(CNN) -- The U.S. space shuttle program retired in 2011, leaving American astronauts to hitchhike into orbit. But after three long years, NASA's successor is almost ready to make an entrance. Orion, the agency's newest manned spaceship, is being prepared for its first mission in December. In future missions, it will journey into deep space -- to Mars and beyond -- farther than humans have ever gone before. Orion comes loaded with superlatives. It boasts the largest heat shield ever built and a computer 400 times faster than the ones on the space shuttles. It will be launched into space on the most powerful rocket NASA has ever made. No astronauts will be aboard the December flight, which will test the spacecraft's systems for future manned missions. Final work on the spacecraft is under way at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Orion came one step closer to completion this month with the stacking of the crew module atop the service module. "Now that we're getting so close to launch, the spacecraft completion work is visible every day," Orion Program Manager Mark Geyer said in a statement. A 3,600-mile journey When complete, the Orion capsule will resemble a fencing foil, with a tall spire shooting up from a rounded base. At the top will sit a launch abort system, with downward-facing thrusters that would save the crew from a jarring crash in the event of a rocket malfunction. The bottom portion, the service module, will perform various functions such as in-space propulsion and cargo storage. Nestled between the two will be the crew module, capable of supporting human life from launch until recovery. Attached to the service module will be a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. For the first time since the space shuttle's debut launch in 1981, the crew compartment will ride on the tip of the rocket rather than hanging onto its side, evoking the configuration of the famous Apollo or Gemini missions.

Question: "What is significant about the Orion?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "NASA's successor is almost ready to make an entrance"

Response: no

We drove about a great deal--the country at the back of Deauville, going away from the sea, is lovely--very like England--charming narrow roads with high banks and hedges on each side--big trees with spreading branches meeting overhead--stretches of green fields with cows grazing placidly and horses and colts gambolling about. It is a great grazing and breeding country. There are many haras (breeding stables) in the neighbourhood, and the big Norman posters are much in demand. I have friends who never take their horses to the country. They hire for the season a pair of strong Norman horses that go all day up and down hill at the same regular pace and who get over a vast amount of country. We stopped once or twice when we were a large party, two or three carriages, and had tea at one of the numerous farmhouses that were scattered about. Boiling water was a difficulty--milk, cider, good bread and butter, cheese we could always find--sometimes a galette, but a kettle and boiling water were entirely out of their habits. They used to boil the water in a large black pot, and take it out with a big spoon. However, it amused us, and the water really did boil.

Question: "Many haras (breeding stables) could be spotted in the back of what country?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Breeding"

Response: no

Backers of Legal Aid services for the poor are pushing a measure that would increase court filing fees in Kentucky to raise money for the program, which faces steep funding cuts. The proposed bill, sponsored by Rep. Charles Geveden, D-Wickliffe, would double the portion of the fee that goes to Legal Aid -- in district court to $10 from $5 and in circuit court to $20 from $10. Kentucky's current fee for filing a case in district court is $50.50, and in circuit court $108. The increase still would leave Kentucky's filing fee costs below those of surrounding states and would raise about $1.3 million a year -- almost enough to replace what Legal Aid is losing from federal and other sources, said Jamie Hamon, executive director of the Access to Justice Foundation, a state poverty law resource center in Lexington. Geveden said his measure appears to be the only potential source of money for the program, which is being forced to lay off workers and close offices around the state. Geveden said he's concerned because federal funding hasn't increased in recent years, and states with increased poverty are taking a greater share of the money. ''If you don't come up with the money somewhere, legal services to people in need will diminish or go away,'' he said. Hamon said the proposed bill has attracted a number of co-sponsors, and Legal Aid backers are hoping to get it passed in the upcoming legislative session. Hamon said she knows fee increases aren't popular with lawmakers but hopes they realize the crisis Legal Aid is facing. ''A lot of poor people are not going to get served,'' she said. The measure has the endorsement of the Kentucky Bar Association. The association's board of governors voted unanimously last month to back the bill, said KBA President Stephen Catron, a Bowling Green lawyer. Legal Aid ''has been a godsend to a great number of people in this state,'' Catron said. ''We simply must find a way to provide those services to the public.'' Larry York, executive director of Appalachian Regional Defense Fund, which provides Legal Aid services in 37 Eastern Kentucky counties and is a KBA board member, said he hopes the measure is approved. ''It would really offset the current cuts,'' he said.

Question: "What organization has endorses the measure to increase legal aid fees?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Appalachian Regional Defense Fund"

Response: no

After the 1998 embassy bombings, the U.S. government tried to develop a clearer picture of Bin Laden's finances. A U.S. interagency group traveled to Saudi Arabia twice, in 1999 and 2000, to get information from the Saudis about their understanding of those finances. The group eventually concluded that the oft-repeated assertion that Bin Laden was funding al Qaeda from his personal fortune was in fact not true. The officials developed a new theory: al Qaeda was getting its money elsewhere, and the United States needed to focus on other sources of funding, such as charities, wealthy donors, and financial facilitators. Ultimately, although the intelligence community devoted more resources to the issue and produced somewhat more intelligence, it remained difficult to distinguish al Qaeda's financial transactions among the vast sums moving in the international financial system. The CIA was not able to find or disrupt al Qaeda's money flows. The NSC staff thought that one possible solution to these weaknesses in the intelligence community was to create an all-source terrorist-financing intelligence analysis center. Clarke pushed for the funding of such a center at Treasury, but neither Treasury nor the CIA was willing to commit the resources. Within the United States, various FBI field offices gathered intelligence on organizations suspected of raising funds for al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. By 9/11, FBI agents understood that there were extremist organizations operating within the United States supporting a global jihadist movement and with substantial connections to al Qaeda. The FBI operated a web of informants, conducted electronic surveillance, and had opened significant investigations in a number of field offices, including New York, Chicago, Detroit, San Diego, and Minneapolis. On a national level, however, the FBI never used the information to gain a systematic or strategic understanding of the nature and extent of al Qaeda fundraising. Treasury regulators, as well as U.S. financial institutions, were generally focused on finding and deterring or disrupting the vast flows of U.S. currency generated by drug trafficking and high-level international fraud. Large-scale scandals, such as the use of the Bank of New York by Russian money launderers to move millions of dollars out of Russia, captured the attention of the Department of the Treasury and of Congress. Before 9/11, Treasury did not consider terrorist financing important enough to mention in its national strategy for money laundering.

Question: "What different possible funding sources for Bin Laden were considered?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Government"

Response:
no