[VIDEOS] Andrew Tate and brother Tristan to be tried in Romania on rape and trafficking charges [Update on post #1294]

There we go, now Liberals are starting to accept the notion that the so called alleged incriminating videos were nothing but a spot of boasting by Tate, and perhaps this is what the Romanian authorities are realising too!

Haha. Took a while but we will get there.
 
In fact let me educate the pair of you a bit more.

If I said in a video that I have murdered somebody as a hitman then I have incriminated myself for murder and admitted it. I cannot however be prosecuted for the crime of murder in a court of law until a victim is identified as that is one of the points to prove.

You must have a grasp of law before you go all technical. Criminal prosecution is not like it is shown on the Bill or a Netflix movie.

Please also look up the definition of 'incriminated'. This means there is evidence of a crime. Saying you murdered someone without naming the victim , is not incrimination. You were close but got yours wires crossed.

Sorry to say my friend, its your understanding of law which has been exposed time after time. The youtube video claim was gold.
 
So there's no evidence for charges or for convictions! There is no timing if there is evidence to hand over. Its been months now, not sure what they think they will find after finding jack so far.

The point is the MET allegations are far more serious yet this case gets more media attention. You are also more interested in this so wondered by you and the media are. Of course your right is not to discuss anything you dont want to or dont care of but strange.


So me and you don’t know what evidence and lines of enquiry are being followed, that’s the truth of it. The investigation so far is lawful and the detention is so far lawful and a police investigation will always remain confidential until it goes to trial.

Again what has the Met police got to do with this? And how do you know what I’m interested in my personal life? You’re making statements about when the reality is that you don’t know me. Getting personal is also a reflection on you rather than me. I’m pretty confident and take no offence on your lack of maturity.
 
There we go, now Liberals are starting to accept the notion that the so called alleged incriminating videos were nothing but a spot of boasting by Tate, and perhaps this is what the Romanian authorities are realising too!

Haha. Took a while but we will get there.

They didnt break Youtube rules but acc to Waq broke criminal law. :))

Incriminating is when there is evidence along with what was said or proof, ie another video confirming etc.
 
So me and you don’t know what evidence and lines of enquiry are being followed, that’s the truth of it. The investigation so far is lawful and the detention is so far lawful and a police investigation will always remain confidential until it goes to trial.

Again what has the Met police got to do with this? And how do you know what I’m interested in my personal life? You’re making statements about when the reality is that you don’t know me. Getting personal is also a reflection on you rather than me. I’m pretty confident and take no offence on your lack of maturity.

I genuinely wanted your view for but its fine, your choice to worry about what you want.

We do know, there is none. As I showed you the police have to make disclosure. i.e If I am arrested, the police in the interview disclose what evidence they have to arrest me. In the UK if none bought(24 hrs to 72 max) forward, you are free on bail until the investigation ends.

Are you saying you support the Romanian system where someone can be held for 180 days without charge and without any evidence being disclosed?
 
They didnt break Youtube rules but acc to Waq broke criminal law. :))

Incriminating is when there is evidence along with what was said or proof, ie another video confirming etc.

Yup, changing the laws to suit an argument is bad enough, but changing the definition of words is light years ahead.

Tate did not incriminate himself by any stretch of the liberal imagination. He would have been arrested and charged in 2022, at the height of his global influence and popularity had he incriminated himself.
 
Unsurprisingly, where are these 4 other women (out of the 6)? Surely their testimonies are enough to charge Tate? I mean if the affidavits of the 2 other women supporting Tate were made public, what are the remaining 4 women waiting for?

Probably being coerced!

Very very fishy indeed.

In short I don’t know why they haven’t been charged but the reasons for continual detention have satisfied a judge. I can think of possible scenarios why but time will tell.
 
I genuinely wanted your view for but its fine, your choice to worry about what you want.

We do know, there is none. As I showed you the police have to make disclosure. i.e If I am arrested, the police in the interview disclose what evidence they have to arrest me. In the UK if none bought(24 hrs to 72 max) forward, you are free on bail until the investigation ends.

Are you saying you support the Romanian system where someone can be held for 180 days without charge and without any evidence being disclosed?

Of course they support 180 days without charge, that's 180 less days of speaking his mind to the masses.

If it were up to liberals, they'd ensure Tate is banged up for decades like Mandela, but Mandela to be fair did commit a crime.
 
I genuinely wanted your view for but its fine, your choice to worry about what you want.

We do know, there is none. As I showed you the police have to make disclosure. i.e If I am arrested, the police in the interview disclose what evidence they have to arrest me. In the UK if none bought(24 hrs to 72 max) forward, you are free on bail until the investigation ends.

Are you saying you support the Romanian system where someone can be held for 180 days without charge and without any evidence being disclosed?

You haven’t explained how the Met police is linked and I don’t know why you want my view of the Met police but create a thread and I’ll see if I want to participate.

You are correct about UK police procedures but in the UK, police get around this by bailing you pending further enquiries and it is common for somebody to be on bail for a number of months whilst officers obtain evidence such as witness statements, obtain cctv or await lab results on forensics etc. Bail conditions may well ask you to reside at a certain address and not leave the country but you won’t be detained on remand custody like you have in Romania.

There must be reasons for this step that Romanian authorities have taken and one that will eventually be released into the public domain.
 
Of course they support 180 days without charge, that's 180 less days of speaking his mind to the masses.

If it were up to liberals, they'd ensure Tate is banged up for decades like Mandela, but Mandela to be fair did commit a crime.

Romanian law is nothing like UK law. Liberals claim to believe in freedom but are now happy a man is incarcerated without any evidence and could be for a total of 6 months.

Romania scores 40 odd out of 100 The Corruption Perceptions Index, 2nd most corrupt nation in Europe.
 
You haven’t explained how the Met police is linked and I don’t know why you want my view of the Met police but create a thread and I’ll see if I want to participate.

You are correct about UK police procedures but in the UK, police get around this by bailing you pending further enquiries and it is common for somebody to be on bail for a number of months whilst officers obtain evidence such as witness statements, obtain cctv or await lab results on forensics etc. Bail conditions may well ask you to reside at a certain address and not leave the country but you won’t be detained on remand custody like you have in Romania.

There must be reasons for this step that Romanian authorities have taken and one that will eventually be released into the public domain.

Why didnt you say this from the start? We need to see the evidence if any or he does more importantly. There are no reasons it seems, just a corrupt nation doing the bidding of other nations who dont like Tate.

Let me ask again, yes or no will do thanks.

Are you saying you support the Romanian system where someone can be held for 180 days without charge and without any evidence being disclosed?
 
I am going to make a prediction.

The Romanian authorities will find ZERO evidence of rape & human trafficking, instead they will stich him up with tax evasion charges - or something similar.

This is what happened with Al Capone, with Trump, and my prediction, will happen with Andrew Tate.

Makes sense because the only thing that takes more than 70 days to find evidence of a crime, is to go through tax records!

:)
 
Why didnt you say this from the start? We need to see the evidence if any or he does more importantly. There are no reasons it seems, just a corrupt nation doing the bidding of other nations who dont like Tate.

Let me ask again, yes or no will do thanks.

Are you saying you support the Romanian system where someone can be held for 180 days without charge and without any evidence being disclosed?


Yes if it’s necessary and supervised from a higher authority such as a judge and there is evidence too of course
 
Yes if it’s necessary and supervised from a higher authority such as a judge and there is evidence too of course

Wow, lets hope this type of law doesnt come to play in the UK. 180 days could destroy the minds of most innocent people if locked up. Heck people who abuse women or have indecent photos of kids here in the UK dont get 6 months inside sometimes.

Do you also agree ALL their calls should be recorded , personal calls and even calls between the accused and their lawyer(s)?
 
Yes if it’s necessary and supervised from a higher authority such as a judge and there is evidence too of course

Detaining 180 days without charge? That doesn't sound right.

Why no charge after 60+ days if evidences are compelling?
 
Last edited:
Detaining 180 days without charge? That doesn't sound right.

Why no charge after 60+ days if evidences are compelling?

It seems Mr Waq would also be in favour of wiping, waterboarding and whatever else if its the Tates. Poor chap must think of them before going to sleep every night.

If you support 6 months detention without charge you are not a supporter of justice for sure.
 
It does not surprise me liberals support the detention of a suspect for 180 days without charge. It really doesn't. As far as liberals are concerned, cancelling people whose views stand against the liberal agenda trumps that of basic human rights.

The Gestapo are fast becoming a foot note in history, soon to be replaced by fascist liberalism.
 
It seems Mr Waq would also be in favour of wiping, waterboarding and whatever else if its the Tates. Poor chap must think of them before going to sleep every night.

If you support 6 months detention without charge you are not a supporter of justice for sure.

The only justice Liberals understand is Social Justice Warriors.
 
It does not surprise me liberals support the detention of a suspect for 180 days without charge. It really doesn't. As far as liberals are concerned, cancelling people whose views stand against the liberal agenda trumps that of basic human rights.

The Gestapo are fast becoming a foot note in history, soon to be replaced by fascist liberalism.

There are many other practical measure the Romanians take which are pretty cruel but if he addresses questions one by one , more can then be asked.

So far its been a fruitful discussion. From they dont need to show evidence, to they dont have any but will in time.

Earlier in court, they refused bail because on some phone call they claim they said they will flee to Dubai. The Tates arent stupid, they know the calls are recorded , so most likely they didnt say this or they made a joke, ie I would love to be in Dubai now etc.

As far as Im aware the recording wasnt shown or heard.
 
There are many other practical measure the Romanians take which are pretty cruel but if he addresses questions one by one , more can then be asked.

So far its been a fruitful discussion. From they dont need to show evidence, to they dont have any but will in time.

Earlier in court, they refused bail because on some phone call they claim they said they will flee to Dubai. The Tates arent stupid, they know the calls are recorded , so most likely they didnt say this or they made a joke, ie I would love to be in Dubai now etc.

As far as Im aware the recording wasnt shown or heard.

Yes indeed, the discussion has been fruitful, I have now even more insight in to what I consider the greatest threat to humanity.

As for the phone call, I agree, Tates aren't stupid, but assuming there was a recording, the 'existence' of that recording is now in public domain. Strange, that, a phone call deemed as evidence Tate wants to allegedly leave Romania has been confirmed to the public, but no incriminating evidence surrounding the allegations have been announced to the public thus far, bot even a hint.

Pick and choose evidence day!

If this is Romania, I am so glad the UK is out of the EU, which I always considered to be a fascist state anyway.
 
Yes indeed, the discussion has been fruitful, I have now even more insight in to what I consider the greatest threat to humanity.

As for the phone call, I agree, Tates aren't stupid, but assuming there was a recording, the 'existence' of that recording is now in public domain. Strange, that, a phone call deemed as evidence Tate wants to allegedly leave Romania has been confirmed to the public, but no incriminating evidence surrounding the allegations have been announced to the public thus far, bot even a hint.

Pick and choose evidence day!

If this is Romania, I am so glad the UK is out of the EU, which I always considered to be a fascist state anyway.

Even the BBC admit

]]]]One of the Tates' lawyers, Eugen Vidineac, told the BBC that, while the brothers' phone calls in custody were being tapped, nothing they had discussed was illegal.

"There is no flight risk," he said.

"It was a discussion between Andrew and his secretary, saying that - if he was freed by the judges under these conditions - he will go to Dubai [for medical examinations]", he added.

It was not an attempt to escape Romanian justice, he said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64789944

Tate basically telling his secretary, if ALLOWED he would like to go to Dubai for medical assessment. Of course no sane man would go to some dodgy Doctor provided by Romanians. Its not so important as they would use any excuse to keep him behind bars.
 
Even the BBC admit



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64789944

Tate basically telling his secretary, if ALLOWED he would like to go to Dubai for medical assessment. Of course no sane man would go to some dodgy Doctor provided by Romanians. Its not so important as they would use any excuse to keep him behind bars.

Exactly, plus it can be a cunning trick to test if the phones are tapped.

And anyway, why don't the Romanians confiscate Tate's passports? This is the normal thing to do to prevent suspects from leaving a country, and also issue a notice to border agencies too.

It really does sound like Romania is worse than a 3rd world country.
 
Exactly, plus it can be a cunning trick to test if the phones are tapped.

And anyway, why don't the Romanians confiscate Tate's passports? This is the normal thing to do to prevent suspects from leaving a country, and also issue a notice to border agencies too.

It really does sound like Romania is worse than a 3rd world country.

I think they may have their passports but cant recall, something along the lines of they have private jets etc and can still escape, not knowing no nation will allow you to enter without a passport or allow you to board unless its parked in some field.

He's lucky he's brother is with him, they cant harm as much as they would like. In the UK prison system you are allowed to room/share cell with your co-defended. Not sure if Romania has this rule.
 
I think they may have their passports but cant recall, something along the lines of they have private jets etc and can still escape, not knowing no nation will allow you to enter without a passport or allow you to board unless its parked in some field.

He's lucky he's brother is with him, they cant harm as much as they would like. In the UK prison system you are allowed to room/share cell with your co-defended. Not sure if Romania has this rule.

If true then it would mean they confiscated Tate's flashy cars etc, but not their private jets!

The plot thickens!
 
Wow, lets hope this type of law doesnt come to play in the UK. 180 days could destroy the minds of most innocent people if locked up. Heck people who abuse women or have indecent photos of kids here in the UK dont get 6 months inside sometimes.

Do you also agree ALL their calls should be recorded , personal calls and even calls between the accused and their lawyer(s)?

You forgot to read my words ‘if it’s necessary and supervised and there is evidence’.

Surveillance authority is again regulated and supervised and reviewed regularly and should be granted if necessary. And yes I believe in legal privilege with your lawyer so no listening.
 
It seems Mr Waq would also be in favour of wiping, waterboarding and whatever else if its the Tates. Poor chap must think of them before going to sleep every night.

If you support 6 months detention without charge you are not a supporter of justice for sure.

My sleep was fanatic thanks.

Now from getting personal, you are now resorting to be flippant and sensationalist.

You also fail to see the irony of accusing me of thinking of the Tate’s in my sleep.
 
There are many other practical measure the Romanians take which are pretty cruel but if he addresses questions one by one , more can then be asked.

So far its been a fruitful discussion. From they dont need to show evidence, to they dont have any but will in time.

Earlier in court, they refused bail because on some phone call they claim they said they will flee to Dubai. The Tates arent stupid, they know the calls are recorded , so most likely they didnt say this or they made a joke, ie I would love to be in Dubai now etc.

As far as Im aware the recording wasnt shown or heard.

I assume this is aimed at me? I see you are now resorting to misquoting and blatant lying. Tut tut.

Please do highlight exactly where I said that you don’t need to show evidence and that there isn’t any evidence?

Please tell me why you feel the Tate’s are not stupid and only made a joke to their secretary about going to Dubai hence were refused bail. Read you statement again and see who the joke is on.

So you believe that this recorded evidence isn’t genuine and you don’t believe a judge tested the authenticity of the evidence?
 
Even the BBC admit



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64789944

Tate basically telling his secretary, if ALLOWED he would like to go to Dubai for medical assessment. Of course no sane man would go to some dodgy Doctor provided by Romanians. It’s not so important as they would use any excuse to keep him behind bars.

Oh come on - you’re now defending him shamelessly despite Tate admitting he pimps women and encourages others to do so.

You’re also shamelessly lying by saying ‘even the bbc admit’. No my dear friend, the bbc is reporting and quoting the lawyer and admitting nothing. The bail hearing deemed Tate’s Dubai statement as grounds to deny bail. It’s only illegal if he actually leaves for Dubai if he had restrictions and it didn’t happen, it was simply stopped from happening.

A rational person will think that somebody accused of organised crime wants to go to Dubai where extradition is difficult to Romania for escape purposes. I’m unaware of any health issues of Tate that merits treatment in Dubai. Romania was good enough for Tate to live in for years and I’m sure it’s private health care is great too
 
Exactly, plus it can be a cunning trick to test if the phones are tapped.

And anyway, why don't the Romanians confiscate Tate's passports? This is the normal thing to do to prevent suspects from leaving a country, and also issue a notice to border agencies too.

It really does sound like Romania is worse than a 3rd world country.

Bail was also denied not only because they may flee the country but because they pose a high risk to the victims of rape and human traffic.
 
Oh come on - you’re now defending him shamelessly despite Tate admitting he pimps women and encourages others to do so.

You’re also shamelessly lying by saying ‘even the bbc admit’. No my dear friend, the bbc is reporting and quoting the lawyer and admitting nothing. The bail hearing deemed Tate’s Dubai statement as grounds to deny bail. It’s only illegal if he actually leaves for Dubai if he had restrictions and it didn’t happen, it was simply stopped from happening.

A rational person will think that somebody accused of organised crime wants to go to Dubai where extradition is difficult to Romania for escape purposes. I’m unaware of any health issues of Tate that merits treatment in Dubai. Romania was good enough for Tate to live in for years and I’m sure it’s private health care is great too

Its like talking to a brick wall. Again, Im not defending anyone, im interested in this case from a legal pov.

Please dont call me a liar, its your poor understanding as it was with the law. Of course I know BBC reports lol. Remember it was I who helped your learn the legal terms and how the legal system works. I was stating ironically its nice to see the BBC admit/report more in a factual way, rather than making up stuff.

Tate is smarter than you my friend. He was stating he would like to go to Dubai if allowed for medical treatment, clearly the man is not well now. But of course you dont care if a man is behind bars for so long without charge. Its a disgrace to support such poor laws.
 


Mohammed Hijab takes down the case against the Tate brothers, on how he is being detained without any evidence, and that human rights groups should be consistent and raise their voice for the release of the Tate brothers from detention.
 
Andrew Tate in his own videos: “I work with the Romanian mafia.”

Andrew Tate on his own website: “I seduce women and exploit them for sex work.”

Andrew Tate on wiretaps: “I use those women to commit more crimes.”

Tate stans: “THE MATRIX IS ATTACKING HIM”
 
Andrew Tate in his own videos: “I work with the Romanian mafia.”

Andrew Tate on his own website: “I seduce women and exploit them for sex work.”

Andrew Tate on wiretaps: “I use those women to commit more crimes.”

Tate stans: “THE MATRIX IS ATTACKING HIM”

Do you have any proof for these claims ?
 
Boasting to boost an image isn't a new thing, quite a few of you are guilty of this too.

If there was evidence/proof, the Romanian authorities would have it by now.
 
People clutching at straws to defend brother tate. . There is a great article on the mindset of people sticking up for Tate. Will post it soon
 
Andrew Tate in his own videos: “I work with the Romanian mafia.”

Andrew Tate on his own website: “I seduce women and exploit them for sex work.”

Andrew Tate on wiretaps: “I use those women to commit more crimes.”

Tate stans: “THE MATRIX IS ATTACKING HIM”

Videos?

Please advise on convictions and sentence for these.
 
People clutching at straws to defend brother tate. . There is a great article on the mindset of people sticking up for Tate. Will post it soon

You keep on repeating the same things. For example, you bumped this thread with exactly the same type of post you wrote before.

Just to reiterate, here are some facts about Tate:

1) Tate was a non-Muslim before. He has probably done shady things but he did so as a non-Muslim. If he is guilty, by all means, he should be punished. Nobody here is saying otherwise.

2) Tate has converted to Islam. Since his conversion, he didn't engage in this type of activity (to the best of my knowledge).

3) Romanian authorities are yet to charge him even though it has been over 60 days. If there are compelling evidences, why no charge after so many days? Why are they keeping him locked up without charge?

4) Lastly, what took so long to arrest him? If these were all true, why not arrest before? Could it be because he converted to Islam and/or spoke against the deep state?
 
There are many other practical measure the Romanians take which are pretty cruel but if he addresses questions one by one , more can then be asked.

So far its been a fruitful discussion. From they dont need to show evidence, to they dont have any but will in time.

Earlier in court, they refused bail because on some phone call they claim they said they will flee to Dubai. The Tates arent stupid, they know the calls are recorded , so most likely they didnt say this or they made a joke, ie I would love to be in Dubai now etc.

As far as Im aware the recording wasnt shown or heard.

Do you still claim not to be a Tate fan and have no agenda other then potential misjustice.

Yes Tate is really smart and clever as you said. He deliberately said that he would going to Dubai if given bail to confirm wire taps, lol.

I take it your idol Tate also deliberately said to his cronies on the telephone to bribe Romanian politicians and discredit female victims because he knew he was under surveillance! lol

Tate’s attempt to fake having cancer has also been debunked.
 
I think a great article on why tate, Matt Walsh jordan Peterson resonante with some people on this message board and Muslim men in the west.


Andrew Tate and the Moral Bankruptcy of Muslim Proselytization
British-American former professional kickboxer and controversial influencer Andrew Tate (L) clutches a copy of the Quran as he leaves the Bucharest Court of Appeal with his brother. (Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images)
At first glance, Andrew Tate is easy to dismiss as a product of an online culture that packages inflammatory anti-women narratives with quick buck hustling and aggressive gym bro culture. However, Tate — who, despite his global platform, is now languishing in a Romanian jail — has succeeded in bringing together an unlikely alliance from across the global political, ethnic and religious spectrum, both online and offline, that has come to his defense against various controversies.
Tate has made headlines for many reasons, but two incidents in particular stand out: his conversion to Islam and his recent arrest in Romania on rape and human trafficking charges. His defenders immediately cast doubt on the legitimacy of the allegations, pointing fingers at the so-called “matrix,” an allusion to the international system, which they say fabricates accusations in order to silence Tate from telling the “truth.” These defenders reflect a growing ideology rooted in misogyny, homophobia and transphobia that has brought together groups historically pitted against one another, such as the far right and Muslims. Now, these identities are coming together to rally against their common enemies of feminism, liberalism and “wokeness.” Their rallying cries have become widespread through influencers like Tate, whose popularity shows that these ideas are no longer on the fringes of society and can spread like wildfire.
Even though Tate has been part of the online “manosphere” for several years now, it was only last year that he went viral on various social media platforms. This was no coincidence. Through Tate’s “Hustler University,” an online training course that claims to teach people how to be successful and wealthy, subscribers are encouraged to promote short videos on apps like TikTok to rile up viewers by broadcasting some of his most inflammatory statements, such as justifying the physical abuse of women. Tate has mastered the science of manipulating social media algorithms to broadcast his message, which is often countered by users who respond or “stitch” the videos with their disapproving reactions. This cycle of controversy and outrage keeps his name trending and generates curiosity among viewers.
In 2022, Tate announced that he had converted to Islam, indicating a cross-cultural appeal that makes him stand out from others. Coinciding with a growing distrust in institutions and mainstream media across fringe groups (including far-right, far-left and nonpolitical conspiracists like anti-vaxxers), these groups were drawn to Tate’s content, often for similar reasons rooted in mistrust and anger at mainstream society.
The intersectionality between elements of the manosphere and far-right extremism has been documented by groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and researchers across the globe. Last year, my colleague Lydia Wilson wrote about the popularity of Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson among many Arabs and Muslims, noting that his conservative, father figure and family man persona resonates with many who hold traditional values dear and are increasingly wary of liberalism gaining traction in their communities. Many women in patriarchal settings appreciate Peterson’s approach to gender roles, marriage and family no less than men do. Muslim scholars and fans alike had openly encouraged Peterson to embrace Islam, claiming that he was already Muslim but “just doesn’t know it yet.” His lectures praising patriarchal systems echo much of what scholars and preachers in the Muslim world have been saying for decades. But, as Wilson noted in her essay, Peterson’s flirting with the far right and Christian fundamentalism did not appear to bother his Muslim fans. To the contrary, his religious devotion, even if not to Islam, endeared him to many Muslims at a time when the idea of a global war on religion waged by secular forces is growing.
Along with the perceived collapse of traditional values, there is a widespread belief that domestic policies worldwide are pushing for the abandonment of religion by refusing religious classes in public schools — what conservative communities believe is the indoctrination of liberalism.
Matt Walsh, an American journalist, is another conservative commentator gaining traction among Muslim communities and online religious preachers. Segments from Walsh’s documentary on gender issues, “What Is a Woman?” with Arabic subtitles have been making the rounds in WhatsApp chat groups in the Middle East. Candace Owens’ conservative commentaries on gender roles are also endorsed in chat groups and circulated widely among traditional Muslims. The common themes raised by Walsh and Owens that resonate with certain audiences in the Muslim world are the outright rejection of transgender individuals and the use of nonbinary pronouns as well as criticism of feminist and women’s liberation movements. The political views and affiliations of this brand of conservative commentators are often anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim, but that does not appear to affect their growing popularity. The acceptance of this narrative among Muslim preachers is not surprising, but their overlooking of condescending views regarding Islam is interesting, because it changes the enemy from the usual Jewish and Christian suspects to the new liberal world order.
Tate is different from Peterson, Walsh and Owens in that he embraces what is usually considered depravity in Islam. He boasts about having an endless series of girlfriends and has acknowledged that he has used women to create adult content for profit. In summary, Tate represents everything that Muslim preachers warn against and consider the epitome of social decay. Nonetheless, Tate’s conversion to Islam was welcomed by the same preachers, who disregarded his behavior by either implying he is a new Muslim and will learn in time or by not discussing it at all. Meanwhile, Tate’s far-right followers in the West, many of whom have a record of Islamophobia, largely ignored his conversion, and he lost no support from the majority of them, such as the British alt-right commentator Paul Joseph Watson and Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
Tate’s effect on young Muslim men is worth noting, particularly because a different section of the West’s manosphere has appealed to various sectors of the Muslim world before. In a Canadian high school, an Islamic studies teacher was shocked when one of her 10th-grade male students argued that women belonged in the kitchen. The teacher, who wears a niqab — a conservative Muslim face cover that reveals only the eyes — had not heard this before from her students. Upon inquiring, she learned the student was inspired by Tate. To understand this phenomenon better, I approached some of Tate’s most avid Muslim defenders online. They ranged in age from 21 to 32 and agreed to speak on condition of anonymity.
“Look, we know it’s not ideal and what he has done in the past is sinful, but he is a new convert and will learn in time,” one of the young men said, speaking of Tate’s exploits and vices. “Nothing he was doing or is doing now can be worse than kufur,” he continued, using the Arabic word for infidelity. “Islam forgives everything but kufur, and all new converts must be welcomed.”
I struggled to understand the cognitive dissonance before me. While it is true that, from the religious perspective, new Muslims must be welcomed, repenting for one’s sins is also a vital part of converting to Islam — and Tate has never once indicated any desire to repent. Defending Tate as a recent convert goes beyond typical double standards; the same men who chastise Muslims like Egyptian soccer star Mo Salah for decorating a Christmas tree in his home somehow have no vocal objections to another Muslim man who still openly describes himself as a “pimp” and exploits women for money.
In these conversations, there was an interesting, albeit inaccurate, comparison made between Tate and early Muslims from the conquest era. “Muslim men have historically had women on the side and found ways to justify it,” said another respondent. “Look at the concubines! Owning them as war spoils was permissible in Islam. Men used them for entertainment purposes. They used to buy and sell them. That tier of women is not different from the ones in Andrew’s webcams. The rules that apply to these women are different from the ones that apply to the women in our families, like our sisters and potential wives.” There is an entire scholarly body of work to explain the concubine tradition in Islam from the seventh to the 18th centuries that is beyond the scope of this essay but, regardless of how we feel about it from a 21st-century moral standpoint, the contexts are drastically different.
The baseless comparison does, however, reveal one of many overlapping ideas between Tate’s Muslim supporters and the far-right movements in the West: how they define depravity. The threat is not nonmarital sex and adultery (when committed by a man), nor is overindulgence in earthly pleasures the source of the decay in civilization. Rather, the threat is the new wave of feminism and liberalism that influences the kind of women who these groups would rather keep in traditional gender roles in order to uphold the traditional, patriarchal order — which permits a man to indulge in whatever pleasures he desires, while expecting chastity and submission from the women in their direct circles. It is reminiscent of the Jezebels in the popular television show “The Handmaid’s Tale,” where an entire secretive nightlife exists in the pious, God-fearing Republic of Gilead made for the high-ranking ruling men. Sex with the Jezebels, the fallen women, is abundant. But outside this secret world the wives, sisters and daughters of these men could be executed for engaging in as much as an affair.
After Tate’s arrest, I reached out to the Muslim men whom I previously spoke to for comment, and only one agreed to speak to me. “It is all lies. They are coming after him because he is now Muslim and because he is exposing the matrix,” a 23-year-old told me. “The red pill wave will continue no matter what they do.” This was another overlap with the far-right manosphere: the conspiracy of the red pill.
To understand Tate and the larger manosphere requires knowledge of certain key terms used to explain the ostensible dangers of the feminist and woke movements, many of which go back to the blockbuster 1999 film, “The Matrix.” In the movie, characters are given a choice between a red pill that exposes the real world as a machine-controlled reality that has enslaved humans, and a blue pill that allows them to remain in the comfort of their ignorant bliss. Alluding to this, Tate and other manosphere influencers refer to the “matrix” as the new liberal order and the “pill” as the choice to face (their) reality or continue to ignore it.
In an example of how fringe groups are moving closer together despite fundamental ideological differences, this same language is used by both the far-right commentator Tommy Robinson and the Muslim preacher Mohammed Hijab. Tate’s newfound faith does not seem to be an obstacle to supporting Robinson, who is known for using inflammatory language against Muslims and Islam. Now, the perceived attack on masculinity has made feminism and woke culture a common enemy for Muslim preachers, Islamists and Islamophobes alike. Many Muslim preachers have long believed in their own version of the matrix, in which the West conspires to destroy Islam through depravity and progressive lifestyles. In more recent times, these “matrices” appear to overlap in the belief that a new liberal world order is out to destroy all religions and impose new values that contradict tradition, and that secularism has infiltrated all religions except for Islam.
The intersectionality of homophobia, transphobia and feminism has helped create an alliance of ideas. Tate’s recent arrest has vindicated the belief that those “exposing the matrix” risk losing their freedom. Abdul Aziz al-Ansari, a Qatari preacher with more than 600,000 subscribers to his YouTube channel, believes Tate was arrested because he challenged the liberal world order by converting to Islam and exposing the hypocrisy of the West. Even before his conversion to Islam, Tate had praised the religion and described it as the only successful one.
The Egyptian preacher Dr. Haitham Talaat, a physician-turned-online-preacher, published a long video on his YouTube channel (boasting 406,000 subscribers) praising Tate, while claiming that hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on the anti-Islam, pro-secular project in the Muslim world through networks supporting feminist movements, LGBTQ rights and national identity politics. According to him, all of these had disintegrated in a few months at the hands of a “charismatic young American man named Andrew Tate, who has fought secularism in the West and has now converted to Islam, the last true religion to reject secularism.” Alt-right commentator Mike Cernovich flirted with this idea in 2019, when he tweeted to his 1.1 million Twitter followers that Islam was perhaps the West’s last hope in the face of wokeism. The tweet reads illogically, but examining the context further reveals that the message is not too far-fetched. Reactionaries who believe there is a war on masculinity are looking for a place where the “tough guy” is accepted. A superficial understanding of Islam and Muslims provides just that: a religion with a global following that rejects progressive values, preaches intolerance of women’s and minority rights, and responds to any criticism with violence.
The very Islamophobic stereotypes that many Muslims have fought against are now attracting the toxic masculinity types to Islam, and the Muslim community is not only unfazed but has embraced them.
Muslim preachers have always used mosques to spread their messages in Friday sermons. Since the 1970s, they have been expanding into many other spaces with each technological development, from TV channels and cassette tapes to YouTube channels and social media platforms. Guidance and self-help gurus in the Muslim world are rarely secular, and preachers have often played the role of spreading religion and social guidance with conservative lenses. The common theme shared among generations of preachers is the need to fight back against the Western depravity infiltrating Muslim communities. In the 1950s, the prominent Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb noted the sexual freedom he saw in the town of Greeley, Colorado, during his time as an exchange student. He returned to Egypt adamant on rejecting the West and sticking to conservative Islam. Since then, this theme has been a constant in conservative religious preaching with an emphasis on women’s role in luring men into sin and women’s responsibility in maintaining chastity to help their male counterparts live a life free of sin. This responsibility was not only embodied in women committing to modesty but also accepting traditional gender roles, including staying at home to serve the family. The double standards toward men and women have always been there, but preachers have rarely, if ever, endorsed or accepted a male figure whose hedonism violates basic Islamic norms. That was, until Tate converted.
Other common themes that Muslim preachers have traditionally encouraged and praised are modesty, humbleness and asceticism in lifestyle choices, traits that completely contradict Tate’s world, where mansions, yachts and luxurious sports cars reflect a status that all young men should aspire to. Tate defines success as being outrageously wealthy and believes that being poor is the ultimate failure.
A friend of mine who lives between the Middle East and Europe and preferred that her name remain unmentioned shared a personal family story with me related to Tate’s influence on young Muslims. One day, her young adolescent son suddenly began expressing frustration at his family being “cheap” and “poor.” My friend is by no means cheap nor poor and does not live as such. Her family’s lifestyle, indeed, could be described as wealthy and upper-class. “He would angrily ask his father and I why don’t we have more modern cars and show off our money. It was all so odd, because that is not how we raised him,” she told me. After some research, the mother learned her son and his friends had recently discovered Tate on YouTube and were agreeing with his every word. Tate’s recent move to the United Arab Emirates and endorsement of the stereotypical Gulf lifestyle had influenced the teenage Muslim boys.
Contentment and not chasing what is often described as earthly distractions such as wealth have traditionally been core components of preachers’ sermons. There is no indication that Tate has altered his lifestyle. On the eve of his arrest, he was recorded alongside his brother, Tristan, partying with a crowd of scantily dressed women and drinking alcohol. Despite that, none of the Muslim preachers who have welcomed his conversion have called attention to the fact that he continues to boast about his wealth and sexual adventures.
Another value that most Muslim preachers espouse is the importance of earning a livelihood through what is considered a lawful and honest means of labor. Though scholars consistently debate what constitutes unlawful, some of Tate’s sources of income are unquestionably prohibited in Islam, even by the most lenient scholars. The most egregious example is hiring young women for his webcam studio, which provides sexual services to clients. While Tate claims that the girls are scantily clad but never nude, the ongoing investigation has indicated that the webcam studios provide adult content for clients. Neither the aforementioned Muslim preachers, nor Tate’s Muslim fans, mention any of these outright violations of Islamic law.
After declaring his conversion to Islam, Tate stated he was already collecting bricks to stone his partner if she ever cheated, alluding to the Sharia punishment for adultery. He explained that Islam’s appeal lay in the fact that there are consequences for being critical of traditional values, and many of these values — namely gender roles and the belief in the superiority of men over women — align with his personal beliefs. But this interpretation of Islam is a far cry from the message of kindness, modesty and honesty that the Prophet Muhammad espoused to first spread Islam. As kids, we all learned these values in our Islamic classes as the most important attributes that a Muslim can possess and promote. We learned stories about how Islam entered lands like Singhasari and Majapahit (Indonesia today) that highlighted generosity and morality, not bullying and masculinity — even when the history was more complicated than this depiction — as the driving force behind the gradual conversion of entire peoples.
There is a void in Islamic preaching, especially as the public spheres in places like the Middle East are tightly controlled and policed by autocratic regimes. It is not only the absence of heroes that has allowed individuals like Tate to emerge as role models but also the inability to create an appealing Islamic narrative that can realistically address the allures of consumerism and earthly desires. Now, this void is being filled by any self-proclaimed preacher who can set up a YouTube channel and podcast. As Hijab, the British-Egyptian YouTube preacher and debater with more than 650,000 subscribers, said, “[Tate] is the most-Googled man on the planet.” For him and many other Muslim preachers, this seals the deal on why Tate must be accepted — not because he is “a good man” but because he is “the most-Googled man.” Tate knows how to maintain this support by playing on the heartstrings of this particular demographic of Muslim followers. He quotes Ibn Taymiyyah, the controversial and ultraconservative 13th-century Muslim theologian, in his tweets. Tristan Tate, Andrew’s brother, recently said that none of his Christian friends had supported him after the arrest, whereas his brother’s Muslim friends and followers have defended him and stood by him.
Another aspect of Tate that has resonated across both the Muslim world and the West is his explanation of the frustration of young men who feel disenfranchised in the world’s liberal order. It seems to them — and to Tate — that society has set the bar for success, especially in dating, unrealistically high and fails to provide them with the necessary tools to thrive. Consuming this discourse feels like another moment of cognitive dissonance. If anything, global patriarchal systems have ensured that men of all ages require less effort to succeed in comparison with girls and women. This fear of being marginalized is reminiscent of the justifications of the far right’s appeal as a reaction to growing immigrant populations or advocating for ethnic and religious minorities. It is the fear of being equal to those whom they see as less advantaged and losing their privileges that is driving young men to inflammatory narratives. No one is taking anything from them, but plenty of influencers, like Tate, are emphasizing their entitlement instead of teaching them acceptance and tolerance.
While the concept of “incel” (involuntary celibate) has a very different meaning in the Muslim world than in the West, the underlying message of entitlement is similar. In the West, it refers to a man who cannot attract a sexual partner despite his belief that he is entitled to one (on the sole basis of being male). But, in the Muslim world, the social constructs of gender roles, tradition and family mean that marriage is more important, and any man, regardless of his financial situation, status or physical appeal, can find a wife. Yet there is a chance that he does not find a wife in a social class higher than his, or one who fits his idea of physical attractiveness. Similar to the way that incels in the West lash out at women whose standards are “too high,” any ideas that show women that they do not have to settle for marriage without happiness and love are extremely dangerous to the patriarchal status quo.
Tate is no genius and offers nothing original to the worldview made up of conspiracy, misogyny and red pills. He follows a long tradition that has grown and thrived with online subcultures. But his conversion to Islam is telling — not for understanding the milieu he comes from but for the reactions from Muslims, who might have been expected to stand against most of his views and behavior. The fact that they have overlooked his involvement in racy adult video content, accusations of rape and human trafficking, financial gain from his investments in gambling and casinos — all considered grave sins in Islam — to claim his righteousness about women and minorities shows just how desperate some preachers in the Muslim world are for any legitimation and popularity, however toxic.
 
• Dr Ali Razzak is exposed as a GP, not an oncologist and also is a friend of Tate and his Twitter / YouTube buddies such as Tam Khan, Shooter and the porn star guy Stirling

• The Tate brothers are being held in a soft detention centre where politicians are held and they have been able to order steak from a restaurant

• No charges means no exchange of evidence as of yet. It’s a prosecution right to buy time to strengthen their case. If they submit evidence now then the prosecution have to release Tate if they haven’t gathered all the evidence that they need. Upto 180 days being detained is legal.

• Tate has access to lawyers who are legally qualified to practice in Romania. Gigla is one of the best in the country and heading his team.

• Leaked extended transcripts show trafficking/fear/ intimidation

• Tate was accused before he acquired wealth and the #metoo movement. No matrix back then surely?

• Prejudicial and faked transcripts leaked by the Tate PR Team. This has all been debunked already and the timelines and dates of WhatsApp’s didn’t correlate.

• A massive Tate authorised bot system of retweets is operating. This all brought him fame so it works both ways.

• Misinformation campaign by Tate PR machine and all of his Dubai buddies - most who are fame hungry and / or of dubious character

• Intimidation of victims claims leaked by prosecution and allegedly shown to Judge, mainly using Romanian mafia. How else was Tate able to possibly bribe politicians as already confirmed.

• Romanian law on pre-trial arrest and detention of 180 days is actually an average length compared to other countries. Romania has hundreds of human trafficking convictions in the last few years and they know what they are doing.

• Tate self-incriminating evidence IS admissible in Romania and has been referred to in Court judgments

Time will tell what happens, but Tate was accused of all this much before his Islam conversion.

What was Tate doing in Romania for years?
 
Andrew Tate in his own videos: “I work with the Romanian mafia.”

Andrew Tate on his own website: “I seduce women and exploit them for sex work.”

Andrew Tate on wiretaps: “I use those women to commit more crimes.”

Tate stans: “THE MATRIX IS ATTACKING HIM”

The timeline of the videos would be important. If you are producing old videos when Tate was a minor raping Christo-atheist, then that would be disingenuous.
 
The timeline of the videos would be important. If you are producing old videos when Tate was a minor raping Christo-atheist, then that would be disingenuous.

Or another way to answer your query is that if we accept that Tate became one of the most famous faces and names on social media from late summer 2022, why would he continue to talk about trafficking, pimping and lover boy methods to traffic girls? He is smart and now in the big time on Piers Morgan shows etc.

Tate has admitted doing all this for £50 a month as part of his hustlers university courses he was selling. The only retort I get to this is why has Tate not been charged yet? My response is that victims need to be identified and he is being investigated for it as we speak.
 
Mike Tyson converted to Islam in early 90s and he was no role model but he got blind support for changing his faith. The Mike Tyson of 2023 is much more mellow and philosophical and I have always found him quite inspiring.

Tate being a Muslim does nothing good or bad in my opinion of him. Nawaz Sharif is a Muslim too!

I do get annoyed when some people become sheep and blindly support a man because of his own personal journey.

As I’ve said many times on this thread and happy to be disbelieved - but I’ve seen him up close. I know girls he and his brother have approached and treated like meat. I may regularly go to a Mayfair members club where he used to frequent? I may also be a supercar owner myself who went on a cannonball run where Tate took his Porsche GT2 and David Haye also went on this tour and I spend a good few days with them? Maybe search for the Asians in that YouTube video to identify me and my car I took.

I may even know personal things such as Tate buying the cannonball company and dropping it to simply add to his brand.

What I do know is that Tate to me is a narcissist who is fame hungry. He is younger then me and he is now approaching his 40s and has no meaningful relationship or children but no, he has a gold Bugatti so life is great! Tristan Tate has never had a proper job / career and mid 30s and hanging onto his brother. All they do is sleep with insecure broken women and then made it into a business as they don’t respect women.

A proper role model for me is a Muslim family man who can operate a meaningful or legit business or career.
 
Or another way to answer your query is that if we accept that Tate became one of the most famous faces and names on social media from late summer 2022, why would he continue to talk about trafficking, pimping and lover boy methods to traffic girls? He is smart and now in the big time on Piers Morgan shows etc.

Tate has admitted doing all this for £50 a month as part of his hustlers university courses he was selling. The only retort I get to this is why has Tate not been charged yet? My response is that victims need to be identified and he is being investigated for it as we speak.

His Hustlers University course must have been running long enough to gain such success to charge £50/month for long enough to take it seriously. The Times actually ran an extensive article of his subscribers who have done very well out of it, they must have considered it money well spent.

You are talking about victims, but what qualifies you describe who is a victim?
 
His Hustlers University course must have been running long enough to gain such success to charge £50/month for long enough to take it seriously. The Times actually ran an extensive article of his subscribers who have done very well out of it, they must have considered it money well spent.

You are talking about victims, but what qualifies you describe who is a victim?

Yes I believe the online hustlers university course made the Tate brothers millions every month. Tate spent much of that on algorithms to go viral on social media along with his great camera speaking skills, it worked a treat.

Sorry I don’t get your question on what qualifies me? Everybody pretty much knows what a victim of crime is right? If Tate admits he sexually exploits women and pimps them for web camming then who am I to disagree with him? I do know that this only becomes a crime if there is an actual victim identified as it’s not a victimless crime. I’m sure this is not the sole evidence that DIICOT of Romania have against Tate!
 
Last edited:
So basically, some users despise Tate because he had money, fame, and supercars - put simply, jealousy.

:)))
 
Do you still claim not to be a Tate fan and have no agenda other then potential misjustice.

Yes Tate is really smart and clever as you said. He deliberately said that he would going to Dubai if given bail to confirm wire taps, lol.

I take it your idol Tate also deliberately said to his cronies on the telephone to bribe Romanian politicians and discredit female victims because he knew he was under surveillance! lol

Tate’s attempt to fake having cancer has also been debunked.

Are you struggling to comprehend? Lets put it this way, im as much fan of Tate as you are of David Carrick.


Tate has yet to be charged, yet to be convincted.

But thanks for confirming YOU are happy for a man to be incarcerated for upto 6 months without charge. I wonder if he was your family member if you'd see it the same?
 
So basically, some users despise Tate because he had money, fame, and supercars - put simply, jealousy.

:)))

Who is jealous? You? I’m certainly not and I didn’t get the sense of anybody on here being jealous of the colour of his Bugatti either.

Isn’t that what your Top G says that they all jealous because he has a Bugatti?

Aren’t you that funny poster who also refuses to comment on why Tate made university syllabus videos about pimping and divert the topic about Epstein and the John Lennon assassination instead? Lol
 
Who is jealous? You? I’m certainly not and I didn’t get the sense of anybody on here being jealous of the colour of his Bugatti either.

Isn’t that what your Top G says that they all jealous because he has a Bugatti?

Aren’t you that funny poster who also refuses to comment on why Tate made university syllabus videos about pimping and divert the topic about Epstein and the John Lennon assassination instead? Lol

I refuse to debate with you since you decided to disengage days ago.

Yes you seem jealous of Tate. Did he steal your car keys too?

All makes sense now.
 
Are you struggling to comprehend? Lets put it this way, im as much fan of Tate as you are of David Carrick.


Tate has yet to be charged, yet to be convincted.

But thanks for confirming YOU are happy for a man to be incarcerated for upto 6 months without charge. I wonder if he was your family member if you'd see it the same?

Why do you think you know my opinions of David Carrick and why do you even think you know anything about me or my past career? Isn’t this all a bit obsessive when I’ve never confirmed my background on here? Please feel free to message a senior Mod such as Saj or Mig for my private email address and I’ll happily explain what I do as you seem so keen to find out or think you know me. Getting personal is a female trait and also signs that a person cannot debate on the facts.

If my family member was like Andrew Tate then yes I’d be fine with him being on remand.

As for him being held for over two months without charge - it’s legal so tough and it’s all being supervised by a Judge and the investigation is being led by DIICOT who are being over seen by the a European human trafficking organisation.

Disclosure has not yet been done because then a charging decision will have to be made - investigation is confidential and on going
 
I refuse to debate with you since you decided to disengage days ago.

Yes you seem jealous of Tate. Did he steal your car keys too?

All makes sense now.

Brilliant, bravo.

Go back and reflect on who disengaged. Evidence is here for all to see.
 
Why do you think you know my opinions of David Carrick and why do you even think you know anything about me or my past career? Isn’t this all a bit obsessive when I’ve never confirmed my background on here? Please feel free to message a senior Mod such as Saj or Mig for my private email address and I’ll happily explain what I do as you seem so keen to find out or think you know me. Getting personal is a female trait and also signs that a person cannot debate on the facts.

If my family member was like Andrew Tate then yes I’d be fine with him being on remand.

As for him being held for over two months without charge - it’s legal so tough and it’s all being supervised by a Judge and the investigation is being led by DIICOT who are being over seen by the a European human trafficking organisation.

Disclosure has not yet been done because then a charging decision will have to be made - investigation is confidential and on going

You can get personal but others cant? :)) Get the point, dont go crying to mods.

No you wouldnt, you'd cry , stop lying.

Disclosure starts at arrest, go back to college.
 
You can get personal but others cant? :)) Get the point, dont go crying to mods.

No you wouldnt, you'd cry , stop lying.

Disclosure starts at arrest, go back to college.

Again the thread is open and clear for all to see about who is being personal.

You seem to think you know me outside of here and my career etc so as I said go get my email from the mods and I’ll tell you privately.

You seem unable to stick to the thread topic as well as your buddy.

If you feel that disclosure starts are arrest then that’s fine. Show me some links / proof?

Why do I need to go to college?
 
Last edited:
Brilliant, bravo.

Go back and reflect on who disengaged. Evidence is here for all to see.

Post #628

You have some serious issues.

Now you have revealed that you hanged out with Tate, at the same Mayfair clubs, events, and witnessed what he did to women, so clearly in the same social circle, and then you have the audacity to question Tate’s character and qualifications to be a role model.

Did he beat you in a race or something?

You just let the cat out the bag, and frankly it explains everything, your inability to cite evidence, your wish for Tate to be incarcerated without evidence let alone a trial, and constant shifting of your understanding of legal processes.

Have a good night!
 
Post #628

You have some serious issues.

Now you have revealed that you hanged out with Tate, at the same Mayfair clubs, events, and witnessed what he did to women, so clearly in the same social circle, and then you have the audacity to question Tate’s character and qualifications to be a role model.

Did he beat you in a race or something?

You just let the cat out the bag, and frankly it explains everything, your inability to cite evidence, your wish for Tate to be incarcerated without evidence let alone a trial, and constant shifting of your understanding of legal processes.

Have a good night!

Ok so if I say I’ve spent a week with him on a cannonball run and a member of private members club with thousand plus members that I’m now in the same social circle?

Even if that was the case, does that mean I believe I’m trafficking?

Another very bitter and personal poster
 
Ok so if I say I’ve spent a week with him on a cannonball run and a member of private members club with thousand plus members that I’m now in the same social circle?

Even if that was the case, does that mean I believe I’m trafficking?

Another very bitter and personal poster

Who said you were trafficking? Very insecure of you.

Fact is you are clearly jealous of Tate, and just after a week? Wow.

Your accusation of Tate trafficking remain allegations by the way, but we already know this because you have not cited any evidence.

Insecurity is a trait of jealousy too.
 
Who said you were trafficking? Very insecure of you.

Fact is you are clearly jealous of Tate, and just after a week? Wow.

Your accusation of Tate trafficking remain allegations by the way, but we already know this because you have not cited any evidence.

Insecurity is a trait of jealousy too.

Yes I have written what I believe are reasons why I dislike Tate and presented facts and questions that remain unanswered (not Epstein ones!).

Yes you got me, Tate’s car has 100 more bhp than mine so I’m hoping he goes down for sex trafficking.
 
Yes I have written what I believe are reasons why I dislike Tate and presented facts and questions that remain unanswered (not Epstein ones!).

Yes you got me, Tate’s car has 100 more bhp than mine so I’m hoping he goes down for sex trafficking.

Did he beat you by an inch or a mile?
 
Did he beat you by an inch or a mile?

By miles. Your leader was far too superior.

Anyway, do tweedle Dee and tweedle dum ever fancy going back to debating the facts of Tate’s arrest and why he made videos admitting he pimped?
 
By miles. Your leader was far too superior.

Anyway, do tweedle Dee and tweedle dum ever fancy going back to debating the facts of Tate’s arrest and why he made videos admitting he pimped?

No I do not fancy going back to debating with someone who decided to disengage with me. I cited the post number too.

Especially now that you have revealled how you knew Tate, albeit for a week, so your POV in this case (pun fully intended) is the epitome of a biased, subjective, and bitter view.
 
No I do not fancy going back to debating with someone who decided to disengage with me. I cited the post number too.

Especially now that you have revealled how you knew Tate, albeit for a week, so your POV in this case (pun fully intended) is the epitome of a biased, subjective, and bitter view.

Great logic I see
 
Yes I believe the online hustlers university course made the Tate brothers millions every month. Tate spent much of that on algorithms to go viral on social media along with his great camera speaking skills, it worked a treat.

Sorry I don’t get your question on what qualifies me? Everybody pretty much knows what a victim of crime is right? If Tate admits he sexually exploits women and pimps them for web camming then who am I to disagree with him? I do know that this only becomes a crime if there is an actual victim identified as it’s not a victimless crime. I’m sure this is not the sole evidence that DIICOT of Romania have against Tate!

We are true Brits mate. We can sniff out a fake a mile away.
 
I think a great article on why tate, Matt Walsh jordan Peterson resonante with some people on this message board and Muslim men in the west.


Andrew Tate and the Moral Bankruptcy of Muslim Proselytization
British-American former professional kickboxer and controversial influencer Andrew Tate (L) clutches a copy of the Quran as he leaves the Bucharest Court of Appeal with his brother. (Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images)
At first glance, Andrew Tate is easy to dismiss as a product of an online culture that packages inflammatory anti-women narratives with quick buck hustling and aggressive gym bro culture. However, Tate — who, despite his global platform, is now languishing in a Romanian jail — has succeeded in bringing together an unlikely alliance from across the global political, ethnic and religious spectrum, both online and offline, that has come to his defense against various controversies.
Tate has made headlines for many reasons, but two incidents in particular stand out: his conversion to Islam and his recent arrest in Romania on rape and human trafficking charges. His defenders immediately cast doubt on the legitimacy of the allegations, pointing fingers at the so-called “matrix,” an allusion to the international system, which they say fabricates accusations in order to silence Tate from telling the “truth.” These defenders reflect a growing ideology rooted in misogyny, homophobia and transphobia that has brought together groups historically pitted against one another, such as the far right and Muslims. Now, these identities are coming together to rally against their common enemies of feminism, liberalism and “wokeness.” Their rallying cries have become widespread through influencers like Tate, whose popularity shows that these ideas are no longer on the fringes of society and can spread like wildfire.
Even though Tate has been part of the online “manosphere” for several years now, it was only last year that he went viral on various social media platforms. This was no coincidence. Through Tate’s “Hustler University,” an online training course that claims to teach people how to be successful and wealthy, subscribers are encouraged to promote short videos on apps like TikTok to rile up viewers by broadcasting some of his most inflammatory statements, such as justifying the physical abuse of women. Tate has mastered the science of manipulating social media algorithms to broadcast his message, which is often countered by users who respond or “stitch” the videos with their disapproving reactions. This cycle of controversy and outrage keeps his name trending and generates curiosity among viewers.
In 2022, Tate announced that he had converted to Islam, indicating a cross-cultural appeal that makes him stand out from others. Coinciding with a growing distrust in institutions and mainstream media across fringe groups (including far-right, far-left and nonpolitical conspiracists like anti-vaxxers), these groups were drawn to Tate’s content, often for similar reasons rooted in mistrust and anger at mainstream society.
The intersectionality between elements of the manosphere and far-right extremism has been documented by groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and researchers across the globe. Last year, my colleague Lydia Wilson wrote about the popularity of Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson among many Arabs and Muslims, noting that his conservative, father figure and family man persona resonates with many who hold traditional values dear and are increasingly wary of liberalism gaining traction in their communities. Many women in patriarchal settings appreciate Peterson’s approach to gender roles, marriage and family no less than men do. Muslim scholars and fans alike had openly encouraged Peterson to embrace Islam, claiming that he was already Muslim but “just doesn’t know it yet.” His lectures praising patriarchal systems echo much of what scholars and preachers in the Muslim world have been saying for decades. But, as Wilson noted in her essay, Peterson’s flirting with the far right and Christian fundamentalism did not appear to bother his Muslim fans. To the contrary, his religious devotion, even if not to Islam, endeared him to many Muslims at a time when the idea of a global war on religion waged by secular forces is growing.
Along with the perceived collapse of traditional values, there is a widespread belief that domestic policies worldwide are pushing for the abandonment of religion by refusing religious classes in public schools — what conservative communities believe is the indoctrination of liberalism.
Matt Walsh, an American journalist, is another conservative commentator gaining traction among Muslim communities and online religious preachers. Segments from Walsh’s documentary on gender issues, “What Is a Woman?” with Arabic subtitles have been making the rounds in WhatsApp chat groups in the Middle East. Candace Owens’ conservative commentaries on gender roles are also endorsed in chat groups and circulated widely among traditional Muslims. The common themes raised by Walsh and Owens that resonate with certain audiences in the Muslim world are the outright rejection of transgender individuals and the use of nonbinary pronouns as well as criticism of feminist and women’s liberation movements. The political views and affiliations of this brand of conservative commentators are often anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim, but that does not appear to affect their growing popularity. The acceptance of this narrative among Muslim preachers is not surprising, but their overlooking of condescending views regarding Islam is interesting, because it changes the enemy from the usual Jewish and Christian suspects to the new liberal world order.
Tate is different from Peterson, Walsh and Owens in that he embraces what is usually considered depravity in Islam. He boasts about having an endless series of girlfriends and has acknowledged that he has used women to create adult content for profit. In summary, Tate represents everything that Muslim preachers warn against and consider the epitome of social decay. Nonetheless, Tate’s conversion to Islam was welcomed by the same preachers, who disregarded his behavior by either implying he is a new Muslim and will learn in time or by not discussing it at all. Meanwhile, Tate’s far-right followers in the West, many of whom have a record of Islamophobia, largely ignored his conversion, and he lost no support from the majority of them, such as the British alt-right commentator Paul Joseph Watson and Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
Tate’s effect on young Muslim men is worth noting, particularly because a different section of the West’s manosphere has appealed to various sectors of the Muslim world before. In a Canadian high school, an Islamic studies teacher was shocked when one of her 10th-grade male students argued that women belonged in the kitchen. The teacher, who wears a niqab — a conservative Muslim face cover that reveals only the eyes — had not heard this before from her students. Upon inquiring, she learned the student was inspired by Tate. To understand this phenomenon better, I approached some of Tate’s most avid Muslim defenders online. They ranged in age from 21 to 32 and agreed to speak on condition of anonymity.
“Look, we know it’s not ideal and what he has done in the past is sinful, but he is a new convert and will learn in time,” one of the young men said, speaking of Tate’s exploits and vices. “Nothing he was doing or is doing now can be worse than kufur,” he continued, using the Arabic word for infidelity. “Islam forgives everything but kufur, and all new converts must be welcomed.”
I struggled to understand the cognitive dissonance before me. While it is true that, from the religious perspective, new Muslims must be welcomed, repenting for one’s sins is also a vital part of converting to Islam — and Tate has never once indicated any desire to repent. Defending Tate as a recent convert goes beyond typical double standards; the same men who chastise Muslims like Egyptian soccer star Mo Salah for decorating a Christmas tree in his home somehow have no vocal objections to another Muslim man who still openly describes himself as a “pimp” and exploits women for money.
In these conversations, there was an interesting, albeit inaccurate, comparison made between Tate and early Muslims from the conquest era. “Muslim men have historically had women on the side and found ways to justify it,” said another respondent. “Look at the concubines! Owning them as war spoils was permissible in Islam. Men used them for entertainment purposes. They used to buy and sell them. That tier of women is not different from the ones in Andrew’s webcams. The rules that apply to these women are different from the ones that apply to the women in our families, like our sisters and potential wives.” There is an entire scholarly body of work to explain the concubine tradition in Islam from the seventh to the 18th centuries that is beyond the scope of this essay but, regardless of how we feel about it from a 21st-century moral standpoint, the contexts are drastically different.
The baseless comparison does, however, reveal one of many overlapping ideas between Tate’s Muslim supporters and the far-right movements in the West: how they define depravity. The threat is not nonmarital sex and adultery (when committed by a man), nor is overindulgence in earthly pleasures the source of the decay in civilization. Rather, the threat is the new wave of feminism and liberalism that influences the kind of women who these groups would rather keep in traditional gender roles in order to uphold the traditional, patriarchal order — which permits a man to indulge in whatever pleasures he desires, while expecting chastity and submission from the women in their direct circles. It is reminiscent of the Jezebels in the popular television show “The Handmaid’s Tale,” where an entire secretive nightlife exists in the pious, God-fearing Republic of Gilead made for the high-ranking ruling men. Sex with the Jezebels, the fallen women, is abundant. But outside this secret world the wives, sisters and daughters of these men could be executed for engaging in as much as an affair.
After Tate’s arrest, I reached out to the Muslim men whom I previously spoke to for comment, and only one agreed to speak to me. “It is all lies. They are coming after him because he is now Muslim and because he is exposing the matrix,” a 23-year-old told me. “The red pill wave will continue no matter what they do.” This was another overlap with the far-right manosphere: the conspiracy of the red pill.
To understand Tate and the larger manosphere requires knowledge of certain key terms used to explain the ostensible dangers of the feminist and woke movements, many of which go back to the blockbuster 1999 film, “The Matrix.” In the movie, characters are given a choice between a red pill that exposes the real world as a machine-controlled reality that has enslaved humans, and a blue pill that allows them to remain in the comfort of their ignorant bliss. Alluding to this, Tate and other manosphere influencers refer to the “matrix” as the new liberal order and the “pill” as the choice to face (their) reality or continue to ignore it.
In an example of how fringe groups are moving closer together despite fundamental ideological differences, this same language is used by both the far-right commentator Tommy Robinson and the Muslim preacher Mohammed Hijab. Tate’s newfound faith does not seem to be an obstacle to supporting Robinson, who is known for using inflammatory language against Muslims and Islam. Now, the perceived attack on masculinity has made feminism and woke culture a common enemy for Muslim preachers, Islamists and Islamophobes alike. Many Muslim preachers have long believed in their own version of the matrix, in which the West conspires to destroy Islam through depravity and progressive lifestyles. In more recent times, these “matrices” appear to overlap in the belief that a new liberal world order is out to destroy all religions and impose new values that contradict tradition, and that secularism has infiltrated all religions except for Islam.
The intersectionality of homophobia, transphobia and feminism has helped create an alliance of ideas. Tate’s recent arrest has vindicated the belief that those “exposing the matrix” risk losing their freedom. Abdul Aziz al-Ansari, a Qatari preacher with more than 600,000 subscribers to his YouTube channel, believes Tate was arrested because he challenged the liberal world order by converting to Islam and exposing the hypocrisy of the West. Even before his conversion to Islam, Tate had praised the religion and described it as the only successful one.
The Egyptian preacher Dr. Haitham Talaat, a physician-turned-online-preacher, published a long video on his YouTube channel (boasting 406,000 subscribers) praising Tate, while claiming that hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on the anti-Islam, pro-secular project in the Muslim world through networks supporting feminist movements, LGBTQ rights and national identity politics. According to him, all of these had disintegrated in a few months at the hands of a “charismatic young American man named Andrew Tate, who has fought secularism in the West and has now converted to Islam, the last true religion to reject secularism.” Alt-right commentator Mike Cernovich flirted with this idea in 2019, when he tweeted to his 1.1 million Twitter followers that Islam was perhaps the West’s last hope in the face of wokeism. The tweet reads illogically, but examining the context further reveals that the message is not too far-fetched. Reactionaries who believe there is a war on masculinity are looking for a place where the “tough guy” is accepted. A superficial understanding of Islam and Muslims provides just that: a religion with a global following that rejects progressive values, preaches intolerance of women’s and minority rights, and responds to any criticism with violence.
The very Islamophobic stereotypes that many Muslims have fought against are now attracting the toxic masculinity types to Islam, and the Muslim community is not only unfazed but has embraced them.
Muslim preachers have always used mosques to spread their messages in Friday sermons. Since the 1970s, they have been expanding into many other spaces with each technological development, from TV channels and cassette tapes to YouTube channels and social media platforms. Guidance and self-help gurus in the Muslim world are rarely secular, and preachers have often played the role of spreading religion and social guidance with conservative lenses. The common theme shared among generations of preachers is the need to fight back against the Western depravity infiltrating Muslim communities. In the 1950s, the prominent Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb noted the sexual freedom he saw in the town of Greeley, Colorado, during his time as an exchange student. He returned to Egypt adamant on rejecting the West and sticking to conservative Islam. Since then, this theme has been a constant in conservative religious preaching with an emphasis on women’s role in luring men into sin and women’s responsibility in maintaining chastity to help their male counterparts live a life free of sin. This responsibility was not only embodied in women committing to modesty but also accepting traditional gender roles, including staying at home to serve the family. The double standards toward men and women have always been there, but preachers have rarely, if ever, endorsed or accepted a male figure whose hedonism violates basic Islamic norms. That was, until Tate converted.
Other common themes that Muslim preachers have traditionally encouraged and praised are modesty, humbleness and asceticism in lifestyle choices, traits that completely contradict Tate’s world, where mansions, yachts and luxurious sports cars reflect a status that all young men should aspire to. Tate defines success as being outrageously wealthy and believes that being poor is the ultimate failure.
A friend of mine who lives between the Middle East and Europe and preferred that her name remain unmentioned shared a personal family story with me related to Tate’s influence on young Muslims. One day, her young adolescent son suddenly began expressing frustration at his family being “cheap” and “poor.” My friend is by no means cheap nor poor and does not live as such. Her family’s lifestyle, indeed, could be described as wealthy and upper-class. “He would angrily ask his father and I why don’t we have more modern cars and show off our money. It was all so odd, because that is not how we raised him,” she told me. After some research, the mother learned her son and his friends had recently discovered Tate on YouTube and were agreeing with his every word. Tate’s recent move to the United Arab Emirates and endorsement of the stereotypical Gulf lifestyle had influenced the teenage Muslim boys.
Contentment and not chasing what is often described as earthly distractions such as wealth have traditionally been core components of preachers’ sermons. There is no indication that Tate has altered his lifestyle. On the eve of his arrest, he was recorded alongside his brother, Tristan, partying with a crowd of scantily dressed women and drinking alcohol. Despite that, none of the Muslim preachers who have welcomed his conversion have called attention to the fact that he continues to boast about his wealth and sexual adventures.
Another value that most Muslim preachers espouse is the importance of earning a livelihood through what is considered a lawful and honest means of labor. Though scholars consistently debate what constitutes unlawful, some of Tate’s sources of income are unquestionably prohibited in Islam, even by the most lenient scholars. The most egregious example is hiring young women for his webcam studio, which provides sexual services to clients. While Tate claims that the girls are scantily clad but never nude, the ongoing investigation has indicated that the webcam studios provide adult content for clients. Neither the aforementioned Muslim preachers, nor Tate’s Muslim fans, mention any of these outright violations of Islamic law.
After declaring his conversion to Islam, Tate stated he was already collecting bricks to stone his partner if she ever cheated, alluding to the Sharia punishment for adultery. He explained that Islam’s appeal lay in the fact that there are consequences for being critical of traditional values, and many of these values — namely gender roles and the belief in the superiority of men over women — align with his personal beliefs. But this interpretation of Islam is a far cry from the message of kindness, modesty and honesty that the Prophet Muhammad espoused to first spread Islam. As kids, we all learned these values in our Islamic classes as the most important attributes that a Muslim can possess and promote. We learned stories about how Islam entered lands like Singhasari and Majapahit (Indonesia today) that highlighted generosity and morality, not bullying and masculinity — even when the history was more complicated than this depiction — as the driving force behind the gradual conversion of entire peoples.
There is a void in Islamic preaching, especially as the public spheres in places like the Middle East are tightly controlled and policed by autocratic regimes. It is not only the absence of heroes that has allowed individuals like Tate to emerge as role models but also the inability to create an appealing Islamic narrative that can realistically address the allures of consumerism and earthly desires. Now, this void is being filled by any self-proclaimed preacher who can set up a YouTube channel and podcast. As Hijab, the British-Egyptian YouTube preacher and debater with more than 650,000 subscribers, said, “[Tate] is the most-Googled man on the planet.” For him and many other Muslim preachers, this seals the deal on why Tate must be accepted — not because he is “a good man” but because he is “the most-Googled man.” Tate knows how to maintain this support by playing on the heartstrings of this particular demographic of Muslim followers. He quotes Ibn Taymiyyah, the controversial and ultraconservative 13th-century Muslim theologian, in his tweets. Tristan Tate, Andrew’s brother, recently said that none of his Christian friends had supported him after the arrest, whereas his brother’s Muslim friends and followers have defended him and stood by him.
Another aspect of Tate that has resonated across both the Muslim world and the West is his explanation of the frustration of young men who feel disenfranchised in the world’s liberal order. It seems to them — and to Tate — that society has set the bar for success, especially in dating, unrealistically high and fails to provide them with the necessary tools to thrive. Consuming this discourse feels like another moment of cognitive dissonance. If anything, global patriarchal systems have ensured that men of all ages require less effort to succeed in comparison with girls and women. This fear of being marginalized is reminiscent of the justifications of the far right’s appeal as a reaction to growing immigrant populations or advocating for ethnic and religious minorities. It is the fear of being equal to those whom they see as less advantaged and losing their privileges that is driving young men to inflammatory narratives. No one is taking anything from them, but plenty of influencers, like Tate, are emphasizing their entitlement instead of teaching them acceptance and tolerance.
While the concept of “incel” (involuntary celibate) has a very different meaning in the Muslim world than in the West, the underlying message of entitlement is similar. In the West, it refers to a man who cannot attract a sexual partner despite his belief that he is entitled to one (on the sole basis of being male). But, in the Muslim world, the social constructs of gender roles, tradition and family mean that marriage is more important, and any man, regardless of his financial situation, status or physical appeal, can find a wife. Yet there is a chance that he does not find a wife in a social class higher than his, or one who fits his idea of physical attractiveness. Similar to the way that incels in the West lash out at women whose standards are “too high,” any ideas that show women that they do not have to settle for marriage without happiness and love are extremely dangerous to the patriarchal status quo.
Tate is no genius and offers nothing original to the worldview made up of conspiracy, misogyny and red pills. He follows a long tradition that has grown and thrived with online subcultures. But his conversion to Islam is telling — not for understanding the milieu he comes from but for the reactions from Muslims, who might have been expected to stand against most of his views and behavior. The fact that they have overlooked his involvement in racy adult video content, accusations of rape and human trafficking, financial gain from his investments in gambling and casinos — all considered grave sins in Islam — to claim his righteousness about women and minorities shows just how desperate some preachers in the Muslim world are for any legitimation and popularity, however toxic.

After reading this article one more time , I find this article so relevant to the posters who are Tate supporters on the message board. It’s describes these posters in such detail and on point.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[MENTION=156573]SalimBhai[/MENTION]

I have just had a chance to read the article and I agree with much of its contents, particularly the last paragraph.

Some posters on here may never admit that they support Tate mainly because he is Muslim but I am doubtful of their denials.

You can ask posters on here who support him why he makes abhorrent lecture videos promoting pimping and they will avoid this question. It’s sad and as per your article, a form of brainwashing.

You break down points being debated and faced with abuse, deflected comments about Epstein and then you’ll see subtle hints of cheerleading, such as Tate is smarter than you, Tate is this and that etc. You will also be faced with matrix questions and why YouTube haven’t taken down the video.

Assuming that we all agree that Tate’s multiple videos about pimping are genuine, why did Tate make them and how can it be justified?

We must clean our own house first is an apt saying in this case.
 
Last edited:
I used it think that for some but no more

I think it comes down to life experiences and how much time you spend on social media.

If you’re a Brit who is continually watching one version of truth on TikTok, YouTube and instagram then your FYP and algorithms will all be one sided. Coupled with having no significant face to face social networks and intellect, it can lead you to believing all sorts.

I’m wary of anybody who says listen to me and has a God complex. Tate certainly ticks those boxes and it’s obvious that he has chased fame his entire adult life.
 
[MENTION=156573]SalimBhai[/MENTION]

I have just had a chance to read the article and I agree with much of its contents, particularly the last paragraph.

Some posters on here may never admit that they support Tate mainly because he is Muslim but I am doubtful of their denials.

You can ask posters on here who support him why he makes abhorrent lecture videos promoting pimping and they will avoid this question. It’s sad and as per your article, a form of brainwashing.

You break down points being debated and faced with abuse, deflected comments about Epstein and then you’ll see subtle hints of cheerleading, such as Tate is smarter than you, Tate is this and that etc. You will also be faced with matrix questions and why YouTube haven’t taken down the video.

Assuming that we all agree that Tate’s multiple videos about pimping are genuine, why did Tate make them and how can it be justified?

We must clean our own house first is an apt saying in this case.

Nobody is justifying those pimping videos. Those videos are wrong if true. He should be penalized if he is found guilty of any wrongdoing.

All we are saying is he made those videos before conversions. After conversion, he has been relatively clean. I don't know if you know this but if a non-Muslim converts to Islam, he starts with a clean slate. His sins are wiped out. Please check this: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/46505/islam-erases-the-sins-that-came-before-it.

Umar (RA) was an enemy of Islam; he even tried to kill Muhammad (PBUH). He converted to Islam and later on became a Caliph. My point is people can change and we should leave judgements to God.

BTW, why is Romanian authorities not charging him even after 70 days? If evidences are compelling, what are they waiting for? Do you think it is right to detain someone without a charge for over 60 days?

Why did they suddenly go after him after all these years? Is it due to his conversion to Islam and/or speaking against deep state?

P.S. I am not a follower of Tate. I don't watch his videos and I don't care about him.
 
Last edited:
Nobody is justifying those pimping videos. Those videos are wrong if true. He should be penalized if he is found guilty of any wrongdoing.

All we are saying is he made those videos before conversions. After conversion, he has been relatively clean. I don't know if you know this but if a non-Muslim converts to Islam, he starts with a clean slate. His sins are wiped out. Please check this: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/46505/islam-erases-the-sins-that-came-before-it.

Umar (RA) was an enemy of Islam; he even tried to kill Muhammad (PBUH). He converted to Islam and later on became a Caliph. My point is people can change and we should leave judgements to God.

BTW, why is Romanian authorities not charging him even after 70 days? If evidences are compelling, what are they waiting for? Do you think it is right to detain someone without a charge for over 60 days?

Why did they suddenly go after him after all these years? Is it due to his conversion to Islam and/or speaking against deep state?

All your questions at the end of your post have been answered multiple times in than thread over the last 7 days
 
Nobody is justifying those pimping videos. Those videos are wrong if true. He should be penalized if he is found guilty of any wrongdoing.

All we are saying is he made those videos before conversions. After conversion, he has been relatively clean. I don't know if you know this but if a non-Muslim converts to Islam, he starts with a clean slate. His sins are wiped out. Please check this: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/46505/islam-erases-the-sins-that-came-before-it.

Umar (RA) was an enemy of Islam; he even tried to kill Muhammad (PBUH). He converted to Islam and later on became a Caliph. My point is people can change and we should leave judgements to God.

BTW, why is Romanian authorities not charging him even after 70 days? If evidences are compelling, what are they waiting for? Do you think it is right to detain someone without a charge for over 60 days?

Why did they suddenly go after him after all these years? Is it due to his conversion to Islam and/or speaking against deep state?

P.S. I am not a follower of Tate. I don't watch his videos and I don't care about him.

All non Muslims who convert to Islam are given clean sheet?

The reasoning why do msny convicts and others that have made huge mistakes in life have converted? Same line used by evangelists when they say Jesus forgives all your past mistakes...

Keep going
 
Last edited:
All non Muslims who convert to Islam are given clean sheet?

The reasoning why do msny convicts and others that have made huge mistakes in life have converted? Same line used by evangelists when they say Jesus forgives all your past mistakes...

Keep going

[MENTION=141306]sweep_shot[/MENTION]

Hypothetically if Epstein converted to Islam just before his neck was broken / he committed suicide, does this forgiveness also apply?

Is there a spectrum of offences to what forgiveness applies to?

Does this mean that the laws of a land shouldn’t prosecute you anymore if you convert to Islam?
 
All non Muslims who convert to Islam are given clean sheet?

The reasoning why do msny convicts and others that have made huge mistakes in life have converted? Same line used by evangelists when they say Jesus forgives all your past mistakes...

Keep going

Read below:

Praise be to Allah.

Firstly:

Who has guided him to Islam. We ask Allaah to make him steadfast and to guide him to that which is good for him in this world and in the Hereafter.

Secondly:

By His grace and mercy, Allaah has caused Islam to destroy the sins that came before it. When a disbeliever becomes Muslim, Allaah forgives all that he did when he was a non-Muslim, and he becomes cleansed of sin.

Muslim (121) narrated that ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: When Allaah put Islam in my heart, I came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and said: “Give me your right hand so that I may swear allegiance to you.” He held out his hand and I withdrew my hand. He said, “What is the matter, O ‘Amr?” I said, “I want to stipulate a condition.” He said, “What do you want to stipulate?” I said, “That I will be forgiven.” He said, “Do you not know that Islam destroys that which came before it?”

“Islam destroys that which came before it” means that it erases it and wipes it out. Stated by al-Nawawi in Sharh Muslim.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked a similar question, about someone who earned money by dealing in drugs before he became Muslim. He replied:

We say to this brother whom Allaah has blessed with Islam after he had earned haraam (unlawful) wealth: be of good cheer, for this wealth is permissible for him and there is no sin on him in it, whether he keeps it or gives it in charity, or uses it to get married, because Allaah says in His Holy Book (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from disbelief), their past will be forgiven. But if they return (thereto), then the examples of those (punished) before them have already preceded (as a warning)”

[al-Anfaal 8:38]

i.e., all that has passed, in general terms, is forgiven. But any money that was taken by force from its owner must be returned to him. But money that was earned by agreements between people, even if it is haraam, like that which is earned through riba (interest)or by selling drugs, etc. it is permissible for him when he becomes Muslim because Allaah says, “Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from disbelief), their past will be forgiven”. And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas when he became Muslim: “Do you not know that Islam destroys that which came before it?”

Many of the non-Muslims became Muslim after they had killed Muslims, but they were not punished for what they had done. So tell this brother that his wealth is permissible and there is no sin in it; he may give it in charity and use it to get married. As for what he has been told about it not being permissible for him to give it in charity, there is no basis for that. End quote.

Liqaa’aat al-Baab il-Maftooh, /373-374.

Reference: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/46505/islam-erases-the-sins-that-came-before-it.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=141306]sweep_shot[/MENTION]

Hypothetically if Epstein converted to Islam just before his neck was broken / he committed suicide, does this forgiveness also apply?

Is there a spectrum of offences to what forgiveness applies to?

Does this mean that the laws of a land shouldn’t prosecute you anymore if you convert to Islam?

There's no point in talking about hypothesis.

Post #792 answers your question. If he is guilty, he should be penalized; I did say that. Nobody is saying otherwise on this thread.
 
I think it comes down to life experiences and how much time you spend on social media.

If you’re a Brit who is continually watching one version of truth on TikTok, YouTube and instagram then your FYP and algorithms will all be one sided. Coupled with having no significant face to face social networks and intellect, it can lead you to believing all sorts.

I’m wary of anybody who says listen to me and has a God complex. Tate certainly ticks those boxes and it’s obvious that he has chased fame his entire adult life.

I would also ask in that case, why has Tate suddenly become a worldwide phenomenom? If we are talking social media trends, why did you suddenly pop up out of nowhere on PP after so many years in hibernation? Is the Tate message that dangerous?
 
I would also ask in that case, why has Tate suddenly become a worldwide phenomenom? If we are talking social media trends, why did you suddenly pop up out of nowhere on PP after so many years in hibernation? Is the Tate message that dangerous?

I think Tate became a phenomenon as he speaks very well, he can be charming and funny and he knows how manipulate social media algorithms. Part of Tate’s university hustler course was telling us students to defend his posts online from the matrix - this can be checked online easily and you don’t have to take my word for it. He also sticks up for men in a positive way and does have some good messages but he also sees women as assets and takes it too far.

I didn’t realise I was a social media trend and that I’ve popped out of nowhere? I’ve contributed to many threads in recent times. I’m happy to go offline and give you a synopsis off why life didn’t allow me to be as active on PP for the last decade it it helps?
 
Back
Top