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.

 

[Amin Yasister]

More lies Sir Keir, more lies. Just an idle threat that you will never enact

 

[BongoMongo]

I really wish someone with nothing to lose would take down starmer. I know he would be replaced by next WEF puppet in line but the idea of him meeting his end, soiling himself and scared makes me froth at the gash.

 

[>IMPLYING]

I really wish someone with nothing to lose would take down starmer. I know he would be replaced by next WEF puppet in line but the idea of him meeting his end, soiling himself and scared makes me froth at the gash.

I actually think he's the right man to lead the Left for the Right at the moment due to how shit he is. I reckon if he didn't cockup after Southport with the whole "cancelling winter fuel payments" thing and he just went full retard with the economy and giving out free shit, we'd be fighting an uphill battle, or things would be progressing a tad slower than they are. By instantly shattering the illusion of the Labour party's supposed alignment with the working class and pensioners, he immediately estranged a large chunk of Labour's base - Big Gaz-types - and push them into the arms of Reform. This same estrangement is the entire catalyst for Corbyn's party, which further threatens Labour's position. Some polls have them getting fewer seats than Liberal Democrats!

Starmer was the perfect leader, just not for the side he's meant to represent.

 

[SirCliveSinclairdabbing]

I really wish someone with nothing to lose would take down starmer. I know he would be replaced by next WEF puppet in line but the idea of him meeting his end, soiling himself and scared makes me froth at the gash.

What’s good for Gaddafi (pbuh)

 

[Tom Nook's Gloryhole]

I really wish someone with nothing to lose would take down starmer. I know he would be replaced by next WEF puppet in line but the idea of him meeting his end, soiling himself and scared makes me froth at the gash.

Hoping someone kills Starmer is fucking retarded and would result in Labour winning the next election, public support for right wing parties being banned and seeing you taken away in a black van.

The cruelest outcome is to simply let Starmer keep being in charge. He's clearly way over his head, has no idea how to get out of the situation and I genuinely believe he expected to be ousted by now but nobody in the Labour party wants to be the one in charge when the IMF tell us to drop the pound and join the Euro. Every week that Starmer is in charge is another +1 to Reform and pushes the Overton window further to the right.

 

[Overly Serious]

They're absolutely going to raid ISAs. At this point I don't know how anyone who has managed to amass substantial savings can win at all, other than just locking it up and hoping to God that another government will reverse it in the future so you can take it out safely.

Any thoughts on protective measures that can be taken for those with ISAs?

Or even just in general for the coming squeeze?

 

[Smyrna]

The IMF won't tell us to join the Euro. They wouldn't even have us with our debt-to-GDP ratio and current level of borrowing. Having your own currency can also help pay debt through printing.

The IMF will tell us to gut welfare and the NHS (the two biggest recipients of government money besides the interest payments), and no-one wants to be in charge when that happens.

 

[teriyakiburns]

I know he would be replaced by next WEF puppet in line but the idea of him meeting his end, soiling himself and scared makes me froth at the gash.

You might want to see a doctor about that. Better call up now so you can get an appointment for next year.

Starmer was the perfect leader, just not for the side he's meant to represent.

The way I'm hearing people describe him recently is "weak". "He's a weak man" Not in the political sense, but in the sense that he's a genuinely weak-spirited, weak-minded, or pathetic in some way. He responds like a weak man, by strutting and bolstering his self image while bullying and lashing out against whoever he can. I'm firmly convinced he's only leader because he makes a good puppet for McSweeney, who was the mastermind behind the ejection of Corbyn from the party. He's got close ties to Hope Not Hate and similar groups.

Actually, I'll just quote the wiki page about him, which is surprisingly frank about his role.

Director of Labour Together

McSweeney became director of the think tank group Labour Together in 2017, reporting to a board that included Reed, Lisa Nandy, Jon Cruddas and Trevor Chinn, and also serving as company secretary.[8] As Labour Together director, he declared his aims to be "to move the Labour party from the hard left" and to "build a sustainable winning electoral coalition."[13]

Under his leadership, Labour Together worked on a potential replacement of then leader Jeremy Corbyn and reforms to prevent the left-wing of the Labour Party from regaining power.[11] Through polling Labour membership, he determined that it would be possible to peel away the soft left, younger "idealists" of Labour from Corbyn's support base, eventually picking Keir Starmer to do so.[8][11][7] As part of his strategy, he focused on preventing the growth of the newly founded left-wing news website The Canary among Labour members while building a close link between the mainstream centre-left newspaper The Guardian and Labour Together.[13]

He composed a three-year plan for Starmer to become Prime Minister after taking control of the party, which involved first performing "immediate CPR" to reform the party's ranks (which included removing supporters of Corbyn and Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard and excluding them from future leadership contests), then secondly becoming an effective opposition in parliament by directly attacking the Conservatives on their failures, and lastly winning power by outwitting the Conservatives on crime, defence and the economy.[9][7] He was then recruited to run Starmer's 2020 campaign for Labour leader, which Starmer won.[9] During this time McSweeney set up the Center for Countering Digital Hate, initially designed to target online antisemitism.[9]

McSweeney fundraised for Labour Together during his role as company secretary, though stopped reporting the large majority of donations the group received from December 2017 onward, eventually failing to report more than £730,000 in funds within the 30 days required by law during his tenure. The undeclared donations as well as additional incorrect information declared by McSweeney were investigated by the Electoral Commission; Labour Together received a fine of £14,250 for over 20 breaches of electoral law in September 2021,[8] which a spokesman for the Commission stated was "towards the high end of [the] scale".[14]

Literal soft coup of the party by a post-nationalist migrant-humper.

 

[Tom Nook's Gloryhole]

Any thoughts on protective measures that can be taken for those with ISAs?

Or even just in general for the coming squeeze?

Keep as much money as you possibly have in US stocks and shares. If we ever have a hyperinflation moment those stocks can be cashed in at the new value.

Alternatively, now is the time to buy long term quality of life improvements before they become much more expensive. I've just built a brand new PC from scratch which will keep me covered for the next 5 years and turned the older one into a locked down Opsec PC (debian with every drive attached encrypted) as well as upgraded my NAS so I can fit more movies and TV shows on it so at least I can watch Robot Wars from the comfort of my bed while things kick off outside my house.

If you have a house, one option would be to overpay your mortgage so when it comes to renewal your outgoing expenses will plummet.

 

[>IMPLYING]

Literal soft coup of the party by a post-nationalist migrant-humper.

He's to Corbyn what Sunak was to Truss and Boris was to May. Labour and the Conservatives sort of treated themselves like the big-tent parties over in America, a product of arrogance or pure imitation I don't know. They accept various shades of their political wing within, but then these implicit faction vie for control over the party, elevating fellow members whilst undermining opponents, and eventually come out on top.

We saw this happen throughout the entire Conservative tenure. It's difficult to put them in exact boxes but people Cameron and May represented the socially-liberal/centrist essences of the party, whilst people like Mogg, Boris and Sunak represented the quasi-corporate interests (Mogg's entire opus for supporting Brexit wasn't immigration, it was regulation)/soft-Thatcherites, and Truss represented a sort of true Thatcherite faction, which got the soft-Thatcherites to elect her in the first place, but then quickly couped her when she tried to do something actually Thatcher-esque and lower taxes.

I think Badenoch and Jenrick are essentially in alignment with the likes of Sunak and Boris, but the meek attempts to attract Reform voters will remain toothless since they probably won't even touch the subject of legal immigration with a ten-foot pole and try to go in hard on purely illegals instead. If Jenrick ever got to power, I think he would try to employ Macron-esque measures to deradicalise mosques and "better educate" the Muslims already here to be more British over anything else. I feel that he probably expects the Shariah courts to dismantle themselves once the people running them have been made to watch Zulu once or twice.

Edit: I we all know what the Labour party's schism is currently. It's Spenders vs. Blairers, basically. Blair gave us minimum wage, but began charging us for university, which is essentially how their model is meant to work. Give and take. Where Keir's fucking up with the Blair-style is he's taking and not giving, but it's hardly his fault since at this point the state has given all it can give so him and that faction of the Labour party are screwed. He could "give" by doing something about immigration but that's anathema to both factions and the people who have their ears so it's a non-starter.

 

[Mound Dweller]

I'm just gonna say it; NHS was a mistake, socialized services are doomed to wreck and ruin just like everything else socialist.
It was a nice idea and actually worked well for a while, but that was only made possible thanks to the post-war dividend of social cohesion; good luck getting that goldilocks scenario back again.

 

[BongoMongo]

Can someone with more knowledge than I explain something in idiot friendly terms please?

Germany is packing illegals to Afghanistan. A town in Spain has banned Muslim celebrations in public places.

The answer I was always given when asking why we can't do similar was "well we're part of the EU so we can't". But Germany and Spain are, and they are.

How does it work? Is it a case of we could too,they just absolutely don't want to?

 

[Chunky Salsa]

Can someone with more knowledge than I explain something in idiot friendly terms please?

Germany is packing illegals to Afghanistan. A town in Spain has banned Muslim celebrations in public places.

The answer I was always given when asking why we can't do similar was "well we're part of the EU so we can't". But Germany and Spain are, and they are.

How does it work? Is it a case of we could too,they just absolutely don't want to?

Yes. We could have them all gone inside of a year if we really wanted. Yes they would riot and cry about it; but the reality is that they'd still end up gone. There is nothing stopping us from parking an Aircraft Carrier off the coast of Africa right now, and shipping all the brown sludge in our country direct to whatever random countries are there; and then leaving. We would be condemned internationally, people would whine, nothing would happen.

They. Just. Don't. Want. To.

They hate you, they want the line to go up forever and ever and ever. They want you to accept third world living conditions and be content to live in a slum where a nation used to be. It's literally that simple. It's not incompetence, or well-meaning but deluded people. It's malice. If it weren't malice then at some point, somewhere by sheer law of statistics, them fucking up would benefit us somehow. But it doesn't, not ever.

 

[pot of sneed]

Can someone with more knowledge than I explain something in idiot friendly terms please?

Before Britain decided to vote for Brexit, Europe went full retard with the immigration crisis. There were whole swarms flooding into Europe thanks to Angela Merkel opening her arms and signalling for all the world's scum to come on in. Lots of propositions to force countries to 'take in their share' of migrants they never asked for and it tipped Britain over the edge to vote for Brexit, especially as the government had bleated for years they were beholden to the EU and all the shitty decisions was because of them.

People decided "bet", voted to leave the EU and suddenly the conversatives were without their shield. They could no longer blame everything on the EU and that their hands were tied and went full retard themselves increasing immigration to unprecended levels. Instead of at least somewhat culturally-compatible immigrants from Europe (along with a lot of their criminals - many foreign prisoners were Polish here to commit crimes and so on), the conservatives then opened the floodgates to shitskins in order to replace lost labour from Europe.

Without Britain to take in all the unwanted scum, the EU then decided maybe it wasn't such a good idea to import millions of welfare-hungry, violent shitskins from around the world, fearing another Brexit would happen since immigration is a hot topic across the world. Unfortunately for Britain, it's just gone to show that no matter what you vote for, you're getting immigrants whether you like it or not, and perhaps to punish the people of Britain for daring to vote in their best interests, spitefully decided to import the world's scum en-mass.

 

[teriyakiburns]

How does it work? Is it a case of we could too,they just absolutely don't want to?

Absolutely is. The EU was a convenient whipping boy and justification for every insane plan or every ignored problem. When Blair was trying to get his nanny-state ID cards through, the responsibility for his intricate and overbearing plans was laid at the feet of the EU (which did want some form of universal ID, but at the time wasn't nearly as intrusive in its ambitions). Likewise, for numerous things that the government wanted to ignore, they simply had to say "subsidiarity mate", claiming that the EU was preventing them from doing it. Kicking out immigrants was one of these things they claimed was impossible with EU membership, much as they wanted to, because of freedom of movement and so on.

The absolute panic of the political establishment after the brexit referendum was due to the fact that they would now be directly responsible for their decisions, without having any way to lay the blame elsewhere. It's why they;re so desperate to reverse that decision and get back in, because they want all the trappings of power, with none of the requirement to actually do any work.

It's the same with the Convention on Human Rights, which while it is buggering up our legal system, is not nearly as all-encompassing as the Human Rights Act has forced it to be on our law. It's our own politicians that foisted the impossibility of repatriation and deportation on us, by encoding into our law things that only exist because they wanted them.

 

[>IMPLYING]

I'm just gonna say it; NHS was a mistake, socialized services are doomed to wreck and ruin just like everything else socialist.
It was a nice idea and actually worked well for a while, but that was only made possible thanks to the post-war dividend of social cohesion; good luck getting that goldilocks scenario back again.

JK

Can someone with more knowledge than I explain something in idiot friendly terms please?

Germany is packing illegals to Afghanistan. A town in Spain has banned Muslim celebrations in public places.

The answer I was always given when asking why we can't do similar was "well we're part of the EU so we can't". But Germany and Spain are, and they are.

How does it work? Is it a case of we could too,they just absolutely don't want to?

Because those are the barest concessions. Germany has some of the most lenient paths to citizenship in Europe, requiring at minimum 5-years residency, and revoking citizenship after it has been granted is all but impossible. Before the new government got in, good migrants good get citizenship after just 3 years. In the UK revocations are fucked due almost entirely to the ECHR and the inability to get rid of stateless peoples once they're inside the country, but Germany has both the ECHR and its own laws acting against it.

“These are Afghan men who are legally required to leave the country and who have a criminal record,” the ministry said, according to local media.

Each deportee was issued up to €1,000 in financial support, as German courts can block removals if returnees face destitution.

The Spanish thing is based, but apparently it may violate the 16th amendment so it may get overturned (judiciary is gonna judiciary).

Basically: Germany is acting well within the boundaries of the ECHR and its own laws/constitution. The men people deported are only able to be deported because they have a criminal record, not because they're illegal, and even then, it's required they be send back with a chunk of change to help them on their way.

That one Spanish town may soon have what it voted for overturned by a higher authority, so I'd hold off on celebrating that for the time being.

Edit: Forgot to answer the question: Yes. Devil's advocate answer: Maybe.
I think at this point in time the immigration question is purely the result of optics, politics, and behind the scenes dealings. I think if we were to cease all immigration entirely and actively reduce our population numbers by killing people out, our economy would absolutely hit the shitter in the short-term as the markets perceive us to be in decline and our value as a consumer base goes down purely because there's fewer active consumers about. If I, retard, can arrive at that sort of conclusion then it's possible the politicians have too so don't want to risk doing something that'll cause larger potential harm in trade for giving people what they want right now. But that's assuming there's a "greater good" motive behind not culling immigration numbers, but fact is no politician ever explains why we need so many besides fixing problems that were caused by bringing in so many to begin with.

 

[Smyrna]

Some polling that might act as a little whitepill; 20% of the population would take part in 'political violence' if conditions deteriorated further, including 30% of young people (presumably under 25s or 30s).

https://xcancel.com/Scarlett__Mag/status/1953388349252657226

 

[pot of sneed]

Some polling that might act as a little whitepill; 20% of the population would take part in 'political violence' if conditions deteriorated further, including 30% of young people (presumably under 25s or 30s).

What are the racial demographics of those asked?

 

[Smyrna]

A very good question. Merlin Strategy (the polling company responsible) are members of the British Polling Council, so they should publish their crosstabs for this poll within a few days, which may give us an answer.

 

[East_Clintwood]

Our system is not controlled by the Americans, this is a meme and I don't really know how it started.

I think it's a mixture of shitposting to try and make us look worse, combined with retards not actually understanding and confusing it with NATO nuclear sharing (where America does retain launch authorisation). Expect it to get worse now we've decided to take part in that program now as well.

We have our own solid rocket booster companies part owned by government so if we ever needed to, we could rustle up our own ICBM's inside of a few years (they won't work lmao, but ho-hum).

To be fair our Tridents don't work half the time anyway, so what would be different really?

A test firing of a Trident missile from a Royal Navy submarine has ended in failure for the second consecutive time.​

The recent malfunction occurred during a test from HMS Vanguard, positioned off the east coast of the United States.


According to reports from the Sun, which first highlighted the issue, the missile’s failure was due to the malfunction of its booster rockets, resulting in the missile plummeting into the sea close to the launch site.