What evidence from the text best represents the central point of elie wiesel's nobel prize acceptance speech?
a. i remember he asked his father."can this be true? this is the twentieth century, not middle ages. who would allow such crimes to be committed? "
b. sometimes we must interfere. when human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant.
c. and now the boy turning to me. "tell me," he asks " what have you done with my future, what have you done with your life? "
d. and i tell him that i have tried. that i have tried to keep memory alive, that i have tried to fight those who would forget.

The correct answer is:

B. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant.

Explanation:

Elie Wiesel (1928-2016)  was a Holocaust survivor, that spent his life as a political activist, fighting for injustice and humanity. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986, during his acceptance speech he talked about what he would say to himself if he were to meet the little boy he used to be during World War II, and about how that little boy would feel for what he had done during his life, but Wiesel also and most importantly; addressed to humanity and talked about indifference, he asked people to have opinion on all matters of humankind, to speak up for those who can't speak up, and to fight for freedom even if the problem is not in one's country. Wiesel stated that any injustice on humanity should concern all of us, no matter the country, religion or race because if people is indifferent with injustice it only fortifies the evil.

This is why "Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant is the central point of Elie's speech.

its everything except for telling nonfiction and using first person

the sentence does not violate the phrase structure second rule (introduced by noam chomsky) because noun phrases consist of a determiner such as a, the or every, and a noun. in the sentence, the noun phrase the cake includes a determiner (the) and a noun (cake).

on the other hand, the first rule indicates that a sentence encloses a noun phrase, followed by a verb phrase. the example sentence can be analysed as follows:

john (n) + ate (v) + the (det) + cake (n).