Countryfile Report On Halal And Kosha Meat

[pie-eater 377]

If in doubt order pork they wont touch it.

[socks 32,253]

If in doubt order pork they wont touch it.

Erm so that means they won't cook it .... Name me a pork dish on an Indian menu ..............

[Guest ragumup]

Nick clag says he wouldn't ban halal on LBC radio the other day, you can bet that Camoron and that rodent Ed millipede thinks the same ......

Edited March 10, 2014 by ragumup

[Guest ragumup]

link didn't work...

[k99yle 53]

How did everyone kill deer their dogs caught before the ban then? .

Apparently the dogs kill the Deer whilst the hunters, poachers, criminal gangs stand around watching, laughing and taking bets on how long it will take for the dogs to tear it to pieces. It must be true i read it in the papers

[unlacedgecko 1,466]

 

Straight and honest answers to two of ye questions, mate;

 

1. They simply don't stun cattle. Just slash the carotid artery and leave them, in a neck clamp, to bleed to death fully conscious.

 

2. I did that to a Dog once. Police sanctioned it (off the record. RTA job)

 

Arsepca got involved, later down the line. Said cutting its artery was fine. " It's considered a perfectly normal manner of euthanasia, in several other countries and cultures. We have no problem with it. "

but the police were interested in this case http://www.cumbriacrack.com/2014/02/02/horror-dog-found-throat-cut/

 

 

When I did my Lincolnshire deer RTA first responder course, we were told under no circumstances was a knife to be used for humane dispatch. If it was not possible to shoot the deer, then we were to insist that the police call out, and pay for, a vet to inject the animal. Apparently the head RSPCA rep in the area had publicly stated their intention to prosecute anyone who uses a knife to dispatch an RTA deer.

 

I have researched halal slaughter quite extensively on the internet. This series of videos shows some excellent examples of halal slaughter.

 

 

Although I disagree with his religious views, his respect for his stock and his pride in production of his product is obvious to see. I

[paulus 26]

 

 

 

 

They HAVE to tell everyone they do it as it's advertised in all their shops. Doesn't make it humane. It might only take a few seconds to bleed out, but it must be better to be stunned while it's happening.

 

Muslims and Jews might find non-Halal meat offensive, but I find Halal meat equally offensive.

but according to countryfile over % of halal meat is stunned prior to slaughter

 

 

So the Muslim they asked said, yes. And if saying a prayer while slaughtering in the "normal" way makes it Halal, then so be it. But he also mentioned the hardcore Muslims who insisted that the animals were conscious to hear the prayer. Assuming they speak Arabic. Can you really believe the stun some, and not others to cater for their religion? I don't.

 

What they do and say on TV and what they do behind closed doors i suspect are very different.

 

but the point is it can not be both humane to stun and humane not to stun surely as it begs the question why are we stunning on the grounds of a humane slaughter in the first place

 

Are you taking the piss?

 

Lets see would you rather me knock you out and cut both your ears off? or would you like to sit in a chair awake and let me do it? its that simple....

 

And they don't cut the throat the go all the way back to the neck bone i have videos if you would like to see.

 

Im not the one bashing religion here WE are the victims of religious slaughter getting pushed under our nose.

 

I bet you order currys dont you

 

again thats my point would it be correct for both to be called humane, as we are being told is the case in stunning or not stunning prior to slaughter in our abattoirs

[unlacedgecko 1,466]

 

 

 

 

 

They HAVE to tell everyone they do it as it's advertised in all their shops. Doesn't make it humane. It might only take a few seconds to bleed out, but it must be better to be stunned while it's happening.

 

Muslims and Jews might find non-Halal meat offensive, but I find Halal meat equally offensive.

but according to countryfile over % of halal meat is stunned prior to slaughter

 

 

So the Muslim they asked said, yes. And if saying a prayer while slaughtering in the "normal" way makes it Halal, then so be it. But he also mentioned the hardcore Muslims who insisted that the animals were conscious to hear the prayer. Assuming they speak Arabic. Can you really believe the stun some, and not others to cater for their religion? I don't.

 

What they do and say on TV and what they do behind closed doors i suspect are very different.

 

but the point is it can not be both humane to stun and humane not to stun surely as it begs the question why are we stunning on the grounds of a humane slaughter in the first place

 

Are you taking the piss?

 

Lets see would you rather me knock you out and cut both your ears off? or would you like to sit in a chair awake and let me do it? its that simple....

 

And they don't cut the throat the go all the way back to the neck bone i have videos if you would like to see.

 

Im not the one bashing religion here WE are the victims of religious slaughter getting pushed under our nose.

 

I bet you order currys dont you

 

again thats my point would it be correct for both to be called humane, as we are being told is the case in stunning or not stunning prior to slaughter in our abattoirs

 

 

I read something recently which seemed to suggest that the requirement for the animal to be conscious was due to the climate. Both Judaism and Islam originate in the Middle East, where the climate is mainly hot. In such climatic conditions, meat would quickly spoil (especially pork). To ensure that the followers of each religion did not die of gastroenteritis from eating off meat, pork was made unclean, and all other meats required the animal to be healthy and conscious before slaughter.

 

This is just one line of thinking as to the origin of ritual slaughter, and not something I necessarily agree with.

 

The video series I posted appears to show almost instant loss of consciousness for the sheep and goats being slaughtered. Halal slaughter requires that a sharp knife is used to deliver a single stroke which severs both the carotid artery and the jugular vein, as well as the windpipe. In the case of sheep and goats, I can see how it could be almost as humane as standard British slaughter, where stunning is used.

 

In the case of bovines (cattle, yaks, ox etc) they have a series of veins and arteries which run within the vertebrae, alongside the spinal cord. This means that ritual slaughter is does not instantly sever the blood supply to the brain. As the below video shows, this means that the animal retains consciousness and awareness for some minutes. There are similar videos showing kosher slaughter of cattle where the animal is released from the clamp to wander the killing floor whilst blood pours out of its neck.

 

 

There is a study (available at this link for anyone interested; http://www.scribd.com/doc/18968848/Conventional-Slaughter-vs-Halal-A-Scientific-Examination) in which electrodes were implanted in the skulls of several sheep and calves. This measured the EEG (brainwaves effectively) for the animals as they were slaughtered. The findings were that the EEG readings for animals slaughtered under ritual slaughter conditions 'zero lined' (ceased) quicker than those for animals stunned by bolt gun.

 

However, this study was done in 1978, so quite some time ago. Several online forums state that the study has since been largely discredited, although I can't put my hand on anything immediately to prove this.

 

Re deer, the Deer Initiative Best Practice guide for dealing with wounded deer states that a firearm should always be the preferred method of humane dispatch. However, where a firearm is unavailable, or its use would be unsafe, then a knife maybe used. A very sharp blade of at least 12 cm should be used for a thoracic stick (stab to the base of the neck). If this is impractical then a similar blade should be used to sever the blood vessels of the neck, at the base of the jaw.

 

Following up deer in heavy cover makes a rifle impractical and unsafe. I have used the thoracic stick on roe and muntjac several times and can attest to its effectiveness. I wouldn't like to use it on anything larger.

 

In my opinion, ritual slaughter is inhumane and should be banned.

[Lab 10,979]

Well I don't actually see the problem with it. Yes it doesn't look to good but there's no actual 'cruelty' involved.

Is it less cruel to shoot an animal or set a dog on it...how much pain difference between getting your throat cut or shot. Anyone making comparisons.....would you rather have your throat cut or get killed by a dog?

Now if they were skinning them alive or chopping there legs of and leaving them to die I think that would be a whole different story.

[walshie 2,804]

I think people are missing the point. Just because a method of killing is more humane than another, doesn't make it humane in itself.

[Lab 10,979]

I think people are missing the point. Just because a method of killing is more humane than another, doesn't make it humane in itself.

Is it humane to shoot something then mate? I'd hate to go down the humane route for Halal for it to be banned and then them to turn on shooting and ask for that to be banned.

As I've said I see no 'cruelty'.....maybe not best practice but not 'cruelty' in my eyes.

[micky 3,325]

 

If in doubt order pork they wont touch it.

Erm so that means they won't cook it .... Name me a pork dish on an Indian menu ..............

 

vindaloo

[pie-eater 377]

 

If in doubt order pork they wont touch it.

Erm so that means they won't cook it .... Name me a pork dish on an Indian menu ..............

 

There isnt a pork dish on an Indian menu. Do you deliver? No we do lamb chicken or beef.

 

If youre ordering from a Chinese or any restaurant that sells pork the pork is the safest option if youre trying to avoid halal was my point.

[Frann 882]

Perhaps the Indians only serve lamb or prawn vindaloo? I know here they do, no pork.

[paulus 26]

Well I don't actually see the problem with it. Yes it doesn't look to good but there's no actual 'cruelty' involved.

Is it less cruel to shoot an animal or set a dog on it...how much pain difference between getting your throat cut or shot. Anyone making comparisons.....would you rather have your throat cut or get killed by a dog?

Now if they were skinning them alive or chopping there legs of and leaving them to die I think that would be a whole different story.

you seem to be getting the idea of what i am very badly trying to say but if there is no difference then why did the industry introduce stunning and now in this country considered humane when it would also appear that not stunning is also humane next question is how can a compulsory requirement not be compulsory in certain circumstances