首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
On July 7th, I was traveling in London. I was having breakfast at a hotel very near Liverpool Street Station when the first expl
On July 7th, I was traveling in London. I was having breakfast at a hotel very near Liverpool Street Station when the first expl
admin
2011-02-11
67
问题
On July 7th, I was traveling in London. I was having breakfast at a hotel very near Liverpool Street Station when the first explosion was detonated. Hearing the sirens and seeing London’s emergency personnel respond to the bombings brought back vivid memories of the events of Sept. 11, 2001.
People have not forgotten Sept. 11, 2001. Americans can still recall exactly where they were and what they were doing on that fateful day. But it’s understandable that some remember it as historical fact, lacking the painful impact and immediacy they originally felt. If we allow a dimming of purpose—to eliminate terrorism—these terrorist attacks in London serve as another chilling reminder that we’re still at war.
Something constructive emerges from these tragic, horrible and unexplainable attacks. It is the message that we must remain vigilant in opposing an enemy who intentionally targets innocent civilians.
Since Sept. 11, 2001, the civilized nations of the world have remained mostly united in opposing these despicable, wanton acts of terror. We have had some great successes in that effort. We have arrested perpetrators and plotters, and we have foiled planned attacks. We have reduced the power and scope of those who despise freedom and democracy.
The effort must continue. As we learned Thursday—and in Madrid and Bali—the enemies of freedom have not lost their resolve. We must not lose ours.
Ultimately, the only real defense from terrorist attacks is being able to find out about them in advance. Intelligence gathering has improved but needs to be even stronger, including consistently improving human intelligence and patrol. Police and ordinary citizens must be alert and encouraged to convey information.
Once a terrorist incident does occur, there’s no such thing as a perfect response. By definition, a terrorist attack means people are being hurt or killed. But by studying the response to past attacks, we can better prepare to handle those in the future.
London is one of the most secure cities in the world, steeped in years of dealing with terrorism. The city’s preparation and resolve was evident on Thursday. I am very impressed by London’s reaction to the bombings. Both the emergency personnel and the citizens seemed prepared. The first responders were rapid, well-directed, organized and professional, in accordance with obviously well-tested plans.
As for the citizens, at least a dozen people told me in one way or another, "We knew this was going to happen; it was just a question of when."
That is not only a realistic assessment; it also is a mindset that just might save lives. Political, business and community leaders are sometimes reluctant to talk about terrorism or stage drills to prepare their response because they don’t want to frighten or upset people. But that’s a mistake. People react to emergencies more effectively when they’re not shocked by them.
Tony Blair and London Mayor Ken Livingstone have made preparedness a priority, and their efforts clearly paid off during Thursday’s response to the attacks.
There’s another benefit to preparing for terrorism in advance. Part of the damage the terrorists hope to inflict is the emotional reaction in the wake of the destruction. The reason it’s called’ "terrorism" is that they want fear and its debilitating effects to linger long after the smoke has cleared.
By preparing citizens for the possibility of a terrorist attack, leaders can help minimize the emotional response in the wake of the destruction.
Finally, Thursday’s attacks demonstrate that we must remain committed to confronting and eliminating terrorism. There are those who assert that the efforts to eliminate terror are somehow provoking the terrorists. That is wrong. The terrorists have been attacking innocent people long before Sept. 11, 2001, or the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Seeing Prime Minister Blair speak so forcefully, with President Bush, President Jacques Chirac and other world leaders right behind him; was encouraging. Let’s remember the unity the world shared after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Free nations can and will disagree. But let us always remember that free people must be steadfast and resilient in defending our way of life.
The terrorist attack in London conveys to us the message that
选项
A、people in London did not feel painful.
B、we must be on the alert for terrorism.
C、we should stay at home to avoid terrorism.
D、the effort at anti-terrorism was in vain.
答案
B
解析
第3段最后一句提到,在反对蓄意以无辜平民为袭击目标的敌人肘,必须保持警醒。文中的remain vigilant与B项中的be On the alert同义,故B正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/F2YO777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
FoodandFitness:theAmericanObsessionAmericansseemtobealwaysinahurry,whichhasbecomeone【1】【1】__________
SteveandYaserfirstmetintheirchemistryclassofanAmericanuniversity.YaserwasaninternationalstudentfromJordan.He
Eliot’sinterestedinpoetryinabout1902withthediscoveryofRomantic.Hehadrecalledhowhewasinitiatedintopoetryby
A、websetB、educationalschoolC、InternetportalD、foreigncompanyC
WhichofthefollowingdoesnotbelongtoShakespeare’sromanticlovecomedies?
CrypticColoringCrypticcoloringisbyfarthecommonestuseofcolorinthestruggleforexistence.Itisemployedforthe
有一个农夫养了一群鸡。每次给鸡喂食的时候,他总是将栅栏门碰得很响。长时间以后,聪明的鸡们就得出这样一条因果律:栅栏门响过之后,主人必然会来喂食,因为以前总是这样的。一日,友人来访。农夫为了款待朋友,准备杀两只鸡。他提着刀走进鸡场,照例把门碰得很响。
Conversationalistswill,asarule,berelaxedandnotworrying【1】______abouttheimpressiontheyarecreating—unlikethelec
Englishbelongsto______writingsystem.
______takesLondonasthesettinginmostofhisnovels.
随机试题
下列有关劳动防护用品管理的做法中,错误的是()。
目前中国的技术输出主要是力所能及地向发展中国家提供()
扩张性心肌病的心肌灌注图像表现,下列正确的是
30岁妇女,现停经12周,少许阴道出血1周,B超示胎芽如孕10周大,未见胎心。此时最佳处理为
企业的各种明细分类账都是根据记账凭证、原始凭证或汇总原始凭证登记的。( )
《民法通则》规定的普通诉讼时效期间为()年。
甲注册会计师在对A国有独资公司1999年度会计报表审计时发现:该公司委托评估机构对其所拥有的厂房进行了评估,评估增值5000万元。对此项业务,甲注册会计师审查的内容应包括( )。
蹦极运动员从高处跳下,弹性绳被拉展前做自由落体运动,被拉展后在弹性绳的缓冲作用下,下落到一定高度后速度减为零。下列说法中错误的是()。
如果你坚持爬山,那么你就不会未老先衰。除非你坚持爬山,否则就会莫名烦恼。因此,你如果未老先衰,那么一定是莫名烦恼。以下哪项与上述推理最类似?
在面向对象方法中,()描述的是具有相似属性与操作的一组对象。
最新回复
(
0
)