Jump to content

Looks like they're on to Russell Brand now.


78ast78dgyad

Recommended Posts

These type of stories are also used to promote instagram, and channels like Netflix and the idea that these same channels are facing calls to 'delist' Brands' programmes, and so enforcing the idea of group outrage. Also in the last couple of days Katy Perry has sold her back catalogue or song rights for a couple of hundred million and is promoting a new range of clothes and boots. This from Hello magazine; 

 

" Despite the gravity of the situation surrounding Russell, Katy's Instagram post on Tuesday made no reference to the allegations. Instead, the pop star introduced her latest line of cowboy boots, sharing a vibrant photo of herself perched on a scooter. "

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Observations said:

These type of stories are also used to promote instagram, and channels like Netflix and the idea that these same channels are facing calls to 'delist' Brands' programmes, and so enforcing the idea of group outrage. Also in the last couple of days Katy Perry has sold her back catalogue or song rights for a couple of hundred million and is promoting a new range of clothes and boots. This from Hello magazine; 

 

" Despite the gravity of the situation surrounding Russell, Katy's Instagram post on Tuesday made no reference to the allegations. Instead, the pop star introduced her latest line of cowboy boots, sharing a vibrant photo of herself perched on a scooter. "

No news is bad news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jason57 said:

But how do we know these claims and accusations are  true? Could be stories made up by the media (who you can never trust to tell you anything truthful) to tarnish Brand even more.

 

I think it's niave to "pick a side"  here, so early on into the scandal.

 

I'm not saying Brand didn't do these horrific things, but to fully believe the tabloids or Channel 4 is very naive.

 

the british government asked rumble to demonitise brands channel.....why are they involved in this?

 

why would the british government be troubling itself with a youtuber?

Russell Brand: Rumble rejects MP's 'disturbing' letter over income

6 hours ago

By Ian Youngs
Entertainment & arts reporter

Video site Rumble has hit out at a UK Parliamentary committee that asked if it would cut Russell Brand's income in the wake of sexual assault allegations.

Dame Caroline Dinenage, chair of the House of Commons media committee, wrote to Rumble to say she was "concerned" that he could profit from his content.

But Rumble said that was "an extremely disturbing letter" and that the company would not "join a cancel culture mob".

Brand has strongly denied the allegations of rape and sexual assault.

The star has 1.4 million followers on Rumble, where he posted a daily show until the allegations emerged last week.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-66875128

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, octoplex said:

I take your broader point, but for many of us, this is not early in the scandal. This is very late.

 

Many of us were onto Brand as child-rapist years ago, and some of that evidence has been raised earlier in this thread. The scandal began, approximately, when Brand began openly-trafficking victims with Jimmy Savile live on a radio show in 2007.

 

We are already sixteen years behind schedule on this operation.

 

now that saville has been publically outed as a pedo that radio interview in retrospect sounds creepy. Brand's pied piper childrens book is also a bit creepy but presumably he didn't do the illustrations for that.

 

But so far none of the accusations i have heard involve pedophilia so what evidence is there, if any of that?

 

I've started to wonder if the whole metoo movement is really a giant desensitisation movement which aims at pointing the finger at so many people and making so many accusations that it seems like the entire world is guilty of something which would then eclipse the real crimes of the cabal. In the same way that certain words like 'racist' or 'anti-semite' have lost a lot of their power through over-use (and missuse) i'm beginning to wonder if the same process is occurring with the word 'rape' which then detracts from the real rapes going on

 

I've always wondered how the elites could normalise their perversions and its obvious that they have sexualised pop music and Tv and now childrens books and also public spaces with drag queen story hour in libraries and pride marches in the streets but perhaps another way they do this is to saturate everyone with this metoo stuff to the point where in the public consciousness it begins to seem ubiquitous

 

So i'm interested whether there is any real and solid evidence in amongst all this noise?

 

I think some interesting points are made by these guys that apply to the whole metoo hysteria that we have been seeing in recent years; how much real horror is being obscured by all of that?

The Russel Brand Hit-Piece Explained! Viva & Barnes Highlight

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

the british government asked rumble to de-monitise brands channel.....why are they involved in this?

 

Because the British Government are terrified that this will spread up the chain-of-command.

 

The British Government has to appear to be acting against Russell Brand, or the 'masses' will begin to realize that Russell Brand is a media arm of the British Government The venn-diagram of British politicians and Freemasons is almost a complete overlap. Russell Brand's strings are pulled by the Freemasonic order, of which he is a Savile-grade mid-level puppet.

 

The British Government hope the 'villagers' will now pitchfork Russell, so that they don't pitchfork his organ-grinders: The BBC; the political-class etc.

 

I realize this is difficult to fathom, if coming to the topic afresh, but perhaps it is easiest to recall how Jimmy Savile was entwined with politics and the royal family. If Savile had been outed in his lifetime, the British Government would have written a strongly worded letter to the BBC to de-monetize Savile. Then the BBC would have written a letter about how it was morally unacceptable to de-monetize Savile until a proper trial had been run.

 

This despite the fact that YouTube and Rumble will happily de-monetize us 'normal people' at the drop of a hat. Suddenly, with Russell Brand, they mysteriously grow a sense of legal-procedure, and remember basic human-rights. You don't get human-rights from Rumble or YouTube, but Russell Brand does. You uploaded footage of a protest; Russell Brand raped children.

 

You're de-platformed instantly.

But Russell Brand throws YouTube and Rumble into a deep ethical and moral open-philosophization, which they broadcast in strongly-worded letters.

 

Suddenly YouTube and Rumble have to wrestle with 'morals'. Give me a break.

They de-platformed doctors for nothing.

Yet they hesitate and 'umm' and 'err' over an (from their perspective, alleged) pedophile with multiple survivor-testimonies.

 

Wow.

just wow.

Edited by octoplex
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, octoplex said:

Russell Brand raped children.

 

i never really paid brand much attention. When he first appeared on the truther scene i warned people he was a pied piper....those were the exact words i used and shortly afterwards he then advised everyone to vote for ed milliband who is a marxist.

 

so i'm not invested in brand in anyway, but i'm hearing a lot of stuff said and it all appears to be from the past and very suddenly coordinated so that does make it interesting as it seems like a targetted takedown

 

so i don't know the truth about brand either way but i'm just curious what actual evidence there is?

 

I see that there is a person saying that they slept with brand when they were 16 and he was 30-odd and if that's true then i would definately view that as very shoddy behaviour but technically it wouldn't be illegal as a 16 year old is legally able to give consent.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sidlittle said:

I’m sorry but have *** just discovered ‘TV’ ? 

 

 

The joy is in UNdiscovering it, like mobile phones. and Netflix.

I put *** (aka reads "you") because as you know it's not me thy were talking to, but hi anyway.

 

Was Sid Little a .... no nevermind. 😁 Don't spoil my childhood tv precious memories pleeeeeeeeeaaase.

Edited by Certified Green of Heart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

I see that there is a person saying that they slept with brand when they were 16 and he was 30-odd and if that's true then i would definately view that as very shoddy behaviour but technically it wouldn't be illegal as a 16 year old is legally able to give consent.

 

This keeps happening on this thread.

You must hear the survivors' testimonies because your summary(and others') is a complete mis-representation.  Russell Brand raped a schoolgirl delivered from school-lessons to his home by BBC chauffeur. He nicknamed her "The Child" and would refer to her repeatedly as such. And that was only the beginning. Other survivors withdrew their accounts from the documentary before broadcast, out of fear. We only hear from a small-subset of Brand's victims.

 

You can listen to the survivor, and others, in full, by watching the Channel 4 documentary here. You'll need to VPN into the UK, if overseas.

 

Here I have paraphrased one account from the documentary:

 

Quote

 

Russell Brand's victims include a schoolgirl who was delivered, via BBC chauffeur, from her school lessons to Russell Brand's house. Here, she described how, without any consent whatsoever, Brand pushed his phallus down her throat until she was unable to breathe. Then to prevent herself from being choked to death by Brand, she had to punch Russell Brand in the stomach as hard as she could. Later, Brand ordered the schoolgirl to sit in a bathtub of water. Leaving the house, Brand demanded that the schoolgirl remain in the cold water until he returned.

 

Being only a CHILD, and already having been nearly choked to death by Brand's phallus, the child shivered until his return.

 

 

Edited by octoplex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, octoplex said:

 

This keeps happening on this thread.

You must hear the survivors' testimonies because your summary is a complete mis-representation. Hopefully, unintentionally.

You can listen to the survivor, and others, in full, by watching the Channel 4 documentary here. You'll need to VPN into the UK, if overseas.

 

Here I have paraphrased one account from the documentary:

 

 

 

if he slept with a 16 year old then that would definately be shoddy but not illegal

 

so what you have there is a persons account years later that wasn't aired when brand was a liberal-luvvie on TV and schmoozing goldsmiths but has only now surfaced years later when brand is speaking about big pharma and so on

 

isn't that a little odd? I'm just asking questions

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

if he slept with a 16 year old then that would definately be shoddy but not illegal

 

That is not a claim that has been made. The claim is that he violently raped a 16-year-old schoolgirl who the BBC chauffeured to his house. To prevent herself from being choked-to-death, she punched Brand in the stomach. Nobody 'slept' with her and re-framing it in those terms is inaccurate.

 

Thank you for your second question, however, it is a good one: Why have the claims resurfaced now?

 

The theory that the Trial-By-Media is payback for Brand's challenge to Big Pharma doesn't make sense if the investigation into Brand was begun by the media in 2019, which is what the reporters say. This predates the entire Covid Hoax, and predates Brand saying anything on the topic of Big Pharma etc.

 

Secondly, the a-priori assumption here is that Brand challenges Big Pharma.

But does he?

Who is Big Pharma?

 

Big Pharma is merely the chemical-toxin-production arm of the global-elite. The more Brand convinces his followers that Big Pharma have genocided us, the more he deflects attention from the higher-tiers of power. Instead of marching on Buckingham Palace, or storming the Bastille, Russell Brand directs you to.... what? Stop buying shampoo and conditioner, to spite Johnson and Johnson? Or does he even do that? There is never any call to action. Other than to shrug and laugh.

 

Finally: How can Russell Brand challenge Big Pharma when he is plainly jabbed up to the eyeballs in Pfizer?

How did he enter the US through a major airport terminus for his Tucker Carlson interview? At the time 'vaccination' (self-poisoning) was compulsory. They were turning away global tennis stars at the time. Remember?

 

Russell Brand is so pumped up on mRNA modification that he's a living-satire.

A recovered alcoholic who owns a pub.

A YouTube preacher who rapes schoolgirls.

An enemy of Big Pharma who is vaxxed to the rafters.

"Stay Free".

Edited by octoplex
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, octoplex said:

 

That is not a claim that has been made. The claim is that he violently raped a 16-year-old schoolgirl who the BBC chauffeured to his house. To prevent herself from being choked-to-death, she punched Brand in the stomach. Nobody 'slept' with her and re-framing it those terms is inaccurate.

 

so she was on her knees with her mouth open....

 

i'm just asking questions......how did she end up on her knees with her mouth open? Did he grab her and shove her down there? Did he issue threats?

 

or did she make a decision to do that?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, octoplex said:

How did he enter the US through a major airport terminus for his Tucker Carlson interview? At the time 'vaccination' (self-poisoning) was compulsory. They were turning away global tennis stars at the time. Remember?

 

i was listening to an interview between michael yon and mike adams recently and mike asked michael how he had managed to do all the flying he'd done for example down to the darien gap to cover the migrant crisis and over to the netherlands to cover the farmers protests without being jabbed and michael said that he was never stopped

 

but once again i want to be clear: i don't know the truth about brand. Maybe brand is vaxxed upto the eyeballs or maybe he's got some sort of freemasonic privilege pass. I don't know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, octoplex said:

Yes, he issued threats.

The entire account can be heard here.

 

i don't like clicking on links that could lead anywhere

 

so did he issue threats to get her to his place?

 

do you see the point? at some point you have to accept that she made a choice to go along with him. Now that doesn't mean that rape can't subsequently happen but if you take weinstein for example. I don't like weinstein. I didn't like weinstein since before his scandal because i'd read peter biskind books about how the weinstein brothers would tie scripts up in contracts so that the writers would have to agree to changes that they often felt compromised their vision for their story

 

but you have these stories emerge that a woman was mistreated by him in his hotel room. But why is she there? why did she drink with him, why did she go to his room, why was she standing near his bed etc etc

 

and what i suspect is that sometimes women want things from men and sometimes they use sex to get those things they want and then after that woman gets her shot in the movies because she slept with the horrible producer and she has made her millions she regrets how she did it. But those of us who slog our guts out in 9 to 5 jobs everyday might find it a little hard to sympathise with their choices

 

so really shouldn't the message here be that women need to make responsible choices?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

9 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

i don't like clicking on links that could lead anywhere

 

Is Channel 4 Dispatches no good then? Not to be rated? I can't remember if it's any good or not (without a Sid Little recommended TV). 😁

but it's not a random link anyway, I can see as I hover over it using LapTop, but maybe you are on your phone -Or Not, as I remember you don't own one, so not sure of the problem there maybe in your mind?.....

Edited by Certified Green of Heart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, octoplex said:

 

This keeps happening on this thread.

You must hear the survivors' testimonies because your summary(and others') is a complete mis-representation.  Russell Brand raped a schoolgirl delivered from school-lessons to his home by BBC chauffeur. He nicknamed her "The Child" and would refer to her repeatedly as such. And that was only the beginning. Other survivors withdrew their accounts from the documentary before broadcast, out of fear. We only hear from a small-subset of Brand's victims.

 

You can listen to the survivor, and others, in full, by watching the Channel 4 documentary here. You'll need to VPN into the UK, if overseas.

 

Here I have paraphrased one account from the documentary:

 

 

"

Russell Brand's victims include a schoolgirl who was delivered, via BBC chauffeur, from her school lessons to Russell Brand's house. Here, she described how, without any consent whatsoever, Brand pushed his phallus down her throat until she was unable to breathe. Then to prevent herself from being choked to death by Brand, she had to punch Russell Brand in the stomach as hard as she could. Later, Brand ordered the schoolgirl to sit in a bathtub of water. Leaving the house, Brand demanded that the schoolgirl remain in the cold water until he returned.

 

Being only a CHILD, and already having been nearly choked to death by Brand's phallus, the child shivered until his return."

 

Not making any judgement on the bloke's guilt (he's always struck me as a devious/deviant little fucker) but that excerpt reads more like really poorly written bad-sex fiction. If things like that really went on, and it sounds horrific, summarising it like that in a programme doesn't help the suspicion that something ain't right. The child shivered...? C'mon. They've just been attacked and tortured, basically. So why have they added that bit?

 

But, like ppl are saying, maybe RB is "protected" in ways just like Savile was, and the victim didn't feel they could report it to the police. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Anti Facts Sir said:

But, like ppl are saying, maybe RB is "protected" in ways just like Savile was, and the victim didn't feel they could report it to the police. 

 

That too is a possibility...we are exploring possibilities here

Edited by Macnamara
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rebornsteve said:

@Certified Green of Heart 

it was just a pic about eating popcorn and watching the thread develop, not sqecifically about Trump. 

 

so not a comment on how trump was also stung by stormy daniels....

 

so this story is being broken simultaneously by the times newspaper which is owned by rupert murdoch and by channel 4 which is owned by the british government and run through the department for culture, media and sport

 

so murdoch and the british government have tag teamed on this

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

so not a comment on how trump was also stung by stormy daniels....

 

so this story is being broken simultaneously by the times newspaper which is owned by rupert murdoch and by channel 4 which is owned by the british government and run through the department for culture, media and sport

 

so murdoch and the british government have tag teamed on this

The same murdoch who has just stepped down from Fox and News Corp. 

 

Timing is remarkable 

 

The worlds most powerful – and divisive – media tycoon hands over ‘The Sun’, ‘The Times’ newspapers and Fox Corporation to his son Lachlan after 70 years of making headlines

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-chairman-b2415898.html

Edited by rebornsteve
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...