Russell Brand

[Hoonercat]

No, I'm not talking about putting boots on the ground, I'm talking about the hardened stance he is taking with Russia.

Yes you are. You may try and back-pedal here but your response is above

My response was to you mentioning Biden going 'off-script' and his rhetoric towards Putin. I mentioned both Germany and France as examples of leaders showing weakness towards Putin, as well as former Russian players stating that Putin only responds to strength, not weakness. You have somehow misinterpreted that as me wanting to see US boots on the ground, rather than me applauding Biden's show of strength. If I wanted to see US boots on the ground, I'd say so.

[mangocrazy]

Exhibit #1 - How to avoid justifying a totally schizophrenic position. Dismiss the argument as 'nit-picking' and 'vacuous' without giving any reason other than you're tired of it.

It is nit picking and vacuous for the reasons I detail in the very part you quote.

How is that "not giving any reason" when you actually quote those reasons you moron.

You really do have the blinkers on today. It's customary when attempting to bebunk what someone else has said to apply logical, resoned argument, not just dismiss those comments as 'nit-picking' and 'vacuous'. That is not the language of reason, it's just slinging epithets about. You actually need to demonstrate why those comments are 'nit-picking' and 'vacuous'.

Exhibit #2 - Take the argument back to your happy place by constructing an entirely fictional narrative that has no basis in anything other than the fruitcake delusions of your own mind.

I tried to write an amusing analogy by taking it down to a childish level even an idiot could understand.

I would have thought that should be perfect for someone like you.

You wrote a bunch of drivel that you thought was clever but was in fact an object lesson in how to crawl up your own arse.

[Screwdriver]

Well, no, you can't just brush it aside and quote smoke and mirrors at us. Like I say, mass conspiracy is very difficult to (a) organise and (b) keep secret. You can't censor all the people, all the time.


And yet you really weren't bothered when Trump was accused of very similar. Funny that.

In a sense I agree. It was difficult to keep it a secret but they got away with it anyway. Those people are in fact still being censored.

How do you know whether or not I was bothered?? Since you want to drag that up again, let's go, tell me what the charges were and point me at the evidence and I'll tell you what I think rather than have you tell me.

[Horse]

You "can't be arsed" to read my response
Well then what are you doing in this thread?

Not when it started with insulting me, no.

Actually, 'this thread'? Read the thread title. I'm probably one of the few who responded to the start by actually clicking the triangle on Brand's video, then posted based on that.

That you have diverted it onto the Bidens isn't my fault.

Much as you would like to make this personal

Yet again, my fault. As you seem to have forgotten - even though you wrote it - here's your exact wording, making it personal:

I am tired of these nit picking semantic issues you seem to have with my criticisms. As for the "content" of your argument, it is as vacuous and empty as Joe Bidens presidency.

If I've made a personal attack on you, whether here in this thread or another, please tell me where and I'll [almost certainly] apologise for it.

But as [playground mode] you started it, don't expect me to read on further in a post.

[Screwdriver]

My response was to you mentioning Biden going 'off-script' and his rhetoric towards Putin. I mentioned both Germany and France as examples of leaders showing weakness towards Putin, as well as former Russian players stating that Putin only responds to strength, not weakness. You have somehow misinterpreted that as me wanting to see US boots on the ground, rather than me applauding Biden's show of strength. If I wanted to see US boots on the ground, I'd say so.

Biden actually said "you'll see that when you're there" when talking to a group of US soldiers about the situation in Ukraine. I refer to that as a disastrous idiotic statement the WhiteHouse had to walk back (immediately) YOU then say it's a sign of "strength of leadership" which you go on to suggest is some sort of counterpoint to my argument.

So which is it? Idiot gaffe or sign of strength?

[Screwdriver]

You really do have the blinkers on today. It's customary when attempting to bebunk what someone else has said to apply logical, resoned argument, not just dismiss those comments as 'nit-picking' and 'vacuous'. That is not the language of reason, it's just slinging epithets about. You actually need to demonstrate why those comments are 'nit-picking' and 'vacuous'.

I tried to write an amusing analogy by taking it down to a childish level even an idiot could understand.

I would have thought that should be perfect for someone like you.

You wrote a bunch of drivel that you thought was clever but was in fact an object lesson in how to crawl up your own arse.

Again you have to revert to telling me what I think when you could just ask. I note also that once again, you're waffling on about Screwdriver and your assertion that "it's a load of drivel" merely to avoid having to answer the actual points raised.

[DefTrap]

In a sense I agree. It was difficult to keep it a secret but they got away with it anyway. Those people are in fact still being censored.

How do you know whether or not I was bothered?? Since you want to drag that up again, let's go, tell me what the charges were and point me at the evidence and I'll tell you what I think rather than have you tell me.

Lets not because it will distract you from providing even a shred of evidence about "the election was rigged". Everyone's being censored? Really?
Conspiracy on such a large scale will always be heard, it's not credible to suggest otherwise, you're just shouting random accusations. I'd -love- the U.S. electoral system to be shown as a sham - why not? What a story. But come on, at the moment it sounds like rambling nonsense. And made worse by Trump being at the centre of it - a born bad-loser - he was writing his losing speech excuses 6 months before it happened.

[Screwdriver]

In a sense I agree. It was difficult to keep it a secret but they got away with it anyway. Those people are in fact still being censored.

How do you know whether or not I was bothered?? Since you want to drag that up again, let's go, tell me what the charges were and point me at the evidence and I'll tell you what I think rather than have you tell me.

Lets not because it will distract you from providing even a shred of evidence about "the election was rigged". Everyone's being censored? Really?
Conspiracy on such a large scale will always be heard, it's not credible to suggest otherwise, you're just shouting random accusations. I'd -love- the U.S. electoral system to be shown as a sham - why not? What a story. But come on, at the moment it sounds like rambling nonsense. And made worse by Trump being at the centre of it - a born bad-loser - he was writing his losing speech excuses 6 months before it happened.

Haha. Another classic.

Def: this is what you think...
Screw: how so?
Def: not telling..

FFS.

[DefTrap]

Haha. Another classic.

Def: this is what you think...
Screw: how so?
Def: not telling..

FFS.

To be fair we started with

Screw: Here is my theory on why the world has gone mad.
Def: Show me the evidence
Screw: But they stole the evidence
Def: What the 10s of thousands of people involved either aren't telling or have been silenced?
Screw: Yes
Def: Show me the evidence
Screw: But they stole the evidence
Chorus-line: Show us the ev-i-deeeeence !!
Screw: But they stole the evidence
<Cut-to-the-audience>: SHOW US THE EVIDENCE!



Rather than attempt to add some effing substance, you've embraced the chance to be offended, What a surprise.

[mangocrazy]

Again you have to revert to telling me what I think when you could just ask.

I did not tell you what you think. That's just ridiculous. I don't need to ask - you tell everyone at great, rambling length.

I note also that once again, you're waffling on about Screwdriver

Referring to yourself in the third person? Bit of an affectation, isn't it?

and your assertion that "it's a load of drivel" merely to avoid having to answer the actual points raised.

There were no points raised. It was a rambling, hypothetical, stream of consciousness piece of drivel

And why are you still so coy about telling us what you regard as mainstream UK media? I've asked twice before with no answer. Third time lucky?

[DefTrap]

This is getting personal, calm down or I will be 'censoring' it for a day or two.

Mr Biden?

Seriously though, he's definitely monitoring this channel, I'm sure there'll be some evidence if we all sit and wait.

[KungFooBob]

So Brand has found god, got baptized and been reborn, leaving the past and all his previous miss doings behind.

Call me cynical, but I'm not convinced.

[gremlin]

So Brand has found god, got baptized and been reborn, leaving the past and all his previous miss doings behind.

Call me cynical, but I'm not convinced.

You reckon he's up for claiming asylum in the UK?

[KungFooBob]

He got baptized in the Thames on purpose, he didn't fall in off a small boat.

[Horse]

He got baptized in the Thames

Jeez! (sic)

With what the water companies discharge into the Thames, that's putting your life at risk.

eg
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68674088.amp

[MyLittleStudPony]

I'm part way through his 2007 book, My Booky Wook. It's really good. He is very funny, clever and honest.

[DefTrap]

He's having a funny old life, and is a dead-ringer for an early demise. Would it be so bad if he found God and sorted himself out?

[Taipan]

I suspect this is more linked too his addictive personality than finding God.

[KungFooBob]

You saying he's on the Jesus Juice?

[Sunny]

I saw Russell Kane last weekend. He described the three Russells of comedy (Howard, Kane, Brand) as being known as: 'Cross-eyed, Gobshite, and Rapey'.