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...
FedPostalService said:
I’ve worked with a few gays like this. They’re regular blokes but just like cock. Each to their own. I’ve got a mate who loves fat girls and whilst I find that repugnant best of luck to him.

The day he comes swanning in dressed and acting weird because shagging land whales is his entire personality then that’s the day I have an issue. Same goes with gay blokes.

Everyone, just enjoy yourself without with an arse about it.
Click to expand...
100 agree with this - do as you will, but harm and annoy no one in the process.

When a person makes it all about them, then I lose both patience and interest.
 
-Jack- said:
Why are we even giving back the Chagos Islands? Who gives a shit what the top UN court thinks, it's all run by Chinese chinks anyways, they're extremely close to the Mauritians. Paying billions to give them back.
Click to expand...
Starmer has to as he's commanded by the WEF.

Trump isn't going to be happy (though he's going to Make Greenland Red Again) and he'll hammer the UN, the British Legal system etc. as he was adamant that the Chagos people shouldn't be impacted unfairly,

I just wonder if this is going to bite Starmer on the arse, like a lovebite from Lord Alli.

Amin Yasister said:
And we will never hear the end of it from their fans.
Click to expand...

Saw this and thought of your comment.
 
Otterly said:
This doesn’t work though. If you castrate then they don’t lose the propensity of being a pervert they just use other ways and objects. Look at the entirety of trannies, they’re on hormones and anti androgen and they’re still raging perverts. Sex offenders need to be in a cell, or a ditch.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Everything is about sex, except sex, which is about power, which is why reducing sex drive does nothing reduce reoffending for sex offenders because they don't do it to get off; it's pure sadism.
"Castrate pedos" is a great headline and also a crucial stage of drawing-to-quartering but in and of itself is a bit pointless and achieves nothing Unless you're doing it with rusty razor.
Morethanabitfoolish said:
Headline could have been, "wah"
Click to expand...
>Muh dead babies
It does warm the cockles of my withered heart that for all the bullshit the piggus get up to, waving an outright Hezbollah flag will still get you banged up, those idiots with the glider cosplays got the same treatment so I'm confident little Liam is gonna get some legit street cred for this one.
 
Did Starmer really go out there saying “I did a deal the tories didn’t get done!!!” As he’s giving away free land and money? Just when I think it can’t get more stupid….
 
-Jack- said:
Why are we even giving back the Chagos Islands?
Click to expand...
Worse still, we're "giving it back" to people who never had any territorial claim on the islands. They say it's because the Chagossians were taken there from Mauritius as French slaves, but prior to that the islands were completely uninhabited and the slaves never had any actual claim that didn't depend on a colonial power to begin with. It's not like the Chagossians are going to benefit from this anyway. They won't be allowed back. The real reason it's going to Mauritius - a Chinese client state - is because the Chinese demanded it be so, as they want the islands for their strategic position in the Indian Ocean. British foreign policy towards China has been one of appeasement for the last twenty years, so it was always going to happen.

Made In Wales said:
Trump isn't going to be happy (though he's going to Make Greenland Red Again) and he'll hammer the UN, the British Legal system etc. as he was adamant that the Chagos people shouldn't be impacted unfairly,
Click to expand...
I'm not sure he'll actually care. The US gets to keep its base and doesn't even have to pay for it, as that particular bill is being taken care of by British tax payers.
 
teriyakiburns said:
Worse still, we're "giving it back" to people who never had any territorial claim on the islands. They say it's because the Chagossians were taken there from Mauritius as French slaves, but prior to that the islands were completely uninhabited and the slaves never had any actual claim that didn't depend on a colonial power to begin with. It's not like the Chagossians are going to benefit from this anyway. They won't be allowed back. The real reason it's going to Mauritius - a Chinese client state - is because the Chinese demanded it be so, as they want the islands for their strategic position in the Indian Ocean. British foreign policy towards China has been one of appeasement for the last twenty years, so it was always going to happen.
Click to expand...
At this rate, Starmar might aswell give back the fucking falklands lol.
 
The only rainbows I have is that when this fucker is out in a few months, he will be ignored and the MSM will annihilate him. They will drag up his personal affairs, his wife, and his family with prejudice. He will be remembered as the worst leader in UK Political history, and Labour will be in a death spiral.

Starmer is at the level where he cannot even walk in the street without disdain, and people actually attacking him. (good). People who think he is lasting til Christmas, I want to know your supplier. This is someone operating at a 15% approval rating, Trump has never seen those numbers. He never even seen 35%, fuck I don't even think Blair Iraq was so low and people hated the cunt.

You can tell they're afraid because they are trying to oust Rayner. We know for some reason, Blair has stopped her leaving, and I think it is to threaten Starmer and act as a stopgap. They really want Ange to go though and it is probably to act as a sacrifice for Reeves and Philipson. The question is will they reach the hallowed one year anniversary?
 
Kier Starmer said:
People who think he is lasting til Christmas, I want to know your supplier.
Click to expand...
It's because labour is actually delusional. They're not just blood sucking parasites wearing skinsuits like the conservatives. Their internal processes are not set up to allow the leader to be ousted; and they are all mildly retarded mongs, with the politicking ability of children. Labour will probably last the whole time because Labour is staffed by insane retards, and there's even less shame in them than the cons.

You're making the mistake of assuming that the government gives a single solitary fuck about the plebs, that they don't just shrug and go "Who gives a shit ha!" or "No, this isn't correct actually." When they see the polls. What are you going to do about it? Protest? Write a strongly worded letter? Starmer is sticking around because Starmer is a psychopath that lacks imagination - his words not mine, he's never felt fear, nor has he ever really imagined or dreamed of anything before in his life - who doesn't give a shit what people think. He's got the job until 2029, and he's not going to leave it unless someone physically drags him out of it.
 
Kier Starmer said:
The only rainbows I have is that when this fucker is out in a few months, he will be ignored and the MSM will annihilate him. They will drag up his personal affairs, his wife, and his family with prejudice. He will be remembered as the worst leader in UK Political history, and Labour will be in a death spiral.

Starmer is at the level where he cannot even walk in the street without disdain, and people actually attacking him. (good). People who think he is lasting til Christmas, I want to know your supplier. This is someone operating at a 15% approval rating, Trump has never seen those numbers. He never even seen 35%, fuck I don't even think Blair Iraq was so low and people hated the cunt.

You can tell they're afraid because they are trying to oust Rayner. We know for some reason, Blair has stopped her leaving, and I think it is to threaten Starmer and act as a stopgap. They really want Ange to go though and it is probably to act as a sacrifice for Reeves and Philipson. The question is will they reach the hallowed one year anniversary?
Click to expand...
I think that they'll manage to not be the shortest serving Government in history (that of Wilson in 1974), but something will have to give over Whitsun.

Even The Guardian mention Starmer's name fleetingly and without the fawning.

I think Rayner has dirt on Starmer, and Blair is begging her not to split rank. Notice that she's had far less of the criticism of late than others in the Cabinet - it's almost been as if she's faded into the background.

If I was a betting man (and thank the Lord I'm not, Sir) I'd wager that Reeves or Joicey (her husband) know that Starmer did something unspeakably bad and that's why she's been allowed to stay in position.

Rayner going is feasible, but Reeves being sacked or going may well unleash the political Kraken.
 
I leave for work and the Chagos deal was stopped, I come home from work and the Chagos islands deal was signed. Well that was bloody pointless then wasn't it?

Anyways this island is a laughing stock and I am hopefully waiting on the video of Kier being pissed on to leak (get it?) so that we can prove once and for all to every nation that no country has ever fallen as far from grace as the British have.
 
Chunky Salsa said:
It's because labour is actually delusional. They're not just blood sucking parasites wearing skinsuits like the conservatives. Their internal processes are not set up to allow the leader to be ousted; and they are all mildly retarded mongs, with the politicking ability of children. Labour will probably last the whole time because Labour is staffed by insane retards, and there's even less shame in them than the cons.

You're making the mistake of assuming that the government gives a single solitary fuck about the plebs, that they don't just shrug and go "Who gives a shit ha!" or "No, this isn't correct actually." When they see the polls. What are you going to do about it? Protest? Write a strongly worded letter? Starmer is sticking around because Starmer is a psychopath that lacks imagination - his words not mine, he's never felt fear, nor has he ever really imagined or dreamed of anything before in his life - who doesn't give a shit what people think. He's got the job until 2029, and he's not going to leave it unless someone physically drags him out of it.
Click to expand...
You're right in that Labour are delusional, but implying that them not giving a shit about the electorate will still see them in office until 2029 is, IMO, wrong.

You only have to look at the polling from Redfield & Wilton to YouGov to realise that this is a Government unlike any which has gone before - a Government which has been beset by problem after problem (many of their own making) and which has treated the electorate with contempt from the start.

The Servant should serve the Master, instead the Servant has usurped the Master and has stolen his title et al in the process.

At no other point during recent history (I'd say from the Attlee Government of 1945) has a third party scored consistently higher with the electorate despite only less than a year elapsing from the previous GE. Certainly, the Governments of Margaret Thatcher (1979, 1983 and 1987) saw very little upward movement for the Liberals and SDP (who then amalgamated into the Liberal Democrats in 1989) and even 1992 post Black Wednesday would not result in much of a win for Paddy Ashdown's then new party. Blair's first two GE's (1997 and 2001) saw Labour gain and both the Tories and Lib Dems lost badly, with the latter rallying late in the 2000s to then form a coalition of power in 2010 when David Cameron and the Tories came back to power after 13 years. The only other third party to score well during the 2010s was the SNP - who now should be renamed the SDS (Scotland's Damp Squibs).

In 2025, it is Reform UK who are the most popular party and not the incumbent Labour party.

I gather that Starmer will have to be dragged kicking and screaming from No. 10 Downing Street, but don't forget that there's factors in play that even he cannot stop nor prevent - the 'unknown unknowns' I believe Donald Rumsfeldt called them:

* Mass rebellion and resignations against the Migrants & Borders bill could trigger a VONC. Dare Starmer head this off with the threat of a GE?

* The truth about Starmer could also leak out - just how damning this would be remains to be seen.

What you cannot ignore is that, despite the issues that Reform UK have had (Lowe and the idiot Banbury Councillor), they are the party which the UK is crying out for and they are only going to get stronger and the voice of Nigel is only going to get louder. It's not a case of 'oh let's drag it out until 2029' as people will not have this. The Zeitgeist has changed, the Overton Window has shifted and Labour's pompous attitude towards the Working Class is only digging their grave that bit quicker.

Yeah, myself and the poster/user @Kier Starmer might be idealists, but we can also see that nothing is certain at this point - to use a footballing analogy, I did not see Crystal Palace winning the FA Cup last weekend (apologies to @BrightonAndHoveAlbion) but win it they did.

In the end, what will be will be - the uncertain and unexpected may still have a say in events.

A-Logato said:
I leave for work and the Chagos deal was stopped, I come home from work and the Chagos islands deal was signed. Well that was bloody pointless then wasn't it?

Anyways this island is a laughing stock and I am hopefully waiting on the video of Kier being pissed on to leak (get it?) so that we can prove once and for all to every nation that no country has ever fallen as far from grace as the British have.
Click to expand...
Starmer sings:

'Why does it always rain on me...'
 
Made In Wales said:
What you cannot ignore is that, despite the issues that Reform UK have had (Lowe and the idiot Banbury Councillor), they are the party which the UK is crying out for and they are only going to get stronger and the voice of Nigel is only going to get louder. It's not a case of 'oh let's drag it out until 2029' as people will not have this. The Zeitgeist has changed, the Overton Window has shifted and Labour's pompous attitude towards the Working Class is only digging their grave that bit quicker.
Click to expand...
Sure, but mechanically, what is actually going to happen? That's my issue with the idea of labour getting the boot. In order to actually get rid of a Prime Minister, they have to either step down, or be forced out. Starmer I don't think can comprehend doing something other than more of what he's already doing; and the rest of the party are cowardly retards. It's sort of a catch-22. Either they know how fucked up everything is, and know that if they do a no confidence, they will implode their party and be out of the job, or they don't and in that case; why would they blow up their party when they already won?
EDIT: My basic issue, is that the government has nakedly been operating on the logic of "If they don't STOP me doing it, I'm going to do it." for a while now. I don't see why they'd change that purely so they can just lose their jobs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom