There is this saying in criminology. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. So Mandela was once a terrorist. But he later became a world renowned freedom fighter.
Victory or defeat , eventually , writes the epithet.
You are no less a terrorist because you can dance around UN General Assembly. What you are, in the main, is how you are regarded by the govt and the laws where you operate. PKK is a terrorist group in Turkey. In Iraq, they are America’s ally.
Armed robbers are not terrorists. Serial murderers are not terrorists. So Fulani herdsmen can be serial murderers but they are not terrorists. Criminology thinks that terrorism must involve pursuit of political or religious objectives and not just unlawful activity that causes widespread fear. So Fulani herdsmen can only be named terrorists, in criminology, if the massacres perpetrated by them are done to service a political ideology.
Massacres by Fulani herdsmen are not in practical terms lesser crimes than terrorism. It’s just nomenclature
You have to kill or contribute to homicide to be a murderer. You don’t have to kill or contribute to homicide to be a terrorist. So that he has never killed , is not a good argument against being designated a terrorist.
In criminology, corruption is not theft. You heard him say it. Looting of public resources is theft. Abuse of power for private advantage is corruption. Now look at this other misconception. You can commit terrorism from the pulpit. You can commit it from a small radio station. “We have no guns, we killed no one” is no good defence.