Comments by "dixon pinfold" (@dixonpinfold2582) on "Gad Saad"
channel.
-
70
-
18
-
18
-
13
-
13
-
11
-
7
-
7
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The source of my own doubt is that The Times tracked down hundreds (their word) of his sex partners to get dirt on him. We don't know what they said to all those women, whether they made promises of material support, whether they led them along with all the (female) rhetorical support they could muster, manipulated them, etc. — in short, whether they did whatever they had to in order to amass four accusers.
There's no doubt about it, they were on a mission. They assigned multiple reporters and spent four years on it, as well as presumably hundreds of thousands of pounds in wages and expenses (travel, legal, etc). A group that determined could probably nail Santa Claus.
Then there are the sheer statistical odds that some people who've had casual sex with a celebrity will end up resenting that person. Surely the tryst itself means much more to them than to the famous person, so that sets up a massive potential for resentment all by itself. Add to that the fact that Brand's political leanings have taken a turn from ten-plus years ago, which may add to any sense of affront. If you search long and hard enough you can probably find a few people that will say things that aren't true, people who are also intelligent enough to present those things in a well-thought out and credible-seeming fashion.
Another possibility is that some of the accusers are being truthful and others aren't.
It's certainly impossible for me to be sure one way or the other.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1