Question

Over 500 dogs being delivered to a butcher house were saved by a Chinese animal protection organization.

The incident then triggered debate among Chinese netizens about the necessity of pouring so much money and efforts into saving dogs.

On Friday, a truck loaded with over 500 dogs were stopped by volunteers from animal protection organization on Jingha Expressway Beijing section.

Beijing Times reported these dogs were being delivered to slaughter houses in the city of Changchun, northeast Jilin Province and would be eventually served on dinner tables.

After negotiations with the truck driver, pet service provider Leepet Holding Corp.and a philanthropic foundation, Shang shan Foundation purchased these dogs, each paying 50,000 yuan.Dogs were then delivered to the headquarter of China Small Animal Protection Association (CSAPA), being taken care of and waiting for adoption.

After the “dog saving mission” was reported, Chinese net users debate over whether saving dogs worth so much efforts and money while there are still many poor and needy people in China lacking assistance.

Some net users argue the “dog saving mission” is placing overt attention to animals while lots of needy people are still left unattended.

A microblogger “Xiaowulaitajie” said on China's twitter­ like website, weibo.com, “Dogs are saved, adopted and they attracted media spotlight. We'd better spend such money and take such efforts in helping the needy people.”

Another microblogger, Liluping, said “We poured such huge sum of money into saving dogs.I would rather the money be spent on disaster relief.”

Some applaud volunteers'actions and show eagerness of offering their helping hands to those saved dogs.

Still many disapprove those “saving dogs” critics, but they argue that such act nonetheless promotes social progress.

A microblogger named “broken bridge” said, saving dogs does not run counter to taking care of people.Such enthusiasm in public affairs will help raise social awareness in helping the needy.

I think people and animals are created equal.Attention should be paid to people as well as animals.

1.Where did the article come from?

A.A storybook. B.A novel.

C.Internet. D.A magazine.

2.Which one has the similar meaning to the underlined phrase “run counter

to” in the last but one paragraph？

A.meet with B.go against

C.agree with D.come across

3.Whose opinion is closest to the writer's?

A.Some net users'. B.Broken bridge's.

C.Liluping's. D.Xiaowulaitajie's.

4.The following statements are TRUE except _______.

A.All the people don't think it right to save these dogs with so much money.

B.More than 25,000,000 yuan was given to the truck driver to purchase these dogs.

C.These dogs were finally saved and sent back to their owners.

D.Some people think it better to spend the money in helping the needy people.

Answer 1

1.C

2.B

3.B

4.C

【解析】

试题分析：本文讲述中国动物保护协会用了较多的金钱救了500只要被送去屠宰的狗，这件事引起了网上热议。

1. incident then triggered debate among Chinese netizens这件事引起了中国网民热议，可知本文最可能来自网络，故选C

2. microblogger named “broken bridge” said, saving dogs does not run counter to taking care of people.Such enthusiasm in public affairs will help raise social awareness in helping the needy.第二句对于公共事务的热情将会有益于提高帮助需要人群的意识，可知救狗与关心人类之间不冲突，A满足B冲突C同意D碰巧，故选B

3. think people and animals are created equal作者认为人和动物是平等的，故作者赞同救狗，倒数第二段broken bridge的观点也是赞同，故选B

4. were then delivered to the headquarter of China Small Animal Protection Association (CSAPA), being taken care of and waiting for adoption.狗被送到保护小动物协会，被照顾以及等待收养，可知狗并没有送还主人，故选C

考点：考查新闻阅读