<span>his book basically represents what happened during the holocaust ... just in a different form. The terrible things (a.k.a. the Nazis) take away the animals (a.k.a. the different groups of people persecuted during the holocaust) one at a time because it was easy. The Nazis in real life did the same thing. By taking groups one at a time no large uproar was caused. If they had taken more animals, there might have been a larger negative reaction and possibly a revolt. The animals were able to justify the other animals being taken away, and by justifying the terrible thing's reasoning and actions they made it easier for the terrible things to continue. As for the last question ... often people do not listen to one lone voice in a crowd, especially one that in young and supposedly "inexperienced." Unfortunately for us, children are often able see things in a different and more "black and white" light, and by not listening to what they have to say we all lose out. H</span>
There is a slight error in the title of this question :)
Instead of ‘if my dad would let me’, it’s ‘had my dad let me (remember this useful phrase ending). This is because you can’t have a double ‘would’ in the same phrase.
The answer is D) Her. And this is a subject. (Her ; subject.)
Answer:
C. "As in Beckett's play..."
Explanation:
In context, this line is expressing the similarities of 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead' and 'Waiting For Godot'.
1. Salad from the vegetable group for dinner
2. Apples and oranges from the fruit group for a noon snack
3. Lunch can be strawberry, chicken salad
4. Breakfast can be waffles but with no syrup
