Halal or Vegeterian?

The arabic word Halal means lawful. In the Holy Quran, Allah commands Muslims and all of mankind to eat of the Halal things. Among the many verses of the Quran that convey this message, here are a few:

O mankind! Eat of that which is lawful and wholesome in the earth, and follow not the footsteps of the devil. Lo! he is an open enemy for you. (2:168)

O ye who believe! Eat of the good things wherewith We have provided you, and render thanks to Allah if it is (indeed) He Whom ye worship. (2:172)

Eat of that which Allah hath bestowed on you as food lawful and good, and keep your duty to Allah in Whom ye are believers. (5:88)

The Prophet (SAW) said, “The superiority of 'Aisha to other ladies is like the superiority of Tharid (i.e., a meat and bread dish) to other meals.”

When one first reads the above Hadith, it appears to be non-controversial and simply stated to honor a strong and blessed Muslim woman. However, a vegetarian reading it might have trouble accepting the fact that the Prophet himself (SAW) elevated a meat dish to such a high rank among foods.

On the other hand, vegetarians would be pleased with a Hadith related by Yahya that states that the Prophet (SAW) said, “Beware of meat. It has addictiveness like the addictiveness of wine” (Malik). In this Hadith, it seems that meat does not hold such a high rank, after all; rather, it appears to be among the worst foods we can consume.

The general consensus, amongst the Prophet and modern health experts, is that we should eat meat – at least in moderation – and, while it certainly can become “as addictive as wine,” it holds a high rank amongst foods as long as it is eaten in moderation. Therefore, we can conclude that the best health is enjoyed by those who “Eat of the good things We have provided for your sustenance, but commit no excess therein" (Qur’an, 20:81).

For years, they have boasted of the health benefits of their leafy diets, but now vegetarians have the proof that has so far eluded them: when it comes to cancer risks, they have the edge on carnivores.

Fresh evidence from the largest study to date to investigate dietary habits and cancer has concluded that vegetarians are 45% less likely to develop cancer of the blood than meat eaters and are 12% less likely to develop cancer overall.

Scientists said that while links between stomach cancer and eating meat had already been reported, they had uncovered a "striking difference" in the risk of blood cancers including leukaemia, multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma between the groups. The study looked at vegetarians, fish eaters and people who ate meat.

There is a lot of problem with Beef in North America. Sometime back I posted about the Halal Chicken Scam in UK.

This is from an old post but probably still applicable:

North American Muslims have in recent years seen the number of Islamic-oriented food stores double in number. Drive down Dundas Street in Mississauga, Canada, or take a stroll through Dearborn, Michigan and you will see nearly hundreds of halal food and meat stores festooning the area. New Jersey in 2000, for example, became the first state to pass a consumer protection law that specifically deals with issues of halal food. The law established guidelines that sellers and distributors must follow when labeling foods as halal.
Living an Islamic way of life, it seemed, was becoming easier in North America.

That perception may have been shattered by a series of events in late May, which until now were virtually undiscovered and kept under wraps.

Many Muslims are in fact not even aware that halal classification, according to the Quran, goes beyond merely monitoring the proper method of animal slaughter.

In accordance with strict Islamic law and guidelines, a slaughtered animal is considered halal when its feed is also considered halal; feed therefore plays an important role in halal classification. Feed for animals must be from a vegetable source; no meat feed is allowed.

Furthermore, the now popularly-administered growth hormones are not allowed because they are made with pork-based material. The prevalent method of stunning should be avoided. Blood must also be fully drained from the slaughtered animal.

Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, a Canadian Islamic scholar, says that the issue of proper feeding of livestock never occurred to him or other Islamic institutions prior to the BSE outbreak.

"This issue provides a challenge for us Muslims to ensure that our Islamic standards are enforced not only in slaughtering animals but also, even more importantly, in the way they are bred and treated," he told this writer.
Kutty charged that feeding is a central issue and should take precedence over other matters of contention regarding what may be considered halal.

"[Feeding] is far more crucial and important from a shari'ah point of view than the customary issues often raised by the Muslims such as machine slaughter versus hand slaughter; stunning or not stunning or whether one can eat what is slaughtered by people of the book (Christians, Jews, and Sabaeans)," he explained.
California-based Ahmad Sakr, professor emeritus of Food Science and author of "Understanding Halal Food" and "A Muslim Guide to Food Ingredients" recently told soundvision.com that some halal meats may actually not be halal at all, primarily because of what the animal is fed.

"Islam dictates that if an animal has received meat and/or blood while it was halal, it becomes haram and in order to become Halal you have to put that animal in a quarantine area for 40 days before you slaughter it to make it Halal," Sakr said.

Have Muslim communities taken any steps to monitor feeding practices?

"This is beyond our control, it is a government issue and they regulate feeding practices," says Ehsan Sairally, Canadian representative of the Islamic Food and Nutrition Council of America (IFANCA).

However, Canada and the United States secretly allow dead animals to be fed to live ones, some quarters charge. A May 27 Washington Post report says that there are loopholes that allow some dead animals to be ground up and fed to livestock. The 1997 ban does not prevent proteins from dead animals to be fed to poultry, hogs and pigs.

I would advise people that they eat meat only in moderation and eat from the Halal vegetables and fuits of Allah's creation which you know for sure are halal and helps your health as well.

Halal Chicken Scam in UK

According to the Independent, UK, Chicken injected with beef and pork waste is being sold in UK:

Cafes and restaurants across Britain have been selling chicken secretly injected with beef and pork waste.

In a hi-tech fraud run by firms in three EU states, food manufacturers are making bulking agents out of porcine and bovine gristle and bones that help inflate chicken breasts, so that they fetch a higher price.

The swindle was only detected by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) using new scientific techniques because the non-chicken material had been so highly processed it passed standard DNA tests.

Thousands of restaurateurs and cafe owners are likely to have been conned into buying chicken containing the powder – which binds water into chicken breasts – while diners have been unwittingly consuming traces of other animals when eating out.

Britain's two million Muslims, Jews and Hindus are forbidden from eating either pork or beef. Muslims would ordinarily eat halal chicken and Jews kosher chicken sold through approved caterers and butchers.

The Hindu Forum of Britain described news of the adulteration, which will be confirmed publicly today, as "shocking and potentially very distressing". Its secretary general, Bharti Tailor, said: "Eating beef is expressly forbidden because cows are considered to be sacred as they are a representation of the bounty of the gods, even unknowingly. The fact that the protein powders injected into chickens served in restaurants and cafes contain even traces of beef or pork is horrific. And [the fact] that Hindus will have been eating beef contaminated chickens will be mentally agonising. Many will feel that they have broken their religious code of conduct."

The food regulator acknowledged the serious consequences of its findings. "Use of these proteins does not make chicken products unsafe, but it is important that people are given accurate information about their food," the FSA said.

The fraud has been taking place for at least the past two years, and still continues because of inaction by the authorities in three EU states, believed to be Germany, Netherlands and Spain.

The European Commission rebuffed British demands to ban beef and pork proteins from being added to chicken when first detected in the UK and Ireland in 2001 and 2003. Then, action was taken against a chicken company in the Netherlands and the authorities thought the problem had gone away.

When complaints began to surface again last year, the FSA launched a secret investigation to ascertain whether chicken – the most eaten meat in the UK – was being adulterated again. At first, scientists could not find any non-chicken protein because the meat had been "de-natured" (made unrecognisable). The Central Science Laboratory in York and York University developed special DNA market tests.

"It's like Olympic drug tests; they stay one step ahead of the testers," said a source close to the investigation.

Manufacturers in Germany and Spain are thought to be making the protein powders; Dutch firms inject them into chickens sold on to UK wholesalers supplying the catering trade.

Using a new DNA marker technique, the FSA tested five protein powders from three companies. All five were found to contain a non-poultry material identified as bovine collagen. Further tests found the presence of porcine material in two powders.

Tests picked up traces of beef in one of three chicken breasts.

In a report passed to The Independent, the FSA noted: "The study of a small number of injection powders used in chicken breast products has indicated the presence of undeclared, mammalian peptides, i.e., from a non-poultry source in the samples analysed. The analyses applied indicate the presence of bovine collagen in all the powders sampled and suggest the presence of porcine collagen in some of the powders."

It added: "Certification accompanying the powders claim they are produced only from a poultry source, however, the analytical results suggest this claim could not be substantiated."

Manufacturers can legally add water to chicken, for instance to improve succulence, but must declare water content of above 5 per cent. Fresh chicken meat sold by supermarkets or butchers cannot have any added ingredients. When the FSA alerted its continental counterparts, the factories involved were inspected but no legal action has been taken.

Some chicken products state on the label whether they contain hydrolised (chicken) proteins. The FSA advised consumers that they "may wish" to avoid such chicken. "If you are eating food from a restaurant or takeaway you should ask if the chicken served contains hydrolysed animal proteins," the FSA will say today. "Restaurants and catering establishments will have this information available to them."

Sue Davies, chief policy adviser at the consumer group Which?, said: "It's bad enough that when you think you're buying chicken what you're paying for is an awful lot of water and other animal proteins but if you want to avoid beef or pork for religious reasons it's going to be particularly shocking and annoying. There's a need for better enforcement action, or people will carry on doing this."

The Gaza Tunnel Scam

For years, a network of underground smugglers' routes from Egypt to the Gaza Strip has supplied a besieged population with everything from cement to cattle. But now a series of major scams has destroyed the dreams of desperate investors who saw the tunnels as a path out of poverty

Jawad Tawfiq, a 52-year-old Gazan actor and director, was dubious at first, but his nephew insisted. If they could scrape together enough money, the nephew said, large profits could be made from investing in the tunnels that snake beneath the Egyptian border.

"They were liars," Tawfiq said bitterly last week. "They took my money to put in their own pockets. And we are being offered a fraction of what we gave them."

At first the tunnels emerged as smuggling routes; then they became the vital lifeline for a Gaza under economic siege by Israel. But many people who invested in the tunnels now see them quite differently - as a source of ruination.

The tunnel schemes were advertised as opportunities for doubling and trebling money by unscrupulous figures linked to powerful businessmen in Gaza and, allegedly, to senior officials in Hamas, but have instead led to huge losses for ordinary residents of the Strip.

According to Hamas's economics minister, Ziad al-Zaza, whose office is investigating the issue, some $100m has been taken fraudulently from would-be entrepreneurs. Others suggest the figure could be closer to $500m.

There have been many brutal phases in Gazan history, culminating in the Israeli invasion at the turn of the year, which laid waste much of the Strip's fragile infrastructure. But the hitherto untold story of the great Gazan tunnel scam is notable for being self-inflicted and, therefore, particularly depressing for a beleaguered population.

As Omar Shaban, an analyst from a local thinktank, says: "The harm done to Gaza goes well beyond the savings lost in the investment schemes. The tunnels distort Gaza's social structure. They destroy the values that a state requires to function. In fact, they present no values that people can believe in."

The tunnels are not supposed to exist at all. As the war in Gaza ground to a close in January, Israel insisted on a ceasefire condition that the subterranean network be closed.

Yet there are now scores of them - more than ever before - snaking ever closer to each other. On the Egyptian side, bribes and an unwillingness to close off Gaza keep open the tunnels and smuggling routes. Analysts say that Israel knows this full well, but finds their existence convenient because they take pressure off the argument for reopening the Gaza crossings.

What comes through the tunnels is what keeps Gaza afloat economically. Metal ladders lead down brick-lined shafts into layers of shored-up sandy tunnels through which are winched bags of cement, cigarettes, cheese, children's bicycles and car parts. Even herds of lowing cattle are led through the larger workings.

Above ground, amid the Israeli bomb craters and ruined houses where the tunnels begin, their entrances are patrolled both by their owners and black-clad men from Hamas.

It is easy to see the smuggling routes as a heroic resistance to a crippling economic blockade. But many Gazans now reject the tunnels' status as an indispensable lifeline. In the most recent incident, investors in a tunnel scheme being promoted by one Ihab al-Kurdi were informed that their money was "gone" - without explanation.

To add insult to injury, they were pressurised last week into signing confidential contracts with Kurdi's "company" offering them 16.5% of the money they put in, in exchange for not complaining, an offer many investors apparently felt they could not refuse.