The Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism

[Dante]

They were unofficial, had no power, and had no legal standing in the government.

That literally is like trying to claim that a agent or political activist is an "Official agent of Congress". They are not, because they have absolutely no power in the government, and Congress is free to ignore them.

That is not representation, you fail again.

https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/parliament-and-empire/parliament-and-the-american-colonies-before-1765/parliament-and-the-american-colonies-before-1765/

No one argued what you just have. The colonists were subjects who obeyed the laws Parliament passed.

An agent represents

 

[Dante]

Wow, I rarely see somebody spinning so hard and fast in here.

Are you honestly expecting to be taken seriously, and as anything other than a joke when you are trying to argue you never said it was terrorism, then turn right around and accuse another of disagreeing with your belief it is terrorism?

Good god, at least be consistent. Talk about speaking with a forked tongue.

considered -- look it up

 

[Dante]

Either stand by your OP or stop posting crap.

Never walked away from the OP.

You're as confused as Liability is. Not healthy.

 

[Dante]

Wow, I rarely see somebody spinning so hard and fast in here.

Are you honestly expecting to be taken seriously, and as anything other than a joke when you are trying to argue you never said it was terrorism,

could be considered terrorism

nuance

 

[Weatherman2020]

I love how we got the OP to spam up his own bullshit thread.

 

[sparky]

That one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter repetitively on this rock escapes most Dante'

What they lack in such perspective is due to the propaganda they've digested

~S~

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

This is what you believe?

verb: sabotage;

1. deliberately destroy, damage, or obstruct (something), especially for political or military advantage.

Sabotage is not terrorism. The only victims were the owners of the tea.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Yes, by today's standards, the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism.

 

[BackAgain]

keeper post

Thank you

You’re welcome. And you’re partly right. It is a “keeper” posting only you could learn from it.

But, of course, given your endless dishonesty, it’s not likely you will learn from being so publicly corrected.

 

[BackAgain]

Yes, by today's standards, the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism.

Not at all. It was an act of theft and of property damage. But where words have meaning, it wasn’t and couldn’t possibly be “terrorism.”

 

[Weatherman2020]

That one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter repetitively on this rock escapes most Dante'

What they lack in such perspective is due to the propaganda they've digested

View attachment 873698
~S~

**** with us we keeeel you.

America has never attacked any half civilized Muslim nation.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Those loyalist were here much longer than many rebels. They made the colony what it was at the time. Your views on colonial American and early USA history are stuck at the Junior High School level.

Snitchy? Some of the most celebrated arguments came from Colonists who later broke with the rebels over going against the Sovereign. They were loyalists, yet the rebels incited groups using the arguments of those very loyalists.

Why are you talking to yourself?

Those laws you mentioned were enacted without any representatives from the colonies voting on them. That is YOUR error, again.

 

[BackAgain]

Either stand by your OP or stop posting crap.

The Dainty reserves its right to post shit and refuse to stand by its own word.

 

[sparky]

Sabotage is not terrorism.

then i guess diebold is off the hook admiral

~S~

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Good gawd...

From the article, posted in the OP, Post #1: Two separate items listed, which are mutually exclusive?

to commit seditious conspiracy and destroy private property
From the article, posted in the OP, Post #1: Actions not against the government?

all because they didn’t want to obey a duly passed law
Facts: not like your distorted opinions "the tea would be taxed at the point of entry in colonial ports." The East India Company was not taxing anyone. The British Parliament was.
"Boston's consignees petition the governor to safeguard the tea once it arrives, but with British forces confined to Castle William since the unfortunate events of the Boston Massacre, Hutchinson is powerless to oblige. The streets belong to the opposition." (sounds like ANTIFA to me).

Governor Hutchinson is incensed, calling the dumping of the tea high treason

https://www.masshist.org/revolution/teaparty.php

So, it was treason and not terrorism. You just destroyed your own premise.

 

[sparky]

Yes, by today's standards, the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism.

yes well, homeland security was rather lax at the time you see....

~S~

 

[BackAgain]

Not my problem if some of you are confused when confronted with nuance and ...

Dante has not denied his OP or the Headline.

The Dainty is now outright lying to distance itself from its own words.

Pathetic. But amusing.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Sailors?

Are you just waking up?

Sailors. You know, the ship's crew?

My God, you are incredibly stupid!

 

[BackAgain]

Never walked away from the OP.

You're as confused as Liability is. Not healthy.

It’s an ongoing bit of hilarity to see the dainty reduced to outright lies to evade responsibility for its own words.

Please, the Dainty. More. The crowd wants more!

 

[BackAgain]

then i guess diebold is off the hook admiral
View attachment 873702
~S~

For terrorism? Good call. But not much for sabotage.