Answer:
B
He helped implement peaceful integration of the city schools.
Explanation:
Answer:
The peer-review process
Explanation:
The peer-review process, also known as refereeing deals with the subjection of the scholarly work of an author, ideas or research to evaluation and scrutiny by some group of experts in the same field, before the paper is then submitted for publication in a journal, as a book, or conference proceedings. This is the same example as stated in the scenario portrayed in the question, and it is a necessary step to get your work published.
No they would not have went to africa
The answer is: [B]: "False".
______________________________________________________
Note: An "indictment" does have to involve any type of jury, or even any crime serious enough to be handled at the "grand jury level". An "indictment", or being charged with an offense, may be made by a prosecutor by a court even at the local county level—and SOMETIMES even when no "arrest" has ever been made.
_____________________________________________________
Answer:
<h3>I think this might help you</h3><h3>
Explanation:</h3><h3 />
<h3>With the flu season swiftly approaching and the H1N1 already affecting large numbers across the world, New Hampshire faces the possibility of a flu epidemic. In such an instance, what action would the state or federal government take? The possibility of a massive quarantine gets thrown around every time a flu epidemic exists, but is such an action an infringement of the rights of individuals living in a free nation? Or is the common good of preventing the spread of infection more important?
</h3><h3>
</h3><h3>Even the current health care debate reflects the tension between individual rights and the common good. Over the past months New Hampshire town halls have been crowded with individuals taking a side in the individual rights/common good debate. Some have expressed the view that health care initiatives are in the interest of a healthier state and nation. Others claim that compulsory health insurance impedes individuals’ right to the best health care money can buy. Can the individual rights vs. common good debate help us understand some of the ideological tension behind the current health care discussion?
</h3><h3>
</h3><h3>As many of these examples show, this month’s question is largely political, but it can also flow into other areas of thought. There’s the philosophical and moral question of the Donner Party; if you and five others were stranded and starving, and your only hope of getting out alive is to eat the first member who passed away, would you do it to save the rest of the group? There is the question that comes up around the disabled. Do you build special infrastructure to accommodate the few who are disabled even if that meant the cost to do this would jack up prices. Then there is the commercial/environmental side. What is more important, buying a cheaper car that fits your personal budget and your personal tastes or a more expensive and efficient auto that would help save the environment? What do you think?
</h3>
