A funeral for Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter and a noted foreign policy expert and thinker, will be held Friday at St. Matthew's Roman Catholic Cathedral in Washington, D.C. Brzezinski died May 26 in Virginia. He was 86. In a statement, Carter called Brzezinski "a superb public servant" as well as "brilliant, dedicated and loyal." Along with Henry Kissinger, Brzezinski helped shape U.S. foreign policy with a lasting impact, while also serving as an adviser to Presidents Lyndon Johnson and John F. Kennedy. One of his most well-known accomplishments came in 1978, when Brzezinski helped President Carter reach an agreement between Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat to secure the Camp David peace accords between the two countries. He also was involved in making other major U.S. foreign policy decisions during the Carter administration, including negotiating the Panama Canal Treaty, arming mujahedin in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet invaders and planning a failed mission to rescue 52 American hostages held in Iran. Alexander Vershbow, a former deputy secretary general of NATO and former U.S. ambassador to Russia, told VOA Brzezinski's wisdom also guided U.S. and NATO policy in the post-Cold War period. "On one hand, listening to the appeals of countries like Poland, like Czechoslovakia, like Hungary, to become part of the Western family, which they were denied 70 years ago ... but also reaching out to Russia, and trying to help Russia become an integral part of the European family, the common European house, as [former Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev described it," Vershbow said. Following his work in the White House, Brzezinski continued to be an influential voice on foreign policy matters. He served as a counselor and trustee at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a professor at Johns Hopkins University. Brzezinski went on to ruffle the feathers of Washington's power elite with his 1983 book, "Power and... What did Brzezinski guide after the cold war? A. the direction U.S. and NATO actions B. the Camp David accords C. White House directives D. not enough information
A

The popularity of lip pencils and crayons is soaring, I suspect it's because they're just so easy to use. I've been trying out two new ones to see which I prefer. In the red corner we have MAC Patent Polish Lip Pencil and in the blue corner we have NARS Velvet Matte Lip Pencil. So let's get ready to rumble while I put them through their paces. Although the packaging of these two is quite similar the formulation and finish of the lip colours are very different MAC Patent Polish is a light gloss and NARS Velvet Matte has a stark matte finish. So whether you prefer your lips sheer and glossy or pigmented and matte there should be something for everyone here. MAC Patent Polish Lip Pencil this is the first lip pencil that I've tried from MAC (apart from lip liner) and I'm really impressed with it. As the name suggests the finish is a very shiny gloss that gives an almost patent shine, it has the feel of a lip gloss but it's not sticky. The colour is called Spontaneous, MAC describe it as a 'soft plum with pearl'. It's definitely a plummy shade, although I can't really detect any pearl in there. It looks quite dark as a crayon but as it's very sheer it appears much more natural once it's on the lips. It's a great way to introduce darker lip colours to your make-up bag if you're not used to them. MAC Patent Polish Lip Pencil is a bit like a fabulous giant tinted lip balm! The crayon itself is chunky and easy to hold, the nib is quite chunky and not great for precision application, but you could use a lip brush to apply it. I love to apply MAC Patent Polish straight from the crayon, it's quick and easy, and as it's very light and sheer it's easy to wipe away any mistakes and re-apply. When did the author decide which lip product she liked better? A. not enough information B. while she tried both products C. after she tried both of the products D. before she tried both products
C

Q: Some years ago a woman on our staff came into my office to, basically, tell me off and complain to me about others and about myself. This woman had not been very supportive of me in my role ever since I began working there. I couldn't figure out if she was arrogant or lacking in self esteem. During this meeting / confrontation, she told me, in no uncertain terms, just what she didn't like about some recent decisions I had made. I listened to her speak for about 30 minutes. She, quite methodically, tore me apart. Initially, I had planned to hear her out, make a few vague remarks, and send her on her way, thinking that maybe she just needed to be heard. But about 20 minutes into her harangue, I had a change of heart. I decided that, if she asked for a response for me, if she asked my advice, I was going to tell her exactly what I thought. She did, in fact, ask me for a response. I asked her if she was a happy person, and said that I suspected that she was not, as she came across as a bully and was acting like a horrible person. She sat and looked at me, then burst into tears. I waited. Looking up, she said, "Yes, you are correct. I am a horrible person. And I am miserable. What can I do?" We spent some time discussing what she could do, and (even though I didn't want to take the time to do it) I asked her if she would like a mentor me? She said that she would like such a thing. This woman and I ended up becoming fairly, no, very good friends and she has been one of my strongest supporters. I didn't expect that. The friendship between the two after the meeting has lasted: A. Quite a few months B. not enough information C. 30 minutes D. 20 minutes
A: A