Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: The Trump administration's recent airstrikes in Syria just the latest action in a long-running conflict that has challenged U.S. presidents of both parties has prompted a new round of questions on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers are asking where last week's strikes fit in the larger U.S. strategy in response to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and for greater clarity to prevent an escalation of the conflict. "There needs to be a comprehensive strategy here laid out by the administration for Congress in terms of the options to pursue because of the urgency," House Foreign Affairs Chairman Ed Royce said during a House panel Wednesday. "Does the administration support imposing costs on the Russians and the Iranians for their role in the Assad regime's war crimes against its own people?" In his speech announcing the air strikes to the American people Friday, President Trump said the United States is "prepared to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents." But later Friday, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the latest action against Assad was a "one-time shot." Trump ordered Friday's strikes just weeks after saying the U.S. would "be coming out of Syria like very soon," reflecting changes in the administration's posture in response to Assad's reported use of prohibited chemical agents. "We're at a real risk here of conducting strikes without any clear strategy," Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, told VOA. "The Trump administration for the past several months has issued contradictory statements, with former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and some diplomats saying that the U.S. troops inside Syria, in eastern Syria, would be dedicated to also countering Iran inside Syria. The Pentagon was saying something completely different defeating ISIS and continuing that campaign," he said. Trump administration officials told a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs committee Wednesday the president's goals in Syria remain clear. Question: How many were killed via the airstrike? Options: A. 1500 B. not enough information C. 100 D. 30
B

(Question)
Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: In September, a new and widely advertised school opened its doors in the capital city - the Part-time Evening Elementary School. You could read in its beautifully printed brochure that the school was designed to help all those "children of wealthy parents, who are too busy to learn during the day due to the time spent on the difficult task of maintaining our country's high ranking in the very competitive field of computer games." In other words: when a parent wanted to have some peace and quiet, he or she would leave the kid at home in front of the computer with a bag of chips. When the kid had enough, which normally happened in the evening, he would go to school for about two hours. The creator of PEES and its first principal was Krzycho Jedynak, a former junior high PE teacher in Potylica, a computer games fan and the winner of, as we could read in the beautifully printer brochure, "a local Amiga gaming championship". Understanding exactly the needs of his future students, he planned to open classes of the following profiles: platform PSP (one group), platform PC (three groups), platform GB (one) and platform Mac (cancelled due to a lack of interest). The school received an astonishing number of applications (four for each spot), which meant that many kids spent their days playing computer games and that many parents wanted time for themselves. To be accepted, young candidates had to demonstrate their social and psychological maturity and computer instincts, evaluated according to a patented method developed by Mr. Jedynak. The parents, on the other hand, had to pass an exam in using a joystick and provide a proof of income of at least 7000 zloty per month for a young family member. During the registration process was so competitive, it ended in violence. A disappointed father of a child who didn't get in, shouted that only VIP brats had been accepted, for which he got hit in the face by editor Furtok, in private - a father of a kid who got in to group B2/platform PC. Question: The number of slots available in the school were: Options: A. Just right. B. Too few. C. not enough information D. Too many.
(Answer)
B

Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: Cooking food is something we have done since the first caveman threw a mammoth steak on the fire. While it is true that cooking does cause chemical changes in food and a loss of some nutrients, it is a clear case of being alert and not alarmed. Every time we cook food, there is some degree of nutrient loss. Exposing food to heat, oxygen or light alters the nutrients found in food. It is not all bad news though because cooking food also has its advantages. Cooking food can increase its digestibility, meaning you will get more nutrients out of it. And even though there may be less of some nutrients from cooking, it is swings and roundabouts as the availability of certain phytonutrients increases. And of course, let's not forget that heating food kills some of the nasty microbes that can cause food poisoning. The principle behind a raw food diet is that cooking food destroys the natural enzymes and nutrients that would otherwise give us optimal health and control body weight. A raw food diet is almost entirely plant-based and includes fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, grains, vegetable oils and juices in their natural uncooked state. Now on the pro side for a raw food diet, it means if you are currently eating a lot of processed food, then switching to raw food will be a clear nutritional win. So that gets a big tick. Unquestionably, there are many benefits to eating plenty of fruits and vegetables. These foods are high in nutrients and fibre and low in kilojoules. But is raw superior to cooked? A review of 28 research studies found eaters of both cooked and raw vegetables had a lower risk of cancer compared to people who did not eat many vegetables in the first place. Where the science gets murky is the claim that raw food is better because cooking destroys the enzymes found in plants. It is 100 percent correct that cooking will do this. But so too does digestion. Few enzymes survive their trip through the hydrochloric acid spa bath in the stomach. And those plant enzymes are essential only to the plants. The... Question: After cooking vegetables, they are probably: Options: A. less tasty B. more healthy C. not enough information D. less healthy
D