Maybe you should have said what you said in your reply, rather than "there are no terrorists". I tend to agree with what you said in your reply, but your initial statement isn't helpful. Like I said, the truth is somewhere between the terrorist equivalent of "reds under the bed" and "no-one is a terrorist."
I would argue that the atrocities I mentioned can and should be called terrorist acts, but that there should be greater understanding of and more responsible reporting of the chances of being involved in one of them. Furthermore there should be a better reporting of the social and political reasons for them having come about.