A-America
B-British
C-General Cornwallis
D-Delaware River crossing
E-England
F-French allies to the Americans
G-Guerrillas
H-Hope
I-john Iago
J-thomas jeffeson
k-king george the third
L-john Locke
m-battle at monmouth
n-george nixen
o-olive branch petition
q- john Quincy
r-paul revere
s-battle at saratoga springs
t-treaty OS Paris
u-Jacob ubehend
w-general George Washington
x-henery knoX
y-Yorktown
z-john peter zenger
The British view it as hardly a massacre which influenced the forming of an outspoken Anti British public opinion.
it was an objective and biased statement in the point of view of those who wrote it.
First person point of view
Point of view is Third Person Narrator.
it's from a Norman point of view
He was a revolutionary or terrorist depending on your point of view.
The British view it as hardly a massacre which influenced the forming of an outspoken Anti British public opinion.
Domestic terrorism or revolutionary action, depending on your point of view.
He thinks people are traitors for signing the declaration of independence.
it was an objective and biased statement in the point of view of those who wrote it.
"Hur mår du?", it is pronounced (from british point of view) "hur mour do".
There view is they get more money that's what they intended for all of there Acts just like America they need taxes to not be in debt but the British went over board with all of there taxes.
It depends on your point of view. It depends on your point of view. It depends on your point of view.
The whole point was to get indeppendence from the british. Also, Alot of important peeps signed it to break away from great Britian. The Americans wanted to get away from the British and their way of suceeding was to sign the Decleration of INdependence
it was an objective and biased statement in the point of view of those who wrote it.
it was an objective and biased statement in the point of view of those who wrote it.
it was an objective and biased statement in the point of view of those who wrote it.