I've seen many folks here and around the net hammering this point.
The definition of terrorist seems to be slowly changing.
Webster says a terrorist is a practitioner of terrorism, and terrorism is:
the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.
We don't know enough to make that call yet.
While he created terror, he is not a terrorist unless the terror he created has a specific intent to affect others behavior through coercion.
If he killed all those people because he wanted to go out with a bang and be famous in death, then he isn’t a terrorist.
If he killed all those people because he thought they tended toward a set of beliefs or behaviors he was opposed to and thought he could turn people away from the those actions or beliefs by his actions then he is a terrorist.