Consept

4 year olds definitely have beliefs and concepts and an ego. Ego apparently starts to develop around 2, its not as concrete as an older person's might be but it is there. What OP is saying could be true for a new born or very young baby, maybe up until 1 years old. There is some research I heard where if the baby is with other babies and one starts crying, the others cry as they can't differentiate themselves from the other. Also as they don't have language or experience of anything they can't build up concepts or put ideas together. At 4 you would have at least some language and be have a rudimentary understanding of the world.

@Danioover9000 OK so give me clear examples where there were false stories made up about Tate not ones that you've made up as a hypothetical

I dont think you understand what the terms witch hunt and defamation mean - 'communication to third parties of false statements about a person that injure the reputation of or deter others from associating with that person'. I dont see what false statements are being said about Tate, unless youre saying the statements he himself made and were then reported on by the media are defamation, which obviously would be ridiculous. Witch hunt - 'A witch-hunt is an attempt to find and punish a particular group of people who are being blamed for something, often simply because of their opinions and not because they have actually done anything wrong'. Again we've established from Tate himself that hes done things that are definitely wrong. There are many other red pill content creators or pick-up artists or even incels that are free to create content and dont have cases against them, even if what they speak about is even worse than Tate, just for example Fresh and Fit, Pearl Davis even Nick Fuentes who outwardly promotes racist beliefs unashamedly doesnt have court cases for abuse or whatever else popping about him although he has been banned from youtube and other platforms. So Tate is not the victim of a witch hunt, hes feeling the repercussions of doing and then speaking publicly about crimes. Show me where in any media, Tate being accused of something that there is no evidence for him doing. I have shown you a lot of evidence but you just seem to be saying things without any back up. I have no problem at all with people serving their time or even repenting and then doing something positive, this is actually a great thing when it happens. Problem with Tate is that he was laughing and bragging about his pimping business on podcasts just a couple of months before he got caught. He has never owned up to what hes done in fact hes denied all of it. So i would ask you, if someone killed someone brutally on film and never showed any remorse and even bragged about it, would you really believe that person had redeemed themselves and could give out a positive message? btw heres some clips of Tate, ones from reddit so click through and watch, the other ill just embed, these are not even videos in the mainstream, they kinda went under the radar. Watch them and tell that Tate is a victim - https://www.reddit.com/r/Hasan_Piker/comments/w6jt5y/how_is_this_andrew_tate_video_not_more_widespread/ Notice that the girls locks herself in the bathroom Is this who youre saying is being unfairly treated?

If you watch the 52 minute clips of him saying his crimes, he breaks down in detail how he evaded tax, its basically through bitcoin and then also he said he lies to the girls about paying tax as well as other things so he can keep most of their money, in fact in one of the clips he claims he made 40k from one 'customer' and that he only paid the girl 1k. This is wrong, hes not been extradited because of rumour started by Adin Ross. What happened which i thought was clear, is that he was planning on fleeing Romania, most likely because he knew either the case wasnt going to go the way he thought it would or he somehow knew that England wanted to extradite him. The case in England has been worked on for years by a lawyer and representing the girls in question, these are not the same girls from an earlier criminal case that didnt have enough evidence to convict. Both of the cases are rape cases btw. So the extradition was planned or in the process ALREADY. Where Adin Ross comes in, is that Andrew, knowing that this was going on, was attempting to set something up with Adin to get some content out before he fled because he knows Adin is has a large audience. So he sent a text saying Adin should come to Romania because its 'now or never'. As Adin is pretty dumb, he read the text out which was basically saying that Tate planned to flee, this did get picked up as im sure Tate is being monitored, so with this they took the further action. Tate also has history in doing dumb shit like this because he made several calls in prison that were monitored and recorded him trying to get politicans involved and trying to shut down the girls that were speaking out. Im not going to go into Maximillian or whatever that guys called cos i know nothing about that case and i dont see it as relevant. What has been interpreted incorrectly? No one ive heard has said Tate had a sex dungeon and was raping on a daily basis. You say he was only a pimp, human trafficker, evaded taxes and money laundering for one i dont know why youre minimising that, courts take it very seriously and he could get 10 or 20 years inside if found guilty, btw this is some of the same stuff Epstein was doing and probably not to the same extent as Tate actually as Epstein was mainly doing it for himself. The 'mob' are not happy because of the crimes hes done and his influence on young people. You yourself would say he more than likely has done these things that hes spoken about himself, so if that is the case why in the world would parents be happy about a potential rapist and sex trafficker giving advice to their kids about attracting women? You can make a seperate argument that parents shouldnt let their kids watch him, which is fair enough but i can see why they would want to let it be known that Tate isnt someone you should follow. No one said hes raping daily, these a strawmen youre putting up btw, but even if he raped only a few times wouldnt that be bad enough to stop him from influencing kids? The new charges are not baseless and apparantly there is at leat enough evidence to have him extradited after the Romania case. I think you have some kind of argument to make against witch hunts, but this case is not the one to do that on. Tate has made himself famous by partly talking about how cool he was doing these crimes, if there is a mob against him it would be because of that. Any criminal that goes around talking about their crimes online will no doubt get a lot of pushback, should he literally be a sex trafficker trying to influence kids and no one say anything? Think about what youre arguing for.

First off theres no point in throwing in the other case for the purposes of this topic, might as well just stick to one. So the reason why hes getting investigated isnt to do with the public mob, the mob dont have the power to say someones guilty of something with absolutely no evidence and then the target get arrested, if that was the case people would be getting arrested constantly. You say 'invented charges' which is really key to your argument, as in, if they are not invented or if theres enough smoke to warrant looking for a fire then you dont have a point. One of his crimes was being accused is recruiting girls through the 'loverboy method' which is defined as - "The ‘lover boy’ technique is widely used by criminals to recruit victims facing economic and social hardship into forced prostitution. The suspects prey on their victims’ vulnerabilities, enticing them with expensive gifts or promises of a better life. The scam starts with the perpetrators approaching potential victims under the false pretence of wanting to build a relationship with them. Eventually, perpetrators convince victims to move away from or cut ties with their family. Once isolated, the victims are forced into prostitution to earn money for their handler. They are often kept in this situation through a combination of affection, violence, and threats against them and their families." https://www.europol.europa.eu/operations-services-and-innovation/public-awareness-and-prevention-guides/how-not-to-fall-for-lover-boy-scam#:~:text=The 'lover boy' technique is,promises of a better life. Now here is Tate talking about what his 'job' was - Here is Tate explaining why he doesnt use an aggressive approach to pimp women - This is the a report about the leaked war room chats talking about Iggy, Tates right hand man - "He gives the members instructions on how to take advantage of a lady by "reducing attention and noting if she chases" as well as how to "set up a "coffee date" and carry out a move to find out if she is willing to pay for our coffee and serve us." He continued, "After that it becomes a series of gradual steps to remove her entire support structure from her life," the BBC reported. 'Then we 'punish her for a transgression - real or imagined - by having her get our name tattooed on her, leaving her family's home/apartment/town/country, WebCamming/stripping/walking the track for us, getting us girls'. He then said to 'escalate, escalate, escalate,' the message shows." https://documentwomen.com/andrew-tate-call-log Now Ive highlighted that this is nothing to do with just 'immoral acts', these are by the book crimes, we even know the intention behind Tate and his crews crime because he was very proud of them and breaks down his thinking behind them, he even creates a course so that others can do the same crimes which they do Its actually incredible how unabashed he did this whole thing. Then to complain that youve been wrongfully targeted, im sorry but i dont know what world youre living in. Even if i want to give complete benefit of the doubt that Tate was just bantering and doing it for entertainment, he 100% still shouldve been investigated if he was talking about how to do crimes and saying he was doing them, that isnt unjust treatment, do you want the police to just not investigate these types of things? So to me the only people that can defend this are heavily biased toward Tate.

Great thread, well done man, if you think there's not a lot of people that will actually do what you did in their whole life so respect 👏🏾

Why do i have to condemn someone else ive never heard of? With all respect its not a good strategy to bring up a completely different case with different variables and use that as a defence of the case at hand. Even if a steelman you and say that the doc you brought up shows that that person was treated unfairly, why would that automatically mean that Tate is being treated unfairly? Why dont you extend that to Epstein, maybe Epstein was innocent because this some other guy was treated unfairly, i dont get the logic. But if this guy has admitted to whatever his crimes are in the same way Tate has and there are witnesses, essentially all the evidence that Tate has on him, then he wouldnt be being treated unfairly, if there isnt that evidence then he has. Do people make false claims online either wilful ignorance or actual ignorance? Yeah of course, but just because that happens doesnt mean every situation is that. If you look at the Tate examples that ive posted, which is literally nearly an hour of him admitting crimes up until just before the case, I dont see how someone can put all that out and then say its a smear campaign, if it is hes smeared himself. Also notice that hes now backtracked from everything he said in those clips, if there was nothing wrong with what he did, why is he now changing his story? Your whole point rests on him not having done the things hes been accused of but then how do you consolidate that hes said hes done all the things hes been accused of? The only thing you could argue is that, he didnt mean it, it was entertainment etc but then you cant blame him being investigated even if he is innocent. If I go online and start saying im going to bomb somewhere as a joke, I cant then say 'theyre out to get me' when the police knock on my door. But its very clear from the clips that hes not joking, especially taking into account chat logs and witnesses etc. Honestly speaking i dont understand this defence of him, i think youre too smart for that

Yes hypothetically if Romania made up something to unfairly target Tate then that would be injustice. But in the Tates case what are Romania making up? There's evidence of everything he's being charged for. The other case you brought up I really don't get the relevance. Who incriminated Tate other than himself? he was on podcasts just before talking about how much money he made from scamming guys. As well as all the historical videos of him breaking down exactly how he pimped women. So I don't get this injustice thing. It's literally the equivalent of someone explaining how they killed someone, teaching others how they kill, posting it all online and then saying its an injustice that they're being investigated. What do you want to happen. If you want to talk about injustice, what about all the women he's groomed and ripped off who by his own admission had never done any sex work before? what about the lonely men he's scammed out of 1000s? What about their justice? If any country saw this video below and numerous others after getting complaints about this guy, should they just leave it?

I was answering the other person in thread specifically so obviously I'm mot going to cover all angles of this in single posts. But to answer you, the whole idea of them facing injustice hinges on whether theyre guilty or not. If they are guilty then it's not an injustice how they're treated as they would be treated as any other human trafficker/rapist only difference with them is that they're famous so of course it's going to be more public. You can argue that the Romanian legal system is unjust but that's not an argument specific to the Tates as anyone that lives in Romania is subject to it and most of then wouldn't have had a choice to move away from it unlike Tate. If the argument is that they're really innocent but they are being treated as if they're guilty, that's fine. Except imo there's more than enough evidence to prosecute as we can see in this thread, however you want to spin the evidence is whatever but its still there, if it wasn't investigated that would be an injustice to the alleged victims. If Tate wasn't famous and in the public eye and this evidence was around for some unknown human trafficker, no one in the world would be saying this was unjust. @Ahbapx 's point of others usinh Tate for their own agenda is par for the course. Anyone whos in the public eye and commits crimes will leave themselves open for others agendas. But that doesn't take away what I've outlined in the first 2 paragraphs. Even if he was being used for an agenda he still either did these things or created enough smoke where people think there's a fire. My perspective is that he did what he said he did in videos and on his private chat, so imo he's guilty based on his own submissions.

Like these guys?

OK so you're saying that he could've exaggerated his talks to encourage men to buy, so that would be false advertising. Either way it's not great. But evidence wise there are chat logs from his war room chat, that detail how he manipulates the women to stay. He specifies how he lied to one woman saying that he's heard stuff from her home town about her being a sex worker, he said this is to cut her off from her support system. There's another one where he breaks down how he gets the girl to come to Romania but cuts off her money until she agrees to work on camera. He shows pictures of the girls in the chat, there are numerous chats like this. There are others in the chat that verify this as they are part of the chats. So this takes away the marketing element as these guys have already signed up right? Some of the women have also come out with testimonials that match the chats and Tates description from the videos. Aside from that just because they aren't in prison yet isn't enough to say that they're innocent. I would also argue that I am being objective, I don't think anyone can see the evidence there and say that he didn't do anything, I would argue that seeing that evidence and still finding excuses is heavily biased as if it wasn't Tate and you saw that evidence, no one would say that person's innocent.

@Ahbapx A good example thinking about it, is someone like John Gotti, he was part of the mafia and committed lots of crimes, but because he willingly became a 'celebrity' they went in harder on him, because obviously him being a criminal and rubbing the feds face in it is going to lead to them going after him. Now you could say he was used as a scapegoat for war on crime. Probably that's true to some extent but there is no way that the feds are going to allow someone being a criminal and becoming a celebrity. It's very similar to Tate you could make the argument that Tate is being a scapegoat but he has done criminal activities and he has put himself out there as a famous person, what's kind of unique to Tate is he literally snitched on himself. People get hung up on the, 'he's saying stuff that people don't want him to say' but this is a complete misdirection. The reality is it doesn't matter what he says, it's the criminality that underpins it.

Yeah you can make the argument that society has let down young men, I agree with you. But on a personal level he has not been treated unfairly, he has done certain actions which will receive certain repercussions. What would you consider fair treatment for someone who trafficked women, influenced others to do the same and then knowing his own history put it out there as a positive thing?

No one cares about his harmful and misogynistic ideas in a criminal sense. There are plenty of content creators with similar or even more harmful ideas who are still able to upload content on youtube and have no, as far as I know criminal charges against them. What he generally says is not the issue at hand and not why he's being accused of the crimes he has been, although it has made him more visible. Its similar to if someone killed someone and got away with it he'd probably be ok, but if he starting producing content and selling courses on how to kill people, it may lead to someone investigating him, it doesn't matter about other stuff he talks about, even if it is positive. You should also be aware that Tate in his pimping hoes degree, literally said his job was making girls fall in love with him to work on camera and then lie to them about how much they get paid. This is literally a crime and he's basically confessed to it on camera and posted it online. A scapegoat would imply that he's done nothing wrong, again he has done and admitted to criminal activity. Aside from the criminality, its highly immoral and manipulative both to the women and the guys, some of which he finessed 100s of 1000s of $. The implication your making is that he's done nothing wrong and because people don't like what he says, he's being persecuted, but the 2 things are completely seperate. Even if he said the most powerful impactful things, he has still committed criminal acts, he is being treated in accordance to those acts. If he is being treated harshly by the public it is because he choose to put himself in front of the public and become a celebrity. Of course if you do that you will receive more attention for better or worse. But everything in this situation has been his doing, as a chess man he should know that. I would have some sympathy if he came out and just said yeah I did these things and they were wrong, but not taking responsibility and him still believing he was right and is being unfairly persecuted, I cant feel sorry for him. Especially as someone who's so big on masculinity, a key tenant is taking responsibility for your actions, he just blames it on the 'matrix'.

Check the start of this thread to see what they've done. What do you think has been unfairly done to them?

Im not gonna argue whether theyre guilty or not as the courts will do that, i would say theres more than enough evidence of him self snitching in this thread anyway. What I was arguing against is them facing injustices, I have no sympathy at all when they chose to go there and insulted Romania by saying they'll just pay their way out that would literally be the definition of injustice id they did what they wanted to do and then to cry like a baby complaining about injustices done to you?? The thing is, if they never went to Romania and kept a relatively low profile, they would've been fine even they kept doing the webcam stuff. But instead they literally became as famous as possible and talked about all their crimes. The only reason why they've been arrested now is because they texted a streamer exposing themselves in a bid to get more eyeballs on them. For someone who proclaims himself as a genius he does the dumbest shit, he's like a villian who tells the hero his whole plan and then gets caught.

Its not so much what they say it's criminal acts they have committed. Also any injustices they've faced atvthe hands of the Romanian legal system, fall directly at the Tates as they've said they moved there specifically because they believed the legal system to be lax and corruptible.

@Reciprocality That's very honest and it totally makes sense. For the first time on this thread I've got a glimpse of you and I appreciate it

You talk about him like he's Jesus He made money convincing girls to love him and then sold their bodies online to lonely men getting them to fall in love with the girls. His message is anti-establishment and that a man should be strong and conquer, its not that deep

@Reciprocality No one said dumb down, Re-read your original post, I'm convinced no-one on this forum bar you can understand it. That's not saying people on this forum are dumb, that's saying it is incomprehensible. What @Carl-Richard was true, you have to be honest with at least yourself in what the intention of your post is, not just this but in general witness how you communicate and the reasons behind it. For example I would say with you, your main focus isn't to communicate an idea, that might be a secondary focus, but a big part of your communication is show how smart you are and how deep your ideas are. Which is fine all of us when we communicate have different motives that we might not be conscious of, I might partly be wanting to help you but also I might be wanting to win a debate and feel smarter and more grounded than you. But in your case I think you've gone so far one way that we can't even decipher what you're trying to say, in which case you need to look at, is everyone else so dumb or is it on me to really identify the reasons behind what I'm saying and how I'm saying it.

What word did he spread? Its not complicated what he says

This skit makes me laugh as well

its drawing interest because of how confusing it is. But I don't mean to insult you anyway, what I'm trying to push you toward is seeing how you could better improve your communication. You seem on some level to be a deep thinker, you just need to work on how to best deliver your ideas to other people's minds in a way that can be understood as much as possible. Some of the stuff you've written in the thread I'm not sure anyone in the world would be able to comprehend. Communication itself is a delivery method of ideas from one consciousness to another. The package you're delivering maybe amazing but it's useless if the delivery chain doesn't function.

At least you know how we feel

The British lawyer has been building his case for a long time and he has got evidence but it's a civil case so there won't be jail time. What im not clear on is when the UK case is done does he go back to Romania to finish that trial?