pap

Scored 71% in Salmond's favour. I'm wondering whether the Scots are starting to get a bit weary with the Better Together messages. Broadly, one campaign is based on fear, the other is based on hope.

I've not had cause to quarrel with the bloke myself, tbh - but every now and then, he forgets he can't sting without killing himself in the process and decides to have a go. As someone with a firm respect for the food chain, I'm duty bound to swat insects. I commend you on your shaky alliance and wish you well with it.

You are more likely to have kicked a County Road crim's wheels, given that L5 is a sizeable section of North Liverpool.

No. Yes. Nah. I'm happy to fight when the challengers roll up, but I can and do live without it.

I worry that the impending zombie apocalypse will be started by e-cigarettes. Don't buy any sold by the Umbrella Corporation.

McDonalds humour. Guaranteed to generate a grimace.

Salmond crushed Darling in latest debate, according to some commentators. Highlights here. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/aug/26/salmond-darling-second-debate-scottish-independence-video

Why on Earth would I do that? LSD? Pity? A public pat on the head for Complete Bóllocks Fry? "You good boy, you!. Your comment wasn't shít at all. People love your repetition" Two choices, CB:- 1) Keep it up. You seem to be having a lot of fun saying "great resource". I'm getting to popularise and promote the Complete Bollócks Fry meme and show the immense shallows of your one-trick pony act. You're winning after all, according your own judgement. 2) Accept that you've had your day out, and fúck off home.* (*I included 2 for variety. I've every expectation that we'll have 1) back, bowled underarm, as per)

NEW FORUM RULES JUST IN Replying to a comment older than a day is now a bump. By order of Complete Bollócks Fry*. *Not to be confused with rules over regurgitating things from unrelated threads written months ago, which is perfectly acceptable if you're up shít creek, without a paddle, trying to sneer your way to land**. **Also by order of Complete Bollócks Fry.

Three minutes on the site, four (to your count) subsequent mentions of the site before your little contribution tonight, this series of bizarre posts in which you're keen to establish the precise amount of time you spent there, plus the sarcastic endorsements that are making you look like Roger Irrelevant's less capable brother to our JCL brothers and sisters. Not obsessed at all.

Very glad to see this change of heart. It's a far cry from what you first did; which was to spend time scouring their forums so that you could pass off the most dubious threads as representative. Some might say that such an approach was counter-productive to the point of being infantile, given that it was advanced on an internet forum, where we all kinda know one person doesn't speak for all. I'd simply remark "Ha, you berk. You went there!" FWIW, I'm not at all bothered at the link to letsroll. Go dig, people. Anyone with a brain will be able to separate the wheat from the chaff. I know that excludes you, but don't be a hater, Complete Bóllocks Fry. I didn't dislike Michael Jordan because I never made b-ball player.

But I'm confused. You mention this forum continuously in your "ripostes" (pending steward's enquiry). One would consider you thought it was important. Perhaps obsession is a wee bit strong. It's easily confused with one note ponies that say the same things all the fúcking time. I'll get a steward's enquiry on that too. I'm gladder for the positive feedback I got from the link, but feel free to keep mentioning it. Further data can only help me in my obsessed/one trick pony conundrum, even though in all likelihood, it's nailed on to be your common or garden Complete Bóllocks Fry* *not to be confused with multi-talented namesake

Obsessing over an internet forum you've no interest in, going as far as to imagine what it might look like rendered as a pub, but not actually writing the fruits of those imaginative episodes down in your usual warm literary tones. Shame, especially with JK Rowling only having a passing interest in the Potter universe these days #gapinthemarket Did you develop the idea further than your initial sentence, or did the demons start telling you to burn things again?

Nah, I wouldn't be talking about mainboard issues

Should probably get better hobbies, mush. I'm learning guitar.

What in liked about my comment is this:- 1) Rage Against The Machine lyric 2) Isn't racist, therefore smashing your "it's all a little bit racist" claim. 3) Tells you to do one They say things come in threes.

Fúck you (I won't do what you tell me)

Propasandla. http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/06/26/you-don-t-mess-with-the-racism/

The problem with talking without substantiation is that you're reasonably easily defeated when presented with a few, basic facts. Hamas' campaign of bombing Israel into submission. Have you actually checked the history of the recent ceasefires? Israel is most often the breaker of ceasefires, which ruins your dogma of Hamas' constant bombardment. This latest round of attacks wasn't started by a rocket attack either. The kidnap and murder of three Israeli teenagers began this round of attacks. Of course, once hostilities kick off, Hamas do end up firing rockets, and simple minded folk get to pretend that the Hamas artillery is capable of bombing Israel into submission. http://antiwar.com/blog/2014/02/06/the-truth-about-cease-fire-violations-between-israel-and-gaza/ Thanks for making the points about Egypt and Jordan's stance. They are an excellent example of a continuing criticism I have of your analysis. At best, it's born of ignorance and omits key information. At worst, it's outright shít Jordan makes the "sins of omission" category. Yes, it's true that King Abdullah has knocked Hamas back, but there is popular support amongst Jordanians (many former Palestinians) and Abdullah has his own reasons for not wanting to promote them, mainly to do with keeping Jordanian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood contained. Your point about lack of recognition looks a little weaker when put in the context of a single autocrat and internal conflicts of interest. Egypt not recognising Hamas omits loads too, but is probably better recognised as an example of complete shít. The military junta in Cairo has its own Muslim Brotherhood issues, and that's a factor, but the complete shít part of the "Egypt doesn't recognise Hamas" argument is surely Egypt's recent leading role in brokering cease-fires between Israel and Hamas. If Egypt doesn't recognise Hamas, why is it inviting the organisation to its capital city for peace talks as representatives of Gaza, including the military wing? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/19/israel-hamas-blame-rockets-air-strikes-end-gaza-truce Basic research, sir.

I'm far from writing them off, and I'm fairly realistic about a new setup. I remember suffering plucky losses and improving to dodgy draws before finally going on to establishing a bit of winning form. The Millwall game is a good opportunity to get the first competitive win of the season and kickstart some form. I think it's just the sheer number of variables that's shítting me up a bit.

Crap screen 1024 x 600.

This weekend's cultural exchange was We're the Millers, as suggested by my youngest brother. His record on comedy is patchy; he likes the Scary Movie films and earnestly recommended You Don't Mess With the Zohan a few years back. I've learned to be wary. We're the Millers is pretty good though. It concerns a weed dealer that ends up losing a load of cash, and is strong-armed into smuggling a large quantity of weed in from Mexico to make good on his debts. He hits upon the brainwave that families are less likely to get searched crossing the border, so lacking one of his own, he recruits a stripper, a homeless girl and the weird kid from next door to be his family. The writers have a lot of fun with the family-that's-not-really-a-family conceit. They barely know each other to begin with, so their lack of social grace in family situations drives much of the early comedy. They have no knowledge of what the others will say, but the word fúck is a safe bet in their early encounters with other families. There's another genius use of how they're perceived later on, but I won't spoil it. The comic performances are mostly very good. Jennifer Aniston does well as the stripper pretending to be a mom (sic), especially the having the body of a stripper part Son of Rambow's Will Poulter plays the girl-shy geeky son and probably steals the show. Emma Roberts plays the troubled daughter; she's Julia Robert's niece, dontcha know? Jason Seudeiki's lead can be a bit unlikeable, but really, that only happens when the plot demands it. That's the only real other issue with this film; it's a three act road trip movie by the numbers, including the seemingly insuperable moment of doom at the end of act 2, followed by the unnecessarily cheesy ending. IMDB gives it 7.1. About right.

I dunno, chaps. I can see how the internecine combat between feuding posters might get wearying, but have you ever stopped to consider what'd happen if this outlet was not available. This madness could spread to the real world. SaintsWeb exile to stranger in future pub:- "So what you reckon of Tadic then?" "Yeah, he looks a good buy" "You must be fkn deluded, mate" *thwomp* *sirens in distance*

Back in Liverpool and have a few thoughts. 1) Thank feck we didn't lose. When WBA thought they'd scored, so did I and I had that sinking feeling set in. Jeering at them afterwards was amusing. 2) Fans were shít. Real poor atmosphere for the first game of the season. I think half the problem is that with the amount of player departures and lack of heroics from the new blood, we've got fk all left to sing, especially as WBA not really northern enough to be told they eat off the floor. Their fans were a bit poor too. Sat on their seats for most of the game, shít fashion sense (stone thrown from comfort of glass house). Our fans that were on Pelle's back were especially shít. Support the team, FFS. 3) All hail Fraser. He's the main reason we have that point, and the brightest bit of a very dull game. 4) Still haven't had my big fear quelled. Can Koeman actually cut it? Are the team implementing his plans badly, or are the plans bad? Pochettino's style of play was strategically vague, but his general tactics were easy for both players and fans to understand. I'm not getting a sense of how we play yet. Last week's performance was brave, decided on the margins, but was reactive for large parts and offered few clues. This week was RK's opportunity to get some momentum behind his brand of football. I am not yet feeling a direction of travel.

I don't know; if you're not being provided the context and don't have a great deal of knowledge about history or world affairs, then I imagine it can be quite easy for say, your average BBC viewer to arrive at that impression. That's why the BBC was protested; for providing coverage that was devoid of any context or balance, unless it's for the Israelis. Example. Every time Israeli commits an atrocity, we're given some sort of justifying context. Hamas killed teenagers, fired rockets, etc. Reciprocal context for the Palestinians is either based on a world that began yesterday or just not provided at all. Brilliantly succinct.