Input:  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. 

Does the response "Years" correctly answer the question "Who hires a strong pair of Norman horses for the season?"?
***
Output: no


Input: In February 1998, the 40-year-old Saudi exile Usama  Bin Laden and a fugitive Egyptian physician, Ayman al Zawahiri, arranged from their Afghan headquarters for an Arabic newspaper in London to publish what they termed a fatwa issued in the name of a "World Islamic Front." A fatwa is normally an interpretation of Islamic law by a respected Islamic authority, but neither  Bin Laden, Zawahiri, nor the three others who signed this statement were scholars of Islamic law. Claiming that America had declared war against God and his messenger, they called for the murder of any American, anywhere on earth, as the "individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it." Three months later, when interviewed in Afghanistan by ABC-TV,  Bin Laden enlarged on these themes. He claimed it was more important for Muslims to kill Americans than to kill other infidels." It is far better for anyone to kill a single American soldier than to squander his efforts on other activities," he said. Asked whether he approved of terrorism and of attacks on civilians, he replied:"We believe that the worst thieves in the world today and the worst terrorists are the Americans. Nothing could stop you except perhaps retaliation in kind. We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets." Note: Islamic names often do not follow the Western practice of the consistent use of surnames. Given the variety of names we mention, we chose to refer to individuals by the last word in the names by which they are known: Nawaf al Hazmi as Hazmi, for instance, omitting the article "al" that would be part of their name in their own societies. We generally make an exception for the more familiar English usage of "Bin" as part of a last name, as in  Bin Laden. Further, there is no universally accepted way to transliterate Arabic words and names into English. We have relied on a mix of common sense, the sound of the name in Arabic, and common usage in source materials, the press, or government documents. When we quote from a source document, we use its transliteration, e.g.,"al Qida" instead of al Qaeda. Though novel for its open endorsement of indiscriminate killing,  Bin Laden's 1998 declaration was only the latest in the long series of his public and private calls since 1992 that singled out the United States for attack. In August 1996,  Bin Laden had issued his own self-styled fatwa calling on Muslims to drive American soldiers out of Saudi Arabia. 

Does the response "They believe that the worst thieves and terrorists  in the world today are the Americans" correctly answer the question "What reasons does  Bin Laden give for issuing a fatwa on all Americans?"?
***
Output: yes


Input: Tuesday, September 11, 2001, dawned temperate and nearly cloudless in the eastern United States. Millions of men and women readied themselves for work. Some made their way to the Twin Towers, the signature structures of the World Trade Center complex in New York City. Others went to Arlington, Virginia, to the Pentagon. Across the Potomac River, the United States Congress was back in session. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, people began to line up for a White House tour. In Sarasota, Florida, President George W. Bush went for an early morning run. For those heading to an airport, weather conditions could not have been better for a safe and pleasant journey. Among the travelers were Mohamed Atta and Abdul Aziz al Omari, who arrived at the airport in Portland, Maine. Boston: American 11 and United 175. Atta and Omari boarded a 6:00 A.M. flight from Portland to Boston's Logan International Airport. When he checked in for his flight to Boston, Atta was selected by a computerized prescreening system known as CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System), created to identify passengers who should be subject to special security measures. Under security rules in place at the time, the only consequence of Atta's selection by CAPPS was that his checked bags were held off the plane until it was confirmed that he had boarded the aircraft. This did not hinder Atta's plans. Atta and Omari arrived in Boston at 6:45. Seven minutes later, Atta apparently took a call from Marwan al Shehhi, a longtime colleague who was at another terminal at Logan Airport. They spoke for three minutes. It would be their final conversation. 

Does the response "President George W. Bush" correctly answer the question "Who boarded a 6:00 A.M. flight from Portland to Boston's Logan International Airport with Mohamad Atta and arrived at Boston at 6:45 pm?"?
***
Output: no


Input: Victims of domestic violence will have access to quality legal representation through a campaign undertaken by Idaho Supreme Court Chief Justice Linda Copple Trout and corporate leaders. "Thousands of times a year, Idahoans are victims of domestic violence. The victims are often women and their children and they frequently have few resources with which to pursue their legal rights," Trout said Tuesday. "This campaign helps fill that gap in legal services for women who need the help at a time when they are in crisis." The Idaho Partners for Justice Project has already secured pledges of more than $35,000 from law firms, attorneys, corporations and individuals. The goal is $100,000. The drive to pay for free legal services will continue for the next two months. The money goes to Idaho Legal Aid Services and the Idaho Volunteer Lawyers Program. Last year, more than 5,000 petitions were filed in Idaho for protection orders in domestic violence cases. More than 12,000 victims contacted shelters or crisis hotlines. Joining Trout in the announcement was Idaho Bar Association President Fred Hoopes of Idaho Falls and Ida-West Energy Co. Chief Executive Officer Randy Hill, members of the project's executive committee. Also on hand were some women who were victims of such violence, but benefited from free legal services. Last year's campaign generated enough money and resources to help more than 450 victims. The help ranged from representation in protection order hearings to legal assistance in divorce, visitation and child support cases. The donations are tax deductible. 

Does the response "Idaho Bar Association President Fred Hoopes of Idaho Falls and Ida-West Energy Co. Chief Executive Officer Randy Hill" correctly answer the question "Who joined the Idaho Supreme Court Justice in making the announcement?"?
***
Output:
yes