Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

On 2/7/15 5:14 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/7/2015 5:07 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 4:50 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/7/2015 4:34 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 4:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the
centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by
Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


Power and land lust, of course, promulgated by the Catholic Church.



Also defense against Islam fundamentalists.

I was watching a ultra liberal debating someone on MSNBC a couple of
hours ago. He was resorting to the same argument, citing holy wars
conducted by the Catholic hierarchy ... in the 11th and 12th century
as if somehow that excuses the actions of modern day Islamic
fundamentalists like ISIS.

Why is it that liberals always blame things on something that happened
many years ago in history .... in this case about 900 years ago ...
when the world was different and religious leaders were governmental
leaders?





Perhaps it is because history is a continuum, and the hands of
Christians are dirtier than the hands of Muslims? And, of course, you
don't have to go all the way back to the Crusades to find examples of
Christians slaughtering people of other religions.

For many reasons, most Christians in Germany in the late 1920s and
early
1930s welcomed the advent of Nazism. In 1933, Hitler called
Christianity
the foundation for German values. The Nazis signed an agreement with
the
Vatican that year, and while some church leaders in Germany throughout
the war years opposed the Nazis, many did not.

At war's end, most church leaders in Germany were silent about the
slaughter of the Jews for religious reasons, and it became obvious that
great numbers of ordinary German Christians were involved in the
persecution of the Jews and other minorities.

To claim that only Muslims have been involved in terrorism in recent
decades is just plain naive.





Should Scandinavians and nations like Norway (that you admire so much)
be judged today by the historical actions of the Vikings? They were
pretty barbaric. "Beserkers"


The point is that both Muslims and Christians have plenty of blood on
their hands throughout history for "religious" reasons. And the
Holocaust isn't so far in our past, is it?



Hello. It's 2015.






So?

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

On Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 1:34:36 PM UTC-8, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 4:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by
Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


Power and land lust, of course, promulgated by the Catholic Church.



Also defense against Islam fundamentalists.

I was watching a ultra liberal debating someone on MSNBC a couple of
hours ago. He was resorting to the same argument, citing holy wars
conducted by the Catholic hierarchy ... in the 11th and 12th century
as if somehow that excuses the actions of modern day Islamic
fundamentalists like ISIS.

Why is it that liberals always blame things on something that happened
many years ago in history .... in this case about 900 years ago ...
when the world was different and religious leaders were governmental
leaders?





Perhaps it is because history is a continuum, and the hands of
Christians are dirtier than the hands of Muslims? And, of course, you
don't have to go all the way back to the Crusades to find examples of
Christians slaughtering people of other religions.

For many reasons, most Christians in Germany in the late 1920s and early
1930s welcomed the advent of Nazism. In 1933, Hitler called Christianity
the foundation for German values. The Nazis signed an agreement with the
Vatican that year, and while some church leaders in Germany throughout
the war years opposed the Nazis, many did not.

At war's end, most church leaders in Germany were silent about the
slaughter of the Jews for religious reasons, and it became obvious that
great numbers of ordinary German Christians were involved in the
persecution of the Jews and other minorities.

To claim that only Muslims have been involved in terrorism in recent
decades is just plain naive.



--
Proud to be a Liberal.

"Hitler called Christianity the foundation for German values."

Really?

http://www.mgr.org/NazismAndTheOccult.html

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

On 2/7/15 6:09 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 1:34:36 PM UTC-8, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 4:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by
Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


Power and land lust, of course, promulgated by the Catholic Church.



Also defense against Islam fundamentalists.

I was watching a ultra liberal debating someone on MSNBC a couple of
hours ago. He was resorting to the same argument, citing holy wars
conducted by the Catholic hierarchy ... in the 11th and 12th century
as if somehow that excuses the actions of modern day Islamic
fundamentalists like ISIS.

Why is it that liberals always blame things on something that happened
many years ago in history .... in this case about 900 years ago ...
when the world was different and religious leaders were governmental
leaders?





Perhaps it is because history is a continuum, and the hands of
Christians are dirtier than the hands of Muslims? And, of course, you
don't have to go all the way back to the Crusades to find examples of
Christians slaughtering people of other religions.

For many reasons, most Christians in Germany in the late 1920s and early
1930s welcomed the advent of Nazism. In 1933, Hitler called Christianity
the foundation for German values. The Nazis signed an agreement with the
Vatican that year, and while some church leaders in Germany throughout
the war years opposed the Nazis, many did not.

At war's end, most church leaders in Germany were silent about the
slaughter of the Jews for religious reasons, and it became obvious that
great numbers of ordinary German Christians were involved in the
persecution of the Jews and other minorities.

To claim that only Muslims have been involved in terrorism in recent
decades is just plain naive.



--
Proud to be a Liberal.

"Hitler called Christianity the foundation for German values."

Really?

http://www.mgr.org/NazismAndTheOccult.html



You do know what "occult" means, right? It simply means "hidden from
view." It has other meanings, of course, but since it can relate to
religious figures, you know what that means, right?




--
Proud to be a Liberal.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

True North wrote:
Wait a minute...that was just after midnight this morning. Place must be open 24 hrs.
Learn to quote or get lost, old man.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 5:00 PM, KC wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


The crusades were a response to years of attacks... anybody with a hs
education should know that...

I'm embarrassed that you also went to public schools in Connecticut, but
apparently not very good ones, eh? No CE history courses?

Arab Muslims took Jerusalem in 638 CE. The First Crusade was launched
400+ years later, in 1095 CE.

Do you want to talk about the unjust nature of the seizure of California
from Mexico less than 200 years ago? Or the seizure of lands in this
country from the Native Americans?

The crusades were nothing more than acts of Christian aggression to
retake territory that was perceived in the 11th century to be Christianity's patrimony.

That sort of perception doesn't make it anything more than a perception.




What was unjust about taking California from Mexico? We also had Russian
Enclaves here, and Mexico only "owed" California for 30 years. The Spanish
only had the southern half of the state, and they stole it from the
natives.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 4:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by
Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


Power and land lust, of course, promulgated by the Catholic Church.



Also defense against Islam fundamentalists.

I was watching a ultra liberal debating someone on MSNBC a couple of
hours ago. He was resorting to the same argument, citing holy wars
conducted by the Catholic hierarchy ... in the 11th and 12th century
as if somehow that excuses the actions of modern day Islamic
fundamentalists like ISIS.

Why is it that liberals always blame things on something that happened
many years ago in history .... in this case about 900 years ago ...
when the world was different and religious leaders were governmental
leaders?





Perhaps it is because history is a continuum, and the hands of Christians
are dirtier than the hands of Muslims? And, of course, you don't have to
go all the way back to the Crusades to find examples of Christians
slaughtering people of other religions.

For many reasons, most Christians in Germany in the late 1920s and early
1930s welcomed the advent of Nazism. In 1933, Hitler called Christianity
the foundation for German values. The Nazis signed an agreement with the
Vatican that year, and while some church leaders in Germany throughout
the war years opposed the Nazis, many did not.

At war's end, most church leaders in Germany were silent about the
slaughter of the Jews for religious reasons, and it became obvious that
great numbers of ordinary German Christians were involved in the
persecution of the Jews and other minorities.

To claim that only Muslims have been involved in terrorism in recent
decades is just plain naive.




And FDR did not care about the slaughter of Jews either. We never bombed
the rail lines in to the death camps. Mohammedism was spread via conquest.
When the crusades got going, the Muslim's were knocking on the doors of
Paris. You either converted or died.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

On 2/8/15 12:45 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 5:00 PM, KC wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


The crusades were a response to years of attacks... anybody with a hs
education should know that...

I'm embarrassed that you also went to public schools in Connecticut, but
apparently not very good ones, eh? No CE history courses?

Arab Muslims took Jerusalem in 638 CE. The First Crusade was launched
400+ years later, in 1095 CE.

Do you want to talk about the unjust nature of the seizure of California
from Mexico less than 200 years ago? Or the seizure of lands in this
country from the Native Americans?

The crusades were nothing more than acts of Christian aggression to
retake territory that was perceived in the 11th century to be Christianity's patrimony.

That sort of perception doesn't make it anything more than a perception.




What was unjust about taking California from Mexico? We also had Russian
Enclaves here, and Mexico only "owed" California for 30 years. The Spanish
only had the southern half of the state, and they stole it from the
natives.



Following your logic, what was "just" about the Christians mounting
crusades to take back the "holy land" 400+ years after the Muslims took it?

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

On Sun, 08 Feb 2015 12:52:18 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/8/15 12:45 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 5:00 PM, KC wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


The crusades were a response to years of attacks... anybody with a hs
education should know that...

I'm embarrassed that you also went to public schools in Connecticut, but
apparently not very good ones, eh? No CE history courses?

Arab Muslims took Jerusalem in 638 CE. The First Crusade was launched
400+ years later, in 1095 CE.

Do you want to talk about the unjust nature of the seizure of California
from Mexico less than 200 years ago? Or the seizure of lands in this
country from the Native Americans?

The crusades were nothing more than acts of Christian aggression to
retake territory that was perceived in the 11th century to be Christianity's patrimony.

That sort of perception doesn't make it anything more than a perception.




What was unjust about taking California from Mexico? We also had Russian
Enclaves here, and Mexico only "owed" California for 30 years. The Spanish
only had the southern half of the state, and they stole it from the
natives.



Following your logic, what was "just" about the Christians mounting
crusades to take back the "holy land" 400+ years after the Muslims took it?

What was just about the Muslims taking it in the first place? At least you're getting
to the reason Christians were so 'barbaric' to the Muslims.
--

Guns don't cause problems. The behavior
of certain gun owners causes problems.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

On 2/8/15 1:08 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sun, 08 Feb 2015 12:52:18 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/8/15 12:45 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/7/15 5:00 PM, KC wrote:
On 2/7/2015 3:40 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 15:03:02 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 2:31 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:18:53 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/7/15 12:08 PM, Tim wrote:
I don't think Harry would like the place. It's owned by a family
of gun totin' Christians! Lol!

http://www.shootersgrillofrifle.com/laurens-prayers-2/



I do think the combo of guns and jesus is absurd humor, but it
wouldn't
keep me from patronizing the joint if the food were any good.

More absurd than swords, lighter fluid and Mohammed?



I'll be the first to admit I know little about the teachings of
Mohammed,

You're right.

I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that over the centuries
since the founding of Christianity and Islam, more people have been
slaughtered by Christians in the name of Christianity than by Muslims in
the name of Islam.

Bad guess. Better go back and see what prompted the Crusades.

[Note: some snippage of Krause's post.]


The crusades were a response to years of attacks... anybody with a hs
education should know that...

I'm embarrassed that you also went to public schools in Connecticut, but
apparently not very good ones, eh? No CE history courses?

Arab Muslims took Jerusalem in 638 CE. The First Crusade was launched
400+ years later, in 1095 CE.

Do you want to talk about the unjust nature of the seizure of California
from Mexico less than 200 years ago? Or the seizure of lands in this
country from the Native Americans?

The crusades were nothing more than acts of Christian aggression to
retake territory that was perceived in the 11th century to be Christianity's patrimony.

That sort of perception doesn't make it anything more than a perception.




What was unjust about taking California from Mexico? We also had Russian
Enclaves here, and Mexico only "owed" California for 30 years. The Spanish
only had the southern half of the state, and they stole it from the
natives.



Following your logic, what was "just" about the Christians mounting
crusades to take back the "holy land" 400+ years after the Muslims took it?

What was just about the Muslims taking it in the first place? At least you're getting
to the reason Christians were so 'barbaric' to the Muslims.



Kinda sketchy on early Middle Ages history, John?

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

Looks like a friendly place to eat.
 

On Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 4:35:30 PM UTC-5, Keyser Söze wrote:

Wow...a prideful son of Slammer.


If Wayne is my Son, then dicklicker white must be a mutant hanger-on of you.. *snerk*