Input: The protagonist Preetam ( ( ( Ganesh , on a visit to Eva Mall amidst a heavy wind , spots a pretty girl , Nandini . While staring at her , he inadvertently falls into a manhole . Nandini rescues him from the pit , but in the process loses her heart-shaped watch she had just bought . While accompanying his mother to Madikeri , Preetam confronts a man named Jaanu . Jaanu , who has been following Nandini , beats up Preetam thinking that he is in love with Nandini . Preetam , unaware that Jaanu has vowed not to allow any one near Nandini , trashes Jaanu and his gang in return . In Madikeri , Preetam meets Nandini unexpectedly . He identifies himself and expresses his love towards her and offers to tie the watch as an indication for their marriage . Nandini , who is already engaged rejects his request . Still , Preetam vows to marry Nandini if she meets him again . In the meantime , Preetam discovers that his host in Madikeri , Col. Subbayya is Nandini's father , who is pretty much deaf , and Nandini's marriage is a just a week away . Dejected , Preetam throws Nandini's heart-shaped watch away . But Nandini calls him over the phone and taunts him to return . Delighted , Preetam goes in search of her watch and brings it back . While searching it , he spots a rabbit , Which he calls Devadas , and brings it along with him . Since Nandini's friends are due to arrive from Mumbai for the marriage , Preetam takes Nandini to the railway station . The train from Mumbai is delayed by five hours , so Nandini and Preetam decide to visit a nearby hill-temple .

Does the response "A rabbit" correctly answer the question "What object did Preetam throw away, then search for and what did he find in addition?"?
***
Output: yes

Input: Defeated last month for re-election, Gov. Roy Barnes announced Tuesday that he will spend his first six months out of office as an unpaid attorney for the Atlanta Legal Aid Society, where he will represent poor people. "One day I'll probably do some legal work that I will charge a handsome fee for - at least I hope there are those that are still willing to pay," he told reporters. "But for now, I think it is important to fulfill my duty as a lawyer to help those who need it the most, to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves and to defend those whose life and livelihoods depend on it," he said. Previous governors have gone to prestigious law firms, joined corporate boards or returned to thriving businesses. "I don't think I've ever heard of anybody doing this before," Emory University political science professor Merle Black said. "If he's actually going to represent individuals for that organization, they're going to get great representation. You're going to get some powerful legal muscle there," Mr. Black said. Mr. Barnes said he already has his first case, but he wouldn't say what it is. Atlanta Legal Aid provides civil services to poor people in five metro Atlanta counties. Mr. Barnes said he was hoping to send a message to other lawyers. "This privilege to practice law is just that - it's a privilege. And it comes with a cost and it comes with a bill . We as lawyers have a responsibility to make sure that everyone, regardless of whether they can afford it or not, has quality representation. And if we don't do that, then we're not much of a profession," he said. Steven Gottlieb, the society's executive director, said, "I can't imagine anything that could be better than to have the governor of the state, in his first act as a private citizen, donate six months of his time to represent poor people .

Does the response "Yes" correctly answer the question "Does Gov Barnes thinks that all people are entitled to good lawyers regardless of their means to pay?"?
***
Output: yes

Input: After the August missile strikes, diplomatic options to press the Taliban seemed no more promising than military options. The United States had issued a formal warning to the Taliban, and also to Sudan, that they would be held directly responsible for any attacks on Americans, wherever they occurred, carried out by the Bin Laden network as long as they continued to provide sanctuary to it. For a brief moment, it had seemed as if the August strikes might have shocked the Taliban into thinking of giving up Bin Laden. On August 22, the reclusive Mullah Omar told a working-level State Department official that the strikes were counterproductive but added that he would be open to a dialogue with the United States on Bin Laden's presence in Afghanistan. Meeting in Islamabad with William Milam, the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, Taliban delegates said it was against their culture to expel someone seeking sanctuary but asked what would happen to Bin Laden should he be sent to Saudi Arabia. Yet in September 1998, when the Saudi emissary, Prince Turki, asked Mullah Omar whether he would keep his earlier promise to expel Bin Laden, the Taliban leader said no. Both sides shouted at each other, with Mullah Omar denouncing the Saudi government. Riyadh then suspended its diplomatic relations with the Taliban regime. (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates were the only countries that recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.) Crown Prince Abdullah told President Clinton and Vice President Gore about this when he visited Washington in late September. His account confirmed reports that the U.S. government had received independently. Other efforts with the Saudi government centered on improving intelligence sharing and permitting U.S. agents to interrogate prisoners in Saudi custody. The history of such cooperation in 1997 and 1998 had been strained. Several officials told us, in particular, that the United States could not get direct access to an important al Qaeda financial official, Madani al Tayyib, who had been detained by the Saudi government in 1997.67Though U.S. officials repeatedly raised the issue, the Saudis provided limited information. In his September 1998 meeting with Crown Prince Abdullah, Vice President Gore, while thanking the Saudi government for their responsiveness, renewed the request for direct U.S. access to Tayyib. The United States never obtained this access. An NSC staff-led working group on terrorist finances asked the CIA in November 1998 to push again for access to Tayyib and to see "if it is possible to elaborate further on the ties between Usama bin Ladin and prominent individuals in Saudi Arabia, including especially the Bin Laden family." One result was two NSC-led interagency trips to Persian Gulf states in 1999 and 2000. During these trips the NSC, Treasury, and intelligence representatives spoke with Saudi officials, and later interviewed members of the Bin Laden family, about Usama's inheritance.

Does the response "Sudan" correctly answer the question "During the two trips taken to the Persian Gulf, the NSC spoke to officials from what country?"?
***
Output:
no