Yes, after my mother died I found out from my supposed half-sister that my dad was not my birth father. She was 19 yrs older than me and had been living in Colorado since I was young. I was born and raised in N.J. I did not see her she did not come to see us. I was grown, married, had children and was living in FL. when she showed up at my door with her husband. I was shocked since we never heard from her and I did not know she even knew where I lived. She stayed all of about 20 minutes, just long enough to very unpleasantly state that “my father is NOT your father and I am NOT your sister!” I always wondered why my mom hated me SO much, I found out that both my mom and “dad" were having affairs while married and both had children by someone else. I have never met my birth father (to my knowledge) only know his name, but understand that he was the father of my supposed half-brother (which would make him my only whole sibling out of seven siblings.) Obviously my oldest “half-brother", who is 20 yrs older than me, is not actually related to me either. I don't have for sure “proof" about my other siblings, but they all have strong resemblances to my “dad" and each other. Growing up people would comment about how much I looked like my mom but I also was told a lot that you would never know me and my other sisters were sisters, we used to laugh about it as kids because my sisters (all light haired/light skinned) and I (dark haired/deeper skin toned) were very different in appearance but we “knew" we were sisters. I also found out that my apparently ONLY whole brother, approximately 9 yrs older than me, did not even know his real fathers name even though he knew our “dad“ was not his birth father. Why was the author's supposed half-brother her only whole sibling? - Because both her mom and "dad" had children by someone else. - not enough information - Because her dad was not her birth father. - Because her birth father was the father of her supposed half-brother.
Because her birth father was the father of her supposed half-brother.

WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason. The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0." But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago. And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa. "Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group. Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms. There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest. There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster. There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow. And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights. The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens." Under Clinton, the number... when did the modern militia movement gain traction? - after an FBI attack on the Branch Davidian compound - not enough information - after the election of Barack Obama - after the election of Donald Trump
after an FBI attack on the Branch Davidian compound

(Q).
If you’ve ever seen travel photos of Venice or been to Venice yourself, you’re probably familiar with the Rialto Bridge. The Ponte di Rialto is one of the most popular tourist destinations in Venice and one of the most iconic landmarks of the Italian city. Even in 1594, when the bridge was only recently completed, a British traveler called it the “eighth wonder of the world.” The version of the bridge that most people know was built between 1588 and 1591, but there’s been a bridge in this location since around 1180. The Rialto Bridge was the first bridge to cross the Grand Canal, and until the 1800s it remained the only bridge across Venice’s major waterway. The Rialto district was the main commercial hub of Venice and people increasingly needed access to buy and sell goods. The first bridge built at this site was a pontoon bridge that was eventually replaced by a wooden bridge in 1264. This wooden bridge was destroyed and rebuilt several times: it burned down during an unsuccessful coup in 1310, and in 1444 collapsed under the weight of a crowd watching a boat parade during a wedding. Its last collapse came in 1524, and by then Venice decided it was time to build a more permanent and durable bridge. Beginning in 1525, many architects submitted designs for the Rialto Bridge, but none of them was unanimously selected for the commission. The elected council overseeing the bridge’s construction deliberated and consulted several local builders to figure out how they could erect a stone bridge across the wide Grand Canal. They had a few limitations to consider: the sloped shores on either side, the need for boats to be able to pass underneath, and the practicality of having shops atop the bridge. Andrea Palladio’s design for the Rialto Bridge, published in his architectural treatise, Quattro libri, in 1570, featured three arches that would have prevented larger boats from passing under the bridge. Although his design utilized an appealing classical aesthetic, it was rejected in favor of Antonio Da Ponte’s. how long the problem lasted: - not enough information - 150 years - 250 years - 200 years
(A).

200 years