1、专业八级分类模拟 193 及答案解析(总分：100.10，做题时间：90 分钟)一、READING COMPREHENSIO(总题数：1，分数：100.00)Section A Multiple-Choice Questions In this section there are several passages by fourteen multiple choice questions. For each multiple choice qutestion, there are four suggested answers marked A. B, C and D. Choose the o
2、ne that you think is the best answer and mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET TWO. PASSAGE ONE If there“s a sensitive investigation into the flaws of crime fighters, the man the feds often call in to do the job is William H. Webster. Over the decades, the former FBI and CIA chief has headed numerous hi
3、gh-profile investigations into public agencies, including the Los Angeles Police Department“s response to the 1992 Rodney King riots and the FBI“s failure to catch Soviet and Russian mole Robert Hanssen. But the probe into whether the FBI mishandled information about Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who is
4、charged with killing 13 people and wounding 32 at Fort Hood in Texas, could be Webster“s trickiest assignment yet. The Nov. 5 shootings have raised a host of nettlesome issues regarding Hasan and his contacts with Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical cleric in Yemen, and why the FBI decided not to raise the a
5、larm about Hasan even though it had tracked his suspect communications. In the aftermath of the shootings, critics have raised questions not only about intelligence-sharing, but also about whether the U.S. Army psychiatrist successfully used the cloak of research as a smoke screen for his personal e
6、xtremism and, perhaps, murderous intentions. At the heart of the inquiry is the troublesome revelation that the FBI knew that Hasan, who became more religiously devout after his parents“ deaths, corresponded with al-Awlaki, an American-born imam who led a northern Virginia mosque where two of the Se
7、pt. 11 hijackers worshipped. After al-Awlaki departed the U.S. in 2002, eventually ending up in Yemen, his sermons and teachingsdelivered in Englishapparently became a source of inspiration for the Fort Dix six and some of the young men who eventually left the U.S. to join al-Shabaab, the Islamist g
8、roup in Somalia. E-mail surveillance turned up as many as 20 messages between al-Awlaki and Hasan, which an FBI-headed Joint Terrorism Task Force in Washington reviewed. At the time, the task force concluded that the correspondence matched Hasan“s research into the mind-set of Muslim soldiers who tu
9、rn on their comrades and was insufficient evidence to launch an investigation. Separately, U.S. Army colleagues at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington have said they raised concerns with supervisors about Hasan, his statements about Islam and whether he was mentally stable or possibly even
10、 dangerous. The Army, however, did not share the information with the FBI. It“s not yet clear how wide-ranging Webster“s probe will be, and opinions vary on its scope. Bill Burck, a former deputy counsel to President George W. Bush, said that while Webster“s previous probes tended to look for policy
11、 lapses or fault, this review may be more difficult. The review could go to the heart of assessing threats posed by radicalized Americans, who have fights that terrorists from outside the country do not. “That presents a very difficult set of questions about how do you balance the traditional law-en
12、forcement approach to deal with those threatswhich is typically how we“ve dealt with those things in the pastwith the reality that you“re dealing with people that are much harder to deter,“ Burck says. The FBI has already turned over to the White House a preliminary internal review of the agency“s a
13、ctions before the shootings. Director Robert Mueller appointed Webster, who headed the FBI from 1978 until 1987 before becoming CIA director, to perform an open-ended, independent review of FBI policies, practices and actions preceding the incident. That will include a review of the initial findings
14、 as well as any additional issues that Webster has the discretion to take up. In a statement, Mueller said Webster would have complete access to necessary information and resources that Webster would coordinate with existing Department of Defense probes. “It is essential to determine whether there a
15、re improvements to our current practices or other authorities that could make us all safer in the future,“ he said. PASSAGE TWO Looking back, it was naive to expect Wikipedia“s joyride to last forever. Since its inception in 2001, the user-written online encyclopedia has expanded just as everything
16、else online has: exponentially. Up until about two years ago, Wikipedians were adding, on average, some 2,200 new articles to the project every day. The English version hit the 2 millionarticle mark in September 2007 and then the 3 million mark in August 2009surpassing the 600-year-old Chinese Yongl
17、e Encyclopedia as the largest collection of general knowledge ever compiled (well, at least according to Wikipedia“s entry on itself). But early in 2007, something strange happened: Wikipedia“s growth line flattened. People suddenly became reluctant to create new articles or fix errors or add their
18、kernels of wisdom to existing pages. “When we first noticed it, we thought it was a blip,“ says Ed Chi, a computer scientist at California“s Palo Alto Research Center whose lab has studied Wikipedia extensively. But Wikipedia peaked in March 2007 at about 820,000 contributors; the site hasn“t seen a
19、s many editors before. “By the middle of 2009, we have realized that this was a real phenomenon,“ says Chi. “It“s no longer growing exponentially. Something very different is happening now.“ What stunted Wikipedia“s growth? And what does the slump tell us about the long-term viability of such strang
20、e and invaluable online experiments? Perhaps the Web has limits after all, particularly when it comes to the phenomenon known as crowdsourcing. Wikipediansthe volunteers who run the site, especially the approximately 1,000 editors who wield the most power over what you seehave been in a self-reflect
21、ive mood. Not only is Wikipedia slowing, but also new stats suggest that hard-core participants are a pretty homogeneous setthe opposite of the ecumenical wiki ideal. Women, for instance, make up only 13% of contributors. The project“s annual conference in Buenos Aires this summer bustled with discu
22、ssions about the numbers and how the movement can attract a wider class of participants. At the same time, volunteers have been trying to improve Wikipedia“s trustworthiness, which has been sullied by a few defamatory hoaxesmost notably, one involving the journalist John Seigenthaler, whose Wikipedi
23、a entry falsely stated that he“d been a suspect in the John F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy assassinations. They recently instituted a major change, imposing a layer of editorial control on entries about living people. In the past, only articles on high-profile subjects like Barack Obama were prote
24、cted from anonymous revisions. Under the new plan, people can freely alter Wikipedia articles on, say, their local officials or company headsbut those changes will become live only once they“ve been vetted by a Wikipedia administrator. “Few articles on Wikipedia are more important than those that ar
25、e about people who are actually walking the earth,“ says Jay Walsh, a spokesman for the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that oversees the encyclopedia. “What we want to do is to find ways to be more fair, accurate, and to do betterto be nicerto those people.“ Yet that gets to Wikipedia“s central
26、 dilemma. Chi“s research suggests that the encyclopedia thrives on chaosthat the more freewheeling it is, the better it can attract committed volunteers who keep adding to its corpus. But over the years, as Wikipedia has added layers of control to bolster accuracy and fairness, it has developed a ki
27、nd of bureaucracy. “It may be that the bureaucracy is inevitable when a project like this becomes sufficiently important,“ Chi says. But who wants to participate in a project lousy with bureaucrats? There is a benign explanation for Wikipedia“s slackening pace: the site has simply hit the natural li
28、mit of knowledge expansion. In its early days, it was easy to add stuff. But once others had entered historical sketches of every American city, taxonomies of all the world“s species, bios of every character on The Sopranos and essentially everything elsewell, what more could they expect you to add?
29、 So the only stuff left is esoteric, and it attracts fewer participants because the only editing jobs left are “janitorial“making sure that articles are well formatted and readable. Chi thinks something more drastic has occurred: the Web“s first major ecosystem collapses. Think of Wikipedia“s commun
30、ity of volunteer editors as a family of bunnies left to roam freely over an abundant green prairie. In early, fat times, their numbers grow geometrically. More bunnies consume more resources, though, and at some point, the prairie becomes depleted, and the population crashes. Instead of prairie gras
31、ses, Wikipedia“s natural resource is an emotion. “There“s the rush of joy that you get the first time you make an edit to Wikipedia, and you realize that 330 million people are seeing it live,“ says Sue Gardner, Wikimedia Foundation“s executive director. In Wikipedia“s early days, every new addition
32、 to the site had a roughly equal chance of surviving editors“ scrutiny. Over time, though, a class system emerged; now revisions made by infrequent contributors are much likelier to be undone by lite Wikipedians. Chi also notes the rise of wiki-lawyering: for your editors to stick, you“ve got to lea
33、rn to cite the complex laws of Wikipedia in arguments with other editors. Together, these changes have created a community not very hospitable to newcomers. Chi says, “People begin to wonder, “Why should I contribute anymore?“and suddenly, like rabbits out of food, Wikipedia“s population stops growi
34、ng. The foundation has been working to address some of these issues; for example, it is improving the site“s antiquated, often incomprehensible editing interface. But as for the larger issue of trying to attract a more diverse constituency, it has no specific planonly a goal. “The average Wikipedian
35、 is a young man in a wealthy country who“s probably a graduate studentsomebody who“s smart, literate, engaged in the world of ideas, thinking, learning, writing all the time,“ Gardner says. Those people are invaluable, she notes, but the encyclopedia is missing the voices of people in developing cou
36、ntries, women and experts in various specialties that have traditionally been divorced from tech. “We“re just starting to get our heads around this. It“s a genuinely difficult problem,“ Gardner says. “Obviously, Wikipedia is pretty good now. It works. But our challenge is to build a rich, diverse, b
37、road culture of people, which is harder than it looks.“ Before Wikipedia, nobody would have believed that an anonymous band of strangers could create something so useful. So is it crazy to imagine that, given the difficulties it faces, someday the whole experiment might blow up? “There are some blog
38、gers out there who say, “Oh, yeah, Wikipedia will be gone in five years,“ Chi says. “I think that“s sensational. But our data does suggest its existence in 10 or 15 years may be in question.“ Ten years is a long time on the Internetlonger than Wikipedia has even existed. Michael Snow, the foundation
39、“s chairman, says he“s got a “fair amount of confidence“ that Wikipedia will go on. It remains a precious resourcea completely free journal available to anyone and the model for a mode of online collaboration once hailed as revolutionary. Still, Wikipedia“s troubles suggest the limits of Web 2.0that
40、 when an idealized community gets too big, it starts becoming dysfunctional. Just like every other human organization. PASSAGE THREE Even if they produced no other positive result, the attacks on the London Underground have compelled Europeans of all faiths to think with new urgency about the Contin
41、ent“s Muslim minority. Such a reckoning was long overdue. Some leftwing politicians, like London“s mayor, Ken Livingstone, have chosen to emphasize the proximate causes of Muslim anger, focusing on the outrage widely felt in Islamic immigrant communities over the war in Iraq and the Israeli-Palestin
42、ian conflict. But the harsh reality is that the crisis in relations between the European mainstream and the Islamic diaspora has far deeper roots, consoling as it might be to pretend otherwise. Indeed, the news could scarcely be worse. What Europeans are waking up to is a difficult truth: the immigr
43、ants who perform the Continent“s menial jobs, and, as is often forgotten, began coming to Europe in the 1950“s because European governments and businesses encouraged their mass migration, are profoundly alienated from European society for reasons that have little to do with the Middle East and every
44、thing to do with Europe. This alienation is cultural, historical and above all religious, as much if not more than it is political. Immigrants who were drawn to Europe because of the Continent“s economic success are in rebellion against the cultural, social and even psychological sources of that suc
45、cess. In a sense, Europe“s bad fortune is that Islam is in crisis. Imagine that Mexican Catholicism was in a similar state, and that a powerful, well-financed minority of anti-modern purists was doing its most successful proselytizing among Mexican immigrants in places like Los Angeles, Phoenix and
46、Chicago, above all among the discontented, underemployed youth of the barrios. The predictable, perhaps even the inevitable, result would be the same sort of estrangement between Hispanics and the American mainstream. Whatever the roots of the present troubles, what is undeniable is that many immigr
47、ant Muslims and their children remain unreconciled to their situation in Europe. Some find their traditional religious values scorned, while others find themselves alienated by the independence of women, with all its implications for the future of the “traditional“ Muslim family. In response, many h
48、ave turned to the most obscurantist interpretation of the Islamic faith as a salve. At the fringes of the diaspora, some have turned to violence. So far, at least, neither the carrot nor the stick has worked. Politicians talk of tighter immigration controls. Yet the reality is that a Europe in demog
49、raphic freefall needs more, not fewer, immigrants if it is to maintain its prosperity. Tony Blair just proposed new laws allowing the deportation of radical mullahs and the shutting of mosques and other sites associated with Islamic extremism. But given the sheer size of the Muslim population in England and throughout the rest of Europe, the security services are always going to be playing catch-up. Working together, and in a much more favorable political and security context, French and Spanish authorities have, after more than 20 years, been unable to put an end to t
