KFC Update 2015

Interesting conundrum….From what I am reading this is what is being said.

RAW CHICKEN:

There are similarities and difference between the two sources of chicken. The on the surface similarities are that they are both stunned before slaughter. The in depth difference is that Freeman is certified, closely monitored, open to surprise inspections. It has been inspected repeatedly and it has been found that chicken are alive at time of slaughter. The inspection process is rigorous and compliant according to Mufti Yusuf Sacha and anyone is welcome to sit down with him and he can walk them through the process. Any Muslim can contact Freeman, make an appointment, visit and see it for themselves. KFC source is not open to any independent examination, process is not fully known, sites are not known so not sure how it can be visited by Muslims. The mechanics of how HFA certify is not open to discussions or independent verification.

So let me summarise (source):

1. NANDOS: Chicken is Halal and there is no doubt
2. KFC: Chicken is unknown but likely Halal

COOKED CHICKEN:

There are similarities and difference between the two Restaurants. NANDO has no inspection process at the restaurant whatsoever but all their chicken comes from a single source. KFC (Halal) has inspection process but source is not singular. The details and mechanics of HFA inspection are also not clear.

HFA need to be transparent in terms who (as in how many) inspect what, where and how. Instead they are just making a statement that everything is inspected from slaughter to the plate. The current employee strength of HFA make this impossible!

So let me summarise (Resturant):

1. NANDOS: No inspection at site, source is good
2. KFC: Inspection suspect, supply line suspect and even source suspect

HMC:

I sat down with (Maulana) Yunus Dudhwala (HA) a few weeks ago and asked some very probing questions about HMC. Each and every chicken certified by HMC is tracked in terms of:

1. Slaughterhouse
2. Slaughterer
3. Inspector
4. Transport (mechanism)

Sunnah?

That which is lawful is clear and that which is unlawful is clear and between the two of them are doubtful [or ambiguous] matters about which not many people are knowledgeable. Thus, he who avoids these doubtful matters certainly clears himself in regard to his religion and his honor.

Personally...

I was at Euston station 2 days ago and I was getting hungry so I bought a sandwich. Later, I saw that there was a NANDOS outside and I could have eaten if I was desperate enough. If there was a (Halal) KFC, I wouldn’t eat unless the desperation levels were way way way way higher. I dislike KFC, MacDonald’s etc principally so once or twice I may have eaten but as a general rule I don’t. I of course respect  brothers like AsSaghir and others whose sole concern is Halal vs Haram but I guess I don’t have that level of knowledge or Taqwa.

In my personal opinion, the little I can do for Palestine is not to contribute financially to the Capitalistic system which underpins it. It is my personal choice as to how I spend my money and I am neither trying to convince anyone nor advocating my line of thinking. Everybody here is an adult and can do whatever they like with their money.  In my head, what money does is more important than marches and protests. I am also not saying NANDOS is innocent but as a business they are " financially cleaner", relative to KFC

I learnt from Mufti Hussain Kadodia (on SF) years ago that the matter is not as clear cut as laymen think (in their head). Imagine that NANDOs stop serving Alcohol at a few select restaurants and Mufti Yusuf Sacha inspects and certifies the restaurant (the source is Halal remember), there will be Muslims who will blame him for making Haram into Halal so I guess he cannot win (and neither does he care to be honest)

All of this is my personal opinion...