Starbucks Military Audit

1. Executive Summary and Strategic Overview

1.1 Audit Objective

This forensic audit was commissioned to rigorously evaluate the extent of Starbucks Corporation’s involvement with the State of Israel, specifically focusing on allegations of military complicity, direct defense contracting, logistical sustainment of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), and supply chain integration. In the contemporary geopolitical landscape, the definition of “complicity” has expanded beyond direct arms sales to include dual-use technology investment, logistical support via third-party vendors, and ideological endorsement by corporate leadership. The objective of this report is to distinguish between meaningful complicity—defined as direct operational, financial, or logistical support that materially enhances military capabilities—and incidental association, which encompasses standard global corporate operations, passive investment overlaps, and third-party distribution networks.

1.2 Scope of Inquiry

The scope of this inquiry is exhaustive, spanning the period from the company’s initial entry into the Israeli market via the “Shalom Coffee Company” joint venture in 2001 through the volatile geopolitical climate of 2024-2025. The audit examines four critical vectors of potential complicity:

1. Direct Defense Contracting: Investigation into prime contracts with the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMoD) for catering, base sustainment, or logistics.
2. Supply Chain Integration: Analysis of the “Global Coffee Alliance” with Nestlé and the role of its Israeli subsidiary, Osem-Nestlé, in distributing Starbucks intellectual property (IP) and products within the Israeli market.
3. Leadership and Capital Allocation: Forensic review of former CEO Howard Schultz’s personal investments (e.g., Wiz), his receipt of the “Friend of Zion” award, and the separation between personal ideology and corporate treasury operations.
4. Technological Dual-Use: Assessment of Starbucks’ investment arm, Valor Siren Ventures, and its cybersecurity partners for overlaps with the Israeli military-industrial complex.

1.3 Top-Level Findings

The forensic analysis yields the following high-confidence determinations:

• Direct Defense Contracting: The audit found zero evidence of direct contractual relationships between Starbucks Corporation and the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMoD) or the IDF. There are no records of prime contracts for catering, base sustainment, or logistical support services.¹
• Operational Presence: Starbucks currently maintains no direct retail footprint in Israel. The “Shalom Coffee Company” joint venture was dissolved in 2003 due to operational challenges.⁴ Current availability of Starbucks-branded products in Israel is managed exclusively through a global licensing agreement with Nestlé, distributed locally by its subsidiary, Osem-Nestlé.⁶
• Supply Chain Leakage: A vector of indirect association exists through Osem-Nestlé. Osem has a documented corporate history of supporting IDF units, specifically the “adoption” of the Golani Brigade.⁸ While Starbucks does not control Osem’s corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives, it profits from the licensing fees generated by Osem’s distribution of Starbucks products.
• Leadership and Ideology: Former CEO Howard Schultz has a documented history of personal Zionist support, including the receipt of the “Israel 50th Anniversary Friend of Zion Tribute Award” in 1998.¹⁰ Furthermore, Schultz has made significant private investments in Israeli cybersecurity firms (e.g., Wiz).¹² The audit distinguishes these as private capital allocations distinct from Starbucks’ corporate treasury operations.
• Institutional Capital: Major shareholders Vanguard and BlackRock hold significant equity in both Starbucks and defense primes like Elbit Systems and Lockheed Martin.¹¹ This represents a structural feature of modern index fund capitalism rather than a strategic directive by Starbucks to align with defense interests.

1.4 Verdict Summary

The analysis categorizes Starbucks Corporation’s relationship with the Israeli military apparatus as Incidental Association driven by globalized supply chains and third-party licensing, rather than Meaningful Complicity. The company does not meet the criteria for direct defense sustainment or dual-use proliferation, although its brand is indirectly present in the Israeli economy through Nestlé’s distribution network.

2. Strategic Context and Audit Methodology

2.1 Defining Complicity in Asymmetric Logistics

To conduct a forensic audit of this nature, we must first establish the theoretical framework of “military complicity” within the context of global logistics and asymmetric warfare. In modern conflict, the “tooth-to-tail” ratio—the proportion of combat personnel to support personnel—relies heavily on civilian contractors. Therefore, a civilian corporation can be deemed complicit if it provides critical sustainment that allows the military apparatus to function more efficiently.

We utilize a three-tiered classification system for this audit:

• Tier 1: Direct Sustainment (Prime Contractor). The entity has a direct contract with the military to provide goods (rations, fuel, weapons) or services (catering, construction) on bases or in combat zones. Example: A company running dining facilities (DFACs) on IDF bases.
• Tier 2: Dual-Use & Strategic Partnership. The entity provides technology (cybersecurity, AI, drones) or strategic capital to the defense industrial base. Example: A venture capital arm investing in military-grade surveillance startups.
• Tier 3: Incidental & Third-Party Association. The entity’s products are available in the conflict zone via open markets or third-party distributors without direct corporate oversight or specialized military contracts. Example: A soldier buying a specific brand of coffee at a civilian supermarket.

2.2 The “Boycott” Landscape: Information Warfare

The audit operates within a highly contested information environment. The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement and organic consumer boycotts have targeted Starbucks. It is the auditor’s duty to separate reputational risk (driven by perception and viral narratives) from material complicity (driven by logistics and finance).

The narrative surrounding Starbucks often conflates the personal actions of its founder, Howard Schultz, with the operational reality of the corporation. This audit rigorously separates the “Principal” (Schultz) from the “Agent” (Starbucks Corp) to determine legal and logistical liability.

2.3 Methodology

The audit utilized a multi-spectral approach:

• Open Source Intelligence (OSINT): We analyzed over 100 distinct data points, including archived press releases, legal filings from the 2023 union dispute, and historical records of the 1998 Jerusalem Fund award.
• Financial Forensics: We reviewed SEC filings (10-K, Proxy Statements) to trace corporate donations and capital expenditures. We analyzed the ownership structures of subsidiaries and joint ventures.
• Supply Chain Mapping: We traced the flow of goods from Starbucks’ roasting facilities through the Global Coffee Alliance to Israeli shelves, identifying the role of intermediaries like Nestlé and Osem.
• Institutional Shareholder Analysis: We examined the holdings of Vanguard and BlackRock to assess the validity of “cross-pollination” theories regarding defense stocks.

3. Operational History: The Rise and Fall of the “Shalom Coffee Company”

3.1 The 2001 Market Entry

To understand the current “zero footprint” status of Starbucks in Israel, one must examine its failed entry in 2001. This period represents the only time Starbucks engaged in Tier 1 Direct Operations within the state, albeit as a civilian retailer.

In 2001, Starbucks Coffee International formed a joint venture with the Delek Group, one of Israel’s largest conglomerates.⁴ The entity was named the Shalom Coffee Company.

3.2 The Delek Group Connection: A Defense-Adjacent Partner

A critical forensic detail often overlooked is the nature of the local partner, the Delek Group. Delek is not merely a retail holding company; it is a strategic energy and infrastructure giant.

• Defense Relevance: Delek controls significant energy assets (gas fields, fuel stations) that are critical to Israeli national infrastructure and, by extension, the IDF’s logistical endurance.
• Complicity Implication (Historical): During the 2001-2003 period, Starbucks was a minority partner with a company deeply embedded in Israel’s strategic sector. Had the venture succeeded, Starbucks would have been generating revenue for a conglomerate that supplies fuel to the Israeli military.
• Severance of Ties: The dissolution of the partnership in 2003 severed this link. There is no evidence that Starbucks retained any equity in Delek or the Shalom Coffee Company after the closure.⁵ The exit was total.

3.3 Reasons for Withdrawal: Commercial vs. Political

Persistent rumors allege that Starbucks closed its Israel operations due to political pressure or, conversely, to support the government during the Second Intifada. The forensic evidence supports a commercial failure hypothesis ⁵:

1. Market Mismatch: Israeli coffee culture favors strong espresso and a “sit-down” social experience. Starbucks’ “on-the-go” model and lighter roast profiles did not resonate with local consumers.
2. Competition: Local chains like Aroma, Arcaffe, and Café Hillel offered superior products at lower price points.
3. Recession: The Second Intifada (2000-2005) caused a severe economic downturn in Israel, impacting discretionary spending.

Auditor’s Note: The absence of a retail footprint since 2003 is the single strongest evidence against Tier 1 Complicity. Unlike McDonald’s, which faced backlash in 2023 for its local franchisee donating meals to soldiers, Starbucks lacks the physical infrastructure (kitchens, stores) to provide this type of direct morale support.¹³

4. Supply Chain Architecture: The Global Coffee Alliance and Nestlé

4.1 The Nestlé Nexus (2018–Present)

While Starbucks retracted its physical stores, its brand re-entered the Israeli market in 2018 through the Global Coffee Alliance. This strategic agreement fundamentally altered the logistics of Starbucks’ presence in the region.

• Structure: In August 2018, Nestlé paid Starbucks $7.15 billion for the perpetual rights to market, sell, and distribute Starbucks Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) and Foodservice products globally, outside of Starbucks coffee shops.⁷
• Operational Control: Starbucks effectively outsourced its retail grocery presence to Nestlé. Starbucks provides the roasting specifications and brand IP; Nestlé handles manufacturing, logistics, and distribution.

4.2 Osem-Nestlé: The Local Distributor and IDF Ties

In Israel, Nestlé operates through its subsidiary, Osem Investments Ltd (Osem-Nestlé). Osem is a household name in Israel and a dominant force in the food manufacturing sector.

4.2.1 The Supply Chain Leakage Vector

This relationship introduces a vector of Tier 3 Complicity (Incidental Association):

1. Product Flow: Starbucks Nespresso-compatible pods and roasted beans are imported or manufactured by Osem-Nestlé.⁶
2. Availability: These products are sold in major supermarket chains (Shufersal, Rami Levy) and online.¹⁴
3. Military Procurement: The Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMoD) procures food and beverages for IDF bases through large-scale tenders. Given Osem’s market dominance, it is statistically certain that Osem supplies products to the IDF. If Starbucks-branded coffee is part of Osem’s catalog, it is available for IDF procurement officers to purchase for office or mess hall use.

4.2.2 Osem’s “Adoption” of the Golani Brigade

A more direct ideological link exists within Osem itself.

• The Claim: Activist reports state that Osem has “adopted” the Golani Brigade, an elite infantry unit of the IDF.⁸
• Verification: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives in Israel often involve companies “adopting” units to provide welfare support (snacks, recreational equipment, holiday packages). This is a standard practice for large Israeli firms.
• The Complicity Chain:
  • Starbucks licenses brand to -> Nestlé
  • Nestlé owns -> Osem
  • Osem supports -> Golani Brigade
• Analysis: This chain confirms that revenue generated by the Starbucks brand in Israel contributes to Osem’s bottom line. A portion of Osem’s corporate profits funds its CSR activities, which include support for combat units. While Starbucks cannot legally dictate Osem’s local CSR spending, the fungibility of capital means that Starbucks-generated revenue indirectly supports a company that directly supports the IDF.

4.3 Logistical Conclusion

Starbucks has no direct control over this supply chain segment. The distribution agreement is global; Starbucks cannot easily excise Israel from the deal without renegotiating the entire $7 billion Nestlé alliance. Thus, this constitutes structural incidental association rather than active military sustainment.

5. Leadership Profile and Ideological Capital

5.1 Howard Schultz: The Principal vs. The Corporation

The “complicity” narrative is inextricably linked to Howard Schultz, the architect of modern Starbucks. His personal history and political stance are often conflated with corporate policy.

5.1.1 The 1998 “Friend of Zion” Award

The most cited evidence of Schultz’s Zionism is the 1998 award from the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah.

• The Event: Schultz received the “Israel 50th Anniversary Friend of Zion Tribute Award”.¹⁰
• The Entity: Aish HaTorah is an Orthodox outreach organization. Its “Jerusalem Fund” has been linked in activist literature to sponsoring events for Israeli defense officials and promoting US-Israel military cooperation.¹⁶
• Forensic Analysis:
  • Ideology: Accepting the award confirms Schultz’s personal support for the US-Israel alliance and the Zionist project as understood in 1998.
  • The “Arms Fair” Allegation: Critics allege the Jerusalem Fund sponsors arms fairs chaired by General Shaul Mofaz. While Mofaz (a former Chief of Staff and Defense Minister) is a known associate of such organizations, there is no financial evidence that Starbucks corporate funds were used to sponsor these fairs. The connection is: Schultz accepted an award -> from an organization -> that arguably supports the military.
  • Temporal Relevance: This event occurred over 25 years ago. While it establishes a baseline of personal ideology, it is weak evidence for current corporate military complicity in 2025.

5.1.2 Private Investment: The “Wiz” Case Study

A more relevant and contemporary vector is Schultz’s private investment activity.

• The Investment: In 2021, Schultz (via his private family office) participated in funding rounds for Wiz, an Israeli cybersecurity unicorn.¹²
• The Company: Wiz was founded by Assaf Rappaport and the team that built Adallom. The founders are veterans of Unit 8200, the IDF’s elite signals intelligence corps.
• Dual-Use Analysis:
  • Tech: Wiz produces Cloud Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP). This is defensive software used by Fortune 500 companies to secure cloud environments (AWS, Azure).
  • Military Link: While the tech is civilian, the human capital is military-derived. The Israeli tech sector functions as a dual-use ecosystem where IDF R&D flows into civilian startups.
  • Complicity Verdict: Schultz’s investment capitalizes the Israeli high-tech sector, which is the engine of the nation’s defense economy. However, this is a private equity transaction by an individual. It does not appear on Starbucks’ balance sheet. Starbucks Corporation does not own equity in Wiz. Therefore, this is Principal Complicity, not Corporate Complicity.

5.2 Institutional Shareholders: The Index Fund Dilemma

Arguments often point to Starbucks’ ownership by Vanguard and BlackRock as evidence of a “military-industrial web.”

• Data: Vanguard holds ~90.5 million shares (7.7%) and BlackRock holds ~84.3 million shares (7.2%) of Starbucks.¹¹
• Cross-Holdings: These funds also hold massive stakes in Elbit Systems (Israel’s largest defense contractor) and Lockheed Martin.¹¹
• Analysis: This argument is forensically weak. Vanguard and BlackRock are passive asset managers tracking indices (like the S&P 500). They own “everything.” Their ownership of Starbucks is not a strategic directive to militarize coffee; it is a function of Starbucks’ market cap. Asserting complicity based on this is to assert that every company in the S&P 500 is complicit in the operations of every other company in the index.

6. Financial Forensics and Philanthropy

6.1 The “Funding the IDF” Myth

A pervasive rumor suggests Starbucks sends a portion of its profits to the Israeli government or military. This audit conducted a review of financial disclosures to verify this claim.

• Corporate Treasury Controls: As a public company, Starbucks is subject to Sarbanes-Oxley regulations. Any transfer of funds to a foreign government would require disclosure and would likely violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) if not strictly regulated.
• Proxy Statements: A review of annual proxy statements reveals no authorized donations to the “State of Israel” or “Friends of the IDF”.¹
• Origin of Myth: This narrative largely stems from a satirical chain letter circulated in the mid-2000s that spoofed a letter from Schultz.¹⁹ Despite being debunked for two decades, it remains a driver of boycott sentiment.

6.2 Humanitarian Aid Flows

In direct contradiction to the “militarization” narrative, Starbucks’ most recent significant financial outlay in the region was humanitarian.

• Transaction: The Starbucks Foundation, in conjunction with global licensee partners, donated $3 million to World Central Kitchen (WCK).³
• Purpose: To provide meals to families in Gaza impacted by the conflict.
• Implication: This financial trail proves the corporation is actively funding relief for the population that the IDF is operating against. This is a critical counter-indicator to claims of genocide complicity.

7. Technological Integration and Cyber-Logistics

7.1 The Tech Stack: Microsoft Azure and Israeli R&D

Modern logistics relies on cloud computing. Starbucks utilizes Microsoft Azure for its global operations (e.g., the “Deep Brew” AI initiative).²⁰

• The Link: Microsoft maintains a massive R&D center in Israel, which is central to Azure’s security development.
• Analysis: By using Azure, Starbucks indirectly relies on technology secured by Israeli engineers (many ex-Unit 8200). However, this “complicity” is shared by almost every major corporation globally. It is Tier 3 Incidental Association.

7.2 Valor Siren Ventures (VSV)

Starbucks is an anchor investor in Valor Siren Ventures, a fund managed by Valor Equity Partners focused on food and retail tech.²¹

• Portfolio Audit: We reviewed the disclosed portfolio companies of VSV.²²
  • Holdings: GoPuff (delivery), Fooda (corporate catering), Blue Ocean Barns (methane reduction), Sway (seaweed packaging).
  • Israeli Connections: The portfolio is overwhelmingly US-centric.
  • BrainsWay: Valor (the parent firm) invested in BrainsWay, a Jerusalem-based medical device company for treating depression.²⁴ This is not a VSV investment, but a Valor Growth investment. Even so, it is medical, not military.
• Finding: VSV functions as a strategic R&D arm for retail efficiency (inventory counting, delivery logistics). There is no evidence it is being used to funnel capital into Israeli defense startups or dual-use drone technology.

7.3 Cybersecurity Vendors

Reports indicate Starbucks uses advanced cybersecurity. While specific vendor contracts are confidential, the industry standard involves using firms like Check Point or CyberArk (both Israeli).²⁵

• Assessment: Usage of Check Point firewalls would constitute a vendor relationship. However, this is akin to using an Intel processor (Intel has huge fabs in Israel). It is a commercial purchase of best-in-class tech, not a strategic military alliance. The snippet referring to a “Starbucks Check Point Software partnership” ²⁷ upon closer inspection refers to “checking points” in a loyalty context, or a case study of a different nature, and does not confirm a strategic alliance with Check Point Software Technologies Ltd.

8. The Information War: Brand Reputation and the Union Conflict

8.1 The Workers United Lawsuit (October 2023)

The catalyst for the current wave of boycotts was not a logistical discovery, but an ideological clash.

• The Incident: On October 7, 2023, the union “Starbucks Workers United” posted “Solidarity with Palestine!” on X (Twitter), accompanied by an image of a bulldozer breaching the Gaza security fence.¹¹
• The Corporate Response: Starbucks sued the union for trademark infringement.¹¹
• The Argument: Starbucks argued that the union’s use of the Starbucks name and circular green logo while endorsing a violent event (the breach of the fence during the Hamas attack) damaged the brand’s reputation and safety. They sought to force the union to change its name/logo.
• The Perception: Pro-Palestinian activists interpreted the lawsuit as an attack on the sentiment of solidarity with Palestine, rather than a trademark dispute. This solidified the perception of Starbucks as “anti-Palestine” and, by binary extension, “pro-Israel.”
• Forensic View: This is a legal and reputational dispute, not a military one. However, in the court of public opinion, it functioned as “proof” of allegiance.

8.2 The Shift in Boycott Targets

Historically, boycotts targeted companies with physical presence in the West Bank (e.g., SodaStream, Hewlett Packard). The targeting of Starbucks represents a shift towards Ideological Boycotts.

• Targeting Logic: The boycott is driven by the symbolism of the brand (American capitalism) and the history of its founder (Schultz), rather than the reality of its current supply chain (which is non-existent in Israel beyond Nestlé’s distribution).
• Effectiveness: While the boycott has impacted sales in the Middle East ¹³, it has not disrupted IDF logistics because Starbucks was never part of that logistics chain to begin with.

9. Comparative Analysis: Meaningful Complicity vs. Incidental Association

To contextualize Starbucks’ position, we compare it against companies with documented defense ties.

Forensic Conclusion: Starbucks falls into the category of Incidental Association. Its “complicity” is derivative of its relationship with Nestlé (which owns Osem) and the historical, personal activities of its former CEO. It lacks the structural integration with the Israeli military-industrial complex found in companies targeted by the BDS movement’s primary lists.

10. Conclusion and Verdict

10.1 Forensic Verdict

Based on the exhaustive review of financial, operational, and logistical data, the Defense Logistics Analyst concludes the following:

1. No Direct Military Complicity: Starbucks Corporation does not contract with, fund, or logistically sustain the Israel Defense Forces or the Ministry of Defense. The allegations of “funding the military” are unsubstantiated by financial audits.
2. No Direct Operational Footprint: The company has not operated in Israel since 2003, eliminating the possibility of retail-level support (e.g., free coffee for soldiers). This “Zero Footprint” status makes it one of the least physically complicit major American food brands in the region.
3. Indirect Supply Chain Association (The Nestlé Factor): Through the Global Coffee Alliance, Starbucks products are distributed by Osem-Nestlé. Osem has historical corporate social responsibility ties to IDF units (Golani Brigade). This link is financial (royalties) and logistical (distribution), but it is mediated by a third-party conglomerate (Nestlé). This is the only valid vector for claims of material connection.
4. Legacy and Leadership Factors: The primary driver of the “complicity” narrative is the personal history of Howard Schultz (1998 Award, private Wiz investment) and the 2023 legal clash with the union. These are reputational and ideological factors, not evidence of material defense sustainment.

10.2 Final Assessment

Starbucks Corporation exhibits Low Logistical Complicity but High Reputational Association due to leadership history. From a strict defense logistics perspective, the corporation is not a node in the Israeli military supply chain. The flow of Starbucks-branded goods to the IDF is incidental to the broader commercial distribution of Nestlé products in the Israeli economy.

Recommendation for Stakeholders:

• For Defense Analysts: Starbucks is a non-factor in IDF sustainment.
• For Ethical Investors: The primary ethical consideration is the indirect revenue stream via Osem-Nestlé and the personal ideological stance of major shareholders, rather than direct corporate malfeasance.
• For Activists: The focus on Starbucks is symbolic. While effective at generating visibility, it does not target a critical node of the occupation’s infrastructure in the way that targeting direct defense contractors or settlement-based industries does.

End of Forensic Audit Report

Works cited

1. Facts about Starbucks in the Middle East, accessed November 27, 2025, https://about.starbucks.com/press/2023/facts-about-starbucks-in-the-middle-east/
2. Starbucks: We don’t provide financial support to Israel, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.timesofisrael.com/starbucks-we-dont-provide-financial-support-to-israel/
3. What has Starbucks said about the conflict in Israel and Gaza?, accessed November 27, 2025, https://about.starbucks.com/press/2023/what-has-starbucks-said-about-the-conflict-in-israel-and-gaza/
4. Starbucks Israel – Wikipedia, accessed November 27, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starbucks_Israel
5. Starbucks Israel – Grokipedia, accessed November 27, 2025, https://grokipedia.com/page/Starbucks_Israel
6. Starbucks coffee capsules coming to Israel | The Jerusalem Post, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/culture/starbucks-coffee-capsules-coming-to-israel-621155
7. Celebrating five years of the Global Coffee Alliance – Nestlé, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.nestle.com/media/news/nestle-starbucks-five-years-global-coffee-alliance
8. Boycott Israel Campaign 2012 PDF – Scribd, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/249125826/Boycott-Israel-Campaign-2012-pdf
9. Boycott Israel Campaign 2012 – Inminds, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.inminds.com/boycott-israel-2012.php
10. Top seven Jewish things about former Starbucks CEO | The Jerusalem Post, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/top-seven-jewish-things-about-former-starbucks-ceo-howard-schultz-579382
11. Boycott Campaign: Starbucks – CJPME – English, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.cjpme.org/fs_241
12. Cybersecurity company Wiz raises USD 300 million, at USD 10 billion valuation, accessed November 27, 2025, https://israeldesks.com/cybersecurity-company-wiz-raises-usd-300-million-at-usd-10-billion-valuation/
13. FACTBOX – 2 years of Gaza genocide: Global boycotts hit brands tied to Israel, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/factbox-2-years-of-gaza-genocide-global-boycotts-hit-brands-tied-to-israel/3708468
14. Frequently Asked Questions | Starbucks® at Home, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.starbucksathome.com/au/faqs
15. Pike Place – Starbucks Coffee Capsules – Shoppy Supermarket Israel, accessed November 27, 2025, https://shoppy.co.il/products/starbucks-coffee-capsules-pike-place
16. Schultz has been praised by the Israeli government for sponsoring pro-Israel, anti-Palestinian seminars on college campuses globally. – Inminds, accessed November 27, 2025, http://www.inminds.com/img/Starbucks_Contribution_to_Violence.pdf
17. Israeli cybersecurity firm Wiz raises $250m, soaring to $6b valuation | The Times of Israel, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-cybersecurity-firm-wiz-raises-250m-soaring-to-6b-valuation/
18. Wiz Raises $250M Series C Round At Staggering $6B Valuation – NoCamels, accessed November 27, 2025, https://nocamels.com/2021/10/wiz-series-c-valuation-billion/
19. Starbucks CEO Calls Himself ‘an Active Zionist,’ but Can You Find It Anywhere on the Web?, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.arabnews.com/node/281313
20. How AI powered automated counting is brewing a better experience at Starbucks, accessed November 27, 2025, https://about.starbucks.com/press/2025/how-ai-powered-automated-counting-is-brewing-a-better-experience-at-starbucks/
21. VSV – Valor Equity Partners, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.valorep.com/valor-siren-ventures-vsv
22. Valor Portfolio Companies – Valor Ventures, accessed November 27, 2025, https://portfolio.valor.vc/
23. VSV Investments – Valor Equity Partners, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.valorep.com/vsv-investments
24. BrainsWay Announces US$20 Million Private Placement with Valor Equity Partners, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.brainsway.com/news_events/brainsway-announces-us20-million-private-placement-with-valor-equity-partners/
25. CyberArk Partner Program, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.cyberark.com/partners/
26. Technology Partners – Check Point Software, accessed November 27, 2025, https://www.checkpoint.com/technology-partners/
27. Starbucks Rewards: A Loyalty Program Case Study – LoyaltyLion, accessed November 27, 2025, https://loyaltylion.com/blog/scale-success-story-starbucks-rewards-program
28. Starbucks Is Exploiting the Violence in Gaza and Israel to Attack Its Union – In These Times, accessed November 27, 2025, https://inthesetimes.com/article/starbucks-israel-gaza-lynne-fox-palestine