题目内容
TEXT D New and bizarre crimes have come into being with the advent of computer technology. Organized crime to has been directly involved; the new technology offers it unlimited opportunities, such as data crimes, theft of services, property-related crimes, industrial sabotage, politically related sabotage, vandalism, crimes against the individual and financially related crimes... Theft of data, or data crime, has attracted the interest of organized criminal syndicates. This is usually the theft or copying of valuable computer grogram. An international market already exists for computerized data, and specialized fences are said to be playing a key role in this rapidly expanding criminal market. Buyers for stolen programs may range from a firm’s competitors to foreign nations. A competitor sabotages a company’s computer system to destroy or cripple the firm’s operational ability, thus neutralizing its competitive capability either in the private or the government sector. This computer sabotage may also be tied to an attempt by affluent investors to acquire the victim firm. With the growing reliance by firms on computers for their recordkeeping and daily operations, sabotage of their computers can result in internal havoc, after which the group interested in acquiring the firm can easily buy it at a substantially lower price. Criminal groups could also resort to sabotage if the company is a competitor of a business owned or controlled by organized crime. Politically motivated sabotage is on the increase; political extremist groups have sprouted on every continent. Sophisticated computer technology arms these groups with awesome powers and opens technologically advanced nations to their attack. Several attempts have already been made to destroy computer facility at an air force base. A university computer facility involved in national defence work suffered more than $ 2 million in damages as a result of a bombing. Computer vulnerability has been amply documented. One congressional study concluded that neither government nor private computer systems are adequately protected against sabotage. Organized criminal syndicates have shown their willingness to work with politically motivated groups. Investigators have uncovered evidence of cooperation between criminal groups and foreign governments in narcotics. Criminal groups have taken attempts in assassinating political leaders... Computers are used in hospital life-support system, in laboratories, and in major surgery. Criminals could easily turn these computers into tools of devastation. By sabotaging the computer of a life-support system, criminals could kill an individual as easily as they had used a gun. By manipulating a computer, they could guide awesome, tools of terror against large urban centers. Cities and nations could become hostages. Homicide could take a new form. The computer may become the hit man of the twentieth century. The computer opens vast areas of crime to organized criminal groups, both national and international. It calls on them to pool their resources and increase their cooperative efforts, because many of these crimes are too complex for one group to handle, especially those requiting a vast network of fences. Although criminals have adapted to computer technology, law enforcement has not. Many still think in terms of traditional criminology. Which of the following can be labeled as a politically motivated sabotage of a computer system
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
TEXT E These days we hear a lot of nonsense about the "great classless society". The idea that the twentieth century is the age of the common man has become one of the great cliches of our time. The same old arguments are put forward in evidence. Here are some of them: monarchy as a system of government has been completely discredited. The monarchies that survive have been deprived of all political power. Inherited wealth has been savagely reduced by taxation and, in time, the great fortunes will disappear altogether. In a number of countries the victory has been complete. The people rule; the great millennium has become a political reality. But has it Close examination doesn’t bear out the claim. It is a fallacy to suppose that all men are equal and that society will be leveled out if you provide everybody with the same educational opportunities. (It is debatable whether you can ever provide everyone with the same educational opportunities, but that is another question. ) The fact is that nature dispenses brains and ability with a total disregard for the principle of equality. The old rules of the jungle, survival of the fittest, and might is right are still with us. The spread of education has destroyed the old class system and created a new one. Rewards are based on merit. For aristocracy "read meritocracy"; in other respects, society remains unaltered: the class system is rigidly maintained. Genuine ability, animal cunning, skill, the knack of seizing opportunities, all bring material rewards. And what is the first thing people do when they become rich They use their wealth to secure the best possible opportunities for their children, to give them a good start in life. For all the lip service we pay to the idea of equality, we do not consider this wrong in the western world. Private schools which offer unfair advantages over state schools are not banned because one of the principles in a democracy is that people should be free to choose how they will educate their children. In this way, the new meritocracy can perpetuate itself to a certain extent: an able child from a wealthy home can succeed far more rapidly than his poorer counterpart. Wealth is also used indiscriminately to further political ends. It would be almost impossible to become the leader of a democracy without massive financial backing. Money is as powerful a weapon as ever it was. In societies wholly dedicated to the principle of social equality, privileged private education is forbidden. But even here people are rewarded according to their abilities. In fact, so great is the need for skilled workers that the least able may be neglected. Bright children are carefully and expensively trained to become future rulers. In the end, all political ideologies boil down to the same thing: class divisions persist whether you are ruled by a feudal king or an educated peasant. What is the main idea of this passage
TEXT E These days we hear a lot of nonsense about the "great classless society". The idea that the twentieth century is the age of the common man has become one of the great cliches of our time. The same old arguments are put forward in evidence. Here are some of them: monarchy as a system of government has been completely discredited. The monarchies that survive have been deprived of all political power. Inherited wealth has been savagely reduced by taxation and, in time, the great fortunes will disappear altogether. In a number of countries the victory has been complete. The people rule; the great millennium has become a political reality. But has it Close examination doesn’t bear out the claim. It is a fallacy to suppose that all men are equal and that society will be leveled out if you provide everybody with the same educational opportunities. (It is debatable whether you can ever provide everyone with the same educational opportunities, but that is another question. ) The fact is that nature dispenses brains and ability with a total disregard for the principle of equality. The old rules of the jungle, survival of the fittest, and might is right are still with us. The spread of education has destroyed the old class system and created a new one. Rewards are based on merit. For aristocracy "read meritocracy"; in other respects, society remains unaltered: the class system is rigidly maintained. Genuine ability, animal cunning, skill, the knack of seizing opportunities, all bring material rewards. And what is the first thing people do when they become rich They use their wealth to secure the best possible opportunities for their children, to give them a good start in life. For all the lip service we pay to the idea of equality, we do not consider this wrong in the western world. Private schools which offer unfair advantages over state schools are not banned because one of the principles in a democracy is that people should be free to choose how they will educate their children. In this way, the new meritocracy can perpetuate itself to a certain extent: an able child from a wealthy home can succeed far more rapidly than his poorer counterpart. Wealth is also used indiscriminately to further political ends. It would be almost impossible to become the leader of a democracy without massive financial backing. Money is as powerful a weapon as ever it was. In societies wholly dedicated to the principle of social equality, privileged private education is forbidden. But even here people are rewarded according to their abilities. In fact, so great is the need for skilled workers that the least able may be neglected. Bright children are carefully and expensively trained to become future rulers. In the end, all political ideologies boil down to the same thing: class divisions persist whether you are ruled by a feudal king or an educated peasant. Who can obtain more rapid success
Question 29 and 30 are based on the following news. At the end of the news item, you will be given 10 seconds to answer the question. Now listen to the news. According to the news, the current Indian landmass was once part of ______ millions of years ago.
TEXT C Though England was on the whole prosperous and hopeful, though by comparison with her neighbors she enjoyed internal peace, she could not evade the fact that the world of which she formed a part was torn by hatred and strife as fierce as any in human history. Men were still for from recognizing that two religions could exist side by side in the same society; they believed that the toleration of another religion different from their own. And hence necessarily false, must inevitably destroy such a society and bring the souls of all its members into danger of hell. So the struggle went on with increasing fury within each nation to impose a single creed upon every subject, and within the general society of Christendom to impose it upon every nation. In England the Reformers, or Protestants, aided by the power of the Crown, had at this stage triumphed, but over Europe as a whole Rome was beginning to recover some of the ground it had lost after Martin Luther’s revolt in the earlier part of the century. It did this in two ways, by the activities of its missionaries, as in parts of Germany, or by the military might of the Catholic Powers, as in the Low Countries, where the Dutch provinces were sometimes near their last extremity under the pressure of Spanish arms. Against England, the most important of all the Protestant nations to reconquer, military might was not yet possible because the Catholic Powers were too occupied and divided: and so, in the 1570’s Rome bent her efforts, as she had done a thousand years before in the days of Saint Augustine, to win England back by means of her missionaries. These were young Englishmen who had either never given up the old faith, or having done so, had returned to it and felt called to become priests. There being, of course, no Catholic seminaries left in England, they went abroad, at first quite easily, later with difficulty and danger, to study in the English colleges at Dubai or Rome: the former established for the training of ordinary or secular clergy, the other for the member of the. Society of Jesus, commonly known as Jesuits, a new Order established by St. Ignatius Loyola same thirty years before. The seculars came first; they achieved a success which even the most eager could hardly have expected, Cool minded and well-informed men, like Cecil, had long surmised that the conversion of the English people to Protestantism was for from complete; many—Cecil thought even the majority—had conformed out of fear, self-interest or—possibly the commonest reason of all—sheer bewilderment at the rapid changes in doctrine and forms of worship imposed on them in so short a time. Thus it happened that the missionaries found a welcome, not only with the families who had secretly offered them hospitality if they came, but with many others whom their first hosts invited to meet them or passed them on to. They would land at the ports in disguise, as merchants, courtiers or what not, professing some plausible business in the country, and make by devious may for their first house of refuge. There they would administer the Sacraments and preach to the house holds and to such of the neighbors as their hosts trusted and presently go on to some other locality to which they were directed or from which they received a call. What was Martin Luther’s religions
微信支付 
支付宝支付