« Subsidizing Sabotage | Main | The Chicago Way »

Muslim moderation in Britain

Let's just thank God they're not radical:

Around a third of young British Muslims favour killing in the name of Islam, according to a survey revealed by the WikiLeaks' publication of U.S. diplomatic cables.

A survey of 600 Muslim students at 30 universities throughout Britain found that 32 per cent of Muslim respondents believed killing in the name of religion is justified.

A U.S. diplomatic cable from January 2009 quoted a poll by the Centre for Social Cohesion as saying 54 per cent wanted a Muslim party to represent their world view in Parliament and 40 per cent want Muslims in the UK to be under Sharia law.

The survey results, revealed by WikiLeaks' release of thousands of U.S. diplomatic cables, suggests increasing radicalisation among Britain's young Muslims.

A further U.S. cable, dated February 5 2009, said reaching out to Britain's Muslim community there was a 'top priority' for U.S. embassy staff.

It stated: 'Although people of Muslim faith make up only 3 to 4 per cent of the UK's population, outreach to this key audience is vital to U.S. foreign policy interests in the UK and beyond... This is a top mission priority.'

A top mission priority eh?  So I guess this means Obama will soon be calling on NASA.

Just sayin'.

H/T VerumSerum.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/40802.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Muslim moderation in Britain:

» Brutally Honest linked with Muslim moderation in Britain

Comments (53)

"'Although people of Muslim... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"'Although people of Muslim faith make up only 3 to 4 per cent of the UK's population, outreach to this key audience is vital to U.S. foreign policy interests in the UK and beyond... "

Yeah, "outreach" is working out so well for the Brits, isn't it?

I can think of several effe... (Below threshold)
Brett:

I can think of several effective delivery systems for appropriate "outreach".

outreach to this key audien... (Below threshold)
Hank:

outreach to this key audience is vital to U.S. foreign policy interests in the UK and beyond... "

Make one wonder what the hell our foreign policy interests are nowadays. Sure isn't peace through strength.

Given how uber-leftist Amer... (Below threshold)
Caesar Augustus:

Given how uber-leftist American academic circles have become, it won't be too long before 1/3 of U.S. college students want to blow themselves up in the name of anti-American and anti-Israeli jihad.

I wouldn't worry, Obama's i... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

I wouldn't worry, Obama's intelligience director is aware of the terrorist problems in England. Oops! Nevermind. ww

3-4 % translates into a cou... (Below threshold)
914:

3-4 % translates into a couple million peaceful barbarians. They must have inherited this from Boooosh.

A survey of 600 Muslim s... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

A survey of 600 Muslim students at 30 universities throughout Britain found that 32 per cent of Muslim respondents believed killing in the name of religion is justified.

The problem I have with the above is we don't know the wording of the survey. I seriously doubt the poll phrased it exactly, "Do you believe killing in the name of religion is justified?" Frequently, the media and blogs will inaccurately paraphrase survey questions. Without the actual wording of the survey questions it is easy to distort survey results.

Tina, the question posed to... (Below threshold)
Hank:

Tina, the question posed to muslim students was:

Is it ever justifiable to kill in the name of religion.

The study is at:
www.socialcohesion.co.uk/files/1231525079_1.pdf

The Religion of Peace will ... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

The Religion of Peace will be peaceful as soon as we are dead or enslaved. The Brits are impatient for that "peace" and are just hurrying the Jihadis along! Smoooooth!

I believe that the killing ... (Below threshold)
jim m:

I believe that the killing of 32% of young British muslims is justified in the name of world peace.

Some might find that harsh, but I'm really beyond caring about trying to work things out with these lunatics.

Hank, thanks for the link I... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

Hank, thanks for the link I couldn't find. The survey asked:



Is it ever justifiable to kill in the name of religion?

A.Yes in order to preserve and promote that religion.

B. Yes but only if that religion is under attack.

C. No it is never justifiable.

D. Not sure.


I believe it was justifiable to kill Nazi's who were trying to eliminate the Jewish religion by exterminating all Jewish people. Since the survey asked is it ever justifiable, I would have to agree with both response A & B.

If a Muslim believes killin... (Below threshold)
DaveD:

If a Muslim believes killing in the name of religion is fine so be it. If said Muslim does indeed carry out a killing, the Mosque that he/she attends gets blown up/bulldozed. If the Mosque is uncertain we'll pick one at random.

TinaS, I agree that with polling it is really enlightening to know how the question was phrased. I have no argument there. Unfortunately I have become so put out with how a certain segment of Western society goes out of its way not to offend Muslims, despite the fact this religion is the prime incubator of terrorism in the present day, that I have grown cynical and believe most polls also try to avoid any major offense of Islam.

Oooooh, TIna, nice try.... (Below threshold)
epador:

Oooooh, TIna, nice try.

[Chuck Barry hits the gong loudly]

Tina, the Nazis weren't fou... (Below threshold)
Oyster:

Tina, the Nazis weren't fought because they were trying to eliminate a religion. They were fought and killed because they were killing all manner of people, Jews, the physically and mentally handicapped, Christians, those who did not fit the aryan mold, gypsies - you name it, Hitler hated it.

If you had something the Nazis wanted, they'd kill you and take it.

That's why we fought the Nazis.

Tina,There is a di... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Tina,

There is a difference between attacking a religion and genocide. I'm sorry that you are so liberal that you are unable to perceive that difference. I'm also sorry that you have to twist things so far to appologize for people who would dance in the street after slitting your throat.

Tina,You might als... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Tina,

You might also consider that muslims consider a cartoon an attack on their religion that justifies murder.

Tina, the Nazis weren't ... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

Tina, the Nazis weren't fought because they were trying to eliminate a religion. They were fought and killed because they were killing all manner of people, Jews, the physically and mentally handicapped, Christians, those who did not fit the aryan mold, gypsies - you name it, Hitler hated it.

There were many attrocities committed by the Nazis that justified the killing of Nazis.

If the Nazi's only focused on eliminating Jews, that would have provided enough justification to kill Nazis.

If the Nazi's only focused on killing the handicapped, that would have provided enough justification to kill Nazis.

If the Nazi's only focused on killing the gypsies, that would have provided enough justification to kill Nazis.

Since the killing of Nazis can be justified based on what they did to the Jewish people, my answer to the survey (not neccessary why we went to war) is still A & B. The fact that they did more than just try to kill Jews, provides additional justification to kill more Nazis.

If Stupidity ever becomes a... (Below threshold)
Jim Addison:

If Stupidity ever becomes an Olympic sport, Tina S will be a strong contender for Gold.

Seriously, does she not realize these are the people who will kill you for drawing a cartoon of their prophet? Who believe women who are raped are guilty of adultery and should be executed?

Obama voters . . . whenever you wonder how we got into such a mess, talk to one of them for a minute. My dog is smarter than most of them.

They should survey Brits to... (Below threshold)
TexBob:

They should survey Brits to see who is in favor of killing muslims who believe in killing in the name of islam.

The results would be interesting.

Tina,The question ... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Tina,

The question was never whether or not we were justified in going to war and killing the nazis.

The question was whether murdering someone on the street because they attack your religion is acceptable.

32% of british muslim college students said yes.

We have already seen that muslims consider writing a book that criticizes islam is reason for murder. Drawing a picture of mohammad is reason for murder. Suggesting that other peolpe draw pictures of mohammad is reason for murder. Making a movie that they deem derogatory to their religion is reason for murder.

Does the point just not seep in? What you or I would consider an insult they consider an attack on their religion justifying lethal force to respond. One out of every 3 in Britain would feel justified in killing you or I for the flimsiest of reasons.

And yet you defend them and suggest that their decision is a rational and understandable one.

When will people recognize ... (Below threshold)
Gmac:

When will people recognize Islam for what it is?

Their goal is total worldwide domination, using violence to achieve that goal has been a cornerstone of the religion.

The math is very simple, you either are a member of the religion or you are a target.

ROPMA

There is a difference be... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

There is a difference between attacking a religion and genocide. I'm sorry that you are so liberal that you are unable to perceive that difference. I'm also sorry that you have to twist things so far to appologize for people who would dance in the street after slitting your throat.

jim m, In the U.S., when people speak of religion being under attack, it is due to people banning prayer from school or stores saying happy holidays. However, in other parts of the world where religous violence is more common, people are more likely to interprete "attack on religion" as physical violence. Therefore, depending on what part of the world you live in, ones intepretation of the survey question will likely differ.

Around a third of young Bri... (Below threshold)
LiberalNitemare:

Around a third of young British Muslims favour killing in the name of Islam, according to a survey revealed by the WikiLeaks' publication of U.S. diplomatic cables.


So, when it gets to 3/5ths, are we allowed to profile?

When they come for Tina, I'... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

When they come for Tina, I'm sure she'll have the appropriate 'astonished look' on her face, blubbering "But....but....but......"

More fun from "Jolly old En... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:
There are several m... (Below threshold)
irongrampa:


There are several means of outreach in these cases.

Most are available at selected retail outlets.

Tina,Really? I me... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Tina,

Really? I mean, really,?

So you think that Salman Rushdie living in seclusion for the last two decades is just a publicity stunt for his publisher? You think that Theo vanGogh having his head cut off in a city street is just a fabrication? You think that the woman who suggested "Everyone draw mohammad day" living in fear for her life from death threats is just fooling around? I suppose that you think that the violence that followed the Danish mohammad cartoons was just an exaggeration?

No Tina, muslims have made it very clear that they believe that verbal and artistic slights are dangerous attacks on their religion and that such attacks are to be countered by murdering those who make them.

Where have you been that you could possibly be so naive as to think that muslims think that an attack on their religion means tanks rolling into the mosque courtyard? To say that they think of rifles and grenades is the position of a simpleton. At least I have their behavior to back my position up. What evidence do you have to suggest that anyone should think otherwise? Liberal wishful thinking and self-loathing?

GarandFan,I like h... (Below threshold)
jim m:

GarandFan,

I like how the AntiChristmas poster says that christmas is responsible for domestic violence. I thought domestic violence was the result of muslim men not knowing that anal sex wouldn't get their wives pregnant.

If someone believes that th... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

If someone believes that the United States should go to war because God would want us to protect Israel. Would that mean they believe in killing in Gods name? That person would probably never publically say they believe in killing in Gods name. But what if they privately believe that supporting a war would help get them to heaven. Or not supporting a war might prevent them from getting to heaven. Wouldn't that mean they believe in killing in the name of God?

Tina,I believe tha... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Tina,

I believe that you are making this far too abstract. For most people, if you walked up on the street and asked them if it was OK to kill someone for attacking your religion, they would 1) think that "attack" meant to insult or deride said faith and not to assault with machine guns; and 2) they would think that you were out of your tree for suggesting such a thing.

This is not a hypothetical about what would Christians respond to the same question. Even so I think you would get a single digit response in favor of murder at most.

I sincerely doubt that someone responding to the survey took the time to ponder the logical extension of the question and thought, "Can I conceive of any situation where God might ask me to kill someone to defend my faith and would I do what God asked if He made such a demand?"

Please. You're just looking foolish now.

A simple explanation is that muslims have a widespread belief that killing other people because they disagree with your religion is not just OK but a requirement of that religion.

In attempting to apologize for your blood thirsty muslim friends you have tried to first blame the poll question. Then you compared people attacking religion to nazis exterminating Jews. Then you said that attack must have meant military assault to them. Now you claim that Christians would give the same polling results without offering anything to support it.

Thanks for the tour of dishonest argumentation. It has been enlightening.

Tina -Don't you ev... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Tina -

Don't you ever get tired of the 'moral equivalence' posturing? I'm looking at what you wrote and I'm shaking my head - do you really believe that? Or are you just attempting to make an argument that sounds logical to you but conveys no sense of reason, reality, or logic to the rest of us?

I'm most likely wrong on this - but you seem to believe that playing with definitions which might define why someone did something is of far more importance than the actual actions they've taken.

If Iran tries to take out Israel - I'm sincerely hoping that we do get involved and level Tehran and as many cities in Iran to suffice to make the point that YOU DON'T DO THAT SHIT ANY MORE. It's not about the religion, it's about (a) standing up to a nuclear aggressor and (b) standing up for your allies.

You may look upon war with cold horror and believe that ANYTHING is better than war. And I'll sympathize with you - to a point. War should be a last resort, undertaken only when there's no other recourse - when your nation is in a fight for its existence, or fighting to preserve another nation's freedom. (And I'm fast getting to a point where if we DO have to go to war, I'm all for just wrecking the other country and then leaving them to rot. Go to war against the US or its allies, and you'll be a hell of a lot worse off than when you started.)

But capitulation to an enemy's demands is worse because there's one thing that's certain with appeasement - you simply get more threats. Look at Chamberlain's 'success' with Hitler. The words on paper by Hitler meant nothing - the actions of Hitler following the signing of Munich Agreement meant everything. And that 'Peace in our time' lasted until the next day when ol' H glommed onto the Sudetenland.

That you're trying so hard to equate a justification for defending Israel into the equivalence of killing for religion makes no sense to me. It's really like you're trying to justify Muslim death threats, and I don't understand why you would even want to - much less justify their mindset that any slight against Islam must be avenged in blood.

Words don't mean much. Actions mean everything. A 'religion of peace' that allows its adherents to hack off heads and kill those who slight the religion doesn't seem to be living up to its label.

After all, Tina. Look at ho... (Below threshold)
Woop dere It Is:

After all, Tina. Look at how well the lesson we taught the middle east by invading and toppling Saddam Hussein has taken hold.

Oh, wait a minute. We toppled Iran's neighbor and not only did they not cower in fear, they're busily developing a nuclear capability with which they can defend or even attack nations such as the U.S. should matters escalate.

Instead of fostering peace, our yahoo cowboy shit-kicking attitude has caused a destabilization in the region and accomplished nothing more than ratcheting up the possibility of a nuclear bomb detonation in the region, or in an attack against the United States.

jim m, I agree that if you ... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

jim m, I agree that if you walked up to someone in the streets of the United States they would agree with the definition of "attack" you gave. Britain has a high rate of hate crimes against Muslims including Mosque burnings. In Britain "attacks on religion" could include the burning of a Mosque.

Nazis were not killed by Ch... (Below threshold)
Rick Author Profile Page:

Nazis were not killed by Christians seeking to destroy them in the name of their religion...

The comparison made by Tina is ridiculous...

Tina, you're undercutting w... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Tina, you're undercutting what little support the 19th amendment still has.

Woop, haven't you joined the military yet, now that you can?

Sigh.Yes Tina. At... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Sigh.

Yes Tina. Attacks on relgion could include burning a mosque. I confess I do not follow UK local news that closely so I cannot say whether they are common or not, although you offer no data to support your claim. Much like the liberal claim of church burnings when Clinton ran for President, I suspect your claims are made up.

Never-the-less, I will state again that muslims have already provided ample proof that simply drawing a picture of mohammad is worthy of murder. Muslims in Britain will kill their daughters for merely dating a non-muslim.

Why do you defend such monstrous people? Why do you give cover to their hate and violence?

I really don't care for the excuse that you and woop and Bruce etc will give that "Oh, Christians were violent once upon a time hundreds of years ago." or "other people are hateful and violent so it's wrong to single out muslims."

NO! their hate and violence is wrong regardless of whether we have stood up to other groups. They are wrong regardless of what other groups may have done in the distant or recent past. If you cannot bring yourself to acknowledge and condemn their hate and violence I have nothing but disgust for you.

Don't you ever get tired... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

Don't you ever get tired of the 'moral equivalence' posturing? I'm looking at what you wrote and I'm shaking my head - do you really believe that? Or are you just attempting to make an argument that sounds logical to you but conveys no sense of reason, reality, or logic to the rest of us?

Do I actually believe everything I've said tonight? Regarding comment 29. I do understand the difference between protecting Isreal and others who are willing to blow up innocent people in the name in of god. But I still consider anyone basing a decision to go to war on what God would want is killing in the name of God.

I am extremely skeptical of the survey because the number seems way to high. I'll try to find a similar survey and compare the results.

What exactly does killing i... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

What exactly does killing in God's name mean? I've always considered it to mean that the person believed he was acting in God's will.

Do I actually believe ev... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Do I actually believe everything I've said tonight?

Well, thank you for answering that, at least. Kind of. Obliquely.

But you missed the second part, where I said...

... you seem to believe that playing with definitions which might define why someone did something is of far more importance than the actual actions they've taken.
In the case of Islam, you're not willing to see the reality of their actions, instead going through intellectual convulsions to avoid blaming the actions on the adherents of the religion.

Reality cannot be denied - whether you delude yourself with 'reality-based' thinking, politically correct groupthink, adhering to the properly vetted ideas of your group, clan, clique or classroom - the knife is still sharp, and there will be those who believe that death for those who insult Islam is justifiable, proper, and their responsibility... and they aren't meaning it rhetorically.

They are, to excuse the phrase, dead serious in their determination.

Tina,You can choos... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Tina,

You can choose to doubt the numbers but IIRC, the results are similar to other polls taken across Europe and worldwide.

As to what killing in God's name means, I would say that generally that the victim has committed some offense that requires punishment and that you are acting as God's instrument. In the case of muslims they point to specific statements in the koran that command them to kill infidels.

One thing I am pretty certain of and that is that you are confusing the idea of a just war with acting in God's name. The just war concept is not that you are acting on God's behalf but that in going to war you are acting to protect the weak or as an act of defense against aggression. Libs like you like to claim that Bush claimed that he was doing God's will by invading Iraq, when in reality he was claiming that it was a just war.

Since you cannot distinguish between people insulting islam and nazis committing genocide, I would hazard that the difference is just to difficult for you to understand.

Nazis in Germany prosecuted... (Below threshold)
Woop:

Nazis in Germany prosecuted jews simply because of their religion.

Christians in America hope to prosecute muslims simply because of their religion.

The difference is simply a matter of time. If we, the intelligent people of the US don't stop the Christian right from prosecuting our fellow Americans who are of the muslim faith then we are just like the Germans who stood by silently while the Nazis hunted down the jews.

We will stop them. There is no other option. We will stop them.

One aspect I think Tina has... (Below threshold)
epador:

One aspect I think Tina has missed is that the survey not only identified Muslim students, it also identified non-muslim students answers. If you look at the question and answers on page 43 of the linked publication, you will see that an additional statistic "don't know" showed that about 15% of muslims answered this, and 4% of non-muslims said so. 94% of non-muslims said "never" and ONLY 53% OF MUSLIMS SAID IT IS NEVER ACCEPTABLE. THis does not appear to be a problem of understanding what the questionnaire was asking. Its YOUR problem with not wanting to accept the answer.

C'mon TIna. This is telling about attitude. Your apologia attempt isn't even weak. It only shows your blinders are still firmly set in place. Please, take them off. Look and think, before you become a victim yourself. I gonged you early on and you've only wallowed in denial since in your replies to other comments. I've seen you stop and think before. This would be a great time to try that again.

Woop, I sure hope you are p... (Below threshold)
epador:

Woop, I sure hope you are putting all those malaprop's out there to amuse us, 'cause if you are not, you are one sorry-ass example of whatever education system you've been through up to this point in life.

Well, once again I'm late t... (Below threshold)
Walter Cronanty:

Well, once again I'm late to the melee, but this statement cannot go unchallenged. Woop says: "Christians in America hope to prosecute muslims simply because of their religion.

The difference is simply a matter of time. If we, the intelligent people of the US don't stop the Christian right from prosecuting our fellow Americans who are of the muslim faith then we are just like the Germans who stood by silently while the Nazis hunted down the jews."

Can we have sufficient, cited examples of Christians prosecuting muslims "...simply because of their religion"? Do you include prosecutions of terrorists who kill/plan to kill innocent victims because their religion of Islam commands them to as prosecuting muslims "...simply because of their religion"?

Walter,Not ... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Walter,


Not only do we need evidence of Christians persecuting muslims because of their muslim faith , but we need woop to show us Christians who do so because they feel directed by their Christian faith. Otherwise their Christian faith is beside the point. We might as well talk about accountants who persecute muslims, or carpenters.

85% of people in the US identify as Christian. So it is easy to find "Christians who persecute muslims for their faith" if anyone is persecuting muslims so. By default over 8 out of 10 will be Christian. Woop needs to learn the difference between causality and coincidence. I'm not going to hold my breath.

You Catholics, Protestants,... (Below threshold)
studakota:

You Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Orthodox Greeks, Mormons, whatever mumbo-jumbo you're using to make yourself feel superior to the next person, may have to give up your fairy tales if you want the Muslims to abandon their most recent crusade. That will be a good thing, actually. You do know that the greatest percentage of Muslims do not know how to read Arabic, they're only required to memorize the Koran. That's one of the reasons they've given us so many Nobel Laureates, through the years. But they feel as strongly about their religion as you do yours, so it's best if you all give up your Miracles, your Shrouds, your Holy Trinities, your Baptisms, your absurd diets, your incense, your Heaven, your Hell, your Arks, just stop it already. Let's start using our minds to get us out of the horrendous mess we've gotten ourselves into. Cheers...

Jim, note that Woop writes ... (Below threshold)
Walter Cronanty:

Jim, note that Woop writes "prosecute", not "persecute". Thus, he needs to cite official governmental "prosecution" of Muslims based solely on their religion. Since our Attorney General cannot/will not speak the words "Muslim" or "Islam" while giving a presser on terrorism, I doubt that there is a giant cabal of batshit crazy Christian prosecutors running around indicting Muslims "... simply because of their religion." But, maybe Woop can show me the error of my ways.

"That's one of the reaso... (Below threshold)
jim m:

"That's one of the reasons they've given us so many Nobel Laureates, through the years. "

Really? Muslims have won "so many" Nobel prizes?

Let's see:

Literature
1988 - Najib Mahfooz.

Peace:
1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
1994 - Yaser Arafat (a terrorist)
2003 - Shrin Ebadi
2005 - Mohamed ElBaradei
2006 - Muhammad Yunus

Physics:
1999 - Ahmed Zewail

Medicine:
1960 - Peter Brian Medawar
1998 - Ferid Mourad

That's it. 20% of the world's population 9 nobels.

Contrast to the Jews who comprise 0.2% of the world's population and have earned 166 Nobels. Of the 813 individuals who have received awards one can assume that the majority of the rest of them have been from Christian backgrounds.

Heck the University of Chicago boasts 85 Nobels, more than nine times the entire muslim world's contribution. And U of C is only third behind Columbia and Cambridge.

Any female Muslim Nobel pr... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Any female Muslim Nobel prize winners? Unlikely! See The trouble with Islam.

Not able to grasp sarcasm v... (Below threshold)
studakota:

Not able to grasp sarcasm very well are you Jimbo? By the way your god, or their god they call Allah has not struck me dead yet. Does that surprise you believers?

Oh sarcasm. I must have mi... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Oh sarcasm. I must have missed your tone f voice when I read it.

It does not surprise me in the least that you have not been struck down. But I do see that God is allowing you to make yourself a fool. That's better than striking you down.

studakocka-"? By t... (Below threshold)
914:

studakocka-

"? By the way your god, or their god they call Allah has not struck me dead yet. Does that surprise you believers?"


No, God has a sense of humor.

Brett knows of several eff... (Below threshold)

Brett knows of several effective delivery systems for appropriate outreach to Islamanazism.

Me too. But too damned bad that unlike an earlier president, Thomas Jefferson, who appropriately projected America's already unrivaled and still unchallenged power and summarily dispatched his era's Barbary pirates, then president, George Walker Bush, failed in his duty as united States of America's Commander-In-Chief when he missed the very best modern opportunity to provide outreach to Islam by not, by the morning of September 12 2001, centering the detonation of the biggest bomb in our beloved fraternal republic's nuclear arsenal on Obama bin Laden's bloody head.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy