UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
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
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.
 
Not quite. Needs moar grey hair and stubble.
@Judge Dredd said: Supposedly Kier Starmer is trying to pass laws based on the show, calling it a documentry. Retarded if true. ...Is it true?
Super retarded. I fucking hope not. But, Starmer is nothing if not a populist fuckwit. It's anyone's guess at this point.
That assumes women think.
Don't be a dick 🙄
There are issues that aren't internet porn. Boys used to do better than girls in school, this was seen as a failure of the school system and was changed. Now girls are doing better than boys in school, and boys are the problem. There's the general treatment of men and boys in media, where white men are either evil or stupid, unless they become gay, passive, effeminate, and defer to women in all things. There's issues with the dating market where women are chasing the top 20% of men, and the bottom 70% are not considered people. I could go on with examples, but I don't want to turn this post into a MRA/MGTOW lecture.
I focused on porn and relationships because the programme is about a girl rejecting a boy, initially.

Well done on ignoring absolutely every other point I made tho, and thank you for my big red ❌ it matches my eyes 👀

There's absolutely no point in me getting into a discussion with you about the rest. In your eyes, I'll be wrong about everything I say, for the simple fact that I have a vagina. You're obviously entrenched in that mindset and I've got better things to do than to waste my time with that. The fact that you're blaming it all on women instead of the rich people who actually enact shitty policies, and don't seem to understand that the vast majority of the working class don't think like that, at ALL, tells me all I need to know.

Toodles 😘
 
ike Bristol, IIRC, to have cameras and barriers everywhere, to ultimately restrict freedom of movement for everyone.
I'm not sure what you've been reading but there's no 'barriers' restricting movement in Bristol. They put in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods recently because retarded pakis, niggers and chavs love screaming down residential roads at 60mph to avoid the main roads but that's it.
 
FWIW I definitely think you should. I’d read it.
Suggested it in the meta thread. If there's an interest we could. Mumsnet lite on the farms - how to avoid raising a Troon. How to raise a family when Muhammed is taking photos at the school gates and the fuzz do fuck all. How to protect your house without looking like a weirdo on the street.
 
Supposedly Kier Starmer is trying to pass laws based on the show, calling it a documentry. Retarded if true. ...Is it true?
I think there's a few reasons that might answer why he and everyone else in government has such a hard on for adolescents...

Oops, sorry, I meant Adolescence.

One: It's being used to retroactively justify laws and policy, such as the internet safety bill or the 'ninja sword' ban. Ofcom did highlight increasing risk against girls as one of the reasons why the internet safety bill is necessary, to name one. Might also be an attempt to inspire the public to want more done (God no!) thus encouraging further restrictions, or plant the seed now for further shit to be done later. — Creates a shield to deflect against pushback to laws and policy by moralising the issue and justify not acknowledging counter-arguments, and creates cause for further 'action'. — Politics.

Two: The government insisting it's a concern gives them a non-issue to tackle to make it look like they're doing something important, since stuff pertaining to the economy and things that matter are 'too hard' or will result in too much push back (see attempted benefit cuts). By placing blame entirely on the shoulders of the internet, it also answers why any action the government (both past and present) was impotent in stopping violent crime, and anything they attempt to do now will do nothing unless something is done about Andrew Tate (lmao). Also gives them an easy 'out' to answering any of the other possible motives, causes, or reasoning for crime by young people. — Cynical attempt to make them look active and useful to slow ever-falling poll figures and public enthusiasm, can also combine with making it a moral issue so there's no reason to engage with critics. Also justifies continued inaction (doing stuff that actually works) for the most part. — Laziness.

Three: It's being used to retroactively give motive to past, present and near-future violence to 'young men', be it random murders or terrorist attacks. You've seen them try to link the Manosphere to the Southport killer believe or not, or Brianna Ghey's killers too (despite one of them being a girl, which is why they'll only point out she was lured and killed by 'two teenagers'). — Yet another attempt to stop the public putting 2 and 2 together who is responsible for a lot of this young violence, especially as it takes place in the cities, and it gives a nice clean answer to nearly every murder committed by a male against a female and if successful, people might not even look into it as the show already gave them an 'answer'. — Malicious.

Four: All of the above. — Anarcho-Tyranny

In the Ofcom/Internet Safety Act thing, if one looks at the criteria used to assess risk on their website, they specifically mention the risk individual users and site content poses to women and girls in one of the bullet points; I mentioned in a prior post that the current kayfabe of government is that girls and women are at risk from young males being radicalised by online content creators (and nothing else!) so if they make it seem like a genuine issue, they look good for trying to tackle it (this is joined by the prior government's handling of the trans issue being motivated much the same alongside public resentment of of the Ts).

The 'ninja sword' ban that was passed recently for example was Labour's attempt at tackling knife crime, rather than tackle the issue of whose holding these knives to begin with and ignoring the fact katanas are not what's being used in the majority of incidents (they banned 'ninja swords' before machetes?).

Both of the incidents justifying the above occurred under the Conservative government (thing that prompted Internet Safety Act occurred in 2017 I believe, and the incident which provoked the 'Ninja sword' ban was in 2022), so Labour might be trying to follow on from the plans of the prior government (malicious uniparty-esque agenda or Labour being feckless and having no actual plans so copying the prior government is all they got — up to you). It tracks, partly, as the charity which is responsible for showing the program around high schools in the UK and invited alongside the show's creators began receiving money from government contracts at the start of 2023 under the Tories:
1743701593430.png

A lot of their income is through private donations but still, the government has employed the charity for some reason or another. Either this was a planned psyop under the Conservatives now being carried out by Labour (Cumbernoch not playing ball could be because Labour have stolen their play, or they're actually changing internally), or it simply coincides with the narrative by the media and government both that Incels/Manosphere were the number 1 threat to national security and responsible for the recent spate of horrific violence, and Adolescence coming out was just a happy coincidence to further push that idea. (Earliest article I could fine on Incels being the number 1 terror threat was from the BBC in 2021 and a corroborating article by the Guardian start of 2023 ) The government also being late to address something people wanted done much sooner is consistent enough.

Having spag bol. Yes, I use Dolmio. Mince meat prices are getting absurd.
 
Off top of my head he visited Mirfield? Was running his fat trap about the state of the transport system,promising he would fix it. Perhaps starting with stripping the free bus passes off illegal migrants would be a start?

My local council (not Kirklees) is bad and good depending on what your issues or needs are. I found the council tax team were extremely good with referring me for additional support when I was unemployed last year, and I can't fault them on that.

However, as they're now all using up budget and the whole of West Yorkshire is apparently a gigantic fucking roadworks, I do have an issue with that, especially seeing as how the end game is to, like Bristol, IIRC, to have cameras and barriers everywhere, to ultimately restrict freedom of movement for everyone.
Exactly the same in another area.
Roadworks everywhere, in a new tax year, just before council elections..
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThrobbingWalloper
Finally, some news we can be proud of:

RAF ban on flying with Tunnock's Teacake could be lifted 60 years on
18940490.jpg
The man who invented the Tunnock's Teacake Boyd Tunnock with his Tunnock Teacakes at their (Image: PA)

Scientists have carried out tests to see if it is safe to fly with a Tunnock’s Teacake, 60 years after they were banned by the RAF.
The ban was put in place when a packet of teacakes exploded during a flight in 1965, leaving the pilot, controls and windows covered in marshmallow and chocolate.
Now, scientists at RAF Centre of Aerospace Medicine in Henlow, Bedfordshire, have produced work to prove it is now viable to fly with the snack and the ban could be lifted.
The Daily Mail reports that scientists took the teacakes to 8,000ft inside an altitude chamber normally used in the training of new jet pilots.

They were then rapidly decompressed to 25,000ft in three seconds to see if they would blow up and while the marshmallow in the teacakes did escape, they did not explode or cause a risk to safety.
A further test saw the teacakes frozen before being taken on board and the hardened shell was able to withstand the pressures better and avoid cracking.
Dr Oliver Bird, a Medical Officer Instructor at the RAF Centre of Aerospace Medicine, was leading the tests and he told the Mail Online: “I think the best advice is that the snacks are kept frozen and in their foil wrappings until pilots are ready to consume them.”
Tunnock's tea cakes are made in Uddingston, South Lanarkshire.
 
From the moment I saw the Adolescence crap it's just screamed govt pysop and/or nudge unit to me. All the mainstream news has been pushing any male on female crime as being a direct analogy to it. There was one guy sentenced earlier in the week who the BBC reported "hated women" in the headline about the case. He was actually obsessed with true crime and trying to get away with murder looking at the evidence, and the only reference to him hating women came from the prosecution statements suggesting motives as they never conclusively found one...

This is all to just give them cover for the OSA and whaever else crazy shit they have in the pipeline.

Yes, I use Dolmio
It's never been the same since they were bullied into removing most of the salt, but I do enjoy the onion and garlic one if I can't be bothered making my own sauce.
 
I'm not sure what you've been reading but there's no 'barriers' restricting movement in Bristol. They put in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods recently because retarded pakis, niggers and chavs love screaming down residential roads at 60mph to avoid the main roads but that's it.
For me, it's mostly YouTubers talking about it. A recent one was the council installing "bus gates" at 3am with 60 police and a drone acting as guards because residents keep protesting and interfering with construction. Of course, construction work at 3am woke up the residents, but they managed to get a bit of work done before there were enough numbers for the workers to retreat.
 
There's been plenty of white teenagers killing their exes or someone who's turned them down. I don't see how the race issue comes into it at all.
The ease of access to rough and/or violent porn and extreme misogyny (and please note that I said extreme) has been an issue amongst young teenagers for ages. We know that. It wasn't as much of an issue before the internet was so readily accessible, unless their dads were into some hardcore German porn or something. They wouldn't have had any frame of reference for it. IMO it's mostly a parenting fault for not being more on top about what their kids are watching online, but, kids are going to access that shit one way or another, eventually. It's down to the parents first, backed up by schools a bit to teach kids how to differentiate between bullshit and the real world, and its consequences.

It might not be... or it could be?

As an aside, I think the internet on young people has its swings and roundabouts. We can talk about the normalisation of certain degeneracy, upswing in trannies worldwide, proliferation of weirdos and brain rot, social contagion, etcetera. But it can also help the youth explore beyond what they're told by pre-approved sources in the news and the like, for better or worse...

DDG Footsoldier or Fuentes catboy, pick one.

We see the most annoying, extreme and downright disgusting at the forefront. But I assume most grow up relatively normal. Relatively. I would still restrict usage for my kids until a certain age and limit all porn exposure the best I can. I'm just saying, in my view, it's not the main underlying cause of violence among young people and I don't think it should be the go-to explanation for why a male committed a crime, as the government are currently in the process of trying to do.

The main issue with this topic and why race is brought up at all is that the government and media, or so it feels to some, are arguing that violent crime numbers amongst the youth is mostly a white issue despite it being a disproportionately non-white problem. Or they're doing as much as they can to imply it so certain groups don't feel targeted by the government's actions.
  • in the 14 years to March 2019, the number of young people in youth custody went down in every ethnic group
  • in the year ending March 2019, 27.8% of people in youth custody were Black – more than double the percentage in the year ending March 2006 (12.5%)
  • White people made up around half (50.6%) of young people in custody in the year ending March 2019, compared with 71.7% in the year ending March 2006
  • in the year ending March 2019, more young people were in custody for violence against the person than any other type of offence
So not only does it appear white youth crime is going down, it's inclining up for others, and this contradicts a possible government objective I'll touch on at the end. Women's crime rate has been trending downward for decades in-line with younger whites and the immigrants don't pick up the slack, so there's a point on the scoreboard I suppose for the fairer sex.

The Conservatives felt more generalised (it was a male youth problem), but Labour seem more overt, even if it's just a comedy of errors thanks to incompetence. They're not discussing internet usage in young children (because young internet users would cover everybody born after X-year but before Y-year I.E. old enough vote) or placing the blame on parents (also voters), or even porn (Conservatives tried, their solution was banning face sitting in porn and trying to implement porn IDs essentially, both doing nothing but earning ridicule), they're explicitly targeting people like Andrew Tate since he's an easy scapegoat for an issue more complex than they're willing to handle.

Keep in mind they're doing this whilst:

1. Citing a white murderer (the crossbow killer had 10 Tate videos in his Youtube watch history) as an example of what online influences can do to a man, when a far more horrific example of youth violence against young girls (Southport killer) is ignored/forgotten.
Crossbow killer: 26, ex-girlfriend being a common motive, but made the face of extremist misogyny by both press and government.
Southport stabber: 17, no motive known, a random act of horrific violence and assigned no labels by media or the government.

2. Having stricter sentencing guidelines for whites whilst being a lot more lenient on non-whites (I think this will get overturned if I recall correctly, or put on pause at least until they can sneakily implement it later); this also been an objective of David Lammy since 2017, and Mahmood (secretary of Justice) being a non-white, doesn't make it too hard to accept it was done in favour of their 'group'.

3. Possibly basing policy and government action on a fictious TV show where they possibly race swapped the killer, if they did indeed base it on a true story, but the water's already been muddied on that; the fact people can point to the show's plot — a youth violently murdering a girl — happening in real life but with a black youth is just a tragically funny timing.

If it didn't feel so targeted, I think people would be slightly (emphasis on slight) less pissed off what the government's solutions are, even if resentment would still ultimately be present since their 'fix' involves punishing everybody and does fuck all at the end of the day.

The most charity I can give the 'big-G' Government, is that they're stuck between trying to fix 'unfair' sentencing and lower the disproportionately high black/minority incarceration rate (which eased sentencing guidelines would enable) whilst also also trying to tackle the issue of youth crime (which the prior guidelines would harm, since fewer of them would get punished and locked away, and non-white youths are more likely to reoffend).
The reoffending rate of adults was highest for those aged 18-20 for ethnic minorities (excluding white minorities).The reoffending rate for offenders from the black, Asian, and other ethnic groups was highest for those aged 18-20. For offenders from the white ethnic group, those aged 35-39 presented the highest reoffending rate.

Assuming they're retarded and don't see the contradiction in what they're doing, they'll assume banning x-number of websites will lower the overall number of criminals due to a lack exposure to certain materials, whilst arresting more whites will make things appear more 'fair' when looking at the stats (which I'm convinced only became a 'problem' to fix after importing BLM sentiments from America) but all it'll do is result in whites getting stricter sentences, punishing everyone through restricting certain websites (assuming they do anything at all on that), and letting young minority criminals off to reoffend which they're already more likely to do.

The 'education' sentiment the government are going for (that you linked to) isn't going to amount to much. I think the main thing not addressed in either article you linked is the possibility of indifference or apathy to the material, especially from boys, but that they fellate the show so much that it might be inconceivable people come away not giving a shit.

Anecdote, feel free to ignore: I remember in high school watching Goodnight Mister Tom, a movie about an evacuee going to the countryside during WW2, and bursting out into laughter at one point. The evacuee is told his friend might've died after returning home to visit family after an air raid on London, and he's walking back to where he's staying all sad and shit. At the gate is someone with his friend's bike, ringing the bell, with a ribbon attached to the handles. It was just so funny. They didn't even give him time to mourn at all, the kid might not actually be dead — Zero situational awareness. Got me good.

There's talk of the 'emotional distress' and whatnot, but it feels less a concern for boys than it does girls, at least in my view. People are forgetting that with all this messaging, you're basically telling younger girls to be afraid of the boys they share a classroom with, all based on fiction and vague ideas. Though I'd claim the to have the same 'fear' too for my kids if it meant saving them from watching four hours of utter shite. It's the 'loner quiet kid with his backpack in the corner' repackaged for a new, younger female audience otherwise, and it doesn't help the situation.

If Incels/Manosphere/MGTOW are a result of men feeling like women ignore them, don't give them 'what they're owned', or are just generally starved of female contact so they need to cope by hating/devaluing women, wouldn't a series being showed to young girls across the entire nation that might result in them being more afraid of the opposite sex from a young age cause a larger rift? They intend the opposite, obviously, by encouraging boys to not do what the killer in Adolescence did, but that's more to educated boys, it doesn't do shit to help girls feel truly secure from their male classmates and might just make them feel less so. What are they doing? I'm not saying girls will actually watch this shit and be traumatised or affected but it still demonstrates a complete lack of foresight.

Another bizarre contradiction about showing this in Highschools is that, according to the stats, it's also being indirectly targeted at non-whites anyway, since the white youths most likely to offend are uneducated and poor whilst non-whites did crime in spite of education. Based Labour? Anyone? Showing it to highschoolers feels extra redundant when you know it's the uneducated anyway.
The educational attainment of young people who were cautioned or sentenced for an offence was lowest for the white ethnic group, across all three measures.Of young people from the white ethnic group matched to a KS4 attainment record in academic years 2013/14 and 2014/15, 12% achieved 5 or more GCSEs (or equivalents) graded A* to C, compared to other ethnic groups at 24%.


TLDR: Left-wing meme for a Left-wing recipient. There might not be a racial component to youth crime, but the government and media make it feel like a white problem despite evidence to the contrary (half of all youth criminals are non-white, increasing, whilst white youths have gone from 70% to 50% in 13 years according to data). It's also easy to assume an anti-white slant to it all when to consider: Mahmood secretary of justice, absence of Southport from narrative, TV show possibly race swapped the killer. The internet (be it porn or Tate) feels like the easy answer to male violence, and so of course the government took it. Trying to 'fix' disproportionate incarceration and unfair sentencing by making it easier for non-whites to get off but making it easier to incarcerate whites, but simultaneously trying to fix youth crime & young male violence, feels like a contradiction of objectives. Showing the 'young boy becomes a killer because of the internet' show, and playing it off as serious business might have no effect, indifference/acknowledgement at best, or at worst, make young girls more afraid to be around the opposite sex and doing nothing for boys.

It's never been the same since they were bullied into removing most of the salt, but I do enjoy the onion and garlic one if I can't be bothered making my own sauce.
They have these packets you can microwave that are just a sauce you pour over some pasta. Decent snack if you got nowt in and light on calories. Cousin gave me a few a while back. Had a packet it on a whim a week after with some penne for something different at lunch. Surprised at how solid they were. I tend to favour just the plain sauce but the basil or chili were decent as well. But I also like Rustler burgers so my opinion on all food-related subjects might be considered null and void...

My sausage roll experience growing up was mostly just Pound Bakery too, Greggs was an actual luxury.

Do more home cooking nowadays, bit wary about the complex stuff in case I fuck it up but simple shit I'm comfortable doing. Dolmio was used for my spag bol when I was younger so I guess I'm just attached to the brand. Might try making my own sauce next week and using slightly more expensive mince meat to see if I can make something better. You have a recipe you go by or is it just something you eyeball?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All this talk about Andrew Tate, but didn't he convert to Islam a few years ago? Seems like the kind of thing you don't just take back.
Also seems like the kind of thing that needs pointing out to everyone who mentions how "toxic" and misogynistic he is, every single time.
Needs to be really pushed hard imo, Tate - misogynist- Muslim. Helpful context, completely overlooked, but brings the story full circle.
In fact, isn't one of his main misogynistic quotes:
"Islam is right about women"?
 
2. Having stricter sentencing guidelines for whites whilst being a lot more lenient on non-whites (I think this will get overturned if I recall correctly, or put on pause at least until they can sneakily implement it later); this also been an objective of David Lammy since 2017, and Mahmood (secretary of Justice) being a non-white, doesn't make it too hard to accept it was done in favour of their 'group'.
Don't focus on the white side of it, remember Shabana Mahmood has a stated intent of two-tier justice for women, hoping to end their incarceration for crimes. While she might claim to be opposed to two-tier sentencing her own words prove that a lie. Whether or not she also supports it in the case of ethnicity is harder to say but at the core these sentencing guidelines applied to everyone who wasn't a white, cisgender, neurotypical, heterosexual male over...25 I think? So she is completely fine with 1/6 of those caveats resulting in different sentencing guidelines (male) making it hard to believe her when she claims a blanket opposition to two-tier justice.
 
the council installing "bus gates" at 3am with 60 police and a drone acting as guards because residents keep protesting and interfering with construction
Yeah because anytime they tried to complete the work, a load of unemployed muslims would go out and protest it. You can't allow a small group of muslims to dictate what does and doesn't happen in an area. They voted for the green party so they get green party policies. It's the same anywhere they install these things.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: GloJojo
Fucking hell, you absolute deviant. I haven't had a Rustlers in 20 years, but they were shite back then. I'm sure they haven't improved since.
Rustlers are great because they give you the experience of being cheap slop food, without actually being food.
Haute cuisine.
Don't focus on the white side of it, remember Shabana Mahmood has a stated intent of two-tier justice for women, hoping to end their incarceration for crimes. While she might claim to be opposed to two-tier sentencing her own words prove that a lie. Whether or not she also supports it in the case of ethnicity is harder to say but at the core these sentencing guidelines applied to everyone who wasn't a white, cisgender, neurotypical, heterosexual male over...25 I think? So she is completely fine with 1/6 of those caveats resulting in different sentencing guidelines (male) making it hard to believe her when she claims a blanket opposition to two-tier justice.
You could posit she's doing it for both women and non-whites, as she's in both groups? But yeah I get you. Thanks for the link I wasn't aware of that article. I mostly used her name as an example of how the government's actions are helping foster the idea of an anti-white/anti-British narrative, even if it's not their true intention.

If the government's current modus operandi is all for "protecting women" then it's the easiest way for them to deflect criticism and engage as little as possible with opposing arguments, although I admit that the attempt to defend the guidelines has been flaccid. They caved almost immediately, and unless new ones are proposed by Tuesday, there won't be any discussion on it until the 22nd since Parliament won't reconvene until then.
 
Last edited:
You have a recipe you go by or is it just something you eyeball
I just followed one I found online at first, it also depends if you want to do a quick sauce or make it properly which means letting it simmer for a few hours. Only only really go to the effort now for either special occasions or if I'm doing a meal prep week. Which is what my point about Dolmio being pretty good for the effort required was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: >IMPLYING
Back