Law russell brand allegations

[Fox by the Sea]

Emphasis on a court of law. Private companies don't need to wait for that, which seems to upset folks in this thread a lot.

they don't do it from any kind of moral requirement or belief. they do it because the public is just like from the Idiocracy i have mentioned and companies don't want all sorts of screaming idiots on their social media yelling that they support rapists, which is exactly what would happen.

if the public had a sense of seriousness and distinguished composure, and trust in the justice system, no company would act like that. the way the companies act is an indictment of how infantile and vengeful people are these days.

 

[avenue94]

they don't do it from any kind of moral requirement or belief. they do it because the public is just like from the Idiocracy i have mentioned and companies don't want all sorts of screaming idiots on their social media yelling that they support rapists, which is exactly what would happen.

No, they do it for dollars and cents. Same as most companies of their size.

if the public had a sense of seriousness and distinguished composure, and trust in the justice system, no company would act like that. the way the companies act is an indictment of how infantile and vengeful people are these days.

I don't recall a long line of companies wanting to work with OJ Simpson after his acquittal. Plenty of companies dropped Tiger Woods after he had an affair. This stuff is routine.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

No, they do it for dollars and cents. Same as most companies of their size.

I don't recall a long line of companies wanting to work with OJ Simpson after his acquittal. Plenty of companies dropped Tiger Woods after he had an affair. This stuff is routine.

yes, it's routine because the public is shit, which is what i was saying.

 

[Scerpi]

Your evidence is what? Just imagination, right? As long as he spreads CTs, he can't possibly have done anything bad.

Exhibit A - Howard Stern

 

[avenue94]

yes, it's routine because the public is shit, which is what i was saying.

So you think companies were wrong to not want OJ as their brand sponsor or whatever post-murder trial? Is it really some great injustice that companies are hesitant to work with Brand after it became clear he followed a woman into the bathroom and (depending on the jurisdiction) sexually assaulted her or tried to, then talked about it on air?

 

[burningspear]

his viewership is increasing lol people aint buying this bs

 

[Fox by the Sea]

So you think companies were wrong to not want OJ as their brand sponsor or whatever post-murder trial? Is it really some great injustice that companies are hesitant to work with Brand after it became clear he followed a woman into the bathroom and (depending on the jurisdiction) sexually assaulted her or tried to, then talked about it on air?

where did i say they were wrong?
they correctly responded to the society's expectations.

 

[avenue94]

where did i say they were wrong?
they correctly responded to the society's expectations.

You're the one saying the public is shit for not wanting to see someone like OJ as a brand ambassador, so your stance is a bit confusing. You also didn't address the BBC story about Brand to. Can you blame companies for not wanting to be associated with someone like that?

yes, it's routine because the public is shit, which is what i was saying.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

You're the one saying the public is shit for not wanting to see someone like OJ as a brand ambassador, so your stance is a bit confusing. You also didn't address the BBC story about Brand to. Can you blame companies for not wanting to be associated with someone like that?

yes, the public is shit.
yes, given that the public is shit the companies reaction is the correct one.
i don't give a shit about the story. it's a story. let him be accused, go to trial and be sentenced. nobody should be sentenced by the news.

 

[avenue94]

yes, the public is shit.
yes, given that the public is shit the companies reaction is the correct one.
i don't give a shit about the story. it's a story. let him be accused, go to trial and be sentenced. nobody should be sentenced by the news.

So the public is shit for...not wanting companies to work with an almost assured murderer (OJ Simpson) or creep/maybe sexual assault perp (Brand)? It sounds more like your personal morals are a void and you want everyone else to do the same.

i don't give a shit about the story. it's a story. let him be accused, go to trial and be sentenced. nobody should be sentenced by the news.

If a company doesn't want to associate with someone because they think they're sus, that's more than fair. It's freedom of association and speech. Funny how all you folks talking about freedom of speech and association want to compel it from companies when the parties involved fit your worldview.

And my guy...Brand literally admits to this incident on air.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

So the public is shit for...not wanting companies to work with an almost assured murderer (OJ Simpson) or creep/maybe sexual assault perp (Brand)? It sounds more like your personal morals are a void and you want everyone else to do the same.

If a company doesn't want to associate with someone because they think they're sus, that's more than fair. It's freedom of association and speech. Funny how all you folks talking about freedom of speech and association want to compel it from companies when the parties involved fit your worldview.

And my guy...Brand literally admits to this incident on air.

i have already said all i care to about the matter. if you want to keep droning on about the subject, find somebody else.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

yes, the public is shit.
yes, given that the public is shit the companies reaction is the correct one.
i don't give a shit about the story. it's a story. let him be accused, go to trial and be sentenced. nobody should be sentenced by the news.

I agree with this for the most part, but I think if you get extreme enough on the spectrum i'd be more ambivalent about it. Like if there was actual video of crimes etc. You'd think the legal system would not let people on bail in those kind of cases so it gets kind of moot.

Will be interesting once AI reaches next level and people can create videos of people committing crime making real recordings and fake videos indistinguishable from each other.

 

[giusti825]

Your evidence is what? Just imagination, right? As long as he spreads CTs, he can't possibly have done anything bad.

Serious question: Are you retarded?

Pay attention to the story. None of this is contested:

Nobody came forward. The MSM has been contacting Brand's family, friends, acquaintances and ex girlfriends for months looking for dirt on him. No public criminal or civil allegations existed prior.

He wasn't chosen at random. He was targeted by the TNI due exclusively to his political speech.

It would be a different story if this happened organically and women came forward without prodding. It's a different story entirely when mainstream news networks are spending months upon months bothering everyone who has ever been in the man's life trying to smear him.....

This was about demonetization and deplatforming. Google is also a member of the TNI and don't like how heavily Brand is promoting Rumble, which is a competitor. There was a mutual benefit here between mainstream media and Google in the crusade against Brand. They're colluding to limit your choices.



The selective nature of who they attack makes it even more obvious. Why is Biden still allowed on YouTube?



So what's the standard here? Both were accused. And we know presidents aren't off limits to deplatforming. The difference is one of the accused does the establishment's bidding and the other speaks out against the establishment.

Is it seriously your contention that this is all coincidence? That Brand wasn't targeted?

Too many damn coincidence theorists on this forum these days.....

 

[giusti825]

Canadian liberals literally applauding a Nazi from WW2. Guess who's not covering this: the MSM. Guess who is: Independent media like Russell Brand. Hmmm.... Wonder why he became a target.

First Jon Stewart gives a Nazi a medal at Disney. Then Mark Hamill gives a tongue bath to Nazis in a video he posted to Twitter. Now this. Can they find a Ukrainian hero that isn't a Nazi, ffs?

I thought liberals hated Nazis. Now they are willing to shut down the American government if there isn't agreement to keep funding and supporting them in a war that they are incapable of winning.

 

[cincymma79]

Canadian liberals literally applauding a Nazi from WW2. Guess who's not covering this: the MSM. Guess who is? Independent media.

First Jon Stewart gives a Nazi a medal at Disney. Then Mark Hamill gives a tongue bath to Nazis in a video he posted to Twitter. Now this. Can they find a Ukrainian hero that isn't a Nazi, ffs?

I thought liberals hated Nazis. Now they find and support them.

You have to understand something, they are completely ducking stupid. Once they’ve taken a position amending it in any way is admitting they’re stupid and they aren’t going to do that. So you just keep doubling down. Might even call you a nazi for not supporting nazis (literally the argument I had at work yesterday).

 

[Jack V Savage]

Serious question: Are you retarded?

Pay attention to the story. None of this is contested:

Nobody came forward. The MSM has been contacting Brand's family, friends, acquaintances and ex girlfriends for months looking for dirt on him. No public criminal or civil allegations existed prior.

He wasn't chosen at random. He was targeted by the TNI due exclusively to his political speech.

It would be a different story if this happened organically and women came forward without prodding. It's a different story entirely when mainstream news networks are spending months upon months bothering everyone who has ever been in the man's life trying to smear him.....

This was about demonetization and deplatforming. Google is also a member of the TNI and don't like how heavily Brand is promoting Rumble, which is a competitor. There was a mutual benefit here between mainstream media and Google in the crusade against Brand. They're colluding to limit your choices.



The selective nature of who they attack makes it even more obvious. Why is Biden still allowed on YouTube?



So what's the standard here? Both were accused. And we know presidents aren't off limits to deplatforming. The difference is one of the accused does the establishment's bidding and the other speaks out against the establishment.

Is it seriously your contention that this is all coincidence? That Brand wasn't targeted?

Too many damn coincidence theorists on this forum these days.....

Good lord. You're too deep into the cult to really be communicated with. Everyone who thinks independently and doesn't just blindly take the word of dictators, celebrities, and sleazy infotainers like Hannity or Greenwald is "retarded."

Here are a couple of questions: Do you think child rape is OK as long as the perpetrator has the right political views? If not, do you think it's possible, even in theory, for a CTer to do it?

 

[avenue94]

Canadian liberals literally applauding a Nazi from WW2. Guess who's not covering this: the MSM. Guess who is: Independent media like Russell Brand. Hmmm.... Wonder why he became a target.

First Jon Stewart gives a Nazi a medal at Disney. Then Mark Hamill gives a tongue bath to Nazis in a video he posted to Twitter. Now this. Can they find a Ukrainian hero that isn't a Nazi, ffs?

I thought liberals hated Nazis. Now they are willing to shut down the American government if there isn't agreement to keep funding and supporting them in a war that they are incapable of winning.

The speaker resigned. What other consequences would you like to see? It was quite a mainstream story so unless you're living under a rock, not sure why you think it wasn't covered.

 

[Yoricks Wisdom]

It's common practice btw for organizations, news or otherwise, to engage in dredging.
Send out diggers to find dirt on somebody that might help neutralize them somehow for whatever reason.
It's done all the time.
Is this the case with Brand? Who knows. One doesn't have to be a conspiracy theorist to wonder about the timing.
Is he guilty of any wrongdoing? Who knows and who really cares. He doesn't hold any public office. The public arena is a tough, unforgiving place.

Reminds me of old AC/DC lyrics "If you want to a star of stage and screen, look out it's rough and mean."

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Serious question: Are you retarded?

Pay attention to the story. None of this is contested:

Nobody came forward. The MSM has been contacting Brand's family, friends, acquaintances and ex girlfriends for months looking for dirt on him. No public criminal or civil allegations existed prior.

He wasn't chosen at random. He was targeted by the TNI due exclusively to his political speech.

It would be a different story if this happened organically and women came forward without prodding. It's a different story entirely when mainstream news networks are spending months upon months bothering everyone who has ever been in the man's life trying to smear him.....

This was about demonetization and deplatforming. Google is also a member of the TNI and don't like how heavily Brand is promoting Rumble, which is a competitor. There was a mutual benefit here between mainstream media and Google in the crusade against Brand. They're colluding to limit your choices.



The selective nature of who they attack makes it even more obvious. Why is Biden still allowed on YouTube?



So what's the standard here? Both were accused. And we know presidents aren't off limits to deplatforming. The difference is one of the accused does the establishment's bidding and the other speaks out against the establishment.

Is it seriously your contention that this is all coincidence? That Brand wasn't targeted?

Too many damn coincidence theorists on this forum these days.....

What you are calling a targeted attack because no women came forward on their own could also be called investigative journalism too couldn't it?

I have no final opinion on brand btw.

 

[avenue94]

It's common practice btw for organizations, news or otherwise, to engage in dredging.
Send out diggers to find dirt on somebody that might help neutralize them somehow for whatever reason.
It's done all the time.
Is this the case with Brand? Who knows. One doesn't have to be a conspiracy theorist to wonder about the timing.
Is he guilty of any wrongdoing? Who knows and who really cares. He doesn't hold any public office. The public arena is a tough, unforgiving place.

Reminds me of old AC/DC lyrics "If you want to a star of stage and screen, look out it's rough and mean."

What you call "dredging" is basic corroboration. You guys cry about everything. If they only talked to one woman, you'd complain that there wasn't any fact checking. Now that they have talked to dozens or hundreds of people, its dredging.

They started the investigation a couple years ago, before Brand ever took off in his current pursuit.