Input: Animated history of the US. Of course the cartoon is highly oversimplified, and most critics consider it one of the weakest parts of the film. But it makes a valid claim which you ignore entirely: That the strategy to promote "gun rights" for white people and to outlaw gun possession by black people was a way to uphold racism without letting an openly terrorist organization like the KKK flourish. Did the 19th century NRA in the southern states promote gun rights for black people? I highly doubt it. But if they didn't, one of their functions was to continue the racism of the KKK. This is the key message of this part of the animation, which is again being ignored by its critics. Buell shooting in Flint. You write: "Fact: The little boy was the class thug, already suspended from school for stabbing another kid with a pencil, and had fought with Kayla the day before". This characterization of a six-year-old as a pencil-stabbing thug is exactly the kind of hysteria that Moore's film warns against. It is the typical right-wing reaction which looks for simple answers that do not contradict the Republican mindset. The kid was a little bastard, and the parents were involved in drugs -- case closed. But why do people deal with drugs? Because it's so much fun to do so? It is by now well documented that the CIA tolerated crack sales in US cities to fund the operation of South American "contras" It is equally well known that the so-called "war on drugs" begun under the Nixon administration is a failure which has cost hundreds of billions and made America the world leader in prison population (both in relative and absolute numbers).

Does the response "Carter" correctly answer the question "What US president is indirectly linked by the author to the Buell school shooter?"?
***
Output: no

Input: Mr. Neville ( ( ( Anthony Higgins , a young and arrogant artist and something of a Byronic hero , is contracted to produce a series of 12 landscape drawings of an estate by Mrs. Virginia Herbert for her absent and estranged husband . Part of the contract is that Mrs. Herbert agrees '' to meet Mr. Neville in private and to comply with his requests concerning his pleasure with me . '' Several sexual encounters between them follow , each of them acted in such a way as to emphasise reluctance or distress on the part of Mrs Herbert and sexual aggression or insensitivity on the part of Mr Neville . Meanwhile , whilst living on the estate , Mr. Neville gains quite a reputation with its dwellers , especially with Mrs. Herbert's son-in-law , Mr. Talmann . Mrs. Herbert , wearied of meeting Mr. Neville for his pleasure , tries to terminate the contract before all of the drawings are completed and orders Mr. Neville to stop . But he refuses to void the contract and continues as before . Then Mrs. Herbert's married , but as yet childless , daughter , Mrs. Talmann , who has apparently become attracted to Mr. Neville , seems to blackmail him into making a second contract in Which he agrees to comply with what is described as her pleasure , rather than his a reversal of the position in regard to her mother . A number of curious objects appear in Neville's drawings , Which point ultimately to the murder of Mr. Herbert , whose body is discovered in the moat of the house . Mr. Neville completes his twelve drawings and leaves the house .

Does the response "Mrs. Herbert's daughter" correctly answer the question "Who is the husband of Mrs. Talmann?"?
***
Output: yes

Input: We do not know exactly how the hijackers gained access to the cockpit; FAA rules required that the doors remain closed and locked during flight. Ong speculated that they had "jammed their way" in. Perhaps the terrorists stabbed the flight attendants to get a cockpit key, to force one of them to open the cockpit door, or to lure the captain or first officer out of the cockpit. Or the flight attendants may just have been in their way. At the same time or shortly thereafter, Atta-the only terrorist on board trained to fly a jet-would have moved to the cockpit from his business-class seat, possibly accompanied by Omari. As this was happening, passenger Daniel Lewin, who was seated in the row just behind Atta and Omari, was stabbed by one of the hijackers-probably Satam al Suqami, who was seated directly behind Lewin. Lewin had served four years as an officer in the Israeli military. He may have made an attempt to stop the hijackers in front of him, not realizing that another was sitting behind him. The hijackers quickly gained control and sprayed Mace, pepper spray, or some other irritant in the first-class cabin, in order to force the passengers and flight attendants toward the rear of the plane. They claimed they had a bomb. About five minutes after the hijacking began, Betty Ong contacted the American Airlines Southeastern Reservations Office in Cary, North Carolina, via an AT&T airphone to report an emergency aboard the flight. This was the first of several occasions on 9/11 when flight attendants took action outside the scope of their training, which emphasized that in a hijacking, they were to communicate with the cockpit crew. The emergency call lasted approximately 25 minutes, as Ong calmly and professionally relayed information about events taking place aboard the airplane to authorities on the ground. At 8:19, Ong reported:"The cockpit is not answering, somebody's stabbed in business class-and I think there's Mace-that we can't breathe-I don't know, I think we're getting hijacked." She then told of the stabbings of the two flight attendants. At 8:21, one of the American employees receiving Ong's call in North Carolina, Nydia Gonzalez, alerted the American Airlines operations center in Fort Worth, Texas, reaching Craig Marquis, the manager on duty. Marquis soon realized this was an emergency and instructed the airline's dispatcher responsible for the flight to contact the cockpit. At 8:23, the dispatcher tried unsuccessfully to contact the aircraft.

Does the response "Daniel Lewin" correctly answer the question "Who claimed they had a bomb?"?
***
Output:
no