Sure. I was referring to the violent protests we've seen in the past, such as those at the G8 and G20, as we heard, and remembering the Summit of the Americas. In those cases, we know there were violent elements of those protest movements seeking to take advantage of the protests to advance their violent agendas, but we did not label or consider those protests “terrorist”.
We've also seen a series of blockades, in this country's history, that were non-violent but illegal. We have refrained from calling them “terrorist”, because they lacked that serious threat of violence. That's been proper, in my view.