After the 1998 embassy bombings, the U.S. government tried to develop a clearer picture of Bin Laden's finances. A U.S. interagency group traveled to Saudi Arabia twice, in 1999 and 2000, to get information from the Saudis about their understanding of those finances. The group eventually concluded that the oft-repeated assertion that Bin Laden was funding al Qaeda from his personal fortune was in fact not true. The officials developed a new theory: al Qaeda was getting its money elsewhere, and the United States needed to focus on other sources of funding, such as charities, wealthy donors, and financial facilitators. Ultimately, although the intelligence community devoted more resources to the issue and produced somewhat more intelligence, it remained difficult to distinguish al Qaeda's financial transactions among the vast sums moving in the international financial system. The CIA was not able to find or disrupt al Qaeda's money flows. The NSC staff thought that one possible solution to these weaknesses in the intelligence community was to create an all-source terrorist-financing intelligence analysis center. Clarke pushed for the funding of such a center at Treasury, but neither Treasury nor the CIA was willing to commit the resources. Within the United States, various FBI field offices gathered intelligence on organizations suspected of raising funds for al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. By 9/11, FBI agents understood that there were extremist organizations operating within the United States supporting a global jihadist movement and with substantial connections to al Qaeda. The FBI operated a web of informants, conducted electronic surveillance, and had opened significant investigations in a number of field offices, including New York, Chicago, Detroit, San Diego, and Minneapolis. On a national level, however, the FBI never used the information to gain a systematic or strategic understanding of the nature and extent of al Qaeda fundraising. Treasury regulators, as well as U.S. financial institutions, were generally focused on finding and deterring or disrupting the vast flows of U.S. currency generated by drug trafficking and high-level international fraud. Large-scale scandals, such as the use of the Bank of New York by Russian money launderers to move millions of dollars out of Russia, captured the attention of the Department of the Treasury and of Congress. Before 9/11, Treasury did not consider terrorist financing important enough to mention in its national strategy for money laundering.

Question: "Who were on opposite sides of the idea to create an all-source terrorist-financing intelligence analysis center?"

Answer: "Congress"

Response: no

Billy had a pet turtle that he took good care of, everyday. His turtle's name was Tumble. Tumble liked to walk around outside in the garden and dig small holes to sleep in. Billy loved Tumble and would visit him outside when he got home from school. Tumble's favorite food was oatmeal. So, every day after school, Billy would make Tumble a big bowl of oatmeal and take it outside for Tumble to enjoy. Tumble would see Billy and walk up to him as fast as a turtle can go. Billy would put the bowl down and wait for Tumble to come up to the bowl to eat from it. When Tumble reached the bowl, he put his nose on it. But, the oatmeal was too hot to eat. Billy reached down and blew on the hot oatmeal, to cool it down for Tumble to eat. Once the oatmeal was cool enough, Tumble could dig in and eat his big bowl of oatmeal. Billy loved to watch as Tumble ate his bowl of oatmeal, because Billy took good care of Tumble, everyday.

Question: "What kinds of things did Tumble like to do?"

Answer: "Sleep in his cage"

Response: no

Surely, you have noticed the tall poles along the roadside. Do you know what is on top of those poles? Thats right, wires that carry electric current. These wires carry electric current to your home. But what is electric current? Electric current is actually the flow of electrons. You may recall, an electron is the outer-most particle in an atom. They have a negative charge. Electricity is the continuous flow of these particles. Electrons are able to move through wires. Their speed can even be measured. The SI unit for electric current (or speed) is the ampere (A). Ampere is often shortened to amp. Electric current may flow in just one direction, or it may keep reversing direction. Direct current (DC) flows in only one direction. Direct current is what is used in devices like flashlights. Alternating current (AC) flows in two directions. This is the type of current that flows into your home through wires.

Question: "How many directions does a current flow in a flashlight?"

Answer: "1"

Response: yes

When 74-year-old Penny Sweat was evicted from the HUD-subsidized Glendale Senior Housing in Salt Lake City last month, she moved to a nonsubsidized apartment at five times her previous rent because she was unaware of her rights. It turns out the manager of the seniors complex, its attorneys and government overseers were unaware, too. Lee Kemp, a hearing-impaired World War II disabled vet, also was evicted, but he contacted Utah Legal Services and was told to stay put. Attorney Marty Blaustein then notified Utah Nonprofit Housing Corp., the building's owner, that Kemp's eviction was not legal and that he had a right to a hearing. That didn't stop Utah Nonprofit Housing's attorneys from then sending Kemp a summons to show cause why he had not moved out. Meanwhile, Sweat's granddaughter called Salt Lake City housing officials, federal housing officials, state officials and several agents of Utah Nonprofit Housing to find out about her grandmother's rights. Nobody knew. Blaustein then took Sweat's case along with Kemp's and demanded her ousting be rectified. Utah Nonprofit Housing President Marion Willey returned from an out-of-town trip and learned HUD procedures were not followed. The eviction was activated because of ongoing personality conflicts among seniors in the complex, he said, and the new building manager decided the problems were with Sweat and Kemp. Several tenants blame other neighbors as perpetrators of the rift, however. Willey said when his building manager called attorneys retained by the company, they erroneously told her she could go ahead and kick out the tenants. When she called HUD to make sure, the inquiry got bogged down in bureaucracy and nobody called her back. Willey says he has offered Sweat and Kemp apartments in another complex operated by his company at their old rates. He also is retaining new attorneys.

Question: "Who were the two tenants that were being evicted?"

Answer: "Kemp"

Response:
yes