Thanks for putting this together. Knowing what the worst accusations about controversial figures really helps get a good grasp of what the reality of the situation in.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I cut through everything in this write up, it all boils down to this:

• Andrew Tate manipulates women to fall in love with him, and then to make money for him

And the entire thesis is that "AMP" model can be applied to claim that this constitutes Human Trafficking.

Correct me if I am wrong in understanding the overall narrative of this essay.

Now take a moment and consider these examples:

1. A woman pretends to love a man, users specific techniques such as seduction, pretending to be pregnant, getting pregnant etc (fraud) and makes that man love her (induce), and then causes that man to work overtime to earn extra money to buy her presents (Labor Services).

2. A company makes false claims about themselves (fraud) and hires people (recruit) and gets them to work for them (labor services).

The same arguments can be used to apply the same AMP method to both these example to make the case that they are involved in human trafficking.

This AMP is such a ridiculous construct, not even as hard to pierce as some of the more advanced constructs they use in family courts, mental health, law, medicine etc.

This is a very common technique used to create false equivalences towards two situations that causes some crazy conclusions:

• When someone caught with weed - convincing people to treat them the same way as you would treat a mexican drug lord.

• When someone lies/exaggerates a woman and sleep with her, convincing people using "consent arguments" to treat that person same a someone who grabs a woman into an alleyway and rapes her.

We can go on and on, but this is how the social gaslighting works.

Thanks for putting the facts together. I have never been a fan of Tate and can never watch him for more than a few minutes, but I am now more than ever convinced he is not a "Human Trafficker" even if he is a garbage human, let alone the same level as those depicted in SOF.

And no, anyone who cares of about SOF does not have to automatically denounce Tate to be exactly the same or else become a hypocrite, lol.

Oh, and don't worry about finding the sources for these clips. Even as clips without context, they fail to deliver what they promise.

And yeah, just so there is no confusion, Tate sounds like a garbage guy but his prosecution is definitely above and beyond anything - so I think the next dig needed is exactly why he is being targeted for Human Trafficking.

Thanks for putting this together. Knowing what the worst accusations about controversial figures really helps get a good grasp of what the reality of the situation in.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I cut through everything in this write up, it all boils down to this:

• Andrew Tate manipulates women to fall in love with him, and then to make money for him

And the entire thesis is that "AMP" model can be applied to claim that this constitutes Human Trafficking.

Correct me if I am wrong in understanding the overall narrative of this essay.

Now take a moment and consider these examples:

1. A woman pretends to love a man, users specific techniques such as seduction, pretending to be pregnant, getting pregnant etc (fraud) and makes that man love her (induce), and then causes that man to work overtime to earn extra money to buy her presents (Labor Services).

2. A company makes false claims about themselves (fraid) and hires people (recruit) and gets them to work for them (labor services).

The same arguments can be used to apply the same AMP method to both these example to make the case that they are involved in human trafficking.

This AMP is such a ridiculous construct, not even as hard to pierce as some of the more advanced constructs they use in family courts, mental health, law, medicine etc.

This is a very common technique used to create false equivalences towards two situations that causes some crazy conclusions:

• When someone caught with weed - convincing people to treat them the same way as you would treat a mexican drug lord.

• When someone lies/exaggerates a woman and sleep with her, convincing people using "consent arguments" to treat that person same a someone who grabs a woman into an alleyway and rapes her.

We can go on and on, but this is how the social gaslighting works.

Thanks for putting the facts together. I have never been a fan of Tate and can never watch him for more than a few minutes, but I am now more than ever convinced he is not a "Human Trafficker" even if he is a garbage human, let alone the same level as those depicted in SOF.

And no, anyone who cares of about SOF does not have to automatically denounce Tate to be exactly the same or else become a hypocrite, lol.

Oh, and don't worry about finding the sources for these clips. Even as clips without context, they fail to deliver what they promise.

And yeah, just so there is no confusion, Tate sounds like a garbage guy but his prosecution is definitely above and beyond anything - so I think the next dig needed is exactly why he is being targeted for Human Trafficking.

Thanks for putting this together. Knowing what the worst accusations about controversial figures really helps get a good grasp of what the reality of the situation in.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I cut through everything in this write up, it all boils down to this:

• Andrew Tate manipulates women to fall in love with him, and then to make money for him

And the entire thesis is that "AMP" model can be applied to claim that this constitutes Human Trafficking.

Correct me if I am wrong in understanding the overall narrative of this essay.

Now take a moment and consider this example:

• A woman pretends to love a man, users specific techniques (such as seduction, pretending to be pregnant, getting pregnant etc) and makes that man love her, and then causes that man to work overtime to earn extra money to buy her presents.

The same arguments can be used to apply the same AMP method to this example to make the case that she is involved in human trafficking.

This is a very common technique used to create false equivalences towards two situations that causes some crazy conclusions:

• When someone caught with weed - convincing people to treat them the same way as you would treat a mexican drug lord.

• When someone lies/exaggerates a woman and sleep with her, convincing people using "consent arguments" to treat that person same a someone who grabs a woman into an alleyway and rapes her.

We can go on and on, but this is how the social gaslighting works.

Thanks for putting the facts together. I have never been a fan of Tate and can never watch him for more than a few minutes, but I am now more than ever convinced he is not a "Human Trafficker" even if he is a garbage human, let alone the same level as those depicted in SOF.

And no, anyone who cares of about SOF does not have to automatically denounce Tate to be exactly the same or else become a hypocrite, lol.

Oh, and don't worry about finding the sources for these clips. Even as clips without context, they fail to deliver what they promise.

And yeah, just so there is no confusion, Tate sounds like a garbage guy but his prosecution is definitely above and beyond anything - so I think the next dig needed is exactly why he is being targeted for Human Trafficking.