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.

 

[ApeBass]

But do keep in mind that many of them aren't really fleeing because they hate the country, but because their country hates them. People who nobody there will employ for whatever reason, people who have committed crimes for which their own countries have actual punishments, those who have tried to overthrow their government and failed... the list goes on.

 

[Otterly]

their ideas/plans, which were spoken will full confidence and also with the bizarre belief that most of the population would be receptive to them, were dismal failures which either faced backlash in places which attempted soft implementation

I’ve mentioned on here before but I know a couple of fairly influential academic types who are committed believers of this kind of thing. They genuinely believe in it - it’s important to note that. They’re the foot soldier (or maybe one step above that) class who wrote the position papers and self reference it into existence (experts say….)
I’ve had a few run ins with them where I’ve tried to point out that 15m cities aren’t about having nice facilities close at all. And they always sulk and say it is, and then in the same breath they drop the mask and talk about how we must lower our standard of living and de-develop. And all sorts of other things.
But they absolutely do believe in it - the one I know is hard core - holidays by rail, unless of course she’s being flown all over the world to conferences or for research. Makes her children wear only second hand.
All her kids are very unhappy, they all have to eat borderline vegan, her husband is an alcoholic. It’s not a happy household.

I think she’s insane and she gets very mad at me when I talk about nuclear power.
She’s a committed cultist, a true believer and she’s absolutely terrifying. She believes 100% that she’s on the right side. It’s important we acknowledge that there are people who believe this stuff.

 

[Goodbye Horses]

I never said make it green or profitable, I said we can do it, but we don't because it's expensive. Build a nuclear powerplant and hit the shit with 10 million degree electrical arcs to vapourise it. run the gasses through stages of carbon and HEPA filters.
Wash the filters in solutions/water that separate the useful carbons.
Take those carbons and use them to make carbon brushes, or fire, or pencils or whatever.

We can do it, we just don't want to.

The Japanese do exactly that, though they're using the electricity to generate a plasma jet rather than applying it to the plastic directly. Some Korean scientists have just developed a plasma jet system using hydrogen rather than argon, so the whole thing should become a whole lot cheaper in the near future. Still doubt we'll ever see it in this country, as actually recycling plastic would reduce the amount of tax payer money going into grifters pockets.

 

[A-Logato]

I’ve mentioned on here before but I know a couple of fairly influential academic types who are committed believers of this kind of thing. They genuinely believe in it - it’s important to note that. They’re the foot soldier (or maybe one step above that) class who wrote the position papers and self reference it into existence (experts say….)
I’ve had a few run ins with them where I’ve tried to point out that 15m cities aren’t about having nice facilities close at all. And they always sulk and say it is, and then in the same breath they drop the mask and talk about how we must lower our standard of living and de-develop. And all sorts of other things.
But they absolutely do believe in it - the one I know is hard core - holidays by rail, unless of course she’s being flown all over the world to conferences or for research. Makes her children wear only second hand.
All her kids are very unhappy, they all have to eat borderline vegan, her husband is an alcoholic. It’s not a happy household.

I think she’s insane and she gets very mad at me when I talk about nuclear power.
She’s a committed cultist, a true believer and she’s absolutely terrifying. She believes 100% that she’s on the right side. It’s important we acknowledge that there are people who believe this stuff.

The people who pushed this originally did so for control via policy disguised as empathy and knew what the long term effects would be or they actively wanted to destroy the west (KGB). The people in charge now are not this first wave and are the second or even third wave and a lot of them have unironically bought into it all and don't realise it was all just a scam to cease power. Look at Starmer as an example, he was flying over to Russia in the 80's during the peak of the cold war for his work as a lead member of a university socialist group and even spent time in a Czechoslovakian work camp as a part of a tour by communist officials. He's as communist as they get and these officials in Russia really only used him to spread their ideology back in Britain and in some way as a human bio weapon and he likely doesn't even know it, all he knows now is to do it via the back door and not head on like Corbyn does.

You still get the ones who know it's a big scam but you are getting more and more who don't know it's a scam and are unironic in their push for all of this.

 

[BongoMongo]

I’ve mentioned on here before but I know a couple of fairly influential academic types who are committed believers of this kind of thing. They genuinely believe in it - it’s important to note that. They’re the foot soldier (or maybe one step above that) class who wrote the position papers and self reference it into existence (experts say….)
I’ve had a few run ins with them where I’ve tried to point out that 15m cities aren’t about having nice facilities close at all. And they always sulk and say it is, and then in the same breath they drop the mask and talk about how we must lower our standard of living and de-develop. And all sorts of other things.
But they absolutely do believe in it - the one I know is hard core - holidays by rail, unless of course she’s being flown all over the world to conferences or for research. Makes her children wear only second hand.
All her kids are very unhappy, they all have to eat borderline vegan, her husband is an alcoholic. It’s not a happy household.

I think she’s insane and she gets very mad at me when I talk about nuclear power.
She’s a committed cultist, a true believer and she’s absolutely terrifying. She believes 100% that she’s on the right side. It’s important we acknowledge that there are people who believe this stuff.

Her Husband should sober up and get those kids out of there. Seriously growing up like that is going to damage those kids so hard.

 

[Tom Nook's Gloryhole]

The Mahmood stuff regarding immigration policy is hilarious for multiple reasons:

1. It shows that some Labour supporters would legitimately vote for Pakis being shot if it was a policy implimented by Labour.
2. It's going to completely alienate the other half of the party who see this as drastically more far right than the Tories who they voted against.
3. Absolutely NOTHING is going to be implimented within the next year. Not a thing. Everything she says will be watered down in order to stop a back bench rebellion and the government doesn't have the balls or mandate to force through laws that will make any of this come quicker. They think if they say it loud enough without doing anything the niggercattle Reform voters will go back to Labour.

As an added bonus, I'm going to REALLY love concern trolling Labour supporters by asking them why they're supporting a fascist, right-wing government.

 

[Overly Serious]

As an added bonus, I'm going to REALLY love concern trolling Labour supporters by asking them why they're supporting a fascist, right-wing government.

Don't over do it, even though funny. It just creates pressure on Labour to reverse direction. Instead, tell them how you've heard people starting to say they might vote Labour now - really put them in a bind!

 

[Hoi Polloi]

As an added bonus, I'm going to REALLY love concern trolling Labour supporters by asking them why they're supporting a fascist, right-wing government.

The last week of news has kind of left one spoiled for choice here.

You can indeed go your route, but you can also articulate the (valid) concern of Your Party being run by a bunch of insane puritanical Muslim MPs by just saying "I'm really concerned about the transphobic views that seem to be prevalent in the party"

Unfortunately you can't really do the same for Green because the power of equip tiktok quip reels calling people "licherellay Faschist" seems to completely outweigh Polanski's retarded breast growth grift. I want to try to concern-troll by saying that offering breast growth as a service is misogynistic implying that larger breasts inherently increase a woman's worth and see if anyone goes for that.

 

[Duane Dibbley]

The Mahmood stuff regarding immigration policy is hilarious for multiple reasons:

She is going to try and stop illegal migration by enforcing stricter visa rules for legal migrants.
She will attempt to send criminals- illegal migrants, through a stream-lined legal process and hope that helps.
Just sink the boats and stop being cowards.

I think mahmood is getting ready for a leadership challenge.

 

[BongoMongo]

I don't know about anyone else but with this budget I am going to, as far as possible avoid these extra taxes by not paying for whatever is being taxed. I can take or leave milkshakes,for one thing. My savings in any bank account will be below whatever thresholds they impose.

I'm not sure what else Thieves is planning but I'm not playing her poxy game. She can go rope herself.

 

[Heinrich Maneuver]

I want to try to concern-troll by saying that offering breast growth as a service is misogynistic implying that larger breasts inherently increase a woman's worth and see if anyone goes for that.

I've been doing the "well either he DID believe womens breasts can grow via hypno and that really shows how unintelligent he is/his poor thought processes, or he didn't believe it and he was a snake oil saleman- which you don't want in a politician!" concerntroll because I can't just say I don't like Polanski because his shits all retarded and he talks like a fag

Milkshake tax is fucking CRAZY as well can we not put a weight cap on benefits??? That would stop fatties.

 

[Tom Nook's Gloryhole]

I think the milkshake shit is smoke and mirrors to distract from something big like stopping ISAs

 

[tack så mycket]

I’ve been reading the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire recently, and it’s actually horrifying just how many immigrants were housed in local authority housing. Yeah, some of the flats were bought and rented out, but the vast majority weren’t. There were far more immigrants in that tower than Brits. Why?

Okay, I found the Louise Perry interview I was thinking of, it was on Winston Marshall's podcast on 25th October.* They start talking about the general topic of the native population of the East End being replaced with immigrants at ~28 minutes, and she starts describing the change in policy regarding the allocation of social housing at ~31 minutes.

In a nutshell, social housing was not originally reserved for the poorest of the poor. It was kind of a social benefit for the working class, and it was intended for people who had jobs and made a contribution to the community, had family ties in the area, etc - the "respectable poor." Decisions about allocating social housing were originally made locally.
This changed in the mid-70s when a national policy came into play, which said social housing must be given on the basis of need. There was already a small established population of poor immigrants in the area (primarily from SEA) and these people suddenly went to the top of the list, and have remained there ever since.

The book she mentions is The New East End: Kinship, Race & Conflict.

*For future reference, would it have been better to edit my own post to add this information, or is there another better option?

 

[BongoMongo]

With Grenfell what a lot of people don't know is that the Labour run council was told "x fire doors with y burn times are what you need. Sure they're spendy but these are best" and they said "naw man duck off give me the cheap option".

And brown people died. So sad.

 

[UselessRubberKeyboard]

Okay, I found the Louise Perry interview I was thinking of, it was on Winston Marshall's podcast on 25th October.* They start talking about the general topic of the native population of the East End being replaced with immigrants at ~28 minutes, and she starts describing the change in policy regarding the allocation of social housing at ~31 minutes.

In a nutshell, social housing was not originally reserved for the poorest of the poor. It was kind of a social benefit for the working class, and it was intended for people who had jobs and made a contribution to the community, had family ties in the area, etc - the "respectable poor." Decisions about allocating social housing were originally made locally.
This changed in the mid-70s when a national policy came into play, which said social housing must be given on the basis of need. There was already a small established population of poor immigrants in the area (primarily from SEA) and these people suddenly went to the top of the list, and have remained there ever since.

The book she mentions is The New East End: Kinship, Race & Conflict.

*For future reference, would it have been better to edit my own post to add this information, or is there another better option?

It’s better for me that you put it in a separate post, as I got a notification about it. Editing your other post, I’d have missed the new information.

Why were people from SEA on the housing list in the first place? That’s what baffles me. I feel like even without the change in housing policy, the fact that these people had been added into a housing system at all was an issue.

But absolutely, that change in the rules opened the floodgates for everyone and anyone to be given a council property, they just had to cry poverty. It used to be much stricter, even after you were given a council property, but councils because very disdainful of council housing by the late 70s or so. How wonderful that they wanted to hold less housing stock (as it was expensive) and wanted more people to take responsibility for their own housing issues, while allowing people who never should’ve been on the housing list in the first place access to it. It’s pure stupidity and was always going to mean an avalanche of immigration for ‘free’ housing in the big, rich city abroad.

 

[Heinrich Maneuver]

The 'confiscating valuable jewellery' rule change makes no sense to me, wouldn't the human traffickers seize anything valuable from people if they knew they had it, and if they know the UK government will take it, what's to stop them from forcibly searching people before taking them across the Channel? (And I don't like the idea of the state being able to take away jewellery and things, idk it genuinely has a concentration camp feel to it and we all know what the UK thinks of political dissidents : / )
The Times reports Mahmood is threatening visa bans on Angola, Namibia and the Democratic Republic of Congo unless they take back illegal migrants- They’ll have one month to start co-operating from tomorrow. Interesting, and i like the shorert deadline. India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Somalia and Gabon could also be considered for a visa ban. Labour MPs are expressing anger towards these changes; tweet from Braverman, I think ECHR is next up for the gov to claw back votes.

The Labour party feels so out of lockstep with Mahmood now discussing these Danish style reforms and Thieves absolutely raping us over milkshakes. (side note, very cute of Keir to pretend there's some kind of Danish-UK friendship now with the immigration advice and the drones stuff, the fucking Egyptian ambassadors were building lego pyramids with the Danish ones the other day. Keir can't even get a lego set gift fuck sake man.)

 

[Crunkle]

I think the milkshake shit is smoke and mirrors to distract from something big like stopping ISAs

I have probably one milkshake every decade, so is it just me that this new tax punishment policy means nothing to me?

If this is their best attempt to distract from the other nukes about to explode, things really are that dire.

 

[A-Logato]

The 'confiscating valuable jewellery' rule change makes no sense to me, wouldn't the human traffickers seize anything valuable from people if they knew they had it, and if they know the UK government will take it, what's to stop them from forcibly searching people before taking them across the Channel?

You and I both know every piece of jewellery they have will be safely placed and stored in "natures back pocket" if they know that the UK government will take it (big fucking doubt they even will).

 

[>IMPLYING]

I’ve mentioned on here before but I know a couple of fairly influential academic types who are committed believers of this kind of thing. They genuinely believe in it - it’s important to note that. They’re the foot soldier (or maybe one step above that) class who wrote the position papers and self reference it into existence (experts say….)
I’ve had a few run ins with them where I’ve tried to point out that 15m cities aren’t about having nice facilities close at all. And they always sulk and say it is, and then in the same breath they drop the mask and talk about how we must lower our standard of living and de-develop. And all sorts of other things.
But they absolutely do believe in it - the one I know is hard core - holidays by rail, unless of course she’s being flown all over the world to conferences or for research. Makes her children wear only second hand.
All her kids are very unhappy, they all have to eat borderline vegan, her husband is an alcoholic. It’s not a happy household.

I think she’s insane and she gets very mad at me when I talk about nuclear power.
She’s a committed cultist, a true believer and she’s absolutely terrifying. She believes 100% that she’s on the right side. It’s important we acknowledge that there are people who believe this stuff.

People like you mention, despite being in an academic setting, never once question things they are told and take the concepts as shared with them as they are*. I don't need to tell you this, but when a theory/concept is proposed you're supposed to pick it apart and see which parts of it hold up to scrutiny. With shit like "15 minute cities"**, you have a concept that which proposes a goal – people ought to have access to vital services within an acceptable distance – which effectively takes the place of a proposed theory, where agreement with the platitude essentially also means accepting any and all praxis which would bring it about. You're not allowed to pick apart the theory to test its validity, because the morality of the platitude is "good" and so it and all ideas which would enable it must be left alone. This has it dangling between "unproven" and "self-evidently true", where its supposed morality makes it beyond question.

My only theory about this is they're taking subjective concepts and theories as fact largely due to who they learnt them from, and since they might've become their own authority on the matter, they've ingrained it into something they must believe in because it's become an integral part of themselves and their livelihoods. The bigger the lie though, the more prominent a place it must take in your life, occupying a religion-like role just to maintain it. There's a sort of comparison to vegans. The ones who do the diet for purely for health-related reasons, weight loss, etcetera, tend to be less insane than vegans who do it because they care about the animals, who are also slightly less insane than those doing it for environmental reasons, and much less insane than vegans who think humans were originally vegan and our current omnivorous state is the result of defying nature or something.

These people do exist and they absolutely do represent a threat to the state of things. However the biggest thing these people have going against them is they die in truly meritocratic or popularity-based systems, which is why the rely on propping one another up financially or through nepotistic appointment. Their ecosystem appears self-sustaining and its resilience to outsiders a false impression to its popularity. These people zealots and it allows them to weather through hardships to the cause, but they can and eventually will die out. As of April this year, Just Stop Oil have put the lid on protests and demonstrations. We see that they still exist in name, largely thanks to the aid of other organisations like themselves, but the money and capacity to organise just isn't there anymore.

“The repression does make it more difficult to mobilise, and the external environment has changed,” she told the AFP news agency.
Just Stop Oil has been coy about its future strategy, but has said it will “continue to tell the truth in the courts, speak out for our political prisoners and call out the UK’s oppressive anti-protest laws”.
“In the background, we are working with other [similar] groups… to develop a strategy for what comes next,” said Carrington.

The last stranglehold of these people are within academia and politics, which is rather unfortunate because those are the two worst places you want them really. The politics stuff is arguably more solvable (Vote harder) but academia I have no idea. You'd probably have to make the universities private or make student loans from the government apply only to specific degrees so that you can strangle the offending fields of cash and, much like the corporate world is seeing, the universities will be forced to cut off these vestigial limbs that have long since become worthless and are rotting as we speak.

*Normal person:
"The sky is blue."
"How do you know it's blue?"
"Because you can see that it is blue, and we know it is "blue" because of [light-spectrum stuff that I don't know anything about in detail but that goes here]."
"Ah, so it is."

So-called "Academic":
"The sky is blue."
"Okay."

This works when the claim is provably true, and like the Nostradamus thing I mentioned maybe they're told some things that are true by the source, so it mires the bullshit with legitimacy even though it's pulled out of their ass.

Normal person:
"The sky is green."
"How do you know it's green?"
"It just is."
"But I can see that it's blue."
"According my definition of blue and my definition of green, the sky is actually green."
"But it's observably blue, so I do not accept your claim."

So-called "Academic":
"The sky is green."
"Okay."

You don't necessarily need to be a philosopher about every aspect of life and reality, but at bare minimum you ought to ask "why?" and "how?" on certain things. If the "how" and "why" don't hold up to scrutiny, or you get a proverbial family tree of questions from answers that make the plausibility of the thing too complex to conceive, then you should probably err on the side of it being wrong, or at the very least, highly suspect.


**One of the dumbest things about "15 minute cities", especially regarding talk about implementing them in the UK, is that it already exists and emerged so organically throughout most of Europe. In the UK? Corner shops, local pharmacies, local post office, etcetera give people access to some service or place to restock on bare essentials (milk, bread, butter, toilet paper, etc) within a 15 minute drive/walk and usually within spitting distance of one another. The dystopian turn of it into limiting the range of your car from your home and other shit was a political product or re-defining by true believers to make it fit to the UK, like a form of localisation. The WEF's plan to bring this about was effectively what we're supposed to see with "The Line" by the Saudis – build an apartment-like complex housing a bunch of required services all in one place, with the mandatory carbon-neutralising accoutrements to make up for the shitshow of construction and resources it'd take to build such a thing. Not quite "Restrict driving to be within 15 minutes of a person's home", especially when the WEF didn't even propose that shit, it was entirely a product of stooges and retards.

 

[Le b0wski]

I think the milkshake shit is smoke and mirrors to distract from something big like stopping ISAs

Triple Lock?