4. Consider again the requirement that allegations be “plausible.” In light of the religious and ethnic background of those who took responsibility for destroying the World Trade Center, why was it not plausible to infer that the government adopted a policy aimed at members of this religious and ethnic group? Would it be reasonable to infer from that allegation the intentional animus needed to establish a claim of discrimination? Are you persuaded that the Iqbalpleading standard is consistent with Rule 9(b)’s requirement that state-of-mind conditions “may be alleged generally”?