Once upon a time there a little girl named Ana. Ana was a smart girl. Everyone in Ana's school knew and liked her very much. She had a big dream of becoming spelling bee winner. Ana studied very hard to be the best she could be at spelling. Ana's best friend would help her study every day after school. By the time the spelling bee arrived Ana and her best friend were sure she would win. There were ten students in the spelling bee. This made Ana very nervous, but when she looked out and saw her dad cheering her on she knew she could do it. The spelling bee had five rounds and Ana made it through them all. She was now in the finals. During the final round James, the boy she was in the finals with, was given a really hard word and he spelled it wrong. All Ana had to do was spell this last word and she would be the winner. Ana stepped to the microphone, thought really hard and spelled the word. She waited and finally her teacher said "That is correct". Ana had won the spelling bee. Ana was so happy. She won a trophy. Ana also won a big yellow ribbon. The whole school was also happy, and everyone clapped for her. The whole school went outside. They had a picnic to celebrate Ana winning.

Question: "Who had a big dream of becoming a spelling bee winner?"

Response: "Peter"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: 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: "Which U.S. agency was not able to find or stop al Queada's money flow and also was unwilling to commit resources for an all-source terrorist-financing intelligence analysis center?"

Response: "CIA"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: 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: "Does the place where his friends never take their horses have many haras?"

Response: "No"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A:
no