Is it valid to believe that a group that has taken control of airports, public streets, television stations and government buildings to force their political agenda should be considered terrorists?

Whats your opinion?

IMHO you need to "terrorize" people with physical harm before you can be considered a "terrorist".

undoubtedly they're political terrorists, with support from the batty-bway crowd

From Wikipedia:

Usage notes

The use of the label "terrorist" is often controversial or subjective, since one person's terrorist may be another's freedom fighter, and vice versa. A cynical definition may be that a terrorist is someone who murders or terrorizes more of those for whom the terrorist is fighting, than his supposed enemies.

To title someone a terrorist who's just go to the limits of his democratic rights is still a breach of existing law as long as there isn't any conviction.

Not to agree with other thinking humans didn't gives you the right to name them Terrorist!

I'll close this thread because of the question asked to force others exceed the limits set in the forum rules.

///CLOSED