The dutch general election. The biggest one so far for the right wing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

As I have written above I have no problem as long as the animal has been well looked after and it feels no pain when it is killed. What Jon59 seems to be suggesting is that there is no difference between halal killing where the animal is not stunned and non-halal killing where it is stunned. He says the two processes are "almost identical". I suppose if your brain is made of wood and sawdust it is hard to notice differences and to make distinctions. The stunning makes a big difference. With halal killing the animal is awake - which is probably an unfamiliar concept to Jon59 - and with non-halal killing the animal is unconscious.

The strange thing about Jon59's post is that before he says the two forms of slaughter are almost identical he says he is opposed to killing without stunning. Why is he opposed if there's hardly any difference? This is what happens when you try to support illogical dangerous religious cults - you tie yourself up in knots and you make yourself look slow-witted.

---

I'm afraid that you are the one who looks slow-witted to anyone who is still following this. Jon was clearly referring to the ~85% of meat that is slaughtered by halal rules but also is stunned beforehand.

https://fullfact.org/news/stunned-sl...-meat-sold-uk/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

As I have written above I have no problem as long as the animal has been well looked after and it feels no pain when it is killed. What Jon59 seems to be suggesting is that there is no difference between halal killing where the animal is not stunned and non-halal killing where it is stunned. He says the two processes are "almost identical". I suppose if your brain is made of wood and sawdust it is hard to notice differences and to make distinctions. The stunning makes a big difference. With halal killing the animal is awake - which is probably an unfamiliar concept to Jon59 - and with non-halal killing the animal is unconscious.

The strange thing about Jon59's post is that before he says the two forms of slaughter are almost identical he says he is opposed to killing without stunning. Why is he opposed if there's hardly any difference? This is what happens when you try to support illogical dangerous religious cults - you tie yourself up in knots and you make yourself look slow-witted.

---

Your misunderstandings of his post notwithstanding, I'm sure you'll read a terrible report like this and agree that cruelty is not unique to halal slaughter.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...oirs-two-years


Edit: in case you can't be arsed to read it:

"Failures in the slaughter process were also highlighted, with thousands of instances of animals not being stunned properly and in some cases not stunned at all."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

As I have written above I have no problem as long as the animal has been well looked after and it feels no pain when it is killed. What Jon59 seems to be suggesting is that there is no difference between halal killing where the animal is not stunned and non-halal killing where it is stunned. He says the two processes are "almost identical". I suppose if your brain is made of wood and sawdust it is hard to notice differences and to make distinctions. The stunning makes a big difference. With halal killing the animal is awake - which is probably an unfamiliar concept to Jon59 - and with non-halal killing the animal is unconscious.

The strange thing about Jon59's post is that before he says the two forms of slaughter are almost identical he says he is opposed to killing without stunning. Why is he opposed if there's hardly any difference? This is what happens when you try to support illogical dangerous religious cults - you tie yourself up in knots and you make yourself look slow-witted.

---

Eric and Lardy have said it for me. You seem to have a real problem understanding simple English. I did not say 'there is no difference between halal killing where the animal is not stunned and non-halal killing where it is stunned' - quite the opposite. Let me try one last time:

Animals killed without being pre-stunned in either halal or non-halal abattoirs = wrong. Should be banned.

Animals killed after being stunned in either halal or non-halal abattoirs = right. Should be the standard all meet.

Is there any other reason (if not animal welfare) for you to object to halal slaughterhouses in the 85-90% of cases where they do stun the animal?

It is a genuine question. Are there other animal welfare concerns apart from stunning that we should think about? Or is the objection because these places are staffed by Muslims and comply with a religious requirement? I assume that is your concern (you haven't come up with any other animal welfare issues) and that is what Mrs Steve R suggested in one of her earlier posts. Is it a fear of 'creeping Islamisation' or something?

I don't personally have a problem with certificates or rituals that have no bearing on any pain or suffering of the animal or on the quality of the meat. If an Andean shaman wants to have a dance and bless a carcass in an abattoir that does not bother me at all. Same for any rituals that Muslims or Jews want to follow - with the caveat above. I don't share their beliefs (I don't have any religious beliefs) but they seem harmless to me and you haven't explained why they are not.

I am of the same view as Lardy. What counts is the welfare of animals in any slaughterhouse - whether halal or not. There are too many examples of cruelty and suffering in halal, kosher and other (probably the majority) slaughterhouses. That should be what gets people angry.


Edit: Just re-reading your post above you seem to be denying that any halal slaughterhouses stun animals before slaughter - that the definition of 'halal' is that they are not stunned. That is not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Your misunderstandings of his post notwithstanding, I'm sure you'll read a terrible report like this and agree that cruelty is not unique to halal slaughter.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...oirs-two-years


Edit: in case you can't be arsed to read it:

"Failures in the slaughter process were also highlighted, with thousands of instances of animals not being stunned properly and in some cases not stunned at all."

---

I don't read The Guardian unless I'm looking for fake news.

One method seems to be cruel in error and the other cruel in principle. At least with stunning - even if it doesn't work every time - an attempt is made to lessen suffering.

Muslims when they do stun do not use the more effective captive bolt method of stunning. They are not "almost identical" methods of stunning as Jon59 suggests. Many animals need to be given the electric shock method of stunning more than once. It is stressful and unnecessary. Jon59's line of argument is a red herring. He is trying to divert the argument away from the increased use of a cruel method of killing animals in the Uk to whether I am an Islamaphobe.

Another thing that is overlooked is that Muslims are only allowed to use religious slaughter for consumption by Muslims. They are deliberately overproducing halal meat.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/halal-and-kosher-slaughter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

I don't read The Guardian unless I'm looking for fake news.

One method seems to be cruel in error and the other cruel in principle. At least with stunning - even if it doesn't work every time - an attempt is made to lessen suffering.

Muslims when they do stun do not use the more effective captive bolt method of stunning. They are not "almost identical" methods of stunning as Jon59 suggests. Many animals need to be given the electric shock method of stunning more than once. It is stressful and unnecessary. Jon59's line of argument is a red herring. He is trying to divert the argument away from the increased use of a cruel method of killing animals in the Uk to whether I am an Islamaphobe.

Another thing that is overlooked is that Muslims are only allowed to use religious slaughter for consumption by Muslims. They are deliberately overproducing halal meat.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/halal-and-kosher-slaughter

---

Thanks for partly answering my question. So you are saying that the method of stunning in halal abattoirs is less effective and therefore more distressing/cruel than in non-halal abattoirs? If that is true it is a fair point. It isn't something that I have seen in any of the news reports on the controversy from 2014, including this (presumably 'fake news') item:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...ughter-involve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Majority? Are you sure?

---

IMO Bob, I would say so. Perhaps not the vast majority, but a majority nonetheless.

I welcome your (and others) thoughts on the rest of my post.

To quote Edmund Burke, "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

I think the attitudes of people like you are more dangerous towards western values than 99% of Muslims out there.

---

Can you explain why ?

I would also appreciate your thoughts on the details of my post that you disagree with.

I welcome an intelligent debate with you.

Based on the 1% of Muslims you mention, that's 25,000 seriously dangerous Muslims in the UK. I wouldn't disagree with that, apart from you under estimating the numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Thanks for partly answering my question. So you are saying that the method of stunning in halal abattoirs is less effective and therefore more distressing/cruel than in non-halal abattoirs? If that is true it is a fair point. It isn't something that I have seen in any of the news reports on the controversy from 2014, including this (presumably 'fake news') item:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...ughter-involve

---

Here's a quote from an EU document :

"A concern is that after stunning, animals regain (some) consciousness.This is particularly so for electrical stunning."

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegDat...75_REV2_EN.pdf

The same document says most halal slaughter in France, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Spain is done without stunning.

Here are a couple of comments on ritual slaughter by our MPs in the 2015 Parliamentary debate :

"One of my Muslim constituents wants to buy halal meat because of not only the religious justification, but welfare. For him, halal slaughter is a method with a higher standard of welfare than other methods that were common, such as strangulation." Steve Baker (Con). In other words halal is good because it is better than strangulation. These are the idiots deciding our fate.

"My local Muslim community is concerned about this debate. Many do not feel that it is really about animal welfare; they worry that it is some sort of covert attack on them and their way of life." Diane Abbot

Another idiot made the same point.

"On the back of the Copenhagen and Paris attacks, many of my Jewish constituents worry that they are not wanted in this country." Matthew Offord (Con). So if we are opposed to religious slaughter we hate Jews.

"Sadly, it shows that perhaps ignorance, racism, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism lurk behind some of the respectable arguments." Mike Freer (Con).

Your argument against religious slaughter might seem respectable but it really means you are a racist.

Isn't Mike Freer saying the same as you Jon1959?

I don't know if he is saying the same thing as me. I don't know if Diane Abbott is saying the same thing as me. Did either of them say that their main concern about methods of animal slaughter was 'animal welfare'?

Your misrepresentation and evasion were the reason I asked if you had any other reason to denounce halal abattoirs.

If, as you subsequently seemed to say, your concern is those abattoirs that don't stun before slaughter, and that where stunning is used it is (you claim) not as effective as alternative methods, then I will agree with you. But you also keep making comments in your posts that suggest you are opposed to the practices in halal abattoirs because they are based on some idea of religious compliance, separate from the way the animals there are treated. If that is correct (is it?) then it becomes a different discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

I agree that all meat production is pretty grim, as a veggie though I think there should be a ban on non-stun slaughtering in abattoirs.

As for Jon's question..

"Is there any reason for carnivores to reject halal meat other than the stunning (animal welfare) concern?"

Religion?

"According to the 2011 UK census, Christianity is the major religion, followed by Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Judaism and Buddhism in terms of number of adherents"

I really don't know the answer to this but do other religions care or get a say in it? what if Christians don't want their meat blessed by another god?

---

This post actually got me thinking. I am moderately anti-religion, I think I am of the opinion that religion is too easily manipulated by bad people for the sum of it's impact to be positive. Upon reading the post I thought 'hmm I wouldn't really want any of that religious meat' but on reflection, if I am certain in my belief that religious practices are next to meaningless, why would I care if someone blesses it. Equal opportunities is a concern, if Halal slaughter becomes more widespread and it 'must' be done by Muslim butcher then that is obviously bollocks.

I am all for removing the imposition of religion in everyday life, lets get rid of Halal meat, Catholic schools, religious buildings can just be nice places without bigotry and bias. Somehow I doubt our 'christian country' would go for that though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

This post actually got me thinking. I am moderately anti-religion, I think I am of the opinion that religion is too easily manipulated by bad people for the sum of it's impact to be positive. Upon reading the post I thought 'hmm I wouldn't really want any of that religious meat' but on reflection, if I am certain in my belief that religious practices are next to meaningless, why would I care if someone blesses it. Equal opportunities is a concern, if Halal slaughter becomes more widespread and it 'must' be done by Muslim butcher then that is obviously bollocks.

I am all for removing the imposition of religion in everyday life, lets get rid of Halal meat, Catholic schools, religious buildings can just be nice places without bigotry and bias. Somehow I doubt our 'christian country' would go for that though.

---

Why just pick on them? do you think any of the other religions mentioned in my post would go along with it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

Why just pick on them? do you think any of the other religions mentioned in my post would go along with it?

---

It is the prominent religion and sets the agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

Why just pick on them? do you think any of the other religions mentioned in my post would go along with it?

---

Because if he'd said islam,which if people were being honest is the only religion that is a danger to western values,he'd have had to kick himself to death for being an islamaphobe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goslow

Because if he'd said islam,which if people were being honest is the only religion that is a danger to western values,he'd have had to kick himself to death for being an islamaphobe.

---

Quote:

---

I am all for removing the imposition of religion in everyday life, lets get rid of Halal meat, Catholic schools, religious buildings can just be nice places without bigotry and bias. Somehow I doubt our 'Islam country' would go for that though.

---

I have done what you have asked. To everyone's surprise I am not kicking myself to death but it doesn't make much sense to me.

Absolutely insane change in odds:

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/...prime-minister

Wilders out to 29/5.

Bookies have taken people to the cleaners.

Edit - I am confused, paddy power still has him as the favourite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordKenwyne

Absolutely insane change in odds:

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/...prime-minister

Wilders out to 29/5.

Bookies have taken people to the cleaners.

Edit - I am confused, paddy power still has him as the favourite.

---

Might be the difference between "biggest party" and prime minister, as there will undoubtedly be a coalition in power and not many would risk a toxic collaboration with Wilders.

Well that was a load of fuss over nothing.

Sort of RJK but a dreadful result for the left again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pearcey3

Sort of RJK but a dreadful result for the left again.

---

The greens and socialist party have apparently done better than expected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ninianclark

Just what radio5 have been saying - no one likes him - he dont care......, he has won a number of seats , apparently gained 10 seats.

I think the Dutch (finally) acting tough over Turkey in the last few days (convenient or what) may have helped

---

For a long time they were expected to gain the most seats and they are a long way from that. Even if they got the most seats they weren't likely to be in a coalition, so now i guess they'll be sidelined.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Well that was a load of fuss over nothing.

---

The Dutch result is of no significance in the grand scheme of things. Keep your eyes on France, if Le Pen wins the EU will have well and truly fallen off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

The Dutch result is of no significance in the grand scheme of things. Keep your eyes on France, if Le Pen wins the EU will have well and truly fallen off.

---

And, no doubt, you would have been saying the same if Wilders' mob had been the biggest party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

And, no doubt, you would have been saying the same if Wilders' mob had been the biggest party.

---

I haven't commented once in this thread about Wilders, his political party or the Dutch general election. That should tell you how much interest I had in it. The Brexit/Trump support team are over in France, and that is where my interests lie, as I am curious to see if those data science guys can pull off a hattrick of victories. Of course, it would also be a bonus to see the EU smashed into pieces at the same time :biggrin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

I haven't commented once in this thread about Wilders, his political party or the Dutch general election. That should tell you how much interest I had in it. The Brexit/Trump support team are over in France, and that is where my interests lie, as I am curious to see if those data science guys can pull off a hattrick of victories. Of course, it would also be a bonus to see the EU smashed into pieces at the same time :biggrin:

---

That doesn't really answer my point though does it? Are you telling me that you would not have said anything on here if Wilders was the leader of the party with the most seats this morning? Seems to me that the centre right party that were the "winners" of the election are natural candidates for the globalist elite which you detest and yet you would have not said anything on here if they had been beaten? I agree the French election is the bigger barometer though and can only hope that, as in the Netherlands, "the wrong kind of populism" gets rejected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

That doesn't really answer my point though does it? Are you telling me that you would not have said anything on here if Wilders was the leader of the party with the most seats this morning? Seems to me that the centre right party that were the "winners" of the election are natural candidates for the globalist elite which you detest and yet you would have not said anything on here if they had been beaten? I agree the French election is the bigger barometer though and can only hope that, as in the Netherlands, "the wrong kind of populism" gets rejected.

---

Win or lose, I seriously wouldn't have commented, as I really haven't been paying attention to what is happening there. Regarding the globalists, many of the lower ranking ones are merely the useful idiots. They departmentalise everything, and it's only the upper echelons who know the real plans for the end game. Anyway, things should be hotting up soon. 2017/18 is going to be the greatest show on earth, and we should consider ourselves lucky that we are here to witness all of it.

These are certainly very interesting times, but I'm far from convinced yet that we are lucky to be living through them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

Win or lose, I seriously wouldn't have commented, as I really haven't been paying attention to what is happening there. Regarding the globalists, many of the lower ranking ones are merely the useful idiots. They departmentalise everything, and it's only the upper echelons who know the real plans for the end game. Anyway, things should be hotting up soon. 2017/18 is going to be the greatest show on earth, and we should consider ourselves lucky that we are here to witness all of it.

---

There certainly are a lot of useful idiots at play, but they aren't the ones you think they are.
They are the ones that think they are fighting the good fight against the evil "globalist agenda", but in reality they are just a pawn of the right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

There certainly are a lot of useful idiots at play, but they aren't the ones you think they are.
They are the ones that think they are fighting the good fight against the evil "globalist agenda", but in reality they are just a pawn of the right.

---

You do realise that the EU would eventually be joined together with NAFTA, ASEAN, UNASUR and all the other regional economic groups, giving us the fabled New World Order.

Europe is being conquered by using people as weapons. I predict that within 30 years Barry Island will be renamed Sharia-by-the-Sea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

You do realise that the EU would eventually be joined together with NAFTA, ASEAN, UNASUR and all the other regional economic groups, giving us the fabled New World Order.

---

Lovely, can't wait

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Lovely, can't wait

---

It won't be the paradise that you imagine :biggrin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

It won't be the paradise that you imagine :biggrin:

---

I'm not sure that a descent into nationalism is likely to be quite the roaring success you're expecting either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

I'm not sure that a descent into nationalism is likely to be quite the roaring success you're expecting either.

---

It seems to be more peaceful now, you rarely hear of mass shootings in the US or European attacks any more. They were happening every week at one stage under Obama.