UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

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

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.

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.

 

[Chunky Salsa]

So guys - when will that Enoch Powell resurrection machine be finally made?

Or the Oswald Mosley one, for that matter?

Both men were, bluntly, utterly fucking useless. Mosley suffered a setback and harrumphed, then fucked off to yacht around the world like the out of touch tosser he was; and Powell gave a rousing speech which got people in the streets chanting for him to make a new party; whereupon he demurred and abandoned politics. If we shot forward 100 years, people would probably say the same about Jacob Reese Mogg because the cunt once chatted with Bowden and told him that he thinks what's being done to the UK is awful; but leave out that he also said that taking drastic action would be 'Un-British'.

 

[Eddie Riggs]

Both men were, bluntly, utterly fucking useless. Mosley suffered a setback and harrumphed, then fucked off to yacht around the world like the out of touch tosser he was; and Powell gave a rousing speech which got people in the streets chanting for him to make a new party; whereupon he demurred and abandoned politics. If we shot forward 100 years, people would probably say the same about Jacob Reese Mogg because the cunt once chatted with Bowden and told him that he thinks what's being done to the UK is awful; but leave out that he also said that taking drastic action would be 'Un-British'.

Heh - good to know "le heckin' basederino, am i right fellow trads" have equivalents across the ocean. Sobering in a way.

 

[Zoot]

Or the Oswald Mosley one, for that matter?

I pray for the return of his avatar everyday.

 

[Chunky Salsa]

Heh - good to know "le heckin' basederino, am i right fellow trads" have their own equivalents across the ocean. Sobering in a way.

I think they had the right ideas. Just not enough or not able to follow through. Powell was not one for revolutionary and radical action; and Mosley had much better options than potentially losing everything trying to be be fascist in a world where fascism had been bombed to shit.

Hitler turned a prison stay into a public spectacle and a political career not because he was more ideologically pure, or stronger willed than Mosley - though he probably was considering all the married women Mosley fucked behind his wifes back - but because he really didn't have much of a choice otherwise.

 

[Made In Wales]

A GE would amount to them willingly giving up power. I would like to have one, but these people do not give up power

True, but Starmer withdrawing the Whip from rebels is something that I can see happening.

He's damned either way - if the vote goes through, there'll be protests and resignations and if it doesn't he faces a potential VONC.

All to save a couple of quid for Ukraine or whichever Current Thing we'll be facing next.

As I've said more than a few times, watch the angry Left as they urgently want a regime change here - Starmer out, Labour out, Good PM who'll do as we command in (whoever that might be).

Whilst @Chunky Salsa is right in that there's nothing I can do directly, I'm part of the 'Far Right' - I mock the opposition, I comment upon their stupidity, I do more than my fair share of Whatiffery and try to look three moves ahead. What I don't do is threaten the lives of MP's (as some on the Far Left are doing and may well sadly do, because it's their way or the highway) or threaten to bring air travel to a halt, derail trains or whatever other crass plans they have in mind.

When we have talk of unity between the useless idiots and the potential for them to 'go rogue' then that I fear is going to do us a lot of damage - could/would they kill Starmer? Yes, of course they would, and they'd feel righteous about doing so.

The question then is who is paying the Far Left to attack 'The Left'...

Anyway, I understand that talk of a GE is contentious here, therefore if and when it's 'happening' I'll post about it over in Happenings. I welcome the opinions of everybody here about if it will or won't happen, but maybe we should move on and not get too bogged down in this.

Que sera sera.

 

[Chunky Salsa]

The question then is who is paying the Far Left to attack 'The Left'...

You don't need to pay them to, all movements have vanguard elements within them. Groups that are more radical than the main body, which adhere to the more pie in the sky ideas of the movement. Someone probably is helping them out from within the less radical left, in the same way that the IRA was helped out by the less radical members of their own movement.

EDIT: I am not advocating for anything; but the approach of non violent mockery is like tossing tomatoes at a hand puppet. The puppet can just get replaced with a new one and the hand carries on doing its thing. To get realistic for a second (boooooo I know), violence historically works and you win, or doesn't and you die. A lot of would be radicals always forget that the second is a far more likely - and often inevitable - option for revolutionary action.

EDIT2: I sound like some blackpilled doomer lunatic, I'm really not. I just highly doubt the utility of non violent passive resistance against a system that wants you to just lie down and die anyway. On the other hand pulling the trigger on actual violent resistance has a very, very high likelihood of getting you in prison at best, dead at worst; and still not working.

 

[Made In Wales]

You don't need to pay them to, all movements have vanguard elements within them. Groups that are more radical than the main body, which adhere to the more pie in the sky ideas of the movement. Someone probably is helping them out from within the less radical left, in the same way that the IRA was helped out by the less radical members of their own movement.

EDIT: I am not advocating for anything; but the approach of non violent mockery is like tossing tomatoes at a hand puppet. The puppet can just get replaced with a new one and the hand carries on doing its thing. To get realistic for a second (boooooo I know), violence historically works and you win, or doesn't and you die. A lot of would be radicals always forget that the second is a far more likely - and often inevitable - option for revolutionary action.

EDIT2: I sound like some blackpilled doomer lunatic, I'm really not. I just highly doubt the utility of non violent passive resistance against a system that wants you to just lie down and die anyway. On the other hand pulling the trigger on actual violent resistance has a very, very high likelihood of getting you in prison at best, dead at worst; and still not working.

To me you sound like a decent and normal person, and yes I agree that sometimes the time for talking is done and action has to happen.

You don't have to justify your position here, and despite the fact we may not see eye to eye on everything I always find your posts entertaining and educational.

It's amazing that Kiwi Farms has some genuinely VERY smart and sharp minds resident, and no I'm not just saying that for effect - there's some great people and great discussions here.

My only concern re: violence is when innocent people get caught up in the action, however 'justifiable' it is. I certainly do not back the Far Left's plans of 'destruction at any and all cost' - derailing trains on the three main high speed lines in the UK (East Coast, Great Western and West Coast) or blowing up shopping centres like Bluewater in order to scare people into conformity.

My hope is that the toxic society the Left has created also turns against them and (figuratively) swallows them alive.

I am reluctant to be violent, unless I have no other option.

 

[Kofi Drinka]

We had an RAF base break in and the government is literally going "LALALALALA FUCK YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU YOU'RE JUST BEING SEXIST!" despite the fact that someone could have walked off with handfuls of rifles if they so pleased. A German man once said that hope is cowardly as it ignores reality, and despite not particularly liking Germans; I am compelled to agree. We have a police state, it's not going away until at least 2029. Get used to it, and learn to live under it, or go do something criminal if you think it'd make a difference.

We get it. Nothing ever happens and no government has ever been forced into a general election before. It's all just a dream. The general public have never had a major backlash against a PM calling for war and will never consider why a country is 'preparing for war' with open borders and no attempt to close them.

whereupon he demurred and abandoned politics.

He got black listed by everyone around him. His wife got spat on when she went out to higher end places and couldn't understand why telling the truth got them kicked out of the upper class. You can't start a political party and expect to get any where with no money.

threaten to bring air travel to a halt, derail trains or whatever other crass plans they have in mind.

Are they going to stop the last 3 trains that run at all? Or make the planes fall out of the sky more than they already are?

I fall in line with Movie Bob on this. There are no bad tactics, only bad targets. If it would save my people and my homeland I consider it a valid thing to do. I'm not going to drive a van into a crowd because it's not going to make any difference. Jo Cox made no difference and it replaced a cog with another one. Terrorism doesn't have a big enough impact on the status quo to be worth throwing your life away. The Muslims aren't conquering the country because they're ramming vans into people. They're out breeding the natives and abusing the system to build up. Random terrorism doesn't help them and they lose ground every time one happens.

 

[Chunky Salsa]

We get it. Nothing ever happens and no government has ever been forced into a general election before. It's all just a dream. The general public have never had a major backlash against a PM calling for war and will never consider why a country is 'preparing for war' with open borders and no attempt to close them.

General elections are forced when there is a mechanism to force it, shit doesn't happen just by magic. What actual mechanism do you think will compel a general election, walk me through the steps that you think will happen to make a general election occur.

 

[teriyakiburns]

View attachment 7554704
I'm starting to think aliens are real and they work for the BBC.

Huh, and here I thought Carel Struyken had retired from playing weird aliens.

EDIT: This is an issue of people being disconnected from what they are even talking about; an election is the government deciding to end itself. Does anyone genuinely think that our government is A) The sort of government that gives a single solitary fuck about what the people it governs thinks and B) Is wiling to shrug and admit they were wrong?

I'm eyeballing a few threads. The first is the likelihood of Starmer applying his prosecutor brain to party rebels and meting out severe punishments. He's got form for withdrawing the whip from members for small slights already - he did it right after the election, which did keep the sitting PLP in line for a while - but there's a large enough rebel group now that any such threat would be seen as pissing into the wind, and would likely foment an actual vote of no confidence from the threatened MPs if he went ahead with it.

The second is how many Labour MPs are weighing "definitely lose my seat in 29 because of this tosser" vs "maybe lose my seat this/next year if we throw him out". The balance has well tipped for some of them, I think.

Third is that Streeting is definitely, though quietly, canvassing for a leadership challenge, and I believe there's at least one other senior party member making discreet overtures as well. Streeting is the sort who will very likely go to the country to shore up support if he wins, to establish a clear delineation between his administration and Starmer's before. That would push any early GE into next year, but it would make it much more likely.

The challenge to all my optimism on this is that the mechanism Labour uses to begin a leadership challenge is much more complicated than the Tory method of sending the men in grey suits, but it does mean that you can see it coming if you're paying attention.

 

[>IMPLYING]

Chunky salsa put it best. Look, ya ain't getting one. It's going to be a loooong 4 years if you keep getting your hopes up for a GE every time the govt looks weak or does something stupid/unpopular/retarded. They'll be doing that a lot.

I agree with him, I guess I prefer to approach "not being able to do anything" with indifference as opposed to frustration/moroseness, since being upset that you the individual can't bring forth change alone is like being upset you're not God. Keep a hold of hope but be realistic, but also don't become blackpilled.

Time's the primary obstacle here. Not that we have too little of it but rather we'll have to wait for much more of it to be spent before we see change. We won't get what we want tomorrow, the week after tomorrow nor the month. We're years away yet, even though we recognise the problems in this instant, too many people simply don't, not yet (a handful of people I spoke to this morning weren't even aware of Israel and Iran bombing each other - true story). We need years for the ignorant to become informed, and the tolerant to become the intolerant.

One of the primary reasons to object to an early GE in fact is that the longer Labour hold on (just as the Tories did), the stronger anti-immigrant/anti-Muslim sentiment becomes. Pre-Southport, we might've just stopped boat crossings and trim down the numbers substantially (700k to 2010's 300k might've been enough for some people). But post-Southport and continued ignorance to the issue: banning Niqab and Halal is a common talking point, something that specifically affects Muslims. We now have exact stats on how disproportionately Pakis rape white girls and how the government covered it up and how the media helped them with it (something done to ameliorate growing immigration resentment, somehow? Remember that Starmer ordered it to begin with) and as resentment grows Labour and the Conservatives will be forced to adhere to a new baseline in order to not be discounted outright for anyone sick of immigration at this point, which is pretty much everybody North of London.

A GE would amount to them willingly giving up power. I would like to have one, but these people do not give up power

They're self-centred and worry for their careers (you need a minimum time in parliament to qualify for the pension after all), so I think for many MPs and early election would be too much of a deterrent to their financial interests rather than politics.

Whilst it might come from me underestimating them collectively, I think power might only be a concern for some (the naïve idealists, egomaniacs, those that actually care). I imagine many having simpler motives tied to money and using the role as a mere stepping stone for other things. This is a problem of course since it's effectively short-termism as seen in the corporate world, but for politics, and carries many of the same flaws relating to short-term gains over long-term ones. For a lot of politicians becoming an MP is just a nice mark on their CV I imagine, before using that experience to springboard elsewhere. A lot of MPs are carrying business degrees into the role with them, so in lieu of experience working in business, there's a lot of inferred experience working as a member of parliament (organisation, administration, balancing budgets, etcetera) that may be more attractive to some employers.

 

[Clem Fandango]

Guys, I want to believe. I probably want a Reform govt more than most in this thread - I'm a Reform hipster: I liked them before they were cool. By which I mean I travelled quite a way to visit their rally in Derby like 4 years ago (celebrity guest speaker, Anne Widdecombe!). For all their flaws, it was truly refreshing at the time to have people giving speeches with lines like "I am white, and I'm not ashamed", and openly disparaging the recent Black lives Matter movement.

I want it to happen, ASAP. I just don't think it will.

Anyway, enough talk. Let's put some stakes on it. If there's a GE before 2029, I'll change my pfp to some equivalent of the Burger Suit thing in the US politics thread.

Anyone who's confident the other way should make a similar bet!

 

[Chunky Salsa]

Anyone who's confident the other way should make a similar bet!

I will make a Warwick Davis respect thread where I espouse his - short - virtues and change my pfp to him being happy, rather than being sent to a death camp.

 

[Made In Wales]

My last word on Politicians is that they need to realise that THEY are there to serve THE PEOPLE.

Once that bond and contract is broken, then they need to be replaced.

 

[Zoot]

the more I get involved in propagating nationalist ideas the less doompilled I feel.

Politicians will keep lying and cheating and ignoring people. The increase in browns will increase the anger.

The far right needs to keep working on pushing its ideas out on the grassroots level. from irl to online. It might take twenty years, it might take longer, but imo a return to a properly nationalistic attitude is coming back and once that happenst he apparatus of the state returns to us.

We don't need to rely on the current crop, once the public become hardloine on brown people, the we will just take it all over.

 

[Made In Wales]

Guys, I want to believe. I probably want a Reform govt more than most in this thread - I'm a Reform hipster: I liked them before they were cool. By which I mean I travelled quite a way to visit their rally in Derby like 4 years ago (celebrity guest speaker, Anne Widdecombe!). For all their flaws, it was truly refreshing at the time to have people giving speeches with lines like "I am white, and I'm not ashamed", and openly disparaging the recent Black lives Matter movement.

I want it to happen, ASAP. I just don't think it will.

Anyway, enough talk. Let's put some stakes on it. If there's a GE before 2029, I'll change my pfp to some equivalent of the Burger Suit thing in the US politics thread.

Anyone who's confident the other way should make a similar bet!

Okay, I'll change mine to Vincent Tan (the demonic little shit currently in charge of Cardiff City) if we have a GE called for one of the following dates:

September 4th
September 11th*
September 18th
September 25th

* Date I believe most likely that it will take place.

 

[They were once men]

My last word on Politicians is that they need to realise that THEY are there to serve THE PEOPLE.

Once that bond and contract is broken, then they need to be replaced.

can you give me one example in british history where politicians have ever served the people?

 

[Chunky Salsa]

can you give me one example in british history where politicians have ever served the people?

Britain is a tough one, but the Dutch ate one of theirs in 1672.

 

[teriyakiburns]

I'll change my pfp to some equivalent of the Burger Suit thing in the US politics thread.

It'll have to be a sausage roll.

I'm not making bets, because I'm not making predictions. Just projecting possibilities.

 

[>IMPLYING]

General elections are forced when there is a mechanism to force it, shit doesn't happen just by magic. What actual mechanism do you think will compel a general election, walk me through the steps that you think will happen to make a general election occur.

Elections are, in general, the responsibility of being called by the Prime Minister. Here's the steps to force one, assuming Starmer doesn't do it himself if he loses the upcoming vote on the bill because contrary to what he says, the bill might be regarded as confidence in him and so he calls one then resigns (throwing a grenade and leaving to not deal with it himself, which'd be the funniest) or he just resigns.
1. No Confidence Starmer
2. New Labour leader is selected (Labour have their own entire process) which may take 4 months (2024's started in January, Starmer was elected leader in April)
3. New leader, now Prime minister, will have to decide whether to hold a GE or not.

Tons of factors involved, but the other half of the Labour party who chose not to no-confidence Starmer might be a pain in the ass for them so may wish to call a GE just to get rid of them, or call one to assuage them until the date of the new election ("Play ball unti xx/202x"), something to that effect. It'd also go against recent precedent to not call one (early GEs called following resignation of Cameron, May, Boris/Truss), which acts as ammo for the opposition in some capacity (don't know how but it feels like it could).

The most definite way to call one regardless of the PM is if commons no-confidences the government, which would also require a large swathe of Labour MPs to vote in opposition to their own party, forcing them to either give power to the opposition or call a general election.

Though it's far more beneficial for Labour to keep their majority than give it up, so it's not very likely.

Edit: If an early one is called, I think we're looking at 2027 or 2028 at the latest or 2026 at the earliest (which relies on Starmer being outed, a new prime minister selected in a similar amount of time to Starmer becoming Labour leader, and then said prime minister calling for a GE a reasonable amount of time from his tenure).