The Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism

[Weatherman2020]

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

If destroying property without anyone being injured is terrorism, we know what Democrats do when they destroy a thousand times that property value AND PEOPLE ARE MURDERED.

Thanks for clarifying that Democrats are terrorists.

BTW - the ship carrying the tea only suffered a broken lock. The next day the lock was replaced by the tea party.

 

[Dante]

If destroying property without anyone being injured is terrorism, we know what Democrats do when they destroy a thousand times that property value AND PEOPLE ARE MURDERED.

Thanks for clarifying that Democrats are terrorists.

BTW - the ship carrying the tea only suffered a broken lock. The next day the lock was replaced by the tea party.

Did Dante claim "destroying property without anyone being injured is terrorism?" No he did not. And why focus exclusively on a ship, and not all of it and the not wanting to obey a duly passed law?

next

 

[BackAgain]

Did Dante claim "destroying property without anyone being injured is terrorism?" No he did not. And why focus exclusively on a ship, and not all of it and the not wanting to obey a duly passed law?

next

In the BTP, was anyone injured? Was anyone actually subjected to “terror?”

No?

So much for your thread.

 

[Dante]

In the BTP, was anyone injured? Was anyone actually subjected to “terror?”

No?

So much for your thread.

If I steal your home, are you injured? If I attack the state, is anyone injured?

 

[BackAgain]

If I steal your home, are you injured?

Physically? No. Financially yes. And?

If I attack the state, is anyone injured?

That would depend on HOW you attack the state.

Is there any hope of a point?

 

[Dante]

Physically? No. Financially yes. And?

That would depend on HOW you attack the state.

Is there any hope of a point?

With you? Nope.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Did Dante claim "destroying property without anyone being injured is terrorism?" No he did not. And why focus exclusively on a ship, and not all of it and the not wanting to obey a duly passed law?

next

Yes, you did say destroyed property is terrorism.
A mere $2M worth too.

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

 

[Dante]

Yes, you did say destroyed property is terrorism.
A mere $2M worth too.

It was a quote from an article. I agree with much of the article. I also think the 'party' could be classified as a terrorist act. You must learn how to read and comprehend.

 

[Weatherman2020]

It was a quote from an article. I agree with much of the article. I also think the 'party' could be classified as a terrorist act. You must learn how to read and comprehend.

It’s your OP.

Thanks for clarifying Democrats are terrorists.

 

[Dante]

It’s your OP.

Thanks for clarifying Democrats are terrorists.

You really need to get a handle on what ails you.

 

[Libby von H]

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

But that is wrong right away
There were several such events across the Colonies.
The main anger was against Britain, Governor Hutchinson who insisnted that the ships would not leave until emptied.ZSAALL

ALL WRONG please learn some history, please​

 

[BackAgain]

With you? Nope.

Except of course you were the one attempting to make one. Failing is your forte.

 

[BackAgain]

It was a quote from an article. I agree with much of the article. I also think the 'party' could be classified as a terrorist act. You must learn how to read and comprehend.

Under what conceivable and accurate definition of “terrorism” would dumping physical property in the water be considered a “terrorist act?”

Notice that The Dainty cannot (and will not even try to) supply a coherent answer to that obvious question.

 

[Dante]

Under what conceivable and accurate definition of “terrorism” would dumping physical property in the water be considered a “terrorist act?”

Notice that The Dainty cannot (and will not even try to) supply a coherent answer to that obvious question.

Neither the article, nor Dante has claimed dumping physical property in the water is considered a “terrorist act?”

 

[BackAgain]

Neither the article, nor Dante has claimed dumping physical property in the water is considered a “terrorist act?”

Actually, you kind of did, the Dainty.

You’re the idiot who had just posted: “I also think the 'party' could be classified as a terrorist act.”

 

[Dante]

Actually, you kind of did, the Dainty.

You’re the idiot who had just posted: “I also think the 'party' could be classified as a terrorist act.”

kind of?

Okay. Are you kind of pregnant?

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Neither the article, nor Dante has claimed dumping physical property in the water is considered a “terrorist act?”

Uh, what is this wacko referring to yourself in the Third Person all about? Is it contagious?

Have you been reading too much about King George III? Or watching too much of … “The Donald” on TV?

 

[Dante]

But that is wrong right away
There were several such events across the Colonies.
The main anger was against Britain, Governor Hutchinson who insisnted that the ships would not leave until emptied.ZSAALL

ALL WRONG please learn some history, please​

View attachment 873618

cuckoo

and no links

 

[BackAgain]

kind of?

Okay. Are you kind of pregnant?

Did you or did you not write: “I also think the 'party' could be classified as a terrorist act.”

Your evasions are noted with appropriate derision. But you can only run and hide for so long.

 

[Mushroom]

Neither the article, nor Dante has claimed dumping physical property in the water is considered a “terrorist act?”

Oh really?

#looks up at the very title of this thread#

The Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism​

Yea, I would say that is wrong, Unless you are trying to claim that you did not create this thread and gave it that name.

all because they didn’t want to obey a duly passed law is considered - vandalism?

But that is the problem, the law was not "duly passed".

Both the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights of 1689 both clearly stated that taxes could not be imposed upon those who did not have representation. Therefore the law was not "duly passed" and illegal. Which was the very issue that kicked off the revolt, that they did not have representation.

And the UK at that time did not have a "Supreme Court" to bring the issue up with. They could and did petition both the Crown and Parliament to address the issue, and each time they simply refused to accept the petition. That is one of the reasons why when they later formed their own government, they established a Supreme Court. So the citizens could force the government to at least listen to them, and to strike down a law if it was in violation of the Constitution.

If the UK had such a court at the time, it would have struck down the taxes as they were indeed against British Law. But there was no such court in existence at the time.