Thursday, April 12, 2012

Halal Slaughter, Zakat, and Mad Cow Disease

Prompted by the discussion on recent posts, our European correspondent Lexington was prompted to send additional information about the long-term effects of the widespread consumption of halal meat products:

While looking at the Politically Incorrect site, I went to another link which states “hundreds of children die yearly from Halal Meat”.

The fatal and untreatable condition of Creuzfeldt-Jacob is mentioned as a result of both kosher and halal slaughter and as a cause of deaths of children, especially from the consumption of ground-minced meat products (kids, of course, consume huge quantities of hamburgers).

The mention of C-J rang a bell for me because, years ago, when first posting on British sites about Moslem consanguinity, a discussion arose about C-J as a condition to which Jews especially were prone, no one at the time tying this in with kosher slaughter practices. Apart from periods of Islamic conquest, we in the West have been unaccustomed up until now to large numbers of Moslems. Thus I don’t know if there have been any studies done that relate halal slaughter’s causing this C-J problem in Moslems, or, more importantly, among Westerners in general as a result of consumption of halal food.

The “mad cow disease” in Britain was used to decimate the farming industry. France, which also had this problem, kept quiet about it while the EU and the British government ruined the livestock industry.

I believe that one of the reasons halal slaughter is not dealt with publicly is because of the connection with kosher slaughter. I know, from my own experiences in commenting at online sites in Britain and the US that Jews have stated they will “stand with” the Moslems over ritual slaughter. One of the commonest remarks of pseudo-conservatives is that “Moslems are the first victims of Islam”; the same could be applied to Jews with their kosher practices.

The British government in the last few weeks has stressed that dementia is a major “time bomb” for its elderly population, all while encouraging euthanasia. I think that years of unknowingly being fed halal products (eggs, chickens, turkey as well as beef, and don’t put it past them to also deal with pork), has aggravated this situation dangerously for the general population in every Western country, and not just Britain.

This issue really does need to be opened up entirely without any sympathy or demurring to “religious” practices. The reality is that, while we may speak endlessly (as you and I certainly have done for years) about the threat to our freedoms, people generally ignore such an issue until they’re directly affected. Yet what they eat, and how it affects them, is a daily concern.

As for why leaders, governments, animal “rights” orgs, etc. don’t deal with it, it’s not just fear or PC: one of the other uses of Zakat is, of course, for (from Reliance of the Traveller):

H8.14 Those Whose Hearts are to be Reconciled

The fourth category is those whose hearts are to be reconciled. If they are non-Muslims, they are not given Zakat but if Muslim, then they may be given it (O: so that their certainty may increase, or if they are recent converts to Islam and are alienated from their kin)

Those to be reconciled include:

-1- the chief personages of a people (O: with weak Islamic intentions) whose Islam may be expected to improve, or whose peers may be expected to enter Islam;
-2- or the heads of a people who collect zakat for us from Muslims living near them who refuse to pay it, or who fight an enemy for us at considerable expense and trouble to themselves

I read the above as an obvious use of bribes (consider the likely candidates for “private” conversion to Islam among British, American and European politicians; it’s “only” a one-sentence declaration of “faith” and offers limitless power and wealth to them). And it also partly explains so many wars being conducted by Western powers, ostensibly to aid Moslems in their fights against one another.

All quite enough to put one off one’s feed, and plain as a pikestaff, too.

— Lexington

7 comments:

K. from Germany said...

Thank you, it's high time this topic gets wider exposure.

You dropped a letter upon copying the link to the article which results in a "Server not found" error. Here is the correct one:
http://www.unzensuriert.at/content/007730-Hunderte-Kinder-sterben-jaehrlich-Halal-Fleisch

Baron Bodissey said...

K. from Germany --

Thanks for correcting that. I knew the link was bad, but that was the way it came through in Lexington's email, and I didn't know the right one. I've fixed it.

Paardestaart said...

There is no reason, motive or justification whatsoever for westerners to ban the production, sale or consumption of kosher meatproducts, only because the scenes from of islamic slaughterhouses are so incredibly disturbing and obscene.
In the first place: non jews do not have to eat it, and the jews are certainly not surreptitiously trying to sell us kosher meat in order to waging a war against us with the proceeds. Secondly, jews have never argued for equal religious rights with the objective of doing away with ours. So, if we do not have to eat their meat if we do not want to, why should we concern ourselves with the kosher proces of slaughter? Do we not trust the jewish shochets to be at least as compassionate as our own butchers? Do we not know that religious jews are usually pretty finicky and precise in all things moral?
Surely, as far as the cruelty to animals is concerned: if I were on a wagon bound for market it would not particularly reassure me to know that it wasn't a shochet awaiting me, but an efficient western slaughterhouse, where they were going to slam a pin through my brain first, before killing me
A shoget - a kosher butcher - is in no way comparable to an islamic one, and the jewish method is no crueler than our own.
Let´s respect the rights the jews have shown themselves to be worthy of and let´s censor muslims even though they call their ways religious.. Let´s be brave enough to acknowledge that all religions are not equal

babs said...

Whether all religions are equal or whether they are not, let's all strive for disclosure. And let us all recognise that the Jewish faith lived for over 50 years in our culture and never demanded the types of "rights" that the Islamic faith now demands.
Hallal slaughter really makes me sick to my stomach and I would really like the choice of being informed about which animals are slaughtered in this manner and which aren't.
I don't think that is too much to ask and, I don't think it is too much for the gov't to grant me. The problem is that not enough people ask this of their gov't.

Anonymous said...

Outside of the fact that humans have digestive systems geared towards vegetarianism, and that animal slaughter for meat eating (when the world is full of good vegetarian options) is barbaric and unnecessary, killing, with any form of 'ritual' attached, belongs to pagan superstitions of the bronze age. Whether you call it Halal or Kosher.

Blogger said...

I find this article hard to swallow. Unless I've missed something, can someone explain how CJD is associated with Halal? thanks

Unknown said...

This article is a joke.

CJD is a prionic disease, caused by malformed protiens in neurological tissue. CJD is the human TSE (Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy). Mad Cow is the bovine form, scrapie is the sheep version.

CJD can occur in families due to an inherited genetic defect, or it may be caused by consumption of infected meat.

Mechanized slaughterhouse practices (airguns fired into the animal's forehead) will spread infected brain tissue into the body of the animal. Ritual slaughter is actually safer, as this does not happen.

There is a cluster of CJD cases in Libya, which has been attributed to the local custom of eating sheep eyeballs (retnas are neurological tissue). As of a few years ago there were no other cases that could be attributed to Jewish or Islamic customs. Certainly some Jews contract CJD, but it is likely to be from the natural 'background radiation' of infected animals (i.e. @ 2-4 steer in the U.S. are born with the spontanious genetic defect annually, meaning the animals parents did not carry the defect) and ate their meat. Lamb is probably more risky than beef, given the higher scrapie rate.

About the only truth stated by the article is that ground beef is more risky. This is true, since it often contains meat from the head of the animal. Gelatin is riskier still, since it contains material from near the spinal cord.

Please ignore this article's, ahem, baloney.