English Blog 2BTX: February 2012

26 February 2012

text and mp3 files VOA : read and listen to the news at the same time
Special English archive (news audio with tapescripts)
To learn English listen a lot ( choose the topic, listen and read)
listening lessons ( with tapescript and exercises)
easy listening stories
real english conversations

25 February 2012

FORBIDDEN TO SMOKE

Spain has suffered the consequences of the smoking ban. It has been forbidden to smoke in restaurants and outside some public areas like hospitals or schools. In my opinion, it will make smokers become angry because there’s no reason not to let them smoke in the street.

The way I see it, smokers should be allowed to smoke outside all the public establishments as the new law doesn’t let them smoking in bars. I think the government should have imposed the law in parts in order to help people to get used to it. In my view, if the government had first only banned smoking in bars, people wouldn’t have reacted in that way. What’s more, if people were able to smoke anywhere in the street, they wouldn’t be so angry. The problem is that in many cities or small towns there are lots of schools, hospitals and parks. As a result, it has become a problem for smokers to find a place where to smoke without breaking the law and in peace. It’s seems like some day people will only be able to smoke in their houses.

To sum up, I think that the biggest mistake made by the government has been forbid people to smoke in the street. The citizens must be able to choose if they want to smoke in an open area and I am sure that the tobacco effects are not worse than the pollution from cars.

Elisabet Carbó 2A

SHOULD THE SPANISH GOVERNMENT REMOVE THE BAN ON SMOKING?

Since the Spanish government passed the law that prohibits smoking in public areas like bars, restaurants and some other places, there are many criticisms and complaints about the issue, nevertheless, many people are also in favour of the law.

Some consumers say that it should be a personal choice and business owners are really affected by the law. But in my opinion, there is something more important than economic losses and personal pleasure, it is the right of non-smokers, for instance, babies, children, pregnant woman, older people…

The OMS says that peoples who live with a smoker have a 35 times higher risk of suffering lung cancer than those who do not. And do you know that 42 per cent of children with chronic respiratory disease are caused by tobacco fumes? So I think that even though this ban could be too tough and difficult to obey, it is absolutely necessary and fair, since in my view, people who smoke are not only killing themselves, but also killing others.

To conclude, I want to tell all smokers, please think about their sons, daughters, parents, husband, wives, friends and everyone who loves you and live with you, stop killing them!

Mengjun Lin 2n BTX A

SMOKING BAN

Some people think that the new smoking ban will decrease the number of smokers in Spain. Other people consider that it will be a complete disaster for restaurants and pub owners. In my opinion, people will get used to it and nobody will talk about it.

For one thing is clear, smoking is bad for our health; experts think that if people don’t smoke in public places there will be a reduction in lung cancers, especially when we talk about people such as waiters, who work in places where smoking is something natural. This is one of the reasons why the government has decided to go on with the prohibition despite the criticism of smokers in general.

However, in my opinion, this law should have been passed before. We must not forget that this same government allowed pubs and restaurants to create special rooms for smokers. Consequently they spent a lot of money just two or three years ago and now they are not allowed to use those spaces.

In short, there will always be different opinions and points of view about smoking but I honestly think that everybody will be pretty happy about the new legislation in the future.

José Mª Morillas Jiménez 2n Batx. C

THE SMOKING BAN IN SPAIN

The new law against smoking in Spain has been quite discussed. Some people think that it is excessive and other people say it’s OK. Obviously, people who are against the law smoke. I don’t smoke, but I think that the smoking ban is too tough.

I don’t like people who smoke and throw you the polluted air but I also think that the decision of smoking should be voluntary. It’s also a contradiction because, for example: smoking is not allowed in bars but you can buy cigarettes there. Moreover, it seems to me that banning smoking in bars, restaurants and other places like parks and the surroundings of schools are too many places to prohibit smoking. Despite the fact that not many years ago bars were forced to have isolated areas in order not to annoy non-smokers, now all the money they had spent has been wasted with no profit.

The way I see it, this law won’t stop the increasing number of smokers; if the government really wants to stop smoking it should make Spaniards aware of the risks of smoking or prohibit the sale of tobacco. But I don’t think that the government wants to stop the number of smokers in Spain because it has great benefits from cigarettes’ taxes. Finally, I think that this law is nonsense and the number of smokers in Spain won’t decrease because of it.

Sara Ortego Huguet 2ºA

SMOKING BAN

Nowadays the new smoking law is being mentioned by everyone. This law is causing a lot of headaches because neither all smokers nor some non-smokers like it.

In my opinion I’m one of those who think that this new law is stupid because the only thing that the government will achieve with it is to harm bar as well as disco owners, and all those who own places where you can’t smoke now. One of the reasons is that they are losing a lot of clients because if they can’t smoke inside a bar they won’t probably go to that bar. Another reason is that some years ago the Government passed a law with which bars had to prepare a special zone for smokers if they wanted to have smokers in their establishments. Therefore a lot of restaurants had to pay a lot of money to separate their restaurants into smokers or none smokers’ zones and now they see that all the money that they had spend has been wasted.

In conclusion, for me, this law is a law that threatens freedom and an insult to the business.

Ignasi Rovellada 2n BTX C

SMOKING BAN

A new law came into force in Spain on the 2nd January prohibiting to smoke in some public places, such as bars, restaurants, schools, hospitals and so on. Another law, which was implanted a few years before, wasn’t successful, because the number of smokers increased instead of going down (the law made restaurants and bars have a specific area for smokers and another one for the non-smokers… it was a foolish idea, because the smoke could be breathed everywhere). Experts think that this new law will have better results.

On the one hand, I think it’s a good idea to ban smoking in some places because for those who don’t smoke (like me, for example) smoke is something that bothers. When you are in touch with it (for example while you’re eating in a restaurant), then clothes smell really bad. On the other hand, I can understand the smokers (and how difficult it is to stop smoking, because I have some examples in my family, some of them have been able to stop, while others have such a big habit that they can’t stop smoking) and the owners of the establishments where now it’s prohibited to smoke, because there’s a large number of customers who visit their business and meanwhile they have a cigarette, and as now it isn’t possible to have a cigarette, they won’t go there. This will harm bars, pubs, restaurants, discos etc. because if people don’t go there, the sale of tobacco and the benefits and income of the owners will decrease.

Can this law lower the consumption of tobacco? Yes, it’s possible, but I disagree with this idea, in my opinion, if people want to continue smoking they will, even though they have to stay at home or outside where they are. I also think that the law is too strict. There are too many places where it’s forbidden to smoke. It’s a great idea not to smoke in hospitals or schools (as a respect to the patients and the children) because it’s a good way of being healthy and for children it’s also good to grow up happily and breathing pure air.

In conclusion, I want to emphasize that for me (and I’m sorry for the smokers) it’s a really good idea to ban smoking in public places, I’m really happy because of this… because I can’t stand smoke’s smell.

Cristina Melià 2nd Batxillerat B

SMOKING BAN

As the government has imposed a new law recently which forbids the sale of tabacco, I am going to talk about this smoking ban, because as far as I’m aware, this issue has been discussed all over the country. What is more, due to the tough law, people have wrangled about this topic. Therefore, I will give my view.

As far as I’m concerned, I’m for it, so I will argue it reasonably. First of all, I think that this idea is great, because It’s not that the government want to bother us, but they try to encourage people to give up smoking as well as banning to smoke in establishments in order not to annoy the people who aren’t smokers. Furthermore, It’s seems to me that the latter could diminish the smoky atmosphere in bars or pubs, where you can’t cope with that.

Otherwise, the owners of establishments could be ruined owing to the new ban. Moreover, it is believed that the costumers, who used to go for a coffee, let their coffee go as they can’t do their diary cigarette. So, the owners are worried. For this reason, the people who run a bar have been claiming for altering what could be the cause of being broke.

To sum up, on one hand, I’m for the law because it could be the point which ends with diseases. On the other hand, I’m against because lots of workers depend on these people who used to go to the bar in order to have a coffee as well as smoking their diary cigarette.

Salomé Mir Sánchez

SHOULD COMPUTERS BE USED IN CLASS?

It seems that more and more often computers and technology are being used in an educational setting. This use of computers in education has changed the way that people learn in a short period of time. However, there are many people who think that it’s not a good idea to use computers in classroom.

On the one hand, it is said that computers allow students to have access to different ideas, thoughts, and materials they wouldn’t have if they didn’t have any. Furthermore, students can be interactive learners, since they may read, do activities or play educational games. In addition, children would be able to see anything they can’t see. For instance, so many children have no concept of what an ocean is as their parents can’t afford to take them, but with a laptop they can see it and understand. The possibilities are endless. Furthermore, computers can also help students with visual disabilities.

On the other hand, many people think that computers shouldn’t become the centre of attention during the lesson, seeing that laptops bring on too many distractions, from messenger to other web pages, or games. Furthermore, due to the use of computers, students are becoming worst and worst writers. As they can’t practise writing with paper and pen, their calligraphy is awful. But not only the calligraphy is worse, the spelling is also getting worse, since the computer corrects their mistakes, so now children make more spelling mistakes.

As I see it, there are more advantages than disadvantages about the use of computers. However, it’s necessary to solve the problems as well. Besides, nowadays children spend too much time on the computer, and it can be dangerous as it interferes with other physical activities that can help them be balanced individuals.

Martina López 2ndB batx

SHOULD LAPTOPS BE USED IN CLASS?

We live in a word highly influenced by technology which is progressing constantly. If technology advances, we do too. Consequently, these days, more and more schools are introducing laptops in classes. So, many people ask themselves if the use of laptops in classrooms is beneficial, or on the contrary, they are a distraction.

The advances of this are obvious: firstly, using computers in classrooms allows students to take notes more easily. Moreover, using laptops means an adaptation to the technological word in which we live (“If you don't get a laptop, you will get old fashioned”). Also, using computers in classes involves making less spelling mistakes since computers correct them for you.

On the other hand, the disadvantages of using them are: firstly, people can't take notes more easily on the computer because they are slower, and, consequently, the prefer taking them by hand. Secondly, many people consider them like an incentive to a distraction, because having Internet involves access to websites like Messenger, Tuenti, twitter or Facebook. Finally, the fact that laptops correct our mistakes means that students don't pay attention and make more spelling errors.

On balance, I'm in favor of using laptops in classes because they help us to take notes more easily. However, I believe there are occasional cases in which using laptops in class is not a good idea, because in languages classes, for example, we have to learn to write and not make mistakes.

Paula Gómez de Tejada 2 Btx B

ABORTION, SHOULD IT BE ALLOWED?

Nowadays, abortion is highly discusses, there are many opinions about that issue. Actually, it is difficult to have a clear position about abortion, since it is very controversial.

On the one hand, there are people who agree with abortion because they think that the unborn child cannot be considered a human yet. Others say that girls who have been rapped may have the option to abort so that they do not have to carry this misfortune for life. The other reason that supports abortion is that when a woman has a child, her life changes completely, especially for young school girls or women without enough money. For this reason, it may be irresponsible to have a child when you cannot take care of him. Moreover, some believe that a woman should have freedom or the right to decide about her own life, this means that she is the person who has to decide whether to abort or hot, and not the society. Finally, the major reason is that sometimes, the child that a woman is going to have can put his mother's life at risk, because of an illness or deformation, then, the woman should choose between her own lifer and her child's life.

Nevertheless, on the other hand, there are also many people who disagree what abortion since they think that a foetus, even though not a human, is a life, and it is said that a foetus' organs are almost completely formed at the fourth month, so, although being in his/her mother’s womb, he can hear and fell. Moreover, though a rape is a misfortune, the child is innocent, and he or she does not have to pay what others did. People also believe that reasons such as money or mother’s age are not enough to kill a baby because the situation can change, while you are alive you have hope, but if you die, you do not have anything! For example, the woman may take government aid if she does not have money. And even a woman has the right to decide, but do not forget that she only has the right to decide about her own life, but not about her child’s life.

In conclusion, I think that abortion should not be allowed since a foetus is also a life, like you and me. So, please do not undervalue a life which doe not belong to you, in spite of being his mother. However, I believe that when a foetus can put his mother’s life at risk, then the woman can abort, since she has to decide when her own life is also involved. But I think this is the only reason that permits a woman to abort.

Mengjun Lin 2n BTX A

ABORTION IN SPAIN

Abortion in Spain has been legalized since July 5, 2010. It has been a quite controversial issue, however, nowadays global recession has pushed this matter into the background.

On the one hand, some people think it is a good idea if you are young and you have had an absentmindedness or if you know your baby is deformed and you do not want your baby to suffer a hard life. Moreover, it is a good way to stop a child’s birth whose mother has been raped. Some people defend this idea if children’s parents have trouble with drugs or money and know the baby’s life will be awful.

On the other hand, some people criticize abortion because it means taking the life of another human without punishment and say that if it is used as a contraception method it is not correct because contraception should be taken before. Furthermore, in case of rape, the child is not responsible, so he or she shouldn’t be killed. Women who have an abortion usually regret it later because this decision is usually taken when the women are young and inexperienced.

To conclude, I am definitely against this way of killing an innocent, nevertheless, I think people should be able to use this method in case of rape. The way I see it, abortion shouldn’t be legal or at least shouldn’t be so easy to get free from your responsibility.

Sara Ortego Huguet 2ºA

SHOULD ABORTION BE LEGALIZED?

Abortion in Spain has been legalized since 2009. While some people agree with this law, others disagree.

On the one hand, people who are against abortion, say that aborting means murdering, because you are killing a baby; a person who can’t decide whether to live or not. They think that people should be more responsible, that they ought to think more before acting, so that this wouldn’t happen.

On the other hand, people who are in favour of it, say that if the abortion takes place early, the baby isn’t formed yet, so, it doesn’t mean any murder at all. They also say that abortions are safe medical procedures, as less than 0.5% risk of serious complications, and that women should have the right to control their own body.

I think that aborting isn’t a good solution, because, as it is legalized, some people can see it as a normal thing and don’t care about it in the way they should. However, as I see it, there are some circumstances when you can justify it. For example, if you know that the baby is going to suffer from a serious illness, like degenerative or deadly ones, or if the woman has got pregnant involuntarily, because not aborting in these cases, would mean further psychological harm.

Paula Segui Llull 2n A BTX

SHOULD TEACHERS BE STRICTER?

Nowadays, most people think that teachers should have more authority to improve education; but others think that they shouldn’t because we wouldn’t have freedom.

On the one hand, people who are in favor, think that if teachers had more authority, students would have a better behaviour and they would listen more in class; as a result, they would have a higher educational level. In addition, children would be more controlled and they couldn’t use cribs.

On the other hand, some parents think that their children wouldn’t have so much freedom because teachers would be too hard and, if they had more authority, they could get to abuse them. Consequently, the students who were in these schools would have a closed thought; they should learn other rules.

I think that some teachers should be stricter with some of the students; especially with students who have a bad behaviour so they can modify it. And if they were stricter, students would have better performance.

Raquel Haro 2n BTX A

22 February 2012

Piracy

Piracy is when somebody downloads files (like music, films or software) from the internet for free (without paying the author rights of these files).

On the one hand it's true that if people download, for example, a music album, they won't buy the original CD after that. On the other hand, perhaps if they like the music they have downloaded, they would go to the convert of the group, which provides artists with lots of money.

In conclusion, I think that in fact it's unethical to download files illegally and for free because the author hasn't authorised selling his product for free. Finally I believe that one solution could be to create legal webs where people could download files legally and for free with the agreement, of course, of the authors of these files.

The banning of burqas

In France, on 13th of July of last year, a new law came into force, called "banning of burqas". The burqa is a veil that covers the face completely, and is used by Muslim women.

This is, for Muslim ladies, a part of their culture, and in France, the people who use the burqa are very angry about the new law, because they defend the liberty of everybody to wear the clothes they want, as the human rights say.

On the one hand, it's true that everybody should wear the clothes they like, being burqas or another type of head-to-toe clothing.

On the other hand, people could use these veils to be completely face-covered and if authorities like the police, security mans, etc. can't recognise the face of all the people who are in public places, they could think these unidentified people are planning a terrorist attack or another type of crime; and these is the argument that the French politicians used to refuse and ban the burqa.

In conclusion, I think the human rights and being free are more important than the remote possibility of a terrorist disguised in a burqa or another type of veil which covers the face completely. To sum up, I disagree with the banning of burqas.

21 February 2012

THE MURDER OF A DICTATOR

Muammar Gaddafi known to most people as Colonel Gaddafi was killed on 20^th October 2011. Gaddafi was the official ruler of Libya for 42 years. It is said that he ruled the country as a dictator and it is generally believed that he wasn't interested in developing the country and, moreover, everything he did was for his own benefit. For these reasons there was an uprising against him and his government which lasted for 8 months and resulted in not only his death, but also his son's and one of his aids.

Firstly, official reports say that Gaddafi was killed in a crossfire, however there are videos on the Internet that show the moments leading to his murder. The videos show a Gaddafi begging for his life while he was being tortured. Afterwards you are able to see his dead body with bullet holes and stab wounds. Although he had done a lot of bad things, I don't think that anybody deserves to die like that. What's more, his dying moments were seen by the whole world.

On the one hand, I understand why the citizens of Libya wanted him to suffer, but on the other hand, the way they killed Gaddafi was the same as the way that Gaddafi treated his people and that's why the uprising began in the first place.

Not only did they not bury Gaddafi, according to the Muslim tradition, but they showed off his body like a trophy, so that anybody who wanted to could take photos. As far as I'm concerned, this shows a lack of respect to the Muslim religion and to Gaddafi's family.

To sum up, in my opinion, it is good that Gaddafi is no longer the ruler of Libya, however, the Libyan people should have found another way of removing him as a leader. It is clear that Libya is now free from Gaddafi's rule, but who knows who is going to be the next leader of Libya.

MUSIC PIRACY

Piracy is the unauthorized use or reproduction of another person's work. This practice has increased since everybody can download music easily from the Internet and, what's more, it's allowed by the government.

On the pne hand, in Spain buying CDs is very expensive. Furthermore, it might happen that you like 10 songs out of 14, but you are paying for all the songs. The advantages of downloading music from the Internet are that you can choose which songs you want to have and even the lyrics, and the best thing is that you can get all of these for free. On the other hand, when you download music instead of buying CDs what you are doing is cheating on composers and singers. And, what's more, they have been working hard so as to create something important that can make us feel better, imagine, smile...

In my opinion, music piracy is wrong because singers deserve to earn money for the job that they have made. It's true that since we download music from the Internet, more singers and groups have been discovered. I think that piracy is very difficult to forbid, but what singers can do is give more concerts or make CDs cheaper.

20 February 2012

LOWERING THE LEGAL DRINKING AGE

Picture

SHOULD ALCOHOL BE FURTHER RESTRICTED OR EVEN BANNED? COMMENTS

SHOULD THE DRINKING AGE BE LOWERED?ARTICLE

SHOULD THE DRINKING AGE BE LOWERED? PROS AND CONS

KEEP THE DRINKING AGE AT 21. ARTICLE

THE DEBATE ON THE DRINKING AGE VIDEO

DRINKING AGE DEBATE VIDEO

ESSAYS ON THE DRINKING AGE

ESSAY ON THE DRINKING AGE LIMIT

LOWERING THE DRINKING AGE ESSAY

ARGUMENT TO LOWER THE LEGAL DRINKING AGE IN AMERICA ESSAY

LOWERING THE DRINKING AGE ESSAY

BODY SCANNERS

BODY SCANNERS LINKED TO CANCER? VIDEO

OVERWEIGHT PASSENGERS. SHOULD THEY BE CHARGED MORE?

TOO FAT TO FLY? DEALING WITH PASSENGERS OF SIZE (ARTICLE)
Discussing overweight passengers is like discussing politics or religion around the Thanksgiving dinner table with family: generally not a good idea.

When I saw the picture above, though, I felt compelled to address the issue. The picture you see was allegedly taken by an American Airlines flight attendant. Since bins are open and people are standing up, it appears it was taken during boarding.

I think we can all agree that allowing a passenger to protrude halfway into the aisle is clearly a safety violation. I also think it is safe to assume that the passenger was re-seated before takeoff to a row with an open middle seat.

Most U.S. airlines, including United and American, will not charge passengers of size (POS) for an extra seat as long as there are other open seats on the plane. I support this policy because I see no reason to castigate a POS further, especially when obesity is not always wholly dependent on lifestyle choice.

The problem arises when a flight is full and an airline is left with the choice of letting a POS literally occupy 1.5-2 Economy seats by allowing the arm rest to stay up and squeezing the other passengers in the row or having to VDB or even IDB a passenger to accommodate the POS. In such cases, I think an airline must give the POS the choice of stepping off the flight and waiting for the next one with an extra seat or paying for an extra ticket, perhaps at a lower cost.

Some posit that airline seats are too small and POS have no other alternatives. I disagree. United offers Economy Plus and First Class on most mainline domestic flights and Economy Plus, Business, and First Class on most international flights. Furthermore, it is not like airlines can easily (or even not so easily) install couches or rotund lazy boy recliners in their planes. To mandate that airlines compromise and dismantle a well-planned seating arrangements to accommodate a tiny sliver of the flying public is no more reasonable than arguing that an airline must make half-size seats available to compact people and only charge half-price for them.

Another analogy might be passenger baggage. Are bigger passengers allowed a higher weight allowance on checked bag? Of course not. They pay the same price as others and must abide by the same weight limits. Why should it be any different with onboard seating?

In some cases, like the picture above, any airplane seat (short of Singapore's A380 suites) would likely be too small for the passenger. In such cases, I believe a carrier should reserve the right to refuse passage on the grounds of passenger safety--both for the POS and others.

Am I missing something? How do you propose airlines deal with POS? Unfortunately, it is a growing problem in America. No pun intended.

SHOULD OVERWEIGHT AIRPLANE PASSENGERS BE CHARGED MORE? DEBATE
SHOULD OBESE PASSENGERS HAVE TO PAY MORE? DEBATE

AIRPORT SECURITY: FULL BODY SCANNERS

ARE FULL-BODY SCANS AN EFFECTIVE TOOL TO COUNTER TERRORISM? PROS AND CONS

AIRPORT SECURITY CONTROLS. DEBATE

SCHOOL UNIFORMS

ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINS SCHOOL UNIFORMS
ARGUMENTS ABOUT UNIFORMS
PROS AND CONS OF SCHOOL UNIFORMS
PUBLIC SCHOOL UNIFORM DEBATE
NO SCHOOL UNIFORMS. DEBATE
DO UNIFORMS MAKE SCHOOLS BETTER? ARTICLE

19 February 2012

ENDANGERED SPECIES

Asia is an enormous continent, where a lot of species live, but many of them are endangered for different reasons.
For example, Bengala tigers. If we travel to Asia to see this animal, perhaps we won't see it, because only 7000 Bengala tigers live in the world, so it is more probable that we can see one at the zoo, and not in their natural habitat.

In the past Bengala tigers were very abundant in the world, but many of them have disappeared because of their continuous hunt. People hunt these animals to trade with their exotic fur or with their meat. But also with their bones because many people attributed medicinal properties.

Nowadays, there exist lows that have banned the hunting of tigers and other species that are killed for their fur. For instance the pangolinos, a little mammal that has a beautiful and strange skin, as an armour, that many designers would like to make their designs, on the other hand there are people who believe that pangolino's meat is an aphrodisiac.

In conclusion, one of the most important causes that make these species and many others get endangered are humans and their beliefs. I think that killing animals to make clothes that we don't need is a real crime. We've got other materials in order to make our clothes, we don't need exotic animals to make them.

18 February 2012

DRUG DEALING (VIDEO AND SCRIPT)

How do Mexican cartels get drugs into the United States? The Drug Enforcement Administration maps out a typical scenario.

A ton of pure cocaine is ordered from Colombia and it’s hidden inside a shipment of coffee inside a semi truck and a professional courier then starts driving north through central America. If he runs into any problem, they simply ship the load onto a boat, they bypass the problem area and they bring it back to the truck and then they continue on north up here to the border and there he waits. What is he waiting for? Well, for the drug bosses to watch what’s going on there and figure out an optimal time to cross. What are they looking for? Well, they are looking for times of heavy traffic along the border when there are lots of people there. They’re looking for times when there might be a holiday. They’re looking for times when they might have a big storm of some sort. Anything that will distract law enforcement. When the right moment comes, they signal and their truck driver simply blends in with the traffic and he drives north into the United States and he’s ready for the next leg on the drug delivery road.

Once a drug truck enters the US with, for example that typical ton of cocaine, the DEA describes the first goal is to get away from the crossing point and in that process, officials say it may well act like a delivery van making drops in places like Las Vegas here or Los Angeles or San Francisco, maybe even up to Portland. In each place a mid-level cartel boss collects payment from local distributors or move the product to their own places, mix it with talcum powder, turn that one ton into 5 tons and within 48 hours the Mexican cartel’s whole load is selling on the street supplying hundreds of dealers in dozens of surrounding towns and thousands of American drug users.

Estimates on the value of the illegal drug trade vary widely but one state department number suggests four million dollars worth may be entering the US every hour and some parts of the country pay more than others to support this illegal supply and demand. The DEA says a kilo of cocaine in the west may go for 17 thousand dollars but the extra cost involved and the risk in bringing it across the country to the east makes it more like 22,000 dollars at the time it arrives over here. All that money may be smuggled directly back into Mexico or the cartel might pull one last trick using the money to buy appliances and other consumer goods here, products which can be loaded legally onto a truck, exported back to Mexico and resold there where the cartel collects the now laundered cash.

DEA = Drug Enforcement Administration (D.E.A.)

Administración de Cumplimiento de Leyes sobre las Drogas

ACID ATTACK ON AFGHAN GIRLS FOR GOING TO SCHOOL

MUSLIM WOMEN EATING SPAGHETTI IN PUBLIC

BEYOND THE VEIL (VIDEO)

WATCH THE VIDEO AND TRY TO COMPLETE THE SENTENCES

After the US invasion of Afghanistan, the world had a first time look at ________1____________

Women are encouraged _________2__________ to _________3 _________ , not only ____________4_______________but also as a religious requirement ________5________ All Mighty.

Are women wearing the veil in democratic societies like Canada oppressed or was it their freedom of choice?

She says it is a symbol of her ________6_______ and that she is basically following what her _____________7___________________.

When she wears the veil she can walk around ______8________she does not have ________9________ ,and she doesn't have to care about men _______10______ at her or ________11_______ at her or _____12______ comments . When she gives speeches wearing this, it forces people to _________13___________. People don't judge her __________14__________ , ______15______ or by the way she looks.

She says women are not forced into _________16____________ they are not ________17____________. It does not symbolize __________18_________ The veil, on the contrary is _________19___________.

Now, as her family cannot see her, it’s a great opportunity ______20_____ and ________21________ She’s wearing it regardless of _______22_______ of what is happening and ______23_______________ people get.

People in the campus have learnt that weating this doesn’t mean she can’t do this or that. She wasn’t _________24________ and they get to ___________25__________ .

AFGHAN WOMEN'S RIGHTS ( VIDEO )

Sixty-year-old Ghoma is sitting in a classroom for the first time in her life. These women are _______1_____ age, but that isn’t stopping them from learning how __________2____________.

Sherifa grew up in a home __________3_____________ didn’t believe girls should have an education, but her husband doesn’t feel the same, _______4_________ she is now able to attend this class.

Because of our age, we cannot go to regular schools, that’s why we’re here. We came here so that __________5_________and get an education.

Women are slowly becoming more vocal in a culture _________6__________ any real power, education, they believe, would give them just that.

I want to become a teacher ________7____________ teach other women. I’ll encourage other girls to study and have an education because it will play a beneficial role in our lives.

Thousands of women in this province have had to ________8________ themselves after losing their husbands during the wars. These are some of them. Maybe they aren’t lucky enough _________9_________ literacy classes, but at least, they are learning crafts.

Over one hundred women are benefiting from this local project making just enough money ________10_________ their sewing and embroidery.

It is a big _________11____________improving the lives of the women of Kandahar. Just a few years ago, they weren’t able to venture __________12____________ without a male escort. Today things have changed. They come to bazars and some are fighting back. This woman is one of them, her predecessor was gunned down __________13___________ last year. Ronata Ree knows she could be next, but it is not the Taliban _________14___________, but a culture which ___________15______________ women. The Taliban is not the ________16___________, the biggest problem for women is Pashtun culture, which doesn’t believe in __________17____________. A generation of women may have never had the chance to change their lives for the better, and for those who are now trying, it may be ___________18____________ before conservative traditions are locked away.