Duomo are was known to talk more about the Renaissance time period and culture. One aspect of the Duomo's architecture is the Painting called Frescos.
<h2>
Frescos</h2>
- Frescos aspect of the Duomo is known to show the time period. This is due to the fact that the painting had plenty religious influences. It is known to show vital artistic themes used by Northern European Renaissance such as engraving, vibrant colors, etc.
Fresco is used or found inside the Duomo in Florence, Italy. It is known to be a fresco of the Last Judgement that was created by Giorgio Vasari and painted majorly by his talented student called Frederico Zuccari. Other aspect is the dome. This is called the cupola in Italian.
Learn more about Art from
brainly.com/question/11161574
The Iran–Contra Scandal (Persian: ماجرای ایران-کنترا, Spanish: caso Irán-Contra), also referred to as Irangate,[1] Contragate[2] or the Iran–Contra affair, was a political scandal in the United States that occurred during the second term of the Reagan Administration. Senior administration officials secretly facilitated the sale of arms to Iran, which was the subject of an arms embargo.[3] The administration hoped to use the proceeds of the arms sale to fund the Contras in Nicaragua. Under the Boland Amendment, further funding of the Contras by the government had been prohibited by Congress.
The official justification for the arms shipments was that they were part of an operation to free seven American hostages being held in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a paramilitary group with Iranian ties connected to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The plan was for Israel to ship weapons to Iran, for the United States to resupply Israel, and for Israel to pay the United States. The Iranian recipients promised to do everything in their power to achieve the release of the hostages.[4][5] However, as documented by a congressional investigation, the first Reagan-sponsored secret arms sales to Iran began in 1981 before any of the American hostages had been taken in Lebanon. This fact ruled out the "arms for hostages" explanation by which the Reagan administration sought to excuse its behavior.[6]
Answer:
1. The Federalist believed that there is no need for inclusion of Bill of Rights. This is based on the perception that Constitution restricted the government not the individuals or citizens.
2. The Anti- Federalists argued that the Constitution bestowed the central government enormous power, which, in the absence of Bill of Rights, can be exploited at the detriment of the people
Explanation:
1. The Federalists believed that there is no need for inclusion of the Bill of Rights. This is based on the perception that the Constitution restricted the government, not the individuals or citizens. - The Federalists which was spearheaded by the likes of Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, wrote various documents termed as "Federalist papers" (sometimes referred to as Publius) where they argued their case against the Bill of Rights. Their conclusion was that the Bill of Rights would only impede the rights of the people rather than safeguard them.
2. The Anti- Federalists argued that the Constitution bestowed the central government enormous power, which, in the absence of the Bill of Rights, can be exploited at the detriment of the people - These group of people argued their case in various papers termed as Brutus, Centinel etc. One of the major personality in this camp is Patrick Henry.
Their submissions amongst others, were that the new constitution can turn the central government to be a threat to their individual liberties.
