ATTACHMENT 1

 Home  About us  Press Release  Community Services  Muslim Community News  Muslim Directory  Islam  Report Hate Crime  Register  FAQs  Contacts THE ISLAMIC COUNCIL OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA (ICWA) ICWA – HALAL GUIDELINES

INTRODUCTION

Islam is not a mere religion. It is a way of life with rules and manners governing every facet of life. Since food is an important part of daily life, food laws carry a special significance. Muslims are expected to eat for survival, to maintain good health and not to live for eating. In Islam, eating is considered to be a matter of worship of God like prayer, fasting, alms-giving and other religious activities. A Muslim eats to maintain a strong and healthy physique in order to be able to contribute his knowledge and effort for the welfare of the society. Muslims are supposed to make an effort to obtain the best quality nutritionally. It is mentioned in a Hadith that the prayer of a person is rejected by Allah if his food is haram. Another Hadith states that hell-fire is more deserving of the flesh which has been nourished with haram.

Australia is a multicultural and multi-religious country. The problem of Halal-Haram with respect to food thus becomes an issue because some non Muslims may not understand the problems and sensitivities of the Muslims. This is compounded by the fact that Australian manufacturers are either unaware of Muslims requirements or choose to ignore them as insignificant.

It is therefore in this situation that like the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, its mother body, the Islamic Council of W.A. is endeavouring to establish the highest standards in the sanctioning of foods as Halal.

1

HALAL

In general every food is considered lawful in Islam unless it is specially prohibited by the Qu’ran or the Hadith. By official definition, Halal foods are those that are:

 Free from any component that Muslims are prohibited from consuming according to Islamic law.  Processed, made, produced, manufactured and/or stored using utensils, equipment and/or machinery that has been cleansed according to Islamic law.  Free from contamination while prepared or processed with anything considered Najis (filthy). HARAM

1. According to the current Islamic thinking, the following are considered Najis and therefore Haram (unlawful, prohibited): 1. Swine including all by-products. 2. Insects considered ugly or filthy such as worms, lice, flies, etc. 3. Animals with fangs such as tigers, lions, cats etc, 4. Birds that have talons with which they catch their prey such as owls, eagles, etc. 5. Animals which Islam encourages to kill such as scorpions, centipedes, rats etc, 6. Dogs 7. Animals which Islam forbids to kill such as bees etc. 8. Animals which have toxins, poisons or produce ill effects when eaten such as some fish etc. 9. Amphibian animals such as crocodiles, turtles, frogs etc. 10. Meat (limbs, tails etc.) which have been cut from a live animal. 11. Lawful animals not slaughtered according to Islamic rites. (Fish is exempt from slaughtering). 12. Carrion or dead animals.

2. Plant and their products. 1. Poisonous Plant. 2. Intoxicating Plant

3. Liquids and their products 1. Poisonous drinks 2. Intoxicating drinks

4. Other matters and their products 1. Faeces and urine 2. Placental tissue 3. Blood

2

5. Halal Sources Products made from the following substances are Halal unless containing or come into contact with a Haram substance 1. All plant and their products 2. Certified Halal meat, poultry, game birds and animals. 3. All water creatures, fish, crustaceans and molluscs. 4. Egg from acceptable birds only. 5. Rennet from certified Halal slaughtered calves 6. Non animal rennet (NAR, culture) 7. Gelatine produced from certified Halal beef skins and/or bones, 8. Animal ingredients certified Halal

6. Halal Slaughter The conditions required for Halal slaughter of animals and birds are: 1. The abattoirs or factory must be under the close and constant supervision of a religious organisation, namely ICWA. 2. The premises, machinery and equipment must be classed according to Islamic Shariah (law) before any production takes place. 3. The slaughterman must be a mature, pious Muslim of sound mind who understands fully the fundamentals and conditions relating to Halal slaughter and be approved by the religious authorities. 4. Only acceptable live animals and birds can be slaughtered. 5. The slaughter must be done manually using a steel knife. 6. Facilities must be available for rinsing the knife after each kill. 7. The slaughterman must sever the respiratory tract, oesophagus and the jugular vein. 8. The animal must be completely dead before skinning can take place.

HALAL CONCEPT

Within the Islamic religion, a strong emphasis is placed on cleanliness – both spiritually and in the context of food and drink. For a food or drink product to be approved for consumption it must conform to the Islamic dietary laws as specified in the Qur’an, the Hadith (sayings) of the Prophet Muhammad, his Sunnah (tradition) and in the Fiqh (understanding) of the Islamic Jurists: Hanafi, Shafi’, Maliki and Hambali. The Qur’an has numerous injunctions instructing Muslims to choose and consume good and wholesome foodstuffs.

In the selection of food and drink, Islam has laid down three very important guidelines, namely;

1. Whether the consumption of the foodstuff is prohibited by Allah, 2. Whether the foodstuff is obtained through Halal or Haram means, and 3. Whether or not the material is harmful to health.

There are several factors that determine the Halal/Haram status of a particular foodstuff. Amongst others, it is dependent on its nature, how it was processed and where it originated from. As an example, any pig product is considered Haram because the material itself is Haram. Whereas beef from an animal that has not been

3

slaughtered according to Islamic rites would still be considered Haram. Also Haram is food that has been stolen or acquired through unethical means. Islam also prohibits the usage of any materials that are detrimental to the spiritual or mental well-being of a person, such as alcoholic drinks and drugs.

The concept of Halal in Islam has very specific motives;

1. To preserve the purity of religion 2. To safeguard the Islamic mentality 3. To preserve life 4. To safeguard property 5. To safeguard future generations 6. To maintain self-respect and integrity.

Islam encourages its followers to choose Halal foods. This awareness is always propagated in Muslim societies and is strengthened by the widespread knowledge extolling the virtues of consuming clean and Halal foods. Due to advancements in food technology and distribution, Muslims are more exposed to various ingredients and manufactured foods imported into Muslim countries. The most common of these are food additives, gelatine, emulsifiers and rennet in cheese manufacture. The Muslim community would like to know whether or not the addition, the ingredients or the finished foods contain any Haram substance. These products can become Halal if the raw materials are Halal and the process is compatible with the Islamic way.

To determine the Halal-Haram status of foodstuffs and other material, Islam has laid general guidelines on this matter, namely:

1. All raw materials and ingredients used must be Halal. 2. Naturally Halal animals such as cattle, goats etc., must be slaughtered according to Islamic rites, the rituals specify that the act must be performed by a mentally sound Muslim, to sever the blood and respiratory channels of the animal, using a sharp cutting tool such as knife. 3. The Halal ingredients must not be mixed, or come into contact with haram materials such as products from pig or dog during storage, transport, cooking, serving etc.

It must be understood that the production of Halal food is not only beneficial to Muslims, but also to food producers, by means of increased market acceptance of their products. Manufacturers and exporters of Halal products can receive Halal certification for their products from ICWA.

MODERN PRODUCTS

In the modern processing of food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products we cannot escape from the issue of food ingredients which originates from animals, especially additives and many of these are imported. The ingredients are made from various sources, including Haram sources as well. The products from animal sources which may pose problems are given below:

1. Fresh Meat

4

There are many types of animals available and these may or may not be slaughtered according to the Islamic law. Some of these animals include chicken, duck, turkey, quail, cattle, goat, sheep, rabbit, venison.

2. Meat Products Another important group of meat products are those using a mixture of pork and non pork raw material. These include luncheon meat, salamis, various types of sausages etc. In these products pork fat is used instead of beef fat. Of course these products are also available in a form which no pork or lard is added as in kosher salami and beef frankfurter’s. There are also available chicken and turkey roll. If these products contain pork or pork products and are not made from Halal slaughtered animals Muslims will not purchase them.

3. Offal Products Example of these include liver, lungs, heart, intestines, tripe, brains and blood. Besides direct consumption, some of these can also be processed into value-added products. Intestines in their wet or dry form can be used as casings for various types of sausages. All these must be from animals slaughtered in a Halal manner otherwise the whole product will not be acceptable. Blood on the other hand is never acceptable under any circumstance.

4. Bone and Hide Products Gelatine which is used in many food preparations is another important animal product. The main sources are skin and bones. The production from skin basically involves an extraction process of several stages with increasing temperatures, filtration and concentration in a vacuum evaporator. On the other hand production from bones would involve the removal of fat, demineralisation and extraction with dilute alkali. Besides being a source of gelatine, bones when converted into bone meal and purified, is used as a natural source of calcium and phosphorus which can be used in paediatric food. The hides of the cattle can be processed into edible crackers, while chicken and pig skin can be emulsified to be used as ingredients in the production of emulsion type sausages. Again if the bones and hides are not from the slaughtered animals these products can not be accepted. Pork and all pig products are prohibited.

5. Fats as Food Apart from lean meat animal fat has been used as food for man for a long time. Beside being highly digestible and providing high calories, fat plays an important role in adding palatability to the lean meat because of the flavour and aroma it provides. Fats also carry fat soluble vitamins and have essential fatty acids and phospholipid. However, in modern diets, the consumption of fat, especially saturated fats, has been reduced drastically for health reasons.

Animal fat from abattoirs is classified into edible and inedible fats. Edible fats are obtained from certain parts of a carcass which are certified sound and healthy by the Department of Primary Industry (DPI). Edible fats can be used in their original form or further processed by rendering process into tallow from cattle and sheep or lard from pig. The rendering process basically involves heating the fatty tissue under pressure. After cooking, the pressure is released from the cooker and the settled mass withdrawn, purified and deodorised before packing.

The processed meat industry uses a lot of unprocessed fat in the production of various meat products like burgers, sausages and other smallgoods. Back fat from pigs is used substantially in the manufacture of sausages and salamis and is used for frying purposes. Shortening from animal fat are used in bakeries. Only tallow and shortening made from the fats of Halal slaughtered animals can be used.

Emulsifiers such as glycerol mono-stearate, fatty acids as well as glycerine are obtained through further processing of fats, these are being widely used in food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries. Muslims will only consume any of these products if the original animal was slaughtered in a Halal manner.

5

6. Imitation Pork Products Bacon and ham are traditional products made from pork. As such, they are clearly Haram. However, these products can also be made from beef and lamb products and are made to resemble the original pork version.

7. Pharmaceutical Products A number of Pharmaceutical products can be obtained from various animal tissues, especially from the glands like pancreas, thyroid, adrenal, pineal as well as organs like liver, stomach, lungs and also blood as well as other fine chemicals obtained from animals like bovine serum albumin and gelatine which are classified under protein. Bovine serum albumin is sometimes used as a component of moisturising cream and lotions.

Classified under hormones are products like insulin, glucagon, pituitary gland powdered extract, adrenocorticotropin, thyroid and parathyroid, insulin is used for the treatment of diabetes. The pancreas gland of the pigs and cattle are used as the main source of insulin although in recent years, insulin of microbial origin have been used. Glucagon is also obtained from the pancreas gland. It raises blood sugar levels and helps counteract insulin shock resulting from an overdose of insulin. Adrenocorticotropin’s most important medical use in restoring the activity of malfunctioning adrenal glands in human. It can also be used in the treatment of rheumatic disorders such as arthritis, and eye inflammation due to allergies.

Many of these products are made from animals which may pose a problem to Muslims. The relevant religious authorities are aware of such situations. And the food, cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries should be aware if they want to increase their market share in Muslim countries.

HALAL MARKETING

It is estimated that the world’s Halal food trade average nearly US$60 billion per year and growing. The existence of such a big market naturally opens the doors of economic opportunities for those engaged in the business, directly or indirectly.

A successful seller is not always the one whose product is exactly the same as of others in the line, but the one who, while producing in the same product line, can cater to the special tastes, preferences and needs of a group of customers which other producers have failed to meet.

Halal food market exists wherever there are Muslim consumers whose tastes and preferences are governed by Islamic law on food specification which calls for Halal food.

A successful seller is one who, in the same product line, can produce the goods with SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS to meet the SPECIFIC NEEDS of various groups of consumers. In this case Halal food may apparently be the same as others are selling, by its nature, technique of its processing involving the ingredients, handling, use of various methods from the beginning to the end is always the one approved and recommended by Islamic law.

The Halal food trade presents the following challenges:

1. Attitude of the suppliers of Halal food products 2. Increasing the volume of sales

6

3. Efficient distribution network 4. Advertising 5. Creating consumer loyalty

1. Attitude of the Suppliers When a Muslim consumer buys a Halal product, he is doing so because of his commitment to Islamic principles and teachings. But this does not mean that the seller should develop a patronising attitude towards the buyers. This will happen if a seller ignores the tastes and preferences of the buyers, and fails to improve the quality of the product and adopt cost effective methods of production which would enable him to be competitive within the target market.

Today in many Muslim countries, poultry, meat and dairy products are imported from European countries, Australia, New Zealand etc…. and the importing countries are happy because they are not only getting Halal food but also high quality food.

Thus from a marketing point of view, the firm issue in the Halal food trade, is the issue of the exporter’s psychology and his recognition of the golden rule of marketing without which any attempt to promote Halal food exports to Muslim countries are doomed to fail.

2. Efficient Distribution Network From the producers point of view, there are two types of markets for Halal food:

1. The market in Australia 2. The market in Muslim countries,

In the case of Australian market the problem is serious because the Muslim communities are scattered. But despite these difficulties one cannot discount the huge potential of Halal food market. The answer is to make the product Halal in the first place and to make it available for all. Also to take part in exhibitions and conferences of the Muslim communities in the various big centres.

For the Market in the Muslim countries , the real issues are:

1. honouring the commitment on a regular basis 2. maintaining quality 3. winning support of the local religious institutions who can certify the product as Halal and who can stand by your claim of Halal status. In addition you are dealing with local distributors, it is important to know their culture, their expectations and their way of saying ‘yes or no”. One should also be ready to learn how things can be made to move in that culture.

3. Advertising Advertising is the key to marketing and sales. From the Halal point of view the advertising strategy depends upon whether a particular market is fully a comprehensive Muslim majority or it is appropriate to emphasise the Halal nature and characteristics of the food so that it attracts the common folks in the society who are the majority.

7

In a multi-religious society where Muslims are a significant proportion of the population the product can be marked as Halal on the label so that the members of the community are aware of its status as well as promoting the product in the Muslim and ethnic media.

4. Creating Consumer Loyalty Muslim consumers become loyal when:

1. They always get the product they want 2. When the supplier has kept his promise 3. When the Halal nature of the product is beyond doubt, and some respectable authority stands behind the claim of the producer.

RULES FOR MUSLIM SLAUGHTERMEN REGISTRATION:

1. All new applicants for registration must be practising Muslims (such as observing five daily prayers, Friday prayer once a week, and avoiding the haram or forbidden things), reputable persons of good character, allowed to work in Australia, financial members of an Islamic Society and known to at least two prominent Australian Muslims who are prepared to write a reference about them.All Halal Slaughtermen will register with ICWA annually and obtain an Identity Card (I.D.) before they can Halal Slaughter. 2. Payment of prescribed registration fee. 3. Carry I.D. at all times while doing Halal Slaughter. 4. Registration as ICWA slaughtermen depends on approval of the person concerned by the ICWA Halal Committee. The actual registration as ICWA slaughtermen is done by the AUS-MEAT. This registration depends entirely on the approval stroke recognition of the persons concerned by the ICWA. Since it is ICWA approval which is sought, ICWA reserves the right to refuse approval of an application. 5. Even if ICWA agrees to approve an applicant, the I.D. card from AUS-MEAT would be obtained normally when the person concerned selected for specific meat work. 6. ICWA I.D. card qualifies the person concerned to be considered for employment by an abattoir or a meat work nominated by ICWA. ICWA I.D. cards are not automatically valid for consideration of employment by the concerned companies. 7. ICWA does not provide employment to any slaughterman. ICWA I.D. card is also not a guarantee or a licence or a ticket for employment in an abattoir or Halal meat establishments. 8. From time to time it may become necessary to advise transfer of services of slaughtermen from one plant to another, or from one level to another within the same plant. This will take place in the event of an absence of a senior slaughterman requiring a replacement by an equally senior slaughterman from another plant or mutual transfer of two slaughtermen in order to maintain communal peace or to remove any possible malpractices. Such transfer of shuffling will take place with the approval of the ICWA Halal Committee. All ICWA slaughtermen would be expected to co-operate in the maintenance of a successful Halal slaughtering and supervision services.

2. SUPERVISION:

1. The Halal Slaughterman will perform all religious duties including slaughter under direct supervision of the ICWA Halal Supervisor/s. 2. The supervisor will contact the ICWA Office in the event of any dissatisfaction, with his recommendation. The matter will be investigated by the ICWA Halal Committee. 3. The Halal Slaughterman will follow rules of the meat Works and instructions of the Meat Works’ supervisor/manager as long as these do not interfere with the methods and rules of Halal Slaughter and other ICWA requirements and procedures.

3. DISCIPLINARY ACTION:

8

The Halal Slaughterman registration will be cancelled and barred from all ICWA’S operations in the following cases:-

1. He ceases to be a Muslim. 2. Does not follow the Methods of Halal Slaughter as stipulated elsewhere in these Rules. 3. Commits any serious crime or breaks the important injunctions of Islam, e.g. stealing, lying, drinking alcohol, adultery, causing division in the community etc. etc. 4. Consistently fails to provide ICWA with record of daily Halal slaughter or production (cartons,packages) on a weekly basis. 5. Fails to adhere to the clear instruction given to him about the conduct of Halal slaughter, meat handling and certification given to him by the Supervisor. 6. Does not make sure that what he slaughters as Halal is transferred on to an ICWA Interim Certificate for purpose of authentication of the official ICWA Halal Certificate, or transfer of meat to another plant in Australia. 7. Does not make sure that what he produces as Halal ultimately is certified as Halal by ICWA alone and no other person/persons or non-ICWA Certifier. 8. Fails to attend a meeting called by the ICWA Halal Committee without a valid reason. 9. If found to be guilty of immoral conduct such as abuse of ICWA I.D. card in the following manner:- 1. Demanding extra payment from the employer without a valid reason related to work 2. Demanding other concessions from the employer not supportable by a valid reason related to work. 3. Is guilty of saying or doing things which reflect on ICWA or likely to jeopardise the reputation of the Australian Meat Trade. 10. Refuses to accept instructions, written or verbal-from the State Supervisor concerning his relocation within the same plant or another plant within that State or another State. Such relocation may become necessary in the interest of keeping the ICWA services healthy and viable from religious point of view. This refusal will prove that the person concerned has no loyalty to the organisation and is only concerned with his own welfare.All authorities in Australia and overseas importers will be notified of the de-registration.

4. RULES FOR HALAL SLAUGHTER AND HANDLING OF HALAL MEAT: The animal must be slaughtered by the ICWA’s Registered Halal Slaughtermen. The actual process of cutting the neck must be done by a Muslim.

1. While slaughtering the animal, the Muslim Slaughterman must recite the Islamic Prayer: “BISMILLAH-ALLAHO- AKBAR” (in the name of Allah, the Great). 2. Animal must be laid on its left side for slaughter. 3. The knife used for slaughtering must be sharp so that the animal suffers least agony and slaughter takes place quickly and easily. 4. The throat must be severed with a single cut – knife must not be lifted and the cut must be below Adam’s Apple, to be retained on head. The animal slaughtered in such a way that both the respiratory and jugular veins are quickly cut and blood oozes out in full making the animal dead quickly. 5. The neck should neither be cut completely nor broken, thus avoiding the severance of the spinal cord. 6. There should be no contamination of Halal meat with ‘pig’ meat or non-Halal meat of other animals, either in the abattoir, boning rooms, freezer, chiller or at the time of packing, loading and unloading. This is ICWA responsibility in which DPI officials at the plants are supposed to support ICWA approved slaughtermen. 7. The equipment used for killing pigs must not be used for slaughtering animals meant for Halal consumption. The area must also be free of all contamination by pig or non-Halal slaughtering.

9

5. STUNNING: ICWA is opposed to stunning of animals before slaughter on religious grounds, because generally speaking the present methods of stunning in Australia are not right from Islamic point of view. Abattoirs have been advised to take steps towards removal of stunning and its replacement with straining devices such as koshers box in respect of cattle and the restrainers in respect of small stock. We have allowed them time during which this could be achieved. In the meantime, all ICWA approved slaughtermen are required to make sure that in case stunning of animal is taking place the following conditions are rigidly enforced:-

1. In case of cattle the gun used is properly adjusted and modified (which should only knock the animal as unconscious) concussion device and not a penetrating pistol nor the normal mushroom head gun. 2. The slaughter takes place on the floor whilst the animal is still alive. 3. In case of an animal who clearly shows that it has not been stunned properly a red tag around its neck should be used as it is unacceptable for Halal purposes. Such rejected animal should be counted and disposed of separately from Halal carcasses at all stages. The clear sign of an animal not stunned properly is that there is a hole in the skull and blood is coming out. That means that the animal has been fatally wounded by a wrong stunning method. 4. That after slaughtering the animals should be allowed sufficient time to die as a result of bleeding and not processed until death has taken place.

6. HALAL STAMPS: An ICWA stamp (both metal and rubber) will be in the custody of the senior DPI official at each plant. ICWA authorised slaughtermen are required to collect the stamp, if necessary in the presence of a company official, from the DPI and take it to the floor where carcasses are to be stamped or to the boning/packing room where cartons are to be stamped. It is the duty of ICWA slaughtermen to make sure that the stamp is collected in this manner and returned to the DPI official. It is also the right and the duty of the ICWA slaughtermen to check and participate in the security arrangements relating to this stamp because ICWA is a party to the stamp. Normally, it is ICWA slaughtermen who would put the stamp on the carcasses or cartons. Variation in this is possible if the acceptable arrangements have been put in place. These arrangements can vary from abattoir to abattoir.

Under no circumstances ICWA slaughtermen should surrender their religious duties as at 4, 5, and 6 above to company or DPI officials.

7. HALAL CERTIFICATION: ICWA approved slaughtermen will have to sign an ICWA Interim Certificate after making sure that the production recorded tallies with the daily slaughtering/production record maintained by the slaughterman himself. This certificate will come to ICWA Office and ICWA will sign the final certificate only if the details in the Interim Certificate match with those given in the Official Certificate.

8. STATEMENT OF SLAUGHTERING: All slaughtermen are expected to maintain a record of their daily slaughter or in accordance with boning/packing room, the number of cartons of each type of meat cuts made. This record has to be forwarded to ICWA Office on a weekly basis in the prescribed form. Failure to do this will result in the withdrawal of nomination of the slaughterman.

 Home

10

Attachment 2

Halal Certification Logo

Attachment 3

Note the author of the Senate Enquiry Submission does not necessarily endorse the views held in this article but would like to present it as a well researched essay on various aspects of non and partial stunning slaughter.

It was copied from webpage: http://www.natalt.org/2012/03/29/animal-cruelty-and- kosherhalal-slaughter/

Animal Cruelty and Kosher/Halal slaughter

On March 29, 2012 by Ryan Walsh

Nationalist Alternative condemns the exemption to pre-stunning slaughter methods extended on religious grounds to Kosher and Halal as a further example of multiculturalism in action.

We have previously published an article on live export and our support for pre slaughter stunning Australia wide in an effort to improve animal welfare.

On the weekend October 29-30,2011 an article titled ‘ Religious abattoirs dodge stun law’ appeared on page 7, The Nation in The Weekend Australian (October 29-30,2011). This article describes the decision by primary industry ministers including Federal Labour Minister Joe Ludwig to not impose mandatory pre stunning in all abattoirs Australia wide.

Pre stunning before slaughter aims to ensure the animal is rendered unconscious and insensible to pain.

Instead in what can only be described as timid governance unsure of its sovereignty, we are pandering to minorities which in this instance is supporters of Kosher/Halal slaughter amongst sections of Australia’s Jewish and Muslim population and possibly elsewhere.

Twelve abattoirs will be provided with exceptions which according to the article will see up to 250,000 alive and conscious sheep, cattle, and hens killed a year without first being rendered unconscious before their throats are cut.

We condemn such practices as barbaric, inhumane, cruel and a affront to Australian morality and further examples of multiculturalism NOT enriching Australian culture. Some fellow opponents of ritual slaughter may baulk or sidestep our inclusion of multiculturalism with this issue but they are clearly linked particularly when some supporters claim their religion or culture demands/obligates this practice and that they would be discriminated against or lead ‘less fulfilling lives’ if not allowed to continue.

1

Kosher and Halal slaughter requires the animal to be alive to facilitate the draining of the blood and proponents argue the throat slitting is humane because the animal dies quickly or some claim instantaneously.

It is claimed that due to the ‘sharp’ blade the animals are killed in one stroke. With the animal collapsing almost immediately due to an abrupt outpouring of blood thanks to a clean and complete severing of both jugular veins and cateroid arteries.

It has also been claimed, in some articles or commentary, that ritual slaughter is in fact more humane and painless than mandatory pre stun captive bolt conventional methods.

Analysis of the ritual slaughter proponents assertions

We will provide opposing evidence below including quotes that include eye witness accounts as well as hard science to disprove the above claims.

We believe the evidence against ritual slaughter is so overwhelming that assertions and articles presenting it as humane seem like ignorance at best and at worst deliberate equivocating in order to mislead and provide partial truths. All in a desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable banning or shunning of the practice, at least in Western countries that do not share these cultural views.

Claim: Ritual slaughter involves instantaneous, painless ‘quick’ death or where pain occurs it is minimal.

Opposing evidence:

Proof of pain leads to calls for ban on ritual slaughter. Oct 2009.

…But the new research suggests otherwise. Dr Craig Johnson and his colleagues at New Zealand’s Massey University reproduced the Jewish and Islamic methods of slaughter in calves. The calves were first anaesthetised so although their pain responses could be detected, they wouldn’t actually feel anything. They were then subjected to a neck incision. A pain response was detected for up to two minutes following the cut, although calves normally fall unconscious after 10 to 30 seconds.

2

The team then stunned the calves five seconds after cutting their throats: the pain signal detected by electroencephalography ceased immediately.

Johnson told the New Scientist he thought this work was “the best evidence yet that [ritual slaughter] is painful”. However, he observed that the religious community “is adamant animals don’t experience any pain so the results might surprise them”.

The findings have earned Johnson the inaugural Humane Slaughter Award from the Humane Slaughter Association. Dr James Kirkwood, the charity’s chief executive, said: “This work provides significant support for the value of stunning animals prior to slaughter to prevent pain and distress.”

Adam Rutherford, an editor of Nature, wrote on the Guardian website: “It suggests that the anachronism of slaughter without stunning has no place in the modern world and should be outlawed. This special indulgence to religious practices should be replaced with the evidence- based approaches to which the rest of us are subject.”

Some European countries, such as Sweden, require all animals to be stunned before slaughter with no exception for religions. 1 [emphasis added]

Opposing evidence:

Time to loss of brain responsiveness – The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) found in its 2003 Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing found that by observing brain function the “evidence shows that sheep become insensible within 5-7 seconds of the cut”, and adult cattle may take between 22 and 40 seconds to become insensible.”

” Furthermore, a separate study of brain response after Shechita (Jewish ) slaughter of cattle compared to that after captive-bolt stunning indicated responses for up to 60 seconds in the former and no response in the latter ” 2 [emphasis added]

Claim: In Ritual slaughter ‘ knife throat cuts are not painful and instead quick and efficient with a sharp blade”

Opposing evidence:

3

Pain and distress during exsanguination – The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) found in its 2003 Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing found

“When a very large transverse incision is made across the neck a number of vital tissues are transected including: skin, muscle, trachea, oesophagus, carotid arteries, jugular veins, major nerve trunks (e.g. vagus and phrenic nerves) plus numerous minor nerves. Such a drastic cut will inevitably trigger a barrage of sensory information to the brain in a sensible (conscious) animal. We are persuaded that such a massive injury would result in very significant pain and distress in the period before insensibility supervenes.” 2 [emphasis added] more on claims of the ‘ lack of pain’ involved with throat cutting

Opposing evidence:

” That lead me to look-up studies on the agony of human suicide, as these studies are not likely affected by either monetary grants or by religious beliefs pertaining to halal or kosher slaughter of animals. There are several studies on this issue, among them the study by Rhyne, et al. (1995) Dimensions of suicide: perceptions of lethality, time, and agony. In this study, a group of pathologists was asked to rate the time to death (in minutes) and the agony of dying. The agony of dying was rated by using scale that ranged from 0 (painless) to 100 (excruciating). Results of this study are listed in the table below.

4

The agony of death by cutting the throat was rated by medical experts only second to that by burning. In secular slaughterhouses the animals are rendered unconscious by firing a bolt into the animal’s head, corresponding to the ‘gunshot to head’ method in the Table 1. The duration of dying (Figure 1, in minutes) and the agony of dying (Figure 2, on a 0-100 scale) 3

We are aware that the table and study in the quote relate to humans however if you re read the quote immediately above this one by The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) the likelihood of extreme pain with a cut throat seems highly likely and correlates with this separate study.

Claim: The ritual slaughter technique involves an efficient ‘ one stroke’ knife throat cut

Opposing evidence: from the Viva Going for the Kill’ .Viva! Report on Religious Slaughter.by Juliet Gellatley BSc Zoology. PART TWO – The Reality of Religious Slaughter –

“Viva! has interviewed experienced slaughtermen to discover whether the stated procedures above are adhered to and to find out the reality of religious slaughter. These men have many decades of experience in killing animals and observing different methods of slaughter. We have also referred to the eminent Farm Animal Welfare Council’s (government advisory body) report on religious slaughter (11); to published scientific studies and to video evidence.

Examples of Witness Statements obtained by Viva! from Slaughtermen in the UK regarding Jewish and Muslim Slaughter”

Mike “I have been working for well over forty years and that’s a lot of killing. I have seen Kosher and Halal carried out in many different places and I’ve assisted. It disgusts me… Jewish Shechita slaughter is just a sick joke. They claim they kill with one cut but with the bigger animals it never is. The Shochet slices backwards and forwards and it can take as many as 20 cuts and the animal obviously feels real pain. It can take minutes to lose consciousness.”

…Viva! Video of Jewish Slaughter

Viva! has obtained video evidence, filmed officially, of two bullocks being killed by the Jewish slaughter method. Viva! has been told on several occasions that cattle are killed by one stroke across the neck and that the animal collapses almost immediately, however this is not the case.

Case 1 The bullock’s neck is extended and the head lifted upwards by a chin lift in an upright pen. The animal’s nostrils are flaring, eyes staring and he is salivating. The slaughterer cuts the bullock’s throat by slicing across it, backwards and forwards 13 times. The bullock jerks away from the knife as far as he can and his facial reaction shows pain and great aversion. The bullock does not collapse immediately (the filming ends before he does).

Case 2 Again, the bullock’s neck is extended and the head lifted upwards by a chin lift in an upright pen. After three strokes the blood pours out; the chin lift which supports the head is

5 removed, but the animal does not collapse. He is clearly conscious as the blood gushes from his gaping wound. His eyes are seeing, his ears moving and he holds his head upright. The captive bolt is used on him after 30 seconds, but he still does not collapse. He is still managing to hold his head up without any support after 50 seconds when the filming is stopped.

Did the video footage show legal slaughtering methods? The slaughter shown in Case 1 formed part of Viva!’s Sentenced to Death video, which exposed cruelty in both mainstream and religious slaughter. Viva! submitted this footage to the Meat Hygiene Service in August 2000.

MHS Chief Executive Chris Lawson responded, “With regard to the video footage of a bovine being slaughtered using Shechita methods, we can confirm that the slaughter of this bovine was in compliance with the relevant legislation applicable to slaughter by a religious method. Such methods do not always render animals immediately unconscious. However, they do have to be carried out by licensed slaughterers.” (53)

This confirms that the extreme suffering we have on film is legal and strengthens our case for a ban on Shechita slaughter methods.

Chris Day MRCVS viewed our video footage of Shechita slaughter and comments: “The religious slaughter appears clearly to show an animal standing and fully conscious, pouring blood from the carotid artery area, having had its throat cut. This method of killing will inevitably cause pain and distress. I join Viva! in calling for stunning, prior to such procedures, to be made compulsory.” 4 [emphasis added] further opposing evidence here

D.K. Blackmore (22) of the Dept. of Veterinary Pathology and Public Health, Massey University, New Zealand who has published many papers on slaughter states: “A BASIC requirement for humane slaughter is that an animal should be rendered insensible before exsanguination (bleeding) is initiated and this should last until the animal becomes permanently insensible from cerebral anoxia.”

Blackmore studied the behaviour of sheep and cattle after being cut; he found that sheep lose consciousness more quickly than cattle. Lambs collapsed after an average of 2.6 seconds and stopped attempting to stand after 10 seconds (not being able to stand does not mean inability to feel); in contrast calves were standing up to 135 seconds after their throat was cut and were attempting to stand up to 385 seconds after that. Even though the calves had both carotid arteries and jugular veins severed three out of four were breathing up to 11.6 minutes later and so were shot. Lambs were gasping for up to 3.8 minutes after carotid arteries and jugular veins were cut. A bull was killed by the Jewish method and was still gasping sporadically for seven minutes after his carotid arteries, jugular veins, oesophagus and trachea were cut. 5 [emphasis added] further opposing evidence here

Thornton’s Textbook of Meat Inspection says:

6

“A factor of considerable importance, and to which not sufficient attention has been paid in considering the problem of Jewish slaughter, is that after the carotid arteries of cattle are severed transversely, they tend, by virtue of their elasticity, to retract rapidly within their own external connective tissue coat, and as a result the sealing of the cut ends of the vessels may occur.As the blood pressure…is then maintained by the heart, the blood pressure in the vertebral arteries may likewise be maintained at a substantial level and unconsciousness therefore delayed”.

This explains why “some cattle have regained their feet and walked a considerable distance before they succumbed some minutes later.”

>The Textbook of Meat Inspection continues: “these occurrences have been attributed to the fact that all the neck vessels may not have been severed completely, but observations lead one to the conclusion that the cut is invariably made dextrously… There is therefore considerable doubt as to whether unconsciousness always follows rapidly in cattle after the severance of the neck vessels, for by the very nature of the neck cut made in Jewish slaughter it is impossible to ensure that self-sealing of the cut ends of the carotid arteries will not occur.”4 [emphasis added]

Combine, one, potentially long times to unconsciousness as quoted above (therefore the prolonged period in which pain is felt) with two, a ‘quickly rush every task’ production line mentality that we can reasonably assume occurs at any commercial abattoir and you have fertile conditions for this shocking further excerpt from the Going for the Kill – Viva.org.uk article

“In Jewish slaughter the Shochet examines the thoracic cavity of cattle and sheep for signs of abnormalities. The FAWC found that this examination can take place too quickly – the hand being plunged into the body while the animal was alive.. 8

Alle Processing in New York one of the largest U.S. kosher-meat suppliers owned or was owned by Mottel Bergman and imports a large proportion of its meat from South America, notorious for using the shackle and hoist method. PETA activists after initially exposing the practice at one plant in 07/08 shot another video in 2010 illustrating the same horrific practice STILL being carried out at the slaughterhouse known as Frigorifico Las Piedras outside Uruguay’s capital, Montevideo.

Israel is also another large importer from South American slaughter houses and despite some noise being made seemingly tokenly from Israel and the Orthodox Union in the US on stopping certification of animals killed via shackle and hoist nothing concrete has ensured as the PETA videos shot over several years indicate.

Inverted Pens and Rotating Cages

In this section we discuss what became a supposed more human alternative from the shackle and hoist method. Shockingly this method still relies on having the cow upside down prior to the live throat cut.

The animal is lead into a cage which then rotates upside down all whilst still alive ensuring the animal ends up in effectively the same situation as the shackle and hoist just by different means.

7

Some have commented that stress levels for inverted slaughter with devices known as the Weinberg pen (which are less stressful than shackling and hoisting) have yielded the highest average stress ratings ever published (almost 300% higher than cattle killed in upright pens).

The above photos are snapshots from a video on Agriproccessors, a kosher slaughterhouse in Iowa that was owned by Aaron Rubashkin and managed by two of his sons, Sholom Rubashkin and Heshy Rubashkin. Eventually it became the largest kosher meat-packing plant in the United States.

As described above (and shown as untrue) supposedly in kosher slaughter the animal is killed with a quick, deep stroke across the throat with a sharp knife. A PETA undercover investigation over several years from 2004 – 2008 revealed many disturbing practices, below a just a few including an observation about the inverted rotating cage above.

2004

PETA’s first investigation at Agriprocessors in 2004 revealed almost 300 instances of inhumane slaughter, in which cows’ sensitive faces were shocked with electric prods, fully conscious cattle had their tracheas and esophagi ripped from their throats with meat hooks or knives, and they writhed in pools of their own blood, trying desperately to stand up for up to three minutes as blood poured from their throats.

8

The following are excerpts from the investigator’s notes:

The cow was loaded into a machine that resembles a large metal tube. His head stuck out of the front, then a metal bar clamped under his neck and forced his head upwards and back, cocked in an awkward and painful-looking position. The entire machine rotated, turning the cow upside-down. This process seemed to terrify him—his eyes were wide with fright—I imagine because he had never been in such a helpless position. The cow’s exposed neck was scrubbed with a hose and brush, then a rabbi came out of a small room and slit the cow’s throat. Another worker followed the rabbi and gouged a chunk of flesh out of the cow’s neck and then pulled his trachea or esophagus (I’m not sure which one) outside of his throat so that it hung down. Then the machine reverted the cow into an upright position. The trap door on the side opened up, and the cow was dumped onto the floor, where another worker attached a chain to the animal’s ankle so that he could be hoisted into the air and sent down the line.

Many cows were still alive and conscious when they came out of the tube and were slammed onto the floor. Their heads often hit the concrete with a sickening crack. I watched as one cow landed on his feet and started scrambling around with a shocked look on his face. The workers simply jumped behind their barricade and waited for him to collapse. 9 [emphasis added]

Please visit the article ‘PETA Reveals Extreme Cruelty at Kosher Slaughterhouses’ for the full story including 3 separate graphic videos shot on each undercover operation there.

1. Mutilations at Agriprocessors Slaughterhours 2. Second investigation still reveals cruelty at Agriprocessors 3. Undercover at Rubashkins Again!

Incredulously we found an article titled ‘Rubashkin: It’s all a lie’ dated June 3 2008 by Ben Harris on the website jewishjournal.com which quotes Rubashkin

““We got 21 or 23 inspectors,” Rubashkin said in a thick Yiddish accent. “Every minute the plant is open, there is USDA inspector. We got maybe 30 rabbis. How can we do something which is wrong? If I want to, God forbid! We are ethical people. We don’t do no injustice to nobody, not to a cat.” 10

9

We further note this excerpt from the PETA article linked above

‘ After a May 2008 federal raid of the plant over immigration violations, 76 percent of the 968 Agriprocessors employees were found to be using false or fraudulent Social Security numbers that were allegedly supplied by plant management’ 9

Inverted slaughter methods such as the pens above have been banned in England and some countries in Europe however allegedly the Israeli Chief Rabbinate requires that the animals be inverted in order for the cut to be in a downward motion in line with Jewish law.

Upright Pens

These pens followed a path from opposition to shackle and hoist, which then lead to the inverted pens and now in some places the upright pens are used.

From the viva.org.uk, Part Two, The Reality of Religious Slaughter under the section titled ‘ ‘ Examples of Witness Statements obtained by Viva! from Slaughtermen in the UK regarding Jewish and Muslim Slaughter ‘ we quote Mike who says

“Now they say there’s nothing wrong with the upright crushes but there is. In fact the Shochet is cutting upwards, working against gravity and with a weaker set of arm muscles. It therefore makes the cut much weaker and often means more of them. 4″

The above must be read in conjunction with the claim that Kosher slaughter involves a clean single cut of the neck as a big part of how its supposedly ‘ humane ‘. See earlier quotes at the start of the article.

In our opinion the ‘ evolution ‘ of handling methods, whilst noted as a separate component of suffering mainly represent attempts to present the whole killing process as humane and the industry as being concerned and seeking improvements. Clearly slaughter itself without mandatory pre stunning is cruel and not in line with Western morals.

Any improvements/prospects on reducing or eliminating religious slaughter

Halal:

10

New Zealand appears to have made some headway with Halal meat (but not Kosher) being already pre stunned according to the article titled ‘ Humane Slaughter? killing animals fully conscious ‘ 11 on the website www.safe.org.nz.

However this ‘pre stunning’ is only via electrical stunning and is sometimes known as ‘ reversible stunning’ where the animal can regain consciousness prior to the throat cut. This is to be compared to irreversible captive bolt pre stunning required by all other non halal non kosher slaughter. It is obviously a concession to religious interests with the loss being to the animal.

The 2008 Adams/Sheridan report on animal welfare prepared by the Animal Welfare Branch of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, states

‘reversible stunning is not in itself sufficient to lead to death of the animal. All stunning must be inextricably linked to the performance of slaughter using a reliable and fast means of exsanguination.’ 12( p XIV)

Lets speak directly to the plain truth here, unless the animal has been properly bled in the small time before the stunning wears off, it wakes up into the middle of its own murder with its throat cut and a crescendo of pain. In a commercial environment of animal after animal, with staff that get tired, bored, distracted over a long day it is reasonable to assume that mistakes and incompetency can and does happen.

Now finding direct data from the abattoirs is difficult only due to the obvious self interest religious slaughter houses have in keeping such statistics hidden, denied, covered up or not recorded at all. It is in such an environment that we applaud undercover investigations such as PETA or the frank if anonymous reports current and ex slaughtermen provide such as can be found quoted here from the viva.org.uk articles.

One other such place to search is of course the internet and below we quote a revealing discussion from the Muslim internet chartroom which we have saved even if they tactically delete it

‘sunniforum.com – a resource for the propagation of authentic Islamic teachings’ . Here – ‘Abdullahnana’(15/2/2010) -we read in the report by the Muslim scholars who toured Australian slaughter houses at the end of 2009 that –

‘Slaughterers are authorized to remove animals from the line which did not bleed properly, were not stunned properly, or were not cut properly. They will mark them with a special tag and inform the plant manager to process the animal separately. There are strict measures in place to keep these animals completely separate from the regular halal animals. These carcasses are not labeled as halal and not exported to halal markets

The main concern is whether the animal remains alive after this method of stunning.The two scholars have conducted research on electric stunning for sheep……. They even requested that a sheep be stunned with the electric stunner and removed from the line in order to give it time to regain consciousness. The animal DID regain consciousness within a few seconds.

11

A pneumatic stunner or mushroom stunner is used for beef. This is also a non-lethal type of stunning in which the device does not penetrate the brain of the animal. The beef plants have measures in place to reject those animals whose skulls are damaged or cracked from the stunner. This type of stunning also will not cause the death of the animal and will not affect the halal status of the meat. 13 [emphasis added]

Snippets of conversation like this by two Muslims interested in whether the killing process in Australia meets Halal requirements (NOT animal welfare) in this authors opinion contribute to a far more revealing insight into what goes on then any whitewashed official news release by a Halal slaughterhouse or spokesperson. For instance the statement about the ‘main concern is whether the animal remains alive after this method of stunning’ is diametrically opposed to our aims.

Kosher:

The move to pre stunning appears even less prevalent in the Kosher world of animal slaughter with staunch opposition argued by some theologically to the more humane mandatory pre stun technique as illustrated in the quote below

‘Jewish law requires that all animals for slaughter must be healthy and without injury prior to slaughter, otherwise the meat is trefar, unfit for human consumption. Levinger states that Jews cannot accept stunning because the definition of healthy is that the animal moves. If the animal is stunned it may not move.Secondly, there should not be any pathological-anatomical changes. The bolt causes brain damage; electric shock causes damage… 14 [emphasis added]

The Viva article that provided the above quote also contains the following

‘National Council of Shechita Boards makes the following astonishing justification of religious slaughter in a letter to Viva!:

In reference to cows being killed “the animal, being an herbivore, does not react to blood and remains oblivious throughout to what is happening around it and to it, both prior to and during Shechita.” (14) They are suggesting that because an animal does not eat meat, it is not familiar with blood and so doesn’t react when its throat is sliced open; or presumably when it is cut elsewhere. ‘14

Another non Viva UK source further confirming the above is found in the small piece titled ‘ What’s wrong with stunning? ’ by Chabad.org states

“Stunning” refers to the methods of attempting to render an animal or bird unconscious prior to slaughter. The main methods used in the general slaughtering industry for cattle and sheep are:

• captive bolt gun: a steel bolt is shot into the skull at the front of the animal’s brain.

• electric shock: electrodes are clamped to the animal’s head/heart and the animal is electrocuted.

12

These methods are contrary to Jewish law, because an animal intended for food must be healthy and uninjured at the time of shechita. The above stunning methods injure the animal, making it treifa (non-kosher and thus prohibited). If the stunning kills the animal it makes it neveila (an animal which has not been shechted) and is forbidden as food for Jews.” 15

To conclude this section ‘ Any improvements/prospects on reducing or eliminating religious slaughter’ we have observed during our research for this article that

1: Jewish-Kosher slaughter seems to get an easier ride than Muslim-Halal slaughter in the press despite both involving horrific slaughter of live animals and in some reporting the Jewish-Kosher practice seems conveniently ignored whilst Halal is discussed.

2: Kosher slaughter looks to possess the least chances for improvement based on its very rigid and inflexible theological underpinnings.

To the second point we reference two pieces

Stunning Use under Halal, Kosher Practices Revealed

UK – No poultry are now slaughtered for halal production without stunning while no kosher poultry are stunned before killing, according to a senior Defra official. However, the Halal Monitoring Committee (HMC) says all poultry at its certified plants are killed without prior stunning.

The Muslim News of the UK reports that Lord Moonie asked the Government “What estimate they have made of the number of domesticated animals and birds slaughtered in 2010 without being stunned first.”

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Lord Henley, responded that the most recent data on the slaughter of animals without prior stunning was published in March 2004 by the Meat Hygiene Service in its Animal Welfare Review. The data was collected through a survey of meat plants between 1 and 7 September 2003.

The number of animals killed over that period without prior stunning for the production of Kosher and Halal meat: cattle, 365; calves 8; young lambs, 6,845; other sheep, 11,454; goats, 62; broilers, 167,745; hens, 15,900; turkeys, 749 and ducks, 610.

More recent data collected by the EU Dialrel project shows that, of the UK abattoirs surveyed, 100 per cent of the animals and birds slaughtered for the production of Kosher meat were slaughtered without prior stunning. For Halal meat, 25 per cent of cattle and seven per cent of sheep were slaughtered without prior stunning. The Dialrel data also indicates that no poultry were slaughtered for Halal production without stunning. (Source: Hansard, House of Lords, Written Answers, January 18)

However, one of the many organisations which certify halal meat products, the Halal Monitoring Committee (HMC), told The Muslim News that “Poultry certified by HMC is done without stunning. HMC does not actually certify any abattoir as such, HMC certifies the poultry product that has been witnessed and labelled by the HMC inspectors on site at the time of slaughter.” 16

13

This article illustrates that despite conflicting data regarding Halal slaughter there is at least more evidence of pre-stunning (even if only the non permanent and still unacceptable pre- stun..) being attempted whilst on the Kosher count (in the UK) moves to pre stunning are rare to non existent instead ‘compromise’ has involved in some instances a ‘post stun’ after the live throat cut which is laughable.

The following quote proudly written by a Kosher slaughter supporter on the Israellycool blog is gold as far as evidence towards proving point 2 about re Kosher’s rigidity and therefore lack of will to compromise in achieving a humane end. Note text sections preceded by ‘Ed.’ have been added by us.

Halal: It’s Just Not Kosher

Over the coming months we will see attempts to ban halal slaughter in Europe. But they won’t be worded in such a way to target only halal, they’ll probably go after something nebulous like “ritual slaughter” or “religious slaughter without stunning”. If that happens (as is ongoing in New Zealand) it will more likely than not deprive European Jews of kosher meat and make very little difference to the lives of farm animals.

This essay will be general but will draw specific examples from the UK.

As much as Muslims like to talk about halal, it is not a religious requirement in the same way as kosher has been to Jews for thousands of years. There is conclusive historical and archeological evidence across Israel and anywhere else Jews lived, that the rules of “Shechita” have been followed in an unaltered form for millennia. The mere fact that kosher food is perfectly acceptable to Muslims while halal is not acceptable to Jews shows the Muslim requirement has a certain inherent flexibilityborn of political expediency. The Jewish laws do not yield for convenience or to achieve other goals. Halal has also been flexible enough to include “light stunning” which has been enough to sidestep a ban in New Zealand. A very large proportion of the lamb consumed in the middle east is actually New Zealand lamb and in the UK this halal lamb is nearly always sold unmarked in big supermarkets. 17 [emphasis added]

So the author is admitting he/she is not concerned about ‘nebulous’ things like animal rights which the generic title ‘ritual slaughter ‘ fairly covers instead it’s just about denying Muslims their practice whilst maintaining the Jewish one! Hypocrisy. The comment about ‘ little difference being made to the lives of farm animals’ flies in the face of evidence of extreme pain during live throatcutting.

The comment about ‘the rules of “Shechita” have been followed in unalterated form for millennia’ proves our point 2 on Koshers rigidity and least likelihood to change compared to Halal. The comment ‘shows the Muslim requirement has a certain inherent flexibility born of political expediency’ attacks the notion of being flexible on ritual slaughter and at the same time just proves again our point 2.

As for Halal being more flexible due to ‘political expediency’ , response one is that anything that results in less animal suffering is a win for the animals regardless. Response two, is that this could imply the Jewish side is for some reason less susceptible or more resistant (stubborn?) than Muslims to community pressure against ritual slaughter in Western countries. Indicating this group possesses more relative societal ‘ power ‘ to weather the

14 storm of adverse public opinion and/or find ways to deflect or lessen any negativity. If this is the case then ritual slaughter opponents of all stripes should bear this in mind when attempting to reign in Kosher slaughter as part of a broad approach that seeks to stop ritual slaughter of ANY kind by ANYONE.

Finally the comment ‘The Jewish laws do not yield for convenience or to achieve other goals’just about sums up our argument then on point 2, at least in the case of this individual Kosher Jewish slaughter supporter.

Labelling

It is shocking to think that there is no clear labeling system for ritually slaughtered meat in Australia and/or in many other Western nations.

An example of an appropriate clear and transparent label would be

“Animal subject to live slaughter in accordance with Kosher/ Halal religious requirements.”

Followed on a second line with the Kosher and Halal symbols.

We demand clear explicit labeling of religious slaughtered meat for 2 primary reasons

1 Cultural:

Kosher and Halal slaughter with its inhumane methods are not part of Australian culture or values or indeed Western culture and hence our people and children should not be forced to be eating meat with such origins. Current Australian slaughter guidelines reflect our values regarding pre stunning and we note it is mandatory across the land…other than the religious minority exceptions discussed here.

2 Health

In our opinion massive amounts of stress hormones would be released in animals that are either not stunned at all or only stunned via the reversible method as they recover consciousness. Animals would begin releasing these stress hormones as they smell the blood, hear the cries of other animals and are forced into positions (think hoist shackle, inverted pens, upright pens with neck compresses) needed for slaughter men to cut the throat of a conscious animal!

15

Such stress hormones, released in large amounts under these circumstances would seep into the muscle (meat) as the animal slowly bleeds to death. We fail to see how such hormones would not be detrimental to human health.

Lack of Transparency:

Australians purchase meat believing it is pre stunned, we believe a clear majority would be shocked to learn that in fact Halal and Kosher meat finds its way into mainstream meat sales by stealth.

Consider the following quote

“British Veterinary Association : Our position is clear – all animals should be stunned before slaughter and if that’s not possible the meat should be labelled as not stunned…By ensuring that all meat from animals that are not stunned only enters the specific communities that it is targeted at, we can make a significant difference.” 2.1 million UK animals are killed annually using Shechita slaughter methods, of which none are pre-stunned, and an estimated 70% of those cattle slaughtered enter the non-Jewish market.… Last month, the EU Environment, Public Health and Food Safety committee voted in favour of new labelling regulations requiring meat to be labelled as stunned or non-stunned. The new measures will be put forward for full approval by the parliament in July.”18 [emphasis added]

And here

‘Another area of concern that has been raised with the RMAA and the Department of Agriculture is a whole animal is kosher slaughtered (no pre-stun) but as we know only the forequarters are used for Jewish consumption. Currently the kosher slaughtered hindquarters are processed for the everyday meat market, we believe that that meat should be marked kosher slaughtered. Consumers believe that all meat that they buy – other than kosher, – is in fact pre-stunned, the above proves that to be wrong – this is mislabelling of products and should be addressed, consumers should have the right to make informed decisions. 19 [emphasis added]

Here

‘British public has no idea that they are eating halal meat, a senior member of the Church of England’s governing body said yesterday.

In comments likely to spark controversy, Alison Ruoff said, ‘this is just another back door way to the Islamification of our country.” [emphasis added]

Livestock destined for halal meat is dispatched in a process that involves the animal being prayed over by a Muslim butcher as its throat is cut. Some religious abattoirs do not stun the animal, as Sharia law stipulate that the animal must hear the prayer. It’s estimated that it can take around 30 seconds to die…

16

The interview on Premier Christian Radio’s Woman to Woman show yesterday tackled the issue of unlabelled halal meat being sold to unsuspecting customers in supermarkets; an issue that affect people of all faiths, and not just Christians. [emphasis added]

Ruoff revealed that most stores stock halal lamb only, with Morrisons being the only store to label their products.

She believes that most meat imported from New Zealand is halal, enabling them to sell on to Muslim markets. She alleged that economically it’s cheaper to butcher the animals in the same way, rather than halal and non-halal.

Joy Barrow, Interfaith Relations Officer said: ”No person should be made to eat halal meat. Clearly it’s an issue of labelling.” 20

Commerce over Culture: Values be damned

The underlined text in the previous quote raises another issue, namely big business, food production and the lack of concern large enterprises commonly have for the values, customs and culture of the host populations they rely on.

We would agree with the sentiment that vast modern slaughterhouses simply make the decision that it is cheaper and more efficient (lovely adjective to excuse anything) to setup one production line then multiple ones. As it is currently not illegal to palm off’ ‘killed alive’ slaughtered meat on non muslims and non jews their business decisions are currently not liable to prosecution.

In fact such practices clearly fit with our position that international capitalism operates in the world from an economic reductionist position. Namely that diversity and difference between cultures, religions, ethnicities et al merely get in the way of ‘efficiency’ and add production costs. Costs that would be removed if the world did away with our diversity and humanity become a once race, one culture, one religion atomized consumer with the only diversity being the choices in a catalogue or menu.

Another economic related excuse related to labeling comes from the below quote

What would strict labelling mean?

One of the ways that people are calling for some introduction of control on the spread of halal meat is by calling for strict labelling of meat that is not stunned before slaughter. There is a particular issue with halal today because there is a large amount of halal meat in the normal food chain that is not labeled as such. This is not such an issue with kosher meat except in one respect. Fully kosher meat is always much more expensive than non kosher and this reflects the small nature of its market and the care with which it has to be produced. Halal is generally cheaper than non halal. Some parts of kosher slaughtered animals do end up in the non-kosher meat supply, however, because this does help keep kosher meat affordable.

So strict labelling would be a problem for Jews if it meant that producers of meat pies and sausages were reluctant to accept some meat because it would force them to label their end product as containing some parts from non stunned animals. 21

17

Animal welfare and pre stunning is what is at issue here, economic arguments from proponents whether ‘ Halal is cheaper so why not change your mind” or ‘ Strict labels will cause Kosher meat to be more expensive ’ bear no weight. In fact both are insults. The former implies we are happy to trade off our values and morals based on money and the second that we should trade off BOTH values and money for a minority to be satisfied against the wishes of the host population amongst whom they have been allowed to settle.

Prior to a complete ban being achieved transparency through labeling will provide Australians with the ability to take a ‘conscious vote’ as to the kill method employed when they choose their meat from the supermarket shelve.

Conclusion

Nationalist Alternative advocates on grounds of compassion and in line with Australian values the total ban on any form of inverted killing methods whether shackles, pens or otherwise for all slaughter in Australia. We also reject the token reversible pre stunning method.

We call to STOP ALL SLAUGHTER of ANIMALS that are NOT FULLY, PERMANENTLY STUNNED and UNCONSCIOUS PRIOR to throat slitting.

There is no use being tricked into the often decades long slow reform path of ‘ compromise ‘ with the supporters of religious slaughter.

Politically correct politicians need to gain some backbone and ensure there are no exemptions for anyone and simply weather the minority lobby groups attempts to cry foul inevitability with the old chestnuts of ‘anti semitism or islamaphobia’ and ‘ how can we possibly live without these exemptions’ et al. In 2012 general citizens are slowly waking up to the fact that these labels are merely attempts to shut down discussion and close down opponents without debating them.

References

1 http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/19151/proof-pain-leads-calls-ban-ritual-slaughter

2 http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports/pb8347.pdf or http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports.htm and then select the report titled’ Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing – Part 1: Red Meat Animals – 2003′

3 -

18 http://www.visualstatistics.net/043%20phenomenological%20analysis%20of%20obscured%2 0events/Slaughter.htm this articles quotes the study: Rhyne, et al. (1995) Dimensions of suicide: perceptions of lethality, time, and agony. Suicide & Life Threatening Behavior, 25(3), 373-380

4 http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/ritual_slaughter/goingforthekill01.htm http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/ritual_slaughter/goingforthekill2.htm#27 or pdf here http://www.viva.org.uk/pdfs/GoingfortheKillReport.pdf

5 http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/ritual_slaughter/goingforthekill2.htm#27 under the section FAWC observations of Religious Slaughter

6 http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/ritual_slaughter/goingforthekill3.htm under the section titled

‘Conclusion’.

6

Going for the Kill.Viva! Report on Religious Slaughter. by Juliet Gellatley BSc (Zoology), Director of Viva!

under the section titled ‘ Trefar ‘ also referenced in the Viva article at point 14: Letter from Michael Kester, Executive Director, National Council of Shechita Boards, 8 May 1997

http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/ritual_slaughter/goingforthekill01.htm

7 http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/ritual_slaughter/goingforthekill2.htm under the section titled ‘ FAWC observations of Religious Slaughter’

19 also referenced in the article by – 37. Ghulam Mustafa Khan, 1982. Al-Dhabh; Slaying Animals for Food the Islamic Way. Islamic Medical Association.

Also see the pdf copy at http://www.iccservices.org.uk/pdf/Al- %20Dhabh%20M%20Khan.pdf

8

Widely condemned cattle-killing method is used by kosher meat firm’s supplier‘ by Nathaniel Popper in the Los Angeles Times, April 15 2010. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/15/business/la-fi-kosher-slaughter15-2010apr15

9

PETA Reveals Extreme Cruelty at Kosher Slaughterhouses http://www.peta.org/features/Agriprocessors.aspx

10

June 3, 2008. ‘ Rubashkin: It’s all a lie’ -By Ben Harris http://www.jewishjournal.com/nation/article/rubashkin_its_all_a_lie_20080604/

11

‘ Humane Slaughter? killing animals fully conscious ‘ under the subsection ‘Religious slaughter in New Zealand’ http://www.safe.org.nz/Campaigns/Religious-slaughter/

12

‘Specifying the Risks to Animal Welfare Associated with Livestock Slaughter without Induced Insensibility’ by David B Adams and Allan D Sheridan. Prepared by the Animal Welfare Branch of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. 28th Nov 2008. – page xiv.

13 www.sunniforum.com – a resource for the propagation of authentic Islamic teachings> General Forums > Health and Well-Being > Halal Meat Criteria in Australia?

Post by ‘ abdullahnana ‘ on 15-02-2010,6.26AM http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-54639.html

14

20

Under the section Trefar. http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/ritual_slaughter/goingforthekill01.htm – under the section ‘ Trefar’

15

What’s Wrong with Stunning? http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/222246/jewish/Whats-Wrong-with- Stunning.htm

16.

‘ Stunning Use under Halal, Kosher Practices Revealed ‘, Feb 24 2011, www.themeatsite.com http://www.themeatsite.com/meatnews/13683/stunning-use-under-halal-kosher-practices- revealed

17

‘ Halal: It’s Just Not Kosher, May 06, 2011 http://www.israellycool.com/2011/05/06/halal-its-just-not-kosher/

18

‘BVA calls for total pre-stunned slaughter’ Gemma Mackenzie, Tuesday 17 May 2011. http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/17/05/2011/126837/BVA-calls-for-total-pre-stunned- slaughter.htm

19

‘ Many faces of slaughter ‘ 07/06/2010. National Council of SPCAs promoting the Welfare of All Animals http://www.nspca.co.za/page.aspx?Id=291&CateId=14&Category=Farm&SubCateId=291 &SubCategory=Slaughter

20

‘Halal meat: are you eating it without choosing it?’ Courtesy by: Inspire Magazine. Posted by Halal Research Council on Jan 19 2011 http://halalrc.blogspot.com/2011/01/halal-meat-are-you-eating-it-without.html

21

21

‘ Halal: It’s Just Not Kosher, May 06, 2011 http://www.israellycool.com/2011/05/06/halal-its-just-not-kosher/

22