Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Netherlands set to ban halal/kosher slaughter without stunning watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Ever seen a goat tied up then having its throat cut? Never heard an animal make such cries.
    Yeah, I've heard this. It's not nice! There is a little paddock down the end of my road and there were some goats and a sweet little cow there. One day I was feeding the cow some apples and I saw the owners pick up one of the goats and take it behind the shed. Then I head the goat crying

    I think they did the same with the cow because he's not there anymore...and neither are any of the other goats.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Very good idea. Not stunning the animal is quite primitive
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    In 1978, a study incorporating EEG (electroencephalograph) with electrodes surgically implanted on the skull of 17 sheep and 15 calves, and conducted by Wilhelm Schulze et al. at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Germany concluded that "the slaughter in the form of a ritual cut is, if carried out properly, painless in sheep and calves according to EEG recordings and the missing defensive actions" (of the animals) and that "For sheep, there were in part severe reactions both in bloodletting cut and the pain stimuli" when captive bolt stunning (CBS) was used. This study is cited by the German Constitutional Court in its permitting of dhabiha slaughtering.

    Happy?
    Then we have this study.

    http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/54850,...ious-slaughter



    As well as that going by this post on another thread.

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...7#post30631087

    I am inclined to believe that study in Germany was an anomaly as the poster seems pretty clued up on all this.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    In 1978, a study incorporating EEG (electroencephalograph) with electrodes surgically implanted on the skull of 17 sheep and 15 calves, and conducted by Wilhelm Schulze et al. at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Germany concluded that "the slaughter in the form of a ritual cut is, if carried out properly, painless in sheep and calves according to EEG recordings and the missing defensive actions" (of the animals) and that "For sheep, there were in part severe reactions both in bloodletting cut and the pain stimuli" when captive bolt stunning (CBS) was used. This study is cited by the German Constitutional Court in its permitting of dhabiha slaughtering.

    Happy?
    A more recent study in New Zealand (who have already banned ritual slaughter) carried out in 2009 also using EEG has shown that it does in fact cause pain. When the kosher method of slaughter is carried out properly it's usually a quick and relatively painless death simply because of the requirements regarding the knife, such requirements don't exist for halal methods. Also a more recent study concluding that, in terms of the risk of compromising animal welfare bolting > bolting/cutting > cutting. Also one of the problems is the methods of restraint used particularly for cows.

    There doesn't seem to be a definitive answer at the moment because there are many factors including the type of animal, the equipment used, the treatment of the animal, the method of restraint, the skill of the operator, the precision of the slaughter etc - all of these things vary.

    With that said I'd much rather an animal be rendered unconscious prior to slaughter and thankfully many countries have this as a prerequisite to slaughter by law.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    Cattle or lifestock stunned with electricity are more likely to feel pain for longer than Cattle or lifestock whose juggular vein is slit instantly, killling it just as fast as or even faster than being stunned with electricity.

    Infact the quality of meat that is stunned is poor compared to halal/kosher meat. By stunning the lifestock blood vessels burst and Haemorrhages form.

    Cutting the veins on the neck of the animal also drains all blood from it's body. EEG medical studies have shown that the direct method of slaughter (cutting the neck veins) is infact PAINLESS to animals.

    In conclusion people that consume Non Halal/Kosher meat products are actually cruel to animals. Perpetuating the myth that shocking the animal is far more humane is insanity. I think it's just that westerners look down upon cutting the neck of the animal as it seems Barbaric. When infact it IS the most humane.

    I don't know about Kosher meat, but I know that Cattle being slaughtered in the Halal manner is treated well, fed, given water. And then killed. The animal is not forced to move to many areas, and does not experiance alot of stress.
    Aren't animals hung upside down first before halal/kosher slaughter?
    It would be more convenient for a cow be stunned/unconscious first before being hung upside down and have 1 ton of weight hanging off it's legs.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by B-Man.)
    It doesn't contain any hyperlinks. And if you expect me or anyone other TSR member to actively find everyone of those books to verify his claims your dreaming.
    Those references were taken from a resource on red meat welfare published by Bristol University, an institution renown for it's work in meat science and animal welfare. Those are the original sources for most (if not all) that I have mentioned, you should be able to view the abstracts by searching on google scholar or using the interlibrary loan system at your local library or institution.

    Pleading ignorance does not validate your own argument or magic all of the contravening evidence away.

    (Original post by Teras)
    I am totally against this! There is more pain in electrocution then in sharp slaughter with the knife.

    The example I will give to prove this is us humans. If anyone has been electrocuted you will know that you will feel quite a lot of pain whereas when you cut any place in your body you wont feel any pain till few minutes later. I had a friend who accidentally CHOPPED part of his finger off, soo much blood was coming out but he told me there was no pain whatsoever. He was just confused and too worried to think of the pains. I have been electrocuted a few times and I seriously hate the pain and stays for quite some time!
    Physical trauma damages nerves and it causes inflammation, this is what precipitates pain - using a sharp knife or cutting implement does not circumnavigate this. It wasn't that your friend didn't experience any pain rather that he went into a state of shock (probably as a result of intense pain, the sight of cutting his finger off, etc) which would eventually inhibit pain and his recollection of events.

    Electrocution is a different process to stunning.

    (Original post by The Cornerstone)
    I wonder what they're going to do about the constant pain they give to farm animals like chicken by feeding them growth hormones
    Hormones and artificial growth promoters are banned EU wide in food producing animals.

    (Original post by crazycake93)
    Infact the quality of meat that is stunned is poor compared to halal/kosher meat. By stunning the lifestock blood vessels burst and Haemorrhages form.
    Only if you use an excessively high current which is avoided because as you note it decreases meat quality.

    (Original post by Ilios_Lampros)
    My opinion vegetarian and a veterinary student -

    While I don't want to see any animals killed in any way, I don't believe, for the most part, that modern slaughter methods with stunning are preferable to halal slaughter in a significant way. There are many cases, especially with chickens, where the stunning (which is sometimes carried out by hanging chickens upside down and passing their heads through an electrified bath) doesn't always kill the animal and the suffering is alot worse (especially where the animal is injured from the convulsions caused by the shock).
    What you're talking about isn't a problem with the science behind stunning but rather the application. If you take measures to avoid pre-stun shocks and use a variable voltage stunner (it is only a matter of time before they become an industry standard) you improve animal welfare and meat quality significantly.

    Stunning of bovines doesn't use electricity but a captive bolt gun; which kills the animal almost instantly due to rapid compression and decompression inside the cranial cavity.
    Strictly speaking the aim of stunning is not to kill the animal, you're merely rendering the animal unconscious until the point of death and it is possible to recover from.

    Some mechanical stunners are capable of killing animals (eg; your mushroom head non penetrative stunners) however they are rarely used because of the stress they place on the operator's arm (the concussive force is so strong that it causes repetitive strain injuries).

    (Original post by CombineHarvester)
    Actually this system often fails (particularly with overweight animals) and the animal needs to be shocked again for it to lose consciousness.
    Certainly with respect to poultry heavier animals receive a better stun because they have a greater amount of contact with the metal shackles.

    (Original post by mohamed aden)
    It is simply far too easy in a debate of this magnitude to be derailed, bring facts/articles/concrete studies not theories or baseless arguments im open to different ideas!

    Regarding whether or not specifically it is more humane to stun animals, (keep in mind that the term humane is open to debate due to difference in human perception). For my readers sake lets assume Humane means " Upholding the moral principle that all slaughtering is done with the intent to minimize the pain that is inflicted upon the animal, whether sacrilegious or not"

    IN Islam

    "The animal is not to be harshly restrained, nor hoisted up by chains, nor is the animal to see the knife. Skillful slaughter brings about a quick and relatively painless death. According to studies of the correctly preformed Halal method of slaughter, the animal registers little pain and died quickly, the but heart continues to pump blood out of the body, which purifies the meat from potential disease."(Vincent J. Cornell - Voices of Islam: Voices of Life: Family, Home, and Society - Volume 3 - Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007 - Page 16).

    Moreover, an academic named Professor Schultz and his colleague: Dr. Hazim scientifically & objectively proved the Zabiha method to be superior over all other methods:

    "Professor Schultz of Hanover University, Germany, performed a comparative experiment between methods of slaughter. He compared modern "captive bolt gun" (CBG) stunning method to the Islamic method, using electrodes to record the electrical brain activity of the animals. With the Islamic method, the graph showed that the animal felt no pain at the point of the incision or for the following moments. A reflex of the spinal cord caused the body to convulse vigorously, which completely drained it of all blood. The graph showed zero level of pain during the entire process, and the end result was clean and hygienic meat for the consumer.

    On the other hand, the stunning method rendered the animal unconscious for a second, which was immediately followed by severe pain. The stunning caused the animal's heart to stop sooner than that of the halal method. The result was that a lot of blood was retained inside the body - unhygienic meat for the consumer and a lot of pain for the animal." (Duaa Anwar - The Everything Koran Book - Everything Books, 2004 - Page 101)."
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    In 1978, a study incorporating EEG (electroencephalograph) with electrodes surgically implanted on the skull of 17 sheep and 15 calves, and conducted by Wilhelm Schulze et al. at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Germany concluded that "the slaughter in the form of a ritual cut is, if carried out properly, painless in sheep and calves according to EEG recordings and the missing defensive actions" (of the animals) and that "For sheep, there were in part severe reactions both in bloodletting cut and the pain stimuli" when captive bolt stunning (CBS) was used. This study is cited by the German Constitutional Court in its permitting of dhabiha slaughtering.

    Happy?
    Are you aware that this is the only study to support Halal slaughter, it's results have not been replicated in over 30 years and that significantly more, more recent studies oppose this?

    (Original post by *Dustinthewind*)
    I have not actually seen any of these studies. Could you provide sources please?

    Also I said 'conclusively' in order to put across the point that small studies are not conclusive. They allow speculation, yes, but not a firm basis to validate people's claims.
    Funnily enough the main/only study to support Halal slaughter involved just 32 animals.

    (Original post by silent ninja)
    I'm against this.

    So the actual stun bolt to the head is harmless? What a load of nonsense. "No but it's less painful than the throat being cut." Evidence please?
    (Original post by *Dustinthewind*)
    Regardless of whether you stun them, or slit their throats, at the end of the day you're killing the animals and I imagine causing them some degree of pain. Unless studies can conclusively show that the kosher way of killing is far more painful for the animals, this is a loads of codswallop.
    As I said in an earlier thread:

    "With mechanical stunning what you're trying to achieve is a 'knockout punch' sort of effect on the brain, to do this you need to accelerate the brain within the skull to ~40m/s, the average for most captive bolt guns is around 50m/s. Now most captive bolt guns do this in the space of 1.2-1.5ms which is significantly faster than the brain is able to register sensation or pain.

    As for electrical stunning the aim is to induce a tonic/clonic epileptic seizure whereby the animal is unconscious and unable to feel pain. While this can take as long as 200ms (it is often shorter) the current inhibits normal brain activity within this window anyway."


    (Original post by *Dustinthewind*)
    On the plus side, Jews and Muslims agreeing. Could be the start of something beautiful :P
    They only agree because it is in their own (mutual) interests however that does not validate what they're fighting for.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Any opposition to this is baseless and ignorant.

    Bolt to the brain is instant. Bleeding out can take up to minutes. Just compare a video of an animal having it's throat slit, and one of it being killed by a bolt to the brain in a slaughter house. The difference is obvious to see. I'd link some videos, but I don't want to get into trouble with the Mods
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by No Man)
    Aren't animals hung upside down first before halal/kosher slaughter?
    It would be more convenient for a cow be stunned/unconscious first before being hung upside down and have 1 ton of weight hanging off it's legs.
    Nope, killed. Then Hung upside down (to drain all the blood from the meat)

    It would be more convenient to be stunned, or course it would. But it's not humane to kill an animal by stunning, because the animal does feel pain from that type of killing. Also it is the reason why Non Kosher/Halal meat is cheaper, because its of a poorer quality.

    The vessels burst and haemorrages form, meaning more blood in the meat.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anti-duck)
    I love it how people are saying stuff like this! Do you really think that this decision is ignorantly being led by a pack of brain dead idiots or something? The majority of the country's MP's support this, I would like (and hope) to think that the people running the Netherlands are bloody well advised!



    I also agree with that 200%
    As a veggie I think this is a pathetic attempt at people trying to make themselves feel better.
    If you are so concerned about animals and the pain they feel regardless for how long, then don't eat meat....

    Actually no. The fact is there are conflicting studies on this and opinions. So until it's 'CONCLUSIVE' then there is no point speculating based on a few small scale studies. Are you that brain dead that you are unable to comprehend that? It's like saying, hey a new drug was tested by twelve people and should be avaliable to wider society based on just that.

    I would like to think that they would provide evidence for their findings first.....
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Regardless of which method is used we should always know if the meat on offer in a restaurant, cafe, takeaway or butcher is kosher, halal, or neither, so we can make our own choice if we wish to purchase it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    Those references were taken from a resource on red meat welfare published by Bristol University, an institution renown for it's work in meat science and animal welfare. Those are the original sources for most (if not all) that I have mentioned, you should be able to view the abstracts by searching on google scholar or using the interlibrary loan system at your local library or institution.

    Pleading ignorance does not validate your own argument or magic all of the contravening evidence away.
    I didn't claim that it did. However, if I ask to be linked to a source, I expect to be given a hyperlink, instead of a refference to numerous books that I do not own. I am not saying that this validates my arguement - that would be absurd. I am saying that I can't verify for you claims so I cannot take your comments as 'evidence.'

    However, I have seen other sources since my initial post and have come to the conclusion that stunning causes less pain to the animal.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    A more recent study in New Zealand (who have already banned ritual slaughter) carried out in 2009 also using EEG has shown that it does in fact cause pain. When the kosher method of slaughter is carried out properly it's usually a quick and relatively painless death simply because of the requirements regarding the knife, such requirements don't exist for halal methods. Also a more recent study concluding that, in terms of the risk of compromising animal welfare bolting > bolting/cutting > cutting. Also one of the problems is the methods of restraint used particularly for cows.

    There doesn't seem to be a definitive answer at the moment because there are many factors including the type of animal, the equipment used, the treatment of the animal, the method of restraint, the skill of the operator, the precision of the slaughter etc - all of these things vary.

    With that said I'd much rather an animal be rendered unconscious prior to slaughter and thankfully many countries have this as a prerequisite to slaughter by law.
    Both Kosher and Halal meat are similarly slaughtered.

    Your prophet, peace be on him, Moses, is my prophet. Can we not fight in israel and allow each other to have it's own state? This is justice, and this is truth. We share the most common similarities, thus.

    I have read parts of the Torah

    I am a muslim , by the way

    salam/shalom and peace
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sixthformer)
    Both Kosher and Halal meat are similarly slaughtered.

    Your prophet, peace be on him, Moses, is my prophet. Can we not fight in israel and allow each other to have it's own state? This is justice, and this is truth. We share the most common similarities, thus.

    I have read parts of the Torah

    I am a muslim , by the way

    salam/shalom and peace
    Why bring Israel into it, what's wrong with you?! :confused:

    Yes, halal and kosher methods are similar but there's one key difference and that is the Jewish guidelines that govern the knife used significantly reducing the chance of the blade gouging the wound which in turn causes the animal to struggle violently. Feel free to correct me but to my knowledge there is no guidelines regarding the knife used for halal slaughter.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    Why bring Israel into it, what's wrong with you?! :confused:

    Yes, halal and kosher methods are similar but there's one key difference and that is the Jewish guidelines that govern the knife used significantly reducing the chance of the blade gouging the wound which in turn causes the animal to struggle violently. Feel free to correct me but to my knowledge there is no guidelines regarding the knife used for halal slaughter.
    Yes there is. The knife has to be kept in a sharpened state in order to allow for a swift and easy slaughter and to minimise pain.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    Why bring Israel into it, what's wrong with you?! :confused:

    Yes, halal and kosher methods are similar but there's one key difference and that is the Jewish guidelines that govern the knife used significantly reducing the chance of the blade gouging the wound which in turn causes the animal to struggle violently. Feel free to correct me but to my knowledge there is no guidelines regarding the knife used for halal slaughter.
    Halal essentially is meat that Muslims are allowed to eat according to Islamic law. The laws require that only certain types of meat can be eaten and that meat must be prepared in a certain way, it is also essential that halal food is not prepared with non-halal food as there is a risk of cross contamination if a chef accidentally uses the same knife to cut the different types of meat with for example.

    According to the Qur’an and Islamic law some substances are wrong for people to eat, whether by their nature or in the way in which they have been treated or butchered, so all halal meat is prepared according to strict guidelines;

    Meat from pigs
    Meat from pigs is not allowed, so there is no such thing as halal pork and halal meat must never come into contact with pig meat or anything else that has been in contact with pig meat to avoid contamination.

    Blood Blood is considered harmful to consume; as part of its preparation halal meat should be drained completely of blood, which also keeps the meat fresher for longer.

    Carnivores Considered by the Qur’an, and further proven by science to be dangerous for humans to consume, halal meat must never include nor come into contact with meat from carnivores or birds of prey.

    Carrion Humans should not make food from an already dead animal, so meat prepared in the halal way is killed as an integral part of the slaughter process; most western preparations kill the animal first then slaughter them later on.

    Strangulation, beating, goring or savaging To be halal meat animals must be killed quickly in a certain way, it is unacceptable to eat meat from an animal that has been strangled, beaten, gored or savaged by other animals.

    Alcohol Muslims should not consume any kind of alcohol and as such halal food cannot be prepared with alcohol of any kind or include alcohol in sauces.

    In the name of Allah Allah’s name should be pronounced over the meat as thanks during the slaughter process, any animal slaughtered in another idol’s name can never be halal.

    Dhabiha This is the name for the halal method of slaughter, which requires that animals are killed with a swift incision to the throat from a razor sharp blade. The animal must never see another animal being slaughtered nor must it ever see the blade being sharpened. Animals must be checked prior to slaughter to ensure they are healthy and given clean water to drink, once they have drunk they are turned to face Mecca, the name of Allah is spoken and then the throat is cut and the blood drained from the carcass.

    When carried out correctly the sudden drop in blood pressure to the brain renders the animal brain dead within seconds and many researchers have found Dhabiha to be less stressful and painful to the animal than modern western methods of slaughter. The intention behind all of this is to ensure that the meat is fresh and free of impurities, the animal is given proper respect and Allah is thanked for providing us with food.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    Those references were taken from a resource on red meat welfare published by Bristol University, an institution renown for it's work in meat science and animal welfare. Those are the original sources for most (if not all) that I have mentioned, you should be able to view the abstracts by searching on google scholar or using the interlibrary loan system at your local library or institution.

    Pleading ignorance does not validate your own argument or magic all of the contravening evidence away.



    Physical trauma damages nerves and it causes inflammation, this is what precipitates pain - using a sharp knife or cutting implement does not circumnavigate this. It wasn't that your friend didn't experience any pain rather that he went into a state of shock (probably as a result of intense pain, the sight of cutting his finger off, etc) which would eventually inhibit pain and his recollection of events.

    Electrocution is a different process to stunning.



    Hormones and artificial growth promoters are banned EU wide in food producing animals.



    Only if you use an excessively high current which is avoided because as you note it decreases meat quality.



    What you're talking about isn't a problem with the science behind stunning but rather the application. If you take measures to avoid pre-stun shocks and use a variable voltage stunner (it is only a matter of time before they become an industry standard) you improve animal welfare and meat quality significantly.



    Strictly speaking the aim of stunning is not to kill the animal, you're merely rendering the animal unconscious until the point of death and it is possible to recover from.

    Some mechanical stunners are capable of killing animals (eg; your mushroom head non penetrative stunners) however they are rarely used because of the stress they place on the operator's arm (the concussive force is so strong that it causes repetitive strain injuries).



    Certainly with respect to poultry heavier animals receive a better stun because they have a greater amount of contact with the metal shackles.





    Are you aware that this is the only study to support Halal slaughter, it's results have not been replicated in over 30 years and that significantly more, more recent studies oppose this?



    Funnily enough the main/only study to support Halal slaughter involved just 32 animals.





    As I said in an earlier thread:

    "With mechanical stunning what you're trying to achieve is a 'knockout punch' sort of effect on the brain, to do this you need to accelerate the brain within the skull to ~40m/s, the average for most captive bolt guns is around 50m/s. Now most captive bolt guns do this in the space of 1.2-1.5ms which is significantly faster than the brain is able to register sensation or pain.

    As for electrical stunning the aim is to induce a tonic/clonic epileptic seizure whereby the animal is unconscious and unable to feel pain. While this can take as long as 200ms (it is often shorter) the current inhibits normal brain activity within this window anyway."




    They only agree because it is in their own (mutual) interests however that does not validate what they're fighting for.
    Hmmm you are aware that if you looked closely that the latest my studies pre-dates back to 2004 (30 years ?? no im sorry), but even if your comment was directed mainly towards the fellow who brought the studies from 1978. The answer is yes! the studies i have brought forward 27 years later do back up crazycake93's studies. Therefore the challenge is clearly presented

    "If you could present a study (legitimate source!!), that clearly heavily support that stunning is a less painful ordeal than by all means cite it!"
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sixthformer)
    Halal essentially is meat that Muslims are allowed to eat according to Islamic law. The laws require that only certain types of meat can be eaten and that meat must be prepared in a certain way, it is also essential that halal food is not prepared with non-halal food as there is a risk of cross contamination if a chef accidentally uses the same knife to cut the different types of meat with for example.

    According to the Qur’an and Islamic law some substances are wrong for people to eat, whether by their nature or in the way in which they have been treated or butchered, so all halal meat is prepared according to strict guidelines;

    Meat from pigs
    Meat from pigs is not allowed, so there is no such thing as halal pork and halal meat must never come into contact with pig meat or anything else that has been in contact with pig meat to avoid contamination.

    Blood Blood is considered harmful to consume; as part of its preparation halal meat should be drained completely of blood, which also keeps the meat fresher for longer.

    Carnivores Considered by the Qur’an, and further proven by science to be dangerous for humans to consume, halal meat must never include nor come into contact with meat from carnivores or birds of prey.

    Carrion Humans should not make food from an already dead animal, so meat prepared in the halal way is killed as an integral part of the slaughter process; most western preparations kill the animal first then slaughter them later on.

    Strangulation, beating, goring or savaging To be halal meat animals must be killed quickly in a certain way, it is unacceptable to eat meat from an animal that has been strangled, beaten, gored or savaged by other animals.

    Alcohol Muslims should not consume any kind of alcohol and as such halal food cannot be prepared with alcohol of any kind or include alcohol in sauces.

    In the name of Allah Allah’s name should be pronounced over the meat as thanks during the slaughter process, any animal slaughtered in another idol’s name can never be halal.

    Dhabiha This is the name for the halal method of slaughter, which requires that animals are killed with a swift incision to the throat from a razor sharp blade. The animal must never see another animal being slaughtered nor must it ever see the blade being sharpened. Animals must be checked prior to slaughter to ensure they are healthy and given clean water to drink, once they have drunk they are turned to face Mecca, the name of Allah is spoken and then the throat is cut and the blood drained from the carcass.

    When carried out correctly the sudden drop in blood pressure to the brain renders the animal brain dead within seconds and many researchers have found Dhabiha to be less stressful and painful to the animal than modern western methods of slaughter. The intention behind all of this is to ensure that the meat is fresh and free of impurities, the animal is given proper respect and Allah is thanked for providing us with food.


    Mashallah i think you pretty much said it better than i could :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mohamed aden)
    [/B]

    Mashallah i think you pretty much said it better than i could :rolleyes:
    in all honesty, it was from this site :http://www.halalcateringco.com/halal_meat.asp

    salamunalukum
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sixthformer)
    in all honesty, it was from this site :http://www.halalcateringco.com/halal_meat.asp

    salamunalukum
    Hey sincerely thankyou, its always good to see a direct reference!
    i would rep you again my if i could (since the -ve reps dont do you justice) :confused:

    Jazakallah Khair :cool:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I saw, "Netherlands to ban..." and was worried for a moment, until I saw the rest of the title and thought "phew".
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 10, 2011
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.