单选题{{B}}Text 4{{/B}} Should anyone much care whether an American boy living overseas gets six vicious thwacks on his backside? So much has been argued, rejoined and rehashed about the case of Michael Fay, an 18-year-old convicted of vandalism and sentenced to a caning in Singapore, that an otherwise sorry little episode has shaded into a certified International Incident, complete with intercessions by the U. S. head of state. An affair has outraged American libertarians even as it has animated a general debate about morality East and West and the proper functioning of U.S. law and order. Which, to all appearances, is what Singapore wanted. The question of whether anyone should care about Michael Fay is idle. though Singapore officials profess shock at the attention his case had drawn, they know Americans care deeply about the many sides of this issue. Does a teenager convicted of spraying cars with easily removable paint deserve half a dozen powerful strokes? At what point does swift, sure punishment become torture? By what moral authority can America, with its high rates of lawlessness and license, preach of a safe society about human rights? The caning sentence has concentrated minds wondrously on an already lively domestic debate over what constitutes a due balance between individual and majority rights. Too bad Michael Fay has become a focus for this discussion. Not only does he seem destined to be pummeled and immobilized, but the use of Singapore as a standard for judging any other society, let alone the {{U}}cacophonous{{/U}} U. S. , is fairly worthless. To begin with, Singapore is an offshore republic that tightly limits immigration. Imagine crime-ridden Los Angeles, to which Singapore is sometimes contrasted, with hardly any inflow of the hard-luck, often desperate fortune seekers who flock to big cities. Even without its government's disciplinary measures, Singapore more than plausibly would be much the same as it is now. An academic commonplace today is that the major factor determining social peace and prosperity is culture--a sense of common identity, tradition and values. Unlike Singapore, though, the U. S. today is a nation in search of a common culture, trying to be a universal society that assimilates the traditions of people from all over the world. Efforts to safeguard minority as well as individual rights have produced a gridlock in the justice system. Its troubles stem more from the decay of family life than from any government failures. Few societies can afford to look on complacently. As travel eases and cultures intermix, the American experience is becoming the world's. The circumstances of this affair--evidently no Singaporean has ever been punished under the Vandalism Act for defacing private property--suggest that Singapore has used Fay as an unwilling point man in a growing quarrel between East and West about human rights.

单选题The moral high ground has always been female territory because

单选题{{B}}Text 2{{/B}} When a customer claimed to have found a severed finger in a bowl of chilli served at a Wendy's fast-food franchise in California, the chain's sales fell by half in the San José area where the incident was reported. Wendy's brand and reputation were at risk, until the claim was exposed as a hoax in late April and the company, operator of America's third-biggest hamburger chain, was vindicated. Yet the share price of Wendy's International, the parent company, rose steadily through March and April, despite the finger furore and downgrades from analysts. One reason was heavy buying by hedge funds, led by Pershing Square Capital. This week Pershing made its intentions public, saying that it was worried by market rumours that Wendy's might soon buy more fast-food brands, and arguing that the firm should be selling assets instead. Pershing's approach indicates rising pressure on American restaurant companies to perform, at a time when the industry's growth prospects look increasingly tough. The hit on customers' wallets from higher petrol prices and rising interest rates will probably mean that year-on-year sales growth across the American restaurant industry slows to just 1% by the fourth quarter of 2005, down from a five-year historic average of 5.6%, say UBS, an investment bank, and Global Insight, a forecasting group. Looking further ahead, says UBS's David Palmer, the industry may have to stop relying on most of the long-term trends that were behind much of its recent growth. Three-quarters of Americans already live within three miles of a McDonald's restaurant, leaving little scope for green-field growth. [Obesity is a growing issue in America, and with it come the threat of liability lawsuits against big restaurant chains and, perhaps, legal limits on advertising.] This week America's biggest food trade group, the Grocery Manufacturers' Association, was said to be preparing tougher guidelines on the marketing of food to children, in the hope of staving off statutory controls. Home cooking may also be making a comeback, helped by two factors. The percentage of women joining America's workforce may have peaked, and supermarket chains such as Wal-Mart have been forcing down retail food prices. Expansion overseas is one option for American restaurant chains. Burger King, the privately owned number two hamburger chain, opened its first outlet in China last month, apparently aiming to maintain strong growth ahead of an initial public offering next year. McDonald's has 600 outlets in China and plans 400 more. But at home, the future seems to hold only an ever more competitive and cost-conscious restaurant industry. Fast-food chains are trying to poach customers from "casual dining" chains (such as Applebee's Neighborhood Grill), while those chains are squeezing out independent restaurants unable to compete on cost or in marketing clout. Business conditions, not severed fingers, are the real threat to the weaker firms in the restaurant business.

单选题{{B}}Part A{{/B}}{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points){{B}}Text 1{{/B}} The Federal Communications Commission is not alone in worrying about television stations that air corporate advertisements masquerading as news stories. In fact, the FCC requires that broadcast stations disclose the corporate backers of "video news releases" or face a maximum fine of $32,500 for each violation. Enough violations and a station could lose its license. The FCC sets out a clear policy: All outside news reporting must be identified, disclosing the source of any video news release aired on a news program. There are occasional declines. A nonprofit consumer watchdog group reported to the FCC that 77 stations broadcast video features about products from 49 companies without pointing out that they were produced by public relations firms representing these corporations. Public relations firms have one goal: to make their video news releases look as if they are legitimate news reports, not propaganda. However, PR-produced video news releases merely are the tip of the iceberg. Ever since newspapers began, special-interest groups have tried to influence the quality and quantity of the news printed. Often, in exchange for advertising revenue, newspapers would print glowing stories of their sponsors and suppress any news that might hurt their heavy advertisers. Those without the ability to inform the press, either through news releases or contacts usually are ignored unless they commit a crime or act in attention-getting ways. For most of the 20th century, women and people of color found it almost impossible to break the special-interest news barriers. Their stories were ignored unless there was a sensational or unique element. Usually, though, items concerning these minorities required an enormous wrongdoing, such as the murder of someone in the white community or some attack on the status quo that threatened the peace and quiet, as well as the productivity, of a neighborhood. There have been splendid exceptions, but not many. One reason the Hispanic news media has been so successful is that it caters to its audience in the same manner all media does. While its bias may seem different, it actually is the same bias all media has: an overwhelming concern to keep its supporters happy. So, while the hue and cry over PR-created video news releases are well and good, they really do not attack the problem of biased news, and appeals to a specific group that shares the same prejudices and concerns about the present and future. All of this is one key reason Americans so often are surprised when the news outlets are forced to report stories that do not please advertisers or consumers. Better to continue, when possible, a steady supply of news about the latest celebrity baby or yet another piece about sex offenders or restaurant health violations.

单选题Which conclusion can NOT be drawn from the first three paragraphs?

单选题The food you eat does more than provide energy. It can have a dramatic effect on your body's ability to fight off heart disease, cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, stroke, and weak bones. With remarkable consistency, recent research has found that a diet high in plant-based foods—fruits, vegetables, dried peas and beans, grains, and starchy staples such as potatoes—is the body's best weapon in thwarting many health-related problems. These foods work against so many diseases that the same healthy ingredients you might use to protect your heart or ward off cancer will also benefit your intestinal tract and bones. Scientists have recently estimated that approximately 30 to 40 percent of all cancers could be averted if people ate more fruits, vegetables, and plant-based foods and minimized high-fat, high-calorie edibles that have scant nutritional value. Up to 70 percent' of cancers might be eliminated if people also stopped smoking, exercised regularly, and controlled their weight. In the past, researchers had linked fat consumption with the development of cancers, but they currently believe that eating fruits, vegetables, and grains may be more important in preventing the disease than not eating fat. "The evidence about a high-fat diet and cancer seemed a lot stronger several years ago than it does now," says Melanie Polk, a registered dietitian and director of nutrition education at the American Institute for Cancer Research. The road to strong bones is paved with calcium-rich food. Leafy green vegetables and low-fat dairy products are excellent sources of calcium, the mineral that puts stiffness into your skeletal system and keeps your bones from turning rubbery and fragile. Your body uses calcium for more than keeping your bones strong. Calcium permits cells, to divide, regulates muscle contraction and relaxation, and plays an important role in the movement of protein and nutrients inside cells. If you don’t absorb enough from what you eat to satisfy these requirements, your body will take it from your bones. Because your body doesn't produce this essential mineral, you must continually replenish the supply. Even though the recommended daily amount is 1,200mg, most adults don't eat more than 500mg. One reason may have been the perception that calcium-rich dairy products were also loaded with calories. "In the past, women, in particular, worried that dairy products were high in calories," says Letha Y. Griffin, M. D. , of Peachtree Orthopaedics in Atlanta. "But today you can get calcium without eating any high-fat or high-calorie foods by choosing skim milk or low-fat yogurt." Also, low-fat dairy products contain phosphorous and magnesium and are generally fortified with vitamin D, all of which help your body absorb and use calcium. If you find it difficult to include enough calcium in your diet, ask your doctor about supplements. They're a potent way to get calcium as well as vitamin D and other minerals. But if you rely on pills instead of a calcium-rich diet, you won't benefit from the other nutrients that food provides. Getting the recommended vitamin D may be easy, since your body makes the vitamin when your skin is exposed to the sun's rays.

单选题Besides applying for breathing space from creditors, managers in American firms can also

单选题Despite increased airport security since September 11th, 2001, the technology to scan both passengers and baggage for weapons and bombs remains largely unchanged. Travellers walk through metal detectors and carry-on bags pass through x-ray machines that superimpose colour-coded highlights, but do little else. Checked-in luggage is screened by "computed tomography", which peers inside a suitcase rather like a CAT scan of a brain. These systems can alert an operator to something suspicious, but they cannot tell what it is. More sophisticated screening technologies are emerging, albeit slowly. There are three main approaches: enhanced x-rays to spot hidden objects, sensor technology to sniff dangerous chemicals, and radio frequencies that can identify liquids and solids. A number of manufacturers are using "reflective" or "backscatter" x-rays that can be calibrated to see objects through clothing. They can spot things that a metal detector may not, such as a ceramic knife or plastic explosives. But some people think they can reveal too much. In America, civil-liberties groups have stalled the introduction of such equipment, arguing that it is too intrusive. To protect travellers "modesty, filters have been created to blur genital areas. Machines that can detect minute traces of explosive are also being tested. Passengers walk through a machine that blows a burst of air, intended to dislodge molecules of substances on a person"s body and clothes. The air is sucked into a filter, which instantaneously analyses it to see whether it includes any suspect substances. The process can work for baggage as well. It is a vast improvement on today"s method, whereby carry-on items are occasionally swabbed and screened for traces of explosives. Because this is a manual operation, only a small share of bags are examined this way. The most radical of the new approaches uses "quadrupole resonance technology". This involves bombarding an object with radio waves. By reading the returning signals, the machines can identify the molecular structure of the materials it contains. Since every compound—solid, liquid or gas—creates a unique frequency, it can be read like a fingerprint. The system can be used to look for drugs as well as explosives. For these technologies to make the jump from development labs and small trials to full deployment at airports they must be available at a price that airports are prepared to pay. They must also be easy to use, take up little space and provide quick results, says Chris Yates, a security expert with Jane"s Airport Review . Norman Shanks, an airport security expert, says adding the new technologies costs around $100,000 per machine; he expects the systems to be rolled out commercially over the next 12 months. They might close off one route to destroying an airliner, but a cruel certainty is that terrorists will try to find others.

单选题In a science-fiction movie called "Species", a mysterious signal from outer space turns out to describe the genome of an unknown organism. When the inevitable mad scientist synthesizes the DNA described by the instructions, the creature he breeds from it turns out to resemble Natasha Henstridge, an athletic actress. Unfortunately, the alien harbors within her delicate form the destructive powers of a Panzer division, and it all ends badly for the rash geneticist and his laboratory. Glen Evans, chief executive of Egea Biosciences in San Diego, California, acknowledges regretfully that despite seeking his expert opinion—in return for which he was presented with the poster of the striking Mr Henstridge that hangs on his office wall—the producers of "Species" did not hew very closely to his suggestions about the feasibility of their script ideas. Still, they had come to the right man. Dr Evans believes that his firm will soon be able to create, if not an alien succubus, at least a tiny biological machine made of artificial proteins that could mimic the behavior of a living cell. Making such proteins will require the ability to synthesize long stretches of DNA. Existing technology for synthesizing DNA can manage to make genes that encode a few dozen amino acids, but this is too short to produce any interesting proteins. Egea's technology, by contrast, would allow biologists to manufacture genes wholesale. The firm's scientists can make genes long enough to encode 6,000 amino acids. They aim to synthesize a gene for 30,000 amino acids within two years. Using a library of the roughly 1,500 possible "motifs" or folds that a protein can adopt, Egea's scientists employ computers to design new proteins that are likely to have desirable shapes and properties. To synthesize the DNA that encodes these proteins, Egea uses a machine it has dubbed the "genewriter". Dr Evans likens this device to a word-processor for DNA, on which you can type in the sequence of letters defining a piece of DNA and get that molecule out. As Egea extends the length of DNA it can synthesize, Dr Evans envisages encoding not just proteins, but entire biochemical pathways, which are teams of proteins that conduct metabolic processes. A collection of such molecules could conceivably function as a miniature machine that would operate in the body and attack disease, just as the body's own defensive cells do. Perhaps Dr Evans and his colleagues ought to get in touch with their friends in Hollywood.

单选题Which of the following is not part of the "anti-sprawl movement" as planned by governor Roy Barnes?

单选题September 11th 2001 drew the transatlantic alliance together; but the mood did not last, and over the five years since it has pulled ever further apart. A recent poll for the German Marshall Fund shows that 57% of Europeans regard American leadership in world affairs as "undesirable". The Iraq war is mainly to blame. But there is another and more. intractable reason for the growing division: God. Europeans worry that American foreign policy under George Bush is too influenced by religion. The "holy warriors" who hijacked the planes on September 11th reintroduced God into international affairs in the most dramatic of ways. It seems that George Bush is replying in kind, encouraging a clash of religions that could spell global catastrophe. Dominique Moisi, a special adviser at the French Institute for International Relations, argues that "the combination of religion and nationalism in America is frightening. We feel betrayed by God and by nationalism, which is why we are building the European Union as a barrier to religious warfare." Josef Braml, of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, complains that in America "religious attitudes have more of an influence on political choices than in any other western democracy." The notion that America is too influenced by religion is not confined to the elites. Three in five French people and nearly as many Dutch think that Americans are too religious-and that religion skews what should be secular decisions. Europeans who think that America is "too religious" are more inclined to anti-Americanism than their fellow countrymen. 38% of Britons have an unfavourable view of America, but that number rises to 50% among people who are wary of American religiosity. Is America engaged in a faith-based foreign policy? Religion certainly exerts a growing influence on its actions in the world, but in ways more subtle and complicated than Europeans imagine. It is true that America is undergoing a religious revival. "Hot" religions such as evangelical Protestantism and hardline Catholicism are growing rapidly while "cool" mainline versions of Christianity are declining. It is also true that the Republican Party, is being reshaped by this revival. Self-identified evangelicals provided almost 40% of Mr. Bushes vote in 2004; if you add in other theological conservatives, such as Mormons and traditional Catholics, that number rises closer to 60%. All six top Republican leaders in the Senate have earned 100K ratings from the Christian Coalition. It is also true that Mr. Bush frequently uses religious rhetoric when talking of foreign affairs. On September 12th he was at it again, telling a group of conservative journalists that he sees the war on terror as "a confrontation between good and evil", and remarking, "It seems to me that there's a Third Awakening" (in other words, an outbreak of Christian evangelical fervour, of the sort that has swept across America at least twice before). And Christian America overall is taking a bigger interest in foreign policy. New voices are being heard, such as Sam Brownback, a conservative senator from Kansas who has led the fight against genocide in Darfur, and Rick Warren, the author of a bestseller called "The Purpose-Driven Life", who is sending 2,000 missionaries to Rwanda. Finally, it is true that religious figures have done some pretty outrageous things. Pat Robertson called for the assassination of Hugo Ch vez, the president of Venezuela. Lieutenant-General William "Jerry" Boykin, deputy under-secretary of defence for intelligence, toured the country telling Christian groups that radical Muslims hate America "because we're a Christian nation and the enemy is a guy named Satan". He often wore uniform.

单选题According to the text, civil rights activists maintain that one disadvantage under which minority-owned businesses have traditionally had to labor is that they have