Stop Slashing Animals Throats - Leader Of Britain's Vets

6th March 2014

We don't let them do it to humans - why do we let them do it to animals?

Please discuss.

Halal and kosher slaughter of animals should be outlawed, Britain's leading vet said today.


John Blackwell, president-elect of the British Veterinary Association, has argued the ritual killing of poultry, sheep and cattle by cutting their throats causes unnecessary suffering to animals.

Traditionally, Jewish and Islamic slaughter practices involve animals having their throats slit and the blood drained because it is 'humane'


But Mr Blackwell, who has been accused of 'inflaming prejudice' by religious leaders, says animals must be stunned before the cut because some will be conscious for up to two minutes before death.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574456/Stop-slashing-animals-throats-ritual-slaughters-halal-kosher-meat-says-new-leader-Britains-vets.html#ixzz2vBgG3NSA

it should be illegal and enforced, it is against our laws, the courts keep saying they do not allow for religious beliefs yet we are doing nothing about this..

I agree father.

I wanted to put a video up from youtube to show how barbaric it is but you have to sign in to see any of them.

Why does a country of 70 million allow a small percentage to ride roughshod over the wishes of the huge majority?

BigAndy9 wrote:I agree father.

I wanted to put a video up from youtube to show how barbaric it is but you have to sign in to see any of them.

Why does a country of 70 million allow a small percentage to ride roughshod over the wishes of the huge majority?

it seems to happen all the time, in an attempt to protect minorities we give them more rights than the majority..

heavenly father wrote:it should be illegal and enforced, it is against our laws, the courts keep saying they do not allow for religious beliefs yet we are doing nothing about this..

yes agree

He's talking bollocks. Nearly all halal and kosher meat is prestunned. All animals, halal, kosher and the rest have to have the throat cut to drain the blood.

I also know how quickly you know nothing after a major artery in the neck is cut. My daughter had a canula put in her carotid artery in her neck (which shouldn't have been done) and the doctor left it open. Within seconds she was unconscious and didn't remember a thing about it, she was lucky at the time, to live.

Sassy wrote:He's talking bollocks.   Nearly all halal and kosher meat is prestunned.   All animals, halal, kosher and the rest have to have the throat cut to drain the blood.

I also know how quickly you know nothing after a major artery in the neck is cut.   My daughter had a canula put in her carotid artery in her neck (which shouldn't have been done) and the doctor left it open.   Within seconds she was unconscious and didn't remember a thing about it, she was lucky at the time, to live.

Britain's leading vet is talking bollocks?

How strange that you would dismiss this Sassy.

Ok, it isn't strange at all is it?

Hundreds of vets disagree with him, as does much research.

This video carries a warning that it shows graphic halal and other slaughter methods, but I do urge you to watch it if you can:

Was this an issue when it was only being done in the U.K. for kosher food preparation and not also for halal?

Ben_Reilly wrote:Was this an issue when it was only being done in the U.K. for kosher food preparation and not also for halal?

I'm not sure Ben.

It's obviously increased since the muslim population has increased so dramatically in recent years and because muslims "kick off" so much, a lot of meat stockists will now only supply halal.

Other public organisations will now only serve halal - better to keep the 1% muslim population happy - they can cause a lot of damage when made angry.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Was this an issue when it was only being done in the U.K. for kosher food preparation and not also for halal?

to me it was or are we in the islamic fall back position, well they do it too..  

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Was this an issue when it was only being done in the U.K. for kosher food preparation and not also for halal?

I'm not sure Ben.

It's obviously increased since the muslim population has increased so dramatically in recent years and because muslims "kick off" so much, a lot of meat stockists will now only supply halal.

Other public organisations will now only serve halal - better to keep the 1% muslim population happy - they can cause a lot of damage when made angry.

But the actually practice of slitting animals' throats is the controversy now. Now, and not when it was being done to prepare kosher food? How is that fair?

heavenly father wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Was this an issue when it was only being done in the U.K. for kosher food preparation and not also for halal?

to me it was or are we in the islamic fall back position, well they do it too..  

To me it's like what happens here in some small Texas towns that see a sudden surge in their Hispanic population, and then *suddenly* someone wants to ban the speaking of Spanish in public school.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

I'm not sure Ben.

It's obviously increased since the muslim population has increased so dramatically in recent years and because muslims "kick off" so much, a lot of meat stockists will now only supply halal.

Other public organisations will now only serve halal - better to keep the 1% muslim population happy - they can cause a lot of damage when made angry.

But the actually practice of slitting animals' throats is the controversy now. Now, and not when it was being done to prepare kosher food? How is that fair?

I'm sure there were many people protesting 20 years ago Ben.

But the practice is now more widespread, and the meat itself is more widespread.

I personally may be able to accept it if I wasn't forced to eat it unknowingly.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

But the actually practice of slitting animals' throats is the controversy now. Now, and not when it was being done to prepare kosher food? How is that fair?

I'm sure there were many people protesting 20 years ago Ben.

But the practice is now more widespread, and the meat itself is more widespread.

I personally may be able to accept it if I wasn't forced to eat it unknowingly.

they still don't have to label it as hal lal, which is wrong in my opinion.

heavenly father wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


I'm sure there were many people protesting 20 years ago Ben.

But the practice is now more widespread, and the meat itself is more widespread.

I personally may be able to accept it if I wasn't forced to eat it unknowingly.

they still don't have to label it as hal lal, which is wrong in my opinion.

I know father - and feeding it to our children is just unbelievable.

Christ on a bike - if they accidentally sniffed pork because of a British person they'd sue the government in no time.

Again - a warning - the video is graphic, but I urge everybody to view it:

BigAndy9 wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

they still don't have to label it as hal lal, which is wrong in my opinion.

I know father - and feeding it to our children is just unbelievable.

Christ on a bike - if they accidentally sniffed pork because of a British person they'd sue the government in no time.

I know and they yell for equal rights, if we had equal rights they would n't get away with the crap they do...

You guys are afraid you're going to turn Muslim from eating it, huh?

The video shows the difference between traditional British methods over Halal slaughter.


There was a debate on BBC Radio 2 the other day and a muslim said "so how did the farmers in the UK do it 300 years ago?" to which somebody replied "yes, that was 300 years ago - we have evolved since then".




Please discuss.

Merged -- we don't need more than one ongoing thread about this at a time.

Please watch this incredibly distressing video everybody:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Merged -- we don't need more than one ongoing thread about this at a time.

no we don't heaven forbid people hear about it and express an opinion on it...  

heavenly father wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Merged -- we don't need more than one ongoing thread about this at a time.

no we don't heaven forbid people hear about it and express an opinion on it...  

That's what this thread is for.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

no we don't heaven forbid people hear about it and express an opinion on it...  

That's what this thread is for.

well I could say, I hope you have a slow and painful death like these animals, good job that's not classed as abuse eh!!!....  as it is in context and wishing death is not classed as abuse...

heavenly father wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

no we don't heaven forbid people hear about it and express an opinion on it...  

That's what this thread is for.

well I could say, I hope you have a slow and painful death like these animals, good job that's not classed as abuse eh!!!....  as it is in context and wishing death is not classed as abuse...

As I just got done saying to someone else, HF -- you get treated like that because of the way you act here. You don't see that many people being wished death. No, you're *special*, and it's not just because people disagree with your views. Otherwise this site's contents would be 50 percent death wishes.

Ben you have listened to others complain about me and my husband , quite honestly people can wish me dead as much as they want and they are just words and cannot affect me, the point you need to see is that it looks bad for those looking in to join if they see you are allowing this to happen do you think it will attract potential members ?

Maine coon lover wrote:Ben you have listened to others complain about me and my husband , quite honestly people can wish me dead as much as they want and they are just words and cannot affect me, the point you need to see is that it looks bad for those looking in to join if they see you are allowing this to happen do you think it will attract potential members ?

I don't want any more oversensitive members, thank you very much.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:Ben you have listened to others complain about me and my husband , quite honestly people can wish me dead as much as they want and they are just words and cannot affect me, the point you need to see is that it looks bad for those looking in to join if they see you are allowing this to happen do you think it will attract potential members ?

I don't want any more oversensitive members, thank you very much.

people don't want to read this though Ben ,

newsfix the nice forum ?

Maine coon lover wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:Ben you have listened to others complain about me and my husband , quite honestly people can wish me dead as much as they want and they are just words and cannot affect me, the point you need to see is that it looks bad for those looking in to join if they see you are allowing this to happen do you think it will attract potential members ?

I don't want any more oversensitive members, thank you very much.

people don't want to read this though Ben ,

newsfix the nice forum ?

People don't want to read that someone suffering from cancer should stop chemo and go to brewing orange peels with their tea in order to be cured.

People don't want to read that evolutionary theory is a "guess."

People don't want to read that letting business owners treat people as second-class citizens is "equality."

People don't want to read that homosexuality is an illness.

Shall I go on?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:

people don't want to read this though Ben ,

newsfix the nice forum ?

People don't want to read that someone suffering from cancer should stop chemo and go to brewing orange peels with their tea in order to be cured.

People don't want to read that evolutionary theory is a "guess."

People don't want to read that letting business owners treat people as second-class citizens is "equality."

People don't want to read that homosexuality is an illness.

Shall I go on?

okay so basically what your saying is you don't want anyone's opinion but your own , that isn't debate is it ?

Maine coon lover wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:

people don't want to read this though Ben ,

newsfix the nice forum ?

People don't want to read that someone suffering from cancer should stop chemo and go to brewing orange peels with their tea in order to be cured.

People don't want to read that evolutionary theory is a "guess."

People don't want to read that letting business owners treat people as second-class citizens is "equality."

People don't want to read that homosexuality is an illness.

Shall I go on?

okay so basically what your saying is you don't want anyone's opinion but your own , that isn't debate is it ?

Not what I'm saying at all, MCL ...

what are you saying then Ben ?

How can someone debate a subject if you object to their opinion ?

Maine coon lover wrote:what are you saying then Ben ?

How can someone debate a subject if you object to their opinion ?

I think the fact that you object to someone's opinion is great for debate!

I think this article says it all, and far quicker than I could write it.


Jewish and Muslim methods of slaughter prioritise animal welfare
Religious slaughter is at least as humane as conventional mechanical slaughter. The British Veterinary Association should look elsewhere
The head of the British Veterinary Association has said that religious slaughter methods need to change to prevent animal suffering. It is unfortunate that the BVA and other animal welfare organisations in the UK tend to view religious slaughter as incompatible with humaneness; quite the contrary is true – compassion and animal welfare stand at the centre of the entire process.

Shechita and zabiha are not words commonly known by the public, but to Jewish and Muslim communities they are synonymous with sincerely held, religiously mandated care for animals. They refer to the Jewish and Muslim humane methods of slaughter of animals for food, and the body of religious law in which they are contained talks not only about the last two seconds of an animal's life, but about its treatment from birth.

There is much difference between shechita and zabiha, but both quickly dispatch the animal by severing the structures at the front of the neck – the trachea, oesophagus, carotid arteries and jugular veins. When carried out by a trained practitioner, the speed and precision of the incision ensures the lack of stimulation of the severed structures and results in the immediate loss of consciousness; blood flow to the brain is completely halted. In addition, blood empties rapidly from the brain.

Irreversible cessation of consciousness and insensibility to pain are achieved, providing the most effective stun. There is no delay between stun and subsequent death, so the animal cannot regain consciousness – as can happen with conventional slaughter methods.

Traditional British methods of stunning by use of a captive bolt, gassing or electrocution (by electrified pincers for larger animals, or a water bath with an electric current running through it for poultry) paralyse the animal, and it is unable to display outward signs of feeling pain. However, it is impossible to know whether the animal is feeling pain or not.

There is ample scientific evidence that religious slaughter is at least as humane as conventional mechanical slaughter. Research in the UK and the US, including by Dr Temple Grandin – one of the authorities on animal welfare – have supported this view. By contrast, many of the studies that suggest that religious slaughter causes unnecessary pain have been agenda-driven and methodologically flawed, stretching data in a distinctly unscientific fashion to unsupported conclusions.

It is remarkable therefore that religious slaughter can generate such a huge amount of publicity and media scaremongering when in fact the number of animals affected is extremely low. Halal and kosher meat are responsible for a fraction of the cattle slaughtered in the UK.

So even if one believes, despite the lack of scientific consensus, that religious slaughter is cruel, it is deeply troubling that the BVA has chosen to focus its attention on religious slaughter rather than other, far more pressing animal welfare issues. For example, between 2009 and 2011 the campaign group Animal Aid filmed secretly and found evidence of unspeakable cruelty and illegal activity in eight of nine randomly chosenBritish slaughterhouses: animals were kicked, slapped, stamped on, and even burned with cigarettes. We are yet to hear of a campaign by the BVA to root out this kind of cruelty.

Similarly, the European Food Safety authority found in 2004 that the failure rate for the much-trumpeted penetrating captive bolt stunning in conventional mechanical slaughter may be as high as 6.6%, and up to 31% for non-penetrating captive bolt and electric stunning. This equates to millions of animals each year that experience incredible suffering. But the BVA has not mounted a campaign on this.

There will always be a discussion about what can be learned from scientific evidence, and the Jewish and Muslim communities stand ready to debate in any constructive forum. But let us not pretend that religious slaughter represents a key battleground for animal welfare in this country – to do so is disingenuous in the extreme.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/06/jewish-muslim-slaughter-animal-welfare-humane

Very interesting indeed, Sassy. And I still contend this has way more to do with anti-Muslim sentiments than with any sincerely held concern for animal welfare. I don't see the types getting behind this lining up for PETA memberships  ::D:: 

The thought of a cow in an electric chair is awful.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Very interesting indeed, Sassy. And I still contend this has way more to do with anti-Muslim sentiments than with any sincerely held concern for animal welfare. I don't see the types getting behind this lining up for PETA memberships  ::D:: 

Exactly.  There is video after video by animal charities of animals being tortured in slaughterhouses, with the people who are supposed to be doing the stunning taking great delight in inflicting pain and terrifying the animals.   Most halal is now prestunned, but the cut is done within seconds of the stunning.   Killing an animal for food is not pretty whatever way you do it, but all this rubbish about halal and kosher is not based on any sense of pity for the animal, but just another stick to beat muslims with.

It also a stick to beat Jews with.

Croissant wrote:It also a stick to beat Jews with.

Yep, can't be having anything that is not Anglo Saxon can we?

Croissant wrote:It also a stick to beat Jews with.

Didn't realize anti-Semitism was that bad in the UK.

Sassy wrote:

Croissant wrote:It also a stick to beat Jews with.

Yep, can't be having anything that is not Anglo Saxon can we?

Don't know, I'm Jewish.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Croissant wrote:It also a stick to beat Jews with.

Didn't realize anti-Semitism was that bad in the UK.

It wasn't, it's starting to be, now people are realising that muslim and jewish people have a lot in common with religious rules etc, and there are extreme jewish people as well as extreme muslim people religion wise.

Are there any extreme Atheists?

Croissant wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Yep, can't be having anything that is not Anglo Saxon can we?

Don't know, I'm Jewish.

Keith, never know when to take you seriously. On my father's side back a bit I have Jewish family I have not long discovered, on my Mother's side I have Maltese family.

There was and still is a problem for many people with kosher slaughter in the UK its not a particular 'bash the Muslims' deal at all - its just that as the Muslim population has grown its become more widespread, obviously, kosher meats were not sold all over the place. The real problems stem from people who are not properly trained or motivated and that goes for kosher/halal or western methods

Wise words Vintage.   

My great grandad was a dustman from Ireland and he traveled to the USA and met this moose that had got lost and ended up outside a barber's in Oregon. Certainly explains the size of my feet.

Guest wrote:what are you saying then Ben ?

How can someone debate a subject if you object to their opinion ?

I think that 84% of Muslim halal meat is stunned then bled, death is enviable, and it's the proteins and fats that many of us crave, can't beat a decent steak, it's yum, but it ain't so yum if the meat has suffered a long an agonising death.

We have turned death into an art form when we manufacture meat, stunned and bled seems fine to me.

On the matter of your status, I do not know what you have done, but it does appear from what you're saying that Ben objects to your fascist, racist, homophobic mumbo jumbo!

Is that true?