Jump to content

Russell Brand


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Axe said:

Bad morals is not the same as law breaking.  

 

Only one out of those 3 names has been charged and convicted of any criminal offence.  Everyone remains innocent until proven guilty in a criminal court.  

No no no.

 

Women are not vindictive or lie.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12529309/Lucy-Letby-maybe-murdered-THREE-babies.html

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/03/eleanor-williams-lied-grooming-gang-guilty-perverting-justice

 

 

Just two high profile cases recently.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

So Google / Youtube have got involved censoring and/or removing Brand's income.

Funny, I thought people were innocent until proven guilty ?

Google are such HYPOCRITES.

 

They remove Brand's income, even though someone is supposed to innocent until proven guilty, yet they allow websites on there which charge for Australian Visas even though they are issued free by the Australian Govt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chekhov said:

Google are such HYPOCRITES.

 

They remove Brand's income, even though someone is supposed to innocent until proven guilty, yet they allow websites on there which charge for Australian Visas even though they are issued free by the Australian Govt.

Absolutely disgraceful and yet people will be happy about this.

 

No surprise though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Prettytom said:

Chekhov said:
Google are such HYPOCRITES.

They remove Brand's income, even though someone is supposed to innocent until proven guilty, yet they allow websites on there which charge for Australian Visas even though they are issued free by the Australian Govt.<<

 

That’s a very niche observation.

You are becoming beyond parody.

It's fair comment.

Google are world class virtue signallers (remember that ludicrous advert for their "Family site" ? ), yet they are also world class hypocrites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

Do you think YouTube are correct in cutting off someone's income even though at present they are innocent?

I didn’t offer a comment on that. I was merely questioning Checkers attempting to promote an equivalence between that and his own lack of awareness.

 

Youtube are a private company. They can do as they wish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.