It's the letter of the definition, but not the spirit. The spirit of the definition is scaring average civilians, the everyman or everywoman, into feeling like they could be violently killed at any moment in order to frighten them into complying. Threatening politicians, military leaders, activists or foreign corporations is qualitatively different, because the threat isn't random and opaque; the people being threatened have some relevant link to the changes being demanded, and know they or their assets aren't safe, while the average civilian knows they probably are unless their leaders mess up; and those under threat aren't going to be suddenly blasted to bits from the shadows (with some notable exceptions), but are going to suffer systematic economic backlash or military assault from an organized and relatively visible entity. Terrorism, however, means nobody knows concretely who is threatening them, how, when, or why.

Not to say that muscling people into doing what you want isn't boorish and despicable, but neither intimidation nor blackmail are what is meant when most people say "terrorism." (talk)13:14, 28 November 2010