You have a legitimate point but I do not recall any accounts of the American Patriots attacking English civilians in an attempt to terrorize the civilian population of England or of having a desire to drive the English people into the sea, something Arabs have repeated as their goal over and over again. Violence and terrorism are not synonymous terms even though they may acheive similar results. I do not think of the men who fought in the revolutionary war as being terrorists even though many redcoats may have felt the terror of war.
Just as a point of correction (and I'm sorry to be so off-topic), if you consider the loyalists living in America as "British citizens" since that's the way they considered themselves, then I'm afraid that the term terrorist can be used for some Patriot actions, especially in the southern colonies. Of course, the same can be said of Col. Banastre Tarleton and his dragoon regiment, not to mention some of the loyalist militia actions (cf Hancock's Bridge). In addition, the actions of groups such as the Sons of Liberty, not to mention the Test Laws enacted by the Patriot Congress that included expropriation, loyalty oaths, etc. would certainly be considered "terrorist" by most modern definitions.
™ Version 4.2