Who could blame a young physician for choosing a different specialty -- one that didn't involve the threat of assassination and require often elaborate security measures to preserve personal and family safety?

It would be useful in judging your statements to know whether the business structure was such that even if everyone in the joint was content to continue working there doing the same thing, the place would still have to close forever.

If it could have continued on profitably without Tiller but the terror of the act was just too much for everyone, then it might be legit to say it resulted from the act of terrorism (although terrorism is usually directed at government policies rather than individual enterprises.)

On the other hand, if the act of Tiller dying doomed the enterprise then it's rather opportunistic and unethical to go on and on about the terrorism winning when it was in fact the plain old criminal murder that actually did the job.