UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679 (https://archive.ph/5Ba6o)

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs
2764.png


7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See spread happiness's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary

42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See pg often's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
BongoMongo said:
@>IMPLYING I mean who doesn't like Mormons. They're wholesome as fuck. Probably something I have said before so apologies if I have. I left my ex husband in 2015. He gave me an absolute pasting before I left- black eyes,broken ribs and nose,the works.

I very literally ran into two Mormon sister missionaries and I will never forget what they said on seeing me. "Shall we call the Bishop? No,call his *wife*". And they did. And they got me back to my mum,nigh on 500 miles away, they put me up in a hotel for a few nights before they could get me on a flight. I was invited to the bishops home for food. And to this day, a decade later I still send those two young ladies,and their former Bishop, a a Christmas card.

The LDS church has its faults (under the banner of heaven is a god read if you're interested) but the individual men and women,both lay people and missionaries are wonderful human beings in my experience.

His nibs and I are wedding next month with a view to being temple sealed as Mormons and hoping for him to get a job in Utah with part of company he works for. Sure no caffeine and booze sucks but the trade off is a racially homogeneous community and the benefits of that cannot be understated.
Click to expand...
I don't mean to be rude, but isn't this how all groups do recruitment?
Love bombing people in vulnerable positions until they gain their trust, making them think that it's their idea to join the group, then getting them to move a great distance away from their family before they reveal their abusive side?
Like that first guy did?
What if they'd been really nice Scientologists, or Amish?
 
teriyakiburns said:
but as I hear it the youth are getting more sectarian rather than less.
Click to expand...
Just proves what a disaster multiculturalism is. When people as similar as that can't get on when forced to live together.

LIberalism is so divorced from reality it probably well described as psychosis
 
Brahma said:
Sounds like there's a need for a nativist friendly news outlet to start churning out some reporting on them. Gript seem to be doing this in Ireland re the immigrant hotels, regular articles that amount to not much more than "person X is director of company y that received z millions to host fugees". Gets the names in to the public discourse
Click to expand...
1751015553056.webp
1751015590521.webp
GBnews have spoken about it twice. TalkTV have brought it up. But people don't consume traditional news outlets all that often. It's easier on the brain to attribute a majority of the blame to nebulous entities rather than specific ones, which consequently leads to people neglecting names, how its run specifically, what they do to help these people get here, and how simple it actually is; I've seen people blame the UN for these NGOs, when it's in fact either people who can roundly be described as traitors or people who are just helping their in-group. Regardless, whilst people on the right are generally aware that there are groups helping these people get in and stay in our country, individuals and names are typically absent specifically because it can be seen as targeted action, or so I think.

Hope Not Hate doxing Morgothreviews was shitty to us specifically because they doggedly pursued his actual identity and location with the implicit hope of bringing him harm, however since they went after "Nazis" with a "profit/hate motive", they'll likely see no repercussion. With NGOs/charities, despite all the names and therefore identities of the trustees being attached to the organisation's registration, highlighting them individually for flooding our country with leeches and rapists would probably not be received in the same way by the authorities. Because they're operating a "charity", you can't attribute financial motive to their actions but only makes them look altruistic but misguided at worse and thus not worthy of scorn, making you look like a baddie for calling them out to begin with; also the idea that groups can be "anti-white" is still an absurd notion to far too many people but is especially neglected by those in positions of power.


As an aside, whilst Care4Calais has been highlighted once or twice, there's a name that's being generally being left out: CalaisLight.
They are definitely suspicious, but they don't operate in the UK, so calling them out for fucking us does nothing since the French themselves benefit from what they're doing and have no motive to stop them. Though they did register semi-recently in the UK.

Something weird I found about them is that they have a Youtube channel created 4 years ago with a single video on it.
The title of the video: A Minute on the Aegean Sea | Video Meditation to Visualise the Life & Death Choices Refugees Make
Youtube channel
Preservetubelink

Care4Calais
1751017871325.webp

1751017895802.webp

CalaisLight
1751018001029.webp


Mary Stretch founded CalaisLight, and I also suspect she's the video's narrator.
1751018855554.webp


Despite working for the BBC as a reporter, there's shockingly little of her out there, just a scattering of interviews all dated after 2020.
 
Brahma said:
Sounds like there's a need for a nativist friendly news outlet to start churning out some reporting on them. Gript seem to be doing this in Ireland re the immigrant hotels, regular articles that amount to not much more than "person X is director of company y that received z millions to host fugees". Gets the names in to the public discourse
Click to expand...
GBnews is sort of that but it's not enough. Twitter seems to be the place to make noise to get stuff out there. I wouldn't use it myself because I'm too much of a spastic and would end up with a knock.
>IMPLYING said:
With NGOs/charities, despite all the names and therefore identities of the trustees being attached to the organisation's registration, highlighting them individually for flooding our country with leeches and rapists would probably not be received in the same way by the authorities. Because they're operating a "charity", you can't attribute financial motive to their actions but only makes them look altruistic but misguided at worse and thus not worthy of scorn, making you look like a baddie for calling them out to begin with; also the idea that groups can be "anti-white" is still an absurd notion to far too many people but is especially neglected by those in positions of power.
Click to expand...
You're using too many words to say too little. They wouldn't look kindly on whites defending themselves. They would do you because you're opposing the replacement and being a problem.

Many people are aware whites are second class citizens. Two tier Keir was a mainstream meme and if Reform had any balls they would hammer it home every time they have to talk about him. Take out adverts showing same crimes and difference sentencing between racial groups. Use their media reach to have it be in the news cycle every week. White people do not like unfair treatment and if you made it so every day they heard how they were being treated worse you would stoke a fire. Bill boards used to be good for this because people would drive past them daily and have to look at it. There's avenues the right don't use.

Someone said why would the backbenchers remove Starmer if they know he's weak and will buckle? Because it's politics. It's better to be the boss than to have someone else be the boss. The perks and access to future business partners is better than someone else having them. Every time Starmer goes to a big summit like the G7 he's meeting 6 other people who are going to be part of big tech or the major banking industry within the next ten years. You want that networking so your 'retirement' makes Scrooge McDuck look working class.
 
FuckedOffToff said:
I don't mean to be rude, but isn't this how all groups do recruitment?
Love bombing people in vulnerable positions until they gain their trust, making them think that it's their idea to join the group, then getting them to move a great distance away from their family before they reveal their abusive side?
Like that first guy did?
What if they'd been really nice Scientologists, or Amish?
Click to expand...
Yup, it's cult indoctrination 101.
 
A poster said, "Why would they just keep him, then bleed him each time?" The issue with that is the backbenchers hate THE CABINET and Starmer. I said from the get-go a year ago that his majority would be his downfall. It's too wide and difficult to whip them, but when they have a unified motive, it will be impossible to stop. He has no charisma, and he put a cabinet together that collectively despises him. In the old days, a PM would use those cabinet ministers to go to their own cliques and whip support, but Starmer has the opposite of that.

Now the Tories know they can kill Kemi at the same time because she used her rope, and it spells disaster for both.

The letter Starmer issued to the signed rebels is something else.

""A year ago next week, our Labour government was elected after 14 years of chaos and decline under the Tories. It is because of people like you that we won a majority and a mandate to change our country.

Like you, I joined the Labour Party because I believe in care, compassion and social justice. In Opposition, we watched the Tories chip away at the social contract underpinning the welfare state in Britain. A welfare state that our party created. We said then that we would fix it. And that is exactly what we’re doing.

At its best, our welfare state does what we cherish: it protects the people who need it.At its worst, because of the changes made by the Tories, it traps people into the system and denies them the dignity and security that they deserve.

The government I lead is not going to stand idle as more and more severely ill and disabled people face the insecurity of being continually reassessed for social security when it is clear that they cannot work again. We will end the cruel re-assessments for those who can’t work.

I will not accept a country where 1 in 8 young people are not in education, employment or training, with no support to help them get a foot on the ladder. When 2.8 million people of working age are written off by a Tory system that was designed to fail, I will not accept this.Let me be clear: if we do nothing to reform social security, we will fail the people who need it most. And we will give a pass to our political opponents who want to see an end to it. If the Tories were the architects who designed a system that failed people in this country, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK is the party who wants to see it off for good.

It is our job to fix the system that they have broken, to protect it for the long term. Our party created the welfare state and it is our job to secure it for the future.Our investment in mental health services, childcare and social housing is giving people the chance to live the life they want to live.

I know that in recent days there have been some concerns about the changes that we have proposed. I have listened to colleagues who have rightly shared ways for us to improve our changes. And we are taking those improvements forward.

But I want you to know this: the values that motivate our changes to social security, are the same values that mean our Plan for Change is delivering free breakfast clubs in primary schools, free school meals for those who need them, and a £1,400 boost to pay for 3.5 million low paid workers.We are delivering for the people we came into politics to serve.

I want to thank you for your support. We were elected on a mandate to change Britain. We are getting on with the job. And we are putting our values of care, compassion and social justice to work.""

What is worse, Rachel's changes were finally costed and it came to 2.5 billion saved and not 5 billion. So what is even worse is that she was doing it purely to spite the disabled. Again, if you cut benefits to migrants, you save 1 billion monthly, and if you abolish the hotels, you would save an additional 500 million monthly. That there is a saving of 18 billion. This is costed under too. No, British disabled people are bad, though. Just admit you are an evil bitch, Starmer though co-signed this cunt and has to go down with it.

Apologies for the long post, frens.
 
The governments actions make perfect sense if you assume they are an occupational force that hates you and wants you to die.
EDIT: Between taxes, benefits cuts, the abortion bill, the assisted dying bill and the not giving a fuck about violent crime; it really is a government of 'Please just fucking die. Please?' A real government for death.
 
Kier Starmer said:
At its best, our welfare state does what we cherish: it protects the people who need it.At its worst, because of the changes made by the Tories, it traps people into the system and denies them the dignity and security that they deserve.

The government I lead is not going to stand idle as more and more severely ill and disabled people face the insecurity of being continually reassessed for social security when it is clear that they cannot work again. We will end the cruel re-assessments for those who can’t work.
Click to expand...
This is true, they always tell the truth and then come up with a solution that makes the problem worse. The benefits system is a mess and many ill and disabled people have to fight to get their benefits reviewed when a foreigner comes in and judges if they're sick enough or not. They spend billions and jam up the legal system with appeals and tribunals. If the system worked the legal cost alone with be more of a saving than any of these cuts would.

The left taking over these sort of fights really hurts our people. There should be a way to move from benefits to work and back again as needed and fixing that would be a good thing. Leaving people alone who can't do anything ever again in life cuts down on the need for third party assessment companies wasting tax payers money.

I hate how two faced all of this is. This is a problem. It does need fixing. Their fix is to kick people off benefits so Abdul can get a free five star hotel. They tell you the truth as they stab you in the back.

"If you don't support me and what I'm doing Farage will crawl out from under the bed and destroy the country" was a good read. He's trying to build up Reform as the next national socialist party and painting himself as the one to stop it. If you don't support him you support Reform and are responsible for what they do.
 
twitter account is of the rear admiral mentioned. Worth reading the article. Condemend and ignored a rear admiral because people might think it is racist. reminds me of the grooming gangs. I'm more and more certain that racism is the answer
Screenshot 2025-06-27 14.31.28.webp GucMd2ZWoAA94wb.webp

Link
Archive
 
Something that got my noggin joggin' recently was this little bit of news.
Work has begun on a controversial project to create the building blocks of human life from scratch, in what is believed to be a world first.
The research has been taboo until now because of concerns it could lead to designer babies or unforeseen changes for future generations.
But now the World's largest medical charity, the Wellcome Trust, has given an initial £10m to start the project and says it has the potential to do more good than harm by accelerating treatments for many incurable diseases.
Dr Julian Sale, of the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge, who is part of the project, told BBC News the research was the next giant leap in biology.
"The sky is the limit. We are looking at therapies that will improve people's lives as they age, that will lead to healthier aging with less disease as they get older.
"We are looking to use this approach to generate disease-resistant cells we can use to repopulate damaged organs, for example in the liver and the heart, even the immune system," he said.
But critics fear the research opens the way for unscrupulous researchers seeking to create enhanced or modified humans.
Dr Pat Thomas, director of the campaign group Beyond GM, said: "We like to think that all scientists are there to do good, but the science can be repurposed to do harm and for warfare".
Details of the project were given to BBC News on the 25th anniversary of the completion of the Human Genome Project, which mapped the molecules in human DNA and was also largely funded by Wellcome.

Every cell in our body contains a molecule called DNA which carries the genetic information it needs. DNA is built from just four much smaller blocks referred to as A, G, C and T, which are repeated over and over again in various combinations. Amazingly it contains all the genetic information that physically makes us who we are.
The Human Genome Project enabled scientists to read all human genes like a bar code. The new work that is getting under way, called the Synthetic Human Genome Project, potentially takes this a giant leap forward – it will allow researchers not just to read a molecule of DNA, but to create parts of it – maybe one day all of it - molecule by molecule from scratch.

Scientists will begin developing tools to create ever larger sections of human DNA
The scientists' first aim is to develop ways of building ever larger blocks of human DNA, up to the point when they have synthetically constructed a human chromosome. These contain the genes that govern our development, repair and maintenance.
These can then be studied and experimented on to learn more about how genes and DNA regulate our bodies.
Many diseases occur when these genes go wrong so the studies could lead to better treatments, according to Prof Matthew Hurles, director of the Wellcome Sanger Insititute which sequenced the largest proportion of the Human Genome.
"Building DNA from scratch allows us to test out how DNA really works and test out new theories, because currently we can only really do that by tweaking DNA in DNA that already exists in living systems".

These machines used to read human DNA may soon be used to write sections of it
The project's work will be confined to test tubes and dishes and there will be no attempt to create synthetic life. But the technology will give researchers unprecedented control over human living systems.
And although the project is hunting for medical benefits, there is nothing to stop unscrupulous scientists misusing the technology.
They could, for example, attempt to create biological weapons, enhanced humans or even creatures that have human DNA, according to Prof Bill Earnshaw, a highly respected genetic scientist at Edinburgh University who designed a method for creating artificial human chromosomes.
"The genie is out of the bottle," he told BBC News. "We could have a set of restrictions now, but if an organisation who has access to appropriate machinery decided to start synthesising anything, I don't think we could stop them"
Ms Thomas is concerned about how the technology will be commercialised by healthcare companies developing treatments emerging from the research.
"If we manage to create synthetic body parts or even synthetic people, then who owns them. And who owns the data from these creations? "
Given the potential misuse of the technology, the question for Wellcome is why they chose to fund it. The decision was not made lightly, according to Dr Tom Collins, who gave the funding go-ahead.
"We asked ourselves what was the cost of inaction," he told BBC News.
"This technology is going to be developed one day, so by doing it now we are at least trying to do it in as responsible a way as possible and to confront the ethical and moral questions in an upfront way as possible".
A dedicated social science programmewill run in tandem with the project's scientific development and will be led by Prof Joy Zhang, a sociologist, at the University of Kent.
"We want to get the views of experts, social scientists and especially the public about how they relate to the technology and how it can be beneficial to them and importanlty what questions and concerns they have," she said.
Click to expand...
Putting aside various typos and errors in the article the concept of building artificial DNA is fascinating. However, going with the UK's plan to DNA test all babies I am sat here wondering how easy this project will make it to fake evidence of people committing crimes.
 
Morethanabitfoolish said:
Putting aside various typos and errors in the article the concept of building artificial DNA is fascinating. However, going with the UK's plan to DNA test all babies I am sat here wondering how easy this project will make it to fake evidence of people committing crimes.
Click to expand...
They can already plant false evidence or make it up. Designer DNA isn't needed when it's so easy to get DNA from anything someone touches.

Making fake DNA would be extremely dangerous. Until we understand how genes work and have the full picture anything we create will be riddled with problems and clashing systems. Our genetics turn on and off depending on our parents and grand parents experiences. Something grown in a lab will have none of those systematic influences flowing in the same direction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom