单选题
Enough is never enough, not when the government believes that it can invade your privacy without repercussions. The Justice Department wants a federal judge to force Google to turn over millions of private Internet searches. Google is rightly fighting the demand, but the government says America Online, Yahoo and MSN, Microsoft's Online Service. have already complied with similar requests. This is not about national security. The Justice Department is making this baldfaced grab to try to support an online pornography law that has been blocked once by the Supreme Court. And it's not the first time we've seen this sort of behavior. The government has zealously protected the Patriot Act's power to examine library records. It sought the private medical histories of a selected group of women, saying it needed the information to defend the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act in the federal courts. The furor is still raging over President Bush's decision m permit spying on Americans without warrants. And the government now wants what could be billions of search terms entered into Google's web pages and possibly a million website addresses to go along with them. Protecting minors from the nastier material on the Internet is a valid goal: the courts have asked the government to test whether technologies for filtering out the bad stuff are effective. And the government hasn't asked for users' personal data this time around. What's frightening is that the Justice Department is trying once again to dig up information first and answer questions later, if at all. Had Google not resisted the government's attempt to seize records, would the public have ever found about the request? The battle raises the question of how much. of our personal information companies should be allowed to hold onto in the first place. Without much thought, Internet users have handed over vast quantities of private information to corporations. Many people don't realize that some harmlessly named "cookies" in personal computers allow companies to track visits to various websites. Internet users permit their e-mail to be read by people and machines in ways they would never tolerate for their old-fashioned mail. And much of that information is now collected and stored by companies like Google. When pressed on privacy issues, Google whose informal motto is "Don't be evil" —says it can be trusted with this information. But profiling consumers' behavior is potentially profitable for companies. And once catalogued, information can be abused by the government as well. Either way, the individual citizen loses.
单选题
In the opening paragraph, the author introduces his topic by______.
单选题
The Justice Department made such a decision in order to______.
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】事实细节题。从文章第二段“The Justice Department is making this baldfaced grab to try to support an online pornography law that has been blocked once by the Supreme Court.”可以看出，司法部门此番举动是为了支持关于限制网上色情的法律，虽然文中提到诸多类似行为是为了获取私人信息，但这里却是另外一种情况，选项C最为符合。
单选题
By introducing the example of government seeking private medical information, the author intends to show ______.
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】推理判断题。文中第三段举了一个例子，政府获取了一组妇女的医疗信息以维护一项法律，在举这个例子之前作者是在说明当前司法部门的做法，由其连接句“And it's not the first time we've seen this sort of behavior.”可以推断出，举这个例子是为了说明这种现象不是第一次出现，不算特例。故选A。
单选题
What does the last sentence of the fourth paragraph imply?
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】推理判断题。第四段最后一句是“Had Google not resisted the government's attempt to seize records, would the public have ever found about the request?”(如果Google没有对政府获取信息的行为展开反抗，公众还能知道这种请求吗?)这句话是虚拟语气的反问句，表明事实与句中信息正好相反。选项 A“Google不应该反抗政府的企图”，有责备Google的这种行为的意思，因此不符合；B“公众不知道这个请求”，而句中可以反映出来公众已经知道了这个事实；C“政府成功地得到了信息”，最后一句并没有提到这一点；D“亏了Google公众才知道了事实真相”，正是最后一句的意思。故选D。