rocket_scientist

7.5 minutes in. We are winning this. They are worse than us.

If the west are motivated on humanitarian grounds, where was the outcry against what's been done to the Palestinian people over the last 70 years? And where's the action against the murderers of the Rohingya?

The insanity has just manifested into air strikes. This is a bad day for the world. Trump, May and Macron have made a gargantuan mistake. A deterrent against the use of chemical weapons? Doing it to save people's lives? Concerned about the welfare of the Syrian people? Nobody can believe these lies. The hypocrisy is palpable. For seven years, that country has been ravaged by civil war. It came about because the west wanted regime change and they created and funded ISIS. If you give radical people the hint of power, they're going to do what radical people do, which is to be radical. So the great western plan to slaughter Assad and his supporters - the democratically-elected government - couldn't possibly succeed whilst his opposition fractured into naturally-occurring religious and ethic groups. Russia stepped in to restore peace. They have no enemy on the ground but they do have a strategic alliance with the legitimate governments in the region, as all non-rogue states should. The quashing of the rebels restores the legitimate government. But this isn't what we wanted so the propaganda machine, always in use, goes into overdrive. Where was the concern for humanity when the drone strikes created "collateral damage"? When innocent men, women and children were killed by western technology? The decade before in Iraq, "shock and awe" killed hundreds of thousands of ordinary people and for what? Regime change yet again. The biggest user and developer of chemical weapons is America. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the big ones. Agent Orange and Napalm were just experimenting on "the gooks". Neither Russia nor Syria have history of using chemical weapons against random populations, the staged events in Salisbury being absurd. Litvinenko was poisoned by polonium and this individual act of retribution was considered a precedent upon which the Brits could build the case for war. The biggest false flags are the haste with which the west and May in particular has been judge, jury and executioner. The Syrians would know if Assad used chemical weapons. So would the Russians. Without any evidence that he did last weekend, and without any evidence that the Russian state poisoned the Skripals, we have launched air strikes into Syria and expelled diplomatic relations, and convinced other weak lapdog nation's to follow us. We are the problem. We voted them in to act in our name. And they're acting at the behest of something else.

Now then. One needs to consider how these words will be perceived. Is it a case of speaking with pessimism to mask hidden hopes and naturally-occurring optimism? Or simply to soften the blow in advance of any bad news that might occur? Nope. I don't give a fuck how any cunt interprets fuck all. I'm North East. I'm with Dr M Scott Peck. Dedication to the truth is all. I think we will lose. 5/2 for Motherwell is ridiculously generous. AFC sans 3 of our best players - not that we have many good footballers - ain't winning this. McInnes couldn't inspire a grunnies tea party. 3 or 4 nil or 1.

BB and I going for Raith Rovers 4/11 and Montrose 2/5 (now 1/2 on McBookie, tempting bastards). £12.50 staked, £23.86 back. Sunday the two Madrids. Not decided how much to stake yet.

We once lost a £20 stake on a freak result which put us back into the red, to the tune of £1.37. So mad was I that that bet lost, we staked £45 on Spurs 2/11 and Liverpool 2/9 to return £65, thereby getting our £20 back when they both won 2-0 at home. That was a risk for sure as we didn't have £45 in the bank to play with but it was a defining point, the reminder we needed to stop shooting for fish in a barrel and revert to our original philosophy, nailed-on doubles. It's also the shortest combined odds we've ever gone for. ICT on Tuesday were hardly nailed on but because I had chosen Fulham, which was also his first pick, he sought out great value from the formbook which allowed us to risk less to give us our biggest-yet return.

No, never the same stake. That's just casual punting, putting an interest on. We're not interested in that. We are doing it to beat the bookie. Our first bet in late December was a £2.50 double. It took us over a month before we staked a tenner, mainly cos we didn't get off to a good start. Our bet this Saturday is £115. Our previous biggest stake was £75. There is an element of "more confident" but mostly, it's stakes-management to get ever increasing returns. Our last two nailed-on doubles have netted us our two biggest profits. Saturday's £115 stake returns just over 185 which would be the first bet over £70 profit. On Tuesday we earned £69.09 which was 40 on ICT and Fulham, 109.09 back. The key is that we are using bookies money to take more of it from them but playing within our means, managing the risks. Tuesday was our first time over £400 profit, Saturday will be our first over £500.

I don't understand the question sir. As I said at the start, maintain a spreadsheet. It's the ONLY way to beat the bookie. The average odds for a double between BB and I and my mate and I is over evens and not as speculative as 1.5 to 1 i.e. 6/4. For example, two picks at 1/3 + 1/2 is an even bet.

Unlucky run of form kitns. You were 3 of your first 4 and then 7 losers in a row. Or is it luck? Your average double would return 3.14 if successful. Our (BB and I) average pick is 2.41 and our average winning factor is 2.34. With my mate with whom we have been doing this for 3.5 months, very successfully, our average winning return is 2.21. Our £115 double this weekend returns 1.63. Anyway, status as follows; kitns -14.64, 12/22 picks, 3 out of 11 doubles. us +39.67, BB 8/12 picks, rs 11/12 picks, 7/12 doubles. My average odds pick is 1.41. Bobby's is 1.73. My only loser was our first one, a 3/10 away for Juventus of all things so we know that heavily odds on picks don't always win, particularly aways. But going for doubles at more than 2 to 1 on average, these are not in the spirit of what I suggested to you i.e. "nailed-on" doubles. I'm really not surprised that you're failing, as I predicted you would even when you were winning. For sure there is an element of luck. Bobby's Blackburn were tanking into the opposition last night but never got the breakthrough. My other mate enjoyed an 81st minute winner for ICT last night and a 94th minute winner for Morton to return 3/3 trebles that he and another guy have just opened a paddy power account for, an £84 balance already. I just think that we make our own luck and hunting for such big returns as you are, it is impossible to win more than you lose... without a GREAT deal of luck. My 1 loser in 12 v BB's 4 losers in 12 isn't because I know more about football than him, or that I've been luckier than him or that I have a crystal ball. I'm just playing the odds and the bookies better, something gleaned for decades of experience, some of it bitter.

I've never supported neither the Russian point of view nor the west's. My approach to these things is to seek the truth which means recognising and disregarding propaganda and lies. The saddest part in all this is that it is our fault. We elected these people. The North East of Scotland stunned me with its unbelievable stupidity at the last General Election. War is the agenda and the US global hegemony project is the aim. Stand up to them at your peril. It's their utter arrogance and ignorance that they think they can win. Their disregard for humanity is already well-proven, all over the globe over many decades. Putin does not seek war. Why would he? The lies we have been fed to demonise him is nothing new. They are being given to us in a crass attempt to justify war against Russia. War is profitable. Go back 100 years and see how the Rothschilds constructed the new world order after WW1. America is a disgusting state and Britain it's strongest supporter. May is pure evil and we, the British people are so insouciant and imbecilic we don't want to not believe her.

The proof that the US - fuelled by Trump's intellectual retardation and John Bolton's agenda and facilitated by gross sycophancy and stupidity in the west, May being a leading puppet and even the PM of Denmark for fuck sake (who cares what he's got to say about anything?) being wheeled out in front of our complicit corrupt media - is hell bent on world war was paraded like a beacon in the United Nations this week. Chemical weapons being deployed by Assad against his own civilians is a lie. It is a further false flag accusation which the CIA have fucked up with, in the ongoing demonisation of Putin and the legitimately-constituted government in Damascus. Assad and his English wife were our friends, with whom we provided diplomatic privileges including a state visit and all its pomp. Something changed. Unless the Middle East bow down to the US hegemony project, they shall be outcast and their people will be assassinated. The disregard for humanity and for truth is shocking. This is all being fuelled by Israel. Their influence in Washington is now total and Bolton is pushing the buttons. The oldest warring peoples on the planet will be the death of us all, through two very simple truths; the abuse of power and utter stupidity and arrogance. This will be a conflict that the west can't win.

I'm on Man C tomorrow and Fulham both tomorrow and Saturday. Good luck this week. Don't need you digging into your monopoly fund.

£15 on, £35.33 back. Cheers.

We go again Tuesday and Saturday this week BB Fulham for me the morn.

Outstanding away pick today Bobby. £54.67 up thru 11. This is going to be profitable

If you missed Limmy on Thursday then you better have had a better excuse than washing your hair. I had a good excuse but I iPlayered it yesterday afternoon when I got home and it was immensely awesome. As expected. One two one two...

Us +35.86, BB 7/10, rs 9/10, 6 out of 10 doubles. kitns -9.64, 11/20 picks, 3 out of 10 doubles. I was at Glebe Park for the first time in my life to see some of my bets come in. Having backed against Brechin for 5 of my last 8 picks and being successful 5/5, I won't be doing so again! They are really shite but if that's the gulf between top and bottom, they're not worth the declining odds we're getting for Brechin's opponents. Plus the pitch was so bad, anything can happen. Just a shite game of fitba made bearable by some great banter from a huge away support thinking they might win the league today and a phenomenal header by me the minute before they scored, for which I got congratulations from admiring buddies. Left 20 minutes before the end.

Poor odds? A double that pays roughly evens is my favourite type of double as I'm usually very confident in my two picks when that's the type of return. Maybe the penny is dropping! Having said that, I don't think Peterhead at 1/2 for the AWAY is that good value so yes I agree, that could be classed as poor odds. They've been too hot and cold for me this year. The only time I backed them in our NOD's was at 9/20 for a HOME win. Even though they won 7-0, I still haven't touched them since.

kitns, I'm on Schalke too tomorrow. Loved the evens price. I put them on in a double with Hibs on Tuesday when they beat Hamilton, a number of bets I put on, some of which have already won and a few running this weekend carrying forward wins from this week.

With our first NOD, it took us 17 bets from late December to 11th March to first get our balance over £100. We went over £200 for the first time on 30th March and one day later, last Saturday, 31st March, we exceeded £300 for the first time. Our 6 x winning doubles in a row came to an end with losses on Sunday and Monday but back to winning ways with Rochdale and ICT (v. Brechin) on Tuesday. Hopefully will exceed £400 for the first time tomorrow and if Sunday wins too (Valencia and Arsenal), we will be over £500.

Bobby went for Blackburn and I'm on the opponent's of Brechin again, which happens to be St Mirren this week. £12 on, £22.50 return. On Sunday I'm on Arsenal and BB has taken Lazio. £10 staked, £28.81 return.

I gave cts jam for his post. I was hoping that it was a positive (simmie) rather than a negative so was pleased to see that it was. Personally, I would have marmalade on a toasted rowie and have never added neither jam nor dairylea ever but since I only eat 3 or 4 of them in a year, my preference doesn't really matter, neither to me nor to any of you. To Rico - why would I say "everything" is wrong when it clearly is not? Are you suggesting that I'm a negative cunt? I can assure you that I'm not from Fife and that you may be misinterpreting my outlooks from anything I may have posted before. Peace and love. And hate, when and where appropriate.

A good way to see who's the best of the two, now three candidates on the table is to see how they would fit into a great AFC team. Messi would be a straight swap for Strachan although given how good the wee ginger weirdo was, albeit inconsistently, perhaps Lionel would be used as a squad filler, instead of Brian Grant or Dougie Bell. Then again that's harsh because Gruntie did more good break up play than the wee Argentinian could ever do and I doubt he's ever been as good and as influential on any game than Dougie was against the Belgians. Even though Ronaldo looks like he might be as good as Eric Black was, I just can't drop my favourite from yesteryear for the sulky Portuguese faggot. I wouldn't have even considered dropping McGhee, Archibald, McDougall or Harper for Cristiano although given Dingus' unfortunate personality, he might be fav to step aside. But no, Ronaldo wouldn't have been able to stick it on Hewitt's head like McGhee did that wet night. Zizou though, you pick him first and then pick players around him. But we had Jim Bett, the Scottish Zidane. Maybe Zinedane was the French Algerian Bett? It's a dilemma, one we can never prove, simply because we never saw any of these three foreign cunts in a red shirt. Two out of three wouldn't be bad but no way all three were good enough for Aberdeen.

This is not "my agenda". This is a viewpoint. I don't have "an agenda". I do have opinions and views however. They are not what the mainstream media feed us. Rifkind on Newsnight tonight is in damage limitation mode. The BBC are suggesting that the Russians - who have only asked for proof - are engaged a strategy of creating doubt. And yet there was no doubt in the words of our leaders? A position of certainty that influenced others to follow them in the further vilification and demonisation of Putin by excluding diplomats. Whatever happened to "our values" and our rule of law that includes innocent until proven guilty? This is my opinion; the west NEEDS a war. This is a fact; the truth of any matter can only be established by exploring all the possibilities. Listening to only what the mainstream media feed us and not just going to the where the boundaries are (critical thinking) but by going beyond them too, is a surefire way to fail to understand. Most in the UK fail to understand what's going on because, as Adolf Hitler famously said, the biggest lies shall be hidden by public incredulity. https://evolvepolitics.com/a-massive-36-tweet-thread-exposing-the-extraordinary-scale-of-tory-racism-and-abuse-is-going-viral-for-very-obvious-reasons/ If you were a traveller from space and your only means of understanding what was going on in Britain was to read newspapers and watch the BBC, you’d have thought that the Labour Party was a truly despicable organisation that nobody in their right mind could possibly consider voting for. However, thankfully, many people nowadays are waking up to just how extraordinarily biased our mainstream media is, and that their constant smearing and attacks on Jeremy Corbyn – a man who wants to pay for things that will truly benefit ordinary people out of the extra money Britain makes from cracking down on tax-evaders like the super-rich tax-avoiding billionaires who own Britain’s media outlets – from becoming Prime Minister and actually forcing them to finally pay their fair share. But for the many ordinary people who are forced to go through life struggling from day to day, or those whose minds are constantly worrying that one missed paycheck or one unexpected illness could see them lose everything and be out on the streets, it’s almost impossible to keep fully up to date with the intricacies of modern-day politics. Many are therefore forced by necessity to simply rote-learn their knowledge of current affairs and events from the background noise of TV news, or a quick glance at the odd newspaper headline on their coffee break at work (if your employer even bothers to give you one). And this is exactly what the Tories and their super-rich cronies want. If people are constantly worrying about money, or frantically busy working all the time in insecure employment, you are much less likely to have the time or energy to properly engage with the world of politics and find the facts about what is really going on in the world. This incomprehensibly frantic and insecure society that we live in is precisely why politics is throwing up extraordinary upsets at the moment, and why the establishment – who are not living the same insecure lives as ordinary people – simply don’t know (and frankly don’t much care) what to do to stem the tide of political chaos. In some cases it’s the far-right winning from the resulting confusion and chaos, and in other cases it’s the populist left. But, in addition to the frantic society we live in, the crux of what is stifling the inevitable march of positive progress across the Western World is that whilst almost all ordinary people know full-well that our current system is inherently unfair on them and that it desperately needs changing, the super-rich billionaires who have virtually monopolised the means of communication are providing such a skewed argument from what actually constitutes reality that it is almost impossible for ordinary people to see who is the good guy looking to change things for the better and who is the bad guy simply looking to grab your vote. In other words, as Malcolm X so eloquently put it: “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” Whilst Malcolm X’s sentiment specifically refers to the heroic fight by African Americans to obtain civil rights in American society, it also perfectly relates to today’s unbelievably fraught political climate. Whilst the vast majority of British media outlets are giving an extraordinary amount of negative column-inches and air-time to attacking Jeremy Corbyn for supposedly not doing enough to stamp out racism (a man who has literally spent his life campaigning against racism), the same media outlets are giving a free ride to the party that has, throughout its entire history and numerous incarnations, done absolutely everything it possibly could to promote racism, and silence those who speak out against it. The difference is this: whilst Jeremy Corbyn has spent 40 years fighting, protesting, and campaigning against racism for absolutely no other reason than it is the right thing to do, the Tory party have proved time and time again that they will only bother to speak out against such things if they know it will score political points. But hypocrisy knows no bounds in the Tory party – and, what’s more, they couldn’t care less. For whilst Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour have a tiny minority of supporters who may espouse some particularly distasteful and racist sentiments at times, it can never possibly compare to the outright open sewer that is the Tory party. So, in the spirit of fairness and equality in the media – here are at least 165 times (we’ve literally tried counting numerous times but there are actually too many for us to be sure of the precise figure) the Tories proved they were, and always will be, the real nasty party: