Here's a link to the definition of terrorism in the UK terrorism Act 2000.

It was written in such a way that it could definitely be used against civil disodedience if they wanted to; and it's been pointed out that if it had been in place, people expressing sympathy for the African National Congress during the time of Apartheid woudl heva been liable to be cxaught by it.

Actually it reads to me as if a strict interpretation of the definition of terrorism would include activities of a lot of governments. If the activity "(a) involves serious violence against a person, or (b) involves serious damage to property" and "the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public" that's terrorism, according to the act.

Which definitely would seem to mean that Tony Blair, George Bush, as well as people like Sharon and Saddam would be properly classed as terrorists, alongside Nobel Peace Prizewinner Nelson Mandela.

"the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public",