Answer:
if actually possible, I would recommending sending the letter to their prime minister,
but there a big possibility that they wont believe me or even pay attention to the problem. That is because mostly in politics, the politicians usually take up the seat to literally "gobble up" money from the citizens for different reasons and project which are never carried out, all they want is to earn money for their own luxuries. They use the trust of the people they have on them.
Why would they want someone to come up to them and tell them that the are about to get themselves plunged into a huge ocean of loans,
they would probably think that if they have minimal time left in their tragedy,
they would ''gobble up'' more money to satisfy their needs even when they are in deep trouble.
(this is my opinion on the problem)
(BTW im from one of the countries so....... u see what u wanna do)
The Alien and Sedition Acts were unconstitutional as it limited free speech, which is guaranteed in the first Amendment. If the individual states chose to nullify the acts, that would be a sign of rebellion. I do not think that the US should institute forms of the Alien and Sedition Act. It's America. The people here should be free to say what they want to say.
<span> The fourth amendment/Amendment IV prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires search warrants.</span>
Option D is correct. Corroborated sources of historical evidence is necessary to validate a claim about an event in history.
Historians tend to use written sources, but audio and visual materials as well as artifacts are important objects that supply information to modern historians.
Historical sources are usually divided into two categories: primary and secondary sources. Depending on the historian's intent, some sources shift their designation. Determining what type of sources toimplement, and the level of credibility and reliability of those sources, is a significant step in critical thinking for the historian.