What difference does it really make that guns, specifically, were used or not? It is less of a crime if they were all stabbed and cut to death (and/or beheaded) with knives, machetes or swords, or doused with gasoline and set afire, or grenades were thrown through the doorway, or a car bomb was set off, or a hundred other ways you can kill someone?

Yeah, I just saw those yesterday after posting. However, I also read some Nexus 7 owners who said L was worse than K, so now I'm thinking I'll just sit tight. Maybe even backrev a bit.

I was hoping against hope that might speed it up, because even 4.4.4 sorta sucks on my mine, especially Chrome.

I have a first gen 2012 Nexus 7 tablet, and they haven't released lollipop for it yet that I can tell I check daily. Chrome on 4.4.4, at least on my Nexus, is worse than a horrible joke. It's beyond slow and buggy, so I stopped using it, Dolphin is 400% faster.

I'd attribute a good portion of that delay to the disarray and infighting the christian world was in after the fall of the Roman Empire. There was a lot of ebb and flow in the hostilities and peaceful times between the two religions, there was no unbroken 500 year long period of calm between them. Eventually Europe got it's own act together enough to have the wherewithal to do what was seen by the crusaders as a way to recapture lost glory.
It'll always be controversial, even professional historians are disagreed on motive, but there are likely more than one.

The trolls are taking over. I read it can even be a source of income now, from certain countries. Oh yay. Now, jokes, OTOH.. a little levity never hurts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... A bacteriophage /bæktr.i.ofed/ (informally, phage /fed/) is a virus that infects and replicates within a bacterium.

Not all bacteria are bad. The point is, it's a virus as I said, it's destructive, it replicates, and goes well with the whole 'phobe 'phile suffix thing.
Also, http://en.memory-alpha.org/wik...

Your turn to enlighten me further.

Again with the "brown skinned people" trope. Maybe that's all you care about, yes? Goes both ways.
There's a difference between Verden and south America: The conquistadors primary aim was secular, to claim territory and riches for Spain, and to forge a better trade root to China and India; the religious component was there, and I admit I'd not thought of that, it certainly adds to the tally; but their evangelical motives, while strong, were secondary; they'd have slashed their way through South America even if it were already Christian (but technologically inferior), same as they tried warring against the English in vying for land and gold.
I stand by my statement: the attack on Verden massacred 4,500 pagan saxons directly for their refusal to convert to Christianity. That was an attack committed expressly in the name of Christianity, much like Islamic extremists are doing today.

Besides, slavery /= death. The post I replied to claimed the Catholic church was responsible for more deaths than all other religions combined. Granted, death was prevalent among the american natives due to diseases which the Europeans already had immunity to and probably didn't think much about. I doubt there was anything they could have done about it anyway, as they had no knowledge of microbes and viruses in the 15th century. . I've seen no evidence it was deliberate religiously based biological warfare, though I'm sure they figured it was a sign from God that He was on their side.

Nope, not a typo. Islamic extremists ARE a virus, and they intend to spread their virus to all uninfected hosts, AKA "infidels".

Noted.

Unfortunately, you're right about American journalists/cartoonists. It's politically incorrect to allow free speech where Islam is concerned, that must be deemed, "hate speech"; of course, any and every other religion or group is fair game every day.

AKA Dearbornistan.
My worry is, though the moderate majority may indeed intend no harm nor foul to non-muslims, if the time comes when their hand is forced to pick a side when things get more heated, I'm betting more than half will fall on the side of their islamic brethren.

I'm also sick of hearing people, including Obama, state that IS is "not Islamic". I've never heard a more prime example of the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy.

We? Are you French? The French aren't allowed guns for the most part. They're sitting ducks for these guys.

"Innocent"? Not exactly. Muslims captured Jerusalem and sent their armies out into the world (Moors, mamluks, etc..) The claim that the crusades were nothing more than unprovoked rampaging and looting is muslim apologist bullshit. When one religious group attacks another's holy site and captures it, what do they expect to happen??
Many horrible things have been done in the name of every religion on Earth, but I tire of seeing the crusades constantly misrepresented as nothing more than a murdering/looting spree, and the false portrayal of muslims as their innocent victims.

Clearly you are not looking at the Muslim armies, the Moors, and Mamluks of history. You're not looking at the war between Hindus and Muslims in India during Ghandi's time I'll wager that all you know about is the Inquisition (which had a strong Spanish secular component) and the Crusades, which were in fact a response to Muslim Imperialism. Actually, probably the worst atrocity committed in the name of Christianity was the Massacre at Verden by Charlemagne, not dissimilar to what Islamophages are doing now, today.