Which identifies the Turkish perspective of the Armenian genocide? Although some Armenians were victims of atrocities, there was no systematic genocide
carried out by Turkish officials.
The government of Turkey has accepted responsibility and publicly apologized for the
Armenian genocide.
Armenians carried out the forced migration and atrocities in order to frame Turkish
leaders
O No Armenians were victims of atrocities or forced migration by Turkish officials.

thx po sa points God bless you po

peasants’ war, (1524–25) peasant uprising in germany inspired by changes brought by the reformation, peasants in western and southern germany invoked   divine law to demand agrarian rights and freedom from oppression by nobles and landlords. as the uprising spread, some peasant groups organized armies. although the revolt was supported huldrych zwingli and thomas müntzerits condemnation by martain luther contributed to its defeat, principally by the army of the swabian league. some 100,000 peasants were killed. reprisals and increased restrictions discouraged further attempts to improve the peasants’ plight.

i think it would be " a" i might be wrong tho

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