All of these terms can be true at the same time, y‘know the sentence “one man‘s terrorist is another man‘s freedom fighter”. He‘s fighting for sick ppl and terrorizing the CEOs, I think that‘s what the comment was trying to say. The CEOs are also the ones up the hierarchy and in league with government, police, prosecution and media. They likely deliberately chose to use this term on him to bring to mind for people the disgust or fear response they get when the worst terror attack they have heard of is brought to mind.

So you can deny it completely (in the case of the charge which hopefully the lawyers can do well), but also you can argue by itself the meaning of the word and how it‘s used and if it‘s always bad (like say bring example of Nelson Mandela who was labelled a terrorist and is now widely known as freedom fighter).

So terrorist is in my point of view a politically charged term which is selectively applied by the people in charge to form a public opinion.