Answer: When Sheila and Laura got home, her dog was waiting by their front door it was wagging its tail as hard as it could.
Explanation:
Hope this helps.
Woah. I love Fantasy so it will be fun answering your question. ^^
Now I'm guessing that the place and time might be taken in the past like maybe a long time ago where there weren't planes or trains? Since that's when a lot of folk stories and fantasy things are placed.
Just in case I'll leave some options in all time periods so you have a variety:
Ireland is a good one. In all time periods. Since there is water surrounding all sides of it there is room for mermaids. There are also cliffs there Also have you heard of the drombeg circle? Thats something popular loacted there.
I looked up some forests for your wolves Tongass National Forest, Alaska. Its an older forest..
Yakushima Forest, Japan is another one
Africa leaves a lot of options for different animal mixes since it has the most animals located there.
Hope this helps! (i spent too much time on this im sorry) :P
The dissenters in the flag-burning case and their supporters might at this juncture note an irony in my argument. My point is that freedom of conscience and expression is at the core of our self-conception and that commitment to it requires the rejection of official dogma. But how is that admittedly dogmatic belief different from any other dogma, such as the one inferring that freedom of expression stops at the border of the flag?
The crucial distinction is that the commitment to freedom of conscience and expression states the simplest and least self-contradictory principle that seems to capture our aspirations. Any other principle is hopelessly at odds with our commitment to freedom of conscience. The controversy surrounding the flag-burning case makes the case well.
The controversy will rage precisely because burning the flag is such a powerful form of communication. Were it not, who would care? Thus were we to embrace a prohibiton on such communication, we would be saying that the 1st Amendment protects expression only when no one is offended. That would mean that this aspect of the 1st Amendment would be of virtually no consequence. It would protect a person only when no protection was needed. Thus, we do have one official dogma-each American may think and express anything he wants. The exception is expression that involves the risk of injury to others and the destruction of someone else`s property. Neither was present in this case.
Answer:
"A surging, seething, murmuring crowd of beings that are human only in name, for to the eye and ear they seem naught but savage creatures, animated by vile passions and by the lust of vengeance and of hate. "
and
"During the greater part of the day the guillotine had been kept busy at its ghastly work: all that France had boasted of in the past centuries, of ancient names, and blue blood, had paid toll to her desire for liberty and for fraternity."
Explanation:
The first sentence seems to describe the crowd as wild animals, which can show the perspective that they themselves were feral and barbaric. The second sentence describes the cruelty in which they took action.
