Write one paragraph comparing the memoir and the article. compare how the writers present similar ideas to the reader. include evidence from the text to support your comparison.  by the time my mother married my father, however, she knew all about the true nature of the dictatorship. thousands had lost their lives in failed attempts to return the country to democracy. family friends, whom she had assumed had dropped away of their own accord, turned out to have been disappeared. my father had been lucky. as a young man, he had narrowly escaped to canada after the plot he had participated in as a student failed. this was to be the first of two escapes. that same year, 1937, el generalísimo ordered the overnight slaughter of some eighteen thousand haitians, who had come across the border to work on sugarcane plantations for slave wages. it was from my father that my mother learned why trujillo hated blacks with such a vengeance, how he disguised his own haitian ancestry, how he lightened his skin with makeup.–“a genetics of justice,”julia alvarezthe method his soldiers used in 1937 to try to identify those who would be killed was cruelly unique. when confronting someone in the lands along the border with haiti, they would hold up a sprig of parsley and ask what it was. if the person responded by trilling the "r" in perejil (spanish for parsley), he would be free to go. anyone who didn't trill the "r" was thought to be a haitian creole speaker—and was likely to be killed.–“remembering to never forget,”mark memmott

The first author, Julia, describes the facts as anecdotes of her family, while the other author, Mark, reports the events from an unknown source. Both authors write about the culling of Haitians in lands they are clearly not welcome in. Moreover, while Julia states the reason behind the killing of Haitians - having learned from her family its due to the hate the ruler of the land holds againts them -, Mark describes in detail the victim identification methods of these people - being the verification of their pronunciation.

read this passage from the crisis. what rationale is paine using for going to war with great britain? my own line of reasoning is to myself as straight and clear as a ray of light. not all the treasures of the world, so far as i believe, could have induced me to support an offensive war, for i think it murder; but if a thief breaks into my house, burns and destroys my property, and kills or threatens to kill me, or those that are in it, and to "bind me in all cases whatsoever" to his absolute will, am i to suffer it? what signifies it to me, whether he who does it is a king or a common man; my countryman or not my countryman; whether it be done by an individual villain, or an army of them? if we reason to the root of things we shall find no difference; neither can any just cause be assigned why we should punish in the one case and pardon in the other.

it is waged war against an army of countrymen

it would lead to independence from britain

it would be an offensive war

it would be a defensive war

- "a.) it includes letters and books gathered over 1200 years, and consists of two parts.

- most of the new testament is letters from paul to the different churches, and since there's a new testament that means there is an old testament. "