The correct answer to this open question is the following.
You forgot to include a question. Here it is only a statement.
We assume that you want to know more about Chief Powhatan's address to Captain John Smith.
If that is the case, then we can comment on the following.
Chief Powhatan(1545-1618), who was also known at that time as Chief Wahunsenacawk, was the leader of the tribe Powhatan, an important Native American Indian tribe that settled in the territory of Jamestown, Virginia. Let's have in mind that European colonizers arrived at Jamestown in May 1607.
In the beginning, the Native American Indians helped the white Europeans to survive in this new territory and the weather conditions. The Native Indians even helped the Europeans giving them food to survive. But the good relationship did not last for so long because the Europeans were interested in exploiting the many raw materials and natural resources of the region, and the Indians heavily opposed to this. There were many differences that confronted the Native Indians with white Europeans.
That is why Chief Powhatan addressed John Smith, a leader of the colonists, trying to peacefully resolve the many issues that confronted both sides.
Correct answer: Exterminating all European Jews
Context/detail:
The Holocaust was the mass extermination of Jews and other unwanteds in Germany during World War II. The Nazi Party under Adolph Hitler was in charge in Germany at the time. This was a fascist and nationalistic form of government.
Hitler and the Nazis believed in the supremacy of what they referred to as the "Aryan race" -- which was a term they used for the Germanic peoples. They believed their race was superior to "lesser races" like the Jews, blacks and others. Hitler and the Nazis mounted a campaign in Germany to promote their race over others like Jews and Roma (gypsies), etc.
They enacted what are called the Nuremberg Laws, which were passed at a Nazi rally in Nuremberg in 1935. These laws denied citizenship and other rights to Jewish persons. Examples of such laws:
- The Reich Citizenship Law ruled that only persons of proper ethnic blood were eligible to be German citizens.
- The Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour prohibited marriages or any sexual intercourse between Jews and Germans. It even went so far as to say that Jewish persons could not employ female Germans in their household who were under the age of 45 (afraid of something happening and somebody becoming pregnant.)
The Nazi campaign against Jews got even worse from there. They rounded up Jews and put them in concentration camps (which later became extermination camps). In support of their World War effort, they used Jews for forced labor in the concentration camps. They also used Jewish persons and others they deemed undesirable essentially as laboratory rats for doing unethical medical experiments on them. For example, they'd put persons in a pressure chamber to find out how high an altitude they could let their pilots fly before they'd become unconscious from the altitude and pressure. Others of their experiments were even more gruesome.
Ultimately, there was what the Nazis called "The Final Solution" (in the 1940s). Millions of Jews, along with other unwanteds, were exterminated in mass killings. The Nazis used poison gas and other means of killing in their extermination camps.
The answer would be <u>D. Akbar the Great </u>He Expanded the the Mughal Empire.
The federal government was too weak no enforce their laws and couldnt levy taxes, and only could request taxes in the aricles, which was a main reason of its failure. There was no national courts set up in the articles or national currency. Im not sure exactly what the question is asking but im assuming its talking about how powers differed between the constitution and the articles and in conclusion I would say, after independance America was a baby country who was scared of the rights being incriminated once again so the central government had very little powers.
Answer:
Explanation:
The president exercises a check over Congress through his power to veto bills, but Congress may override any veto (excluding the so-called "pocket veto") by a two-thirds majority in each house. ... The Supreme Court does not have any enforcement power; the enforcement power lies solely with the executive branch.
