"his recent attempts to out big pharma and those involved with the cancelling of voices that would try to expose what has been going"
Yep, this is basically the case that everybody questioning the "timing" has been making. But as I said to Paul:
a) there are hundreds, maybe thousands of people saying the same things as Brand.
b) it's not as if he was the leader of an activist movement that was changing things or rooting out corruption, all he was doing was riling up an existing echo chamber.
c) all of his "anti-establishment" videos are still up, available to view, he's just not making money from them.
d) this documentary was years in the making. How could it be related to things he's been saying recently?
Again, I'm not disputing that there's political bias in the world and in the media. I'm saying it doesn't make a lot of sense that he's the victim of it. Or that anybody was taking him, specifically, seriously enough to try to "take him down."
If you look into the groups that he is attacking, none of this is a surprise, anymore than the others who have spoken out and are getting slandered. If he is guilty of crimes, then he should be held accountable. I don't deny that. But then why were the claims against Joe Biden so quickly dismissed by those around him and the mainstream media? That was also assumed to be timing.
"anymore than the others who have spoken out and are getting slandered"
But who are we talking about here? Jimmy Savile? Bill Cosby? Harvey Weinstein? Jeffrey Epstein? R Kelly? Who did any of these guys "go after"? And if the groups that Brand was going after were so scared of what he was saying, why are all of his videos still up for everybody to see? This whole scandal has only driven more views to his content, no?
And what about the timing of Hillary Clinton's email investigation? Many people claim the timing of that investigation lost her the election. Given the margin, they might be right. Or what about the claims against Trump? Why has he not served any jail time despite countless claims against him? Many of which he paid off?
We can play this game all day, because, of course, there is corruption in politics. And rich people generally get away with crimes you and I wouldn't. But it takes hardly any thought to see that the claim the Brand was "taken down" because of his YouTube videos makes no sense.
Then we'll just have to agree to disagree on your last statement. I don't disagree with the points you make about the member of the hit parade you mentioned, but I wasn't referring to them. There are many who are probably as guilty as the day is long, and no, they were not standing for anything controversial. Likewise, I tend to agree with your assessment of the political sphere. There always seems to be an agenda if one digs deep enough.
I was thinking about others who seeming did nothing wrong except spoke out against big pharma, and government over-reach for instance. Many were de-platformed very soon after having the nerve to go against the narrative and the money/power junkies. Naomi Wolf as an example. RFK Jr. Doctors who spoke out about Covid misdeeds and the shots. They were silenced to whatever extent possible because they were accused of spreading mis- and/or disinformation. Brand has jumped on board to ask questions. Suddenly his past matters.
“They were silenced to whatever extent possible because they were accused of spreading mis- and/or disinformation”
Yep, happy to agree to disagree. I can’t resist addressing this point though. Does this mean that in your mind, any accusation of impropriety against someone who questions vaccine safety, and there are hundreds if not thousands of people doing so, is suspicious? What checking mechanism are you using to ensure that this doesn’t bias you against believing genuine accusations?
In response to your questions, the first is no. I don't think the people who question these things are saints, so people are free to challenge them. But they don't. They de-platform them. Where is the debate? Why not have real dialogue? What are they afraid of? As an example, all one has to do is study what viruses are for a little while to know there is something wrong with the idea that a virus desires to kill its host. At best, the experts didn't know what to do when the pandemic hit, and at worst they lied and are still lying. The shots don't work, yet they continue to say they do. Who is responsible for the messaging?
I think it's pretty much agreed that anyone who is guilty of the evils being attributed to the various people mentioned so far, should be held accountable for them, no matter who they are, or how powerful and influential they may be. Conversely, the accused should have their day in court to make their case. Right off, I would assert that we are not seeing that. We are seeing some get accused, and immediately found guilty by big tech and others of the crimes. Others are protected. Why is that?
Many in the medical/pharmaceutical field have been shown to be either wrong, or lying, or both. They continue to do so at the expense of those who believe them. They tell us to follow the science, but they don't do it themselves. Viruses are not new. They have been here, and will continue to mutate and be here until the end of time. Propaganda is sometimes hard to distinguish, but the general public seems ripe for the picking, and propagandist remain forever ready to exploit them.
I care about the truth, no matter where if comes from. I may not always recognize it, but I spend a lot of time pursuing it. I believe that good people are being harmed by those who are only interested in power and riches, and I believe that good people are trying to expose the others. They will be attacked for doing so. I believe we are seeing a lot that these days because these people are getting too close to breaking through the shroud of deceit. I'm not saying those pushing back are saints, but I will always question the timing of the decision to publicize their alleged misdeeds.
Thank you for the opportunity to actually discuss an issue. It's appreciated.
"his recent attempts to out big pharma and those involved with the cancelling of voices that would try to expose what has been going"
Yep, this is basically the case that everybody questioning the "timing" has been making. But as I said to Paul:
a) there are hundreds, maybe thousands of people saying the same things as Brand.
b) it's not as if he was the leader of an activist movement that was changing things or rooting out corruption, all he was doing was riling up an existing echo chamber.
c) all of his "anti-establishment" videos are still up, available to view, he's just not making money from them.
d) this documentary was years in the making. How could it be related to things he's been saying recently?
Again, I'm not disputing that there's political bias in the world and in the media. I'm saying it doesn't make a lot of sense that he's the victim of it. Or that anybody was taking him, specifically, seriously enough to try to "take him down."
If you look into the groups that he is attacking, none of this is a surprise, anymore than the others who have spoken out and are getting slandered. If he is guilty of crimes, then he should be held accountable. I don't deny that. But then why were the claims against Joe Biden so quickly dismissed by those around him and the mainstream media? That was also assumed to be timing.
"anymore than the others who have spoken out and are getting slandered"
But who are we talking about here? Jimmy Savile? Bill Cosby? Harvey Weinstein? Jeffrey Epstein? R Kelly? Who did any of these guys "go after"? And if the groups that Brand was going after were so scared of what he was saying, why are all of his videos still up for everybody to see? This whole scandal has only driven more views to his content, no?
And what about the timing of Hillary Clinton's email investigation? Many people claim the timing of that investigation lost her the election. Given the margin, they might be right. Or what about the claims against Trump? Why has he not served any jail time despite countless claims against him? Many of which he paid off?
We can play this game all day, because, of course, there is corruption in politics. And rich people generally get away with crimes you and I wouldn't. But it takes hardly any thought to see that the claim the Brand was "taken down" because of his YouTube videos makes no sense.
Then we'll just have to agree to disagree on your last statement. I don't disagree with the points you make about the member of the hit parade you mentioned, but I wasn't referring to them. There are many who are probably as guilty as the day is long, and no, they were not standing for anything controversial. Likewise, I tend to agree with your assessment of the political sphere. There always seems to be an agenda if one digs deep enough.
I was thinking about others who seeming did nothing wrong except spoke out against big pharma, and government over-reach for instance. Many were de-platformed very soon after having the nerve to go against the narrative and the money/power junkies. Naomi Wolf as an example. RFK Jr. Doctors who spoke out about Covid misdeeds and the shots. They were silenced to whatever extent possible because they were accused of spreading mis- and/or disinformation. Brand has jumped on board to ask questions. Suddenly his past matters.
“They were silenced to whatever extent possible because they were accused of spreading mis- and/or disinformation”
Yep, happy to agree to disagree. I can’t resist addressing this point though. Does this mean that in your mind, any accusation of impropriety against someone who questions vaccine safety, and there are hundreds if not thousands of people doing so, is suspicious? What checking mechanism are you using to ensure that this doesn’t bias you against believing genuine accusations?
In response to your questions, the first is no. I don't think the people who question these things are saints, so people are free to challenge them. But they don't. They de-platform them. Where is the debate? Why not have real dialogue? What are they afraid of? As an example, all one has to do is study what viruses are for a little while to know there is something wrong with the idea that a virus desires to kill its host. At best, the experts didn't know what to do when the pandemic hit, and at worst they lied and are still lying. The shots don't work, yet they continue to say they do. Who is responsible for the messaging?
I think it's pretty much agreed that anyone who is guilty of the evils being attributed to the various people mentioned so far, should be held accountable for them, no matter who they are, or how powerful and influential they may be. Conversely, the accused should have their day in court to make their case. Right off, I would assert that we are not seeing that. We are seeing some get accused, and immediately found guilty by big tech and others of the crimes. Others are protected. Why is that?
Many in the medical/pharmaceutical field have been shown to be either wrong, or lying, or both. They continue to do so at the expense of those who believe them. They tell us to follow the science, but they don't do it themselves. Viruses are not new. They have been here, and will continue to mutate and be here until the end of time. Propaganda is sometimes hard to distinguish, but the general public seems ripe for the picking, and propagandist remain forever ready to exploit them.
I care about the truth, no matter where if comes from. I may not always recognize it, but I spend a lot of time pursuing it. I believe that good people are being harmed by those who are only interested in power and riches, and I believe that good people are trying to expose the others. They will be attacked for doing so. I believe we are seeing a lot that these days because these people are getting too close to breaking through the shroud of deceit. I'm not saying those pushing back are saints, but I will always question the timing of the decision to publicize their alleged misdeeds.
Thank you for the opportunity to actually discuss an issue. It's appreciated.