Colonization may indeed be a very complex affair, but one thing is certain: you do not walk in, seize the land, the person, the history of another, and then sit back and compose hymns of praise in his honor. to do that would amount to calling yourself a bandit. so what do you do? you construct very elaborate excuses for your action. you say, for instance, that the man in question is worthless and quite unfit to manage himself and his affairs. if there are valuable things like gold or diamonds which you are carting away from his territory, you proceed to prove that he doesn't own them in the real sense of the word - that he and they just happened to be lying around the same place when you arrived. finally, if worse comes to the worst, you will be prepared to question whether such as he can be, like you, fully human.

What is a capital crime? its not social studies but they don't have criminal justice

Ahusband who believed that his wife was having an affair with his brother hired an arsonist to burn down the brother's house. they planned for the husband to take his brother to a ballgame so that the arsonist would be able to set the house on fire without detection. after the husband and brother left for the ballgame, however, the arsonist decided to abandon the plan and immediately left town without doing anything further. when the husband returned from the ballgame with the brother, he saw the house still standing and blurted out what was supposed to have happened. the husband and the arsonist were arrested and charged with conspiracy to commit arson. at the arsonist's trial, his attorney argued that he was innocent of the conspiracy because he decided not to go ahead with the plan, and nothing criminal had in fact occurred.at common law, how should a jury find the arsonist? a not guilty of conspiracy, because going to a ballgame is not a criminal overt act.b not guilty of conspiracy, because the husband, not the arsonist, committed the overt act.c guilty, because the husband executed his part of the plan.d guilty, because the arsonist agreed to set the brother's house on fire.

The defendant, angered because a rival gang member had twice beaten him up after school, obtained a heavy lead pipe and waited in a deserted alleyway which he knew the rival took as a route home every day after school. when his enemy came walking down the alley, the defendant leapt out behind him and smashed the pipe into the victim's head, knocking him to the ground. the defendant then rolled the victim over and pounded his face with 15 to 20 heavy blows with the lead pipe, killing him. the jurisdiction defines first degree murder as murder committed with premeditation and deliberation. all other murders are defined as second degree murders. why will the defendant be convicted of first degree murder (as opposed to second degree murder)?