The violent arena of domestic abuse litigation has grown a bit more volatile here, now that a judge has decided to hold two women in contempt of court for returning to men who had been ordered to stay away from them. "You can't have it both ways," said Judge Megan Lake Thornton of Fayette County District Court in recently fining two women $100 and $200 respectively for obtaining protective orders forbidding their partners from contacting them, then relenting and contacting the men. Ruling that the order was mutually binding, Judge Thornton also cited the men for contempt. "It drives me nuts when people just decide to do whatever they want," said Judge Thornton, who is experienced in the state's thick domestic abuse docket, which produces close to 30,000 emergency protective orders a year. Kentucky officials say there is a virtual epidemic of abusive relationships in the state. Judge Thornton's ruling has alarmed advocates for battered women, who plan to appeal it. The advocates say the finding goes beyond existing law and is unrealistic because some renewed contacts often prove unavoidable in domestic abuse cases, which involve economic and family dependency and other complications of daily living. The state office on domestic violence has pointedly agreed, warning that the ruling could cause abused women to hesitate in bringing their plight before the courts for fear of being chastised for their trouble. "The reality is it's easy to say they should never have contact," said Sherry Currens, executive director of the Kentucky Domestic Violence Association, an advocacy and legal protection group. "But we're talking about people in long-term relationships. They may have children in common. It's pretty hard to say, 'Never speak again.' People have financial difficulties. They may love the partner. It's not an easy thing." But Judge Thornton declared in court, "When these orders are entered, you don't just do whatever you damn well please and ignore them." The ruling stunned Cindra Walker, the lawyer for the two women, who is with Central Kentucky Legal Services, which represents many of the thousands of indigent women caught in abusive relationships. "For over five years, I've been in court practically every day on these abuse cases," Ms. Walker said, "and I've never before had a victim threatened with contempt."

Question: "What are two of the reasons Sherry Currens gives for people violating protective orders?"

Response: "Financial difficulties"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: yes

Problem: The new administration had already begun exploring possible diplomatic options, retracing many of the paths traveled by its predecessors.U.S. envoys again pressed the Taliban to turn Bin Laden "over to a country where he could face justice" and repeated, yet again, the warning that the Taliban would be held responsible for any al Qaeda attacks on U.S. interests. The Taliban's representatives repeated their old arguments. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told us that while U.S. diplomats were becoming more active on Afghanistan through the spring and summer of 2001, "it would be wrong for anyone to characterize this as a dramatic shift from the previous administration." In deputies meetings at the end of June, Tenet was tasked to assess the prospects forTaliban cooperation with the United States on al Qaeda. The NSC staff was tasked to flesh out options for dealing with the Taliban. Revisiting these issues tried the patience of some of the officials who felt they had already been down these roads and who found the NSC's procedures slow." We weren't going fast enough,"Armitage told us. Clarke kept arguing that moves against the Taliban and al Qaeda should not have to wait months for a larger review of U.S. policy in South Asia." For the government," Hadley said to us,"we moved it along as fast as we could move it along." As all hope in moving the Taliban faded, debate revived about giving covert assistance to the regime's opponents. Clarke and the CIA's Cofer Black renewed the push to aid the Northern Alliance. Clarke suggested starting with modest aid, just enough to keep the Northern Alliance in the fight and tie down al Qaeda terrorists, without aiming to overthrow the Taliban. Rice, Hadley, and the NSC staff member for Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, told us they opposed giving aid to the Northern Alliance alone. They argued that the program needed to have a big part for Pashtun opponents of theTaliban. They also thought the program should be conducted on a larger scale than had been suggested. Clarke concurred with the idea of a larger program, but he warned that delay risked the Northern Alliance's final defeat at the hands of the Taliban. During the spring, the CIA, at the NSC's request, had developed draft legal authorities-a presidential finding-to undertake a large-scale program of covert assistance to the Taliban's foes.

Question: "Who thought the program should be larger?"

Answer: "Rice"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer: yes

Input: Fossils give clues about major geological events. Fossils can also give clues about past climates. Fossils of ocean animals on the top of a mountain? Ocean animals have been found on the Earths tallest mountain. Its hard to believe, but it is true. These fossils were found at the top of Mt. Everest. Mt. Everest is the highest mountain on Earth. These fossils showed that this entire area was once at the bottom of a sea. It can only mean that Mt. Everest was uplifted. In fact, the entire Himalaya mountain range was raised. It was forced up from the collision of two continents. Fossils of plants are found in Antarctica. Now, Antarctica is almost completely covered with ice. Plants do not grow in Antarctica. According to fossils, they once did. This means that Antarctica was once much warmer than it is now. These fossils tell us about Antarcticas past climate.

Does the response "Plants must have grown on Antarctica in the past, though they do not now" correctly answer the question "What does the fact that fossils have been found on the top of Antarctica?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output:
yes