Romania Racism and Islam Phobia
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
231.73987
Summary
On this episode of the podcast, we discuss the ongoing investigation into the disappearance of two teenage girls in Romania, the lack of evidence presented by the prosecution, and the defense's request for the case to be dismissed. We also discuss the recent case of a Black Muslim convert to Islam, who is now serving a life sentence in prison.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
So you're saying they didn't give them the weaker part of the case too.
00:00:05.520
Right. So CCTV footage of, so CCTV footage, the imperative.
00:00:09.920
It basically shows, it'll give us a very good window into understanding,
00:00:14.240
were these women detained? Were they controlled? Were they let out?
00:00:18.800
It won't give us the full scope, but it'll give us a significant scope,
00:00:23.760
They also had CCTV in the house where the girls were living.
00:00:27.520
Wait, so they didn't include the CCTV footage that was actually in the house
00:00:33.680
That's right. And so, and the defense wants to include it.
00:00:37.200
And that's going to be, I'm going to explain why that violates other articles
00:00:41.440
within international law, which is then incorporated into Romania law.
00:00:44.160
I don't think they have to, I don't think there's an obligation for the court to include
00:00:50.480
To include every single piece of evidence that we would want the defense to include,
00:00:53.680
right? At some point, I'm pretty sure that their goal is to just balance out whether
00:00:57.360
or not a future investigation is likely to lead to some sort of criminal charge.
00:01:01.280
It's not to present the entirety of the defense's case at that point in time to see
00:01:05.680
It's just to see if there's enough to detain them there for the investigation to continue,
00:01:08.960
meaning they're going to begin to, or they're already in the process of subpoenaing
00:01:11.840
electronic records and devices and going through chat logs and everything.
00:01:14.880
And the judge, insofar as the statements he's released, has felt like there are
00:01:19.920
And I think publicly, I think we can all see that, that it warrants detaining them,
00:01:23.520
especially given that there are flight risks, so that the investigation can conclude.
00:01:26.480
And it might be at the end of that investigation that decide,
00:01:30.960
But it, I mean, I think right now, what we've seen publicly is we've all seen
00:01:34.160
there's plenty enough evidence out there to say,
00:01:35.840
it's probably something here that's worth investigating.
00:01:38.080
That's not correct, because the reason why they have this process
00:01:41.600
is because you can give someone who's been accused of a crime due process,
00:01:46.080
he's given an opportunity to present the evidence.
00:01:49.920
The reason for that is because everybody knows if you have a scenario in any kind of system where
00:01:54.960
the prosecutor only provides positive evidence to try and prosecute,
00:01:58.400
and he doesn't provide the evidence that weakens his case, you will end up in trial no matter what.
00:02:03.040
And then what will happen is everybody knows, even if you're innocent, trial risk could go wrong
00:02:07.360
Hence why they have these things in place to ensure that doesn't happen and more innocent people aren't
00:02:12.880
incarcerated. And someone, and I know you're from the United States where there's a huge amount of
00:02:17.040
incarcerations and more than anyone per capita around the world, as well as, for example,
00:02:22.560
in the United States, you have much more black people, Hispanic people, 300% more,
00:02:26.320
who have been incarcerated. So again, this is an example of another black man who's basically
00:02:30.000
being incarcerated in, sorry left, do you not agree?
00:02:33.200
I don't know. I don't think this has anything to do with black men or whatever that's being incarcerated.
00:02:37.040
I don't know why that's even, I don't know why it even got brought up.
00:02:39.040
Oh, it does. It does. Because basically you're ignoring the fact that he's in Eastern Europe.
00:02:43.360
It's a basically significantly, has a significant amount of issues in terms of race issues.
00:02:48.640
It also has a significant amount of issues in terms of sex trafficking.
00:02:51.520
Yeah, well, it has, well, and we will talk about that. But in terms of the significant
00:02:55.680
amount of race issues, significant amount of Islamophobia, you have a scenario where this country
00:03:00.160
has not allowed any kind of dark immigrants into their country, but now they've changed that for
00:03:05.280
Ukrainian immigrants and allowed a significant amount in, you've got a significant amount of
00:03:08.960
history of Islamophobia. So of course, when a man, when a black man, who is a Muslim,
00:03:13.040
gets incarcerated immediately after he's converted to Islam, I think-
00:03:17.120
How long has the investigation been going on for? Since April at least?
00:03:20.080
Well, they claim that investigation has been going on for April. We don't know exactly.
00:03:23.200
It's going to be interesting to see when the evidence comes out, what evidence comes out,
00:03:29.040
Just curious, is there a single shred of evidence to point to anybody at any point of this process
00:03:35.440
I've just explained to you examples of how Romania has demonstrated that. And also,
00:03:40.720
I'm going to demonstrate to you throughout this process how, for example, people are not
00:03:45.040
understanding that a lot of the comments he makes is based on his heritage, is based on his background,
00:03:49.360
where he comes from, something which I understand you may not understand based on your upbringing
00:03:54.400
Sure. So let me ask that, yeah, let me ask that one more time.
00:03:56.320
Is there a single shred of evidence that anybody has participated in any Islamophobia
00:04:02.640
Yeah, yeah. No, no. I've just given you an example of Romania having a significant amount of racism.
00:04:08.320
Well, I think it'd be harsh to call it racism, but it's a significant indicator.
00:04:12.720
If you're not letting people who are of dark color into your country, but you're letting
00:04:16.560
people of white color into your country, I think that says a lot.
00:04:18.640
Okay, so I'll ask a third time, and if you don't have an answer, that's fine.
00:04:20.880
You have no evidence of any Islamophobia or racism present in the Take-Ass, right?
00:04:25.280
You're telling me that the country as a whole maybe have had problems with racism,
00:04:29.280
but in this particular case, I'm curious if there's any...
00:04:32.080
Like in the United States, if something happens and a cop was racist,
00:04:34.880
we might look for like a statement that the cop has made.
00:04:36.960
You wouldn't just say that like, wow, a black guy got arrested.
00:04:39.200
That's racism, right? But you're saying that because he got arrested,
00:04:42.960
it's racism and Islamophobia. So I'm curious if there's any evidence of that whatsoever.
00:04:45.760
No, no. What I'm saying is when you look at the scenario, there is the significant issues
00:04:50.320
when it comes to the fact that he is a black man and he is just converted to Islam
00:04:55.200
and even incarcerated in a Eastern European country. To ignore that is ridiculous,
00:05:00.080
and I'll explain why. Because you may... Again, this is a scenario where if you ignore the issues
00:05:05.440
of race, if you ignore the issues of someone's heritage, which is happening a lot in this case,
00:05:08.640
because I know, and we're going to talk about some of the videos that you're complaining about,
00:05:12.240
then you can basically break it into the bare bones and look at literalism and convict anyone of
00:05:17.600
anything. But it's illogical. You have to look at the background. You have to look at the history of the
00:05:21.920
person. And in reality, when you take all them things into consideration, they have a significant
00:05:27.920
impact. Look, this is quite simple. Because you can give these examples, and obviously you have to
00:05:32.880
generalize them. This is a scenario where, let's be clear, it's a person who's a black man who's being,
00:05:37.280
again, accused of doing... accused of rape or human trafficking, essentially white women,
00:05:43.200
and being incarcerated in an Eastern European country without enough evidence. I mean, that takes me
00:05:48.000
back to, you know, for example, the United States, you know, when this type of things are happening
00:05:53.840
in the plantation and KKK. Okay. So we've got Romanian judges, KKK, Andrew Tate, more black men.
00:06:00.480
No, no, no, no. You can minimize it, but the issue is... Well, not minimize it. No, no, no,
00:06:04.240
but let's talk about this. There's a significant... Hold on, wait, you just said a whole thing.
00:06:06.880
Well, just real quick. Can I just make one point? Well, you say like seven points. No, no, because...
00:06:10.960
Basically, you have a significant issue where black people are being accused of rape by white people,
00:06:16.880
and it's happened significantly throughout the West. You've seen it now with Benjamin Mendy,
00:06:20.720
you saw it with Greenwood footballers who were accused, and now after losing so many years of
00:06:24.400
their life, they've finally been let out. So to think that this is not happening subconsciously
00:06:28.720
or consciously is an issue. Okay. So just this is a personal feeling that I have. I think that when we
00:06:34.000
pivot to other cases, I feel like it's because we know that this case is very weak. If you want to
00:06:38.080
talk about racism that exists in the United States or racism that exists in particular cases, I'm free to
00:06:42.880
do that at any point in time. But right now, we're talking specifically about the Andrew Tate case.
00:06:46.720
Andrew Tate is a man that has released an entire university guide on how to be a pimp,
00:06:51.200
on how to seduce women and get them to work for you, and how to sex traffic, on how to scam them
00:06:55.520
on taxes, on how to do all of these things. He's had charges in multiple countries relating to rape.
00:06:59.680
He's had charges in Romania now relating to his entire business relating to sex trafficking.
00:07:04.000
To try to hand wave all of this and go Islamophobia and racism would be okay if we had even one iota
00:07:09.840
of evidence, a statement that a prosecutor made, a statement that a judge has made,
00:07:13.520
uh, any, any type of evidence like this. But right now, we don't have any of that. So I can only go
00:07:17.920
by what I've seen in front of me. So then, then based on that, based on that, then you deny
00:07:21.040
institutional racism, because you can never have a scenario where you can have, use specific evidence
00:07:24.320
for generalization. But the whole point is, we use generalization to, we should, we should, we show
00:07:30.000
many examples to then say, look, this is a general issue. So that's the first point.
00:07:33.120
You might use generalization. If you want to talk about generalization, that's fine. But we use generalization to talk about
00:07:37.520
general issues. We don't use generalization to talk about a particular issue.
00:07:40.320
No, no, no. You, not at all. What happens is you, you use specific issues to create a generalization
00:07:44.640
and then said generalization is used for subsequent issues. That's actually how it works. In terms of,
00:07:49.840
um, coming back to the point, because you made quite a lot of points in terms of the allegations.
00:07:53.920
Again, because this is another problem what we have, and because we're on the race issue, let's talk
00:07:58.240
about it. So you have a scenario where you've basically got a guy who comes from Luton, England,
00:08:02.320
who's basically got a background in, look, he was basically, if you give an American comparable,
00:08:07.760
he's basically from the ghetto. He has a scenario where people from that, that kind of upbringing
00:08:12.000
are talking in very much slang, humor, ghetto type talk. Oh, I'm a gangster. I'm a G. I did this. I did
00:08:17.920
that, that girl, that, this, that, all that kind of stuff. So that's how they talk. Then to say, oh,
00:08:22.160
guess what? He's talked like that. Therefore, he must have done these things. He's calling women like
00:08:26.320
this. He's, he's saying that he's done this. He's done, he said he's done fraud. All of these things are
00:08:30.160
hugely problematic in the sense of you're basically removing his history and heritage. Now I understand
00:08:36.480
as a white man, you may not understand the background and heritage and these type of things
00:08:39.040
that he's going through, but the issue is that's quite important. Do you not agree? No. Why not?
00:08:46.720
Because me being white or black or whatever has nothing to do with him giving a detail. I don't know.
00:08:52.080
I'm going to be honest. I've only been in London a few times. Okay. Now I haven't walked to some of
00:08:56.640
the roughest parts, but I haven't, maybe there are parts where you walk around and they're talking
00:09:00.800
about how the top G's do tax fraud on their employees. Maybe that's just a way of speaking,
00:09:05.680
but if it is a way of speaking and you detail it to an incredible level, and you have a business
00:09:11.040
where you claim to do that, and you put that out on videos, on social media, and then you go to jail
00:09:15.440
for it. Yeah. You're probably going to get in trouble. Let me finish responding. Okay. Your entire point
00:09:21.200
that this is just a way of talking is ridiculous. It is absurd. He has listed exactly a step-by-step
00:09:27.280
guide on how he lover boys girls into his sex trafficking business. He uses actual prostitution
00:09:32.960
terms like bottom bitch to describe his relationship to some of the employees that he has. He talks about
00:09:37.760
bringing women into his, into his company to work them as sex traffic models. And then he specifically
00:09:42.960
talks about defrauding them using taxes to steal money from them. I don't think that, I think it's a
00:09:47.680
little bit racist of you to say that that's just how people from Luton, England or whatever talk,
00:09:51.520
or that's how they function. I don't believe that is the case. Okay. So I'll answer your question.
00:09:55.200
So no, again, your point is actually doesn't make sense and it doesn't follow. It's non-secretary,
00:09:59.920
and I'll explain why. The reason is because when you look at what he said online, again,
00:10:04.240
you can give the example of bottom bitch and so on and so forth. That's basically slang. That's how
00:10:08.480
people talk. And that's what you're not understanding. In terms of, let's look at your example,
00:10:12.640
which is completely ridiculous, because what you're saying is, guess what? He said this online,
00:10:16.000
therefore, he should be convicted based on it online. Well, that's the inference you're making.
00:10:21.120
Basically online, you gave this example, you said, he's trying to defraud them because online,
00:10:25.440
what he actually said was this in that video, because I know the video you're referring to,
00:10:28.800
he says in the same video, he says, I'm going to take all the money in the same video. He says,
00:10:32.720
I'm going to give 50, 50 in the same video. He says, I'm going to give 50, 30, 70, 30,
00:10:37.120
because you know, 20%, you know, I'm going to tell us for tax purposes, but then I ain't going to pay the
00:10:41.600
taxes. And hence why you're making the claim for fraud. The point is this,
00:10:46.000
from the court documents, which I'm sure you've read, none of that is in there.
00:10:51.040
In the court documents, what it actually says is complete opposite. What it says is,
00:10:54.960
and this is the worst one. So this is the worst woman. She says,
00:10:58.960
I received 50%, he receives 25%. So she receives double of what he receives. So that is nothing
00:11:06.160
got to do with or has no links to the video. And she doesn't mention anything about being
00:11:12.160
defrauded of taxes because she's receiving 50%. So what you're claiming is, guess what? I don't care
00:11:19.040
about what the court documents say. I don't care what the witness are saying, but guess what? In a
00:11:23.200
video, he said this, and therefore he should be convicted based on the video. No, there's only two
00:11:28.160
explanations for the video because the court documents don't add up to what the video says. Either
00:11:32.560
he was exaggerating and talking in this kind of slang language is what I'm trying to explain. So he was
00:11:37.040
exaggerating. Or it could be, which is a possibility that it was so long ago that he did engage in
00:11:44.000
those practices and no longer does. But what we know is in this case, what he's been charged for,
00:11:49.840
so what, sorry, what he's been held for, he hasn't been charged yet. So what he's been arrested for,
00:11:53.920
no one says that. Okay. So I'm sure you've talked to a lot of people that have only watched clips of
00:11:59.920
Andrew Tate, which is fair. And I think that a lot of people say a lot of dumb things about him
00:12:03.120
because they've only seen clips, which is also not fair. I think people shouldn't do that.
00:12:07.120
But I think you're relying on me having only seen clips. So you're trying to pass this off as
00:12:12.000
slang. When he used that phrase, bottom bitch, he wasn't passing it off as slang. He was very
00:12:17.280
specifically detailing, bringing girls that were in love with him over to dinner, where he would
00:12:22.400
introduce them to his youngest, youngest working, or one of his younger working models, a woman that
00:12:26.320
he met at 16 that had been working with him for five years, is now 21, and how he would use her to
00:12:31.280
mislead the relationship that they had so that she could get the girl, the new one that was brought in,
00:12:36.240
into working as a cam girl. This is prostitute behavior. This is pimping behavior. This is
00:12:41.840
exactly what it is. When he says bottom bitch here, he's not just using slang in a funny way to talk
00:12:46.320
about a girl that's a friend of his that also works as her girlfriend. He's literally detailing,
00:12:50.960
step by step, the process by how he would deceive and mislead, which are key components of sex
00:12:56.960
trafficking, a new woman that he's brought in with another woman. He would mislead the extent of
00:13:01.360
their relationship, and then he would use that to get her to go and be a cam girl. So that is not
00:13:06.160
slang. Right, right. Wait, wait, let me finish. That's not slang. You just talk for ages, but okay.
00:13:09.440
No, no, hold on. I didn't talk for ages. Yeah, I just spent like half the time. I literally wrote down
00:13:15.280
two points. I am going. I go nonstop, okay? So it is not a slang thing. Secondly, you're bringing up this
00:13:20.640
thing that the witness says they got 50%. That is not what the witness said. The witness said that
00:13:24.960
originally there might have been an agreement where it was a 50-25-25 split, but the witness also said that they were
00:13:30.800
randomly dinged for different charges that made it so that they didn't get that payout. For instance,
00:13:34.960
if you didn't stream the full 12 hours, you might be fined like 1,000 to 4,000, uh, whatever the Roman,
00:13:41.040
um, or whatever the Romanian currency is. And that there were a lot of things where,
00:13:45.120
because one of the claims was they had to work 12-hour shifts with a five-minute break,
00:13:48.160
and if they didn't work enough there, the witness also said that if they didn't post enough on OnlyFans,
00:13:52.560
they didn't post enough TikToks, that they also were ding their pay as well. So while on paper,
00:13:56.000
it might have been a 50-50 split, we have the issues where the witness is saying that they've lost some of it
00:14:00.240
due to being fined, and we also have the fact that Andrew Tate on video has talked about how to
00:14:04.160
defraud the women with their taxes, and we have another statement of him saying that he also
00:14:08.400
oftentimes just bills in cryptocurrency, which is impossible to track. The woman would have no
00:14:11.840
idea if she's getting that or not. Right. So again, your statement that you've
00:14:17.440
relayed is inaccurate. So the woman who said that 50%, 25%, 25%, she did-
00:14:22.080
Is there a way we could pull this up on screen, the document that you guys are talking about?
00:14:26.000
Do you know what it's called? It's on some website, Spice something. It's in Romanian.
00:14:29.760
Oh, it's in Romanian. Yeah. You didn't bring a Romanian translator? Are you even trying?
00:14:34.400
I'm sorry. I thought this was a serious show. Jesus.
00:14:39.840
So how did you read it then, the document? Someone translated it, but I don't know about that.
00:14:45.920
I learned Romanian. You learned Romanian? I have Romanian friends. You can also use
00:14:49.920
Google Translate on this other thing too, yeah. I'll pull it down, okay. Because we could also pull
00:14:55.600
up the video you guys were talking about too. So in terms of what you're saying, that's not right,
00:14:59.520
because the woman who claimed 50% never claimed that she ever got fined. I can say that without
00:15:03.280
doubt. What she's claiming is other women were fined and their percentage was much higher. So that's not
00:15:08.560
right. She wouldn't know. She would never- No, no. So she's saying, this is the problem. She's saying,
00:15:14.800
I never got fined. I got 50% because you're trying to make it look like this. And this is what you're
00:15:19.120
trying to portray. You're trying to portray this point. She got 50%. Then she got fined. So
00:15:23.840
therefore the percentage reduced. That's basically what you're trying to portray. Can you explain?
00:15:27.040
But what she said was, no, I got 50%. She never got fined. Other women who allegedly got a bigger
00:15:34.320
percentage were fined. That's what it was. That's not true. But I'm just curious, how would she know she
00:15:39.120
got 50%? Sorry? How would she know she got 50%? Well, she said she got 50%. I'm asking you how
00:15:45.760
she would know. How would she know if she didn't? I'm going by Andrew Tate's statements to figure out
00:15:51.200
what was paid or not. And Andrew Tate himself has said that he would try to scam the models. But I'm
00:15:55.040
curious because- No, no, no. No, no, no. This is the problem, you see, because again,
00:15:59.920
another point is this. You know when you said you used the bottom-bitch method and you know,
00:16:03.600
he used a woman to Laura and get another woman. There's no woman who's open till now out of the
00:16:08.640
victims whose information we have. No woman has claimed that that occurred. So no woman has said
00:16:14.400
that Andrew Tate took her for dinner, brought her bottom-bitch and then tried to lure her and
00:16:18.640
convince her and then make her go abroad. No one has said that. They all have said that they all
00:16:22.720
went abroad based on their own interaction with the Tates and there was no other woman involved in trying