Input: Hannah Harvey was a ten year old that had many friends in school. She lived in New York and enjoyed doing gymnastics and playing soccer. One day, Hannah came home from school and her parents greeted her. She knew that something was different by the expressions on their faces. Even Jackson, Hannah's dog, was acting different. Hannah asked why everyone was being so strange. Hannah's father, who was known as Pop, explained to Hannah that his job was forcing him to move. Hannah did not seem to think this was too big of a deal. Then, Hannah's mother explained that they were moving to Kenya. Kenya, she explained, was a place in Africa and life would be very different there. As Hannah began to cry thinking about all of her friends at home, Hannah's mother calmed her with a gentle touch. Jackson began howling as Hannah cried, but was also calmed by Hannah's mother. Hannah spent the next two weeks visiting her friends and saying her goodbyes. She did not know the next time she would be home. She cried very hard when she said goodbye to her best friend, Susan. Susan did not quite understand where Kenya was, but promised to visit Hannah. The next day, Hannah boarded a plane with her family. At first, they thought that Jackson could not come with them. However, Hannah worked hard and helped make sure that he had all of his shots so that he could come. After he had them all, the airport said it was OK for Jackson to come! The Harvey family left and off they went across the ocean to begin their new life in Kenya.

Does the response "The police said so" correctly answer the question "Why is the family dog Jackson getting shots?"?
***
Output: no

Input: Although Bin Laden, Atef, and KSM initially contemplated using established al Qaeda members to execute the planes operation, the late 1999 arrival in Kandahar of four aspiring jihadists from Germany suddenly presented a more attractive alternative. The Hamburg group shared the anti-U.S. fervor of the other candidates for the operation, but added the enormous advantages of fluency in English and familiarity with life in the West, based on years that each member of the group had spent living in Germany. Not surprisingly, Mohamed Atta, Ramzi Binalshibh, Marwan al Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah would all become key players in the 9/11 conspiracy. Mohamed Atta was born on September 1, 1968, in Kafr el Sheikh, Egypt, to a middle-class family headed by his father, an attorney. After graduating from Cairo University with a degree in architectural engineering in 1990, Atta worked as an urban planner in Cairo for a couple of years. In the fall of 1991, he asked a German family he had met in Cairo to help him continue his education in Germany. They suggested he come to Hamburg and invited him to live with them there, at least initially. After completing a course in German, Atta traveled to Germany for the first time in July 1992. He resided briefly in Stuttgart and then, in the fall of 1992, moved to Hamburg to live with his host family. After enrolling at the University of Hamburg, he promptly transferred into the city engineering and planning course at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, where he would remain registered as a student until the fall of 1999. He appears to have applied himself fairly seriously to his studies (at least in comparison to his jihadist friends) and actually received his degree shortly before traveling to Afghanistan. In school, Atta came across as very intelligent and reasonably pleasant, with an excellent command of the German language. When Atta arrived in Germany, he appeared religious, but not fanatically so. This would change, especially as his tendency to assert leadership became increasingly pronounced. According to Binalshibh, as early as 1995 Atta sought to organize a Muslim student association in Hamburg. In the fall of 1997, he joined a working group at the Quds mosque in Hamburg, a group designed to bridge the gap between Muslims and Christians. Atta proved a poor bridge, however, because of his abrasive and increasingly dogmatic personality. But among those who shared his beliefs, Atta stood out as a decisionmaker.

Does the response "Mohamed Atta was born on September 1, 1968, in Kafr el Sheikh, Egypt. After completing a course in German, Atta traveled to Germany for the first time in July 1992" correctly answer the question "When was Mohammad Atta born and when did he move to Germany?"?
***
Output: yes

Input: 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.

Does the response "They could make money via hard work versus in europe no one cared about making money" correctly answer the question "How were the American lower class's views of wealth and fine possessions different from those of the European lower class?"?
***
Output:
yes