Says the guy who wrote the above re-quoted post :kitty::D:p
Poster claims Nandos is changing in response to a complaint. Turns out nobody complained and Nandos isn't changing. Blueblade calls this splitting hairs
Come on blueblade admit it. You fell for it hook line and sinker and came out with an embarrassing "more bending over for muslims" which you're now trying to justify.
The ridiculous thing is, if this particular branch of Nandos ran the numbers and realised that incorporating Halal in some aspect would represent a significant increase in profits, we'd have the usual suspects whinging that they'd been "bullied" or "forced" in to doing it and, invariably, whinging even harder that it's "islamification" or some other nonsense.
I think a few people are really sore because ian_charles actually provided a link, and they never expected him to. So they're making a huge issue of the facts he got wrong, in order to save face. At the end of the day, he was asked for a link, and he provided one.
If he had intended to lie, he'd never have provided the link.
That's the top and bottom of it.
Argue if you want to, but you know damn well it's true, as do I.
He claimed that his local Nandos was going halal but hasn't provided a link to prove that claim. The link that he did provide contradicts what he said in his first statement.
He took an innocent story about a petition and twisted it to try and get people outraged at the (imaginary) bending over backwards for Muslims.
You can argue if you want to, but you know damn well that it's true.
It's the same thing. The consumer can make a choice by going elsewhere.
Indeed they can. Since Asda is very cagey about the source of its meat and refuses to state whether the "ordinary" meat is halal or not, I refuse to purchase meat there.
From the Evening Standard article that someone linked to earlier...
Even the original story on Britain First included the bit about them giving her pasta instead.
To me there's a big difference between not giving a child food and a child refusing to eat the food that they're given.
To be honest, I wouldn't want to eat plain spaghetti. Sounds grim (and dry).
As I say, there's some bunkum here. We've established that the mother was asked by Merton Council to send her daughter to nursery with a packed lunch (no other restrictions). Why would anyone in the nursery even care what this child had been made, whether it was halal, kosher or dog food? It is the parent's choice as to their own child's nutrition if they are sending a packed lunch. No one else can make a choice about whether the child can then eat it other than the child.
Which leads me to suspect in conclusion that, typically for a child, she just didn't like mum's skanky chicken salad roll and hummus and wanted the turkey twizzlers that everyone else was having.
Why on earth are you so keen to present this as an accurate tale?
Why on earth do you spend 10 hours of every day trying to score points over strangers you will never meet, constantly contradicting yourself and accusing them of everything you do yourself ? ;-)
It is a totally barbaric practice 'justified' by preposterous fantasy bullshit. >:(
Welcome to the forum by the way. ^_^
Actually, the idea that halal meat is "barbaric" whilst non-halal meat somehow isn't, is slightly lazy thinking (though understandable given the reporting over the matter in recent years). The reality is that the animals are reared with exactly the same mass-production farming techniques, and most industrial abattoirs now have Halal-certification.
Yes, it used to be the case that the Halal slaughter involved the draining of the blood from a conscious animal to kill it, and this would indeed cause needless suffering. But with the EU abattoirs now licenced to supply Halal meat, the difference is a smallish change to the process (agreed with the MCB and similar organisations abroad). Non-Halal meat involves the animal being bolt stunned in the head to make it unconcious, then it is killed (typically with electrocution to stop the heart), then its blood is drained. For Halal-slaughtered meat, the animal is bolt-stunned then the blood is drained whilst it is unconcious but still alive (initially), so it meets the criteria.
That said, the worry that arises from this is that some animals may not be stunned properly by the more lax abattoirs.
Why on earth do you spend 10 hours of every day trying to score points over strangers you will never meet, constantly contradicting yourself and accusing them of everything you do yourself ? ;-)
I think a few people are really sore because ian_charles actually provided a link, and they never expected him to. So they're making a huge issue of the facts he got wrong, in order to save face. At the end of the day, he was asked for a link, and he provided one.
If he had intended to lie, he'd never have provided the link.
That's the top and bottom of it.
Argue if you want to, but you know damn well it's true, as do I.
That's analogous to me coming on here and shouting "The Queen's bedroom has been invaded by angry gypsies!" and then when someone else questions the veracity of this story, I post a link to the Slough Advertiser explaining that Berkshire County Council have voted to agree on a new traveller site.
I've posted a link, so I'm not lying, it's just that I'd got some of the details wrong.
A company making a change which will enable more people to buy it's product and thus increase it's profits.
Real!
According to one Muslim, the Koran makes it clear that when visiting or living in non-Muslim countries, you're not required to eat Halal meat. He thinks some British Muslims are setting a bad example when it comes to integrating into western cultures and are even 'selfish' to a degree. Other countries are allowed to follow the 'when in Rome' scenario but not so much the UK.
Actually, the idea that halal meat is "barbaric" whilst non-halal meat somehow isn't, is slightly lazy thinking (though understandable given the reporting over the matter in recent years). The reality is that the animals are reared with exactly the same mass-production farming techniques, and most industrial abattoirs now have Halal-certification.
Yes, it used to be the case that the Halal slaughter involved the draining of the blood from a conscious animal to kill it, and this would indeed cause needless suffering. But with the EU abattoirs now licenced to supply Halal meat, the difference is a smallish change to the process (agreed with the MCB and similar organisations abroad). Non-Halal meat involves the animal being bolt stunned in the head to make it unconcious, then it is killed (typically with electrocution to stop the heart), then its blood is drained. For Halal-slaughtered meat, the animal is bolt-stunned then the blood is drained whilst it is unconcious but still alive (initially), so it meets the criteria.
That said, the worry that arises from this is that some animals may not be stunned properly by the more lax abattoirs.
I think you are bending the truth somewhat with your post.
Not all halal slaughter within the EU is pre stunned, I think in Britain it's about 90 % unlike kosher which is never pre stunned.
We have laws in place to try and limit animal suffering to a minimum, but religious exemptions allow certain groups to ignore the laws imposed on the rest of us.
This is the problem, if laws are made because society have deemed them necessary, then it should apply to everybody without exemption.
According to one Muslim, the Koran makes it clear that when visiting or living in non-Muslim countries, you're not required to eat Halal meat. He thinks some British Muslims are setting a bad example when it comes to integrating into western cultures and are even 'selfish' to a degree. Other countries are allowed to follow the 'when in Rome' scenario but not so much the UK.
There are plenty of halal places in France, and I'm sure in many other Western countries too.
The "Speldhurst pork sausages" on Tuesday suggest not.....
I call bunkum on this story.
The Halal part may be untrue or it may be one member of staff who said it we don't know, what we do know is that it is a fact that a member of staff allowed a child to go hungry all day when there was absolutely no need and that is wrong
The Halal part may be untrue or it may be one member of staff who said it we don't know, what we do know is that it is a fact that a member of staff allowed a child to go hungry all day when there was absolutely no need and that is wrong
Some people would argue that allowing a child to go hungry all day for reasons of bureaucracy or incompetence is a lot worse than doing so for misguided cultural reasons.
Why on earth do you spend 10 hours of every day trying to score points over strangers you will never meet, constantly contradicting yourself and accusing them of everything you do yourself ? ;-)
Are you blueblades knight in shining armour?
If not believing an obvious "muslims are taking over" wind up is point scoring then so be it.
Some people would argue that allowing a child to go hungry all day for reasons of bureaucracy or incompetence is a lot worse than doing so for misguided cultural reasons.
With that I would totally agree, there were so many ways to get round the alleged rule book and the staff member chose not to , that to me would question whether that staff member should be working with kids if they thought that acceptable , I don't have kids but even I know you would not let them go hungry you find a way to sort something out not just quote the rules.
There are plenty of halal places in France, and I'm sure in many other Western countries too.
In this country it is not as though anyone is restricted in choice of places to eat , ok in a small country village maybe but no one is too far from plenty of places to choose from to satisfy their taste or beliefs.
Reading between the lines, is it possible that the catering team give out food, and the member of staff wasn't trained well enough to know that if a child has a packed lunch you ust give it to them. The worker may have assumed the child was Muslim due to her name or appearance, and being overcautious about their own responsibility refused to give her the food?
Reading between the lines, is it possible that the catering team give out food, and the member of staff wasn't trained well enough to know that if a child has a packed lunch you ust give it to them. The worker may have assumed the child was Muslim due to her name or appearance, and being overcautious about their own responsibility refused to give her the food?
But who working in a school or nursery doesn't trust a kids own parents to prepare whatever they think is suitable?
I'm still applying Occam's Razor - I reckon the kid simply didn't want the sandwich she was given by mum. She was offered plain spaghetti as a safe alternative (though how did they know she wasn't coeliac?), and understandably didn't want that either.
Mum is upset, blames nursery for witholding her own packed lunch due to some religious claptrap.
This has to stop. It's small issues like this which lead to the distribution of pro-ISIS literature on the streets of London. Muslims are free to practice their religion but they have to realise that Islam is NOT the ideology of Britain. In Britain we eat whatever meat we like, provided the animal has been humanely killed. We need to ban the sale of Halal meat immediately.
This has to stop. It's small issues like this which lead to the distribution of pro-ISIS literature on the streets of London. Muslims are free to practice their religion but they have to realise that Islam is NOT the ideology of Britain. In Britain we eat whatever meat we like, provided the animal has been humanely killed. We need to ban the sale of Halal meat immediately.
And Kosher too presumably? Although I'm not sure you can say that any animal is "humanely" killed...
And Kosher too presumably? Although I'm not sure you can say that any animal is "humanely" killed...
Lets leave that to the experts and make no allowance for any religious requirement. Britain is a Christian/Secular/Liberal country, other religions must bend to our ideology.
Comments
Poster claims Nandos is changing in response to a complaint. Turns out nobody complained and Nandos isn't changing. Blueblade calls this splitting hairs
Come on blueblade admit it. You fell for it hook line and sinker and came out with an embarrassing "more bending over for muslims" which you're now trying to justify.
He claimed that his local Nandos was going halal but hasn't provided a link to prove that claim. The link that he did provide contradicts what he said in his first statement.
He took an innocent story about a petition and twisted it to try and get people outraged at the (imaginary) bending over backwards for Muslims.
You can argue if you want to, but you know damn well that it's true.
Indeed they can. Since Asda is very cagey about the source of its meat and refuses to state whether the "ordinary" meat is halal or not, I refuse to purchase meat there.
To be honest, I wouldn't want to eat plain spaghetti. Sounds grim (and dry).
As I say, there's some bunkum here. We've established that the mother was asked by Merton Council to send her daughter to nursery with a packed lunch (no other restrictions). Why would anyone in the nursery even care what this child had been made, whether it was halal, kosher or dog food? It is the parent's choice as to their own child's nutrition if they are sending a packed lunch. No one else can make a choice about whether the child can then eat it other than the child.
Which leads me to suspect in conclusion that, typically for a child, she just didn't like mum's skanky chicken salad roll and hummus and wanted the turkey twizzlers that everyone else was having.
Why on earth do you spend 10 hours of every day trying to score points over strangers you will never meet, constantly contradicting yourself and accusing them of everything you do yourself ? ;-)
Actually, the idea that halal meat is "barbaric" whilst non-halal meat somehow isn't, is slightly lazy thinking (though understandable given the reporting over the matter in recent years). The reality is that the animals are reared with exactly the same mass-production farming techniques, and most industrial abattoirs now have Halal-certification.
Yes, it used to be the case that the Halal slaughter involved the draining of the blood from a conscious animal to kill it, and this would indeed cause needless suffering. But with the EU abattoirs now licenced to supply Halal meat, the difference is a smallish change to the process (agreed with the MCB and similar organisations abroad). Non-Halal meat involves the animal being bolt stunned in the head to make it unconcious, then it is killed (typically with electrocution to stop the heart), then its blood is drained. For Halal-slaughtered meat, the animal is bolt-stunned then the blood is drained whilst it is unconcious but still alive (initially), so it meets the criteria.
That said, the worry that arises from this is that some animals may not be stunned properly by the more lax abattoirs.
The school could certainly argue that it's reputation had been damaged I would imagine, so would they take it further ?
These are questions as well, not statements of fact or anything implying any knowledge of any legal procedures or anything else, just to be clear
That reminds me of somewhere ;-)
That's analogous to me coming on here and shouting "The Queen's bedroom has been invaded by angry gypsies!" and then when someone else questions the veracity of this story, I post a link to the Slough Advertiser explaining that Berkshire County Council have voted to agree on a new traveller site.
I've posted a link, so I'm not lying, it's just that I'd got some of the details wrong.
According to one Muslim, the Koran makes it clear that when visiting or living in non-Muslim countries, you're not required to eat Halal meat. He thinks some British Muslims are setting a bad example when it comes to integrating into western cultures and are even 'selfish' to a degree. Other countries are allowed to follow the 'when in Rome' scenario but not so much the UK.
I think you are bending the truth somewhat with your post.
Not all halal slaughter within the EU is pre stunned, I think in Britain it's about 90 % unlike kosher which is never pre stunned.
We have laws in place to try and limit animal suffering to a minimum, but religious exemptions allow certain groups to ignore the laws imposed on the rest of us.
This is the problem, if laws are made because society have deemed them necessary, then it should apply to everybody without exemption.
There are plenty of halal places in France, and I'm sure in many other Western countries too.
The Halal part may be untrue or it may be one member of staff who said it we don't know, what we do know is that it is a fact that a member of staff allowed a child to go hungry all day when there was absolutely no need and that is wrong
Some people would argue that allowing a child to go hungry all day for reasons of bureaucracy or incompetence is a lot worse than doing so for misguided cultural reasons.
Are you blueblades knight in shining armour?
If not believing an obvious "muslims are taking over" wind up is point scoring then so be it.
With that I would totally agree, there were so many ways to get round the alleged rule book and the staff member chose not to , that to me would question whether that staff member should be working with kids if they thought that acceptable , I don't have kids but even I know you would not let them go hungry you find a way to sort something out not just quote the rules.
In this country it is not as though anyone is restricted in choice of places to eat , ok in a small country village maybe but no one is too far from plenty of places to choose from to satisfy their taste or beliefs.
But who working in a school or nursery doesn't trust a kids own parents to prepare whatever they think is suitable?
I'm still applying Occam's Razor - I reckon the kid simply didn't want the sandwich she was given by mum. She was offered plain spaghetti as a safe alternative (though how did they know she wasn't coeliac?), and understandably didn't want that either.
Mum is upset, blames nursery for witholding her own packed lunch due to some religious claptrap.
And Kosher too presumably? Although I'm not sure you can say that any animal is "humanely" killed...
Lets leave that to the experts and make no allowance for any religious requirement. Britain is a Christian/Secular/Liberal country, other religions must bend to our ideology.
Did you have a long enough run up for that leap?
I wouldn't want you doing yourself a mischief..
We have to draw the battle lines somewhere - I say we start in the kitchen.