BDS movement lied about TIAA-CREF selling Sodastream

Earlier this month I reported how the BDS movement said that pension fund giant TIAA-CREF had sold their holdings in Israeli company Sodastream, and how the Israel-haters claimed this was a victory for their cause - even if they didn't know the reasons for the sale of the stock.

I noted that it was clear from TIAA-CREF's own statements that any Israeli stock they sell was not because of the BDS movement.

My mistake was that I assumed that the BDSers weren't lying about the sale to begin with!

I just received two PDF documents, showing TIAA-CREF's holdings in their CREF Stock Account and in the TIAA-CREF Growth and Income Fund as of June 30, 2013. They detail their holdings in these funds in full detail, and the documents were generated on July 23.

Why does anyone still give these guys any validity?

(h/t Adam Levick)

Read More

8/07 Links Part 2: BDS Fail at Delta, Vatican Slams Water's anti-Semitism, Soros Funds Conflict in Israel

From Ian:

---

Vatican op-ed slams anti-Semitism at pig-flying musician’s concert

“The spirit and the style of the Werchter Rock festival was visible, with the fans who had every right to listen to music that they enjoy,” Cristiana Dobner wrote in a weekend edition of Osservatore Romano, referring to the July 20 concert. “But did they also have the right to draw the Star of David on the back of a pig and not be reported? … We continue to talk about the respect for every religion and every human being, yet we keep falling into these shameful situations.”
The op-ed, headlined “Unrestrained anti-Semitism at a rock festival,” did not mention former Pink Floyd front man Waters, 69, by name. In his act he used a huge inflated balloon in the shape of a wild boar. A Star of David was prominently visible on it, as were other symbols, including a hammer and sickle, crosses and a dollar sign.

Carol Hunt: I'll ask this only once: What has Israel ever done to us?

You see, I've read all the histories, so I am aware that after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France divided up the Middle East – creating Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. I know that in 1921 80 per cent of what was called the "Palestinian Mandate" was made into (Trans) Jordan (where currently two million Palestinian refugees live yet only 167,000 are allowed citizenship or are eligible for education and healthcare).
I am aware that in 1948 the UN voted to halve the remaining 20 per cent; Israel was born and immediately invaded by five neighbouring Arab countries whose objective was – and still is – to annihilate it. In 1967, when tiny Israel was forced to pre-empt a massive Arab invasion, the West Bank was occupied by Jordan and the Gaza Strip by Egypt. I know that all current facts and statistics show that Palestinians are treated far better by Israel than other Arab nations –where they are subjected to apartheid discrimination. And I'm aware that if I am to be accepted in polite, liberal society I should keep my mouth shut and just agree – Israel bad, Arabs good.
But in all conscience I can't. I need to know why so many Irish politicians and groups are only "pro-Palestinian" "against Israel", as it were, and say, not Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan or the Arab League?

Embarrassment as Anti-Israel Claims Debunked

Last week, Electronic Intifada, a blog aligned with the BDS movement, announced its latest "victory," claiming that Delta Air Lines had decided to stop serving a snack produced in the Barkan Industrial Zone, due to its location in Samaria. Electronic Intifada claimed that the decision was made after a complaint was lodged by a member of the far-left "Coalition of Women for Peace," publishing what it said was the text of an email in which the airline said that it would be dropping the product. The blog's editor, Ali Abunima, claimed that "Delta Air Lines lawyers ruled that Israeli settlement-made snacks should not be served."
Veteran Israeli activist Avi Mayer, however, was unconvinced, and promptly discovered that claims of a boycott were completely false.

Watchdog Group: Soros Funding Conflict in Israel

OSF also funds Al Haq, an Arab organization based in the Palestinian Authority-controlled city of Ramallah, north of Jerusalem. NGO-Monitor’s researchers described Al-Haq director Shawan Jabarin as “a human rights campaigner by day and a terrorist by night,” who is among the senior members of the PFLP terrorist group.
The extreme-left Israeli group B’Tselem also receives OSF funds. B’Tselem is notorious for publishing one-sided reports, and for inflating Arab civilian casualty figures. For example, the group included hundreds of Hamas policemen in Gaza as “non-combatants,” and counted Sheikh Ahmed Yassin – then the leader of Hamas – as not a definite combatant.

Wal-Mart pushes SodaStream profit up

SodaStream International Ltd. says its second-quarter net income jumped 36%, boosted by strong demand fueled by its launch at Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
The company raised its revenue and profit outlook, pushing shares higher in morning trading.
SodaStream makes beverage carbonation systems that enable consumers to easily transform tap water into carbonated soft drinks and sparkling water.

CiF Watch prompts correction to Guardian publication claim about Israeli immigrants

Per our communication with The Observer’s Readers’ Editor, EPA Photo Agency researched the matter and promptly issued the following the correction:

Attention editors, on July 23rd, 2013 we moved a set of images showing immigrants arriving from New York to Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv. We have been made aware of that the part of our caption saying ‘… New immigrants predominately move to Israeli settlements in the West Bank,..’ is wrong and is not supported by figures of the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics that we have received.

BBC Weather doesn’t know in which country Jerusalem is located

If you happen to be looking for the weather forecast for Tel Aviv, you will naturally also be offered the option “Israel”.
But if your search was for Israel’s capital city, well…that city is not located in any country at all according to the BBC.

Arab MK Attends Post-Ramadan Dinner on Marmara

The Turkish IHH organization, which was responsible for the 2010 flotilla aimed at breaking the naval blockade on Gaza, recently hosted a delegation aboard the Mavi Marmara ship, including one elected Arab Israeli Member of Knesset.
The Mavi Marmara is currently docked in Istanbul, where it arrived in December of 2010 after the incident during the flotilla, in which IDF soldiers who were forced to board the ship when it refused orders to change course and head towards the Ashdod Port, were attacked by the IHH activists on board with clubs and knives. The soldiers had no choice but to open fire, leaving nine Turks dead.

Over 50% of Palestinians back peace talks, survey finds

More than half of Palestinians support the resumption of peace talks with Israel, according to a public opinion poll published Tuesday.
The poll – conducted by Alpha International, an organization that aims to help decision-makers take “effective” decisions – also found that jailed Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti would win in a presidential election if Mahmoud Abbas does not run for another term.

SWC to Greek President: Politician’s Swastika Tattoo is Grounds for Banning the Symbol Nationally

Jewish human rights group the Simon Wiesenthal Center on Tuesday called on Greek President Karolos Papoulias to ban the public use of the Swastika after photos surfaced of a high-profile Greek politician sporting a tattoo of the offensive symbol on his shoulder.
The front page of the August 4th edition of Greek’s largest newspaper, Poto Thema, featured the photo, obtained from the Greek Helsinki Monitor, of Golden Dawn Party Member of Parliament and Spokesman, Elias Kasidiàris, on his beach vacation last week.

VIDEO: Muslim IDF Soldier Keeps Watch Over Gaza Border

Watch our exclusive interview with Staff Sergeant Ahmed Inaim, a Bedouin soldier who guards Israel's Gaza border. Staff Sgt. Inaim's brother, who also served as an IDF soldier, was killed in combat several years ago. In 2006, Hamas terrorists injured another one of his brothers when they attacked Israel and kidnapped Gilad Shalit.
Despite his family's sacrifices, Staff Sgt. Inaim remains determined to serve his country. Last week, he spoke with us as he patrolled the Gaza border.

The Guardian wants your refugee story.

Do you have a compelling story to tell about the Jews who fled Arab or Muslim countries as refugees in the years following WWII? If so, The Guardian wants your story. Yes, I kid you not - The Guardian. Why? Because it does not feel it gave a fair shout to some refugees in its timeline by Mona Chalabi published recently (expertly ‘fisked’ by CiF Watch here). That timeline omitted 800,000 Jewish refugees from Arab countries altogether. This is your chance to help set the record straight. But hurry – the deadline is in less than two weeks. Register as a commenter and write-up your story in no more than 250 words.

Treblinka Uprising 70th Anniversary Ceremony Features Last Living Survivor Samuel Willenberg

The site of the Treblinka concentration camp, in Poland, played host to a ceremony this past Friday commemorating 70 years since the Jewish prisoner revolt at the camp that became known as the “Treblinka uprising.”
The ceremony featured Samuel Willenberg, the last living survivor of the uprising, and Israel’s Deputy Minister of Education MK Avi Wortzman.

Yehuda Lev, who smuggled Holocaust survivors to Palestine, dies

Yehuda Lev, an iconoclastic journalist and veteran of World War II and Israel’s War of Independence who established a European underground route to smuggle Holocaust survivors to Palestine, has died.
Lev died Aug. 3 in Providence, Rhode Island, after a prolonged illness. He was 86.

Coke, Yoplait monitor water with Israel’s Blue I products

Israel’s Blue I (pronounced blue eye) had already defined the space for online water-quality monitoring in the early 2000s, before most people heard of smartphones.
Now the company, officially founded in 2003, boasts tens of thousands of its “smart” water systems in factories and municipalities around the world. Blue I smart boxes, based on electro-optics, are about to be installed in several American cities, and are found in about 150 locations throughout Barcelona.
Clients include Yoplait yogurt in France; BASF, the largest chemical company in the world; and 25 Coca-Cola bottling plants — including in India and Israel. Israel’s national water company Mekorot is another Blue I client, as is Israel’s Oil Refineries.

Stand With Us: Israel - Small Country, Big Ideas

Read More

#BDSFail-ures admit they will claim victory even if it isn't true

I had missed this story two weeks ago at the BDSMovement site:

Victory! US pension fund giant TIAA-CREF drops SodaStream stock

Pension fund giant TIAA-CREF has removed the increasingly controversial Israeli company SodaStream (NASD: SODA) from its portfolio. As of March 2013, financial data posted on TIAA-CREF’s website valued shares in SodaStream at $9,444,292. According to financial data available today, it is zero.

But did TIAA-CREF say they sold the stock because they intend to divest? Of course not. There could be many reasons for them to sell.

Even the BDSers are tacitly admitting that they will claim victory no matter the reality:

“No matter the reason TIAA-CREF dropped SodaStream, we view this as a conscientious decision.” said Sydney Levy of the We Divest Campaign.

Hater Anna Baltzer says something similar:

Well, we cannot be sure of the reasons why TIAA-CREF divested from SodaStream. We do know that SodaStream has performed very well over the last 12 months, market-wise; well above average. And yet TIAA-CREF decided to divest.

Regardless of TIAA-CREF’s reasons, I think what we’re seeing is that it is increasingly unacceptable to associate in any way, to invest in, to sell products that are produced in illegal Israeli settlements. And we’re seeing this as part of that trend.

Perhaps the age old financial advice of "buy low, sell high" is too difficult for BDSers to fathom.

It is nice to see that even the BDSers admit that they are more than willing to lie and declare victory when the evidence is lacking.

One thing that is very certain is that the sale of SodaStream stock was not because they are divesting from Israel. As noted recently in a linkdump:

For the fourth year in a row, the TIAA-CREF Board refused to put divestment from Israel to a vote at its annual share holders’ meeting. TIAA-CREF, the leading provider of retirement services in the academic, research, medical, and cultural fields and a Fortune 100 financial services organization was supported by a recent ruling of the Securities and Exchange Commission in choosing not to plunge its four million investors into the controversial geopolitical issue of sovereignty of disputed areas in the West Bank/ Judea Samaria.

(h/t Lianne)

Read More

CBS bans SodaStream ad from Super Bowl. Will BDS claim credit?

From Forbes:

CBS banned SodaStream’s Super Bowl spot because, apparently, it was too much of a direct hit to two of its biggest sponsors, Coke and Pepsi.

Please pause and read that sentence again.

I am shocked that CBS would ban a spot for being too competitive. But I’m even more shocked that the advertising world isn’t up in arms about it.

SodaStream has a product that could be wildly disruptive to the soda industry, if successful. As in, the “automobile” to the soda industry’s “buggy whip.” If SodaStream takes off, Coke and Pepsi would have a lot to worry about, for sure. But isn’t that what progress is all about?

CBS is protecting its relationship with Coke and Pepsi. Those two brands spend big bucks on the Super Bowl and on the network, in general. I get it. But all CBS would have to do, if Coke and Pepsi put the pressure on, is say, “Hey, we’re just the unbiased middle man here. It’s not up to us what competitors of yours say about you.” There’s no need for the medium to have a say in the message.

Competitive battles should be fought in the marketplace.

If the SodaStream product is a better “soda idea” than Coke and Pepsi, then shouldn’t it be given a fair shot within any medium it decides to risk its dollars? If it’s not a better idea, the market will decide its fate, not CBS. But even beyond that obvious argument, it’s in CBS’s, and all media’s, interest to encourage unbridled competition. The more threatened a Coke and Pepsi feel, in this case, the more likely they are to launch new campaigns specifically targeting the threat. And that’s more money pouring into the media, not less. But Coke and Pepsi won’t do that now (or are less likely to), because CBS intervened, took the pressure off, and effectively sided with Coke and Pepsi.

Advertising Age adds:

So what's the issue? The content of its planned commercial seemed to have concerned CBS because it was a direct hit at two other Super Bowl sponsors and heavy network TV advertisers: Coke and Pepsi.

SodaStream, which sells home soda-making machines, has already run afoul of authorities in the U.K. for a Bogusky-crafted spot indicating its product is more environmentally friendly than established sodas; the spot shows branded bottles and cans of soft drinks exploding into thin air. For the Super Bowl, it hoped to up the ante with a spot depicting truck drivers clad in clothing with Coca-Cola and Pepsi marks on them, according to Ilan Nacasch, SodaStream's chief marketing officer.

"We really tried to comply with the standards" set by CBS, he said. At the same time, he added, "We were taking it to a new level, and that's the level where they apparently judged to be going too far."

Interestingly enough, Pepsi has scored big points with viewers over the years by showing Super Bowl ads with Coke deliverymen abandoning their employer wholesale for a sip of a Pepsi drink.

Here's the ad, which has already gained over 2 million views since yesterday:



The BDS movement has been freaking out about the ad since it was announced, to no avail. (SodaStream is Israeli.) I'm sure they will attempt to claim credit here. The controversy will probably help SodaStream in the end, though, with more people watching the ad on YouTube than would have on CBS.

However, it seems likely that the earlier British Sodastream ad, that had been banned in the UK for even dumber reasons, is being retooled for the Super Bowl without mentioning the big guys:



If you really want to make the Israel-haters' heads explode like the plastic bottles in these ads, read this:

SodaStream International Ltd. (SODA) is poised for its biggest gain in seven months as the Israeli maker of home soda machines seeks to expand sales in the U.S. by airing its first Super Bowl commercial.

Shares have posted a 13 percent gain this month after dropping 0.3 percent to $50.53 in New York yesterday.

...SodaStream will probably say on Feb. 28 that sales rose 37 percent last year to $425 million, according to the mean estimate of eight analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. The company last year expanded into U.S. retail outlets including Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) The U.S. represents more than 90 percent of SodaStream’s Americas sales, which also include Canada and Brazil, Lloyd said.

There's one other aspect of this I enjoy: watching pseudo-liberals fight against a company that helps the environment and instead side with big soda makers. All because it was created by smart Jewish Israelis.

(h/t D)

Read More

UK pulls Sodastream ad - because of Pepsi or BDS?

From Globes:

SodaStream International Ltd. (Nasdaq: SODA) insists that the ban of its new global advertising campaign in the UK is absurd, and censors the company for trying to save the environment.

Clearcast, the organization that pre-approves UK television advertising and is jointly funded by the UK's major broadcasters, notified SodaStream that the ad campaign would not be allowed to air in the UK. The decision was made just before the commercial's premier in the UK on November 22. Although the ad is already aired in the US, Sweden and Australia, Clearcast deemed it inappropriate for UK audiences.

The ad shows different scenes of soda bottles disappearing instantaneously as people use the SodaStream soda maker, delivering a powerful message about waste and sustainability. The spot closes with commentary of 'with SodaStream you can save 1000 bottles per year.'

Clearcast said, "The majority decided that the ad could be seen to tell people not to go to supermarkets and buy soft drinks, instead help to save the environment by buying a SodaStream. We thought it was denigration of the bottled drinks market."

"This decision is absurd, and the explanation given is totally unreasonable," said SodaStream CEO Daniel Birnbaum. "Are we really being censored for helping to save the environment? This might be the first time in the world when an environmental approach has been shut down by the media to protect a traditional industry. Of course we're competing with bottled beverages, but why is offering a game-changing approach denigrating? It is like saying that iPod ads denigrate the Walkman or that car ads denigrated the horse and buggy. Clearcast's decision is disappointing and disturbing for any democratic society."

The reasons given are nothing short of ridiculous. Would Clearcast say that ads for electric cars denigrate gas guzzlers?

But I'm sure that some BDS idiots will regard this as a victory since Sodastream is an Israeli company they constantly call to boycott, with manufacturing in a Jerusalem suburb that Arabs claim is theirs.

The joke is on them, because the publicity is worth more than the ad itself.

The timing for SodaStream could hardly be better. The Israeli company has dramatically improved distribution over the past year with a series of high profile retail partnerships. The holidays are upon us, and the company is promoting a new, easier to use carbonator – the SodaStream Source. While the SodaStream ad campaign is not running in the UK, an appeal could put it back on the air next week, and it’s already running globally. Media attention over the clumsy UK move will only help SodaStream build awareness.

Of course it’s difficult to argue that a product whose entire existence is based on the premise that traditional soft drinks create unnecessary waste is not denigrating to the existing industry. But that’s hardly the kind of denigration that deserves censorship. And in any case, the unintended consequence of this ban will be to give little SodaStream another injection of PR adrenaline to power through the holidays.

Read More