You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > BBC (again)
October 4 2023 5.16pm

BBC (again)

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 329 of 333 < 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 >

 

View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 18 Sep 23 10.16pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

So she claims.

I have yet to see something that convinces me of anything other than the fact that Brand used his position to shag as many women as possible and was proud of it. He has never been afraid to express what some would call sexist attitudes, and perhaps did things that in retrospect were unwise given his celebrity status and potential vulnerability to exactly these sorts of accusations.

When the CPS decides that he can be prosecuted for something specific, and he is found guilty in a fair trial, we can call him a criminal.
Until then, he is innocent in the eyes of the law.

How this affects his career going forward is another story.

Pretty much how I see it.

Everyone and his dog knew what Brand was like and he said so himself. If he's an actual rapist then let them prove it.

However, I'm pretty skeptical.....and as we saw, our court system managed to find for Amber Heard....So If they find he is I'll be interested upon what grounds they found it was proven.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 18 Sep 23 10.28pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

So she claims.

I have yet to see something that convinces me of anything other than the fact that Brand used his position to shag as many women as possible and was proud of it. He has never been afraid to express what some would call sexist attitudes, and perhaps did things that in retrospect were unwise given his celebrity status and potential vulnerability to exactly these sorts of accusations.

When the CPS decides that he can be prosecuted for something specific, and he is found guilty in a fair trial, we can call him a criminal.
Until then, he is innocent in the eyes of the law.

How this affects his career going forward is another story.

Why would he apologise if the claims were untrue?

I have yet to hear anything that convinces me that the claims are untrue. That he was proud of his behaviour is besides the point. The point is whether it was always consensual. Not sometimes or even most times but always.

Whether enough evidence can be presented to clear the relatively high bar needed for a criminal conviction, especially given the time elapsed, is yet to be determined. The CPS could easily refuse to allow a prosecution.

That though doesnít mean Brand would succeed with a deformation suit.

Which would leave us all to reach our own conclusions. Which will be as divided as they always are here.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Online Flag Addiscombe West 18 Sep 23 10.34pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Pretty much how I see it.

Everyone and his dog knew what Brand was like and he said so himself. If he's an actual rapist then let them prove it.

However, I'm pretty skeptical.....and as we saw, our court system managed to find for Amber Heard....So If they find he is I'll be interested upon what grounds they found it was proven.

And if heís completely innocent as youíre both inferring as it fits your narratives, I await his aggressive legal response, which, against unfounded and made up allegations will wipe the floor with all of the accusers, journalists and corporations. Heíll make a pretty penny.

On balance it seems pretty likely that heís overstepped the mark a few times out of the 500 plus encounters heís no doubt had. Donít think Iíve ever heard of a respectful sex addict.

Does make me laugh that the right embrace him so warmly now heís no longer the lefts darling, and now theyíll do anything to protect him.

The big shame is that when balanced he had/has had some very on the nail summations of the issue with power and corruption. Amongst other things.

But that doesnít make you immortal

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Online Flag Addiscombe West 18 Sep 23 10.38pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Why would he apologise if the claims were untrue?

I have yet to hear anything that convinces me that the claims are untrue. That he was proud of his behaviour is besides the point. The point is whether it was always consensual. Not sometimes or even most times but always.

Whether enough evidence can be presented to clear the relatively high bar needed for a criminal conviction, especially given the time elapsed, is yet to be determined. The CPS could easily refuse to allow a prosecution.

That though doesnít mean Brand would succeed with a deformation suit.

Which would leave us all to reach our own conclusions. Which will be as divided as they always are here.

I think if this is all made up and one big ruse, he will clean up.

The usuals on here just donít want to believe that his outing has nothing to do with his (admittedly sometimes laudable) anti-establishment stance because it doesnít allow the conditions to bolster their political and ideological beliefs.

Heís always been an oddball. Itís not that big a stretch.

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 18 Sep 23 10.58pm Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Why would he apologise if the claims were untrue?

I have yet to hear anything that convinces me that the claims are untrue. That he was proud of his behaviour is besides the point. The point is whether it was always consensual. Not sometimes or even most times but always.

Whether enough evidence can be presented to clear the relatively high bar needed for a criminal conviction, especially given the time elapsed, is yet to be determined. The CPS could easily refuse to allow a prosecution.

That though doesnít mean Brand would succeed with a deformation suit.

Which would leave us all to reach our own conclusions. Which will be as divided as they always are here.

And since it took 5 minutes of the programme for a conclusion to be reached no one can say all the evidence wasn't objectively assessed.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 18 Sep 23 11.32pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

And if heís completely innocent as youíre both inferring as it fits your narratives, I await his aggressive legal response, which, against unfounded and made up allegations will wipe the floor with all of the accusers, journalists and corporations. Heíll make a pretty penny.

On balance it seems pretty likely that heís overstepped the mark a few times out of the 500 plus encounters heís no doubt had. Donít think Iíve ever heard of a respectful sex addict.

Does make me laugh that the right embrace him so warmly now heís no longer the lefts darling, and now theyíll do anything to protect him.

The big shame is that when balanced he had/has had some very on the nail summations of the issue with power and corruption. Amongst other things.

But that doesnít make you immortal

You misread.

My position on rape has been pretty constant on Hol regardless of who was accused of it. That's independent of whether someone is on the right or left.

It's evidence based, something that is very hard to prove with this kind of crime.

Do I think that Brand is a rapist? I certainly doubt it. But how would I know. We will await developments.

However, I've already suggested what I think the outcome will be.

Anyway do I think that promiscuous people get themselves into dodgey situations and sometimes shag mentally unstable people?....certainly I've seen it happen.

They make the choices and them the breaks.

Does that make them a rapist? I doubt it.

However, as I say, it's my view that Brand is also the subject of bad faith actors mixed in with activism.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Online Flag Addiscombe West 18 Sep 23 11.47pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

You misread.

My position on rape has been pretty constant on Hol regardless of who was accused of it. That's independent of whether someone is on the right or left.

It's evidence based, something that is very hard to prove with this kind of crime.

Do I think that Brand is a rapist? I certainly doubt it. But how would I know. We will await developments.

However, I've already suggested what I think the outcome will be.

Anyway do I think that promiscuous people get themselves into dodgey situations and sometimes shag mentally unstable people?....certainly I've seen it happen.

They make the choices and them the breaks.

Does that make them a rapist? I doubt it.

However, as I say, it's my view that Brand is also the subject of bad faith actors mixed in with activism.

I didnít misread. Itís inferred and backed up by your quite amusing suggestion that his accusers are all mentally unstable, and therefore fabricating their claims.

Iíd say on probability the chance of some journos spending over a year of their lives on this and betting the house on some crazy womenís rantings, plus having various legal teams sign off on it going public is extremely low.

The chance a slightly oddball narcissist with a well documented sex addiction who has probably churned through several hundred women not once crossing a line into an unconsensual act? Much higher.

Simple probability.

Heís not big enough to warrant the time, effort and resources to bother orchestrating some highly risky elaborate made up ruse to silence him in his waning years.

Thereís no logic there. At all

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 19 Sep 23 12.13am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

I didnít misread. Itís inferred and backed up by your quite amusing suggestion that his accusers are all mentally unstable, and therefore fabricating their claims.

Iíd say on probability the chance of some journos spending over a year of their lives on this and betting the house on some crazy womenís rantings, plus having various legal teams sign off on it going public is extremely low.

The chance a slightly oddball narcissist with a well documented sex addiction who has probably churned through several hundred women not once crossing a line into an unconsensual act? Much higher.

Simple probability.

Heís not big enough to warrant the time, effort and resources to bother orchestrating some highly risky elaborate made up ruse to silence him in his waning years.

Thereís no logic there. At all

Proving rape can be cut and dried....usually a bloke forces himself on an unwilling woman using violence or his strength..or maybe she's unconscious and we all know he deserves all the anger and retribution that should come his way.

However, when that's not what's happened things can be complicated.....and as a social conservative I certainly don't approve of Brand's past behaviour as I've stated.

Let me present a nuance of what I was implying. It's just a reality that If you're going to be like Brand and you shag that number of people you're going to put your d1ck in crazy many times.

However, I didn't say that this means all these accusers are mentally unstable?....you misread...I didn't say that. It can be far more complicated.

Whose to say what the motives might be amongst all of them. It can be complex. The reality of subjectivity and in the moment decisions can mean that two people can have two different perceptions of an event. Sometimes even different before and after they occur....it's happened many times over the years. Taking a reasonable line on what went on can be complicated and it isn't always black and white.

Even the definition of what consent is and what someone can reasonably perceive can differ between individuals....cases like that have been seen many times in sex cases and can find themselves in the weeds.

At the simple level maybe he's done what you suggest and has raped women....or any of the descriptions that might be used for it.

Perhaps it'll all come out like that in court....or perhaps it'll end as I suggested.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Sep 2023 12.30am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Matov's Profile Matov Flag 19 Sep 23 6.47am Send a Private Message to Matov Add Matov as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

Heís not big enough to warrant the time, effort and resources to bother orchestrating some highly risky elaborate made up ruse to silence him in his waning years.

Thereís no logic there. At all


But there is logic in having some claims, from decades ago, that will never stand up in court? My understanding is that Brand now presents himself as a family man. And nobody (yet) is emerging from the woodwork to challenge that narrative.

I get what you are saying about deriding the notion it was done to silence his political views because it will actually do the opposite. Making a lot of people who probably had forgotten about him, seek him out now.

But what public interest, in the here and now, is there is airing historical allegations of sex-crimes which will boil down to 'he said, she said'? And doing so in such a publicity-seeking manner? That is the bit I don't get. I cannot imagine any of it making court based on what was aired with the more lurid allegations not even falling within British juristriction.

Any of these women could have gone to the police of their own validation at any time. They chose not to. In fact, the reporting team actually tracked them down, along with dozens, possibly hundreds, of others whose own encounters were clearly not worthy of telling us about.

This was a top down operation. And given a genuine prominence through both what is considered the eminent newspaper of our time along with an award winning documentary team. Which is fine.

But still none of that explains the 'why' in terms the effort. Brand is barely B list these days and has been so for years.

 


"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 19 Sep 23 8.11am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

As I was never a fan or paid much attention to RB I have been quite surprised over the last few days with a re-hash of his career.

Most of the right wing papers are pointing out that RB at that time was a poster boy for the left. It seems quite amazing now that he was lauded by the BBC and C4 and many left wing politicians even though his misogynistic behaviour was out there in the open for all to see.

Peter Hitchens has pointed out that the BBC hired him in 2012 4 years after Sachsgate. Obviously lessons were learned NOT.

I guess it took the #MeToo campaign and RB's move away from the left (I have no idea what he stand for today and frankly don't care) before the TV companies started to distance themselves.

As for Ed Milliband what the hell was he playing at.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View mezzer's Profile mezzer Flag Main Stand, Block F, Row 20 seat 1... 19 Sep 23 8.16am Send a Private Message to mezzer Add mezzer as a friend

Marketing departments will study this for years.

At the same time, a lesson in Brand awareness and the need to re-Brand in one campaign.

 


Living down here does have some advantages. At least you can see them cry.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 19 Sep 23 10.58am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Why would he apologise if the claims were untrue?

I have yet to hear anything that convinces me that the claims are untrue. That he was proud of his behaviour is besides the point. The point is whether it was always consensual. Not sometimes or even most times but always.

Whether enough evidence can be presented to clear the relatively high bar needed for a criminal conviction, especially given the time elapsed, is yet to be determined. The CPS could easily refuse to allow a prosecution.

That though doesnít mean Brand would succeed with a deformation suit.

Which would leave us all to reach our own conclusions. Which will be as divided as they always are here.

You can apologise for acting badly, but that does not imply criminal behaviour.
How many people have done things in their youth that in retrospect they know were ill judged?

Morality is not set in stone. It changes from one decade to the next. Sometimes from one year to the next.

The written law is rigid in terms of what you can and can't do, but the reality of people's behaviour is far more complex.

In Russell Brand's case, I feel that his attitudes and current political views have made him a target for the new puritanical identity politics zealots.

They will find ways to cancel you if you don't agree with them and irrespective of the outcome of this particular case, we need to resist their kind at all costs. His Youtube channel has already been restricted before any charges have been brought.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (19 Sep 2023 10.59am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 329 of 333 < 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > BBC (again)