Directions: Read the passage, and answer the question that follows. I WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST

The Show Goes On. For more than 100 years, the name Barrymore has been associated with famous actors. The highly regarded Barrymore clan has contributed many male and female actors to the stage and various members of the family have been handsome leading men, dramatic actresses, or hilarious comedians. The first of the Barrymore family was Maurice Barrymore, who first acted on stage in England using his real name, Herbert Blythe. Blythe immigrated to America in 1875 and changed his name. He then married Georgiana Drew, an actress from a theatrical family. Their first child, Lionel, was born in 1878 and the other children, Ethel and John, followed soon afterward. Perhaps because their parents invested so much time in their work, Maurice and Georgiana's children became accomplished actors also. Those three children became the next generation of Barrymores to act on stage and in films. John Barrymore had two children, Diana, born in 1921 and John Drew Barrymore, born in 1932. Diana and John Drew continued the tradition. The Barrymore dynasty didn't end there, though. John Drew's daughter, Drew Barrymore, was born in 1975, and she is a well-known actress today. Will the dynasty continue? Only time will tell. Bottom left, a portrait of Drew Barrymore in 2007. Top right, a portrait of Ethel Barrymore in 1896.

Which of the following statements is false?

a.

John Drew Barrymore was born 11 years after his older sister, Diana.

b.

Ethel Barrymore, born in 1878, was Maurice Barrymore’s only daughter.

c.

Drew Barrymore was born exactly 100 years after her great-grandfather, Maurice, immigrated to America.

d.

Lionel Barrymore, born in 1878, was Maurice Barrymore’s son.

to leave the reader thinking and wandering on their own. without a resolution we are clueless to what happens next, and why it does. it may even cause suspension with the reader.

explanation:

answer:   a good wench, give it me.

iago

good girl, give it to me.

emilia

what will you do with ’t, that you have been so earnest

325to have me filch it?

emilia

and what are you going to do with it? why did you want it so much that you begged me to steal it?

iago

  why, what is that to you?

iago

what’s it to you?

emilia

if it be not for some purpose of import,

give ’t me again. poor lady, she’ll run mad

when she shall lack it.

emilia

if you don’t need it for some important reason, then give it back to me. poor lady, she’ll go crazy when she sees it’s missing.

iago

be not acknown on ’t,

330i have use for it. go, leave me.

iago

don’t admit to knowing anything about it. i need it. now go, leave me.

exit emilia

emilia exits.

i will in cassio’s lodging lose this napkin

and let him find it. trifles light as air

are to the jealous confirmations strong

as proofs of holy writ. this may do something.

335the moor already changes with my poison.

dangerous conceits are in their natures poisons

which at the first are scarce found to distaste,

but with a little act upon the blood

burn like the mines of sulfur.

i’ll leave this handkerchief at cassio’s house and let him find it.to a jealous man, a meaningless little thing like this looks like absolute proof. this handkerchief may be useful to me. the moor’s mind has already become infected with my poisonous suggestions. ideas can be like poisons. at first they hardly even taste bad, but once they get into your blood they start burning like hot lava.

enter othello

othello enters.

    i did say so.

340look, where he comes. not poppy nor mandragora

nor all the drowsy syrups of the world,

shall ever medicine thee to that sweet sleep

which thou owedst yesterday.

here he comes. no drugs or sleeping pills will ever give you the restful sleep that you had last night.

othello

    ha! ha! false to me?

othello

argh! she’s cheating on me?

iago

why, how now, general? no more of that.

iago

oh, general, , no more of that!

explanation:

in "people in peace, not profit and war" chrisholm uses inductive reasoning for her argument against defense spending by stating that the new administration, like most americans, wanted to invest in social objectives, so they must not want to prioritize defense spending. mr. nixon said "we can delay no longer in launching new approaches to the problem that beset them", but chrisholm points out that the programs were delayed anyways.

answer: they were written as a long tale

explanation:

i googled it.