Answer:
The answer comes from history when DR. King made his speech
Explanation: You can find this documentation anywhere in any library or resources that keeps documents from the past.
Even though you didn't underline anything, there is only one pronoun in this sentence - the word them.
The case of this pronoun is objective - it functions as an object in the sentence. It is really easy to determine this - all you have to do is ask the questions <em>whom </em>or <em>what. Whom did the designer dress in black and teal costumes? </em>And the answer is - <em>Them. </em>
This way you know that the pronoun is also the object; to be more specific, it is a direct object.
Therefore, the correct answers are case: objective; function: direct object.
Answer: Simile
Explanation:
The similes compare thing with other using the words like and as a
Y - 4x ≤ -6y - 4x ≤ -6
We add 6y and 4x to each equality
7y ≤ 0 ≤ 6y + 4x -6
Observing:
7y ≤ 0, we see that the values of y can be only negative or 0, not positive.
So we are left with (-2,-14) (-1,-9) (0,-5)
We check the second equality:
6y + 4x - 6 ≥ 0 for these 3
None of the inequalities satisfy the given expressions simultaneously.
He wanted to convey that indifference is worse than hate or anger. One could be angry at injustice or hate evil, violent acts Indifference is the absence of compassion and implies something worse than outright hate; indifference implies a lack of acknowledgment. Being indifferent to another's suffering is like saying, 'you're suffering is not even worth my consideration.' Wiesel speaks from his experience of the Holocaust, but this could be applied to any situation in history in which the world was indifferent; in which the world willfully refused to acknowledge suffering of others for any number of unjustifiable reasons: 1) out of sight, out of mind, 2) passivity, laziness, 3) an untried feeling of hopelessness ('what could i possibly do?'), 4) selfishness. When Wiesel speaks of indifference he also means ignorance in 3 senses: 1) ignorant as in lacking sensitivity, 2) lacking knowledge and 3) ignoring. The 'perils of indifference' could be described as the 'the terrible outcomes of ignoring atrocities. Apply this to anything today, where suffering is ignored by indifferent people and governments. (i.e., Darfur, Haiti). The peril of indifference would be to allow (allow by ignoring = indifference) an atrocity like the Holocaust to occur again.
