The victim of a terrorist act is never the intended target. You do not understand the definition
of the word terrorism. As you wrote, words have meaning.
Sorry to be so ignorant and stupid. Merriam-Webster says terrorism is “the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion,” without mentioning the intended target. Terrorism is the intent to intimidate or cause terror. Destroying a statute, however repugnant, surely isn’t intimidating, it is maddening, it might be insulting but it is not threatening, nor is it what I would call coercive. Who would be coerced? What would they be coerced into doing? What, pray, would be coercive in blowing up a statue? It might cause alarm among the non-sentient statue population, but few others unless they happen to be very skittish, or unless they believe themselves to be non-sentient statues. By your definition, sanitation workers threatening to strike is an act of terror. Blank slate, indeed.