Is what you're living for today, worth dying for tomorrow?
How many terrorists are actually fighting for freedom?
Terror is a reaction from the victimized. If you are not terrorized by the event, i.e. those who know it was coming; collaborators, then you are more likely to see him as a freedom fighter.
"I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann
I'll say no. But it depends on the situation. And it can be viewed objectively.
There are situations, where both sides could be terrorists fighting each other. In other words, the end goal of both sides is to subjugate and take control over the other side, and place them under their rule. And there are situations where a recognized tyrannical government is fighting with a tyrannical terrorist group. In these situations, there are no freedom fighters, as neither side is fighting for freedom.
However there are situations where one side is fighting to free people, from tyranny or terrorists, and the other side is fighting to retain its power and control over the populace. Thus the former are freedom fighters. The other side may or may not be terrorists. Recognized uniformed militaries are not terrorists and do not fit the definition. So warfare in and of its self should not be viewed as "freedom fighters vs. terrorists", when it can be viewed through the scope of two militaries fighting each other.
I always ask myself, "Is this group fighting to free people so that they may choose their representatives in government, or are they fighting to retain or obtain power over the people?" If I can answer yes to the former, they are freedom fighters IMO, and if I answer yes to the latter, they are not.
"Loyalty only matters when there's a hundred reasons not to be-" Gen. Mattis