Halal slaughter ban invalid under EU law: Polish Muslims

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Poland's Muslim community on Tuesday said a controversial nationwide ban on halal and kosher slaughter, which has spurred intense debate at home and abroad, was invalid under European law.

The EU directive "applies in Poland and in this case it supersedes national law," Poland's top Muslim leader, Mufti Tomasz Miskiewicz, said, quoting an expert legal analysis commissioned by the Muslim community and the meat industry.

Animal rights activists have hailed the ban, but Jewish and Muslim leaders in overwhelmingly Catholic Poland argue that it violates their religious freedom and Israel has called it "unacceptable".

Farmers and exporters of meat to Israel and Muslim countries, who exported up to 350 million euros ($460 million) worth of kosher and halal meat a year before the ban, have also condemned it.

The Jewish community has asked Poland's Constitutional Court to rule whether the ban violates their religious freedom, but Miskiewicz said there was "no need" for such a ruling because European law trumped the ban.

The ancient practices of Muslim halal and Jewish kosher slaughter are therefore "legal in Poland since January 1 and can be conducted in slaughterhouses," he told reporters in Warsaw.

European Union rules on the slaughter of livestock are designed to minimise the animals' suffering, but religious groups are exempted from a requirement that animals be stunned before death.

Under kosher and halal rules, animals are killed by slitting their throats.

This method was banned in Poland on January 1 after the Constitutional Court deemed it incompatible with animal rights legislation
http://news.yahoo.com/halal-slaughter-ban-invalid-under-eu-law-polish-203917291.html Notice this AND CONSIDER ITS ABOUT MUCH MORE THAN THE MEAT...... A nation can give up its sovereignty a little or a lot but its bad either way. As America will find out if Obama's agenda continues and we yield to the UN or we sign treaties that strip our sovereignty. Poland now sees their sovereignty /national law is superseded by treaty agreement and membership in the EU. The
EU directive "applies in Poland and in this case it supersedes national law," Poland's top Muslim leader, Mufti Tomasz Miskiewicz, said, quoting an expert legal analysis commissioned by the Muslim community and the meat industry. OBAMA WOULD LIKE TO WEAKEN US ENOUGH TO DO MUCH THE SAME IMHO.--Tyr

[Arbo]

A nation can give up its sovereignty a little or a lot but its bad either way. As America will find out if Obama's agenda continues and we yield to the UN or we sign treaties that strip our sovereignty. Poland now sees their sovereignty /national law is superseded by treaty agreement and membership in the EU.

Would be interesting to have a bit more information. For a 'muslim leader' saying that EU law overrides Poland law seems to be his opinion. I wonder what Poland (government) thinks on the issue.

Could be an interesting fight. And no doubt bad news for any EU country depending on the outcome as it could set a very bad precedent.

[jafar00]

Before you all go off on a "aaaargh the Muslims are coming to take over us aaaaaalllllll!!!!" rant, the Jews are also pissed about this.


JERUSALEM, July 15 (Reuters) - Israel has criticised an extension of Poland's ban on kosher meat production, saying on Monday that it damaged efforts to rehabilitate Jewish life in a country whose large Jewish community was all but wiped out in the Holocaust.

Citing animal cruelty, Warsaw lawmakers on Friday rejected a government-backed bill that would have allowed slaughterhouses to produce meat in accordance with Jewish ritual law. The practice was halted last year by a constitutional court ruling.

Israel's Foreign Ministry called the vote "totally unacceptable".

"Poland's history is intertwined with the history of the Jewish people. This decision seriously harms the process of restoring Jewish life in Poland," it said in a statement.

"We call on the parliament to reassess its decision and expect the relevant authorities to find the way to prevent a crude blow to the religious tradition of the Jewish people."

The Holocaust almost eliminated Poland's Jewish community, Europe's biggest before World War Two broke out in 1939. Nazi concentration camps including Auschwitz and Treblinka were located on Polish soil.

Some Polish Jewish groups have also said prejudice about their faith played a part in the anti-kosher measures.

Usually, slaughterhouses stun livestock before killing them, while kosher rites demand that an animal is killed by slitting its throat while it is alive and bleeding it to death. The halal meat consumed by observant Muslims is killed in a similar way.

The bill's defeat was a setback for Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who has sought to strengthen ties with Israel.

During a trip to Spain, Tusk described the Israeli Foreign Ministry statement as inappropriate.

"Especially the historical context is, to put it mildly, off target and is not applicable to the situation," he said. (Writing by Dan Williams; Additional reporting by Andres Gonzalez in Madrid; Editing by Jeffrey Heller and Alistair Lyon)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/poland-kosher-slaughter-ban_n_3597550.html

[stevecanuck]

Jafar, why no comment on the "this is what muslims teach their children" thread? Can't think of way to squirm out of admitting it's true?

[fj1200]

Notice this AND CONSIDER ITS ABOUT MUCH MORE THAN THE MEAT......

Are we talking the Globalists or the "Muzzies"?

[jafar00]

Jafar, why no comment on the "this is what muslims teach their children" thread? Can't think of way to squirm out of admitting it's true?

Why do I need to comment? You lot are having your own circle jerk without my help.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Are we talking the Globalists or the "Muzzies"? Globalists on this one.;) The muslims are involved here but the point being made by me was about the globalists and nations giving away their sovereignty to a foreign body.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

Globalists on this one.;) The muslims are involved here but the point being made by me was about the globalists and nations giving away their sovereignty to a foreign body.. -Tyr

OK. But I don't really see us having to worry about that too much.

[Arbo]

OK. But I don't really see us having to worry about that too much.

I dunno, those globalist might force us to join the EU. ;)

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I dunno, those globalist might force us to join the EU. ;) Or more likely the One World government they are striving for. As in the New World Order, Google can be your friend if you are unaware that both are real and are one and the same. --Tyr

[Marcus Aurelius]

I dunno, those globalist might force us to join the EU. ;)

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/conditions-membership/


Membership criteria – Who can join? The Treaty on the European Union states that any European country may apply for membership if it respects the democratic values of the EU and is committed to promoting them.


A... A country has to apply
B... Country must be in Europe

Globalists can't force it, Special Ed.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

OK. But I don't really see us having to worry about that too much. Why? Do you see us as invincible? Or too brilliant a population not to vote away or give away our sovereignty? Many European nations were not...as the EU often proves..--Tyr

[fj1200]

Why? Do you see us as invincible? Or too brilliant a population not to vote away or give away our sovereignty? Many European nations were not...as the EU often proves..--Tyr

Invincibility is not the issue, but yes, for all intents and purposes we are. We're not a piddling little country in the middle of a large continent with more to gain than lose. But we also have a Constitution which limits the reach of any such treaty. A better analogy would be any of the 50 states that ceded "sovereignty" to the Federal.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/conditions-membership/


A... A country has to apply
B... Country must be in Europe

Globalists can't force it, Special Ed. True about the EU, here it would have to be the AU = American Union or perhaps the OU- Obama Union... :laugh:---Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Invincibility is not the issue, but yes, for all intents and purposes we are. We're not a piddling little country in the middle of a large continent with more to gain than lose. But we also have a Constitution which limits the reach of any such treaty. A better analogy would be any of the 50 states that ceded "sovereignty" to the Federal. Yes, we have a Constitution but for how much longer? Obama is doing his best to weaken and destroy it. Also very possible that in less than 5 years at the rate we are going we as a nation default on all our debt. Should that occur you'd see us drop to third world status fairly rapidly. I can see how far we have fallen just in the last decade myself.. I think its not as cut and dry as you may believe. That's the thing about the execution of a long range plan(globalist agenda) it sneaks up on you and is only found out by the populace when its too late. Look at Britain for an example of that, as they haven't even figured it out yet and their world power status was destroyed while they slept IMHO. --Tyr

[red state]

Yes, we have a Constitution but for how much longer? Obama is doing his best to weaken and destroy it. Also very possible that in less than 5 years at the rate we are going we as a nation default on all our debt. Should that occur you'd see us drop to third world status fairly rapidly. I can see how far we have fallen just in the last decade myself.. I think its not as cut and dry as you may believe. That's the thing about the execution of a long range plan(globalist agenda) it sneaks up on you and is only found out by the populace when its too late. Look at Britain for an example of that, as they haven't even figured it out yet and their world power status was destroyed while they slept IMHO. --Tyr

SPOT ON, Tyr!!! The liberals and deniers can't see that we have lost MUCH of our freedoms and one only need look at how these enemies (from within) have trodden on our security via the 2nd Amendment or our freedom to worship with their misquoting FREEDOM OF RELIGION (not FROM religion). We have so many new and "improved" agencies such as the IRS who blatantly abuse power and have carved many more of our freedoms from free speech, religion, ownership of land, our prosperity and our privacy). So much is gone that I truly believe that our founders would declare that we are more like the state we were in under King George than how they left us to this GREAT experiment. As Ben Franklin said, it is up to us to KEEP it and we've done a poor job at preserving our Life, Liberty and Pursuit of happiness.

[fj1200]

Yes, we have a Constitution but for how much longer? Obama is doing his best to weaken and destroy it. Also very possible that in less than 5 years at the rate we are going we as a nation default on all our debt. Should that occur you'd see us drop to third world status fairly rapidly. I can see how far we have fallen just in the last decade myself.. I think its not as cut and dry as you may believe. That's the thing about the execution of a long range plan(globalist agenda) it sneaks up on you and is only found out by the populace when its too late. Look at Britain for an example of that, as they haven't even figured it out yet and their world power status was destroyed while they slept IMHO. --Tyr

I think I disagree with everything you mentioned. We'll have a Constitution for far longer than BO is POTUS and defaulting on our debt would mean very little.

[Arbo]

I think I disagree with everything you mentioned. We'll have a Constitution for far longer than BO is POTUS and defaulting on our debt would mean very little.

Agreed. Besides neither party has a monopoly on sidestepping the Constitution. They are both very guilty of doing whatever they can to get around it. If that wasn't the case, most of the federal government (and it's agencies) that exists now would not exist.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

SPOT ON, Tyr!!! The liberals and deniers can't see that we have lost MUCH of our freedoms and one only need look at how these enemies (from within) have trodden on our security via the 2nd Amendment or our freedom to worship with their misquoting FREEDOM OF RELIGION (not FROM religion). We have so many new and "improved" agencies such as the IRS who blatantly abuse power and have carved many more of our freedoms from free speech, religion, ownership of land, our prosperity and our privacy). So much is gone that I truly believe that our founders would declare that we are more like the state we were in under King George than how they left us to this GREAT experiment. As Ben Franklin said, it is up to us to KEEP it and we've done a poor job at preserving our Life, Liberty and Pursuit of happiness. They are --"conditioning" -- the younger generation as one doesn't miss that which they never had or never knew! What man people fail to realize is these people are patiently evil. They are fine with the victory happening decades in the future or not even in their lifetimes. The big problem for us is that this long range plan started in earnest back in the late 40's IMHO!!! --Tyr

[red state]

Tyr, I actually believe it happened long before the 40's. One could say that we lost much under Lincoln or under Wilson but that is for another thread. Besides, one could say that we have always been on a degrading process after the genius of our founders wrote the extraordinary document that has kept us this far. They should have made this Nation better by applying ALL MEN when they started this GREAT EXPERIENCE but the biggest falls have come from those who offer something for nothing or step in where they should have stayed out of our lives.

Truly, it may be that those who knew what we were are fading too fast to preserve what they have fought and died for. We've let the enemy in and we're paying for it.

[fj1200]

We've let the enemy in and we're paying for it.

And who would that enemy be?

[Nukeman]

I dunno, those globalist might force us to join the EU. ;)


http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/conditions-membership/


A... A country has to apply
B... Country must be in Europe

Globalists can't force it, Special Ed.

WOW.. You think that was serious??? panties in a bunch? Talk about your "special ed" Learn how to recognize sarcasm!!!!:poke::laugh:

[Marcus Aurelius]

WOW.. You think that was serious??? panties in a bunch? Talk about your "special ed" Learn how to recognize sarcasm!!!!:poke::laugh:

At least it was on topic.:coffee:

[Drummond]

I heard about THIS quite some time ago ... a North American equivalent of the EU. See ...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/10646-wikileaks-exposes-north-american-integration-plot


As early as January of 2005, high-ranking officials were discussing the best way to sell the idea of North American “integration” to the public and policymakers while getting around national constitutions. The prospect of creating a monetary unit to replace national currencies was a hot topic as well.

Some details of the schemes were exposed in a secret 2005 U.S. embassy cable from Ottawa signed by then-Ambassador Paul Cellucci. The document was released by WikiLeaks on April 28. But so far, it has barely attracted any attention in the United States, Canada, or Mexico beyond a few mentions in some liberty-minded Internet forums.

Numerous topics are discussed in the leaked document — borders, currency, labor, regulation, and more. How to push the integration agenda features particularly prominently.

Under the subject line “Placing a new North American Initiative in its economic policy context,” American diplomatic personnel in Canada said they believed an “incremental” path toward North American integration would probably gain the most support from policymakers. Apparently Canadian economists agreed.

The cable also touts the supposed benefits of merging the three countries and even mentions what elements to “stress” in future “efforts to promote further integration.” It lists what it claims is a summary of the “consensus” among Canadian economists about the issues, too.

Merging the United States, Canada, and Mexico

Integration is a little-used term employed mainly by policy wonks. But while it may sound relatively harmless, it generally describes a very serious phenomenon when used in a geopolitical context — the gradual merging of separate countries under a regional authority.

Similar processes are already well underway in Europe, Africa, and South America. And according to critics, the results — essentially abolishing national sovereignty in favor of supranational, unaccountable governance — have been an unmitigated disaster. But the U.S. government doesn’t think so.

In North America, integration has been proceeding rapidly for years. The New American magazine was among the first to report on the efforts to erect what critics have called a “North American Union,” encompassing Canada, the United States, and Mexico. But more recently, the topic has received more attention.

After the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — similar in many ways to the European Common Market that preceded the political union in Europe — the integration scheme has only accelerated. And the bipartisan efforts have been going on for years.

Under President George W. Bush, integration occurred through the little-known “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.” And with the Obama administration, the process, now virtually out in the open, is only accelerating.

Back in 2005, the cable released recently by WikiLeaks explained how it would be done. And looking back, the document was right on the mark.

The best way forward, according to the cable, is via gradual steps. “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers,” the cable states in its summary.

“Our research leads us to conclude that such a package should tackle both ‘security’ and ‘prosperity’ goals,” the document claims, using the two key words that have been emphasized at every step along the way. “This fits the recommendations of Canadian economists who have assessed the options for continental integration.”

Toward the end, the cable offers more advice on how to advance the integration agenda by tailoring the narrative. “When advocating [the North American Initiative to integrate the three countries], it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers,” the cable states, noting that it’s harder to “estimate the benefits” on a national or continental scale.

Whatever might be said about the viability or otherwise of such a thing, the fact remains - I'd have thought - clear enough. There ARE forces out there with an agenda of eradicating national identities, and subsuming them into ever-more integral power-blocs.

You want to be American ? To have your own national identity, culture, autonomy ? Enter Globalists on to the scene to try and crush your freedom to have ANY of these things to call your own. And to exercise dominion over all that you hold dear.

The EU, in case anyone's forgotten this, started out as something very different .. the 'Common Market', or 'EFTA', the European Free Trade Association. It was meant to be a trading setup to help facilitate free trade between European nations. BUT IT MUTATED INTO A POWER-HUNGRY CRUSHER OF NATIONAL AUTONOMIES, INSTEAD ... complete with its own Parliament, statutes, demands to subsume national laws into its overriding diktats.

It didn't happen by accident - power brokers filled a vacuum, because it was there to be exploited by those with an agenda. If Americans want to be complacent enough to think that nothing like that could ever happen to them ... well, reflect on the fact that it wasn't too many years ago that the British Empire exercised its muscle over its own member countries. NOW, the EU increasingly subsumes us, in the UK, into ITS rule ... and goodbye, EVEN our right to control our own borders !!!

[Arbo]

I heard about THIS quite some time ago ... a North American equivalent of the EU. See ...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/10646-wikileaks-exposes-north-american-integration-plot


It's a two year old article, is there something more recent to show this CT is anything more than CT?

I love the 'about' page for the site:


As you can see, unlike myriad news organs that deceptively slant the news while claiming to be "objective," The New American forthrightly acknowledges an editorial point of view. But, that aside, we always approach the news honestly, relying on facts and reason to make our case and allowing the chips to fall where they may.

There is no doubt there are people that would like to remove all borders, to overpower the Constitution, etc. But this is no easy task, and not something that will happen overnight. Nor do I believe it is as widespread as some think. YMMV.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

It's a two year old article, is there something more recent to show this CT is anything more than CT?

I love the 'about' page for the site:[B]



There is no doubt there are people that would like to remove all borders, to overpower the Constitution, etc. But this is no easy task, and not something that will happen overnight. Nor do I believe it is as widespread as some think. YMMV. Read and learn.. -Tyr http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/cobb/130219 February 19, 2013

THE NEW AMERICA: Agenda 21 and the U.N. One World Government plan By Don Cobb

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I investigate conspiracy theories and I gather evidence before I believe anything anyone purports to be true. 8-10 years ago this New World Order topic came to my attention, and along with it, the One World Government plans. At the time, I remember reading that the American mainstream media was calling the New World Order a "conspiracy theory" and denied that any such thing existed. They pooh-poohed the idea of a One World Government, as well.

In 1992, however, in their Venezuela conference, the United Nations passed something called "Agenda 21," which the elder President George Bush of the United States of America publicly gave it his support. It referred to something called "Sustainable Development" and seemed to be concerned with protecting the planet by limiting and controlling the development of corporate and personal structures. As I perused this effort, I saw that rural development was going to start being restricted and that the Train to Nowhere, that we have been struggling with here in Sonoma County (called that because it starts in a little hamlet devoid of much corporate activity and ended at a location in San Rafael which did not connect with the existing train – BART – and required a taxi ride across town in one wished to take this train into San Francisco).

Why would anyone be so intent on building a high-speed train from a little town called "Cloverdale" with a population of 8,634 that sits out in the middle of nowhere, nearly 2 hours north of San Francisco, to another destination which isn't connected to BART, and is still another 30 minutes outside of SF? Millions of dollars have been poured into a campaign to get public approval over the past ten years. By their own estimation, only 1,400 trips are estimated, which would be 700 round trips. Estimating a cost into the hundreds of millions of dollars, to transport barely 700 people? Were they serious? Yes, they were. But why?

UN Agenda 21 was passed in 1992 without any particular fanfare. The media was almost completely silent about it, and continues to relegate Agenda 21 to page 9, if any mention is made at all. But included in Agenda 21 is a plan for high-speed trains nationwide. Ooo, how exciting! Another interesting part of the plan is that it includes building six-story apartment complexes along these train lines, intended to relocate civilians away from their farms and ranches, which will no longer be approved for residential development. If you want to know what researchers have discovered about this effort, a simple google will lead you to all you ever wanted to know. Personally, I prefer the facts, Ma'am, nothing but the facts.

Further investigation reveals that the Clintons and the Bushes approved of Agenda 21 and also approve of this development of a One World Government system. Barack Obama is also supportive of this Agenda 21 effort and this OWG plan, with approval and funding coming from our own federal government as well as local governments, is being implemented nationwide today. Locally, the little towns of Cotati (population 7,333 not counting the chickens or the snakes) and Cloverdale have been putting elements of Agenda 21 in place for years already. Why would our government choose these little unknown towns to begin implementing this thing?

More importantly, if our own presidents are willing to give the United States of America over to a one world government system, then who is looking out for America's best interests now?

[fj1200]

Read and learn.. -Tyr http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/cobb/130219 February 19, 2013

THE NEW AMERICA: Agenda 21 and the U.N. One World Government plan By Don Cobb

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I investigate conspiracy theories and I gather evidence before I believe anything anyone purports to be true.

At least he's upfront about it. :poke:

[Arbo]

At least he's upfront about it. :poke:

Yeah. Like I said, no doubt some have nefarious plans, but the reality of them reaching their 'goal' seems a bit out there.

[Nukeman]

At least it was on topic.:coffee:
AS much as mine!!!!!!!!!!!! douche bag!!!!!