BY NIRAJ WARIKOO • FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER • March 30, 2008
Growing up in Dearborn, Zeinab Chami often was tempted by ads for Col. Sanders' original recipe, the finger-lickin' meal sold by fast-food giant KFC.
However, Chami was an observant Muslim, and the restaurant's chicken was not halal, meaning it wasn't prepared according to Islamic law. Her choices usually were limited to what her immigrant parents cooked or the occasional takeout from Middle Eastern restaurants.
But now she's able to get a taste of KFC. Last month, the restaurant's east Dearborn restaurant began selling halal chicken, a change that reflects the growing demand for halal products among metro Detroit's sizable Muslim population.
Underneath the colonel's bearded face, the store's sign reads "Now serving halal original & crispy." The juxtaposition of an American icon with Islamic tradition is a striking display of the changing landscape of southeast Michigan. Halal meat is not new to Dearborn's butcher shops and Arab restaurants, but a growing number of national chains have been accommodating the local demand for Muslim food in recent years.
"A lot has changed just in the past decade," said Bilal Dabaja, 22, a Dearborn resident who eats halal. "More people want these products."
The change is similar to how the growing Jewish population decades ago led to kosher becoming part of the American food industry and vocabulary. The kosher symbols "K" and "U" can be seen today on everything from Heinz ketchup bottles to Fruity Pebbles cereal boxes.
Muslims hope to create a similar market for halal products.
In Dearborn, two McDonald's restaurants are the only ones selling halal Chicken McNuggets and sandwiches among about 13,700 McDonald's in the country. Ram's Horn, a local chain of diners, and Big Boy restaurants also serve halal meat in the city. And a manager at a Subway restaurant in Dearborn hopes it soon will become halal, but it is facing difficulties because of the chain's insistence on using uniform meat suppliers.
Many in the Muslim community welcome the restaurants' changes, but some are still reluctant to eat there because they haven't been vetted by Islamic scholars.
Halal is an Arabic word that generally refers to "what is permitted." Its opposite, haram, refers to what is forbidden.
Like Jews, Muslims don't eat pork. Halal also requires that during the slaughters, the animal must face Mecca, its blood be totally drained, and the butcher has to say a prayer invoking God.
Drinking alcohol is also considered not halal, and so some Muslims would refuse to eat at the now-defunct La Shish chain because they sold beer and wine.
There are varying interpretations among Islamic leaders as to what exactly is halal. And individuals make personal decisions on how to eat halal depending on strictly they observe Islam.
One challenge is determining if the meat is truly halal.
"A sign saying it's halal is not always enough," said Imam Mohammad Elahi, a religious scholar who heads the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights. "There needs to be other evidence."
A general rule is that if the preparer is Muslim and says the meat is halal, it's OK, But if the preparer is non-Muslim, you have to dig further to back up the claims.
In some cases, halal slaughterhouses are now using recordings of a man saying an Islamic prayer that repeats itself each time an animal is killed so that it's halal.
Chami, 23, wants to try KFC's chicken, but is reluctant because she hasn't seen how it's prepared. One concern that she and Dabaja have is whether KFC uses separate fryers for its halal and non-halal meat, because using the same fryer contaminates the halal. When Chami eats tuna or vegetarian sandwiches at Subway restaurants, she always asks the sandwich preparer to don another set of plastic gloves because they might have the taint of non-halal meats on them.
Store employees at the KFC and McDonald's in east Dearborn said they use separate fryers. At the Subway on Schaefer in Dearborn, manager Ramsey Hourani said he wants to make his store halal, but "it's a lot more difficult than it sounds" because of the company's insistence on restaurants using similar food suppliers.
In England, Subway is rolling out all-halal restaurants in up to 200 locations, according to Zabihah.com, a Web site that tracks halal restaurants around the world. Hourani hopes that one day, American stores can take a similar path.
For now, many Muslims often stick with halal products they find in Middle Eastern grocery stores such as halal marshmallow crispy treats.
But others are excited about the KFC restaurant in Dearborn. Tarek Baydoun, 23, of Dearborn, heard about the halal chicken through a friend's text message. This month, he went there with his family.
"It's a good value and it's very tasty," Baydoun said. "It was bound to happen because it just makes sense from a business perspective."
Contact NIRAJ WARIKOO at 248-351-2998 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
This news story should really be in the category = YOU COULND'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP!
So will all muslim busdrivers start stopping buses - FIVE times a day - to pray?
The bus company is taking the incident under "full investigation" which will likely mean NOTHING will be done to the driver for his total disregard for the passengers under his care.
Welcome to Britainistan.
Go to link on first sentence for video of this farce.
Article in full- emphasis mine
GET OFF MY BUS I NEED TO PRAY
By ALEX PEAKE
and ANDY CRICK
The white Islamic convert rolled out his prayer mat in the aisle and knelt on the floor facing Mecca.
Passengers watched in amazement as he held out his palms towards the sky, bowed his head and began to chant.
One, who filmed the man on his mobile phone, said: “He was clearly praying and chanting in Arabic.
“We thought it was a wind-up at first, like Jeremy Beadle.”
The 21-year-old plumber added: “He looked English and had a London accent. He looked like a Muslim convert, with a big, bushy beard.
“Eventually everyone started complaining. One woman said, ‘What the hell are you doing? I’m going to be late for work’.”
After a few minutes the driver calmly got up, opened the doors and asked everyone back on board.
But they saw a rucksack lying on the floor of the red single-decker and feared he might be a fanatic. So they all refused.
The passenger added: “One chap said, ‘I’m not getting on there now’.(GOOD FOR HIM!!)
“An elderly couple also looked really confused and worried.
“After seeing that no-one wanted to get on he drove off and we all waited until the next bus came about 20 minutes later. I was left totally stunned. It made me not want to get on a bus again.”
The bizarre event unfolded on the number 81 in Langley, Berkshire, at around 1.30pm on Thursday.
The passenger said he rang the bus firm to complain but claimed it did not believe him.
He said: “They asked me, ‘Are you sure?’. Then they said they would get back to me, but they weren’t taking me seriously at all.”
Yesterday the driver, who said his name was Hrun, told The Sun: “I asked everyone to get off because I needed to pray. I was running late and had not had time.
“I pray five times a day as a Muslim — but I don’t normally ask people to get off the bus to do it.”
Muslims pray at pre-dawn, noon, afternoon, sunset and evening.
A spokesperson for bus company London United said: “We are aware of a reported incident involving our route 81.
“We are currently undertaking a full investigation into the matter.”
The below article is a good representation of how muslims view Christianity and believe that it should be and is subservient to Islam. Only if all Christians recognize and accept Mohammed as a prophet; do many Saudi feel that a Christian Church would be allowed to be built there.
In fact these "mediators" don't even acknowledge that there are Christians living in Saudi Arabia - except for a few "transients" and separates the ability to practice ones NON muslim religion from human rights.
So the same arguments used by muslims, throughout the Western world, to facilitate the building of hundreds of Saudi financed mosques and mega-mosques are hypocritically discounted when Christianity/Christians seeks to become accessible and visible in Saudi Arabia.
Riyadh: March 29, 2008.
No churches should be permitted in Saudi Arabia, unless Pope Benedict XVI recognised the prophet Mohammed, according to a Middle East expert.
While Saudi mediators are working with the Vatican on negotiations to allow places of religious worship, some experts believe it will not occur without this recognition.
Anwar Ashiqi, president of the Saudi centre for Middle East strategic studies, endorsed this view in an interview on the site of Arab satellite TV network, al-Arabiya on Thursday.
"I haven taken part in several meetings related to Islamic-Christian dialogue and there have been negotiations on this issue," he said.
"It would be possible to launch official negotiations to construct a church in Saudi Arabia only after the Pope and all the Christian churches recognise the prophet Mohammed."
"If they don`t recognise him as a prophet, how can we have a church in the Saudi kingdom?"
Ashiqi`s comments came after a declaration launched by the papal nuncio of the Persian Gulf, the archbishop Mounged El-Hachem, at the opening of the first Catholic church in Qatar last week.
The prelate had announced the launch of "treaties to construct a church in Saudi Arabia where it is banned to practise whatever religion they want outside Islam".
El-Hachem estimated three to four million Christians in the Saudi kingdom who want to have a church.
A member of Saudi Arabia`s Consultative Council, Abdelaziz al-Thinani, rejected the prelate`s claims saying that there were no Christians among the Saudis who were all Muslims.
"Those few Christians do not reside in the country permanently, they come and go," he said.
He denied there were four million Christians in the kingdom and said the issue of human rights should not be used to call for the construction of a Christian church.
Most of Saudi Arabia`s Christians are foreign workers. There are 8.2 million foreign workers in a country of 25.6 million people according to a report by the Saudi Labour Ministry.
Britain caves into IRAN, Bangladesh and other muslim warnings and threats due to Manchester located -Live Leak website. Live Leak initially hosted Geert Wilders film- Fitna, but removed the movie today under muslim death threats. The British government says is worried about the movie creating safety concerns of British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan - and "extremists" (don't use that banned phrase- muslim terrorists) targeting the soldiers. Don't these idiots believe that the brave British soldiers already KNOW about muslim violence and isn't that the reason the soldiers are in those countries to begin with?? What a load of cobblers!!!!!
Truth is Gordon Brown et al are being dhimmis to Iran and the other muslim nations. So much for free speech in the once "Great" Britain.
So just which countries does Britain's Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, refer to when he expounds upon "European free speech":
"in each of our countries there are legal and judicial systems to ensure that freedom is not used to incite religious or racial hatred”.
- Is he condeming the muslim countries that are issuing threats of death and violence??? NO- David is pillorying our freedom of speech which is now equivalent to "inciting religious or racial hatred" - Again the question arises - just what nations are inciting hatred? - surely the answers are glaringly obvious.
entire article - emphasis mine:
Britain drawn into controversy over anti-Islam video by Geert Wilders
Britain was dragged into the controversy over an anti-Islam film made by a far-Right Dutch MP after Iran condemned its appearance on a UK-based video-sharing website today.
“This heinous measure by a Dutch lawmaker and a British establishment... is indicative of the continuation of the evilness and deep vengeance such Western nationals have against Islam and Muslims,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said.
Mohammad Ali Hosseini, called on the Dutch, British and other EU governments to block any further showing of “this blasphemous, anti-Islamic and anti-cultural film”.
The 17-minute “documentary” by Geert Wilders had been broadcast on the internet with the aid of an organisation based in Britain, he said.
Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim nation, also condemned the film, titled Fitna, an Arabic word meaning “strife”, while Bangladesh warned it could have “grave consequences”.
A coalition of Jordanian media said it would sue Mr Wilders and urged Arab leaders meeting at a summit in Syria this weekend to review ties with the Netherlands and Denmark.
Governments in the Muslim world are wary of a repeat of what happened two years ago when the publication in Denmark of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad ignited rioting in a dozen countries, leading to about 50 deaths.
Mr Wilders’s film, which intersperses images of the September 11 attacks and other Islamist bombings with quotations from the Koran, was first posted on the website of his small right-wing Freedom Party on Thursday night.
It disappeared after a few minutes because of “technical difficulties” before becoming available in Dutch and English on LiveLeak, a Manchester-based website, raising fears that extremists could also target British interests. Some 4,000 British troops are serving in Iraq and a further 7,800 in Afghanistan.
The company running LiveLeak defended its decision to host the film. “Liveleak.com has a strict stance on remaining unbiased and allowing freedom of speech so far as the law and our rules allow,” it said in a statement posted online.
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, said “we hold fast and firm to European values of freedom of speech”. However, speaking in Slovenia where he was attending talks with his EU counterparts, he added that “in each of our countries there are legal and judicial systems to ensure that freedom is not used to incite religious or racial hatred”.
An Indonesian foreign ministry spokesman urged his country’s people not to “be incited” by the film which he said had “a racist flavour and is an insult to Islam, hidden under the cover of freedom of expression”.
Arab media were scathing about Mr Wilders today but reluctant to pay him attention and rise to what they saw as his baiting of the Muslim world. A senior editor at al-Jazeera said his influential television station had not given the controversy prominence.
“We don’t see a big story yet. The man [Mr Wilders] is a marginal, low-profile politician and he has even been criticised by Dutch politicians,” he told The Times.
Khaled al-Maeena, the editor of Arab News, an English language Saudi daily, said: “We should let barking dogs bark. This man [Mr Wilders] is an agent provocateur.” He added: “Our paper and the media here [in Saudi Arabia] are asking for calm and peace.”
After receiving death threat to their staff, Live Leak has decided to remove the Geert Wilder's film, FITNA.
So - Muslims are outraged that a film says muslims are violent - and they respond with typical muslim threats of violence -------------------------------
Apparently the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki--moon, doesn't believe that muslims have any "social responsibility" to not issue threats of death and violence. And if indeed the violent muslims are a small minority, as he states, why are the GOVERNMENTS OF MUSLIM NATIONS worried that throngs of muslim people will riot and deaths will occur - worldwide?
Please see my next blog on the Britain's role in this situation.
Here is entire Live Leak's Official statement:
LiveLeak on Friday afternoon issued a statement explaining its decision: "Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature, and some ill-informed reports from certain corners of the British media that could directly lead to the harm of some of our staff, LiveLeak.com has been left with no other choice but to remove Fitna from our servers.
"This is a sad day for freedom of speech on the net but we have to place the safety and well being of our staff above all else. We would like to thank the thousands of people, from all backgrounds and religions, who gave us their support. They realized LiveLeak.com is a vehicle for many opinions and not just for the support of one.
"Perhaps there is still hope that this situation may produce a discussion that could benefit and educate all of us as to how we can accept one another's culture. We stood for what we believe in, the ability to be heard, but in the end the price was too high."
Initial efforts to detail the film proved less successful. Network Solutions on Saturday suspended the Web site where Wilders had been planning to premiere the film, citing complaints about the then unseen film's content.
During the day that the film was available, it prompted widespread condemnation. On Friday, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon decried Fitna as hate speech.
"I condemn, in the strongest terms, the airing of Geert Wilders' offensively anti-Islamic film," said Ban in a statement. "There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence. The right of free expression is not at stake here. I acknowledge the efforts of the Government of the Netherlands to stop the broadcast of this film, and appeal for calm to those understandably offended by it. Freedom must always be accompanied by social responsibility."
Ban said that the real fault line is not between Muslim and Western nations but a minority of extremists eager to stir strife.
The Organization of The Islamic Conference also denounced the film as blasphemy. OIC Secretary General Prof Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu said, "The film is a deliberate act of discrimination against Muslims, incitement for hatred and an act defamation of religions which is solely intended to incite and provoke unrest and intolerance among people of different religious beliefs and to jeopardize world peace and stability."
In the day that Fitna played, it was viewed over 420,000 times. More than 280 comments were posted on LiveLeak.com. And many chose to reply through countervideos, which are still online.
The word "fitna" in Arabic means strife or conflict within a group.
The film may also generate a lawsuit. The BBC reports that Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, known for his cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed wearing a bomb-shaped turban, plans to sue Wilders for using his cartoon in the film without permission.
Over 50% of the Dutch view Islam as a threat and see rampant immigration as the biggest mistake in Dutch history. Undoubtedly the populations of more EU countries will soon or already do agree. Also interesting is the fact that the Dutch greatly overestimate their past role in slavery - apparently the goal of the multiculturalists to proliferate indigenous shame and inferiority has worked well.
The Europeans can thank their governments and idiocrats who have worshipped at the altar of multiculturalism while the countries indigenous citizens have been pillored for being "nativists". Particularly Great Britain and Denmark have been under assault by muslim colonization that has been aided and abetted by government policies. Not until the indigenous populations retake their governments and rid them of the scourge of multiculturalism- will anything soon change - in fact the flood of immigrants from Asia and Africa will only worsen.
|Dutch: Mass Immigration Our Biggest Mistake Ever|
AMSTERDAM, 27/03/08 - The majority of the Dutch are negative on Islam and immigration. Additionally, their knowledge of Dutch history is meagre, according to a survey by three history professors.
According to 56 percent of the Dutch, Islam is a threat to the Dutch identity. As well, 57 percent named admitting large groups of immigrants as "the biggest mistake in Dutch history".
The results come from the History Monitor. This survey was carried out among a representative group of 1,069 people by De Volkskrant newspaper, Historisch Nieuwsblad history journal and TV programme Andere Tijden in consultation with history professors James Kennedy, Niek van Sas and Hans Blom.
The History Monitor presented 20 multiple-choice questions on Dutch history and identity. Only for six questions did over 60 percent know the right answer. The worst answered was the question 'Since which century has the Netherlands been a kingdom'; only 17 percent knew the Netherlands was a republic before the 19th century.
Also remarkable is the self-criticism on the Netherlands' slavery past. Only 21 percent correctly gave the Netherlands a 5 percent share in the world slave trade; the rest estimated a higher share. The researchers attribute the overestimating to a feeling of shame, born of structural and years-long media attention for the dark sides of the dominant role the Netherlands played in the world in the 17th century.
All in all, the average Dutch respondent scored 5.2 for national historical knowledge. Immigrants scored 4.9 percent on average. The over 65s averaged 6.0; conversely, the 16-34 age group averaged just 4.4.
TO SEE GEERT WILDERS FILM FITNA - CAUTION - THERE ARE SCENES WHICH SOME PEOPLE WILL FIND UPSETTING
The Hague - Geert Wilders, Dutch politician and leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV), has called his just-released Fitna a 'respectable film'. He admitted that Muslims may not be happy with it, but emphasised that he had always stuck to the facts. He said he believes that the film is also 'one thousand kilometres within the framework of the law'.
While noting that he hoped that Fitna's release would cause no disturbances, Mr Wilders stressed that the maker of the film could not be held responsible for any riots or boycotts that might result, and that it was not meant to provoke disruption. Rather, he said, the images in Fitna were intended to make clear the dangers contained in the Qur'an and Islam.
He also said that he hoped it would lead to discussions of the disadvantages of the faith, both in the Netherlands and abroad, and explicitly invited Muslims to engage in such discussions.