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.

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:
A moral panic by third wave feminists in their 20’s who seem to only have one night stands with the worst type of men possible because they remind them of their dads and think all men like to choke women.
These are the most damaging women for society, doubly so for other women. They make terrible choices, then rant at other women for making better choices.

I don’t like choking porn but since two consenting adults can choke the fuck out of each other whilst they’re banging I see banning this as retarded. Plus everyone watching porn used a VPN now so this is useless.
Two adults consent, isn't there someone you forgot to ask?
 
Every woman I know would flip out if a bloke tried to strangle them during sex, it's not normal

Why do women have to 'choose better'? Why can't men just be better? A lot of men pretend to be upstanding people and then turn out to be felons, rapists, pedos, violent. Not all shitty men have grills, face tats and dreadlocks to warn potential victims.

The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.
These are the most damaging women for society, doubly so for other women. They make terrible choices, then rant at other women for making better choices.


Two adults consent, isn't there someone you forgot to ask?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.
Most men are not, but the unfortunate reality is that some men simply are, the same way some dogs are violent retards and some apples are half rotten. They're all usually easy to spot, though. It just requires a little discretion. No mind reading needed.
 
The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.
I shouldn't wade into this as I don't really want to join the "Men Should Strangle Women" party by some sort of default, but the logical flaw in the above is that it treats men as a block. No matter how good I am, it wont make the next man also good. And given the set of Men is always going to be a mix of good and bad (mostly good, I hope), the only viable solution is to be able to distinguish between the good and bad ones. And regrettably I have known a number of women in my life who could not distinguish between strong and cruel.

Saying that actually brings to mind a personal case from my early 20's when a girl I was somewhat acquainted with fell for another guy because she saw him as strong/tough/something, I don't know. The reason it comes to mind is that he and I ended up having a little bit of a set-to and I dealt with him rather handily which I honestly pretty much expected as to me he seemed rather weak and unpleasant. But - and this is the point - she was shocked. She genuinely seemed to just fall for his loud and aggressive schtick which was bizarre to me. He was clearly just an arsehole with an inflated ego. I think a lot of women for whatever reason, genuinely cannot tell when someone is just being petty and nasty to people weaker than themselves, rather than actually strong and confident. I don't fully know why.
 
Last edited:
Why do women have to 'choose better'? Why can't men just be better? A lot of men pretend to be upstanding people and then turn out to be felons, rapists, pedos, violent. Not all shitty men have grills, face tats and dreadlocks to warn potential victims.

The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.
Go back to the Beauty Parlour, cat-lady.
 
Go back to the Beauty Parlour, cat-lady.
No.

Wholeheartedly disagree. There are instances of very introverted men, doctors, pastors, lawyers, judges committing horrific acts of abuse. Chris Watts who murdered his entire family to run away with another broad was considered an upstanding citizen, and he's far from the only one. Domestic violence refuges in my country are full, how probable is it that all those women had received warning signs that the guy was trouble? Most domestic violence victims I have met were partnered with introverted, educated and well-spoken men with no reason to fear in the initial stages.

I would argue that if a woman starts a relationship with someone who is very obviously a wigger or who hails from a ghetto or dodgy upbringing would be unwise, but nonetheless it doesn't mean the man is justified in bringing her to any harm. That said, if I were female, I would certainly avoid men from certain backgrounds and cultures.

There is no legal loophole in my country that excuses the abuser of a battered woman if he presented with a 'tough guy' or 'thug' image and thus she 'should have seen it coming'. I have never even heard an argument made by any defence lawyer of an abuser in a court that his client should be precluded from accountability because of his image. Most women who enter into relationships with thugs are likely also from a Dickensian upbringing, which explains the pairing. Can you think of a white-collar, well-to-do man in a respectable profession seeking a woman from a slum?

Inversely, I have yet to hear of a male abuse victim being asked why he didn't 'choose better' (in a way that is not from women who are facetiously mocking the exact arguments made here) or why he was not somehow able to look into his crystal ball and prophetically predict that the woman he loved would turn on him. The idea of 'choosing better' , for either gender, is highly illogical: (but I suspect that you already know that in your heart of hearts and simply delight in the pain of women).

(Sincerely, a man with a cock and two fully functioning bollocks who has actually lives in the world and knows people who've been abused.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think a lot of women for whatever reason, genuinely cannot tell when someone is just being petty and nasty to people weaker than themselves, rather than actually strong and confident. I don't fully know why.
Because we don’t fight physically any more. And… I will try to phrase this in a way that doesn’t blame women for men’s violent actions. It is always and only the fault of the violent parter if they are violent.
And … yes I have had several girlfriends who could not see what was in front of them. The one who insisted that she’d only date men with designer clothes and good grooming who was shocked when not one but two boyfriends turned out to be gay. Several who went for men they were told were bad news.
It isn’t restricted to women though, bad judgement. I know nobody has 20:20 foresight and we can all be caught out but I’m constantly surprised at how little insight some others have into their fellow man. ‘Don’t stick your dick in crazy’ being a cliche for a reason, men also do this, and they’re warned but she’s a looker or good in bed and boom, life ruined….
But it goes way beyond sexual partner choice. The new hire who to me screams insanity who everyone insists is wonderful and then yes, turns out to be insane. Tony fucking Blair -people acted like he was the second coming and you can just watch the man on tv for three minutes and see he’s a snake. People announce who they are constantly. The way they speak and act and react is all a huge tell. But a lot of people do not look. They can’t tell when they’re being lied to - I know some people are extremely convincing liars but most aren’t and it’s generally obvious if someone’s lying to you. The pedoface and AGP smirk are things that have really struck me since Ive been on here.
Some people are just not good at detecting very obvious cues. Again I’m not wanting to blame people for what happens because some people can be very convincing and it’s always and only the fault of the perpetrator, but the inability of the general public to detect a bad ‘un is weird
I’m convinced this is where the lizard people stuff comes from. Some people are so off putting and unpleasant they trigger this ‘run’ response and yet our ability to realise this is being trained out of us hard by the media and social engineering. You’re left with your primal instincts telling you this person will do very bad things and your higher brain telling you you’re a bigot if you even entertain the idea and the clash won’t resolve.
People need to listen to their gut more. It’s rarely wrong
@emptypacketofmethadone ive over the years had quite a few female colleagues get battered and hurt by male partners and the same line trotted out, nobody had a clue and yet when I’ve met the ‘upstanding’ husband at a work do I’ve thought he was horrid, and I am far from the only one who thought the same. When you actually talk to people who know them you’ll see behind that veneer, I’ve never encountered anyone who I genuinely thought was a lovely person who went on to do something really bad. I will freely admit I don’t think many people are lovely people. The number of people who can genuinely and consistently put on a perfect t facade and be monsters is low (thankfully.) almost all of them have impulse control issues that breach that surface regularly.
 
. There are instances of very introverted men, doctors, pastors, lawyers, judges committing horrific acts of abuse.
Yes, there are, which is why I said usually easy to spot. The problem here is that you're moving from a general demand (all men need to not be cruel), which was met with a general response that most men are not, to special pleading; some men are. Which I already agreed with. Some men are, and they're usually easy to spot. The existence of a harder-to-spot minority of a minority doesn't negate the fact that the vast majority are not cruel. And don't give me any of the bowl of M&Ms nonsense, if you're thinking about that shit. The exact same arguments apply to the minority of women who are willing and able to destroy the lives of every man they interact with, but we're not judging all women by that standard (woman hate thread doesn't count, because it's full of emotionally stunted manchilds).

Can you think of a white-collar, well-to-do man in a respectable profession seeking a woman from a slum?
I can think of two examples of this from my own life. One worked out; they have three kids and a nice home (though who knows, maybe she's secretly flattening his dick every monday). One very much didn't and left the man a pale shadow of who he used to be, after she was done isolating him from everyone he knew and tearing out his heart and soul.

Inversely, I have yet to hear of a male abuse victim being asked why he didn't 'choose better'
What do you think "don't stick your dick in crazy" means, if not a direct criticism of a man making a really bad decision on who to have a relationship with?
 
@Otterly You don't necessarily know that the female colleagues hadn't been lovebombed or manipulated to see their abuser positively, though. Maybe everyone else in her life also regarded him positively.

Yes, there are, which is why I said usually easy to spot. The problem here is that you're moving from a general demand (all men need to not be cruel), which was met with a general response that most men are not, to special pleading; some men are. Which I already agreed with. Some men are, and they're usually easy to spot. The existence of a harder-to-spot minority of a minority doesn't negate the fact that the vast majority are not cruel. And don't give me any of the bowl of M&Ms nonsense, if you're thinking about that shit. The exact same arguments apply to the minority of women who are willing and able to destroy the lives of every man they interact with, but we're not judging all women by that standard (woman hate thread doesn't count, because it's full of emotionally stunted manchilds).


I can think of two examples of this from my own life. One worked out; they have three kids and a nice home (though who knows, maybe she's secretly flattening his dick every monday). One very much didn't and left the man a pale shadow of who he used to be, after she was done isolating him from everyone he knew and tearing out his heart and soul.


What do you think "don't stick your dick in crazy" means, if not a direct criticism of a man making a really bad decision on who to have a relationship with?
Sorry if I've wildly misinterpreted this but: sticking your dick = having sex. Not choosing a life partner.
 
Lovebombing always cracks me up, there's virtually no difference between lovebombing and seduction. Pretty sure it's only seen as toxic nowadays because the concept of only wanting one person and not treating a date as one of the twenty five people lined up feels so foreign in modern dating. Couples who fell in love hard at the start and are still together are obviously not going to have a problem with 'lovebombing' so it's generally only bitter exes who will talk about it.
 
Lovebombing always cracks me up, there's virtually no difference between lovebombing and seduction. Pretty sure it's only seen as toxic nowadays because the concept of only wanting one person and not treating a date as one of the twenty five people lined up feels so foreign in modern dating. Couples who fell in love hard at the start and are still together are obviously not going to have a problem with 'lovebombing' so it's generally only bitter exes who will talk about it.
'Lovebombing' is just a way for people to persecute their family and friends for being nice to them
 
Again I’m not wanting to blame people for what happens because some people can be very convincing and it’s always and only the fault of the perpetrator, but the inability of the general public to detect a bad ‘un is weird
I think part of it is a lot of people are inclined to give others the benefit of the doubt and try to see the best in them. Some of it can be an excess of empathy, others is part of being nice but I'm not insightful enough to nail it down precisely.
 
Arguing with women about choosing better men is like arguing with gym bros about tribal tats. You're never going to win, there's no point. It devolves into hysterical denials of reality. You should choose better, be more discerning; make better decisions. Don't get that shitty tattoo, don't go with the guy that is obviously abusive; and they almost always are comically and blatantly abusive.

I think part of it is a lot of people are inclined to give others the benefit of the doubt and try to see the best in them. Some of it can be an excess of empathy, others is part of being nice but I'm not insightful enough to nail it down precisely.
If I'm being generous, it's because a lot of people are confrontation averse and predatory people use that as a way to stay in peoples lives. A sunk cost fallacy from the victim combined with basic bitch manipulation tactics from the perpetrator.
If I'm being non-generous, I'd say it's because some people are just perpetual victims who refuse to just take action.

I think the peoples families should just lynch the abusers. When my sister got abused - thankfully only once - me and my friends drove around in a friends van looking for him. Not sure what we would have done, but a bunch of young lads in a group probably would have gotten ourselves arrested.

I've had female friends and family members get slapped around, and each time it's happened they've had dozens of people - myself included - say "Hey, this guys seems like an absolute lunatic, leave him." They don't. At some point you have to shrug and go 'you've been told to not go down that alleyway, you're a big boy/girl, you can make your own choices.' and let the dice fall. The police are useless, a lot of the time less than useless and will actively punish both parties with slaps on the wrist. Which sounds like a 'oh that's pointless' but actually means that when you get to court the defence can simply point to the police cautioning and punishing both parties and use that to cast reasonable doubt at the violent man.

Abuse is a theoretically complicated issue, with a very simple solution; kill the abuser. However the abuser typically tries to find people that are ripe for abuse; and society refuses to let you just clean house properly.
 
'Great British Energy solar panels' were made in China

The first schools in England to install what the government described as "Great British Energy solar panels" bought them from Chinese firms, the BBC has learned.

The first 11 schools involved in the GB Energy scheme bought solar panels from Aiko and Longi, two Chinese firms.

The government said the scheme was "the first major project for Great British Energy - a company owned by the British people, for the British people".

Labour MP Sarah Champion said GB Energy should be buying solar panels from companies in the UK rather than China, where there have been allegations of forced labour in supply chains.

"I'm really excited about the principle of GB Energy," she told BBC News.

"But it's taxpayers' money and we should not be supporting slave labour with that money. And wherever possible, we should be supporting good working practices and buy British if we can."

She added: "That means that yes, unfortunately, in the short term, solar panels are probably going to be slightly more expensive.

"There are solar panels made around the world in Taiwan, Canada, even in the UK."

Longi and Aiko both told the BBC they forbid forced labour in their production and supply chains.

China is the world's leading producer of solar panels and the suppliers in the Xinjiang region have been linked to the alleged exploitation of Uyghur Muslims.

Earlier this year, the law was changed to ban GB Energy from investing in renewables if there is evidence of modern slavery in their production.

China has dominated the market and, according to the International Energy Agency, the country's global share in all the manufacturing stages of solar panels exceeds 80%.

Champion, who is chair of the International Development Select Committee, said "abuse in renewable supply chains is insidious and hard to root out".

But she urged ministers to exclude known human-rights offenders from winning public contracts.

A GB Energy spokesperson said all of the solar contracts issued under the schools initiative complied with the UK's modern slavery rules.
The Xinjiang challenge

Up to 50% of the world's supply of polysilicon - a key component in solar panels - is estimated to come from the Xinjiang region.

Mark Candlish is the director of GB-Sol, which calls itself the only manufacturer of conventional solar panels in the UK.

He said polysilicon was "a key social issue facing our industry, with the risk of forced labour in the main mining areas".

He added: "The global solar market is so dominated by China that it is difficult to avoid buying Chinese if you want the low cost energy and low carbon benefits of solar PV."

Many businesses and governments - including the UK's - buy Chinese solar panels because they are cheaper than those made elsewhere.

Two thirds (68%) of the solar panels imported by the UK came from China in 2024, according to HMRC trade data. That's an increase on the figure in 2023, when Chinese products accounted for 61% of UK solar imports.

A report by Sheffield Hallam University in 2023 linked various solar companies to suppliers in the Xinjiang region.

One of the report's authors, Alan Crawford, said the general lack of transparency in the entire solar supply chain was greater now than it was in 2023, when his Over-Exposed report was published.

"Companies that were willing to comment are now silent," he said.

'Ethical supply chains'

GB Energy is a state-owned company that was set up by the Labour government to invest in renewables, such as solar power.

In its first big investment, GB Energy is spending about £200m on rooftop solar for 200 schools and NHS hospitals across the country.

The first tranche of this funding has been spent on the Chinese solar panels for the 11 schools.

The Department for Education told the BBC which companies had made the solar panels in response to a freedom of information request.

A GB Energy spokesperson said the company would "lead the way in ethical supply chains" and insisted there was "no place for forced labour or unethical practices in the UK's energy transition".

The spokesperson added: "That is why we are introducing a statutory duty on Great British Energy to prevent modern slavery in its supply chains, and reviewing supplier transparency and disclosure standards to ensure confidence in all public-facing renewable programmes.

"All contracts issued under this schools and hospitals solar initiative complied with UK procurement rules, including extensive requirements under the Modern Slavery Act.

"GBE will seek to uphold these requirements in its contracting arrangements and are actively engaging with international partners to raise the bar globally on solar supply chain accountability."

China has been accused of committing crimes against humanity against the Uyghur population and other mostly-Muslim ethnic groups in the north-western region of Xinjiang.

In state-sponsored programmes, detainees are forced to produce goods including polysilicon, a core ingredient in solar panels, according to the US Department of Labor.

The Chinese government has denied all allegations of human rights abuses in Xinjiang.

Longi and Aiko are both members of the Solar Stewardship Initiative, which is a scheme designed to develop confidence in the supply chain and the responsible sourcing of solar panels.

An Aiko spokesperson said the company was "committed to upholding the highest standards of ethical business conduct and responsible sourcing".

"We take any concerns related to human rights and labour practices seriously and expect our suppliers to do the same," the spokesperson said.

"As part of our ongoing efforts, we engage with suppliers to promote transparency and continuous improvement in line with international guidelines. We are also closely monitoring global supply chain developments and remain committed to working with stakeholders to support a fair and sustainable solar industry."

Longi said it regretted the findings of the Sheffield Hallam University report and "categorically affirms that forced labour has no place within our supply chain".

A company spokesperson said the conclusions in the Over-Exposed report "may not fully reflect the comprehensive measures Longi has implemented to ensure full compliance with international labour standards".

"Independent third-party audits play a critical role in verifying compliance and identifying potential risks," the spokesperson said.

"While the complexity of global supply chains presents challenges, Longi remains steadfast in its efforts to eliminate any risks associated with forced labour."
 
I do but I go to gocompare, order by price and choose the cheapest package at £13. I don't read the terms and conditions but I don't think it would bring my body back if I died from being a drunken idiot in a hotel pool.
Seems that they weren't drunk, but they drowned because of the shape of the pool.

And most travel insurance to Europe from UK typically has repatriation coverage, which includes bringing a body back if the policyholder died abroad.

Go wild!
 
Some afternoon headlines:


Man dies after car 'ploughs into Albert Bow pub' in Bow, London in horror crash as two people arrested:




Asylum seekers caught 'running illegal porn business' in taxpayer funded hotel in Blackpool:




Astronomer CEO resigns after being caught on kiss-cam with co-worker at Coldplay concert:




Rachel Reeves set to sell £5bn in seized Bitcoin in bid to plug 'black hole' in Budget:




Labour MP brands 'transphobes' as 'swivel-eyed loons' in leaked audio recording:




Keir Starmer’s left-wing purge sparks Labour panic as rebels warn PM ‘rolling out red carpet for Nigel Farage’:


 
Back
Top Bottom