Thursday 5 February 2015


You know when the whole class is punished for the misdemeanours of a minority? 

Well, society’s mischief-maker in chief is always getting others into trouble. 
The present issue is the Halal debacle. But also, there is the circumcision debate. And the ‘religious practices’ issue. Religious dress. Oh, and racism.

Society’s mischief-maker is actually ‘the Muslim’. Now that there are so many of them in Britain, or at least it seems as though there are, and they’re so demanding, Muslim related issues are continually dominating the news. They’re responsible for an emerging tidal wave of sexual offences, they’ve been found to be sticking to their own curriculum in schools, they’re clogging up our prisons and procreating multiple Mohammeds at a rate of knots.

Because people are oh so scared of being thought Islamophobic they can’t even accuse ‘the Muslims‘ of being a damned nuisance. 

Take the Halal debacle. Political correctness forces people to use terms like ‘religiously slaughtered‘ meat, or ‘non-stunned meat’, pretending to be solely concerned with animal welfare; all this just to avoid being thought racist.
So because ‘the Muslims‘ have been caught out practicing sloppy, unhygienic and allegedly ill-defined methods of producing Halal meat, and also because of the unsolicited adoption of Halal in schools, hospitals and supermarkets, Kosher food is caught up in blanket condemnation.

Jews are the inevitable victims of collateral damage every time anyone has the temerity to criticise something “Muslim”.   ‘The Muslims’ are spoiling things for everybody else.

I’m told Kosher meat and poultry production is highly regulated, and scrupulously monitored. Whether it is or not, it has never been foisted upon anyone who didn’t want it. 

It has never caused trouble and strife except amongst those who are inherently ‘anti-Jew.‘ I say that because many observers attest to the fact that mainstream mass production methods can cause perhaps more suffering to animal despite, or because of, the hit and miss stunning procedure.  

On Harry’s Place this thread explores it quite extensively. (I'm sorry that the comments will eventually be erased) 
Personally I’m not fussed. I don’t eat much red meat, though when do I buy it I’d rather it was ‘locally sourced’. I’m not religious, and I’m not especially emotionally attached to cattle though I quite like the concept of the happy chicken. I particularly don’t want \the Muslim’ to be the one calling the shots.

Then there’s the circumcision. I plead ignorance about the medical pros and cons. 
Personally I avoid all irreversible body modifications (through choice) piercings and tattoos included. 
One thing I do know, is that in most of the opposition to ‘ritual’ Muslim circumcision, the Jews get caught up too. Frequently condemned, by some Jews and by many antisemites, Jewish circumcision is done at around eight days old, whereas Muslim circumcision is done at any old time; and equating male and female circumcision is plain malicious.  Religious Jews have been practicing bris without any noticeable hullaballoo until ‘the Muslim’ came along and annoyed everyone by imposing their cultural obligations upon the rest of us.

Then there’s this “France ‘no Jews‘ job ad”. When challenged, the company said they didn’t like the idea of religious practices interfering with the working hours. That was plain antisemitism; which religion is it that makes the most unreasonable demands on an employer? Not Judaism.

Some of us find head-to toe black garb, or those pious little faces wreathed in folds of cloth tucked tightly under the chin mildly (or greatly) disturbing. That is because they imply that the wearer ‘hates‘ you. Objecting to ostentatious Muslim dress means the turban, the kippah, the Magen David or the cross on a chain have to be objected to, too. If we express disapproval of ’the Muslim‘, we’re Islamophobic unless we also express equal disapproval of the Jew, the Christian and the Buddhist etc., etc.  If we merely object to Islam we’re racist

So when UKIP or anyone else says something disparaging about Halal, they must be allowed to mean just Halal. And so on.


  1. I hate to say this Sue but the general population may buy meat from animals killed in the kosher way as far as I understand. Whilst the whole animal has to be suitable for kashrut ie free of disease etc (there is glat kosher that is super kosher but a red herring here). But it is usual only to use the fore quarter of the animal for sale at kosher butchers. I understand it is possible to prepare the hind quarter to kosher standards ie remove all the blood but it is extremely expensive. Therefore the hind quarter ie all the steaks including rump and sirloin go into the general trade meaning cheaper steaks for the goyim and cheaper kosher meat for the Jews.

  2. Deborah, I’d be very surprised if kosher meat was introduced by default into non Jewish schools and hospitals. :-)

  3. Sue -

    I presume you are not saying all religious practices - animist and so on - are acceptable because followers adhere to them devoutly. Issues such as MGM will have to be addressed in my view. But obviously FGM is a much greater priority.

  4. Anonymous,
    Thank you for commenting. Have you taken an unintended message from my post? I can’t see how your comment relates to the contents of the above piece. If the problem is lack of clarity on my part, I’m sorry.

    I did Google ‘animist’ to find out what their religious practices might be. One animist blogger says it’s not an actual religion.

    If MGM stands for Male genital mutilation, it seems the jury’s still out on the medical and ethical pros and cons.
    Personally I prefer to leave the human body as nature intended. (Apart from bushy beards)

    Did you hear the horrifying description of FGM on Today this morning?


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.