Crusaders, Mamelukes, and Turks: The Crusaders established a feudal Christian state with Godfrey at its head. They built many impressive churches during the term of the first Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, but in 1187 they were driven out by Muslim forces under the great warrior Saladin. During the Sixth Crusade (1228 1229), the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II managed to secure Jerusalem for the Christians by negotiation. The Christians, however, could not hold the city. After they lost Jerusalem, a Mongol invasion swept through, and in 1244 the Mameluke dynasty of Egypt took control, ruling Jerusalem for the next 250 years. The city struggled to rebuild from Crusader wars and invasions. Much of the best Islamic architecture in the city was constructed in the Mameluke era, but the past thousand years had taken their toll: Jerusalem was unable to regain the prosperity it had enjoyed in earlier times. In the early 16th century, the Ottoman Turkish Empire was advancing through the Middle East. Jerusalem fell to the Ottomans in 1517, remaining under their control for 400 years. Suleiman the Magnificent rebuilt the walls and gates in the form they retain to this day. Fountains, inns, religious schools, and barracks were constructed. But when Suleiman died, his empire, including Jerusalem, began a long period of decline. The Holy City remained a backwater until the 19th century, when renewed interest among Christian pilgrims made it the destination of thousands of travelers each year.

Question: "During the Sixth Crusade, what city could the Christians not hold?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Constantinople"

Response: no

Among the early blows struck for independence was a rebellion in the town of Olhao. On 16 June 1808, the townsfolkarmed with little more than ancient swords, spears, and stonesattacked and captured the local French garrison. It's said that a party of local men then set sail from Olhao all the way to Brazil, without maps or navigational aids, to tell the king of the insurrection. The real battle, however, was waged under the leadership of the Duke of Wellington, whose coalition forces expelled the French after two years of bitter fighting. The war left Portugal further weakened, and in 1822 its major empire outpost, Brazil, declared independence. At the same time, a dispute over the crown continually raged between Pedro IV, the absentee monarch who preferred to reign as Emperor of Brazil rather than return to Portugal, and his brother Miguel. The power struggle, with strong overtones of absolutism versus liberalism, excited the interest and intervention of other powers. With British help, Pedro defeated Miguel off Cape St. Vincent in 1833, and his expeditionary force marched to Lisbon. Pedro took the throne, though armed struggle continued for months and the lingering bitterness long after that. By 1892 Portugal, racked by wars and the continuing expense of maintaining its African colonies (including those of Mozambique and Angola), declared itself bankrupt. The seeds of discontent with absolutist rule were sown. Kingdom's End Bloodshed would haunt the remaining years of the Portuguese monarchy. On 1 February 1908, the royal family was riding in an open carriage along the Lisbon river front plaza, Terreiro do Paco, when an assassin opened fire and killed King Carlos and the heir to the throne, Prince Luis Filipe. The prince's younger brother, Prince Manuel, was also hit, but he survived and was thus propelled to the throne at the tender age of 19. Amid republican agitation, a surprise uprising led by elements within the armed forces deposed Manuel in 1910. Having ruled for less than three years, Manuel died in exile in 1932 in England. The sudden end of more than seven centuries of monarchy brought confusion and crisis to the country. Presidents and prime ministers were ushered into and out of office an unbelievable 45 times between 1910 and 1926, until a military revolution suspended Portugal's problematic democracy.

Question: "Why was King Carlos assassinated?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Because he betrayed the nation"

Response: no

If you build a campfire, you start with a large stack of sticks and logs. As the fire burns, the stack slowly shrinks. By the end of the evening, all that is left is a small pile of ashes. What happened to the matter that you started with? Was it destroyed by the flames? It may seem that way. What do you think happened? The truth is that the same amount of matter still exists. The wood changed not only to ashes, but also to carbon dioxide, water vapor, and other gases. The gases floated off into the air, leaving behind just the ashes. Although matter was changed, it was not created or destroyed. Because the same amount of matter still exists, we can say that matter is conserved. You may wonder how it can be conserved if something is now missing? Assume you had measured the mass of the wood before you burned it. Assume you had also trapped the gases released by the burning wood and measured their mass and the mass of the ashes. What would you find? The ashes and gases combined have the same mass as the wood you started with. This example illustrates the law of conservation of mass.

Question: "Ashes and gases in an example of what?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Matter"

Response: yes

He repeatedly calls on his followers to embrace martyrdom since "The walls of oppression and humiliation cannot be demolished except in a rain of bullets." For those yearning for a lost sense of order in an older, more tranquil world, he offers his "Caliphate" as an imagined alternative to today's uncertainty. For others, he offers simplistic conspiracies to explain their world. Bin Laden also relies heavily on the Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb. A member of the Muslim Brotherhood executed in 1966 on charges of attempting to overthrow the government, Qutb mixed Islamic scholarship with a very superficial acquaintance with Western history and thought. Sent by the Egyptian government to study in the United States in the late 1940s, Qutb returned with an enormous loathing of Western society and history. He dismissed Western achievements as entirely material, arguing that Western society possesses "nothing that will satisfy its own conscience and justify its existence." Three basic themes emerge from Qutb's writings. First, he claimed that the world was beset with barbarism, licentiousness, and unbelief (a condition he called jahiliyya, the religious term for the period of ignorance prior to the revelations given to the Prophet Mohammed). Qutb argued that humans can choose only between Islam and jahiliyya. Second, he warned that more people, including Muslims, were attracted to jahiliyya and its material comforts than to his view of Islam; jahiliyya could therefore triumph over Islam. Third, no middle ground exists in what Qutb conceived as a struggle between God and Satan. All Muslims-as he defined them-therefore must take up arms in this fight. Any Muslim who rejects his ideas is just one more nonbeliever worthy of destruction. Bin Laden shares Qutb's stark view, permitting him and his followers to rationalize even unprovoked mass murder as righteous defense of an embattled faith. Many Americans have wondered, "Why do 'they' hate us?" Some also ask, "What can we do to stop these attacks?" Bin Laden and al Qaeda have given answers to both these questions.

Question: "Which religious faith did Sayyid Qutb follow?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Islamic"

Response:
yes