| ||The Daily Mail has once again attempted to perpetuate the myth of the Islamisation of Britain via-halal meat, publishing an article on the rejection of demands to serve halal meat in the restaurants and cafes of the Houses of Parliament. |
Titled, ‘We won't eat halal meat, say MPs and peers who reject demands to serve it at Westminster’, the article states that no halal option will be made available to those who desire to eat it, and that some Muslim MPs and peers have been misled into believing that they had eaten halal meat when it was not so.
From the Daily Mail.
“The Palace of Westminster has rejected demands to serve halal meat in its restaurants.
“Muslim MPs and peers have been told they cannot have meat slaughtered in line with Islamic tradition because the method – slitting an animal’s throat without first stunning it – is offensive to many of their non-Muslim colleagues.
“The stance has infuriated some parliamentarians who have eaten meat in the Palace’s 23 restaurants and cafes, having been assured that it was halal.
“Lord Ahmed of Rotherham said: ‘I did feel misled. I think a halal option should be made available.’”
“In 2010, the Mail on Sunday revealed schools, hospitals and restaurants were serving halal meat to unwitting customers.
“Waitrose, Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, Somerfield and the Co-op all said they stocked meat slaughtered according to Islamic tradition without letting customers know.
“Fast-food chains including Domino’s Pizza, Pizza Hut, KFC, ¬Nando’s and Subway are also using halal meat without ¬telling customers, it was revealed.
“Members of the Church of England have complained that the spread of halal meat was 'effectively spreading Sharia law' across Britain.
“However, a spokesman for the House of Lords and the House of Commons confirmed that it was not served in their restaurants.
“Alison Ruoff, a member of the Church of England, said: ‘It’s a bit hypocritical that the Houses of Parliament, which have allowed other people to provide halal food, have ruled it out on their own premises.’
“At Halal slaughterhouses thousands of birds are killed every hour.”
The article does not substantiate the charge that halal meat is “offensive” to non-Muslim colleagues with any statement or quote.
Moreover, the relevance of the last sentence on the “thousands of birds” killed in halal slaughterhouses is highly questionable- are thousands of birds, cattle and pigs not also killed in regular slaughterhouses in the UK and in the slaughterhouses which produce the imported meat that many Brits consume?
The Daily Mail has been at the forefront of a tabloid-press campaign portraying halal slaughter as unethical and perpetuating the myth that Muslims as well businesses and institutions are imposing their religion on others by serving halal meat options or halal-meat only (see here, here, here and here).
This article, like many before, poses the issue as one of animal rights. If this is so, then why no furore, for example, over the tens of millions of chickens which are battery-farmed in Britain? And why no mention of the fact that Kosher Jewish slaughter practices are almost identical to that of halal slaughter? Moreover, ‘Indian’ restaurants have been serving halal meat for decades, and as curry is something which is often considered the nation’s favourite food. It is somewhat puzzling therefore, that moral outrage has only found expression in the past few years, and that Muslims are singled out for their practices; practices which are significant to the Muslim community but in the context of the issue of animal rights and meat consumption in Britain, form and fraction of the issue. There is little doubt that articles such as this one and those that have preceded it are there to give fuel to anti-Muslim sentiment by peddling the idea that Islam is a barbaric religion and that Britain is slowly being Islamised.
|< Prev||Next >|