Question:
Crusaders, Mamelukes, and Turks: The Crusaders established a feudal Christian state with Godfrey at its head. They built many impressive churches during the term of the first Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, but in 1187 they were driven out by Muslim forces under the great warrior Saladin. During the Sixth Crusade (1228– 1229), the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II managed to secure Jerusalem for the Christians by negotiation. The Christians, however, could not hold the city. After they lost Jerusalem, a Mongol invasion swept through, and in 1244 the Mameluke dynasty of Egypt took control, ruling Jerusalem for the next 250 years. The city struggled to rebuild from Crusader wars and invasions. Much of the best Islamic architecture in the city was constructed in the Mameluke era, but the past thousand years had taken their toll: Jerusalem was unable to regain the prosperity it had enjoyed in earlier times. In the early 16th century, the Ottoman Turkish Empire was advancing through the Middle East. Jerusalem fell to the Ottomans in 1517, remaining under their control for 400 years. Suleiman the Magnificent rebuilt the walls and gates in the form they retain to this day. Fountains, inns, religious schools, and barracks were constructed. But when Suleiman died, his empire, including Jerusalem, began a long period of decline. The Holy City remained a backwater until the 19th century, when renewed interest among Christian pilgrims made it the destination of thousands of travelers each year.  After reading the above, is "Muslims" the correct answer to the question "Who did NOT rule Jerusalem at some point?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:
no
Input: 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. 
"What was the US government trying to find during 1999 and 2000?" is "To find bin laden"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Output: no
Input: (CNN) -- Cuba will pardon more than 2,900 prisoners, the government said Friday, though U.S. subcontractor Alan Gross is not among those who will be freed. The decision to release the prisoners follows "numerous requests" from their family members and religious institutions, and is a humanitarian gesture, said Cuban President Raul Castro. Among those who might be freed are prisoners over the age of 60, along with those who are sick, female or young with no previous criminal record. With some exceptions, prisoners convicted of spying, terrorism, murder and drug trafficking will not be released. Those who will be freed have already served a "important" part of their sentences and exhibited good behavior, according to an official statement published on the state-run website Cubadebate. The jailed American, Gross, will not be among those pardoned, the Cuban Interests Section in Washington said. Gross was jailed in December 2009, when he was working as a subcontractor on a U.S. Agency for International Development project aimed at spreading democracy. Castro has accused him of importing satellite equipment to connect dissidents to the Internet, and this year Cuba's highest court upheld the 15-year sentence imposed on Gross for committing crimes against the security of the state. He has maintained his innocence and said he was trying to help connect the Jewish community to the Internet. Castro, speaking to the National Assembly, said that 86 prisoners from 25 countries would be among those released in coming days. He cited the upcoming visit of Pope Benedict XVI as one of the motivations behind the move, which he said showed the "generosity and strength of the revolution." The pope has said he plans to visit Mexico and Cuba before Easter. 

Does the response "Spies" correctly answer the question "Of the 2,900 prisoners, who will be released?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no
Question:
The opening shot of the movie shows Kunti praying for Lord Krishna's protection for the Pandavas .  Lord Krishna consoles Kunti and promises to ever protect the Pandavas and guide them through troubles and problems that may occur in life .  The sons of Pandu and Dhritarashtra progeny break into an argument .  When Duryodhana insults the Pandavas as `` dependents '' , Bheema counters by saying that , the Kauravas are the progeny of a widow .  Duryodhana asks Veda Vyasa for an explanation .  He is then told that , since his mother , Gandhari had an astrological defect , she is first married of to a goat and then married to his father .  Duryodhana gains animosity towards the kingdom of Gandhara where the king , the father of his mother Gandhari , rules .  He attacks Gandhara and lays waste of the whole kingdom .  He them imprisons the royal family in his prison .  He gives them only one rice grain per prisoner .  The king of Gandhara then stops everyone from grabbing the little food that is provided .  He says that instead of everyone dying , they could keep at least one of their princes alive .  He chooses Sakuni to be alive .  Sakuni takes an oath that he will do everything he can to destroy the entire Kaurava clan .  He makes magic dice from his father's spinal cord .  The magic dice show exactly the number that he would want .  Duryodhana takes pity on the lone prisoner , Sakuni after the rest of the Gandhara royal family dies in prison out of starvation .  Sakuni joins the evil of coterie of Duryodhana , Karna and Dushyasana .  After reading the above, is "krishna" the correct answer to the question "Who attacked the kingdom of Gandhara?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:

no