perhaps, but she’s the kind that puts a little silver in her pocket above her principles.

      • Citizen
        January 30, 2014, 2:44 pm

        @ Woody
        How does what you say fit into her booting her stage mother from her operation?

      • Woody Tanaka
        January 31, 2014, 10:07 am

        I don’t know enough about that situation to comment on it.

    • just
      January 30, 2014, 10:05 am

      I’ll take it, talknic.

      She sold her soul, her name, and her brand. Toxic. But she brought awareness with her awful choice.

      I think that this is going to stick to her and ss. All those that think that she was unaware and a bubblehead are wrong, imho. She simply thought that it would cause nary a blip on the radar, since acceptance of all things Israel was de rigueur. Not anymore!

      It’s like those cows burping and farting in the barn– kaboom! And now the barn door is open……..

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25922514

      • Kathleen
        January 30, 2014, 11:01 am

        With you Just. I think she knew and thought it would fly

      • Citizen
        January 30, 2014, 2:48 pm

        Me too. Shows what she think of the American pubic. Kirk Douglass and his son could do this and thus live in comfortable morally and for sure, in wealth, all the while secretly dissing the Goys. Not happening these days, thank goodness.

      • eGuard
        January 30, 2014, 4:16 pm

        Kathleen: I think she knew and thought it would fly

        She and her advisers. She’ll raise her eyebrow in her handlers’ office.

      • adele
        January 30, 2014, 11:18 am

        Monsieur Just:

        “All those that think that she was unaware and a bubblehead are wrong, imho. She simply thought that it would cause nary a blip on the radar, since acceptance of all things Israel was de rigueur. Not anymore!”

        Completely agree, she’s been living in her privileged, Hollywood bubble, blissfully riding along on the old memes, that Israel is universally adored and worshiped….but she got a rude awakening, Israel is not so cool after all, but to her detriment she’s still putting her money on apartheid.

      • Walid
        January 30, 2014, 12:25 pm

        Adele, I wouldn’t put it past SS to have orchestrated the whole thing knowing all too well how pro-Palestinian activists would react and how Oxfam would have to react. It sure gave SS a whole lot of free advertising for a couple of weeks.

      • just
        January 30, 2014, 12:38 pm

        I really don’t think so, Walid. The fizz has fizzled, and more people have been educated.

        I’m sure that ss will try to capitalize on their relationship with SJ, but it will only work on those already swooning with bubbly ziocaine. ss is building a factory in the Negev, you know. Let’s make it fail………..and the stock plummet further.

      • David Doppler
        January 30, 2014, 2:06 pm

        I think there’s a carrot and a stick for SJ: yes, she’s being well-paid under a contract with SS, but SS has also invested millions more in developing and buying air-time for the ad. For her to turn on them at this point could make her liable for significant damages, probably would breach several terms of her contract, upon which they’ve relied. So the decision she makes today to resign from Oxfam may not be the same decision she’d have made when she signed that contract probably unaware that this issue would fly as it has. As Annie points out, it’s all great PR for BDS, and SJ has provided it, even if that isn’t what she intended. She’s probably not sleeping well these days, stuck without good options, living with unexpected consequences of an earlier decision.

      • adele
        January 30, 2014, 2:49 pm

        this wasn’t orchestrated, but they certainly tried to spin it to their advantage. Unfortunately, it won’t work, any marketer will tell you that having one’s brand associated with questionable social practices is not good business…their last resort is calling in the PR cavalry. Doesn’t always work though, its very risky. The main winner here (apart from ScarJo’s bank account) is the BDS movement because of greater awareness around it, and the fact that more and more people will be less inhibited to question Israel’s apartheid practices. SodaStream can’t brush under the rug the fact that more people know that their production is in illegally occupied territory and in contravention of international law.

      • Citizen
        January 30, 2014, 2:49 pm

        Agreed.

    • Taxi
      January 30, 2014, 10:25 am

      There’s huge value in exposing zionist moles in our political as well as our cultural halls.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 30, 2014, 10:11 pm

      they would have sued her bigtime. the same agents who got her this gig will get her a blockbuster. but he image is irreparably tarnished.

  13. Citizen
    January 30, 2014, 9:57 am

    She made her choice, and now we can make ours across the world. She did a lot of good work for Oxfam and its website hives her full credit and simply says it was a conflict of interest because Oxfam is against the settlements because they are illegal and restrict economic opportunities, causing poverty. Interesting, she said most recently her choice was because she’s against BDS. Oxfam does not directly support BDS and has never made any statement about BDS to my knowledge. Maybe she just found out about BDS?

  14. pabelmont
    January 30, 2014, 10:00 am

    YAHOO(UK): “long overdue debate about the taboos in US public discourse and media regarding the Israeli apartheid and Zionist settler-colonialism in Palestine.

    BDS (boycott-divest-sanction) activists and pro-Palestinian voices are receiving more exposure to public platforms and media venues that were inconceivable a few years ago. However, the violent and irrational Zionist backlash against the ASA, in particular, and the BDS, in general, is not going away anytime soon.

    Nice, blatant statement of issues. “[T]he violent and irrational Zionist backlash.” Will we see this in USA MSM?

    Thanks, Yahoo(UK).

  15. Taxi
    January 30, 2014, 10:19 am

    Dithering Oxfam didn’t officially let her go – Scarlet quit herself. The ziominions out there are gleeful and saying that Scarlet has BDS’s Oxfam. Which, at this stage is neither here nor there cuz Scarlet is already being trashed for her support for illegal settlements; and judging by the comments sections on popular news sites like yahoo.news, it is your average American who is trashing on Scarlet and not just your average BDS activist.

    Let’s face it, nobody deserves egg on their face more than Scarlet and other celebrities like her who sign up for charitable work as a PR accessory for their image, and not for any genuine humanitarianism or caring for the underprivileged.

    The public attacks on Scarlet should never stop – her films and other products she peddles should be boycotted till she recants her support for the brutal Apartheid and occupation in the holy land.

  16. judithbell
    January 30, 2014, 10:24 am

    Precisely. She stood up to BDS and did so in a classy manner. This is a loss for BDS, no matter how you swing it.

    She does not need the money. She is not at that point in her career where she needs the exposure. People will ask her about this on talk shows etc and she will talk about building bridges of peace, blah, blah, blah and America will fall all over her.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 30, 2014, 3:44 pm

      this is incredible exposure for bds. incredible.

      “Without doubt, the biggest loser in this well publicized BDS campaign was SodaStream, which was exposed to the whole world as an occupation profiteer. Prior to this, most SodaStream customers had no idea that it is involved in grave violations of human rights by producing in an illegal settlement in the occupied Palestinian territory.

      more here: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/publicized-sodastream-reactions.html

      • seafoid
        January 30, 2014, 11:45 pm

        “Precisely. She stood up to BDS and did so in a classy manner. This is a loss for BDS, no matter how you swing it. ”

        Hitler denied the Russians would make it to Berlin right until the end

        But there are always rational people around to tell the others what’s actually happening.

      • judithbell
        February 1, 2014, 12:06 am

        This product is sold at Walmart and Sears. The people who shop there don’t know who OXFAM is, don’t know what BDS is and don’t care. The image of Scarlett will be enough to have them walk over.

        Israel is presented by the left wing media as illegitimate etc but people don’t follow or trust the media. They think the media lies and is biased.

        People follow Scarlett and Justin Timberlake and the Kardashians and Oprah.

        Even most university students don’t care about BDS etc. That is a vocal minority. Most of them care about passing and getting a job.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      January 30, 2014, 3:52 pm

      ”She stood up to BDS and did so in a classy manner”

      Yes. Saying that human rights violations were insignficant compared to a few more million in her bank account. Real classy.

      ”This is a loss for BDS, no matter how you swing it.”

      Hardly. Johansson is just production line eye-candy who cannot act. She’ll be on the scrapheap in 10 years time, if not much sooner. It’s not like she’s someone of integrity. People will remember that she chose the cash over human rights. It’s certainly a lot more memorable than her utterly forgettable films.

      • judithbell
        February 1, 2014, 12:09 am

        Wow! You must be really upset. Well, at least you didn’t say she was unattractive.

        She didn’t say human rights were insignificant. She said that she believed in bridges between people. The employees are well paid and treated fairly.

        As for the millions, how much is she being paid? Do you know her financial situation at all?

    • amigo
      January 30, 2014, 5:24 pm

      “She does not need the money. She is not at that point in her career where she needs the exposure. People will ask her about this on talk shows etc and she will talk about building bridges of peace, blah, blah, blah and America will fall all over her.”miss bell

      So you agree, she is just a supporter of Apartheid and could give a s–t about human rights and her stint with Oxfam was all a scam.

      I like the way you described building bridges of peace!!!!!!blah, blah, blah.

      Perfect.

      • judithbell
        February 1, 2014, 12:23 am

        She has been pretty clear that she does not believe in boycotts, that she supports the right of this factory to continue operating and employing these people.

        For 65 years the Palestinians have remained the only, out of tens of millions of refugees, in the 20th century – including the entire Jewish population of the Arab world- to remain refugees.

        How did it happen? Unlike the 15 million Germans, the 10 million Hindus and Muslims in India/Pakistan, the 850,000 Jews from Arab lands, the Palestinians were not absorbed

        They were given identity cards in the places they went with their ethnicity on it. Based on that ethnicity which was passed on to their children, they were given inferior rights A child born in Lebanon today with that designation cannot be Lebanese, go to a Lebanese school, get a profession, own land.

        Would you support that for the Syrian refugees if they can not go back? Or the Iraqis? That is what is going to happen because the Middle East is sectarian.

        People like you support that system of keeping the Palestinians refugees because on principle to you Israel is illegitimate.

        Well, I believe that the Iraqi Christians who are a community from the time of Christ should be allowed to go back also. So should I petition my government for them to come to Canada but in order to keep their rights alive, they should not be given citizenship, nor should their children so their “refugee” crisis can be solved. We can watch lives be destroyed, generation after generation, on principle.

        They can be refused the right to do certain jobs because they are not Canadian citizens.

        That is what the Arab nations did for the Palestinians. If Europe and the US had done the same to its Palestinian refugees, people would have been outraged.

        Your attitude to Sodastream is the same. It is like Palestinians are not human to you. If they work, it will not impact the peace process.

        I think Scarlett gets that. I think she gives a s–t about more than the platitudes of human rights. She give a s–t about the humans.

      • Citizen
        February 2, 2014, 9:56 am

        @ judithbell

        So she made it clear she doesn’t believe in boycotts? No, she just named one she doesn’t agree with. So she doesn’t believe in her government’s boycott of Cuba or Iran? Where’s the evidence? How about past boycotts–she doesn’t believe the boycott of apartheid was worthy? She must know about that; she’s a college grad, right?

        In all the countries you named in your comment, which one involves a state currently “managing a belligerent, or any, occupation of a native people?”

    • Cliff
      January 30, 2014, 5:50 pm

      since when is having your publicist speak for you in talking-points that seem engineered by the corporation you’re whoring yourself out to….EVER seem ‘classy’?

      You Zios have low standards, judy

      • judithbell
        February 1, 2014, 12:25 am

        Which publicist wrote it? You people know so much of the behind the scenes stuff. You must be very well connected.

        My impression is she is very wealthy and can make choices. She made a choice. A whore doesn’t do that. They usually don’t have choices.

    • just
      January 30, 2014, 10:28 pm

      ” She stood up to BDS and did so in a classy manner. This is a loss for BDS, no matter how you swing it. ”

      Schwing!

      Classy!

      • seafoid
        January 30, 2014, 11:40 pm

        Wonderful !

        There are so many ideas out there to bring down the citadel.

    • Talkback
      January 31, 2014, 8:55 am

      Precisely. She stood up to BDS and did so in a classy manner. This is a loss for BDS, no matter how you swing it.

      What a Pyrrhic victory. The real victory was for BDS that an insitution like Oxfam made clear that humanitarian help and support for war crimes don’t go together. And the whole case showed how hypocrit some Jews can be, when they want to portray themselves as humanitarian (or “liberal”).

    • eljay
      January 31, 2014, 9:40 am

      >> She stood up to BDS and did so in a classy manner.

      I agree that she chose Zio-supremacism over humanitarianism in a very classy manner.

      >> This is a loss for BDS, no matter how you swing it.

      I disagree. In some ways you swing it, the publicity helps raise awareness of BDS and of the ugly reality of Zio-supremacism. This is a win for BDS.

      >> People will ask her about this on talk shows etc and she will talk about building bridges of peace, blah, blah, blah and America will fall all over her.

      I agree, and I think it’s unfortunate.

      • Citizen
        February 1, 2014, 5:47 pm

        @ eljay
        Really? It was a given SJ was hugely popular and seductive, and also that Hasbara 101 was the mainstream media’s song. Anything that puts a dent in that strong cultural-pc combo, such as the tempest re Sodastream, has to be deducted from the status quo as a plus for the huge underdog BDS.

      • eljay
        February 3, 2014, 9:36 am

        >> Anything that puts a dent in that strong cultural-pc combo, such as the tempest re Sodastream, has to be deducted from the status quo as a plus for the huge underdog BDS.

        I agree, which is why I said ” … the publicity helps raise awareness of BDS and of the ugly reality of Zio-supremacism. This is a win for BDS.”

    • Annie Robbins
      February 3, 2014, 4:23 pm

      She stood up to BDS and did so in a classy manner.

      quick, someone alert the press. they must have gotten the wrong message:

      Americans don’t like it when celebrities appear greedy or unprincipled, and choosing a soda-maker company over an international poverty-fighting NGO certainly risks that appearance (Corollary: News organizations have an incentive to write about frequently Googled celebrities, which requires engaging with controversies around those celebrities, which increases the controversy.)

      …….

      A third reason this has struck such controversy is that the entire issue got wrapped up in a separate-but-related issue called “BDS,” short for “boycott, divestment and sanctions.” BDS is an international movement that calls on the world to boycott and sanction all of Israel as a means of changing its policies toward the Palestinian territories. That movement has, as the Financial Times reports, seized on the Johansson controversy to further its larger campaign. Strategically, from BDS’s point of view, that makes sense: An issue closely related to their issue is in the news, and Johansson is getting hammered by the press, so why not seize on that sentiment at a time when it would seem to be unusually sympathetic?

      The effect, though, has been for the conversation around Johansson’s sponsorship deal to develop increasingly into a conversation about BDS, about boycotting Israel. And that debate is far more polarizing and contentious than the separate-but-related question of whether Johansson should have chosen Oxfam over SodaStream.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/01/30/how-scarlett-johansson-got-mired-in-one-of-the-middle-easts-touchiest-controversies/

  17. Sycamores
    January 30, 2014, 10:29 am

    you know it’s strange i don’t free like celebrating, this Oxfam, SJ and SS fiasco should never have happen.

    the victory goes to civil society in the general sense which the BDS movement is a part of.

    my respect to the writers on Mondoweiss for keeping us up to date. who in no small part brought awareness of the issue to a wider audience.

    something tells me that Oxfam were going to drop SJ but she resign first to save face.

    • Citizen
      January 30, 2014, 2:53 pm

      @ Sycamores
      That’s the way I read it. She was counseled to drop OXfam before it (eventually) dropped her. Thus giving her PR folks more to say than if she was dismissed by Oxfam. She beat them to the punch, but it still won’t save her.More see daily she’s a Zionist addict. You gotta remember, she pridefully told us she was a “New York Jew.” So many in entertainment like her, who think we are all as oblivious as they are as to what’s happening in Israel and OT. I can’t help but think of many half jewish stars and celebrities. Think of the star of Sex And The City, and then recall also Kristen Davis had the same problem.

  18. Blownaway
    January 30, 2014, 10:53 am

    Instead of them severing the relationship and maintaining the high ground they let her quit? She should have been fired

    • Mondowise
      January 30, 2014, 1:55 pm

      i agree, that oxfam did NOT sever ties with sj … and i mean IMMEDIATELY… over her stupid ss endorsement is a huge ethical and moral blunder on oxfam’s part as far as i’m concerned. it leaves the world wondering how long it may have taken oxfam to cut her loose, and why it even took this long and still they had not done so. how convenient for them that she quit. i now question the truth of oxfam’s integrity.

      i’m not saying oxfam jumped off the cliff, i’m just left kinda hanging without certainty of resolve about them since they waited and did nothing, and it’s that very insecurity that leaves me questioning them. had they immediately taken firm action to end their relationship with her (because it was a blatantly obvious no-brainer to do so), they would have saved themselves/their image and intentionally not left any doubts, imho.

    • Citizen
      January 30, 2014, 3:00 pm

      @ Blownaway
      My feelings too. I now think so much less of her and of Oxfam too.

  19. Chu
    January 30, 2014, 10:56 am

    The Noah Browning report confirms my doubts about the Sodastream plant – It’s a sweatshop that exploits Palestinians. Maybe OxFam can investigate and shine more light on the plight of the Palestinians. It would benefit Oxfam and Palestinians to encourage this meeting.

    • judithbell
      February 1, 2014, 12:44 am

      There is a report in the Jewish Daily Forward, a pretty left wing publication, which goes through all of the allegations of BDS and of Sodastream. The author visited the site about a year ago I think.

      Along with Sodastream, OXFAM is going after Pepsi in a big way. OXFAM just got a 2.5 million donation from Coke and both Pepsi and Sodastream are their competitors

      As well, OXFAM has a close association with Dubai. The UAE is one of the worst abusers of workers in the world. Only 11.5% of the inhabitants are citizens. 99% of the workforce are foreign workers. OXFAM holds a glittering event there every year serviced by basically slave labour. In 2011 the Guardian wrote conditions were so bad, 2 workers killed themselves EACH WEEK.

      OXFAM does not operate in any Gulf country. FIFA is holding the World Cup in Qatar and right now 12 workers die on the job a week but the expectation is the numbers are going to go up hugely. Walk Free has started a campaign but again OXFAM is ignoring these workers.

      So whatever you think of Sodastream, OXFAM is hardly a beacon of morality. It parties with dictators and looks the other way.

  20. Kathleen
    January 30, 2014, 10:59 am

    Writing Oxfam and thanking them for doing the right thing. Too bad about Scarlett once again demonstrating even people who allegedly stood up for human rights and social justice for all make a huge exception when it comes to the illegal occupation and apartheid government of Israel….oh and big money. Scarlett A$

    • W.Jones
      January 30, 2014, 11:25 am

      The incident surprised me. I did not expect Oxfam America has 0 projects to help Palestinians.

    • Citizen
      January 30, 2014, 3:03 pm

      @ Karthleen
      Is there a more iconic celebrity for PEP than Scarlett? I hope Phil does a piece on this subject.

  21. shachalnur
    January 30, 2014, 11:49 am

    Arutz Sheva(most important Israeli settler mouthpiece) wrote a small matter of fact piece today ,stating Scarlett and Oxfam are parting ways,no triumphalism,no judgement,no explanation.

    So is this “Victory” or “Pigeon Superstition”?

    The settlers don’t trust Sodastream and their Scarlett operation,do you?

    The real war is invisible,the visible war is an illusion.

    • seafoid
      January 30, 2014, 11:37 pm

      Nice try Shachal but this psy ops stuff is probably straight outta Hevron from the people who thought Sharon was a lefty.

      This is the money shot :

      http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/30/scarlett-johansson-sodastream-oxfam-israeli-settlement

      “Small as it may seem in the context of a long battle, the Johansson affair is one more piece of evidence that illegal Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories are being increasingly held up to scrutiny. There is no longer impunity for those willing to associate themselves with it.
      Patience has run out and an honest debate on western support for Israel at all costs is now on the table. This debate is better than silence, or than celebrity airbrushing of deep-seated problems. I welcome it.”

      Sure you can brush it off but Zionism is suddenly impotent.

      It’s as if Hugh Hefner’s body has suddenly rejected Viagra. Can you imagine what that would mean for all the girls in the Playboy mansion?

      And I linked it with money shot because this is about virility which is on the other side of the scales to death.

      ,  “It was a technique which the Zionists were to employ throughout their struggle. The technique of promoting damaging personal attacks on those who stood in their way rather than trying to counter their arguments.”
      “Such non conformists were subtly made aware that their jobs might be at risk, their books unpublishable, their preferment out of the question, their public reputations vulnerable if they did not renounce the heresy of anti Zionism ”
      Publish it not, Mayhew and Adams, 1975

      Here’s some more of the Zionist CV

      http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/questions-about-the-alice-walker-case.html/comment-page-1#comment-585543

      Ben Gurion must be spinning in his settler grave. This is really sloppy
      and it’s very slippy from here on for you guys

      • shachalnur
        January 31, 2014, 8:30 am

        Seafoid,

        You would do better to take MSM articles and op-ed’s with a grain of salt.

        The Guardian is the paper where the Greenwald/Snowden operation is run through.

        I’m not surprised the Guardian is telling you what you want to hear.

        It’s called”Feeding Pigeon Superstition”

        Does that make the Guardian bad?Not a all ,they are doing a great job ,attacking TPTB,and I’m quite sure they will never try to damage Israel in general,since the ones that control Guardian are on Israel’s side.

        Read my comments under “Without a doubt,the biggest loser…..” for a more detailed explanation.

        I’m not a Hasbarist or settler fan,only explaining the lies,psy-ops and disinfo from all sides.

        The real war is invisble,the visible war is an illusion,as it always was.

  22. LanceThruster
    January 30, 2014, 1:01 pm

    She’ll never work in this town again…

    Wait, what?

  23. Citizen
    January 30, 2014, 3:09 pm

    This issue will not be going away like whoever told Scarlett it would:
    http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/01/30/how_scarjo_endorsing_a_soda_machine_became_an_international_controversy

    Should we ask her now stranded stage mom why she’s such a selfish person? She reminds me of the picture of Dorian Gray.

  24. Citizen
    January 30, 2014, 5:48 pm

    On The Five on Fox Channel right now (5:46PM EST). They discuss Scarlett & Sodastream very briefly with little valuable comment. Only only one comment on the occupation among Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Greg Gutfeld, Dana Perino. Perino was the only one who even mentions the occupation as the root of the issue. The rest said nothing of any insight at all. That should tell U something.

  25. seafoid
    January 30, 2014, 5:56 pm

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/1.571594

    “Thousands gathered for a mass prayer rally at the Western Wall in Jerusalem on Thursday to protest efforts toward Israeli-Palestinian peace talks brokered by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

    Dubbed “prayer for salvation of Israel and its legacy,” the protesters called for an end to the “Kerry edicts,” referring to the U.S. secretary of state’s efforts at a framework deal that Israelis and Palestinians will agree on.”

    Allahu Akbar, baby
    Literally

  26. seafoid
    January 30, 2014, 6:00 pm

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.571597

    “Israeli teacher won’t be fired for expressing ‘leftist’ opinions, school rules
    Adam Verete’s position as civics teacher at the ORT school in Kiryat Tivon was in danger after a student accused him of expressing opinions ‘against the state’; Verete urges teachers to continue expressing their opinions in class
    • In Verete’s first hearing, which was recorded and reported on in Haaretz, ORT first claimed that Verete had admitted that he had said that the Israel Defense Forces was not a moral army, and that his statements had been one-sided and extreme. They said he had asked ORT to consider whether to continue employing him. However, the recording contradicted ORT’s statements.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.571651.”
    “Israel’s military magazine “Bamahane weekly” reports that an increasing number of West Bank settlers hold command positions.
    The Israel Defense Forces outlet reported Thursday that 16 percent of those who attended the latest company and battalion commanders’ training course were residents of the West Bank — four times the proportion of settlers in the Israeli population.
    A recent graduate of the course quoted in the report said settlers had more motivation to serve given their proximity to Palestinians attacks. But the report also raised questions about how these officers would respond if ordered to evacuate settlements for a future peace deal. ”

    I would love to see Beinart triangulate that.

    Israel is such a car crash

  27. biorabbi
    January 30, 2014, 6:44 pm

    Annie, is it now four or five million Soda Stream downloads of the SJ add? How is that a win for BDS? If this is a victory for BDS, then as an ardent lover of zionism, I wish for many more BDS victories like the courage of Scarlet and many more downloads of the SS add.

    • Djinn
      January 31, 2014, 4:39 am

      You know that people downloading an ad because they think SJ is hot does not translate to sales for SS right? Viewing something on YouTube costs nothing. If sales of SS markedly increase in the wake of her tawdry ad then sure maybe SS could make a claim to “winning”. However the resulting publicity has meant they have also been linked with the occupation in the minds of many who wouldn’t have otherwise been aware of that link, something that may hurt their sales which has to be taken into account. Most of the publicity surrounding this has referenced the BDS campaign, ergo free publicity for the campaign, ergo win.

    • Sumud
      January 31, 2014, 7:34 am

      You’re equating YouTube plays with support for Israeli apartheid and Scarlett profiting from it – on what basis do you draw this conclusion?

      • tree
        February 3, 2014, 4:54 pm

        Well, Sumud, that “Leave Brittany alone!” video got over 47 million hits on You-tube, and the Double Rainbow guy got over 39 million hits. We all know that the fortunes of both Brittany Spears and double rainbows just sky-rocketed after those videos went viral!! oh wait, … maybe not.

        The SS video may have gone viral but it hasn’t translated into any win for SS or Johansson. Sodastream’s stock is down again today, and Johansson’s wooden performance got panned.

    • Citizen
      January 31, 2014, 9:29 am

      To each his own. I won’t be seeing any more movies if Scarlett’s in them. I will keep watching Kirsten Davis. So now we have Stolen Beauty and Stolen Bubbles.

  28. W.Jones
    January 30, 2014, 6:54 pm

    Platitudes about Sodastream’s humanitarianism reflects that one hardly cares what happens to Palestinians.

    It’s like the Ottoman empire or the Fatimids destroying things and not caring. Someone goes to Africa and sympathizes with people who became refugees, but is OK with other people back home getting dispossessed.

  29. noanoa
    November 27, 2015, 2:25 pm

    Scarlett Johansson is better than ever !!!
    We just signed a huge contract with 12 Israeli companies to import lots of their products made in Israel (Judea & Samaria).

    Cheers Mates

Leave a Reply