The term only means what they want it to mean. They've done extensive work ensuring that these words convey a certain image beyond their true definitions.
For example, I remember after the Boston Bombing, they asked "Is this terrorism?". Is this terrorism? Of course it's freaking terrorism, it doesn't matter if it's a Muslim or a government agent, it fills the definition of fighting using unconventional means for violence. What they were really saying is, is there a muslim we can create mass-hysteria over? They've completely changed the definition to mean any arab who opposes the US and Isreal, just add "suspected" if they haven't actually committed or plotted any violence, and voila, permission to do whatever you want to them.
Similarly, we all know that extremist is a similar label so that they can do whatever they want to those with opposing ideas, regardless of whether they're actually plotting any sort of resistance or violence or not.
Should that scare us? Probably, but people are increasingly realizing what they're doing, and that collectively we can remove the legitimacy that they have taken. We must continue with an intellectual revolution that has a much greater track record, rather than taking them on at what they do best (force). They realize that their power hinges on we the people allowing it, they just don't want us to know how much power we truly have.