Well I'm not normally wrong, so we'll go with number 2 there That was just me making concessions seeing as you'd already told me before not to presume - like you, I've got no doubt he knew full well what he was doing I agree that that does happen at times, and I also agree that it makes it worse. But here, he's basically accusing Muslims running rival stores of funding terrorism. Well, strictly speaking he's potentially accusing anyone, although most people's prejudices would almost certainly mean that if you've got Geordie Joe running a shop at one end of the road and Mohamed at the other end, no-one's going to be suspecting Geordie Joe of anything. It's not like the stories you hear (although whether they're actually true or not is a different matter) of people being asked to take down England flags because of upsetting Muslims. There's nothing wrong with putting up a flag in your window, even if it does wind people up. There is something wrong with starting rumours that legitimate shopowners may be funding terrorism. I'd argue that semantically there's a difference between "Our milk is not out of date" and "Don't buy out of date milk". The former is more like a defence against an accusation (and would be the equivalent of the sign at Fletchers saying "We don't fund terrorism" rather than "Don't fund terrorism"). The latter sounds more like an accusation against others. Four times in one night would certainly be excessive. But I do think they needed to pay him a visit (albeit one would have been sufficient).