Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

A list UK celeb in trouble

Status
Not open for further replies.
andy4efc said:
My point is the age of consent being different for different things. As you said. Can go to war at 16…. But can’t drive a car? Can have sex at 16 but can’t watch porn?

I am not calling to increase. Just merely saying how odd it can be.
Click to expand...
I didn’t don’t believe you can go to war until you’re 18, I very much could be wrong though. Obviously you can join up at 16 but I’m sure I read you need to be 18 to go to war.
 
dholliday said:
Double-meaning, which i suppose no one caught, as he was a 'fellow liberal' when he did the accused deeds. During which none of this was really seen as an issue.

Now that he's a perceived conservative, married and packed up his probing pecker...now he's fair game for the media-coordinated sex-scandal trope.


Makes this thread seem less an attack on Russell's alleged sex crimes, it feels more like a gleeful Culture War pile-on (see also Kavanaugh from a few years back). The instant presumption of guilt of the political-other is something to behold. Is everyone ignoring innocent-until-proven-guilty? Or Brand's own remarks that all these activities were consensual?


Ordinarily, who gives a flying frak about Russell Brand? Why is his alleged sexual deviancy from decades back massive news? Why are y'all so intensely interested?

Is it the humanity? Or something else?


I don't think I've got anything left to say here, except to allow the accused 3 minutes airtime in this discussion:

(after 4 hours since uploading over 33-thousand comments posted, the vast majority seem supportive of Brand...make of that what you will):



Click to expand...

His political leanings (which are flexible, he'll clearly follow the low hanging fruit that divvies like you lap up) are absolutely nothing to do with the rights and wrongs of being, erm..... 'liberal with his willy.'

Why are you defending him? Are you also a bit liberal with yours?

I hope charges are brought, I hope he's convicted, I hope he's sent down for a hell of a long time.
 

dholliday said:
You clearly didn't read it yourself, or didn't understand what it said.

By putting pressure on removing Brand's ability to make money from his work, he will have less incentive to do that work.

Ergo...they are trying to stop him doing his work.


How is his discussing government corruption related to accusations of sexual deviancy from two decades prior?

How is he profiting from alleged sexual offences when his content has nothing to do with said alleged offences?

You claim I didn't read anything, but you certainly didn't. As what I've just described is also Rumble's argument (linked in my post you quoted).


Remember Assange and his alleged crimes coming off the back of his own brand of anti-establishmentarianism?


Like Assange, people here are letting their personal dislike of a celebrity figure cloud their judgement...or rather, as soon as that figure made a perceived ideological shift from Left-to-Right he's suddenly fair game for the old sexual-deviancy-accusations trick.

And everyone thinks it's perfectly normal how all the mainstream media synchronise in tandem to the story. Surely just a coincidence that Brand's very successful content of the last few years has been anti-authoritarian, during a pandemic in which authorities convinced most of the population to get jabbed with a very profitable product.

See also the timing of the Assange accusations (right after releasing a video of militaric mass murder).



Ignorance is strength.


That's the same thing.

I take away your payslip, will you still go to work regardless?


Projection.
Click to expand...
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are being deliberately obtuse.

I did read it. And did understand exactly what it said. There simply is nothing to try to silence him. If temporarily turning the taps off YouTube monetisation counts as silencing, then he simply must not actually care about the any kind of message he is giving. Surely demonetisation would make anyone actually should louder against the oppressors?

How is he profiting from sexual offences? Well, let’s join the dots, slowly, shall we? His name is in the news much more than usual. Level of fame/notoriety rising. More clicks. More cash.

It’s a separate question about whether it is morally right for someone to profit, fairly directly, from such serious allegations?
My opinion is that, if there is truth in the allegations, then no. If there is no shred of truth, then some form of compensation would be appropriate - the form of which is best decided elsewhere rather than saying “ah, just let him have the extra revenue it generated”.

Again, you may have read it. But your comment was based on a heavy set of assumptions about the motive and effect, which I don’t happen to believe at all. My comment was based on the link and text itself.
 
dholliday said:
In normal times, that Tory letter to Rumble would be profoundly controversial. Bigger than Profumo or Watergate.

Instead, the bigger controversy is a bohemian lad being a bit liberal with his willy.


Hence why they call it Clownworld.
Click to expand...

This is probably THE best thing I’ve ever read on here. Bravo!

Either it’s a long con leading up to this point, or an incredible, incredible lack of any semblance of awareness, empathy, compassion or morals.

Either way, I don’t think it’s worth anyone’s time trying to discuss such an issue with you if you are able to portray rape and sexual abuse in such a way.
 
b-rad said:
This is probably THE best thing I’ve ever read on here. Bravo!

Either it’s a long con leading up to this point, or an incredible, incredible lack of any semblance of awareness, empathy, compassion or morals.

Either way, I don’t think it’s worth anyone’s time trying to discuss such an issue with you if you are able to portray rape and sexual abuse in such a way.
Click to expand...
Ah, now you've twigged it.

See, this particular poster is widely ignored and derided on here because he's at best an edge lord wum. At worst a not particularly nice buffoon who, despite repeatedly making an absolute arse of himself and demonstrating the intellect of a wooden spoon, genuinely considers himself an intellectual.

Quelle surprise he's being an edge lord over Band.

Do yourself a favour and press 'ignore'.
 

dholliday said:
Double-meaning, which i suppose no one caught, as he was a 'fellow liberal' when he did the accused deeds. During which none of this was really seen as an issue.

Now that he's a perceived conservative, married and packed up his probing pecker...now he's fair game for the media-coordinated sex-scandal trope.


Makes this thread seem less an attack on Russell's alleged sex crimes, it feels more like a gleeful Culture War pile-on (see also Kavanaugh from a few years back). The instant presumption of guilt of the political-other is something to behold. Is everyone ignoring innocent-until-proven-guilty? Or Brand's own remarks that all these activities were consensual?


Ordinarily, who gives a flying frak about Russell Brand? Why is his alleged sexual deviancy from decades back massive news? Why are y'all so intensely interested?

Is it the humanity? Or something else?


I don't think I've got anything left to say here, except to allow the accused 3 minutes airtime in this discussion:

(after 4 hours since uploading over 33-thousand comments posted, the vast majority seem supportive of Brand...make of that what you will):



Click to expand...

So he posts on YouTube to tell you how YouTube have silenced him.

Doesn't compute. I need to be one of those critical thinkers who realises that if the person says something I agree with is actually correct and the rest is all a woke conspiracy against me.
 
Wizard said:
Have you been aware of Russell Brand's behaviour before these allegations? I read his autobiography many years ago when he talks about how he got locked out of his flat naked because he had thrown a woman out and spat in her face and turned around realising he didn't have his key. His own words.

It's nothing to do with his turn to being a conspiracy theorist or moving from the left to the right. He built his reputation on being a sexually promiscuous cad. Now it has come around and he has to face the reckoning. One of the accusers describes a sexual assault that he then only 25 minutes later was joking about on his radio show. If you really think someone corners a woman into a room and says he is "going to f... her" is just waving his willy about then I worry about you.

As for the video you've posted, he doesn't do anything to address the allegations. He just goes back to his tick list of conspiracy theories and complains about being silenced despite the fact he is still able to post on Twitter, YouTube, TikTok, Rumble etc.
Click to expand...
he isnt being silenced at all, I am absolutely sure that if he wanted to be interviewed live on air, ALL of the major UK broadcasters would be interested in airing it, he wont do it because he knows he will incriminate himself.
He is a childish sexual predator (alleged) and he hopefully will soon be facing his comeuppance.
 
@dholliday You've had some shitty takes in the past, but this is probably the shittiest.

Brand is a beast. You've probably not read the whole thread, but just so you know, he assaulted a friend of my ex-girlfriend back in 2006 when he was 30 and she was a teenager.

Your dismissal of his behaviour as "being liberal with his willy" is grim in the extreme, and suggests you don't really know what you're talking about.

Plenty of actual journalists have done much more to expose the machinations of government than some namaste poser repeating far right talking points for clicks, and they haven't been called out as rapists.

Have a word with yourself.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top