 |
Making amends - Offering an apology
|
|
|
|
Text 4
1. Translate these words and word-combinations:
average
attendance
pursue
inconsistencies
hit
sense
credibility
tower
collaps
impact
suicide mission
improbable
consciousness
instantly accept
merely
wedge
reliance
testimony
foreknowledge
2. Read and translate the text:
MAKING AMENDS - OFFERING AN APOLOGY
More than thirty-five times now, and in nine countries, I have lectured on 9/11. The average attendance at the lectures has been between 400 and 500 people. In an estimated sixty-five per sent of those lectures, in question and answer sessions lasting sometimes up to three hours I have been asked why I don't pursue the physical evidence inconsistencies of 9/11. At least 9, 100 people have heard me say something like:
" I don't for a minute believe that an airliner hit the Pentagon. And no one has ever seen a video of an airliner hitting the Pentagon because there isn't one. It doesn't look like the WTC towers collapsed because of the impacts and the way that they collapsed doesn't make sense. But if I, with some measure of journalistic credibility, and my readers on Capitol Hill and in universities start writing stories about these things, I wind up in either a journalistic suicide mission, or in the improbable place of having to explain where the airliner that didn't hit the Pentagon went or how the towers were brought down. There is a mountain of physical evidence that blows the government story in my mind, but my experience says that it will never penetrate the consciousness of the American people in a way that will bring about change. What will penetrate, from my experience, is taking non-scientific reports that most people instantly accept as credible, whether news reports or government statements or documents, and merely showing that they are lies. That opens the wedge, and removes any reliance upon expert or scientific testimony which is typically used to confuse simple facts. From there, you can begin to show people all the other documentary evidence of foreknowledge, planning and participation. "
3. Answer the following questions:
a) Did the author believe that an airliner hit the Pentagon?
b) Is there a mountain of physical evidence that blows the government story?
c) They can begin to show people all the other documentary evidence of foreknowledge, can’t they?
4. These sentences are not true. Correct them.
a) The average attendance at the lectures hasn’t been between 200 and 300 people.
b) There isn’t a mountain of physical evidence that blows the government story.
c) The author believes that an airliner hit the Pentagon.
5. Complete the following sentences:
a) In an estimated sixty-five…
b) It doesn’t look like…
c) There is a mountain of physical evidence…
6. Give English equivalents for:
посещение
длиться
коллапс
|
|
|
изменение
лгать
обычные факты
участие
планирование
свидетельство
Text 5
1. Translate these words and word-combinations:
hurriedly
explosive
conclusion
jet
fuel
shaft
collapse
carnage
demolition
scramble
reliable
earthquake
straw
windstorm
assassination
2. Read and translate the text:
On September 13, 2001, I hurriedly published a 241-word story on the FTW web site wherein I reached the early conclusion that explosives had not been placed in the World Trade Center. At the time, I based my conclusion upon several things. They included a detailed BBC report citing scientific sources and architectural experts saying that jet fuel running down the elevator shafts had been sufficient to cause the collapse; a detailed statement by New York architect John Young (still on the web) supporting these conclusions, and statements from my ex-wife Mary, an eyewitness who had seen the carnage from her Battery Park apartment nearby. Neither she, nor anyone she knew had heard any secondary explosions that might have indicated demolition charges inside the building.
As the world was turning inside out, we all scrambled for reliable information in a place where nothing was to be trusted. It was like trying to stand sill in an earthquake. The BBC, because it was not American and held prestige, seemed like something that could be trusted - a straw in a windstorm. Whether accurate or not, I recognized that - much like the newspaper accounts appearing in Australia and New Zealand within hours of the Kennedy assassination that impossibly included Oswald's picture with statements that he was the assassin - for most of the world this avenue had already been closed off.
I wish I would have said that then.
3. Answer the following questions:
a) When did the author publish a 241- word story on the web site?
b) On what things (factors) did the author base his conclusion?
c) What did the author recognize?
4. These sentences are not true. Correct them.
a) On 5 July 1996 the author published a story on the web site.
b) We all read for information in a place where nothing was to be trusted.
c) It was like trying the dresses.
5. Complete the following sentences:
a) They included a detailed …
b) Neither she, nor anyone she knew…
c) I recognized that…
|
|
|
