GET READY FOR HALA MEAT...

Example:   [Collected via e-mail, October 2011] 

The other day I wrote about Costco stocking their meat counters with "Halal" meat.

So yesterday I shopped for groceries at my local Walmart. As usual, I bought a bag of frozen chicken breasts, but this time I checked to make sure the meat was not labeled "Halal". Here's why.

Halal is the Islamic term that basically means the meat is lawful to eat for a devout Muslim. What makes it lawful or acceptable is that the meat has been processed in a very specific way. Unlike kosher food, where the physical processing of the meat is the focus, for Islam it is the spiritual component that makes the meat lawful.

For lawful (halal) meat in Islam, the animal must be killed while the butcher faces Mecca, and either the butcher cries "Allah Akbar" or a tape plays the words over a loud speaker.

Ann Barnhardt is a cattle commodities broker, has more about "Halal." NEVER buy meat that is marked as "Halal".

I am in the cattle business, and believe me when I tell you that Halal kill plants are CONSTANTLY being cited and shut down by the USDA for horrific, infractions. Most of these plants are in Michigan and upstate New York.

One of the things that halal kill plants are notorious for is putting already-dead animals in the human consumption line. They will go pick up a dead cow off of a farm or ranch and instead of putting it in their rendering tank where the resulting "tankage" is worth pennies on the dollar as pet food or industrial products, they will shackle the dead animal on the normal kill line and process it as human food which is the highest-dollar product.

Since Islam teaches dishonesty (taqiyyah) and no regard for one’s neighbor, this kind of sickening behavior is standard.

Halal plants are also notorious for general citations for filth and uncleanliness. I have toured normal cattle slaughter plants, and guys, you could eat off of the floor.

Everything is white and men walk around with water hoses and steam guns constantly keeping everything in a state of spotlessness.

Halal plants are filthy. A lot of Halal meat is also labeled as "organic."

Origins:   Halal is an Arabic word meaning "lawful" or "permissible" (the opposite of haraam, which means "unlawful" or "forbidden"). When applied to consumables, halal references foods that conform to Islamic dietary guidelines as specified in the Qu'ran. (Food products that are not considered halal include pork, alcohol, any type of blood, and meat from carnivorous animals.) Any meat products must come from animals which have undergone a prescribed method of slaughtering (known as dhabihah) in order to be considered halal:

This method of slaughtering animals consists of using a well sharpened knife to make a swift, deep incision that cuts the front of the throat, the carotid artery, wind pipe and jugular veins but leaves the spinal cord intact. The blood is to be completely drained from the body before its meat is cut. The head of an animal that is slaughtered using halal methods is aligned with the qiblah. In addition to the direction, permitted animals should be slaughtered in the name of Allah (the Lord) and the person who is slaughtering should be a Muslim and he/she should be in a good mental condition and faith. All these steps have to be completed to render the meat edible for Muslims' consumption.

The production and availability of halal certified food products in North America has been driven by both domestic and foreign demand. In U.S. cities with higher concentrations of Muslims in their population, more and more local grocery stores and restaurants are offering halal food products to make it more convenient for Muslim families to maintain their religious dietary specifications. Some national supermarket chains (such as Costco and Wal-Mart) have begun selling halal food products as well. 

In 1998, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recognized the growing potential of domestic and foreign markets for U.S.-produced halal meat products, noting that:

Contrary to the overall declining trend in the United States' lamb, mutton, and goat consumption, there is a growing, high-value market to be found among the American Muslim population. Entrance into this particular market, as well as Muslim markets overseas, requires Halal certification.

Halal is an Islamic religious term used to describe food that is "lawful" to eat. It is similar to Kosher in the Jewish religion in many ways. Many slaughterhouses in the United States already meet the standards set by the American Muslim community for Halal status. The USDA has had a policy on Halal labeling in effect since 1996. Halal requirements are not difficult to meet, and the USDA believes that any American slaughterhouse should be able to comply with the new Halal policy.

The U.S. government is negotiating with several major Muslim countries to gain acceptance of U.S. Halal standards as equivalent to their own. This will open more markets to U.S. lamb and mutton exporters, as at least twenty Muslim countries require Halal certification for meat. There are 1.5 billion Muslims throughout the world, so the potential market for Halal meat is very large.

The text reproduced above makes a number of statements about the production of halal meat products in the U.S. (and Islam in general) which are inaccurate or unsubstantiated: 

·  Unlike kosher food, where the physical processing of the meat is the focus, for Islam it is the spiritual component that makes the meat lawful.
It is not accurate to assert that a primary or major difference between kosher and halal methods of processing meat is a focus on the physical in the former case and the spiritual in the latter case. Islamic dietary guidelines are similar to Jewish kosher dietary guidelines in that both sanction the religious blessing of food as well as the manner of the handling and slaughtering of the animal, and both urge consumption of food that is clean and wholesome. 

·  For lawful (halal) meat in Islam, the animal must be killed while the butcher faces Mecca, and either the butcher cries "Allah Akbar" or a tape plays the words over a loud speaker.
As noted above, in halal processing the head of an animal that is to be slaughtered should be aligned with the qiblah, and animals should be slaughtered in the name of Allah. How the latter aspect is satisfied varies with region and culture; it does not necessarily involve the uttering or recorded playing of the phrase "Allahu Akbar." 

·  Halal kill plants are CONSTANTLY being cited and shut down by the USDA for horrific infractions. One of the things that halal kill plants are notorious for is putting already-dead animals in the human consumption line.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/halal.asp#I52dyZKB1pMdvcf5.99

LIFE SUPPORT ON EARTH

            Life-support shortage?

In 1600 Queen Elizabeth I and a few intimates founded the East India company. Exercising her crown privileges the Queen granted the company limited liability for losses on the part of the enterprise backers. They could lose their money if the ship were lost, but they could not be held liable for the lives of the sailors who were drowned. While the owners could insure and very greatly limit the magnitude of their losses, the sailors and their families could not.

“Ltd.”—limited, in England—and “Inc.”—incorporated in the U. S. A.—and other similar legal definitions in all capitalist countries constitute “for ages uncontested” –ergo, custom-validated and legal-judgments-upheld-royal decrees greatly favoring ig-money capitalism over the mortal, breadwinner-loss-taking vast majority of the poor.

Elizabeth’s East India Company scheme was to have her national navy (and armies) first win mastery of the world’s sea-lanes. This advantage would thereafter e exploited by her privately owned enterprise. This scheme became of the first of such national power structures bids for establishing and maintaining world-trade supremacy through dominance of the world’s ‘high seas’ ocean currents’, trade winds’, critical straits’, and only-seasonably-favorable passages’ world-around line of vital and desirable supplies. All the other world-power-stature individuals who vied for supreme mastery of the world’s high seas lines of supply also operated invisibly through monarchs and nations over whom they had sufficient influence.

Through such behind-the –throne influence the influenced nation’s resources could be politically maneuvered into paying for building and operation pf the navies and armies that would seek to establish and protect their respective privately owned enterprises.

With the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805 the British Empire won “the world’s power structures championship” and became historically the first empire “upon which” it is said, “the sun never sets”. This is because it was the first empire in history to embrace the entire spherical planet earth’s 71-percent maritime, 29-percent landed, wealth-producing activities. All precious empires—Genghis Khan’s, Alexander the Great’s, the Roman Empire, et al,-- were all land areas surrounded by the unknown. The British Empire was the world’s first spherically closed finite system.

Building and maintaining the world’s most powerful navy, The British Empire was to maintain its sovereignty of the world’s oceans for 113 years.

In 1800 Thomas Malthus, later professor of political economics of the East India Company College, was the first human in history to receive a comprehensively complete inventory of the world’s vital and economic statistics. The accuracy of the pre-Trafalgar 1800 inventory was verified by a similar world inventory taken by the East India Company in 1810. In a later post-Trafalgar—book Malthus confirmed in 1810 his 1800 finding that world-around humanity was increasing in numbers at a geometrical progression rate while increasing its life-support production at only an arithmetical progression rate, ergo, an increasingly majority of humans would have to live out their short years in want and misery.

“Pray all you want” said Malthus, “it will do you no good. There is no more”

A half-century later Darwin expounded his theory of evolution, assuming that nature’s inexorable processes were the consequences of “the survival only of the fittest species and individuals within those species.”

Karl Marx compounded Malthus’s and Darwin’s scientifically convincingly conclusions and said, in effect, “The worker is obviously the fittest to survive. He is the one who knows how to handle the tools and seeds to produce the life support. The opulent others are ‘parasites’.

The opulent others said, “We are opulent because we demonstrate Darwin’s ‘fittest to survive.’ The workers are dull and visionless. What is needed in this world is big-thinking enterprises, courage, cunning, and fighting skill.”

For the last two centuries these two ideologies have dominated the political affairs of world-around humanity. Each side says you may not like our system, but we are convinced we have the ‘fittest’, fairest, most ingenious, way of coping with the lethal inadequacy of life support operative on the planet, but because there are those who disagree diametrically on how to cope, only all-out war can resolve which system is fittest to survive.”

Those in supreme power politically and economically as of 1980 are as yet convinced that our planet Earth has nowhere nearly enough life support for all humanity. All books on economics have only one basic tenet—the fundamental scarcity of life support. The supreme political and economic powers as yet assume that is has to be either you or me. Not enough for both. The hat is why those in financial advantage fortify themselves even further, reasoning that unselfishness is suicidal. That is why the annual military expenditures of the U.S.S.R., representing socialism and the U.S.A. representing private enterprise have averaged over $200 billion a year for the last thirty years, doubling it to $400 billion –making a thus-far-total of six trillion, money spent in developing the ability to kill ever-more people, at ever-greater distances, in ever-shorter time.

If that money had been spent developing newer and better methods of agriculture and colonizing other planets such as Mars and the Moons of Jupiter there would be no threat of a life-support shortage. There is plenty of real-estate out there for those with enough ambition, intelligence and guts to go get it. Get up off your haunches…   

DHS orders targets of children and pregnant women!

DHS Contractor Apologizes For Selling Shooting Targets of Children.

“Offensive” cut-outs depicting pregnant women, gun owners in residential settings removed from website
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
February 22, 2013

A company which received $2 million dollars from the DHS has apologized and taken offline “no more hesitation” shooting targets which depicted pregnant women, children, and elderly gun owners in residential settings as “non-traditional threats,” following an online uproar.

As we first reported on Tuesday, Law Enforcement Targets Inc. (LET), a Minneapolis based company that has received almost $2 million dollars in contracts from the Department of Homeland Security over the last three years, recently began selling cardboard cut-out targets designed to desensitize police to “non-traditional threats,” including pregnant women, mothers in school playgrounds, and little boys, as well as elderly gun owners in their homes.

The company’s relationship with the DHS, along with thousands of law enforcement agencies, led to fears that the targets could be connected with Homeland Security’s purchase of roughly 2 billion rounds of ammunition over the last year, which many fear is linked to preparations for mass social unrest. As we documented, the LET’s contracts with the DHS were for “training aids” and “paperboard”.

In its apology, posted on the company’s website as well as Facebook, LET acknowledged that the targets were requested by law enforcement agencies.

We apologize for the offensive nature of our “No More Hesitation” products. These products have been taken offline due to the opinions expressed by so many, including members of the law enforcement community.

This product line was originally requested and designed by the law enforcement community to train police officers for unusually complex situations where split-second decisions could lead to unnecessary loss of life.

Consistent with our company mission as a training supplier (not a training methods company), we will continue to seek input from law enforcement professionals to better serve their training objectives and qualification needs. We sincerely appreciate law enforcement professionals for the risks they take in providing safety and defending freedom.

The company’s excuse that the targets were designed to help police prevent “unnecessary loss of life” is highly dubious given that the images were all of armed individuals termed “non-traditional threats,” designed to ensure “no more hesitation” from police officers encountering them.

As one respondent to the company explained, “Look, each of the supposed “threats” appeared to be in their own home settings. They were also all holding a weapon….it is obvious these paper targets were never intended to be decoy (don’t shoot targets). It is apparent this was designed to assist in desensitizing the trainee.”

In addition, the company had previously struck a different tone when it told Reason’s Mike Riggs that the targets were designed to combat, “hesitation on the part of cops when deadly force is required on subjects with atypical age, frailty or condition.”

Although the targets have been taken off the company’s website, it’s unclear whether or not they have been removed from sale entirely.

Mike Lilly, a retired 32-year police officer, demanded that the targets be discontinued completely.

“Whomever convinced you this was a good idea needs psychological counseling. Proper training and readiness is NOT dependent on shooting pictures of pregnant women and children. Anyone who says otherwise is seriously mistaken or has another agenda It is noted that you say they were taken OFFLINE. Have they been DISCONTINUED AND RECALLED?” he stated.

Lilly’s concern was echoed by retired City of Houston police officer T.F. Stern, who asked why police officers were being trained “to feel nothing’s wrong in shooting a pregnant lady or an old man with a shotgun inside his own home.”

View the targets that caused the uproar below.