Of Kisses & Horses (Part 2)

There's no label that says, "Meat".

There’s no label that says, “Meat”. Well, I guess the “Loin” sign may be misleading some folks…

I’m not into horses but I often dream about riding one into the sunset. It’s unlikely that will ever happen.

Last week, one of my favourite grocery stores announced that they found horse meat inside their beef burgers. I understand that people make mistakes and that society is often too hard on companies that fail us in one way or another but this is alarming. I have a whole bunch of questions – and they don’t seem to be questions that news authorities are asking.

The key question from the public seems to be, “how did horses’ meat get into your beef burgers?” While this is a valid question, I’m more interested in WHO exactly is KILLING horses in such a way that they are dead enough to be meat in a beef burger!

May I ask if horses’ meat is an accepted delicacy these days? If pork or fish or duck or even hamster meat was found in the burgers, I may understand how that could happen but HORSES’ meat? What is going on? My heart goes out to all horse-lovers.

Moving on…

Related articles

Surveillance, profiling and terrorism: a Reblog

Ana Canhoto is a senior lecturer at Oxford Brookes University. Last week on her bog, she discussed the ongoing investigations into the French-Algerian man, Mohammed Merah who killed 7 people in Toulouse this past week. She touches on whether surveillance and profiling actually detect terrorism. This is an excerpt from her post:

As I write this post, details are starting to emerge about the man suspected of killing 7 people in 3 separate attacks in the area of Toulouse, south of France (for instance, see BBC article here).  The details echo a familiar theme. This is someone who had come to the attention of law enforcement and placed under surveillance.  With surveillance and compulsory data collection taking over more and more areas of our life, the question needs to be asked: If profiling can detect when a credit card has been stolen, or a customer is pregnant, why does it fail to stop terrorism?

In this post, I describe what is doable vs. what is acceptable, when it comes to using profiling to stop terrorism.

She asks whether behavioural profiling can indeed detect terrorism and how the stereotype of Islam extremism failed in the 2011 attacks in Norway. You can read the rest of her thought-provoking post here.

She poses this question to her readers:

Does it upset you knowing that governments monitor your movements for security purposes? How is that different from knowing that commercial organisations monitor your purchases to shape their offer?

To which I answered:

Great entry, Ana. And I’ve never really thought about how I feel about being monitored by the government. I suppose if it is for the greater good – to protect society (and I’m passionate about freedom from terrorism), I can live with being monitored.
On the flip side, I think being monitored by organizations is a different matter. I don’t feel strongly about it either way. For instance, stores like Tesco get my money because I like earning points so I don’t mind being monitored on my habits and purchases. I see that this is ultimately for profit. But there is a clear difference between this and monitoring for terrorism.


What would be your answer to Ana’s question?

%d bloggers like this: