Declaration Of Intent To Sell: Fill & Download for Free

I think the biggest misconception that people have about the Founding Fathers is how united people seem to think they were. People talk about the intent of the founders and framers like they were a monolithic bloc who generally agreed on things, right from the events leading up to the Revolution and Declaration of Independence on up to the drafting of the Constitution.But there is one story that really sticks out to me as a prime example of how much we’ve lionized the men who started us down the path to independence.The Boston Patriots and the Real Reason for the Tea PartyThe story we’re taught in US history is that the revolutionary fathers like Sam Adams were mad about increased taxes and so to send a message to the British, they snuck on board dressed like Indians and tossed over some tea.This is an extremely sanitized version of the truth.[1]As it turns out, the Boston Patriots were organized criminals. They were tea smugglers.The British had been paying for the Redcoat military to protect the colonies from Native Americans that were rightly pissed at the colonists for showing up and seizing their lands. Add to that some conflicts with the French, and keeping the new frontier secure was getting to be an expensive proposition.The British asked for the colonies to chip in. The colonies gave them the one-fingered salute. So, the British, for better or worse, started taxing goods coming in and out of the colonies. This ended up leading to widespread (and quite lucrative) smuggling.The colonists loved tea. They were straight up caffeine addicts.The British gave a monopoly on tea to the East India Company. As a royal charter corporation, a not insignificant portion of the profits went to the English crown treasury, since the government provided them with a fair amount of financial backing. This made some people fantastically wealthy, and as fantastically wealthy people do, they bought their way into government and engaged in a little regulatory capture. So, the British — with a great many EIC supporters in Parliament — required all imports to have to go through Great Britain first to ensure the government got their cut.In response, the colonists ran fake customs stops out of Amsterdam to cut down on shipping costs, and smuggle in cheaper tea to undercut the EIC market.That’s what led to the Tea Act of 1773, which allowed the EIC to ship direct to North America, no stops required, and cut the prices for the legitimate stuff to help unload huge warehouses of overstocked EIC tea. This made British officially imported tea cheaper than the Boston tea mafia could sell it for.And in comes the rest of the story we’re familiar with.So, the Sons of Liberty, part of the local tea smuggling syndicate, dressed up like Mohawk Indians for plausible deniability, and tossed $2.1 million dollars of high-grade tea into the Boston harbor. It was an act of corporate sabotage by the tea cartel, not a patriotic gesture to stick it to the man.The men who signed on to the Declaration of Independence included an article about how pissed they were that the Crown was establishing numerous customs checkpoints and sending over officers to man them.Why?Because it made it harder for the Boston Tea Mafia to operate.Footnotes[1] Revisionist History Season 4 Episode 3

I am not so sure about the ICBM, but they would probably be able to buy a bomb and take it close enough to one of the USA's more important East Coast cities, like New York or Washington DC.This will not be that different from the intent of terrorist groups - to cause maximum death and chaos, not necessarily a target of high strategic value. They will want to leave their mark, and the perpetrators will think it heroic to die in the act.Once this bomb gets to the USA, it will be very difficult to stop from exploding. Pakistan is leveraging all of the USA's hope that it will stay stable enough to prevent this from happening, and in many ways, the USA is Pakistan's golden egg laying goose, so I am not sure why any Pakistani in charge of military assets would want to sell to the ISIS, but money is a great motivator, and it only takes one sympathizer with power.I don't think this threat is yet considered large enough or imminent enough. But I have no doubt at all that the ISIS has clarity of intent - to nuke the USA somewhere or the other. Foremost on their consideration will be the highest density of population.

Well, anonymous statist, I can point you in the direction of 10 United States Code, Section 311, titled "Militia composition and classes", which states:(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.(b)The classes of the militia are—(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.I can also point you to search the Constitutions and Statutes of the 50 states, as I have. If you do so, you'll discover that all of the states, save Delaware, Maryland and Wisconsin, have provision similar to the US Code, many of which are more inclusive in terms of age and gender.I can also point you to the precursor of the Oxford English Dictionary, Samuel Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language, published in 1755, which includes a definition of “regulated” that includes efficient and quick, not the 2019 definition that makes “regulated” synonymous with restricted, limited, and subject to oversight.As far as “safe and responsible firearms ownership”? What if I pointed you to the NRA, which has educated tens of millions of people in safe firearms use and storage - or would their data be deemed “tainted” and dismissed in the same way that their gun safety messages are by the legacy media, who allow gun control groups to offer half truths and outright lies as unchallenged “public service messages”?What if I pointed you to the statistics and data (nearly all from the government) illustrating that despite all the ballyhooed “gun violence” we're told by the Gotham Pimp and his propaganda selling legacy media occurs 5,346 times per minute, for every recorded criminal homicide, use of a firearm in a crime, firearm accident or suicide, there are over 830 lawful, legitimate sporting and defensive uses that occur each year? Given that firearm accidents are down over 82% since 1964 (even though the number of states allowing concealed carry holders has increased over 800% during the same time frame) and the “blood in the streets” forecast by rabid anti-gunners since 1986 has yet to materialize, I'd say that's pretty darn safe, wouldn't you?Or are you just offering a snarky comment in the form of a question to share with colleagues at a cocktail party while you mock the hicks in flyover states?