[arista]

[arista]

[arista]

[arista]

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

There's me. A working class lad from East Yorkshire being a part of Q and I didn't even know it. Thank God for you and your university education eh Soldier? Who else could have figured it out but you.

Who else? Anyone who knows anything about conspiracy/persecution theories, where they originate and how they spread.

Originally Posted by Alf

I haven't gone away. I'm still here I've just been having something to eat.

I'm going to bed now but am determined to find my original Q thread before I fall asleep.

I linked to it Alf. It was called "Q", in Nov 2020. It's right there. I posted the link.

You were right with your first instincts about it and should have stuck with them.

[arista]

More women
have gone to the Times paper


Ch4 have now remove all content
online from him

[arista]

[arista]

[user104658]

Originally Posted by arista

More women
have gone to the Times paper

There will be dozens.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

There will be dozens.

100s

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

100s

I was thinking a realistic figure of maybe 10% of women who will have had a notably bad experience with him, but then... if the tales of his exploits are true and he genuinely did sleep with 1000+ people... I guess that is getting into the hundreds .

[thesheriff443]

Just another media circus

[user104658]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Just another media circus

1) Yes, but

2) That doesn't mean that it doesn't have truth to it.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

1) Yes, but

2) That doesn't mean that it doesn't have truth to it.

The truth is worth nothing these days.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

The truth is worth nothing these days.

That's not true, I was going to vote him Most Missed Member but Kate says it's not allowed.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

1) Yes, but

2) That doesn't mean that it doesn't have truth to it.

Yeah, Russell has certainly turned into a calmer person these days, since he's sober, older, married, has kids etc but as much as I liked him back then as a presenter on big mouth etc it's easy to believe that he could have done that stuff, he was very blatantly sexual(not sure if that's the right wording for what I'm trying to say but you get the gist)on screen so you can imagine he was probably worse behind closed doors

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

That's not true, I was going to vote him Most Missed Member but Kate says it's not allowed.

Not remotely funny

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah, Russell has certainly turned into a calmer person these days, since he's sober, older, married, has kids etc but as much as I liked him back then as a presenter on big mouth etc it's easy to believe that he could have done that stuff, he was very blatantly sexual(not sure if that's the right wording for what I'm trying to say but you get the gist)on screen so you can imagine he was probably worse behind closed doors

He replaced a drug addiction with a sex addiction

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

He replaced a drug addiction with a sex addiction

Yeah seems so

[arista]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Just another media circus

For Sure

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah, Russell has certainly turned into a calmer person these days, since he's sober, older, married, has kids etc but as much as I liked him back then as a presenter on big mouth etc it's easy to believe that he could have done that stuff, he was very blatantly sexual(not sure if that's the right wording for what I'm trying to say but you get the gist)on screen so you can imagine he was probably worse behind closed doors

My genuine thoughts are that he was having so much sex, and (IMO) not-quite-so-sober as he claims (I think he was obviously off heroin, but still doing **** like coke and methamphetamines in the 2000's) combined with it being "pre-MeToo" when the "Oh it's just kinky rough sex" excuses still had legs ... that he probably just straight up doesn't remember half of what he did.

But for one that's not an excuse, and for two I don't believe for a second that he doesn't know and remember fine well a lot of it crossed the line in terms of consent. That he wouldn't do it these days really isn't relevant. And if he was truly a better man now, he'd be apologising for his past behaviour, not trying to make out that it's all lies "because Big Pharma!" and other associated nonsense. He's not changed that much. He might not be assaulting people any more, but it's all still mind games and manipulation.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

My genuine thoughts are that he was having so much sex, and (IMO) not-quite-so-sober as he claims (I think he was obviously off heroin, but still doing **** like coke and methamphetamines in the 2000's) combined with it being "pre-MeToo" when the "Oh it's just kinky rough sex" excuses still had legs ... that he probably just straight up doesn't remember half of what he did.

But for one that's not an excuse, and for two I don't believe for a second that he doesn't know and remember fine well a lot of it crossed the line in terms of consent. That he wouldn't do it these days really isn't relevant. And if he was truly a better man now, he'd be apologising for his past behaviour, not trying to make out that it's all lies "because Big Pharma!" and other associated nonsense. He's not changed that much. He might not be assaulting people any more, but it's all still mind games and manipulation.

Yeah I agree with that. I need to actually watch the show though to get my head around the actual story/accusations properly though

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah I agree with that. I need to actually watch the show though to get my head around the actual story/accusations properly though

The cliffnotes for most of it is that it's not really about him assaulting people randomly/who had no interest, it's mostly him being coercive/manipulative with people who were "at first" with him by consent, but not stopping when they said no, pinning them down and carrying on. They talk about his "eyes glazing over" and him being out of control once sexual contact started.

All of which makes it 100% believable even in terms of his own description of what he was like at the time. Instinct-driven sexual predator who stopped giving a **** about consent once he was in a sex haze. They consented to be there, the rest was irrelevant.

[user104658]

Oh and a whole several-month relationship with a 16 year old girl, who was there consensually but the whole thing is quite clear grooming. Honestly that was some of the worst of the accusations for me - and it was 99% totally "technically legal". But absolutely, shockingly gross.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The cliffnotes for most of it is that it's not really about him assaulting people randomly/who had no interest, it's mostly him being coercive/manipulative with people who were "at first" with him by consent, but not stopping when they said no, pinning them down and carrying on. They talk about his "eyes glazing over" and him being out of control once sexual contact started.

All of which makes it 100% believable even in terms of his own description of what he was like at the time. Instinct-driven sexual predator who stopped giving a **** about consent once he was in a sex haze. They consented to be there, the rest was irrelevant.

Right, gross but sounds believable as well.