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...
Why did we all silently agree to do the pro-noun thing? Why are we still doing it? Why is it costing people their livelihoods for using the wrong words?

Since when did the yewff call the shots? We never listen to kids, because they're retards, but we're still doing it.

It's madness. Absolute madness.
 
Dad wears muzzle to the pub and sips pint through a straw in solidarity with his XL Bully

Bongs, you knows I love yous, but :shit-eating:

1704380637810.png Screenshot_20240104-090423.png

A dad staged a one-man protest against new laws on XL Bullies by wearing a muzzle and drinking a pint through a straw at his local pub.

Eamonn Mcgeady, 51, and his six-month-old dog Lexi wore matching protective guards during their visit to the Straw Hat. Eamonn ordered a pint at the bar and drank it through a straw, much to the amusement of other patrons. His daughter Elle, 19, said he did this to make a point about the new legislation on the breed, which made her feel proud.

Elle, an apprentice engineer from Chester, expressed her disagreement with the muzzle rule. She said: "We'd be happy enough to walk her on a lead but we're not happy with the muzzle - it's just not nice to see." Eamonn isn't the only owner to go to such lengths and another man did similar.

She added that Lexi now hides when it's time for a walk because she knows she has to wear the muzzle. Elle also claimed that other dogs have started to bully Lexi since she's been on a lead with a muzzle and said that people's reactions towards Lexi have changed.

She said: "Before people would come up and give her a stroke and a pat but now we're getting more evil looks off people instead."Despite the negative reactions, Elle was proud of her dad's protest at the pub. She said: "Dad was drinking pints using a straw through the muzzle and getting on the floor with Lexi to play around with her."

Eamonn wanted to show Lexi that she wasn't the only one who had to wear the muzzle. According to Elle, people they walked past praised Eamonn for his actions, saying it showed he's a good owner. The Government has rolled out a series of new laws concerning XL Bullies following a number of fatal attacks in 2023. As of New Year's Eve, it became mandatory for these dogs to wear a muzzle in public.
Click to expand...
 
Fungible penis said:
Bongs, you knows I love yous, but
Click to expand...
I suspect this is the Straw Hat Pub in Ellesmere Port.

1704397695997.png

Using Chester as a location is incredibly misleading when talking about some of the surrounding environs.

Andy Burham's giving us a vision of what Labour will be doing to address the housing crisis. Not for everyone of course, just certain groups.


Manchester is set to get the 'UK's first purpose-built' LGBTQ+ housing scheme as part of a 'landmark' proposal for the city.

The extra care housing development will see 120 flats built on the vacant site of Spire Hospital in Whalley Range.

The ground-breaking proposal has been revealed by Great Places Housing Group, which plans to build two new apartment blocks on the demolished hospital plot.

One will be a 'four to five storey' brick building including 80 one-and-two-bedroom flats for over-55s from the LGBTQ+ community, and the other will have 40 apartments, also of one-and-two-bedrooms.

A consultation has now been launched on the scheme, which has the backing of city leaders and Paul Martin, chief executive of the LGBT Foundation.


'The views of the local community are key to making this development a success,' Mr Martin said.

'We encourage people to use their voice to help shape the future of this landmark project, to ensure it offers a safe and welcoming home for older LGBT+ people.'

Under the plans, the majority of residents would be from the LGBTQ+ community in Manchester who would live alongside other members of the local community.

As part of the scheme, the smaller block of 40 flats would be available to first-time buyers and eligible for shared ownership. It would be separate from the other development, which is for over-55s.

The larger building will feature properties available for social rent. It will also have shared facilities, lounges and treatment rooms as well as landscaped gardens.

Councillor Gavin White, Manchester City Council's housing boss, hailed the scheme a 'landmark development for Manchester's LGBTQ+ community'.

Helen Spencer, executive director of growth at Great Places Housing Association, said the 'exciting and innovative project aims to create the UK's first purpose-built and co-produced LGBTQ+ Extra Care housing scheme'.

'We believe this scheme will not only meet the specific needs and aspirations of the LGBT+ community, but also enhance the diversity and vibrancy of Whalley Range as a neighbourhood,' she added.

A public consultation meeting is set to take place on January 12 between 2pm and 8pm at the site in Russell Road and again from midday to 2pm the following day. People have until March 8 to give their views.
Click to expand...
 
I recently found something hilarious, the Guardian has different money begging demands depending if you are viewing the pages using your phone or not.

The article is the standard "evil far Right are coming for our brains, Labour need to spend infinite tax payer money on Green policies and jail anyone who ever doesn't vote for them."

The difference between the begging is great though. Here's the normal one at the www. link.

… there is a good reason why people choose not to support the Guardian.

Not everyone can afford to pay for the news right now. That’s why we choose to keep our journalism open for everyone to read. If this is you, please continue to read for free.

But if you can, then here are three good reasons to make the choice to support us today.

1. Our quality, investigative journalism is a scrutinising force at a time when the rich and powerful are getting away with more and more.

2. We are independent and have no billionaire owner controlling what we do, so your money directly powers our reporting.

3. It doesn’t cost much, and takes less time than it took to read this message.

Choose to power the Guardian’s journalism for years to come, whether with a small sum or a larger one. If you can, please support us on a monthly basis from just £2. It takes less than a minute to set up, and you can rest assured that you’re making a big impact every single month in support of open, independent journalism. Thank you.
Click to expand...
The lowest default option is £3 a month not £2 by the way. Can't even provide accurate reporting about what they want each month.

Then there is this marvel from the amp. link which I can't archive because Wayback doesn't capture it as it's separate from the article.


Well, 2023 didn’t exactly go to plan, did it?​

Here in the UK, the prime minister, Rishi Sunak, had promised us a government of stability and competence – not forgetting professionalism, integrity and accountability – after the rollercoaster ride of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss. Remember Liz? These days she seems like a long forgotten comedy act. Instead, Sunak took us even further through the looking-glass into the Conservative psychodrama.

Elsewhere, the picture has been no better. In the US, Donald Trump is now many people’s favourite to become president again. In Ukraine, the war has dragged on with no end in sight. The danger of the rest of the world getting battle fatigue and losing interest all too apparent. Then there is the war in the Middle East and not forgetting the climate crisis …

But a new year brings new hope. There are elections in many countries, including the UK and the US. We have to believe in change. That something better is possible. The Guardian will continue to cover events from all over the world and our reporting now feels especially important. But running a news gathering organisation doesn’t come cheap.

So this year, I am asking you – if you can afford it – to give money. Well, not to me personally – though you can if you like – but to the Guardian. By supporting the Guardian from just £2 per month, we will be able to continue our mission to pursue the truth in all corners of the world.

With your help, we can make our journalism free to everyone. You won’t ever find any of our news reports or comment pieces tucked away behind a paywall. We couldn’t do this without you. Unlike our politicians, when we say we are in this together we mean it.

Happy new year!

John Crace,

Guardian columnist
Click to expand...
Note that John Crace here is not the columnist for this article.
 
Morethanabitfoolish said:
Looks like that warchest has only grown since then, from 850 million to 1.29 billion. However that fell to 1.24 billion

Click to expand...
Yep, the graun is sort of like wikipedia in that sense. It has a fuckton of cash on hand, but it begs for pennies from its almost exclusively middle class readership, to trick them into thinking it's a poor freedom fighter against the oppressive oligarchs that run the world. This despite the fact that its columns are filled with the alcohol-soaked ramblings of upper-middle-class yummy mummies, Americans, and various other rich twats, with the occasional token paki for diversity points.
 
teriyakiburns said:
Yep, the graun is sort of like wikipedia in that sense. It has a fuckton of cash on hand, but it begs for pennies from its almost exclusively middle class readership, to trick them into thinking it's a poor freedom fighter against the oppressive oligarchs that run the world.
Click to expand...

It's also worth noting that, while they happily talk about how they're not owned by one of those big ol' meanie pants billionaires they regularly bitch about, they sure do take a lot of money from them.

The Gates Foundation:
Gates Foundation.png Gates Foundation 2.JPG
The Conrad Hilton foundation:
Hilton Foundation.JPG
The Rockefeller Foundation:
Rockefeller Foundation.JPG
The Ford Foundation:
Ford Foundation.JPG
Ford Foundation 2.JPG
The Knight Foundation:
Knight Foundation.JPG
 
Fuck me, two Millwall fans arrested for making helicopter gestures at a football match against Leicester.

No update on any arrests of those in Leicester parading Hamas flags in the streets.

The UK is fucked.
 
Amin Yasister said:
Fuck me, two Millwall fans arrested for making helicopter gestures at a football match against Leicester.

No update on any arrests of those in Leicester parading Hamas flags in the streets.

The UK is fucked.
Click to expand...

To give this context the Millwall fans were mocking the helicopter death of the Leicester chairman in 2018. So not a nice thing to do, but surely not a criminal offence ? Is the summons merely for a banning order from football grounds ?

One wonders where this will all end ? Is it now a criminal act to offend someone ? I can understand that certain things might be in very poor taste, but unless they encourage violence ( for example supporting a known terrorist organisation ), I would be inclined to allow people the freedom to express themselves. If something really is that offensive, then surely the total public condemnation will be enough ?
In five years' time, if I swear at a millenial in front of a policeperson ( they haven't been men for a long time ) will I be arrested ?

More importantly, who decides what constitutes an offensive act ? Isn't the whole pronouns thing about offending the poor little confused millenials ? Something which I'm sure if you had asked most people a decade ago, they would have thought it was a joke. It's a slippery slope.....

The UK is indeed fucked.
 
Bad taste yes, but Brits have always had gallows humour. Some one famous dies, and within minutes, jokes about them are being shared.

Too many people are getting too upset at jokes comedians told just five or ten years ago, and demanding that they be cancelled.

It offends me greatly to see people on social media demanding that these two people are sacked from their jobs for this.
 
EddyRooney said:
More importantly, who decides what constitutes an offensive act ?
Click to expand...
The police do. We have a number of laws now, where the operative clauses hinge on the "feeling" of an investigating officer. If they "feel" that something is grossly offensive or indecent, then the law is broken and they can arrest you. Given how much they enjoy arresting people for hurting their own feelings, these recent laws are a god-send for the rozzers. They can arrest whoever they like, at any time they like, and be pretty sure of a prosecution.
 
teriyakiburns said:
The police do. We have a number of laws now, where the operative clauses hinge on the "feeling" of an investigating officer. If they "feel" that something is grossly offensive or indecent, then the law is broken and they can arrest you. Given how much they enjoy arresting people for hurting their own feelings, these recent laws are a god-send for the rozzers. They can arrest whoever they like, at any time they like, and be pretty sure of a prosecution.
Click to expand...
Does this not worry you ? The thought that the average plod is making these kinds of decisions is frankly terrifying to me.
I was brought up to respect the Law and by extension, the Police.....Nowadays, unfortunately, I'm really not sure I do.
It seems they have become increasingly political in nature and only seem to enforce some laws and police some people.
Personally I don't think laws should be subjective in nature wherever possible. There are always going to be individuals that delight in acts of brinksmanship ( commonly known as pisstakers ) in this nature, but personally I want the police arresting people committing actual crimes, not people that misgender, indulge in bad taste jokes, or call other people nasty names.
 
Caught some details of an old one here with some interesting wider implications.

A woman who faked a medical degree certificate to work as a psychiatrist for more than two decades has been jailed for seven years.
Zholia Alemi worked across the UK after claiming to have qualified at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, Manchester Crown Court was told.
Alemi, of Plumbe Street, Burnley, had the power to detain mental health patients against their will.
She had denied 20 offences including forgery but was found guilty by a jury.
She was convicted of 13 counts of fraud, three of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception, two of forgery and two of using a false instrument.
At the sentencing hearing Judge Hilary Manley called for an inquiry to be held into how the General Medical Council (GMC) registered her as a doctor, when the documents she submitted in 1995 were "clearly false".
Alemi studied to be a doctor in New Zealand in the early 1990s but did not finish her course, however she managed to work as a consultant clinical psychiatrist.
In 1995 she forged a degree certificate and a letter of verification - with the word verify misspelt, the court heard.
Despite that they were both accepted as evidence by the GMC who registered her as a doctor.

Manchester Crown Court heard she "practised continuously in a very large number of posts literally from one end of the country to another".
The court heard Alemi had earned up to £1.3m in wages from the NHS, which she obtained fraudulently because of her falsified documents.
An investigative journalist uncovered the truth, when in 2018 Alemi was convicted at Carlisle Crown Court of attempting to forge the will and powers of attorney of an 84-year-old widow from Keswick who was one of her patients - so she became main beneficiary of her estate.
She was jailed for five years.

​

After that Phil Coleman from Cumberland News made phone calls to New Zealand which established the truth, prompting an investigation by Cumbria Police.
The prosecution told the judge that her offences are likely to have led to a loss of confidence in the NHS and "a large number of vulnerable patients have at least been put at risk by being 'treated' by this entirely unqualified defendant".
Following Alemi's 2018 conviction, the GMC apologised for its "inadequate" checks in the 1990s and began an urgent check of about 3,000 foreign doctors working in the UK.
Una Lane, director of registration and revalidation at the GMC, said: "We are very sorry that Zholia Alemi was able to join our medical register in the 1990s, based on fraudulent documentation, and for any risk arising to patients as a result.
"Our processes are far stronger now, with rigorous testing in place to make sure those joining the register are fit to work in the UK.
"It is clear that in this case the steps taken almost three decades ago were inadequate. We are confident that, 27 years on, our systems are robust."
Click to expand...
Where it gets unusual is what I caught on Radio 4 today which was doing a deeper dive into it, specifically how she got up to the level of a consultant with no qualifications. It essentially snowballed up after her initial appointment where her prior employment within the NHS was used as proof she was qualified for further qualifications.

Her fake degree got her in the door. 2 years later in 1997 she went from a provisional registration to a full one. 2003 she got membership of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and then in 2012 they recommended her for entry to the specialist register which qualified her for consultant posts.

So about 10 years ago the GMC was not doing diligence on the people they were appointing to some of the highest positions they could including those given powers to have mental health patients held. Wonder how many more like her there are in the NHS?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom