How did they know my major in college was Computer Information Systems?
Meme Thread for Both Posting and Discussing Memes
- Thread starter Captain X
- Start date
Blasterbot
Well-known member
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
mrttao
Well-known member
twatter did recently declare it to be a slur
everywhere else is fair game though
Idk where to really put this other than memes because it's so silly
But they're still talking about this fight. Elon is working out with some dumbells at the office, while Zuck has been actually training MMA for I think over a year now.
I really, really hope this fight happens. I like Elon more than Zuck, but holy shit he's going to get manhandled. It'll he hilarious to watch.
notthebee.com
But they're still talking about this fight. Elon is working out with some dumbells at the office, while Zuck has been actually training MMA for I think over a year now.
I really, really hope this fight happens. I like Elon more than Zuck, but holy shit he's going to get manhandled. It'll he hilarious to watch.
WE HAVE A MAJOR ESCALATION IN THE MUSK VS. ZUCK BEEF/CAGE FIGHT
Ladies, gentlemen, and fight fans around the world, I interrupt your hopefully pleasant Sunday evening to bring news of a major escalation in the 12-figure-club beef between the world's richest man, Elon Musk (net worth $233 billion) in the Twitter corner, and his foe, in the Meta corner, the...
notthebee.com
Blasterbot
Well-known member
I like how he used X and not threads for his sniping.
Whose the guy on the bottom, for those of us who don’t know?
Andrew Tate.
Huh. Barely looks like the images I’ve seen of him.
Did he actually say something like that? I know I’ve heard that the media has unkind stuff to say about him; but then, the media isn’t particularly kind to anyone whose not onboard with their bullshit. So it’s kind of hard to keep track of it all.
mrttao
Well-known member
> Trafficking
Stop misusing words like this. When you misuse words they lose their meaning and get diluted. We saw this with metoo and other movement. We saw this with amber alerts for parental custody battles. People stop giving a fuck if you misuse and mislabel a serious crime to attack people at random.
Epstein (man on top left) bought slave girls under 10 year old and forced them to work as prostitute in his island brothel where the rich and powerful raped them.
Tate (man on bottom right) hired adult women to do only fans and then engaged in tax evasion.
Some lawyers are arguing that "technically speaking according to the law in romania tax evasion in a legal sex business business counts as sex trafficking" (it looks like a total stretch of the definition. but that is what they are arguing)
Nah, he is a human trafficker, using the loverboy method. He talks about it himself. I agree with not trusting the media, but then just because the media says someone is bad doesn't mean that person is good either. Because then that's another way the media can control people: trying to force people who disagree with them into holding stupid positions, so they can discredit all of their positions by pointing at the stupid ones.
No. He both conned girls and intimidated them into staying with him (he's on record admitting to this stuff). He very likely raped them (multiple women have accused him of this, and with the rest of the info, it fits fairly well), and basically acted like any normal sorta pimp.
He's not just being accused of simply doing tax evasion.
Some examples such as this:
Show the proof. You only really need to listen to the parts where Tate talks. His part about girls not being allowed out? That's trafficking.
mrttao
Well-known member
He is not on record for admitting any of this.
"If you want me to marry you, you have to do X" is not "intimidation".
Tate acted like a scumbag. But don't go making up shit
MSM repeatedly states as such.
Yet after so many years, as of today we still have exactly 0 women who pressed charges of rape against him.
This video is a highly edited hit piece and it fails to show tate admitting to any of that.
TLDR:
video is mostly just reading accusations. its concrete bit is at 11:00 mark where it shows highly edited chat transcripts of a girl saying:
> tate is a trafficker
> the other girls are all brainwashed
> I am safe to talk
> I am just going to grab another girl and leave
and then she does.
followed by a snippet of tate saying the girl are not allowed to go out, which he clarifies means "no clubbing, no restaurants, nothing".
it tries to tie the two together to mean he literally imprisoned girls in a building.
but as the transcripts show the girl just left. the only chains holding her back were "brainwashing".
specifically he promised to marry them and said he will not marry them if they do not do as he says.
It flips between the video maker reading articles that claim that tate did XYZ. (tate did intimidation, rape, coercion, blah blah blah) is just an article.
Then cutting to videos of tate admitting to completely different things. (seducing women, being a controlling boyfriend, and then convincing them them to work for him as eSluts to get simp donation money). scumbag behavior that is not illegal.
The most solid bit in the video is the part where, as you say "not allowed out is trafficking"...
This happens at around the 11:00 mark in the video.
the problem is that this is not true. Whether "not allowed out" is trafficking depends entirely on how he enforces "not allowed out"
Trafficking: "I am physically locking you in this house and will harm you if you leave"
Not Trafficking: "If you want me to marry you you will not go clubbing and restaurants. I will break off this engagement and find another girl"
This is controlling fiance/boyfriend, not human trafficking.
The woman can choose to end the relationship if she finds the terms unacceptable.
In the line where he said "not allowed out" he explicitly clarifies that means "no restaurants, no clubs, nothing". "Going out" is a turn a phrase which means "going on dates" or "going clubbing"
The video you linked only and most damning moment is where they show messages where a girl was chatting with her parents.
The girl texts her parents that "the other girls here are brainwashed".
So... she just grabs another girl and leaves.
Here is the thing, if the tates were really traffickers. Then people have been going about proving it in all the wrong ways.
Every so called proof I have seen so far made the proovers look like clowns with an agenda.
Also when showing the messages that "prove" trafficking that video censors the messages above and below the part that they want to show.
instead of highlighting the parts they do want you to focus on but letting you see the whole thing.
Also, fail to link to the full transcript.
Then cutting to videos of tate admitting to completely different things. (seducing women, being a controlling boyfriend, and then convincing them them to work for him as eSluts to get simp donation money). scumbag behavior that is not illegal.
The most solid bit in the video is the part where, as you say "not allowed out is trafficking"...
This happens at around the 11:00 mark in the video.
the problem is that this is not true. Whether "not allowed out" is trafficking depends entirely on how he enforces "not allowed out"
Trafficking: "I am physically locking you in this house and will harm you if you leave"
Not Trafficking: "If you want me to marry you you will not go clubbing and restaurants. I will break off this engagement and find another girl"
This is controlling fiance/boyfriend, not human trafficking.
The woman can choose to end the relationship if she finds the terms unacceptable.
In the line where he said "not allowed out" he explicitly clarifies that means "no restaurants, no clubs, nothing". "Going out" is a turn a phrase which means "going on dates" or "going clubbing"
The video you linked only and most damning moment is where they show messages where a girl was chatting with her parents.
The girl texts her parents that "the other girls here are brainwashed".
So... she just grabs another girl and leaves.
Here is the thing, if the tates were really traffickers. Then people have been going about proving it in all the wrong ways.
Every so called proof I have seen so far made the proovers look like clowns with an agenda.
Also when showing the messages that "prove" trafficking that video censors the messages above and below the part that they want to show.
instead of highlighting the parts they do want you to focus on but letting you see the whole thing.
Also, fail to link to the full transcript.
Last edited:
mrttao
Well-known member
According to legal analysis videos I have seen by real lawyers going over his current indictment.
He is currently being indicted over "tax evasion therefore trafficker" argument.
You are confusing "media accusations" with "trial accusations"
mrttao
Well-known member
Funniest part is... I think all pornographers should be in jail for the crime of corrupting the youth with pornography. This includes tate too.
I am in this very awkward position where I am forced to defend someone I think needs to be in jail. Because what I think he should be in jail for is not a crime, I think it should be a crime, but it isn't. Instead he is being accused of a variety of things by people who keep on undermining themselves with their attack pieces.
I am in this very awkward position where I am forced to defend someone I think needs to be in jail. Because what I think he should be in jail for is not a crime, I think it should be a crime, but it isn't. Instead he is being accused of a variety of things by people who keep on undermining themselves with their attack pieces.
mrttao
Well-known member
Hmm. you know. what I am really getting here is that rather than a human trafficking ring. Tate formed a cult.
Cults are not a legally defined term. While cults can engage in illegal behavior, the cult itself part is not illegal.
If the cult murders those who break their tenants, or pairs up adults with children. then it is breaking the law. But if the cult is just insisting members cut off outsider contact and excommunicates those who break their rules, then it is perfectly legal.
Cults are not a legally defined term. While cults can engage in illegal behavior, the cult itself part is not illegal.
If the cult murders those who break their tenants, or pairs up adults with children. then it is breaking the law. But if the cult is just insisting members cut off outsider contact and excommunicates those who break their rules, then it is perfectly legal.
Agent23
Ни шагу назад!
That would make every single person involved in porn that is not the pornstars themselves be involved in "trafficking".
Also, hooking is kinda legal in a few places.
And we have shit like that sugar baby website, too.
Last edited: