|
Post by Joe K on May 10, 2014 7:42:44 GMT
You're right, Kay, it is strange that criticism of kosher meat is practically absent compared with the storm over halal meat in the past few days. If you combine with with Eddie's belief that what is in the past should be left to itself, which seemingly does apply to the loss of Palestinian homes some fifty years ago, but not to the Jewish 'homeland' thousands of years back, it does imply a double standard that favours Jews and their supporters. But Eddie would never fail to see that glaring injustice... The sale of halal meat by stealth
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2014 14:15:11 GMT
Perhaps most people are unaware that kosher meat is always killed without any type of stunning. Possibly people also don't want to be labelled as racist for criticising Jews, but are happy to slag off Islam. Or maybe the British public is feeling very pressured by Islam, but not by Judaism.
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on May 10, 2014 15:26:19 GMT
I suppose it's riskier to criticise Judaism because, along with Sikhism, such criticism can be interpreted as racial, but I would have thought that if halal was the default position for practical, economic reasons, the additional stricture about no stunning would also be enforced. Would animal rights campaigners ever accept that? What else aren't we told about our food?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2014 13:57:06 GMT
I've just read something funny: you know that it was Northcliffe Media that kicked up a fuss about halal meat being served up to people without their knowledge; well, according to this week's new edition of Private Eye, that's exactly what happens in the Northcliffe Media canteen that's used by the very hacks who condemned the practice.
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on May 14, 2014 17:09:21 GMT
Nothing would surprise me about those journalists. They're as inconsistent as the coppers...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2014 11:08:25 GMT
I think that the implication was that it was the ordinary journalists who had been deceived by their bosses. I expect that one of them found out and, not being willing to get himself/herself fired by openly whistle-blowing, chose to tell Private Eye, who keep their sources secret.
|
|