You don't need to actually murder someone to be considered a terrorist, nor to actually effectually cause people to die. If you advise and encourage others to do so, to a strong degree, then you are just the leader of the terrorists rather than the foot person who actually blows himself up.
This person has no respect for government, and maliciously and repeatedly breaks laws put in place to protect the citizens.
Terrorism literally means to cause terror. People get pretty terrified when people steal and abuse all of their information.
Also, hacking can and does cause death. Consider what happens if you hack into the computers at a drugstore and change the prescriptions to give people the wrong drugs. Terrorism?
Sure, hacking could be used to kill civilians with the objective of causing mass terror to advance a political agenda. But until Mr. Hammond either attempts, incites or announces plans to take action with the objective of killing people, he is not a terrorist. If the term "terrorist" has any sensible definition other than "people who oppose us politically and who we don't like, and maybe do random criminal actions that are covered under more normal laws".
If he only causes economic harm, I could be convinced that he can still be guilty of: destruction of property, computer fraud and perhaps sabotage. But terrorism?
This person has no respect for government, and maliciously and repeatedly breaks laws put in place to protect the citizens.
Terrorism literally means to cause terror. People get pretty terrified when people steal and abuse all of their information.
Also, hacking can and does cause death. Consider what happens if you hack into the computers at a drugstore and change the prescriptions to give people the wrong drugs. Terrorism?