Why is "Sí, se puede!" ("Yes, it can be done!") a fitting motto for Cesar Chavez's life and for the influence he had on events, ideas, and the people around him? Why do you think Chavez thought it was important to defend human rights? In crafting your response, begin with a clear thesis statement and use your understanding of informational text elements by analyzing the interaction among people, ideas, and events in the selection. Organize and support your writing with textual evidence, and use precise language and vocabulary from the selection. Use transitions to show the relationships among your ideas, and provide a concluding statement that summarizes your key points. Can U PLZ ANSWER AS FAST AS U CAN AND I WILL MAKE U BRAINLIST

nuclear fission produces the atomic bomb, a weapon of mass destruction that uses power released by the splitting of atomic nuclei the fighting in iwo jima and okinawa affected the allies' pacific strategy because truman decided to drop the atomic bomb on mainland japan.

martin luther king (1929-1968) was an activist for the african american rights, mr. king has a profile of a kind leader that built a tenacity, respect and full of hope future. he was an activist through civil disobedience and no violence pressure mechanisms. he tried to build a more egalitarian and fair society. his efforts carried a reivindication message of the civilian rights to every west corners. for that reason, he won the nobel prize in 1964.

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is

they both wanted to stop protestantism, they felt a call in life and it was to strengthen the church. charles used inquisition, philip used army's, charles gave control to outsiders, philip centralized all power.

hope this you !