Over the past centuries, common law crime has been very clearly defined in British and American jurisprudence as the joint union and / or operation of act and intent, or criminal negligence, perpetrated by criminals. Most heinous crimes have always involved two or more perpetrators and also a particular stage of planning or conspiracy on the part of those perpetrators to prepare to commit the crimes. Such defined incremental criminal planning is formally called a “conspiracy” to commit the crime. “Take, for example, bank robbery, robbery, robbery, arson, blackmail, murder, extortion, or kidnapping; all of these crimes are serious crimes that generally involve a prior planning stage by generally two or more persons. This prior stage is now codified, numbered, and defined in state and federal criminal codes as the separate and distinct offense of “conspiracy.” In other words, it is a punishable felony for two or more persons to sit down. a table and “conspire” or conspire to commit a serious crime, even if the crime is never actually committed. The intention of the perpetrators to conspire together works in conjunction with the act of conspiring the crime in defined stages achievable to make the conspiracy be prosecutable, in and of itself, as a crime. All that is needed for a criminal conspiracy to be hatched is the cooperative work of two, or more, cry-minded human beings. They have the mens rea, or criminal intent, to plan and commit an act that is designated by law as a crime. In fact, a misdemeanor, such as shoplifting, can be turned into a felony by offenders planning to enter a store to steal merchandise. This planning elevates the misdemeanor crime of shoplifting to the status of a felony, robbery. Of course, there are some good conspiracies that can be planned by two or more people, such as surprise parties, but there are far more bad conspiracies planned and executed than good ones.
Since the beginning of recorded history, the criminal conspiracy has been the cause of the worst and most tragic human criminal events, resulting in the saddest human history of war, death and despair. However, the leading recorders of American history since the inception of the republic, academic historians, have had the prerogative to classify and publish these heinous events as what they really were, criminal conspiracies, or as “accidental” events that simply result of negligent mistakes rather than deliberate human intentions. This gross misrepresentation of the facts has obviously been done in order to deliberately distort, for political purposes, the perception of people who read and study the history of the events for decades; that is, the national electorate. In his fictional book “1984”, George Orwell wrote about the sad inhuman outcome of a futuristic totalitarian government that falsely revised human history to re-educate a collective population to believe what was totally false, but necessary for the functioning of government. fascist. That falsely revised story was called, by Orwell, “Newspeak.”
A clear and convincing example of this distortion of public perception is the currently published history of the use and application of the terminology “manifest destiny.” Most of the academic histories of the Mexican War, from 1846 to 1848, in almost all United States history textbooks used in high schools, colleges, and universities, state that “Mexico created a war with the United States. United in 1846 by crossing the Rio Grande and attacking a camp of American soldiers led by General Zachary Taylor. ” This story goes on to assert that the alleged attack led to General Taylor’s expeditious report to President James Polk that Mexico had committed an act of war against the United States, meriting a congressional declaration of war against Mexico. This was exactly how the Mexican War was described politically and academically for over a hundred years until actual discernible events bore witness to a very different set of circumstances. The actual events revealed that the term “manifest destiny” was created by President James Polk as what he envisioned as the eminent right of the United States to reclaim the land of North America formerly owned by Mexico, which now consists of the States of Arizona. , California, New Mexico, Nevada, Wyoming, and parts of Utah. The facts also reveal that President James Polk summoned General Zachary Taylor and conspired with him, in Polk’s office in the White House, to create a military situation on the Mexican border to which Mexicans would react violently. Polk explicitly ordered Taylor to ensure that American lives were lost in an exchange of fire with Mexican troops on the US side of the border. In the subsequent speech Polk made before Congress, calling for a declaration of war, he used the term “manifest destiny” to glorify the ultimate purpose of the soon-to-come war. According to the actual events, Abraham Lincoln was the only United States representative in the 1846 House of Representatives who questioned Polk’s motives for demanding a war against Mexico. Lincoln was actually the only voice in the entire Congress of 1846 that questioned a call for war.
Therefore, it can only be said, in truth, that President James Polk was involved in a criminal conspiracy with General Zachary Taylor to create an illegal war with Mexico for the purpose of illegally acquiring Mexican land. However, it is not written that way in the history textbooks studied by American high school and college students, and the damning truth is generally not expressed by high school and college professors in their classes. . And why is this? In most cases, this is because their administrators explicitly tell these teachers and professors to strictly adhere to the textbook version of the facts about all historical events. However, if teachers and professors had the insight and audacity to tell their students the historical truth about these misperceived events, they would in all likelihood be fired from their posts; but the use of the word “conspiracy” could, as a result of his daring, be more clearly understood by the American public in accordance with the true facts surrounding those and many other “events” labeled accidents; such as the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor or the sinking of the RMS Lusitania in 1915, which precipitated the suspicious entry of the United States into the First World War.
Several distinguished historical writers, including imminent historians John Toland and Georgetown University Dr. Charles Tansill, have boldly written the truth about the Pearl Harbor debacle, reclassifying the surprise attack as a deliberate conspiracy hatched by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, rather than negligence. accident. However, these published real facts about Pearl Harbor have not been enough to make the official published history of the homicidal incident reflect that a criminal conspiracy occurred rather than accidental negligence.
Furthermore, if the true, relevant and material facts were published in all officially studied history books on the circumstances leading up to Operation Desert Storm and the 1991 Gulf War, I have no doubt that the precipitating reason for that the invasion of Iraq would be officially that “a presidential administration hatched a criminal conspiracy” instead of “the open aggression of Saddam Hussain”. I firmly believe that the true facts about Operation Desert Storm revealed to me by veteran journalist Jean Heller of the former “St. Petersburg Times,” with whom I spoke at length over the phone, would be enough to correctly rewrite what has been deliberately said. and incorrectly written in American history books since 1991, that “Saddam Hussain was camping with his army on the border between Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, threatening the Saudi oil fields, as shown by the NSA satellite photos.” However, Jean Heller was authorized by his newspaper in 1991 to purchase satellite photos taken by the Russian commercial Soyuz-Karta satellite of the same terrain allegedly photographed by the NSA satellite, at the exact same time. A careful examination of the Soyuz-Karta photos by former Pentagon photographic analysts revealed that Saddam’s army was not near the Saudi-Kuwait border, but had retreated as far as the Kuwait-Iraq border and was not posed no threat to Saudi Arabia. -Arabia. The tragic and unnecessary US and Iraqi deaths that resulted from the US invasion of Iraq in 1991 were entirely based on heinous lies told to the US electorate by a US presidential administration. So, can it be said that that presidential administration had generated a “criminal conspiracy” that led directly to the invasion of Iraq? And if there was a criminal conspiracy in that case, how many other sordid criminal conspiracies have been spawned by federal officials since 1991, culminating in the deaths of thousands of innocent human beings across the country and the world? Furthermore, how many of the recent mass shootings, bombings, and other tragic events that have shaken the moral fabric of the republic have been federal conspiracies, which have been deliberately misclassified by federal police and the media, as accidental events for? The express purpose of distorting the American public perception? The correct and disturbing answer to these egregiously poignant questions will certainly mortify the inquisitive minds of Americans!