It's only a matter of time now, folks: Sharia, the death of free speech, the death of free society, and the oppression of non-Muslims and women are sure to follow along in due course. Islamization of Britain Update: "Mohammed is most popular boys' name in England," from AFP, October 27 (thanks to all who sent this in):
LONDON (AFP) - Mohammed was the most popular name for newborn baby boys in England and Wales in 2009, according to official data released Wednesday.But 12 different spellings of the name, each listed separately, meant that Oliver officially topped poll.
The name, given to 7,364 children, ended Jack's 14-year reign at number one, with Harry, Alfie and Joshua rounding out the top five in the figures published by the Office for National Statistics.
The two most common spellings of the Muslim name came in at 16th and 36th place, a total of 7,549 baby boys, making it the most popular name overall.
The most common spelling, Mohammed, was the number one name in its own right in the West Midlands region of central England which includes the city of Birmingham, and number four in London....
Mohammed is now the most popular boys' name in England
...............
My God. It's *much worse* than I had thought. I knew "Mohammed" was the most popular boy's name in parts of London—shocking enough—but *for the whole of England and Wales?* Deeply disturbing, and a terrible omen for the future.
Yes, the fact that 'Mohammed' is the most common name in Britain is symptomatic of the Islamizing trend in Britain.
If someone had mentioned twenty years ago that 'Mohammed' would soon become the most popular name for boys in England, such a person would have been laughed at.
So too, in the case of the Islamization of part of East London, Tower Hamlets, which has been brought about through the policy of mass immigration, in that case mainly from Bangladesh. It is not an isolated case.
These are the consequences of both ignorance of the British political elite about the nature of Islam, together with the application of political correction over several decades by liberal/left governments. Although there may be more murmurings now among more British people against Islamic political demands, such murmurings need to be converted into solid political opposition.
"Its astounding to me that people with the most blood on their hands throughout history, the ones who have caused the most wars, destroyed the most, raped and plundered the most and to this day continue to do so, are the ones who shout the loudest about morality and label others barbarians."
Well, that's the Moslems in a nutshell.
Birthrate = power
"Fecundism (word derived from fecundity) is the politics of willfully promoting high birth rate among a group for the sake of enlarging its numbers related to other groups and, consequently, its political influence."
Barbarians multiplying within
"The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." - Will Durant
Muslim leaders plan to overwhelm Britain with Muslim babies
Muslim hate fanatics plan to take over Britain by having more babies and forcing a population explosion, it has been revealed. The swollen Muslim population would be enough to conquer Britain from inside, they claim. Fanatics told a meeting of young Muslims on the anniversary of the 9/11 atrocity, that it would then be easy to impose Sharia law on the population, the Sun newspaper reported. Speaking at a meeting in London, Anjem Choudary, right-hand man of exiled preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed, said: "It may be by pure conversion that Britain will become an Islamic state. We may never need to conquer it from the outside."
More at http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/demographic-jihad-and-muslim-fecundism.html
Dearest Manarervin,
Thanks for making the strong comparison between the conquering of the Americas and the Islamization of Great Britain. It's a very accurate way to look at what's ahead unless it's stopped. Another excellent example is to look at what happened to all those tens of millions of Hindus in India. Or the current slaughter-grounds of Islamicized African nations.
Looking at your anorexic profile pic, one could be worried that your brain is starved for fuel. But one supposes you ate some bean sprouts and had a faint glimmer of activity up there.
Abe
What's even more funny? If you name your toon in an online game, "Mohammad" or "Mohammed", the muslims get all upset. Yet 9 out of 10 boys in Islamic Culture are named after Mohammed.
I guess it's just the fact that a Kaffir would dare use the name of the Most perfect man in all of Islam.
Not looking for a fight here, folks. What are the "official" numbers for muslims in Britain? Are they accurate? Are there "unofficial" stats more reflective of the reality on the ground? I ask because the "take over" of Britain isn't exactly hot off the wire. Is it really possible for, say, 10% of the population to take over? I don't have a PHD in history but Lenin and his Bolsheviks come to mind. Thanks in advance for your insight(s).
Actually y'all, it's not as bad as it seems. The first point is that Mohammed is only the most popular name if you add together all the varient spellings, yet as far as I know, no one has bothered to do that with all the varient spellings of say John, +Jon, +Yohan, +Jonathan, +Ian, +Euon, +Juan, +Yahya, etc.
The second point is that it shows the limited imagination of Muslims. If a Muslim name is the most popular in the country then a staggering number of their children are being called the same thing. Muslims are only 3% of the British population, so to achieve that popular name statistic they must be selecting from a very narrow range of names.
What a sad thing to see my country in terminal decline like this.
In fact this is a particularly interesting post, because I work in finding people and make extensive use of the births, marriages and death indices. As a little project a few weeks ago, I searched for instances of births in the name "Mohammed" since 1956 (I can go back much further but I stopped there, and you'll see why).
Regrettably the index stops at 2005 and they haven't produced more recent data that's publicly accessible.
1956 - 17
1957 - 20
1958 - 20
1959 - 18
1960 - 36
1961 - 36
1962 - 64
1963 - 66
1964 - 104
1965 - 232
1966 - 303
1967 - 416
1968 - 489
1969 - 535
1970 - 603
1971 - 620
1972 - 576
1973 - 553
1974 - 602
1975 - 640
1976 - 752
1977 - 789
1978 - 1043
1979 - 1195
1980 - 1253
1981 - 1394
1982 - 1447
1983 - 1739
1984 - 1832
1985 - 2031
1986 - 2145
1987 - 2081
1988 - 2204
1989 - 2271
1990 - 2177
1991 - 2169
1992 - 2222
1993 - 2264
1994 - 2752
1995 - 2786
1996 - 3109
1997 - 3429
1998 - 3537
1999 - 3963
2000 - 4021
2001 - 4435
2002 - 4597
2003 - 4786
2004 - 4897
2005 - 4930
I had a brief play around with the spelling "Muhammad" too and it's the same story.
Well, let's hope that in 20 years time, the most popular names chosen by those who want to change their names will be John, James, Peter, Simon, Jude, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke...
"What a sad thing to see my country in terminal decline like this."
Suck it up...Gawd, Churchill must be turning in his grave...
how many boys were born in England during that same time frame...let's see that list along side your previous one.
Then rational people can see what an idiot you are running around crying about how you are under assault because 5,000 boys were born in England with a Muslim name.
Its astounding to me that people with the most blood on their hands throughout history, the ones who have caused the most wars, destroyed the most, raped and plundered the most and to this day continue to do so, are the ones who shout the loudest about morality and label others barbarians.
Throughout history...That a long time...Those darned barbarians have been at it for 1400 years or so, raping, plundering, destroying, and continue to this day...You can see their handy work of barbarity, in Iran, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, UK, US, Russia, China, Somalia, Nigeria, Philippines, Yemen,Pakistan, and others...Those barbarians have a lot of blood on their hands, don't they?
Actually, Jon and Jonathan are not etymologically derived from "John". "John" comes from "God is gracious", while Jonathan derives from "God has given".
However, John, Ian, Jean, Juan, Johannes, Hovannes, Yahya, Yuehan, Jan, etc. are legitimate cognates to "John".
" Babur Shah--unless his boast of killing 67,000,000 of them [roughly equivalent to some estimates of the entire Indigenous population of the Americas in 1519, according to some estimates] was mere militarist propaganda."
Egad, that comment almost smacked of journalistic integrity...you actually didn't just run with the number as if it were God's truth...frightening to find that here.
But of course you still presented that BS numnber, right?
How many English boys born at the same time were named John, Stephen, Peter, James, Charles, Thomas, Harold, Owen, Paul, Jacob, Cyril...?
And how many other Anglo-Asian boys were named Premchand, Sujinder, Krishna, Govinda, Lal, Ashok...?
And, before we get too fearful of Muslim names, I've run into elders in Christian churches named Rashid, Akbar, and Jafar. Granted, though, some such people got baptized as old-school Presbyterians rather later in life than tender infancy.
"Mohammed was the most popular name for newborn baby boys in England and Wales in 2009, according to official data released Wednesday."
This can't be happening! How is this happening? My God how absolutely horrific.
Wow, I find common sense and intelligence here, of all places, here? Nothing suprises me now...
In the time frame he spelled out by allenby there wee approximately 80,000 boys born in England with a Muslim name...
In the same time frame approximately 4.4 million other English boys were born...John, Bob, George, does it really matter?
So are we to believe as allendy implies that England will be usurbed by people outnumbered 55 to one?
Like I said, Churchill must be rolling over in his grave right now...Egad!
A loose interpretation of the stats mean about 5% of all male births in GB are muslims right now.
As a point of fact, muslims only make up 3.3% of the population in Britain. As pointed out above, it's because of the brainwashing lack of imagination that they name at least 1/2 of their male sons Mo. So that has to be kept in context. And they squirt out kids at about a 3 to 1 ratio. So, you're looking at about 5% of all male kids born in GB are muslim right now.
Male children born in 2009 were 95% normal and 5% ticking time bomb potential jihadists.
Abe
“Male children born in 2009 were 95% normal and 5% ticking time bomb potential jihadists.”
Wow, Abe, I can’t belive your frontal lobe screwed the editing up on that one. Here lets straighten you out:
“Male children born in 2009 were 95% blue collar alcoholic soccer fans and 5% were doctors, engineers, and soccer fans… at least there is one thing in common!”
Mohammed, whatever the spelling, is more dominant than any other name among muslim males. A look at the list of girls names is a lot less alarming. The muslim girls names would appear to be more varied as they don't appear so high on the national figures.
The news item, is however, a bit of a wake up call, and if you happen to be passing a school in the UK when kids are going in or out, you might have a very different estimate of the proportion of muslims in the population than the official figure of about 3%. The perceived proportion of school age children who are muslim is probably a combination of typically large family size and a hidden population of illegals that don't appear on the electoral roll but who do partake of educational and other services provided by local governments.
The "Mohammed" symptom is happening elsewhere in western Europe: here are just two examples
August 13th 2009 Daily Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/netherlands/6022588/Mohammed-is-most-popular-boys-name-in-four-biggest-Dutch-cities.html
Mohammed or other variations of the name of Islam's founding prophet, has become the most popular name choice for baby boys in the four biggest cities of the Netherlands
...traditional Dutch names have been displaced in the urban centres of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht as the country's Muslim population grows.
January 28th 2008 Islam in Europe blog
http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2008/01/oslo-muhammad-most-popular-boys-name.html
Muhammad, taking together all its different spellings, is the most popular boy's name in Oslo. Nationally, it's in 53rd place.
Jørgen Ouren of Statistics Norway says that Mohammed being the most popular name in Oslo is not new, but this is the first time they've dared say that
HAHAHHAHA
Vohopenhame...
HAHAHHAHA
You mean those 5% "doctors, engineers, and soccer fans..." ticking time bombs who attend mosques like these?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2515587181120245843#
WATCH IF YOU DARE. This is what Jihad Watch and all these sites are ringing the alarm bells about. It's all very real. The really are 5% potential ticking time bombs. Maybe you don't know about what's going on? I'll give you the benefit of a doubt. Watch the video. Be honest with yourself, painful as it may be. It's a realistic statement.
Muslims appear to simply be cloning evil...
Tom Billesley: A look at the list of girls names is a lot less alarming. The muslim girls names would appear to be more varied as they don't appear so high on the national figures.
With girls being half the worth of a boy I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few went missing immediately after being born.
I can't prove it, it's purely conjecture based on the revolting treatment females get under islam.
Abe, I watched your video.
England - how could you be so stupid? You let the over-breeding ("Fecundism") Barbarians in, and now you can't get 'em out. They 're definitely going to take over in 50-100 years if you don't do something.
sean above posted this info:
Birthrate = power
"Fecundism (word derived from fecundity) is the politics of willfully promoting high birth rate among a group for the sake of enlarging its numbers related to other groups and, consequently, its political influence."
Barbarians multiplying within
"The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." - Will Durant
Muslim leaders plan to overwhelm Britain with Muslim babies
Muslim hate fanatics plan to take over Britain by having more babies and forcing a population explosion, it has been revealed. The swollen Muslim population would be enough to conquer Britain from inside, they claim. Fanatics told a meeting of young Muslims on the anniversary of the 9/11 atrocity, that it would then be easy to impose Sharia law on the population, the Sun newspaper reported. Speaking at a meeting in London, Anjem Choudary, right-hand man of exiled preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed, said: "It may be by pure conversion that Britain will become an Islamic state. We may never need to conquer it from the outside."
While this is an increasingly alarming phenomenon in Europe, concerns about this in the US are treated with seething derision:
"Republicans Scared of Baby Terrorists"
A specter is haunting us ... the specter of baby terrorists!
U.S. Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX) has revealed the very real possibility of terror cells plotting to breed future terrorists inside the United States.
"It appeared that [the terrorists] would have young women, who became pregnant, would get them into the United States to have a baby," Gohmert said during a speech on the House floor. "And then they would turn back where they could be raised and coddled as future terrorists."
Gohmert issued the warning while defending Arizona's immigration law, which the Department of Justice is now officially challenging in court. Yes, Gohmert would like us to believe in the very unreal possibility of pregnant Mexican woman risking their lives to cross the hot sweltering desert or swim across the Rio Grande into the United States to raise their kids with a hatred for America...
..................
Somehow, I don't think Congressman Gohmert had "pregnant Mexican women" in mind with his warning...
http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/republicans_scared_of_baby_terrorists
Going by name of baby mean nothing. Muslim parent can just as easy name they bassby boy after Churchhill.
Daily Telegraph op-ed by Damian Thompson Oct 28th 2010
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100061260/mohammed-is-the-top-boys-name-because-muslims-are-becoming-more-religious-not-because-there-are-more-muslims/
Bring back the Catholic faith and the Catholic State....quick!! Secular nations going under fast!! They were never made to last anyhow.
What is also worrying is the number of young white girls seen with coffee coloured children. They look poor, most probably on benefit and usually pregnant.
There is also the problem of many white business women converting to Islam. Before converting they say they lead a life of drink, easy sex and drugs and by becoming a Muslim they leave their old life behind. I don't understand why they didn't fully investigate Christianity before joining the most barbaric religion on earth. Perhaps one day soon we shall see some of them at the battered wives home.
Actually, Jon and Jonathan are not etymologically derived from "John". "John" comes from "God is gracious", while Jonathan derives from "God has given".
My bad! You're right John and Jon are not derived from the same root. John is from Yohanan and Jon is derived from Yonathan. Nevertheless, my point holds, and it would be interesting to see whether Mohammed would still be the most popular boys' name in Britain if all the variations of John or other names were were totalled up in the same way.
The partial list the gave in the article suggest John and it's variants should be top as Jack, which is a variant of John, is still close to the top.
So if anyone wants to re-calculate the positions here are all the variants of John I could find:
John, Johnny, Jack, Shawn, Seán, Siôn, Ian, Iain, Ioan, Iohán, Ioane, Juan, Euan, Ewan, Evan, Ivan, Ivo, Yuēhàn, Chuan, Xuan, Xoán, Xan, João, Juho, Juha, Huã, Huan, Hannu, Hovhannes, Hannes, Hans, Honza, Anžej, Jens, Jan, Jani, Janne, Jean, Johan, Johann, Juhani, Johannes, Joanes, János, Jānis, Jonas, Janez, Jaan, Juons, Juhan, Janko, Ivanko, Yok-Hon, Jógvan, Jovan, Jon, Yon, Ion, Ionuţ, Ionel, Ionică, Ioannis, Ioannes, Yann, Giuàn, Giuanni, Gianni, Giuvanni, Giovanni, Ġwanni, Gioann, Gjon, Gjin, Ganix, Yuḥanna, Yahya, and Manez.
Britain being the multicultural paradise it is these days, I'm sure there must more than a few of these exotic variations present in the list - the Muslim Yahyas also adding to the count.
Let's not get carried away people. This is not an example of the Islamisation of Britain, it merely shows that Muslim parents have no sense of originality when naming their kids. Just imagine what it must be like for boys at school in the West Midlands, everyone's called Mohammed. Sooner or later they'll realise it's a bit ridiculous.
I agree with Thompson's analysis, it is a symptom of increased Islamic religiosity rather than an indicator of a massive increase in the Muslim population (though their birthrate is higher than the "Christian" population).
But this thing about Mohammed being the most popular male baby name in the UK is also a result of statistical manipulation, if you are going to aggregate all the variants of Mohammed, you need to aggregate all the variants of other names too if you want to get a true picture. And you can be sure that whoever brought this "fact" to the news stands didn't bother to do that.
Tommo wrote: What is also worrying is the number of young white girls seen with coffee coloured children.
Whte women with coffee coloured kids is not a problem, in fact it's a beautiful thing.
Ideology and belief have nothing to do with skin colour or physical features; there are white, black, yellow and brown Christians, there are white, black, yellow and brown communists, there are white, black, yellow and brown facists, and there are white, black, yellow and brown Muslims.
Despise Islam for it's bigoted and hateful ideals, not for the skin tone of it's adherents - most of whom, anyway, are descendants of people who were forced or coersed into convertion, not who chose to believe this stuff of their own free will. And once they're in, they're trapped. Islam is cult with no exit door.
I was in london last week and almost all the taxi drivers (most were from afghanistan) tried to convert me to islam. This is happening in london and I'm suprised no one has complained about this.
@Vohopehame
What exactly is your argument here? And why on Earth would Churchill be turning in his grave? He would be agitating for anti-Islamic measures far more aggressively than I am able to.
RE: My "terminal decline" comment, actually this hinges on much more than just name data. The anti-market egalitarian and social justice nonsense that sees massive government misspending of funds obtained under duress is viewed by me as an even greater threat than the Islamic menace, and it's another issue that's getting a lot of attention over here now.
Have a look here:
http://www.brin.ac.uk/figures/#HinduMuslimSikh
Check out the Excel document under "5. Estimates of the Hindu, Muslim and Sikh populations of England and Wales, 1961-2001"
Of course the Islamic population is small. Smaller even than other Western European countries, and yet just behold the privileges extended to these people. We have sharia courts now, halal meat sold to an unsuspecting public, a fundamentalist winning a mayoral election, ever rising numbers of niqabs on the streets, and so on. The population is growing, and growing faster than other groups. This means more sympathy for sharia, more sympathy for terrorism, more sympathy for the conquest of the kafir. Islam is fundamentally anti-civilisation and by God I am going to counter it.
For those who stress that this development speaks to lack of creativity of Muslim parents, yes, it does, but when was that not true? Have they only in recent years restricted themselves to a tiny selection of names? The growth of Muslim numbers speaks against this suggestion. Between 2004 and 2008 alone the Muslim population increased by 500,000!!
I envy the American leftists who comment on this debate from their white majority stongholds. The tide of opinion in Europe is strongly opposed to this threat and that's not going to go away. How it will all end is going to be a hell of a thing to see. Fascism in Europe again for sure by 2050, but is it going to be of the Islamic variety or the infidel variety?
The racist who said he or she doesnot like to see white woman with brown color skin babies prove Islamoprobic are racist too.
Allenby,
My argument is that you are phobic about an issue, extremely unreasonably fearful, and that I feel would have the old battle axe turning in his grave in shame of you.
And I note your comment addressing issues outside of the demographic information is valid, forgive me, I thought your sole concern was the decline of England based on the minute rise in Muslim citizens.
By the way, pPrivileges extended to the Muslim citizen are equivalent exactly to those extended to the Jewish citizen of England, and for that matter, under the law of England, the same rights to all. Beth Din Court and Kosher Deli = Sharia Court and Halal deli. In America there have been Beth Din courts for I think 50 to 100 years...it is within the law to have Sharia Courts as well...it is called non-binding arbitration.
I do agree that there is a demographic shift in the world, to be true. The mid west of the United States and most of the mid south is something like 55% latino…shouldn’t that raise more of a concern? I mean, just across the southern border there were 28,000 murders due to the Mexican drug cartels, many of which worship their own “saint of death”…I’d be more concerned about that than Muslims rising in population.
It’s all about where people want the future to be. If you look at a growth curve now and get ahead of it in a good way everyone will benefit…if you plan for violence and oppression that is what you will get.
You sir are absolutely out of your mind....First what you call Native Americans migrated east to arrive in the Americas crossing the bearing straight....The Americas are not their Native lands they hail from Euro-Asia...Native American is one that is born in America unlike Obama!
Just how much blood does America have on its hands? You do not know and you do not understand period....American blood resides in the 50,000 soldiers that lay in French ground buried. We liberated all of Europe and you are welcomed!
America shares its wealth with the world and no other Nation even comes close to the monies we aid other countries with....It is in the trillions since we were founded! What have you done?
America has sent millions of jobs oversees to vitalize ailing economic countries...This is done at the expense of American Sweat, Blood, and Tears!
You fail to mention that America has spilt the blood of its enemies for the entire free world! Never has America has never issued a declaration of war out of greed and lust for power....Every single war Americans have engaged has been through provocation....To aid you:
The sinking of the USS Lusitania= War with Germany
• Pearl Harbor= war with Japan
• Civil war Korea= war with North Korea
• Yemen attack/Iraqi Boasting WMD that had already been used to kill 100,000 Iraqi citizens= Desert storm and Iraqi Freedom and the liberation of an oppressed people
• (9/11)= war with Afghan and the liberation of an oppressed people
• Human atrocities and ethnic cleansing (Muslim)= Bosnia bombing
Sir you are a fool and a history revisionist and your history is not accurate either…In ignorance and stupidity you draw conclusions. You may defend Ignorance but you cannot defend stupid…Get it? You have no defence!
You sir are absolutely out of your mind....First what you call Native Americans migrated east to arrive in the Americas crossing the bearing straight....The Americas are not their Native lands they hail from Euro-Asia...Native American is one that is born in America unlike Obama!
Just how much blood does America have on its hands? You do not know and you do not understand period....American blood resides in the 50,000 soldiers that lay in French ground buried. We liberated all of Europe and you are welcomed!
America shares its wealth with the world and no other Nation even comes close to the monies we aid other countries with....It is in the trillions since we were founded! What have you done?
America has sent millions of jobs oversees to vitalize ailing economic countries...This is done at the expense of American Sweat, Blood, and Tears!
You fail to mention that America has spilt the blood of its enemies for the entire free world! Never has America has never issued a declaration of war out of greed and lust for power....Every single war Americans have engaged has been through provocation....To aid you:
The sinking of the USS Lusitania= War with Germany
• Pearl Harbor= war with Japan
• Civil war Korea= war with North Korea
• Yemen attack/Iraqi Boasting WMD that had already been used to kill 100,000 Iraqi citizens= Desert storm and Iraqi Freedom and the liberation of an oppressed people
• (9/11)= war with Afghan and the liberation of an oppressed people
• Human atrocities and ethnic cleansing (Muslim)= Bosnia bombing
Sir you are a fool and a history revisionist and your history is not accurate either…In ignorance and stupidity you draw conclusions. You may defend Ignorance but you cannot defend stupid…Get it? You have no defence!
The name "mohammed" is synonymous with EVIL ...
Why anyone in their right mind would name their son after this evil death cult leader *MOHAMMED* is beyond me. Unless of course they are not in their right mind. What is WRONG with people when they fail to see "prophet" mohammed for what he is: a hardened criminal. It is very troubling to me when people choose to embrace evil over good, very troubling indeed ...
"Jacob is the most popular American baby name."
sigh ...
Jacob was not an evil man, but mohammed WAS. An evil hardened criminal - to be exact, and I'm being kind.
friends:
the english have become sheep.
just get them belly up, and eat their innards, and they do not squirm nor do they shriek, and g_d forbid that they should fight.
the will get into a riot over a soccer match, but g_d forbid that they should defend their country.
they are beneath contempt. just pathetic what happens there, and they all pretend that it isn't.
john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa
Re. the fact that so many Muslim boys are named Mohammed, or variations thereof.
I remember, back in 2009 when the Israelis were giving a well-deserved drubbing to Jihad Fortress Gaza, and Muslim colonies in the west were screaming and yelling and holding pity parties and rage sessions, that one poster here went along to have a look at one of the demonstrations.
The poster reported that at a particular moment, while the crowd were gathering, someone sang out 'Mohammed!' (obviously intending to call a brother, friend, or cousin of that name) ...at which, all over the crowd, guys jumped and turned toward the voice, as one does when hears one's name being called.
Its astounding to me that people with the most blood on their hands throughout history, the ones who have caused the most wars, destroyed the most, raped and plundered the most and to this day continue to do so, are the ones who shout the loudest about morality and label others barbarians.
You're right. You could hardly have described Islam and its followers any better, as 1,400 years of history and the subjugation of infidels throughout those years testifies. Just as well we had Charles Martel, the Crusaders, Jan Sobieski, Johannes Graf von Salm, Jean Parisol de la Valette etc, otherwise Sharia would have been the law of the land with its public beatings, stonings, amputations and beheadings on trumped-up charges in a kangaroo court.
You mean like "Winston Achmed" or "Winston Abdullah"? "Winston Yilmaz"? Did you know that there exists an accepted name-list for Moroccan people in Holland to name their children? Mandatory because even in Holland a Moroccan always must stay Moroccan and keep his/ her Moroccan passport? Which means other names, like Winston, are dis-allowed?
One of my colleagues is a Tunesian Muslim, he married a Dutch woman and so became a Dutch national. The pair got 2 children, but they (really HE) had to name them both Islamic names; Asha and Anouar. I suppose giving them any Western name was out of the Question for him.
Well, that settles it.
A lot of newborns in England and Wales will be named after The Most Perfect Man.
Who also happened to be a child molester.
If Satan himself came to earth in human form, it had to be as mohammad.
Your'e probably right about the female converts to Islam later joining the masses of battered women. I am greatly concerned about the numbers of fatherless children, for I teach high school in a less-affluent American community. I'm even with you if you are alarmed at silly women trying to make loopy political statements via the men they sleep with. BUT...
My beige-colored sons have done their mostly-white father proud on many occasions. I've known fine Christian people of many colors, and a fairish number of Jews are rather swarthy or even brown. Since 9/11, some of our churches are getting rather browner with a number of Muhammads and Husseins and Alis making inquiry and (brace yourself, Defender of Islam) getting baptized. What's going to happen to them and their offspring as they absorb into communities founded by persons of more northerly extraction? Brownish babies.
I honor the great contributions people of the "white" race have made, and greatly honor the contributions to the ideals of limited government, rule of law, and political compact made by Celto-Anglo-Saxons from George Buchanan down to the American founding. I readily recognize the contributions the "white" race has made to spreading the faith I hold dear. But I have no qualms about hobnobbing with non-white people (including my dear wife, thank you).
No less a WASP than Jonathan Edwards once wrote that he looked forward to an era when learned books of Christian theology would be written by blacks and Indians. Since that day has come, I see no point in expecting us all to fit into neatly delineated color codes.
No kidding, Demsci? If I'm a Moroccan immigrant in the Netherlands, convert to the Gereformeerde Kerk, and have a son, I've got to name him Yahya rather than Jan or Johannes? Is it THAT bad?
I've had a student who had a Tunisian Muslim father and a native French mother, who bore a distinctly non-Muslim personal name--and I know that France also keeps lists of officially approved names.
"The racist who said he or she does not like to see white woman with brown color skin babies prove Islamoprobic are racist too."
Let me see if I follow your 'Islamic logic'.
One 'Islamoprobic' racist makes a racist comment therefore all 'Islamoprobic' people are racist?
Thanks for sharing. Keep up the Da'wa.
I'm with you on that, Kepha.
I know of one apostate from Islam in the UK - Hannah Shah, author of 'The Imam's Daughter' - who is a convert to Christianity and happily married to a native Anglo-Saxon Brit who is an Anglican church worker; since Hannah's ethnic ancestry hails from the subcontinent, any children she and her Englishman have (and I would be surprised if they didn't, unless the abuse she suffered as a child affected her fertility) will be coffee-and-cream and none the worse for that. Patrick Sookhdeo, author of 'Global Jihad', apostate from Islam and now an Anglican canon, is married to an Anglo-Celt from New Zealand, and they have a number of children, now grown up.
One of my best friends is Anglo-Indian: daughter of a Brahmin West Bengali medical student who fell in love with a Presbyterian Scots girl at university in Scotland. They solved the religion problem by both becoming Catholics! And had four beautiful children, including my friend...who now attends an Anglican church, in Australia.
Another friend is Italo-Australian, born to migrants from the Friulan region. Her handsome and very Italianate brother, dark hair, Roman profile - and most importantly, a practising Christian - married a lovely Christian Chinese lady from Malaysia and their son is now twelve; a very handsome, intelligent and well-brought-up young Australian he is, too.
I know a lady whose first name is 'Sita' (it suits her, for she is very, very beautiful in a classically-Indian style); her mother is Indian, her father English; she was born in Australia, and is married to an Anglican vicar of Euro-Australian ethnic ancestry; their children are coffee and cream.
In the Anglican church I attended for seventeen years in an inner-city suburb of Sydney, there were many Eurasian couples: that is, one partner Anglo-Celt Australian, the other of Sino-Australian extraction, and children displaying the traits of both parents.
So many devout Sudanese Catholics and Anglicans have come to Australia - and promptly joined Aussie churches, that I would not be in the least surprised to see marriages, in due time, between Sudanese Christian girls and boys and Euro-Aussie Christian girls and boys, who have passed their childhood and youth in creche, Sunday School and Youth Group together, with the inevitable result (Youth Groups do not merely nurture Christian knowledge and practice, they also provide a safe zone where Christian young people may discreetly court one another...).
The church doesn't care about the skin colour/s of a couple who front up to be married ; what matters is their Christian commitment and their intention of fidelity and holy life and to bring up any children they may have, in a sound knowledge of the faith.
Well, I can live with it now, but I remember that at the thought I heard about the 2nd child's name that it was pretty egoistic or ethnocentric or supremacist to name the SECOND child also according to the father's wishes, in line with HIS culture. And so, in sum the side of the mother, her original culture, well that wasn't honored in equal measure. See?
NEWSFLASH:
Mohammed is NOT the most popular boys' name in the UK!
I've just be going through the published figures doing the same trick as the pro-Islamic press has done, totalling up the varients to twist the statistics. And I've found that, as I predicted, John and it's variants are more popular than Mohammed, but Jacob and its variants outstrips them all, being three times more popular than Mo.
But even without that I noticed that the "Mohammed is most popular" claim is actually a straight-out lie. You can get the data from here for England and Wales:
Here for Scotland:
Northern Ireland hasn't published the full data, only a summary of the top ten names. Mohammed doesn't appear in that list.
So anyway, in just the English & Welsh data alone, the figures don't add up to make Mohammed the most popular name. Mohammed appears in the top 100 three times, as Mohammed (3300), Muhammad (2162), and Mohammad (1073) this adds up to 6535, which would mean it only reachs third behind Oliver and Jack. And to beat Oliver it would needs a further 829 from other variations. Not impossible, but as I said before once you start using that tactic with one name you have to follow it through with all names - at which point Jacob and its derivatives stand head and shoulders above the rest with 18877 from the top 100 positions alone.
Conclusion: the claim that Mohammed is the most popular boys' name in the UK is a con. End of story!
I'm not sure why the links don't show in the above post, so I'll try again.
England and Wales data: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Product.asp?vlnk=15282
Scotland data: http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/statistics/publications-and-data/popular-names/babies-first-names-09/detailed-tables.html