Background

On 7 January 2025, the online celebrity and direct marketer known as Andrew Tate posted some comments on his Twitter (X) account in which he spoke of “Islamic crimes”, “rape”, “illegally invading and occupying lands” and other affairs. Given that Tate has millions of followers, and could quite easily have exonerated Islām from the actions of sinful Muslims, which he knows are crimes in the Sharīʿah and warrant corporal or capital punishment, instead he reinforced the rhetoric of typical Islām haters such as Geert Wilders, Kate Hopkins, Tommy Robinson and others through the words he chose to use.

What follows below is constructive criticism and “bruverly” advice which brave, masculine men never reject or scorn.

Tate’s remarks come at a time when Donald Trump (“incoming indebted and subservient US President serving AIPAC and strategic interests of Rothschild-Israel”^[1]) and Elon Musk^[2] (“technological pied piper and frontman of the Great Reset, doing the bidding of corporate vultures such as Blackrock and others”) have received some criticism from their zealous follower-base on their recent views on immigration.

Their followers feel betrayed. MAGA is split, and Musk is on the defensive as he tries to convince these same Americans that they need more brown faces to take their jobs.

So to deflect attention from that, Musk is playing the UK grooming-gang card to divert the attention of his followers and to rebuild trust. Andrew Tate appears to have joined in, giving them a helping hand.

Both Musk and Tate give credence to the notorious Islām-hater who goes by the name of Tommy Robinson.

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, his real name, is “a stooge and pawn (shabbos-goy) of the Zionists” who coopted him years ago in order to drown out and replace the more educated, intelligent and articulate people like Nick Griffin, who pose a threat because they are more Christian and nationalist in their outlook. They believe that, as a nation, they should be left alone with their own affairs and have no involvement in foreign conflicts. This is a true representation of the actual views and sentiments of Western populations.

Griffin himself had turned down an offer of Zionist support for his party in return for speaking ill of Muslims and not mentioning international finance and banking. When he refused, they started to fund the EDL which are a bunch of hooligans and louts, and unleashed through them, a hate-filled anti-Islām and anti-Muslim message to the British populace whose main fuel was sustained focus on grooming gangs and sexual abuse as a means of creating outrage.

This was part and parcel of shaping and forming public opinion to advance geopolitical agendas involving Muslim lands. Why Tate would give credence to this unstable moron on a leash is incomprehensible and raises questions.

Given that:

01  The Neocons and those they serve seek further invasion, war, intervention and inteference in Muslim-inhabited lands in order to facilitate the expansion of Rothschild-Israel as part of the Zionist-Communist project—“ethno-religious birthright nationalism for us and racial melting-pot collectivism for everyone else” in Europe and beyond.

02  And that masses of Christians in the US and Europe are re-evaluating their understanding of the realities of World War II, and the myths and propaganda surrounding its background, causes and reasons—and are recognising and identifying the players behind the destruction of their white Christian nations through usury, immorality, wokeism, liberalism and immigration and are moving towards Christian Nationalism^[3] which threatens Jewish Marxist Communism.^[4]

Then these Neocons, their financial backers and their agents are in a panic and trying to stoke hatred among these white Christian populations against Muslims in order to portray them and their religion as the most harmful and dangerous enemy to them, all as a diversion. Hence, the machinery has been put into motion, the media, talking heads, paid personalities, influencers, agents, algorithms and AI bots, are all saturating the minds and hearts of Western populations for this purpose.

Meanwhile, those behind the destruction of these Western Christian nations through usury, looting of treasuries, industries of immorality, wokeism, liberalism, centralisation and collectivisation continue apace with their attempts to turn these nations into feudal states where the subjects will be governed by corporations, own nothing and be happy.

Within this context, we take a look at Andrew Tate's remarks, under the assumption that Tate is more intelligent than not to know and understand what has preceded and not to know the effects of his choice of words, given the current climate.

Comments on Tate's Remarks

Let's take a look at Tate's words in his original post:

There is no such thing as “Islamic crime” and the two words are opposites to each other. Islām enjoins justice and benevolence and prohibits immorality, evil (16:90-), and crimes against self, property and honour, be that in respect to a Muslim or a non-Muslim. These are the foundations of law.

The Islamic Sharīʿah outlawed all evil, immoral and unjust affairs from the days of ignorance prior to Islam—such as killing female newborns for fear of shame and poverty, prostitution, fornication, adultery, usury, murder, robbery and so on. For the ruling and punishment of rape, see further below. Thus, to say and use the term “Islamic crime” is incorrect.

What should be said is that there are Muslims who commit crimes as minorities in this country which Islām condemns and for which it has severe punishments and that Muslims should be vocal in freeing their religion from these crimes and their perpetrators, as this is a form of treachery. This would be something fair to say, but as for saying, “Islamic crime” this is irresponsible, inflammatory and has an effect opposite to the one Tate claimed in his follow up video, which is to stop white Christians hating Muslims. On the contrary, such language only evokes hatred, and it is hard to believe that a skilled chess player like Tate does not calculate the outcomes of his moves, and in particular, given that he is an expert direct marketer, the psychological and subconscious effects of the very specific words he uses.

The objective fact is that after Christian Nationalism lost to Marxist-Bolshevism-Communism in WWII, these Western social democracies (set up as vehicles to enable the slow, imperceptible move towards Communism) have been on the decline, and we are just seeing the culmination of all of that.

Western Christian nations have been systematically attacked and ruined through usury, industries of immorality, wokeism, liberalism, socialism, sexual liberation philosophies, hijacking of government, private usurpation of what is publicly owned, and finally floodgates of immigration for deliberate dilution of race as a strategic weapon and so on.

The downward spiral is inevitable, and when poverty, broken-homes, emasculation of men, and dissolution of the family set in, they leave certain segments of the society vulnerable and exposed. The situation so-created by a mixture of the above assaults on a nation allows for the exploitation of its subjects in various spheres of life, and one of them is grooming, pimping and trafficking. Thus, in such circumstances, there emerge:

01  Organised, high-level grooming, trafficking and blackmailing networks such as Epstein-types on the one hand, who have tremendous resources and reach. These are international in their scope and use the cover of government and intelligence in order to traffic children and women for pedophilic and other fantasies of politicians and celebrities, some of which are in on the blackmail ops against others to keep them in line.

02  Then in the middle are grooming and prostitution networks ran by pimps and peddlers, looking to financially enrich themselves by exploiting the proclivities of men.

03  Then there are low-level groomers, whether individuals or gangs such as what occurs in, but not exclusive to, inner cities or deprived areas, who opportunistically engage in crimes of a sexual nature, often tied to delinquency, drugs and alcohol. While this category are no doubt evil, they pale into insignificance compared to the scale of the first two categories.

Colonialism and Homosexuality is the title of a Routledge publication (2008) by Robert Aldrich and is a full-length study of how European middle and upper-class men in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries used to visit the colonies specifically for the purpose of practising homosexuality, usually in the form of pederasty (that is, sex with young boys). In this period homosexuality was illegal in most European countries but in many colonies the poverty of the locals and the wealth of the Europeans made many boys available for hire, or even for outright purchase. Pederasty was thus an extension of imperialism, and this exploitative relationship was the forerunner of modern-day homosexual and pedophile sex tourism to places like Bangkok in Thailand, the Phillipines and Sri Lanka.

If you imagine this is what Westeners were doing when homosexuality was illegal back in the days, what, pray tell, do you think they (and the likes of Ivor Caplin) would be doing these days?

Its very cheap trying to blame Islām and Muslims for a problem (in its most modern sense) that has been in the making (or engineering) for 70 years, and whose engineers and architects, are in fact, those who deal in industries of usury, and of immorality and vice, which help to break down society through poverty, broken homes and delinquency.

Given that murder and fornication are from the greatest of major sins, Muslims are indeed outraged by them, and it is not possible for there to be a speck of faith in the heart of a Muslim without dislike of such sins and crimes. However, Muslims are also outraged that sins committed by Muslims, and which carry either corporal or capital punishment, are described as "Islamic." This emanates either from a rank ignoramus, or a person who intends evil, corruption and harm against Muslims.

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said:^[6]

Thus, the one who says for example, that "drinking alcohol" is an Islamic crime because it is committed by Muslims is an ignorant person. The one who says that grooming girls, and plying them with alcohol or drugs, and having unlawful sexual relations, that these are "Islamic crimes" because they are committd by Muslims, despite the fact they are opposed to faith (īmān) and are punishable crimes in Islam, he does not know what he is saying, either because he is ignorant, or he is intoxicated, or he is foolish, or he is hateful, or he has an agenda.

We do not know who these Muslims are and if indeed any Muslim has defended the convicted perpetrators, then we do not agree with them. What we do know is that large numbers of both Muslims and non-Muslims are fully aware of the fact that this affair is being used by Zionists, Neocons, warmongers and others as a diversionary tactic, to stoke religious tensions in order to justify their geopolitical agendas, and that given the awakening taking place in white Christian nations, they are trying to enrage these populations against Muslims. Tate, of all people, should be acutely aware of this, and given his reach and influence, should use his words carefully and responsibly.

The rate of rape in Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia is 0.1 per 100,000 population. In England and Wales it is around 150, per 100,000 population. This is because of different morals and attitudes towards family, marriage and women, and because industries of immorality and vice are not allowed in Saudi Arabia and most Muslim countries. Given that this was one of the reasons that led Tate to Islam, then these comments of his betray his otherwise good perception and analysis of ailing Western and Christian nations.

As for rape, then the Muslim scholars have explained the ruling and made clear that a person convicted of rape faces corporate or capital punishment.

The Muslim scholar and jurist, Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr said:^[7]

Contrary to the lies of Islām-haters, there is no punishment or blame on the victim, as Imām Mālik (رحمه الله) said:^[8]

Further, Muslim scholars add, if the person used threat of violence or actual violence, such as a using a knife or a weapon as a means of coercion, then this also comes under "waging war against Allāh" (5:33-), and the ruler is to combine between the various prescribed punishments. In this case, his hands and feet on opposite sides would be severed, and after that, whatever corporal or capital punishment was due, would be meted out.

Further still, in the view of many scholars, the perpetrator would also be forced to pay a dowry to his victim, because he has wronged her in that respect also, given that sexual relations are only lawful within marriage, and he has violated her in that respect. Hence, he receives penalties in different ways, because of the various ways this crime affects the individual (and the society).

As for a woman defending herself against rape:

Ibn Abī Shaybah (رحمه الله) relates from ʿUbayd bin ʿUmayr that:^[9]

He also relates from al-Sāʾib bin Yazīd that:^[10]

And Abū Bakr al-Khallāl (رحمه الله) relates that:^[11]

After mentioning these narrations, Ibn Qudāmah (رحمه الله), the Ḥanbalī jurist commented:^[12]

Thus, a woman is allowed to kill a rapist if it is going to protect her from being violated, and there is no liability in that. Rather it is considered that this rapist has been killed by Allāh’s will and decree, in other words, it is Allāh that killed him in reality, because a person is not held accountable for that which is done by compulsion and necessity.

If however, the rapist overcame her, and was then able to get away, vigilante justice would not be allowed, and the affair would be raised to the authorities, who would, after convicting the criminal, make an example out of him as a deterrent to others.

As for what happens in Britain, or in Western social democracies overrun by wokeist, liberal notions of justice, then often pity is shown for criminals (rapists, murderers), or they are given cover, or they are let off lightly, or placed in prisons hotels where they are given food, television and gyms.

It is as if Tate is promoting the line that Muslims are illegally invading and occupying Western nations, when in fact it is Western governments doing the bidding of the Zionist, Neocon warmongers, to which many of these nations are married, who are bombing Muslim nations, looting their mineral resources, and destroying their infrastructure, leading to mass immigration.

Then there are those who promote and channel this immigration to Europe and beyond, and even explain that its the reason they are going to be resented and hated.

Barbara Lerner-Spectre said:

All of these agents and players, the likes of Donal Trump, Elon Musk, Tommy Robinson, are intellectually dishonest, they complain about immigration and invasion, but are not brave enough to explain where its all coming from, and who or what is behind it.

This is one of the secrets behind mass immigration, it is part and parcel of destroying nationalism, patriotism, and erasing jealousy for nation, religion, culture and family, all of which are hated by the Marxists, Bolsheviks, Communists, Collectivists.

Being intellectually honest would require pinpointing the root of problem as the attack upon white Christian nations by Marxist-Communism, (something that did not end with WWII), and that mass immigration and dilution of race is one aspect of that attack. Hence, putting an end to it requires the light to be shined on the instrumental players, the string-pullers, the engineers and architects, who themselves are only too aware of what they are doing, and in fact, publicly, and explicitly declare it, as if to boast about it.

As for scapegoating a handful of “Pakis” in inner cities (who prey upon vulnerable girls from broken homes) for the woes of the nation, and stoking religious and racial hatred, in order to channel the anger and resentment of white Christian populations away from the fact their nations have been looted through usury, their morals have been destroyed, their mothers, sisters and daughters enticed by pimps into selling themselves online, whether for riches or simply to make ends meet, and so on, then this is not a surprising tactic.

Tate uses the term “Islamic crime” again, indicating the first time around, it was not a slip.

Thank you, but we as devout Muslims, along with our scholars have been warning Muslims against sin, disobedience and crime in non-Muslim lands for decades before you came onto the scene. As Muslims have entered these lands under covenant (contracts and agreements), then to violate these contracts and agreements (through crime and corruption) is considered a great evil, violation of the Sharīʿah and disobedience to Allāh (عز وجل).

Shaykh Muḥammad bin Ṣāliḥ al-ʿUthaymīn (رحمه الله) advised a large gathering of Muslims in the city of Birmingham in July 2000:^[13]

And another scholar, Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (حفظه الله) stated:^[14]

For many decades, Muslims who are engaged in daʿwah—that is calling non-Muslims to Islām and calling sinful Muslims to righteousness and piety—they have been turning many Muslim youth away from drugs, alcohol, fornication and crime. This is because these are affairs that are unlawful, comprise major sin and corruption. Large numbers of Muslims have been saved from these evils, by Allāh’s grace. As for those who remain upon these vices, then they are far removed from what Islām enjoins upon Muslims. To label what they do as “Islamic crimes” is the saying of a person who does not know what he is saying, and if not, we fear what his real intentions may be.

We personally have not seen or heard any Muslims defending child rapists, and it is unclear whether this is an accurate representation of the reality, but in any case, anyone who defends these crimes, irrespective, of whether they are commited by Atheists, Jews, Christians or Muslims, then he or she must be a depraved person and we denounce such people for lacking such basic morality.

As for the reputation of Islām, then Islām is the religion which Allāh revealed upon all of His Prophets and Messengers, from them, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus (عليهم السلام) and the last of them, Muḥammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Islām will remain and people will always be able to willingly and freely choose to enter it, after they have understood its reality. lslām will not be harmed by the barking of hounds and nor the braying of asses.

Yes, there are those Islām haters, from the Zionist Jews and Zionist Christians, who are in an alliance with each other, and there are multi-million dollar industries of Islam-hatred that use lies and propaganda to vilify Muslims (and Arabs) in print, media and movies. They wish to extinguish the light of Islām because it wages war against usury, prohibits all that is evil and shameful, and safeguards people’s rights, including those of property and because it delivers people from the clutches of those who profiteer (to the tune of billions) from industries of vice and immorality.

Sorry pal, but its not a bunch of “Pakis” in 21st century Britain that caused Christians to hate Islām, Christians have hated Islām for centuries because Muslims do not believe that Jesus is Lord and King, and do not worship him.

Rather, they believe exactly as Jesus (عليه السلام) believed about himself: That he is a noble messenger of Allāh, just like Abraham and Moses, but that he was born a miraculous birth, without a father, through Allāh’s word of command, given to Gabriel, who was commanded, through a word, to blow of the spirit (soul) of life into Mary, the Chaste, through which Jesus was conceived, without impregnation by a man. Jesus called to the worship of Allāh alone, as did Abraham, Moses and all the Israelite prophets. He called to salvation through righteous works and observance of the law, and he prayed, fasted and dressed as do Muslims today, and Muslim women dress like his mother, Mary the Chaste (عليها السلام).

Despite this belief of Muslims in this great and noble Messenger, many (but not all) Christians, in particular the sycophantic Christian Zionists, hate Islām and Muslims and they ally with, arm and support those who claim that Jesus, their Lord and God, is burning in Hell in hot excrement, whose mother was an indecent woman, and who bomb Muslim, men, women, children, and unborns, burying them alive under rubble and even burn them alive as they lie in hospital beds. In fact, they do not even spare Christians and their places of worship.

In Conclusion

Though Tate has explained the reason for these inflammatory remarks (because white Christians are going to be very upset if Muslims do not come out in defence of the innocent victims), that does not absolve him of his recklessness in speech. For a man who has to very carefully think about all his moves, as in a game of chess, then this type of rhetoric and inflammatory speech in front of millions is irresponsible.

From the qualities of manhood, masculinity is to accept your mistakes and take advice, on the chin if need be, and make your ego subservient to truth, justice and wisdom, because they are above and beyond the ego, in fact, they trample the ego, without fail, every time.

Footnotes