Answer:
n November 8, 1942, in the thick of World War II, thousands of American soldiers landed on the Atlantic coast of Morocco, while others amassed in Algeria, only to take immediate gunfire from the French. Needless to say, it marked the end of U.S. diplomatic relations with the Vichy government installed in France during WWII.
The invasion of North Africa—a joint venture between the United Kingdom and the United States known as Operation Torch—was intended to open up another front of the war, but the colonial power in the region was France, purportedly a neutral party in World War II. After all, France had signed an armistice with Adolf Hitler on June 22, 1940, within weeks of being overrun by German soldiers. Yet as the National Interest reports, “Instead of welcoming [the Americans] with brass bands, as one sergeant predicted, Vichy France’s colonial forces fought back with everything they had.”
Explanation:
answer: ssi benifits are payed at the first of the month Also ssi benifits are not based On prior work or family members prier work.
Explanation:
Ok lets do this Im ready to help you :)
Following the Alhambra decree in 1942, to elimante their influence on Spains large converso population.
So that means the answer is They took it with them as they fled.
Thats the answer because Jews were Forced to convert or they would get expelled many wanted to flee but other jews did not want to get expelled cause had no where to go so 50,000 or more jews converted to Catholism as a result of the religous persecutain and progoms in 1391.
There is the answer, hope this helps you
Some cons would be Your gonna have inaccurate weather predictions because the mountains make the weather change also we are Ruining animals homes by building in the mountains so they are forced to walk down the mountain to more dangerous areas (again there are more) some pros are gonna be since mountains are so high they are said to keep the thought of global warming down (if you believe in it) and again not hanging super hot weather
Many people talk about academic excellence — but who or what really defines this elusive quality?
Michèle Lamont, Robert I. Goldman Professor of European Studies and professor of sociology and of African and African American studies, analyzes the system of peer review in her new book “How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment” (Harvard University Press, 2009). By examining the process of scholarly evaluation, she also addresses larger questions about academia.
“In some ways studying peer evaluation and review is a point of entry into a much broader issue, which is the issue of meritocracy in American higher education,” says Lamont.
To research the book, Lamont interviewed panelists from research councils and societies of fellows who were evaluating proposals for research funding in the social sciences and the humanities.
Lamont explains that academics must constantly make evaluations, whether of scientific findings or of graduate students. Expertise, personal taste, and the perspective of the evaluator play into the decision-making process, she writes.
“A lot of what the book does is to look at what criteria people use to judge and what meaning they give to these criteria,” says Lamont. “So for instance, what do they mean by ‘significance’ and what do they mean by ‘originality’? How does the definition of ‘originality’ and ‘significance’ vary between philosophy and economics? How strong is the consensus between fields?
