The Asda superstore on the Isle of Dogs East London has decided to replace its fresh meat counter with a Halal only service. This on the area where Derek Beackin won the BNP’s first ever council seat in 1993. The Isle of Dogs is 50% Muslim and 20% of the population are Bangladeshi. Asda are claiming they are reacting to consumer demand. They have also set up a contract with a local Halal meat supplier.
Asda may be bowing to customer demands, but I would bet they are going to lose more out of this than they gain. There will be a lot of customers who will not only not want to eat meat from animals that have died from bleeding to death after having their throats cut, they may also not want to shop where this type of meat is being sold.
There is also the possibility of increased racial tensions, especially as Asda is a major supplier in the area.
For those customers who want to show their feelings by voting with their feet, try some of the opposition:
Tescos: 15 Cabot Square, E14 4QT.
Waitrose: Canada Square, E14 4QT.
They may not give you the same range that you are used to, but why not give them a chance?
This may also re-ignite the debate between traditional UK butchery and Halal butchery as to which is more humane and should Halal butchery be banned in the UK. I'm sure this is a debate that many animal lovers would like to see.
As the British arm of Walmart, I reckon Asda are perfectly sensible to offer halal meat in that store with that ethnic mix of customers. They must have made the calculation of whether it would be good or bad for business and acted accordingly.
There is no question of them breaking any law by doing so.
The article seems to be slanted to extract a response on ethnic or racial grounds which Asda has no control over.
Hi Brian, the article is meant to ask a question about cruelty to animals. As an aside it also points to a sort of 'ghettoisation' that is occurring in this country.
To me, cruelty to animals has been subordinated to certain minority groups, except of course where cuddly foxes are concerned.
What I want to know is, if chasing animals through the undergrowth is cruel and banned, why isn't the practice of causing a conscious animal bleed to death also cruel and banned? Whatever the religion.
Ah, Labour hypocracy!
Don't worry, the Tories will repeal the hunting with hounds foolishness and then halal will be relatively humane.
Asda. No problem. Either it listens to us, or its profits in the UK will plummet. It will change its halal-compliant policy because we non-Muslims are organising a boycott campaign. Asda will rue the day that it decided to pander to dark-age savagery rather than prioritise animal welfare, for it will lose much more from our combined purchasing power than it will win from the pockets of Bangladeshi immigrants.
i think that this racist uneducated approach to this column is disgusting.
please do your research and educate your foolish ignorant minds before making the most 'animalistic' of comments.
no1 . by cutting the throat of an animal (jugular vein) which is one of the criteria of meat being halal, it also ceases any nerves transmission to the brain: layman terms; no pain being felt by the animal. bringing almost every drop of blood out through this passage as dead blood cells often cause the meat to be harmful.
no2. cruelty to animals you say? in order for the meat to be halal, the animal must not see the instrument by that which it will be slaughtered by: why? because if the animal feels threatened then it releases harmful toxins into the blood stream (adrenaline rush if u like) which is also harmful to the meat.
in this day and age, just as it has been for the last 14centuries, this is the only most un-cruel way of slaughtering an animal. animal feels no pain, neither is the meat harmful by way of any bacteria or dead cells and it has been tranquilized by the words recited to it before slaughter (proven scientific evidence). no other way of slaughter has more superiority in un-cruelty to animals.
DO YOUR RESEARCH.
I appreciate your comments Alfie but:
1. Cutting a vein does not cut the nerves, try it on yourself sometime.
2. An animal does not have the acumen to recognise a knife as a threat to its life. If I threatened a cow,a sheep or a pig with a knife it would just stare at me and continue eating.
3. The assertion by you that the animal feels no pain when slaughtered in this way I find obscene. Take a knife, to yourself and tell me where it truthfully didn't hurt when you cut yourself.
You and your beliefs are rooted in the past.
i appreciate your comments Jeff but please as i have requested, for you to go and do proper research, proper history, proper laws, going back to the root of everything.
1. cutting the jugular vein does (please research as i did mention in my reply, and by research i do not mean google it, biological – studies of the anatomy and of course its going to hurt when you cut yourself wherever it may be)
2. animals do have acumen to recognise an object or even other living beings as a threat. (again you are talking from a biased uneducated view in your opinion regarding this matter)
The requirements to fulfill the criteria of halal, is that the animal :
-cannot see another animal being slaughtered
-most not be ill
-most not be in pain
-most not be in a dieing state
-most be slaughtered along with the recitation of gods name
-the meat must be cleaned of its blood(healthier)
3. the assertion my me and the studies into the anatomy show that if the jugular vein is cut, then the instant rush of blood out of the brain and out through the cut would insure absolutely no time for the animal to even recognise anything anymore.
'you try cutting your jugular vein and see if you even have a second to say anything, almost as instantly as your body would completely loose function and minutes later you'd be dead'
I think you'll find that one believes in the superior evidential truth and does not follow new-age pointless ignorant heard of sheep views.
Please do your research and not sit there on google or any other man made thing that is designed to keep you occupied and manipulate you into chasing desires that which will not come with you when you die.
Hi Alfie can you clear up the name of the God that would be recited? thanks.
Hi Richard, thank you for your question.
Before i answer the question, i'd like to clear up..
you have asked the question in a manner which has led to other implications;
'name of THE God' which implies, which God? implying that there are more than one.
you see if there is a God, a greater being, superior and all knowing then surely he has communicated with us as mankind seem to think.
surely this God which is far superior to anything we know and see must not have flaws in any which way, surely he must not contradict in himself whislt communicating to us, surely he has instructed us the way of conducting our lives in the best way possible absolutely, from eating to sleeping, surely there is a beneficial superior way to conduct life, and this information as it seems would only likely be from the Creator to its creation (we wouldnt take a samsung TV to Sony would we..?)..
during my research i have come to find, after looking at all the scriptures that there is only One God, the one who created Adam, and from him Eve, the one who sent Noah, Moses, Jesus to reveal to mankind (of those times) to acknowledge God as he is due recognition The God that gave jesus the power of miracles as a testimony to mankind that jesus is of superior nature as a prophet of God. the same God who sent Muhammad (peace be upon him and all the prophets) to be (as newly found research shows (google it)) the most influential man to have ever lived, why? because he is the last messenger of God and has brought the message that will suffice mankind forever, the Best and most superior way of living.
taking this into account, God has chosen many languages to communicate and the last of them being the (rairly spoken) ancient arabic (fus-ha), not what these buffoons speak in saudi arabia. this is because this language cannot be tampered with or manipulated in any way. see for yourself. as it stands, for the last 14centuries, the Qur'an has not changed in one bit, leaving it as pure as it was the 1400 years ago when it was revealed. in which God has said ;
"Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal), for sure it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience to Allah). And certainly, the devils do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [by making Al-Maytata (a dead animal) legal by eating it], then you would indeed be Mushrikun (polytheists): [because they (devils and their friends) made lawful to you to eat that which Allah has made unlawful to eat and you obeyed them by considering it lawful to eat, and by doing so you worshipped them, and to worship others besides Allah is polytheism]." Holy Qur'an (Al-An’am 6:121)
the words recited are 'Bismillah, Allahu Akbar' 'In the name of God, God Most Great'
i urge everyone who is reading this column to please research into this as it would not benefit me in any way but only yourselves. seek the truth. by turning the blind eye would ony render you ignorant. thank you.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
I am half Iranian myself and my father's side of the family are Muslim….so I say this with the GREATEST of respect for yourself and your faith. I am a Christian and would therefore not want the name of Allah recited over my food……that is just a personal sensitivity. Perhaps there could be blessings for different faiths and methods of animal slaughter to represent the different faiths and those products have their own sections within supermarkets. I believe the fear is that all l meat sold in supermarkets will be Halal.
As a Christian I would find that unacceptable.
but you do realize that Allah is the arabic word to describe the superior entity in its absolute form of being 'One and only' God, so your saying you would not want the name of God recited before sacrificing one of (His) Gods living creations?
because in essence what you are saying is that the indian man likes to sit on his 'kursi' (hindi for :chair) but you dont want to sit on a kursi, u want to sit on a chair???
are they both not one and the same thing?
But Alfie, other languages use other names such as Elohim or Yahwey. To use another name would to them be considered wrong. Their name represents another different version of God to other peoples'.
Alfie we will have to agree to disagree on this….its something that has brought me into conflict with my own family. But I thank you for your contribution on this matter and welcome you to the site.
There's also a Tesco near Tiller Road for anybody not wanting to travel to Canary Wharf.
Really disappointing that ASDA have taken the meat section away, the ham they used to sell there was very nice, and now the stuff they've replaced it with IS NOT THE SAME. I'm 100% sure of that as I'm now unable to buy it.
Disgusting.
we are voting with our feet. bye bye asda.
Well Alfies right halaal is the correct and best policy for our own health,yes sure we must slaughter a cattle in name of ALLAH as almighty created everything.even you folks so please understand the meaning of halaal,I advise people not to be aggressive and disobedient to the only one lord of seven heavens and earth. Glad asda is halaal meat tastes even better this time! Also with subway! And kfc! Europe will be all Muslim oneday! God willing.
Go on YouTube about eating pork my advise.