Political and religous groups recently requested a boycott of two high-profile US companies, Starbucks (SBUX) and Coca Cola (KO), in predominately Muslim Malaysia. The boycott seeks to protest "US failure to prevent Israel's military actions" against Hezbollah in Gaza and southern Lebanon. Organizer Jamarulkhan Kadir is quoted in the Agence France-Presse news service story saying that a similar boycott three years ago protesting the US invasion of Iraq made a "dent' in sales. Last time I checked, the US is still in Iraq. In any case, Norman Fernandez writing to www.malaysiakini.com, urges Malaysians to strongly consider the national impact before participating in such a boycott. The US is Malaysia's largest trade partner and Fernandez sites that that trade relationship is valued at $44 billion a year (2005).
Michael Canfield is a private investor, a business and media writer, living in Seattle. He doesn't own stock in Starbucks.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-16-2006 @ 10:49PM
Bruce Silverman said...
Absolutely amazing how the US was supposed to prevent Israel's military RESPONSE to flagrantly aggressive (and ongoing) actions by an extremely well-armed and imbedded militant terrorist organization on the other side of its border. That Malaysians and many others continue to downplay that Israel is only acting in DEFENSE of itself is no surprise, but I really hope anyone reading or listening to such absolute drivel isn't swayed by their spin on things. If we had armed insurgents lobbing missiles at us with impunity from the other side of our borders with Mexico or Canada, and here or there either making raids into Vermont, Michigan, Texas or California, we'd damn well be sending in the Special Forces if the Mounties or Federalies didn't lift a finger to rein them in. And so what if the Brits supplied a Harrier or two? This is almost the same boat that Israel is in, except that maybe it would be more similar if these insurgents onto American soil from Mexico or Canada would also be so full of hate toward our very existence that they've sworn to the death to destroy us and don't mind blowing themselves up in the process. Oops, wait. That's already something our country faces. So why would we want to stop Israel from protecting itself from the same ACTIVELY ongoing threat?
8-17-2006 @ 12:44AM
Arkab Sykiua said...
Quit trying to "spin" your zionist agenda. You are so transparent...Starbucks sux.
8-17-2006 @ 5:09AM
Jon said...
There is no zionist agenda Israel was fully and completely justified in attacking Hezbollah (which is a state with in a state). Hezbollah is a terrorist organization that is embeded in the Lebanese civilian infrastructure. The Hezbollah organization is so cowardly it has to hide behind civilians, they won't fight oout in the open. Also what of this idea that Israel show disproportinate amount of force? Is not that the point of war? The point of war is to show overwhelming and greater force than the enemy.
8-17-2006 @ 6:07AM
Ryan said...
@ Arkab
By zionist do you mean acknowledging Israels right to continue existing?
8-18-2006 @ 11:32AM
steve said...
Bruce and Jon,
I think you two have deep misunderstandings of what the Malaysians generally thinks. We ARE NOT against Israel or the US. We DON'T care if the US is giving weapons to ISRAEL. What we DON'T like is the US's bias towards Israel and totally ignored Lebanon (note: not Hezbollah, but Lebanon - like the people, the children the women). Imagine this, some guy (assume Israel) who is in dispute with one of the asshole tenants (Hezbollah) in your aparment complex. He set your apartment on fire as away to get back to that asshole tenants. When you (Lebanon) call 911 to seek help, imagine the operator (UN & US) tells you that "they will try to solve the issue with utmost urgency". That it doesn't matter if you wife and kids are dying in the burning apartments. That they can't help you unless you can agree on eradicating the root cause of the issues, namely the arsonist, the asshole tenants, gang violence in you area (which is totally out of your control). They also want to make you agree on the blueprint of the new apartment before they will come to put out the fire at the exisiting one.
That's why the Malaysians are complaining. We care for the kids and the women. And you two are only talking about things in the high level and totally disregard loss of innocent lives. And please do not twist this as anti-israel, becuase I think israel has every bit of their right to exists and protect their citizens.
8-18-2006 @ 11:55AM
Sheldon said...
Steve,
Many of your points are fine. But one concept is twisted. Lebanon is the landlord, not Israel. Israel is the next-door neighbor. Your tenant has been throwing things from their window at the neighbors house, Israel, threatening their friends and relatives, killed some family members and so forth....Neighbor Israel pleads with you to do something and you do not or cannot; so neighbor Israel calls the police (UN, US, EURO) who also say they are helpless and/or unwilling to do anything and tell you that's your problem. Again you go to Lebanon the landlord for help and get nothing. In the mean time the threatening neighbor invites even more friends from another near by neighborhood to join in on the harassment of neighbor Israel. By now the tenant has raised the stakes and threatened the other tenants or at least put them in harms way. Neighbor Israel takes things into their own hands having no recourse and everyone suffers. The landlord, the tenants, and the neighbor.