Blogs Coffee House

It’s not acceptable to pass off halal food without telling us

8 May 2014

1:53 PM

8 May 2014

1:53 PM

 

 

It matters; it really does, if meat from animals conscious when killed is being passed off on us by stealth by supermarkets, schools and restaurants. It wouldn’t be just an imposition on the squeamish but a large-scale taking of liberties by the big food retailers which would affect most carnivores in Britain who shop in supermarkets and eat in chain restaurants, viz, the majority of us. The Mail reported today that the default option for many retailers is to sell meat that has been ritually slaughtered according to Islamic requirements. And ritual slaughter can mean not stunning the animal before killing it. What we need to know is: what kind of halal – the Islamic equivalent of kosher – we’re talking about here.

[Alt-Text]


The list of those retailers who sell halal meat without going to the trouble of labelling it includes Waitrose and M&S, which is going to cause the middle class carnivore an acute sort of angst – if you can’t trust Waitrose, well, who can you trust? We know already that in many parts of the country, meat served in schools is halal by default…without informing parents, obviously. The question is not whether the animals turning up on the meat counter have been prayed over before they were slaughtered, which is a ritual requirement, but whether they were insensible at the time. The retailers mentioned by the Mail say that they do use stunned meat; yet the fact is that some halal meat is from animals that were conscious during slaughter. What’s needed is clear labelling for the cruel stuff…well, the crueller stuff, the sort where the animals were more or less sentient when killed. It’s a distinction with a difference. And I’d like that, please, on restaurant menus as well as vacuum packed chops in the freezer cabinet. Not as an option; a requirement.

As I say, few meat-eaters – and I am an enthusiastic carnivore – would be much bothered to know that their lamb had been prayed over before having its throat cut so long as we were reassured that the animal was genuinely insensible when it happened. Animal slaughter is a grisly business on even a small scale; on a big commercial scale it’s far more dodgy (I refer you to Eric Schosser’s Fast Food Nation for the horror stuff); and, if done without stunning, a downright instance of animal cruelty. There have been various studies of just how cruel it is: the British Veterinary Association is, for instance, strongly opposed to the slaughter of animals without stunning. Professor Bill Reilly, its former chairman, has suggested that far more meat is ritually slaughtered than is actually necessary – chiefly as a cost cutting measure by the retailers who would otherwise be obliged to market the halal and non-halal stuff separately. He thinks that half of lambs killed for the halal market aren’t stunned, a figure disputed by Muslim organisations. That, ladies and gents, would amount of hundreds of thousands of creatures every year. And of the process of killing without stunning, which he observed earlier in his career, he remarks that “the distress, fear and pain were there for all to see in the abbatoir”. Well, quite.

Granted, the FSA has said that the number of animals not stunned before slaughter is relatively low as a proportion of the market: three per cent of cattle, 10 per cent of sheep and goats; four per cent of poultry. Most halal meat is stunned before slaughter – obviously this also applies to animals ritually slaughtered for Orthodox Jews, whose numbers are much smaller. But, you know, however consoling those figures are in percentage terms, they still amount to an awful lot of animals. Killing a heifer for instance without stunning is indubitably cruel, being a large beast, it takes longer to die, far longer than a poussin. I try, myself, in my poncey way, to avoid eating any poultry or meat that I think has had either a miserable life or a notably painful death (though when I’m in the Balkans, I pretty well give up).  Obviously the thing to do is to subsist off road kill, or wild woodpigeon or rabbit or nicely shot deer, on the basis their lives have been as decent as they can reasonably expect before perishing. But short of that, the least we can do for our animals in return for eating them is to try to insist that they are insensible at the point of death. And that’s just what we don’t know when it comes to halal meat.

So, why shouldn’t the government get on the case pronto? Why is David Cameron so anxious not to get involved, apart from the obvious reason? What I want, what lots of us want, is for food that’s been killed without stunning, wherever it’s sold or passed off on our children, to be labelled as such. Then we’ll know where we stand and can avoid it. Personally I’d rather like the government to get tougher on the whole business of non-stunned killing, to ensure it’s sold and passed off strictly to religious groups for whom this is a matter of conscience. I suppose the obvious option is for the squeamish to go vegetarian but I don’t quite see why we should do so as a precautionary measure, rather than strict Muslims. Failing that, readers may like to consider the option of some nice, free range pork?

PS: The British Veterinary Association has launched an online petition against slaughter without stunning; I just mention it for your interest.


More Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 15 issues delivered for just £15, with full web and app access. Join us.



Show comments
  • I_Hate_radicalism

    Why should we accept Halal? If they want to eat halal meat they can go ahead but why try to change everything as per their needs? They don’t change anything in their Islamic nations for any non Islamic community.

  • John Vilinskis

    Muslims not eating Pork is all Hogwash!
    As for humane slaughter of animals, human beings do not seem to be included under this banner. Halal Vegemite – i wonder how many in the minority group of Muslim immigrants, actually eats this product?

  • disqus_1Q7D0egcLN

    Talk about the relative harm to animals, the suggestion that the most humane methods are also likely to involve suffering is about as pathetic an argument as that which suggests people have no right to know which deity has been invoked and which particular ritual has been used. I am as loath to eat ritually slaughtered meat as those who must eat it. The obscurantism in this debate, is typical. To suggest that my wishing to know these things is the product of some sort of discrimination against those who feel compelled to eat ritually slaughteted food, is designed to deprive me of my right to know. I shall not buy any meat until I am quite sure it is not halal or kosher but how.is this to be done?

  • disqus_1Q7D0egcLN

    It seems plain to me that I have as much right to know whether the meat I eat has been ritually slaughtered or not, as do people with special religious requirements. To suggest that this is minority bashing is just cynical obscurantism.

  • freddiethegreat

    What I do is surrepititiously stick pins into bacon packs and then into the meat packs, thus rendering them non-halaal. I wouldn’t do it if I was given a choice by Pick ‘n Pay.

  • Mike

    Readers here should also read an excellent piece by Dr Taj Hargey in the Daily Mail who puts the record straight on Halal food in a Islamic context and corrects some mistakes made here. His basic tenet is that apart from Pork, there is nothing in the original Islamic scriptures that demands ritual killing of animals in the way its being done surreptitiously today. His commentary is in sharp contrast to the bottling out by Cameron to make any observation of the scam thats being pulled over the food buying public who are being denied a choice of how their food is slaughtered.

    • FrenchNewsonlin

      Except that if you Google for a 1990s Atlanta Texas story about said TH, it would appear he’s not as kosher as he would have people believe and his “doctorate” may not be what it seems either.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    The cruelty of halal slaughter is unconscionable. Stop pandering to Muslims. Grow a backbone Britisher pals: Tell them bluntly, “No more Halal. And if you don`t like it you can FO.”
    Take a leaf out of Australia`s book.

  • Owi Wowi

    Sikhs forbid the consumption of ritually slaughtered meat on a religious basis so clearly a two fingers up to them. Similarly the Jews obviously prefer a different brand of mumbo-jumbo infused meat.

    As for the rest of the carnivores in the country they can rest assured that a small portion of the money they pay for their meat keep a lot of imams in work and minarets popping up across the country.

    • the viceroy’s gin

      …yes and thank phucqq for that, huh?

  • Pembroke

    Perhaps even before the issue of animal welfare, we should not be duped into participating in Abrahamic rituals simply because we cannot tell whether the meat we buy has been involved in religious ritual. Meat needs to be labelled so that we can choose whether or not to support religious ritual slaughter.

  • ButcombeMan

    I have always assumed a fair proportion of my meat is Halal, I am surpised this issue is such a big deal.

    What really concerns me is that meat is what says it is.

    I love meat but eating less of it and better quality seems sensible.

  • andagain

    Of course, if Halal was a Mormon rite, no one would give the proverbial damn…

    • mohdanga

      How about if all meat was Kosher? I’m sure none of the Religion of Peace types would mind,no?

      • andagain

        Perhaps not, since the requirements are very similar to Halal. OTOH, I bet that would get a lot less objection from the people objecting to this.

        • the viceroy’s gin

          Why would you bet that?

          • andagain

            For the fairly obvious reason that there seems to be less fear and dislike of Jews than Muslims these days.

            • the viceroy’s gin

              You seem to be imagining that it’s all about opposition to one or another religion, when actually it’s about one or more of: additional unneeded food production costs, potential animal cruelty and the law potentially forcing one religion’s followers to accommodate another religion’s followers, against their own beliefs, your “these days” analysis notwithstanding.

              • andagain

                Well it certainly is not about “food production costs” or “animal cruelty”. No one has bothed to compare the cost or cruelty of Halal slaughter against the other techniques used, or even showed the slightest interest in what those techniques are.

                And it isn’t about the law of the land forcing anyone to do anything, because the law of the land is not forcing anyone to use this particular method of slaughter.

                So what was it about again, if not about dislike of Islam?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  What, it’s not about that because you say so, lad? Sorry, life don’t work that way.

                  You’re right, no one has bothered to analyze this fully. That’s the entire problem. And your statement that there isn’t the “slightest interest” it that really couldn’t be more false.

                  If the law of the land is forcing people to accommodate another religion’s followers, against their own beliefs, then yes the law of the land is at issue. Sorry, but again, you saying otherwise is just you saying it, and means nothing.

                  It is you that imagines it’s about opposition to some religion or another, which you do after you dream away arguments to the contrary.

                • andagain

                  If the law of the land is forcing people to accommodate another religion’s followers

                  It isn’t. And no one except you has tried to suggest it has.

                  So I ask again: can you give an honest reason for complaining about Halal slaughter in the UK?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  It is if it refuses to permit proper labeling of the product. And yes, everybody is saying precisely this.

                  Again; you really should cease fantasizing your arguments.

                • andagain

                  The law does permit Halal meat to be labelled as such. And it permits non-Halal meat to be labeled as such, in the unlikely event that someone wanted to.

                  I did specify that I wanted an honest reason.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  It’s not happening, and thus the law’s cage is being rattled. This will continue, of course.

                  How fortunate we are, that such as you aren’t permitted to set the limits of argument, based upon your arbitrary definitions of what’s legitimate and “honest”, as determined in your fantasies.

                  That leaves with all the reasons folks might be concerned here, be they health, cost, religious disharmonies, etc. Such a blessing, is freedom and liberty, at least until some authoritarian destroys them.

        • mohdanga

          Really? Muslims riot because a Koran gets dropped 8,000 miles away or a cartoon is published. I can just imagine how tolerant they would be to have to eat food prepared according to the Jewish faith, their hated enemy.

          • andagain

            Kosher requires the animal to be slaughtered by slitting its throat and letting it bleed to death. So does Halal. the only difference I know of is that Halal objects to stunning the animal first, but the Kosher rite is not always interpreted as requiring that. So Kosher meat may not be Halal, but Halal meat is probably usually Kosher.

            They already are eating food prepared according to the Jewish faith!

            • nae a belger

              I was always under the impression that Moslems could eat Kosher but not vice versa.
              The Kosher butcheries always look sparklingly clean…

              • andagain

                I think that Kosher requires a certain cut across the throat, but Halal only requires that it be done with a sharp knife.

    • Ron Todd

      I would.

  • Michael Ray

    My guess is that the halal business is more to do with cheaper production methods than religion.Since we started processing food it has been the practice to adulterate it by substituting cheaper ingredients.The same reason as Horse got in the food chain.

  • GraveDave

    You and Brendan O’Neil are right, while Christine Odone of the DT is doing her usual to look nice and ‘right on’ by calling it anti Muslim prejudice, and everyone who disagrees bigots..

    • GeeBee36_6

      The DT these days is more Progressive than the Guardian. That aside, Odone is quite wrong: it is not ‘anti Muslim prejudice’ at all. What it is (and it’s an absolutely crucial distinction) is plain anti-Muslim. That word ‘prejudice’ is, when left in place, what allows the Progressives to claim the upper ground. It means (and almost no-one these days bothers to think about it) that someone has pre-judged something, based on a single characteristic alone. In this case, that would mean that someone has declared an antipathy to Muslims for no other reason than that they are Muslims. In Odone’s use of the term, however, this is demonstrably false. The people who are against this practice are by no means declaring automatic antipathy – ie prejudice – to Muslims for no other reason. Rather they are declaring that they have considered one specific element of the Muslim faith, and concluded that it is abhorrent. Thus they find it unacceptable that halal slaughter, when universally applied, and thus when used to provide halal meat to non-Muslims (people who therefore do not insist upon it), perpetuates unnecessary cruelty.

  • Adam Carter

    It mifght not matter to you that the name of Allah is spoken at the time of slaughter but it most certainly matters to me,.
    I reject Allah as shown to us in the Koran and Hadith; I think he is a false deity and I think he is evil.
    I want nothing whatever to do with him.

    • ROBERT BROWN

      Indeed, he is the Antichrist……

  • JoeDM

    And Cameron cannot be bothered to take interest in the issue !!!

  • Dan Grover

    Melanie doesn’t really explain why it matters, simply that “it really does”. I can’t say I care that much. No one needs to eat meat to live – we do it because we enjoy it. I think that, by the time you get to the point where you’re raising and then killing animals for your own pleasure, getting hoity over the exact manner in which they’re slaughtered is a bit rich.

    I say that as a card carrying carnivore, by the way. I think we just have to accept that what we do is pretty barbaric – caring about whether the thing is stunned or not in the last ~30 seconds of its life seems a bit pointless.

    • Alexsandr

      because having the animal in stressful pain for those 30 seconds is not what we do oin a civilised society, if we have a way of avoiding that pain by stunning.
      and as I said above, a stressed animal is full of adrenalin, and that affects the taste and toughness of the meat

    • GraveDave

      You’re missing the point.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        …not for the first time.

  • zanzamander

    People who hide behind the animal welfare schtick but all the while are really upset because Halal meat is essentially an Islamic religious slaughter should come out and say so.

    There is nothing wrong in that, otherwise bringing up this whole fluffy animal welfare argument, you’re only snookering your self into a corner.

    • saffrin

      We need a Government that will ban the sale of religious meat altogether.
      That will sort it in more ways than one.

    • Adam Carter

      Agreed. I have done so on this thread, saying unequivocally why I am opposed to it, and it’s not on animal welfare grounds.
      I hope my comment stays up.

  • The Elderking

    It actually does matter even if the animal has been stunned before the ritual slaughter.

    Why should I be duped into eating meat killed to pacify some Muslims imaginary friend on the moon? If Muslims can demand a ritual slaughter I should be able to know that MY meat has not gone through such a process. It should be labeled as such at EVERY outlet – shops, supermarkets, restaurants, takeaways, schools, hospitals, venues etc etc and non-halal alternatives provided.

    I refuse to have my food dictated to my muslims and greedy business’s. Why should my cultural/religious/humane sensitivities be trumped by Islam and ignored by government?

    There is also a point that seems overlooked….

    If most meat is to be ritually slaughtered then ONLY MUSLIMS WILL BE QUALIFIED TO BE SLAUGHTERMEN. Eventually all abattoirs may become muslim only business’s

    Does no-one care about that insidious takeover of our food chain?

    • Chris Morriss

      I simply do not understand why the religious slaughter techniques of these two Middle-Eastern retrograde religions are allowed to take place in this country. Why can they not be banned? After all, the government is very keen to ban all sort of things that are far less harmful to our society.
      And while they are at it, ban the horrendous ritual sexual mutilation of young boys that these two religions get away with.

      • mohdanga

        Yes, we all know that male circumcision is the equivalent of Muslim FGM. Yawn. Next Muslim apologist please.

        • mohdanga

          Oops, you called Islam retrograde which would make it appear you’re not an apologist.

  • Joseph Harry Tyrrell

    Do you all think that your meat is gently massaged to death in a non-halal abattoir? If you care so much about the welfare of animals, why not give up eating them entirely? I’m sure they’d much rather that than being so blessed by everyone’s decision whether to kill them instantly by slitting their throat or to stun them (often more than once) before doing do.

    • Blindsideflanker

      Kill them instantly by slitting their throats? Yeah right, would you care to quantify ‘instantly’?

    • McRobbie

      I’ve seen it done when traveling through the desert many years ago..the goat in question did not like its throat being cut at all and made everyone aware for a significant period of time, certainly it was not instantly dead. Its a cruel and beastly business. I dont want to eat meat butchered that way and I should have the choice.

    • cartimandua

      The failed stunning argument is proven utterly false. Failed stuns are .0004 % according to vets.

  • swatnan

    Its a barbaric practice, kosher and halal, medieval and out of its time. These ritual killings must be stopped.

  • Joe Soap

    In reality it’s Islamisation by stealth. Another notch in the sword of Islam!

  • Frank

    It is said to be cheaper to kill animals the Halal way, so it actually relates to the spivs / bean counters running the show rather than a hidden religious conspiracy.
    Good to see that Dave Cameron is not in favour of compulsory labelling telling you how the animal was slaughtered. Why can’t he get even this minor decision right?

  • glurk

    It matters at the very least simply because we dont know. As a BBC bod pointed out this AM, we slaughter by stunning and cutting throats , just as do most Halal slaughterers. The only difference is the requirement for the slaughterman to be a follower of Islam and the short prayer that must be said by him which to my mind is unimportant but we should at least be informed. Information is all, then at least we also have choice.

  • cartimandua

    I once asked in Tescos and they couldn’t tell me.

  • Ron Todd

    No point the likes of me complaining nobody in authority will give any more concern to my views than they would give to the views of their 3rd cousins pet goldfish.

    Only when the Muslims start asking for all food to be clearly labeled halal or humanly slaughtered will anything change. If most of them buy meat from halal butchers from their home country they won’t care too much what the big British supermarkets are doing.

    • Blindsideflanker

      You have got it, you know your place, confirmed by Cameron already washing his hands of it , claiming it is nothing to do with Government, which is pretty incredible considering he has run a Government that has stuck its nose into pretty much everything,

    • GraveDave

      According to Brendan O Neil, Subway are not only all Halal but have taken bacon and ham off the menu.

      The sandwich shop Subway has also gone default halal, dishing up halal-only meat in 185 of its stores in the UK and taking ham and bacon off the menu. What about those of us who might want a delicious bit of pig-flesh in our 6in sarnie? Apparently our wishes come a poor second to the Muslim minority’s religious preferences. Many schools have gone default halal, too. Last year it was revealed that three quarters of schools in one London borough now feed their pupils halal grub only.
      ….

  • kyalami

    Perhaps it’s time to have a week where those who object to halal meat protest by not buying any. 1st – 7th June, anyone?

    • Blindsideflanker

      Have a pork week. Hmmmmmm baron sarnie with brown sauce, why wait? I think I will start it tomorrow

      • kyalami

        Indeed. Stock up now before the rush!

      • kyalami

        Although it would not entirely surprise me to find that porkers are slaughtered halal-style.

  • TeachESL

    Kosher slaughter is the most humane there is; the animal feels no pain in the process. But kosher slaughtering is under attack whereas Halal is getting a free pass.

    • Blindsideflanker

      I don’t believe so, some Muslims will accept a level of stunning, Kosher won’t. And when you see cattle being slaughter for Kosher they are put in frames (turned up side down I think) and have then have their throats slit. If the cattle aren’t well and truly stressed out by that procedure, breathing in their own blood is probably an excruciatingly painful way to be killed.

      • TeachESL

        All I know is that the purpose is to make sure that the animal loses consciousness immediately. I don’t know how it could breathe in its blood if it has lost consciousness.

        • saffrin

          The same way you would.

        • cartimandua

          Because it wont “immediately” at all.

          • the viceroy’s gin

            …sort of like some do with pre-born infants, then?

            • cartimandua

              There is no such thing as a “pre born” and no one beheads them. I suppose you mean “partial birth” abortions.
              Well what we do in this country is stop the foetal heart when
              it is more humane to end a pregnancy .
              Prolifers in the USA insist infants must die after birth when they could feel it. They also put all women at risk which is why womens health stats are so bad Amnesty has complained about it.

              • the viceroy’s gin

                …I rest my case.

      • Alexsandr

        stressing the animal before death put adrenalin into the blood. and that makes for nasty tasting and tough meat.

    • cartimandua

      And the difference is?

  • Radford_NG

    The reason New Zealand lamb is halal is because of the EU Common Agricultural Policy (presided over by the French) which imposes restrictions on non-EU produce.This has meant the New Zealanders,deprived of free access to their traditional British market,have had to gear their market to selling to the UAE and other muslim states.

  • Toby Guise

    Melanie,

    By concentrating only on animal welfare, your article only deals with a third of the halal issue. There are two other important stakeholders in this debate which, when combined with people concerned about animal welfare, make up a considerable proportion of people in this country.

    The first is Secularists. Halal butchers contribute a proportion of their income to the Dawa. Rather like the tithe of the medieval church, this is a financial contribution towards the religion with a particular focus on the prosletysing of the faith. By returning huge volumes of business to halal butchers, companies like M&S, Waitrose, and Pizza Express – not to mention the entire New Zealand meat industry – are offering direct financial support to Islamic prosletysation. There is nothing wrong with Islam prosletysing – I’m sure I would want to if I was a Muslim – but there is a lot wrong with your average Joe with a taste for chicken pizza paying for it.

    The second is Christians and Jews. There is this pesky footnote in the Old Testament called the Ten Commandments, the first of which is an exhortation to have ‘no other gods but me’. It is easy to contend that eating meat which has been killed in honour of another God breaches this; and furthermore that being allowed to observe the First Commandment in this way should be included under the ECHR as a natural and inviolable expression of these two religions.

    Although the fact that Daisy the Sheep had a nasty time being killed by the Halal butcher suits the level of the British press, the above two issues are far more consequential and magazines like yours should really get onto them.

    I hope you read this.

    Regards,

    Toby Guise

    • HookesLaw

      Which other God are you talking about?

      • saffrin

        George Cloony.

      • Chris Morriss

        Probably the historically widely-held view that the common god of Jews and Muslims is a different entity from the god of whom Jesus spoke.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        David Cameron, your messiah.

    • Liz

      The third is that non-Muslims cannot carry out the slaughter.

  • monty61

    Interestingly Lidl is the only supermarket named in the article where all Halal meat is labelled – so it can hardly be argued it’s a cost thing.

    (Nice to know – I’ve taken to loading up on their packs of Aberdeen Angus fillet steak for £5 a portion).

    • Alexsandr

      well we have the answer. Fill in those customer comment cards at your local supermarket and demand that method of slaughter and whether mumbo jumbo witterings have taken place be on their labels, or you wont buy their meat.

  • Blindsideflanker

    I am sorry it does matter to have our food prayed over by a faith, here we are being co opted into Islamic culture by default. I resent that.

    It seems that we are being made to jump to the demands of a minority.

    There are demands in the Christian faith that they shouldn’t pander to false gods and idols, which would include having Islamic sanctioned meat. Why should they have to accommodate the demands of a different religion in preference to their own.

    But its not just Christians, Sikhs are told that they shouldn’t eat food that has been religiously sanctioned.

    We also see the hypocrisy of the British establishment, where they make it their business to criminalise a Christian couple who didn’t want homosexuals in their B&B, but come over all coy and retiring when it might mean upsetting the religion of peace.

    Finally, the whole Halal thing is a rubbish. I believe the Koran says that eating with the people of the book (i.e Christians) is fine, which means eating non halal food is fine. In addition the requirements of Islam is really about laying down principles of food hygiene, the whole prayer thing is an irrelevance. What was being specified is that animals shouldn’t be put in any more stress than was possible, and that the carcass should be drained of blood because the meat keeps longer that way, especially in hot climates. But as we now have better animal welfare and ways of dispatching animals, if the Koran was being written down now the modern methods for slaughter would be considered in preference to slitting an animals throat.

    • HookesLaw

      The points you make are fair enough and it illustrates the way the Muslim religion is all things to all people – including those who see mileage in opposing it. It needs to evolve but seems to have no central structure or organisation that can facilitate this.

      • Blindsideflanker

        Its a matter of exerting power and control. Imam control over Muslims by dictating what they eat and drink, which keeps them a separate group within societies, and power in that by claiming to have immovable religious requirements they can make everybody else dance to their tune.

      • saffrin

        Trident would go along way towards facilitating the problem I’m sure.

    • FrenchNewsonlin

      Halal is now a multi million pound/euro/dollar business. The certification procedures generate fees for the mosque committees which produce them. Part of such fees go to Muslim charities and some of that money in turn could be funding causes that Western security services may well disapprove of! The stats suggest far more meat is being slaughtered to Halal requirements each day than the Muslim population of the UK (or indeed as has also been shown) of France can possibly consume.

  • Liz

    People need to understand that halal pre-stunning is not standard pre-stunning. The current is different so that the animal remains conscious.

  • Radford_NG

    There is more to it then slaughter;it is the question of following the money.

    Kosher has always been a niche market for Jewish communities.Halal is different.It has been introduced into the general market and is a commercial enterprise.But what happens to the money?A proportion of it goes to support `who-knows-what` Islamic causes.Muslems have to contribute a proportion of their income to such causes;but not only,this slaughterers have to pay a fee to be authenticated and the clergy are paid to give a blessing.I have grave doubts as to what may happen to this money and what it maybe financing:(nobody ever suggested the Stern gang was financed this way;but what are we financing now?).

    How did this come about?We may attribute it to the results of the civic jehad;and a Quisling ruling caste.

    • HookesLaw

      I have grave doubts about you. Just how much money do you think some muslim vicar is paid to say a few prayers to bless the slaughter house? This is going to pay for another 911?

      • Blindsideflanker

        Indeed it makes the slaughter business a closed shop for Muslims.

        • HookesLaw

          How so?

          • Blindsideflanker

            If the person slitting the throat of an animal is required to make a prayer to Allah it rules out an atheist doing the job.

            • Adam Carter

              Or a Christian.

  • alabenn

    Let us get things in perspective, does it matter if some people are so witless, as to think saying a prayer before killing an animal, makes its meat any better.
    The part that matters is the slitting of the throat while still alive, this allows the heart to pump the blood from the body which in hot climates, it is believed the carcass would spoil quicker than in moderate or cold climates.
    Stunning before does not stop the heart so it would still be effective in removing blood.
    Religion should not be allowed to come into it, it is down to food hygiene .

    • HookesLaw

      I agree the prayer is a bit pointless. The fact that halal meat can still be OK with stunning for most Muslims shows the issue of the animal being alert, as opposed to being merely alive, when killed is not a big one for most of them.
      Even McDonaugh has to admit that the numbers of animals slaughtered alert and alive is very small. 3% of cattle is 84,000 not millions. She can always stick to pork.
      In the end labelling the meat ought not to be a big issue and it ought not to be a big issue for all muslims to accept stunned animals.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        …but that won’t keep you Camerluvvies from pandering to your socialist mates over it, as usual.

    • the viceroy’s gin

      It’s hygiene, yes, but also animal cruelty is involved. A quick and humane kill is something we should strive for, no matter what the religious types say.

    • itdoesntaddup

      The prayer is frankly irrelvant. The texture and flavour of the meat are affected by halal slaughter. I do not prefer my meat to be chewy with less good flavour, however many spices you try to disguise it with.

      Inhumane slaughter without stunning is even worse for the animal and for flavour and texture, as the animal tenses its muscles.

  • you_kid

    Informed consent is in many ways an outdated concept.
    No longer does it apply in our ‘over-informed with tripe’ society. People are flooded with regurgitated waffle – many have no opinion at all.

    • Inverted Meniscus

      You certainly specialise in “regurgitated waffle” and utter gibberish for that matter.

      • you_kid

        You have no idea what is discussed in (medical) ethics today as you aptly demonstrate. Give me more, loons, give me more!

        • the viceroy’s gin

          …give you and the goat another 1/2 dozen sockpuppets, is what you mean .

          • you_kid

            Your mate chuzzlewitz is now rebranded, lad? Did you know or have you had a hand in that one too?
            You and your nat socialist mate raw england will kid us not. Not the you_kids.

            • the viceroy’s gin

              Can ANY of you other socialist nutters translate this nutter’s gibberish?

    • William Haworth

      Good job we’ve got experts to run our lives for us instead.

      • you_kid

        Nanny stateism goes hand in hand with reducing the relevance of informed consent. If the information is flawed as it often is, there can be no meaningful consent.

        • the viceroy’s gin

          …good thing we have you fascists to take over, eh lad?

          • you_kid

            You and your pal raw engerland are the natsis, lad.
            Why deny it any longer. Come out. I will assist if I must.

            Say it loud and with pride:
            I vote UKIP because I hate competition and the free market.

            • the viceroy’s gin

              Nope, still gibberish, lad… from this and any of your many sockpuppets, and I notice you and some of your sockpuppets have been outed elsewhere.

  • @PhilKean1

    .
    A nation of animal lovers – dwindling in number due to the EU-Liberal-left’s unlimited immigration –

    – that has strict rules governing the treatment of animals – unless cruelty is inflicted in the name of religion.
    .

    • Tony_E

      I have never seriously considered vegetarianism before but somehow it doesn’t seem like the worst option……

      • William Haworth

        That’s just giving in. At least my bacon butty will never be halal.

        • Alexandrovich

          You reckon? They don’t eat it but enough of them work in pig ‘processing’ plants. There’s money in it you see.

    • John Dalton

      That anyone is surprised by this leaves me astounded. The steady Islamifi-cation of our country is self-evident and made even more terrifying when you look at the demographics – but for years now the cowards who govern us have shut down the debate by smearing anybody who questions what is happening as a “rac-ist” – and the situation is getting worse not better.

      Just look at the treatment UKIP are getting – the one party who actually would try to do something about this. Put this together which what’s happening in our schools, universities and prisons together with the various groo-ming scandals and you have just a small taste of what’s to come…

      • Shazza

        This horror of halal slaughter and it being foisted on us is just another nail in the coffin of Western secular standards and mores.
        The headline should read ‘ Further capitulation to islam’ – islam means ‘submission’ and like lemmings, we are rushing to the cliffs to throw ourselves backwards to the 7th century. Why?

        • Alexandrovich

          Because, I suppose, we supply military hardware to Saudi Arabia.

        • The_Missing_Think

          “Why?”
          _____

          Buy £100’s worth of secondhand lappy, use it as a truth book, and nothing else. When it dies of viruses, re-format, and re-install XP, or buy another. Use a £10 dedicated memory stick for it, and it alone.

          Do not use it for anything other than seeking the answer to why? No banking, no bidding, just going adventuring beyond your normal comfort zone.

      • I_Hate_radicalism

        Well said.

    • HookesLaw

      What have people from Pakistan got to do with the EU? Numbers from Pakistan have fallen dramatically.

      The most common reason for people coming to Britain is to study. And the govt have been successful in cutting bogus students. So talk of ‘unlimited immigration’ is just your fantasy.

      • @PhilKean1

        .
        There’s one born every minute.

        We can’t control immigration as long as we remain in the hated EU !
        .

        • Dan Grover

          How many immigrants demanding Halal produce do you think come from within the EU?

          • the viceroy’s gin

            …you mean, after it expands to Vladivostok like Call Me Dave wants it to do?

            His ilk will probably try to get Shinto rites written into the EUSSR, so they can take over Japan, before they’re finished.

          • Tim Reed

            “How many immigrants demanding Halal produce do you think come from within the EU?”

            To rephrase your question :

            How many immigrants, having migrated from non-EU nations into any of the 28 member states of the EU, have subsequently entered the UK who might demand Halal produce?

      • saffrin

        Pakistan’s double every time one gets married… they import a wife/husband then breed in multiples.
        They grow, they double again in imported marriage,they breed again in multiples.

  • Ricky Strong

    It’s really not so much the method of slaughter. I am vehemently against the mass production and appalling treatment of animals be it for halal or non-halal consumption.

    What I do object to with an intense passion is that I should in any way, shape or form have anything to do with Islam in my life. I want that religion as far away from me as possible and I have that right as much as Muslims do to eat halal meat.

  • telemachus

    Pizza Express confirms that all it’s Chicken is Halal but the website confirms it stuns the chicken before killing
    I am more concerned that the Government inquires into those areas it controls
    There is a strong suspicion that School and NHS meals are made with Halal meat
    *
    Why has the Mail not exposed this?

    • Tony_E

      It’s odd isn’t it, that the Left in this country cannot decide which of it’s political allies to stand with on this issue:

      Animal rights groupings (who they traditionally supported over hunting and life sciences) or Islamic ones (because as was stated earlier this week – the right has no traction with immigrant muslims who are largely Labour supporting)

      We are seeing the problem of political parties trying to gain power by appealing to lots of interest groups – they tie themselves in knots trying to please them all at once.

      I haven’t heard Labour’s spokesman on this yet…..

      • Kingstonian

        Nor animal rights activist either.

        • Tony_E

          I wonder what they are scared of?

      • telemachus

        As always the Socialist position is a quest for honesty

        • Tony_E

          You mean they honestly don’t want to offend any of their potential voters by taking a stand?

        • Inverted Meniscus

          You need to check your spelling. Add the letters ‘dis’ to the beginning of the word ‘honesty’ and you have the Fascist a Labour on everything.

        • flaxdoctor

          …the object of the said quest being to crush it under a tonne of lies wherever you find it.

      • Inverted Meniscus

        Labour will calculate which special interest group represents the most votes, postal or legitimate, then decide accordingly.

      • Holly

        Maybe Chuck will be able to ‘shed some light’ on Labour’s position on this, at his appearance on yet another outing of QT I will not be watching.

        • the viceroy’s gin

          …and how about you socialist Camerluvvies?

    • Ron Todd

      They did mention it.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here