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, 03/29/2007

   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 justice.

    [B] The Pentagon is working effectively to try the detainees.

    [C] The detainees are not supposed to have civilian lawyers.

    [D] Talibans were involved in illegal kangaroo trade.

   2． What can we infer from the second paragraph?

    [A] Hicks’s 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 guity of both charges by the prosecutor.

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

   3． What does “kangaroo court” (Line 8, Paragraph 1) mean?

    [A] a court dealing with kangloo smuggle

    [B] a weird court

    [C] an unfair court

    [D] a military

   4． The fourth paragraph suggests that _______.

    [A] the jail in Guantánamo Bay will be closed in the new 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] Mr. Hicks is a big name in the al-Qaeda organization.

    [B] All the detainees in Guantánamo Bay are proved guilty.

    [C] Most detainees will face permenant jail when sent back home.

    [D] It is ironic to say that the Hicks case shows America’s justice.

   篇章剖析

   本文就來(lái)自澳大利亞的塔利班恐怖分子大衛(wèi)·�？怂钩姓J(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�出了對(duì)于美國(guó)軍事法庭不公平性問(wèn)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(shuō)明了針對(duì)軍事法庭爭(zhēng)議的復(fù)雜性；第三段說(shuō)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 [tri`bju:nl] n. (特等)法庭                 intimidate [in`timideit]v. 脅迫

   lurch [lE:tF] vi. 突然傾斜                      begraggled [bi`dVAgld]adj. 全身泥污的

   combatant [`kCmbEtEnt] n. 戰(zhàn)士, 戰(zhàn)斗員          injection[in`jektFEn] n. 注射, 注射劑

   halt [hC:lt] vt. 使停止                          custody [`kQstEdi]n. 監(jiān)管，保管

   skinner [`skinE] n. 皮革商                   etainee [9ditei`ni:]n. 被拘留者, 未判決囚犯

   bar [bB:] vt. 禁止, 阻擋, 妨礙                   penalty [`penElti]n. 處罰, 罰款

   breach [bri:tF] v. 違背, 破壞                     phase out 使逐步淘汰, 逐漸停止

   contemptuous [kEn`temptjuEs] adj. 輕蔑的, 侮辱的  lax [lAks]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  這個(gè)句子的結(jié)構(gòu)看上去比較容易讓人混淆。經(jīng)過(guò)分析，可以發(fā)現(xiàn)第一個(gè)出現(xiàn)的動(dòng)詞詞組“set up”并不是謂語(yǔ)，而是用來(lái)修飾the American military 的過(guò)去分詞結(jié)構(gòu)。這個(gè)句子真正的謂語(yǔ)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。

   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”。

   2．D. 推理題。文章第二段比較后希克斯的父親說(shuō)the guilty plea was just “a way to get home”，而且前文提到了希克斯遭受的各種折磨，這都暗示�？怂钩姓J(rèn)自己的罪行是希望能夠逃離折磨，回到祖國(guó)。

   3．C. 語(yǔ)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(wú)妨，因?yàn)榭梢詮纳舷挛囊馑贾型瞥�。后一句話中提到，“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(wú)法出庭，說(shuō)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(wèn)題上的態(tài)度過(guò)于樂觀。

   5．D. 推理題。文章從頭到尾所傳達(dá)的信息都是，�？怂挂话复嬖诤芏嗖还�正因素。A、B、C選項(xiàng)都能在文中找到意思相反的對(duì)應(yīng)信息。

   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。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?lái)一直受到所謂“敵對(duì)戰(zhàn)斗人員”身份的爭(zhēng)議困擾，即從去年開始用所謂的拷打、縱容逼供和比較高法院等方式取代之前的軍事法庭進(jìn)行審判。盡管如此，對(duì)于美國(guó)的國(guó)際正義來(lái)說(shuō)，�？怂沟陌讣�還很難說(shuō)是一個(gè)另人振奮的開端。評(píng)論家們稱，31歲的希克斯先生曾經(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?yàn)閷?duì)軍事法庭的尖刻批評(píng)將面臨被起訴的威脅。

    公訴人莫利斯·戴維上校稱辯護(hù)律師可能已違背軍法中關(guān)于禁止軍官針對(duì)主席或者高級(jí)官員使用侮辱性詞語(yǔ)的條例。而莫里少校針對(duì)該起訴也提出了一個(gè)反向指控，認(rèn)為起訴意在脅迫他�，F(xiàn)在我們比較終不會(huì)再聽到類似這樣的傳聞，因?yàn)榭瓷先ッ嫔�蒼白精神頹廢的希克斯先生已經(jīng)承認(rèn)了關(guān)于“提供資源支持恐怖分子”的指控。而法庭已經(jīng)放棄了另一個(gè)關(guān)于“違背戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)法的謀殺未遂”指控。當(dāng)本刊發(fā)行之時(shí)，從軍事法庭即將聽到更多他的懇求和宣判細(xì)節(jié)，人們普遍認(rèn)為希克斯先生將會(huì)在澳大利亞服刑。他的父親特里·希克斯聲稱其子自從在阿富汗被捕以來(lái)經(jīng)歷了地獄般的五年生活，期間遭受了毆打、強(qiáng)奸和強(qiáng)迫注射等——盡管這些指控已被五角大樓駁回。�？怂瓜壬�的父親說(shuō)承認(rèn)有罪不過(guò)是一種得以回家的方法罷了。

   在澳大利亞有很多人認(rèn)為�？怂瓜壬�更像一個(gè)喪失靈魂的人而并非危險(xiǎn)的恐怖分子。確實(shí)，案件記錄他被描述成一個(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，希克斯的杰哈迪履歷看起來(lái)非常令人同情。前者包括基地組織的行動(dòng)首領(lǐng)哈立德·謝赫·穆罕默德，他在本月早期一個(gè)確定其是否為敵對(duì)戰(zhàn)斗人員身份的聽訟會(huì)中，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(lái)自坦桑尼亞和也門的Ahmed Ghalfan Ghailani 和Waleed bin Atttash也承認(rèn)自己為1998年肯尼亞和坦桑尼亞美國(guó)大使館的爆炸事件提供了相應(yīng)設(shè)備。

    這些鼎鼎大名的恐怖分子很多即將面臨審判，而且可能被判死刑。但是軍事法庭目前只會(huì)審判380多名關(guān)塔那摩囚犯中的60-80名。幾年來(lái)，囚禁者中已有成百人被遣送回了自己的國(guó)家，他們有被繼續(xù)監(jiān)禁，大多數(shù)則被釋放——不過(guò)有時(shí)又被重新逮捕。布什行政當(dāng)局宣稱有必要逐漸減少人員并比較終關(guān)閉這個(gè)監(jiān)獄。但看很難在幾年內(nèi)做到這一點(diǎn)，一方面是因?yàn)槿狈ζ鹪V這些囚禁者的證據(jù)（即使是在不夠嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)能姺�框架下），另一方面則是因?yàn)槠渌麌?guó)家事實(shí)上并不愿意將那些囚犯帶回。