In my opinion, the correct answer is C. anger. This phrase doesn't give the audience a reason to panic or despair, and it is far too strong to cause mere anticipation. It causes downright anger because, according to the speaker, the injustice continues in spite of all the efforts. This is an appeal to ethos, a very delicate matter that is supposed to engage the listeners, rather than just move them emotionally.
C.) Both inform the reader that Faryad and Liaqat were not given the chance to tell their version of events at the police station.
In the frames, both Faryad and Liaqat put their fingerprint on a piece of paper when they are at the police station. However, neither of them are given a chance to tell their story. In Faryad's case, "the police write down what they claim has happened". The testimony in the report is not Faryad's. In Liaqat's case, after he put his fingerprint on the paper, he was told to leave and not given any interview.
Option D is incorrect because the reader is not the one responsible for investigating what Faryad and Liaqat were prevented from saying. It does make the reader curious and interested, but the reader can't do the investigation. Option B is wrong because there is no miscommunication. Option A is wrong because there is no proof or even mention of a death in either the frames or the excerpt.
I think it's C.
Because, lemme put commas on each sentences....
(1) If you ask me, Jerry is a tennis whiz.
<span>(2) When she is worried, Lucille eats a lot. </span>
<span>(3) Jerry loves tennis, he plays everyday. </span>
<span>(4) Lucille bought a new tennis racket and brought it home. << Where should I put it?
</span>
So, (4) is automatically out of question. (1) and (2) seems okay with comma, but (3) is a little bit weird. (3) supposed to have 'and' in the middle, but it's not there. So, you can put semicolon there, to separate the words.
Answer:
follows a liberal ideology
Explanation:
follows a liberal ideology