Well, the doughty and cerebral pro-Israel blogger Edgar Davidson wasted no time in complaining to the company about its stance: http://edgar1981.blogspot.com/2011/06/lush-pushing-death-to-israel-narrative.html
Promptly, a representative of the company responded, blaming "the wall" for the Palestinians' plight and observing, inter alia:
"History does not excuse such suffering. It will take both sides to come to a solution, but what is also clear is that this is not a conflict of two equal sides and thus the onus must be on the dominating force, Israel."Again wasting no time, Edgar Davidson has written back with a polite but firm dissection of the representative's reply.
Here's part of his response:
"Finally, I now see that the previous lies about poverty have been replaced with
“life for most Palestinians living under the illegal Israeli occupation is at least as bad as that endured by black South Africans in the bad old days of apartheid.”
This is even more incorrect and offensive than the original statement. The West Bank is officially “disputed territory” not “illegally occupied” and the “apartheid” analogy is bizarre in this context. It would be just as meaningful to say that poverty levels in Glasgow are at apartheid levels.
Clearly the statement was intended to promote, indirectly, the false notion of Israel as an apartheid state. There are certainly several apartheid states in the area but Israel is not one of them. The Apartheid states are all Arab: a total of 0 Jews live in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority areas, 0 Jews live in Jordan and Saudi Arabia (where in both countries it is illegal to be a citizen if you are a Jew) and less than a handful of Jews live in all of the other Arab countries combined. Less than 60 years ago those Arab countries had thriving communities of Jews totally some 1,000,000. They have all been driven out. But, of course you never heard their narrative did you?"