Problem: Clarifying the Record The defense of U.S. airspace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with preexisting training and protocols. It was improvised by civilians who had never handled a hijacked aircraft that attempted to disappear, and by a military unprepared for the transformation of commercial aircraft into weapons of mass destruction. As it turned out, the NEADS air defenders had nine minutes' notice on the first hijacked plane, no advance notice on the second, no advance notice on the third, and no advance notice on the fourth. We do not believe that the true picture of that morning reflects discredit on the operational personnel at NEADS or FAA facilities. NEADS commanders and officers actively sought out information, and made the best judgments they could on the basis of what they knew. Individual FAA controllers, facility managers, and Command Center managers thought outside the box in recommending a nationwide alert, in ground-stopping local traffic, and, ultimately, in deciding to land all aircraft and executing that unprecedented order flawlessly. More than the actual events, inaccurate government accounts of those events made it appear that the military was notified in time to respond to two of the hijackings, raising questions about the adequacy of the response. Those accounts had the effect of deflecting questions about the military's capacity to obtain timely and accurate information from its own sources. In addition, they overstated the FAA's ability to provide the military with timely and useful information that morning. In public testimony before this Commission in May 2003, NORAD officials stated that at 9:16, NEADS received hijack notification of United 93 from the FAA. This statement was incorrect. There was no hijack to report at 9:16. United 93 was proceeding normally at that time. In this same public testimony, NORAD officials stated that at 9:24, NEADS received notification of the hijacking of American 77. This statement was also incorrect. The notice NEADS received at 9:24 was that American 11 had not hit the World Trade Center and was heading for Washington, D.C. In their testimony and in other public accounts, NORAD officials also stated that the Langley fighters were scrambled to respond to the notifications about American 77,178 United 93, or both. These statements were incorrect as well. The fighters were scrambled because of the report that American 11 was heading south, as is clear not just from taped conversations at NEADS but also from taped conversations at FAA centers; contemporaneous logs compiled at NEADS, Continental Region headquarters, and NORAD; and other records.

Question: "Who handled the U.S. air defense on 9/11?"

Answer: "Civilians"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer: yes

Problem: Meridian National Corp. said it sold 750,000 shares of its common stock to the McAlpine family interests, for $1 million, or $1.35 a share. The sale represents 10.2% of Meridian's shares outstanding. The McAlpine family, which operates a number of multinational companies, including a London-based engineering and construction company, also lent to Meridian National $500,000. That amount is convertible into shares of Meridian common stock at $2 a share during its one-year term. The loan may be extended by the McAlpine group for an additional year with an increase in the conversion price to $2.50 a share. The sale of shares to the McAlpine family along with the recent sale of 750,000 shares of Meridian stock to Haden MacLellan Holding PLC of Surrey, England and a recent public offering have increased Meridian's net worth to $8.5 million, said William Feniger, chief executive officer of Toledo, Ohio-based Meridian.

Question: "What will be the increase in the conversion price per share if the loan is extended?"

Answer: "$1.35 a share"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer: no

Problem: One of the most dramatic changes in priorities proposed by the City Council would shift $25.6 million from funding for court-appointed lawyers to the Legal Aid Society. In a document released yesterday to justify its reordered priorities, the Council contended that Legal Aid can achieve greater economies of scale than lawyers appointed pursuant to Article 18-B of the County Law. The Council document also noted that "inexplicably" 18-B lawyers are handling 50 percent of the indigent criminal cases in New York City, even though their mandate is to handle only multi-defendant cases where the Legal Aid Society had a conflict. In past years, the City Council had consistently added $5.6 million to the $54.7 million proposed for the Legal Aid Society by former Mayor Giuliani, bringing the total to just a shade over $60 million. But this year for the first time, the Council is proposing shifting more than $20 million in funds earmarked by the Mayor for 18-B lawyers to the Legal Aid Society, which would increase its total funding to $80.4 million. That would reflect a jump in its current finding of about one-third. Meantime, the City Council proposed slashing the Mayor's allocation of $62.8 million for 18-B lawyers by 66 percent, to $21.4 million.

Question: "By increasing current funding to the Legal Aid society by $25.6 million, how much is the Council increasing their funding?"

Answer: "$80.4 million"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer:
yes