question: Michelle Obama has just started a campaign against childhood obesity with the admission that she put her girls Malia and Sasha on a diet because they were getting fat. Clearly, childhood obesity must be solved urgently. But is it a good idea for mothers to put their daughters on diets? Studies show that the more children diet, the more likely they are to become obese as adults. Research also shows that girls are highly influenced by their mothers when it comes to eating habits and body image. This was the case for Carly, 40, who blames her mother for her lifelong struggle with weight. "My mother was on a diet the whole time I was growing up," she says. "And she put me on my first diet when I was 10. I lost puppy fat, gained her approval and never ate normally again." America's First Lady clearly has a vital healthy eating message to convey. But could this be damaging for Malia and Sasha? Could they develop eating disorders because of it? "It's wrong just to blame mothers for their daughters' eating disorders," says Susan Ringwood, chief executive of the eating disorders charity. "There is a genetic component to eating disorders." However, "We do know that parents have a very strong influence over a child's eating. It's important to realize that you are your daughter's role model. Girls idolize their mothers." says Ringwood. "No food should ever be 'good 'or' bad'," Ringwood says. Instead, "You have to make it clear that food is a sociable, healthy and fun part of life, not something to be feared." "Talk to her about body image," Ringwood says. "Talk about how curves are an important and exciting part of being a woman. Show her that anorexic ) fashion models are not sexy, but ill. The pressure on girls today is immense," she says. Never forget that you are the authoritative voice, too.
1. Who are Michelle Obama's girls?
2. Were they getting heavy?
3. What do the studies show about diets
4. Who is susan ringwood?
5. Do girls idolize their mothers?
6. Is there a genetic component to eating disorders
7. Should food be" good or bad"?
8. Should food be feared?
9. What is the pressure on girls today?
10. How old is Carly?
11. Who does she blame?
12. Who has an eating message?
13. When did Carly go on her first diet?
14. What did she lose?
15. Is it wrong just to blame mothers?
****
answer: 1. Malia and Sasha
2. yes
3. they show that the more children diet, the more likely they are to become obese
4. chief executive of the eating disorders charity
5. yes
6. yes
7. no
8. no
9. immense
10. 40
11. her mother
12. America's First Lady
13. when she was 10
14. puppy fat
15. yes

question: Once there was a fish who had lived his whole life in his bowl. He often got bored and wished to see the rest of the world, but because he was a fish, he couldn't leave the water. So one day he made a special fish suit that would allow him to walk on land and breathe air like humans. He knew this would change his life, and make him rich, but first he would have to test it out.

He put the suit on and leaped from the bowl that until now had been his whole world. The suit worked! Now he could go where he wanted.

First he went to the kitchen of the house. There he saw a parrot eating a cracker. Second he went outside to the yard. He saw squirrels there running around looking for food. Third he went to the barn in the field. He saw a mommy cow. She was teaching her calf how to run. Finally he went to forest where he saw more trees than he had ever seen in his whole life.

But after all this he was tired, and made up his mind to go back to his home in the bowl. It was a lot of work trying to see the world. He took off the special suit and splashed back into the water. His suit had passed the test and he was very happy, but he had made up his mind that his bowl was the place for him.
1. Where did the fish live?
2. For how long?
3. Did he find that exciting?
4. So how'd he feel?
5. And what did he want to do?
6. Could he?
7. Why?
8. Why not?
9. So what'd he do to change that?
10. What'd it do?
11. And what else?
12. Like who?
13. What'd he know?
14. But what'd he have to do first?
15. Did the suit work?
16. Where could he now go?
17. So where'd he go first?
18. What'd he see there?
19. Doing what?
20. Where did he go next?
****
answer: 1. in his bowl.
2. his whole life
3. No
4. He often got bored
5. see the rest of the world
6. No
7. he couldn't leave the water.
8. because he was a fish
9. he made a special fish suit
10. allow him to walk on land
11. breathe air
12. humans
13. this would change his life, and make him rich
14. test it out
15. Yes
16. where he wanted
17. the kitchen of the house
18. a parrot
19. eating a cracker
20. outside to the yard.

question: Hoover began using wiretapping in the 1920s during Prohibition to arrest bootleggers. In the 1927 case Olmstead v. United States, in which a bootlegger was caught through telephone tapping, the United States Supreme Court ruled that FBI wiretaps did not violate the Fourth Amendment as unlawful search and seizure, as long as the FBI did not break into a person's home to complete the tapping. After Prohibition's repeal, Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934, which outlawed non-consensual phone tapping, but allowed bugging. In the 1939 case Nardone v. United States, the court ruled that due to the 1934 law, evidence the FBI obtained by phone tapping was inadmissible in court. After the 1967 case Katz v. United States overturned the 1927 case that had allowed bugging, Congress passed the Omnibus Crime Control Act, allowing public authorities to tap telephones during investigations as long as they obtain a warrant beforehand.

In March 1971, the residential office of an FBI agent in Media, Pennsylvania was burglarized by a group calling itself the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI. Numerous files were taken and distributed to a range of newspapers, including The Harvard Crimson. The files detailed the FBI's extensive COINTELPRO program, which included investigations into lives of ordinary citizensincluding a black student group at a Pennsylvania military college and the daughter of Congressman Henry Reuss of Wisconsin. The country was "jolted" by the revelations, which included assassinations of political activists, and the actions were denounced by members of Congress, including House Majority Leader Hale Boggs. The phones of some members of Congress, including Boggs, had allegedly been tapped.
1. What act let authorities wiretap people's phones with a warrant?
2. Who was it passed by?
3. Which case overturned Olmstead v. United States?
4. In what year?
5. What happened in March 1971?
6. by who?
7. What did they take from there?
8. And what did they do with them?
9. What program did they have information on?
10. And it included investigations into whose lives?
11. How did the population react?
12. What did Hoover begin doing?
13. When?
14. For what purpose?
15. What had happened to some members of Congress?
16. What did the Communications Act of 1934 do?
17. And it was passed after what?
18. Who was Hale Boggs at the time?
19. Where was the office of the FBI agent who was burglarized?
****
answer:
1. the Omnibus Crime Control Act
2. Congress
3. Katz v. United States
4. 1967
5. the residential office of an FBI agent was burglarized
6. a group calling itself the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI.
7. Numerous files
8. They were distributed to a range of newspapers
9. the COINTELPRO program
10. the lives of ordinary citizens
11. The country was "jolted" by the revelations
12. He began using wiretapping
13. in the 1920s
14. to arrest bootleggers
15. Their phones had allegedly been tapped
16. outlawed non-consensual phone tapping, but allowed bugging
17. the 1927 case Olmstead v. United States
18. House Majority Leader
19. Media, Pennsylvania