题目内容
SECTION C NEWS BROADCAST
Directions: In this section you will hear everything ONCE ONLY. Listen carefully and then answer the questions that follow. At the end of each news item, you will be given 10 seconds to answer the questions.
听力原文： More Die from Bad Alcohol in Kenya
The death toll from a poisonous illegal liquor sold in the Kenyan capital rose to 137 today, with more deaths predicted among the more than 400 patients, many of them seriously ill---now in five Nairobi hospitals.
Kenyan police said they had so far arrested 58 people on charges of preparing, distributing or selling the brew, locally known as chang' aa. Those arrested include a man suspected of manufacturing the poisonous element in the drink.
More than 20 of those still in hospital have lost their sight, medical sources said.
More Deaths Expected
The deadly consignment, believed to contain a high level of methanol, first hit the streets in a Nairobi slum area last Tuesday.
The first deaths were quickly followed by more from several other congested slum areas around the city, and new cases are still trickling into the hard-pressed hospitals.
Despite widespread publicity about its dangers, police said many people were still buying and drinking the illicit concoction and further cases of poisoning could be expected.
Nairobi newspapers reported that some policemen were among the dead.
Popular in Poor Areas
Chang' aa is highly intoxicating and offers one of the few means of escape from the misery of slum living and is popular among Nairobi's poor.
The city's slums, home to at least half of the capital's three million population, are packed with bars which compete for business by boasting of their brew.
Most are run by elderly widows and police say those arrested include 12 women suspected of selling the drink.
There have been sporadic outbreaks of poisoning among chang' aa drinkers in Kenya in recent years, with over 100 dying in Nakuru, 160 km (100 miles) northwest of Nairobi two years ago. But the latest Nairobi poisonings are the most serious yet recorded, police said.
How many people have lost their sight？
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
According to reports in major news outlets, a study published last week included a startling discovery: the nation's Jewish population is in shrinking. The study, the National Jewish Population Survey, found 5.2 million Jews living in the United States in 2000, a drop of 5 percent, or 300,000 people, since a similar study in 1990. What's truly startling is that the reported decline is not tree. Worse still, the sponsor of the $6 million study, United Jewish Communities, knows it.
Both it and the authors have openly admitted their doubts. They have acknowledged in interviews that the population totals for 2000 and 1990 were reached by different methods and are not directly comparable. The survey itself also cautions readers, in a dauntingly technical appendix, that judgment calls by the researchers may have led to an undercount. When the research director and project director were asked whether the data should be construed to indicate a declining Jewish population, they flatly answered no. In addition, other survey researchers interviewed pointed to other studies with population estimates as high as 6.7 million.
Despite all this, the two figures --5.2 million now, 5.5 million then --are listed by side in the survey, leaving the impression that the population has shrunk. The result, predictably, has been a rash of headlines trumpeting the illusionary decline, in turn touching off jeremiads by rabbis and moralists condemning the religious laxity behind it. Whether out of ideology, ego, incompetence or a combination of all three, the respected charity has invented a crisis.
United Jewish Communities is the coordinating body for a national network of Jewish philanthropies with combined budgets of $2 billion. Its population surveys carry huge weight in shaping community policy. This is not the first time the survey has set off a false alarm. The last one, conducted by a predecessor organization, found that 52 percent of American Jews who married between 1985 and 1990 did so outside the faith. That number was a fabrication produced by including marriages in which neither party was Jewish by anyone's definition, including the researchers.
Its publication created a huge stir, inspiring anguished sermons, books and conferences. It put liberals on the defensive, emboldened conservatives who reject full integration into society and alienated ordinary folks by the increasingly xenophobic tone of Jewish communal culture. The new survey, to its credit, retracts that figure and offers the latest survey has spawned a panic created by the last one.
So why did the organization flawed figures once again？ Some scholars who have studied the. survey believe the motivation then came partly out of a desire to shock straying Jews into greater observance. It' s too early to tell if that' s the case this time around. What is clear is the researchers did their job with little regard to how their data could be misconstrued. They used statistical models and question formats that, while internally sound, made the new survey incompatible with the previous one. For example, this time the researchers divided the population of 5.2 million into two groups--"highly involved" Jews and "people of Jewish background"- and posed most questions only to the first group. As a result, most findings about belief and observance refer only to a subgroup of American Jews, making comparisons to the past impossible.
We can' t afford to wait a decade before these figures are revised. The false population decline must be corrected before it further sours communal discourse. The United Jewish Communities owes it to itself and its public to step forward and state plainly what it knows to be true: American Jews are not disappearing.
According to the passage, which of the following statements is NOT true about the National Jewish Population Survey？
听力原文： Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said Sunday that Israel would carry out a military strike if Palestinian militants continued their attacks.
Mofaz, speaking at a weekly cabinet meeting Sunday, said Israel would launch a "massive, prolonged and intricate" military strike if the Palestinian Authority did not curb militants who have been attacking Israeli targets with rockets and mortar rounds in recent days, The Associated Press quoted a meeting participant as saying.
Sharon made a similar statement. "I spoke to the heads of the defense establishment and informed them that there are to be no restraints on our operations," Sharon said Sunday, according to The AP.
Israel has ordered troops near Israel's border with Gaza to prepare to enter the Gaza Strip if necessary a warning to the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, to begin to move against militant groups.
Reuters reported that an Israeli Army sniper had killed a Palestinian militant in the Gaza Strip on Sunday.
The shooting followed the Israeli Army's arrest early Saturday of 30 members of the militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad on the West Bank. The army also fired rockets from helicopter gunships at three suspected Hamas weapons factories in Gaza City and Khan Yunis, army spokesmen said.
It is unlikely that Israel would move troops in force into Gaza with Abbas there, with the U.S. secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, scheduled to visit this week and with Israel's pullout from its Gaza settlements only a month away. Mofaz also says that Israel will give the Palestinian Authority time to control the violence.
Israel threatened to carry out a military strike if______.
SECTION B INTERVIEW
Directions: In this section you will hear everything ONCE ONLY. Listen carefully and then answer the questions that follow. Questions 1 to 5 are based on an interview. At the end of the interview you will be given 10 seconds to answer each of the following five questions.
Now listen to the interview.
听力原文：Interview with PAUL RAY:
AD: How did you discover the Cultural Creatives？
PR: When in 1986 I co-founded American LIVES, I was less interested in traditional market research and more in how America was changing. One of the first things we discovered in our research was that a clear cultural change was happening: not just change in one area of people's lives, but in many areas. From environmental issues to consumption patterns, from media preferences to the purchase of food products. We also discovered that the people who were changing were a definite subculture and part of a longer-term pattern. Although most Cultural Creatives in our surveys thought they were alone or part of a very small group, it turned out that they represented a sizable and fast-growing portion of the American population, now reaching over 50 million.
AD: How do you explain this impression of Cultural Creatives that they are not part of a larger group？
PR: Cultures are generally self-maintaining, and the Cultural Creatives differ from the official culture of the U.S.: i.e., the modern culture, which is a culture of getting and spending, a culture of materialism, a culture of big government, big corporations, and big media. That official culture is adhered to by just under half of Americans. The other half of Americans doesn't believe in it at all. Mainstream media usually describe Cultural Creatives as isolated individuals often labeled as tree huggers, protesters, New Agers, etc. When Cultural Creatives follow the news media, they see they are hardly mentioned, and therefore come to the false conclusion that they are only part of a very small group. Another reason why Cultural Creatives believe they are alone is that when you go to the workplace, you are supposed to check your values at the door. Cultural Creatives in the average workplace don' t express themselves as such. A third reason is that in the process of becoming a Cultural Creative, one frequently had to shed old friendships, old marriages, old careers, because their views were changing in ways others weren't. This is a very individualized process, the benefit of which is that it really lets you change. The cost is that you believe you are unique and the only one going through this process.
AD: You indicate that there are 50 million Cultural Creatives in the U.S. and 80 million in Europe. What are the reasons for their rise？
PR: In part this is because our planet is in deep trouble. There is a daily drumbeat that we are moving into a crisis period for humanity. People who are good at synthesis, like most Cultural Creatives, see that if we continue our way of life we will be in deep trouble. At the same time there are personal changes happening at a psychological and spiritual level. Today, for the first time in human history, people who are interested in an inner life have access to every esoteric tradition in the world. Access to information about personal growth is enormous. Access to information about what is going on around the planet is never ending. In short, better information, large crises at the social level, and miniature crises at the individual level all contribute to more and more people being exposed to the opportunity to deal with personal change.
AD: Why are there so many women among Cultural Creatives？
PR: Women as both wage earners and homemakers feel the contradictions more in our society. They feel more subtle, institutional discrimination. If a society inherits dysfunctional institutions then it is often the people with intelligence, skills, and an alternative perspective who are going to come up with better a
What happened in early Sunday？
微信支付 
支付宝支付