Russell Brand is a Bellend: More evidence.

[crankedup]

Mr Whippy said:

He might be a tit, he may not even articulate himself very much, but no one would make a tt out of themselves unless they felt strongly about something.

I think he has valid concerns about where society might be heading so there is nothing wrong with him airing them.

The danger is if he takes too much advice on how to come across, he'll just come across about as vanilla as David Cameron or one of the Balls brothers and say nothing with a lot of similarly large words.

But I do think he needs to think a bit more before he strikes. He could probably do more good if he did vs just running straight into banks.



And who gives a toss about the guys lunch going cold? Is he being serious or something? Or trying to be funny? Or ironic. It didn't come across but hey.

Dave

Agreed, the blokes doing exactly the right thing in bringing attention to an issue for which he must be passionate about. He is attracting media attention, something that requires ever stranger M.O. to gain the valuable air/print. He clearly gives not a monkey regarding how he is personally perceived, it's all about the issue. Its all bull and bluster tied in with being a celeb'.
Personally I dislike the guy following 'that telephone call'.

[fido]

Mr Whippy said:

Well we're meant to care about a man's lunch going cold because he can't get in his office because of another man who we're not meant to care about who badly articulates what he's worried about.

The lunch is a metaphorical prop (though having worked at both RBS and eaten at Fernandos it's also a very tasty one*) - the author is using it as binding material for his IMO cleverly worded rant at Brand - a subtle technique that perhaps Brand could learn something about.

• - the curry chicken is also highly rated

[paranoid airbag]

AJS- said:

Bit of a disservice to bellends. He's a dreadful individual and how he came to be taken seriously by anyone, even in the BBC and the Guardian, is a mystery to me.

Long winded letter but a very good account of Brand's M.O.

Is it really a mystery to you?

He annoys bigots. People who want a lefty figurehead to be annoyed by, because they don't have the intelligence to do more than hurl verbal feces at an obvious target.

Everyone else ignores him and gets on with it.

[Mr Whippy]

fido said:

Mr Whippy said:

Well we're meant to care about a man's lunch going cold because he can't get in his office because of another man who we're not meant to care about who badly articulates what he's worried about.

The lunch is a metaphorical prop (though having worked at both RBS and eaten at Fernandos it's also a very tasty one*) - the author is using it as binding material for his IMO cleverly worded rant at Brand - a subtle technique that perhaps Brand could learn something about.

• - the curry chicken is also highly rated

I didn't read too far into the letter. Sorry

After the first few paragraphs I was bored about reading about someone's cold lunch before he actually got to his point.


If it finally made sense then great I suppose. But he could have probably got his actual point into one paragraph by the sounds of it?

Dave

[Mark Benson]

Mr Whippy said:

garyhun said:

Mr Whippy said:

I've no idea.

Just saying. Most people don't waste their time for no raisin.

Dave

Umm... publicity?

He's an attention we.

But as has been discussed on another thread, he could make more money and be more 'popular' by doing more of what he used to do.

Why go down the path of being less popular and widely seen as a fruit-loop?


The fact he's done this suggests he has some alternative motive to popularity.

Dave

Nothing he's done so far has given him the amount of publicity he's currently getting.

He openly admits to having an addictive personality, he's just found another addiction.

[sugerbear]

First

"I'm not even an RBS employee, though I do currently work for them"

"As for bonuses, well, I'll be honest: I get an annual bonus. I'm not allowed to tell you exactly how much it is"

If he is a non-employee then why is he mentioning his bonus? If he is a contractor then he or his company will be paying his bonus.

Second, as much as Mr Brand does come across as a bit of a bandwagon dick, he does have a point about questioning why no one has been put in jail for rigging the markets.

[Dr Jekyll]

sugerbear said:

First

"I'm not even an RBS employee, though I do currently work for them"

"As for bonuses, well, I'll be honest: I get an annual bonus. I'm not allowed to tell you exactly how much it is"

If he is a non-employee then why is he mentioning his bonus? If he is a contractor then he or his company will be paying his bonus.

Second, as much as Mr Brand does come across as a bit of a bandwagon dick, he does have a point about questioning why no one has been put in jail for rigging the markets.

It's perfectly possible for an independent contractor to negotiate a bonus for hitting specific targets, or penalties for not hitting them come to that.

There have been jail sentences for insider trading in the past and there is at least one trader that has been convicted for rigging Libor and is currently awaiting sentence.

[Otispunkmeyer]

Brand. What an asshat.

[Corpulent Tosser]

paranoid airbag said:

Is it really a mystery to you?

He annoys bigots. People who want a lefty figurehead to be annoyed by, because they don't have the intelligence to do more than hurl verbal feces at an obvious target.

Everyone else ignores him and gets on with it.

Brand is a difficult man to ignore, but it is well worth the effort !

[Mr Whippy]

Mark Benson said:

Nothing he's done so far has given him the amount of publicity he's currently getting.

He openly admits to having an addictive personality, he's just found another addiction.

Really?

I imagined while he was starring in some Holywood films (good or bad) and going out with Katy Perry and being the 'good' celebrity who just gush irrelevancies all day, he was far more 'in the news', far more employable for future films, and far more acceptable to most peoples palettes.


Dave

[Du1point8]

Dr Jekyll said:

sugerbear said:

First

"I'm not even an RBS employee, though I do currently work for them"

"As for bonuses, well, I'll be honest: I get an annual bonus. I'm not allowed to tell you exactly how much it is"

If he is a non-employee then why is he mentioning his bonus? If he is a contractor then he or his company will be paying his bonus.

Second, as much as Mr Brand does come across as a bit of a bandwagon dick, he does have a point about questioning why no one has been put in jail for rigging the markets.

It's perfectly possible for an independent contractor to negotiate a bonus for hitting specific targets, or penalties for not hitting them come to that.

There have been jail sentences for insider trading in the past and there is at least one trader that has been convicted for rigging Libor and is currently awaiting sentence.

This every day of the week.

Those that are getting punished never really make the front page of the papers, so joe public assumes everyone got away with it, when in reality they didn't and are being suitably punished.

All joe public sees is bankers bonuses and the crisis, when in actual fact those getting the stupid large bonuses had very little to do with the crisis other than working for a bank/hedge fund and therefore are deemed to be evil bankers who must give their salary over as anyone can do their job and screw up as good as them. They didn't and are getting penalised for it, but don't let that get in the way of how the spin doctors have made all bankers look.

[Scuffers]

true enough, the problem is that the real villains got away with it, specifically Fred the shred etc.

I see they banned the guy skipping rail tickets for working in the city for life, but fred's still OK to work....

[Du1point8]

Scuffers said:

true enough, the problem is that the real villains got away with it, specifically Fred the shred etc.

I see they banned the guy skipping rail tickets for working in the city for life, but fred's still OK to work....

Not sure what you mean, I didn't think he worked in Finance anymore and has disappeared after being kicked out of RBS, then by his wife, losing his knighthood and not doing anything since.

[fido]

Scuffers said:

true enough, the problem is that the real villains got away with it, specifically Fred the shred etc.

What did he get away with it? Did he break any laws? If not what laws could we change to compensate for this? And if there is a law for bad bankers then what about bad chancellors or even a PM who handed over financial regulation to a toothless FSA (cough Gordon) This is why I tire of the guff that Brand spouts - simplistic sound bytes that don't really help anyone. This is what Pasta Man was alluding to.

Edited by fido on Thursday 18th December 15:38

[Scuffers]

fido said:

Scuffers said:

true enough, the problem is that the real villains got away with it, specifically Fred the shred etc.

What did he get away with it? Did he break any laws? If not what laws could we change to compensate for this? And if there is a law for bad bankers then what about bad chancellors or even PMs (cough Gordon) This is why I tire of the guff that Brand spouts - simplistic sound bytes that don't really help anyone.

that's a good question.

did he break any law's?

to be honest, I am sure if somebody was motivated to look hard enough though his management of RBS, I am pretty sure he (and the board) crossed the line a few times, but with the as was FSA being about as much use as a chocolate kettle, it's a moot point.

[supersingle]

Russell Brand is doing the whole anticapitalist thing 'cos it impresses naive young girls and helps him get in their knickers.

With people like Brand it's all vanity, nothing more. One look at him is enough to know what a preening, self-obsessed narcisist he is.

[durbster]

Du1point8 said:

This every day of the week.

Those that are getting punished never really make the front page of the papers, so joe public assumes everyone got away with it, when in reality they didn't and are being suitably punished.

OK, so who has been punished for the financial crisis, and how? I don't mean that provocatively, I'm just curious because it seems nobody has been held accountable.

The bottom line here is, Brand is touting a view that isn't represented by any of the political parties. Democracy needs an alternative view and all we have had on offer for a long time is two and a half shades of grey. The lack of appeal of the main parties gives rise to more extreme parties like UKIP, which will undoubtedly lead to a similarly unhinged party on the other side of the political spectrum.

I can't say I agree with Brand and he's plain wrong about voting, but a lot of the other questions he's asking need to be said by somebody, and very few of our MPs or media are asking them on our behalf.

The simple fact The Sun is so desperately (and quite pathetically) attempting to smear him suggests what he's saying is of interest. If it was just groundless ramblings it would never make the front page of Murdoch's flagship paper.

[Du1point8]

Scuffers said:

fido said:

Scuffers said:

true enough, the problem is that the real villains got away with it, specifically Fred the shred etc.

What did he get away with it? Did he break any laws? If not what laws could we change to compensate for this? And if there is a law for bad bankers then what about bad chancellors or even PMs (cough Gordon) This is why I tire of the guff that Brand spouts - simplistic sound bytes that don't really help anyone.

that's a good question.

did he break any law's?

to be honest, I am sure if somebody was motivated to look hard enough though his management of RBS, I am pretty sure he (and the board) crossed the line a few times, but with the as was FSA being about as much use as a chocolate kettle, it's a moot point.

The only thing he really did wrong was not doing enough analyst of the risk, or overriding the people in the risk department with regards to ABN merger, then not wondering why Barclays ran away from the deal as fast as possible when they worked out it was just toxic debt.

However that is not illegal in itself, just bad luck, but then you could say Alistair Darling is at fault too.

Alistair Darling, as Chancellor in conjunction with the FSA, signed off the RBS takeover of ABN Amro. This, according to reports, squeezed the bank’s capital buffers and exposed RBS to more troubled loans and toxic debt. Why was Treasury scrutiny of the takeover so poor?

So blame Fred as much as you like, but Alistair and the FSA looked the whole thing over before it exploded.

[griffin dai]

Guys a right cock end. I think he's just after as much publicity as he can get, because let's face it...he's nobody really and easily forgotten. Just another st comedian who's past it.

[Rude-boy]

supersingle said:

Russell Brand is doing the whole anticapitalist thing 'cos it impresses naive young girls and helps him get in their knickers.

With people like Brand it's all vanity, nothing more. One look at him is enough to know what a preening, self-obsessed narcisist he is.

Whilst I think that even Brand has got past the 'doing for the cludge' stage (I am sure he has hot and cold running fillies if he wishes these days, regardless) I think that you have hit the nail on the head re vanity.

Brand could not give a st about the common man or the evil bankers or any of the people who he fights or fights for. Brand is all about Brand and fk the rest of the World. He strikes me as the sort who, if he thought that it would advance his profile and be a good career move, would set light to a homeless shelter and beat up puppies.

An odious man with little or no redeeming qualities.

Jeez, he even manages to make Ben Elton look good.