Which of the following best summarizes how the conflicts in Rwanda in 1994 are related to the Holocaust? The events in Rwanda show that genocide can still happen, despite the impact of the Holocaust.

The events in Rwanda show that genocide has stopped because of the effects of the Holocaust.

The events in Rwanda show that the international community has forgotten the impact of the Holocaust.

The events in Rwanda show that the international community no longer cares about the effects of the Holocaust.

citizens united v. federal election commission, case in which the u.s. supreme court on january 21, 2010, ruled (5–4) that laws that prevented corporations and unions from using their general treasury funds for independent “electioneering communications” (political advertising) violated the first amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. in so doing the court invalidated section 203 of the federal bipartisan campaign reform act of 2002 (bcra)—also known as the mccain-feingold act for its sponsors, sen. john mccain and sen. russ feingold—as well as section 441(b) of the federal election campaign act of 1971 (feca), which the bcra had amended. the court also overturned in whole or in part two previous supreme court rulings: austin v. michigan chamber of commerce (1990) and mcconnell v. federal election commission (2003).

immediately perceived as historically important, the decision generated intense controversy outside the court. some hailed it as a resounding victory for freedom of speech, while others criticized it as an overreaching attempt to rewrite campaign finance law. among the critics was pres. barack obama, who remarked in his state of the union address in the house of representatives one week later that the decision would “open the floodgates for special interests…to spend without limit in our elections.” his criticism provoked one of the supreme court justices in attendance, samuel a. alito, to break decorum by mouthing the words “not true.”

explanation:

could you send me the choices?

as general terms,  indian territory,  the indian territories, or  indian country  describe an evolving land area set aside by the  united states government  for the relocation of  native americans  who held  aboriginal title  to their land. in general, the tribes ceded land they occupied in exchange for  land grants  in 1803. the concept of an indian territory was an outcome of the 18th- and 19th-century policy of  indian removal. after the  civil war(1861–1865), the policy of the government was one of  assimilation.

well it definitly does because if you are seen as weak you will be seen as unimportant and they will walk all over you and the us is the most powerful military and the largest in the world

hope this