The Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism

[Mushroom]

No, they don't.

Amazing how you can say that, when I posted a quote and link from the UK Parliament saying that they do have one.

Why don't you go back and take a look.

The United Kingdom constitution is composed of the laws and rules that create the institutions of the state, regulate the relationships between those institutions, or regulate the relationship between the state and the individual. These laws and rules are not codified in a single, written document.

https://www.parliament.uk/globalass...constitutional-reform/The-UK-Constitution.pdf

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

The Americans drank tea?

Actually, if I remember correctly, Americans did drink enormous quantities of tea … and workers drank much beer — including at Samual Adams’ bar in Boston!

But tea fell out of favor during and after the Revolution. English tea got replaced with South American and domestically grown coffee.

 

[Unkotare]

Amazing how you can say that, when I posted a quote and link from the UK Parliament saying that they do have one.

Why don't you go back and take a look.



https://www.parliament.uk/globalass...constitutional-reform/The-UK-Constitution.pdf

The Big Question: Why doesn't the UK have a written constitution, and

Why are we asking this now?

www.independent.co.uk

 

[expat500]

Actually, if I remember correctly, Americans did drink enormous quantities of tea … and workers drank much beer — including at Samual Adams’ bar in Boston!

They played cricket too.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I’m sure the British Crown felt that those hatchet wielding ruffians dressed up like Indians at the Boston Tea Party were not acting “properly” and their actions “Just not cricket”!

To be sure, the way colonials learned to fight their war was often also not exactly “cricket.” One of Thomas Paines’ main points in Common Sense was precisely that the rural and wide open spaces, our forrests and mountains, made it very possible for a determined, tough & creative people, already imbued with a democratic spirit — contrary to the defeatists of the time — to win Independence from the great British Empire.

 

[expat500]

I’m sure the British Crown felt that those hatchet wielding ruffians dressed up like Indians at the Boston Tea Party were not acting “properly” and their acti9n “Just not cricket”!

To be sure, the way colonials learned to fight their war was often also not exactly “cricket.” One of Thomas Paines’ main points in Common Sense was precisely that the rural and wide open spaces, our forrests and mountains, made it very possible for a determined, tough & creative people, contrary to the defeatists of the time, to defeat the great British Empire.

Not without the French.

I always thought the Europeans fought their wars on the North American continent.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Not without the French.

I always thought the Europeans fought their wars on the North American continent.

I agree the naval and military support of France was very helpful, maybe decisive, but it was the republican spirit of Americans that won men like Lafayette and in the British Parliament even conservatives like Edmund Burke to side with the rebels. Men like Thomas Paine came not just to fight for “independence” but to fight for a new free-er type of society, and they played a role too. Their influence was important. In France the role of the great and sophisticated American representative Benjamin Franklin also played an immense role. But yes, without the objective situation being favorable in many respects, the Founding Fathers might have ended up hanging from trees, or consuming and betraying each other as happened during the French Revolution just 13 years later.

 

[expat500]

I agree the naval and military support of France was very helpful, maybe decisive, but it was their radical republican spirit that won men like Lafayette and in the British Parliament even conservatives like Edmund Burke to side with the rebels. In France the role of the great and sophisticated American representative Benjamin Franklin also played an immense role.

Don’t get me started on Benjamin Franklin. I could have an axe to grind.

 

[Unkotare]

You are a stupid teacher. On Ignore.

Running away is your only option at this point.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

How unworthy of a teacher. On Ignore.

The UK constitution is largely written, but in different documents. It has never been codified, brought together in a single document 1. The UK constitution can be found in leading statutes, conventions, judicial decisions, and treaties. Examples of constitutional statutes include the Bill of Rights 1689, Acts of Union 1707 and 1800, Act of Settlement 1701, Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, Human Rights Act 1998, Scotland Act, Northern Ireland Act and Government of Wales Act 1998. Examples of conventions include that the monarch acts on ministerial advice; that the Prime Minister sits in the House of Commons; that the Queen appoints as Prime Minister the person most likely to command the confidence of the House of Commons. These and other conventions have themselves been codified in documents such as the Cabinet Manual 1.

The main disadvantage of an uncodified constitution is that it is harder to understand. Another is that it is easier to amend than in countries with written constitutions with elaborate amendment procedures. But this flexibility can also be seen as an advantage: it has enabled the removal of hereditary peers from the House of Lords, introduction of the Human Rights Act, devolution to Scotland, Wales, and

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

(and)

Unkotare is right there with healthmyth.

What is the UK Constitution?

www.ucl.ac.uk

 

[Unkotare]

(and)

Unkotare is right ....

Yes, I am.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

What i wrote was, "Unkotare is right there with healthmyth." And Unkotare changed it because he is that type of doofus teaching your children, Such a several cuts below decent type of guy. Good bye,

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I always thought the Europeans fought their wars on the North American continent.

True enough. They fought them all over the world, and fought largely for control of colonies.. The French & Indian Wars (1754-1763) in its first years went disastrously for the British, despite their being 2 million English settlers and only 60,000 French permanent settlers in N.A. at that time.

The French army relied more on their Indian friends and trading partners for guides and intelligence, and the French marines and local militia fought very well. The arrogant British generals fought very stupidly. George Washington learned a lot of lessons fighting as aid-de-camp for a brave but arrogant Brit general who got himself and many of his men killed unnecessarily. Of course in the end the French lost control of Canada.

Two years after the beginning of what we call the French & Indian Wars began, the war expanded and in Europe is called The Seven Years War.

***

Though there were no territorial changes in Europe, the Seven Years War was important and ended in a huge British victory [especially control of India] and less significant victories for its allies …

“France and Spain return conquered colonial territory to Great Britain and Portugal respectively.

“France cedes its North American possessions east of the Mississippi River, Canada, the islands of St. Vincent, Tobago, Dominica, and Grenada, and the Northern Circars in India to Great Britain

France cedes Louisiana and its North American territory west of the Mississippi River to Spain

“Spain cedes Florida to Britain in exchange for return of Havana and Manila

“Mughal Empire cedes Bengal Subah to Great Britain”

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

That war became the first world war, being fought on several continents. The Brits emerged as a major player in North America (although France held New Orleans and was strong in the Mississippi River valley, and Spain dominated Mexico and the American west.

 

[expat500]

That war became the first world war, being fought on several continents. The Brits emerged as a major player in North America (although France held New Orleans and was strong in the Mississippi River valley, and Spain dominated Mexico and the American west.

The Revolutionary War wasn’t the end of it. The British were still hanging around: the Battle of New Orleans for instance. But to be fair to them, they had been fighting a war on two fronts, the Colonies and the Napoleonic.

There were many players in all that turmoil, and over the years, after researching it, talking with historians, and visiting some of the battle sites, l‘ve come to see more different aspects of the whole event.

 

[DudleySmith]

Yes, I am.

Ah, a mod sock troll account editing people's posts. lol

 

[DudleySmith]

Not without the French.

I always thought the Europeans fought their wars on the North American continent.

Which is of course is a much better plan than tearing up your own countryside and cities, an obvious lesson isolationists can't grasp.

 

[Unkotare]

Ah, a mod sock troll account editing people's posts. lol

?????????????????????????????

 

[AZrailwhale]

Actually, if I remember correctly, Americans did drink enormous quantities of tea … and workers drank much beer — including at Samual Adams’ bar in Boston!

But tea fell out of favor during and after the Revolution. English tea got replaced with South American and domestically grown coffee.

It's not surprising because water tended to be unsafe to drink in towns and cities. Didn't Prince Albert and Queen Victoria's son die from typhus caused by contaminated water in Buckingham Palace? Or was that Prince Albert himself, my British history is kind of hazy.