240 years of precedent down the tubes

[ECSNorway]

Dartz wrote:

---

The thing with 'terrorist' is that it's become a catch-all term for 'people we don't like'. I think David Cameron's definition of 'terrorist' was 'someone who tried to influence the government' - without regards to whatever method they're using. In the UK, you can be a 'terrorist' by standing outside a building carrying a sign and 'inconveniencing' someone - especially if that someone is sufficiently wealthy.

The terrorists we don't negotiate with are the ones who hijack a plane full of women and children and threaten to blow it up in 24 hours if their demands aren't met NOW.

Everyone else is just a different kind of enemy.

Gotta agree on this one.It's a big step to label someone a "terrorist". Using it for trivial things like you describe is in and of itself terrorism.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.