Nathan Lewin, Rubashkin's attorney, has written another piece, this time for the New York Jewish Week attacking PETA, predictably begining with a comparison of PETA's actions and those of the Nazis.
Mr. Lewin then goes on to state his 'scientific' evidence in support of Rubashkin's slaughter. You'll note that all of Lewin's 'scientific' evidence is from the 1920-50's (before EEG's and other technology existed to help determine consciousness) and he completely misrepresents the scope of PETA's activities.
Mr. Lewin also notes that PETA asked Rubashkin to make the following seven changes, but does not tell you that this request was made before PETA knew of the throat-ripping:
Did PETA claim then that terrified cows were staggering to their feet after workers ripped out their throats? No way. Here is the substance of PETA’s list:
1. Repair your unloading ramps.
2. Restrict the use of electric prods.
3. Ensure that no more than 5 percent of cows vocalize.
4. Ensure that each chicken is held one at a time, by one person, for slaughter.
5. Provide fresh, clean water for all animals at unloading.
6. Ensure that all animals are calm at all stages of processing.
7. Engage in self-audits on a regular basis.
Mr. Lewin then gratuitously adds that none of PETA's seven demands "involved violations of Jewish law."
Apparently Mr. Lewin is unaware of the halakhot of tzaar baalei hayyim and the requirements of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, which include this:
"It is forbidden to use any form of electric prod to herd the animals into the slaughtering stand."
You can read Mr. Lewin's article here or after the jump.
http://www.thejewishweek.com/top/editletcontent.php3?artid=3881
(12/24/2004)
Some Questions For PETA
Nathan Lewin
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals recently released a video bearing the incendiary title “PETA Undercover: Terrified Cows Stagger to Their Feet After Workers Rip Out Their Throats.” Visitors to the PETA Web site are told to watch the video and see “AgriProcessors workers ignore the suffering of cows that are still sensible to pain after having their throats slit by the ritual slaughterer. The animals stagger and slip in blood while their tracheas dangle from their necks. Watch now.”The attack on shechita, kosher ritual slaughter, follows the line almost in precise words that has been taken for centuries by anti-Semites, culminating in Hitler’s laws enacted in April 1933 to protect Germany’s animals against the savagery of the Jewish ritual. (Der Stuermer’s 1938 description of “How Jews Torture Animals” described two German boys watching the animal after shechita “struggle to get up and then collapse” and, after a second cut by the Jew, “the blood spurts, and again the animal struggles to get up.”)
No matter that mounds of scientific evidence establish that an animal that loses blood to the brain loses any sense of pain. No matter that the shechita cut results in anemia of the brain within 2 seconds. No matter that the U.S. Congress held extensive hearings in 1957 and concluded that the Jewish ritual method of slaughter is at least as humane as any other method that modern science has devised. PETA’s “food specialists” and Ph.Ds know the cow that has its throat slit “suffers” and is “still sensible.”
PETA made no such claim when it sent two accusatory letters to AgriProcessors last year, in June and November. I replied to PETA’s first letter that had said it would keep “entirely confidential” its allegation that “Jewish law is being violated” if AgriProcessors would agree to hire Dr. Temple Grandin, which PETA on its Web site calls “the country’s leading slaughter expert,” to institute “humane improvements.” (I noted that this sounded like extortion.) I asked PETA to provide “detailed descriptions of specific conduct to support your conclusions.”
Did PETA claim then that terrified cows were staggering to their feet after workers ripped out their throats? No way. Here is the substance of PETA’s list:
1. Repair your unloading ramps.
2. Restrict the use of electric prods.
3. Ensure that no more than 5 percent of cows vocalize.
4. Ensure that each chicken is held one at a time, by one person, for slaughter.
5. Provide fresh, clean water for all animals at unloading.
6. Ensure that all animals are calm at all stages of processing.
7. Engage in self-audits on a regular basis.
PETA added in the letter that listed its seven demands (none of which involved violations of Jewish law) that it “would prefer it if AgriProcessors stopped killing animals.” But it did not dare repeat the old anti-Semitic canard that cows with their throats slit by the ritual slaughterer were staggering or struggling.
Only after its investigator took “undercover” videos that would rouse emotions in people who have never seen a slaughtering plant in operation did PETA turn from complaining about “unloading ramps” to its publicized allegation that the throat slitting and what followed was brutal and contrary to Jewish law.
Every respected Orthodox authority on Jewish law has concluded that what was shown on the video was not contrary to Jewish law and that the shechita was 100 percent kosher. Some Orthodox rabbis urged that in order to avoid a public misperception of cruelty, one step in the process — a second cut and removal of the trachea — not be done.
It is legitimate, however, to ask PETA a few questions:
How do you know that the animal that has its throat cut and loses blood flow to the brain is “still sensible?”
Three Cambridge University professors (Wood, Barcroft and Newman) authored a report in 1924 on the “Jewish Method of Slaughtering Animals for Food.” They said of the post-shechita movements shown on the video: “Such movements are quite unconnected with sensation. Nevertheless they may appear so purposeful as to convince the lay observer that sensation continues and that the movements are evidence of pain or consciousness.”
Professor William Bayliss of University College in London said in a 1930 study that convulsions “may come on at a stage long after consciousness has ceased” and they “may include raising of the head.”
Do you have comparable “undercover” video of a non-kosher slaughtering plant or of another kosher plant?
What transpires in any slaughtering plant is gruesome to watch. Animals are being put to death in order to be eaten. Before condemning any one plant, one in fairness must see what goes on in others. The process in non-kosher plants is less bloody because throat slitting is not the means of killing the animal, but other steps are probably as painful to watch and possibly more painful to the animal.
Why are you less concerned about the treatment of live animals than about the final minutes of life of animals that are legitimately put to death for human consumption?
I wrote in my letter to PETA that “long before the rest of the world showed any ‘common decency’ to animals or had the slightest concern for the treatment of animals, the laws of the Torah and rabbinic teachings commanded the Jewish people to treat all living creatures humanely. Secular society — including your organization — has still not caught up with the precepts of Jewish law in this regard.”
Why is PETA not concerned, as the Torah is, about animals being overworked?
PETA doesn’t demand a Sabbath for living animals or condemn pairing weak and strong animals or muzzling them in the presence of food. The morality of Torah law apparently is not a model for headline-hungry hypocrites who take cheap shots at targets they think cannot fight back.
Why has PETA not taken on horse racing or dog racing, or rodeos or hunting, where live animals are abused for the sport of humans?
Observant Jews are more inviting targets, particularly since they are ready to confess sins even where there are none.
Nathan Lewin, a constitutional lawyer who has represented many Orthodox clients, is counsel for AgriProcessors in Postville, Iowa.
Special To The Jewish Week