“Truth? You can't handle the truth!”

[Funt Solo]

Russell Brand - right-wing propagandist, verbal idiot savant, sex pest: hear him!

He's swung to the right, has he? I'd totally lost track of him, but to be fair the last time I saw him on telly he was opposing Farage's racist bolloxology.

Although before that he was telling everyone not to vote.

For me, he's always come across as a charismatic moron who swallowed a Shakespearean dictionary. Quite convincing in the moment, but once you take away the flowery language you find his patter's shite, but he wears nice shirts.

The "don't vote" stuff was circa 2013 - and Brand keeps reinventing himself. As far as his politics go, I'd say he's just a messianic (his avatar has a halo) opportunist that rides waves. Right now, his YouTube channel (which seems to be one of his key money-spinners) positions itself (and therefore himself, as its mouthpiece) as an anti-media, right-wing, populist platform.

Look at the most recent few videos and you find him questioning 9/11, worrying about Bill Gates, slinging mud at Obama, worshiping Trump, attacking Kamala Harris, gently stroking Tucker Carlson, anti-vaxxing and platforming the Incel Emperor (Jordan Peterson). It's like pr0n for Tin Foil Hatters.

I don't think he believes anything he says - but it plays well to his viewers (average half a million per video), which translates into $$$.

---

As for being surprised or not at yesterday's news story - I was. From my perspective (and I mostly avoided his output over the years), he seemed like a charismatic lothario. I assumed that a) he'd be "beating them off with a shitty stick" and b) he'd be a relatively good lover.

Turns out he's (allegedly) a rapist who's fond of sexual assault, that enjoys spitting on women and flashing his colleagues. So - yep - I am surprised. (Partly, this may be due to my job - if I behaved anything like he has at work, I'd get immediately sacked and would have to find a new career.)

Naturally, he's now screaming that the establishment are out to get him - but it would seem like the reality is that some investigative journalists have worked very hard to expose the dark side of his powerful career.

[Tjm86]

The ravings in the Twitter-sphere really are something else on this issue.  I've never been a major fan of the guy and as far as the allegations are concerned, my preference would be for them to be properly dealt with in a court of law. 

At the end of the day though we know why that hasn't happened.  Aside from the most cynical side of this with journalists and their employers wanting to sell their wares, the judicial system in this country is pretty much guaranteed of fail the victims.

For me this is the real scandal that the whole sordid affair highlights.  The percentage of sexual assaults that get anywhere near prosecution is insanely small.  Then there is the way in which victims are effectively re-traumatised in the proceedings.  From the outset with the police through to the way assailants can effectively attack their victims again under the pretence of 'cross-examination.'  The argument that rape has effectively been decriminalised is absolutely spot on.

When you think about it the implications are terrifying.  It effectively means that for every registered sex-offender out there, there are potentially scores more that haven't been identified.  When you get into the world of entertainment or politics it seems like it is safe to assume that anyone who wields power / influence is likely to be a predator.  We really do seem to be living in disturbing times.

[M.I.K.]

There's something that's always stuck in my mind about Russell Brand. A few months before the whole "Sachsgate" thing in 2008, Brand made a prank call to an emergency rape phoneline, setup by police in response to a series of attacks in underpasses local to the venue Brand was performing in at the time.

Not only was it difficult for me to comprehend why anyone would think that was an appropriate thing to do, but it occurred to me that it likely wasn't even a spur of the moment thing, because he would had to have taken note of the number at some point beforehand.

[JayzusB.Christ]

As for being surprised or not at yesterday's news story - I was. From my perspective (and I mostly avoided his output over the years), he seemed like a charismatic lothario. I assumed that a) he'd be "beating them off with a shitty stick" and b) he'd be a relatively good lover.

Turns out he's (allegedly) a rapist who's fond of sexual assault, that enjoys spitting on women and flashing his colleagues. So - yep - I am surprised. (Partly, this may be due to my job - if I behaved anything like he has at work, I'd get immediately sacked and would have to find a new career.)

 

I was pretty surprised too. I remember when the Rolf Harris thing came out (which disturbed me profoundly, far more than the Savile semi-revelations), Brand was talking about how it was like someone graffitiing over your childhood memories, and I thought that was a very good description. Turns out he is (ALLEGEDLY) a massive hypocrite.

There's something that's always stuck in my mind about Russell Brand. A few months before the whole "Sachsgate" thing in 2008, Brand made a prank call to an emergency rape phoneline, setup by police in response to a series of attacks in underpasses local to the venue Brand was performing in at the time.
 beforehand.

Wow. Not cool at all. I liked his stuff at the time - went to see him once, in fact - but yeah, he's just another gobshitey-wobshitey and always has been, it seems.  Of course, we live in times when a proven rapist may soon be the most powerful person in the world, so who the fuck knows where people's minds are at.

[Funt Solo]

Well, if anything positive comes out of things like this it should be that we (as a society) recognize that there's a problem (that Brand, actually, isn't all that much of an aberration) with a system that supports the sort of behavior he has engaged in.

*Reportedly, a BBC car picked the 16-year old up from school and drove her to his house, when he was 30. And his management persuaded him not to go out in public with her. It may have been strictly legal, but it's not a good look for the BBC, and it's obvious the management team wanted to hide the relationship.

Anyway, in context, this is now ... something else entirely:

[The Legendary Shark]

You should watch the C4 documentary. He was surrounded by enablers, such as assistants who (allegedly) procured the contact details of Brand's choice of audience members for him and daren't refuse for fear of losing their jobs. At one point, there's a clip of Brand saying something like, "you can be as mad as you want so long as some people are making money out of you."

Whether the allegations are true or not, and I'd prefer to wait and see on that question, this atmosphere of entitlement surrounding the whole entertainment industry (amongst others) is disgusting. Brand is just the small tip of a very large iceberg. As I've said before, there is something terribly dark hidden in the depths of our society that needs illuminating with urgency.

Meanwhile, as we're all focused on this story, the official death toll in Maui stands at 96, while it seems that nearly 1,000 children are missing from schools. Where are all these children? Why isn't this question getting the same attention?

[Funt Solo]

it seems that nearly 1,000 children are missing from schools. Where are all these children? Why isn't this question getting the same attention?

Because it's not true (according to the same site fact-checking the wild, unsubstantiated rumors it published only a few days before):



(School enrollment being down is not the same as "missing children". It's a bit like panicking about a zombie apocalypse because the high street's a bit quiet today.)

Good to hear you're not going to jump to conclusions based on incomplete evidence, though.

[The Legendary Shark]

(September 15th).

You are correct, it seems, according to official figures the number is - thankfully - coming down.

I am intrigued to know how me asking where these children are indicates "jumping to conclusions." I hope the remaining number of unaccounted for children drops even further, preferably to zero. 191, though, is still 191 too many as I hope you'll agree. And of course enrolment being down doesn't mean anything other than that a number of children are currently missing from the records, but to intimate that you know the figures are nothing at all to worry or be concerned about is, I feel, an odd position for a teacher to take. If first 2,025, and then 1,208, and finally 191 students didn't turn up at your local schools following a horrendous disaster, wouldn't you want to know where they were, even if only to be assured they're at least still alive?

[Funt Solo]

Human-induced climate change (HICC) is the probable cause of the tragic extreme weather event in Maui that has left (according to the FBI) 66 people unaccounted for (one being a minor).

So, there are two points:
 - it's not 1000 (your first claim), or 191 (your second), but 1. I'm sure you will double-down on that, though.
 - the ultimate threat (HICC) is something you don't believe in.

But it was fun that you blithely accused me of not being worried about the plight of children. I could imagine a baddy character in a children's book doing that. Let's call him Willy Weasel. Can you picture him?

[The Legendary Shark]

The 191 isn't my claim, it's the latest number from the Maui authorities, posted 7 days after the FBI's list was issued. Did the FBI not pass on details (names, locations, phone numbers, emails, etc.) of the people they've traced to the Maui authorities in order to at least put islanders' minds at rest? Possible, I guess, given governmental inefficiencies. It's certainly more likely that people are missing after a massive fire that actually happened than in some fantasy "zombie apocalypse" that exists only in your own mind.

And sure, the "nearly 1,000" number does appear to be inaccurate but was based on more recent official documentation. Are we to believe that no official numbers are to be believed? Or only some numbers? Or just the ones you KNOW are correct? Situations evolve, numbers change. Even the 191 might (hopefully) be wrong. I even hope the FBI's 1 is a mistake.



You care less about trying to understand an evolving situation than you do about spewing out your hatred of me and perspectives you don't like, which was what your original Russel Brand post was about. You clearly wanted to use the Brand story to tar everyone who doesn't agree with you, or who shares a different worldview, with the same "bad apple" brush - your trademark ad-hominem nonsense.

I could imagine a baddy character in a children's book doing that. Let's call him Willy Weasel. Can you picture him?

Yep - 






Okay. Enough of this.

I asked you once in p.m. and now I ask you in public - let us stop this petty (on both our parts) bickering, it's beneath us both.

[Funt Solo]

Is it petty to post news about Russell Brand and what seems to be a litany of sexual assaults? Aren't you interested in knowing the truth about someone who purports to be exposing hypocrisies in the world? Isn't the exposing of truths what this thread is for?

Is it petty to point out the difference between disaster relief and conspiracy theories? Just to be clear - Maui is a shit-show because of an extreme climate event. All this bollocks about mysteriously missing kids is just bollocks. Two minutes of research outside of nutso-land will throw up the truth of the matter: people can't register at burnt down schools and are home-schooling more than they did before everything got burnt to fuck.

Is it petty to suggest that human-induced climate change is a bigger problem than some fucked up fever dream about stolen kiddos?

I really am trying to focus on the issues you raise - and not on you the person. You see this as me "having a go at you", but I'm not - I'm having a go at your arguments because they're nonsense. Not you. Your arguments.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

Shark:



Funt:

[Funt Solo]

I'd hold my hands up to that if I wasn't too busy typing.

[The Legendary Shark]

William Hurt: actor, wife-beater, structural engineer. Hear him!

Ad-hominem attack to avoid dealing with the film he produced.

Dr. Graeme MacQueen: Ph.D. in Buddhist Studies, Professor of Religious Studies [retired], structural engineer. Hear him!

Ad-hominem to avoid dealing with the film Peace, War, and 9/11.

Russell Brand - right-wing propagandist, verbal idiot savant, sex pest: hear him!

Ad-hominem to avoid dealing with what he says about things you don't like directly. If you posted it on your News channel, then fair enough, but you posted it here - because either you think the case against him is a conspiracy or, as I said, to generally disparage everyone who doesn't see the world in the same way you do.

Maui is a shitshow for all kinds of reasons - the emergency warning system was turned off because it's for tsunamis and not fires, so using it would encourage people to run away from the coast and into the fire(!); police blocked exits from the fire causing dangerous gridlock as the fire raged(!); authorities turned off the water to Lahaina so that people wouldn't hurt themselves trying to put out the fires on their own property(!); the US Coastguard turned away civilians trying to bring aid to the victims while FEMA was still nowhere to be seen(!)... All these, and more, come from people who actually live on Maui, not msm reports. Could they be lies? Of course, that's always a possibility. Could they be true? According to The Book of Funt, absolutely and positively not.

Who said the children had been stolen? You did (straw-man). I ask where they are which, for some reason, seems to you to be a question nobody should ask because trust the telly.

You never get anywhere near the arguments to adequately decipher whether they're nonsense or not because you fallacy your way into avoiding them. Why not watch the films and comment on their actual content so that we can debate it? Because you daren't?  Because fallacies are easier? You reject the meal because you don't like the plate, and we end up arguing about the plate instead of the quality of the meal.

Funt Solo: Pedagogue, master fallacist, comic book nerd. Hear him! (See how dumb that is?)

[Funt Solo]

William Hurt: actor, wife-beater, structural engineer. Hear him!

Ad-hominem attack to avoid dealing with the film he produced.

Attack? I listed his qualities and said "hear him". Next you'll be telling me he wasn't a structural engineer.