In India to purchase some horses , British aristocrat , Lord Esketh and his wife , Edwina , come to the town of Ranchipur at the invitation of the elderly Maharani . Their marriage is an unhappy one and Lord Esketh announces his intention to return to England and begin divorce proceedings . The spoiled , insensitive Edwina scoffs at this . She renews in Ranchipur an acquaintance with a former lover , Tom Ransome , now a dissolute alcoholic . She also meets and attempts to seduce a distinguished Hindu physician , Dr. Rama Safti , a decent man who is the elderly Maharani's personal choice to succeed her someday . Safti at first resists , but ultimately succumbs to Edwina's charms and falls hopelessly in love with her . Lord Esketh becomes aware of this , but Safti saves him from a man-eating tiger during a safari . Safti admits his love for Edwina to Lord Esketh , who is now sympathetic toward this good man's plight . Ransome feels the same way , warning Edwina to stay away from Safti , a friend he admires . Edwina similarly falls into disfavor with the Maharani , who explains that Safti has been raised to lead a pure life and that Edwina is unworthy of him . Ranchipur suddenly is ravaged by a natural disaster , an earthquake and flood . Dr. Safti is so busy saving lives that he can not personally care for Edwina , who has fallen ill . Ransome looks after her as well as for young Fern Simon , who has declared her love for him . When a dam is exploded by dynamite and as a result the flood waters recede , it is Dr. Safti who reveals that Ransome is the one who risked his personal safety to save the people of Ranchipur .

Question: "Who tries to seduce the man who saves Lord Esketh from a man-eating tiger during a safari?"

Answer: "Martha"

Response: no

Tocqueville asserted that the values that had triumphed in the North and were present in the South had begun to suffocate old-world ethics and social arrangements. Legislatures abolished primogeniture and entails, resulting in more widely distributed land holdings. This was a contrast to the general aristocratic pattern in which only the eldest child, usually a man, inherited the estate, which had the effect of keeping large estates intact from generation to generation. In America, in contrast, landed elites were less likely to pass on fortunes to a single child by the action of primogeniture, which meant that as time went by, large estates became broken up within a few generations which, in turn, made the children more equal overall. It was not always a negative development, according to Joshua Kaplan's interpretation of Tocqueville, since bonds of affection and shared experience between children often replaced the more formal relation between the eldest child and the siblings, characteristic of the previous aristocratic pattern. Overall, in the new democracies, hereditary fortunes became exceedingly difficult to secure and more people were forced to struggle for their own living. This rapidly democratizing society, as Tocqueville understood it, had a population devoted to "middling" values which wanted to amass, through hard work, vast fortunes. In Tocqueville's mind, this explained why America was so different from Europe. In Europe, he claimed, nobody cared about making money. The lower classes had no hope of gaining more than minimal wealth, while the upper classes found it crass, vulgar, and unbecoming of their sort to care about something as unseemly as money; many were virtually guaranteed wealth and took it for granted. At the same time in America, workers would see people fashioned in exquisite attire and merely proclaim that through hard work they too would soon possess the fortune necessary to enjoy such luxuries. Despite maintaining with Aristotle, Montesquieu, and others that the balance of property determined the balance of power, Tocqueville argued that, as America showed, equitable property holdings did not ensure the rule of the best men. In fact, it did quite the opposite. The widespread, relatively equitable property ownership which distinguished America and determined its mores and values also explained why the American masses held elites in such contempt.

Question: "How did Europeans' and Americans' attitudes toward amassing wealth differ?"

Answer: "Europeans preferred money while Americans preferred estate"

Response: no

From Babylon, Alexander went to Susa, one of the Achaemenid capitals, and captured its legendary treasury. He sent the bulk of his army to the Persian ceremonial capital of Persepolis via the Royal Road. Alexander himself took selected troops on the direct route to the city. He had to storm the pass of the Persian Gates (in the modern Zagros Mountains) which had been blocked by a Persian army under Ariobarzanes and then hurried to Persepolis before its garrison could loot the treasury. On entering Persepolis, Alexander allowed his troops to loot the city for several days. Alexander stayed in Persepolis for five months. During his stay a fire broke out in the eastern palace of Xerxes and spread to the rest of the city. Possible causes include a drunken accident or deliberate revenge for the burning of the Acropolis of Athens during the Second Persian War.

Question: "Who sent the bulk of his army to Persepolis?"

Answer: "Alexander"

Response: yes

Powell contended that it was not inconsistent to want to foster cooperation even with an organization like the Indonesian military, which has a history of human rights abuses. "If you get young officers, expose them to a military organization that is within a democratic political institution, such as the United States, then that rubs off on them," he said. In Malaysia, Powell met with Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has led the country since 1981. The Malaysian foreign minister, Syed Hamid Albar, later told local reporters that Powell had proposed that American and Malaysian officials review the idea of forming a regional training center in Malaysia to coordinate antiterrorism activities. His brief stop in Malaysia also highlighted the moral ambiguities of the effort to prevent terrorism and its emphasis on cooperation with governments that the United States has often criticized. The United States once distanced itself from Mahathir for strong-arm tactics with political rivals, and human rights groups criticize him for arresting and jailing scores of suspected militants, including some who may be linked to al-Qaida, without trial. Powell said his discussions with Mahathir "touched on the case" of his former deputy, Anwar Ibrahim, who is serving a 15-year sentence on charges of sodomy and abuse of power after trials that Powell said the United States had "always felt" were flawed. The assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, James Kelly, met on Tuesday morning with Anwar's wife, Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, for what she later told Malaysian reporters was a discussion about both the detention of her husband and six supporters, and the campaign against terrorism.

Question: "How is Colin Powell's approach to relations with the Indonesian military different than the US previous approach?"

Answer: "Powell contended that it was not inconsistent to want to foster cooperation even with an organization like the Indonesian military, which has a history of human rights abuses"

Response:
yes