YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Coś Tu Poważnie Nie Gra! Ta Sama Para! Druga Identyczna Sytuacja w 2 Dni! O Co Chodzi? Analiza Ator

Coś Tu Poważnie Nie Gra! Ta Sama Para! Druga Identyczna Sytuacja w 2 Dni! O Co Chodzi? Analiza Ator — Transcript

by wideoprezentacje · 9,456 words · 1,419 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00Good morning, everyone. A warm welcome
0:02to you. The topic of today's podcast is
0:04: something is seriously wrong here.
0:10And it's not just about the fact that
0:12the Polish police and prosecutor's
0:13office apparently have no problem with
0:15a Black man from France publicly
0:17hitting a Polish woman in the face, and
0:18then threatening a Pole who dared to
0:20intervene and report it to the police
0:22with a dangerous weapon. Ladies and
0:29gentlemen, look at this photo. Of
0:36course, in accordance with the
0:38regulations in force in Poland, the
0:40individuals are anonymized, but I think
0:42you can tell it's the exact same couple
0:43as in the weekend incident. What's more
0:53, this is a frame from a video that was
0:55made public after the weekend by a
0:56completely different person. But other
1:01than it being a different person,
1:03everything is the same. A man is
1:09walking down the street, sees a Black
1:11Frenchman treating a woman brutally,
1:13intervenes, and is told not to
1:14intervene. This time, however, we don't
1:24see the newcomer trying to beat him to
1:25death or threatening to kill him with
1:27an improvised club. But other than that
1:31, everything matches. The same couple,
1:35the same situation, a different place,
1:37a different time. A different place, a
1:39different time. The same couple, the
1:41same situation. Everything, ladies and
1:43gentlemen, is the same. And now we have
1:48only two possibilities. Either this
1:53woman loves being degraded in public on
1:55the street, loves being treated very,
1:57very badly. She loves being beaten in
2:02public, and this man provides that for
2:04her. And that is some kind of very, I
2:10would say, well, very strange
2:12relationship. Or, ladies and gentlemen,
2:16this is some kind of provocation. And I
2:21will say honestly, even though I am
2:23already over 40. I've seen a lot in
2:26life, I've lived through a lot, I've
2:28read about many things, I know a lot,
2:29definitely more than I would like to.
2:34And there really are, ladies and
2:35gentlemen, various deviations, but
2:37those people usually don't do it in
2:39public, and certainly don't do it in a
2:41way that exposes them to criminal
2:43liability. Maybe at some parade, some
2:49lady leads some gentleman on a leash in
2:51a shepherd dog costume or something
2:53like that. But so clearly, to the point
2:59where it falls under at least violation
3:01of personal integrity, and almost
3:07certainly battery. And regarding that
3:11Pole who intervened, that is a criminal
3:13threat if I've ever seen one. Well,
3:17that, that I haven't heard of. So,
3:20ladies and gentlemen, I would damn well
3:22reject that version. Well, then the
3:26only other situation left is a
3:28provocation. It seems to me, ladies and
3:31gentlemen, that we have fallen victim
3:33to a provocation. And here, ladies and
3:36gentlemen, are two other very, very
3:38interesting pieces of trivia. The first
3:45thing is that while nobody has even
3:47questioned the tanned gentleman yet—
3:49the police arrived, talked, and let him
3:51go free—the gentleman who reported
3:52the incident from that first video has
3:54already been summoned to the police
3:56station, ladies and gentlemen. And
4:04ladies and gentlemen, as Paweł
4:06Wyżykowski reports, he was by no means
4:08summoned to be questioned as a witness,
4:10but to be asked to provide an
4:11explanation. Well, ladies and gentlemen
4:16, providing an explanation to the
4:18authorities means that the authorities
4:20suspect you of something. Of what? Well
4:25, I said, I said not to help people who
4:27bring these "engineers" here, only to
4:29get punched in the face, and then
4:31people of good will who defend them end
4:33up having problems later. Mr. Marcel,
4:37who recorded this "engineer" who
4:39threatened him with a metal rod and was
4:41lunging at him, and who had previously
4:43slapped his partner or caregiver, who
4:45is supposedly paid to be there. A
4:48strange thing to investigate. Mr.
4:49Marcel was summoned to the police
4:51station for the purpose of, mind you,
4:53providing an explanation. So what now?
4:55Mr. Marcel is going to have problems,
4:57right? For some personal good,
4:59presumably, right? And this is a matter
5:04that should always be resolved under
5:06civil law, not by involving the police.
5:11By what right is this man even being
5:13summoned? The one who should be
5:20summoned is the person who brings in
5:22these aggressive "engineers," summoned
5:23to cover the costs of all this harm
5:25they cause here and to guarantee with
5:27their own assets any future costs
5:28generated in this way. About whatever,
5:38ladies and gentlemen, the authorities
5:41—because the police are, after all,
5:43an authority—suspect the person who
5:45filed the report. Well, how to put this
5:52nicely, the reporter—the gentleman
5:54who saw this Polish woman being beaten
5:56in the face by that tanned Frenchman
5:58and who reacted. Well then, the
6:07gentleman who saw this, reacted,
6:09defended this woman, and called the
6:10police, now, regardless of what the
6:12authorities expect from him, this man
6:14has felt quite concerned. Look, this
6:19gentleman recorded a TikTok together
6:20with the Member of Parliament. See that
6:23they are recording this in front of the
6:25police station. The reporter, or so it
6:31seemed to me, the witness who, as
6:33reported by Paweł Wyżykowski, was
6:35invited to a hearing—actually not a
6:37hearing, he was invited to provide an
6:39explanation, which rather suggests they
6:41will want to bring some charges against
6:43him. Now, notice, ladies and gentlemen,
6:51that this man, who it seems did nothing
6:53wrong—well, he wanted to help a woman
6:55in need, who was being beaten in the
6:57face by an aggressive man—felt very
6:59concerned about being asked to go to
7:01the police, because he went there with
7:03the assistance of an MP who, on top of
7:05that, publicly declares that he will
7:07support him. What is he supposed to
7:12support him in? In testifying as a
7:14witness. No one needs support to
7:17testify as a witness. And if someone
7:20actually needs support testifying as a
7:22witness, it should be from people who
7:26help them recall something, right?
7:30Because someone might not remember and
7:32might want to recall, so a psychologist
7:34or therapist, for instance, who helps
7:36process trauma and unblock certain
7:38memories. That, yes. That is when a
7:43person testifying as a witness might
7:44need the help of such a person, if they
7:46are blocked, if they are traumatized
7:48and cannot remember. But not, ladies
7:51and gentlemen, a member of parliament.
7:53A member of parliament won't be able to
7:55recall anything for this gentleman.
7:58Besides, it hasn't even been a week
7:59since this gentleman saw everything, so
8:01he has everything fresh in his memory.
8:05This gentleman has it recorded on a
8:07camera, so he likely watched the
8:09footage before testifying and remembers
8:11everything. So, ladies and gentlemen,
8:13this is a very clear situation. The
8:16gentleman was asked to come to the
8:18station to provide explanations, but a
8:22witness does not explain. A witness
8:25testifies as a witness. These are two
8:27completely different things. And at the
8:32same time, this gentleman felt
8:34threatened enough to ask for an MP's
8:36assistance, and that MP provided him
8:37with assistance. Let's listen. Good
8:43morning. We are here with Mr. Marcel.
8:45Mr. Marcel, who reacted very
8:47appropriately a few days ago in Warsaw
8:49when he saw a foreign black man hitting
8:51a Polish woman. Uh, Mr. Marcel, please
8:54tell us in a few sentences what you, uh
8:56, noticed and what you did, what was
8:58the reaction of this foreigner, and
9:00what was happening there.
9:02While driving down Aleja Krakowska, I
9:03noticed a dark-skinned man hitting a
9:05Polish woman in the face, and I stopped
9:07immediately. Uh, I ran out of the car
9:10to ask if she needed help. The lady
9:12said she didn't need help. I called 112
9:15, where the operator told me to stay on
9:17the scene and follow, follow this
9:19couple if necessary. We all saw that
9:23the foreigner, when you reacted, did
9:25not reduce his aggression, but rather
9:26the aggression escalated. He started...
9:30he started toward the car. He started
9:32pounding on the window; he wanted to
9:34hit it, as if he wanted to break it.
9:36Later he grabbed a metal, a metal rod,
9:38at which point I felt very threatened.
9:40Mr. Marcel, thank you very much for
9:42stepping in. This is exactly how we
9:44should always react, not just stand by,
9:46not thinking someone else will react.
9:49When aggression occurs, one must react,
9:51and we hope it won't be the case that
9:53Minister Żurek or Mr. Tusk, seeing the
9:55reaction—the proper reaction of a
9:57Pole against an aggressive foreigner,
9:59in this case it was just a Black man
10:01who arrived from France—won't want to
10:03draw any consequences for the proper,
10:05pro-Polish, simply proper human stance
10:07of Mr. Marcel. Mr. Marcel is heading to
10:11the police station now. I will be
10:14waiting, and if help is needed, I will
10:16of course provide such assistance,
10:18using my parliamentary mandate. Mr.
10:20Marcel, I wish you luck, and please,
10:22regardless of the fact that this is not
10:24a pleasant situation for you, nor a
10:26comfortable situation to testify,
10:28please hang in there. If you ever
10:29witness such a situation again, please
10:31react in the exact same way. We, as
10:33Poles, will be very grateful to you.
10:35Thank you very much. Well then, ladies
10:42and gentlemen, we have a very strange
10:46situation. Let's recall it very, very
10:49briefly. At the same time, I want to
10:51emphasize that in the description you
10:53have a link to a playlist, and within
10:55that playlist, you have a link to a
10:57piece titled "Alarm Starts in Poland."
11:00Aggressive engineer set free, Pole
11:02arrested. And there, ladies and
11:08gentlemen, is a comparison, on one hand
11:10, of this weekend's situation with the
11:12engineer, and the situation where a
11:14Pole argued with a Ukrainian lady on a
11:16plane, even though he clearly argued
11:18with her, by no means on nationalistic
11:20grounds. The mere suspicion that he
11:30might have argued on nationalistic
11:32grounds caused the police to use
11:33significant forces and resources, as
11:35they admitted themselves, to identify
11:37him and come to his home in at least
11:38two vehicles, because there were at
11:40least six officers there. And since the
11:47cars are five-seaters, they arrived in
11:49SUVs, and besides, they also wanted to
11:51take the gentleman away. So they
11:54arrived at his home in at least two
11:56vehicles, ladies and gentlemen, to drag
11:58him out of his house in handcuffs like
12:00a major criminal. All because he argued
12:06with a Ukrainian lady at the very same
12:08moment the engineer entered into a
12:10highly confrontational situation with
12:11the Polish gentleman. In my private
12:16opinion, it wasn't just a threat that
12:21he would kill him—the engineer
12:23against the Pole—but it was actually,
12:25hmm, maybe even an attempt, because he
12:29was already charging at him with that
12:32with that with that improvised club,
12:37right? Well, not inspired, but God, I
12:43can't remember the word. In any case,
12:47the point is that he simply took an
12:48object that was there and used an
12:50improvised, an improvised club, right?
12:54He used this large steel beam, finished
12:56with a very, very sharp point. One blow
12:59and the guy is dead. Yes. And so,
13:01ladies and gentlemen, a man argued with
13:03a Ukrainian lady on a plane. So, huge
13:06forces and resources. They have to
13:08identify the man, go to him like he's a
13:10major criminal, drag him out of his
13:12house, record everything, and then brag
13:14, brag on the internet about how
13:16efficient the police are, because a
13:18Polish "bandit" argued with a Ukrainian
13:20lady. A Black French gentleman slapped
13:24a Polish lady in the face and
13:25threatened to beat or attempted to kill
13:27a Pole who noticed it. They let him go
13:30free. They let him go free. They didn't
13:33consider that that it's worth it. Well,
13:36they let him go free. Yes, they didn't
13:39charge him, they didn't arrest or
13:41detain him, the prosecutor's office
13:42didn't request a detention. There is no
13:45problem at all. And this podcast is all
13:47about that, ladies and gentlemen. I
13:50invite you to watch it. A very wise
13:52podcast. And of course, the situation
13:56from the weekend is also covered in
13:58this podcast. I will keep it very, very
14:02brief. A gentleman was driving a van,
14:06saw an engineer physically attacking a
14:08Polish woman by hitting her in the face
14:10. He reacted, tried to defend her, and
14:17called the police. This infuriated the
14:20Frenchman, because he is a Frenchman.
14:23Though he looks more like a gentleman
14:24from Africa, for sure. Well, his
14:27methods are things that 100 years ago
14:29were more associated with Africa, now
14:31increasingly with France. That, that,
14:33that is true. And ladies and gentlemen,
14:38well because this gentleman reacted,
14:45the Frenchman took a large metal rod
14:47with sharp crossbars welded at the
14:49bottom. And he threatened the Pole that
14:54he would kill him with it. Because one
14:56blow with something like that is the
14:58end. Yes. And now, ladies and gentlemen
15:01, it turns out that just after the
15:02weekend, a second video appeared. You
15:06will soon understand why I am not
15:07showing these videos and why I only
15:09show screenshots from them. There are
15:12various reasons. One of many is
15:15copyright. There are, ladies and
15:18gentlemen, a whole lot of these videos,
15:20and you never know how the YouTube
15:22algorithm will react. The YouTube
15:24algorithm can, for example, decide that
15:26, hey, this video violates copyright,
15:28and what does it matter that you used
15:30it under fair use? you aren't allowed
15:32to, you aren't allowed to, they can
15:34block your entire video. Well, it
15:35varies, ladies and gentlemen. You have
15:38to, you have to be very careful, right?
15:40But there is also a second reason,
15:42which you will understand, I hope, in
15:44the later part of this material. And so
15:53, ladies and gentlemen, a second video
15:55appeared after the weekend. Another
15:56person is walking down the street, sees
15:58the exact same couple. Exactly. Dressed
16:02a bit differently, but the cap, that
16:04cap must be significant because the
16:05same cap is held in his hand, and that
16:07man is assaulting the woman. And this
16:13other man is no longer so, if I may say
16:15, he is no longer so brave. He only
16:20says that it's not allowed. He only
16:24says that it's not allowed. And he gets
16:27into his vehicle and that's it. But
16:31that lady, similar to then, that lady
16:33defends, defends the perpetrator. What
16:38is very interesting, she has no shoe.
16:40That is there, you can see, you can see
16:42that she is in a sock and that shoe is
16:44nowhere to be seen in the frame, right?
16:46So, ladies and gentlemen, regarding the
16:50passerby's reaction, the situation is a
16:52bit different, right? Because here the
16:57passerby only said that you can't do
16:58that and wanted to intervene verbally,
17:00but it seems he then drove off and
17:02that's it. However, in that first
17:07situation, the Polish gentleman reacted
17:09as he should have, calling the police
17:11while maintaining 100%composure, so as
17:18not to be provoked, not to get into any
17:20fight with that immigrant gentleman,
17:21and not to express himself in a way
17:23that could later be perceived as
17:25xenophobic—he didn't say it like that
17:26at all, because that man attacked the
17:32woman physically, and then threatened
17:33to murder him. Only, he would have
17:36responded like that because the man is
17:38black, and then it would be xenophobia,
17:40right? So, as if the endings are
17:43different, but the beginning is the
17:45same; the same couple, different time,
17:47different place, but the situation is
17:49analogous. A gentleman attacks a lady
17:53physically and there is a reaction from
17:58a passerby. Ladies and gentlemen, there
18:04is an old saying. It comes from the
18:06times of the Soviet Union. I hope this
18:09won't be held against me as some, if I
18:12may say so, Russophilia, because God
18:14forbid, I maintain full neutrality, if
18:16one may say so, but we know the world
18:18we live in. People love to nitpick, yes
18:22, but there was, ladies and gentlemen,
18:24an old saying among Soviet guards. Once
18:29is a coincidence, twice is not a
18:31coincidence, the third time call the
18:33KGB, meaning it's certainly some agency
18:35work. Well, we are, ladies and
18:39gentlemen, in a situation where within
18:41literally a few dozen hours, two
18:43different videos recorded by two
18:45different people appear online,
18:51documenting an analogous event,
18:53practically the same event involving
18:54the same couple, a black gentleman and
19:02a pale-faced lady. That is not a
19:06coincidence. Let us add to this that I
19:10did a little investigation into who
19:12this lady is. And this lady is not a
19:15random lady. Uh, this lady is...and now
19:22I will bite my tongue, because if I am
19:24right about what this lady and this
19:25gentleman are doing, then in my opinion
19:27, if too much information about this
19:29lady is revealed, she will press
19:31charges, go to the prosecutor's office,
19:33and say that someone has flagrantly
19:35violated her privacy. She will try to
19:40frame Poles as criminals under Article
19:43190a of the Penal Code. That's what I
19:45feel in my gut. You know, my biggest
19:50haters, including those two gentlemen
19:52who live alone and publicly claim that
19:54I am gay. Well, one of them will
19:58probably have to, as they say, pull the
20:00handbrake for a while. And he accuses
20:05me of having a big nose. That I have a
20:07big nose. Well, it's better to have a
20:09big nose than to have trouble breathing
20:11. And for me, the worst thing is having
20:14a big nose like mine and trouble
20:15breathing, but that’s not what I’m
20:17getting at, ladies and gentlemen, I’m
20:19getting at the fact that one can have a
20:21defect, like a big nose, but sometimes
20:23this big nose of mine can sniff
20:24something out. And my big nose has
20:30sniffed out that this, ladies and
20:31gentlemen, is a provocation, a very
20:33crudely stitched-together provocation,
20:35one that I think could be on a massive
20:37scale. Okay. Let’s hope that I am
20:43currently diffusing this provocation.
20:47Let’s hope that by me saying what I
20:49think is being prepared here, these
20:51provocateurs—or rather, the
20:52provocateur organization, because a
20:54very serious organization stands behind
20:56this lady. Serious in the sense of
21:00being big and well-funded, not in the
21:02sense of being ethical or anything. So,
21:05ladies and gentlemen, I hope that I am
21:07just now diffusing it. Anyway, ladies
21:18and gentlemen, how to put this nicely,
21:20without saying too much so she won't
21:22later say that I flagrantly violated
21:24her privacy. The lady is an extreme
21:29leftist, you know, from those hate-free
21:36zones, from those lightning bolt
21:38protests, an extremely left-leaning
21:45person, very, shall I say, active when
21:47it comes to far-left activism. The
21:54gentleman is also not an anonymous
21:56person because he introduced himself,
21:58it is easy to find him, he introduced
22:00himself in the first video, so it is
22:02even it is even easier to find him, you
22:08see what's happening there, right? And
22:11so, ladies and gentlemen, these are not
22:13just random people, ladies and
22:15gentlemen. These are not people who—
22:20this gentleman is not just some
22:22Frenchman who, pardon the expression,
22:24was floating on a raft a month ago, but
22:26rather he is a Frenchman who is a very
22:28deliberate choice. This lady is also
22:32not just some random Polish woman, who
22:38has a need to walk down the street with
22:40dangerous people who regularly lose
22:41their temper, and therefore is a victim
22:43of violence. No, that’s not it,
22:47it’s not like that, ladies and
22:49gentlemen. These are people, at least
22:53this lady, is a person who is very
22:58deeply activated, if I may put it that
23:00way. She is a person who is very deeply
23:04activated toward hatred for what she
23:14calls fascism, and what normal people
23:16call not being a far-leftist. Because
23:20you know, on her profile picture she
23:22has a "Hate-free zone" overlay. At the
23:28same time, in my private opinion, she
23:30represents an environment that is full
23:32of hate, just hate toward white,
23:34heterosexual men, Christianity, faith,
23:36and traditional values. And if someone
23:42is a damn right-winger, then they are
23:44definitely a fascist. Oh, oh, oh, oh.
23:46Because just so it's clear, I am
23:48disgusted by fascism, and even more so
23:51by Nazism. That’s why the services of
23:56a certain country to the east of Poland
23:58hate me so much, because I publicized
24:00their march honoring the Waffen-SS in
24:02Lviv. So, it's interesting if they’ll
24:07kill me for that. I think they will try
24:10. So, if anyone can say it, I can say
24:14quite, quite honestly that I am
24:16disgusted by fascism and disgusted by
24:18Nazism. I am risking my life by
24:23highlighting that Ukraine is full of
24:25fascists and Nazis, and Banderism is
24:26slowly becoming almost their national
24:28religion. So I can say that I am
24:32disgusted by this. However, the circles
24:37that this lady represents love to label
24:39people who just want to live normally
24:40with that "f-word." But people who
24:50truly have such tendencies, they don't
24:51see them doing anything wrong. Even
24:58when they give a Nazi salute or sing
25:00the anthem of a genocidal organization
25:02that murdered us Poles just for being
25:04Polish, right? So, ladies and gentlemen
25:08, this is not a random person. Neither
25:11him nor her. And now, ladies and
25:13gentlemen, think about it, do a thought
25:17experiment. What would happen if one of
25:24those gentlemen—because we already
25:25have two—had reacted differently? If
25:32one of those gentlemen had lost his
25:33nerve. If one of those gentlemen had
25:36reacted the way what I call "keyboard
25:41commandos" are now demanding in the
25:43comments they should have. Think,
25:46ladies and gentlemen, what would happen
25:48. And now, if your thoughts went in the
26:00same direction as mine, I’ll just
26:02remind you that I am not saying it
26:03should be that way. Quite the opposite.
26:06I think it is a scandal that we live in
26:08a world where it could be that way. I
26:10will tell you in a moment what I think
26:12that would look like and that it is a
26:13scandal we live in such a world. But,
26:21well, it’s just not me who creates
26:22the law. Yes. Make me Minister of
26:25Justice, make me, damn it, I don't know
26:27, head of a political party, then
26:29I’ll create the law. Of course, that
26:31will be hard for you because I don't
26:33want to go into politics, and so far
26:35I’ve told all three political parties
26:37that wanted to put me on their 2027
26:39election lists "no." But you know, I
26:43don't create the law. I only highlight
26:46the absurdities of this law, trying to
26:48force those who create the law and,
26:50above all, the practice of applying it,
26:52to come to their senses, so that things
26:54can be normal in Poland. So, ladies and
26:58gentlemen, if your thoughts went in the
27:00same direction as mine, then you
27:04probably want to say to yourselves
27:06right away that "no, damn it, that’s
27:07not how it would be." Surely the Polish
27:12police wouldn't punish a man who wanted
27:14to defend a woman. That's simply
27:17impossible. And let's stop right there.
27:19Let me remind you of what happened at
27:21the very beginning. The man who called
27:26the police, recorded this video, and
27:28posted it online was summoned to the
27:29police station to give a statement. Not
27:37as a witness to the assault on that
27:39Polish woman, not as a victim of the
27:40fact that this black man tried to kill
27:42him on the street with that improvised
27:44club. He was summoned to the station,
27:50asked to come to the station to give a
27:52statement. They want to press some
27:56charges against him, or at least
27:58they’re figuring out how to do it.
28:03Moving on, the absurdities of Polish
28:05law, or excuse me, the absurdities of
28:07Polish legal practice. Ms. Najka, do
28:10you remember her? You don't have to
28:12like Ms. Najka. Ms. Najka has various
28:18strange—to put it mildly—lines,
28:20various strange stunts she pulls,
28:22although here one must add—a very
28:24clear exclamation mark—I wouldn't be
28:26surprised if 90%of what is written that
28:29she did, said, or thinks, was neither
28:31said nor done by her, but just written
28:33that way in the media. By the way, Ms.
28:39Najka, if you are watching this, I am
28:41trying to reach you by phone. I would
28:44like to have a quick chat with you, if
28:46you agree. And please notice, I am not
28:49your enemy. The fact that the media
28:53suddenly started telling the truth
28:55about the terrible situation you faced,
28:56strangely enough, happened two weeks
28:58after it happened to you. Yet, just a
29:03few to a dozen hours after I made a
29:05podcast about it. Speaking of what
29:08Mikołaj Teperek once said. Krzysiek,
29:10everyone watches you, no one will admit
29:12it. Yes, I am convinced that I reheated
29:15an old topic from two weeks ago, and
29:17the media then collectively started
29:19reheating that old topic, repeating
29:21more or less the same as me, because
29:22they ripped me off—and it's very good
29:24that they did in this case, because
29:26perhaps thanks to that, in my opinion,
29:28the unfair fate of Ms. Najka will
29:30improve a little. In the sense that I
29:33believe Ms. Najka has faced an
29:35injustice. What is this all about,
29:36ladies and gentlemen? Ms. Najka, Ms.
29:42Najka has already been convicted for
29:44the second time, interestingly enough,
29:46for publicly praising a crime. Well,
29:50someone will say, damn, there is a
29:52regulation, the regulation says you
29:54cannot publicly praise a crime. Well,
29:56Ms. Najka praised one. Well then, Ms.
29:59Najka, you have to face the
30:00consequences. Except that whether Ms.
30:08Najka publicly praised a crime remains
30:09to be seen, because as for Mr. Grzegorz
30:11Braun—since we are talking about the
30:13fire extinguisher incident—it remains
30:15to be seen whether he actually
30:17committed a crime or not. And now,
30:21ladies and gentlemen, a very important
30:23matter. I’ll get right into this, and
30:25we’ll get back to the previous topic
30:27in a moment, but the issue is this,
30:28ladies and gentlemen. Mr. Grzegorz
30:30Braun extinguished the Hanukkah candles
30:34. It hasn't been determined if it was a
30:37crime, because the trial is ongoing.
30:40And Ms. Najka, who said she liked it,
30:42has already been convicted twice for
30:44publicly praising a crime, even though
30:46it is not yet known if it was a crime.
30:58And now, of course, the armchair
30:59lawyers who haven't finished any law
31:01school but ask artificial intelligence
31:03instead, forgetting that it is often
31:05wrong. I’m sure they’ll write in
31:12the comments, "Woźniak, but the laws
31:13on public praise of a crime don't state
31:15it matters if the person was convicted
31:17of that crime or not." Well, yes. Well,
31:24yes. It doesn't matter if someone was
31:26convicted of committing that crime. So
31:30it must be established whether the act
31:31was a crime. And in the case of the
31:37Hanukkah incident, the trial isn't
31:39about whether Mr. Grzegorz Braun
31:41extinguished the candles, because Mr.
31:42Grzegorz Braun admits to it. He even
31:47seems proud of it. The case isn't about
31:50whether Mr. Grzegorz Braun extinguished
31:52the candles. Everyone saw it, it was
31:53recorded. There are a million videos of
31:55it online. The case is about whether it
31:58was a crime. Seriously, you know, it's
32:06like how you can't publicly praise
32:08murder, because everyone knows murder
32:10is a crime and shouldn't be praised,
32:11regardless of whether the murderer is
32:13caught or if a specific person is
32:15convicted or gets off by claiming they
32:17didn't do it. But no one questions that
32:23murder is a crime. However, Mr.
32:28Grzegorz Braun is questioning—and
32:30quite effectively, I might add, so he
32:32might even succeed—that extinguishing
32:34the Hanukkah candles in this specific
32:36instance was a crime. And what happens
32:43if the court judging Mr. Grzegorz Braun
32:45rules that extinguishing the Hanukkah
32:47candles was not a crime? Not that he
32:51didn't do it, because everyone saw that
32:53, but that extinguishing the candles in
32:55this specific instance was not a crime.
32:59And Ms. Najka is convicted, and twice
33:01at that, for publicly praising a crime.
33:07She publicly praised a crime, and then
33:09the court might rule that it wasn't a
33:11crime after all. Do you understand,
33:13ladies and gentlemen, these absurdities
33:15? So, ladies and gentlemen, sorry for
33:23this, for this, for this digression,
33:25for straying from the topic, but we
33:28humans—not even just us Poles, we
33:30humans—have a tendency, when
33:31something seems sick, abnormal, and
33:34wrong to us, to claim it doesn't exist,
33:36to reject it. So, ladies and gentlemen,
33:43I want to point out that such things do
33:45happen, and they happen very, very
33:47often. So, ladies and gentlemen, what
33:50would happen, what would happen, if one
33:59of these men or someone else, because
34:01it looks, ladies and gentlemen, like
34:03these people often walk around the
34:05street and provoke others. And I really
34:09think that you should write to me,
34:10ladies and gentlemen. You have my email
34:14in the description; you can also write
34:16to me on Facebook on all my fan pages,
34:18except for the conspiracy theory one,
34:20because I rarely check it, but you can
34:22write to the video presentation one,
34:24you can write to Krzysztof Torwoźniak,
34:26the links are in the comment section.
34:30Have you perhaps also encountered this
34:32couple, and if you have encountered
34:33this couple, in what situation did you
34:35meet them? What happened there? Because
34:38I have this impression that my gut
34:41feeling is telling me so. So I have
34:45this impression, ladies and gentlemen,
34:47that these people are generally roaming
34:49around the city and generally playing
34:54out a scene, where he hits her in order
35:02to provoke people to various reactions.
35:04Yes, in my opinion, this is a
35:06provocation, ladies and gentlemen.
35:08Therefore, I have a little question.
35:11Because I don't believe, ladies and
35:13gentlemen, that an analogous situation
35:15happened twice within a few dozen hours
35:17. Well, you know, somewhere at home
35:22maybe, but not on the street. Damn, and
35:24in similar clothes, not the same ones,
35:26notice, but similar. Let me know if
35:33you’ve met this couple, if you've
35:34seen them, or how they behaved. Okay.
35:44So, ladies and gentlemen, what would
35:46happen—a thought experiment, what
35:50would happen if one of these people
35:55lost their cool, for example, that
35:57first gentleman? What would happen if
36:03someone reacted seeing a man beating a
36:05woman? A defenseless woman, he's
36:13hitting her in the face, a very
36:14aggressive guy, and he simply wanted to
36:16defend this woman in a way other than
36:18just verbal. What would happen if some
36:23man, I don't know, someone who knows
36:25martial arts or, for example, is
36:27carrying some tool for direct coercion?
36:33Just like that black gentleman was
36:34hitting that lady in the face. simply
36:39struck that man in the face,
36:40effectively preventing him from
36:42continuing to hit that lady. Do you
36:47think that This lady would be grateful
36:53and would say: "My hero," she'd throw
36:55herself around his neck and say: "Thank
36:57you for beating him, for defending me."
37:01Well, truthfully, thank you for
37:03defending me, I am, I will be grateful
37:05to you. Eternally. Thank you so much.
37:07Kind sir. Well, it seems to me that no.
37:11I remind you, ladies and gentlemen,
37:13that the man from the first video is
37:15giving explanations to the police. That
37:18was revealed by Paweł Wyżykowski. Not
37:22testimony, explanations. The word
37:27explanation, ladies and gentlemen, is
37:29associated with charges; I understand,
37:31I’m explaining, and so there is no
37:33doubt, this does not at all mean that
37:35the man from that first video has been
37:37charged. I am convinced he has not been
37:41charged. I am convinced that the police
37:44will be afraid to press charges against
37:45him. However, I believe they were asked
37:51to do so by that lady and that
37:52gentleman. So, ladies and gentlemen,
37:58before we move on: what would happen,
38:03if some person saw a man on the street
38:10beating a woman and—instead of
38:12turning on the camera on their phone to
38:14record the whole situation, and calling
38:16the police from a second phone—
38:17decided that this lady was being harmed
38:19, this lady's life was in danger, and
38:21stepped in to overpower that man? That
38:26man would probably resist, and it would
38:28probably end with that man being beaten
38:30. Well, I am convinced, ladies and
38:34gentlemen, that a video would appear on
38:36the Internet, not from the beginning,
38:38just like we have a whole mass of
38:40different videos lately that don't
38:41start from the beginning, right? Here
38:45we see a Polish woman spitting on a
38:47Ukrainian man. It's clear that the
38:50situation is dynamic. It's clear that
38:52it has been developing for a long time.
38:55It's clear that this is, uh, that this
38:56is only from a certain moment in the
38:58situation in this video, so that when
39:00the camera was turned on, they were
39:02already in a dispute. They were already
39:06exchanging some aggressive behaviors
39:07toward each other. So it is clear that
39:11the recording does not constitute
39:13reliable evidence because it does not
39:15present the situation in its entirety,
39:17only cut out of context. Minister
39:21Żurek spoke about this. The minister
39:24responsible for internal affairs,
39:26meaning also for overseeing the police.
39:30The police are posting photos and
39:32videos of these people's arrest because
39:34a video appeared with the beginning cut
39:36off, where a Polish lady spat on a
39:37Ukrainian man. It is completely hushed
39:42up that, in response, the Ukrainian man
39:44spat on the Polish lady. I am convinced
39:49, ladies and gentlemen, that since a
39:51simple argument on a bus—sorry, yes,
39:53an argument on a plane, of course, an
39:56argument on a plane—or some ugly
39:58confrontational situation,
39:59hooligan-like and vile, but still well,
40:06socially harmless as part of some
40:11drunken brawl, can be escalated based
40:18on a video where the recording is not
40:20turned on from the beginning, in which
40:22the whole situation is not visible, and
40:24you can't see what happened before. And
40:27this is being escalated, so for two
40:29weeks it's the number one topic,
40:31because someone shouted at people
40:37behaving inappropriately on a bus. Well
40:39then, ladies and gentlemen, imagine a
40:42situation like this. A Polish man is
40:53walking down the sidewalk, and he sees
40:55a black man beating a fair-skinned
40:57Polish woman on the street. But he pays
41:02no attention to skin color. He pays
41:04attention to the fact that a man is
41:06hitting a woman, he stands up to defend
41:07this woman, they struggle with the
41:09gentleman, they struggle with the
41:11gentleman. The gentleman gets, as a
41:15result of this, sustains an injury as a
41:17result of this scuffle. Perhaps, for
41:22example, the gentleman would be this
41:26Polish man would be somehow more
41:28physically fit. For example, he would
41:30fold them up like those two who were
41:31causing trouble, I don't remember in
41:33which town, where they stacked them on
41:35the sidewalk one on top of the other.
41:36No. I'll bet on it, ladies and
41:40gentlemen. My gut, which reminds me so
41:43terribly of those two, two gentlemen,
41:49tells me that back then a video would
41:55have appeared quickly, because the
41:56gentleman who intervened wouldn't have
41:58recorded the video, but the other side,
42:00I have the impression, would have had a
42:02video. By complete coincidence, someone
42:04would have recorded it. Just like by
42:06complete coincidence someone recorded
42:08the incident on the plane, where a
42:09Polish man argued with a Ukrainian
42:11woman and so on. There is always
42:12someone recording by accident there.
42:14Pure coincidence, ladies and gentlemen.
42:16Pure coincidence. In the same way, here
42:19it would be a pure coincidence that
42:20someone recorded it. Only, by pure
42:23coincidence, they wouldn't have
42:25recorded the black man hitting the
42:26Polish woman in the face. They wouldn't
42:33have recorded the Polish passerby
42:35intervening and stopping the beating,
42:36they would only have started recording
42:38from when the Pole knocks out the black
42:40man and probably throws a few harsh
42:41words at him too. Next, I am convinced
42:51that this video would have appeared on
42:53the internet, perhaps in this case not
42:55posted by Ms. Panchenko, like in the
42:57case of the famous bus incident at the
42:59turn of June and July, but perhaps by
43:00some other organization. "Smiling"
43:09politicians would have immediately
43:11replicated it, perhaps without such
43:12errors as in the case of the bus
43:14incident, where I think the person who
43:16sent them the texts to post on X,
43:18formerly Twitter, got confused and
43:19that's why at least two parliamentary
43:21figures posted the exact same post, but
43:29it would definitely have been
43:30publicized very strongly. Yes. And the
43:32Pole would have been portrayed as a
43:34racist. Not a hero who stood up to
43:38defend a woman, but a racist who beat
43:40up a black man out of pure hatred, and
43:42Poland would have been presented on the
43:44international stage as a country of
43:46hateful racists. That is how it would
43:51be. I have absolutely no doubt.
43:53After the reaction of that lady who
43:59recorded herself, where that lady asks
44:01the Pole, who was reporting the matter
44:03to the police, to go away after the
44:05victim of the beating She clearly has
44:12grievances against the man who helped
44:14her, even though he didn't do anything
44:16wrong. He called the police, yet she
44:21has obvious grievances against him, so
44:23I am 100%convinced that if her, let's
44:25call him Loverboy, had caught a few
44:35punches to the face, she would have
44:37sided with her tormentor, meaning she
44:39would have accused the man who defended
44:40her of racism. And in my private
44:48opinion, it would have been taken out
44:49of context in such a way that the Pole
44:51would have been portrayed as a man who
44:53unprovokedly attacked a black person,
44:55because the Pole is a racist and
44:56attacked not because he was defending a
44:58woman, but because he hates black
45:00people. Did that cross your mind?
45:09Because it did mine. Time will tell,
45:16ladies and gentlemen, whether such an
45:18accusation against someone won't appear
45:20soon. In my opinion, in my opinion,
45:24after this recording I just made, if
45:26that was the goal, ladies and gentlemen
45:28, it has been slightly defused, because
45:30I hope, at least, that no one will let
45:32themselves be provoked anymore. However
45:36, I am convinced, ladies and gentlemen,
45:38that this is how it would have been,
45:40that it would have been that way and I
45:46really get the impression that was the
45:48goal, one of the goals, because ladies
45:50and gentlemen, the second goal is even
45:52more insidious. Here again, ladies and
46:03gentlemen, I must tell you a story. One
46:07authentic situation that recently took
46:09place, so that you may understand how
46:11brazen people can be. Do you know,
46:15ladies and gentlemen, what copyright
46:17trolling is? Copyright trolling is
46:21unethical profiteering from one's
46:23copyrights. It consists, among other
46:28things, of planting your copyrighted
46:35material somewhere in such a way that
46:37people think they are allowed to use it
46:47normally, in order to then induce
46:49people to massively use that material,
46:51that thing which is covered by these
46:53copyrights, only to then demand a large
46:54fee from them. An example of copyright
47:01trolling. The passing of the late MP
47:05Litewka. A certain female photographer
47:12associated with a certain television
47:14station took a photo of MP Litewka some
47:19time ago. And it is her photo, because
47:23she was the one who took it. Polish law
47:29is very strange, and generally, the
47:31lady took a photo of the late MP
47:33Litewka, but the photo belonged to the
47:35lady who clicked it with her phone or
47:37camera, and not to MP Litewka. That is
47:44the law. Of course, one can argue very
47:47strongly here, and I hope that this
47:49arguing will be in the context that
47:51copyright trolling took place there,
47:53right? Did she pay him for posing, or
47:56did she not pay him, and so on, and so
47:58on, and so on? Because the photo was...
48:02while the late MP Litewka was a public
48:04figure, the photo was posed and not
48:05taken in connection with his
48:07professional duties and so on and so
48:09forth. Those are probably that woman's
48:12victims. If they decide to go to court,
48:16they will probably raise this point.
48:18But what is this all about? A female
48:19photographer associated with a certain
48:22TV station took a picture of MP Litewka
48:24, and gave it to MP Litewka, who then
48:28used it as his profile picture, and it
48:30stayed there. So everyone thought it
48:35was just MP Litewka's profile picture.
48:39Well, and when MP Litewka became the
48:44late MP Litewka, meaning when he died
48:50tragically, people wanting to pay their
48:52respects to the late MP Litewka, wanted
48:59to write online how sorry they were,
49:01what a shame it was, and offer their
49:03condolences. Yes. And it just so
49:07happened here in our online community
49:09that it's customary to add a photo to
49:10that. So people looked for a photo that
49:16definitely wouldn't be protected by
49:18copyright. They assumed that a profile
49:25picture from MP Litewka's profile
49:27certainly wasn't copyrighted,
49:28especially since there were no credits,
49:30like "photographer so-and-so," it was
49:32just a profile picture. So people
49:37downloaded that profile picture, just
49:39applied a black-and-white filter to it,
49:46and then wrote on Facebook and other
49:48social media how sorry they were,
49:49because MP Litewka was a good man, or
49:51so it seems, and people miss him. I
49:55won't hide the fact that I do too. Well
49:58, and some time ago, two or three weeks
50:05ago, people started receiving letters
50:07from the photographer associated with
50:09that TV station, who is demanding 2,000
50:11PLN from them for each use of the photo
50:13, or perhaps for a license in general.
50:17I don't remember if it's for each use
50:19or in general. 2,000 PLN. Do you get
50:23the idea? Pretty heavy, right? This is
50:28a typical example of copyright trolling
50:30, meaning you do something very nasty
50:35and clever in order to gain benefits.
50:43And now, ladies and gentlemen, look at
50:45what's happening. And here you will
50:57understand why I never published the
51:02image of that gentleman or that lady.
51:05Why do they have blurred faces on my
51:07channel? Well, because I put it this
51:14way. Maybe it's a coincidence. It's
51:16definitely a pure coincidence. It's
51:18definitely a pure coincidence. But
51:21yesterday, yesterday afternoon, I met
51:27with a friend who is a lawyer and has
51:29quite a large law firm, and he says: "
51:35Krzysiek, did you know that someone is
51:39looking for a law firm that will handle
51:46a very large case regarding the
51:48unlawful publication and unlawful use
51:51of an image?" And you know, this must
51:56be a big case, because the inquiry said
52:03it would concern a potentially
52:04unlimited number of perpetrators.”
52:08Interesting, right? To be clear, this
52:12might have absolutely no connection.
52:14Absolutely no connection at all, damn
52:16it. Absolutely none. It could be a pure
52:19coincidence. And it could be, ladies
52:23and gentlemen, that the gentleman who
52:28went to the police to give a statement,
52:37didn't go to explain how that man beat
52:39that woman, but went to explain how it
52:41happened that he made two private
52:42individuals 'images public without
52:44their consent. Because ladies and
52:54gentlemen, copyright to a video is one
52:56thing, and the image of the people in
52:58that video is something else entirely.
53:02Ladies and gentlemen, this man went to
53:03the police to give a statement.
53:08That’s not what Paweł Wyzykowski
53:10claims. He clearly used the word "
53:12statement." Not to testify as a witness
53:16in the case of the Polish woman being
53:21beaten by the French man. Not to
53:26testify as a victim in the case of
53:28criminal threats, or even attempted
53:30murder committed by that French man,
53:32but just a statement. And then
53:37everything would add up. Yes, then a
53:42member of parliament would be useful,
53:44someone who could help make sure the
53:46police, well, damn it, as Ferdek
53:47Kiepski used to say, don't mess around
53:49and try to turn the victim into a
53:51criminal here. Yeah, that would add up.
53:58Of course, ladies and gentlemen, this
54:00could be a pure coincidence. A pure
54:02coincidence. For example, this man, I
54:04don't know, could have also said, I
54:06don't know, when he was calling, for
54:11instance, I don't know, the word ""
54:13and he said it as a dynamic linguistic
54:15ornament, just like a comma. Or maybe
54:21the person on the 112 line felt
54:22offended that he was insinuating
54:24something, or the policewoman who
54:26arrived felt that it was directed at
54:27her and that it was an insult to an
54:29officer. Things happen. Things can
54:34happen, ladies and gentlemen, but you
54:36see that it all fits together quite
54:37well. No, no, just so it doesn't turn
54:41out, heaven forbid, just to be clear.
54:45If it turns out that way, I will
54:47support and try to help, because of
54:48course I don't condone it, and that
54:50needs to be said here. I don't want to
54:53end up like Ms. Nika. Therefore, I will
54:55say it very clearly. I don't condone, I
54:58don't condone, ladies and gentlemen,
55:00making someone else's image public and
55:02so on and so forth. It's a completely
55:05different thing if someone has made
55:07their own image public, for example by
55:09putting it as their profile picture,
55:11while being a digital creator, for
55:12instance; then they are a public figure
55:14who made their own image public, and so
55:16on and so forth. It’s something else
55:19entirely, ladies and gentlemen, when
55:20someone has made the image of others
55:22public. So I do not support it, I do
55:24not support it, God forbid, I do not
55:26support it. Don't turn me into "Najka."
55:28You can clearly see I’m not a pretty,
55:30slim blonde, but quite the opposite. No
55:33, you can see that. Don't turn me into
55:35"Najka." However, I will say this: if
55:44the Polish police will try to turn a
55:55criminal now out of a man who acted in
56:03such a way that he wanted to defend a
56:04woman attacked on the street, and the
56:10police and documented at the same time
56:19the categorically bad behavior of the
56:21Polish police, who did not intervene
56:23properly—they didn’t throw that
56:25aggressive Frenchman to the ground,
56:26didn’t handcuff him, didn’t take
56:28him to the station, didn’t detain him
56:30, didn't press charges. If the police
56:37now try to turn that man into a
56:39criminal, because he made the image of
56:44that gentleman and that lady public,
56:51then I will say this: I do not believe
56:52this didn't happen on the clear order
56:54of Minister Pogłos Kierwiński, and I
56:56don't believe that if that happened, it
56:58wouldn't be with the consent and
56:59knowledge of Donald Tusk. Therefore, I
57:07will say this very clearly: just as I
57:09try to be politically neutral and I rip
57:11into every political party every time
57:13they do something wrong, which is why
57:15all political parties hate me. I will
57:20put it this way. If the Polish police,
57:24who committed a draconian and
57:26reprehensible act of negligence, by not
57:32arresting that perpetrator, now try to
57:34turn a witness who exposed it into a
57:36criminal, then I will do everything to
57:46expose every single piece of dirt on
57:47any politician tied to Civic Platform.
57:51that falls into my hands. Well, excuse
57:54me, not every single one. I will not
57:57publish your private photos that were
57:58stolen from your phones and that are
58:00floating around the darknet. I won't
58:03stoop to such things. So ladies and
58:05gentlemen, I will do everything that is
58:07legal. Everything that is legal,
58:09ethical, and just. You know how much
58:15you have on your conscience, so you
58:16know that if I started today, I’d
58:18have enough for two podcasts a day
58:20until the election, because maybe the
58:21law wasn't literally broken there, but
58:23besides the letter of the law, there is
58:25also the spirit of the law. That is one
58:31thing, ladies and gentlemen. And the
58:33second thing, I say it this way. Lately
58:43for a few days it's been terribly hard
58:47and I even checked yesterday, because I
58:49called several companies that provide
58:51this type of service. It is terribly
58:58hard, ladies and gentlemen, to buy the
59:00services of entities that deal with
59:01monitoring the internet and documenting
59:03, in a way suitable for court
59:05proceedings, what is happening online.
59:13Literally for the last two days. And
59:16yesterday in particular, ladies and
59:18gentlemen, I’m calling, and I know
59:20such companies. Some are run by friends
59:22of mine. I call, "Krzysiek, a ton of
59:27orders.""A big order came in, Krzysiek,
59:29a huge order came in.""No, sorry
59:31Krzysiek.""And when will you have, have
59:33time?""I don't know.""A big order came
59:36in." We are swamped. And who
59:38commissioned you for something? We
59:39won’t tell you. Come on, tell me as
59:42old friends. No Krzysiek, we can’t.
59:45It's a big deal again. Maybe it's a
59:47coincidence, ladies and gentlemen.
59:49Maybe, I don't know, I don't know.
59:53Maybe Ryszard Petru ordered internet
59:55monitoring and the documentation of all
59:57posts online that laugh at him. Well,
1:00:01greetings then. I laugh at Mr. Ryszard
1:00:04Petru regularly. But I do it, ladies
1:00:06and gentlemen, in accordance with the
1:00:08law. I’m not insulting Mr. Petru,
1:00:10I’m just reminding you that well, the
1:00:13guy is not, he's not competent, ladies
1:00:15and gentlemen, to manage his own life,
1:00:17yet he wants to manage Poland. It's not
1:00:20funny. A guy whose colleagues stole his
1:00:24own party wants to be prime minister
1:00:26again. That is funny. Yeah, well maybe
1:00:29Rysiek Petru, I don’t know, maybe
1:00:30Rysiek Petru argued with someone. Maybe
1:00:35there are a lot of posts now,
1:00:37unpleasant comments regarding Mr.
1:00:38Rysiek Petru, and maybe Mr. Rysiek
1:00:40Petru put in a large order for internet
1:00:42monitoring, especially Facebook, and at
1:00:45the same time, ladies and gentlemen,
1:00:47documenting internet posts and comments
1:00:49. Documenting them in such a way that
1:00:53they could be used in court. Well maybe
1:00:55Ryszard Petru, well maybe Kierwiński.
1:00:57After all, apparently he had a reverb
1:00:59again lately, this time in the Sejm,
1:01:01and he created reverb on a TVP
1:01:04microphone, I believe, so maybe Kierwa
1:01:06commissioned it, although Kierwa has
1:01:08police officers for that, so why would
1:01:10he pay? Well I don't know, maybe it has
1:01:12nothing to do with it. Or maybe, ladies
1:01:21and gentlemen, a situation has occurred
1:01:24that is very analogous to copyright
1:01:25trolling. Remember? I talked about what
1:01:29copyright trolling consists of. I will
1:01:31now explain why I said that. Ladies and
1:01:35gentlemen, what is under every single
1:01:40post about this situation, every single
1:01:46one. A mass of comments, as I call them
1:01:52, keyboard commandos, who say what they
1:01:57wouldn't do to this gentleman. Ladies
1:02:02and gentlemen, that has its, that has
1:02:19ladies and gentlemen, as they say it
1:02:21nicely, more than one such comment
1:02:25falls under criminal threats. And I
1:02:29remind you, where we live, in what
1:02:31world we are offending, moving around.
1:02:39Where yesterday in the morning
1:02:44commentary it was, ladies and gentlemen
1:02:46, someone poured paint or scribbled
1:02:48with markers on a monument honoring the
1:02:52UPA in Poland, and the Polish police
1:02:56want to press charges for an insult
1:02:58based on national background. Seriously
1:03:01, according to the Polish police, UPA
1:03:06is a nation and UPA is a nationality.
1:03:10Well, it seemed to me that a
1:03:11nationality could be Polish, German,
1:03:13Ukrainian, Russian, Hungarian. And I
1:03:16have never heard of a "UPA nationality.
1:03:18" Seriously. Just as I haven't heard of
1:03:21a Nazi nationality, communist, Nazi.
1:03:24There are Germans, Russians, Ukrainians
1:03:26. But ladies and gentlemen, the Polish
1:03:28police want to, watch out, prosecute
1:03:34for insulting a UPA monument on the
1:03:35basis of national background. Do they
1:03:40think UPA is a nationality? That’s
1:03:42intense, right? So, ladies and
1:03:44gentlemen, I’ll put it simply. What
1:03:48about the issue of paralyzing the
1:03:52Polish judicial system and at the same
1:03:54time paralyzing, let’s call it,
1:04:05disarming, or rather neutralizing those
1:04:07of us Poles who, well, don't like, for
1:04:09example, uncontrolled migration, in
1:04:11such a way that if they monitor the
1:04:13internet well, they have at least 200
1:04:15to 300,000 posts online where this guy
1:04:24is insulted, demeaned, offended, where
1:04:26he is threatened with death, or
1:04:27opinions are expressed that if he’s
1:04:29met, he’ll be done for. I, of course,
1:04:34condemn all of this completely, I
1:04:36condemn it. Don’t try to paint me as
1:04:38a villain. I condemn it, I condemn it.
1:04:40Yes. I condemn it. At the same time, I
1:04:50keep emphasizing that a situation where
1:04:52the Polish police don't give a damn
1:04:53that some man beat up a Polish woman on
1:04:55the street, but at the same time would
1:04:57want to prosecute several hundred
1:04:59thousand Poles who, in the heat of the
1:05:01moment and because of this situation,
1:05:02without really thinking, expressed some
1:05:04comments that might even fall under
1:05:06defamation. But given the circumstances
1:05:15, I think they don’t deserve to be
1:05:17prosecuted. Well, if the Polish police
1:05:21were to pull that off, it would be
1:05:23intense and it would be a scandal. But
1:05:25ladies and gentlemen, the Polish police
1:05:27are capable of pulling that off without
1:05:28the slightest problem. Example: Jurek
1:05:37Gowsiak. Do you remember those complete
1:05:42absurdities, where at 6:00 a.m. the
1:05:44Polish police were dragging elderly,
1:05:46sickly people out of their homes, not
1:05:48even grandparents, just some elderly
1:05:50and infirm people being dragged from
1:05:51their houses. One man was walking with
1:06:00a cane, some lady could barely walk,
1:06:01because Jurek Owsiak allegedly felt
1:06:03threatened after internet comments that
1:06:05these people would kill him. These
1:06:11people could barely walk, but according
1:06:13to Jurek Owsiak, they might have wanted
1:06:15to, for example, stab him with a knife.
1:06:18At least that’s what the context
1:06:19implied. Remember, one lady stood trial
1:06:22for a comment titled: "Die, man." Well,
1:06:27there are harsher comments circulating
1:06:29about this black gentleman. I hope,
1:06:34ladies and gentlemen, that I am a false
1:06:36prophet. I hope my nose fails me. I
1:06:38hope so. And I really count on that,
1:06:42because I am convinced that damn it,
1:06:44I’m right, that I sniffed it out well
1:06:46, that this is a provocation, and one
1:06:47stitched with thick thread. Very thick
1:06:52thread. However, I hope I hope, ladies
1:06:59and gentlemen, that with this material
1:07:01I have blocked this action. I hope, I
1:07:05hope the provocation fails. I hope, I
1:07:09hope, ladies and gentlemen, I hope,
1:07:23ladies and gentlemen, how to put it
1:07:28nicely, er uh how to say it, ladies and
1:07:38gentlemen, I hope I hope that I
1:07:48recorded this podcast and I’m saying
1:07:50what I think they want to do, so that
1:07:51it makes them not dare to do it,
1:07:57because you know how it is, right? Well
1:07:59, that’s sometimes how the services
1:08:00operate. Yes, at least that’s what
1:08:02Radek Sikorski claims. Apparently the
1:08:05third or fourth most influential person
1:08:07in the world, or perhaps the most
1:08:09influential diplomat. So if he says so,
1:08:11then it must be so. It surely can't be
1:08:14the case that Mr. Siekorski is talking
1:08:16nonsense. Well, according to Mr.
1:08:19Siekorski, you act in such a way that
1:08:25you act in such a way that you know
1:08:27something is being prepared, some kind
1:08:29of provocation. Yes. Exactly, that you
1:08:32know a provocation is being prepared,
1:08:34so you reveal how that provocation is
1:08:35supposed to play out, so the other side
1:08:37doesn't dare to carry it out. So, for
1:08:42that purpose, I am publishing my own
1:08:44exclusive guesses, seasoned with the
1:08:46information I have, but only contextual
1:08:48information. These are exclusively my
1:08:52own guesses. And that is why I am
1:08:55publishing them, to try to defuse this
1:09:02bomb, so that if a provocation is
1:09:03planned, they won't dare to carry it
1:09:05out. If there is a provocation aimed at
1:09:13provoking some Pole to hit this black
1:09:15gentleman in the face, in order to
1:09:17frame him for a racist beating, then
1:09:18stop, don't do it. If you plan to
1:09:26charge that poor Pole, who has already
1:09:28recorded two such videos, with the
1:09:30unlawful publication of your image,
1:09:32please don't do it. I've seen through
1:09:37you. If, if, if you are planning, and
1:09:41if this aggressive black gentleman
1:09:43intends to suddenly have grievances
1:09:44against hundreds of thousands of Poles
1:09:46who expressed their opinion that this
1:09:48is not allowed, well, that is exactly
1:09:54what I said, that in my opinion it
1:09:55would be a provocation. I hope that in
1:09:58this way I have managed to defuse it,
1:10:00ladies and gentlemen, meaning that this
1:10:05situation will not happen after all.
1:10:09And that is all, ladies and gentlemen.
1:10:10I send you my very, very warm regards.
1:10:13There will be another vlog today at
1:10:153:00 PM, I mean at 7:00 PM, so I highly
1:10:17, highly encourage you to watch it.
1:10:20Take care, see you soon. bye

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Coś Tu Poważnie Nie Gra! Ta Sama Para! Druga Identyczna Sytuacja w 2 Dni! O Co Chodzi? Analiza Ator by wideoprezentacje, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 9,456 words across 1,419 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.