Dispatches channel 4 expose **Read Opening Post before posting**

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130048#Comment_121130048

Yes, his defenders appear to be claiming that unless this goes to court and ends in a conviction, he's pretty much in the clear and his reputation is intact. But that's not how this works : some of the accusations against him in this investigation are not even of a criminal nature and instead are accusing him of being a manipulative bully and sexual predator who was misusing his position.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130186#Comment_121130186

So its irrelevent nonsense then and not remotely comparable. Im not getting the wrong end of the stick I can see plainly how you frame the opposing arguments in an entirely prejudicial manner.

I think Brands pivot away from mainstream to the conspiracy theory grifter circles was for a reason. Several different ones have been outlined, some strike me as more plausible than others (ie he knew his sexual misconduct would eventually remove mainstream outlets from him) however I would not rule out any of them.

Im defending the argument relating to people forming an opinion about Saville being guilty on the weight of evidence from credible sources - even though there was no trial.

Is Saville guilty or not?

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130192#Comment_121130192

Nothing you've put forward relating to Brand being a Russian agent has been well argued.

Can you provide some evidence of this pro Kremlin rhetoric you've claimed Brand is involved with for reference? I'm assuming he must be singing the praises of Putin and his regime fairly regularly for him to be on the Kremlins payroll. That might be a reasonable place to begin structuring a well argued point.

You state that Russel Brand being a Russian agent is a "common sense" argument. Yet you've provided nothing but your opinion to back it up.

Your pulling me up on the stupidity of my point re "innocent until proven guilty"? Really? Because that's precisely what I was doing with regards to others using that defence for one situation and not another.

You're in fact proving the point I was making, and I'm displaying stupidity? Seriously, get a grip and stop being so aggressive and take a breath before you go in on people in future.

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130302#Comment_121130302

They have offered no evidence to support their theory, so how it is believable is beyond me.

o1s1n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130192#Comment_121130192

What's more likely, that someone who branded themselves a lothario 20 or so years ago when times were very different in the entertainment industry did some questionable things - or that there's actually a grand conspiracy against him involving Russia and the FSB?

I know, innocent until proven guilty and all that, but you don't need to jump to the most absurd conclusion when a very simple one will probably do.

Snooker Loopy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130461#Comment_121130461

Your entire argument is "that's nuts". But it's well known that Russia will explore any avenue to push its influence in the west. So it's demonstrably anything but.

You're living in cuckoo land if you think the likes of Russell Brand wouldn't be the exact sort of person Russia would love on their side. And he is firmly on their side.

Is Savile guilty in your eyes?

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130438#Comment_121130438

It's comparable inasmuch as people are commenting on both and applying the presumption of innonce to one but not the other for no apparent reason. Scratch below the surface and the reasoning is clear, political allegiance, so therefor comparing the two is not only relevant but it is highly topical.

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130479#Comment_121130479

It's up to you to provide evidence.

Russel Brand has been spouting what you describe as pro Kremlin rhetoric on youtube for years according to you.

Link one of these pro Kremlin rants then.

o1s1n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130479#Comment_121130479

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130480#Comment_121130480

Christ, this is off the deep end stuff.

If you lose your car keys, do you assume they're probably down the back of the couch or do you start thinking that maybe they've been stolen by ninjas or international spies? Generally curious how often your minds jump to radical, out there conclusions over much more likely boring ones.

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130489#Comment_121130489

All I did was observe people applying standards to one situation and not another.

chopperbyrne

If he raped or sexually assaulted any women, **** him. He can disappear into obscurity, and hopefully be convicted for a lengthy prison sentence.

Snooker Loopy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130488#Comment_121130488

Well Russell Brand calls Ukraine "Nazis". So I think it's fairly obvious which side he's on, don't you?

maninasia

FORGET all the conspiracy theory political bias nonsense la de la.

He needs to face up to these very serious accusations soon, most likely in a court of law.

Nothing about what he does , says or believes now can change that. Any hot air distractive hand waving nonsense needs to be ignored and he needs to face up to what he did.

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130532#Comment_121130532

Does he?

Post the videos so we can see what you're on about.

GreeBo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121129368#Comment_121129368

How do you (or they) distinguish between "I was exploited by a celebrity when I was younger" and "when I was younger I thought sleeping with a celebrity was a cool thing to do, now I dont"?

I am not saying that this is what happened in any of the cases, I am asking the question about what is the legality around the "victim" changing their view on the events that happened in the past. Does that change the "facts"? Are there even facts in all of these cases or is it often just two opinions that now disagree?

Snooker Loopy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130489#Comment_121130489

I recall people saying similar when it was speculated that Tara Reade could be a chaos agent for Russia.

I recall people saying similar when it was speculated that Chay Bowes could be a chaos agent for Russia.

It was poo pooed in the strongest, most mocking terms.

Sure enough, both defected to Russia.

silliussoddius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130488#Comment_121130488

One of the things I heard him say about the war was “it’s all for the weapons companies” etc., a lot of his schtick was this kind of studenty type thing where we have to question everything and everyone, but accept his for for it. Complete and utter bell end behavior which isn’t an indicator of these changes, but I also think people who try to tell people that everything they hear is wrong but I will tell you the truth are verging close to wannabe cult leader status.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130177#Comment_121130177

I'm surprised to see that you'd find common ground with him. He is essentially peddling political nihilism and cynicism for profit. 7-8 years ago, when I was reading people like Owen Jones, he was peddling stuff far beyond the pale. In the UK, people not voting led to austerity, tuition fee hikes and various other nonsense. Brand would happily see that continue so he can preach his nonsense for a tidy fee. His book was twenty pounds for the Kindle version if memory serves. Utterly outrageous stuff. He also owned a two million pound Malibu home and had a chauffeur. It's like he was the anarchist left equivalent of those US mega-preachers.

Sadly, this is reflected in his attitude to women as we've seen. He'll pretend to be the little establishment victim because it's all he knows and because his friends on the mainstream right lap that drivel up.

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130565#Comment_121130565

That's a pretty tame take.

All wars benefit arms manufacturers first and foremost.

I've looked at some of his stuff and tbh, he seems to be attempting to sit on the fence on most issues. "I don't believe this myself but...". He never says anything that would get him banned from YouTube so it's all a bit limp in terms of its conspiratorial content.

He's not the most out there firebrand of a conspiracy theorist you're going to find, it's more performative stuff looking to appeal to whatever audience he feels are there to be exploited for clicks.

maninasia

Actually the switch to the real looney tunes conspiracy stuff is really over the last couple of years. During covid it was mostly peace and love hippy dippy stuff. He changes his tune to suit the audience he wants to target. There must be a lot more money in the conspiracy peddling.

He got into the conspiracy anti media bias blah blah stuff to make money from YouTube views on his channel in the US.

All this stuff is BESIDES the point though

He could be a binman today and he would still have to deal with the charges against him if they are filed in court.

growleaves

That he's on Youtube in the first place...its owned by Google and they ban people off of blogspot and Youtube all the time. As do Wordpress, patreon and others.

Why would you want a mega-corporation as your middle-man hosting company if you are a serious conspiracy theorist?

maninasia

Because its the biggest online video channel worldwide.

Are you confused lol? Where else would you get that many viewers?

TomTomTim

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130592#Comment_121130592

Why would you want a mega-corporation as your middle-man hosting company if you are a serious conspiracy theorist?

It's a good question, as YT has been curated in a way that it's very hard to actually find alternative theories about anything anymore on there. Years ago you'd find anything on there, not so much anymore.

the.red.baron

what drew these women to brand in the first place?

The smell off him id say

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130592#Comment_121130592

Reach. More reach = more cash.

Brand is also on Rumble which is one of these "free speech" type platforms where it's easier to get away with conspiracy guff, but not as much revenue due to lower user numbers.

K-9

Without going down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole or bringing the clusterfuck of US politics into it, I do see a commonality between Hunter Biden and Brand; serious addiction issues.

Biden got away with some dodgy addiction behavior because of his connections and money. Brand the same. He had tv execs basically acting as pimps for him to keep him happy.

The comparison I can think of that most people would be familiar with is alcohol. You get all types of alcoholics, ones that sit on their own in the bar quiet as a mouse, others the life and soul of the party. Then you get the argumentative bores, and worse than that, violent, dangerous bastards. Others would rob their granny to get the next drink, no moral compass whatsoever.

So you've got a guy who went from a heroine addiction to sex, and also getting his narcissism fix with huge television, film and entertainment exposure. Nobody brave enough to stop his supply of fixes. Even after getting sacked from BBC, he goes and gets a career in the US and Hollywood.

Then when he is out of the public eye for years, he is away on the wellness, conspiracy theory bandwagon. More attention, and a ready supply of admirers who'll turn up at his shows and appearances, plus handily enough, a cohort that'll back him when the allegations inevitably come out.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130610#Comment_121130610

They changed the algorithms and clamped down on it, likewise with Google search and others. Pre 2016 you'd look up something e.g. the moon landings and get page after page of conspiracy theories (that had floated to the top via SEO) instead of actual information.

HalloweenJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130577#Comment_121130577

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130577#Comment_121130577

I'm just going off the politics section on his Wikipedia article.

I'd agree with his criticism of elections in the UK at the time (think it was from the 2010 to 2015 period), though I don't agree with his view that voting is pointless. He eventually went back on this and encouraged people to vote Labour but his undermining the political system previously probably makes it too late. I'm also sceptical of those who dismiss the political system but still try to influence.

Again, what he said to a parliamentary committee about drug addiction and dealing with drug problems is a view I'd agree with and he's someone speaking from experience.

His brief outline of his revolution sounds great but, again where I have a problem with him and doubt his sincerity, there's no substance to it. I remember thinking that at the time when someone was trying to convince me how 'innovative' Brand was. I asked my friend what was so new about what Brand was saying and they just repeated soundbites but no explanation about how to actually bring that about.

I remember when he was protesting high rents in the East End and agreeing with the principle, though being disgusted at how his obnoxious response to a reporter who made a valid comment on Brand's own property dealings.

I haven't kept track of his opinions on Covid and the war in Ukraine but if, as others have mentioned, he denies the former and he refers to the latter as Nazis then I very much disagree with him. I don't give any serious credence to conspiracy theories beyond entertainment. Also, him putting on shows during Covid and telling people how to get around restrictions shows an irresponsible streak that I detest.

My point is he has (or had) some interesting ideas but his execution and his sincerity are doubtful and I'd see him as a charlatan; I certainly wouldn't be looking to him for political guidance even if there were to some extent an overlap in our ideas.

Anyway, I'm guilty myself of what I was complaining of others doing so I'll leave it at that.

silliussoddius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121130579#Comment_121130579

Yeah, but the constant idea that big corporations are behind everything is tame and frankly boring. No matter what is going on these kind of people get something that everyone else doesn’t and is hear to tell you, or better yet “just asking questions “.

As for him being a paid Russian shill, that kind of accusation is also boring, and is similar to those put forward by conspiracy believers: shill for big pharma, CIA etc. You see it aimed a lot at debunkers. And frankly the people who trot it out regardless of political affiliation are two sides of the same coin.

Given that it looks like Brand is a scum bag, I wouldn’t be surprised if he supports the Russian war because it appeals to his inner scumbag/thug.

Dohnjoe

Edit