General Antisemitism

Lush: “We aren’t anti-Semitic”.


This is cross posted at Richard Millett’s Blog

Lush flying the Saudi flag on their site.

Here we go again. Yet another claim that “We aren’t anti-Semitic” by someone attacking Israel in the most crudest terms.

Lush’s website is still promoting a song that claims that there are “more than six million (Palestinian) refugees”, that Palestinians were forced from their homes and history, that Gaza is a prison camp, that the wall that keeps Israelis safe from suicide bombers is an “apartheid wall”, and that blames only Israel for violence and accuses it of racial segregation.

Despite this Lush aren’t anti-Semitic. And you know why Lush aren’t anti-Semitic? Because they say so.

They have just released another statement (see end) part of which reads:

Standing for the human rights of one does not undermine calls for the human rights of others. Likewise, criticising Israeli government policies is not akin to being anti-Semitic or anti the Israeli state. We do not tolerate racism or any other form of discrimination.”

So Lush might not like it that Iranian gays are hanged for wishing to express their sexuality, or that women are not allowed to drive or work in Saudi Arabia or that Syrian civilians are being massacred en masse, it’s just that singling out the Jewish state is more important.

Lush even has shops in Saudi Arabia, so they are actually contributing to a government with a totally deplorable human rights record!

The statement continues:

“We believe that the occupation exacerbates violence in the region and therefore bringing it to an end is a vital step in the peace process.”

So it’s all about “the occupation”, stupid.

It has nothing at all to do with Hamas’ desire to kill Jews as stated in their Charter (Article 7), or that Hamas believes Israel is an “Islamic waqf” (Article 11), or that Hamas has no plans for any “peaceful solutions and international conferences” (Article 13), or that every Muslim’s duty is one of Jihad to fight the “Jews’ usurpation of Palestine” (Article 15).

The Charter also claims that Jews proclaimed “Mohammad is dead” and that “Israel, Judaism, Jews, challenge Islam and the Muslim people”.

But Lush aren’t anti-Semitic, remember. They’re just criticising “the occupation” and Israel’s alleged breaches of international law.

And when the leader of the EDL, Tommy Robinson, said last week that what happened recently in Norway could happen in the UK, he was accused of making threats and condoning violence.

Well, by stating “the occupation exacerbates violence” hasn’t Lush now done a similar thing?

Robinson argues that increased Muslim immigration will bring more violence to our streets from those opposed to it, but Lush are allowed to get away with “understanding” why the Palestinians are so violent against Israelis.

I have tried speaking to Lush for the last week and a half, but they refuse to return calls.

In exhasperation I called Norman Black, the head of marketing at Brent Cross, who said that there was nothing Brent Cross could do about Lush’s campaign. He said it was a Lush issue, not a Brent Cross issue.

He also said that Brent Cross would not allow any sort of peaceful protest against Lush as “this would mean introducing politics into Brent Cross”, nevermind that Lush introduced the politics. This also explains Lush’s “bold” statement, reported in the Jewish Chronicle, that “we would not ask Brent Cross to move people on if they came to protest”.

They know that Brent Cross security will do it for them!

When I spoke to Lush last week I suggested they could be more objective and instead promote the the Parents Circle – Families Forum, an organisation where bereaved Israeli and Palestinian relatives meet and also speak in schools and universities about their tragic experiences due to the conflict. These are people who really have suffered. But Lush refuses to take anything on board, except the anti-Israel propaganda they are constantly fed by War on Want.

Another of Lush’s “ethical campaigns” was to help free Binyam Mohamed from Guantanamo Bay. But what about Gilad Schalit, kidnapped by Hamas nearly five years ago and kept in solitary confinement in Gaza with no access to doctors or his family?

But, I must repeat, Lush aren’t anti-Semitic in the slightest.

Singling out the Jewish state only for criticism while staying silent about Muslim countries executing gays and slaughtering their own people, as in Syria, is not anti-semitic.

Sticking up for Binyam Mohamed, while staying silent about Gilad Schalit is ok. They will get around to Gilad eventually, I’m sure.

When I spoke to Norman Black he said he totally understood our position but that he also admired Lush’s single-mindedness of purpose.

More pertinently, he said he was relieved that the section of society that was outraged by Lush’s campaign was not one that was prone to anything more than peaceful protest.

So, there you have it in a nutshell: British Jews are a benign lot, whereas members of certain other minority groups might not be so forgiving.

Some organisations get this which is why they single out Israel, while allowing other countries to get away with, quite literally, murder. They might also have done the math. There are approximately 1.5 billion Muslims in the world and only about 14 million Jews. It could be great for business to be so anti-Israel these days.

Full Lush press release:

Lush supports the OneWorld Freedom for Palestine campaign because we believe in human rights and equality for all. Freedom for Palestine is a multi-cultural, multi-faith song that expresses the concerns some musicians across the UK and global community have about the denial of basic rights of the Palestinian people. The song calls for the end of the Israeli occupation of Palestine – which the United Nations has recognised as breaking human rights law.

Organisations such as the International Red Cross, Amnesty and Human Rights Watch have expressed concerns about human rights abuses and a resulting humanitarian crisis caused by the occupation. Areas of concern include poverty, unemployment, food insecurity, limited access to clean water and farmland and restricted access to healthcare and medicines.

Standing for the human rights of one does not undermine calls for the human rights of others. Likewise, criticising Israeli government policies is not akin to being anti-Semitic or anti the Israeli state. We do not tolerate racism or any other form of discrimination.

We believe that the occupation exacerbates violence in the region and therefore bringing it to an end is a vital step in the peace process. Calling for an end to the occupation is simply calling for adherence to international law in the hope that this will bring about security and peace for all in the region. The Israeli and Palestinian people must find a solution that respects human rights for both sides and adheres to international human rights law; it’s our job as part of the international community to do what we can to ensure this happens.

Kind regards,

Vicky Jansson
Customer Care Manager
Lush Ltd.

14 replies »

  1. Great post, Richard.

    As far as Jannson’s audacious claim that the song “Freedom for Palestine” is benign “multi-cultural, multi-faith song that expresses the concerns some musicians across the UK and global community have about the denial of basic rights of the Palestinian people.”, please see our post on the song and video, here:

    http://cifwatch.com/2011/06/09/hip-and-trendy-anti-israel-hatred/

    As we noted about the song in our post, it speaks of Israeli “crimes against humanity”, “prison camps”, and even levels the ugly charge of “racial segregation” – all in service of imputing Israeli malice in the context of a feel-good charity endeavor.

    Further the video depicts, in cartoon form, the IDF intentionally targeting Palestinian civilians with tank fire.

    Beyond their absurd characterization of the song as benign, Jannson represents the obsessive nature of the anti-Israel movement best when she says:

    “We believe that the occupation exacerbates violence in the region.”

    What does this even mean? Are we to understand that violence in Syria, Egypt, Bahrain, and Libya are the result of “the occupation” of the West Bank?

  2. Adam, these people are arrested developmentally at pre-adolescence and are doubly handicapped by being as thick as the proverbial short planks. Their arguments have the sort of “samey” quality of those learned by rote from anti-Israel pamphlets and regurgitated without further thought.

    It is counterproductive to support such ignorance by reinforcing it. At the same time, these people are so preternaturally stupid that no amount of contextualising or presenting of the other points of view will impact on them. They have made up their minds and don’t want to be confused by provable facts and like the sheeple they are they prefer to follow whoever shouts the loudest.

    The only way is for us to boycott their products and encourage our friends, family and others to do likewise.

    BOYCOTT LUSH!

    • How do the laws work in Britain? In the United States, a mall could keep you off their private property, but they don’t own the sidewalks or other public areas, and could not stop a demonstration there provided the police permitted it – and they would have to explain why they didn’t to my lawyers if I had any trouble from them.

  3. Does a job in Customer Care department require one to be an expert in international territorial disputes, UN resolutions and foreign affairs?

    Lush are just being pathetic.

    BTW, who are these silly people, they’re just Body Shop wannabe, have I inadvertently bought anything from them? Hope not.

  4. I remember a while back a member of Israel’s extreme left wrote an article for the Guardian in which he suggested that while Israel’s actions were really, really terrible, compared to the antics engaged in by Britain over the years, she was as pure as the driven snow. Naturally, it was met with almost complete silence. But that’s what I don’t understand: given that Britain has been mass-murdering her way around the world for years, in Argentina, Ireland, Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, how come companies like Lush are boycotting Israel and not Blighty? Now there’s a really stupid question.

  5. The Charter also claims that Jews proclaimed “Mohammad is dead”

    But he IS dead. Get over it.

    As for LUSH, what bare-faced hypocrisy. Pocketing Saudi money whilst lecturing Israel on human rights. I hope they go as financially bankrupt as they are morally bankrupt.

  6. They also support the Green Party Brighton, whose member is Caroline Lucas who testified in the EDO case.
    “In July 2010, Lucas expressed her support for seven acquitted campaigners of the Smash EDO campaign who caused £180,000 damage to an EDO MGM arms factory under the lawful excuse defence because the company manufactured and sold certain components used by the Israeli military. Lucas stated that: “I am absolutely delighted the jury has recognised that the actions of the decommissioners were a legitimate response to the atrocities being committed in Gaza. I do not advocate non-violent direct action lightly … [but] their actions were driven by the responsibility to prevent further suffering in Gaza.””
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Lucas

  7. The telling point about antiSemitic jerks like “Lush” is that although they’re all about “justice” and “peace” and “tolerance”, somehow those noble goals just don’t apply to the Israelis! Have you ever heard 1 word from these “global Leftists” for whom it’s become so bizarrely fashionable to bash Israel and defend the brutal Islamofascists, whenever there are Israeli (or other) victims of the Islamists’ murderous terrorism?

    Never. That tells you everything you need to know about their real motivations–obvious racism and antiSemitism pure and simple. It’s the ONLY explanation for their irrational obsession with Israel and total ignoring of the vile and blatant human rights abuses from the Islamists.

  8. Lush cosmetics say they are an ethical company and have a whole list of ethical cuases. Yet at the same time they are supporting oppressive regimes by having shops in these countries. Hopefully I do not need to go into the human right record and oppression of women etc in Saudi Arabia and Sri Lanka.
    How can this company call it self ethical ?

    I suggest we FLUSH LUSH!!!!
    Boycott Lush

  9. You realize that Saudi’s are semites…. right? All of the Arabs in general are semite… My God, pick up a dictionary.

    It’s ok, Lush doesn’t need your money, trust me, we’ll pick up the tab if not give them more money.
    We are rich after all.

    • We are rich after all.

      …and as a proud Saudi womann certainly you can afford a car and a driving licence….