Halal meat served in three-quarters of council-supported schools in Waltham Forest

First published in News
Last updated
East London and West Essex Guardian Series: Photograph of the Author by , Senior reporter

Three-quarters of schools under Waltham Forest Council control serve only Halal meat, the Guardian can reveal.

A total of 46 schools and academies supported by the local authority order only Halal meat from Waltham Forest Catering, their supplier.

Just one school serves both Halal and non-Halal meat and 15 serve meat from animals slaughtered using ‘standard’ methods, a Guardian enquiry has discovered.

The news comes after a row erupted at Larkswood Primary School in New Road, Chingford, last month when parents were informed meat served there would be replaced by food prepared according to the rituals of Islam from mid-April.

Parents said they had no issue with Muslim children practicing their faith and eating Halal meat but did not want these religious beliefs imposed on their own sons and daughters.

A council spokesman said: “All meat provided to local schools is certified by the Halal Food Authority. HFA certified meat is from animals that are stunned prior to slaughter.”

But grandmother Lin Walton, 63, of Forest Drive East in Leytonstone, said many parents might object to the way in which the animals die.

Halal meat is prepared by draining all the blood from the animal, and workers must recite the name of Allah during the slaughtering process. Pork is also forbidden.

The vegetarian, whose two grandchildren attend Barclay Primary School in Canterbury Road, Leyton, said: “People should be aware of what they are eating. There are ethical issues.

“It’s a very inhumane way of killing animals. I’m sure a lot of parents would object to it. The stunning doesn’t do much good. [If a school just serves Halal meat] it should be clear on their website.”

Waltham Forest is home to around 33,000 Muslims, equivalent to 15 per cent of the population, according to the latest available figures.

The Guardian has asked the council to list which schools do and do not serve Halal meat.

There are also 14 schools outside of the authority’s control which make their own meal arrangements.

A spokesman for the council said: “Waltham Forest Catering supplies Halal meat to 46 of the borough’s schools. Whether or not we provide them with Halal meat is a decision for each individual school.

“This is not an issue of cost, and more often than not comes down to simple logistics as many school kitchens simply aren’t big enough to allow staff to store and prepare two types of meat.”

Are you a parent in Waltham Forest? What do you think about the issue? Contact Joe Curtis on 07824 530 127 or at jcurtis@london.newsquest.co.uk.

Comments (112)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:34pm Thu 4 Apr 13

SpursSupporter1 says...

What a joke but heh we are in Waltham Forest
What a joke but heh we are in Waltham Forest SpursSupporter1
  • Score: 3

8:15pm Thu 4 Apr 13

tjw422 says...

I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England.
I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England. tjw422
  • Score: 10

10:12pm Thu 4 Apr 13

everoptimistic says...

Perhaps now is the time for the council to give us a full list of schools which serve halal meat only. This could be done in the Waltham Forest News so that ALL parents in the borough will be aware of what options there are. This would allow them to make an informed choice. It seems that there may have been a lack of transparency here. There seems to be a lack of understanding by the borough and Waltham Forest Catering. Christians, animal welfare supporters, Sikhs and Hindus may not be happy to find that they are unknowingly eating Halal just as Muslims would not be happy to find that they had been eating Haram (as was shown recently with the horsemeat problem). So come on LBWF. Use your newspaper to tell us all the facts for a change or perhaps give a full disclosure to the Guardian.
Perhaps now is the time for the council to give us a full list of schools which serve halal meat only. This could be done in the Waltham Forest News so that ALL parents in the borough will be aware of what options there are. This would allow them to make an informed choice. It seems that there may have been a lack of transparency here. There seems to be a lack of understanding by the borough and Waltham Forest Catering. Christians, animal welfare supporters, Sikhs and Hindus may not be happy to find that they are unknowingly eating Halal just as Muslims would not be happy to find that they had been eating Haram (as was shown recently with the horsemeat problem). So come on LBWF. Use your newspaper to tell us all the facts for a change or perhaps give a full disclosure to the Guardian. everoptimistic
  • Score: 4

10:40pm Thu 4 Apr 13

DBuchanan says...

Not at all surprised to to see this issue develop.

RFree Food or "Religion-Free" food certification is an active concept out of North America that could be useful in the UK - www.religionfreefood
.org.

RFree Food certification would give places like schools a simple and respectful means to inform students and parents that, as part of their official production process, specific products have not been subject to religious ritual.

Many people purchase products because they have been subject to specific rituals and thus meet their religious requirements - that is just fine. Some people do not care if a food product has been subject to a religious ritual, or not. However, in North America, a growing number want to at least know if any given food product has been subject to religious ritual at some point in the production process. Why?

The reasons can be as varied and carry equal conviction as those given in choosing religiously certified foods. In all cases, the choice is personal and it is a growing consumer rights issue to know the facts.

A lot of these issues could be solved with something as simple as proper labelling!
Not at all surprised to to see this issue develop. RFree Food or "Religion-Free" food certification is an active concept out of North America that could be useful in the UK - www.religionfreefood .org. RFree Food certification would give places like schools a simple and respectful means to inform students and parents that, as part of their official production process, specific products have not been subject to religious ritual. Many people purchase products because they have been subject to specific rituals and thus meet their religious requirements - that is just fine. Some people do not care if a food product has been subject to a religious ritual, or not. However, in North America, a growing number want to at least know if any given food product has been subject to religious ritual at some point in the production process. Why? The reasons can be as varied and carry equal conviction as those given in choosing religiously certified foods. In all cases, the choice is personal and it is a growing consumer rights issue to know the facts. A lot of these issues could be solved with something as simple as proper labelling! DBuchanan
  • Score: 0

10:57pm Thu 4 Apr 13

e10biker says...

Should we as council tax payers accept that Halal meat is provided to at least 75% of children in the borough, when only 15% of the population is Muslim? What about the rights of the majority? The UK government and the EU accept that animal welfare is important in the killing of animals for use of food and both believe that Halal and Kosher methods of killing food are inhumane. So why oh why is Waltham Forest trying to make the use of Halal meat the norm in all our schools. Are we as a nation giving up on our values, in this case the humane treatment of animals?
By all means LBWF provide Halal for the 15% but do not discriminate against the rest of us the Christians, the Hindus, Sikhs, the humanists or whatever race you are. Because at the moment the 85% of the population who are not Muslim are being discriminated against by the policies of Waltham Forest Council, however I doubt they care!
Should we as council tax payers accept that Halal meat is provided to at least 75% of children in the borough, when only 15% of the population is Muslim? What about the rights of the majority? The UK government and the EU accept that animal welfare is important in the killing of animals for use of food and both believe that Halal and Kosher methods of killing food are inhumane. So why oh why is Waltham Forest trying to make the use of Halal meat the norm in all our schools. Are we as a nation giving up on our values, in this case the humane treatment of animals? By all means LBWF provide Halal for the 15% but do not discriminate against the rest of us the Christians, the Hindus, Sikhs, the humanists or whatever race you are. Because at the moment the 85% of the population who are not Muslim are being discriminated against by the policies of Waltham Forest Council, however I doubt they care! e10biker
  • Score: 7

10:59pm Thu 4 Apr 13

Redbridge person says...

Oh no...how can anyone dare criticise muslims or islam....the white trendy liberal lefties will be outraged...
Oh no...how can anyone dare criticise muslims or islam....the white trendy liberal lefties will be outraged... Redbridge person
  • Score: 3

11:42pm Thu 4 Apr 13

Trevor 2 says...

Having yesterday (3rd) witnessed the delivery of lamb carcasses to a halal meat shop at the bottom of the High Street, Walthamstow, the said carcasses being taken out of the back of a small grubby car, I suggest Health Inspectors check all the meat these schoolkids are being FORCED to consume!!
Having yesterday (3rd) witnessed the delivery of lamb carcasses to a halal meat shop at the bottom of the High Street, Walthamstow, the said carcasses being taken out of the back of a small grubby car, I suggest Health Inspectors check all the meat these schoolkids are being FORCED to consume!! Trevor 2
  • Score: 8

11:51pm Thu 4 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

Animals killed for halal meat have to be conscious while they die. This is so cruel that ritual slaughter had to be specially exempted from UK animal-welfare law.

They sometimes use a process they call "stunning" but this doesn't knock the animals out, just stops it struggling. There's a lot more information on an earlier story, at
http://www.guardian-
series.co.uk/news/10
308743.Row_over_Hala
l_meat_at_school/

From an animal-welfare site:
http://blog.scotland

foranimals.org/#cate

gory7

There's more at
http://www.secularne
wsdaily.com/2012/05/
barbaric-halal-and-k
osher-butchering-now
-commonplace-in-brit
ain/

A Muslim website makes it clear that animals must be conscious while they bleed to death: http://www.unstunned
halal.com/stunning/U
K_Muslims.html
"The stunning of animals prior to their slaughter is an unacceptable requirement...," said Mr Iqbal Sacranie, Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain.
Animals killed for halal meat have to be conscious while they die. This is so cruel that ritual slaughter had to be specially exempted from UK animal-welfare law. They sometimes use a process they call "stunning" but this doesn't knock the animals out, just stops it struggling. There's a lot more information on an earlier story, at http://www.guardian- series.co.uk/news/10 308743.Row_over_Hala l_meat_at_school/ From an animal-welfare site: http://blog.scotland foranimals.org/#cate gory7 There's more at http://www.secularne wsdaily.com/2012/05/ barbaric-halal-and-k osher-butchering-now -commonplace-in-brit ain/ A Muslim website makes it clear that animals must be conscious while they bleed to death: http://www.unstunned halal.com/stunning/U K_Muslims.html "The stunning of animals prior to their slaughter is an unacceptable requirement...," said Mr Iqbal Sacranie, Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain. Walthamster
  • Score: 4

12:06am Fri 5 Apr 13

mdj says...

'What about the rights of the majority?'

Equally to the point is this Council's routine indifference to the law of the land.
Meat killed for consumption by specified religious minorities is exempt from the stunning rule. To buy halal meat knowingly for anyone else is a deliberate subversion of that law.
This council proclaims its Fairtrade accreditation, but chooses to ignore the humane treatment of animals.

There is also the question of fair competitive tendering: how can a mainstream butcher bid for the large schools market if the council, for reasons of simple convenience, excludes them from consideration?

It would be interesting to see what legal advice is in the minutes of Council meetings discussing this topic.
'What about the rights of the majority?' Equally to the point is this Council's routine indifference to the law of the land. Meat killed for consumption by specified religious minorities is exempt from the stunning rule. To buy halal meat knowingly for anyone else is a deliberate subversion of that law. This council proclaims its Fairtrade accreditation, but chooses to ignore the humane treatment of animals. There is also the question of fair competitive tendering: how can a mainstream butcher bid for the large schools market if the council, for reasons of simple convenience, excludes them from consideration? It would be interesting to see what legal advice is in the minutes of Council meetings discussing this topic. mdj
  • Score: 2

7:26am Fri 5 Apr 13

VillageIdiot69 says...

So 75% of schools are forcing 85% of their pupils to eat meat that is not prepared in accordance with whatever their families particular beliefs are.

I can't say I'm surprised, this stealth takeover has been happening for years and it's only now that peoples eyes are being opened to what is actually happening out in the real world.

At last, a decent investigative report from our local newspaper, well done.
So 75% of schools are forcing 85% of their pupils to eat meat that is not prepared in accordance with whatever their families particular beliefs are. I can't say I'm surprised, this stealth takeover has been happening for years and it's only now that peoples eyes are being opened to what is actually happening out in the real world. At last, a decent investigative report from our local newspaper, well done. VillageIdiot69
  • Score: 0

9:08am Fri 5 Apr 13

cynicalsue says...

tjw422 wrote:
I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England.
You say: "I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group."

Hmmm, methinks Christian/Catholic Missionaries have a lot to answer for in the developing world.
[quote][p][bold]tjw422[/bold] wrote: I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England.[/p][/quote]You say: "I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group." Hmmm, methinks Christian/Catholic Missionaries have a lot to answer for in the developing world. cynicalsue
  • Score: 0

9:49am Fri 5 Apr 13

myopinioncounts says...

Any Head Teacher who has introduced halal only meat without full consultation with ALL parents, staff and governing body should be held accountable.
Any Head Teacher who has introduced halal only meat without full consultation with ALL parents, staff and governing body should be held accountable. myopinioncounts
  • Score: 0

11:20am Fri 5 Apr 13

St George1 says...

What jokers.

1) Less chance of eating deseased meet as blood is fully drained.

2) No one is imposing their beliefs on others, its a decision taken by council/schools, not by muslims to serve only halal meat.

3) Anyway halal meat from the HFA regulated body is the same as non halal meat, ie animal is stunned in the same way as non-halal meat, less regulation and more chances of meat being contaminated with pork/beef/horsemeat, just like non halal meat (this has happened all over the UK with clear cases up and down the country) and therefore cheaper.

4)HMC certified meat is proper halal and less chance of pork/beef/horesmeat contamination (this has not happened yet) therefore more expensive .
What jokers. 1) Less chance of eating deseased meet as blood is fully drained. 2) No one is imposing their beliefs on others, its a decision taken by council/schools, not by muslims to serve only halal meat. 3) Anyway halal meat from the HFA regulated body is the same as non halal meat, ie animal is stunned in the same way as non-halal meat, less regulation and more chances of meat being contaminated with pork/beef/horsemeat, just like non halal meat (this has happened all over the UK with clear cases up and down the country) and therefore cheaper. 4)HMC certified meat is proper halal and less chance of pork/beef/horesmeat contamination (this has not happened yet) therefore more expensive . St George1
  • Score: -1

11:54am Fri 5 Apr 13

J.Lee says...

St George1, you are misinformed.

!. There is no difference in the amount of blood left in the carcass.
2.Wrong, it is Islamification by stealth
No one should have to eat meat that is slaughtered as part of a religious ritual if they do not belong to that religion.
3. Wrong. Those slaughterhouses that do stun use a miniscule aperage on the stunner. This only immobilises the naimal and does not make it insensible so it is argueably worse than no stun at all. It is cheaper because the non-stun abattoirs can have speedier slaughter lines.
4. I thought HMC has gone bust or am I mistaken?
Try this for some actual facts

http://www.simondarb
y.net/2013/03/ritual
-slaughter-id-rather
-be-hated.html?utm_s
ource=twitterfeed&ut
m_medium=facebook
St George1, you are misinformed. !. There is no difference in the amount of blood left in the carcass. 2.Wrong, it is Islamification by stealth No one should have to eat meat that is slaughtered as part of a religious ritual if they do not belong to that religion. 3. Wrong. Those slaughterhouses that do stun use a miniscule aperage on the stunner. This only immobilises the naimal and does not make it insensible so it is argueably worse than no stun at all. It is cheaper because the non-stun abattoirs can have speedier slaughter lines. 4. I thought HMC has gone bust or am I mistaken? Try this for some actual facts http://www.simondarb y.net/2013/03/ritual -slaughter-id-rather -be-hated.html?utm_s ource=twitterfeed&ut m_medium=facebook J.Lee
  • Score: 1

11:54am Fri 5 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

cynicalsue wrote:
tjw422 wrote:
I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England.
You say: "I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group."

Hmmm, methinks Christian/Catholic Missionaries have a lot to answer for in the developing world.
This has nothing to do with missionaries in the developing world.

But I suspect Cynicalsue's response accidentally reveals something important: the reason some non-Muslims support halal slaughter.

I'm sure the same people loudly oppose dog-fighting or fox-hunting. So why do they support ritual slaughter, a far more widespread form of cruelty?

Is it because halal slaughter offends British culture, and people like Cynicalsue despise what I suspect is their own background?
[quote][p][bold]cynicalsue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tjw422[/bold] wrote: I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England.[/p][/quote]You say: "I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group." Hmmm, methinks Christian/Catholic Missionaries have a lot to answer for in the developing world.[/p][/quote]This has nothing to do with missionaries in the developing world. But I suspect Cynicalsue's response accidentally reveals something important: the reason some non-Muslims support halal slaughter. I'm sure the same people loudly oppose dog-fighting or fox-hunting. So why do they support ritual slaughter, a far more widespread form of cruelty? Is it because halal slaughter offends British culture, and people like Cynicalsue despise what I suspect is their own background? Walthamster
  • Score: 0

11:57am Fri 5 Apr 13

J.Lee says...

And just so we know what we are actually talking about from an animal welfare perspective

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=OqZA4ig0z
0I&lc=M-72Vu-Kz-KpVb
lcIPTR2IwIcmenfo0i3j
rqYp7XZ9k&feature=in
box

viewing discretion advised
And just so we know what we are actually talking about from an animal welfare perspective http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=OqZA4ig0z 0I&lc=M-72Vu-Kz-KpVb lcIPTR2IwIcmenfo0i3j rqYp7XZ9k&feature=in box viewing discretion advised J.Lee
  • Score: -1

12:00pm Fri 5 Apr 13

J.Lee says...

More info on HMC

http://www.boycottha
lal.com/call-on-the-
government-to-invest
igate-halal-charitie
s/
More info on HMC http://www.boycottha lal.com/call-on-the- government-to-invest igate-halal-charitie s/ J.Lee
  • Score: -1

12:15pm Fri 5 Apr 13

cynicalsue says...

Walthamster wrote:
cynicalsue wrote:
tjw422 wrote:
I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England.
You say: "I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group."

Hmmm, methinks Christian/Catholic Missionaries have a lot to answer for in the developing world.
This has nothing to do with missionaries in the developing world.

But I suspect Cynicalsue's response accidentally reveals something important: the reason some non-Muslims support halal slaughter.

I'm sure the same people loudly oppose dog-fighting or fox-hunting. So why do they support ritual slaughter, a far more widespread form of cruelty?

Is it because halal slaughter offends British culture, and people like Cynicalsue despise what I suspect is their own background?
Hello Walthamster

Ahh sorry but I don't recognise myself in your summary of me. In fact I despise halal slaughter and the fact that schools/supermarkets etc are 'forcing' us to buy and eat it. I am glad that there is the beginnings of a campaign to highlight this.
However, the cynical side of me always laughs when I read such statements as above (I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group). They might not impose religious ideals in immigrant groups (?) but have caused irreversible damage around the world by 'forcing religious ideals' on indigenous peoples.
For the record, I don't like religion in any shape or form.
[quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cynicalsue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tjw422[/bold] wrote: I cannot calmly put into words what my thoughts are about this continually creeping intrusion into what is basically a stealthy invasion into our still diverse British life. Who makes these decisions? Do we have a proportional representation with these decision makers? Apparently not. I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group. It's time the acceptance of minority people's views accept that we all have to live in acceptable circumstances to all of us. Maybe the point should be made more strongly, this is England.[/p][/quote]You say: "I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group." Hmmm, methinks Christian/Catholic Missionaries have a lot to answer for in the developing world.[/p][/quote]This has nothing to do with missionaries in the developing world. But I suspect Cynicalsue's response accidentally reveals something important: the reason some non-Muslims support halal slaughter. I'm sure the same people loudly oppose dog-fighting or fox-hunting. So why do they support ritual slaughter, a far more widespread form of cruelty? Is it because halal slaughter offends British culture, and people like Cynicalsue despise what I suspect is their own background?[/p][/quote]Hello Walthamster Ahh sorry but I don't recognise myself in your summary of me. In fact I despise halal slaughter and the fact that schools/supermarkets etc are 'forcing' us to buy and eat it. I am glad that there is the beginnings of a campaign to highlight this. However, the cynical side of me always laughs when I read such statements as above (I have yet to see any proof of British citizens forcing religious ideals on any immigrant group). They might not impose religious ideals in immigrant groups (?) but have caused irreversible damage around the world by 'forcing religious ideals' on indigenous peoples. For the record, I don't like religion in any shape or form. cynicalsue
  • Score: 0

1:55pm Fri 5 Apr 13

St George1 says...

jlee

1) Big difference in the amount of blood left in carcass, halal method requires blood to be fuly drained, period.

2) Its islamification according to you, no one is forcing it down your throat, its a pure council/business decision. No muslim parent/person is saying serve non muslims with halal meat as well.

3) Non halal meat also use stunning method.

4) HMC has not gone bust, fully operrational and certifying, just like kosher bodies.

5) This is the UK where kosher and halal food is permitted.
jlee 1) Big difference in the amount of blood left in carcass, halal method requires blood to be fuly drained, period. 2) Its islamification according to you, no one is forcing it down your throat, its a pure council/business decision. No muslim parent/person is saying serve non muslims with halal meat as well. 3) Non halal meat also use stunning method. 4) HMC has not gone bust, fully operrational and certifying, just like kosher bodies. 5) This is the UK where kosher and halal food is permitted. St George1
  • Score: -1

2:23pm Fri 5 Apr 13

DBuchanan says...

RFree Food - The World's Simple and Respectful Religion-Free Food Certification

Www.religionfreefood
.org
RFree Food - The World's Simple and Respectful Religion-Free Food Certification Www.religionfreefood .org DBuchanan
  • Score: 0

2:59pm Fri 5 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

We must point out to those in power that we have the RIGHT to Freedom of Conscience when it comes to the vast over-production of halal meat and so many UNLABELLED halal products & services. As Non-Muslims we do not require halal certification at all in our Non-Islamic nations!
Article 9 Human Rights Act. regarding Freedom of Conscience - should give us the right to religious and secular freedom, i.e. to not be forced to participate in religious rites. Dedicating this meat to a god violates this right: hence there is forced participation in another's religion without consent. Also Jews, Sikhs & Christians are specifically instructed not to eat this meat, so where is their religious freedom?
UK Human Rights Blog
http://ukhumanrights

blog.com/incorporate

d-rights/articles-in

dex/article-9/

Article 9
ukhumanrightsblog.co

m
Article 9 | Right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion Read posts on this Article Article 9 of the Convention provides as follows: (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of thought...
We must point out to those in power that we have the RIGHT to Freedom of Conscience when it comes to the vast over-production of halal meat and so many UNLABELLED halal products & services. As Non-Muslims we do not require halal certification at all in our Non-Islamic nations! Article 9 Human Rights Act. regarding Freedom of Conscience - should give us the right to religious and secular freedom, i.e. to not be forced to participate in religious rites. Dedicating this meat to a god violates this right: hence there is forced participation in another's religion without consent. Also Jews, Sikhs & Christians are specifically instructed not to eat this meat, so where is their religious freedom? UK Human Rights Blog http://ukhumanrights blog.com/incorporate d-rights/articles-in dex/article-9/ Article 9 ukhumanrightsblog.co m Article 9 | Right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion Read posts on this Article Article 9 of the Convention provides as follows: (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of thought... Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

3:01pm Fri 5 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

Muslims have found a loophole which is allowing them to call Electro-immobilisati
on – ‘Stun-to-Immobilis
e'
and from this people assume they mean Electrical Stunning which IT IS NOT!
Stun-to-Immobilise is performed by using Ultra Low Stunning for halal ritual slaughter i.e. the ‘Dimmer Switch’ is turned to the lowest setting!

Electro-immobilisati
on means the animal is stunned JUST ENOUGH TO IMMOBILIZE. It is still fully conscious, just unable to move or vocalise its pain. I am vegetarian because I was disgusted how animals suffer in factory farming but this is worse and totally unnecessary or wanted in 21st century GREAT BRITAIN and EUROPE. We should be moving forward with stopping animals from suffering not going back to 7th century Islam practice.
Muslims have found a loophole which is allowing them to call Electro-immobilisati on – ‘Stun-to-Immobilis e' and from this people assume they mean Electrical Stunning which IT IS NOT! Stun-to-Immobilise is performed by using Ultra Low Stunning for halal ritual slaughter i.e. the ‘Dimmer Switch’ is turned to the lowest setting! Electro-immobilisati on means the animal is stunned JUST ENOUGH TO IMMOBILIZE. It is still fully conscious, just unable to move or vocalise its pain. I am vegetarian because I was disgusted how animals suffer in factory farming but this is worse and totally unnecessary or wanted in 21st century GREAT BRITAIN and EUROPE. We should be moving forward with stopping animals from suffering not going back to 7th century Islam practice. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 1

3:11pm Fri 5 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

The poor things are unable to vocalise their pain and fear. They are NOT STUNNED IN ANY SENSE OF THE WORD. The animal has to be able to 'hear' the prayer.
There is a real danger of cross contamination.
Halal In The UK - What you Should Know - VIDEO
WARNING - there are some images that may distress you in the middle & towards the end of this video... but this is the TRUTH of the matter - this IS what is happening in UK... a vast over-production of halal meat... and now for Export too!
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=OqZA4ig0z
0I&lc=M-72Vu-Kz-KpVb
lcIPTR2IwIcmenfo0i3j
rqYp7XZ9k&feature=in
box
The poor things are unable to vocalise their pain and fear. They are NOT STUNNED IN ANY SENSE OF THE WORD. The animal has to be able to 'hear' the prayer. There is a real danger of cross contamination. Halal In The UK - What you Should Know - VIDEO WARNING - there are some images that may distress you in the middle & towards the end of this video... but this is the TRUTH of the matter - this IS what is happening in UK... a vast over-production of halal meat... and now for Export too! http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=OqZA4ig0z 0I&lc=M-72Vu-Kz-KpVb lcIPTR2IwIcmenfo0i3j rqYp7XZ9k&feature=in box Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

3:47pm Fri 5 Apr 13

St George1 says...

How about kosher food.

This is also slaughtered ritually, would you like this to be banned as well?
How about kosher food. This is also slaughtered ritually, would you like this to be banned as well? St George1
  • Score: -1

3:50pm Fri 5 Apr 13

mdj says...

'..5) This is the UK where kosher and halal food is permitted...'

This evades the point: non-stunned slaughter is allowed for meat consumption by Jews and Muslims only. Slaughter for consumption by others, knowingly or not, is unlawful.

On the other side, I've heard of no evidence that non-Muslims are actually forbidden to consume halal meat, but that's missing the point also.
There remain the questions whether the council can possibly be obeying the laws on humane slaughter, and on fair competitive tendering practices, if non-halal butchers are excluded from bidding.
'..5) This is the UK where kosher and halal food is permitted...' This evades the point: non-stunned slaughter is allowed for meat consumption by Jews and Muslims only. Slaughter for consumption by others, knowingly or not, is unlawful. On the other side, I've heard of no evidence that non-Muslims are actually forbidden to consume halal meat, but that's missing the point also. There remain the questions whether the council can possibly be obeying the laws on humane slaughter, and on fair competitive tendering practices, if non-halal butchers are excluded from bidding. mdj
  • Score: -1

3:54pm Fri 5 Apr 13

e10biker says...

St George 1 says that no-one is forcing non muslims to eat halal meat (I think that is what he is saying). But the article states clearly that a large number of schools in the borough are doing just that. If your child wants a meaty dinner then halal is the only option. You can see the problem. If no halal meat is provided then Muslim parents will complain that they have no choice. As I suggested when this story broke a few weeks ago a simple solution would be for schools to provide a variety of vegetarian options. A vegetarian meal would not upset anyone. Parents could then provide their children with the appropriate meat when they got home. This would be for only one meal in the day and a well planned vegetarian meal could contain all of the nutrients needed. no-one is picking on anyone here but the important thing is that there should be transparency. I am not sure that this has been the case in many schools. Perhaps if and when the Guardian manage to get the information from the borough parents of the schools in question could let us know if they were aware that only halal meat was provided in their school.
St George 1 says that no-one is forcing non muslims to eat halal meat (I think that is what he is saying). But the article states clearly that a large number of schools in the borough are doing just that. If your child wants a meaty dinner then halal is the only option. You can see the problem. If no halal meat is provided then Muslim parents will complain that they have no choice. As I suggested when this story broke a few weeks ago a simple solution would be for schools to provide a variety of vegetarian options. A vegetarian meal would not upset anyone. Parents could then provide their children with the appropriate meat when they got home. This would be for only one meal in the day and a well planned vegetarian meal could contain all of the nutrients needed. no-one is picking on anyone here but the important thing is that there should be transparency. I am not sure that this has been the case in many schools. Perhaps if and when the Guardian manage to get the information from the borough parents of the schools in question could let us know if they were aware that only halal meat was provided in their school. e10biker
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Fri 5 Apr 13

mdj says...

'How about kosher food.

This is also slaughtered ritually, would you like this to be banned as well?'

Do you have any examples of kosher food being fed to gentile children without their knowledge? Nobody is talking of 'banning' anything at this point, but of informed consent and fair trading.
'How about kosher food. This is also slaughtered ritually, would you like this to be banned as well?' Do you have any examples of kosher food being fed to gentile children without their knowledge? Nobody is talking of 'banning' anything at this point, but of informed consent and fair trading. mdj
  • Score: 1

7:17pm Fri 5 Apr 13

Zoreli says...

Overlandandsea wrote:
Muslims have found a loophole which is allowing them to call Electro-immobilisati

on – ‘Stun-to-Immobilis

e'
and from this people assume they mean Electrical Stunning which IT IS NOT!
Stun-to-Immobilise is performed by using Ultra Low Stunning for halal ritual slaughter i.e. the ‘Dimmer Switch’ is turned to the lowest setting!

Electro-immobilisati

on means the animal is stunned JUST ENOUGH TO IMMOBILIZE. It is still fully conscious, just unable to move or vocalise its pain. I am vegetarian because I was disgusted how animals suffer in factory farming but this is worse and totally unnecessary or wanted in 21st century GREAT BRITAIN and EUROPE. We should be moving forward with stopping animals from suffering not going back to 7th century Islam practice.
Well said. If people feel they 'must' kill and eat animals, why add to the creatures' suffering because of superstition. I would urge this school (and all Waltham Forest schools) to provide vegetarian meals instead as E10biker suggests. It's healthier and cruelty free, what could be better?
[quote][p][bold]Overlandandsea[/bold] wrote: Muslims have found a loophole which is allowing them to call Electro-immobilisati on – ‘Stun-to-Immobilis e' and from this people assume they mean Electrical Stunning which IT IS NOT! Stun-to-Immobilise is performed by using Ultra Low Stunning for halal ritual slaughter i.e. the ‘Dimmer Switch’ is turned to the lowest setting! Electro-immobilisati on means the animal is stunned JUST ENOUGH TO IMMOBILIZE. It is still fully conscious, just unable to move or vocalise its pain. I am vegetarian because I was disgusted how animals suffer in factory farming but this is worse and totally unnecessary or wanted in 21st century GREAT BRITAIN and EUROPE. We should be moving forward with stopping animals from suffering not going back to 7th century Islam practice.[/p][/quote]Well said. If people feel they 'must' kill and eat animals, why add to the creatures' suffering because of superstition. I would urge this school (and all Waltham Forest schools) to provide vegetarian meals instead as E10biker suggests. It's healthier and cruelty free, what could be better? Zoreli
  • Score: 1

7:21pm Fri 5 Apr 13

Ferdy54 says...

I do know of a Junior school where the head mistress refused their school having halal school dinners.

And it may seem trivial, and never mind about the health side of it, this also means ordinary school kids can't have anything with bacon or pork in it.
I do know of a Junior school where the head mistress refused their school having halal school dinners. And it may seem trivial, and never mind about the health side of it, this also means ordinary school kids can't have anything with bacon or pork in it. Ferdy54
  • Score: 0

8:24pm Fri 5 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
How about kosher food.

This is also slaughtered ritually, would you like this to be banned as well?
The law clearly states that animals may be ritually slaughtered to be eaten by Jews and Muslims. As that required an exemption from animal-welfare laws, it's questionable whether it is even legal to serve it to non-Jews/Muslims.

No one is feeding kosher meat to schoolchildren without their parents' consent.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: How about kosher food. This is also slaughtered ritually, would you like this to be banned as well?[/p][/quote]The law clearly states that animals may be ritually slaughtered to be eaten by Jews and Muslims. As that required an exemption from animal-welfare laws, it's questionable whether it is even legal to serve it to non-Jews/Muslims. No one is feeding kosher meat to schoolchildren without their parents' consent. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

9:37pm Fri 5 Apr 13

Trevor 2 says...

Religion again interfeering with peoples lives!
Religion again interfeering with peoples lives! Trevor 2
  • Score: 0

11:01am Sat 6 Apr 13

leyton_man says...

I've contacted MP Stella Creasy about this situation, I'm not expecting a reply, any career politician would be wise to stay well clear of this sort of issue.
Stella will only act on issues where she can be seen as a crusader, for example the money lenders.
Considering the ethnic breakdown of her constituency, I imagine she'll keep quiet.
I've also contacted the Labour Party, I expect they'll conveniently brush the issue under the carpet.
This is a disgraceful situation caused by a council only looking after their own interests.
I've contacted MP Stella Creasy about this situation, I'm not expecting a reply, any career politician would be wise to stay well clear of this sort of issue. Stella will only act on issues where she can be seen as a crusader, for example the money lenders. Considering the ethnic breakdown of her constituency, I imagine she'll keep quiet. I've also contacted the Labour Party, I expect they'll conveniently brush the issue under the carpet. This is a disgraceful situation caused by a council only looking after their own interests. leyton_man
  • Score: 1

1:06pm Sat 6 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

Ferdy54 wrote:
I do know of a Junior school where the head mistress refused their school having halal school dinners.

And it may seem trivial, and never mind about the health side of it, this also means ordinary school kids can't have anything with bacon or pork in it.
If one head mistress can take an ethical stance, others should follow her lead. They'd be setting a good example to the children.
[quote][p][bold]Ferdy54[/bold] wrote: I do know of a Junior school where the head mistress refused their school having halal school dinners. And it may seem trivial, and never mind about the health side of it, this also means ordinary school kids can't have anything with bacon or pork in it.[/p][/quote]If one head mistress can take an ethical stance, others should follow her lead. They'd be setting a good example to the children. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

5:12pm Sat 6 Apr 13

Redbridge person says...

The Labour party will not be interested... it is one of their main aims to destroy and eradicate any white british working class culture and replace it with a forced multi cultualism...It is a party full of champagne socialists who all aspire to living in hampstead and upper street ..
The Labour party will not be interested... it is one of their main aims [ as admitted by themselves] to destroy and eradicate any white british working class culture and replace it with a forced multi cultualism...It is a party full of champagne socialists who all aspire to living in hampstead and upper street .. Redbridge person
  • Score: 3

9:33pm Sat 6 Apr 13

Cornbeefur says...

Liberals and Labour have allowed this to happen as most of those in favour of this doctrine have flocked to the sympathetic areas of the UK to advance their position and spread the Muslim faith.

Had the country say had a traditional diet of say two options, meat (of any kind) or a veggie dish, and made a stance, this ridiculous practice of embroiling everyone into a Muslim Diet would never have occurred.

Then again, I suspect that most of those complaining about this, regularly afford themselves a treat to a local Indian (Bangladeshi) meal on a Saturday without even thinking, if it is Halal or not anyhow.

The point should be, tell the parents the truth?
Liberals and Labour have allowed this to happen as most of those in favour of this doctrine have flocked to the sympathetic areas of the UK to advance their position and spread the Muslim faith. Had the country say had a traditional diet of say two options, meat (of any kind) or a veggie dish, and made a stance, this ridiculous practice of embroiling everyone into a Muslim Diet would never have occurred. Then again, I suspect that most of those complaining about this, regularly afford themselves a treat to a local Indian (Bangladeshi) meal on a Saturday without even thinking, if it is Halal or not anyhow. The point should be, tell the parents the truth? Cornbeefur
  • Score: 1

11:34am Mon 8 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Silly comments.

Its a purely commercial decision, comments of islamisation are just plain xenophobic.

You are better off getting the commercial enterprises and schools to explain their decision rather than vent your spleen against muslims.

Schools should provide choices for all parents.

End off.
Silly comments. Its a purely commercial decision, comments of islamisation are just plain xenophobic. You are better off getting the commercial enterprises and schools to explain their decision rather than vent your spleen against muslims. Schools should provide choices for all parents. End off. St George1
  • Score: -1

2:18pm Mon 8 Apr 13

e10biker says...

St George1 wrote:
Silly comments.

Its a purely commercial decision, comments of islamisation are just plain xenophobic.

You are better off getting the commercial enterprises and schools to explain their decision rather than vent your spleen against muslims.

Schools should provide choices for all parents.

End off.
The problem would seem to be that 75% of the population in Waltham forest are being forced WITHOUT CHOICE to have halal meat, for the benefit of the 15%. This is not xenophobia it is the discrimination of the majority by the few.
So please read the article and try to understand the issues rather than retorting to tired line of calling every one racist when you are not winning an argument.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: Silly comments. Its a purely commercial decision, comments of islamisation are just plain xenophobic. You are better off getting the commercial enterprises and schools to explain their decision rather than vent your spleen against muslims. Schools should provide choices for all parents. End off.[/p][/quote]The problem would seem to be that 75% of the population in Waltham forest are being forced WITHOUT CHOICE to have halal meat, for the benefit of the 15%. This is not xenophobia it is the discrimination of the majority by the few. So please read the article and try to understand the issues rather than retorting to tired line of calling every one racist when you are not winning an argument. e10biker
  • Score: 2

2:51pm Mon 8 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Quite clearly there is an agenda here among certion posters, having said that, councils and businesses should not force its decisions on people rather they should offer choices to all.

Can the irate posters agree its not the muslim population that is forcing this issue?
Quite clearly there is an agenda here among certion posters, having said that, councils and businesses should not force its decisions on people rather they should offer choices to all. Can the irate posters agree its not the muslim population that is forcing this issue? St George1
  • Score: -1

4:24pm Mon 8 Apr 13

everoptimistic says...

St George1. I agree that it is not obvious from the article that it is the muslim population who are forcing the issue. However someone in the borough responsible for school dinners must have made this decision either after representation from a concerned group or after working out the cost/logistics of offering a choice to all and deciding that this was the easiest and cheapest option. No thought seems to have been given as to whether the provision of halal only meat might offend anyone else. What we really need are the full facts, the name of who was responsible for the decision and a full statement of why the decision was reached. Chance of getting any of this from LBWF? Your guess is as good as mine but thank you to Joe Curtis for trying to find out. I look forward to the next edition of the Waltham Forest News where I'm sure all will be explained to everyone.
St George1. I agree that it is not obvious from the article that it is the muslim population who are forcing the issue. However someone in the borough responsible for school dinners must have made this decision either after representation from a concerned group or after working out the cost/logistics of offering a choice to all and deciding that this was the easiest and cheapest option. No thought seems to have been given as to whether the provision of halal only meat might offend anyone else. What we really need are the full facts, the name of who was responsible for the decision and a full statement of why the decision was reached. Chance of getting any of this from LBWF? Your guess is as good as mine but thank you to Joe Curtis for trying to find out. I look forward to the next edition of the Waltham Forest News where I'm sure all will be explained to everyone. everoptimistic
  • Score: -1

4:37pm Mon 8 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
Quite clearly there is an agenda here among certion posters, having said that, councils and businesses should not force its decisions on people rather they should offer choices to all.

Can the irate posters agree its not the muslim population that is forcing this issue?
How can posters on this site state whether or not this issue has been forced by muslims? How would we know? That's not the point.

I suspect this undemocratic decision was made by lazy bureaucrats, surrendering before anyone even challenged them.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: Quite clearly there is an agenda here among certion posters, having said that, councils and businesses should not force its decisions on people rather they should offer choices to all. Can the irate posters agree its not the muslim population that is forcing this issue?[/p][/quote]How can posters on this site state whether or not this issue has been forced by muslims? How would we know? That's not the point. I suspect this undemocratic decision was made by lazy bureaucrats, surrendering before anyone even challenged them. Walthamster
  • Score: -1

5:21pm Mon 8 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Anyway whats wrong with providing a healthy non-halal pack lunch?
Anyway whats wrong with providing a healthy non-halal pack lunch? St George1
  • Score: 0

5:54pm Mon 8 Apr 13

everoptimistic says...

Or even a healthy halal packet lunch.
Or even a healthy halal packet lunch. everoptimistic
  • Score: 0

7:01pm Mon 8 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
Anyway whats wrong with providing a healthy non-halal pack lunch?
People who want to give their children a packed lunch are doing so already. As long as schools are providing meals, these should be available to all.

Halal meat does not meet UK animal-welfare requirements, and had a special exemption from the law to make it legally available to Muslims. No one should have this as their only meal option.

I agree with earlier suggestions that schools should either offer a choice of two meals -- one with non-ritual meat and one vegetarian -- or simply provide vegetarian meals for all.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: Anyway whats wrong with providing a healthy non-halal pack lunch?[/p][/quote]People who want to give their children a packed lunch are doing so already. As long as schools are providing meals, these should be available to all. Halal meat does not meet UK animal-welfare requirements, and had a special exemption from the law to make it legally available to Muslims. No one should have this as their only meal option. I agree with earlier suggestions that schools should either offer a choice of two meals -- one with non-ritual meat and one vegetarian -- or simply provide vegetarian meals for all. Walthamster
  • Score: 1

8:13pm Mon 8 Apr 13

St George1 says...

"I agree with earlier suggestions that schools should either offer a choice of two meals -- one with non-ritual meat and one vegetarian -- or simply provide vegetarian meals for all"

No no and no, 3 options, non-halal, halal or veg, don't reduce choices.
"I agree with earlier suggestions that schools should either offer a choice of two meals -- one with non-ritual meat and one vegetarian -- or simply provide vegetarian meals for all" No no and no, 3 options, non-halal, halal or veg, don't reduce choices. St George1
  • Score: 0

9:35am Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

2009 WORLD HALAL FORUM IN EUROPE
Theme: HALAL MARKET POTENTIAL
A REGIONAL FOCUS
Aim: The UK was chosen to be a Pilot Project without consent or knowledge of the British Government.
It happened in a meeting behind closed doors without Britain present on 18 November 2009. Making the list of attendance were members‟ representatives from Australia, Belgium, Bosnia, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland and Thailand.
At this meeting the UK was chosen to be a HALAL PILOT PROJECT by the World Halal Forum
See pages 15 and 25 in this .pdf for what was unilaterally decided for the UK in 2009 by WHF (World Halal Forum).
QUOTE: '3. The forum resolved to work towards a European Halal Regulations and Accreditation system, starting with a single country as a pilot project, with the country proposed being the United Kingdom." (p.25)
This is how UK became a Pilot project for the halal products industry - without the consent or knowledge of the British Public !
http://www.worldhala
lforum.org/download/
WHF09EuropeGenericRe
port.pdf
Note that it will take a while to upload... it is deep in the internet system now.
2009 WORLD HALAL FORUM IN EUROPE Theme: HALAL MARKET POTENTIAL A REGIONAL FOCUS Aim: The UK was chosen to be a Pilot Project without consent or knowledge of the British Government. It happened in a meeting behind closed doors without Britain present on 18 November 2009. Making the list of attendance were members‟ representatives from Australia, Belgium, Bosnia, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland and Thailand. At this meeting the UK was chosen to be a HALAL PILOT PROJECT by the World Halal Forum [WHF] See pages 15 and 25 in this .pdf for what was unilaterally decided for the UK in 2009 by WHF (World Halal Forum). QUOTE: '3. The forum resolved to work towards a European Halal Regulations and Accreditation system, starting with a single country as a pilot project, with the country proposed being the United Kingdom." (p.25) This is how UK became a Pilot project for the halal products industry - without the consent or knowledge of the British Public ! http://www.worldhala lforum.org/download/ WHF09EuropeGenericRe port.pdf Note that it will take a while to upload... it is deep in the internet system now. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 2

9:37am Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

2009 WORLD HALAL FORUM IN EUROPE
Theme: HALAL MARKET POTENTIAL
A REGIONAL FOCUS
Aim: The UK was chosen to be a Pilot Project without consent or knowledge of the British Government.
It happened in a meeting behind closed doors without Britain present on 18 November 2009. Making the list of attendance were members‟ representatives from Australia, Belgium, Bosnia, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland and Thailand.
At this meeting the UK was chosen to be a HALAL PILOT PROJECT by the World Halal Forum
See pages 15 and 25 in this .pdf for what was unilaterally decided for the UK in 2009 by WHF (World Halal Forum).
QUOTE: '3. The forum resolved to work towards a European Halal Regulations and Accreditation system, starting with a single country as a pilot project, with the country proposed being the United Kingdom." (p.25)
This is how UK became a Pilot project for the halal products industry - without the consent or knowledge of the British Public !
http://www.worldhala
lforum.org/download/
WHF09EuropeGenericRe
port.pdf
Note that it will take a while to upload... it is deep in the internet system now.
2009 WORLD HALAL FORUM IN EUROPE Theme: HALAL MARKET POTENTIAL A REGIONAL FOCUS Aim: The UK was chosen to be a Pilot Project without consent or knowledge of the British Government. It happened in a meeting behind closed doors without Britain present on 18 November 2009. Making the list of attendance were members‟ representatives from Australia, Belgium, Bosnia, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland and Thailand. At this meeting the UK was chosen to be a HALAL PILOT PROJECT by the World Halal Forum [WHF] See pages 15 and 25 in this .pdf for what was unilaterally decided for the UK in 2009 by WHF (World Halal Forum). QUOTE: '3. The forum resolved to work towards a European Halal Regulations and Accreditation system, starting with a single country as a pilot project, with the country proposed being the United Kingdom." (p.25) This is how UK became a Pilot project for the halal products industry - without the consent or knowledge of the British Public ! http://www.worldhala lforum.org/download/ WHF09EuropeGenericRe port.pdf Note that it will take a while to upload... it is deep in the internet system now. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

9:37am Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

http://www.guardian-
series.co.uk/news/wf
news/10334813.Halal_
meat_served_in_three
_quarters_of_council
_supported_schools/?
action=success

debate continues here if anyone has missed the latest from the guardian newpaper.
http://www.guardian- series.co.uk/news/wf news/10334813.Halal_ meat_served_in_three _quarters_of_council _supported_schools/? action=success debate continues here if anyone has missed the latest from the guardian newpaper. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

9:42am Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

Information via
https://www.facebook
.com/BOYCOTTxHALAL
who have done enormous research into the subject.
Information via https://www.facebook .com/BOYCOTTxHALAL who have done enormous research into the subject. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

9:48am Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

https://www.facebook
.com/BH.Institutions
https://www.facebook .com/BH.Institutions Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

10:33am Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

You would be wise to take your anti halal bile elsewhere, try the Daily Mail for conspiracy theoriies.

This is about choices for parents, a halal option, non halal option and a veg option.

Even Kingsmill bread has the HFA logo, does this mean it was prepared ritually?
You would be wise to take your anti halal bile elsewhere, try the Daily Mail for conspiracy theoriies. This is about choices for parents, a halal option, non halal option and a veg option. Even Kingsmill bread has the HFA logo, does this mean it was prepared ritually? St George1
  • Score: 0

10:47am Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Looked at your facination with:
http://www.worldhala
lforum.org/download/
WHF09EuropeGenericRe
port.pdf

Could not find anything related to bybassing UK government, what i did find was this:

'Britain‟s Farm Animal Welfare Council member, Dr. Michael Appleby, said, “Animals
should be rendered unconscious or sedated before being slaughtered. This could bedone via stunning or electrocution.” He also suggested that new methods be researched such as cooling the neck area to reduce pain during slaughter.' p15

'The forum also endeavoured to collaborate with academic researchers and other experts in investigating the welfare implication and acceptability of different practices including pre-slaughter methods of restraint and applications to minimise pain and distress at the time of slaughter. The forum resolved to work towards a
European Halal Regulations and Accreditation system, starting with a single country as a pilot project with the country proposed being the United Kingdom.' p15

Hardly bypassing any rules is it now, what this means is that it plans to regulate the industry, just like any trade body out there.

I also found lots of info about commercial companies targetting the Halal market in order to capture it.

You need to stop scaremongering.
Looked at your facination with: http://www.worldhala lforum.org/download/ WHF09EuropeGenericRe port.pdf Could not find anything related to bybassing UK government, what i did find was this: 'Britain‟s Farm Animal Welfare Council member, Dr. Michael Appleby, said, “Animals should be rendered unconscious or sedated before being slaughtered. This could bedone via stunning or electrocution.” He also suggested that new methods be researched such as cooling the neck area to reduce pain during slaughter.' p15 'The forum also endeavoured to collaborate with academic researchers and other experts in investigating the welfare implication and acceptability of different practices including pre-slaughter methods of restraint and applications to minimise pain and distress at the time of slaughter. The forum resolved to work towards a European Halal Regulations and Accreditation system, starting with a single country as a pilot project with the country proposed being the United Kingdom.' p15 Hardly bypassing any rules is it now, what this means is that it plans to regulate the industry, just like any trade body out there. I also found lots of info about commercial companies targetting the Halal market in order to capture it. You need to stop scaremongering. St George1
  • Score: 0

1:25pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1, you say that halal slaughter is "Hardly bypassing any rules is it now".

The reason it's not bypassing any rules is that the animal-welfare law has a special exemption to allow ritual slaughter as long as it's to provide meat for Jews and Muslims.

In other words, the UK law that was made to prevent animal cruelty has a special section allowing cruelty!

How much clearer can I make that?

The law, The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995, is here:
http://www.legislati
on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/
731/schedule/12/made
St George1, you say that halal slaughter is "Hardly bypassing any rules is it now". The reason it's not bypassing any rules is that the animal-welfare law has a special exemption to allow ritual slaughter as long as it's to provide meat for Jews and Muslims. In other words, the UK law that was made to prevent animal cruelty has a special section allowing cruelty! How much clearer can I make that? The law, The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995, is here: http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/ 731/schedule/12/made Walthamster
  • Score: 1

1:26pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

A June 2012 House of Commons report at
www.parliament.uk/br
iefing-papers/sn0131
4.pdf
states:
"The exemption for religious slaughter in Schedule 12 of The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995 (SI 731) 1995 makes clear that it relates to a method of slaughter for people of that religion, not for everybody".

It quotes a 2011 report stating "100% of the animals and birds slaughtered for the production of kosher meat were slaughtered without prior stunning. For halal meat, 25% of cattle and 7% of sheep were slaughtered without prior stunning."

(And yes, I would object just as much if kosher meat was being pushed onto the menu too.)
A June 2012 House of Commons report at www.parliament.uk/br iefing-papers/sn0131 4.pdf states: "The exemption for religious slaughter in Schedule 12 of The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995 (SI 731) 1995 makes clear that it relates to a method of slaughter for people of that religion, not for everybody". It quotes a 2011 report stating "100% of the animals and birds slaughtered for the production of kosher meat were slaughtered without prior stunning. For halal meat, 25% of cattle and 7% of sheep were slaughtered without prior stunning." (And yes, I would object just as much if kosher meat was being pushed onto the menu too.) Walthamster
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

And here are quotes from another government report, April 2011:
http://www.parliamen
t.wa.gov.au/intranet
/libpages.nsf/WebFil
es/whats+new+other+p
arls+uk+religious+sl
aughter/$FILE/whats+
new+other+parls+uk+r
eligious+slaughter.p
df

"The Farm Animal Welfare Council, in their Report of 1985, concluded that religious slaughter involves the animal in greater suffering than methods involving pre-stunning:
The up-to-date scientific evidence available and our own observations leave no doubt in our minds that religious methods of slaughter, even when carried out under ideal conditions, must result in a degree of pain, suffering and distress which does not occur in the properly stunned animal."

The report quotes more research to support this view published by Craig Johnson in 2009 in New Zealand, using electroencephalogram
s, to record activity in the brain.

The New Scientist reported:
"The team first cut calves’ throats in a procedure matching that of Jewish and Muslim slaughter methods. They detected a pain signal lasting for up to 2 minutes after the incision. When their throats are cut, calves generally lose consciousness after 10 to 30 seconds, sometime longer. The researchers then showed that the pain originates from cutting throat nerves, not from the loss of blood, suggesting the severed nerves send pain signals until the time of death. Finally, they stunned animals 5 seconds after incision and showed that this makes the pain signal disappear instantly."

The same 2011 government report quotes the RSPCA:
"The RSPCA recognises that in any democratic country it is a fundamental right of religious groups to practice their beliefs without hindrance, but where these beliefs are directly responsible for animal suffering, that right has to be challenged."
And here are quotes from another government report, April 2011: http://www.parliamen t.wa.gov.au/intranet /libpages.nsf/WebFil es/whats+new+other+p arls+uk+religious+sl aughter/$FILE/whats+ new+other+parls+uk+r eligious+slaughter.p df "The Farm Animal Welfare Council, in their Report of 1985, concluded that religious slaughter involves the animal in greater suffering than methods involving pre-stunning: The up-to-date scientific evidence available and our own observations leave no doubt in our minds that religious methods of slaughter, even when carried out under ideal conditions, must result in a degree of pain, suffering and distress which does not occur in the properly stunned animal." The report quotes more research to support this view published by Craig Johnson in 2009 in New Zealand, using electroencephalogram s, to record activity in the brain. The New Scientist reported: "The team first cut calves’ throats in a procedure matching that of Jewish and Muslim slaughter methods. They detected a pain signal lasting for up to 2 minutes after the incision. When their throats are cut, calves generally lose consciousness after 10 to 30 seconds, sometime longer. The researchers then showed that the pain originates from cutting throat nerves, not from the loss of blood, suggesting the severed nerves send pain signals until the time of death. Finally, they stunned animals 5 seconds after incision and showed that this makes the pain signal disappear instantly." The same 2011 government report quotes the RSPCA: "The RSPCA recognises that in any democratic country it is a fundamental right of religious groups to practice their beliefs without hindrance, but where these beliefs are directly responsible for animal suffering, that right has to be challenged." Walthamster
  • Score: 0

1:28pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

And for a different viewpoint, a plumber writing to a newspaper on the ritual slaughter he'd witnessed while doing work in an abattoir:
http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/foodanddrink/
foodanddrinknews/840
1718/Religious-slaug
hter-fact-file.html
"The process is even more stressful for the cattle than the normally stunning methods. The animal is put in a pen that turns the animal upside down. The animal kicks violently as the cut is made and its eyes turn sharply so that only the whites are visible. I found it unnecessarily cruel."

Another comment from that site:
"However, an increasing number of abattoirs slaughtering for the Muslim market now use a simple low amp shock to the head of the animal immediately prior to slaughter. ...The animal is still conscious (if it were not it would be haram), but no longer able to move or vocalise its pain."
And for a different viewpoint, a plumber writing to a newspaper on the ritual slaughter he'd witnessed while doing work in an abattoir: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/foodanddrink/ foodanddrinknews/840 1718/Religious-slaug hter-fact-file.html "The process is even more stressful for the cattle than the normally stunning methods. The animal is put in a pen that turns the animal upside down. The animal kicks violently as the cut is made and its eyes turn sharply so that only the whites are visible. I found it unnecessarily cruel." Another comment from that site: "However, an increasing number of abattoirs slaughtering for the Muslim market now use a simple low amp shock to the head of the animal immediately prior to slaughter. ...The animal is still conscious (if it were not it would be haram), but no longer able to move or vocalise its pain." Walthamster
  • Score: 0

2:17pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

“Halal” is an Arabic word meaning “lawful” or “permissible”, and the term not only covers food and drink, but also to all matters of daily life.

When it comes to halal food, most people think of meat foods only.
However, Muslims aim to ensure that all foods, particularly processed foods, pharmaceuticals, and non-food items like cosmetics, are also halal.

Frequently, these products contain animal by-products or other ingredients that are not permissible for Muslims to eat or use on their bodies.

Throughout the world there are many different Halal Certification Boards in different countries often with diverse standards or criteria for judging if a product or service is halal compliant.

They seek to certify services, products & chains this will involve sectors, brands & corporations.

Services are food processing plants, meat cutting plants, mainstream manufacturers of soups, grains, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, prepared foods & other products, as well as hotels, restaurants, airlines, sporting venues, hospitals and other institutions.

In addition muslims look to change & control sectors such as in finance, legal, media etc…

They will look at the company’s that are manufacturing &/or distributing products e.g. Dairy, Confectionery & Sauce products contain additives & flavourings along with the main ingredients which may become halal certified.

EXAMPLE: ALLIED BAKERIES PLC

Last year in UK they aimed at Allied Bakeries and began by getting their Walthamstow Plant Halal Certified that will now be closely audited monitored & inspected by the HFA (Halal Food Authority).

See Allied Bakeries amongst others listed here on the HFA website…
http://www.halalfood
authority.co.uk/memb
ers-new.html

This regular HFA audit now has to be paid for by Allied Bakeries, who will have probably been promised many benefits like wider distribution and expansion to new muslim markets. Ingredients used in the Allied Bakery Plant now have to meet the HFA Standard. All cleaning products used in the plant must be halal too and not contain alcohol the requirements for halal compliance go on & on… and can include muslim workers only in certain roles… which marginalises Non-Muslim British workers.
This move on Allied Bakeries towards halal compliance affected 4 Brands Sunblest, Burgen, Allinson and Kingsmill… but only Kingsmill (which involves 18 different types of bread) is showing the Halal Mark on its packaging which adds another additional cost.



So how can this be profitable with all these extra costs?

Many of these halal organisations are Registered Religious Charities and somehow have managed to claim that they are Non-Profit making, so get various Tax & VAT exemptions

(Yes… this will affect our economy as money is channelled off towards Islamic aims!)

NOTE that Allied Bakeries is one of the UK’s leading Bakery Businesses one of three divisions of Allied Milling and Baking, which in turn is a part of Associated British Foods (ABF) plc, a major international business with a turnover of £11.1bn and close to 102,000 employees working in 46 countries. In the UK, well-known ABF brands include: Twinings, Silver Spoon, Primark, Ryvita, Ovaltine, Patak’s and Jordans Cereals. They supply Bread to Schools… which will now be halal and there is no mention of this massive paradigm shift on their website…

Nowhere does it say on their website that Allied Bakeries is now a halal compliant company!

How do I know all this…???
I was on the phone to Allied Bakeries HQ every week as all these changes were made last year complaining… but it was all to no avail.
“Halal” is an Arabic word meaning “lawful” or “permissible”, and the term not only covers food and drink, but also to all matters of daily life. When it comes to halal food, most people think of meat foods only. However, Muslims aim to ensure that all foods, particularly processed foods, pharmaceuticals, and non-food items like cosmetics, are also halal. Frequently, these products contain animal by-products or other ingredients that are not permissible for Muslims to eat or use on their bodies. Throughout the world there are many different Halal Certification Boards in different countries often with diverse standards or criteria for judging if a product or service is halal compliant. They seek to certify services, products & chains this will involve sectors, brands & corporations. Services are food processing plants, meat cutting plants, mainstream manufacturers of soups, grains, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, prepared foods & other products, as well as hotels, restaurants, airlines, sporting venues, hospitals and other institutions. In addition muslims look to change & control sectors such as in finance, legal, media etc… They will look at the company’s that are manufacturing &/or distributing products e.g. Dairy, Confectionery & Sauce products contain additives & flavourings along with the main ingredients which may become halal certified. EXAMPLE: ALLIED BAKERIES PLC Last year in UK they aimed at Allied Bakeries and began by getting their Walthamstow Plant Halal Certified that will now be closely audited monitored & inspected by the HFA (Halal Food Authority). See Allied Bakeries amongst others listed here on the HFA website… http://www.halalfood authority.co.uk/memb ers-new.html This regular HFA audit now has to be paid for by Allied Bakeries, who will have probably been promised many benefits like wider distribution and expansion to new muslim markets. Ingredients used in the Allied Bakery Plant now have to meet the HFA Standard. All cleaning products used in the plant must be halal too and not contain alcohol the requirements for halal compliance go on & on… and can include muslim workers only in certain roles… which marginalises Non-Muslim British workers. This move on Allied Bakeries towards halal compliance affected 4 Brands Sunblest, Burgen, Allinson and Kingsmill… but only Kingsmill (which involves 18 different types of bread) is showing the Halal Mark on its packaging which adds another additional cost. So how can this be profitable with all these extra costs? Many of these halal organisations are Registered Religious Charities and somehow have managed to claim that they are Non-Profit making, so get various Tax & VAT exemptions (Yes… this will affect our economy as money is channelled off towards Islamic aims!) NOTE that Allied Bakeries is one of the UK’s leading Bakery Businesses one of three divisions of Allied Milling and Baking, which in turn is a part of Associated British Foods (ABF) plc, a major international business with a turnover of £11.1bn and close to 102,000 employees working in 46 countries. In the UK, well-known ABF brands include: Twinings, Silver Spoon, Primark, Ryvita, Ovaltine, Patak’s and Jordans Cereals. They supply Bread to Schools… which will now be halal and there is no mention of this massive paradigm shift on their website… Nowhere does it say on their website that Allied Bakeries is now a halal compliant company! How do I know all this…??? I was on the phone to Allied Bakeries HQ every week as all these changes were made last year complaining… but it was all to no avail. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

2:35pm Tue 9 Apr 13

mdj says...

'This is about choices for parents, a halal option, non halal option and a veg option. (St George1)

That's a good objective, but
he rest of us had got the strange idea that this story was about halal meat being covertly served to all children without their or their parents' knowledge or consent.

Do you accept that slaughtering meat by halal methods for non-Muslim consumers is against the law?
'This is about choices for parents, a halal option, non halal option and a veg option. (St George1) That's a good objective, but he rest of us had got the strange idea that this story was about halal meat being covertly served to all children without their or their parents' knowledge or consent. Do you accept that slaughtering meat by halal methods for non-Muslim consumers is against the law? mdj
  • Score: 0

2:44pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

If Jewish people were forcing their kosher on us it would be just as bad. However they are NOT.

The domination of halal is not just in Uk/Europe either.In Australia Halal foodstuffs have become a major industry. There are official Islamic certification boards which decide on these matters, and one such organisation has a listing of Halal products which extends to ten pages of fine print.

All kinds of foods now have the Halal seal of approval, ranging from Vegemite to Cadbury chocolates. This may seem curious since there are only 340,000 Muslims in Australia out of a population of 22 million (or 1.5 per cent of the population). But a major part of the Halal food industry here concerns our exports to other countries. It has become big business indeed.

So what is the concern then about Halal foods in Australia (and the West)? A general concern which all Australians may well have is how this fits into the bigger picture of Islam in Australia. A major worry is that this is just another part of the process of setting up a parallel Islamic state within Australia, leading to the eventual full implementation of sharia law.

Everyone concerned about the free and democratic West and how it is being undermined by various covert and overt Islamic pressures should be worried about this.

Dhimmitude can take many forms, and being forced to forego certain liberties simply to placate a very small minority group is one aspect of this. Today we may be asked to forgo certain foods. Tomorrow we may be asked to forego more significant things.

And one can rightly ask why we are to be so concerned about not offending Muslim feelings in the West, when Westerners in Muslim-majority nations would not dare make such demands. You either comply there, or get out.

In fact, Christians risk their lives in these nations, while Muslims are free to do their thing here. So this is all one way traffic. One could be more inclined to allow for Islamic practices here if they allowed similar freedoms to non-Muslims there.

Another concern is that companies pay these certification boards. So who gets the money? Where are these funds going to? Is it possible that some of it is finding its way into the hands of jihadist groups? These seem to be legitimate questions to ask.

Christian concerns

But more specifically, Christian concerns have to do with how Halal meats are ritually slaughtered. In this process (which can only be carried out by a Muslim), the Muslim prays to Allah while facing Mecca. Arguments can be made about how humane the process is, and groups like the RSPCA claim it is less humane than traditional slaughter methods.
If Jewish people were forcing their kosher on us it would be just as bad. However they are NOT. The domination of halal is not just in Uk/Europe either.In Australia Halal foodstuffs have become a major industry. There are official Islamic certification boards which decide on these matters, and one such organisation has a listing of Halal products which extends to ten pages of fine print. All kinds of foods now have the Halal seal of approval, ranging from Vegemite to Cadbury chocolates. This may seem curious since there are only 340,000 Muslims in Australia out of a population of 22 million (or 1.5 per cent of the population). But a major part of the Halal food industry here concerns our exports to other countries. It has become big business indeed. So what is the concern then about Halal foods in Australia (and the West)? A general concern which all Australians may well have is how this fits into the bigger picture of Islam in Australia. A major worry is that this is just another part of the process of setting up a parallel Islamic state within Australia, leading to the eventual full implementation of sharia law. Everyone concerned about the free and democratic West and how it is being undermined by various covert and overt Islamic pressures should be worried about this. Dhimmitude can take many forms, and being forced to forego certain liberties simply to placate a very small minority group is one aspect of this. Today we may be asked to forgo certain foods. Tomorrow we may be asked to forego more significant things. And one can rightly ask why we are to be so concerned about not offending Muslim feelings in the West, when Westerners in Muslim-majority nations would not dare make such demands. You either comply there, or get out. In fact, Christians risk their lives in these nations, while Muslims are free to do their thing here. So this is all one way traffic. One could be more inclined to allow for Islamic practices here if they allowed similar freedoms to non-Muslims there. Another concern is that companies pay these certification boards. So who gets the money? Where are these funds going to? Is it possible that some of it is finding its way into the hands of jihadist groups? These seem to be legitimate questions to ask. Christian concerns But more specifically, Christian concerns have to do with how Halal meats are ritually slaughtered. In this process (which can only be carried out by a Muslim), the Muslim prays to Allah while facing Mecca. Arguments can be made about how humane the process is, and groups like the RSPCA claim it is less humane than traditional slaughter methods. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

2:53pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

The sanitary aspect- in halal slaughter, the animal is turned towards Mecca, bled without being stunned, a very large incision from the throat to the vertebrae sectioning all organs from the jugular and the carotid but also the trachea and the oesophagus.


1. A regurgitation of the contents of the stomach through the oesophagus

2. The animal continues to breath very hard from the agony that can last a quarter of an hour. Let’s remember that it inhales faecal matter

3. This matter that was inhaled all the way to the puliminary alveoli distributes the germs in the blood much more easily because the membrane there is very thin and the circulation, let’s remember, is always working during this period of agony and even accelerated by the stress at the level of essential organs.

4. Enormous risk of contamination in the depth of the meat is consequently there.

5. We observe also from the intense stress, two physiological phenomenon which conjugate the fall of all immune systems. And the concentration of blood in the essential organs, you can say that the animal retains its blood. This is a natural process of survival that brings on also a bleeding that is not as good. This is opposing the allegations of people doing this practice. There is in fact, a greater production of toxins.

6. The longer the agony finally brings on violent convulsions accompanied by defecation and urine, all of it splashing the whole slaughtering area.
The sanitary aspect- in halal slaughter, the animal is turned towards Mecca, bled without being stunned, a very large incision from the throat to the vertebrae sectioning all organs from the jugular and the carotid but also the trachea and the oesophagus. 1. A regurgitation of the contents of the stomach through the oesophagus 2. The animal continues to breath very hard from the agony that can last a quarter of an hour. Let’s remember that it inhales faecal matter 3. This matter that was inhaled all the way to the puliminary alveoli distributes the germs in the blood much more easily because the membrane there is very thin and the circulation, let’s remember, is always working during this period of agony and even accelerated by the stress at the level of essential organs. 4. Enormous risk of contamination in the depth of the meat is consequently there. 5. We observe also from the intense stress, two physiological phenomenon which conjugate the fall of all immune systems. And the concentration of blood in the essential organs, you can say that the animal retains its blood. This is a natural process of survival that brings on also a bleeding that is not as good. This is opposing the allegations of people doing this practice. There is in fact, a greater production of toxins. 6. The longer the agony finally brings on violent convulsions accompanied by defecation and urine, all of it splashing the whole slaughtering area. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 2

3:03pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Clear islamaphobia here, overlandansea's posts demonstrate this.

If you do not like halal meat don't eat it, halal and kosher are permitted in the UK, i dont need to read loads of articles explaining pros and cons about it being bad for animals.

Allied Bakeries have made a commercial choice, it was not forced onto them.

Do not make out as if is was the muslim population forcing this. Your true agenda is showing here with your anti muslim rants.

Just stick to the isssue here before ranting on about the world, the school should provide 3 options as stated above.
Clear islamaphobia here, overlandansea's posts demonstrate this. If you do not like halal meat don't eat it, halal and kosher are permitted in the UK, i dont need to read loads of articles explaining pros and cons about it being bad for animals. Allied Bakeries have made a commercial choice, it was not forced onto them. Do not make out as if is was the muslim population forcing this. Your true agenda is showing here with your anti muslim rants. Just stick to the isssue here before ranting on about the world, the school should provide 3 options as stated above. St George1
  • Score: -2

3:28pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

No, St George, your opinion -- "the school should provide 3 options as stated above" -- is not more important or valid than anyone else's.

You have not contributed any facts or references to this discussion, just assertions with no evidence to back them.

Instead, you rely on name-calling. It's easy to call people 'islamophobic', but it's dishonest.

Like many people, I dislike kosher slaughter as much as halal. But Jews are not trying to increase sales of ritually slaughtered meat by putting it in school meals. And that's what this debate is about.
No, St George, your opinion -- "the school should provide 3 options as stated above" -- is not more important or valid than anyone else's. You have not contributed any facts or references to this discussion, just assertions with no evidence to back them. Instead, you rely on name-calling. It's easy to call people 'islamophobic', but it's dishonest. Like many people, I dislike kosher slaughter as much as halal. But Jews are not trying to increase sales of ritually slaughtered meat by putting it in school meals. And that's what this debate is about. Walthamster
  • Score: 2

3:37pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

Islamophobia is nothing more than a prejudicial word used by Muslim and Muslim apologists to stop discussion of the facts about Islam.

ALL SCHOOLS IN ALL NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES SHOULD NOT BE FORCING HALAL ON SCHOOLKIDS. end of.
Islamophobia is nothing more than a prejudicial word used by Muslim and Muslim apologists to stop discussion of the facts about Islam. ALL SCHOOLS IN ALL NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES SHOULD NOT BE FORCING HALAL ON SCHOOLKIDS. end of. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

4:00pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

'ALL SCHOOLS IN ALL NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES SHOULD NOT BE FORCING HALAL ON SCHOOLKIDS. end of.'

I agree, if you say that rather than cut n paste from anti halal websites it would be more straight to the point.

Jewish people have their own schools and like to keep themselves totally separate frm gentiles, good luck to them.

If you want to discuss about muslims and making anti-muslim statements you can do so there are plenty of hate sites out there, this is not one of them

My view on 3 choices is more acceptable than your view for a total ban.
'ALL SCHOOLS IN ALL NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES SHOULD NOT BE FORCING HALAL ON SCHOOLKIDS. end of.' I agree, if you say that rather than cut n paste from anti halal websites it would be more straight to the point. Jewish people have their own schools and like to keep themselves totally separate frm gentiles, good luck to them. If you want to discuss about muslims and making anti-muslim statements you can do so there are plenty of hate sites out there, this is not one of them My view on 3 choices is more acceptable than your view for a total ban. St George1
  • Score: -1

4:11pm Tue 9 Apr 13

mdj says...

Any chance that St George1 will answer my question? He's ducked two opportunities.

Again: Do you accept that slaughtering meat by halal methods for non-Muslim consumers is against the law?
Any chance that St George1 will answer my question? He's ducked two opportunities. Again: Do you accept that slaughtering meat by halal methods for non-Muslim consumers is against the law? mdj
  • Score: 1

4:19pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

mdj.

No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.
mdj. No i dont, if it was it would have been banned. St George1
  • Score: 0

4:27pm Tue 9 Apr 13

everoptimistic says...

Excuse my ignorance Overlandandsea but can you clarify something for me. Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal. We have a perfectly good vegetarian symbol in use that, as a vegetarian, I trust. I assume anything with this label does not contain items of animal (flesh) origin. So should not vegetarian foods be suitable for Muslims? Why do we need another label? Is it because some may contain milk and dairy products or eggs? I would be interested to know.
Many thanks.
Excuse my ignorance Overlandandsea but can you clarify something for me. Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal. We have a perfectly good vegetarian symbol in use that, as a vegetarian, I trust. I assume anything with this label does not contain items of animal (flesh) origin. So should not vegetarian foods be suitable for Muslims? Why do we need another label? Is it because some may contain milk and dairy products or eggs? I would be interested to know. Many thanks. everoptimistic
  • Score: 0

4:45pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

' Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal'

It shows the product is free from animal fats AND alocohol.
' Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal' It shows the product is free from animal fats AND alocohol. St George1
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Tue 9 Apr 13

everoptimistic says...

Thanks for the info.
Thanks for the info. everoptimistic
  • Score: 0

5:27pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
mdj.

No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.
I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts?

This is the law:
http://www.legislati
on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/
731/made

Slaughter by a religious method
2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering—

(a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed—
(i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or
(ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or
(b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1.

Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: mdj. No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.[/p][/quote]I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts? This is the law: http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/ 731/made Slaughter by a religious method 2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering— (a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed— (i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or (ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or (b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1. Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"? Walthamster
  • Score: 0

5:34pm Tue 9 Apr 13

myopinioncounts says...

"St George1 says...
4:45pm Tue 9 Apr 13

' Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal'

It shows the product is free from animal fats AND alocohol."
--------
Actually there are many foods and even 'E" numbers that are non halal because they are obtained from animal sources. Gelatine and the red food colouring (if it is real cochineal) are just two products that are 'haram' to muslims. I worked with a strict muslim and she said that many sweets are also forbidden because they contain animal products.
"St George1 says... 4:45pm Tue 9 Apr 13 ' Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal' It shows the product is free from animal fats AND alocohol." -------- Actually there are many foods and even 'E" numbers that are non halal because they are obtained from animal sources. Gelatine and the red food colouring (if it is real cochineal) are just two products that are 'haram' to muslims. I worked with a strict muslim and she said that many sweets are also forbidden because they contain animal products. myopinioncounts
  • Score: 0

6:40pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
mdj.

No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.
I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts?

This is the law:
http://www.legislati

on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/

731/made

Slaughter by a religious method
2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering—

(a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed—
(i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or
(ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or
(b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1.

Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?
Cos you're just going round in circles.

Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.
[quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: mdj. No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.[/p][/quote]I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts? This is the law: http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/ 731/made Slaughter by a religious method 2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering— (a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed— (i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or (ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or (b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1. Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?[/p][/quote]Cos you're just going round in circles. Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman. St George1
  • Score: 0

6:43pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

myopinioncounts wrote:
"St George1 says...
4:45pm Tue 9 Apr 13

' Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal'

It shows the product is free from animal fats AND alocohol."
--------
Actually there are many foods and even 'E" numbers that are non halal because they are obtained from animal sources. Gelatine and the red food colouring (if it is real cochineal) are just two products that are 'haram' to muslims. I worked with a strict muslim and she said that many sweets are also forbidden because they contain animal products.
If a food product is properly certified as halal then its halal, food containing aa animal derived E additive would be haram.

If there is doubt then practicing muslims refrain.
[quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: "St George1 says... 4:45pm Tue 9 Apr 13 ' Why do non meat items have to labelled as halal' It shows the product is free from animal fats AND alocohol." -------- Actually there are many foods and even 'E" numbers that are non halal because they are obtained from animal sources. Gelatine and the red food colouring (if it is real cochineal) are just two products that are 'haram' to muslims. I worked with a strict muslim and she said that many sweets are also forbidden because they contain animal products.[/p][/quote]If a food product is properly certified as halal then its halal, food containing aa animal derived E additive would be haram. If there is doubt then practicing muslims refrain. St George1
  • Score: 0

7:07pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
mdj.

No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.
I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts?

This is the law:
http://www.legislati


on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/


731/made

Slaughter by a religious method
2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering—

(a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed—
(i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or
(ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or
(b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1.

Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?
Cos you're just going round in circles.

Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.
I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states.

The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS.

Not for anyone else's food.

Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: mdj. No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.[/p][/quote]I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts? This is the law: http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/ 731/made Slaughter by a religious method 2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering— (a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed— (i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or (ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or (b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1. Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?[/p][/quote]Cos you're just going round in circles. Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.[/p][/quote]I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states. The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS. Not for anyone else's food. Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

7:18pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
mdj.

No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.
I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts?

This is the law:
http://www.legislati



on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/



731/made

Slaughter by a religious method
2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering—

(a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed—
(i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or
(ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or
(b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1.

Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?
Cos you're just going round in circles.

Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.
I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states.

The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS.

Not for anyone else's food.

Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims.
Where does it state it is illegal to supply to non-jews/muslims?

Quite clearly some people are barking mad. If it was illegal then it would have been banned a long time ago.

Get a grip.

You are interpreting the law to your own end. Feel free to go to court over this, I await the outcome.
[quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: mdj. No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.[/p][/quote]I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts? This is the law: http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/ 731/made Slaughter by a religious method 2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering— (a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed— (i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or (ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or (b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1. Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?[/p][/quote]Cos you're just going round in circles. Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.[/p][/quote]I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states. The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS. Not for anyone else's food. Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims.[/p][/quote]Where does it state it is illegal to supply to non-jews/muslims? Quite clearly some people are barking mad. If it was illegal then it would have been banned a long time ago. Get a grip. You are interpreting the law to your own end. Feel free to go to court over this, I await the outcome. St George1
  • Score: 0

7:32pm Tue 9 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
mdj.

No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.
I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts?

This is the law:
http://www.legislati




on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/




731/made

Slaughter by a religious method
2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering—

(a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed—
(i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or
(ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or
(b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1.

Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?
Cos you're just going round in circles.

Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.
I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states.

The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS.

Not for anyone else's food.

Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims.
Where does it state it is illegal to supply to non-jews/muslims?

Quite clearly some people are barking mad. If it was illegal then it would have been banned a long time ago.

Get a grip.

You are interpreting the law to your own end. Feel free to go to court over this, I await the outcome.
OK, one last time.

The law demands certain animal-welfare requirements.

Ritual slaughter is allowed a special exemption, because Jews and Muslims require this kind of meat.

The law is intended to (among other things) protect the welfare of animals. It nowhere states that anyone can ignore the rest of the law because they feel like it.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: mdj. No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.[/p][/quote]I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts? This is the law: http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/ 731/made Slaughter by a religious method 2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering— (a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed— (i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or (ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or (b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1. Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?[/p][/quote]Cos you're just going round in circles. Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.[/p][/quote]I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states. The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS. Not for anyone else's food. Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims.[/p][/quote]Where does it state it is illegal to supply to non-jews/muslims? Quite clearly some people are barking mad. If it was illegal then it would have been banned a long time ago. Get a grip. You are interpreting the law to your own end. Feel free to go to court over this, I await the outcome.[/p][/quote]OK, one last time. The law demands certain animal-welfare requirements. Ritual slaughter is allowed a special exemption, because Jews and Muslims require this kind of meat. The law is intended to (among other things) protect the welfare of animals. It nowhere states that anyone can ignore the rest of the law because they feel like it. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

7:47pm Tue 9 Apr 13

mdj says...

Walthamster, he plainly doesn't want to hear.
There are laws regarding the humane slaughter of animals for food. Food for Jews and Muslims have an exemption (which is in itself controversial). It's not supposed to be a general get-out, but is increasingly being used as one.

Incidents like the case at this school will no doubt soon lead to court judgments on the matter. This may be bad news for a lot of halal butchers, and even eateries.
Walthamster, he plainly doesn't want to hear. There are laws regarding the humane slaughter of animals for food. Food for Jews and Muslims have an exemption (which is in itself controversial). It's not supposed to be a general get-out, but is increasingly being used as one. Incidents like the case at this school will no doubt soon lead to court judgments on the matter. This may be bad news for a lot of halal butchers, and even eateries. mdj
  • Score: 0

7:51pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
Walthamster wrote:
St George1 wrote:
mdj.

No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.
I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts?

This is the law:
http://www.legislati





on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/





731/made

Slaughter by a religious method
2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering—

(a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed—
(i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or
(ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or
(b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1.

Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?
Cos you're just going round in circles.

Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.
I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states.

The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS.

Not for anyone else's food.

Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims.
Where does it state it is illegal to supply to non-jews/muslims?

Quite clearly some people are barking mad. If it was illegal then it would have been banned a long time ago.

Get a grip.

You are interpreting the law to your own end. Feel free to go to court over this, I await the outcome.
OK, one last time.

The law demands certain animal-welfare requirements.

Ritual slaughter is allowed a special exemption, because Jews and Muslims require this kind of meat.

The law is intended to (among other things) protect the welfare of animals. It nowhere states that anyone can ignore the rest of the law because they feel like it.
But it does not state the food of jews/muslims is only for jews/muslims.

Certain EU countries are planning to ban traditional halal methods of slaughter BUT not the stunning method of halal slaughter. Either way you won't get your way.

Feel free to phone your MP to present a Bill to pass through Commons to get what you want.
[quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: mdj. No i dont, if it was it would have been banned.[/p][/quote]I notice you're not reading any of the information I've posted, St George1. Why not look at facts? This is the law: http://www.legislati on.gov.uk/uksi/1995/ 731/made Slaughter by a religious method 2. In this Schedule references to slaughter by a religious method are references to slaughter without the infliction of unnecessary suffering— (a)by the Jewish method for the food of Jews by a Jew who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1 (which relates to the licensing of slaughtermen) and who is duly licensed— (i)in England and Wales by the Rabbinical Commission referred to in Part IV of this Schedule; or (ii)in Scotland by the Chief Rabbi; or (b)by the Muslim method for the food of Muslims by a Muslim who holds a licence in accordance with Schedule 1. Did you see the words "for the food of Jews" and "for the food of Muslims"?[/p][/quote]Cos you're just going round in circles. Don't cut n paste, just explain for the layman.[/p][/quote]I'm not going round in circles but answering your question. I cut and pasted the text of the law, from a government website, so you would know exactly what it states. The law states that ritual slaughter is allowed FOR THE FOOD OF JEWS AND MUSLIMS. Not for anyone else's food. Therefore it is illegal to supply it to people who are not Jews or Muslims.[/p][/quote]Where does it state it is illegal to supply to non-jews/muslims? Quite clearly some people are barking mad. If it was illegal then it would have been banned a long time ago. Get a grip. You are interpreting the law to your own end. Feel free to go to court over this, I await the outcome.[/p][/quote]OK, one last time. The law demands certain animal-welfare requirements. Ritual slaughter is allowed a special exemption, because Jews and Muslims require this kind of meat. The law is intended to (among other things) protect the welfare of animals. It nowhere states that anyone can ignore the rest of the law because they feel like it.[/p][/quote]But it does not state the food of jews/muslims is only for jews/muslims. Certain EU countries are planning to ban traditional halal methods of slaughter BUT not the stunning method of halal slaughter. Either way you won't get your way. Feel free to phone your MP to present a Bill to pass through Commons to get what you want. St George1
  • Score: 0

7:54pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

mdj wrote:
Walthamster, he plainly doesn't want to hear.
There are laws regarding the humane slaughter of animals for food. Food for Jews and Muslims have an exemption (which is in itself controversial). It's not supposed to be a general get-out, but is increasingly being used as one.

Incidents like the case at this school will no doubt soon lead to court judgments on the matter. This may be bad news for a lot of halal butchers, and even eateries.
'This may be bad news for a lot of halal butchers, and even eateries.'

Laughable, even if we follow EUSSR diktats in banning it the stunning method of halal meat will not be banned, it is this method which HFA subscribes to.
[quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: Walthamster, he plainly doesn't want to hear. There are laws regarding the humane slaughter of animals for food. Food for Jews and Muslims have an exemption (which is in itself controversial). It's not supposed to be a general get-out, but is increasingly being used as one. Incidents like the case at this school will no doubt soon lead to court judgments on the matter. This may be bad news for a lot of halal butchers, and even eateries.[/p][/quote]'This may be bad news for a lot of halal butchers, and even eateries.' Laughable, even if we follow EUSSR diktats in banning it the stunning method of halal meat will not be banned, it is this method which HFA subscribes to. St George1
  • Score: 0

8:35pm Tue 9 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Halal bashers, please read this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-politics-18
187137

Especially this bit:

Chief Rabbi, Binyomin Jacobs, reportedly drew a parallel with Nazism.

"One of the first measures taken during the occupation was the closing of kosher abattoirs," he said.
Halal bashers, please read this: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-politics-18 187137 Especially this bit: Chief Rabbi, Binyomin Jacobs, reportedly drew a parallel with Nazism. "One of the first measures taken during the occupation was the closing of kosher abattoirs," he said. St George1
  • Score: 0

10:20pm Tue 9 Apr 13

e10biker says...

There is a nice epetition on the Westminster government site which I hope many here would like to sign.

https://submissions.
epetitions.direct.go
v.uk/petitions/37206


It simply asks for all halal meat to be clearly labelled, in this way we would all have a choice of what we eat and not be in a situation like in LBWF schools, where so many are not told or given such a choice.
Nothing will change unless we do something about it, I am sure all on this forum can sign it even those her are arguing about the rights and wrongs of halal meat slaughter.
There is a nice epetition on the Westminster government site which I hope many here would like to sign. https://submissions. epetitions.direct.go v.uk/petitions/37206 It simply asks for all halal meat to be clearly labelled, in this way we would all have a choice of what we eat and not be in a situation like in LBWF schools, where so many are not told or given such a choice. Nothing will change unless we do something about it, I am sure all on this forum can sign it even those her are arguing about the rights and wrongs of halal meat slaughter. e10biker
  • Score: 0

9:50pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

http://www.causes.co
m/actions/1725485-la
bel-all-ritually-sla
ughtered-meat-with-r
s-whether-stunned-or
-not
Exactly nothing will change like e10biker says no good moaning but never trying to get our voices heard that we have a right to know what we are buying.
http://www.causes.co m/actions/1725485-la bel-all-ritually-sla ughtered-meat-with-r s-whether-stunned-or -not Exactly nothing will change like e10biker says no good moaning but never trying to get our voices heard that we have a right to know what we are buying. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

9:51pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

We Consumers appeal to those in power to authorise the writing of a suitable policy that will make Labelling ALL Religiously Slaughtered meat a Legal Requirement by Law, so that we all know what we are buying & eating in plain English.

Please sign the petitions.
We Consumers appeal to those in power to authorise the writing of a suitable policy that will make Labelling ALL Religiously Slaughtered meat a Legal Requirement by Law, so that we all know what we are buying & eating in plain English. Please sign the petitions. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

9:54pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

http://www.gopetitio
n.com/petition/44471
/sign.html
http://www.gopetitio n.com/petition/44471 /sign.html Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

10:12pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
Halal bashers, please read this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-politics-18

187137

Especially this bit:

Chief Rabbi, Binyomin Jacobs, reportedly drew a parallel with Nazism.

"One of the first measures taken during the occupation was the closing of kosher abattoirs," he said.
Nobody on this thread has even suggested closing kosher or halal abattoirs.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: Halal bashers, please read this: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-politics-18 187137 Especially this bit: Chief Rabbi, Binyomin Jacobs, reportedly drew a parallel with Nazism. "One of the first measures taken during the occupation was the closing of kosher abattoirs," he said.[/p][/quote]Nobody on this thread has even suggested closing kosher or halal abattoirs. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

10:58am Thu 11 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

My (latest) letter today to Simon Burns MP (Con) Minister too.
Dear Simon Burns,
Are you aware ALL of our Supermarket Fish is Halal Certified now? !
Muslims will tell us that all fish (water air etc.) is halal, but we do
not as non-muslims wear that mindset.
If I go & catch a fish it would not be halal - it will only become
halal if I decide to go to a halal certified halal authority and pay
them to certify it.
If I go to Tesco or Asdas or Saisburys I do not see the halal sign on
their fish, but I see on this website (link below) that all our
supermarkets are displaying a halal sign for accreditation along with
Morrisons!
MORRISONS & the others have fallen for the Halal Fish Industry's
taqiyya - in other words LIES!
This is how it works...
Muslims say that ALL fish is halal
Then they approach companies and say the Company qualifies for a halal accreditation on their fish
Then the Company fall for it! HOOK LINE & SINKER!

COMPANIES DIRECTORY - MORRISONS
http://fis.com/fis/c
ompanies/details.asp
?l=e&company_id=1545
96

WAITROSE FISH IS HALAL CERTIFIED
http://fis.com/fis/c
ompanies/details.asp
?l=e&company_id=5640
6

You will find that they ALL are - ASDA, TESCO, SAINSBURYS etc.

So why do we find that all of our main supermarkets on that website have signed up (& presumably paid) for halal certification on their fish???
REMINDER: Only 4.8% of the British population are muslims!
The rest of the population do not require halal certification at all!
My (latest) letter today to Simon Burns MP (Con) Minister too. Dear Simon Burns, Are you aware ALL of our Supermarket Fish is Halal Certified now? ! Muslims will tell us that all fish (water air etc.) is halal, but we do not as non-muslims wear that mindset. If I go & catch a fish it would not be halal - it will only become halal if I decide to go to a halal certified halal authority and pay them to certify it. If I go to Tesco or Asdas or Saisburys I do not see the halal sign on their fish, but I see on this website (link below) that all our supermarkets are displaying a halal sign for accreditation along with Morrisons! MORRISONS & the others have fallen for the Halal Fish Industry's taqiyya - in other words LIES! This is how it works... Muslims say that ALL fish is halal Then they approach companies and say the Company qualifies for a halal accreditation on their fish Then the Company fall for it! HOOK LINE & SINKER! COMPANIES DIRECTORY - MORRISONS http://fis.com/fis/c ompanies/details.asp ?l=e&company_id=1545 96 WAITROSE FISH IS HALAL CERTIFIED http://fis.com/fis/c ompanies/details.asp ?l=e&company_id=5640 6 You will find that they ALL are - ASDA, TESCO, SAINSBURYS etc. So why do we find that all of our main supermarkets on that website have signed up (& presumably paid) for halal certification on their fish??? REMINDER: Only 4.8% of the British population are muslims! The rest of the population do not require halal certification at all! Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

11:00am Thu 11 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

This is nothing less than a huge money making scam that takes money from Britain to Islamic ends.
Islamic Countries do not have halal certification - but they are
promising that if we get halal certified, then we can increase our
Exports to them.
Can I remind the government that more than 75% of the world's
population are NOT muslims... yet increasingly, in Non-Islamic
countries including our own, it is becoming impossible to avoid halal products when we do our weekly shopping!

Yet all the halal authorities are Registered Not For Profit Charities
(with all the VAT & Business Tax breaks that provides!) - so where is all the money going that they are raking in?
NOT to help the British economy in these times of austerity.
Do you know that small slaughterhouses pay £4 MILLION a year to the halal authority to be halal certified?

So, back to the Fish... why is our Supermarket Fish now halal?
We are not Muslims & do not require halal accreditation on our food.
I as a Christian do not want my food classified by Islam.
Article 9 Human Rights Act. regarding Freedom of Conscience - should give us the right to religious and secular freedom, ie. to not be forced to participate in religious rites. Dedicating this meat to a god violates this right: hence there is forced participation in another's religion without consent.
Also Jews, Buddhists, Hindus & Sikhs who are forbidden by their
religions to eat Halal Food...
So where is our religious freedom?
UK Human Rights Blog
http://ukhumanrights
blog.com/incorporate
d-rights/articles-in
dex/article-9/
This is nothing less than a huge money making scam that takes money from Britain to Islamic ends. Islamic Countries do not have halal certification - but they are promising that if we get halal certified, then we can increase our Exports to them. Can I remind the government that more than 75% of the world's population are NOT muslims... yet increasingly, in Non-Islamic countries including our own, it is becoming impossible to avoid halal products when we do our weekly shopping! Yet all the halal authorities are Registered Not For Profit Charities (with all the VAT & Business Tax breaks that provides!) - so where is all the money going that they are raking in? NOT to help the British economy in these times of austerity. Do you know that small slaughterhouses pay £4 MILLION a year to the halal authority to be halal certified? So, back to the Fish... why is our Supermarket Fish now halal? We are not Muslims & do not require halal accreditation on our food. I as a Christian do not want my food classified by Islam. Article 9 Human Rights Act. regarding Freedom of Conscience - should give us the right to religious and secular freedom, ie. to not be forced to participate in religious rites. Dedicating this meat to a god violates this right: hence there is forced participation in another's religion without consent. Also Jews, Buddhists, Hindus & Sikhs who are forbidden by their religions to eat Halal Food... So where is our religious freedom? UK Human Rights Blog http://ukhumanrights blog.com/incorporate d-rights/articles-in dex/article-9/ Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

11:01am Thu 11 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

Where is our right to proper labelling and to Freedom of Choice in our mainstream supermarkets?
What happened to the promised legislation on LABELLING?
Last year Environment Minister Lord Taylor of Holbeach said that if the European Union fails to agree on a new food labelling scheme, the UK will take action.
If the Government are considering labelling - please remember that a lot of Ritually Slaughtered meat is pronounced haram at the
post-slaughter inspection... and cannot be labelled as halal according to Sharia Law... which presumably we have to abide by now!
This haram meat, which failed the inspection because it has a blemish, or was contaminated by the animal's bodily fluids, or is Diseased in some way - this haram meat is sold off to our Supermarket - UNLABELLED AS SUCH!
Label it or, as they have done in Sri Lanka - Ban halal certification
completely for mainstream products, because 96%+ of the UK population are NOT muslims and do not require halal certification... we prefer to rely on our government and enforcement agencies to inspect and authenticate our food.

If the Followers of Islam want halal certification - let them pay for
it and keep all halal activity within their own market.
We are not Muslims, we do not require halal and I certainly do not want to pay for halal certification!
Where is our right to proper labelling and to Freedom of Choice in our mainstream supermarkets? What happened to the promised legislation on LABELLING? Last year Environment Minister Lord Taylor of Holbeach said that if the European Union fails to agree on a new food labelling scheme, the UK will take action. If the Government are considering labelling - please remember that a lot of Ritually Slaughtered meat is pronounced haram at the post-slaughter inspection... and cannot be labelled as halal according to Sharia Law... which presumably we have to abide by now! This haram meat, which failed the inspection because it has a blemish, or was contaminated by the animal's bodily fluids, or is Diseased in some way - this haram meat is sold off to our Supermarket - UNLABELLED AS SUCH! Label it or, as they have done in Sri Lanka - Ban halal certification completely for mainstream products, because 96%+ of the UK population are NOT muslims and do not require halal certification... we prefer to rely on our government and enforcement agencies to inspect and authenticate our food. If the Followers of Islam want halal certification - let them pay for it and keep all halal activity within their own market. We are not Muslims, we do not require halal and I certainly do not want to pay for halal certification! Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

11:03am Thu 11 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

Please let me know your views on this - and what if anything can be
done about it, because if halal certification is the first step on the
ladder to halal finance and Sharia Law... then Islamic takeover... then we in UK are well on our way!
Remember Lebanon? I do - it was the only Christian country in the
Middle East 30 years ago... look at it now!
For the sake of our economy future generation's FREEDOM... this halal certification racket must STOP!

In closing - Please do something to sort out this mess -
before it is too late - and we end up without any choice at all of
non-halal meat or other products.
Please let me know your views on this - and what if anything can be done about it, because if halal certification is the first step on the ladder to halal finance and Sharia Law... then Islamic takeover... then we in UK are well on our way! Remember Lebanon? I do - it was the only Christian country in the Middle East 30 years ago... look at it now! For the sake of our economy future generation's FREEDOM... this halal certification racket must STOP! In closing - Please do something to sort out this mess - before it is too late - and we end up without any choice at all of non-halal meat or other products. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

12:13pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Yawn.

Stop ranting.

If you dont like halal meat don't buy it.
Yawn. Stop ranting. If you dont like halal meat don't buy it. St George1
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

Unfortunately people are not being presented with a choice. I'm vegetarian however my family are meat eaters as are plenty of others. Why should we not have the choice? Clear labelling should not be something we have to beg for in a non muslim country. Are non muslims second class citizens then? They are thrown the scraps that fail halal standards through disease etc and are sold to us in supermarkets without knowing how our meat was slaughtered? I don't want Islamic prayers recited over what I buy nor animals to suffer because of some 7th century barbaric tosh. I don't want halal certification either...do you know where the money for that may be ending up St. George1? I want to know where my money goes when I buy halal certified goods please give us your input on the tax that is paid and where it may be going. There is not much that isn't halal certified even bottled water & fish!!!! Do you think that is right?? Thank you for your input St. George1 but it is not actually adding much to this debate. If you are a Muslim you are entitled to your view but please do not slap our views down because we do not want it forced on us in 21st century Britain or Europe.
Unfortunately people are not being presented with a choice. I'm vegetarian however my family are meat eaters as are plenty of others. Why should we not have the choice? Clear labelling should not be something we have to beg for in a non muslim country. Are non muslims second class citizens then? They are thrown the scraps that fail halal standards through disease etc and are sold to us in supermarkets without knowing how our meat was slaughtered? I don't want Islamic prayers recited over what I buy nor animals to suffer because of some 7th century barbaric tosh. I don't want halal certification either...do you know where the money for that may be ending up St. George1? I want to know where my money goes when I buy halal certified goods please give us your input on the tax that is paid and where it may be going. There is not much that isn't halal certified even bottled water & fish!!!! Do you think that is right?? Thank you for your input St. George1 but it is not actually adding much to this debate. If you are a Muslim you are entitled to your view but please do not slap our views down because we do not want it forced on us in 21st century Britain or Europe. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

12:51pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Don't come up with labels like 'barbaric tosh', '7th century', 'where my money goes' 'non muslim 2nd class citizens' etc

Just object to it and take your hatred elsewhere like the EDL website where you will be more at home.
Don't come up with labels like 'barbaric tosh', '7th century', 'where my money goes' 'non muslim 2nd class citizens' etc Just object to it and take your hatred elsewhere like the EDL website where you will be more at home. St George1
  • Score: 0

2:01pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

http://fis.com/fis/c
ompanies/details.asp
?l=e&company_id=5640
6

Been on above site, i object to scientists certifying the fish
(http://fis.com/fis/
companies/details.as
p?l=e&company_id=155
802)
As they are in the pocket of corporates, also why is it Kosher certified, i'm gonna write to my MP I dont want these backward people put their labelling on my food.....!!!


zzzzzzzzzz.
http://fis.com/fis/c ompanies/details.asp ?l=e&company_id=5640 6 Been on above site, i object to scientists certifying the fish (http://fis.com/fis/ companies/details.as p?l=e&company_id=155 802) As they are in the pocket of corporates, also why is it Kosher certified, i'm gonna write to my MP I dont want these backward people put their labelling on my food.....!!! zzzzzzzzzz. St George1
  • Score: 0

2:56pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

I wouldn't agree to Kosher food being forced on anyone.Am I paying for Kosher certification. Please enlighten us.
Is Kosher being shoved down our throats when we buy our goods from supermarkets. Not to my knowledge.
Is this debate about Kosher being forced on the marjority of school children. NO.
Come up with some intelligent input please. Yes thanks for the zzzzzzzz'ss you are boring me to tears and think I will leave you to your insults because most people have seen through your intentions. So many people have no idea the extent to which things are as regards the halal situation but it goes much much deeper than just the meat issue.
I wouldn't agree to Kosher food being forced on anyone.Am I paying for Kosher certification. Please enlighten us. Is Kosher being shoved down our throats when we buy our goods from supermarkets. Not to my knowledge. Is this debate about Kosher being forced on the marjority of school children. NO. Come up with some intelligent input please. Yes thanks for the zzzzzzzz'ss you are boring me to tears and think I will leave you to your insults because most people have seen through your intentions. So many people have no idea the extent to which things are as regards the halal situation but it goes much much deeper than just the meat issue. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 1

3:01pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
Yawn.

Stop ranting.

If you dont like halal meat don't buy it.
As you well know, this story is about halal food being served to people who haven't chosen it and in many cases would not buy it.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: Yawn. Stop ranting. If you dont like halal meat don't buy it.[/p][/quote]As you well know, this story is about halal food being served to people who haven't chosen it and in many cases would not buy it. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

3:14pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Yes you are boring us with your rants against muslims, sharia, etc.

Labelling is being done from a commercial point, muslims are not forcing this onto businesses, you need to speak to businesses.

You have tried every trick in the book from labelling muslims as backwards, 7th century tosh, playing the animal welfare card to involving money which involved paying for certification.

Would you please leave us and go to the EDL site now or just get drunk along with your west ham fans.
Yes you are boring us with your rants against muslims, sharia, etc. Labelling is being done from a commercial point, muslims are not forcing this onto businesses, you need to speak to businesses. You have tried every trick in the book from labelling muslims as backwards, 7th century tosh, playing the animal welfare card to involving money which involved paying for certification. Would you please leave us and go to the EDL site now or just get drunk along with your west ham fans. St George1
  • Score: 0

3:15pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

Spot on Walthamster. Clear labelling would be a start and should not be something non muslims have to plead for and even then are refused. They label everything these days, even tell us a packet of nuts may contain nuts!
Why shouldn't we have an INFORMED CHOICE. Imagine the outcry if the boot were on the other foot!
Outrageous!
Spot on Walthamster. Clear labelling would be a start and should not be something non muslims have to plead for and even then are refused. They label everything these days, even tell us a packet of nuts may contain nuts! Why shouldn't we have an INFORMED CHOICE. Imagine the outcry if the boot were on the other foot! Outrageous! Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

3:24pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Labelling is good.

care to comment on this:

Yes you are boring us with your rants against muslims, sharia, etc.

Labelling is being done from a commercial point, muslims are not forcing this onto businesses, you need to speak to businesses.

You have tried every trick in the book from labelling muslims as backwards, 7th century tosh, playing the animal welfare card to involving money which involved paying for certification.

Would you please leave us and go to the EDL site now or just get drunk along with your west ham fans.
Labelling is good. care to comment on this: Yes you are boring us with your rants against muslims, sharia, etc. Labelling is being done from a commercial point, muslims are not forcing this onto businesses, you need to speak to businesses. You have tried every trick in the book from labelling muslims as backwards, 7th century tosh, playing the animal welfare card to involving money which involved paying for certification. Would you please leave us and go to the EDL site now or just get drunk along with your west ham fans. St George1
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

We dont need to pander to minorities like the EDL, we want our country back.


They are nothing but trouble, being drunk, wantan vandalism, enormous policing costs, i object to this.

Outrageous.
We dont need to pander to minorities like the EDL, we want our country back. They are nothing but trouble, being drunk, wantan vandalism, enormous policing costs, i object to this. Outrageous. St George1
  • Score: -1

5:10pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

St George1 wrote:
We dont need to pander to minorities like the EDL, we want our country back.


They are nothing but trouble, being drunk, wantan vandalism, enormous policing costs, i object to this.

Outrageous.
Other posts on this site have provided facts, reasoned arguments and information from checkable sources. Most of yours have been a string of insults and childish accusations of islamophobia or xenophobia. Not really worth arguing with.
[quote][p][bold]St George1[/bold] wrote: We dont need to pander to minorities like the EDL, we want our country back. They are nothing but trouble, being drunk, wantan vandalism, enormous policing costs, i object to this. Outrageous.[/p][/quote]Other posts on this site have provided facts, reasoned arguments and information from checkable sources. Most of yours have been a string of insults and childish accusations of islamophobia or xenophobia. Not really worth arguing with. Walthamster
  • Score: 1

5:17pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Don't argue, just comment on your affiliation with EDL and your true anti muslim agenda will be revealed.
Don't argue, just comment on your affiliation with EDL and your true anti muslim agenda will be revealed. St George1
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Thu 11 Apr 13

e10biker says...

This is a discussion about the rights and wrongs of children being given halal meat without a choice.

I think this is a very serious issue. The UK is a multicultural country where the beliefs of minority (in this case Islam) are allowed to coexist with the majority. In law this is the case with both Kosher and Halal ritual slaughter being allowed for Jews and Muslims respectively. The law specifies that these methods of slaughter are exceptions to meet the needs of these communities. The key word here is exception, ritual killing (Halal or Kosher) should never be the normal method of slaughter it should be allowed only for the ethnic groups the exemption applies for.

Now this is the key point in LBWF in most schools all students are given halal meat, this would seem a breach of the law.

I would propose the council implements the following in its schools.
1. All schools by default should serve meat that has been humanely slaughtered, if the schools wish to serve ritually slaughtered meat (Halal or Kosher) it should only be provided to students of those two faiths.
2. A vegetarian option suitable for children of all faiths should be available in all meals.

Sorry to go on about this but I think there have been some wayward comments and this is too important issue to be dragged down by slurs.

I look forward to more opinions
This is a discussion about the rights and wrongs of children being given halal meat without a choice. I think this is a very serious issue. The UK is a multicultural country where the beliefs of minority (in this case Islam) are allowed to coexist with the majority. In law this is the case with both Kosher and Halal ritual slaughter being allowed for Jews and Muslims respectively. The law specifies that these methods of slaughter are exceptions to meet the needs of these communities. The key word here is exception, ritual killing (Halal or Kosher) should never be the normal method of slaughter it should be allowed only for the ethnic groups the exemption applies for. Now this is the key point in LBWF in most schools all students are given halal meat, this would seem a breach of the law. I would propose the council implements the following in its schools. 1. All schools by default should serve meat that has been humanely slaughtered, if the schools wish to serve ritually slaughtered meat (Halal or Kosher) it should only be provided to students of those two faiths. 2. A vegetarian option suitable for children of all faiths should be available in all meals. Sorry to go on about this but I think there have been some wayward comments and this is too important issue to be dragged down by slurs. I look forward to more opinions e10biker
  • Score: 0

6:44pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

e10biker

I agree with you totally.

Overlandeas claims to be a christian yet goes on to attack another faith as 7th century tosh, ranting against sharia law, not very christian like is it.

I remind them the way animal are slaughterd in the bible:

http://bible.cc/deut
eronomy/12-15.htm

People need to understand its not muslims who are forcing this issue, it is businesses who are making a commercial decision. Muslims buy meat from their own butchers, not from your average supermarket.
e10biker I agree with you totally. Overlandeas claims to be a christian yet goes on to attack another faith as 7th century tosh, ranting against sharia law, not very christian like is it. I remind them the way animal are slaughterd in the bible: http://bible.cc/deut eronomy/12-15.htm People need to understand its not muslims who are forcing this issue, it is businesses who are making a commercial decision. Muslims buy meat from their own butchers, not from your average supermarket. St George1
  • Score: 0

7:59pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

' The key word here is exception, ritual killing (Halal or Kosher) should never be the normal method of slaughter it should be allowed only for the ethnic groups the exemption applies for.'

There are plenty of non-muslims who will eat halal food, they don't care if it was slaughtered ritually. They certainly don't want you or me to intefere in what they eat.

In other words FREEDOM OF CHOICE, rather than cut n pasting from boycotthalal websites to fit a certain aganda as espoused by EDL folks like overlandsea.
' The key word here is exception, ritual killing (Halal or Kosher) should never be the normal method of slaughter it should be allowed only for the ethnic groups the exemption applies for.' There are plenty of non-muslims who will eat halal food, they don't care if it was slaughtered ritually. They certainly don't want you or me to intefere in what they eat. In other words FREEDOM OF CHOICE, rather than cut n pasting from boycotthalal websites to fit a certain aganda as espoused by EDL folks like overlandsea. St George1
  • Score: 0

8:40pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Mark Dawes says...

From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter.

As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue.

Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org.
uk/campaigns/ritual_
slaughter
From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter. As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue. Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org. uk/campaigns/ritual_ slaughter Mark Dawes
  • Score: 0

8:55pm Thu 11 Apr 13

St George1 says...

Mark Dawes

'As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue.'

You are right about this.

However there are advocates on this site who would like to ban it altogether in all forms but allow kosher slaughter. They hide under a conveneint banner but their devious motives come to light.
Mark Dawes 'As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue.' You are right about this. However there are advocates on this site who would like to ban it altogether in all forms but allow kosher slaughter. They hide under a conveneint banner but their devious motives come to light. St George1
  • Score: 0

11:02pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

Mark Dawes wrote:
From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter.

As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue.

Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org.

uk/campaigns/ritual_

slaughter
Interesting link to the Viva animal-welfare site - thank you. They make a very valid point:

"Other practices which may be undertaken for religious reasons – such as polygamy or the stoning of adulterers – are not permitted in the UK. Religious freedom does not override other moral considerations and the suffering caused by this form of slaughter is so severe that it cannot be allowed to prevent action being taken."
[quote][p][bold]Mark Dawes[/bold] wrote: From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter. As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue. Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org. uk/campaigns/ritual_ slaughter[/p][/quote]Interesting link to the Viva animal-welfare site - thank you. They make a very valid point: "Other practices which may be undertaken for religious reasons – such as polygamy or the stoning of adulterers – are not permitted in the UK. Religious freedom does not override other moral considerations and the suffering caused by this form of slaughter is so severe that it cannot be allowed to prevent action being taken." Walthamster
  • Score: 0

11:15pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

Mark Dawes wrote:
From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter.

As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue.

Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org.

uk/campaigns/ritual_

slaughter
Just one point needs making: "prestunning", for halal meat, means the animal has been hit with an electric charge just strong enough to disable it -- not to make it unconscious when it is killed.

This is from a halal website:
http://www.organic-h

alal-meat.com/articl

e/stunning.php

"The stun used is a very low voltage that knocks the animal out for around 15-20 seconds. After 20 seconds it is potentially back to normal and during that 20 seconds it is alive and breathing."

So the halal slaughterers admit the "prestunning" does not leave the animal unconscious while it is killed.

Electrocuting the animal but then reviving it in order to be conscious when it is killed -- that's even more cruel than ordinary halal slaughter.
[quote][p][bold]Mark Dawes[/bold] wrote: From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter. As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue. Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org. uk/campaigns/ritual_ slaughter[/p][/quote]Just one point needs making: "prestunning", for halal meat, means the animal has been hit with an electric charge just strong enough to disable it -- not to make it unconscious when it is killed. This is from a halal website: http://www.organic-h alal-meat.com/articl e/stunning.php "The stun used is a very low voltage that knocks the animal out for around 15-20 seconds. After 20 seconds it is potentially back to normal and during that 20 seconds it is alive and breathing." So the halal slaughterers admit the "prestunning" does not leave the animal unconscious while it is killed. Electrocuting the animal but then reviving it in order to be conscious when it is killed -- that's even more cruel than ordinary halal slaughter. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

5:48pm Sat 13 Apr 13

Mark Dawes says...

Walthamster wrote:
Mark Dawes wrote:
From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter.

As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue.

Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org.


uk/campaigns/ritual_


slaughter
Just one point needs making: "prestunning", for halal meat, means the animal has been hit with an electric charge just strong enough to disable it -- not to make it unconscious when it is killed.

This is from a halal website:
http://www.organic-h


alal-meat.com/articl


e/stunning.php

"The stun used is a very low voltage that knocks the animal out for around 15-20 seconds. After 20 seconds it is potentially back to normal and during that 20 seconds it is alive and breathing."

So the halal slaughterers admit the "prestunning" does not leave the animal unconscious while it is killed.

Electrocuting the animal but then reviving it in order to be conscious when it is killed -- that's even more cruel than ordinary halal slaughter.
I think what they are saying is that animals are stunned so they are unconscious when killed but if they were not slaughtered, they would regain consciousness ie the animals are killed within 20 seconds of stunning.

The same website says - "As for the legality of the meat if the situation is as the questioner described - that the animal recovers and returns to its natural state twenty seconds after having been stunned - then it is lawful (halal) even if the animal is in a lifeless state at the time of slaughter (such that it cannot see or hear and is unable to move). This is because the shock in itself is not a cause of the animal's death."

I will look into this further though to make sure that is the case and it is not be used as a way to get around proper prestunning.
[quote][p][bold]Walthamster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mark Dawes[/bold] wrote: From an animal welfare point of value, pre-stunning is less cruel than other methods of slaughter (although all slaughter is cruel) so if animals are to be slaughtered, they should be pre-stunned and all exemptions to that removed. Animal welfare should be the most important issue re: slaughter. As the majority of Halal meat in this country has been slaughtered using pre-stunning then religion is not an issue. Good article on the issue at http://www.viva.org. uk/campaigns/ritual_ slaughter[/p][/quote]Just one point needs making: "prestunning", for halal meat, means the animal has been hit with an electric charge just strong enough to disable it -- not to make it unconscious when it is killed. This is from a halal website: http://www.organic-h alal-meat.com/articl e/stunning.php "The stun used is a very low voltage that knocks the animal out for around 15-20 seconds. After 20 seconds it is potentially back to normal and during that 20 seconds it is alive and breathing." So the halal slaughterers admit the "prestunning" does not leave the animal unconscious while it is killed. Electrocuting the animal but then reviving it in order to be conscious when it is killed -- that's even more cruel than ordinary halal slaughter.[/p][/quote]I think what they are saying is that animals are stunned so they are unconscious when killed but if they were not slaughtered, they would regain consciousness ie the animals are killed within 20 seconds of stunning. The same website says - "As for the legality of the meat if the situation is as the questioner described - that the animal recovers and returns to its natural state twenty seconds after having been stunned - then it is lawful (halal) even if the animal is in a lifeless state at the time of slaughter (such that it cannot see or hear and is unable to move). This is because the shock in itself is not a cause of the animal's death." I will look into this further though to make sure that is the case and it is not be used as a way to get around proper prestunning. Mark Dawes
  • Score: 0

7:44pm Mon 15 Apr 13

Mark Dawes says...

Further to my previous posting:-

The animals are stunned and killed whilst unconscious. The stunning mentioned that puts an animal unconscious for 20 seconds - in which time it is slaughtered – is used for non-halal as well as halal slaughter. The majority of all sheep, goats & pigs killed use this method of prestunning.

However, there are instances when animals regain consciousness. The RSPCA say that, 'There is increasing scientific evidence that some animals stunned electrically using tongs regain consciousness before they die from loss of blood.' There are two reasons for this: either insufficient electrical current passes through the brain to stun the animal, or the time interval between stunning and sticking exceeds 20 seconds and the animal starts to regain consciousness.

The Scientific Veterinary Committee of the EU says that, 'Under the commercial conditions, a considerable proportion of animals are either inadequately stunned or require a second stun. This is mainly because of poor electrode placements, bad electrical contacts and long stun-to-stick intervals.'

So in conclusion, the prestunning used for Halal – and around 90% of Halal meat produced in the UK is prestunned – is the same as non-Halal but is still cruel. Of course, the only way to avoid this cruelty is not to eat meat at all.
Further to my previous posting:- The animals are stunned and killed whilst unconscious. The stunning mentioned that puts an animal unconscious for 20 seconds - in which time it is slaughtered – is used for non-halal as well as halal slaughter. The majority of all sheep, goats & pigs killed use this method of prestunning. However, there are instances when animals regain consciousness. The RSPCA say that, 'There is increasing scientific evidence that some animals stunned electrically using tongs regain consciousness before they die from loss of blood.' There are two reasons for this: either insufficient electrical current passes through the brain to stun the animal, or the time interval between stunning and sticking exceeds 20 seconds and the animal starts to regain consciousness. The Scientific Veterinary Committee of the EU says that, 'Under the commercial conditions, a considerable proportion of animals are either inadequately stunned or require a second stun. This is mainly because of poor electrode placements, bad electrical contacts and long stun-to-stick intervals.' So in conclusion, the prestunning used for Halal – and around 90% of Halal meat produced in the UK is prestunned – is the same as non-Halal but is still cruel. Of course, the only way to avoid this cruelty is not to eat meat at all. Mark Dawes
  • Score: 0

9:21pm Mon 15 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

Mark Dawes wrote:
Further to my previous posting:-

The animals are stunned and killed whilst unconscious. The stunning mentioned that puts an animal unconscious for 20 seconds - in which time it is slaughtered – is used for non-halal as well as halal slaughter. The majority of all sheep, goats & pigs killed use this method of prestunning.

However, there are instances when animals regain consciousness. The RSPCA say that, 'There is increasing scientific evidence that some animals stunned electrically using tongs regain consciousness before they die from loss of blood.' There are two reasons for this: either insufficient electrical current passes through the brain to stun the animal, or the time interval between stunning and sticking exceeds 20 seconds and the animal starts to regain consciousness.

The Scientific Veterinary Committee of the EU says that, 'Under the commercial conditions, a considerable proportion of animals are either inadequately stunned or require a second stun. This is mainly because of poor electrode placements, bad electrical contacts and long stun-to-stick intervals.'

So in conclusion, the prestunning used for Halal – and around 90% of Halal meat produced in the UK is prestunned – is the same as non-Halal but is still cruel. Of course, the only way to avoid this cruelty is not to eat meat at all.
Thanks for clarifying this, Mark. I can see your point about not eating meat, too. But given that so many of us do, I want slaughter to be as humane as possible. We need higher standards of animal welfare, not lower ones or special exemptions. The last thing we need is the spread of cruelty.
[quote][p][bold]Mark Dawes[/bold] wrote: Further to my previous posting:- The animals are stunned and killed whilst unconscious. The stunning mentioned that puts an animal unconscious for 20 seconds - in which time it is slaughtered – is used for non-halal as well as halal slaughter. The majority of all sheep, goats & pigs killed use this method of prestunning. However, there are instances when animals regain consciousness. The RSPCA say that, 'There is increasing scientific evidence that some animals stunned electrically using tongs regain consciousness before they die from loss of blood.' There are two reasons for this: either insufficient electrical current passes through the brain to stun the animal, or the time interval between stunning and sticking exceeds 20 seconds and the animal starts to regain consciousness. The Scientific Veterinary Committee of the EU says that, 'Under the commercial conditions, a considerable proportion of animals are either inadequately stunned or require a second stun. This is mainly because of poor electrode placements, bad electrical contacts and long stun-to-stick intervals.' So in conclusion, the prestunning used for Halal – and around 90% of Halal meat produced in the UK is prestunned – is the same as non-Halal but is still cruel. Of course, the only way to avoid this cruelty is not to eat meat at all.[/p][/quote]Thanks for clarifying this, Mark. I can see your point about not eating meat, too. But given that so many of us do, I want slaughter to be as humane as possible. We need higher standards of animal welfare, not lower ones or special exemptions. The last thing we need is the spread of cruelty. Walthamster
  • Score: 0

9:38pm Mon 15 Apr 13

Overlandandsea says...

http://www.lancashir
etelegraph.co.uk/new
s/10355947.Lancashir
e_council_leader_say
s_children_are_being
_used_as__pawns__in_
Halal_meat_row/

Lancashire council leader says children are being used as 'pawns' in Halal meat row


Good on him for speaking out.
http://www.lancashir etelegraph.co.uk/new s/10355947.Lancashir e_council_leader_say s_children_are_being _used_as__pawns__in_ Halal_meat_row/ Lancashire council leader says children are being used as 'pawns' in Halal meat row Good on him for speaking out. Overlandandsea
  • Score: 0

6:26pm Mon 22 Apr 13

Walthamster says...

Supporters of halal slaughter claim that it removes more blood from the meat, and that this is somehow healthier.

There is no scientific evidence for either of those claims, as this review of studies shows. It's not just one study, but an independent analysis, by scientists, of the published evidence on the subject.

http://onlinelibrary
.wiley.com/doi/10.10
02/jsfa.2740280509/a
bstract

It starts by saying:
"There seems to be no unequivocal experimental evidence to support the widely held view that the efficiency of bleeding out of slaughter animals affects the eating or keeping qualities of meat. Neither are the effects of different slaughter procedures on bleeding efficiency clear..."
Supporters of halal slaughter claim that it removes more blood from the meat, and that this is somehow healthier. There is no scientific evidence for either of those claims, as this review of studies shows. It's not just one study, but an independent analysis, by scientists, of the published evidence on the subject. http://onlinelibrary .wiley.com/doi/10.10 02/jsfa.2740280509/a bstract It starts by saying: "There seems to be no unequivocal experimental evidence to support the widely held view that the efficiency of bleeding out of slaughter animals affects the eating or keeping qualities of meat. Neither are the effects of different slaughter procedures on bleeding efficiency clear..." Walthamster
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree