Russell Brand: The Assange-ing of Alt Media Continues

Time to test a Modus Operandi of the state's attack dogs

UK Channel 4’s Dispatches is about to drop a “bombshell” that is likely to end some media celebrity’s career, according to other UK media telegraphing the impending UK media bombshell, in a UK media bombshell.

And so, the self-reinforcing takedown narrative winds up to be sprung tomorrow. Just now, Russell Brand put out a statement declaring that he has received an email and a letter containing a long list of disturbing charges regarding his past activities, as well as some “pretty stupid stuff”. He refutes the accusations and states that during his time in the mainstream and during his movie career he “was very, very promiscuous” but all his encounters were consensual.

VST is willing to make an early, high risk guess on this to test a theory about how some things in society work.

The risk here for us is that we’ve not seen the charges or the evidence at all, just Brand’s denial. Most sex offenders do deny the charges initially - just ask any British establishment media or political nonce.

Hypothesis

What you’re looking at is another attack on a media/information threat actor, that will follow roughly the same MO as the attack on Julian Assange. It will be executed by the British establishment using the British media as an intelligence service cut out, but the operation will largely be orchestrated by the US/CIA.

The reason for the attack is that Russell Brand is an outspoken critic of the mainstream who, by VST’s judgement, has grown into someone adequately aware and cynical enough to be on the money enough of the time, with enough of an audience to make him a considerable disruptor of state propaganda among the sub 35-year old audience, and he has increasing cross-border reach. Despite being nearly 50, Brand is still pretty cool for millennials and perhaps some of Gen Z, which puts him close to the youth mind. Taking out in whole or in part Russell Brand sends a message to the rest of the alt media that they can be touched too. This will have deliberate and rapid chilling effects on the weak and the gutless in not just Britain but at least other Five Eyes nations and possibly the EU, given its increasingly draconian media/information laws. Brand is less protected and likely less wealthy than Joe Rogan.

Assange was a publisher of raw, responsibly redacted pure source evidence/material, whose “opinion” or commentary - when he made any - was fully informed and unassailable. Wikileaks was never wrong and never published false information. To deal with that threat, the US hegemon used fake rape charges and torture for over a decade. Remember, fake rape charges were also used to take Dominic Strauss-Kahn off the political stage permanently. Assange couldn’t be taken out on information grounds, so he was subjected to fake sex crimes. Russell Brand doesn’t publish secrets but he effectively undermines the narrative and shows it up as fake, which is almost as bad as actually having receipts.

Russell Brand has made the mistake of being subject to British law by living in Britain, and is likely somewhat vulnerable to attack because of his past flamboyances, irresponsibility and outspokenness. In Britain, he has no real right to free speech, the media are fully controlled, totally unaccountable and have perfected the weaponization of rape allegations. The police will be fully on board and waiting to swoop in. The order of events should be a massive clue to anyone with a pulse. If he had lived in the USA and/or been a citizen there, he probably wouldn’t be so vulnerable.

VST expects Brand to now be attacked mainly on the grounds of sexual offences, which are likely to include sexual assault and rape. For these attacks to be viable, there must be a plaintiff/victim. These are likely to be located in at least Britain and America, which will enable two different versions of attacks and protections for victims to be exploited. Britain has now established a media presentation of “victims should be believed from the get go” and all media reporting against Brand will be heavily biased in this way. From the American side, exposure to serious civil charges are as damaging as criminal charges (see Carroll vs. Trump and Sandy Hook families vs. Alex Jones). #metoo could be pseudo-resurrected against Brand.

If this attack takes this form, there will be little to no physical evidence. Brand claims there are multiple witnesses who directly refute the allegations. The attack will largely play out in the public arena and media to spin a false “public opinion” narrative to wrap up the direct media messaging that tells people Brand is guilty of whatever he is accused of before any charges are brought or trial occurs. This will provide youtube with a pretext to erase Brand’s channel by Sunday to cut off his income. All payment processors will cancel him and likely some of his other banking facilities. This will leave him with Rumble and perhaps one form of payment collection system. He will likely have to go maximally to crypto (this is a potential weakness of the attack).

It’s possible that the British media will actually make tacit call back references to Stuart Hall, Rolf Harris and Jimmy Saville in order to evoke those crimes and the sense of injustice that Saville “got away with it”. Weinstein will be referenced in the USA.

The big problem with this hypothesis is the victims/accusers of assault or rape allegations. By default, this hypothesis would rely on those victims being fake. Well, we refer you back to Julian Assange. In his case, there were never any allegations of rape made by the “victims” and no charges of rape were ever brought. The state literally invented allegations and pressured the “victims” to go along to a certain extent. This was then totally misrepresented by the press to justify a manhunt. In the case of Russell Brand, it should come as no surprise if at least one of the women he has been publicly connected with features somehow in the story.

This attack literally does not have to get to charges or court. It is likely not designed to at all, as far as Brand is concerned. For him, the process is the punishment. The main bulk of the attack will be his deplatforming, loss of income, smearing, loss of audience, and the destruction of his time and resources in dealing with the fallout while prepping a defence. There may be one or two core, specific allegations around which many nebulous and “unconfirmed” circumstantial rumours of his behaviour and character can be attached without any specific or credible source.

If this was about an actual, serious crime, there should be no publicity preceding his arrest and charge. This is US lawfare imported by the Brits and evolved beyond Assange to shut down the alt media sphere.

The rumours around this up coming programme also suggest that others in the “comedy” sphere stand to take a beating. The implication is that people of Brand’s generation including Jimmy Carr and all the other state sanctioned BBC circuit comedians could be in the firing line for infractions of behaviour i.e. their off-screen/off-stage behaviour and opinions going back over a decade may contradict whatever code they profess to subscribe to now. This collective attack is already well underway.

The endless hypocrisy of the comedy class

What’s astonishing about this clip is that it’s proof that these people knew exactly what a woman was about five cultural minutes ago, and found the idea of pretending not to know hilarious.  

Dara Ó Briain has been quite the empty space to his former friend Graham Linehan in this regard. James Corden (full disclosure, the guest star in two episodes I wrote for Doctor Who shortly after this) has been conspicuously compliant with every new and fashionable ideological wheeze, as we can see demonstrated here.   

At times in the last ten years, I have felt like I am going mad. People I knew or worked with in this milieu, who were far more un-PC than me, suddenly changed lanes, leaving me where I’d always been but somehow a pariah. Ironically, I was mocked in the noughties by colleagues for being a bit humourless about identity-based banter that I considered ‘nasty’ and bad form.

The Spectator

The above clip is set to the sequence referenced.

What should be made clear here is that Gareth Robert’s Spectator article was not about the overt reinforcement of the woke agenda, as you’ll see if you read the whole thing. He was literally, as per the title, pointing out these people’s hypocrisy given that they have all since changed their tunes, abandoned their comedy mate Graham Linnehan (who’s doing the right and difficult thing fighting the woke TRA) and are towing the woke line now by their hypocritical direct conformance or silence. Gareth Roberts still recognises facts.

Now some might point out that times have changed. Oh indeed they have, and don’t we know it. But there are still two sexes, and no man can get pregnant. It is ludicrous to pretend otherwise, and ludicrous ideas are funny. 

Of course, these people know this now, as they knew then. Everybody does. And this is the crux of this matter. Because fair enough, you might well think that the ‘abomination’ joke was unkind and cruel to transsexuals and the real people involved. I suspect if I’d seen this in 2008 I might well have thought that. I do now – though I don’t think people telling cruel and tasteless jokes should be cancelled because I’m not a lunatic.  

But some of these same people hooting and howling in this clip have gone far further than that. They swallowed the big bitter pill of genderism – sex is a spectrum, it’s fine to medicalise kids who don’t fit into the cultural stereotypes of their sex, trans-identifying men have the right to enter women’s private spaces – whole, in one gulp. Either they celebrated it, or they pretended not to see it.  

If tomorrow’s Dispatches sucks in such people on the grounds of their hypocrisy re woke (and probably taxes), the pay out will be obvious. They will be the periphery targets in a state-sanctioned drive to cement the woke media agenda by silencing and enforcing full compliance across the light entertainment sector, solidify the BBC’s incessant re-writing of history and also protect and deflect from the MI5 epic fail that is Marianna Spring, who has recently been outed for lying on a job application while being heralded as the point man on BBC Verify, wheedling out “conspiracy theories” and lies. Edinburgh Fringe Festival is fully confirmed as having traded its fringe for a corporate power hairstyle and Linnehan was forced to do his show outdoors in front of the Scottish Parliament. In Britain, there is no more comedy so get fucking used to it.

This is the full on and concerted Othering of the whole alt media sphere, which tells you that the mainstream really is collapsing.

That’s our hypothesis. In less than 24 hours, we’ll see how utterly wrong we are.

EDIT: A reader kindly raised the question of “who is Russell Brand?” with respect to questions about his possible freemasonry etc, as raised in this video:

https://odysee.com/@FreedomFromTyranny:0/WHO-IS-RUSSELL-BRAND:5

We haven't watched it all but we will say this: whether Russell Brand is an op or not doesn't matter in the context of the above. His take down is the example/message, irrespective of what he actually is or how he was created.

The end effect/result looks the same: A popular seeming anti narrative “man of the people” gets shut down in a way that dumb people think was right, and less dumb people see as a threat made by the state to the wider populace.

We kill our enemies and we kill our puppets alike eventually.