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:
You really need to read previous pages:

Sorry for the double post, but you don't have a right to use weapons. You barely have a right to defend yourself. Legally, if you have the opportunity to retreat you have to or you can end up in front of a judge along with the person attacked you.

A lot of this is about optics. If you brained some Mohammed enjoyer with a fire extinguisher as he tried to Minecraft a school playground you won't get charged (you had better well get a lawyer though as there will be parts of the legal system who will want to), but if you're a woman who is regularly beaten by her husband and you pick up a kitchen knife when a man twice your size decides he's going to kill you this time then you are going to go to prison.

Sligh PL but I walk to work through a poorly lit park. I have a small but incredibly sturdy torch in my pocket during this walk just in case. If I ever had to defend myself then I'm going to brain the fucker and then leave as I don't trust thee police to have my back if I reported it. If anything some charity will provide the junky with a lawyer and I'll bankrupt myself getting legal representation.
 
was it a gang initiation? very strange. I could buy it was some schizo if it was only one. But two?
I know they're stupid but doing it a place were there is no possibility of escape whilst risking decades in prison seems insane, even for the racially challenged,
 
was it a gang initiation? very strange. I could buy it was some schizo if it was only one. But two?
Gang initiation seems far more unlikely than a pair of schizos, frankly. To me, it seems probable that it was a racially-motivated attack and they're going to do a big press to keep that from getting out until they get arraigned. I'm sure the thinking is by then they'll be something else to get mad at and no one will pay attention to the fact that two wogs started stabbing people on a train.
 
what did we say about glowposters being off for the half term? containment threads are insufferable holy fuck.
1762096423041.png
'Why is this not a terror attack' indeed.
1762096481787.png
Unions wanting more security; police presence on trains now extended until Tuesday.
Interesting bit from Sky. TL;DR Plato just means 'suspect on loose' but,
British Transport Police may have been in a better position to respond to yesterday's stabbing because, in March, it held an emergency exercise in which a man went berserk with a knife on a train travelling south of Peterborough.
In the training drill, the train stopped immediately between stations when a passenger pulled the emergency cord.
It took police 25 minutes to reach the train and casualties, far longer than the eight minutes in which Cambridgeshire firearms officers reached the scene at Huntingdon station.
huh.
 
All of this talk of gang initiations and scratching your head over the motivation are lying to yourselves. Not to be a reddit fag but occams razor

IT WAS A TERROR ATTACK.

Alex spookabanana was black, described as british born, and the police covered up that it was a terror attack, sending people to jail for calling it what it was, then a year later admitted "yeah he converted to islam and it was properly terror related".
 
Unions wanting more security
They also want unchecked illegal immigration.

If you are a member of a union you are an undeniable traitor at this point and we need to "normalize", as the lefty Twitter mongs say, bullying and ostracising the members of unions and voters of Labour, Conservatives, Lid Dems, Greens, SNP, Plaid Cymru, etc., until you just stop trying to get us all fucking murdered.
 
Unions wanting more security; police presence on trains now extended until Tuesday.
Which will be more of the same wog and jeet security guards you see loitering around train and bus stations who seem more interested in chatting to the under aged chavettes then doing any actual security.
 
Gang initiation seems far more unlikely than a pair of schizos, frankly. To me, it seems probable that it was a racially-motivated attack and they're going to do a big press to keep that from getting out until they get arraigned. I'm sure the thinking is by then they'll be something else to get mad at and no one will pay attention to the fact that two wogs started stabbing people on a train.
yeah , two schizos and a racially/religious motivated attack seems like the most likely scenario. They are probably saying it wasn't terrorism because they aren't linked to any terrorist organization but they can't know that until they actually investigate them. W
 
Terrorism is one of those 'contested concepts' that academics love to debate and police never get right. Without PL'ing the preferred definitions and understandings of what terrorism is ‘a method that entails the use of violence or force or the threat of violence or force with the primary purpose of generating a psychological impact beyond the immediate victims or object of attack for a political motive’ (Richards, 2015) or ‘the use, or threat, of violence by non-state actors against non-state actors to communicate a political message in pursuance of political ends’ (Wight, 2015) with the key focus being non-state actors on both sides. You don't have to be in a terror group (or proscribed group) to be a terrorist.
The Terrorism Act 2000 defines “terrorism” as means the use or threat of action where [emphasis mine]
'a) the action falls within subsection (2),
b) the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1 or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
c) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.'

Section 2 further adds that terrorism can be an action that
'[2]e) is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.'
There is no reason for this to not be treated as terrorism off the bat.
 
Can a Briton explain why their media uses the term "British National" all the time in these types of events? From looking it up, it seems like an umbrella category including people from places like the Falklands or the old empire or Hong Kong. But I don't understand why it's used instead of "British person from Hong Kong" or just "British citizen" or just "Briton". Is this a way to obscure the truth through Newspeak? Does the BBC think it's racist to say "British citizen" because it implies they're actually from Britain? Is it just a UK quirk that looks weird to Americans?

I don't understand what they mean when they say things like "the person who killed 8 little girls was a British National" and whether it's intentionally obscuring who it was by using that term or whether it's purely woke Newspeak with the happy side effect of obscuring the truth or whether it's actually common parlance by British people.
 
Burger hands that pretends they don't remember BLM this.
I don't know what you mean so I can't really pretend to not remember it. Does BLM mean "British Lives Matter"? The extent of my modern British cultural knowledge was living in Glasgow, enjoying Buckfast a lot, and preferring Sainsbury's over Tesco for groceries.
 
Is this a way to obscure the truth through Newspeak? Does the BBC think it's racist to say "British citizen"
British national and British citizen aren't the same thing. You can be born here - making you a national - but not have citizenship, as the UK doesn't have birthright citizenship unless at least one of your parents is also a citizen.

It's a rhetorical trick as well. They emphasise their status as a national to do two things: to trick people into thinking it's a British native; or, to neuter the debate around immigration and islam by clouding the issue with autistic debates about racism. The former just doesn't work on anything other than abject retards. The latter is losing its power daily, but still has enough of an effect that the immediate response to this was a bunch of twittards arguing "see, it's a British national! What now anti-immigrant chuds??:smug:".

It's a deliberate choice, meant to fuck with people and make them doubt their views. All it really does is radicalise previously tolerant people into genuine racism.
 
Last edited:
British national and British citizen aren't the same thing. You can be born here - making you a national - but not have citizenship, as the UK doesn't have birthright citizenship unless at least one of your parents is also a citizen.

It's a rhetorical trick as well. They emphasise their status as a national to do two things: to trick people into thinking it's a British native; or, to neuter the debate around immigration and islam by clouding the issue with autistic debates about racism. The former just doesn't work on anything other than abject retards. The latter is losing its power daily, but still has enough of an effect that the immediate response to this was a bunch of twittards arguing "see, it's a British national! What now anti-immigrant chuds??:smug:".

It's a deliberate choice, meant to fuck with people and make them doubt their views. All it really does is radicalise previously tolerant people into genuine racism.
So it means someone with legal residency in the UK? I don't understand how someone born in the UK can be a British national but not a British citizen unless the term means something akin to having British legal residency and status.

If the point is to confuse people then it definitely works. Just like when they use "Asian" to refer to both streetshitters and civilized Japanese people.

Bad news, that place is Little Palestine now.
It wasn't even that long ago when I lived there but when I look at the demographics now it's like they brought in half of the Middle East in just five years. I feel bad for the British to the extent that no matter who you vote for, you get fucked in the same way. And for the lack of sunlight.
 
Back
Top Bottom