Regarding the Greenwald on O’ Donnell’s show video, seems to me Greenwald goes into deflection as soon as his mouth opens.

He makes the claim terrorist experts have no settled definition of the word terrorism and makes some snark comments that people paid by the government (other journalists?) apparently aren’t experts.

So, big question I have is, if his acknowledged experts have no definitions, then what is the big problem with the way the word is used by other media, the governments, etc.?

Oh…it doesn’t fit Greenwald’s definition.

And then he goes on to make the statement to the effect if the word means anything it should mean what Greenwald wants and that is it has to be “the targeting of civilians” to scare them regarding what their government does.

How big of him!

Just think of all the incidents no longer considered terror attacks under this new definition. The attack on the USS Cole (by the “wrongly” defined terrorist organization al Qaeda), The Marine Barracks in Lebanon. Any bombing in another country against US soldiers that also killed innocent actual civilians. And, I am sure there are many more.

When is the “Glenn Greenwald Unabridged Dictionary of Word Definitions Glenn Greenwald Considers Legitimate for Use - Collegiate Edition” come out?

All bow down to the great Greenwald.