DISCUSS: The Russell Brand “Investigation”
The Russell Brand scandal is big news right now. And by “big news” I mean it is quite literally the front-page story in every major newspaper in the UK…
British tabloids all put out the hit piece on Russell Brand at once pic.twitter.com/gTIVRsK7rx
— David Wolfe (@DavidWolfe) September 17, 2023
…that level of media coordination is weird in and of itself.
I mean, we’re in a time of war, pestilence and famine. And while “celebrity sex scandals” may be interesting to Daily Mail editors they’re not exactly a Horseman of the Apocalypse.
Honestly, most of the time OffG would probably have dismissed this story as tabloid nonsense not worth discussing, but the sheer amount of noise surrounding this story means there must be more to it. A deeper level worth investigating.
The Man
Briefly, because you likely already know most of it. Russell Brand is a British comedian, actor and TV presenter who as has re-invented himself as an alternate media voice/political activist via his YouTube channel. He was an outspoken critic of the Covid19 narrative, most especially the “vaccines”.
His notoriety is such that many don’t entirely trust him, labelling him a “shill”.
Without taking a position either way, it should be noted that he went on Bill Maher’s show and told nothing but the truth…
Russell Brand dropped some facts on Bill Maher’s show about big pharma, the military industrial complex, and the banking industry. Was this when they decided he needed to be taken down? pic.twitter.com/QsovCc4T0c
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 17, 2023
The truth doesn’t stop being true because it comes out of the mouth of a shill, and the more people that hear those facts the better. At the same time, that he was provided that platform at all is curious.
Either way, now he’s been accused of rape and sexual assault.
The Allegations
The accusations came about thanks to a “joint investigation” by several media outlets, and were aired on Channel 4’s “Dispatches” documentary series on Sunday night. The alleged incidents all took place between 10 and 15 years ago, the accusers themselves are anonymous and were voiced by actresses in the documentary.
Brand denied the accusations vehemently and completely in a video on his YouTube channel.
As is the way of these things, it’s now become a feeding frenzy. Every celebrity, however minor, is coming forward with their “Russell Brand is a dickhead” story, while newspaper editors have tasked interns with poring over every second of footage of Brand to find potentially “offensive” content.
According to a statement from the Metropolitan Police not one person has come forward to officially accuse Brand of any crime, and no investigations are taking place.
UPDATE: It was announced just minutes ago that the Met police are investigating another allegation, this time from 2003.
The Response
Literally everyone is talking about it, in very predictable ways.
The people that hated Brand already, that objected to his Covid skepticism or criticism of the mainstream media, are all jumping at the chance to call him a sexual predator.
While the people who agree with him already are claiming it’s all a set up. That he’s being targeted by the same media he rails against in his videos.
We – as usual – are declining the invited binary, while pointing out that the law requires people to be assumed innocent until proven guilty
…so what’s the plan?
That’s really the most interesting point on which to speculate. As always, the story of the story is the story. What is the point here? The allegations, the fall out, the media storm, they serve a purpose…but what?
Prima facie, they serve the same end as anonymous accusations throughout time. Brand, whatever you think of him, holds (or claims to hold) minority opinions frowned upon by the establishment, and discrediting the man discredits the message. That’s basic, see the Julian Assange “rape” accusations as another recent example.
There’s a flipside to this. By attacking Brand with (so far) very weak ammunition, the establishment could be trying to increase his anti-establishment bona fides. By treating him as a threat they get cast a sort of proxy vote for leader of the opposition. After all, there’s no doubt this will increase his support in certain circles.
More subtle, long term thinking, could see a full discrediting of the man and his supporters, by presenting a weak case which is immediately refuted, only to follow it up with stronger evidence and/or a confession from Brand himself. This would taint his message and hurt the credibility of anyone who supported him, whilst boosting the credentials of mainstream “journalism”.
More generally, they do have a society to control.
It hasn’t happened yet, but it wouldn’t be surprising if Brand were to lose his YouTube channel over this (in the current climate it’s very odd it survived Covid intact, to be honest). This would further the push towards “moral” censorship and the spread of “deplatforming” and cancel culture.
This has knock on effects for other critics of the mainstream, too. Seeing someone so famous brought low by this kind of seemingly contrived “scandal” could frighten other potential dissenting voices into keeping quiet.
You may have noticed, but our society has gone mad.
From race to sex to Covid everything has become an opportunity to both signal your own virtues and denounce the sins of your neighbours. This atmosphere of suspicion is very useful to the powers-that-be, but the fervid Crucible-like atmosphere that has been carefully nurtured needs to be sustained with a careful feeding of divisive hot-button news.
More practically, a slow and steady erosion of the idea of presumed innocence is helpful to aspiring tyrants everywhere. And it’s always good to normalise Orwellian unpersoning and rewriting of history.
As one of OffG’s commenters pointed out this morning, there’s also a potentially interesting tie-in to the UK’s upcoming “Online Harms Bill”:
The Russell Brand thing turns out to be even more than first appears. The whole concerted plot was easy to spot a mile off but the repercussions go much deeper.
The government are now asking Youtube (Google) to self censor as they can take RB et al. off MSM but they can’t (Yet) restrict Youtube content. Mark my words this will give the “online harms bill” a new impetus and the comparison with Jimmy Savile welds the evil transgressor image in people’s minds, much like the sinister “denier” label.
Clutching at straws
As they highlight, the comparisons of Brand to Savile are currently everywhere. Which is absolutely bizarre, because even if Brand is guilty as accused…there’s a world of difference between that and supposed pedophilic necrophilia.
Whatever comes out, the simple truth is that the entire media machine is churning out material on this story. And that doesn’t happen unless there’s a rollout on the way.
But what do you think?
- Do you trust Russell Brand?
- Do you think he is a “shill”?
- Do you believe the accusations?
- Is it just a cliché witch-hunt?
- Is there more to it?
- Will he be kicked off YouTube?
- Will there be a criminal charge?
- How will this impact the alternative media in general?
- Will it impact the passing of the Online Harms Bill?
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
Paul below me is very long (1h)
everything you need to know about russell in 1min
looks like glitch
this video
youtube.com/watch?v=C3tgjHtml4M
He’s a fraud.
Winston SMITH is busy.
” see the Julian Assange “rape” accusations as another recent example.”
Fucking an unconscious person is indeed considered as rape in some civilized countries. In this case, it was a sleeping person, a young woman who admired Assange. Assange admitted the act. There clearly was no consent, as the woman had explicitly made it clear she wouldn’t have sex without a condom, but Assange fucked her anyway without a condom when she was sleeping.
And you guys think it’s not rape.
That’s what the hero worship like the Assange cult has done to ”opposition”. It’s all about life and personality of some hero, a leader.
Cults of personality are the worst thing in this world.
It’s authoritarianism, and it’s conflict, creating conflict and authoritarianism. Create conflict and division in order to destroy any focus on real issues and unity.
But in this world there is no unity – only distraction and division. Unity exists only with an issue at hand.
Any person taking over the issue means distraction. And focusing on the person’s sex life is just a narcissistic trait.
Cults are created by narcissistic egos, who are either leaders or followers.
When did assange admit to “fucking her without a condom whilst she was unconscious?” Seems rather strange for Swedish prosecutors to throw out a case based on “weak evidence” if the alleged perpetrator already admitted to the charges? I suggest you get your facts straight before getting your knickers in a knot and perhaps you may avoid making a complete fool of yourself in future
He admitted the act when he was interviewed by Swedish authorities. He admitted having sex like that, but that there was nothing unusual. He denied it was rape and claimed it was consensual. The Assange cult was formed the day the rape allegations were publicized. ”How to smear a hero” was one of the first blog posts where discussion was allowed, only I know from experience that censorship happened, as it happened to many of my comments. The same censorship happened in other sites too, where the fan boys and girls congregated. Cults or cultists never accept criticism or doubt. I followed this case for years and read everything, and in this case practically everything was leaked. Have you read everything? Where did you get your ”facts”? How do you know your hero is innocent of this? The rape apologists for Assange believed that their hero could do no wrong. They changed rape into ”rape” or ”sex by surprise”. The Assange cult abused not just the two women who made the allegations but basically anyone questioning the innocence of their hero. Women, feminists and Sweden were targeted as enemies. Rape apology denies rape and states rape never happened as it never can happen, then attacks those who’ve made rape allegations or sided with the rape victims. It’s always the same story, no matter who the ”hero” is. There’s nothing strange about the actions of the the Swedish judicial system in this case. Swedish judicial system doesn’t operate like Hollywood. And it’s also different from the judicial systems in the UK or the USA. First Assange conflated WikiLeaks with himself and exposing US war crimes with his personal problems in Sweden. Then Mr Courage-is-contagious was so afraid of everything, especially Swedish women, that he chose to imprison himself in the Ecuadorian… Read more »
? People admit to rape all the time!
Where? Who? Examples?
Oh come on! Have you never read a court report in a news paper which records a guilty plea to rape? Here’s one:
https://news.sky.com/story/metropolitan-police-officer-david-carrick-pleads-guilty-to-string-of-sex-offences-including-24-rapes-12787890
No, I hadn’t seen that case. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
After decades of criminal activity, this one got caught. Allegations or accusations had been made against him since 2002. Did you notice that he originally denied all charges? The police apparently believed his words of innocence, too, until 2021, when they arrested him. He said he was innocent and pled ”not guilty”, until December 2022. So twenty years of saying he’s innocent, not guilty, he’s done nothing wrong, and then finally he admitted.
Denying the crime is what criminals tend to do because they do not want to be punished. When they admit the crime, it’s because they think there’s some benefit for them.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/16/david-carrick-timeline-of-key-events-in-life-of-serial-rapist
This was an extreme case. You do realize – do you? – that most rapes are not done by people like that, and not like that.
And you still haven’t shown a case where a rapist has honestly admitted that he raped someone.
Yes you’re right. Pleading guilty is not an admission of rape. Black is white.Night is day. Whatever you say.
According to wikipedia Assange denied the allegations. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority)
I didn’t understand the explanation which Sweden gave for dropping the prosecution ( according to wikipedia). It didn’t make any sense and made the prosecuting authorities look silly ( I think)
Why didn’t you read the explanation I gave in a link?
When you don’t understand something others say, it doesn’t mean the others are stupid.
Of course Assange denied the allegations. But the Swedish prosecution believed the story of the woman, and so do I. Police reports were all leaked and I have read them.
You made contradictory/ confusing statements. I don’t know how you can believe the story of the woman just by reading it . Seems to me the only thing we can say is that we don’t know.
I have read all police reports: Assange, two women, witnesses for both sides. I have read court documents. I have read what’s been online in English and in Swedish. I researched and followed this case for years.
Yes, I can say I have an informed opinion of this.
Why do you believe the words of Assange?
Why do you think it’s not rape what he did?
I didn’t say I believed them. I said we don’t know. Why don’t you stop writing rubbish?
All evidence and statements form a very clear picture of what happened. So certainly we can know.
We can make judgments based on knowledge. If you say we can never know what happened, there’s no point in investigating or judging any crimes, ever.
Assange cultists have tried to shut everyone up who is not pro-Assange.
The two women have been harassed and threatened, as that’s just the modus operandi of cultists defending their hero leader.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9163289/Julian-Assanges-victims-break-silence.html
Anyone worth their conspiratorial salt has long since been ejected from youtube.
One was left wondering why he remained.
Perhaps he has finally realized there is no such thing as a virus?
That will certainly get one booted- from friend and foe alike….
The vultures have the problem that Brand has a lot of money and will not hesitate to spend it and repeat what Johnny Depp did to cancel culture recently: destroy them with superior intelligence and wit.
Johnny Depp was lucky because he is rich. If you want access to justice you often need a good lawyer
The vultures have the problem that Brand has a lot of money and will not hesitate to spend it and repeat what Johnny Depp did to cancel culture recently: fuck them up the ass with a smile, superior intelligence and wit.
Russell Brand reaches the New Age audience in particular, and not just in UK. He is unusual among alt commentators in reaching a multinational audience.
It could be that the 77th and 13th Signals and the other NATO censors are concerned about this becoming a new “wedge” against the coming lockdowns and stepping up of war.
https://moneycircus.substack.com/p/crisis-update-climate-emergency-would
Russell Brand, I never liked the man. I actually disliked his manners as far as I know them because I was never really interested in the guy. But now I actually start to warm up to him.
This has all the appearances of a medieval mob lynching.
Russel appeals to an audience many alt media can’t reach, sometimes our own paranoia leads us to condemn all that don’t follow our version of truth to the letter. Trust? He has created doubt about the media and establishment, I see that as a positive.
No doubt he is making a dollar, some of his spiritual stuff is along correct lines, other bits perhaps not, again though better some knowledge than none.
That he has been hit with the tried and proven sex scandal and that it is widely coordinated is enough for me to believe he was too popular and too loud, it was decided to shut him up.
The great irony is that in a world where we now deify transgenders, where pedophilia is getting a soft approval through the MSM, where prospective politicians have online live sex sites that anyone would care about Russell’s earlier sex life. There has been innuendos to underage, so where is the proof?
I know this sells a lot of newspapers Etc.The media mob just keeps destroying and devouring its “conservative “ targets and no one catches on.
Russel is a foreign paid shill. Specifically Russian and Israeli likely. His brief: destabilize American/ Western Gov. Not that they need much help making themselves look ridiculous. But Russel’s brief is the same basically as Alex Jones, David Icke, Owen Benjamin, David Duke etc etc etc. Destabilize social cohesion.
Oh good gawd.
he is foreign he is a corporation sol
pig swill is over this mockney cockney khazar target
a follower of jacob frank
. . but Israeli or Russki?? fuck right off, that is pure pig swill.
Shows what you know rubber head.
All the down votes must be for the numerous times Russel appeared on RT will trooth bombs.
For people still confused, this explains the psyop you are (mostly) all partaking in:
https://miri.substack.com/p/the-re-branding-of-russell
Interesting read. It’s the old Bohemian Grove blackmail thing.
Ironically, I’ve never much cared for Brand myself. I have respect for his heckling people who deserve it and he’s clearly an intelligent guy. But he strikes me as vain and I doubt if I could stand his company for long.
Not sure if that link mentions it but the Brand thing also serves as a vast distraction.
Brand didn’t become famous for his political views, he was already famous by being a good looking mainstream comedian.
This is brilliant! Thanks for posting. OffG should be publishing Miri’s Missives here. But, I know, it’s quite a diffi-cult club to get into 😉
Excellent post – a very interesting read from Miri. It has definitely got me thinking. It has become clear that in politcis only the ‘owned’ get the top jobs, (look what happened to Corbyn – that close shave won’t be happening again) but I hadn’t particularly considered this happening elsewhere in society. It shook my brain into gear!
Just read this very thought provoking piece on Brand: https://thecritic.co.uk/the-lure-of-the-red-flag/
What do you all think of it?
It goes without saying that every official channel of the media will never for a second raise any query regarding the ruthlessly applied orthodox theology of covid, climate and transgenderism. The coverage of Brand follows a similar pattern i.e. Brand as some kind of Savile Mark 2 is the fundamental screed. You will never see any article that suggests Brand may be a targeted figure. And this piece is no different. Hence, “I can understand why Russell Brand is aggrieved. As he himself says, he was “always transparent … almost too transparent” about what calls his promiscuity. Faced with the serious allegations presented in this Saturday’s Times and Channel 4’s Dispatches, he is naturally confused. He didn’t hide who he was. Implausible deniability was always part of the joke.” And of course “who he was” has been decided. Thus Brand “acts out his entitlement where everyone can see it, then when you complain, you are told it is only a performance”. The word “entitlement” is a clear indication that we are in liberal woke territory. It is a word which automatically conjures up its opposite: “empowerment” as the designated victims go through the demanded triumphalist turnaround to effect an aesthetically pleasing finale. It’s the present day version of the Day of Judgement when all those evil bastards get their comeuppance and the fragile angelic punching bags burst out of their captivity to hammer the crucifixion nails in. “The quiet man cannot be a brute behind closed doors; the man who performs brutishness in public cannot be taken seriously. There is no way for women to win.” See? We’re in The Handmaiden’s Tale. And that is depressingly familiar since we have here the permissible Left who continue to fight yesterday’s battles. (“The only gay in the village” is close behind!) So… Read more »
Over recent years the media has spun three of the biggest lies of all time: covid, climate change and transgenderism. The last named might seem a relatively minor issue but conceptually it’s actually the most daring since it attempts nothing less than to recast the entire concept of sex itself.
Beside these three, it’s a mere bagatelle to smear a comedian to the point of ruination.
this is the Murdoch empire initiating an enquiry. There is no criminal complaint. Sources anonymous- But innocent until proven guilty is meaningless to tabloid smear campaigns. What is startling is how many on the left (sic) join in on this media lynching. The story is due process. Think Assange (also smeared with bogus sex allegations), manning, snowdon…..this is the power of media ghouls like murdoch
” on the left ( sic)” ?…but you’re not quoting anybody. Do you mean: ” on the left”?
I had confirmation today of something that was depressingly predictable i.e. that the smear campaign against Russell Brand would work devastatingly well. A work colleague came in ranting about “that vile pervert” etc. She had seen the Despatches programme. (I wasn’t aware it was 90 minute long. So they were really going for the epic vomit.) She spouted wrath over it – not targeting the reporters of course but taking the whole thing at face value. I made no comment at all, knowing that it would be futile and that she would only turn on me and call me a rape apologist. And the main horror show is the part that has received the highest publicity – as I knew it would: the splicing together of Brand’s tale of blow jobbing, apparently involving mascara, and the shadowed hushed dismal tale of a veiled actor that retold the tale but this time recast as an actual attack. Here is a sample which has no doubt been repeated throughout the entire media: https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/tv/2023/09/russell-brand-in-plain-sight-made-me-sick-with-horror It’s worth quoting at length since, with supreme arrogance, it describes the very effect it wishes to enact: When I read the Sunday Times’ allegations against Russell Brand, my disgust was constrained, I think, both by a lack of surprise and a certain sense of exhaustion. It was only when they were made again on screen a few hours later that horror fully overtook me, popular culture once more having strolled seemingly hand-in-hand with a vile and pernicious misogyny. In Channel 4’s Dispatches, interviews with four women who accused Brand of rape and sexual abuse were shown alongside clips of the comedian on stage and on television: clips in which he made jokes – wild, blunt jokes – about exactly the kinds of behaviour they’d just described. And it… Read more »
As far as connections. There is the Sunday Times and Andrew Neil has been speaking on the topic. Andrew Neil was an editor for the Sunday Times in the 80s with Brian Deer working as social affairs correspondent. Brian Deer was the guy who attacked Andrew Wakefield following the 98 Lancet paper.
https://alchetron.com/Brian-Deer
He also turned up in 2019 for the “measles outbreak” in Samoa just before Covid. There is a documentary about him called Selective Hearing: Brian Deer and the GMC:
https://documentaryheaven.com/brian-deer-and-the-gmc-selective-hearing/
Seems to be a real nasty guy.
The the mainstream media DOES ALLOW certain degree of anti-establishment voices to convince the public that it’s free-speech oriented. It’s called controlled opposition. That’s exactly whose Russell Brand is! The controversial stuff RB has even said was all said long before him by others and in much more greater details. I think RB is just after likes and attention and the media uses his ‘extreme views’ to attract more audience and restore the trust with the public. Remember RB is a multimillionaire and is related to rich powerful elites. Hence he can not be trusted regardless of what he says
Smear campaign, sure. Brand is an enemy of the NWO/WEF, probably. He talks that way.
But nobody was paying much attention to him until these accusations appeared everywhere, at the same time, in familiar, typically coordinated fashion. Are the manipulators so inept that they inadvertently magnify a relatively obscure opponent? Perhaps the net effect will be similar to what happened to Alex Jones.
As a few people have already said, the employment of flawed and damaged individuals and the safety measure of recording their abusive behaviour (and filming it in the case of the Epstein island visitors) ensures compliance in whatever agenda the lunatics in the attic decide they want to push. No celebrity/ politician/ tv presenter will be allowed to go off-message without the risk of the bad stuff coming out. In Brand’s case, what they’ve got against him is extensive bad sex but probably not the paedophilia and crimes against humanity which the ones not speaking out about the Covid nonsense have hanging round their necks. Just to add, in response to the comment on here from a man who says his wife would still shag Brand if she got the chance, why would any woman choose to have sex with someone who hates women and says that spitting on them and choking them is something that turns him on? Why? Clearly she doesn’t like herself enough to want to have sex with someone who is loving and respectful. Bad sex is bad sex whoever the perpetrator is and whatever they look like. The best looking boyfriend I ever had was also the worst sexual experience because he loved himself just a little bit too much. My opinion, of course, but -to the man who wrote this – I do worry for your relationship if such shallowness and self-loathing is being expressed by your partner.
It looks like the knives are out for Andrew Pierce of GBnews. He is described in one comment as “a public toilet season ticket holder” and in another as a “bully towards women”. A third says he is “twatish towards Bev” and a forth says he is “rude & belittling to his co host & guests”. I think he is going to loose his job as people turn their back on Gbnews.
Oh frabjous day! Galoo galay! Remember he called Chris Williamson ex Mp for Derby North antisemitic following Williamson’s WONDERFUL Sheffield Momentum speech
China attacks the Falun Gong because they are an organization which could provide resistance to the state so The west fears Russel Brand.
He was unifying people around a common idea, peace, truth and the right to live a life without state control.
He is being attacked in all western countries
He is a threat to the empire
“Can we trust Russell Brand?” excellent and informative video from 2015
https://odysee.com/@FoxesAmazingChannel:8/Can-We-Trust-Russell-Brand-edit:9
There are many kinds of sheep, and even ideological movements can be full of followers.
Controlling ideological movements has been a mechanism for centuries.
Equinox ritual, killing of the king ritual, they will never learn about the pied pipers in MIC alt media talking 10 years old of date leading the lost astray even when they show the symbolism the symbols illiterate to blind so see as there fake hero has mentioned nothing that the BBC hasn’t mentioned.
The Brand thing as distraction:
https://twitter.com/PhoneixReloaded/status/1704243215212183661
More bullshit distraction:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12534611/Stonehenge-built-Britain-black-country-new-childrens-book-claims.html
So, to sum up:
Britain is institutionally racist against black people, even though it was entirely built by black people and black people have been here much longer than white people actually and all the white people originally were black people but we still need to do more to end white privilege even though there’s no such thing as “race” anyway…
Any questions?
If the white people were initially black people, how would they wind up being white eventually? There is no logic in your utterance. That said, I am a man of African descent. Scientifically, religiously and historically, there is NO black and white race. Whiteness and blackness were social and political constructs and weapons used to divide the human race. Scientifically, we are different shades of brown — from very light to very dark. The differences that we have which separate us are largely cultural, linguistic and national differences. The race card was an effective card of racial manipulation and social division that European oligarchs used and have been using to distract the human family from examining the veritable agenda of the elites.
Can you seriously not recognise sarcasm when you read it?
Also, you claim:
“If the white people were initially black people, how would they wind up being white eventually?“
and then:
“Scientifically, religiously and historically, there is NO black and white race“
and then accuse me of lacking logic?
LOL
given the reality inversion… what can be treated as sarcasm (without context) these days?
Frankly,your comment sounds exactly like the guff that rolls so freely outa folks’ evil, pestilent gubs, these days.
But okay, ye were joking.
I don’t enjoy sarcasm, tis the refuge of the snide and un-creative…
none at all, go fuck yourself.
unless sacasm?
utter shite is what you peddle. is that like the “Pharaoh’s were Ucrainian” quality of article? next you’ll be telling us men can give birth… carry on…
(reminds self to not feed trolls!! ; /)
My guess is that he was allowed to become famous because his sordid past made him easily cancelable/controllable. Seems to be true with most celebrities and politicians. Now that he’s strayed too far from the script he will be cancelled and demonetized from all mainstream (controlled) platforms, it’s that simple.
I haven’t read any of the comments here, or seen any of his recent videos (I have better things to do than “follow” people) but I did watch much of his stuff during the plandemic and two things leap out at me about this story which others may have already mentioned.
1. Brandcs mission as it developef during the covid period seemed to be to work to bring people together in common cause against the establishment. He did good work there, and obviously this is something that cannot be allowed to continue by the powers that be. He was threatening their divide and rule hegenomy and they have to attempt to destroy him. Whatever he did or didn’t do, if you hold any Anti Establishment Opinion views you should support him and try to prevent his destruction, as if you allow it you are contributing to your own destruction.
2. Check out the history of the production company that made the C4 Despatches programme – the have a large portfolio of pro neo-liberal propaganda work. Then folow the money…
No, I don’t trust Russell Brand one iota. Look at who he has worked for in the past and who he has connections with. I don’t know about a shill, certainly an intelligence services asset, possibly one that has gone rogue, but part of the machine, never the less. I believe that he has shagged an absolute shitload of women. My wife’s amusing and honest response when I told her about this was “well I’d still shag him”. Which is no doubt true. I guess the guy is a power mad, egomaniac sex man, but also a famous and good looking millionaire. He would have been fighting them off with a shitty stick, no doubt still is. I could certainly imagine that he has pushed the limits of what most decent men would find acceptable in the pursuit of Women. No doubt some of those women regret shagging him and in the current climate of spurious rape allegations taken as gospel without evidence decades after the fact, it wouldn’t be difficult to find a few covidian normies who he’s been through and discarded who were bitter about what had happened and wanted to take him down. My question is: Why did none of this come out when he was working in the MSM if it was true? We all know the answer to that To me, this is the typical turd in the punch bowl. Guilt by association for anybody with anti establishment views. He probably has gone too far and pissed off too many powerful people, but they will have known about this shit all along. The fact is, that it’s easy pickings for them, ripping apart a fella like Brand. Let’s face it though, if the establishment want to take you down, then they will do so, whether… Read more »
It smells of desperation. The cult are going down real fast at this point. They are throwing some of their key assets into the fire. In any case let’s not get caught up in this. The first rule of dealing with a smear campaign is to “Starve the drama”. “1.go no contact,2. No reaction, 3.control only what you can,4.tell the truth, 5.know who u are. ” I think it is important to offer fruit to any maskers still wondering the streets. The idea is that it will break down their programming. It is a strong no. Instead of walking past and being one of those selfish pro choicers go up to them and offer them a piece of fruit. Walking on by is like stepping on the cracks in the side walk. You could fall down into the pits of hell. The controlled opposition are all about choice but is it enough to stop the masks from spreading and what comes afrer? No. We need to put up a real road block and offering hostages a piece of fruit is a positive way to do that. It inverts the whole thing making the mask a way to identify people in need of help. They are crying out for help so it is the right thing to do. The spell is broken and they could be a key asset with connections in the depths of the beast. They could tell other hostages and reach their doctors etc. In anycase such a strategy will make masking costly to the perpetrarators. It will mean maskers will be talking to pro fruiters and touching pieces of fruit. Maybe they won’t accept it but even so it might get them thinking. Give them some options to escape and pull some others out with them. If… Read more »
I don’t think the mask-wearers are crying out for help at all.
They just feel vaguely ‘safer’, in exactly the same way as people who intend to take the next 17 ‘booster shots’ will do it “just to be safe”.
They are not thinking about the science (“That’s for the ‘experts’ – I don’t have a doctor’s degree in anything”) …
And they don’t give a crap what other people think of them – otherwise they wouldn’t want to stick out like sore thumbs wherever they go.
The sheepiest of the sheep.
That said, giving them a piece of fruit might indeed sow a seed or two of doubt that all is well with their mental health…
Personally, I’d be inclined to give them a piece of fruit cake, and perhaps a T-shirt with the message, “I’ll never die, because I always wear a mask”…
I’m glad you think ” the cult are going down real fast”. Could you please cite any examples? If you means censors/ powerful people / neoliberals, I think they have increasingly the upper hand and it’s well scary
err i think your not glad.
pirates khazars fallen tally ho
a brand
branded
tattoo a body of inked up meat mockny cockney sin bull
in praise of oto as in crowleigh alistair sex magic twatter
a rothstein schill limited hang out
this freak will never talk about building 7
next next next
The “Oh I didn’t like him anyway” move is a very common reaction which completely absolves the speaker of any critique. I found this to be the case with the Ken Livingstone/John Mann confrontation. Many folk were happy to see “that nasty Ken get his comeuppance” without any consideration at all about the artificial theatrical nature of the whole thing with Mann showing up with his camera team.
The “Savile” echoes of the Brand coverage are unbearable considering the gargantuan hypocrisy it shows up. “Why didn’t anyone know?” they bleat. But they only turned the light on Savile after he was conveniently dead and could no longer reveal the true extent of the rot. Furthermore, with Savile, everyone knew. Since Brand is still alive, the one thing that is clear is that accusing him of whatever is no danger to them.
Is the Brand thing some kind of multiple bluff? Possibly. The obsessively high profile of it smacks of distraction. I’d say that, whether Brand is genuine or not, the entire “show” is all about example. “If you do this then here’s what will happen!” is the lesson. It may be more for the “benefit” of other celebs than aimed at the masses.
Russell Brand is a freemason and controlled opposition. I got record downvotes in the ZeroHedge for saying that, and adding that nothing much will happen to him.
Anyway, let’s see how it goes here 🙂
Disagree, add downvote, agree, add upvote.
All the best!
Well, where is the proof of that? Got a link or something, an excerpt? What exactly does he do that serves as controlled opposition, what kind of information is he spreading that serves the freemasons? I’d like to know and although I could probably find it on the internet, you could probably point me to something specific and valid based on your comment. I can’t really give you an up or down vote until you say give some kind of example or evidence to an assertion anyone can make about anyone.
Gave you a downvote because you swallowed the bait.
Serious charges dont appear on the front pages of the tabloid press, they belong only to the Court.
In my young days I voted socialist, I worked in a multinational company, I worked in companies who went bankrupt. I was fired in a few jobs. I had several fiancees. Go make your media story and smear campaign.
How did I fall for anything here Erik? I called the dude on his bullshit and he didn’t respond. I’d say I didn’t fall for a damn thing, this Worthy character did.
I agreed with everything you said except that you couldn’t give him a downvote
oto
yer nose
the golden dawn
crowleighs uniform
33 tat.
donut
know
wtf
yer
tawken about.
dude
Playing the role of the child catcher at the London olympics a ceremony rife with symbolism is enough evidence for me to see Brand is not to be trusted
I asked my father, who is a Freemason. He told me that Brand is certainly not a Brother. That’s good enough for me.
Well if it isn’t, you need a new dad.
Thank you for your votes…OffGuardian has always more bright and analyzing people.
Anyway, I didn’t come here to argue anything, I wanted to know your opinion. With arguing I only hit the brick wall of hate speach. But big question, how to prove that he is a freemason, seek and you’ll find Big Al. But can we prove that “Dr.” Bill Gates is a freemason? We simply can’t.
We live the times of lies and deception. And controlled opposition is part of it, like it or not. I just warn.
never took to the Brand and his robot gurl, their split up was probably his next role cue..
attention seeking creature thing, but admittedly entertaining at times.
I don’t know what this ego has been up to, but it is brazen fact that ME TOO type shite is the populist way of taking men down. Same shit, new face… roll, roll
When will we see a media female arrested for sexual assault??
WHAT ABOUT NIKLA IN THE BALMORAL HOTEL? eh
“…that level of media coordination is weird in and of itself.”
Even more when the coordination is at planetary level.
National newspapers in India, France,Italy, Turkey,Spain, Germany,Brasil and many more are all publishing the same story. I doubt that people in those countries knew RB at all before this story.
Are they trying to cancel or to promote him?
Bad boy Brand got too close to the sun.
I’m always very suspicious when someone strays off the reservation only to then be accused of sexual misconduct in the past.
Its as if the Security Services saw the #MeToo movement and thought “Aha! We can use this”.
What astonishes me about all this is that ‘sexual misconduct’ stopped being something to be publicly ashamed of when all the pop stars went into the ‘free love’ thing way, way, way back…
It was certainly something else when Oscar Wilde, under threat of public shaming for ‘corrupting the young’, said, “Publish, and be damned”.
I doubt even Savile would have had the nerve to say that.
But this is entirely different.
Today a young man having sex with 248 women, some of whom might, or might not, have been of borderline age, just makes people yawn.
American puritanism worked well enough on Bill Clinton, but it won’t work on RB.
This is 2023, and it is not America.
Frankly I look forward to his next tirade against the rotten filth that are currently destroying civilization.
He is noisy, and he has too much self-confidence, but he is a very talented entertainer, with a lot of pertinent facts at his fingertips.
He just needs to learn how to use those splendid teeth when he speaks.
Give your poor epiglo’-‘is a break, man…
I thought it was Wellington who coined ‘ publish and be damned’ ?
If it serves the purpose; i.e., to deplatform him, the truth or not of the allegations does not matter, to them. It’s all about the agenda, first and always.
Another Team-33 s0d0mite, who gives a fuck?
I’m puzzled. The comment you quote says “they can’t (Yet) restrict YouTube content.” But isn’t that exactly what James Corbett said happened to him some two years ago? They censored so much of his content that he just scrapped his YouTube Channel.
Also (and please forgive the faulty memory) about ten or so years ago there was a YouTuber who was very popular but not too generous with his praise of the “system.” He got side tracked by stories of a sexual escapade years earlier. I can picture him: he was African-American, square-jawed and mid to late 40’s. But I can’t remember his name.
What I’m getting at is that, perhaps, the Media picks a name out of a hat just to make sure they haven’t lost their knack of pillorying someone (anyone).
That was my understanding.
I am happy to be corrected.
“…that level of media coordination is weird in and of itself.”
And that’s the crux of it. It looks like some kind of smear campaign conducted by the government and/or intelligence agencies. The clues are in the lack of normal journalistic practice in the stories and the hectoring tone of the commentators. They’re absolutely desperate for us to believe them! Look at the wording of the headline in the Guardian’s editorial today: “Brand was a misogynist in plain sight” – basically tried and convicted without even a police investigation, never mind a trial.
alas it’s only too normal in the new normal
Russel Brand raped my hamster
Everyone knows your hamster is a s lut.
To my shame, I can verify.
Worth listening to:
Did you see these two MEN were smoking?
This is what I want to discuss first before we go into any discussion about matrix or Brand or anything else. Why are these two men teaching our children to smoke??
The next I want to discuss is the way these two MEN demonstrate their muscles, their male power, their suppression male attitude toward vulnerable minorities, women, refugees, coloured people and green lgbt people….and children.
The third thing I want to discuss is their clothe in public television. Doesnt one of these “MEN” need at least a T-shirt? Just asking.
Before these three questions have been profoundly discussed and settled…globally, I refuse to comment on the issue in this video! 😁
my school is trying to ban kids talking about tatey
Hmmm, like that sort of things do you?
Not gonna I’m afraid for a very superficial reason. The appearance of the naked muscular guy in the shades on the left is repulsive. Rambo?
Telling the truth, this video convinced me we still have real men on the planet. It should have many more upvotes if the readers were healthy people.
Russel Brand – Good chap. Well I would say that wouldn’t I. Like him I am a life-long West Ham supporter. Leave the guy alone. He grew up in a miserable place in Grays, Essex and obviously maintained a thorough dislike of the PTB which formed the basis of this political position. He wasn’t on the make as the PTB have made him out to be – and that in my view was what got him into trouble.
OK, so he was a bit wild, Weren’t we? He hadn’t done anyone any harm (apart from rich bastards) at least nobody I know and he wouldn’t have brought down the howling hyena pack after his blood.
Never liked the man. And I don’t trust him either. He could very well be controlled opposition. BUT… “Rape” accusations have now become a bad joke. Thanks to feminists, women can make utterly false allegations of sexual assault, quite anonymously and decades after the event was supposed to have occurred, and the man will somehow have to prove his innocence. Look at the outrageous case of poor Mark Pearson, falsely accused by unhinged actress Souad Faress of a violent sexual assault in the middle of a extremely busy concourse at Waterloo station. The police treated him appallingly, and even though their case against him fell apart in minutes once the court saw that the CCTV footage clearly vindicated him, he didn’t even receive so much as an official apology for being treated like a criminal, guilty until proven innocent. And the liar who falsely accused him suffered absolutely no repercussions for doing so. In fact, on the contrary, she received “victim’s compensation”! …Despite the fact she was proven not to be a victim, as the crime itself never occurred! Had she instead falsely alleged that he’d assaulted her in a location where CCTV could not have vindicated him, then he would have had no such means of proving his innocence and would likely have been imprisoned and put on the sex offenders’ register for life. …For doing absolutely nothing. He did not even know the woman. This is why, regardless of whether one likes the accused or detests him, it is crucial to assume that any accusation of “rape” is entirely false, until convincingly proven otherwise. Yet even just this — the presumption of innocence — is likely to cause one to be hated, when applied to cases where a woman accuses a man of a sexual crime. People (men… Read more »
I don’t think it’s just women who can do what you said. Vicitms of male rape also have these rights ( look at the Kevn Spacey trial etc)
Alas they have not gone mad. fULLY SANE; tOTALLY CORRUPT
“Thanks to feminists just about any sexual encounter can now be recast post hoc as “rape”. Where’s your statistics saying that a majority of women’s allegations of rape are false? Excactly how do you mean feminists have created this? Have you had someone smack your ass in public? Had a relative touch you inappropriately? Being drugged and raped in a tent at a festival? Everywhere you go, music and images depict people like you like sex objects? Have you seen industries like porn and prostitution being built on raping the bodies of people like you? You seem to know more than I do, I am just a young woman “coached to view myself as a blameless victim”. Obviously all of the above was my own fault. I asked for it. Can’t believe this has so many likes. On a forum that is supposed to make you think critically.
I hear you, entirely,
But that is a rather bigoted response, I am well disappointed. Won’t be listening to you anymore.
what part of the world do you live in? do you like any men? have you ever been a man? what generic accusations are you trying to make???
“On a forum that is supposed to make you think critically.”
oh dear.
you miss the point that NOW women cry wolf, to excuse their indiscretions. What really happened is immaterial to the subsequent procedures their feminazi state will implement. they make their own “truth”.
your prejudice cannot trump truth. we live in an inverted mess Anna, where are you, really???
: (
i regard your statement as hate speak.
“men “truly” bad, women perfect victims” (para).
Maybe I dind’t read it carefully enough but my impression was that she was being ironic
17 folks missed that.
?
oh they must be right then?…Sounds like an MSM argument
no, you are an msm argument,
see that far off distance…….
just reread it. Yes you’re right. She wasn’t being ironic. I don’t know what your other comment to me meant.
nevermind, i was being rude, accept my apology.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that it is hate speech. Do you think people should be allowed to express hatred? Isn’t that part of free speech?
Well sadly feminism is now used as a bludgeon. This is part of the backlash. Instead of blaming the godamned media who do endlessly hype false stories most will just blame feminism. As a 62 year old single female who owns her own home, makes her own living and has never demanded any man do it for me, I’m sick to death of the simplistic bashing of feminism for all the world’s problems. It’s as racist as blaming “illegals” for the shit hole most of the world now is. Lazy thinking. Non thinking really.
It’s just more divide and conquer as well. Generational wars the same. Racism the same. Idiocy. Doing the bidding of our owners.
Some men do behave badly, but that really isn’t a reason to presume guilt.
If you want men to behave better (I assume that you do), the way to achieve it isn’t to tar all men with the same brush. That would just push more men into the anti-feminist camp.
You sound aggrieved. Fair enough, but please consider the consequences of your positions. The result of “all men bad” will not be “all men good”, it will be “more men bad”.
Excellent comment; and one that points to other outlandish implications that may be invoked in the near future, namely, the idea that contracts (i.e., smart contracts) will be used as the basis for all sexual relationships in the near future; with each party involved (and, of course, that would include polyamory ones) abiding by the prescriptive and proscriptive details of contract so that any forthcoming disputes and/or lawsuits could be easily settled via the design and delivery of said system of interlocking signees. That is all! RGB-Y3 out!!
Dear Verity,
It is more likely that the rape accusations have been applied against Russell Brand because such a tactic (accusing Celebrity X of rape or multiple sexual assaults) has worked in the past against Julian Assange and other people with high media profiles.
Because in the not-so distant past, actual rape victims were nearly always given a raw deal by the police, defence lawyers, judges and even (in many cases, depending on the context) the entire society, particularly if the rape victims happened to have had multiple sex partners in the past or put themselves in situations where they became drunk, Western societies now carry a baggage-load of guilt over male-against-female rape and sexual assault, and have now gone to the other extreme where accusations of rape made by women against men are automatically assumed to be truthful.
The main area where feminism may have been involved is in demonstrating how the police and the legal system have discriminated against rape victims, in their attitudes and assumptions.
I expect most of the stories are basically true.
But could have been brought out about many stars and at any time.
Now they want people to come forward with more stories there is safety in numbers.
So plenty will with he touched my bum or my boobs and much more.
So will they prosecute him and who cares.
They tried to convict Alex Salmond but failed probably mostly innocent
They tried to convict Kevin Spacey but failed probably not mostly innocent.
The succeeded in convicting Rolf Harris probably mostly innocent
http://www.rolfharrisisinnocent.com/
Two of main witness probably never met Rolf Harris the third has improbable story.
Rolf convicted himself with a honest letter of regret about a relationship to a farther.
Why they chose to take down who knows.
Why they want to take down Russell Brand who knows.
Is it all a distraction just bread and circus.
Many thousands of people have had there living ruined by the dictate of mad ruler.
When the lord of the manor can decide at any time that the peasants shall pay him homage. You shall pay to use the kings highway and if you can not afford you must suffer as you are peasants and I am the lord of the manor. I shall call my penalty ULEZ and pretend it is for your good even if it drives you to poverty and destitution.
But no one will care about you they have a celebrity to worry about.
It’s a bit parochial. In other countries similar commentators have been blown up with explosive statues and in their cars.
The timing of the impending Covid 2.0 leaves little doubt Brand is being taken down for his commentary. Whatever the truth of the past allegations.
Was he controlled opposition? Everyone, if you take into account their upbringing and connections, is controlled, as I have written about Craig Murray, and I would concede myself. You don’t pass through the system objective and unaffected.
Lots of the media fakes its “Left” credentials. This is a prerequisite for going along with the war in Ukraine, while lacking confidence to challenge the Climate Change narrative.
It helps, like Media Lens, that you quote “mother” Caitlin Johnstone occasionally, and use self-referential neo Marxist (ie vague) terminology. And talk about the “Left” a lot.
Because words and self-identifying with the club count more than actions nowadays, and the key thing is to cancel those who challenge the micro alt status quo.
Sound familiar?
Long story short I think these is no sign of medicine involved in lockdowns, poison shots etc. These are criminals not “the establishment”. Family, friends etc. are good to have but if they do not have boudaries there is a problem. We don’t need to look at anything new. We can look at the 90s or earlier to establish who the mob press are.
Prancing around naked and singing “I’m sorry that you’re jaded”! Well she’s got a sense of humour!
The eyes give it away. He has a level of clinical insanity.
I have gone back and forth on RB’s anti-establishment legitimacy. What tipped the scale for me, as someone who has not seen children or grandchildren for years, due to vax mandates in the USA, is that when Russell made his media tour of the US, including the Bill Maher show, PROOF OF VACCINE WAS REQUIRED TO ENTER THE USA.
Just sayin’.
This comment right here is enough to end the “debate”.
Either he’d been vaxxed or he was allowed to enter the US unvaxxed due to some kind of special “privilege” – something that definitely would not have happened if he was any kind of threat to the establishment.
There are no other possible scenarios and both destroy any shred of credibility he might possess.
Thank you friend, and I’m sorry you haven’t been able to see your family.
Note: the covid-19 “vaccine” requirement to enter the US was dropped on May 12 this year, but Bland was in the US, appearing on the Bill Maher show, on March 3:
Case closed.
So he bought a counterfeit QR code.
A vacuum appears, the market fill$ it.
Proof of vaccination at that time only applied to non-immigrant noncitizens. He’s a former US resident previously married to an American. He may well be a dual citizen or a permanent resident, even if he doesn’t live there. I found him to be pretty genuine and a voice of sanity during the worst of the Covidian days.
I am a former permanent resident, with a green card, married twice. I was not allowed in, but then my money doesn’t talk.
“His notoriety is such that many don’t entirely trust him”
His notoriety is such that many entirely don’t trust him.
“the more people that hear those facts the better.”
This is extremely naive imo – if people hear views from someone they’ve been positioned to think of as a scumbag then those opinions are tarnished by association. Many people judge messages by how much they “like” the messenger so put messages you want rejected without any proper thought in the mouth of someone intensely unlikeable. Who knows any real person that likes Russell Brand?
“By attacking Brand with (so far) very weak ammunition, the establishment could be trying to increase his anti-establishment bona fides”.
Firstly, maybe the ammunition is weak by all previous standards but are you sure that’s the world we now live in? Women are now the fount of all truth and virtue and white men just vats of toxicity and privilege so the accusations aren’t necessarily weak. Secondly, this state of play allows the story to be developed in several potential directions depending on how it’s playing (most probably a dripfeed of new accusations on the #metoo model – but it could all quietly be dropped down the memory hole).
Also I can’t let “anti-establishment” pass without a reminder that he supports global government. On the central issue, the big one that underpins everything else, he’s entirely pro-establishment.
Finally, is this look that Brand’s been sporting meant to position him as some sort of substitute-Jesus among such followers as he has? They love getting people to worship graven images. It looks very like another roll of their beloved hero-martyr trope.
Every generation is allowed its Tony Benn, Bernie Sanders or whoever.They’re allowed to speak the truth, to be the maverick, within well defined limits because this shows everyone how democratic and tolerant they are. Usually they’re not allowed near the levers of power but its always tempting to let them if they’re popular enough — and right wing enough — to win elections. This never turns out well (BoJo in the UK, Trump in the US) because often they become monsters, they believe their own hype (worst case scenario is Hitler, of course).
Recommended reading – “Let Them Eat Tweets”.
(Brand may well belong to that group that’s ‘uncommitted buy mercenary’…..I don’t know him at all but he seems more manufactured than real.)
Which is interesting because the victims of his abusive sexual behaviour said that his eyes went ‘black’ and he seemed to be taken over by a malevolent entity – so the Christ-like figure has now transmuted into the devil (and all of the con-theories he spouts are thereby invalidated). Some smart but pretty transparent manipulation going on here.