What, no, using violence is like the only qualifier to “terrorism” that everyone agrees on.
Now, we can - and should - discuss what violence means and the forms it takes in society. But actual physical violence is pretty universally agreed to be the key qualifier for a terrorist.
“Domestic terrorist” would imply the Pope is bombing the Vatican
He probably does bomb Vatican whenever the Holy Kitchen serves some particularly spicy food.
I think that’s a pretty narrow definition of terrorist. My mind went to the beliefs he preaches.
What, no, using violence is like the only qualifier to “terrorism” that everyone agrees on.
Now, we can - and should - discuss what violence means and the forms it takes in society. But actual physical violence is pretty universally agreed to be the key qualifier for a terrorist.
If it was universal the fascists wouldn’t call spray painting a Tesla terrorism
Intentionally damaging property is considered violence, yes. (Don’t mistake this as some sort of pro-Musk statement.)
Truly there is no difference between blowing up a passenger bus and graffiti.