单选题What is NOT the result brought by this attack?A It proves Pakistan’s vulnerability to militant attacks.B It shows some Pakistan officials’ indifference to strike the Taleban militant group.C It is another blow to the government’s credibility.D It has b

What did Jose Bove and his people do in 1999 to protest against McDonald’s?

Some medical care is paid by the U. S. government for _____.

What can NOT be concluded from the passage?

What do the officials from 23 countries and 6 international organizations do?

What is called science or art, according to the author?

Some members of the British government criticized Diana because

Aid for Africa　　The momentum is building ahead of next month’s G8 summit in Scotland where the leaders of the world’s richest nations will debate what they can do to help some of the world’s poorest. Africa is the priority and the politicians will discuss reducing the debt burden, ending trade regulations which put the continent’s economy at a disadvantage, and giving more aid. Mark Doyle, who’s reported from Africa for many years, looks at why aid is necessary, and why much of what’s been donated in the past has not worked.　　All around the edge of Africa-along the coastline, near the continents’ ports—are monuments to exploitation. On the island of Goree, for example, just off the coast of Senegal, there’s :the Slave House. This was the last place many Africans saw before being shipped off to a lifetime of slavery in American or, just as often, to death on the high seas.　　There are many more places like this dating from the three hundreds and fifty years or so of the African slave trade. When people wonder why Africa is so poor, they need look no further for the start of an explanation.　　The end of the slavery was followed by a century of colonialism. Some people argue that colonialism brought limited development—railways and schools and so on—the system was principally designed to turn Africa into a vast plantation and mining site for the profit of outsiders. Of course, some Africans gained from this period. Chiefs who sold their enemies to the European or Arab slavers, for example, and coastal people who creams a little off the colonial trade which flowed through their land.　　But on the whole, for almost half a millennium, the general rule was systematic exploitation.　　This must, surely, be the basic reason why Africa is poor. You could add that the climate .is punishing, that tropical diseases are fife, and that today’s independent African rulers are far from perfect, all true. But these factors, powerful in recent decades, seem marginal when set against to the pattern that was set for centuries.　　The solution, or at least, the project SOLD as the solution to, has been aid. Emergency aid, development aid, agricultural aid, economic advice. Billions of dollars worth of it. The problem with this solution is that, patently, is hasn’t worked.　　On the whole, Africa has got poorer.　　The failure hasn’t really been the idea of real aid but the misuse of that term. Clearly, if, in the famous phrases, you teach a man to fish you’re probably helping him.　　But most aid hasn’t been like that. Most of it has been top-down aid, money that’s given to African governments do the political bidding of the aid givers. A good proportion of it has been creamed off by the recipient government’s officials and another large chunk of it paid back to the so-called donors in consultancy fees, salaries, cars, houses and servants for aid officials, debt repayments and the purchasing of arms.　　And yet, to say aid hasn’t worked IN THE PAST is not the same thing as saying aid CAN’T work.

Thanks to the militant feminist movement of the（）led by Mrs.Pankhurst before the First World War,votes were granted to women over 30 in 1918.

The central government has been working hard to keep China’s economy _____.

Which of the following is true about Mahmoud Abuqammar?

◆Topic 10: Government’s Control of Violence in Media　　Questions for Reference:　　1. What negative effects could be brought by the violence in films and on television to our society according to your observation?　　2. Do you agree that the government’s control of the amount of violence in films and on television would limit our right of free speech? Why /Why not?　　3. Some people put that it is in our best interest as a society for the government to censor broadcast media for violence. Do you think so? Why /Why not?

What is NOT the result brought by this attack?

According to Dyfan Jones what has changed is _____.

Which of the following is what the Pakistan officials have done?

According to the passage, what is the deep, true reason that results in these young men’s difficult situation?

Passage 6　　The story of Pakistan is one of remorseless tug and pull between the civilian and military rulers on the one hand, and-the liberal and religious forces on the other.　　In the process, the country has failed to become either a democracy, a theocracy or a permanent military dictatorship.　　The chief casualties have been the rule of law, the state institutions and the process of national integration, with grave consequences for the civil society.　　How and why did all this come about?　　The country was born in 1947 with a clean slate and a potential to follow in one of two directions.　　It could opt for democracy. It had inherited democratic institutions and experience from the colonial rule, and was itself the creation of a democratic process involving national elections, parliamentary resolutions and a referendum.　　Or it could become an Islamic emirate. The Pakistan movement was based on the theory that the Muslims of India were a nation and had a right to separate statehood.　　They were granted separate electorate by the British rulers, and used Islamic identity as their main election slogan in 1937 and 1946.　　But instead of making a clear choice, the early leaders tried to mix the two, and inadvertently sparked a series of political, legal and religious debacles that define today’s Pakistan. In political terms, democracy has been the first casualty of this hybrid system.　　Its foundations were shaken by two controversial decisions made by the country’s founder and first Governor-General, Mohammad Ali Jinnah.　　He dismissed the Congress-led government of the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) by decree, and instead of ordering fresh elections, appointed a Muslim League leader as the chief minister with the mandate to whip up parliamentary support for himself.　　Secondly, he declared to a large Bengali speaking audience in Dhaka, the capital of East Pakistan, that Urdu would be the only state language.　　The first action created a precedent for Governor-General Ghulam Mohammad, a former bureaucrat, to dismiss the country’s first civilian government in 1953.　　Since then, the governor-generals, presidents and army chiefs have dismissed as many as ten civilian governments that together ruled the country for 27 years. The remaining 33 years have seen direct military rule.　　Mr. Jinnah’s second action alienated the Bengali population of the eastern wing, and set a precedent for the West Pakistani rulers to neutralise the numerical superiority of East Pakistan through legal entrapments and outright disenfranchisement.　　After the secession of East Pakistan in 1971, the military rulers have repeatedly vitiated the federal and parliamentary character of the 1973 Constitution, thereby alienating the three smaller provinces of the remaining country.　　Legal safeguards against tyranny fell by the wayside in 1954 when the Supreme Court justified the governor-generaP s dismissal of the government and the parliament by invoking the controversial “theory of necessity”.　　The theory has endured, and nearly every dismissal of a civilian government and every military takeover have been upheld by the higher judiciary, undermining democratic traditions.　　On their part, the military rulers have co-opted both surrogate politicians and religious extremists as instruments of political strategy and national security policy.　　The political recruits have provided a civilian facade to military governments, while religious— and sometimes ethnic-extremists have tended to distract and destabilise governments run by secular political forces.　　Last, but not least, the Americans have tended to use their crucial financial and military support selectively against democratic governments.　　The pattern is unmistakably clear.　　The first large-scale American food and military aid started to pour into Pakistan in late 1953, months after the dismissal of its first civilian government.　　It continued for a decade as Pakistan under a military regime joined various US-sponsored defence pacts against the Soviet Union.　　The US started having problems with Pakistan when an elected government came to power in1972, but poured billions of dollars into the country when another military regime took over in 1977 and agreed to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.　　Similarly, while the elected governments that followed during 1988-1999 had to live with a decade of US sanctions, the military regime of Gen Musharraf, that ousted the last civilian government in 1999, remains a “well supplied” ally in the US, “war on terror”.　　There is also a gathering political storm on the horizon, in keeping with the cyclical pattern of the country’s political weather.　　As elections approach, exiled leaders Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, both former prime ministers, threaten to return to the country with the express aim of effecting a regime change.　　But Gen Musharraf, like his predecessors, is fighting to keep his military office and his special powers under the constitution to dismiss governments and parliaments.　　Thus, the story of Pakistan continues to be one of despotic regimes using religious extremists and external support to keep the secular democratic forces at bay; and when these forces do assert themselves, to tie them down in legal constraints that are designed to ensure their failure.　　It is the story of a society that has been going round in circles for the last 60 years.　　1. State in one sentence the root cause that has brought Pakistan the unstable and disordered situation since its foundation?　　2. What led to the secession of East Pakistan in 1971?　　3. Describe the big blow to legal safeguards against tyranny and its outcome.　　4. Draw a conclusion of the cyclical pattern of Pakistan’s political weather.

Passage 2　　The admission by the chief of the Pakistani Taleban, Baitullah Mehsud, that his group was behind Monday’s attack on a police academy in Lahore comes as little surprise.　　Analysts and officials said in the immediate aftermath of the attack that the most likely connection was with Mr. Mehsud’s Tehrik-e-Taleban (TeT) organisation.　　What has caught many off guard is how quickly and openly Mr. Mehsud accepted responsibility. Previously he and his organisation would either refrain from accepting responsibility for major attacks, or wait several months before acknowledging their role.　　It is another indication of how much the power of the Taleban has grown and how secure they feel in their safe havens along the border with Afghanistan.　　In particular, the Waziristan tribal region—part of which is controlled by Mr. Mehsud—stands out as the place which currently harbours some of the most wanted men in the world.　　For Pakistani security forces and the US, it has increasingly become centre stage in what was once called “the war on terror”.　　Everybody from Osama bin Laden to the trans-Atlantic bombing suspect, Rashid Rauf, has at one time or another said to have been based in this territory.　　If there is a place in the world which can continue to provide shelter for al-Qaeda, this is it. It is a land of steep mountains and narrow valleys populated by tribesmen proud of their long history of “dying gloriously” in battle.　　During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Waziristan remained the vanguard of the struggle. The first of the Afghan cities to be lost by the Soviets was to a commander from this region, when Khost fell to the now legendary Jalaluddin Haqqani.　　It is his son Sirajuddin who now heads the Afghan Taleban’s command in this region and the adjoining provinces of Afghanistan.　　He was recently declared wanted by the US with a reward of $ 5m for his capture.　　But the most famous and notorious of the Taleban warlords remains Baitullah Mehsud.　　He and his TeT organisation are responsible for much of the spread of Taleban ideology across Pakistan.　　Intelligence officials confirm that it was the help and training of TeT that enabled the Swat Taleban to demand and achieve a separate legal system in that Pakistani district.　　They also say that his support was crucial to the Taleban in nearby Bajaur, enabling them to reach a peace deal with the army despite the military having much of the upper hand.　　The TeT is also said to maintain networks as far afield as the southern port city of Karachi.　　Increasingly, it has grown as a clear and present danger to the state of Pakistan.　　But while the country’s security forces have been able to thwart Mr. Mehsud’s plans outside the tribal areas, it has been almost impossible to curtail his activities—and those of other Taleban leaders—in Waziristan.　　In a series of tactical campaigns, starting in 2004, the Taleban have all but pushed the security forces out of Waziristan. The few that remain are confined to their forts.　　Over the last year, the only thing that has penetrated the Waziristan tribal region are suspected US drones. These have killed hundreds of people, many of them militants, but also many civilians. That has angered ordinary Pakistanis and raised anti-American sentiments to an all-time high. Pakistan’s security forces say the drone strikes also prevent them from acting more strongly against the militants.　　In fact, other than killing a lot of junior and mid-level al-Qaeda and Taleban personnel, the attacks have united all Taleban factions in Pakistan.　　In a recent declaration, Pakistan’s other two Taleban factions—led by Maulvi Nazir and Hafiz Gul Bahadur-said they had formed an alliance with Mr. Mehsud.　　The two belong to the Ahmedzai Wazir tribe, the Mehsud’s traditional enemy.　　The Ahmedzai Wazir is the larger tribe and exists on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. They are believed to harbour most of the senior al-Qaeda leadership, including Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.　　The harsh realities on the ground have made some analysts adamant that Pakistani and US authorities have little choice except direct military action in Waziristan.　　“This would mean bloody and entrenched fighting with serious losses against a battle-hardened enemy” says an ex-army official familiar with the region.　　Whether both sides are willing to take this on, in the face of declining public support for the conflict and its casualties, remains one of the great unanswered questions in this increasingly bloody war.　　1. What is the main difference in Mehsud accepting responsibilities between previous attacks and this one?　　2. What are the unexpected impacts that the US strikes in Waziristan have?　　3. Why does the author take the example of the legendary Jalaluddin Haqqani?

34. HashMap props = new HashMap（）；  35. props.put（”key45”， “some value”）；  36. props.put（”key12”， “some other value”）；  37. props.put（”key39”， “yet another value”）；  38. Set s = props.keySet（）；  39. // insert code here  What， inserted at line 39， will sort the keys in the props HashMap？（）

Some medical care is paid by the U. S. government for ______.