I thought that it was an interesting commentary on how terrorism no longer has a fixed definition. It’s like “New & Improved!” or “King Sized!” on product packaging.

I’m in pretty late to comment, but:

To be fair, the word had a considerably ambiguous definition to begin with. Yes it was specific, in a way, but it is defined in terms which are ripe for opportunistic interpretation.

In high school as a senior I once made my (British) english teacher uncomfortably change the subject when I noted that, according to the English, the American revolutionaries could probably have been accurately defined as being terrorists, had the word existed.

Combine this ambiguous definition with the fact that most of us now think of religious radicals blowing up airplanes full of innocent people when we hear the word “terrorist” and really, you have one of the more perfect buzzwords to get people riled up.

If it was easy to get a rise out of a crowd talking about blacks (but using a slur, of course), or Irish, or gays, or children, or convicts… it’s oh so much easier to do it with “terrorists”. It’s a great word to abuse, because you can say it in a way that is totally dishonest to its connotation, yet perfectly true to the denotation. Lying without “lying” at all.

So the correct answer is no editing tricks going on. I’m not sure what that says about your “sane” answer.

“We ordered a wardrobe, a chest of drawers and a double bed from Tesco Direct. When it came it didn’t have a mattress which we thought we’d paid for.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/05/22/i-ll-stand-by-him-he-had-a-genuine-complaint-115875-21378999/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnoBBJB99SM

Also, their security cameras really provide high quality images. I was expecting Vin Diesel.

Dude totally deserves the jail time, though.

Thanks for the Benny Hillifier!