The Boston Tea Party, Act of Patriotism, Terrorism or False Flag Event, and how do we know the difference?

Question

According to todays world view.

Answer 1

It was hardly terrorism by any standard because no one died.

Answer 2

False Flag -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

Definition of Terrorism -- http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism

http://www.globalterrorism101.com/UTDefinition.html

[According to these definitions the "Boston Tea Party" was a terrorist act and the British troops had every right to fire at the "Boston Massacre."]

The definition of terrorism has expanded slowly since the beginning of the millenium. Any act that disrupts commerce for political reasons, without harming a single person, can be prosecuted as terrorism.

There is no reason to believe that the definition will not continue to expand, and eventually include ANY act of dissent.

In time, YOU may one day wake up on trial for terrorism.

Don't hate me, hate the game.

Answer 3

Depends on which side of the issue you are on. However look at what we as American consider terrorism. Did any of the Boston Patriots make themselves a martyr to kill as many innocent people as possible to make them change how they live their lives? I don't think it qualifies as terrorism today or any other day.

And a false flag event is an event put on by one country to attempt to pin it on another country. History has shown it American Patriots claimed responsibility for the act. It was done to thumb a nose at King George. This would only be considered a False Flag Event by the conspiracy theorists.

Answer 4

Since nobody was hurt I don't see how you could call it a real act of terrorism but you make an interesting point, if being reported today it would probably be classified as a false flag event. Good question. Oh, and by the way yes I believe it was an act of patriotism.

Answer 5

First of all, great question.

Personally, I think that the Tea Party's relevance in history has been extremely exaggerated. The history we usually get tries to focus on the "nicer" aspects of history, and the Tea Party was seen as a good way to show resentment of the British. We must remember however, that 1) not all of the citizens of Boston agreed with it, and 2) it was only one shipment of tea. So, the act did not show total oppoisition to Brittish rule, and was rather pointless.

I would say, none of the above. It is simply a act that was overplayed to be a focus of the American Revolution in history.

Answer 6

If you were British, especially a tea merchant or agent, it was terrorism. If you were a colonist it was an act of Patriotism. I have never heard of a false flag event.

Answer 7

Left wing moron's could stop re-writing background and start up using thier brains for as quickly as. Terrorism has continuously been acts made in defiance which cost lives. Who gained harm interior the process the Boston Tea occasion ? Englands earnings ? And todays Tea occasion pass is crammed with all political ideals for the uninformed contained obtainable. particular, possibly which you would be able to argue greater top wing provided that its the right it extremely is against great government way greater desirable than the left wing is, in spite of the undeniable fact that it extremely is a collective of persons that have not lost thier balls in this u . s . a . to stand up in direction of govt being out of control and dropping taxpayer money. if youin case you probably did no longer know, the federal government produces no longer something, they rob money from its citizens to pay for the coolest deal, and in the event that they act like a spoiled toddler attempting to get the coolest deal they desire, they have have been given to supply you greater money. The Tea Partiers have major the fraud, waste, abuse and lies and as a team have stood as much as decline greater desirable. for somebody damaging to that view, must be you may bear in mind shifting to a socialist u . s . a .. For what fund, what application or initiative hasn't government tried to sell to the persons as a solid suggestion , then been caught with thier hands interior the till, bankrupting it, stealing from Peter to pay Paul ? Social protection ? Medicare ? the final fund......bypass on, attempt to call in basic terms one.

Answer 8

Certainly not terrorism as noone was injured nor were there any threats of injury. If you consider the colonies to have been a seperate entity at that time, it was patriotism. I don't think there were any flags involved, but dressing up as native Americans was deceptive.

Answer 9

It was a tax protest. Not an act of terrorism. If would be equal to marching on Washington against taxes. Its not like 3000 innocent people died when it happened like terrorism.

Answer 10

By pure definition terrorism, as are all violent disruptions of government or commerce by people that are too poor to have an army.