BREAKING! Rubashkin Passes FMI Audit – Actual Slaughter Not Part Of Audit – Removed To Accommodate Rubashkin
AgriProcessors has apparently passed an independent audit done for Albertsons according to the Food Marketing Institute standards.
However, the audit did not include any aspect of the slaughter itself. This special accommodation was made on a one-time basis until the FMI standards are specially rewritten to accommodate Rubashkin. All other kosher facilities can pass the original FMI audit without accommodation.
Even though the OU has trumpeted newly-changed and improved procedures in the plant, AgriProcessors CEO Sholom M. Rubashkin said the new Albertsons audit:
[O]nce and for all put to rest the shameful accusations against the kosher schechita at our plant.
How an audit that did not include shechita itself and was conducted months after the PETA exposé and after plant procedures were publicly changed can be said in any way to clear Rubashkin of any past wrongdoing is unclear.
The USDA investigation is still "ongoing" and, two months after the investigation's findings were expected to be made public no report has yet been issued.
Do you really think a Republican administration will prosecute some of their supporters in order to appease PETA? This issue will go nowhere. People do not care what happens in a slaughterhouse, and PETA should have had a moderate animal rights group make the claim. Instead they wanted the attention and now nothing will be done about it
Posted by: simplejew | February 22, 2005 at 04:56 PM
Rubashkin's owners have not been honest before and got away with it. There is no reason for them to think they won't get away with it now.
They are a perfect example of why certifiers were put in place to start with. Whoa unto us that they have such a corner on the market that the ceriifers dropped the ball.
Posted by: asdfgh | February 22, 2005 at 05:43 PM
"This special accommodation was made on a one-time basis until the FMI standards are specially rewritten to accommodate Rubashkin."
I'd love to see the sources for this statement. Is FMI dirty, too? Aren't they the folks that Grandin supports?
Posted by: Neo-Conservaguy | February 22, 2005 at 08:53 PM
Hey shmaraya
Do you eat rubashkins? Also did you ever hear about moitzee shem rah? maybe you should represent ALL sides on this story, b/c down the line you will pay for all your sins. U r beeing moitzee shem rah befarhesiyah!!!
Posted by: Chaim | February 23, 2005 at 12:32 AM
How to blame the plaintiff : "PETA should have had a moderate animal rights group make the claim". What the commentator presumably means is that if the plaintiff had gone out of its way to eat humble pie everyone could have ignored it.
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | February 23, 2005 at 01:01 AM
DIDAN NATZACH!!!!!!
Posted by: aaron's the best | February 23, 2005 at 09:29 AM
If PETA would have taken the tape to the USDA and have them open a secret investigation into it fine. It might have worked. Its like having Al-Jazeraa vs CNN presenting a story. PETA could have taken one out of 10,000 cows and showed that.
Posted by: simplejew | February 23, 2005 at 02:24 PM