Again, this story plays with truth. In the first paragraph (101), O’Brien tells us, “I heard it from Rat Kiley, who swore up and down to its truth, although in the end, I’ll admit, that doesn’t amount to much of a warranty.” How does O’Brien engage you in a story which, up front, he’s already admitted is probably not “true”? How does this relate to his ideas for a “true war story” found in an earlier story?

- "a nonrestrictive clause functions as a modifier to a noun (that is an object, person or concept). these clauses can be described by the following three options: it is set off by comas, it contains a subject and a verbs and it adds nonessential information to the sentence.

for example, in "here is bill gates, who confounded microsoft software company" we can identify "who confounded microsoft software company" as a nonrestrictive clause modifying the noun bill gates. this clause can be describes as a nonrestrictive clause because it is separated by a comma, it adds nonessential information to identify who bill gates is and it must contain both a subject (who) and a verb (confounded)."

nsnshdhdhdhbsbs

ndhehdhdhdhd 4ncnrct y

y

you need to add the passage to the question.