Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,416
He isn't what I would describe as a "news outlet"Man does exactly the same as every other 'independent news' outlet, muppets talk about grift
More of a political commentator if anything.
Russell Brand.
- Thread starter Von Smallhausen
- Start date
More of a political commentator if anything.
The man is a millionaire. Talk about grift
Jeff Bezos is a billionaire but I still have to pay for Amazon prime. Talk about grift
Yes hence the ' ' around news outletsHe isn't what I would describe as a "news outlet"
More of a political commentator if anything.
Last edited:
The guys got nothing on Hasan Piker and his socialist/ capatilsm is evil ****** whilst buying up multi million dollar properties
Last edited:
Soldato
There is a big difference between something arriving same/next day for no added cost per item and a man ranting at a camera about elites (while being one) and other insane conspiracies and how his subscribers need to wake up. One is actually of some use, the other is is just Alex Jones with a cockney accent and hair like he was dragged through a hedge backwards.
Last edited:
I watched the C4 Dispatches documentary earlier, these are my thoughts:
Out of all of the allegations, there are two that stand out - one involves the alleged rape of a woman in Hollywood, the other involves another rape in LA.
With the first rape - there is a text message apparently confirmed to be from his phone (C4 would have checked the **** out of that before daring to say it) followed by a raging angry text from the alleged victim, followed by more apologies from Brand.
This to me is incriminating evidence, because it directly links the accused to the victim, and proves that there was some sort of incident that took place. I imagine they'd have enough to charge him with those texts, for that specific offence (I'd be amazed if they didn't)
The second rape in LA, a number of witnesses apparently heard the victim screaming and saw her run out, which is also significant evidence, but not as good as the text messages. Either way - I think they'd probably have enough to charge him, if they could get the witnesses to testify.
The rest of the stuff is a bit "meh" it's a huge amount of just general scummy but borderline legal horseplay. Stuff like him getting his **** out all of the time, and just being a general grim **** infront of women, he sounds like a pretty bleak individual, but I didn't really get much in the way of criminal wrongdoing from most of that.
But on the two allegations of rape, I think they have some decent evidence and I think he'll get arrested and questioned soon, possibly charged for one of them.
Out of all of the allegations, there are two that stand out - one involves the alleged rape of a woman in Hollywood, the other involves another rape in LA.
With the first rape - there is a text message apparently confirmed to be from his phone (C4 would have checked the **** out of that before daring to say it) followed by a raging angry text from the alleged victim, followed by more apologies from Brand.
This to me is incriminating evidence, because it directly links the accused to the victim, and proves that there was some sort of incident that took place. I imagine they'd have enough to charge him with those texts, for that specific offence (I'd be amazed if they didn't)
The second rape in LA, a number of witnesses apparently heard the victim screaming and saw her run out, which is also significant evidence, but not as good as the text messages. Either way - I think they'd probably have enough to charge him, if they could get the witnesses to testify.
The rest of the stuff is a bit "meh" it's a huge amount of just general scummy but borderline legal horseplay. Stuff like him getting his **** out all of the time, and just being a general grim **** infront of women, he sounds like a pretty bleak individual, but I didn't really get much in the way of criminal wrongdoing from most of that.
But on the two allegations of rape, I think they have some decent evidence and I think he'll get arrested and questioned soon, possibly charged for one of them.
Last edited:
Soldato
The hard-line feminists are out for this one.
They people irritate me immensely. I think they do their cause no good whatsoever. When they insist that a man should be guilty just because a woman says he is, then I switch off. Oh, the victims are "survivors". What? I'm sorry, was their life ever at risk? It's a bit like claiming that a woman is a survivor because she successfully returned from Tesco.
I might add that no one is anything until Russell is proven guilty.
This is not feminism. It is extremism, and it's ridiculous.
They people irritate me immensely. I think they do their cause no good whatsoever. When they insist that a man should be guilty just because a woman says he is, then I switch off. Oh, the victims are "survivors". What? I'm sorry, was their life ever at risk? It's a bit like claiming that a woman is a survivor because she successfully returned from Tesco.
I might add that no one is anything until Russell is proven guilty.
This is not feminism. It is extremism, and it's ridiculous.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
What an awful and horrible thing to say.
I just hope none of your female friends/family are ever raped so you can tell them to their face they are not survivors.
Most go on to have mental issues for the rest of their lives and some even kill themselves.
Soldato
His fanbois have already solved this one, he probably stole one of her chips from MaccyDs or something.
It could be a million things so we should assume the most innocent and avoid any context.
Associate
The turbo virgin vibes are strong with this one
Soldato
“turbo virgin”
I really must keep up with modern idioms!
I really must keep up with modern idioms!
I like how you went straight to rape bringing up family and friends, really? When you're labelled as "survivor" because someone grabbed your bum for a second.
There are more men that kill themselves because of false accusations. Rapes are as rare as unicorns while false accusations are rife.
Last edited:
Soldato
Are you basing the rarity of rape off of conviction rates?
Soldato
no, he'll be basing it off of his hate for women.
With the text message it reads as if they had sex without a condom and he's apologising, it's not really clear what exactly happened though. He apologises and says he'll get an STD test. We only know they had unprotected sex and that she was annoyed about it afterwards. There's no chance of a conviction on this 11 years after the event, the statute of limitations has passed on both of these if they happened in California, and the evidence is flimsy at best.
Russell won't get charged with anything, but again, that's not the goal.
Soldato
You missed the point. The point is that you aren't a survivor when your life was never in danger. It's just a ridiculous statement. You survive the titanic. You don't survive Russell Brand. Well, actually, you always do, and that's the point. You might not survive a violent rapist, but are we really suggesting that Russell is a violent rapist? There has never been any suggest of that. Calling someone a survivor after meeting Russell Brand is just stupid. Especially since nothing has been proven.
Last edited:
You missed the point. Likening rape or sexual assault to something as trivial as a shopping trip is incredibly crass.
Man of Honour
Yes because he has been accused of rape and you and other knuckle draggers are just fobbing it off as though it's nothing.
Terrible attitude to have.
Hope your Mum is proud.
We have yet to see the woman that claimed she got raped to come forward and talk to the police.
So no he is not accused of that so far let alone charged and convicted while you are here talking about family and friends getting raped. That's how insane people like you are.