Quote:
|
As I've said, I don't look at the Boston tea party as an act of civil disobedience, more of a declaration of war or open rebellion against an oppressive occupier, they called themselves the sons of liberty after all, were they interested in changing Englands laws and having them continue to rule them? No, I don't believe they were, not at all.
|
Then why was the Olive Branch Petition extended to the King if they were so keen on separating?
http://www.pro.gov.uk/virtualmuseum/...on/default.htm
So let's see, the Sons of Liberty broke the laws of the land in order to get a policy change that they wanted. Not civil disobedience? Give me a break. It's the very definition of civil disobedience.
I know I've backed you into a defensive position here. I want you to know that it's ok to admit it when you're wrong. I'll still respect you.
