If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Houston)   Texas schools now teaching Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism. Subby scared to find out what they're calling the Tea Party Tea Party   (houston.cbslocal.com) divider line 72
    More: Interesting, tea party, Texas, Texas schools, for-profit schools  
•       •       •

4022 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Nov 2012 at 3:24 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-24 11:20:00 PM  
8 votes:
See? One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
2012-11-24 11:31:33 PM  
6 votes:

Weaver95: well, from the perspective of the British - yes, it probably WAS an act of 'terrorism'.


Reminds me of a US History class I took as an undergrad where the prof explained things from the British point of view

How the British fronted most of the cost of the French and Indian War. Where there Brits were paying more in taxes to pay for that war than the Americans. And how the British Parliament felt that the Americans should start to pay for their fair share since they were the primary beneficiaries from said war.

Made the colonies sound like a bunch of spoiled ingrates.

Food for thought
2012-11-25 12:21:08 AM  
5 votes:
Um it was? When an animal rights extremist burns down an expensive unoccupied building for political reasons we call it domestic terrorism, why would dressing up and destroying a valuable cargo for political purposes be any different? Calling it terrorism is keeping consistency with the modern definition of the term.
2012-11-24 11:24:02 PM  
5 votes:
well, from the perspective of the British - yes, it probably WAS an act of 'terrorism'.
2012-11-24 11:26:39 PM  
4 votes:
Texas schools now teaching

I stopped reading at that. I call BS.
2012-11-24 11:18:12 PM  
4 votes:
I guess we'd all have to come to an agreement on the definition of "terrorism," but I think that under most reasonable definitions, it was terrorism.

And the American Revolution was treason.

duh
2012-11-24 11:13:29 PM  
4 votes:
Really, I don't have a problem with this.

John Brown was a terrorist.

Jesus was regarded as a terrorist by the Romans.

The Irgun and The Stern Gang were not materially different from the PLO and Hamas.

/yeah, I know, I'm gonna piss off a lot of people with this
//BFD
2012-11-25 06:56:54 AM  
3 votes:

Mikey1969: Sorry, you're reaching.


I'm not reaching. That is what terrorism is. a simple peak in the dictionary proves that to be true. If I'm so wrong, it should be very easy for you to prove it.

here, I'll start

"the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. "

If you don't like that source we can check what the FBI says.

Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

Guess what the Boston Tea party was? It was an unlawful use of force and violence against property to intimidate or coerce a government, in furtherance of political or social objectives. was it not?
2012-11-25 04:03:32 AM  
3 votes:
Sure. If, by 'terrorism' you mean they politely destroyed property and treated the British officials with the utmost respect. In other words it's like Basque ETA calling in their bomb targets ahead of time and deliberately detonating empty buildings. Hell, the Sons of Liberty paid for the tea afterwards.

The Boston Tea Party was NOT terrorism. Tarring & Feathering tax collectors, however, was terrorism.

Oh, and if anyone's interested in the semi-official British opinion of all this there's a hilarious and boneheaded counterargument written in response to the Declaration of Independence. Check out the 1776 version of Bill O'Reilly.
Link
2012-11-25 01:07:41 AM  
3 votes:
It technically was terrorism. It was an act of a select few against an existing power structure for solely personal gain at the expense of the majority that has been utterly blown out of proportion by history. The entire American Revolution is a perfect example of the phrase 'One man's terrorist is another's Freedom Fighter."
2012-11-25 12:04:28 AM  
3 votes:
Why did they wait so long to call it an act of terrorism? What are they covering up? How many Americans had to die because they wouldn't admit it was terrorism right from the start?
I demand a Congressional investigation into Teapartygate.
2012-11-24 11:32:36 PM  
3 votes:

ToxicMunkee: See? One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.


Weaver95: well, from the perspective of the British - yes, it probably WAS an act of 'terrorism'.


That terrorism is a matter of perspective is obvious to some -the others are neo-conservatives.
2012-11-25 01:14:49 PM  
2 votes:

Relatively Obscure: What would people call it if a gang of Muslims ransacked an American ship in port and destroyed all of the cargo?


Burning of the Gaspee? It's still celebrated in Rhode Island.

/Suck it, Boston tea party. Try burning an actual warship.
2012-11-25 07:13:59 AM  
2 votes:

starsrift: Terrorism is the use(or threat) of force to create a state of fear for political purposes. You don't have to be a guerilla or insurgent to be a terrorist; national armies or dictators can do it just fine. It can be as intimate and personal as a suicide bomber or as cold and calculating as a foreign drone patrolling your sky.

While the British were, and still are, quite attached to tea, I don't think they were that attached to it.


No? You might want to read about the Opium Wars. China refused to take British manufactured goods as payment for tea. Thus all the silver drained out of England. They were crazy for tea.

Their solution was to use military force to expand the opium trade in China. The silver flowed back, once they'd created several million addicts. Then they portrayed the Chinese as degenerate rat-eating junkies incapable of governing themselves.

Queen Victoria: the world's biggest drug dealer.

(For tea.)
2012-11-25 04:32:51 AM  
2 votes:
Secede already!
2012-11-25 04:14:07 AM  
2 votes:
Better add The Boston Tea Party to the List Of People Conspiring Against The G.O.P. And Therefore America. (LOPCATGOPATA)


Liberals
Democrats
Socialists
Community Organizers
Geologists
Biologists
Meteorologists
Climatologists
Atheists
Muslims
Jews
Satan
ABC
NBC
CNN
CBS
PBS
All of cable except FNC
The New York Times
The LA Times
The Washington Post
The Associated Press
Reuters
BBC
The Guardian
Black People
Mexicans
Human Rights Activists
SCOTUS
Europe
Movie Industry
Television Industry
Environmentalists
ACLU
The United Nations
Labor Unions
Colleges
Teachers
Professors
ACORN
National Endowment for the Arts
Gays
Judges
NPR
Paleontologists
Astrophysicists
Museums (*except Creationism Museum)
WHO
WTO
Inflated tires
The Honolulu Advertiser
The Star Bulletin
Teletubbies
Sponge Bob and Patrick
Nobel Prize Committee
US Census Bureau
NOAA
Sesame Street
Comic Books
Little Green Footballs
Video Games
The Bible
CBO
Bruce Springsteen
Pennies
The Theory of Relativity
Comedy Central
Young People
whatever the hell a Justin Beiber is
Small Business Owners
Math
CPAC
Navy SEALs
The Economist
Reality
Standard and Poor's
Warren Buffet
Lightbulbs
81 CEO's of Major US Corporations 
The Boston Tea Party
2012-11-25 04:01:29 AM  
2 votes:
there are probably a lot of brown people around the world who can point to their destroyed homes, villages and show pictures of their dead loved ones that consider the USA government military responsible for these actions are terrorists.
2012-11-25 03:52:03 AM  
2 votes:

Meet Us at the Stick: Weaver95: well, from the perspective of the British - yes, it probably WAS an act of 'terrorism'.

Reminds me of a US History class I took as an undergrad where the prof explained things from the British point of view

How the British fronted most of the cost of the French and Indian War. Where there Brits were paying more in taxes to pay for that war than the Americans. And how the British Parliament felt that the Americans should start to pay for their fair share since they were the primary beneficiaries from said war.

Made the colonies sound like a bunch of spoiled ingrates.

Food for thought


I recall reading that the American colonists were taxed at a higher rate than people in England, supposedly because the war most directly benefitted them. Also, no colony was allowed to trade with any other colony, only with English merchants (who jacked up their prices while offering less than the free-market value for American goods.)

The worst thing was, the colonists had no representation in Parliament at all, so they had no legal means of protesting these policies. They were treated as second-class citizens with all of the responsibilities of British subjects but none of the rights.

Basically, the mother country was milking the colonies for as much as they could get and not giving a whole lot in return. (They did help defend the colonists from the French, so there is that.) These policies were set by King George himself (who, it was later discovered, was certifiably insane.)
2012-11-25 01:35:29 AM  
2 votes:

jaylectricity: but since the Boston Tea Party was against a government from another land the analogy doesn't quite hold true.


At that time and place it is highly unlikely that Great Britain was perceived as "another land." The collective idea of being "Americans" was quite foreign--even after the Revolutionary War most people thought of themselves as citizens of individual states first in some kind of loose confederation--rather than units in a primarily Federal system.
2012-11-25 01:28:38 AM  
2 votes:

Meet Us at the Stick: How the British fronted most of the cost of the French and Indian War. Where there Brits were paying more in taxes to pay for that war than the Americans. And how the British Parliament felt that the Americans should start to pay for their fair share since they were the primary beneficiaries from said war.


And that was cost a farkton of money for the British Empire. Primarily because it was actually a worldwide conflict with one of the theaters being in North America. Supply chain management especially along colonial boarders was dammed expensive. And Parliament had long claimed the right to represent all members of colonial Britain as well as metropolitan Britain.
2012-11-25 12:04:25 AM  
2 votes:
The word 'terrorism' gets used lately for a lot of things that have nothing to with 'terror'. Who exactly was 'terrorized' by the Boston Tea Party?
2012-11-24 11:38:08 PM  
2 votes:
enacted by the occupying country's government

This is where they screwed up the lesson. This appears to set the stage for the government to be able to punish future freedom fighters within the U.S., but since the Boston Tea Party was against a government from another land the analogy doesn't quite hold true.

The troubling thing to me is that I think that Texas believes that D.C. is "occupying" their state, yet here they are warning its citizens not to try any funny business with the feds. Is there a need to warn citizens, and if so, it seems like the Texas government wants to be part of the union even if individual citizens don't agree.
2012-11-24 11:20:54 PM  
2 votes:
What would people call it if a gang of Muslims ransacked an American ship in port and destroyed all of the cargo?
2012-11-25 02:57:45 PM  
1 votes:

SilentStrider: You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view


Can't believe I'm the first to say that.


Actually, this is pretty much what I wanted to say. This could have been a wonderful lesson--one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter, and you need to do actual research before simply condemning or demonizing people.

And then I read TFA and realized, no, they're just calling it terrorism because it was a private company. Jesus H. Fark, you wingnuts, we are not actually a corporation-controlled oligarchy, can you try and act like you take some pride in that.
2012-11-25 02:54:33 PM  
1 votes:
Dear Texas:

You will never be permitted to secede.

There will be a United States, and Texas will be part of it when the Sun burns out.
2012-11-25 02:07:33 PM  
1 votes:

jigger: What the goal of the BTP to create fear (terror) or to destroy merchandise? If the sole purpose was to destroy merchandise then it was sabotage, not terrorism.

But yes, the War of American Secession was treason, of course.


What about dressing as Indians when they did it? I'm not sure how to describe it. Cartoonish Terrorism? Slapstick Indirect Hate Crime?
2012-11-25 11:53:57 AM  
1 votes:
There are no "mitigating circumstances" for terrorism against a lawful government.........

....... unless you win.
2012-11-25 11:40:26 AM  
1 votes:
Didn't read through the comments, so I don't know if this has been posted or not yet; I'm guessing not.

What should we call "The Tea Party?" How about the "American Taliban?" (That's the short version. The long version is here, for those interested.)
2012-11-25 10:42:20 AM  
1 votes:
Just for fun, this is what the TEA says about the boston tea party: 5th Grade Social Studies TEKS
2012-11-25 10:37:53 AM  
1 votes:
142 comments in and nobody has read TFA.....
TFA
As recently as January of this year, the Texas Education Service Center Curriculum Collaborative included a lesson plan that depicted the Boston Tea Party, an event that helped ignite the American Revolution, as an act of terrorism. TheBlaze reports that in a lesson promoted on the TESCCC site as recently as January, a world history/social studies class plan depicted the Boston Tea Party as being anything but patriotic, causing many people to become upset with the lack of transparency and review for lessons.

Some red flags here. This is not the TEA, Texas Education Agency. TEA is the group which lists the TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) which all public schools are required to teach. TESCCC is a group which attempts to provide support to Texas schools. Their lesson plans are unofficial, and the article provided no evidence that the LPs are actually being used by anyone.

If anyone wants it, I live in Texas and can write a lesson plan centered around Glenn Beck and TheBlaze being lying sacks of shiat who murdered and raped a girl in 1990. That doesn't mean that anyone will use it or that it is a lesson in line with the TEKS.
2012-11-25 10:32:16 AM  
1 votes:
TheBlaze reports...

I stopped reading after that.
2012-11-25 10:16:35 AM  
1 votes:
By the laws and standards of the era: Not terrorism.

By today's laws and standards: Terrorism.

But then, by today's laws and standards you'd have to say that any Native American tribe that fought against the Union was a terrorist cell, and you'd have to say that, because the Union considered them a non-legitimate organization, the Confederacy would also be a terrorist organization.

So Texas might want to pull back the reigns on this whole line of thinking.
2012-11-25 10:15:09 AM  
1 votes:
It was an illegal act of major property destruction with the expressed intent of making a political point.

Not terribly different from bombing an abortion clinic or setting fire to a draft board office.
2012-11-25 10:11:52 AM  
1 votes:
Get with the program, Texas. it's only terrorism when someone does it to us. Actually Texas- you don't even have a dog in this race as you were an indian nation at the time. Unless that was your tea we had been tossing into the drink.

Hmm.
2012-11-25 10:01:56 AM  
1 votes:

Guidette Frankentits: Better add The Boston Tea Party to the List Of People Conspiring Against The G.O.P. And Therefore America. (LOPCATGOPATA)


Thanks to some diligent Farkers we now have it with linky goodness:

List of People Conspiring Against the GOP, and therefore, America (LOPCATGOPATA for short):

Liberals Link
Democrats Link
Socialists Link
Community Organizers Link
Geologists Link
Biologists Link
Meteorologists Link
Climatologists Link
Atheists Link
Muslims Link
Jews
Satan
ABC
NBC
CNN
CBS
PBS
All of cable news except FNC
The New York Times
The LA Times
The Washington Post
The Associated Press
Reuters
BBC
The Guardian
Black People
Mexicans
Human Rights Activists
SCOTUS
Europe
Movie Industry
Television Industry
Environmentalists
ACLU
The United Nations
Labor Unions Link
Colleges
Teachers (including kindergarten teachers) Link
Professors
ACORN Link
Planned Parenthood Link
National Endowment for the Arts Link
Fashion Industry Link
Gays
Judges Link
NPR Link
Paleontologists
Astrophysicists
Museums (*except Creationism Museum)
WHO
WTO
Inflated tires Link
The Honolulu Advertiser Link
The Star Bulletin Link
Teletubbies Link
Sponge Bob and Patrick Link
Nobel Prize Committee Link
US Census Bureau Link
NOAA
Sesame Street Link
Comic Books Link
Little Green Footballs Link
Video Games Link
The Bible Link
CBO Link
Bruce Springsteen Link
Pennies
The Theory of Relativity Link
Comedy Central Link
Young People
whatever the hell a Justin Beiber is Link
Small Business Owners Link
Math Link
CPAC Link
Navy SEALs Link
The Economist
The Muppets Link
Iowa Republicans
Low-Flow Toilets Link
Breast Cancer Screenings Link
Chrysler Link
Clint Eastwood. Link
Robert Deniro Link
Tom Hanks Link
Glenn Frey Link
Norman Rockwell Link
James Cameron Link
Dr. Seus
Nuns Link
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts Link
Jonathan Krohn at age 17 Link
Fact Checkers Link
Australia Link
Mitt Romney
Rasmussen
Fox News
Lockheed Martin Link
Bureau of Labor Statistics Link
Paul Ryan Link
Debate moderators Link
Ben Stein Link
Soup kitchens Link
Chris Christie Link
Nate Silver (FiveThirtyEight.com) Link
Fox Polling
US Postal Service
Associated Press
Hurricanes Link
Susan Collins Link
Lisa Murkowski Link
Dean Heller Link
Mark Kirk Link
Lindsey Graham Link
Governor Bobby Jindal Link
General Petreaus Link
Saxby Chambliss Link
God Link
Girl Scouts Link
Boston Tea Party Link
2012-11-25 09:55:31 AM  
1 votes:
I dislike Texas as much as the next guy, but this seems like a perfectly legitimate lesson to be given within the context of a history lesson about the Revolution. Of course Loyalists and the British would view the Tea Party in terms of which we would now call terrorism (although pretty tame by our standards, like if the Gazans were launching cream pies into Israel). Save your outrage for something more disturbing. God knows Texas will give you plenty of opportunity to use it.
2012-11-25 09:43:13 AM  
1 votes:

lordjupiter: Of course it was "terrorism". But it was OUR terrorism.

Somewhere between the "America is the Great Satan" and "America can do no wrong" crowd there lies reality...and not just because of some middle-ground assumption. It's context and perspective.

That said, WHARGARBLE.


Sweet farking God this X 1000!

Most reasonable thing I've heard about this stupid story all day.
2012-11-25 09:41:18 AM  
1 votes:
I'm fine with it, so long as they start teaching that Davy Crockett and his comrades died at the Alamo in an attempt to continue being slaveholders.
2012-11-25 09:27:42 AM  
1 votes:
Of course it was "terrorism". But it was OUR terrorism.

Somewhere between the "America is the Great Satan" and "America can do no wrong" crowd there lies reality...and not just because of some middle-ground assumption. It's context and perspective.

That said, WHARGARBLE.
2012-11-25 08:57:23 AM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: It technically was terrorism. It was an act of a select few against an existing power structure for solely personal gain at the expense of the majority that has been utterly blown out of proportion by history. The entire American Revolution is a perfect example of the phrase 'One man's terrorist is another's Freedom Fighter."


Which is probably the whole point of the lesson.

And considering the kind of people on charge of the education curriculum in Texas, I don't think these Yahoos need to worry about anything that interesting actually being used in a classroom.
2012-11-25 08:55:54 AM  
1 votes:

Lionel Mandrake: I guess we'd all have to come to an agreement on the definition of "terrorism," but I think that under most reasonable definitions, it was terrorism.


Remind me, were any people harmed by the Sons of Liberty during the Boston Tea Party? (I'm too lazy to research it myself.) If they managed to neatly limit it to property damage, then I think we need a different term. The word "vandalism" nowadays implies pointless juvenile destruction of property; did it once apply to more purposeful action by an organized movement? I always associate "sabotage" with equipment of some sort rather than a consumable commodity like tea.

And the American Revolution was treason.

It's only treason if you lose. Remember, winners get to write the history books.
2012-11-25 08:49:21 AM  
1 votes:
WHY DID IT TAKE OBAMA 230 YEARS TO CALL THIS AN ACT OF TERROR WHAT IS HE HIDING FIRST BENGHAZI NOW THIS
2012-11-25 08:33:16 AM  
1 votes:

Kibbler: The Boston Tea Party was actually a frat prank that went awry. See, they were going to smuggle a dead horse into George III's office, but Flounder couldn't get enough marbles. So they did the tea party thing instead, and all things American flowed naturally from that.

(It explains a lot, seriously.)


You also forgot to mention that they went on Double Secret Probation after this as well.
2012-11-25 08:24:23 AM  
1 votes:
4.bp.blogspot.com 

24.media.tumblr.com 

suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com
2012-11-25 08:23:33 AM  
1 votes:
It is sort of ironic that the current TEA Party acts to further corporate interest, while the original was an act against collusion between the state and corporate interests...
2012-11-25 07:58:26 AM  
1 votes:

Jim_Callahan: Um... no, vandalism and terrorism aren't the same thing. You have to actually threaten violence against civilians unless political demands are met to be a terrorist, getting drunk and trashing someone's property is just a riot.


... which brings up the little-known fact that according to consumption figures, the Colonials were serious alcoholics by today's standards -- drinking beer for breakfast and getting hammered on spirits at taverns where they hammered out the founding documents of our nation.
2012-11-25 07:56:32 AM  
1 votes:

Dr.Zom: Happy Hours: Also, a local CBS affiliate is reporting that this is what TheBlaze claims.

I'll wait for a more reliable source on this.

Glenn Beck. I'm assuming the opposite of everything in this story is the truth.


I saw this on Facebook too. So I'm skeptical.

These are the same folks who wrote this are the ones rewriting the Texas school curriculum because they believe the current one is too liberal.
2012-11-25 07:37:30 AM  
1 votes:
I'm sure I'm late to the party, but I have a few things to say about this article.

1. The "reporter" (who has not earned the term) doesn't do his or her own research. Instead, our intrepid writer uses information from THE BLAZE. I don't think I need to continue.

2. The information quoted is clearly from a lesson designed to have the student look at the event through the eyes of the British.

"It is believed that the terrorist attack was a response to the policies enacted by the occupying country's government. Even stronger policies are anticipated by the local citizens."

Does that sound like a factual recount of a historical event? Or does it sound like something supposed to be written at the time. By the British.

You can argue if the Tea Party was terrorism, and I would bet money that's the discussion that the lesson was meant to provoke. But that's a far cry from what the article claims.
2012-11-25 07:03:43 AM  
1 votes:

log_jammin: Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).


the definition of Shock-and-Awe-ism is on the next page. it's basically the same thing, but with sparklers.
2012-11-25 06:47:02 AM  
1 votes:
It was terrorism. Also, interesting bit of historical perspective, if you still believe that no taxation without representation bullshiat you might be interested to know several members of the founding fathers deliberately fast tratcked the revolution and antagonized britsh interests to avert then fact that england was on the verge. Of just giving the colonies an equal, IE one third stake in parliament.

\American
\\but I got passing grades in college history.
\\\eh, fark the English anyway, we won.
2012-11-25 05:29:08 AM  
1 votes:

powhound: Darth Macho: Check out the 1776 version of Bill O'Reilly.
Link

I won't listen to derp in English, why should I attempt to read derp in Old English, while heavily buzzed?

/it was probably written by Bill O's great-great-grandaddy


They spoke Anglo-Saxon in 1776? Who knew?
2012-11-25 05:25:49 AM  
1 votes:
I'm sure those ships were unguarded and the cargo was taken control of without a fight.
2012-11-25 04:43:15 AM  
1 votes:
Which only goes to show how badly the word "terrorism" has been bastardized by today's media and politicians.

Strictly speaking, I suppose that the Boston Tea Party would have been terrorism IF such a term had been in use back then; and IF it had been described in the British press; using Great Britain's definition of 2000 which does include "serious damage to property."

The United Kingdom's Terrorism Act 2000 defined terrorism as follows:

(1) In this Act "terrorism" means the use or threat of action where:

(a) the action falls within subsection (2),
(b) the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public and
(c) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause.

(2) Action falls within this subsection if it:

(a) involves serious violence against a person,
(b) involves serious damage to property,
(c) endangers a person's life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public or
(e) is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.[51]

(They added the property damage most likely because the IRA had begun extensively bombing buildings while being extra careful to call in the attacks with plenty of time to evacuate the property; hence, nobody got killed except the insurance salesmen who died of grief)

However, nearly all international and national definitions of "terrorism" as they now exist pretty much require either an act which causes or intends to cause serious harm to civilians (as separate from combat actions) and which are motivated by political or religious ideology, to constitute terrorism. So tossing some bales of tea into a harbor, no matter how politically motivated, just wouldn't cut it nowadays and no matter how bad it soaked the insurers at Lloyds. Although the British might disagree based on their own Terrorism Act.
2012-11-25 04:41:19 AM  
1 votes:

dickfreckle: One thing I've noticed lately is that the "regular media" is now reporting using blogs as their source.


They get more attention that way when it's later proved to be all lies.

log_jammin: Since our original posting of this story, TheBlaze has received a flood of emails from educators and parents in Texas providing more information that will be included in our follow-up story next week. One teacher claimed that our report about the "Boston Tea Party being taught as terrorism" was incorrect and that the lesson is currently not on the CSCOPE website.


See?
2012-11-25 04:36:16 AM  
1 votes:
2012-11-25 04:31:01 AM  
1 votes:
One thing I've noticed lately is that the "regular media" is now reporting using blogs as their source. I don't care if TheBlaze is right (heh) about this; they're wrong (typically deliberately) about damn near everything else.

I fully expect to see a CNN article sourced solely by InfoWars.
2012-11-25 04:17:43 AM  
1 votes:

Jim_Callahan: Um... no, vandalism and terrorism aren't the same thing. You have to actually threaten violence against civilians unless political demands are met to be a terrorist, getting drunk and trashing someone's property is just a riot.


I'd say it's really neither. Though it can be viewed as both.

Anything that incites fear for political outcome/gain is terrorism. It's a really really broad stroke that boils down to perception.

As for vandalism, the perpetrators of the act would have disagreed. In fact, they went to great lengths to avoid any unneeded damages to the ship. It was an act of speech (protest), from their viewpoint.

What the school should be teaching instead of political slant is historical truth.

The number one lesson of the Boston Tea Party was this: fark with people enough and they will get pissed and send you a message that may or may not come at a great personal cost to you.
2012-11-25 04:13:24 AM  
1 votes:
It wasn't vandalism. It was economic sabotage which, since it was performed not by a non-state actor, falls under the definition of terrorism


Since the tea was delivered on consignment (e.g. money had yet to change hands), The East India Tea Company lost 3 vessels (342 crates) worth of merchandise worth approximately £900k today.

If an action by Earth First or Greenpeace cost a company that much money, politicians throughout the west would be decrying the act as terrorism
2012-11-25 03:57:53 AM  
1 votes:
I would like to create a ride similar to "It's a small world". It will show every language in the world, saying:

Fark Texas
2012-11-25 03:48:56 AM  
1 votes:

Somacandra: Meet Us at the Stick: How the British fronted most of the cost of the French and Indian War. Where there Brits were paying more in taxes to pay for that war than the Americans. And how the British Parliament felt that the Americans should start to pay for their fair share since they were the primary beneficiaries from said war.

And that was cost a farkton of money for the British Empire. Primarily because it was actually a worldwide conflict with one of the theaters being in North America. Supply chain management especially along colonial boarders was dammed expensive. And Parliament had long claimed the right to represent all members of colonial Britain as well as metropolitan Britain.


Which is where they ran in to trouble with the American colonies because they wouldn't allow the colonies to represent themselves in Parliament. So while the taxes levied against the colonies may have been fair, the colonies had no say in the matter which was the main problem.
2012-11-25 03:34:50 AM  
1 votes:

Lansydyr: I think the dividing line between "FREEDOM FIGHTER" and "TERRORIST" is about 2 million dollars.

The Boston Tea Party cost an estimated 1.7 million dollars in today's money. These brave patriots were clearly doing their civic duty to protest against unfair taxation.

This RADICAL ECO-TERRORIST cost car dealerships a whole 2 million dollars in damage, at least. He's clearly evil and should be locked away for life.


Actually he was sentenced to 8 years and released after six. He has to pay for his shenanigans but is in perpetual appeal, so not even that, yet. Sounds like he got off pretty easy.
2012-11-25 03:32:04 AM  
1 votes:

Happy Hours: Also, a local CBS affiliate is reporting that this is what TheBlaze claims.

I'll wait for a more reliable source on this.


Glenn Beck. I'm assuming the opposite of everything in this story is the truth.
2012-11-25 02:12:46 AM  
1 votes:

Relatively Obscure: I do, but I'm guessing more than a few people would not follow your first example. It is just a guess though.


That's only because anything a Muslim does in this country is considered terrorism by some.
2012-11-25 01:37:00 AM  
1 votes:
i.imgur.com

Nat Turner laughs at your fauxrage shenanigans, "The Blaze."
2012-11-25 01:35:22 AM  
1 votes:
Also, a local CBS affiliate is reporting that this is what TheBlaze claims.

I'll wait for a more reliable source on this.
2012-11-25 01:32:43 AM  
1 votes:

Relatively Obscure: What would people call it if a gang of Muslims ransacked an American ship in port and destroyed all of the cargo?


That really depends. In your hypothetical scenario, was the ship docked in a Muslim country's port and did they just dump the cargo into the water? If so, then no, I don't think it would be called an act of terrorism.

If the ship were docked in a US port and it was blown up with explosives then yes it would be called an act of terrorism.

See the difference?
2012-11-25 12:33:31 AM  
1 votes:

Frederick: That terrorism is a matter of perspective is obvious to some -the others are neo-conservatives.


QFT
2012-11-24 11:47:18 PM  
1 votes:

Dead for Tax Reasons: Aulus:
John Brown was a terrorist.


John browns body lies a-mouldering in the grave


He's gone to be a soldier in the army of the Lord
2012-11-24 11:31:25 PM  
1 votes:

Aulus:
John Brown was a terrorist.


John browns body lies a-mouldering in the grave
2012-11-24 11:27:31 PM  
1 votes:
OHH FOR F*CK'S SAKE


AAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH
2012-11-24 11:14:08 PM  
1 votes:
It's only terrorism if you don't drop the bombs from airplanes.
2012-11-24 11:12:56 PM  
1 votes:
So we're calling a 230 some odd year old case of vandalism terrorism now. What next making funny faces at babies as a terrorist act.
 
Displayed 72 of 72 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report