What do British authorities think when they hear this news? What do they think Britain will be like in twenty or thirty years? Do they think that all these Muhammads will grow up to be upstanding, loyal British subjects with portraits of Maajid Nawaz on their walls? Does it ever occur to them that some of them might end up embracing the “extremism” that they are so confident that Muslims in Britain do not hold — despite the evidence of hundreds and hundreds of young Muslims leaving Britain to join the Islamic State?
Do David Cameron and Theresa May ever ponder the fact that nothing is being done, beyond cosmetic gestures and half-measures, to prevent young Muslims in the U.K. from becoming “extremists”? Do they ever consider the possibility that future generations of free Britons, if there are any, will remember the names of those who did this to their country?
“Nur and Maryam join Muhammad in list of Britain’s top baby names – while Royal monickers fall with George dropping five places,” Daily Mail, December 1, 2014 (thanks to all who sent this in):
For years Muhammad has been racing up the chart of the country’s most popular baby names – and now he has been joined by his sisters Nur and Maryam.
The two girls’ names have been among the most popular of 2014, according to website BabyCentre.
The data shows a surge in Arabic names in the UK this year, with Omar, Ali and Ibrahim all entering the boys’ top 100 for the first time.
For girls, Maryam has shot up 59 places to number 35, while Nur is a new entry in the girls’ top 100, jumping straight to number 29.
And Muhammad has risen an astonishing 27 places compared to last year to claim the number-one spot for boys….
PGuud says
“Muhammad” is hands down the ugliest name of all time, in every sense of the word.
Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.
Champ says
Exactly, PGuud!
Champ says
The name muhammad (perdition be upon him) means “praiseworthy” …wow how insane is that! What did this evil man ever do to earn ANY praise?
MrIpe says
It’s a curse for the poor boys.
Tradewinds says
I’d love to hear a 21st century philosopher explain just why England is so hell-bent on destroying itself.
ecosse1314 says
Oh dear the headline says UK not England. You have missed out the rest…….just saying like
Tradewinds says
Right – the UK.
ecosse1314 says
Slainte’ as we say in Scotland and Ireland. . Not sure about the Welsh.
pumbar says
Iachyd ‘da.
Georg says
Although I don’t understand all the psychology/mechanisms behind it, I’m certain fear and political correctness are necessary ingredients for this destruction.
I’d also like to point out the necessity of the prolonged demoralization of the native Brits which is taking and must take place in order for this to proceed. I feel groups like CAIR of cognizant of this and use it as a principal tactic.
It’s a great question, Tradewinds.
Fred says
Looks like muslims did not buy the contraception lie.
For all of their problems, at least they welcome new life and have not separated sex from procreation.
Too many of my fellow Christians have become perverts.
ghostoftolkien says
This is so often overlooked, Fred. In fact, I cannot recall ever having read ANYTHING, prior to now, relating to contraception and Islam. I’ve long said that we are breeding ourselves out of existence with recreation-oriented sex (which perpetrates artificial birth control and abortion, both of which contradict the laws of nature and God), while muslims are breeding exponentially (literally, by exponent of wives). Can you imagine a time when our political leaders ever face the problem at its roots? Can you imagine a time when citizens of sovereignty recognize that its not a problem for politicians to fix? I cannot envision such.
Yes, there are other facets to the growth of Islam, historically and today, but you hit the nail on the head with perhaps the biggest “hidden” cause of statistical shift. Bravo!
KiriMasa says
Not only England and UK, but also Norway and Sweden.
In OSLO 2013 Muhammad was the most popular name.
How strange.
http://wp.me/p3tGFm-aq
The socialists have made it possible. They hated christianity so hard and wanted to import competition. Jihad was imported.
No Fear says
Could it be that the Western individualised culture has become a victim of political correctness due to the phenomenon of “altruistic punishment” of it’s own people?
mortimer says
Slow national suicide of the Anglo-Saxons! Islam has nothing to contribute to England. Wake up.
ecosse1314 says
Tu quoque….see above.
ecosse1314 says
Tu quoque….see above. As things stand England is not the UK just as Texas is not the USA……just for info.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Slow national suicide of the Anglo-Saxons!
Hey don’t forget the Celts. Plenty of those in the UK, including in England.
So it’s wildly popular to name your baby boy after the guy Tim Russert used to call The Holy Prophet. The Moslem bible sez that Mohammed was the perfect man, the one to emulate. The troubling part is when you examine Mohammed, what he was, what he did. Apparently the Moslem dads haven’t taken a look at that part.
harbidoll says
That’s why they have physic. problems. Like what happens when one has shameful family secrets one Must keep secret. Plus 1 study says 30 to 50% have IQ’s of around 70’s, as apposed to the 90’s of normal people. This due to cousin marriage.
Champ says
Now that is one *very* sad statistic 🙁
ghostoftolkien says
hmmm. “sad statistic” without “stat” is merely “sadistic”!
Don McKellar says
Who would know that a list of baby names would fortell such violence and horrors in the future? Astonishing. And inescapable — as all of history and endless modern examples show us.
Sean says
Unfortunately I can see Muhammad taking the top spot for at least the next decade or so.
Charli Main says
The UK is truly Paradise on Earth for Muslims. They actually get paid by the British Government, to do what they do best——breed like cockroaches.
Aardvark says
“we need to stop ALL Islamic immigration into the UK and expel ALL illegal immigrants along with any legal immigrants who have committed a crime. ”
I agree whole-heartedly. Especially as I count choosing to be mohammedan as a crime.
StoryBrit says
They’re already trying to say this is wrong, and is to stir up islamophobia. There are variation of muhammed so it isn’t top really, thats just people trying to stoke racial strife. Islam is outbreeding most of europe in 30 years it’ll all be islamic. we’re in a bad place with quislings in charge
Tradewinds says
The Demographic Jihad continues apace and Europe is letting it.
Darren says
Their high birthrates are on top of the high muslim immigration rate. So in some regards the demographic jihad is even worse than we think. Then you add in illegal immigration and the number is even higher.
duh_swami says
hello…My name is Mohammad…this is my brother Mohammad and my other brother Mohammad. Next to him is our cousin Mohammad and his uncle Mohammad…Will the real Mohammad please stand up…
somehistory says
Oh, if only they were all as harmless as Larry, Darrel and Darrel. The only ones having to fear those guys were of the woodland, four-footed kind.
The name mohammed…however it is spelled…is an ugly name. And to name so many the same thing is, imo, a psychological weapon. It can backfire though, because it’s hard to hide where it came from if the kids exhibit psychopathic traits and esp if his first words are jihad and infidel.
Jaladhi says
This my brother Muhammad and this my other brother Muhammad and I am also Muhammad. LOL…Irony is the name means beautiful or something like it.
Tradewinds says
“Praiseworthy.”
voegelinian says
Supposedly, according to scholar John Bowman (an expert in ancient Middle Eastern languages based at the University of Melbourne (he passed away at almost age 90 in 2006) one of the scholars assembled by Ibn Warraq in his new compendium, Christmas in the Koran), the name “Muhammad” was the Syriac (Syrian form of Aramaic) translation of the Greek Paraclete. In Western Christian traditions, the Paraclete has been traditionally translated into English as “the Comforter” (though the word also — and perhaps primarily — means “Advocate”).
Islam teaches, by the way, that the Paraclete mentioned in the Gospel of John (the only place, aside from John’s epistle, where the proper noun proper is used, though other forms of the word are used elsewhere in the New Testament) — which Christian tradition holds is the Holy Spirit promised by Jesus to come after his death — is really a foretelling of the advent of Muhammad.
(If Bowman’s theory is correct, one wonders, incidentally, whether Middle Eastern Christians, most of whom seem incapable of emancipating themselves from using the word “Allah” for God, also use the Arabic (i.e., really Syriac) translation of Paraclete as “Muhammad”…)
http://gatesofvienna.net/2014/12/christmas-in-the-koran/#more-34893
Zebo says
Why the hell are people surprised?
Considering all the organised pedophilia in UK it is pretty logical that the name of the most famous pedophile
is ranked nr.1 in childrens names.
Jaladhi says
Child rapist and pedophile Mo/allah is Muslim’s “perfect man”!!! No wonder all Muslims name their boys Muhammad(same as Mohammad) and want them to grow up like him and they do as evidenced by the evil doings of Muslims.
Can you imagine the quality of life in a country where all these Muhammads are running around raping all the children in sight. I hear Bangladesh has a law that requires to parents to name the male child name to start with Muhammad. Looks like every body is a Muhammad in Bangladesh!! Its a source of their pride to have Muhammad in their name!!
eduardo odraude says
Notice the good news: 9 of the top ten names appear to be non-Muslim.
Fact is, that list could mean all kinds of things, depending on the numbers behind each name, which are not shown.
Salah says
“Muhammad now #1 name for baby boys”
We only have ourselves to blame.
We have turned our backs on our God; we murder our unborn babies, we redefine marriage and dare blame Islam.
When Good disappears, Evil fills the void. We deserve what we get.
“And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it”
Genesis 1:28
Wellington says
Muslims come to the Western world in droves (and often name their sons “Muhammed”) and yet Westerners don’t come to the Islamic world in droves (and name their sons “Samuel” or “Joseph”). Golly, why is that?
Well, let’s see. Here’s reason #1: The Muslim world has been, quite unfairly, subjugated by nasty, imperialistic Westerners who, over the past half millennia or so, and especially over the past century, have retarded Muslim development, which would have otherwise occurred. Also, the medieval Muslim world was just a stunning place of creativitiy, as well as of very important ancillary things like respect for women, respect for Jews and other minorities. Moreover, the Muslim world never engaged in any kind of rank imperialism. It simply “spread” or “expanded,” as modern Western Civilization textbooks document with great accuracy and impartiality.
Here’s reason #2: Muslims come to the West in large numbers because the Islamic world is a desultory place where almost nothing of value has been developed or explored over the past half millennia or more. This is, in large part, due to the Islamic religion itself, which is rooted in parasitism, misogyny, self-pity, master-faith nonsense, consignment in this world of non-Muslims to a pure second-class status across the board, rank superstition, and a decided proclivity to terminate anyone who disagrees with the Islamic take on things. Moreover, the so-called achievements of the medieval Islamic world are almost entirely phantom achievements, either overwhelmingly procured by non-Muslims within the Islamic sphere or by those like Avicenna and Averroes, who would be in big trouble today as they were back then, for, oh my Allah, thinking for themselves——or by way of the patronage of certain Islamic rulers who were technically Muslim but who, for all intents and purposes, were Muslim in name only. The more the Islamic clerics took over the Islamic world from about 1200 A.D. onwards, the more the Islamic world declined——–to the present era where all that the Muslim world essentially exports is either terrorism or fossil fuels, the latter courtesy of Western technology, which the Muslim world on its own would have never developed. And whatever was wrong with Western imperialsim, and there were certainly things wrong with it, such wrongs are secondary in comparison to Islamic imperialism which was the Darth Vader of imperialistic systems and which, contra the Western world, has never apologized, nor tried to make amends, for said imperialism.
You make the call respecting choice 1 or choice 2. I already have. Long ago. And yes, I know it will be a mystery to almost everyone which one I chose.
cs says
Exactly, they only achieved shit in intellectual field when they were less Quranic, and only cultural Muslims, Avicena could be a Christian or a Jew, he was an universalist, so we should surely respect him, but when they are what they , oh F**k, unbearable.
voegelinian says
Wellington left out reason #3, a staggering omission (given how long he’s been reading Jihad Watch). Muslims are invading the West through a protracted demographic process of immigration, reproduction, and false assimilation — pursued with the long-term objective (which has been a desideratum in Islam ever since Muhammad was reputed to have had a vision to conquer “Rome”) of conquest.
Wellington says
My reason #2, voegelinian, covers what you mentioned as reason #3. It is implied thoughout much of reason #2 with such words and phrases as “parasitism,” “master-faith nonsense,” and “consignment in this world of non-Muslims to a pure, second-class status across the board.” Do you really believe that I believe that Muslims can only be characterized by the words and phrases I mentioned above in their own homelands but not when here in the West? How could anyone not read dripping sarcasm and a full awareness of demographic jihad from what I wrote?
On a larger issue, I am fully, 100% aware of what Islam means for the West. I have proposed many ways to deal with this, among them being 1) maximum prosecution of Muslims acting in the name of their faith when they break Western laws, 2) never ceasing to push the idea that Islam is malevolent and a totalitarian ideology which is bad news for liberty and equality under the law, to be ranked with other horrible, freedom-crushiing ideologies like Marxism and Nazism (it will still take some time for this to be fully grasped but the fact that even someone on the Left like Bill Maher gets it is an encouraging sign), 3) finding legal pretexts to virtually halt further Muslim immigration to the West, 4) doing all that is possible to get ourselves off of Middle Eastern oil (no pie-in-the-sky stuff though), and 5) stripping Western citizenship of those “extra devout” Muslims who do such things as go overseas to join ISIS.
In fact, I believe that we have only one huge, major difference and that is that you want mass deportation of Muslims from a nation like America, and though the thought of a virtually Muslim-free America warms my heart, I function within the parameters and possibilities of current American law and I can tell you, as I have told you many times, that your promotion of mass deportation, even assuming it’s a good idea, is simply 100% not feasible or realistic under present American statutory and constitutional law. It’s a total non-starter and you would be laughed out of any court of law in America if you even got so far as trying to argue your position before a judge. Just as pie-in-the-sky energy solutions should be avoided, so should pie-in-the-sky legal solutions. Learn the law, will ya’?
ghostoftolkien says
Whoa fellas, bestill the infighting! You’re both very intelligent and righteously indignant to boot. For my part, I’m glad to see that a slice of viable dialectic exists beneath the broader fog of obfuscation. Moreover, that wellington can identify practical, feasible, actionable measures (though unlikely to be adopted by anyone who presently represents our duly appointed leadership).
JW is a great resource – I’ve been reading Spencer’s stuff well before ever seeing a real-life burka in all its splendor (I don’t get out much). She was a real beauty – fortunately for me, she was covered – probably the only thing that saved me from certain perdition. Spencer is a beacon of light and a worthy harbinger. I only hope we can amass critically in time to save the rest of the west, as it were. IMO, we could draw a vertical line down eastern Germany, if not further east, to demarcate land of the lost (the line delineates rot to its west, all the way to the atlantic). What is already real is not always quite visible, and whatever some of us already see will be too bad to reconcile for most of us by the time enough people see it. Perfectly clear, right?
News upon news, I can only shake my head and conclude that a diabolical shroud cloaks the mind of western man – especially his leadership. Logic evidently does not play a role, any more than does a knowledge of [Muslim] history. In a world where politically correct politicians are incorrect and we are loathe to provide correction en masse (democratically or otherwise), what catalyst for applicable action exists for our betterment? Ah, were good Pope Urban II still be with us perhaps we might have the collective testicles to mount a rally. Alas, we are grounded with Jorge, who would sooner pray in a Mosque and hope to nicey-nice the problem down the road.
In the end, it is a spiritual war. Immorality is at the root of our problem, and for as long as we fail to rouse a rebirth of good ol’ fashioned virtue, we are doomed to reap what we’ve sown (and continue to sow). For after all, Mo was borne from the mind of Lucifer the light bearer, whose false light blinded that tormented Arab man in a cave long, long ago. So it is that our battle is with power and principalities beneath all else…though on the surface we are exiled among their human minions.
voegelinian says
The problem with that, Wellington, is that a group or sect following an ideology could fit the description you provided in those phrases without being a violent threat. While all those characteristics you listed may well be repellant to decent folks, if some group or sect is evincing them, by themselves they would not be enough for us to even want to restrict their immigration, much less want to deport them. I still think you balk at deportation because your grasp of the nature of the problem is, in fact, on the level of a repellant ideology, (about which one can complain till the cows come home and hope for the day when everyone agrees it is repellant but apparently does nothing concrete about its actualizers) — not a clear and present deadly attack on our society with the ongoing threat of more and horribly worse.
Wellington says
Even if I completely agreed with you, voegelinian, about mass deportation, there is simply no way under present statutory and constitutional law that could happen. I doubt a single federal judge exists who would maintain that what you want to do regarding deportation is legally possible to do. Also, who in government, be it at the federal or at the state level, has called for mass deportation? Even if you could name a handful of politicians who have done so (I personally know of none), surely you must comprehend that yours is a voice crying out deep in the wilderness. The turning of the corner of corners for me is the time when Islam, just plain Islam and not “radical Islam” or “extremist Islam,” is described by most everyone, including most elites, as a negative and not a positive. When that happens, the rest will take care of itself as I have outlined many times here at JW.
Dave J says
Way too many Muhammeds. Once the pendulum of rationality swings back towards sanity the resulting backlash may place the many Mu’s at some disadvantage.
They immigrate here but we are not permitted to move there (not that any thinking person would want to).
They build mosques here a mile a minute yet no Christian churches are allowed over there.
They can marry a non-Muslim but only a Muslim can marry a Muslim.
Why on earth would we accept such a double standard state of affairs?
Answer: We don’t have to if we have the courage of our own convictions.
France first, England 2nd says
Let’s face facts. France will be the first to fall to this scourge that is Islam. They have let in far more muslims whose sole aim is to destroy a prosperous society from within. The politically correct left won’t see it until it is too late. The recent French elections were only just won by the socialists with the help of the muslim vote. England has a way to go, no matter how many people are named Muhammad. England still can turn the boat around. France can’t. It is only a matter of 40-50 years (100 if they are lucky) until there will be an Islamic revolution in France. They just need the numbers first for a safe takeover. Blind Freddy can see the writing on the wall.
jewdog says
Let’s not jump to conclusions. I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of British Christians are naming their sons Muhammad so that they will have a better life in a changing Britain: Admittance to good schools, good jobs, eligibility for public assistance, immunity from hate speech laws and the chance to have lots of cute young girl friends.
gravenimage says
Terribly grim. And some have protested that since Muhammad is the most common boy’s name that these stats are misleading—but we now have Muslim girl’s names in the top 100 as well. The truth is that Muslims are not only entering Britain in droves, but they are breading like rats once they get there.
Donald says
Do a google search on images for “Big Ben in London then do a google search on Mecca Clock tower then take Mecca’s clock tower and all of it’s mosque towers and replace the Big Ben Clock Tower with the Mecca clock tower with all the mosque towers and that’s what you’ll have in 2o years or less
No Fear says
36% of all UK child genetic defects are produced by 3% of the population who copy the excellent example of Mohammed and marry their cousins. It is worthy of a death threat to draw a cartoon of Mohamed but it is OK to name a genetically defective child after Mohammed. Go figure.
Jayell says
“36% of all UK child genetic defects are produced by 3% of the population who copy the excellent example of Mohammed and marry their cousins”…..36%? That much? So I wonder how much THAT is costing the National Health Service, the Education system (when the little so-and-so’s need extra help in schools) and in welfare payments when they are found to be too disabled to work. Add to that the extra welfare costs of their over-large families (for which we haven’t got space), the unemployment benefit costs because about 50% of their men and 75% of their women don’t work, the costs of keeping the excess proportion of them in prison (13% of the prison population, I believe) plus the extra costs to pander to their ‘special needs’, not to mention the costs of supporting the victims of their disgusting cfrimes…..Add THAT lot up and you get to see what a privilege it is to have these people enriching our society (sarcasm, you understand!). So THEY impose a tax on non-muslims (gizzya – is that right?) in THEIR countries purely out of typically islmaic malice and with no economic justification. Why don’t WE do likewise on THEM over here to offset the financial burden they wilfully place on US???
joeb says
The truth is that it has been number one for years, but only now have they consolidated all the different spellings into one.
Before when you looked at the list, there were different mohammeds all over it.
Xero_G says
Does #1 status include the variations of Muhammad such as Mohammad, Muhammed, Mohammed, etc?
Crixus says
Shocking isn’t it?
Only it is total nonsense and I’m afraid Robert and all who sent this in have fallen for a cynical attempt at viral marketing by a private business whose owners decided to piggyback publicity off the storm this would cause on sites like this and others as well as the Daily Mail and the inevitable leftist backlash.
The website in question is http://www.babycentre.co.uk
Mohammed/Mohammad is not the most popular baby name in the UK, in fact it does not even feature in the top ten baby names. It is the most popular name in parts of London and in Birmingham, cause for worry, but it certainly is not in the country as a whole.
Babycentre, the website who produced the dubious report cooked the figures to get Mo to the top spot by amalgamating all the various versions of Mo together. Mohammed, Muhammed, Mohammad, Mehmet etc etc etc. And before you say “well, it doesn’t matter how you spell it” the point is that they did not apply the same rules to any other name. So Eric and Erik were counted separately, Tomas, Thomas, Dave, David. Richard, Rick, Richie, Dick, Dicken etc etc etc.
The Office of National Statistics, the UK’s official statisticians (and far from a Government stooge, they make a habit of showing skeletons in cupboards) publish the most common baby names in the contry over the previous year and they are:
Oliver 6949
Jack 6212
Harry
Jacob
Charlie
Thomas
Oscar
William
James
George 4202
when you add all the variations of Oliver together (Olly, Ol, Nol, Ollie etc) Oliver is still the most popular name with the various Mos in 2nd place.
No one doubts the worrying growth of the Muslim population in the last 20 years in the UK. We all know the reasons why this has happened. But trying to enforce this point by using statistics like baby names is daft because it is a classic Tabloid hysteria headline which, even if it were true, does not make the slightest difference as there is no way to measure growth in population by a figure like this. I’m afraid that by reacting to this on Jihadwatch, all we are doing is endorsing the accusation by leftists and dhimmis that the ‘Islamophobia’ is reactionary hysteria.
I would urge Robert to remove this article.
There is a rather more serious situation in the UK, a Islamic School has been discovered siphoning off £1 million ($1.4m) of public money to spend in Pakistan building a school. The Headmaster and governors have been fired and face criminal investigation.
Crixus says
for the record, the ONS report is dated August 2014.
It’s the only source of these figures and BabyCenter would have based their reports on this data
gravenimage says
The idea all of these stories are just the result of some scam by BabyCentre is utterly false.
For instance, the following story’s statistics are based on an independent CNN analysis of British Office of National Statistics data
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/14/mohammed-retakes-top-spot-in-english-baby-names/
Lee says
LOL, and well pointed out – not that we shouldn’t be concerned to reduce Islamic populations in civilized countries as a matter of urgency of course. As to why Muslims so often call their sons ‘Muhammad’ (and variations), it’s because that head-chopper, rapist and paedophile told the freaks and criminals following him to do so. More self-aggrandizement from the worst criminal cult-leader in history…
See Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 216 at http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/073-sbt.php
Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah Al-Ansari:
Allah’s Apostle said, “NAME YOURSELVES AFTER ME (by my name) but do not call (yourselves) by my Kuniya (1), for I am Al-Qasim (distributor), and I distribute among you Allah’s blessings.” This narration has also come on the authority of Anas that the Prophet said so.”
Volume 8, Book 73, Number 217:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, “NAME YOURSELVES AFTER ME (by my name), but do not call yourselves by my Kuniya, and whoever sees me in a dream, he surely sees me, for Satan cannot impersonate me (appear in my figure). And whoever intentionally ascribes something to me falsely, he will surely take his place in the (Hell) Fire.
The ‘Kuniya’ or ‘Kunya’ of Muhammad is Abu’l Qasim, meaning father of Qasim – his son who died at one year of age. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu'_Qasim
BC says
I think you should note that there are no markedly Islamic/Arabic names in the girls list
Sopia and its variant Sophie means wisdom in Greek. What do you make of that? Actually the parents most likely do not know the meaning of it!
Note also Noah and Joshua. When I was at school the owners of those names would have been the target of jokes!
clifford hall says
James
You have a point. Yet all these things are symptomatic and are worth noting. But of course,’ a rose by any other name….’ and all that. To your example I might add the increasing use of violence by the police against lawful Britain First protests evidenced in their latest video
Pumbar
iechyd da
Blitz2b says
Mohammed as a first name is simplif simply a ploy to top the charts. You see in the Islamic tradition the naming of a boy is not the same as in the west, where we have a given name, a middle and the a surname.
In the Islamic tradition majority of boys are given the name Mohammed as a prefix tho his actual name. Eg. Mohammed Ashraf , or Mohammed Sohail, or Mohammed Azeem etc… Where the boys will be referred to as Ashraf, So hail Azeem..etc.
I would venture to say about 80% of males are bestowed this name Mohammed more as an honor to their prophet than as an actual name to be used in every day life.
gravenimage says
Even were this the case, it means nothing. No one cares whether these Muslim boys grow up to use “Mohammed” or “Ahmed” or “Abdul”.
The point is that only Muslims are named “Muhammed” (or its myriad variants.
The point is the Britain is bring overrun with supremacist Mohammedans.
John Magne Trane says
In Norway it was Oslo that first had the “honour” of having Mahmot and derivations thereof as the most popular name for poor, innocent children. It then spreads out with the surrounding “kommuner (counties) also getting the same treatment.
What was interesting, however, is the treatment it gets in the press. The year after the Utøya-attack (and Oslo bombing), my local paper tried to get behind the figures and checked to see it there was a decrease in the usage of the name “Anders” on young boys. They even interviewed the notorious left-wing (hence notorious wrong) Bureau of Statistics, SSB about the matter, but found nothing too conclusive. Small wonder, as Breivik is called Breivik or ABB, noone uses his first name.
But the after the paragraphs where the journalists tried to connect the child murdering terrorist to a change in the usage of names on children, they gave the happy news that a new name had conquered two more communes. Strangely enough they seemed to miss the fact that the name, Muhammed, -mad, Mehmed etc was ALSO the name of a child murdering terrorist…
Salb says
Muslims are doing to Europe,what they did in palestinian territories. Baby bombing. Creeps up slow, and one day you wake up living in a Muslim country.
marky says
So based on the quran, hadiths and sira’s descriptions of what muhamad did..
Muslim parents are naming their baby boys:-
Paedophile, rapist, necrophiliac, transvestite, animal sex molestor, mass murderer, homosexual, liar, thief, speaker from satan…. etc etc etc.
Watcher says
Well all the evidence is the UK authorities don’t think at all!?, except in apologist terms. Ignorant morons
Jae M says
Maybe they will clue in to the idea of taking over a country involves populating it with those of similar ideology. Immigration only works in free countries when the immigrants want to accept the way of life they are going into and accept the religions, traditions, laws and rights therein. Otherwise they will make it a duplicate of the country they left.
Darren says
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o15PljTS2O8
“If we can’t get them out we’ll breed them out”– LongShanks
Aion says
And remember, when 25% or 50% of school age children are Muslim or immigrants, it is not just some meaningless statistic. That means in a few years they will be teens, and eventually adults, and STILL be the same percent of their age group. So if 20% of school children are immigrants that is close to the same proportion they will be of 20-30 year olds, etc. By that point it is already too late, you have lost your country.
Marty says
The future for the UK, Norway and France in particular looks very troubling.
In the UK the government does not just permit the most extreme arab states to open schools
but it also has state funde islamic schools.
To add to this suicidal insanity it allows Church of England schools to become full of muslim kids and employ muslim staff.
In one case the headmistress married a muslim man, had to convert, and used Christian money to fund a muslim school.
Utter suicidal insanity.
Daniel Triplett says
Womb Jihad.
If we don’t employ WWII strategies against Islam, Muslims own our future.
Let’s face the facts, take the gloves off, and eliminate Islam from the face of the Earth.
voegelinian says
“Quite why someone would want to name their child after a sodomite child raping psychopath is somewhat beyond me,”
If we don’t grasp how and why Muhammad is positively revered by all Muslims, we will never be able to manage the horrific problems (and only getting worse as we speak) which they are causing us.