2020考研英語閱讀理解精讀100篇：Unit 67

Unit 67

The American military tribunals set up to pass judgment on terrorism suspects at Guantánamo Bay lurched into life this week when David Hicks, the “Australian Taliban”, unexpectedly pleaded guilty. The Pentagon will be relieved that the tribunals have started to show results after five years of controversy over the status of “enemy combatants”, claims of torture, the admissibility of forced confessions and a Supreme Court ruling last year that halted an earlier version of the tribunals. Yet the Hicks case is hardly an impressive start for America’s offshore justice. Critics say the 31-year-old Mr Hicks, a former kangaroo skinner and alleged al-Qaeda fighter, faces a “kangaroo court”. Two of his civilian lawyers were barred from the hearing on March 26th. His military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, has been threatened with prosecution for harshly criticising the tribunals.

The prosecutor, Colonel Morris Davis, said the defence lawyer may have breached military law that bans officers from using “contemptuous words” against the president or senior officials. Major Mori filed a counter-charge against the prosecution, saying it was trying to intimidate him. In the end the motion will not be heard because Mr Hicks, looking pale and bedraggled, admitted the charge of “providing material support for terrorism”. A charge of “attempted murder in violation of the laws of war” was dropped. As The Economist went to press, the tribunal was due to hear details of his plea and pass sentence, which Mr Hicks is expected to serve out in Australia. His father, Terry Hicks, said his son had had “five years of absolute hell” since being captured in Afghanistan and allegedly suffering beatings, rape and forced injections in American custody—accusations rejected by the Pentagon. The guilty plea was just “a way to get home”, said Mr Hicks’s father.

Many in Australia regard Mr Hicks as more of a lost soul than a dangerous terrorist. Indeed, his charge sheet portrays him as little more than an al-Qaeda foot-soldier, and a poor one at that. His jihadi CV is pitiful compared with the evidence being given by some of the 14 “high value detainees” belatedly brought to Guantánamo from CIA secret prisons in September. They include al-Qaeda’s operational chief, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who in a closed hearing to determine whether he was an “enemy combatant” earlier this month boasted that he had organised the September 11th attacks “from A to Z”, and 30 other plots. Meanwhile, Ahmed Ghalfan Ghailani and Waleed bin Atttash, from Tanzania and Yemen respectively, have admitted supplying equipment for the bombing of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.

Many of these big names will face trial, and perhaps the death penalty. But the tribunals are expected to try only 60-80 of the more than 380 prisoners currently in Guantánamo. Over the years hundreds of detainees have been sent back to their countries, where some have been jailed and most have been released—and sometimes re-arrested. The Bush Administration says it wants to phase out and eventually close the jail. But it is unlikely to do so for some years, either because it lacks the evidence to prosecute detainees（even under the more lax military rules it is using）, or because other countries are unwilling to take them back.

注（1）：本文選自Economist；

注（2）：本文習(xí)題命題模仿對(duì)象為2004年真題Text 3（題目順序稍微調(diào)整）。

1. What does the author intend to illustrate with the Hicks case?

A) The case is not encouraging in promoting America’s justice outside the country.

B) The Pentagon is finally beginning to work effectively to try the detainees of its anti-terrorist war.

C) The detainees are not supposed to have civilian lawyers, while only military lawyers are allowed.

D) The fact that the Pentagon has been involved in a series of controversies leads to the public attention of the Hicks case.

2. What can we infer from the second paragraph?

A) Hicks’ military lawyer was also sued by the prosecutor.

B) The reason that Mr. Hicks pleaded guilty was to escape from the bad treatment.

C) Mr. Hicks has admitted guilty of both charges by the prosecutor.

D) The Pentagon is unaware of the accusation toward the American custody.

3. What does “kangaroo court”（Line 7, Paragraph 1）mean?

A) a court dealing with kangaroo smuggle

B) a weird court

C) an unfair court

D) a military court

4. The fourth paragraph suggests that _______.

A) the jail in Guantánamo Bay will be closed in the near future

B) the government is too optimistic in closing the jail

C) the tribunals will eventually try all the detainees

D) all the detainees will be sent back to their own countries

5. Which of the following is TRUE according to the text?

A) Australians regard Mr. Hicks as a hero since he is a big name in the al-Qaeda organization.

B) Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is charged of his organization of the entire event of the September 11 attacks.

C) Most detainees will face severe trials and sentences when they are sent back to their home countries.

D) The whole passage is permeated by an ironic tone towards the saying that the Hicks case showcases America’s justice.

篇章剖析

本文就來自澳大利亞的塔利班恐怖分子大衛(wèi)·希克斯承認(rèn)法庭對(duì)他的指控一事展開討論。第一段就整個(gè)事件的前因后果進(jìn)行了簡(jiǎn)要的討論，從?？怂拱敢隽藢?duì)于美國(guó)軍事法庭不公平性問題的討論；第二段對(duì)事件進(jìn)一步展開了詳細(xì)論述，并引用了各方人士的觀點(diǎn)，說明了針對(duì)軍事法庭爭(zhēng)議的復(fù)雜性；第三段說明?？怂怪皇且粋€(gè)小角色，被關(guān)押的還有許多具有重要地位的恐怖分子；第四段則指出布什關(guān)于關(guān)閉關(guān)塔那摩基地計(jì)劃的難度所在。

詞匯注釋

tribunal /tr??bju?nl/ n. （特等）法庭

lurch /l??t?/ vi. 突然傾斜

combatant /?k?mb?t?nt/ n. 戰(zhàn)士，戰(zhàn)斗員

halt /h??lt/ vt. 使停止

skinner /?sk?n?/ n. 皮革商

bar /bɑ?/ vt. 禁止，阻擋，妨礙

breach /bri?t?/ v. 違背，破壞

contemptuous /k?n?temptj??s/ adj. 輕蔑的，侮辱的

intimidate /?n?t?m?de?t/ v. 脅迫

begraggled /b??d??gld/ adj. 全身泥污的

injection /?n?d?ek??n/ n. 注射；注射劑

custody /?k?st?di/ n. 監(jiān)管，保管

detainee /?d?te??ni?/ n. 被拘留者，未判決囚犯

penalty /?pen?lti/ n. 處罰，罰款

phase out 使逐步淘汰，逐漸停止

lax /l?ks/ adj. 松的，不嚴(yán)格的

難句突破

The American military tribunals set up to pass judgment on terrorism suspects at Guantánamo Bay lurched into life this week when David Hicks, the “Australian Taliban”, unexpectedly pleaded guilty.

主體句式：The American military tribunals lurched into life.

結(jié)構(gòu)分析：本句中的動(dòng)詞詞組set up并不是本句的謂語，而是用來修飾the American military的過去分詞結(jié)構(gòu)。本句的真正謂語是lurch into life。

句子譯文：人稱“澳大利亞塔利班”的大衛(wèi)·?？怂乖诒局艹龊跞藗円饬系爻姓J(rèn)了法庭對(duì)他的指控，這意味著美國(guó)軍事法庭對(duì)關(guān)押在關(guān)塔那摩灣的恐怖分子嫌犯進(jìn)行審判的努力終于開始發(fā)揮實(shí)際作用了。

題目分析

1. A 推理題。文章對(duì)應(yīng)信息為第一段的“Yet the Hicks case is hardly an impressive start for America’s offshore justice”。B選項(xiàng)的錯(cuò)誤原因在于文章第一句話指出，美國(guó)軍事法庭終于開始發(fā)揮作用，但這并不表示五角大樓在這方面的工作效率開始提高。C選項(xiàng)錯(cuò)誤在于根據(jù)文章第一段最后兩句話，犯人可以同時(shí)擁有民事律師和軍事律師。D選項(xiàng)錯(cuò)誤在于該表述中的兩個(gè)事件并不存在直接的因果聯(lián)系。

2. B 推理題。文章第二段?？怂沟母赣H說the guilty plea was just “a way to get home”，并且前文提到了希克斯遭受的各種折磨，這都暗示希克斯承認(rèn)罪行的目的是希望能夠逃離折磨，回到澳大利亞。

3. C 語義題?！発angaroo court”的意思是“所做裁決不夠公正透明的法庭”。如果不知道這個(gè)意思也無妨，因?yàn)榭梢詮纳舷挛囊馑贾型瞥觥：笠痪湓捴刑岬?，“Two of his civilian lawyers were barred from the hearing on March 26th. His military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, has been threatened with prosecution for harshly criticising the tribunals”，希克斯的律師都無法出庭，說明這個(gè)法庭是不公正的。

4. B 細(xì)節(jié)題。B選項(xiàng)的原文對(duì)應(yīng)信息為“The Bush Administration says it wants to phase out and eventually close the jail. But it is unlikely to do so for some years”，可見布什政府在這一問題上的態(tài)度過于樂觀。

5. D 細(xì)節(jié)題。文章從頭到尾所傳達(dá)的信息是，?？怂挂话复嬖诤芏嗖还蛩?。A選項(xiàng)的錯(cuò)誤原因在于文章第三段第一句話中提到，澳大利亞人們認(rèn)為?？怂瓜壬鷨适Я遂`魂，并不是什么英雄，同時(shí)他在塔利班組織中也不是什么大人物。B選項(xiàng)錯(cuò)誤的原因在于文章只是提到哈立德·謝赫·穆罕默德自稱策劃了911事件，并沒有提到他是否因此受到指控。C選項(xiàng)的錯(cuò)誤原因在于文章最后一段指出，那些被遣送回國(guó)的囚犯大多不會(huì)受到很嚴(yán)厲的懲罰，在監(jiān)獄中呆幾年就可以獲得自由。

參考譯文

人稱“澳大利亞塔利班”的大衛(wèi)·?？怂乖诒局艹龊跞藗円饬系爻姓J(rèn)了法庭對(duì)他的指控，這意味著美國(guó)軍事法庭對(duì)關(guān)押在關(guān)塔那摩灣的恐怖分子嫌犯進(jìn)行審判的努力終于開始發(fā)揮實(shí)際作用了。五角大樓將會(huì)對(duì)軍事法庭初步顯示出的結(jié)果感到輕松，因?yàn)槠湮迥陙硪恢笔艿礁鞣N爭(zhēng)議的困擾，包括“敵對(duì)戰(zhàn)斗人員”身份地位，折磨罪犯的指證，逼供的可接受性，以及去年代替了先前的軍事法庭的最高法院審判等。盡管如此，對(duì)于美國(guó)的國(guó)際正義來說，?？怂沟陌讣€很難說是一個(gè)令人振奮的開端。評(píng)論家們稱，31歲的?？怂瓜壬?jīng)是袋鼠皮革商人和所謂的基地組織戰(zhàn)士，他現(xiàn)在面對(duì)的是一個(gè)不公正的法庭。他的兩位民事律師被禁止在3月26號(hào)聽訟，而其軍事律師少校邁克爾·莫里則因?qū)娛路ㄍサ募饪膛u(píng)面臨被起訴的威脅。

公訴人莫利斯·戴維斯上校稱辯護(hù)律師可能已違背軍法中關(guān)于禁止軍官對(duì)主席或者高級(jí)官員使用侮辱性詞語的條例。而莫里少校針對(duì)該起訴也提出了一項(xiàng)反向指控，認(rèn)為起訴意在脅迫他?，F(xiàn)在人們不會(huì)再聽到類似這樣的傳聞，因?yàn)榭瓷先ッ嫔n白、精神頹廢的?？怂瓜壬呀?jīng)承認(rèn)了關(guān)于“給恐怖主義提供重要支持”的指控。法庭已經(jīng)放棄了關(guān)于“違背戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)法而謀殺未遂”一案的審理。當(dāng)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家發(fā)刊時(shí)，軍事法庭一定會(huì)聽到更多他的抗辯之詞和宣判細(xì)節(jié)，人們認(rèn)為?？怂瓜壬鷮?huì)在澳大利亞服刑。他的父親特里·?？怂孤暦Q其子自從在阿富汗被捕以來經(jīng)歷了五年地獄般的生活，遭受了毆打、強(qiáng)奸和強(qiáng)迫注射等——盡管這些指控已被五角大樓駁回。希克斯先生的父親說承認(rèn)有罪只不過是一種得以回家的方法罷了。

在澳大利亞，很多人認(rèn)為?？怂瓜壬褚粋€(gè)喪失靈魂的人而并非危險(xiǎn)的恐怖分子。確實(shí)，指控記錄中他被描述成一個(gè)基地組織的普通步兵，一個(gè)可憐的小角色。同9月份從中情局秘密監(jiān)獄轉(zhuǎn)到關(guān)塔那摩的14名具有極高價(jià)值的囚犯相比，希克斯的圣戰(zhàn)履歷看起來非常令人同情。前者包括基地組織首領(lǐng)哈立德·謝赫·穆罕默德，在本月一個(gè)對(duì)其是否是敵對(duì)戰(zhàn)斗人員身份的封閉聽訟會(huì)中，他自夸他從頭到尾策劃了911襲擊和30個(gè)其他秘密計(jì)劃。與此同時(shí)，分別來自坦桑尼亞和也門的艾哈邁德·蓋凡·蓋拉尼和瓦立德·本阿塔什也承認(rèn)曾為1998年肯尼亞和坦桑尼亞引爆美國(guó)大使館的恐怖分子提供了相應(yīng)設(shè)備。

這些鼎鼎大名的恐怖分子將面臨審判，而且可能被判死刑。但是軍事法庭目前只打算審判380多名被關(guān)押在關(guān)塔那摩囚犯中的60~80名囚犯。幾年來，囚犯中已有上百人被遣送回了自己的國(guó)家，他們有的被繼續(xù)監(jiān)禁，而大多數(shù)則被釋放——不過有時(shí)又被重新逮捕。布什政府宣稱有必要逐漸減少囚犯并最終關(guān)閉這個(gè)監(jiān)獄。但很難在幾年內(nèi)做到這一點(diǎn)，一方面是因?yàn)槿狈ζ鹪V這些囚犯的證據(jù)（即使是在不夠嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)能姺蚣芟拢?，另一方面則是因?yàn)檫@些囚犯所屬的國(guó)家事實(shí)上并不愿意他們被遣回本國(guó)。