In chapters 3 and 4 we described how the U.S. government adjusted its existing agencies and capacities to address the emerging threat from Usama Bin Laden and his associates. After the August 1998 bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, President Bill Clinton and his chief aides explored ways of getting Bin Laden expelled from Afghanistan or possibly capturing or even killing him. Although disruption efforts around the world had achieved some successes, the core of Bin Laden's organization remained intact. President Clinton was deeply concerned about Bin Laden. He and his national security advisor, Samuel "Sandy" Berger, ensured they had a special daily pipeline of reports feeding them the latest updates on Bin Laden's reported location. In public, President Clinton spoke repeatedly about the threat of terrorism, referring to terrorist training camps but saying little about Bin Laden and nothing about al Qaeda. He explained to us that this was deliberate-intended to avoid enhancing Bin Laden's stature by giving him unnecessary publicity. His speeches focused especially on the danger of nonstate actors and of chemical and biological weapons. As the millennium approached, the most publicized worries were not about terrorism but about computer breakdowns-the Y2K scare. Some government officials were concerned that terrorists would take advantage of such breakdowns. On November 30, 1999, Jordanian intelligence intercepted a telephone call between Abu Zubaydah, a longtime ally of Bin Laden, and Khadr Abu Hoshar, a Palestinian extremist. Abu Zubaydah said, "The time for training is over." Suspecting that this was a signal for Abu Hoshar to commence a terrorist operation, Jordanian police arrested Abu Hoshar and 15 others and informed Washington. One of the 16, Raed Hijazi, had been born in California to Palestinian parents; after spending his childhood in the Middle East, he had returned to northern California, taken refuge in extremist Islamist beliefs, and then made his way to Abu Zubaydah's Khaldan camp in Afghanistan, where he learned the fundamentals of guerrilla warfare. He and his younger brother had been recruited by Abu Hoshar into a loosely knit plot to attack Jewish and American targets in Jordan. After late 1996, when Abu Hoshar was arrested and jailed, Hijazi moved back to the United States, worked as a cabdriver in Boston, and sent money back to his fellow plotters. After Abu Hoshar's release, Hijazi shuttled between Boston and Jordan gathering money and supplies. With Abu Hoshar, he recruited inTurkey and Syria as well as Jordan; with Abu Zubaydah's assistance, Abu Hoshar sent these recruits to Afghanistan for training.

Question: "President Clinton along with which top aid explore options regarding Bin Laden, including expulsion from Afghanistan and execution?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "His chief aides"

Response: yes

New Legitimacy: Organized crime was soon to have a formidable adversary in its bid to control Las Vegascorporate cash. Though Las Vegas had developed a powerful local economy, few major outside investments were made in the city, due primarily to mob infiltration and its inherent ties to illegal activities. That would change dramatically with the 1966 arrival of billionaire Howard Hughes. A legitimate businessman, Hughes was nonetheless eccentric and dramatic, a style suited to the Las Vegas ethos. True to the myth, the reclusive Hughes immediately cloistered himself in the Desert Inn's penthouse. Several weeks later he was askedthen orderedto vacate the room to make room for high rollers, whereupon he promptly bought the property and fired the management. Thus began Hughes' legendary three-year, $300-million Las Vegas buying spree. When it was over, Hughes owned six casinos, an airport, and an airline, along with numerous plots of land stretching from the Strip to the mountains. Hughes' actions would have beneficial repercussions, both immediate and lasting. Because of the new legitimacy Las Vegas acquired from Hughes' investments, established companies such as Hilton Hotels bought into the gaming business, and their influence helped draw a line in the desert sand between legitimate operations and mob casinos, where illegal skimming of profits was rampant. That, combined with the formation of the Nevada Gaming Control Board, would signal the beginning of the end for heavy mob influence in the city. Las Vegas with a Vision As corporations moved in and the mob was slowly pushed out, a new Las Vegas emerged. The legitimization of gambling led to its increased legalization across the US. What was once a sure thing became much more competitive. Casino operators had to reassess the nature of their business. The first to really do so was Steve Wynn, a Las Vegas resident and owner of the Golden Nugget. In the mid-1980s, Wynn began plans to reinvigorate Las Vegas with a new resort. He bought several Strip propertiesthe Silver Slipper and Castaways among themand demolished them to make way for a new kind of resortMirage which became an instant success.

Question: "What signified the ending of heavy mob influence in Las Vegas?"

Response: "The formation of the Nevada Gaming Control Board"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: yes

Legal assistance for battered women is hard to come by. But it just got a little easier to find in Tarrant County. This month, the federal Violence Against Women Office awarded a two-year, $350,000 grant to the Women's Haven of Tarrant County. The money will allow the shelter to add a second full-time attorney to its staff and contract with the law school clinic at Texas Wesleyan University for pro bono and student services. Most important, the funds will help fill a frustrating gap. The Women's Haven, which provides shelter and outreach to domestic-violence victims, already has a full-time attorney. But that person is prohibited (by funding parameters) from representing women in matters of divorce or child custody. That's not a problem for most of the shelter's indigent residents, who can access free legal aid locally from West Texas Legal Services. But many of the clients served by the Women's Haven outreach programs are the working poor, who don't qualify for free legal services. Divorces and custody battles are simply out of their financial reach. "They can't begin to save up enough money for a divorce, so they're stuck," says Sonyia Hartwell, the Women's Haven's associate director. "They're completely shut out of the civil-law system." In Texas, unlike in some other states, women who aren't divorced can't gain full control over their portion of assets. And they can't obtain child support. The grant will also provide law students with valuable experience working these types of cases. "They can't go to court, but they can interview clients and do all the initial intake work that needs to be done" as well as investigative work, says Hartwell. And there's no shortage of abuse victims who need this kind of help. "Within 60 days of hanging out her or his shingle," says Hartwell of the yet unhired new attorney, "we'll have an active caseload of 20 or more."

Question: "Why does it pose a problem for the working poor to get legal aid?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "They don't qualify for free legal services, so they can't file for custody or divorce because it costs too much money. They are completely cut out of the legal system, so they become stuck"

Response:
yes