题目内容
Iran is reacting to the increasing pain of economic sanctions. Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is urging greater efficiency and motivation, and Iran’s vice president is threatening to stop doing business in dollars and euros. As new U.S. and U.N. economic sanctions step up the pressure on Iran’s economy, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is urging his countrymen to change their habits. Fars News Agency reports that Ayatollah wants Iranians to work harder，use more initiative and be more creative. Top Iranian vice president Mohammad Reza Rahimi also told journalists Friday that the government was planning to stop selling oil in euros and dollars. Iran has threatened to stop selling oil in dollars, before, but with limited success. It was the first time that Tehran has threatened to stop using the Euro.The European Union ambassadors, meeting in Brussels, agreed Thursday to a new package of sanctions targeting Iran’s energy sector. The sanctions must be approved Monday at a meeting of EU foreign ministers. The U.N. and U.S. imposed fresh sanctions on Iran, last month, to force it to stop enriching uranium for its controversial nuclear program. Which of following is NOT mentioned in terms of imposing economic sanctions on Iran().
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
You might think they would have learned their lesson by now. At the end of 2005 Republicans in the House of Representatives passed a bill that cracked down on illegal immigration, while doing nothing to regularise the position of the 12m or so people, mostly of Hispanic origin, who were living and working inside the United States without the proper papers, or to create a mechanism for allowing in people from Mexico and other southern neighbours to work with temporary permits. The bill never became law, but its one-sided nature helped stamp the Republicans (92% of whom voted for it in the House) as an anti-immigrant party. In April 2006 Latinos organised a day of protests in more than 100 cities; more than 500,000 people marched in Los Angeles alone. In the 2008 election 67% of Hispanics voted for Barack Obama.Now it is all happening again. Until now, the detection of illegal immigrants has invariably been a matter for the federal authorities.Republican-governed Arizona has just enacted a tough new law of its own: it requires state police to check the papers of anyone whose immigration status they have "reasonable" cause to doubt. Opponents say this is sure to lead to racial profiling. The bill is popular with angry white locals, so much so that the previously reform-minded John McCain, who is running for re-election to the Senate in Arizona, has not dared to oppose it. But in a country that is turning Hispanic at a rapid rate (by mid-century white Anglos will be another minority), the Republicans are once again hellbent on being on the wrong side of demography. The backlash will surely last longer than any bump in popularity gained by looking tough. The marches have begun again: on May 1st, up to a million people across the country took to the streets, by no means all of them Hispanic.For those who yearn for America to have a sensible immigration policy, the Arizona bill is a reason for both despair and hope. The first is easier to spell out. By any measure, Arizona’s offering is deeply illiberal. It would require all non-U. S. citizens to carry documents proving their immigration status, and would require police to check those papers in any contact with anyone who might be illegal. The obvious danger is that it would lead to the systematic harassment of brown-skinned people, including legal immigrants. As for illegals, it would simply drive even more of them underground. It would also criminalise anyone who shelters or helps illegals. Even the plan’s fans acknowledge that this is the toughest such bill ever passed in America.Paradoxically, the reason for hope is much the same. The bill is such a shocker that it is restarting the national debate. The Arizona law passed largely because the government is failing to do its job. The border is not secure; employers can and do hire people who have no legal right to be in America; and cross-border crime is on the rise. Better enforcement is needed. But on both political and moral grounds, better enforcement can only he part of a comprehensive immigration reform. The 12m illegals cannot be wished away, but must be given a chance to earn their citizenship; a guest-worker programme is needed to match the demands of employers with the desire of Mexicans and others to work. Mr. Obama’s administration has talked a lot about an immigration bill. It is now long past time that they produced one. Otherwise, expect to see more Arizonas. If Mr.Obama’s administration cannot come up with an immigration bill,().
You might think they would have learned their lesson by now. At the end of 2005 Republicans in the House of Representatives passed a bill that cracked down on illegal immigration, while doing nothing to regularise the position of the 12m or so people, mostly of Hispanic origin, who were living and working inside the United States without the proper papers, or to create a mechanism for allowing in people from Mexico and other southern neighbours to work with temporary permits. The bill never became law, but its one-sided nature helped stamp the Republicans (92% of whom voted for it in the House) as an anti-immigrant party. In April 2006 Latinos organised a day of protests in more than 100 cities; more than 500,000 people marched in Los Angeles alone. In the 2008 election 67% of Hispanics voted for Barack Obama.Now it is all happening again. Until now, the detection of illegal immigrants has invariably been a matter for the federal authorities.Republican-governed Arizona has just enacted a tough new law of its own: it requires state police to check the papers of anyone whose immigration status they have "reasonable" cause to doubt. Opponents say this is sure to lead to racial profiling. The bill is popular with angry white locals, so much so that the previously reform-minded John McCain, who is running for re-election to the Senate in Arizona, has not dared to oppose it. But in a country that is turning Hispanic at a rapid rate (by mid-century white Anglos will be another minority), the Republicans are once again hellbent on being on the wrong side of demography. The backlash will surely last longer than any bump in popularity gained by looking tough. The marches have begun again: on May 1st, up to a million people across the country took to the streets, by no means all of them Hispanic.For those who yearn for America to have a sensible immigration policy, the Arizona bill is a reason for both despair and hope. The first is easier to spell out. By any measure, Arizona’s offering is deeply illiberal. It would require all non-U. S. citizens to carry documents proving their immigration status, and would require police to check those papers in any contact with anyone who might be illegal. The obvious danger is that it would lead to the systematic harassment of brown-skinned people, including legal immigrants. As for illegals, it would simply drive even more of them underground. It would also criminalise anyone who shelters or helps illegals. Even the plan’s fans acknowledge that this is the toughest such bill ever passed in America.Paradoxically, the reason for hope is much the same. The bill is such a shocker that it is restarting the national debate. The Arizona law passed largely because the government is failing to do its job. The border is not secure; employers can and do hire people who have no legal right to be in America; and cross-border crime is on the rise. Better enforcement is needed. But on both political and moral grounds, better enforcement can only he part of a comprehensive immigration reform. The 12m illegals cannot be wished away, but must be given a chance to earn their citizenship; a guest-worker programme is needed to match the demands of employers with the desire of Mexicans and others to work. Mr. Obama’s administration has talked a lot about an immigration bill. It is now long past time that they produced one. Otherwise, expect to see more Arizonas. It can be inferred from the passage that Barack Obama().
案例一[背景资料]某大学图书馆进行装修改造，根据施工设计和使用功能的要求，采用大量的轻质隔墙。外墙采用建筑幕墙承揽该装修改造工程的施工单位根据《建筑装饰装修工程质量验收规范》规定，对工程细部构造施工质量的控制做了大量的工作。该施工单位在轻质隔墙施工过程中提出以下技术要求：(1)板材隔墙施工过程中如遇到门洞，应从两侧向门洞处要求依次施工；(2)石膏板安装牢固时，隔墙端部的石膏板与周围的墙、柱应留有10mm的槽口，槽口处加泛嵌缝膏，使面板与邻近表面接触紧密。(3)当轻质隔墙下端用木踢脚覆盖时，饰面板应与地面留有5～10mm缝隙；(4)石膏板的接缝缝隙应保证为8～10mm。设施工单位在施工过程中特别注重现场文明施工和现场的环境保护措施，工程竣工后，被评为优质工程。[问题] 轻质隔墙按构造方式和所用材料的种类不同可分为哪几种类型？石膏板属于哪种轻质隔墙？
案例一[背景资料]某大学图书馆进行装修改造，根据施工设计和使用功能的要求，采用大量的轻质隔墙。外墙采用建筑幕墙承揽该装修改造工程的施工单位根据《建筑装饰装修工程质量验收规范》规定，对工程细部构造施工质量的控制做了大量的工作。该施工单位在轻质隔墙施工过程中提出以下技术要求：(1)板材隔墙施工过程中如遇到门洞，应从两侧向门洞处要求依次施工；(2)石膏板安装牢固时，隔墙端部的石膏板与周围的墙、柱应留有10mm的槽口，槽口处加泛嵌缝膏，使面板与邻近表面接触紧密。(3)当轻质隔墙下端用木踢脚覆盖时，饰面板应与地面留有5～10mm缝隙；(4)石膏板的接缝缝隙应保证为8～10mm。设施工单位在施工过程中特别注重现场文明施工和现场的环境保护措施，工程竣工后，被评为优质工程。[问题] 轻质隔墙的节点处理主要包括哪几项？
微信支付 
支付宝支付