The Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism

[BackAgain]

You are delusional. First, was "terrorism" even a term back then? I mean precisely what do you think, "mischief" means?

It don’t mean “terrorism.” Stop trying to dig yourself out of your stupid. Youre only going deeper.

Terrorism, you lummox, is a word with a meaning. It has never meant “mischief.”

And note, Franklin said the culprits couldn't be found, so the "society" should pay the price, should make compensation. Can you say "Gaza"?

Not what he was talking about. He just meant that England would take it out on the colonies. That’s the way they thought.

Yes, the Boston Tea Party was a bunch of terrorists,

No. It wasn’t. You’re fully wrong.

destroying private property, attacking a public company. I mean I don't see you defending animal rights activists and environmentalists that destroy private property as "patriots", and the federal government is prosecuting them as terrorists. Hell, you ain't got enough sense to come in out of the rain.

I cannot assist you out of your ignorance when you cling to it so urgently.

 

[bodecea]

A horde of White men disguised themselves as Native Americans — coppering their faces and donning headdresses in the same tradition that would lead to blackfaced minstrel shows decades later — to commit seditious conspiracy and destroy private property. The riotous mob trespassed on three ships and destroyed goods worth nearly $2 million in today’s money — all because they didn’t want to obey a duly passed law.
I love this article, if for nothing else that it speaks truths, while asking serious questions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/12/13/boston-tea-party-anniversary-crime-patriot/

Opinion | Was the Boston Tea Party an act of terrorism? It depends.

The Boston Tea Party took on the British 250 years ago. It pitted one American value against another.

web.archive.org

Vandalism, not terrorism.

 

[whitehall]

Horseshit. The American Revolution was a revolt by a bunch of scoundrels pissed off that their competitive advantage from smuggling and avoiding the very taxes they pretended to be protesting were eliminated or circumvented. It was a total shit show, Washington was a terrible commander. The war was not won by the Americans, it was lost by the British. I leave with two things. First, the Waxhaw massacre. Second,



Now, somebody, anybody, impress me, and tell me what those two things have in common. And I will give you a hint, the American Revolution was not won because of people like Washington or his aid de camp Hamilton. It was won by some mightily pissed off commoners.

It was won because the Brit advisors to the mentally impaired King convinced him that he couldn't afford to maintain the military effort to keep the Colonies.

 

[Winston]

It don’t mean “terrorism.” Stop trying to dig yourself out of your stupid. Youre only going deeper.

Terrorism, you lummox, is a word with a meaning. It has never meant “mischief.”

Not what he was talking about. He just meant that England would take it out on the colonies. That’s the way they thought.

No. It wasn’t. You’re fully wrong.


I cannot assist you out of your ignorance when you cling to it so urgently.

Let's make this really simple asswhipe. Clearly elucidate why the Boston Tea Party was not a terrorist act.

 

[Winston]

True enough.

Look, I am still looking for someone, anyone, to tell me the connection between the Massacre at Waxhaw and the Battle of New Orleans.

But here is the thing. Washington sent Hamilton to North Carolina in order to assess how many Continental Soldiers he could expect to come from North Carolina. Hamilton came back and told him "NONE".

 

[whitehall]

Let's make this really simple asswhipe. Clearly elucidate why the Boston Tea Party was not a terrorist act.

If idiot King George's troops were terrorized by a bunch of Colonialists dressed as Indians throwing tea bags in the bay the Revolution should have been easy.

 

[Robert W]

Horseshit. The American Revolution was a revolt by a bunch of scoundrels pissed off that their competitive advantage from smuggling and avoiding the very taxes they pretended to be protesting were eliminated or circumvented. It was a total shit show, Washington was a terrible commander. The war was not won by the Americans, it was lost by the British. I leave with two things. First, the Waxhaw massacre. Second,



Now, somebody, anybody, impress me, and tell me what those two things have in common. And I will give you a hint, the American Revolution was not won because of people like Washington or his aid de camp Hamilton. It was won by some mightily pissed off commoners.

I have been where Washington took the surrender of the British with the enormous help of the French. There still is a old home with a cannon ball stuck into the exterior wall in plain sight. It was left there for the tourists to see.

In fact it was inserted by some party AFTER the revolutionary war. The Nelson house.'

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Now, the going theory is that Hamilton, Samuel Adams, and the Sons of Liberty were worried that..." Seriously, Hamilton? Good gawd.

Amen on this point. Alexander Hamilton was between 16 & 18 years old attending Kings College (now Columbia) in NYC during the Boston Tea Party. He was making a reputation as a brilliant intellectual and revolutionary writer and debater.

Horseshit. The American Revolution was a revolt by a bunch of scoundrels pissed off that their competitive advantage from smuggling and avoiding the very taxes they pretended to be protesting were eliminated or circumvented. It was a total shit show, Washington was a terrible commander.

Later you say the American Revolution was fought by commoners in North America. Certainly this is partly true, but could they have won without brilliant leaders who risked everything? You think they won nothing? You and a few others here are just dragging your personal prejudices into the discussion. Others argue that the Revolution was fought to “preserve slavery” and not just for “smuggling.” All of that is just horseshit of people who drag their own modern prejudices into history.

The Boston Tea Party as a single incident certainly had support from John Hancock, the richest individual man and trader in Northeast America with his own commercial interests threatened by the English Crown. Most men like him, however, came to terms with the Crown, or else were involved in the slave trade big time.

Hancock and John Adams were far more than “smugglers,” just as Washington and Jefferson were far more than “slave owners.” Motivations for colonists varied, but the genius of both the revolutionary elites and spokesmen for the common working men (in Boston Samuel Adams and nationally later Thomas Paine) was that they found a new radical Republican ideology for their times and for an emerging “nation” already becoming aware that they were potential colonizers and citizens of a giant “empire of liberty” stretching far across the American continent.

 

[whitehall]

The Battle of New Orleans was about the 2nd attempt of the Brits to tame the Colonies in 1812. Pop Historian Johnny Horton said it best in his hit "the Battle of New Orleans". Old Hickory said we could take them by surprise if we didn't fire our muskets till we looked them in the eyes.

 

[BackAgain]

Let's make this really simple asswhipe. Clearly elucidate why the Boston Tea Party was not a terrorist act.

Look up the definition of “terrorism,” you **********.

Then, gfy.

Damn you’re a fuckin’ retard, Winnie.

 

[Dante]

History is written by the victors.

Yes it is, but facts do not change, nor does the truths.

 

[Dante]

Look up the definition of “terrorism,” you **********.

Then, gfy.

Damn you’re a fuckin’ retard, Winnie.

Wow!

 

[BackAgain]

Wow!

More wasted ^ electrons.

But that doesn’t deter the dainty.

 

[Dante]

Horseshit. The American Revolution was a revolt by a bunch of scoundrels pissed off that their competitive advantage from smuggling and avoiding the very taxes they pretended to be protesting were eliminated or circumvented. It was a total shit show, Washington was a terrible commander. The war was not won by the Americans, it was lost by the British. I leave with two things. First, the Waxhaw massacre. Second,



Now, somebody, anybody, impress me, and tell me what those two things have in common. And I will give you a hint, the American Revolution was not won because of people like Washington or his aid de camp Hamilton. It was won by some mightily pissed off commoners.

Humorous and containing a few kernels of truth. Only a few.

 

[Dante]

It was won because the Brit advisors to the mentally impaired King convinced him that he couldn't afford to maintain the military effort to keep the Colonies.

partially true. kudos!

 

[BackAgain]

terrorism​

noun​

ter·ror·ism ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm

Synonyms of terrorism
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Throwing tea in a harbor isn’t making use of “terror.”

It wasn’t, then. It wouldn’t be, today.

 

[Dante]

Throwing tea in a harbor isn’t making use of “terror.”

It wasn’t, then. It wouldn’t be, today.

If only people were standing on shore throwing tea into the harbor.

 

[BackAgain]

If only people were standing on shore throwing tea into the harbor.

You’d be crying and whining and demanding life sentences for “terrorists,” you mumbling, fumbling, stumbling hypocritical and confused jackass

 

[BackAgain]

If only OP wasn't a stupid ******.

But we’re stuck with The Dainty just the way he is.

Sadly.

 

[The Duke]

But we’re stuck with The Dainty just the way he is.

Sadly.

Well, maybe we'll learn to accept his douchebaggy derpness with love.

Maybe.