Chomper Higgot

It’s referred to as ‘Estuary’.

I think referring to Brand as a money grubber is fair comment. I don’t agree those doing so should face the peril of prison or large fines.

What’s not to hate?

Self inflamed grievance stroking raises its ugly head. You are being tortured by your own imagination.

There is no need to defend ‘Israel’s crimes’. Well not in this thread anyway, because despite your efforts to make it so, this thread is not about Israel’s crimes. Your continuous obfuscation and excusing of Abbas’ deliberately offensive and inflammatory antisemitic systems is noted for what it is. Running cover for an overt antisemite. I look forward to discussing ’Israel’s crimes’ when, as in the past, a thread on the matter is posted.

The antisemites have won. You are arguing between yourselves while Abbas gets a free pass. Obfuscation and excuses have worked their magic.

What, so Russell Brand exists outwith logical reality?

You are misinterpreting jurisprudence with logical reality. Lots of people commit crimes but never stand trial. They remain guilty of the crimes they committed regardless of their luck dodging trial.

Likewise your crackpot conspiracy nonsense.

It has been reported that Brand knew the allegations where coming after he was recently contacted by journalists for comment. My punt is, Brand has known for a long time this was coming.

So ‘the powers that be’ climbed into a Time Machine and went back to force Brand to behave in a manner that would, at an opportune moment, give cause for allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Actually not so. In a rational world one is guilty as soon as one commits a crime. Within the administration of Justice, which may or may not be entirely rational, one is ‘presumed innocent’ during investigation and through to the point of a jury verdict. There is no presumption of innocence outside the justice system.

From your linked article: “YouTube has suspended Russell Brand's channels from making money from adverts for "violating" its "creator responsibility policy". And "If a creator's off-platform behaviour harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action," a YouTube spokesperson said on Tuesday. So Brand has transgressed the terms of service he signed up to and you blame ‘lefties’.

Who cancelled Brand?

Legal jeopardy is perhaps one example. Anyway, why not just admit you inserted ‘morals’ without any basis in my comment you were referring to. Just admit you were wrong, it won’t hurt.

Oh look I suggest ‘concerns’ and you drag up morals. My goodness you are being creative today.

Explain we’re morals come into cancelling Brand’s shows?

I don’t recall stating I know what happened or that Brand is guilty. On the other hand, I’ve not attacked or denigrated his accusers either. My view is the Met can deal with this, now they have a formal complaint they certainly will. As for the media and social media ‘frenzy’, that’s the flip side of the game and fortune Brand has made from media and social media.

Perhaps Brand’s promoters have their own concerns over his behavior. Perhaps they think he should lay low and avoid the press. Perhaps they think Brand cracking jokes following such serious allegations is a bad look for their client. There are probably many other possibilities. But they all come down to Brand’s promoters, not some ‘lefties’ canceling his shows.

Yes the event was canceled, and you dreamed up a reason why.

Now flip the coin and imagine being a victim of rape, looking around and seeing other women reporting rape being referred to as ‘sluts’, see example above.

It was you earlier today who didn’t know why women don’t report rape?

Oh, he was mobbing outside the venue? Ir was he simply expressing an opinion you don’t agree with?!

Someone else with women problems.

Do you have a link or any verifiable evidence of this situation you paint actually having come to pass, or did you make it up?