Based on the number of upvotes I'm getting I think it's you who's really struggling to make a point.

I don't think your arguing in good faith and you are getting called out on it by a few people. So you answer first, then I'll answer -- Was the boston tea party justified? Is civil disobedience ever justified? Is breaking the law a good thing sometimes if it's a bad law (e.g. Rosa Parks)?

If you can't answer those then I think you'll have convinced me and the rest of us that you aren't even trying to make a good-faith effort to make a point.

Again this is not the Boston Tea Party or the Civil Rights movement. I also don’t really care about upvotes either. You keep making comparisons with the best instead of explicitly stating your opinion on the topic at hand in the article. Anyway no point of further discourse.

What riddle? I'm not a native English speaker, and it's pretty clear even to me what he's saying.

It's not complicated.

They are in favor of public vandalism such as that which was committed by the Boston Tea Party whereas you appear to be suggesting that you are vehemently against it.

What a load of shit. You're essentially goading someone to fedpost and holding their argument hostage if they don't.