GboroRam

He just loves scoring against Birmingham.

thing is - it's not really about a criminal conviction at this stage. For these women it's about being heard so everyone knows what he is
For them that's probably enough- I'm pretty sure they have never realistically expected to see him charged with a crime
The Time article is pretty damning - he's a rotten excuse for a man
https://archive.ph/gbfOP

My opinion on Brand for what it's worth is that he took his content in a very specific direction, which was seemingly at odds with his character at any time prior, in an effort to craft a very convenient narrative that he's on the receiving and of an establishment/media stitch up.
He has been using legal threats to stop these allegations from coming out, but he isn't an idiot and knew that would only work for so long. With that in mind, he created a persona and a body of content that very conveniently gives him not only a story to counter the allegations with, but with a means of income once his mainstream career is impacted by said allegations.
Any notion that Brand and his clickbait YouTube ramblings are a threat to the established order and that being the reason for these allegations coming out now is so laughable as to not even be entertained in my mind.

The Sun named him 'Shagger of the Year' in 2006, 07, 08. That hasn't aged well. 

This is fairly ironic given that Youtube as a service provider can act entirely at their own discretion. It's explicitly in their terms and conditions they can remove any content, at any time, for any reason. That's for removal, demonetisation is the step below that, so entirely above board. However this won't be done because they think he's guilty, they simply won't want to be associated with funding someone currently embroiled in a sex offence scandal... They'll act in the best interest of brand representation and it has nothing to do with 'guilt' or legal culpability, just optics.
So I'd just be a little careful criticising the logic of others when your own isn't watertight. 

Am I not getting through to you? Is it that difficult to understand?

Matters not.  His ads have been removed because YouTube has decided his guilt.

No they haven't, they have decided to demonetize his channel for the foreseeable, that's very common. YouTube has a duty to their advertisers and if the content ad-friendly, they remove ad revenue. This happens all the time with popular YouTubers. 

Maybe because Rupert Murdoch and his many organisations have whipped up hysteria against a rival broadcaster, so he can further dominate with his agenda. Just a thought.  

Sorry I meant 'yes'. D'oh!

Because the victim has to go through a degrading process in the investigation and court. They get treated as the perpetrator and assumptions about their character are made based on the way they dress, their history and lifestyle.

We'll have to trust The Met to deal with it fairly then. 
 
😄

It's the misogynstic undertones in that post as well.
'Women are nasty and vindictive, and if you do something to wrong them, they will destroy your life because that's just how they are'.
It's a narrative that you see quite a lot in the incel movement and in Andrew Tate's work.

It cost this fella £12million

I got confused, I thought Herpes were locals that helped mountain climbers on Mount Everest...I googled and it's Sherpas 🫢

I'm sorry, what????????

You don't seem to understand that C4 and The Times are just propaganda outlets. They have no more credibility than the bloke next door. 
What are the facts we know for certain?
We know that Brand has had sex with hundreds of women. He's admitted that. He's also had sex unprotected with prostitutes. He's admitted that.
What can we infer from that? Well I would say that there is a very high chance that he has herpes and he has passed this on to many women. 
If you someone has given you herpes you are not going to publicly accuse someone. No woman wants the world to know she has herpes. How else could you get back at someone who has given you this disease? I'm not saying he hasn't raped all these women but you have to look at all possible explanations. You can't take things on blind trust.
 

That doesn't appear to have stopped you

I'm sorry but some of the posts in here have me raging. 
It's always instantly defending the accused rather than sympathising with the victim, or in this case, victims.
This isn't just a small accusation that has no evidence, this has been on the cards for years and the victims are finally ready to come out. That's okay and if you actually listened or read any of the news articles, any previous attempts to come out, the victims have been intimidated by Brand's lawyers. There's no way C4 or The Times would have been able to publish anything without evidence.
For the past few years Brand has been placing himself on the right side of the political spectrum and has been going with this "anti mainstream media" view because he knows this is his best chance of getting some defenders from the public. When the people speaking out in your favour are Elon Musk, Andrew Tate, Carlson Tucker and Katie Hopkins, I can make my own conclusions solely based off that.  
Look at this from earlier on this year:

This is after a 3 year+ investigation with medical records and text conversations etc, this isn't just a small accusation.
Here are links for anyone suffering or has suffered.
https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/sexual-health/help-after-rape-and-sexual-assault/
https://rapecrisis.org.uk/get-help/want-to-talk/
https://safeline.org.uk/

I may need a lie down. I agree with all of this 😂

I can't believe how rude they were on the suppository helpline.

Harsh.

see, I'm immature too

It could be argued that we need to forget football for another three seasons while Warne is in charge! 

I'm convinced you must work in a Christmas cracker factory. 😀