4. his family and 1. yea he is
Hello. Unfortunately, you did not enter the article this question refers to, which makes it impossible for you to answer it. However, I will try to help you as best I can.
To answer this question, you need to read the entire article. After reading this, you should assess what factors, elements, events, or situations the article presents that could have a major impact on Norman Bowker's PTSD. This impact has to be able to bring about large and positive results that cause differences in PTSD.
Its a dependent clause
and i think you meant "until" im not the grammar police but just sayin
1. I would say the correct answer is C. <span>It led him to believe that violent resistance to white people is both necessary and justified. The problem was not just the taking away of Native American lands; the problem was that the white men cheated. Black Hawk was a famous war leader in more than one conflict, aligning even with the white men from Britain and Canada against their common enemy.
2. In my opinion, the correct answer is D. </span><span>He uses ethos, suggesting his behavior was an ethical and just reaction against the deceitful and immoral behavior of the white men. He isn't trying to manipulate his audience's opinion. He appeals to ethos, relying on their capability to recognize the right and justified cause. When the land where they lived was devastated, of course they were right to do something about it.</span>
Implicit statement is <span>something that is understood but not clearly stated.
So your answer would best be B: Inferred.
</span>
