input: OPTIONS:
- they're red converse All-Stars
- they're battered
- not enough information
- they're gross Now, answer this question: "If you can answer three questions," the dog said, "you can wear the magic shoes." Tommy looked up and down the deserted street. "Did you ... say something?" "That's right. Didn't you hear me?" It was a gruff voice, with just a trace of an English accent, and it was definitely coming out of the dog. "You're a dog." In fact it was a huge, fat bulldog, with big flaps of skin hanging off the sides of its face. From where it sat, on the front steps of the abandoned motel, it looked Tommy straight in the eye. "That's correct," the dog said. Tommy stared hard at the dusty windows of the motel office. "This is a trick, right? There's a TV camera back there and you want to make me look stupid." "No tricks, Tommy. Just three questions." "C'mon," Tommy said. He deepened his voice. "Sit up." The dog stared at him. "Roll over. Play dead." "Cut the crap, Tommy. Do you want the shoes or not?" "Let me see 'em." The dog shifted its weight to one side, revealing a battered pair of red Converse All-Stars. "Yuck," Tommy said. "Those are gross." "Maybe," the dog said, "but they're magic." "What are the questions?" "Which of the following presidents died in office? Lincoln, McKinley, F.D.R.?" "C'mon. They all did. That's the same dumb question they use when they're trying to sell you a free portrait on the telephone." "Which weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pound of lead?" "They both weigh a pound. This is stupid. Next you're going to ask me who's buried in Grant's Tomb." The dog narrowed its eyes. "Have you done this before?" "Ulysses S. Grant," Tommy said. "Lemme see the shoes." They were just his size and felt pretty good, even though they were scuffed up and the metal things were gone out of the side vents. "I don't feel any different," Tommy said. "You need the shoes to look for the treasure," the dog said. "What treasure?" "When you're wearing the shoes, you can open the doors of the motel rooms." Question: Why didn't Tommy like the shoes === The answer to the above question is
A:
output: they're gross

The U.S. State Department has asked American embassies and consulates around the world to identify certain groups that should get extra scrutiny when they apply for visas. A series of directives also instructs U.S. diplomatic posts overseas to review the social media accounts of visa applicants who are suspected of terrorist ties or of having been in Islamic State group-controlled areas. The diplomatic cables sent by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson directed embassies to convene security and intelligence working groups to determine criteria for "population sets" that would warrant increased scrutiny before traveling to the U.S. Even if the applicant otherwise qualifies for a visa, those identified as meeting the criteria would require additional scrutiny, leading to a possible visa denial. It is the first evidence of a plan for the "extreme vetting" of foreigners entering the United States that President Donald Trump promised during his campaign. The four cables sent between March 10 and March 17 do not define which groups would be considered among the "population sets" requiring more scrutiny. But in the first glimpse into what "extreme vetting" may look like under the Trump administration, one of Tillerson's memos would have added to the interview process questions about an applicant's workplaces, employers, addresses and travel history going back 15 years, as well as all email addresses and social media handles used in the last five years. The questions were withdrawn in a following memo, pending approval of the list by another federal agency. The directives, first reported by Reuters, quickly drew criticism from rights groups and others who've accused Trump of discriminating against Muslims through his now-suspended ban on travelers from six predominantly Muslim countries Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. "These measures could provide license for discrimination based on national origin and religion,'' human rights group Amnesty International wrote in a letter to Tillerson on Thursday. "They... Question: Why are human rights groups protesting the proposed guidelines for extreme vetting? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- The guidelines could be used to discriminate based on religion and/or national origin
- not enough information
- Asking questions about an applicant's workplaces, employers, addresses and travel history is a violation of privacy
- Requiring all email addresses and social media handles used in the last five years is too onerous for travelers

Answer: The guidelines could be used to discriminate based on religion and/or national origin

Yes I had. In a domestic violence case (in which I was the accused, but by God I was innocent) with my ex girlfriend, the lawyer whom I hired and paid his dues, openly played a wheeling and dealing game for two and a half years with the prosecutor and had mercilessly thrown me in front of the prosecutor. My ex girlfriend was sexually abused by her own uncles at the age of 5 to 9, had a lot of illusions and psychological problems, along with Bi-Polar Disorder, however, dispite my requests, she never had ever visited a psychologist or psychiatrist in her then 24 years of lifetime, fearing she would be forced to unveil the uncles' child sexual abuse act and this would cause her dismissal from her immediate family. Although I mentioned this to my "so called" lawyer, he refused to mention her unstable psychological condition in the court. I believe by doing so, he also committed a crime by preventing a child sexual abuse case go unveiled. After all these and after having me pushed into loosing my otherwise strong case, I was sentenced with restriction order to my own home, loosing all I had paid for it, loosing my stuff inside home, aforced probation and a forced domestic violence course for no good reason, my so called bloody lawyer also sent to the court a paper indicating that I owed to him and never had paid his dues. Disgusting wheeling and dealing quite often happen between such disgusting lawyers and greedy, heartless prosecutors; unfortunately! My psychologist friend at the time said, "If you are in Illinois, in Champaign County and you have a penis, you are already accepted as guilty by birth to start with dude". They say "Sharks wouldn't attack and eat Lawyers after a ship sunk". Why? It's professional courtesy! Question: When Was the restriction order given? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- After the plea
- Before the plea
- not enough information
- After the plea

Answer:
After the plea