(Q).
Of course, the most unforgettable classmate I had was also the most vicious bully. I attended a boarding school for badly behaved children and it had its fair share of bullies who had been expelled from mainstream schools. But this particular bully had even the teachers running scared. When he went off on one, it could take up to four teachers or members of care staff to get him under control. On my first night at boarding school, he stamped on someone's face and left them permanently disfigured. I never saw anything that bad again but it stayed with me and I could never sleep properly in that school again. On another occasion, it blew up and there were several members of staff restraining him when he farted. To see the teachers all moaning and groaning and huffing and puffing whilst trying to hold him down was hilarious, literally tears in their eyes. He was unpredictable and he didn't care. I once saw him swing a hammer at another pupil and throw snooker balls at another, and he used to punch as if he was throwing something, so it would result in a painful blow. Eventually, the staff couldn't cope with him as they were just as scared as we were. He was removed from the school and placed in a secure unit. The night he left, several of us cried with relief. Last year, I was reading an article in a newspaper when a name caught my eye. It seems he became a hopeless heroin addict at some point and had died in his flat on an overdose of prescription drugs and smack. I felt sad when I read it but I couldn't work out why. Maybe it was because my brother died in the same manner? He was certainly a character, an absolute nutter and ruthless bully who had everyone fearing him. Most definitely the most unforgettable classmate. What did become of the bully? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - Became a writer - Became a teacher - He became an hopeless heroin addict
(A).
He became an hopeless heroin addict

(Q).
The leading U.S. presidential hopefuls reacted strongly Monday to the massacre at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida. Sunday's incident that left 49 people dead and 53 others wounded was the worst mass shooting in U.S. history. The gunman, Omar Mateen, was a U.S. citizen and the son of Afghan parents. In her first speech since the shooting, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton told supporters in Cleveland, "The Orlando terrorist may be dead, but the virus that poisoned his mind remains very much alive." Clinton laid out a multi-faceted approach to combating terrorism. The plan would disrupt terrorist groups by infiltrating their online networks, enhancing intelligence sharing among local and federal law enforcement agencies, and asking allied nations to help "prevent the radicalization and recruitment" of potential terrorists in the U.S. and Europe. In an apparent response to presumptive Republican Party opponent Donald Trump's charge that President Barack Obama and other Democrats refuse to use the word "radical" to describe terrorists who happen to be Muslim, Clinton said earlier on CNN that she is not afraid to use the term, but says she refuses "to demonize and demagogue and declare war on an entire religion." Doing so, she said, "plays right into the ISIS' hands." ISIS is an acronym for Islamic State, which is also known as IS, ISIL and Daesh. Clinton called for citizens to reach out to Muslims in the United States "to help us defeat this threat." She cited the need for "common sense reform" of gun ownership laws, including a ban on assault weapons. After Obama did not use the term "radical" in his remarks Sunday from the White House, Trump criticized Obama's approach to extremism and said the president "should step down." Trump, meanwhile, renewed a call for a ban on the entry of Muslim immigrants into the United States. "The only reason the killer was in America in the first place was we allowed his family to come here," Trump said in a speech to supporters in Manchester, New... why did Clinton use a multi-faced approach to combat terrorism Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - to chase terrorists away - to prevent terrorists from going to United states - to disrupt terrorist groups
(A).
to disrupt terrorist groups

(Q).
I am currently waiting for peer reviews of two books I've worked on: one sole-authored, one co-authored. We don't talk much about the experience of waiting for reviews, and it's not something that appears to have been researched. Yet it's something everyone doing academic work has to go through and it may be bad for our mental health. I'm finding it particularly difficult at the moment because a lot rides on these reviews. The sole-authored book, which is on a contentious topic, has already had one set of reviews. Reviewer 1 was utterly damning, saying "I couldn't find anything to praise". Luckily, Reviewers 2 and 3 were more measured, offering both praise and constructive criticism, and their input helped me to revise and strengthen the typescript. However, in the process, my editor and I realised that we needed further reviews from people with a particular kind of specialist knowledge. My editor approached around ten potential reviewers, but only one agreed to do the job. So I'm gibbering what if that person agrees with Reviewer 1? The co-authored book is in a contentious format. My co-authors and I decided that I would be the person to liaise with publishers, as I have form in this process. The last time I liaised with academic publishers for a co-authored book was in the early 2000s, and I'd forgotten how heavily responsible it makes me feel. Fortunately, I've found a publisher that is interested and has sent the book out for reviews, to two professional academics and two students. This is great and terrifying but at least there are four reviewers. Even so, what if they all think it's rubbish? In many ways I love the peer review system. I welcome feedback on my writing, and I'm not at all averse to constructive criticism. I am by no means arrogant enough to think I can write a good book without input from others. Yet peer review, as a process, is fraught with uncertainty. Comments may not be constructive, or may not come at all. They may be positive, or negative, or in between, or a mixture. Who said "I couldn't find anything to praise"? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - Reviewer 3 - Reviewer 1 - the editor - not enough information
(A).
Reviewer 1