UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679

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.

 

[COMMI3 MARK]

Final prediction: Hung parliament, Tory & Reform coalition with Farage as Deputy Prime Minister.

 

[Racist Trash]

(we were not carrying explosives.)

I am in extreme doubt

 

[Email]

Assault pencils, with heights of 18 cm, 4 cm shy of 22 cm, should be banned due to having a more suitable gripping surface for leveraging the pointed end into the eye or the neck of a politician via the delivery method of mass-imported sand monkey.
It would probably surprise Britbongers to discover that a swift drop and a seizure follows anyone who takes the dreaded assault hands from a pack of niggers being imported without end.

 

[Morethanabitfoolish]

Final prediction: Hung parliament, Tory & Reform coalition with Farage as Deputy Prime Minister.

It's good to keep a sense of humour in these trying times.

Maybe we should resurrect the politics thread for the election, just so the collective screaming is kept in something that will be fall off the first page of results a couple of weeks after it's over? Repression of the horrifying truth is the most British thing imaginable after all.

 

[adam_moche]

I was reading this article about the new UK govt's plan for the British constitution. What is this shit? Is this real? Are you about to do some Austro-Hungarian maxxing?

‘A New Britain’ will strengthen the forces of bureaucracy at every level of life. New and empowered devolved administrations in England will create tens of thousands of jobs for the political class. Each will have a permanent staff, bureaucracy and network of quangos and taxpayer-funded NGOs. The ranks of English devolved Government will be filled by the same curtain-twitchers, village solicitors and local tyrants that form the officer class of the SNP and Plaid Cymru – an enthroned Jackie Weaver in every town hall. Nor will there be any escape from these people. ‘A New Britain’ contains an explicit promise that Westminster will not infringe on the powers of local government, or even reduce its budgets without three years prior notice.

https://dailysceptic.org/2023/07/04/labours-new-britain-constitution-will-end-parliamentary-democracy/

 

[Wuornos]

It is wild to me that basic bitch "Actually running a country"policies that reform run on are treated as the second coming of the NSDAP. Even if they win, and by some miracle got a supermajority the UK would still be the most libshit lefty European nation.

What? More libshit lefty than Ireland or fucking Sweden?

 

[Rusty Metal Skull Gun]

I was reading this article about the new UK govt's plan for the British constitution. What is this shit? Is this real? Are you about to do some Austro-Hungarian maxxing?

https://dailysceptic.org/2023/07/04/labours-new-britain-constitution-will-end-parliamentary-democracy/

Who knows. That article's from a year ago, and in the meantime Starmer's gone from "we're doing what Brown says" to "we're not doing what Brown says" to "we might do what Brown says".

 

[Snekposter]

Who knows. That article's from a year ago, and in the meantime Starmer's gone from "we're doing what Brown says" to "we're not doing what Brown says" to "we might do what Brown says".

I see the man's convictions are as firm as ever.

 

[Morethanabitfoolish]

I was reading this article about the new UK govt's plan for the British constitution.

Given we don't have a constitution that should read "creating a British constitution" but otherwise after a skim of the article seems plausible. I would strongly suggest you give Spunt's thread a skim for the awful state of affairs of the UK.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/spunts-helpful-guide-to-britain-for-fat-americans.94720/

Most of British politics can be understood with the creation of the non-crime hate incidents under Blair. These are essentially a way for the police to decide, without bothering with the legal system getting involved in terms of proving this or informing the individual, that someone has done a no-no. And as such needs something lodged against them forever in criminal records databases that can be provided when required by, for example, prospective employers. These have been repeatedly defeated in the courts by those with the money to fight them, called out as arbitrary, draconian, illogical and, by the more honest, bullshit by all and sundry including that party that took over from the ones who brought them in and have been in power for over a decade. They are still there and what they cover has only been expanded.

Britain, much like America and most of Europe, is a place where the political parties take it in turns to create more sophisticated rods for the voter's backs, only exchanging roles when the abuse of said tools grow too much to bear at which point a new party comes in who does nothing to deconstruct said tools but come up with new ways to make people suffer. Various NGOs and similar are founded that use and abuse these just as much while lining politicians pockets either while they are in office or after they leave with consultancy gigs or outright positions.

We are better off than we were under feudalism but our politicians desperately wish to drag us back there so that they do not every half decade or so go through the panto performance where they pretend we are anything more to them than a vote.

 

[AssignedEva]

Is this real?

Not really, no. Parliament is sovereign and is unable to do anything that renders it insovereign. However the House of Commons is not sovereign. The House of Lords can overrule the Commons, particularly when stuff was not in the manifesto, and send it back with amendments. Likewise, the judiciary (which used to be synonymous with the Lords, but was decanted into the Supreme Court) can overrule decisions if they're deemed to be incompatible with the rule of law.

An ongoing shitfest with Braverman vs Sunak was her entire point was Sunak would need to pass primary legislation to get Rwanda to happen. He didn't, even though he had a majority (you only need a 50% majority, not a "supermajority" that doesn't exist here). Much of what he proposed was illegal based on current laws, so Parliament needed to amend current laws. However if the 2019 manifesto didn't say "we're going to tear up laws xyz", then our upper chamber would not rubber stamp doing so. This is by design. The argument is that the electorate didn't give their consent to things that represent a significant departure from the manifesto, which is partially because Britain in 2023 under Sunak was very different from Britain in 2019 under Boris, and if you want to change things up that much then call another election.

Keir's proposed reforms to the Lords are more to do with altering the rules around peerages. As for devolution? It would make things more difficult for Parliament to do certain things, but it appears to be popular with the electorate. If Parliament wishes to overrule devolved authorities, they sometimes can do. If they get blocked, then they need to run an election where they put the option to the electorate and allow the electorate to decide if they want the Government to overrule devolved authorities.

 

[adam_moche]

Not really, no. Parliament is sovereign and is unable to do anything that renders it insovereign. However the House of Commons is not sovereign. The House of Lords can overrule the Commons, particularly when stuff was not in the manifesto, and send it back with amendments. Likewise, the judiciary (which used to be synonymous with the Lords, but was decanted into the Supreme Court) can overrule decisions if they're deemed to be incompatible with the rule of law.

An ongoing shitfest with Braverman vs Sunak was her entire point was Sunak would need to pass primary legislation to get Rwanda to happen. He didn't, even though he had a majority (you only need a 50% majority, not a "supermajority" that doesn't exist here). Much of what he proposed was illegal based on current laws, so Parliament needed to amend current laws. However if the 2019 manifesto didn't say "we're going to tear up laws xyz", then our upper chamber would not rubber stamp doing so. This is by design. The argument is that the electorate didn't give their consent to things that represent a significant departure from the manifesto, which is partially because Britain in 2023 under Sunak was very different from Britain in 2019 under Boris, and if you want to change things up that much then call another election.

Keir's proposed reforms to the Lords are more to do with altering the rules around peerages. As for devolution? It would make things more difficult for Parliament to do certain things, but it appears to be popular with the electorate. If Parliament wishes to overrule devolved authorities, they sometimes can do. If they get blocked, then they need to run an election where they put the option to the electorate and allow the electorate to decide if they want the Government to overrule devolved authorities.

So the British Parliament is sovereign except when it comes to the British Supreme court and Scotland and Wales? Am I misunderstanding? Why is the British Parliament liquidating its own authority?

I've lived in countries with federal systems. There are things the federal govt and the state govts need to do. That has to be laid out clearly in law. Having an election every time there is a spat between federal and state authorities will create a permanent standoff.

 

[Tragon Dirtle]

I was reading this article about the new UK govt's plan for the British constitution. What is this shit? Is this real? Are you about to do some Austro-Hungarian maxxing?

Isn't Jackie Weaver the meme woman from that council meeting video? why is she unpopular now?

 

[niaff]

They hate anyone smarter than they are, so they become police to make themselves feel important, then come down like a ton of bricks anyone who doesn't respect their vaunted position or pay sufficient obeisance to their superior station in life. They will even arrest someone simply for getting gobby at them and make up a justification after the fact. For all these reasons, a meeting between officer knacker and an autist spells certain doom.

Officers must be very retarded if the typical autist is considered smarter than they are.

 

[Snekposter]

Officers must be very retarded if the typical autist is considered smarter than they are.

You have no idea...

 

[Coccxys]

Final prediction: Hung parliament, Tory & Reform coalition with Farage as Deputy Prime Minister.

Can I get some of whatever you smoked prior to making this prediction please?

There's more chance of a Labour majority and Lib Dem opposition than there is of the Tories and Reform combined picking up 150 seats let alone a majority between them.

Imagine the hell of a Labour supermajority and Lib Dem opposition, it's not impossible either, it is within the margin of polling error for the all up polls (though right to the extreme of the error bars in both cases).

 

[Train Operator]

If only they took a zero tolerance to child raping gangs or acid attacks too.

is there any lower of scum on this earth then a British police officer? every time i ever hear about them or see them in a video they're always arresting a nun for praying in public or tackling someone for putting a sticker on a lamp post that slightly criticize the states invasion immigration policy.

do the British people treat these faggots like the worms they are? when they have family get togethers do they make it clear that they aren't invited because they're traitors? when they go out to the pub do the people around them heckle them and throw beer in their face for assisting in turning London into a mini Syria?

the job should be so toxic to your social standing that it should be impossible to find anyone willing to do it.

 

[Dr J]

the job should be so toxic to your social standing that it should be impossible to find anyone willing to do it.

That would just ensure that only even bigger scum end up doing it. Look at politicians

 

[Bloom Worm Cross Field]

> Check normally-very-comfy Brit news thread on eve before election
> Full of yank community happenings tourists

Hump, well! I wonder if there will be any niche, even of sufferance, left for reactionary back numbers like me (and you). The bigger things get the smaller and duller or flatter the globe gets. It is getting to be all one blasted little provincial suburb.

 

[Kier Starmer]

Rishi's mind right now RN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eXEZDF3G5E

but add Bangladeshi Indian singing and shitting sounds.

 

[Train Operator]

That would just ensure that only even bigger scum end up doing it. Look at politicians

my guy, they ignore child rape gangs and arrest people for "misgendering" or carrying a Zelda toy. there's already no law or command they wont follow. even if there were bigger scum to replace them they wouldn't be doing anything different.

if we aren't going to punish people for being and assisting evil we should at least shame them for it.