‘Scarlett letter’ — Social media pillory Johansson for representing settlement business SodaStream

Israel/Palestine
on 107 Comments

 

Scarlett Letter (graphic: Doc Rocket)

Scarlett Letter (graphic: Rachele Richards @docr0cket)(click on image to enlarge)

Actress Scarlett Johansson’s decision to represent SodaStream has already brought a shockwave of opposition– because SodaStream produces its seltzer-makers in a Jewish colony in the occupied West Bank. We’re expecting to see many creative responses to her decision between now and the Superbowl kickoff on Feb. 2. Here are two, to get the juices flowing.

I contacted Johansson’s publicist to see if she has made any statement about SodaStream’s factory located on a settlement in the occupied West Bank–or whether she is even aware of that. So far, I have not gotten a response.

from stephanie

Scarlett’s mum on SodaStream’s complicity (graphic:Stephanie Westbrook (@stephinrome)

 

107 Responses

  1. Krauss
    January 19, 2014, 1:16 pm

    Do you know why Israel is losing the PR war?

    Because this is what our side produces for free. This is what happens when you have passion and justice on your side. You can spend as many dollars as you want.
    You can bribe as many members of congress as you want to. I don’t care.
    You will never get it that way, because you cannot buy it, it has to be organic. It has to be authentic.

    And this is why Israel’s lobbyists are hopelessly lost and will remain so.
    There are some things money cannot buy, and a clean conscience is part of that.
    And the best art is the most pure art.

    Compare Eli Valley to any right-wing comic(s) like LATMA.
    It’s like peasants vs Stealth bombers.
    It’s over before it even started.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 19, 2014, 1:26 pm

      krass, did you read defner’s article? link to mondoweiss.net

      Weiss likewise ridicules Deputy Foreign Minister Ze’ev Elkin, who runs the government’s “hasbara war,” as he puts it. Weiss: “Yes, in the Foreign Ministry they are for the time being sticking to the old conception: it’s all a question of hasbara.

      it never seems to occur to israel’s gov they need to change more than the hasbara to change their image. there’s only so much lipstick you an put on the apartheid pig. end the occupation!

      • ckg
        January 19, 2014, 1:47 pm

        [Dana] Weiss, to be clear.

      • Krauss
        January 19, 2014, 5:03 pm

        Yeah, Annie, I read Derfner’s article and the quote from Elkin stood out to me.
        In fact, it was what prompted my comment. Always a new program.
        Notice that he’s funding it from diaspora Jewry.

        For me it’s shocking. There are starving holocaust survivors in New York, each year a number of them dies because they can’t afford heating or are weakened by malnourishment. Instead of helping those people, if you must spend money on Jewish causes, they send it to right-wing racists throwing it on more expensive political consultants into a bottomless pit.

        These people have gotten used to the notion that you can buy anything, they do it in Congress every day, so that they simply don’t understand a world which isn’t ruled by money – but by morality. When you move in settings where everyone has a price, to suddenly be confronted with people who are instead moved by a sense of dignity and justice, you’re faced with an intractable problem and most of these people do not know how to mentally deal with this fact. So they just throw more money at the pit, in sheer desperation.

        It’s the only trick they’ve learned, poor pavlonian dogs.

      • ritzl
        January 19, 2014, 6:28 pm

        I never would have thought that there are at-risk Holocaust survivors living in NYC. NEVER. But… link to tabletmag.com

        With all the largesse we bestow upon Israel and with all this yammering about “Israel as the haven for Jews,” I would have thought that “haven” would have meant “free from additional suffering for those that have suffered so much,” at least in small but very fundamental part iff that assertion had any meaning at all. Charity begins at home and now. If not, this whole “haven” thing is just more fabricated rationalizing argumentative BS.

        I used to think that there was some merit to a Jewish state as a haven. Somewhere. Somehow. For some future reason. But since a state exists and it isn’t being used as a haven, that kind of vaporizes that contention.

        Shorter version: Israel is using our money to illegally settle the WB while needy Jewish Holocaust survivors shiver.

      • American
        January 19, 2014, 9:35 pm

        You have no idea what a con and a scam …..”The Jewish Committee for German Reparations to Nazi Surivors”…the main org thru which all money for survivors passes before it is laddled out to 200+ other Jewish orgs to laddle out to the survivors is.
        Its a con and a scam on both Germany and the survivors and those who donate to this.

        There were only 52,000+or- ‘actual’ survivors as defined in the 40’s as survivors —–Jews who had been in nazi camps.
        There were another 1 to 200,000 classified as ‘displaced’.
        Germany has paid 90 Billion dollars to this committee for survivors, 1 Billion a year ++ every year . And every year extra request like 800 million in 2012 for Jewish nursing homes.

        That 90 billion + over the last 60 years would have kept the ‘real’ 50,000 survivors very nicely. Even the actual ‘displaced’ very nicely.

        But Israel decided to change the definition of survivor so they could get more money….so survivor came to be any Jew anywhere who suffered anything during WWII, even if it was being lucky enough to move out of Germany and the nazis countries.
        So now ‘survivor’ includes almost any Jew in Europe (or else where).
        But while this ploy got more money out of Germany it also increased the number of Jews who could apply for payments…so it had to be divided among more people.
        So now there is a ‘formular’ for what amount of payment different Jews get—a actual survivor get so much—a Jew displaced by the war get so much–a Jew that wasnt displaced but hid out gets so much and so forth…a lot of different levels of payments.
        Now almost all Jews that lived in any country ‘involved’ in the war except the US and England are considered survivors by Israel.
        Then Israel also had Russia Jews declared survivors—-they dont get ‘monthly’ payments from Germany but they can apply for benefits from “The Jewish Committe for German Reparations for Nazi Survivors’–even though the US gave all Russian Jews who had no income or assets a 9 year of period of social welfare to adjust to the US and learn English.
        According to Wiki the “Jewish Federation’ raises another 2 billion a year in charity contributions.
        So the absolute minimun amount—not counting government grants
        given by Social Services to Jewish agencies specifically for Holocaust survivors–and not even counting all those fund raising for starving Jews you see on TV—-there is at least close to 4 billion a year that ‘is suppose’ to be going to survivors..but it not really going to the real survivors.

        Every year there is some new scandal–last year it was people working at the Jewish Committe who got Russia Jews to phony up papers on their backgrounds to qualify them for payments—-then the insiders took a cut of the payment made to the phony claimaints.

        Its the most disgusting racket ever run. I dont know why no one and particulary why no Jews who claim to be all about “my people’ and the holocuast have done nothing about it…its a travesty and a crime.

      • kevin
        January 20, 2014, 12:10 am

        Could either of you tell me about “starving” or “at-risk” U.S. WWII veterans in NYC?

        Thanks.

      • ritzl
        January 20, 2014, 7:00 am

        @kevin- I’m sure there are many and not just vets.

        My point was the chasm between Israeli propaganda/argumentation and real-time deeds is gaping. It’s almost like if a need for a haven was to ever arise, Israel would just say, “Too late, you should have come here sooner.” The discrepancy this situation highlights between Israeli words and deeds is that cold-blooded, imo. Israeli “leadership” is so focused on the regional hegemony power game that it’s lost sight of the basics.

        I was not trying to say that in the US Holocaust survivors should take precedence over others equally deserving of help. Sorry if I gave the impression.

      • Daniel Rich
        January 20, 2014, 1:14 am

        @ Annie,

        I think one of the reasons why that happens is because it is not a matter of being on the wrong side of history, it is all about not having explained it to its fullest. If the mind is not convinced of any wrongdoing, how to reach the ‘spirit?’

      • Djinn
        January 20, 2014, 6:06 am

        Could either of you tell me about “starving” or “at-risk” U.S. WWII veterans in NYC

        There are undoubtedly quite a few, the US has a pretty bad record when it comes to looking after vets. Perhaps the billions funnelled in aid every year to a first world country (who the bots keep telling us don’t need it) could be redirected to their care?

    • thetruthhurts
      January 19, 2014, 2:22 pm

      after first reading on mondo about this i suggested an avalanche of protest from the citizenry or whatever.
      looks like they’re listening.
      job well done, you may continue on!

    • Cliff
      January 19, 2014, 4:28 pm

      Exactly Krauss.

      Grassroots versus astroturf.

    • seafoid
      January 19, 2014, 5:01 pm

      “You will never get it that way, because you cannot buy it, it has to be organic. It has to be authentic.”

      It takes up too many evenings.

      Have you seen Madagascar 3 ? The scene in the casino where the penguins and the chimps operate what looks like a late 17th century French gambler – that is how natural hasbara is at this stage

      12 seconds in

      “Whoa . Look at that. That is one ugly magugly lady. That is roadkilling ugly”

  2. Ira Glunts
    January 19, 2014, 1:27 pm

    I don’t have to see any others. The Scarlett Letter graphic wins hands down. Wow!!! Thanks, Annie.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 19, 2014, 1:39 pm

      it’s not a competition ira! we’re really excited about seeing how artists activists deal with this incredibly weird combo of this famous actress branding herself with sodastream/apartheid/illegal settlements. so needless to say we don’t want to discourage anyone ;) but wow is right. i mean, super incredible.

      and one of the very cool things about stephanie’s graphic is that 2 days before she tweeted it i had already contacted her publicist, first by phone and then email. and she had no way of knowing that, or the fact they had not responded to my inquiry. so naturally i flipped when i saw her graphic.

      hats off to both!

    • Ira Glunts
      January 19, 2014, 2:28 pm

      Annie, Point taken. ;-)

      • Annie Robbins
        January 20, 2014, 12:10 pm

        hey Ira, have you clicked in the scarlett letter image? because…wow.
        and all those sparkly carbonated bubbles too.

  3. giladg
    January 19, 2014, 2:16 pm

    Scarlett knows that the area some in recent history call the West Bank but was called Judea and Samaria way before that, is the area around Jerusalem and is also the land in which many of the stories in the Bible refer to. This makes this area part of the historic homeland of the Jewish people and not some invaded land. International law has yet to show impartiality when it comes to Jews and Israel, especially when Arab oil money pull so many strings.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 19, 2014, 2:29 pm

      Scarlett knows that the area some in recent history call the West Bank but was called Judea and Samaria

      but did she know when she signed on w/soda stream where the factory was located? that’s what i want to know. did she know the company was being boycotted and the target of a campaign which had been in the works for quite a while? did she know she’s be pulled into that, her branding would be connected to human rights violations? or was she clueless?

      and if she did know and made this choice as a conscious decision to align herself with this company, then why not release a statement in defense of her decision or in defense of sodastream? hmm? curious minds want to know.

      she lobbied for the president. she must know she’s stepping right into the middle of a very heated controversy. so staying silent implies she feels she owes no explanation for her decision. it will be assumed she’s aligning herself with settlers and the right to build settlements on occupied territory against international law. that’s not the kind of choice one can wash away.

      she could walk away. if she doesn’t, this will (permanently) scar her reputation.

      • shachalnur
        January 19, 2014, 2:55 pm

        Very good questions.

        I feel this Sodastream strategy reflects the desperation in general from the settler/occupier forces.

        It hands opponents a golden opportunity, pointing out Scarlett’s decision to sign up for this,and Sodastreams tarnished reputation might badly backfire on both of them.

        If Scarlett would withdraw now it would even give more attention to the occupation.

        Based on some early interviews with Scarlett-she is not a genius-I feel she knew what she signed up for,but she might thinks,or was advised, she can get away with it.

        Sodastream and the Bubble Bimbo; Hit or fail,will depend much on MSM and alternative media.

      • Shuki
        January 19, 2014, 3:04 pm

        Yes, all 606 of her twitter followers will boycott Sodastream.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 19, 2014, 4:28 pm

        i don’t think she has a twitter account.

      • giladg
        January 19, 2014, 4:02 pm

        Just because you, Annie Robbins, think its okay to boycott this company does not make it right. For some her reputation will be scared. For others it will be enhanced. Hopefully she can think for herself. Unlike the boycott against South Africa, there are many Americans and other supporters around the world, who support Israel and a Zionist Israel at that. So don’t expect things to go the same way as South Africa. Not everyone is going to go over the edge with you Annie. Jews have a right to live and work in the Judea and Samaria, the place you call the West Bank. I would put money on it that those who say that Israel is violating international law are either radical secular leftists or Muslims. The Jewish Bible has no chance with them. So please take your international law and sell it at another second hand yard sale.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 19, 2014, 4:30 pm

        I would put money on it that those who say that Israel is violating international law are either radical secular leftists or Muslims.

        cough. i guess you have not noticed that there is not even one foreign embassy in jerusalem.try asking yourself why that might be.

        So don’t expect things to go the same way as South Africa.

        try peddling that angle to: “Livni: We face South Africa-style isolation because of settlements”

        link to timesofisrael.com

      • talknic
        January 19, 2014, 5:00 pm

        @ giladg Just because you, Annie Robbins, think its okay to boycott this company does not make it right

        The fact that the issue has not been resolved by any other means after almost half a century of Israel ignoring the law makes it right to apply pressure by any peaceful means.

        “there are many Americans and other supporters around the world, who support Israel and a Zionist Israel at that”

        Uh huh. They’re supporting a state in breach of the law and UN Charter (and scared they’ll lose their investments)

        “Jews have a right to live and work in the Judea and Samaria, the place you call the West Bank”

        A) Israeli citizens do not have the right to illegally settle in territories Israel has under occupation, whether they’re Jews or non-Jews

        B) It was officially renamed the West Bank while under the sovereignty of Jordan, a UN Member from 1950’s, which made it a High Contracting Power in 1967, the GC’s apply to the West Bank.

        “I would put money on it that those who say that Israel is violating international law are either radical secular leftists or Muslims”

        You’d lose. The UNSC is neither radical secular leftists or Muslim, it tells us Israel is in breach of International Law, the UN Charter and GC IV, you silly silly person. Those laws (all law is binding) and UN Charter chapters (the UN Charter is binding in its entirety) are reaffirmed and emphasized the in the hundreds of UNSC resolutions giving Israel hundreds of opportunities to comply. For example:
        252 (1968) of 21 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 271 (1969) of 15 September 1969, 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971, 446 (1979) of 22 March 1979, 452 (1979) 20 July 1979, 465 (1980) of 1 March 1980, 476 June 30 1980 and 478 August 20 1980. None of which have anything to do with race or religion. They’re based on the UN Charter, International Law and the GC’s, all of which Israel obliged itself to uphold. Alas it hasn’t.

      • giladg
        January 20, 2014, 1:56 am

        Jordan had no right to do anything in the area. It controlled the West Bank and East Jerusalem for just 19 years. In your mind talknic, 19 years is far more significant than the 3.500 year Jewish connection to the same places. The UN resolutions call for a settlement of “the” territories and as the territories have never, ever been controlled by the Palestinians, yes this is a fact, there is no previous owner to whom they need to be returned to. That is why the area is called contested territories. Until a settlement is reached between Israel and some Palestinianian authority (is it Hamas or the PLO or is it Iran?), Israel has a right to contest for the land.

      • talknic
        January 20, 2014, 7:04 am

        @ giladg
        “Jordan had no right to do anything in the area”

        Strange!

        A) Israel signed an Armistice AGREEMENT with Transjordan. The occupation of Judea and Samaria by Transjordan was legal.

        B) corpus separatum was never instituted, Jerusalem was never separated from what remained of Palestine after Israel was declared independent of Palestine “as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947

        C) The West Bank as it is now known, was legally annexed at the request of representatives of Palestine (Self determination and far better to be a part of a Sovereign state and High Contracting Power than under military Laws of Occupation)

        D) Jordan’s annexation of what was officially renamed the West Bank was as a trustee only (Session: 12-II Date: May 1950). in keeping with the UN Charter Chapt XI

        E) There are no UNSC resolutions against Transjordan for having bilaterally (by agreement/self determination) annexed what became known as the West Bank as a trustee because it was in keeping with the UN Charter Chapt XI. In fact a ” sacred trust”

        “It controlled the West Bank and East Jerusalem for just 19 years. In your mind talknic, 19 years is far more significant than the 3.500 year Jewish connection to the same places”

        A pathetic and false accusation. False accusations are against the basic tenets of Judaism

        “It controlled the West Bank and East Jerusalem for just 19 years. In your mind talknic, 19 years is far more significant than the 3.500 year Jewish connection to the same places”

        How odd!

        A) Jewish history in the region was far longer as PALESTINIAN Jews than any period under Jewish rule.

        B) Palestinian territories do not belong to Jordan

        C) Israel proclaimed its borders effective May 15th 1948 at 00:01 (ME time) (ibid), rendering the 3.500 year Jewish connection to territories “outside the state of Israel” ..”in Palestine” redundant as far as Israeli citizens are concerned. Go have a pathetic whine to the Zionist Federation for demanding a Jewish state

        D) Nothing outside of the State of Israel as it was proclaimed, (ibid) and internationally recognized and accepted into the UN was or is Israeli because;

        C) It is illegal to acquire territory by war, ANY war and;

        D) Israel has never legally annexed any territory

        “The UN resolutions call for a settlement of “the” territories” and as the territories have never, ever been controlled by the Palestinians, yes this is a fact, there is no previous owner to whom they need to be returned to. That is why the area is called contested territories”

        Supply a quote where it says “contested territories” in any Law, any UNSC resolution, any UN Charter chapter, any convention. Good luck !

        Israel is legally required to end occupation and withdraw from Arab territories, “including Jerusalem”! according to these UNSC resolutions. 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 271 (1969) of 15 September 1969, 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971, 446 (1979) of 22 March 1979, 452 (1979) 20 July 1979, 465 (1980) of 1 March 1980, 476 June 30 1980 and 478 August 20 1980 None of which have anything to do with race or religion. They’re based on the UN Charter, International Law and the GC’s, all of which Israel obliged itself to uphold.

        “Until a settlement is reached between Israel and some Palestinianian authority (is it Hamas or the PLO or is it Iran?), Israel has a right to contest for the land”

        It is only contested by a tiny singular minority in the world, the State of Israel and; if Israel is contesting it, then it isn’t yet Israeli!

        Thanks again for affording the opportunity to post invaluable, factual information for the general reader

        Keep up the good work!

      • puppies
        January 19, 2014, 5:02 pm

        @gigladg – “So please take your international law and sell it at another second hand yard sale.”

        How refreshing. The last time we heard it expressed so frankly was from the mouth of Dr. Goebbels.

      • Justpassingby
        January 19, 2014, 5:31 pm

        giladg

        Dont you understand that you have been brainwashed when you say that apartheid is something good?

      • Cliff
        January 19, 2014, 5:40 pm

        @gulag

        Jews have no right to live on Palestinian land unless the Palestinian people allow it.

        Those Jews in the OPT are there by force, illegally colonizing Palestinian land.

        It has nothing to do with them as Jews and everything to do with them as invaders and occupiers.

        You are a religious fanatic. The Jewish Bible has no chance with people who respect human rights.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 19, 2014, 6:25 pm

        omg cliff, i just completely cracked up reading that twist on his name!

      • Ron Edwards
        January 19, 2014, 5:54 pm

        “Jews have a right to live and work in … the West Bank.” Yes, indeed they do, or rather, any citizen-minded person, Jewish or not. No one objects to that, subject to whatever work visa or citizeship process is involved. But we are talking about occupation, land theft, martial law, exploitation, economic theft, home destruction, secret police harassment, gratuitous imprisonment and torture, and daily brutality. These are what the government and culture of Israel do there. Are you claiming the right to those too?

        Plus, “leftists!” “Leftists!” Oooooh, scary leftists! (I’m getting a bit bored with that one, it’s all over the place)

      • just
        January 19, 2014, 6:00 pm

        “So please take your international law and sell it at another second hand yard sale.”

        giladg– thus far, you and yours have managed to trash/ignore international law. If you think you’ll escape justice, you are very wrong. The world is watching and is waiting…your apartheid statelet is coming undone. It never was a “western style democracy”, and lying will never get you out of the mess that you and yours have created and cultivated.

      • eljay
        January 19, 2014, 6:11 pm

        >> … there are many Americans and other supporters around the world, who support Israel and a Zionist Israel at that.

        For now. But the time will come when many Americans and other supporters around the world finally stop supporting your oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State”.

        >> The Jewish Bible has no chance with them.

        The Jewish Bible is as useless as the Muslim Qu’ran, and neither has any value when it comes to determining a just and moral solution to the I-P conflict.

      • ziusudra
        January 20, 2014, 1:59 am

        Greetings eljay,
        … the Jewish bible is as useless as the Muslim Qu’ran….

        Throw in my lasped Christianity also!
        They are all mythologies based on the mythology of the
        deeds & history of the Sumerians & Egyptians.
        ziusudra
        PS Historically there is no concept of Zionism.
        It comes about in Europe ca. 1860.
        Historically the looney Evangelicals go back to O. Cromwell of 1640.

      • giladg
        January 20, 2014, 10:12 am

        @talnic, you suffer from verbal diarrhea.
        Two points you tied to make>

        * Transjordan occupied Judea and Samaria after the ceasefire in 1948. Why did they not give it to the Palestinians then? I know why, do you?

        C) It is illegal to acquire territory by war, ANY war :
        Utter nonsense from you again. International law says that if a country declares war on another without a war being justified, and then loses the war, land lost during that war can legally revert to the country that was attacked.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 20, 2014, 11:11 am

        International law says that if a country declares war on another without a war being justified, and then loses the war, land lost during that war can legally revert to the country that was attacked.

        really? which international law.

      • eljay
        January 20, 2014, 11:39 am

        >> really? which international law.

        The same one that says terrorism, ethnic cleansing, aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction, torture and murder are unjust and immoral UNLESS you are a “Jewish State”, in which case you’re a victim so it’s okay to do all those things.

      • giladg
        January 21, 2014, 4:46 am

        I have heard Professors in International Law talk about the subject of losing land by an aggressor. I tried looking for published articles online but have yet to come up with something concise and comprehensive.
        This subject is better left to the experts but know that it is true, except when the Jewish State is involved.
        Syria, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq had no justification for launching war in 1948.
        In 1967 the Arab armies massed on Israel’s borders. Iraqi forces were present in parts in the West Bank and in the center of the country the width of Israel was only around 9 miles wide. With one push the Iraqi forces could have cut the country into two. War was initiated by the Arabs when they blocked Israel’s shipping lanes (act of war by international law). Jordan signed a defense pact with Egypt in May 1967. The Arabs had no justification for blocking off Israel’s shipping lanes. Israel was left with no choice but to preempt the Arab attack.
        And in 1967, how many settlements were there? Zero. Did Jordan have control of East Jerusalem? Yes. This means that the real intentions of the Arabs is to remove the Jewish state. The settlements of 2014 are not what is preventing peace. It is the attitude of the Arabs to a Jewish State anywhere in the Middle East. And this is the reality.

      • talknic
        January 20, 2014, 11:47 am

        @ giladg “Transjordan occupied Judea and Samaria after the ceasefire in 1948. Why did they not give it to the Palestinians then?”

        As Israel was trying to claim non-Israeli territory not belonging to any nearby state link to wp.me ( per Deuteronomy 20:15 link to google.com.au ) so that it did belong to a state the Palestinians ASKED Transjordan to annex the territory under the military protection of Transjordan. I gave a link to the JCPA. Don’t you trust the JCPA? Amazing!!

        ” I know why”

        You know bullsh*t especially written for people who don’t check and for morons to propagate.

        “International law says that if a country declares war on another without a war being justified, and then loses the war, land lost during that war can legally revert to the country that was attacked”

        Uh huh. Quote the law …thx Meanwhile Schwebel/Lauterpacht/Herzog tell us that a state may “restore” its sovereignty. Restoring sovereignty is not “acquiring” territory by war. link to wp.me

        Israel only has sovereignty over what it proclaimed and what was Internationally recognized (I gave a link to the ISRAELI GOVERNMENT plea for recognition) You fail!

        BTW Who declared war on Israel? I gave you the link to the ISRAELI GOVERNMENT STATEMENT that the Arab states invaded “Palestine” and I gave the link to International convention of the Rights and Duties of States, 1933. You fail again!

        As expected you didn’t even bother to read or learn anything from what you were shown. Other folk will!

        Keep up the good work!

      • giladg
        January 21, 2014, 5:17 am

        talknic, linking to your own blog is a nice trick but does not give credibility to anything. You will continue to believe your own narrative and little will change this.
        Now if you supplied links on your own blog to credible pro-Israeli sites and articles, then you may start to gain some, you propaganda machine you. Sorry to break the news to you talknic, but you are no historian so stop trying to pretend being one. This person in the Israeli government said this and this person said that does not represent the definitive position of Israel at the time. Context is what is missing and often the Palestinians do not shine that well, when this happens.

      • talknic
        January 22, 2014, 1:46 am

        giladg ” if you supplied links on your own blog to credible pro-Israeli sites and articles”

        The links supplied are to official Israeli Government statements, you silly silly person.

        “This person in the Israeli government said this and this person said that does not represent the definitive position of Israel at the time. “

        Official statements by the Israeli Government representative to the UN/UNSC do represent the definitive position of Israel at the time. Unless, of course they were lying!

      • just
        January 22, 2014, 5:41 am

        Are you seriously so dumb?

      • talknic
        January 22, 2014, 5:57 am

        @ just “Are you seriously so dumb?”

        Of course giladg isn’t stupid, it’s part of the program. In an attempt to shift the blame serial and domestic abusers use the same trick. Continuously and frustratingly annoy, hoping to eventually elicit an explosive response so they can then say ‘look, s/he’s hysterical’

    • aiman
      January 19, 2014, 4:12 pm

      Yes giladg, “Arab oil money” fuels the conscience of the world in their machinations against poor Israel. Yeah this is the same Israel which is conjoined with that other misunderstood illustrious country of Saudi Arabia whose oil-starved, zombie takfiri-raising royalty are actually emaciated owing to their great labours for man.

    • Helena Cobban
      January 19, 2014, 4:19 pm

      .. and it was called Canaan ways before “Judaea & Samaria”… and a bunch of other names before and since then, too. And all those peoples had their own stories about the land… Your point, again?

      • giladg
        January 20, 2014, 2:06 am

        Helena, why don’t you do a little research on the Twelve Tribes of Israel?

      • Djinn
        January 20, 2014, 5:52 am

        Why should anyone research a bunch of hoary old religious myths?

      • giladg
        January 20, 2014, 9:57 am

        Does this apply to Islam as well and Islamic claims, like Mohammad ascending to heaven on winged horses?

      • talknic
        January 20, 2014, 11:52 am

        @ giladg “Does this apply to Islam as well and Islamic claims, like Mohammad ascending to heaven on winged horses?”

        The Palestinians claim their rightful territory under the International Law and the UN Charter that Israel obliged itself to uphold. They don’t claim it under any religious belief.

      • Djinn
        January 22, 2014, 3:21 am

        giladg says:
        January 20, 2014 at 9:57 am
        Does this apply to Islam as well and Islamic claims, like Mohammad ascending to heaven on winged horses?

        Of course it does, it also applies to Christian, Hindu, Buddhist and Zoroastrian fairy tales.

        No-one has ever claimed Palestinians have a right to their own land because of anything said in the Quran. Try again numpty.

      • amigo
        January 20, 2014, 6:09 am

        Gulag, you are the one who needs to do some research.

        “Knowing as I did the unsatisfactory nature of the 1967 line, I wasn’t prepared to use wording in the Resolution that would have made that line permanent. Nonetheless, it is necessary to say again that the overwhelming principle was the ‘inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war’ and that meant that there could be no justification for the annexation of territory on the Arab side of the 1967 line merely because it had been conquered in the 1967 war.”Lord Caradon

        The land is not disputed.It is occupied as ruled by the Israeli High Court of Justice.

        See Beit Zourik v Israel case number 2056/04.

        “The West Bank is Held Under Belligerent Occupation ” BY ISRAEL.

        Take your twelve tribes of Israel and put them in a paper shredder.They are just figments of an overly active mind.

    • Justpassingby
      January 19, 2014, 5:29 pm

      giladg

      Lol@ world is ruled by arabs, classic racism by pro-israel giladg.

    • talknic
      January 19, 2014, 8:05 pm

      giladg “This makes this area part of the historic homeland of the Jewish people and not some invaded land.”

      So complain the Zionist Federation you idiotic propagandising fool. Since Israel was declared, way short of the Historic homeland, it has been illegal for Israelis to illegally settle in non-Israeli territory Israel has under occupation.

      Had the Zionist Federation not insisted on a separate Jewish state, we’d have been allowed to live anywhere in Palestine per Article 7 of the LoN Mandate. It’s been moronic blithering twits like yourself who have missed the numerous opportunities to be allowed to live in the historic homeland

      ” International law has yet to show impartiality when it comes to Jews and Israel, especially when Arab oil money pull so many strings”

      Strange. Israel has had more OPPORTUNITIES via UNSC resolutions reminding it to adhere to the Law, than any other state on the planet. Only a braindead f&*^wit passes up get out of jail opportunities in favour of more stupid criminal activities.

    • Djinn
      January 19, 2014, 10:09 pm

      WTF makes you think this “historic homeland” sky god nonsense has any relevance?

      Presumably you are aware that Jews were not the first or last people to settle in the area, so what apart from your inherent supremacism makes you think that ONLY the Jewish “historic homeland” should be honored?

    • Tobias
      January 19, 2014, 10:19 pm

      Gulag, I bet these jealous gits don’t know that SodaStream and Ahava are mentioned in the bible, seven hundred and two times. Each.

    • Kathleen
      January 20, 2014, 7:19 am

      There is no other group of people on the planet laying claim to land that their alleged people lived on 2 thousand years ago. And then add the absurdity of also laying a claim based on a book by some Jewish guys.

      • jon s
        January 22, 2014, 4:44 am

        Kathleen, Israel’s legitimacy is not based (solely) on our people’s having lived here two thousand years ago, but on the continuos presence and ties to the land which was always considered the Jewish historic homeland. It’s not as if the Jews were here two thousand years ago, disappeared and forgot about it, and then suddenly recalled it. Aside from that, even if you disregard the history, there are at present 7 million Israelis with legitimate rights.

      • Shmuel
        January 22, 2014, 4:42 pm

        jon,

        So we’ve got some sort of ancient sovereignty by people we identify as our forebears (literal and/or spiritual), the non-sovereign presence of a tiny number of our co-religionists over the ages, and an overwhelmingly religious connection never strong enough in the real world (until the advent of secular nationalism and the Holocaust) to create anything remotely resembling “national self-determination” (to use the appropriate anachronism).

        It may work with true believers, but it is hardly a convincing argument – with or without the addition of “constant presence” and “ties”.

        there are at present 7 million Israelis with legitimate rights

        Now you’re making some sense.

      • jon s
        January 23, 2014, 3:07 pm

        Shmuel,

        I know we’ve been over this territory before, and we pretty much know where we differ: I think that the historic and religious connection, and –yes- the continuous presence , all that historic baggage – counts for something in the real world here-and- now. You, apparently, don’t. Disregarding – or ignorance of – that connection is what brings some of the commenters on this forum to refer to “Zionist invaders”. I’ve tried to make the point that we’re not invaders or aliens or colonialists , that we’re quite at home here.
        If you want to focus only on the rights of present-day Israelis (and Palestinians) , that’s ok with me. There’s a certain advantage to saying “let’s forget about who was here first, and for how long, and who did what to whom a hundred or seventy or fourty years ago, we’ll never reach agreement anyway, let’s just try to solve today’s problems”. But you’re bound to run into an argument that without the historic connection we really are “invaders” , and invaders don’t have legitimate rights.

      • Shmuel
        January 23, 2014, 6:10 pm

        jon,

        My argument wasn’t that we should just forget the history, but that this particular historical argument doesn’t “translate” well into reasonable recognised universal rights (even assuming agreement on facts).

        But you’re bound to run into an argument that without the historic connection we really are “invaders” , and invaders don’t have legitimate rights.

        This is kind of circular logic – the “historical connection” must count for something, because without it we would be “invaders”. The fact is that by any reasonable (“translatable”) standard, we are invaders. The good news is that even invaders, and especially their descendants and members of the societies they have built do have rights. Omar Barghouti called them “the acquired and internationally recognized rights of Israeli Jews to coexist—as equals, not colonial masters—in the land of Palestine.”

      • RoHa
        January 23, 2014, 9:30 pm

        @ jon s (And what is wrong with the “reply” buttons?)

        Jews born in Palestine are not invaders. Jews born in the bit of Palestine that is now Israel are not invaders of that bit. They are natives, and have the residence rights of natives.

        But the Jews who flooded in from Europe and the Americas were not natives, and their intention – setting up a Jewish State – made them not just immigrants, but invaders.

        The Historic connection is a story that the invaders told themselves. Some – perhaps most – of their distant ancestors lived in that territory. But their more recent ancestors lived in Europe and America. Their more distant ancestors lived in Africa. Why choose to claim rights, connection, etc., on the basis of the distant rather than on the more recent or more distant?

        Perhaps that claim comes from the idea that their religion originated in that territory at the time of the distant ancestors. But why choose to claim rights,etc., on the basis of the origin of the religion? Again, it is just an arbitrary choice, just a story.

        Of course the story has strong emotional importance for Jews and that makes them feel a connection with the territory, but we cannot base rights on feelings. I have watched so many old films that I feel such a strong connection to New York (and especially 42nd Street) that I almost think of it as “home”, and yet it would be absurd to say that my feelings gave me any rights there.

        (Of course, Christians feel a very strong emotional/religious connection to the territory as well.)

        As for continuous presence, well, there has been a continuous presence of Palestinian Jews, but not a continuous presence of European Jews. (They wouldn’t have been European if they had been continuously present in Palestine.)

        There has also been a continuous presence of southpaws in the territory. It would be absurd to conclude that being left-handed gives all the world’s southpaws rights in the territory.

        So how do European Jews get rights in the territory from being Jewish?

      • eljay
        January 23, 2014, 6:23 pm

        >> Israel’s legitimacy is not based (solely) on our people’s having lived here two thousand years ago

        That’s not a basis for legitimacy for a supremacist “Jewish State”.

        >> … but on the continuos presence and ties to the land which was always considered the Jewish historic homeland.

        That is a basis for self-determination with all other members of the indigenous population of that geographic region. It’s not a basis for ethnically-cleansing the non-Jewish indigenous population from their homes and lands and setting up a supremacist “Jewish State” for the indigenous Jews in that region as well as Jews everywhere else in the world.

        For a guy who claims not to be a Zio-supremacist, you sure know how to advocate like one.

    • Talkback
      January 20, 2014, 9:16 am

      International law has yet to show impartiality when it comes to Jews and Israel …

      To the contrary. You have yet to show impartiality when it comes to international law and can differentiate between Jews and Israel. It is very clear that the Jews in PALESTINE (not the Jews as such) declared statehood in the borders recommended by the partition plan. Now you can dream about a Jewish, a German or any others people blood and soil “connection” as much as you want, but the STATE of Israel INVADED the Westbank and keeps it under belligerent occupation.

      Jordan had no right to do anything in the area.

      Of course it did on behalf of those Palestinians your antigentile Junta couldn’t expell and dispossess.

      In your mind talknic, 19 years is far more significant than the 3.500 year Jewish connection to the same places.

      In your mind a “3.500 year Jewish connection to the same place” is far more significant than being actually a habitual resident of or citizen in the same place. You think that Jews all over the world have more rights to live in historic Palestine than Palestinians themselves.

      The UN resolutions call for a settlement of “the” territories and as the territories have never, ever been controlled by the Palestinians, yes this is a fact, there is no previous owner to whom they need to be returned to. That is why the area is called contested territories.

      LOL. You and your occupying Junta calls them “contested”, nobody else. To claim that Palestine had “no previous owner”, allthough a mandatory administered the owner’s possession is quite stupid and reveals a mindset ideologically stuck in colonial times and law.

      Israel has a right to contest for the land …

      Yeah, the Palestinians have the right to contest all of Israel, too. And their case is better, because the majority of citizens of Palestine rejected partition. Israel is just a Jewish Junta who took Palestine by war and expulsion and without ANY legal external or internal legitimation.

      • giladg
        January 21, 2014, 5:32 am

        There was never a Palestine rules by Arab Palestinians. Do you want to bring back the Ottoman’s? Let me repeat, the West Bank was never controlled by the Palestinians, ever.

      • Djinn
        January 22, 2014, 3:23 am

        And prior to 1948 the land was never controlled by Israel. What’s your point exactly?

      • Talkback
        January 23, 2014, 3:48 pm

        There was never a Palestine rules by Arab Palestinians.

        True. First becaused it was ruled on behalf of Zionists and then because it was taken over by a Zionist Junta by war which expelled the Arab majority to maintain an Apartheid regime dominated by a minority of Jews – half of them not even citizens of Palestine. Taken the Zionist scum factor out of the equation, Palestine would be ruled by an Arab majority.

  4. Obsidian
    January 19, 2014, 3:40 pm

    Why not paint a swastika on her forehead?
    That would put Mondoweiss in good company with the Manson Family.

    • talknic
      January 19, 2014, 5:05 pm

      @ Obsidian “Why not paint a swastika on her forehead?”

      Not everyone thinks like a moronic apologist for illegal Israeli expansionism.

      BTW The UN codified laws and adopted a charter based in large part on what befell our Jewish fellows under the Nazis. It’s rather ironic that Israel is in breach of the law and UN Charter, while Germany grants RoR for German Jews and their lineal families.

    • Justpassingby
      January 19, 2014, 5:27 pm

      Obsidian

      Apartheid and nazism is related.
      Its not Mondoweiss but you that defend the apartheid regime.

      Poor fellow.

    • Ron Edwards
      January 19, 2014, 6:05 pm

      Wait, Obs … let’s see – you suggest an action which was not taken by Mondoweiss, then insult MW on the basis of that action. Are you sure you’re Obsidian? Your posts have been way, way lame lately; they used to be subtle. This makes zero sense right out of the gate. Are you posting while drunk?

    • Talkback
      January 20, 2014, 9:20 am

      Why not paint a swastika on her forehead?

      An Israeli flag on her forehead would send the same message.

  5. Sbercovitz
    January 19, 2014, 3:40 pm

    Annie,

    Thank you for bringing this discussion back to the main points. Much appreciated.

    Stanley in Portland

  6. mcohen
    January 19, 2014, 3:42 pm

    Annie says

    “She could walk away”

    Keep up the good work,annie,people are starting to sit up and take notice

    link to blogs.timesofisrael.com

  7. Helena Cobban
    January 19, 2014, 4:20 pm

    Can we make jokes about this Scarlett woman being a bubblehead?

  8. chinese box
    January 19, 2014, 5:14 pm

    “Not everyone is going to go over the edge with you Annie. Jews have a right to live and work in the Judea and Samaria, the place you call the West Bank.”

    I personally find it refreshing that giladg is willing to come out of the closet as a full-fledged zionist, unlike another prolific poster on this site who claims to be “left of center” and “anti-occupation” while he’s clearly just here to do hasbara.

  9. seafoid
    January 19, 2014, 5:51 pm

    link to haaretz.com

    “Justin Timberlake will make his Israeli debut in Tel Aviv’s Park Hayarkon on May 28, though you may have to take a second mortgage on your apartment to see him.

    The cheapest seats for the concert will go for NIS 370 ($106), rising to NIS 1,450 ($415) for “Golden Ring” seats snug with the stage.

    Details of the concert were announced Sunday by public relations maestro Rani Rahav during a flashy press conference.

    Timberlake’s will be in Israel for only two days during his multi-nation 20/20 Experience World Tour. Producer Udi Applebaum said the 90-minute concert would be of a standard to match all his other concerts during the tour.

    It is not known what else Timberlake will do while in Israel.

    Tickets for the show go on sale this coming Wednesday morning, though members of Timberlake’s fan club, Tennessee Kids, and MasterCard holders can get an early start from Monday. Dial *8780 within Israel or purchase tickets online.”

    Cause I don’t wanna lose you now
    I’m lookin’ right at the financial half of me
    The vacancy that sat in my heart
    Is a space that I share with the bots
    Show me how to spin for now
    And I’ll tell you baby, it was easy
    Comin’ back into Israel once I figured it out
    You were right here all along
    It’s like you’re my money
    My money staring back at me
    I couldn’t get any bigger
    With anyone else beside of me

  10. Kathleen
    January 19, 2014, 5:57 pm

    Annie that is so great that you contacted her publicist? Did the deal $ she was offered blind her or is she a right wing Zionist? Or both? She is going to be stuck with the apartheid label for some time

    Check this one out
    link to boilingfrogspost.com

  11. radico
    January 19, 2014, 9:04 pm

    How someone can be so devoid of a moral conscience as to take money from a company that operates on land stolen by indigenous Palestinians? Scarlett has stooped to a new low. One has to wonder if there’s any limit to what Scarlet would do for money.

    I emailed Oxfam a week ago to ask why they are keeping Scarlett as an Oxfam Ambassador, given that she supports Israeli apartheid. They have yet to respond. Maybe we should just assume that Oxfam International, like Scarlett, is totally fine with apartheid.

  12. unverified__5ilf90kd
    January 19, 2014, 11:43 pm

    I and my extended family will not buy a ticket to any Johansson movie in the future. Vote with your money. She has made a silly decision to work for SodaStream. BDS is really having an effect. Lets extend BDS to those people in the media who are apologists for Israeli crimes.

    • Kathleen
      January 20, 2014, 11:50 am

      a deplorable decision. Going to come back to bite her. Will also not spend any money on any of her films. Another great place to protest any theater showing her films

  13. Nevada Ned
    January 20, 2014, 12:38 am

    Because her last name is Johansson, probably not everybody at Mondoweiss realizes that Scarlett is Jewish. Her father is Danish, her mother an American Jew. Scarlett’s parents divorced when was a child, and she was raised by her mother. So Scarlett may been susceptible to appeals to Jewish groupthink, in addition to being motivated by money to be the public spokesperson for Sodastream.

  14. yrn
    January 20, 2014, 4:37 am

    That’s coming from Norway, the most pro Palestinian country in Europe.
    Looks like it took time, but Now they understood the picture.

    Unlike calls echoed in recent years in Norway – among others from local artists – to boycott Israel, Norwegian Minister of Culture T’orenhild says :
    “We Don’t see the boycott Effective to promote positive change. The Norwegian government wants closer cultural relations between Norway and Israel. I am convinced that a deeper mutual understanding is a prerequisite for achieving progress on political issues. “

    • Djinn
      January 20, 2014, 5:19 am

      So what? Governments are generally more beholden to Israel than the people they allegedly represent. What exactly was your point?

      I could post a bunch designed by Australian folk on my twitter feed despite Julie Bishop’s craven pandering to the settlement movement.

      • yrn
        January 20, 2014, 9:09 am

        Djinn

        As an Australian, it shows how ignorant you are regarding Europe.
        When a Government changes it’s policy’s regarding another state, everything changes.
        Culture, trade, tourism, media all the attitude in the public changes.
        Get some knowledge and then jump in regarding your twitter groopies.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 20, 2014, 11:33 am

        When a Government changes ….all the attitude in the public changes.

        uh huh. ;)

      • Djinn
        January 22, 2014, 3:28 am

        Sorry to disappoint you but I hold a UK passport, ie one that allows travel and work all over Europe, something I do regularly. Oh and then there’s the years I worked for the EP. Pretty confident in asserting I know Europe and the working of government much better than you.

        Are you honestly suggesting that just because a government makes a decision that suddenly the entire populace changes their mind? Yeah we definitely saw that happen when various governments supported the Iraq war. Those unprecedented anti-war protests were obviously just millions of people spontaneously taking a simultaneous stroll.

        You’re hilarious, here have a lolly.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      January 20, 2014, 9:27 am

      I hardly think the country that gave us the horrible Oslo Accords is ”the most pro Palestinian country in Europe”, whatever that means.

  15. Kathleen
    January 20, 2014, 7:52 am

    When I was searching to find out whether Scarlett was indeed still an Oxfam Rep. Yes she is still an ambassador. But found this… Check this out.

    Folks might like to leave a few comments in the New Yorker’s blog about apartheid Scarlett and her SodaStream ads

    January 16, 2014
    The Politics of Celebrity Ambassadors
    link to newyorker.com

  16. Kathleen
    January 20, 2014, 8:35 am

    Annie contacted a few national groups about Scarlett’s new Ambassador for Apartheid position. Hoping they will put some more attention on her decision to represent occupation of Palestinian lands and products of apartheid

  17. Kathleen
    January 20, 2014, 8:42 am

    January 16, 2014
    The Politics of Celebrity Ambassadors
    Posted by Emily Greenhouse

    link to newyorker.com

    My comment on thread.
    “Why is Scarlett Johansson supporting a product made in an illegal Israeli settlement in illegally occupied West Bank? Scarlett supporting apartheid. Immoral. Ambassador of apartheid. Deplorable”

    Hope others will also put comments up

  18. hophmi
    January 20, 2014, 1:43 pm

    Wouldn’t bet on getting a response, since nobody outside the BDS cult cares.

  19. Kathleen
    January 21, 2014, 1:24 pm

    Both Codepink and End the Occupation came out today with actions targeting Scarlett the New Ambassador of Occupation and Apartheid. End the Occupation is also focused Scarlett being an Ambassador at Oxfam asking folks to contact Oxfam.

    link to codepink.salsalabs.com

    Urge Oxfam Global Ambassador to End Support for SodaStream

    Dear Kathleen,

    On January 10, 2014, occupation profiteer SodaStream announced that Hollywood actress Scarlett Johansson had become their first-ever Global Brand Ambassador. Her first act in her role will be starring in SodaStream’s Super Bowl ad, which will be aired during the game’s fourth quarter on February 2.

    Scarlett happens to be an Oxfam Global Ambassador, a role that includes a responsibility to “push forward the fight against poverty and injustice.”

    Sign our petition to Scarlett: Don’t Be the Face of Occupation!

  20. Ellen
    January 21, 2014, 4:06 pm

    An intelligent editorial in the New York Post (cough cough)

    Scarlett Johansson, it turns out, is much more than a pretty face. Her casual dismissal of the BDS crowd is downright sexy.

    link to nypost.com

    • Kathleen
      January 21, 2014, 5:28 pm

      “But consider: In the 1970s, many in Hollywood were rightly puzzled by Redgrave’s admiration for plane hijackers, some quietly wondering whether her outburst wasn’t informed by old-fashioned British anti-Semitism. Today, her take is gradually becoming mainstream in Tinseltown.”

      Redgrave never “admired hijackers”. Scarlett Johannsson will never even come within miles of Redgrave’s acting abilities or Redgrave’s intelligence and integrity.
      Hope folks keep contacting Oxfam asking why they would keep an individual who is actively supporting occupation of Palestinian lands? Both the UN and the ICJ have condemned the illegal settlements. Ask Oxfam why they would keep her on as an Ambassador?

      Listen to Redgrave. She turned my lights on then started reading Edward Said’s books and my lights were turned on for good.

      • just
        January 21, 2014, 5:56 pm

        It was, and is, a most amazing speech.

        Many blessings on Vanessa Redgrave– a truly brave and fearless artist and humanitarian.

        Professor Said is and was a giant.

  21. LanceThruster
    January 21, 2014, 4:52 pm

    I thought she was someone who was socially aware for the most part. I wonder if she’s PEP because of ignorance or apathy.

  22. hophmi
    January 22, 2014, 3:39 pm

    Just as in the real Scarlet Letter, the person who tattooed the A on there is the one who ought to be ashamed.

Leave a Reply