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...
Crunkle said:
The government are looking into restricting/banning VPNs now after ProtonVPN reported a 1,800% surge in UK registrations for VPN services after the Online Safety Act came into force. NordVPN reported a 1000% surge in UK registrations.

Link / Archive

This will absolutely work and will not fail utterly. Business rely entirely on VPNs for security.
Click to expand...

Coolio55 said:
Not only would this completely scupper the ability to hire jeets (as easily), the UK Government uses VPNs themselves for home working.
Click to expand...

They're not going to ban the technology. It's fundamental to modern online life and unfeasible to restrict. They'll criminalise it's use for X purposes or without Y reasons (such as a business) and they'll criminalise providers who don't provide backdoors or keep records. After all, what possible reason could their be to not keep records of who uses your service and what they do with it? (sarcasm). And they'll use the payment processors to shut down sales of any VPN in the UK that doesn't comply. And once they've done some combination of these things, they'll begin with selective enforcement to target people they don't like as needed and rely on the chilling effect to stamp out a lot of the use by those who don't want to risk it.

You're naive if you think you can sit this one out and nothing will happen. They're building the fences right in front of you.
 
isalaide said:
Charles Saatchi choked Nigella Lawson in the street,
Click to expand...
I want to choke her after five minutes on the TV. I can't blame him for taking the chance we all wish we had.
Overly Serious said:
However, regardless all movements need to police themselves and gatekeep. Just like people trying to oppose government online censorship or spying need to gatekeep out the loli / paedo crowd. It's fundamental and if you don't do it it will be very quickly used against you.
Click to expand...
You can't gatekeep riots..

The VPN thing will demand any one selling VPNs in the UK to snoop on the users. Pay close attention to who is approved of and isn't because it will tell you the snooping ones.
 
Overly Serious said:
They'll criminalise it's use for X purposes or without Y reasons (such as a business) and they'll criminalise providers who don't provide backdoors or keep records.
Click to expand...
Can't buy a licence to use one without supplying a valid VAT registration number. There, done. Nice and easy and easy to check. The same smoothbrained majority who thought ID cards were okay because "I don't have anything to hide!" will be A-OK with this. Even more in fact because they don't know what a VPN is or why you'd want to use it and also look DISTRACTION ONLINE PAEDOPHILES.

The providers already supply backdoors sufficient for GCHQ use. The entire point of the Five Eyes group is to defeat each member country's legal provisions around privacy and search. You might have some Fourth Amendment protection against your own government, but you've got fuck all against foreign governments who hand the info over to yours, all nice and legal and admissible now.
 
chilli burn said:
Thoughts?
Click to expand...
It doesn't make me think any different, the types that'd get riled up and take it too far outside, and get banged up for it, are the exact same kind of character I'd expect to do the same shit behind closed doors anyway.
Try and apply this logic to ethnicity criminality statistics/certain ethnic representation in particular economic sectors (OY VEY), and you onky get the same botched not actually useful output, pure fallacy on display.
 
Last edited:
Mound Dweller said:
It doesn't make me think any different, the types that'd get riled up and take it too far outside, and get banged up for it, are the exact same kind of character I'd expect to do them same shit behind closed doors anyway.
Try and apply this logic to ethnicity criminality statistics/certain ethnic representation in particular economic sectors (OY VEY), and you onky get the same botched not actually useful output, pure fallacy on display.
Click to expand...
It's almost like every single mass revolt in history is made up of the scum of the earth.

You need a little manure to grow the best roses.
 
Crunkle said:
The government are looking into restricting/banning VPNs now after ProtonVPN reported a 1,800% surge in UK registrations for VPN services after the Online Safety Act came into force. NordVPN reported a 1000% surge in UK registrations.

Link / Archive

This will absolutely work and will not fail utterly. Business rely entirely on VPNs for security.
Click to expand...
Got a few VPN's, Starmer can kiss my arse (he probably would as well, the four eyed faggot).

It's news time:


Vladimir Putin could start 'Space War I' with nuclear 'Pearl Harbour' attack on American satellites:




Taxpayer fury as council blows £15million on hotel now home to 'hundreds of pigeons':




Spain begs Britons to come back after anti-tourism protests leave much-loved resort 'completely dead':




Heavy metal fans in Russia could face PRISON as Vladimir Putin bans 'satanists':




Phil Collins admitted to hospital as star speaks out on hospice rumours:




Nigel Farage unveils detective who caught serial killer Levi Bellfield as Reform UK's police tsar:




NHS England spends £850k on train tickets for staff traveling between London and Leeds offices:




National Lottery winner who bagged £6m prize fled Britain after 'greedy relatives' begged for cash:




Hundreds of Nigerian 'poets and bloggers' enter Britain under little-known literary visa scheme:




One in 12 children aged just 8–14 visit porn sites every month as child rehab cases double:


 
Geoff Capes Vapes Apes said:
For all people talk about how shit it is in the bug-hives, I've had a nice trip out to a steam rally today and you wouldn't know there was a single bomalian in the country. The whole scene could have been 50 years ago with little to no change.
Click to expand...
Steam rallies are effective negro repellent indeed. Never seen any brown people at one in many a year going to them.
FedPostalService said:
That was in 1789. Since then they've achieved nothing but surrendering to the Germans. The whole French resistance thing is a lie we allow them to tell as we gelt sorry for them. We paused arming the resistance as it became clear they weren't fighting the Nazis and were just saving the weapons for a civil war after the US and UK liberated them.

The French are cowards of the highest order. The greatest ever Frenchman was actually an Italian.
Click to expand...
I've always thought the amount of claimed French resistance fighters is probably several orders of magnitude too high compared to reality ("No no, I was not le collaborator! I was working in that factory making ammunition yes, but it was all sabotaged!"), and the vast majority of real ones were probably urban communists who tended to just blow up innocent civilians, much like the French would later encounter in Algeria when the shoe was on the other foot and muslims were blowing up women and children. I quite enjoyed the book Street Without Joy, truly showed how the French decided that those Nazi counter-partisan tactics are actually pretty useful when you are the ones suppressing resistance, and torture can be very useful as long as nobody finds out you were using it.
 
The Government responded to the petition

I would like to thank all those who signed the petition. It is right that the regulatory regime for in scope online services takes a proportionate approach, balancing the protection of users from online harm with the ability for low-risk services to operate effectively and provide benefits to users.

The Government has no plans to repeal the Online Safety Act, and is working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and effectively as possible to enable UK users to benefit from its protections.

Proportionality is a core principle of the Act and is in-built into its duties. As regulator for the online safety regime, Ofcom must consider the size and risk level of different types and kinds of services when recommending steps providers can take to comply with requirements. Duties in the Communications Act 2003 require Ofcom to act with proportionality and target action only where it is needed.

Some duties apply to all user-to-user and search services in scope of the Act. This includes risk assessments, including determining if children are likely to access the service and, if so, assessing the risks of harm to children. While many services carry low risks of harm, the risk assessment duties are key to ensuring that risky services of all sizes do not slip through the net of regulation. For example, the Government is very concerned about small platforms that host harmful content, such as forums dedicated to encouraging suicide or self-harm. Exempting small services from the Act would mean that services like these forums would not be subject to the Act’s enforcement powers. Even forums that might seem harmless carry potential risks, such as where adults come into contact with child users.

Once providers have carried out their duties to conduct risk assessments, they must protect the users of their service from the identified risks of harm. Ofcom’s illegal content Codes of Practice set out recommended measures to help providers comply with these obligations, measures that are tailored in relation to both size and risk. If a provider’s risk assessment accurately determines that the risks faced by users are low across all harms, Ofcom’s Codes specify that they only need some basic measures, including:

• easy-to-find, understandable terms and conditions;
• a complaints tool that allows users to report illegal material when they see it, backed up by a process to deal with those complaints;
• the ability to review content and take it down if it is illegal (or breaches their terms of service);
• a specific individual responsible for compliance, who Ofcom can contact if needed.

Where a children's access assessment indicates a platform is likely to be accessed by children, a subsequent risk assessment must be conducted to identify measures for mitigating risks. Like the Codes of Practice on illegal content, Ofcom’s recently issued child safety Codes also tailor recommendations based on risk level. For example, highly effective age assurance is recommended for services likely accessed by children that do not already prohibit and remove harmful content such as pornography and suicide promotion. Providers of services likely to be accessed by UK children were required to complete their assessment, which Ofcom may request, by 24 July.

On 8 July, Ofcom’s CEO wrote to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology noting Ofcom’s responsibility for regulating a wide range of highly diverse services, including those run by businesses, but also charities, community and voluntary groups, individuals, and many services that have not been regulated before.

The letter notes that the Act’s aim is not to penalise small, low-risk services trying to comply in good faith. Ofcom – and the Government – recognise that many small services are dynamic small businesses supporting innovation and offer significant value to their communities. Ofcom will take a sensible approach to enforcement with smaller services that present low risk to UK users, only taking action where it is proportionate and appropriate, and will focus on cases where the risk and impact of harm is highest.

Ofcom has developed an extensive programme of work designed to support a smoother journey to compliance, particularly for smaller firms. This has been underpinned by interviews, workshops and research with a diverse range of online services to ensure the tools meet the needs of different types of services. Ofcom’s letter notes its ‘guide for services’ guidance and tools hub, and its participation in events run by other organisations and networks including those for people running small services, as well as its commitment to review and improve materials and tools to help support services to create a safer life online.

The Government will continue to work with Ofcom towards the full implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023, including monitoring proportionate implementation.

Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
Click to expand...
I want every single Labour and Tory MP and everyone else who voted for this to watch their family being raped to death by Pakis one by one until they themselves are left to greet eternity through a fatal rectal bleedout.
 
Tom Nook's Gloryhole said:
I want every single Labour and Tory MP and everyone else who voted for this to watch their family being raped to death by Pakis one by one until they themselves are left to greet eternity through a fatal rectal bleedout.
Click to expand...
The government was asked if the government did anything wrong. The government said no.

If Reform were smart they would make a big song and dance about repelling the entire bill as soon as they're in power. They would win a lot of voters on the spot.
 
Kofi Drinka said:
The government was asked if the government did anything wrong. The government said no.

If Reform were smart they would make a big song and dance about repelling the entire bill as soon as they're in power. They would win a lot of voters on the spot.
Click to expand...
The balance is between freedom to enjoy pornography but also keeping children safe from harm.

Do we, therefore, ban the internet for Under 16s to prevent them from viewing online porn if porn is apparently harmful?

That would be all but impossible to do, but we do have a major issue when children as young as eight are viewing stuff which they shouldn't.

Potentially, a child could access TOR and the vile stuff that's on the Dark Web - how anybody can stop that even I don't know. Will Mellor said that the Dark Web should be shut down, to stop child abuse and exploitation, he was told that you may as well shut the sky down as it's impossible.

What is needed is maturity from both sides - protect children from harm but respect the rights of sensible adults who can view porn and not go out and commit mass rape.

Will the Government also now ban betting ads on the idiot box and online, now that smoking, porn and drinking has been declared as haram viewing?

Nigel should scrap this law, when he becomes PM, and come up with a sensible alternative which suits all parties.
 
Made In Wales said:
Potentially, a child could access TOR and the vile stuff that's on the Dark Web
Click to expand...
When I was 13 I remember running a linux live OS from a usb drive in the school library to bypass not just the firewall but the entire OS and login system just to play flash games on newgrounds so I don't think it's a "could access TOR" but more with a sample size of the entire UK that a number of them are.

I just don't like the presumption of guilt that comes with the ID stuff, it's like if you went to buy a lighter and had to smoke a 20 pack as the shopkeeper watches to prove it wasn't going to be used for arson, it's just dumb.
 
Le b0wski said:
When I was 13 I remember running a linux live OS from a usb drive in the school library to bypass not just the firewall but the entire OS and login system just to play flash games on newgrounds so I don't think it's a "could access TOR" but more with a sample size of the entire UK that a number of them are.

I just don't like the presumption of guilt that comes with the ID stuff, it's like if you went to buy a lighter and had to smoke a 20 pack as the shopkeeper watches to prove it wasn't going to be used for arson, it's just dumb.
Click to expand...
Or if you're a 10 year old called Bart and you're 'minding' some cigarettes for your mate Fat Tony.
 
Made In Wales said:
Do we, therefore, ban the internet for Under 16s to prevent them from viewing online porn if porn is apparently harmful?
Click to expand...
Keeping kids off the internet is a good idea but it's too late to manage these things. The internet has become integrated from birth to death in our society and we can't unplug it.

I believe kids will still find porn and they will still share porn no matter how you try to ban it. Look at the Roblox stuff we're seeing come out and how popular sexual content is on there. Do we ban roblox next? It's the same problem with piracy, it cannot be stopped. All you can do is manage your own children's exposure to it and help them safely navigate it. They will be exposed to hardcore porn, gore and shock sites as kids (weren't we?) and it's finding a healthy life style. Parenting is hard, I know that's a controversial statement but it is. You can have the best behaved kid in the world but they're still going to check out sketchy internet sites. You can't ban every new URL or every avenue to finding porn.
 
Did anyone see the footage of two tier batty boy keir and his Mossad handler waiting to go into Trump's golf club?

She looked absolutely fucking FURIOUS. I absolutely loved seeing Trump say SuckDick Khan was a nasty person, and doing a terrible job. That was excellent.

The media spinning this as ooohhh, look, Starmer can get on with him, isn't it great?

He's got no choice. Starmer genuinely believed the leftoid candidate would get in. This isn't how it was meant to work.

If he allies himself against Trump he knows he is absolutely fucked. He's no choice. I get it's killing him to have to do this. I hope it is. I hope the stress gives him a Widowmaker.
 
Last edited:
Trumper is really sticking it to Two Tier and Khan in Chilly Jockoland.
Fucking great watching the treacherous gay prat sit there like a little turd with glasses while Trumper destroys his policies. He wasn't too complimentary about the famer harmer's friend Khan either.

Trump sticking it to Sneaky Little Shit Sadiq while Starmer squirms

Kofi Drinka said:
All you can do is manage your own children's exposure to it and help them safely navigate it. They will be exposed to hardcore porn, gore and shock sites as kids (weren't we?) and it's finding a healthy life style. Parenting is hard, I know that's a controversial statement but it is.
Click to expand...
It's controversial to expect parents to do their job and protect their children from harm ? Fuck me, if it's contorversial to expect parents to do the absolute bare minimum, we truly are lost. Parenting if it's done correctly may well be hard work, but it's not impossible. The problem is exaggerated as it's all the wrong people breeding, who aren't prepared to put in the effort. Demographics - which sections of the population are averaging above two births per female ?

This business isn't about protecting children, it's about increasing the States' power over the people. It's about censorship and as I've said previously, every power grab of this nature is always hidden behind a "noble" cause. It's always a "you don't support this, are you in favour of ( something obnoxious )....... ?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom