If the mountain wont come to mohammed then mohammed will have to be sent to the mountain. Preferably the himalays in India or Pakistan. The goverments of these afformentioned countries should be told to make plans to take their own people back. Since they are saying the 21st century is Asias century then the sooner they leave the better.
2006-12-26 03:24:08 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/21/nnames21.xml
here is the reality of it
2006-12-26 03:31:39 · update #1
sammy. Im not against immigration per se its the amount of it that is uncontrolled and illegal. Therefore the culture of the UK is dissolving where ghettoes are created. The majority of immigrants form their own communitys and refuse to integrate.
2006-12-26 03:35:24 · update #2
That's nothing. Wait twenty years when Islam is Britain's official
religion and you have to publicly swear fealty to Allah so you can
stay in the country. That'll be a drag,won't it?
2006-12-26 03:29:42 · answer #1 · answered by Alion 7 · 2⤊ 5⤋
The mountain will stay where it is and the Mohammeds will remain where they are, and you shouldnt be disturbed about Mohammeds outnumbering Georges, this should have been thought a century ago when the Georges were trying to rule the mohammeds in the country of Mohammeds. Now its too late and pretty soon Georges will get to the history pages.
2006-12-30 11:12:21 · answer #2 · answered by Jaff 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. How many people are called George these days? There are probably more kids named Jesus than Peregrine!
2. Mohammed is a very common name for the followers of an entire religion!
3. The Himalayas stretch across six nations: Bhutan, China, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Afghanistan. There aren't many Muslims nearby.
2006-12-26 11:42:09 · answer #3 · answered by rage997 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Cici is right - you get these stories from the gutter press (yes, I do mean the Telegraph) and post them as fact. You are pathetic, racist and wrong.
George is an old man's name, but there's a 14 year old boy living next door to me called George, and my cousin's 10 year old son is also called George. Both these children were named during Clinton's presidency, how could their mothers have known another George was on his way to the White House ?
Stop peddling this garbage and take up origami or something.
2006-12-26 23:14:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I find it very interesting how many anti-whites have answered your question.
Elfreda - The UK is no longer 94% white - that is a very old official statistic... and only counts those that are legally in the country based on the census. Get your facts correct before quoting percentages.
2006-12-30 08:05:18 · answer #5 · answered by Purple-Fusion 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The reason for this is simple: indigenous families are typically smaller, whereas Black/Asian/Muslim families tend to be larger. These groups tend to be more family orientated and value/cherish children.
If you do not like this, then I suggest you start a campaign to get more white families to procreate.
As for sending them back, if they are born here where should they go back to?
Have you looked into your family history - have your family always lived in the UK? Perhaps you have Swedish/Irish/French/German/African/Asian etc heritage - perhaps YOU should go back to YOUR country.
Perhaps by looking into British history you may find the answer as to why there are people originally from India, Pakistan, Caribbean etc in the UK. Does it have anything to do with colonisation? The need for cheap labour? You cannot rape the world then expect no come back, can you?
P.S Before you get your knickers in a twist - remember, the UK is still 94 - 95% WHITE. Keep things in perspective.
2006-12-26 12:33:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
You should be careful making comparisons especially those derived from the gutter press. Just for the record, George is not a popular UK name, especially with its association with a certain Mr Bush. In the extremely unlikely event that large of Muslims in the UK wished to return to their 'homelands', the British economy would collapse. Who would we blame for all our problems next? Would it be the Jews, the Irish or the Welsh?
2006-12-26 12:05:40 · answer #7 · answered by James Mack 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Who's George?
2006-12-26 11:31:27 · answer #8 · answered by when_it_happens 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
why do people like you always think people of foreign ancestry are in your country because of the CHARITY of your country?
those people EARNED their spot under the sun , maybe more than you ever did .
when INDIANS fought bravely for the ENGLISH , you didnt think they were parasites , did you?
when you took all the riches from INDIA , until BRITAIN became one of the richest countries in the world , you were all for the "empire" weren't you?
when ARABS fought with you in ww1 against the ottoman (old man) empire , you didnt think they were a breed of bloodthirsty terrorists then , did you?
ahh those anglo-saxons
english did not become the dominant culture in the world from nothing
2006-12-26 11:33:59 · answer #9 · answered by shogunly 5 · 6⤊ 1⤋
What u mean more new borns will be named after a prophet from Saudi Arabia rather than the patron saint of England who was a Palestinian....?
2006-12-26 11:36:03 · answer #10 · answered by Convince Pete 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
with so much hatred in your heart, thats a sad way to begin the new year,
by the way its always the brits and americans that invade those countries, so when they get destroyed the people come and live here. seems fair to me
2006-12-27 05:24:33 · answer #11 · answered by purple diamond 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋