Anti-Neocons

New Zealand bans Kosher slaughter
By JTA AND JPOST.COM STAFF
05/30/2010 10:20

New Zealand's new animal welfare code, which took effect Friday, mandates that all animals for commercial consumption be stunned prior to slaughter to ensure they are treated “humanely and in accordance with good practice and scientific knowledge.”

The regulation has shocked the Jewish community.

This decision by the New Zealand government, one which has a Jewish prime minister, is outrageous,” said Rabbi Moshe Gutnick, acting president of the Organization of Rabbis of Australasia. “We will be doing everything possible to get this decision reversed.”

Gutnick, who travels frequently to New Zealand to oversee shechita, added, “One of the last countries I would have expected to bring in this blatantly discriminatory action would have been New Zealand.”

David Zwartz, the chairman of the Wellington Jewish Council, agreed. “I am sure there will objections made that this action is an infringement of the right of Jews to observe their religion,” he said.

Agriculture Minister David Carter rejected a recommendation that shechita be exempt from the new code.

The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee did recommend a dispensation for kosher slaughter in 2001, but the new code does not allow any exemptions.

The New Zealand government estimates that 15-20 beef cattle, 40-50 lambs and 1200-1400 chickens are annually slaughtered to meet the needs of the Jewish communities in Wellington and Auckland, which number about 5,000. Moslem's are unaffected by the regulations as they are allowed to stun animals before slaughtering them.

Among other countries that have banned shechita are Iceland, Norway and Sweden.

Mammals and fowl must be slaughtered in a specific fashion: slaughter is done by a trained individual (a shochet) using a special method of slaughter, shechita (Deuteronomy 12:21). Among other features, shechita slaughter severs the jugular vein, carotid artery, esophagus and trachea in a single continuous cutting movement with an unserrated, sharp knife, avoiding unnecessary pain to the animal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashrut

She told me that the first time she visited a kosher slaughter house, she heard screaming cattle from a half kilometer away and wondered what was different in this place. What she saw was shocking. I quote from her book, Thinking in Pictures, and Other Reports Prom My Life With Autism: "I will never forget having nightmares after visiting the now defunct Spencer Foods plant in Spencer, Iowa fifteen years ago. Employees wearing football helmets attached a nose tong to the nose of a writhing beast suspended by a chain wrapped around one back leg. Each terrified animal was forced with an electric prod to run into a small stall which had a slick floor on a forty-five degree angle. This caused the animal to slip and fall so that workers could attach the chain to its rear leg [in order to raise it into the air]. As I watched this nightmare, I thought, 'This should not be happening in a civilized society.' In my diary I wrote, 'If hell exists, I am in it.' I vowed that I would replace the plant from hell with a kinder and gentler system." And she has been doing that for years now. You may wonder why the Rabbayin listen to a gentile, autistic woman.

One reason may be because she knows the laws of shechita very well. She was told about the Talmud and went to the library and found Mesechet Chulin, in English and read it'. Then, she applied science to what she learned in the Gemorrah and published an article called, "Slaughter," for a scientific journal in the meat industry.

In that journal article she relates some important facts. She studied the reaction time of death from the initial incision of the knife until the death of the animal. She wanted to know if it was painful to cut the animal's throat. She did this by observation of the animal. What she saw was that when animals were led quietly into a restraining device where they stood upright, into a frame that supplied chin and head support, the animals had little or no reaction to the cut," She said that her observations in kosher slaughter houses where there was a poorly designed holder was that the cut allowed the neck to close back over the knife and it resulted in vigorous reactions from the cattle during the cut. She also states that when the moving and holding devises are not well designed, the animal will kick and twist and occasionally go into spasms. She says that when a shochet uses a rapid cutting stroke, on a calm, upright animal, 95% of the calves she observed collapsed almost immediately. She says in her paper: Some rabbinical authorities prefer inverted restraint and cutting downward because they are concerned that an upward cut may violate the Jewish rule which forbids excessive pressure on the knife. There is concern that the animal may tend to push downward on the knife during an upward cut. Observations indicate that just the opposite happens. When large 800 to 950 kilogram bulls are held in a pneumatically powered head restraint which they can easily move, the animals pull their heads upwards away from the knife during a mis-cut. This would reduce pressure on the blade. When the cut is done correctly, the bulls stood still and did not move the head restraint. Equal amounts of pressure were applied by the forehead bracket and the chin lift.

http://www.grandin.com/ritual/kosher.slaughter.html

Kosher Slaughter.

This atrocious act of sadism is carried out by members of the Orthodox Jewish community.If you've ever bought canned meat, and the label was stamped with either a "K" or a "U", then that means that the animal was killed in a Kosher fashion.

You might be asking " What does this mean? How does Kosher slaughter differ from any other form of slaughter?".Allow me to enlighten you.

In a normal, non-Kosher slaughter, the animal is killed by a gas-powered mechanism which fires a retractable steel bolt through the skull and into the brain.Sounds gruesome, but when it's done properly, the animal dies instantly, and feels little or no pain.Afterwards, the lifeless animal is decapitated, and drained of blood.

On the other hand, Orthodox Jewish slaughter law requires that an animal being slaughtered must be ALIVE and AWARE while being rendered exsanguine(bloodless). A "shochet" ( Kosher butcher) binds the animal with rope, or has assistants hold it down. He then produces a long-bladed knife( not unlike a large straight razor with a fixed blade) and slits the live animals throat. The shochet then merely allows the animal to bleed to death on the floor, writhing in agony.In some instances, the assistants will began cutting open the torso and removing innards while the animal is still alive.
It normally takes at least a minute for the unfortunate creature to finally die.

http://www.petitiononline.com/nokosher/petition.html

Muslims and Jews argue that their long established method of slaughter results in a sudden loss of blood from the head, causing animals to feel virtually nothing.

They say they will fight any attempt to prevent a practice required by their religion and central to their way of life.

One rabbi, who had been practicing the Jewish method of animal slaughter for around 40 years, told BBC News: "The process takes a fraction of a second.

"With a very, very sharp knife all the vessels in the neck are severed and that means there's no blood going to the brain and the animal loses consciousness very rapidly and dies soon after that."

The Muslim Council of Britain says animals are not distressed when they are slaughtered.

"It's a sudden and quick haemorrhage. A quick loss of blood pressure and the brain is instantaneously starved of blood and there is no time to start feeling any pain," said spokesman Dr Majid Katme.

The Humanists movement, which has previously called for the abolition of ritual slaughter, said ethical values should be put above religious ones.

"There is no imperative for Muslims or Judaists to eat meat produced in this manner," said spokesman Roy Saich.

"There is no reason why they should not simply abstain from eating meat altogether if they do not wish to eat the same meat as the rest of us."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2977086.stm

Is kosher slaughter cruel?
By Jennifer Green Tue, Feb 26 2008 COMMENTS(9) The Search for Meaning
Filed under: PETA kosher slaughter Jewish Forward
Animal rights groups are calling for an end to a kosher procedure they say is cruel, according to the Jewish Forward. South American slaughterhouses, which produce a considerable amount of Israeli and American kosher meat, use the "shackle and hoist" method, pulling the cow up into the air by one of its hind legs and dropping it on the ground before its throat is slit. The method is usually illegal in the U.S. but it remains popular among kosher producers outside the country because it allows the cow to be upside down when it is slaughtered as required by Israel’s chief rabbis.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) shot a video last fall, showing the animals hanging from a single leg, struggling in the air and bellowing. Once the animal is put on the ground, it is shown writhing and being restrained by multiple workers who step on it and prod it before the cut. The Forward said the U.S. supervision agency, the Orthodox Union, has been concerned enough about “shackle and hoist” slaughter to begin a quiet campaign to have the Israeli rabbinical authorities change it.
“It’s not the kind of system that we want to have, that we would be proud of,” Rabbi Menachem Genack, the CEO of the Orthodox Union’s Kosher Division, told the newspaper. The Rabbinical Assembly of Conservative Judaism passed a ruling in 2000 calling the “shackle and hoist” method a “violation of Jewish law.”

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacit ... cruel.aspx

Why, in a country calling itself Christian, and with a population Aryan or of Aryan strain, should Jews and Mahomedans he allowed to kill their cattle by methods less humane than those we ourselves have adopted?

It is of course necessary that all animals killed for human food should be thoroughly well bled, and this is done by cutting the throat, so that the heart itself pumps the blood froth the animal before it stops beating.

The Aryan or Christian has decided that his cattle shall be stunned first so that they will not feel the anguish of the cut and the awful struggle against death which follows it. The Jew and the Mahomedan claim and receive exemption by British law from following the Briton’s example.

Why?


The excuse is that to the Jew and to the Mahomedan, the slaughter of food‑animals has to be conducted as a religious rite; and that this rite does not allow of the humane process of stunning the animal before its throat is cut.

Actually, Mahomedans willingly waive their religious objections to stunning the animals, and I have myself found that in the East they are easily persuaded to allow animals destined for their food to be shot through the head provided the throat is severed (with the utterance of a prayer) immediately afterwards, whilst the blood can still flow freely.

____________________________________________________________________________________

What is Shechita, the Jewish Method of Slaughter?

It is quite simple; it is cutting the throat from ear to ear without previous stunning, and letting the animal bleed to death.
Before the throat‑cutting can be done, the bullock has to be thrown to the floor, or “cast,” as it is called. Various methods of doing this are used, the usual procedure being to rope the feet together, pass the end of the rope through a ring in the wall, and pull the rope until the animal falls. Naturally, on the hard floor of the slaughter‑house, this is rough treatment, and when, as sometimes happens, the animal’s horns are broken in the fall, it causes acute suffering, for a broken horn means a broken bone in the case of cattle, the horn having a bony core.

To mitigate the violence of casting, indiarubber or straw mattresses have been employed, but are not in general use.

A Jew named Weinberg adapted the invention of a Veterinary Surgeon to the purpose of painless casting of bullocks for Jewish slaughter. This resulted in what is known as the Weinberg Pen, into which the bullock is driven and secured; then the pen, like an operating‑table for horses, is rotated until the bullock is upside down, ready for the cut. But, as the Jewish B’nai B’rith in Leeds reported in 1927, the Weinberg Pen is not used, even when provided, unless visitors are expected.

When the throat is cut, the wound in an ordinary bullock is twelve inches long and gapes twelve inches wide when the head is forced back. Thus forcing back of the head to tense the throat tissues is done by means of a lever.

The Common‑sense View.

Seeing that twelve inches of skin are cut through, albeit that the knife used is always extremely sharp it would seem impossible that anyone could be persuaded that the Jewish method of cattle‑slaughter is justifiable as long as methods precluding pain are available. Even a child soon learns (it is one of the first things it learns) that to make even a nick in the skin, is very painful. Yet, to their discredit, many people have defended Shechita, including physiologists and veterinary surgeons.

I maintain that any individual is as competent as any so‑called “expert” to judge whether Shechita is painful or not; by merely exercising common sense.

If it is not painful, why is it necessary to throw the animal down before the operation can be done?

If it is not painful, why are criminals not executed that way instead of by dislocation of the neck?

I have heard it stated, even, that if it was painful, the bullocks would cry out! Could you cry out if your throat was cut?

However, people like to have the views of experts, so you shall have them.
___________________________________________________________________________________

Apologists for the Jewish Method of Slaughter.

Professor Sir Leonard Hill, physiologist, says (Lancet, 22nd Dec., 1923) that the bullock does not feel the cut of the Jews’ knife. On another occasion (in May, 1932, speaking to an audience of Jewish slaughtermen) he said he had no doubt that when the Weinberg pen was used “the animal is brought by this method into a confusional state, which is equivalent to a hypnotic condition.” In other words, the Professor suggests that to hypnotise an animal, all you have to do is to turn it upside down! I suggest that it is the Professor himself who has been brought into a hypnotic condition, and we feel positive that there is a close Jewish relationship which produced it.

Another physiologist, Sir W. Bayliss also defended Shechita, but with a name like that, and a father called Moses, it is not altogether surprising.

General Sir John Moore, Director of Veterinary Services in the Great War, wrote in 1931 to the Shechita Board: “I consider that the complete severance of the large blood vessels of the neck in the act of cutting according to Jewish ritual is a quick and humane method of despatch.” Sir John, however, is a Freemason, and we may dismiss his opinion with contempt in view of the experiments of Dr. Klein already mentioned; besides, the vertebral arteries supply the brain with a considerable amount of blood and are not severed when an animal’s throat is cut.

The late Sir Frederick Hobday, Principal of the Royal Veterinary College, described the Jewish method as the most humane in the world (Jewish Chronicle, 28th Nov., 1938, p. 12). In July, 1927, Hobday wrote to the Jewish Chronicle to say that he was taking a party, including ladies, over a foreign abattoir; and “we had the misfortune to witness two instances in which the horns were completely broken off (one in each case) during the process of casting for the Jewish killing. The sight was most revolting, even to a hardened man.” What a curious mentality! I should have thought the misfortune was to the bullocks rather than to the onlookers. Sir Frederick’s hardening process was gained in three Masonic Lodges, Nos. 3386, 2190 and 4474, and he was one of the founders of the last mentioned.

Mr. C. A. Lovatt Evans, Professor of Physiology, University of London, is quoted by the Jew C. Roth in The Jewish Contribution to Civilisation as saying: “I should be happy to think that my own end were likely to be as swift and painless as the end of these cattle killed in this way undoubtedly is.” Words fail me in attempting to comment upon this alleged statement.

Some Jewish apologists for the method would be almost amusing were the subject less grim.

The Jew Weinberg, speaking to the Leeds B’nai B’rith said: “The moment the arteries are cut, the animal goes off in a pleasant dreamy manner into unconsciousness.”

The Jewish Chronicle, 16th March, 1923, says: “If the eating of flesh is a necessity, then it is passing fudge, hypocritical humbug and cant, to worry about a second or two more or less of pain occasioned to the animal in procuring it.” We agree, it would be, to a Jew; but not to the average Aryan, who would regard even “a second or two” as of some importance, and forty seconds and more as sufficient to condemn the method and all who advocate it.

The Jew Sir Samuel Montague, when asked, before the 1904 Admiralty Committee, how he would like to be treated like that, said “I cannot fathom the feelings of an ox myself.” He also declared that indiarubber mattresses were “used everywhere” to reduce the rough treatment in casting the bullocks; to which the Commissioners replied that they had never met with any such indiarubber mattresses! Finally, the Jew gave himself away by mentioning that he had himself offered a prize of £200 for an anæsthetic which could be used in the Jewish method of slaughter; but what need is there for an anæsthetic, if death by shechita is simply a matter of going off “in a pleasant dreamy manner into unconsciousness?”

Reading all these recommendations of the method, we wonder the R.S.P.C.A. has not been prevailed upon to join in them; but the fact remains that it hasn’t. Why not?

Once more, I repeat, because it is sheer common‑sense that cutting the throat from ear to car is a ghastly painful process, and it is impossible that contrary opinions by sane men can be honest ones.


http://www.jrbooksonline.com/HTML-docs/ ... ughter.htm