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.

 

[Hitman One]

didn't know sheepshaggers called them softies
remember big softies from Greggs? they were class, were only 99p too. Never forget what they took from you. Back when you could be racist in Greggs

Softies aren't the same as bread rolls, they're a bit sweeter and you eat them with just butter. The rowie, or butterie, is the true sheepy bread product delicacy however.

 

[teriyakiburns]

The banks are starting to turn on her, so we are probably going to see a resignation in due course. Bailey does not like her and is talking to Starmer directly.

Trouble between the PM and Chancellor has long been a bad omen, especially as the two offices have become more interwoven. I won't predict Reeves going will take down Starmer (I don't think we're quite on track for my "out by may" pipe-dream at the moment), but I will point out that it's typically less than a year between a big blow-out resignation or firing of the Chancellor and the PM being punted.

Aren’t you a nigger? You don’t have much room to speak on the ethnicity debate.

We're all wogs to a yorkie.

 

[Karen of Human Resources]

Trouble between the PM and Chancellor has long been a bad omen, especially as the two offices have become more interwoven. I won't predict Reeves going will take down Starmer (I don't think we're quite on track for my "out by may" pipe-dream at the moment), but I will point out that it's typically less than a year between a big blow-out resignation or firing of the Chancellor and the PM being punted.

This is an area I don't know a lot about.

Tories throw out their leaders with very little notice. I don't know if there's any such rumblings with Starmer. I know there was when he became leader of the party, but I don't know where that sits now.

Are Labour inclined to ditch Starmer, or are they still big fans of his work?

If they're not, who could they even replace him with I wonder? The rest of the cabinet are...Shocking, to put it mildly. As incompetent as she is, Reeves is the only one with any actual notable experience of anything.

 

[pot of sneed]

Are Labour inclined to ditch Starmer, or are they still big fans of his work?

The tories frequently went through prime minister after prime minister compared to labour who, at best, chose Gordon Brown after all the scandals Tony Blair left in his wake. It's too early to tell whether Two Tier Kier is indeed labour's Glorious Leader or if they get wind of enough grumbles from the populace, try to placate them with another knobhead to take the reins.

 

[BongoMongo]

This is an area I don't know a lot about.

Tories throw out their leaders with very little notice. I don't know if there's any such rumblings with Starmer. I know there was when he became leader of the party, but I don't know where that sits now.

Are Labour inclined to ditch Starmer, or are they still big fans of his work?

If they're not, who could they even replace him with I wonder? The rest of the cabinet are...Shocking, to put it mildly. As incompetent as she is, Reeves is the only one with any actual notable experience of anything.

Labour voters tend to do whatever they're told,blindly and without thinking. Especially if it's contradictory in some way. Starmer has always been leader of labour. And in a few months they'll pretend it was never so.

 

[Hitman One]

There's nobody in that absolute shower of shite of a Labour Party who could realistically lead a government. Starmer is the best they've got and he's a cunt of titanic proportions. Badenoch won't be Tory leader when the next election is called and I can only presume that Ed Davey died shortly after the last election as I've heard nothing of him since then.

 

[teriyakiburns]

Are Labour inclined to ditch Starmer

At the moment, probably not. Even if they were, it would have to be openly signalled beforehand, creating a visible fracture in the party, which is a problem the tories don't have. There's nobody with the gravitas necessary to challenge Starmer just yet.

If Starmer is smart, he will be able to use this dispute to reset Labour's trajectory and reconcile with the other factions in the party. Reeves will have to lose some of her acquired responsibilities (anything to do with planning reform, which she snatched away from Rayner, for example) and will have to drop some of her stupider ideas for that to work, but it could be done in a way that doesn't require her to resign.

Of course, if the OBR forecast leak turns out to be true, all bets are off. A leak like that will almost certainly have been carried out by a senior member of the civil service, possibly at the behest of a member of the cabinet. I might suspect Rayner will have been the source of it, though of course, we'll never actually know.

 

[Mound Dweller]

Literally who would they even replace ser keith with, Baddienoch at least had some decent name recognition and her own factional following but who (who isn't literally Diane Abott god forbid) is even waiting in the wings for the tainted chair this time? I think we're stuck with him for a good while yet.

 

[Kier Starmer]

I said on Saturday this Government is all about saving face but the issue is there are too many external pressures that will crush a government. What Reeves is doing is compiling those pressures leading to the collapse of multiple systems.

I have a theory about what is going to happen. So far there is a major player and that is Angela and she is probably the most powerful person in the party. She has all the union bosses and in doing so most of the backbenchers and ministers. Angela dislikes Reeves and Starmer and was going to cous last year to oust Starmer but she actually did the intelligent move and waited. I will commend her for this, as doing so prior would have been fruitless and would have given him the ability to recover.

After not doing the cous he announced Reeves as chancellor and this was a stupid move on his part even though it was spiteful. He no doubt knew she was prepping so appointed someone she detests. However, he did not recognize the adage that if a PM loses a Chancellor they if not always fall. I do think she will launch her cous after the local elections because he will be weakened leading to disillusioned frontbenchers securing a stronger no-confidence.

Reeves is gone before March though not only because of her ineptitude but because job role. If the Treasury is only asking for Starmer now then that is a lot of time as they talk daily and with the OBR findings looming then she is actually fucked. She knowingly mislead the house and is the Chancellor almost unheard of and to co-sign that is suicide.

 

[EddyRooney]

From what I can gauge from various news sources the banks are fucking furious as I said they are secure assets for them and internationals use ISAs a lot. I am convinced they will urge Starmer to sack her, they technically can as they are external. Her policies overall go against the basic laws of economies and what is worse she is implementing things that destablise fast on multiple fronts. Putting up tax negates savings and negating savings leads to contraction and wild inflation.

She keeps saying "London is a financial capital" Well it's not you stupid cunt because it is now ash and everyone has fled.

This is for CASH ISAs only ( at the moment - it's a slippery slope ). The idea is to force people to invest in the alternative stocks and shares ISAs ( ideally domestic market only ) - in effect to invest in UK companies. The theory being that this will filter through to UK companies investing more and it leading to......economic growth ( the holy grail she witters on about all the time. I'm not entirely convinced she even knows what it is ).

What they don't want is hundreds of millions sat in cash. Their grand socialist principles will resent anyone that has worked for a living, earned the money and now has the temerity to try to save it tax free. You must help your fellow comrades by investing in our schemes, brother. That money you earned we'll tax it there, then we'll tax it when you invest in a Cash ISA and then if you buy a house or a big ticket item, fuck me, we'll tax it again with stamp duty or VAT. Somebody has to fund the glorious leader Piggy Four Eyes, Two Tier, Free Gear, is he queer, never here, Farmer Harmer Starmer's gold plated pension.

Oh and when she refers to London being a financial capital, I would assume she's talking about the FTSE and other markets and all the investment banks. I don't think even she is thick enough to think it's the shit show Sneaky Little Shit Sadiq is running outside.

 

[Vining]

If I ever visit the UK, the first thing I’m trying is a Gregg’s steak bake and sausage roll.

 

[Kane Lives]

I said on Saturday this Government is all about saving face but the issue is there are too many external pressures that will crush a government. What Reeves is doing is compiling those pressures leading to the collapse of multiple systems.

I have a theory about what is going to happen. So far there is a major player and that is Angela and she is probably the most powerful person in the party. She has all the union bosses and in doing so most of the backbenchers and ministers. Angela dislikes Reeves and Starmer and was going to cous last year to oust Starmer but she actually did the intelligent move and waited. I will commend her for this, as doing so prior would have been fruitless and would have given him the ability to recover.

After not doing the cous he announced Reeves as chancellor and this was a stupid move on his part even though it was spiteful. He no doubt knew she was prepping so appointed someone she detests. However, he did not recognize the adage that if a PM loses a Chancellor they if not always fall. I do think she will launch her cous after the local elections because he will be weakened leading to disillusioned frontbenchers securing a stronger no-confidence.

Reeves is gone before March though not only because of her ineptitude but because job role. If the Treasury is only asking for Starmer now then that is a lot of time as they talk daily and with the OBR findings looming then she is actually fucked. She knowingly mislead the house and is the Chancellor almost unheard of and to co-sign that is suicide.

This remake of Yes, Prime Minister is very compelling.

 

[Whoopsie Daisy]

Sue Gray taking her revenge from behind the scenes while Mandelson schemes to become PM.

 

[Just a boring name]

If I ever visit the UK, the first thing I’m trying is a Gregg’s steak bake and sausage roll.

Let me know if you ever get here....I'll treat you to them and send you the pennies

 

[Kier Starmer]

Just remember to be racist.

 

[Coolio55]

If I ever visit the UK, the first thing I’m trying is a Gregg’s steak bake and sausage roll.

Don't. They're actually shit.

 

[FedPostalService]

Don't. They're actually shit.

Vegan hands typed this.

 

[BongoMongo]

Bit off topic, but look at this fine, clearly not born in this country specimen trying to illegally sublet his social housing property.

Say it loud, say it clear, refugees not welcome here. This is what these cunts, coons and sacks of genetic slop do when we allow them in.

Young, fighting age men fleeing their shitbox countries should not be allowed here.

Seriously they should be fucking thrown back. And if we can't do that, lock them up. And if the camps are "dangerous"? Then that's because the people there are dangerous, and they should not be allowed here.

Anyone geneuinely fleeing real, serious danger with any real legitimate claim to be here would be happy to be safe, secure, fed and looked after.

The very fact these shitskins demand their freedom and gibs and then steal social welfare assetts and try and profit off them, shows them for what they all truly are - degenerate subhuman vermin who should be shot while still out at sea.

 

[Morethanabitfoolish]

Sue Gray taking her revenge from behind the scenes while Mandelson schemes to become PM.

Speaking of she took her seat in the House of Lords yesterday. Shame it wasn't electrified.

Also the Telegraph is nailing it with these asylum seeker ones. The latest winner? Joined a terrorist group to avoid deportation. No, that's not a typo.

https://archive.ph/iRVVZ

A Nigerian woman who tried and failed eight times to secure asylum in Britain was finally granted the right to stay after joining a terrorist organisation just to boost her claim.
The judge who gave the 49-year-old woman the right to stay acknowledged that she was not being honest about her political beliefs and had become involved with the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) only “in order to create a claim for asylum”.
The woman, who came to the UK in 2011, joined IPOB in 2017. A separatist group that has been blamed for acts of violence against the Nigerian state, it has been banned as a terrorist organisation by Nigeria but is not proscribed in the UK.

Upper tribunal judge Gemma Loughran ruled that the asylum seeker’s activities on behalf of the group meant she had a “well-founded fear of persecution” under human rights laws due to her “imputed” political opinion.
The disclosure in court documents, seen by The Telegraph, is the latest immigration case in which migrants have used human rights laws to halt their deportation or win the right to live in the UK.
It is the fourth case exposed by The Telegraph this week. Previous examples include an Albanian criminal who avoided deportation after claiming his son had an aversion to foreign chicken nuggets and a Pakistani paedophile who was jailed for child sex offences but escaped removal from the UK as it would be “unduly harsh” on his own children.
On Wednesday, the issues raised by the cases dominated Prime Minister’s Questions, with Sir Keir Starmer branding as “wrong” another tribunal decision that allowed a Palestinian family to come to live in the UK after they applied through a scheme for Ukrainian refugees.
He said Parliament, not judges, should make the rules on immigration and pledged Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, would work on closing the loophole.

Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said the Nigerian case was “patently absurd”.
“This shows judges are inventing new and comically ludicrous interpretations of vague European Convention on Human Rights’ (ECHR) articles in order to allow foreign criminals and illegal immigrants to stay in the country,” he said.
“This is an abuse of the power judges have been given.
“It is clear to me that a radical overhaul of human rights law is needed in order to end this abuse by the judiciary – who have taken for themselves what amounts to legislative powers.”
It follows controversy over some asylum seekers converting to Christianity to boost their cases, or making false claims about their sexuality.
The Nigerian woman, who was granted anonymity, submitted eight different appeals against a rejection of her right to remain in the UK. They ranged from claims under ECHR Article Eight, which guarantees a right to a family life, to assertions she was a victim of trafficking.
They were all rejected over a 10-year period.

​

In her ninth appeal, she claimed she faced persecution if she returned to Nigeria due to her membership of IPOB and her attendance at its protests, rallies and campaigns. She said protesters at the Nigerian high commission were photographed and potentially watched on CCTV.
She was backed by IPOB’s UK-based medical director, who detailed her roles within the group, although these were not publicly disclosed to avoid revealing her identity.
She told the court she feared being arrested at the airport and “disappeared” if she returned to Nigeria as its government had powers under terror laws to imprison IPOB members. In 2021, in a government crackdown on the armed wing of the IPOB, 115 people were killed, with allegations of suspects being tortured.
Nigerian soldiers in the city of Aba. The government has issued crackdowns against IPOB, which it considers to be a terrorist group Credit: Cristina Aldehuela/AFP via Getty Images
Lower tribunal judge Iain Burnett initially rejected her claim largely because of a lack of evidence about her protest activities, which limited any risk of persecution on her return.
He found that she only became involved in IPOB “in order to create a claim for asylum”.
However, upper tribunal judge Ms Loughran overturned Mr Burnett’s decision, despite accepting that the woman’s IPOB involvement was “in order to create a claim for asylum and that it does not represent a true reflection of her genuinely held political views”.
Judge Loughran said there was a “reasonable likelihood” that the Nigerian woman had been identified as an IPOB activist by the country’s security services and would be identified by the authorities on her arrival in Nigeria.
“It is clear from the country background evidence that the security services act arbitrarily and arrest, harm and detain those it believes may be involved with IPOB without conducting an assessment of the extent of their involvement or their motivation,” she said.
“The appeal is allowed on the basis that [the Nigerian woman] has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of her imputed political opinion arising from her involvement with IPOB in the UK.”

 

[Cloaca Rimjob]

OMG I love me a pizza crunch supper.

does anyone even get deep fried pizza?
you need to go the whole hog and get the pizza crunch. (battered deep fried pizza slice for those not in the know)
blue lagoon ones are shite btw