“Ideological” pretty much covers everything else. A threat to kill is an act of terrorism.

“Ideological” does not cover:

• threatening to kill someone while robbing them
• threatening to kill someone because you’re high off your gourd and hallucinating that they’re a space alien
• threatening to kill someone because they fucked your wife
• threatening to kill someone because they’re threatening you and you’re acting in retaliation or self defense.

There are lots of situations in which a threat to kill is not terrorism. Quit trying to dilute the definition of terrorism.

Oh, and she sung a song in Spanish, and was threatened with death for not singing in American English. That screams political to me…

Okay, and…? I never disputed that this situation counted as terrorism; I only took issue with your overly-broad definition. In fact, it’s doubly weird that you’re choosing to die on this hill because you didn’t even need to go overboard making the definition wider than it is when the situation easily meets the real definition of it anyway! The guy you initially replied to was wrong and you would have been correct, except that you overstated your argument for no good reason.

Words have meanings and you’re using one of them wrong. That’s all.