posted by DenyAllKnowledge
This is a difficult question! there is no "Black or White" right and wrong all are shades if grey. Americans see their Independence movement as a
revolution resulting in freedom and democracy. many American colonists, saw them as rebels and terrorists determined to plunge north America into a
civil war. Sadly, a terrorist will always consider himself to be a freedom fighter. To be a freedom fighter an individual will have to be a bit of a
terrorist and tyrant, to fight for a cause you must have total conviction in it's justification. Any act is justifiable in order to defeat the enemy,
An innocent dies? Well, that's not your fault is it? to sum up, freedom fighters and terrorists are groups with some popular support in the areas
they inhabit . . “ [Edited by Don W]
I wanted to “admit” DAK, that the American Revolution is getting a new look-see. I became interested as I was studying the origins of the
Parliament and its control of the purse strings. How come, I asked, if the monarch was so powerful, did he or she have to come to Parliament for
money? I'm starting at 1215, but obviously there was already a movement strong enough to force King John to sign the Magna Carta. The sitting pope
exonerated him from his oath; the beginning of a struggle for control of England that my hero, Henry VIII ended 400 years later.
I discovered along the way that it is more accurate to describe events of 1775 to 1783 in the colonies as a coup d’etat. Actually, the people who
lived in the 13 colonies were more free - if that is good English - than most of those who lived in England. Sure, we complained we were not
represented in Parliament and that was true but then, so were a lot of Englishmen not represented. I do not think giving the colonies a half dozen
seats in a 600 member House of Commons 3,000 miles distant would have made all that much difference.
Land. The whole thing here was about land. More land here than anyone from Europe could imagine. The War was fought here by those who wanted
unrestrained access and control of millions of acres which was nearly impossible for any low born person from Europe to dream of. The western lands
“solved” all the social problems in America until 1933. That is why there is no socialist movement in America worth a bucket of warm spit. Land,
sometimes free, often cheap, and always available, even today, solved that problem which in Europe was addressed by advocates of mutual sharing and
mutual participation. Mutuality versus individuality.
But alas, I too, have rambled. I have already posted that I say “terrorist” is a psy-ops word. It is pure hyperbole. It is deception. It is
avoidance. It is a fighting word. It is all too bad. If we could raise the dead, you might want to ask Menachem Began about Jerusalem’s King David
Hotel and terrorism and its relation to freedom and democracy. See Irgun Zvai Leumi for more.
[edit on 7/20/2006 by donwhite]