<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_31_2131256</id>
	<title>20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1243763160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>alphadogg writes with this snippet from Network World: <i>"The Internet has brought new hope to reformists in China since the country crushed pro-democracy protests in the capital 20 years ago. But as dissidents have gone high-tech, the government in turn has worked to restrict free speech on the Internet, stifling threats to its rule that could grow online. China has <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html">stepped up monitoring of dissidents and Internet censorship</a> ahead of June 4, when hundreds were killed in 1989 after Beijing sent soldiers to its central Tiananmen Square to disperse protestors. The authoritarian government wants to ensure that date and other sensitive anniversaries this year pass without public disturbances, observers say. In recent months, China has blocked YouTube and closed two blog hosting sites, <a href="http://www.bullog.cn/">bullog.cn</a> and <a href="http://www.fatianxia.com/">fatianxia.com</a>, known for their liberal content."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>alphadogg writes with this snippet from Network World : " The Internet has brought new hope to reformists in China since the country crushed pro-democracy protests in the capital 20 years ago .
But as dissidents have gone high-tech , the government in turn has worked to restrict free speech on the Internet , stifling threats to its rule that could grow online .
China has stepped up monitoring of dissidents and Internet censorship ahead of June 4 , when hundreds were killed in 1989 after Beijing sent soldiers to its central Tiananmen Square to disperse protestors .
The authoritarian government wants to ensure that date and other sensitive anniversaries this year pass without public disturbances , observers say .
In recent months , China has blocked YouTube and closed two blog hosting sites , bullog.cn and fatianxia.com , known for their liberal content .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>alphadogg writes with this snippet from Network World: "The Internet has brought new hope to reformists in China since the country crushed pro-democracy protests in the capital 20 years ago.
But as dissidents have gone high-tech, the government in turn has worked to restrict free speech on the Internet, stifling threats to its rule that could grow online.
China has stepped up monitoring of dissidents and Internet censorship ahead of June 4, when hundreds were killed in 1989 after Beijing sent soldiers to its central Tiananmen Square to disperse protestors.
The authoritarian government wants to ensure that date and other sensitive anniversaries this year pass without public disturbances, observers say.
In recent months, China has blocked YouTube and closed two blog hosting sites, bullog.cn and fatianxia.com, known for their liberal content.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164931</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243799040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.</i> <p>
No, they just get murdered for performing abortions.</p><p>
Fuck you, religion, spawn of Satan.  One day, God will smite you down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion .
No , they just get murdered for performing abortions .
Fuck you , religion , spawn of Satan .
One day , God will smite you down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.
No, they just get murdered for performing abortions.
Fuck you, religion, spawn of Satan.
One day, God will smite you down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162047</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>linzeal</author>
	<datestamp>1243772280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about changing our websites one random day a week or month to online depositories of Chinese pro-democratic material from all Chinese IP addresses?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about changing our websites one random day a week or month to online depositories of Chinese pro-democratic material from all Chinese IP addresses ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about changing our websites one random day a week or month to online depositories of Chinese pro-democratic material from all Chinese IP addresses?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161601</id>
	<title>Youre right!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243768140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>by the way, in case some of you have some spare time, give a try to <a href="http://foxpl.mybrute.com/" title="mybrute.com" rel="nofollow">mybrute.com</a> [mybrute.com], its great game, great time killer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>by the way , in case some of you have some spare time , give a try to mybrute.com [ mybrute.com ] , its great game , great time killer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by the way, in case some of you have some spare time, give a try to mybrute.com [mybrute.com], its great game, great time killer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164025</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243789080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.</p></div><p>The fundamental difference is that the people of the US were able to [peacefully] kick out a government that they decided had stepped past the line of defense to immoral oppression, after an open public campaign.  In China, if people chose to oppose government immorality, they might instead find themselves being tortured in secret prisons.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.The fundamental difference is that the people of the US were able to [ peacefully ] kick out a government that they decided had stepped past the line of defense to immoral oppression , after an open public campaign .
In China , if people chose to oppose government immorality , they might instead find themselves being tortured in secret prisons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.The fundamental difference is that the people of the US were able to [peacefully] kick out a government that they decided had stepped past the line of defense to immoral oppression, after an open public campaign.
In China, if people chose to oppose government immorality, they might instead find themselves being tortured in secret prisons.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162223</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>squidinkcalligraphy</author>
	<datestamp>1243773900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The suppression of human rights (including the free expression of thought via the Internet) is due entirely to Chinese culture.  No foreign power is imposing the current brutal form of government on China.  This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it.  If the minority, who oppose the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), attempted the overthrow the government, then the rest of Chinese society will kill the minority.</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>China is what it is due to how the Chinese people act and think.  No foreign power is imposing the CCP on China.  The Chinese people support the CCP.</p></div><p>Same applies to Burma, obviously.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The suppression of human rights ( including the free expression of thought via the Internet ) is due entirely to Chinese culture .
No foreign power is imposing the current brutal form of government on China .
This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it .
If the minority , who oppose the Chinese Communist Party ( CCP ) , attempted the overthrow the government , then the rest of Chinese society will kill the minority .
...China is what it is due to how the Chinese people act and think .
No foreign power is imposing the CCP on China .
The Chinese people support the CCP.Same applies to Burma , obviously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The suppression of human rights (including the free expression of thought via the Internet) is due entirely to Chinese culture.
No foreign power is imposing the current brutal form of government on China.
This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it.
If the minority, who oppose the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), attempted the overthrow the government, then the rest of Chinese society will kill the minority.
...China is what it is due to how the Chinese people act and think.
No foreign power is imposing the CCP on China.
The Chinese people support the CCP.Same applies to Burma, obviously.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28165721</id>
	<title>bias</title>
	<author>dwater</author>
	<datestamp>1243854540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; since the country crushed pro-democracy protests in the capital 20 years ago</p><p>Dripping with bias, as usual.</p><p>IINM, the protest went on for a long time before they 'ended', and the way they ended sounded to me a lot more like panic amongst the soldiers because the protesters were burning them alive and/or shooting them, rather than any sort of 'ordered-from-on-high crush' that people in the west seem to think happened.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; since the country crushed pro-democracy protests in the capital 20 years agoDripping with bias , as usual.IINM , the protest went on for a long time before they 'ended ' , and the way they ended sounded to me a lot more like panic amongst the soldiers because the protesters were burning them alive and/or shooting them , rather than any sort of 'ordered-from-on-high crush ' that people in the west seem to think happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; since the country crushed pro-democracy protests in the capital 20 years agoDripping with bias, as usual.IINM, the protest went on for a long time before they 'ended', and the way they ended sounded to me a lot more like panic amongst the soldiers because the protesters were burning them alive and/or shooting them, rather than any sort of 'ordered-from-on-high crush' that people in the west seem to think happened.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28165683</id>
	<title>What about 'Free Speech Zones' ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243853820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do they have these? We enlightened free westerners do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they have these ?
We enlightened free westerners do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they have these?
We enlightened free westerners do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161515</id>
	<title>Klein's article on BigBrotherChina is excellent.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243767420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not as epic as her book Shock Doctrine but it is a must read for any tech with a conscience.</p><p><a href="http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2008/05/chinas-all-seeing-eye" title="naomiklein.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2008/05/chinas-all-seeing-eye</a> [naomiklein.org]</p><p><a href="http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine" title="naomiklein.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine</a> [naomiklein.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not as epic as her book Shock Doctrine but it is a must read for any tech with a conscience.http : //www.naomiklein.org/articles/2008/05/chinas-all-seeing-eye [ naomiklein.org ] http : //www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine [ naomiklein.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not as epic as her book Shock Doctrine but it is a must read for any tech with a conscience.http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2008/05/chinas-all-seeing-eye [naomiklein.org]http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine [naomiklein.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28166595</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243863900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was 16 years old and in high school when the I joined the protest in May of 1989. As far as I know, most of the protesters simply want reforms that reduces corruption. And almost all of them supports the CCP and the "Four Basic Principles". Overthrowing the government was heresy.</p><p>In fact, the vast majority of Chinese did not know what democracy was and CCP was the only tangible thing to hang on. An improved version of CCP was all we were hoping for.</p><p>America was arguably the most democratic country in the world. This was the because the initial migrants to the US were throughly democratic. (See Democracy in America: Origin Of The Anglo-Americans) Americans found the perfect balance between democracy and autocracy because the new colonies practiced democracy in small scales before it was officially recognized. When the constitution was drafted, it was simply a matter of putting what the people were already doing on paper.</p><p>I think the best way for China to achieve democratic transformation is not through a revolution, but through peaceful transformation. If there is a peaceful way to take away the power of the communist party and give it to the people, and if the people can utilize the newly given power in a effective manner,  then the transformation will be successful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was 16 years old and in high school when the I joined the protest in May of 1989 .
As far as I know , most of the protesters simply want reforms that reduces corruption .
And almost all of them supports the CCP and the " Four Basic Principles " .
Overthrowing the government was heresy.In fact , the vast majority of Chinese did not know what democracy was and CCP was the only tangible thing to hang on .
An improved version of CCP was all we were hoping for.America was arguably the most democratic country in the world .
This was the because the initial migrants to the US were throughly democratic .
( See Democracy in America : Origin Of The Anglo-Americans ) Americans found the perfect balance between democracy and autocracy because the new colonies practiced democracy in small scales before it was officially recognized .
When the constitution was drafted , it was simply a matter of putting what the people were already doing on paper.I think the best way for China to achieve democratic transformation is not through a revolution , but through peaceful transformation .
If there is a peaceful way to take away the power of the communist party and give it to the people , and if the people can utilize the newly given power in a effective manner , then the transformation will be successful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was 16 years old and in high school when the I joined the protest in May of 1989.
As far as I know, most of the protesters simply want reforms that reduces corruption.
And almost all of them supports the CCP and the "Four Basic Principles".
Overthrowing the government was heresy.In fact, the vast majority of Chinese did not know what democracy was and CCP was the only tangible thing to hang on.
An improved version of CCP was all we were hoping for.America was arguably the most democratic country in the world.
This was the because the initial migrants to the US were throughly democratic.
(See Democracy in America: Origin Of The Anglo-Americans) Americans found the perfect balance between democracy and autocracy because the new colonies practiced democracy in small scales before it was officially recognized.
When the constitution was drafted, it was simply a matter of putting what the people were already doing on paper.I think the best way for China to achieve democratic transformation is not through a revolution, but through peaceful transformation.
If there is a peaceful way to take away the power of the communist party and give it to the people, and if the people can utilize the newly given power in a effective manner,  then the transformation will be successful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163549</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1243784880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There are many in America (and an astounding amount on Slashdot) who would love to have religion banned forever. </i></p><p>I'm an atheist myself, and I've never called for banning superstition.   I just don't accept superstition as a basis for policy.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are many in America ( and an astounding amount on Slashdot ) who would love to have religion banned forever .
I 'm an atheist myself , and I 've never called for banning superstition .
I just do n't accept superstition as a basis for policy.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are many in America (and an astounding amount on Slashdot) who would love to have religion banned forever.
I'm an atheist myself, and I've never called for banning superstition.
I just don't accept superstition as a basis for policy.-jcr</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161623</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>MoonBuggy</author>
	<datestamp>1243768320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I share your surprise - considering all the backlash that the various Western pre-Olympic protests against China and/or their actions saw from regular Chinese people, I was beginning to get the impression that many of them are happy enough with the state of affairs to actively defend it, so they certainly wouldn't challenge it. In that context I wouldn't have thought that information like this was that much of a risk any more.</p><p>Obviously the protests may present a skewed perspective from both sides, but to me it looks like the government are sitting pretty solidly. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe they're just so used to suppressing speech that they either don't think to stop or don't want to risk it in view of the small amount of international praise they stand to gain.</p><p>I wonder what the people of China would choose, politically speaking, if the people <em>were</em> given the option?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I share your surprise - considering all the backlash that the various Western pre-Olympic protests against China and/or their actions saw from regular Chinese people , I was beginning to get the impression that many of them are happy enough with the state of affairs to actively defend it , so they certainly would n't challenge it .
In that context I would n't have thought that information like this was that much of a risk any more.Obviously the protests may present a skewed perspective from both sides , but to me it looks like the government are sitting pretty solidly .
Maybe I 'm wrong , or maybe they 're just so used to suppressing speech that they either do n't think to stop or do n't want to risk it in view of the small amount of international praise they stand to gain.I wonder what the people of China would choose , politically speaking , if the people were given the option ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I share your surprise - considering all the backlash that the various Western pre-Olympic protests against China and/or their actions saw from regular Chinese people, I was beginning to get the impression that many of them are happy enough with the state of affairs to actively defend it, so they certainly wouldn't challenge it.
In that context I wouldn't have thought that information like this was that much of a risk any more.Obviously the protests may present a skewed perspective from both sides, but to me it looks like the government are sitting pretty solidly.
Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe they're just so used to suppressing speech that they either don't think to stop or don't want to risk it in view of the small amount of international praise they stand to gain.I wonder what the people of China would choose, politically speaking, if the people were given the option?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28168871</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>Gulthek</author>
	<datestamp>1243874700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One point, the protesters in 1989 weren't demanding democracy. They were saying that to news reporters because it got them more attention.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One point , the protesters in 1989 were n't demanding democracy .
They were saying that to news reporters because it got them more attention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One point, the protesters in 1989 weren't demanding democracy.
They were saying that to news reporters because it got them more attention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163707</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Reservoir Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1243786080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless your religion involves polygamy. Than it somehow becomes wrong for several adults to decide how to organize their family, somehow the government thinks it's their business to get involved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless your religion involves polygamy .
Than it somehow becomes wrong for several adults to decide how to organize their family , somehow the government thinks it 's their business to get involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless your religion involves polygamy.
Than it somehow becomes wrong for several adults to decide how to organize their family, somehow the government thinks it's their business to get involved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28166741</id>
	<title>Ironic</title>
	<author>georgenh16</author>
	<datestamp>1243864920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In recent months, China has blocked YouTube and closed two blog hosting sites, bullog.cn and fatianxia.com, known for their liberal content.</p></div><p>
Funny how here in America, it is "liberals" who support suppression of free speech. See: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness\_doctrine" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Fairness Doctrine</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In recent months , China has blocked YouTube and closed two blog hosting sites , bullog.cn and fatianxia.com , known for their liberal content .
Funny how here in America , it is " liberals " who support suppression of free speech .
See : Fairness Doctrine [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In recent months, China has blocked YouTube and closed two blog hosting sites, bullog.cn and fatianxia.com, known for their liberal content.
Funny how here in America, it is "liberals" who support suppression of free speech.
See: Fairness Doctrine [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163847</id>
	<title>Re:Some surprising results searching google.cn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243787280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I just searched images.google.cn for "Tiananmen Square (massacre OR killing OR event)" and got a page that seems surprisingly uncensored (by China's standards). Is google.cn only censored when it detects IP addresses within China?</p><p>Here's my search: <a href="http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=Tiananmen+Square+(massacre+OR+killing+OR+event)" title="google.cn" rel="nofollow">http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=Tiananmen+Square+(massacre+OR+killing+OR+event)</a> [google.cn] </p></div><p>Not really, I am in Beijing, and if google" Tiananmen Square", famous tankman pics jump out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just searched images.google.cn for " Tiananmen Square ( massacre OR killing OR event ) " and got a page that seems surprisingly uncensored ( by China 's standards ) .
Is google.cn only censored when it detects IP addresses within China ? Here 's my search : http : //images.google.cn/images ? gbv = 2&amp;hl = zh-CN&amp;sa = 1&amp;q = Tiananmen + Square + ( massacre + OR + killing + OR + event ) [ google.cn ] Not really , I am in Beijing , and if google " Tiananmen Square " , famous tankman pics jump out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just searched images.google.cn for "Tiananmen Square (massacre OR killing OR event)" and got a page that seems surprisingly uncensored (by China's standards).
Is google.cn only censored when it detects IP addresses within China?Here's my search: http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=Tiananmen+Square+(massacre+OR+killing+OR+event) [google.cn] Not really, I am in Beijing, and if google" Tiananmen Square", famous tankman pics jump out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164187</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>neonleonb</author>
	<datestamp>1243790640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You make a good point, but it's not possible to show the West's system to be superior if all evidence is censored. That's precisely what this article is about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You make a good point , but it 's not possible to show the West 's system to be superior if all evidence is censored .
That 's precisely what this article is about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You make a good point, but it's not possible to show the West's system to be superior if all evidence is censored.
That's precisely what this article is about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163687</id>
	<title>Google, the cowardly enabler</title>
	<author>ChipMonk</author>
	<datestamp>1243785900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://gus3.typepad.com/photos/googles\_shame/googlesshame.html" title="typepad.com">Here</a> [typepad.com] is how Google kowtowed to their Communist masters. Peace and love to the Chinese, the truth about the massacre to everyone else.<br> <br>

"Don't be evil"? Fuck you, Google.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here [ typepad.com ] is how Google kowtowed to their Communist masters .
Peace and love to the Chinese , the truth about the massacre to everyone else .
" Do n't be evil " ?
Fuck you , Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here [typepad.com] is how Google kowtowed to their Communist masters.
Peace and love to the Chinese, the truth about the massacre to everyone else.
"Don't be evil"?
Fuck you, Google.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162023</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243772040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Much of what you say is true, but I think you attribute too much to "Chinese culture" and not enough to plain old human nature.</p><p>Now, I'm not standing on terrible solid ground here; I'm just a former American who now lives in and is a citizen of Japan.  But most of the "cultural differences" everyone talks about between the East and the West are just a load of crap from what I've seen.  Culture only affects superficial stuff like greetings, language, manners, and the like, in my experience.</p><p>Humans end up being the same deep down though.  The reason the Chinese government is as it is isn't because the Chinese are intrinsically more submissive or something, but because most Chinese people would rather something that works.</p><p>Right now, the CCP works in China.  I'm fairly certain that once China is affluent and almost all of her people are able to take the food on their plates and the roofs over their heads for granted, movements for freedom of speech and such will begin to crop up.  Of course, there will also be movements trying to keep those movements from rocking the boat and potentially fucking things up.  Till then though, that's all on the backburner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Much of what you say is true , but I think you attribute too much to " Chinese culture " and not enough to plain old human nature.Now , I 'm not standing on terrible solid ground here ; I 'm just a former American who now lives in and is a citizen of Japan .
But most of the " cultural differences " everyone talks about between the East and the West are just a load of crap from what I 've seen .
Culture only affects superficial stuff like greetings , language , manners , and the like , in my experience.Humans end up being the same deep down though .
The reason the Chinese government is as it is is n't because the Chinese are intrinsically more submissive or something , but because most Chinese people would rather something that works.Right now , the CCP works in China .
I 'm fairly certain that once China is affluent and almost all of her people are able to take the food on their plates and the roofs over their heads for granted , movements for freedom of speech and such will begin to crop up .
Of course , there will also be movements trying to keep those movements from rocking the boat and potentially fucking things up .
Till then though , that 's all on the backburner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Much of what you say is true, but I think you attribute too much to "Chinese culture" and not enough to plain old human nature.Now, I'm not standing on terrible solid ground here; I'm just a former American who now lives in and is a citizen of Japan.
But most of the "cultural differences" everyone talks about between the East and the West are just a load of crap from what I've seen.
Culture only affects superficial stuff like greetings, language, manners, and the like, in my experience.Humans end up being the same deep down though.
The reason the Chinese government is as it is isn't because the Chinese are intrinsically more submissive or something, but because most Chinese people would rather something that works.Right now, the CCP works in China.
I'm fairly certain that once China is affluent and almost all of her people are able to take the food on their plates and the roofs over their heads for granted, movements for freedom of speech and such will begin to crop up.
Of course, there will also be movements trying to keep those movements from rocking the boat and potentially fucking things up.
Till then though, that's all on the backburner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179087</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese Government Censors...</title>
	<author>LostInTaiwan</author>
	<datestamp>1243936200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, just like the Germans under the Nazi rule with the Tibetan.  Everything is well for the blond hair blue eye Germans, or in today's China, the han Chinese.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , just like the Germans under the Nazi rule with the Tibetan .
Everything is well for the blond hair blue eye Germans , or in today 's China , the han Chinese .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, just like the Germans under the Nazi rule with the Tibetan.
Everything is well for the blond hair blue eye Germans, or in today's China, the han Chinese.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163263</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161829</id>
	<title>20yrs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243770240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm more curious about how they feel in regards to North Korea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm more curious about how they feel in regards to North Korea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm more curious about how they feel in regards to North Korea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163971</id>
	<title>you omit the possibility</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1243788600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that their support might evolve and decrease over time</p><p>the power of democracy is that it creates legitimacy: "i speak for the people's will, because the people actually got together and said that i did." this is extremely powerful</p><p>nondemocracies have the problem that, inevitably, over time, the distance between the government's agenda and the people's agenda shifts and grows. without democracy, there is no way to naturally reconcile the two agendas, such that the longer time goes on, the less legitimacy nondemocracies have in the eyes of their people. its an inevitable decay. eventually, revolution occurs in the nondemocracy, or some sort of other governmental implosion, and a new system emerges, once again having addressed the will of the people (in an unfortunate and tragic way, rather than an honest and straightforward way)</p><p>without voting by the average man, the nondemocractic government begins to speak only for the agenda of a ruling elite class. while in democratic countries, there are no unheard voices that grow in malcontent and revolution underground, because they can always plug in and express their grievances via democracy, become a voting bloc people have to pay attention to</p><p>of course there are people in democracies who don't believe in the legitimacy of their government. but there are always faithless, hopeless people, they don't represent any valid political opinion, just a psychological problem. likewise, in nondemocracies there are people who support their government. there always spineless types who apparently enjoy being slaves. but no majority of people, anywhere, in any time in human history, enjoys being a voiceless slave who has no voice in their own government</p><p>no matter what propaganda tricks the chinese government uses, you either have a voice in your own government, or you don't, and no set of tricks can paint over this gap forever. there will be another tiananmen square in china someday if the grumpy old technocrats in beijing don't prove to be as wise as they are supposed to be and begin to chart a course to democracy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that their support might evolve and decrease over timethe power of democracy is that it creates legitimacy : " i speak for the people 's will , because the people actually got together and said that i did .
" this is extremely powerfulnondemocracies have the problem that , inevitably , over time , the distance between the government 's agenda and the people 's agenda shifts and grows .
without democracy , there is no way to naturally reconcile the two agendas , such that the longer time goes on , the less legitimacy nondemocracies have in the eyes of their people .
its an inevitable decay .
eventually , revolution occurs in the nondemocracy , or some sort of other governmental implosion , and a new system emerges , once again having addressed the will of the people ( in an unfortunate and tragic way , rather than an honest and straightforward way ) without voting by the average man , the nondemocractic government begins to speak only for the agenda of a ruling elite class .
while in democratic countries , there are no unheard voices that grow in malcontent and revolution underground , because they can always plug in and express their grievances via democracy , become a voting bloc people have to pay attention toof course there are people in democracies who do n't believe in the legitimacy of their government .
but there are always faithless , hopeless people , they do n't represent any valid political opinion , just a psychological problem .
likewise , in nondemocracies there are people who support their government .
there always spineless types who apparently enjoy being slaves .
but no majority of people , anywhere , in any time in human history , enjoys being a voiceless slave who has no voice in their own governmentno matter what propaganda tricks the chinese government uses , you either have a voice in your own government , or you do n't , and no set of tricks can paint over this gap forever .
there will be another tiananmen square in china someday if the grumpy old technocrats in beijing do n't prove to be as wise as they are supposed to be and begin to chart a course to democracy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that their support might evolve and decrease over timethe power of democracy is that it creates legitimacy: "i speak for the people's will, because the people actually got together and said that i did.
" this is extremely powerfulnondemocracies have the problem that, inevitably, over time, the distance between the government's agenda and the people's agenda shifts and grows.
without democracy, there is no way to naturally reconcile the two agendas, such that the longer time goes on, the less legitimacy nondemocracies have in the eyes of their people.
its an inevitable decay.
eventually, revolution occurs in the nondemocracy, or some sort of other governmental implosion, and a new system emerges, once again having addressed the will of the people (in an unfortunate and tragic way, rather than an honest and straightforward way)without voting by the average man, the nondemocractic government begins to speak only for the agenda of a ruling elite class.
while in democratic countries, there are no unheard voices that grow in malcontent and revolution underground, because they can always plug in and express their grievances via democracy, become a voting bloc people have to pay attention toof course there are people in democracies who don't believe in the legitimacy of their government.
but there are always faithless, hopeless people, they don't represent any valid political opinion, just a psychological problem.
likewise, in nondemocracies there are people who support their government.
there always spineless types who apparently enjoy being slaves.
but no majority of people, anywhere, in any time in human history, enjoys being a voiceless slave who has no voice in their own governmentno matter what propaganda tricks the chinese government uses, you either have a voice in your own government, or you don't, and no set of tricks can paint over this gap forever.
there will be another tiananmen square in china someday if the grumpy old technocrats in beijing don't prove to be as wise as they are supposed to be and begin to chart a course to democracy</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163903</id>
	<title>Re:Fat and Happy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243787880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth. It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat. I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat, but it certainly didn't roll them back 20 years. (Not that this is specific to China; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham, it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency.) One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead. The next time China's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period, then we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, I think you are wrong and that the West basically missed its opportunity to promote reform in China 30 years ago or more.  One of the most effective ways of promoting liberalisation in formerly restrictive regimes has been the EU -- a large trigger for the democratisation of Eastern Europe was access to the EU free market, and pots of money.  Not to belittle the Cold War, but a big factor in the Berlin Wall falling was poor East Germans knowing the West Germans were doing it much better and that the only way to join in the wealth was to liberalise.  Since then, eastern European countries have been falling over backwards to reform themselves and get themselves on that EU gravy train.  Hardly surprising -- the same trick worked just as efficiently way back in the 70s with Spain.  With China, meanwhile, we've effectively let them join in the riches without any hint of reform -- the EU and US has happily outsourced all its production to China without much regard to reform or political, religious, or personal freedom.  We no longer have a juicy economic carrot to wave in front of them, because we've long since given it to them.  They can't get "better access to our markets" because they've pretty much already got complete access to our markets.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth .
It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat .
I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat , but it certainly did n't roll them back 20 years .
( Not that this is specific to China ; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it , even after they learned it was a sham , it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency .
) One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead .
The next time China 's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period , then we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth.Unfortunately , I think you are wrong and that the West basically missed its opportunity to promote reform in China 30 years ago or more .
One of the most effective ways of promoting liberalisation in formerly restrictive regimes has been the EU -- a large trigger for the democratisation of Eastern Europe was access to the EU free market , and pots of money .
Not to belittle the Cold War , but a big factor in the Berlin Wall falling was poor East Germans knowing the West Germans were doing it much better and that the only way to join in the wealth was to liberalise .
Since then , eastern European countries have been falling over backwards to reform themselves and get themselves on that EU gravy train .
Hardly surprising -- the same trick worked just as efficiently way back in the 70s with Spain .
With China , meanwhile , we 've effectively let them join in the riches without any hint of reform -- the EU and US has happily outsourced all its production to China without much regard to reform or political , religious , or personal freedom .
We no longer have a juicy economic carrot to wave in front of them , because we 've long since given it to them .
They ca n't get " better access to our markets " because they 've pretty much already got complete access to our markets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth.
It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat.
I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat, but it certainly didn't roll them back 20 years.
(Not that this is specific to China; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham, it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency.
) One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead.
The next time China's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period, then we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth.Unfortunately, I think you are wrong and that the West basically missed its opportunity to promote reform in China 30 years ago or more.
One of the most effective ways of promoting liberalisation in formerly restrictive regimes has been the EU -- a large trigger for the democratisation of Eastern Europe was access to the EU free market, and pots of money.
Not to belittle the Cold War, but a big factor in the Berlin Wall falling was poor East Germans knowing the West Germans were doing it much better and that the only way to join in the wealth was to liberalise.
Since then, eastern European countries have been falling over backwards to reform themselves and get themselves on that EU gravy train.
Hardly surprising -- the same trick worked just as efficiently way back in the 70s with Spain.
With China, meanwhile, we've effectively let them join in the riches without any hint of reform -- the EU and US has happily outsourced all its production to China without much regard to reform or political, religious, or personal freedom.
We no longer have a juicy economic carrot to wave in front of them, because we've long since given it to them.
They can't get "better access to our markets" because they've pretty much already got complete access to our markets.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28186875</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>e\_hu\_man</author>
	<datestamp>1243933260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that's not true.  tommy chong is in prison.  what is torture if not taking weed away from him?</htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's not true .
tommy chong is in prison .
what is torture if not taking weed away from him ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's not true.
tommy chong is in prison.
what is torture if not taking weed away from him?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162563</id>
	<title>Re:And the secret sauce is...</title>
	<author>marco.antonio.costa</author>
	<datestamp>1243776900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A snippet from Atlas Shrugged makes the point precisely.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Says the bureaucrat Floyd Ferris: "You honest men are such a problem and such a headache. But we knew you'd slip sooner or later . . . this is just what we wanted."

</p><p>Rearden: "You seem to be pleased about it."

</p><p>Ferris: "Don't I have good reason to be?"
</p><p>Rearden: "But, after all, I did break one of your laws."

</p><p>Ferris: "Well, what do you think they're there for?"

</p><p>Continues Ferris: "Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against . . . We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A snippet from Atlas Shrugged makes the point precisely.Says the bureaucrat Floyd Ferris : " You honest men are such a problem and such a headache .
But we knew you 'd slip sooner or later .
. .
this is just what we wanted .
" Rearden : " You seem to be pleased about it .
" Ferris : " Do n't I have good reason to be ?
" Rearden : " But , after all , I did break one of your laws .
" Ferris : " Well , what do you think they 're there for ?
" Continues Ferris : " Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed ?
We want them broken .
You 'd better get it straight that it 's not a bunch of boy scouts you 're up against .
. .
We 're after power and we mean it .
You fellows were pikers , but we know the real trick , and you 'd better get wise to it .
There 's no way to rule innocent men .
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals .
Well , when there are n't enough criminals , one makes them .
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws .
Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens ?
What 's there in that for anyone ?
But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt .
Now that 's the system , Mr. Rearden , and once you understand it , you 'll be much easier to deal with .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A snippet from Atlas Shrugged makes the point precisely.Says the bureaucrat Floyd Ferris: "You honest men are such a problem and such a headache.
But we knew you'd slip sooner or later .
. .
this is just what we wanted.
"

Rearden: "You seem to be pleased about it.
"

Ferris: "Don't I have good reason to be?
"
Rearden: "But, after all, I did break one of your laws.
"

Ferris: "Well, what do you think they're there for?
"

Continues Ferris: "Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?
We want them broken.
You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against .
. .
We're after power and we mean it.
You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it.
There's no way to rule innocent men.
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens?
What's there in that for anyone?
But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt.
Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162179</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243773480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True, they get shipped out to Guantanamo for that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True , they get shipped out to Guantanamo for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, they get shipped out to Guantanamo for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162389</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243775220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sheesh, Americans! Any activity they can use to be anti-china is jumped on. Learn the facts ignorant people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sheesh , Americans !
Any activity they can use to be anti-china is jumped on .
Learn the facts ignorant people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sheesh, Americans!
Any activity they can use to be anti-china is jumped on.
Learn the facts ignorant people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811</id>
	<title>Fat and Happy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243770120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth.  It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat.  I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat, but it certainly didn't roll them back 20 years.  (Not that this is specific to China; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham, it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency.)  One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead.   The next time China's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period, <i>then</i> we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth .
It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat .
I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat , but it certainly did n't roll them back 20 years .
( Not that this is specific to China ; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it , even after they learned it was a sham , it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency .
) One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead .
The next time China 's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period , then we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth.
It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat.
I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat, but it certainly didn't roll them back 20 years.
(Not that this is specific to China; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham, it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency.
)  One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead.
The next time China's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period, then we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162059</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>Chicken\_Kickers</author>
	<datestamp>1243772400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have mostly given up posting on Slashdot unless I have some horrible meme or puns to write (anon, of course). Yet I am compelled to respond to the poster above. Basically, what you are saying is this:
<ol>
<li>The majority of China's citizens or (insert country) supports Dictatorship or (insert political system).</li><li>Yet, the Western World thinks that their political system, which ironically is based on the rule of the majority, is superior to all other systems, in all circumstances and historical development.</li><li>Therefore, it for the Chinese people's own good, that they change to be more like the Western World</li><li>or an even more concise summary: West Good, Rest of the World Bad and (sometimes) West angry World not carbon-copies, West SMASH!</li></ol><p>

Those Eastern Europeans you talk about are now reverting (they never changed?) to authoritarian governments, their economies in tatters and some, in even worst state then they were during the Communist era. The Western World should start realizing that 'regime change' never works if imposed from outside and your high sounding ideals might not be practicable elsewhere. Let the Chinese, Iran, or whatever enemy du jour choose their own destiny. The West should instead <i>demonstrate</i> that it's political system <i>is</i> the best, that it is the one with the least corruption, abuses of power, respect for human rights (no torture or rape of female detainees, freedom of press and thought (no blackout of torture pictures) etc. If what you preach is true and good, and you practice it, in the end, people will gravitate towards you and become your followers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have mostly given up posting on Slashdot unless I have some horrible meme or puns to write ( anon , of course ) .
Yet I am compelled to respond to the poster above .
Basically , what you are saying is this : The majority of China 's citizens or ( insert country ) supports Dictatorship or ( insert political system ) .Yet , the Western World thinks that their political system , which ironically is based on the rule of the majority , is superior to all other systems , in all circumstances and historical development.Therefore , it for the Chinese people 's own good , that they change to be more like the Western Worldor an even more concise summary : West Good , Rest of the World Bad and ( sometimes ) West angry World not carbon-copies , West SMASH !
Those Eastern Europeans you talk about are now reverting ( they never changed ?
) to authoritarian governments , their economies in tatters and some , in even worst state then they were during the Communist era .
The Western World should start realizing that 'regime change ' never works if imposed from outside and your high sounding ideals might not be practicable elsewhere .
Let the Chinese , Iran , or whatever enemy du jour choose their own destiny .
The West should instead demonstrate that it 's political system is the best , that it is the one with the least corruption , abuses of power , respect for human rights ( no torture or rape of female detainees , freedom of press and thought ( no blackout of torture pictures ) etc .
If what you preach is true and good , and you practice it , in the end , people will gravitate towards you and become your followers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have mostly given up posting on Slashdot unless I have some horrible meme or puns to write (anon, of course).
Yet I am compelled to respond to the poster above.
Basically, what you are saying is this:

The majority of China's citizens or (insert country) supports Dictatorship or (insert political system).Yet, the Western World thinks that their political system, which ironically is based on the rule of the majority, is superior to all other systems, in all circumstances and historical development.Therefore, it for the Chinese people's own good, that they change to be more like the Western Worldor an even more concise summary: West Good, Rest of the World Bad and (sometimes) West angry World not carbon-copies, West SMASH!
Those Eastern Europeans you talk about are now reverting (they never changed?
) to authoritarian governments, their economies in tatters and some, in even worst state then they were during the Communist era.
The Western World should start realizing that 'regime change' never works if imposed from outside and your high sounding ideals might not be practicable elsewhere.
Let the Chinese, Iran, or whatever enemy du jour choose their own destiny.
The West should instead demonstrate that it's political system is the best, that it is the one with the least corruption, abuses of power, respect for human rights (no torture or rape of female detainees, freedom of press and thought (no blackout of torture pictures) etc.
If what you preach is true and good, and you practice it, in the end, people will gravitate towards you and become your followers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163873</id>
	<title>there is censorship everywhere</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1243787580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there has always been censorship</p><p>and there will always be censorship</p><p>the question is: how vicious? (warnings versus imprisonment)</p><p>and of what? (child porn versus simple political opinion)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there has always been censorshipand there will always be censorshipthe question is : how vicious ?
( warnings versus imprisonment ) and of what ?
( child porn versus simple political opinion )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there has always been censorshipand there will always be censorshipthe question is: how vicious?
(warnings versus imprisonment)and of what?
(child porn versus simple political opinion)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583</id>
	<title>Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243768080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You so happy to talk of China censorship but what of censorship in the West?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You so happy to talk of China censorship but what of censorship in the West ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You so happy to talk of China censorship but what of censorship in the West?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162583</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1243777140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There are many...who would love to have religion banned...these are the same group of people whom would close down gitmo and release the prisoners...Oh the irony...</p></div><p>What's so ironic about it? Were you trying to imply that the two are contradictory? I fail to see the hypocrisy in people who believe religion == bad idea &amp;&amp; gitmo == bad idea since both can be used as tools of repression.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are many...who would love to have religion banned...these are the same group of people whom would close down gitmo and release the prisoners...Oh the irony...What 's so ironic about it ?
Were you trying to imply that the two are contradictory ?
I fail to see the hypocrisy in people who believe religion = = bad idea &amp;&amp; gitmo = = bad idea since both can be used as tools of repression .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are many...who would love to have religion banned...these are the same group of people whom would close down gitmo and release the prisoners...Oh the irony...What's so ironic about it?
Were you trying to imply that the two are contradictory?
I fail to see the hypocrisy in people who believe religion == bad idea &amp;&amp; gitmo == bad idea since both can be used as tools of repression.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164203</id>
	<title>Such a big story...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243790700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Such a big story about something that never happened!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Such a big story about something that never happened !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Such a big story about something that never happened!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</id>
	<title>China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>reporter</author>
	<datestamp>1243769340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The suppression of human rights (including the free expression of thought via the Internet) is due entirely to Chinese culture.  No foreign power is imposing the current brutal form of government on China.  This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it.  If the minority, who oppose the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), attempted the overthrow the government, then the rest of Chinese society will kill the minority.
<p>
When the overwhelming majority of people in a nation truly want democracy and human rights, the nation quickly and peacefully transforms into a liberal Western democracy.  Case in point is Eastern Europe.  Once the Kremlin ceased suppressing Eastern Europe, the Eastern Europeans peacefully and quickly transformed into liberal Western democracies.  Except for Romania (where the dictator was killed), there was no bloodshed.  There was no violence.
</p><p>
In the late 1980s, what was the strength of desire for creating Western democracies in Eastern Europe?  Consider Czechoslovakia.  In one day of 1989 November, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet\_Revolution" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">about 800,000 people gathered in Prague and rallied for the creation of a Western democracy</a> [wikipedia.org].  800,000 people is about 5\% of the population.
</p><p>
By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy.  1 million people is only 0.1 \% of the Chinese population.
</p><p>
In other words, in the late 1980s, the strength of support for democracy in Eastern Europe was 50 times the strength in China.
</p><p>
I admire the Eastern Europeans.
</p><p>
China is what it is due to how the Chinese people act and think.  No foreign power is imposing the CCP on China.  The Chinese people support the CCP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The suppression of human rights ( including the free expression of thought via the Internet ) is due entirely to Chinese culture .
No foreign power is imposing the current brutal form of government on China .
This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it .
If the minority , who oppose the Chinese Communist Party ( CCP ) , attempted the overthrow the government , then the rest of Chinese society will kill the minority .
When the overwhelming majority of people in a nation truly want democracy and human rights , the nation quickly and peacefully transforms into a liberal Western democracy .
Case in point is Eastern Europe .
Once the Kremlin ceased suppressing Eastern Europe , the Eastern Europeans peacefully and quickly transformed into liberal Western democracies .
Except for Romania ( where the dictator was killed ) , there was no bloodshed .
There was no violence .
In the late 1980s , what was the strength of desire for creating Western democracies in Eastern Europe ?
Consider Czechoslovakia .
In one day of 1989 November , about 800,000 people gathered in Prague and rallied for the creation of a Western democracy [ wikipedia.org ] .
800,000 people is about 5 \ % of the population .
By contrast , in one day of 1989 June , about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy .
1 million people is only 0.1 \ % of the Chinese population .
In other words , in the late 1980s , the strength of support for democracy in Eastern Europe was 50 times the strength in China .
I admire the Eastern Europeans .
China is what it is due to how the Chinese people act and think .
No foreign power is imposing the CCP on China .
The Chinese people support the CCP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The suppression of human rights (including the free expression of thought via the Internet) is due entirely to Chinese culture.
No foreign power is imposing the current brutal form of government on China.
This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it.
If the minority, who oppose the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), attempted the overthrow the government, then the rest of Chinese society will kill the minority.
When the overwhelming majority of people in a nation truly want democracy and human rights, the nation quickly and peacefully transforms into a liberal Western democracy.
Case in point is Eastern Europe.
Once the Kremlin ceased suppressing Eastern Europe, the Eastern Europeans peacefully and quickly transformed into liberal Western democracies.
Except for Romania (where the dictator was killed), there was no bloodshed.
There was no violence.
In the late 1980s, what was the strength of desire for creating Western democracies in Eastern Europe?
Consider Czechoslovakia.
In one day of 1989 November, about 800,000 people gathered in Prague and rallied for the creation of a Western democracy [wikipedia.org].
800,000 people is about 5\% of the population.
By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy.
1 million people is only 0.1 \% of the Chinese population.
In other words, in the late 1980s, the strength of support for democracy in Eastern Europe was 50 times the strength in China.
I admire the Eastern Europeans.
China is what it is due to how the Chinese people act and think.
No foreign power is imposing the CCP on China.
The Chinese people support the CCP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163699</id>
	<title>Coincidence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243786020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, I might have to re-adjust my tin foil hat for this (or you might have to put one on), but its amazing that just before the 20th anniversary of the slaughter at Tiananmen Square, their crazy little neighbour to the south sets off an atomic bomb, and yaps like a non-capitalist dog about 'the truce is over and war imminent' blah blah.  Perhaps the dysfunctional leader got the go-ahead to push a button (and several psychological ones), by their freedom-agnostic neighbours to the north.  "Go for it crazy Kim!" reads the dispatch, you push a button at the imperialist dogs and have the emaciated million man army roast hot dogs (I'm not talkin' sausage), I mean Hot Dogs at the fireball.  "Look what the great leader has done, he is saving our lyvers".  The timing is about right though.  The US and allies developed the bomb in 1945.  Living in North Korea is living in a 1945 world.  It takes heat off China for human rights abuses.  Its just as bad in North Korea, except there is no foreign (American, European) investment.  North Korea as a communist experiment, is a disaster.  Before 1980, China was no better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , I might have to re-adjust my tin foil hat for this ( or you might have to put one on ) , but its amazing that just before the 20th anniversary of the slaughter at Tiananmen Square , their crazy little neighbour to the south sets off an atomic bomb , and yaps like a non-capitalist dog about 'the truce is over and war imminent ' blah blah .
Perhaps the dysfunctional leader got the go-ahead to push a button ( and several psychological ones ) , by their freedom-agnostic neighbours to the north .
" Go for it crazy Kim !
" reads the dispatch , you push a button at the imperialist dogs and have the emaciated million man army roast hot dogs ( I 'm not talkin ' sausage ) , I mean Hot Dogs at the fireball .
" Look what the great leader has done , he is saving our lyvers " .
The timing is about right though .
The US and allies developed the bomb in 1945 .
Living in North Korea is living in a 1945 world .
It takes heat off China for human rights abuses .
Its just as bad in North Korea , except there is no foreign ( American , European ) investment .
North Korea as a communist experiment , is a disaster .
Before 1980 , China was no better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, I might have to re-adjust my tin foil hat for this (or you might have to put one on), but its amazing that just before the 20th anniversary of the slaughter at Tiananmen Square, their crazy little neighbour to the south sets off an atomic bomb, and yaps like a non-capitalist dog about 'the truce is over and war imminent' blah blah.
Perhaps the dysfunctional leader got the go-ahead to push a button (and several psychological ones), by their freedom-agnostic neighbours to the north.
"Go for it crazy Kim!
" reads the dispatch, you push a button at the imperialist dogs and have the emaciated million man army roast hot dogs (I'm not talkin' sausage), I mean Hot Dogs at the fireball.
"Look what the great leader has done, he is saving our lyvers".
The timing is about right though.
The US and allies developed the bomb in 1945.
Living in North Korea is living in a 1945 world.
It takes heat off China for human rights abuses.
Its just as bad in North Korea, except there is no foreign (American, European) investment.
North Korea as a communist experiment, is a disaster.
Before 1980, China was no better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>DigiShaman</author>
	<datestamp>1243770660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That will change.</p><p>There are many in America (and an astounding amount on Slashdot) who would love to have religion banned forever. I would go so far as to say they would advocate any and all means stamp it out. Granted, these are the same group of people whom would close down gitmo and release the prisoners because we shouldn't have gone to war in the first place. Oh the irony...</p><p>For the few open minded people left on Slashdot, I would recommend reading a book titled "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark R. Levin. Quite an eye-opener.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That will change.There are many in America ( and an astounding amount on Slashdot ) who would love to have religion banned forever .
I would go so far as to say they would advocate any and all means stamp it out .
Granted , these are the same group of people whom would close down gitmo and release the prisoners because we should n't have gone to war in the first place .
Oh the irony...For the few open minded people left on Slashdot , I would recommend reading a book titled " Liberty and Tyranny " by Mark R. Levin. Quite an eye-opener .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That will change.There are many in America (and an astounding amount on Slashdot) who would love to have religion banned forever.
I would go so far as to say they would advocate any and all means stamp it out.
Granted, these are the same group of people whom would close down gitmo and release the prisoners because we shouldn't have gone to war in the first place.
Oh the irony...For the few open minded people left on Slashdot, I would recommend reading a book titled "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark R. Levin. Quite an eye-opener.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28187479</id>
	<title>paternalism</title>
	<author>e\_hu\_man</author>
	<datestamp>1243935720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yes, yes, we westerners always know what's best for others.  our grasp of the complex issues of a billion-plus person country are perfectly reflected by cartoonish summaries spawning countless cartoonish comments.<br>
<br>
BAD GOVERNMENT!  No Tibet for you!<br>
<br>
INTERNET could FREE PEOPLE OF CHINA, because the truth will set you freeeeeeee!!!!<br>
<br>
CHINESE likey censorship, if car come too<br>
<br>
now that i think about it, it's perfect.  this government vs the people narrative is just like star wars!  now if only the bad guys would dress up in white plastic suits so the rest of the world could tell who they are, we could send in chewie.  i hope the real emperor's head isn't as pale as it was in the movie...the camera beaming images back to a free west might crack a lens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , yes , we westerners always know what 's best for others .
our grasp of the complex issues of a billion-plus person country are perfectly reflected by cartoonish summaries spawning countless cartoonish comments .
BAD GOVERNMENT !
No Tibet for you !
INTERNET could FREE PEOPLE OF CHINA , because the truth will set you freeeeeeee ! ! ! !
CHINESE likey censorship , if car come too now that i think about it , it 's perfect .
this government vs the people narrative is just like star wars !
now if only the bad guys would dress up in white plastic suits so the rest of the world could tell who they are , we could send in chewie .
i hope the real emperor 's head is n't as pale as it was in the movie...the camera beaming images back to a free west might crack a lens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, yes, we westerners always know what's best for others.
our grasp of the complex issues of a billion-plus person country are perfectly reflected by cartoonish summaries spawning countless cartoonish comments.
BAD GOVERNMENT!
No Tibet for you!
INTERNET could FREE PEOPLE OF CHINA, because the truth will set you freeeeeeee!!!!
CHINESE likey censorship, if car come too

now that i think about it, it's perfect.
this government vs the people narrative is just like star wars!
now if only the bad guys would dress up in white plastic suits so the rest of the world could tell who they are, we could send in chewie.
i hope the real emperor's head isn't as pale as it was in the movie...the camera beaming images back to a free west might crack a lens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163263</id>
	<title>The Chinese Government Censors...</title>
	<author>vampire\_baozi</author>
	<datestamp>1243782720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the vast majority of Chinese don't care.</p><p>And why should they?  As long as you don't say inconvenient things, you can DO whatever you want in China.  With freedom of action, and a growing economy, why would most Chinese care?  If it weren't for the amazing economic growth presided over by  the CCP, most Chinese wouldn't have access to computers to even make these websites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the vast majority of Chinese do n't care.And why should they ?
As long as you do n't say inconvenient things , you can DO whatever you want in China .
With freedom of action , and a growing economy , why would most Chinese care ?
If it were n't for the amazing economic growth presided over by the CCP , most Chinese would n't have access to computers to even make these websites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the vast majority of Chinese don't care.And why should they?
As long as you don't say inconvenient things, you can DO whatever you want in China.
With freedom of action, and a growing economy, why would most Chinese care?
If it weren't for the amazing economic growth presided over by  the CCP, most Chinese wouldn't have access to computers to even make these websites.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164785</id>
	<title>Re:Fat and Happy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243797000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham"</p><p>Yeah, it isn't like there were millions of protesters... oh wait, there WERE.</p><p>-Fartnog Buttstinkle</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it , even after they learned it was a sham " Yeah , it is n't like there were millions of protesters... oh wait , there WERE.-Fartnog Buttstinkle</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham"Yeah, it isn't like there were millions of protesters... oh wait, there WERE.-Fartnog Buttstinkle</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161989</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Falconhell</author>
	<datestamp>1243771740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Insightful WTF?</p><p>Heard of extraordinary rendition? Waterboarding? Gitmo? Abu Grahib. Nearly all prisoner moslem, sounds just like China to me.</p><p>Just because you set up your secret prisons outside your country deos not mean you do not have them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Insightful WTF ? Heard of extraordinary rendition ?
Waterboarding ? Gitmo ?
Abu Grahib .
Nearly all prisoner moslem , sounds just like China to me.Just because you set up your secret prisons outside your country deos not mean you do not have them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insightful WTF?Heard of extraordinary rendition?
Waterboarding? Gitmo?
Abu Grahib.
Nearly all prisoner moslem, sounds just like China to me.Just because you set up your secret prisons outside your country deos not mean you do not have them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161951</id>
	<title>Tian-who-men . . . ?</title>
	<author>PolygamousRanchKid </author>
	<datestamp>1243771500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> . . . never heard of that place.  I'd better check the Internet . . .
</p><p>Ah, here it is: <a href="http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Tiananmen\_Square" title="wikia.com">http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Tiananmen\_Square</a> [wikia.com]
</p><p>It's worth a peek for Slashdotters just for the photo of Li Peng using his laser eyes  . . . sharks are up next.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
never heard of that place .
I 'd better check the Internet .
. .
Ah , here it is : http : //uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Tiananmen \ _Square [ wikia.com ] It 's worth a peek for Slashdotters just for the photo of Li Peng using his laser eyes .
. .
sharks are up next .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .
. .
never heard of that place.
I'd better check the Internet .
. .
Ah, here it is: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Tiananmen\_Square [wikia.com]
It's worth a peek for Slashdotters just for the photo of Li Peng using his laser eyes  .
. .
sharks are up next.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161665</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243768740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[Shrug] It took many years before China admitted the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great\_Leap\_Forward" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">great depths of mistakes</a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural\_Revolution" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">made many decades ago</a> [wikipedia.org], and yet the main guy responsible is still revered and there's still a lot of glossing over of the real effects (e.g., tens of millions of deaths).  Denial of one's mistakes is naturally popular.  Why wouldn't they continue the tradition?  Maybe they'll be ready to face the reality of the massacre at Tiananmen Square in a few more decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Shrug ] It took many years before China admitted the great depths of mistakes [ wikipedia.org ] made many decades ago [ wikipedia.org ] , and yet the main guy responsible is still revered and there 's still a lot of glossing over of the real effects ( e.g. , tens of millions of deaths ) .
Denial of one 's mistakes is naturally popular .
Why would n't they continue the tradition ?
Maybe they 'll be ready to face the reality of the massacre at Tiananmen Square in a few more decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Shrug] It took many years before China admitted the great depths of mistakes [wikipedia.org] made many decades ago [wikipedia.org], and yet the main guy responsible is still revered and there's still a lot of glossing over of the real effects (e.g., tens of millions of deaths).
Denial of one's mistakes is naturally popular.
Why wouldn't they continue the tradition?
Maybe they'll be ready to face the reality of the massacre at Tiananmen Square in a few more decades.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163321</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1243783260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
"In other words, in the late 1980s, the strength of support for democracy in Eastern Europe was 50 times the strength in China.

I admire the Eastern Europeans. "
</p><p>
No offense to Easter Europeans, but you might as well admire monkeys.
</p><p>
Of course Eastern Europeans wanted to be like their Western neighbors - not only were they much wealthier and freer, they shared much the history and culture, and were just across the borders.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" In other words , in the late 1980s , the strength of support for democracy in Eastern Europe was 50 times the strength in China .
I admire the Eastern Europeans .
" No offense to Easter Europeans , but you might as well admire monkeys .
Of course Eastern Europeans wanted to be like their Western neighbors - not only were they much wealthier and freer , they shared much the history and culture , and were just across the borders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
"In other words, in the late 1980s, the strength of support for democracy in Eastern Europe was 50 times the strength in China.
I admire the Eastern Europeans.
"

No offense to Easter Europeans, but you might as well admire monkeys.
Of course Eastern Europeans wanted to be like their Western neighbors - not only were they much wealthier and freer, they shared much the history and culture, and were just across the borders.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162591</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243777200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You say the transfer was peaceful in Eastern Europe, and for the most part it was, but you forget all the rallies that were brutally suppressed before hand. Also the Governments of EE didn't keep this knowledge from the masses, and didn't even appear to try to do so. So unrest was able to gather and people never forgot.<br>In China they were just as suppressive, Tiananmem wasn't the 1st and will not be the last. Case in point I see you already forgotten the Tibetan peoples recent unrest nor the Uighurs constant unrest. Also to say that the "Chinese" people support the CCP is willfully ignorant.<br>The Tibetans certainly don't, the Uighurs certainly don't and I can bet you there are probably are few other cultures and peoples in China that would love to have their voice heard.<br>Also your claim that your claim about needing sufficient people to protest and insinuating is poor at best. Considering how the CCP is in continuous control mode gettting 5 MILLION people to demonstrate at one point in place is unrealistic. Multiple co-ordinated protests across the country might reach that number, but again, the problem is you lump in everyone as Chinese.<br>The Tibetans are protesting against the CCP the simply don't want to be part of China, the same as the Uighurs and to expect them to line for pro-democracy presentantions with Han Chinese the population responsible for supressing and displacing them in their own lands is extremely unlikely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You say the transfer was peaceful in Eastern Europe , and for the most part it was , but you forget all the rallies that were brutally suppressed before hand .
Also the Governments of EE did n't keep this knowledge from the masses , and did n't even appear to try to do so .
So unrest was able to gather and people never forgot.In China they were just as suppressive , Tiananmem was n't the 1st and will not be the last .
Case in point I see you already forgotten the Tibetan peoples recent unrest nor the Uighurs constant unrest .
Also to say that the " Chinese " people support the CCP is willfully ignorant.The Tibetans certainly do n't , the Uighurs certainly do n't and I can bet you there are probably are few other cultures and peoples in China that would love to have their voice heard.Also your claim that your claim about needing sufficient people to protest and insinuating is poor at best .
Considering how the CCP is in continuous control mode gettting 5 MILLION people to demonstrate at one point in place is unrealistic .
Multiple co-ordinated protests across the country might reach that number , but again , the problem is you lump in everyone as Chinese.The Tibetans are protesting against the CCP the simply do n't want to be part of China , the same as the Uighurs and to expect them to line for pro-democracy presentantions with Han Chinese the population responsible for supressing and displacing them in their own lands is extremely unlikely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say the transfer was peaceful in Eastern Europe, and for the most part it was, but you forget all the rallies that were brutally suppressed before hand.
Also the Governments of EE didn't keep this knowledge from the masses, and didn't even appear to try to do so.
So unrest was able to gather and people never forgot.In China they were just as suppressive, Tiananmem wasn't the 1st and will not be the last.
Case in point I see you already forgotten the Tibetan peoples recent unrest nor the Uighurs constant unrest.
Also to say that the "Chinese" people support the CCP is willfully ignorant.The Tibetans certainly don't, the Uighurs certainly don't and I can bet you there are probably are few other cultures and peoples in China that would love to have their voice heard.Also your claim that your claim about needing sufficient people to protest and insinuating is poor at best.
Considering how the CCP is in continuous control mode gettting 5 MILLION people to demonstrate at one point in place is unrealistic.
Multiple co-ordinated protests across the country might reach that number, but again, the problem is you lump in everyone as Chinese.The Tibetans are protesting against the CCP the simply don't want to be part of China, the same as the Uighurs and to expect them to line for pro-democracy presentantions with Han Chinese the population responsible for supressing and displacing them in their own lands is extremely unlikely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161891</id>
	<title>Some surprising results searching google.cn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243770720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just searched images.google.cn for "Tiananmen Square (massacre OR killing OR event)" and got a page that seems surprisingly uncensored (by China's standards). Is google.cn only censored when it detects IP addresses within China?
<p>
Here's my search: <a href="http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=Tiananmen+Square+(massacre+OR+killing+OR+event)" title="google.cn">http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=Tiananmen+Square+(massacre+OR+killing+OR+event)</a> [google.cn]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just searched images.google.cn for " Tiananmen Square ( massacre OR killing OR event ) " and got a page that seems surprisingly uncensored ( by China 's standards ) .
Is google.cn only censored when it detects IP addresses within China ?
Here 's my search : http : //images.google.cn/images ? gbv = 2&amp;hl = zh-CN&amp;sa = 1&amp;q = Tiananmen + Square + ( massacre + OR + killing + OR + event ) [ google.cn ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just searched images.google.cn for "Tiananmen Square (massacre OR killing OR event)" and got a page that seems surprisingly uncensored (by China's standards).
Is google.cn only censored when it detects IP addresses within China?
Here's my search: http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=Tiananmen+Square+(massacre+OR+killing+OR+event) [google.cn]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243768620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161945</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243771440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'The Chinese people support the CCP'</p><p>It is not so straightforward as this. There is plenty of discontent. Corrupt officials and police are hated. The CCP do a good job of getting the glory of the Chinese people's fervent nationalistic feeling. Control of the media makes this not too difficult a task.</p><p>'This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it'<br>Not really - it has existed by control, through force, fear and a growing economy. There is no way of testing how many people actually support the government.</p><p>'By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy'</p><p>Wrong on a number of details. The gathering happened throughout the preceding 6 weeks, at least. Many, many more gathered in major cities throughout China at the same time. (I witnessed demonstrations in May 1989 in Beijing,Shanghai,Wuhan,Chongqing, Chengdu).<br>There was no 'demand for the creation of a Western democracy' (ok - individuals might have said this, but no definite concept demanded). The people were fed up with the system, lack of opportunity, corruption - it was an outpouring of many grievances.</p><p>However, I suppose your point is that, if the people were fed up then they could have/should have overthrown the government. The fact they didn't is more to do with the fact that China is a big place, with a mix of cultures,languages, poor communication (especially in 1989), with no environment for establishing a concerted opposition. You cannot infer that, because the people did not overthrow the government, the people support it.</p><p>(signed: a long term foreign resident of China)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'The Chinese people support the CCP'It is not so straightforward as this .
There is plenty of discontent .
Corrupt officials and police are hated .
The CCP do a good job of getting the glory of the Chinese people 's fervent nationalistic feeling .
Control of the media makes this not too difficult a task .
'This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it'Not really - it has existed by control , through force , fear and a growing economy .
There is no way of testing how many people actually support the government .
'By contrast , in one day of 1989 June , about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy'Wrong on a number of details .
The gathering happened throughout the preceding 6 weeks , at least .
Many , many more gathered in major cities throughout China at the same time .
( I witnessed demonstrations in May 1989 in Beijing,Shanghai,Wuhan,Chongqing , Chengdu ) .There was no 'demand for the creation of a Western democracy ' ( ok - individuals might have said this , but no definite concept demanded ) .
The people were fed up with the system , lack of opportunity , corruption - it was an outpouring of many grievances.However , I suppose your point is that , if the people were fed up then they could have/should have overthrown the government .
The fact they did n't is more to do with the fact that China is a big place , with a mix of cultures,languages , poor communication ( especially in 1989 ) , with no environment for establishing a concerted opposition .
You can not infer that , because the people did not overthrow the government , the people support it .
( signed : a long term foreign resident of China )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'The Chinese people support the CCP'It is not so straightforward as this.
There is plenty of discontent.
Corrupt officials and police are hated.
The CCP do a good job of getting the glory of the Chinese people's fervent nationalistic feeling.
Control of the media makes this not too difficult a task.
'This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it'Not really - it has existed by control, through force, fear and a growing economy.
There is no way of testing how many people actually support the government.
'By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy'Wrong on a number of details.
The gathering happened throughout the preceding 6 weeks, at least.
Many, many more gathered in major cities throughout China at the same time.
(I witnessed demonstrations in May 1989 in Beijing,Shanghai,Wuhan,Chongqing, Chengdu).There was no 'demand for the creation of a Western democracy' (ok - individuals might have said this, but no definite concept demanded).
The people were fed up with the system, lack of opportunity, corruption - it was an outpouring of many grievances.However, I suppose your point is that, if the people were fed up then they could have/should have overthrown the government.
The fact they didn't is more to do with the fact that China is a big place, with a mix of cultures,languages, poor communication (especially in 1989), with no environment for establishing a concerted opposition.
You cannot infer that, because the people did not overthrow the government, the people support it.
(signed: a long term foreign resident of China)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164945</id>
	<title>Do you understand implications of the word "ban"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243799280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I fail to see the hypocrisy in people who believe religion == bad idea &amp;&amp; gitmo == bad idea since both can be used as tools of repression.</p><p>You're distorting what he said.  He didn't say that they merely think that religion is a bad idea, he spoke of people who wanted to <b>ban</b> it.  That goes far beyond merely calling religion a "bad idea."  A ban on religion is <i>also</i> a tool of repression (and therein lies the hypocrisy).</p><p>Yes, I have seen people seriously express a desire to outlaw religion in the same ways that China does.  And they don't technically even <i>ban</i> religion entirely (like some wish to), they "merely" regulate what you can believe and require a license from the government for your church.  Even though that's somewhat less than the ban he was mentioning which I have also witnessed people calling for, jackbooted thugs will crash any unlicensed private prayer meetings you're holding.</p><p>If you've never met <a href="http://www.cracked.com/article\_15759\_10-things-christians-atheists-can-must-agree-on.html" title="cracked.com" rel="nofollow">that kind of atheist</a> [cracked.com], I can only say that you must get out even less than I do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I fail to see the hypocrisy in people who believe religion = = bad idea &amp;&amp; gitmo = = bad idea since both can be used as tools of repression.You 're distorting what he said .
He did n't say that they merely think that religion is a bad idea , he spoke of people who wanted to ban it .
That goes far beyond merely calling religion a " bad idea .
" A ban on religion is also a tool of repression ( and therein lies the hypocrisy ) .Yes , I have seen people seriously express a desire to outlaw religion in the same ways that China does .
And they do n't technically even ban religion entirely ( like some wish to ) , they " merely " regulate what you can believe and require a license from the government for your church .
Even though that 's somewhat less than the ban he was mentioning which I have also witnessed people calling for , jackbooted thugs will crash any unlicensed private prayer meetings you 're holding.If you 've never met that kind of atheist [ cracked.com ] , I can only say that you must get out even less than I do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I fail to see the hypocrisy in people who believe religion == bad idea &amp;&amp; gitmo == bad idea since both can be used as tools of repression.You're distorting what he said.
He didn't say that they merely think that religion is a bad idea, he spoke of people who wanted to ban it.
That goes far beyond merely calling religion a "bad idea.
"  A ban on religion is also a tool of repression (and therein lies the hypocrisy).Yes, I have seen people seriously express a desire to outlaw religion in the same ways that China does.
And they don't technically even ban religion entirely (like some wish to), they "merely" regulate what you can believe and require a license from the government for your church.
Even though that's somewhat less than the ban he was mentioning which I have also witnessed people calling for, jackbooted thugs will crash any unlicensed private prayer meetings you're holding.If you've never met that kind of atheist [cracked.com], I can only say that you must get out even less than I do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161885</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Daimanta</author>
	<datestamp>1243770720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you know if a country does or does not have SECRET prisons?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you know if a country does or does not have SECRET prisons ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you know if a country does or does not have SECRET prisons?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161547</id>
	<title>Hello Slashdot Website Maintainers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243767780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Read More... links on the front page are broken.<br>The R3ad More... links on the front page are broken.<br>The Re4d More... links on the front page are broken.<br>The ReaD More... links on the front page are broken.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Read More... links on the front page are broken.The R3ad More... links on the front page are broken.The Re4d More... links on the front page are broken.The ReaD More... links on the front page are broken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Read More... links on the front page are broken.The R3ad More... links on the front page are broken.The Re4d More... links on the front page are broken.The ReaD More... links on the front page are broken.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162547</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>MaskedSlacker</author>
	<datestamp>1243776660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait...you're comparing five percent of the population from an area the size of New Jersey, to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.1\% of the population from a Nation the size of the US?  Seriously?</p><p>5\% of China's population would be 60-70million people...how the hell are they all going to get to Beijing?  You can walk across from one end of the Czech Republic to the other in less than a week.  Information can spread quickly, people can be mobilized.</p><p>The organizational logistics of coordinating people do not scale linearly, it is highly disingenuous to compare the percentages of the population protesting.  Especially when you consider that the Czech protests happened AFTER the fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, when it was already clear that they were going to have their way.  Protesters at Tianamen protested in the face of a regime still in full control, and more than willing to kill them all, which inherently means fewer people were willing to take that risk.</p><p>That being said, I don't doubt your conclusion, that popular support just isn't there.  But your argument borders on absurd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait...you 're comparing five percent of the population from an area the size of New Jersey , to .1 \ % of the population from a Nation the size of the US ?
Seriously ? 5 \ % of China 's population would be 60-70million people...how the hell are they all going to get to Beijing ?
You can walk across from one end of the Czech Republic to the other in less than a week .
Information can spread quickly , people can be mobilized.The organizational logistics of coordinating people do not scale linearly , it is highly disingenuous to compare the percentages of the population protesting .
Especially when you consider that the Czech protests happened AFTER the fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9 , when it was already clear that they were going to have their way .
Protesters at Tianamen protested in the face of a regime still in full control , and more than willing to kill them all , which inherently means fewer people were willing to take that risk.That being said , I do n't doubt your conclusion , that popular support just is n't there .
But your argument borders on absurd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait...you're comparing five percent of the population from an area the size of New Jersey, to .1\% of the population from a Nation the size of the US?
Seriously?5\% of China's population would be 60-70million people...how the hell are they all going to get to Beijing?
You can walk across from one end of the Czech Republic to the other in less than a week.
Information can spread quickly, people can be mobilized.The organizational logistics of coordinating people do not scale linearly, it is highly disingenuous to compare the percentages of the population protesting.
Especially when you consider that the Czech protests happened AFTER the fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, when it was already clear that they were going to have their way.
Protesters at Tianamen protested in the face of a regime still in full control, and more than willing to kill them all, which inherently means fewer people were willing to take that risk.That being said, I don't doubt your conclusion, that popular support just isn't there.
But your argument borders on absurd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28167859</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>Type-E</author>
	<datestamp>1243870320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Great Leap Forward has starved 35 to 40million chinese to death in 3-4 years.  This is greater than the sum of deaths due to natural disaster in recent 2000 years of Chinese history.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Great Leap Forward has starved 35 to 40million chinese to death in 3-4 years .
This is greater than the sum of deaths due to natural disaster in recent 2000 years of Chinese history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Great Leap Forward has starved 35 to 40million chinese to death in 3-4 years.
This is greater than the sum of deaths due to natural disaster in recent 2000 years of Chinese history.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161997</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>diamondsw</author>
	<datestamp>1243771800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, you don't complain in China if you know what's good for you. How many stories do we see every year about prominent protestors being thrown into labor camps?</p><p>Take Hong Kong for a recent example of how life in China works. As soon as the transition was complete - Basic Law, Special Administrative Region or not - the newspapers and politicians made fast 180's and self-censored to avoid bringing the wrath of the Chinese government down on them. Are you saying that a majority of people in Hong Kong love communism and the CCP, since there isn't any public protest?</p><p>Certainly some of the Chinese people have been indoctrinated by the Communist Party. And some accept it because it "doesn't affect them" (moderate capitalism and "openness" has kept the wealthy people in the cities from complaining). But you'd probably find a lot of them are unhappy with it - although probably for the same reasons we're unhappy with our governments (rampant corruption, bureaucracy, and inattentiveness) than the limitations on their freedom of speech, thought, and lives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you do n't complain in China if you know what 's good for you .
How many stories do we see every year about prominent protestors being thrown into labor camps ? Take Hong Kong for a recent example of how life in China works .
As soon as the transition was complete - Basic Law , Special Administrative Region or not - the newspapers and politicians made fast 180 's and self-censored to avoid bringing the wrath of the Chinese government down on them .
Are you saying that a majority of people in Hong Kong love communism and the CCP , since there is n't any public protest ? Certainly some of the Chinese people have been indoctrinated by the Communist Party .
And some accept it because it " does n't affect them " ( moderate capitalism and " openness " has kept the wealthy people in the cities from complaining ) .
But you 'd probably find a lot of them are unhappy with it - although probably for the same reasons we 're unhappy with our governments ( rampant corruption , bureaucracy , and inattentiveness ) than the limitations on their freedom of speech , thought , and lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you don't complain in China if you know what's good for you.
How many stories do we see every year about prominent protestors being thrown into labor camps?Take Hong Kong for a recent example of how life in China works.
As soon as the transition was complete - Basic Law, Special Administrative Region or not - the newspapers and politicians made fast 180's and self-censored to avoid bringing the wrath of the Chinese government down on them.
Are you saying that a majority of people in Hong Kong love communism and the CCP, since there isn't any public protest?Certainly some of the Chinese people have been indoctrinated by the Communist Party.
And some accept it because it "doesn't affect them" (moderate capitalism and "openness" has kept the wealthy people in the cities from complaining).
But you'd probably find a lot of them are unhappy with it - although probably for the same reasons we're unhappy with our governments (rampant corruption, bureaucracy, and inattentiveness) than the limitations on their freedom of speech, thought, and lives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</id>
	<title>It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>DittoBox</author>
	<datestamp>1243767120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's still inconvenient for the Chinese government that this not be seen by the public? Although not easy to pull off, perhaps there should be some plans to bring this issue up world wide when it's not around the anniversary. Catch the Chinese authorities off-guard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's still inconvenient for the Chinese government that this not be seen by the public ?
Although not easy to pull off , perhaps there should be some plans to bring this issue up world wide when it 's not around the anniversary .
Catch the Chinese authorities off-guard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's still inconvenient for the Chinese government that this not be seen by the public?
Although not easy to pull off, perhaps there should be some plans to bring this issue up world wide when it's not around the anniversary.
Catch the Chinese authorities off-guard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179199</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>LostInTaiwan</author>
	<datestamp>1243937400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know for the longest time I thought the same.  I thought after centuries of dynasty changes and political purges the rebellious gene within the Chinese population has been wiped out.   However, I rewatched the Tankman episode on PBS frontline and I am reminded just how resilient that rebellious gene is.   One lone guy probably just got back from buying groceries facing down a column of tanks.  This was a couple days after the massacre, after the tanks has ran over and shot up a bunch of people, yet he persisted and for a few brief minutes stopped that long column of tanks all by himself.

We, the people living and enjoying our freedom finance by cheap chinese made products support the CCP and its continued domination over its people.   Our cold hard currency allows the CCP to stay in power and pacify its people.  If you want to blame the Chinese people for supporting the CCP, you are just as guilty.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know for the longest time I thought the same .
I thought after centuries of dynasty changes and political purges the rebellious gene within the Chinese population has been wiped out .
However , I rewatched the Tankman episode on PBS frontline and I am reminded just how resilient that rebellious gene is .
One lone guy probably just got back from buying groceries facing down a column of tanks .
This was a couple days after the massacre , after the tanks has ran over and shot up a bunch of people , yet he persisted and for a few brief minutes stopped that long column of tanks all by himself .
We , the people living and enjoying our freedom finance by cheap chinese made products support the CCP and its continued domination over its people .
Our cold hard currency allows the CCP to stay in power and pacify its people .
If you want to blame the Chinese people for supporting the CCP , you are just as guilty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know for the longest time I thought the same.
I thought after centuries of dynasty changes and political purges the rebellious gene within the Chinese population has been wiped out.
However, I rewatched the Tankman episode on PBS frontline and I am reminded just how resilient that rebellious gene is.
One lone guy probably just got back from buying groceries facing down a column of tanks.
This was a couple days after the massacre, after the tanks has ran over and shot up a bunch of people, yet he persisted and for a few brief minutes stopped that long column of tanks all by himself.
We, the people living and enjoying our freedom finance by cheap chinese made products support the CCP and its continued domination over its people.
Our cold hard currency allows the CCP to stay in power and pacify its people.
If you want to blame the Chinese people for supporting the CCP, you are just as guilty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161619</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>Brian Gordon</author>
	<datestamp>1243768320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know, I find it hard to believe that they've been able to hide it from their citizens for 20 years. Are there any (urban) Chinese who <i>still</i> haven't heard about it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know , I find it hard to believe that they 've been able to hide it from their citizens for 20 years .
Are there any ( urban ) Chinese who still have n't heard about it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know, I find it hard to believe that they've been able to hide it from their citizens for 20 years.
Are there any (urban) Chinese who still haven't heard about it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162639</id>
	<title>Re:And the secret sauce is...</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1243777680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a fine line distinguishing us (the US) and the likes of China.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a fine line distinguishing us ( the US ) and the likes of China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a fine line distinguishing us (the US) and the likes of China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161663</id>
	<title>No Brutal Authoritarian Government Required</title>
	<author>bhima</author>
	<datestamp>1243768680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not convinced that an authoritarian government is so necessary to re-write the popular mythology of recent history.  The US does not have a government which is strongly authoritarian, yet the re-writing of history is a prominent form of political speech in America.</p><p>I've come across several other examples:  Japanese popular history of the nature of their involvement in WWII.  Australian &amp; American popular history of the treatment of Aboriginals / Native Americans.  I am more familiar with American &amp; Australian histories, so I could name many more... but I think that is beside the point.  Someone with a solid knowledge of another country doubtless could list many other examples.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not convinced that an authoritarian government is so necessary to re-write the popular mythology of recent history .
The US does not have a government which is strongly authoritarian , yet the re-writing of history is a prominent form of political speech in America.I 've come across several other examples : Japanese popular history of the nature of their involvement in WWII .
Australian &amp; American popular history of the treatment of Aboriginals / Native Americans .
I am more familiar with American &amp; Australian histories , so I could name many more... but I think that is beside the point .
Someone with a solid knowledge of another country doubtless could list many other examples .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not convinced that an authoritarian government is so necessary to re-write the popular mythology of recent history.
The US does not have a government which is strongly authoritarian, yet the re-writing of history is a prominent form of political speech in America.I've come across several other examples:  Japanese popular history of the nature of their involvement in WWII.
Australian &amp; American popular history of the treatment of Aboriginals / Native Americans.
I am more familiar with American &amp; Australian histories, so I could name many more... but I think that is beside the point.
Someone with a solid knowledge of another country doubtless could list many other examples.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161799</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>DrLang21</author>
	<datestamp>1243770000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hi.   You must be new here. Since when do people on Slashdot give the US government an easy time when it comes to censorship?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi .
You must be new here .
Since when do people on Slashdot give the US government an easy time when it comes to censorship ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi.
You must be new here.
Since when do people on Slashdot give the US government an easy time when it comes to censorship?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161767</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243769700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And before some idiot who thinks he's clever brings it up...no, that's not what Gitmo is.</p><p>And no, pointing that out doesn't make me a toture-loving right-wing nutjob.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And before some idiot who thinks he 's clever brings it up...no , that 's not what Gitmo is.And no , pointing that out does n't make me a toture-loving right-wing nutjob .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And before some idiot who thinks he's clever brings it up...no, that's not what Gitmo is.And no, pointing that out doesn't make me a toture-loving right-wing nutjob.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163369</id>
	<title>Re:No Brutal Authoritarian Government Required</title>
	<author>GammaKitsune</author>
	<datestamp>1243783620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I must confess, I am not familiar with the Australian popular history of their treatment of Aboriginals. But in America, it seems to me that there is a very dim view on the treatment of Native Americans. Aside from the feel-good stories told during Thanksgiving, popular culture seems to view early Americans as barbaric towards the native peoples. I welcome further input on the subject, in any case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I must confess , I am not familiar with the Australian popular history of their treatment of Aboriginals .
But in America , it seems to me that there is a very dim view on the treatment of Native Americans .
Aside from the feel-good stories told during Thanksgiving , popular culture seems to view early Americans as barbaric towards the native peoples .
I welcome further input on the subject , in any case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I must confess, I am not familiar with the Australian popular history of their treatment of Aboriginals.
But in America, it seems to me that there is a very dim view on the treatment of Native Americans.
Aside from the feel-good stories told during Thanksgiving, popular culture seems to view early Americans as barbaric towards the native peoples.
I welcome further input on the subject, in any case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161707</id>
	<title>Take note</title>
	<author>RyoShin</author>
	<datestamp>1243769160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one of the countries that people want to let control DNS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the countries that people want to let control DNS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the countries that people want to let control DNS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28169767</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>EllisDees</author>
	<datestamp>1243878480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;There are many in America (and an astounding amount on Slashdot) who would love to have religion banned forever.</p><p>If by 'many', you mean a statistically insignificant number, you would be correct. As it is, there are very, very few people making that argument here or anywhere else for that matter. A lot of us may think you are dumb because of your religious beliefs, and a lot of us might enjoy pointing out the factual errors and contradictions in whatever your religion is, but even attempting to ban religion is idiotic. If you're free, you're free to believe in falsehoods.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; There are many in America ( and an astounding amount on Slashdot ) who would love to have religion banned forever.If by 'many ' , you mean a statistically insignificant number , you would be correct .
As it is , there are very , very few people making that argument here or anywhere else for that matter .
A lot of us may think you are dumb because of your religious beliefs , and a lot of us might enjoy pointing out the factual errors and contradictions in whatever your religion is , but even attempting to ban religion is idiotic .
If you 're free , you 're free to believe in falsehoods .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;There are many in America (and an astounding amount on Slashdot) who would love to have religion banned forever.If by 'many', you mean a statistically insignificant number, you would be correct.
As it is, there are very, very few people making that argument here or anywhere else for that matter.
A lot of us may think you are dumb because of your religious beliefs, and a lot of us might enjoy pointing out the factual errors and contradictions in whatever your religion is, but even attempting to ban religion is idiotic.
If you're free, you're free to believe in falsehoods.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163249</id>
	<title>They care more about chatting and games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243782600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The truth is most Chinese internet-users care about the same things as most western internet-users do: chatting and games.</p><p>Years after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, more than half of U.S. citizens could still not locate Afghanistan on the map, either. I'm in Beijing right now. Having Youtube and such banned is annoying as heck, but like most Chinese I treat the blocking of many sites as an annoyance, rather than a severe crackdown on rights. Internet didn't even exist 20 years ago, and most young people (not only in China) aren't very involved in politics. They're more concerned with their future career prospects and the stock market.</p><p>The thing is, although there are a lot of problems in China right now, most people believe that the -Central- government is truly acting in the interest of the country. It has delivered better than any alternatives they can see (Russia? Ended up electing a dictator as well. India? Has twice the number of poor people, terrible infrastructure and higher levels of illiteracy, etc.), so they're happy. People forget that for many Chinese, war, internal conflicts and famine aren't that distant a memory. Now things are relatively peaceful, meat consumption has gone up, and China has become the world's biggest user of mobile phones and internet. Good enough?</p><p>For all media's talk of authoritarianism, power in China is actually very fractured, and most Chinese realize this. Complaints are usually directed towards corrupt -local- officials, not towards the higher-ups. After all, China does have pretty tough laws, but it often lacks the means to enforce it. It's not easy when the local officials are buddy-buddies with the local police and the local press as well. The Central government is apparently experimenting with elections in some villages, but it would take time until such systems are applied on a wider basis.</p><p>(by the way, Google gets bashed a lot because of it assists in the censuring, but I think people are giving it a too hard time. I can actually access most of the news articles on Google News. And most forums have discussion sections about topics otherwise censored in China, but because the forums don't specialize in it those sites actually aren't banned - case in point with Slashdot-. Google gives Chinese people access to 90\% of the information they didn't have access to before, and doesn't give access to 10\% of the stuff they didn't have access to to begin with. Good enough for now)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The truth is most Chinese internet-users care about the same things as most western internet-users do : chatting and games.Years after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan , more than half of U.S. citizens could still not locate Afghanistan on the map , either .
I 'm in Beijing right now .
Having Youtube and such banned is annoying as heck , but like most Chinese I treat the blocking of many sites as an annoyance , rather than a severe crackdown on rights .
Internet did n't even exist 20 years ago , and most young people ( not only in China ) are n't very involved in politics .
They 're more concerned with their future career prospects and the stock market.The thing is , although there are a lot of problems in China right now , most people believe that the -Central- government is truly acting in the interest of the country .
It has delivered better than any alternatives they can see ( Russia ?
Ended up electing a dictator as well .
India ? Has twice the number of poor people , terrible infrastructure and higher levels of illiteracy , etc .
) , so they 're happy .
People forget that for many Chinese , war , internal conflicts and famine are n't that distant a memory .
Now things are relatively peaceful , meat consumption has gone up , and China has become the world 's biggest user of mobile phones and internet .
Good enough ? For all media 's talk of authoritarianism , power in China is actually very fractured , and most Chinese realize this .
Complaints are usually directed towards corrupt -local- officials , not towards the higher-ups .
After all , China does have pretty tough laws , but it often lacks the means to enforce it .
It 's not easy when the local officials are buddy-buddies with the local police and the local press as well .
The Central government is apparently experimenting with elections in some villages , but it would take time until such systems are applied on a wider basis .
( by the way , Google gets bashed a lot because of it assists in the censuring , but I think people are giving it a too hard time .
I can actually access most of the news articles on Google News .
And most forums have discussion sections about topics otherwise censored in China , but because the forums do n't specialize in it those sites actually are n't banned - case in point with Slashdot- .
Google gives Chinese people access to 90 \ % of the information they did n't have access to before , and does n't give access to 10 \ % of the stuff they did n't have access to to begin with .
Good enough for now )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The truth is most Chinese internet-users care about the same things as most western internet-users do: chatting and games.Years after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, more than half of U.S. citizens could still not locate Afghanistan on the map, either.
I'm in Beijing right now.
Having Youtube and such banned is annoying as heck, but like most Chinese I treat the blocking of many sites as an annoyance, rather than a severe crackdown on rights.
Internet didn't even exist 20 years ago, and most young people (not only in China) aren't very involved in politics.
They're more concerned with their future career prospects and the stock market.The thing is, although there are a lot of problems in China right now, most people believe that the -Central- government is truly acting in the interest of the country.
It has delivered better than any alternatives they can see (Russia?
Ended up electing a dictator as well.
India? Has twice the number of poor people, terrible infrastructure and higher levels of illiteracy, etc.
), so they're happy.
People forget that for many Chinese, war, internal conflicts and famine aren't that distant a memory.
Now things are relatively peaceful, meat consumption has gone up, and China has become the world's biggest user of mobile phones and internet.
Good enough?For all media's talk of authoritarianism, power in China is actually very fractured, and most Chinese realize this.
Complaints are usually directed towards corrupt -local- officials, not towards the higher-ups.
After all, China does have pretty tough laws, but it often lacks the means to enforce it.
It's not easy when the local officials are buddy-buddies with the local police and the local press as well.
The Central government is apparently experimenting with elections in some villages, but it would take time until such systems are applied on a wider basis.
(by the way, Google gets bashed a lot because of it assists in the censuring, but I think people are giving it a too hard time.
I can actually access most of the news articles on Google News.
And most forums have discussion sections about topics otherwise censored in China, but because the forums don't specialize in it those sites actually aren't banned - case in point with Slashdot-.
Google gives Chinese people access to 90\% of the information they didn't have access to before, and doesn't give access to 10\% of the stuff they didn't have access to to begin with.
Good enough for now)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161883</id>
	<title>Re:Like this not happens in America</title>
	<author>sackvillian</author>
	<datestamp>1243770660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It does happen to an extent in the US, if the critic happens to be Islamic also.</p><p>But more commonly, it happens on behalf of Americans and American entites worldwide - one protester, essentially murdered by Shell, comes to mind from a recent trial; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken\_Saro\_Wiwa" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Ken Saro Wiwa</a> [wikipedia.org]. </p><p>No, it's not exactly what China is doing, but if your country is largely affected by powerful corporations, they have to be considered as part of your system of governance - and that doesn't make anybody look too pretty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does happen to an extent in the US , if the critic happens to be Islamic also.But more commonly , it happens on behalf of Americans and American entites worldwide - one protester , essentially murdered by Shell , comes to mind from a recent trial ; Ken Saro Wiwa [ wikipedia.org ] .
No , it 's not exactly what China is doing , but if your country is largely affected by powerful corporations , they have to be considered as part of your system of governance - and that does n't make anybody look too pretty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It does happen to an extent in the US, if the critic happens to be Islamic also.But more commonly, it happens on behalf of Americans and American entites worldwide - one protester, essentially murdered by Shell, comes to mind from a recent trial; Ken Saro Wiwa [wikipedia.org].
No, it's not exactly what China is doing, but if your country is largely affected by powerful corporations, they have to be considered as part of your system of governance - and that doesn't make anybody look too pretty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163967</id>
	<title>Re:The Chinese Government Censors...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243788540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And why should they? As long as you don't say inconvenient things, you can DO whatever you want in China.</p></div><p>Really<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... let's try a trivially small example: can they go to a small independent Christian home church without fear of persecution and imprisonment by the government?  Sadly, the answer is 'no'.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And why should they ?
As long as you do n't say inconvenient things , you can DO whatever you want in China.Really ... let 's try a trivially small example : can they go to a small independent Christian home church without fear of persecution and imprisonment by the government ?
Sadly , the answer is 'no' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And why should they?
As long as you don't say inconvenient things, you can DO whatever you want in China.Really ... let's try a trivially small example: can they go to a small independent Christian home church without fear of persecution and imprisonment by the government?
Sadly, the answer is 'no'.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163263</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162035</id>
	<title>deal or no deal?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243772160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been told the Chinese are willing to open up the discussions about Tiananmen if the USA will release the Abu Ghraib pictures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been told the Chinese are willing to open up the discussions about Tiananmen if the USA will release the Abu Ghraib pictures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been told the Chinese are willing to open up the discussions about Tiananmen if the USA will release the Abu Ghraib pictures.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162293</id>
	<title>Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1243774440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the late 1980s, what was the strength of desire for creating Western democracies in Eastern Europe? Consider Czechoslovakia. In one day of 1989 November, about 800,000 people gathered in Prague and rallied for the creation of a Western democracy. 800,000 people is about 5\% of the population. By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy. 1 million people is only 0.1 \% of the Chinese population.</p></div><p>1. The entire country is the size of South Carolina (#40 US) so gathering all the people in easier, unlike China which is same size as the United States.<br>2. That was by far the first mass demonstration, if left in peace the Chinese mass demonstration would probably have grown a lot too.<br>3. The Soviet Union was gone, the Communist Party was failing. It's easy to get out on the streets when you don't fear tanks running you over much.</p><p>You say 50:1. On the monday prior to the 800,000 demonstrating, 100,000 was demonstrating. That is more like 6:1. Add in the fact that 90\% live too far away to possibly go to Beijing just for a demonstration and you start to realize the Tiananmen Square demonstrations were probably as big as any in Eastern Europe, maybe even bigger. But they were struck down with hard military force just like the Soviet Union did, exactly in Czechoslovakia in 1968. On the saturday you speak of the Communist Party had more or less already admitted defeat, so you're really comparing apples and oranges here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the late 1980s , what was the strength of desire for creating Western democracies in Eastern Europe ?
Consider Czechoslovakia .
In one day of 1989 November , about 800,000 people gathered in Prague and rallied for the creation of a Western democracy .
800,000 people is about 5 \ % of the population .
By contrast , in one day of 1989 June , about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy .
1 million people is only 0.1 \ % of the Chinese population.1 .
The entire country is the size of South Carolina ( # 40 US ) so gathering all the people in easier , unlike China which is same size as the United States.2 .
That was by far the first mass demonstration , if left in peace the Chinese mass demonstration would probably have grown a lot too.3 .
The Soviet Union was gone , the Communist Party was failing .
It 's easy to get out on the streets when you do n't fear tanks running you over much.You say 50 : 1 .
On the monday prior to the 800,000 demonstrating , 100,000 was demonstrating .
That is more like 6 : 1 .
Add in the fact that 90 \ % live too far away to possibly go to Beijing just for a demonstration and you start to realize the Tiananmen Square demonstrations were probably as big as any in Eastern Europe , maybe even bigger .
But they were struck down with hard military force just like the Soviet Union did , exactly in Czechoslovakia in 1968 .
On the saturday you speak of the Communist Party had more or less already admitted defeat , so you 're really comparing apples and oranges here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the late 1980s, what was the strength of desire for creating Western democracies in Eastern Europe?
Consider Czechoslovakia.
In one day of 1989 November, about 800,000 people gathered in Prague and rallied for the creation of a Western democracy.
800,000 people is about 5\% of the population.
By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy.
1 million people is only 0.1 \% of the Chinese population.1.
The entire country is the size of South Carolina (#40 US) so gathering all the people in easier, unlike China which is same size as the United States.2.
That was by far the first mass demonstration, if left in peace the Chinese mass demonstration would probably have grown a lot too.3.
The Soviet Union was gone, the Communist Party was failing.
It's easy to get out on the streets when you don't fear tanks running you over much.You say 50:1.
On the monday prior to the 800,000 demonstrating, 100,000 was demonstrating.
That is more like 6:1.
Add in the fact that 90\% live too far away to possibly go to Beijing just for a demonstration and you start to realize the Tiananmen Square demonstrations were probably as big as any in Eastern Europe, maybe even bigger.
But they were struck down with hard military force just like the Soviet Union did, exactly in Czechoslovakia in 1968.
On the saturday you speak of the Communist Party had more or less already admitted defeat, so you're really comparing apples and oranges here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164541</id>
	<title>Re:Fat and Happy</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1243794060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are plenty of people getting rich in China, but many of those are lining their pockets at the expense of others, just as happens here. The concept that the economic growth is positive for everyone is actually untrue, as it often comes as the expense of many less-wealthy groups, and with it corruption has bloomed to the point where it's almost a part of the culture in many ways. Bribes are pretty much part of doing business, and in many cases you can't even get your kid through school properly without certain unwarranted detentions etc unless you're giving his/her teacher a "nice gift" on certain occasions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are plenty of people getting rich in China , but many of those are lining their pockets at the expense of others , just as happens here .
The concept that the economic growth is positive for everyone is actually untrue , as it often comes as the expense of many less-wealthy groups , and with it corruption has bloomed to the point where it 's almost a part of the culture in many ways .
Bribes are pretty much part of doing business , and in many cases you ca n't even get your kid through school properly without certain unwarranted detentions etc unless you 're giving his/her teacher a " nice gift " on certain occasions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are plenty of people getting rich in China, but many of those are lining their pockets at the expense of others, just as happens here.
The concept that the economic growth is positive for everyone is actually untrue, as it often comes as the expense of many less-wealthy groups, and with it corruption has bloomed to the point where it's almost a part of the culture in many ways.
Bribes are pretty much part of doing business, and in many cases you can't even get your kid through school properly without certain unwarranted detentions etc unless you're giving his/her teacher a "nice gift" on certain occasions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162325</id>
	<title>Number of dissidents killed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243774740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It wasn't hundreds that were killed. That was a very carefully propogated lie of the PRC goverment. It was thousands<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. probably more than 10,000 people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was n't hundreds that were killed .
That was a very carefully propogated lie of the PRC goverment .
It was thousands .. probably more than 10,000 people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It wasn't hundreds that were killed.
That was a very carefully propogated lie of the PRC goverment.
It was thousands .. probably more than 10,000 people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28184153</id>
	<title>Re:Fat and Happy</title>
	<author>cyfer2000</author>
	<datestamp>1243964760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, the western countries did.  China simply showed two larger carrots, a vast amount of  cheap labors and a huge market, and the western countries hugged and kissed China immediately.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the western countries did .
China simply showed two larger carrots , a vast amount of cheap labors and a huge market , and the western countries hugged and kissed China immediately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the western countries did.
China simply showed two larger carrots, a vast amount of  cheap labors and a huge market, and the western countries hugged and kissed China immediately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161685</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>jez9999</author>
	<datestamp>1243768920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't you mean, "it's still inconvenient for the Chinese government that this BE seen by the public?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you mean , " it 's still inconvenient for the Chinese government that this BE seen by the public ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you mean, "it's still inconvenient for the Chinese government that this BE seen by the public?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28165597</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>trendzetter</author>
	<datestamp>1243852860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do these Americans always have to complain about the problems with other countries democracies? It's not that theirs is so perfect. If you want to save the rest of the world than start with trying to get your troops home (also from Afganistan). A lot of these human right complains are masked military or economic conflicts or just plain US-aggressions. The US-government is full of criticism about human rights but refuses self-criticism. The US also has <a href="http://www.islamonline.net/english/News/2003-03/25/article16.shtml" title="islamonline.net" rel="nofollow">censorsip</a> [islamonline.net], <a href="http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/us-supreme-court-refuses-hearing-political-prisoner-mumia-abu-jamal" title="blackagendareport.com" rel="nofollow">political prisoners</a> [blackagendareport.com] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture\_and\_the\_United\_States" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">torture</a> [wikipedia.org]. It has the highest number of prisoners in the world! Learn about the crimes of your own government. Start working on your own democracy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do these Americans always have to complain about the problems with other countries democracies ?
It 's not that theirs is so perfect .
If you want to save the rest of the world than start with trying to get your troops home ( also from Afganistan ) .
A lot of these human right complains are masked military or economic conflicts or just plain US-aggressions .
The US-government is full of criticism about human rights but refuses self-criticism .
The US also has censorsip [ islamonline.net ] , political prisoners [ blackagendareport.com ] and torture [ wikipedia.org ] .
It has the highest number of prisoners in the world !
Learn about the crimes of your own government .
Start working on your own democracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do these Americans always have to complain about the problems with other countries democracies?
It's not that theirs is so perfect.
If you want to save the rest of the world than start with trying to get your troops home (also from Afganistan).
A lot of these human right complains are masked military or economic conflicts or just plain US-aggressions.
The US-government is full of criticism about human rights but refuses self-criticism.
The US also has censorsip [islamonline.net], political prisoners [blackagendareport.com] and torture [wikipedia.org].
It has the highest number of prisoners in the world!
Learn about the crimes of your own government.
Start working on your own democracy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161699</id>
	<title>1 print page...</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1243769040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?pagetosend=/export/home/httpd/htdocs/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pagename=/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pageurl=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;site=datacenter" title="networkworld.com">http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?pagetosend=/export/home/httpd/htdocs/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pagename=/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pageurl=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;site=datacenter</a> [networkworld.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi ? pagetosend = /export/home/httpd/htdocs/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pagename = /news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pageurl = http : //www.networkworld.com/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;site = datacenter [ networkworld.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?pagetosend=/export/home/httpd/htdocs/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pagename=/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;pageurl=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/052909-20-years-after-tiananmen-china.html&amp;site=datacenter [networkworld.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28166123</id>
	<title>A few thoughts about freedom</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1243860060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>- or rather, about those who always seem to have a lot of lofty words about freedom, democracy and what people in other countries want.</p><p>First of all what do you actually know about what people in other cultures want or need? This is not just about China; one of the things that always strike is how little Americans and Europeans understand each other, despite the fact that American culture historically is mostly a concoction of elements of European culture. When Americans and Europeans can't even agree on basic terms like the word "freedom" and what it means, how can you be so smug about what people living in even less familiar cultures think and want? To the Chinese the concept of freedom is not as important as it is for Americans - hell, even the Europenas don't make such a fuss about it - and even when the Chinese talk about freedom as a concept, it is clear that it isn't identical to the American concept of freedom.</p><p>Secondly, what do you know about Tiananmen? I'll tell you: you know only what you have been told by mostly American media - so you only know the Western side of the story. You haven't heard the Chinese side of it, and even if you had, you wouldn't have listened, let alone looked for clues that might tell you whether what they have to say rings true. I don't claim to know the whole truth about what happened; from my Chinese friends I hear things that seem to indicate that there were persons - foreign agents - that did their best to stir up discontent and who distributed weapons, among other things. These are only rumours, AFAIK, not something from the official news; but even the possibility of something like is unpleasant to contemplate, in my view. And it is unfortunately all too easy to imagine CIA involved in this kind of thing.</p><p>And finally, what do you know about the Chinese government's motives? Not a single thing, I bet. All you guys know, as far as I can see from comments here, is how to repeat what the American media tell you; which amounts to no more than smug ignorance. They sure as hell don't care about the truth about this, they just want to sell minced woodland to you. Step back a little bit an ask yourself what a govenment can reasonably be expected to want? The Chinese aren't idiots and their govenment officials aren't GWBs - they know that what people want more than anything else is stability and predictability, and that the best way of holding on to power is by providing what the people craves. The Chinese is not interested in oppressing people or freedom - they know very well that democracy and freedom of speech are more or less illusory and can be easily manipulated; they can see clearly how their American colleagues do it. But the Chinese people don't want American style "freedom", they don't want lack of regulations and they don't want to be flooded with odious, American "McJesus" Christianity.</p><p>As I said, I don't know what happened, I just know that there are many more sides to the story than we hear about, especially on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. But if I should hazard guess, I would say that the situation was a whole lot more serious than what we have heard; that there was some foreign involvement in stirring up the sentiments, and that the government felt the situation was desperate and required immediate and decisive action. Maybe they panicked, and perhaps, looking back, they wish they hadn't. The only thing I feel entirely certain about is that they didn't just lean back and say "Freedom? Hah! We'll give freedom - let's massacre the lot".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- or rather , about those who always seem to have a lot of lofty words about freedom , democracy and what people in other countries want.First of all what do you actually know about what people in other cultures want or need ?
This is not just about China ; one of the things that always strike is how little Americans and Europeans understand each other , despite the fact that American culture historically is mostly a concoction of elements of European culture .
When Americans and Europeans ca n't even agree on basic terms like the word " freedom " and what it means , how can you be so smug about what people living in even less familiar cultures think and want ?
To the Chinese the concept of freedom is not as important as it is for Americans - hell , even the Europenas do n't make such a fuss about it - and even when the Chinese talk about freedom as a concept , it is clear that it is n't identical to the American concept of freedom.Secondly , what do you know about Tiananmen ?
I 'll tell you : you know only what you have been told by mostly American media - so you only know the Western side of the story .
You have n't heard the Chinese side of it , and even if you had , you would n't have listened , let alone looked for clues that might tell you whether what they have to say rings true .
I do n't claim to know the whole truth about what happened ; from my Chinese friends I hear things that seem to indicate that there were persons - foreign agents - that did their best to stir up discontent and who distributed weapons , among other things .
These are only rumours , AFAIK , not something from the official news ; but even the possibility of something like is unpleasant to contemplate , in my view .
And it is unfortunately all too easy to imagine CIA involved in this kind of thing.And finally , what do you know about the Chinese government 's motives ?
Not a single thing , I bet .
All you guys know , as far as I can see from comments here , is how to repeat what the American media tell you ; which amounts to no more than smug ignorance .
They sure as hell do n't care about the truth about this , they just want to sell minced woodland to you .
Step back a little bit an ask yourself what a govenment can reasonably be expected to want ?
The Chinese are n't idiots and their govenment officials are n't GWBs - they know that what people want more than anything else is stability and predictability , and that the best way of holding on to power is by providing what the people craves .
The Chinese is not interested in oppressing people or freedom - they know very well that democracy and freedom of speech are more or less illusory and can be easily manipulated ; they can see clearly how their American colleagues do it .
But the Chinese people do n't want American style " freedom " , they do n't want lack of regulations and they do n't want to be flooded with odious , American " McJesus " Christianity.As I said , I do n't know what happened , I just know that there are many more sides to the story than we hear about , especially on / .
But if I should hazard guess , I would say that the situation was a whole lot more serious than what we have heard ; that there was some foreign involvement in stirring up the sentiments , and that the government felt the situation was desperate and required immediate and decisive action .
Maybe they panicked , and perhaps , looking back , they wish they had n't .
The only thing I feel entirely certain about is that they did n't just lean back and say " Freedom ?
Hah ! We 'll give freedom - let 's massacre the lot " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- or rather, about those who always seem to have a lot of lofty words about freedom, democracy and what people in other countries want.First of all what do you actually know about what people in other cultures want or need?
This is not just about China; one of the things that always strike is how little Americans and Europeans understand each other, despite the fact that American culture historically is mostly a concoction of elements of European culture.
When Americans and Europeans can't even agree on basic terms like the word "freedom" and what it means, how can you be so smug about what people living in even less familiar cultures think and want?
To the Chinese the concept of freedom is not as important as it is for Americans - hell, even the Europenas don't make such a fuss about it - and even when the Chinese talk about freedom as a concept, it is clear that it isn't identical to the American concept of freedom.Secondly, what do you know about Tiananmen?
I'll tell you: you know only what you have been told by mostly American media - so you only know the Western side of the story.
You haven't heard the Chinese side of it, and even if you had, you wouldn't have listened, let alone looked for clues that might tell you whether what they have to say rings true.
I don't claim to know the whole truth about what happened; from my Chinese friends I hear things that seem to indicate that there were persons - foreign agents - that did their best to stir up discontent and who distributed weapons, among other things.
These are only rumours, AFAIK, not something from the official news; but even the possibility of something like is unpleasant to contemplate, in my view.
And it is unfortunately all too easy to imagine CIA involved in this kind of thing.And finally, what do you know about the Chinese government's motives?
Not a single thing, I bet.
All you guys know, as far as I can see from comments here, is how to repeat what the American media tell you; which amounts to no more than smug ignorance.
They sure as hell don't care about the truth about this, they just want to sell minced woodland to you.
Step back a little bit an ask yourself what a govenment can reasonably be expected to want?
The Chinese aren't idiots and their govenment officials aren't GWBs - they know that what people want more than anything else is stability and predictability, and that the best way of holding on to power is by providing what the people craves.
The Chinese is not interested in oppressing people or freedom - they know very well that democracy and freedom of speech are more or less illusory and can be easily manipulated; they can see clearly how their American colleagues do it.
But the Chinese people don't want American style "freedom", they don't want lack of regulations and they don't want to be flooded with odious, American "McJesus" Christianity.As I said, I don't know what happened, I just know that there are many more sides to the story than we hear about, especially on /.
But if I should hazard guess, I would say that the situation was a whole lot more serious than what we have heard; that there was some foreign involvement in stirring up the sentiments, and that the government felt the situation was desperate and required immediate and decisive action.
Maybe they panicked, and perhaps, looking back, they wish they hadn't.
The only thing I feel entirely certain about is that they didn't just lean back and say "Freedom?
Hah! We'll give freedom - let's massacre the lot".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179127</id>
	<title>Re:Fat and Happy</title>
	<author>LostInTaiwan</author>
	<datestamp>1243936800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>American's don't mind the Iraq war?   I guess you don't watch the news much.  There were plenty of anti-war demonstration and GOP got voted out of both chamber of congress and then the presidency.     Democracy is not the panacea to stupidity or mass hysteria, but so far it's the best option we got.   Certainly a lot better than waiting to the Chinese government o apologize for the Tienanmen Square Massacre.   After 20 years and seeing the rise of blinded nationalism orchestrated by the Chinese government through censorships and media manipulation, I am afraid I don't have that much confidence in  the political liberalization as a necessary by product of capitalism.   Sad to day, capitalism itself was never about democracy.  It's a economic model based on maximizing profit, not freedom.</htmltext>
<tokenext>American 's do n't mind the Iraq war ?
I guess you do n't watch the news much .
There were plenty of anti-war demonstration and GOP got voted out of both chamber of congress and then the presidency .
Democracy is not the panacea to stupidity or mass hysteria , but so far it 's the best option we got .
Certainly a lot better than waiting to the Chinese government o apologize for the Tienanmen Square Massacre .
After 20 years and seeing the rise of blinded nationalism orchestrated by the Chinese government through censorships and media manipulation , I am afraid I do n't have that much confidence in the political liberalization as a necessary by product of capitalism .
Sad to day , capitalism itself was never about democracy .
It 's a economic model based on maximizing profit , not freedom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>American's don't mind the Iraq war?
I guess you don't watch the news much.
There were plenty of anti-war demonstration and GOP got voted out of both chamber of congress and then the presidency.
Democracy is not the panacea to stupidity or mass hysteria, but so far it's the best option we got.
Certainly a lot better than waiting to the Chinese government o apologize for the Tienanmen Square Massacre.
After 20 years and seeing the rise of blinded nationalism orchestrated by the Chinese government through censorships and media manipulation, I am afraid I don't have that much confidence in  the political liberalization as a necessary by product of capitalism.
Sad to day, capitalism itself was never about democracy.
It's a economic model based on maximizing profit, not freedom.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162995</id>
	<title>Sounds like many private companies in the US</title>
	<author>billybob\_jcv</author>
	<datestamp>1243780500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The US gov't may not censor sites, but many US corporations certainly do.  Post the wrong thing on Facebook (assuming your corporate proxy server will let you get to Facebook) or send an email from work with an F-bomb, and you might be told to clean out your desk.  We're free - as long as it doesn't violate company policy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The US gov't may not censor sites , but many US corporations certainly do .
Post the wrong thing on Facebook ( assuming your corporate proxy server will let you get to Facebook ) or send an email from work with an F-bomb , and you might be told to clean out your desk .
We 're free - as long as it does n't violate company policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US gov't may not censor sites, but many US corporations certainly do.
Post the wrong thing on Facebook (assuming your corporate proxy server will let you get to Facebook) or send an email from work with an F-bomb, and you might be told to clean out your desk.
We're free - as long as it doesn't violate company policy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161845</id>
	<title>Re:It's still inconvenient?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243770300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They DO have the option! They have chosen life, even if it means one in slavery. They have chosen peace and stability over an endless fight for illusive "freedom". And if you think the fight isn't endless, then stand down your armies. And others have chosen the corruption that power brings. It sounds so very similar to every other place on the planet. What is the real intention of singling out China? You know, if they do take over the world, it won't be with bullets, it will be with sperm. They will foul the white man's women with their slanty eyes, and then waddya gonna do when we all look the same? Who're *you* gonna hate now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They DO have the option !
They have chosen life , even if it means one in slavery .
They have chosen peace and stability over an endless fight for illusive " freedom " .
And if you think the fight is n't endless , then stand down your armies .
And others have chosen the corruption that power brings .
It sounds so very similar to every other place on the planet .
What is the real intention of singling out China ?
You know , if they do take over the world , it wo n't be with bullets , it will be with sperm .
They will foul the white man 's women with their slanty eyes , and then waddya gon na do when we all look the same ?
Who 're * you * gon na hate now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They DO have the option!
They have chosen life, even if it means one in slavery.
They have chosen peace and stability over an endless fight for illusive "freedom".
And if you think the fight isn't endless, then stand down your armies.
And others have chosen the corruption that power brings.
It sounds so very similar to every other place on the planet.
What is the real intention of singling out China?
You know, if they do take over the world, it won't be with bullets, it will be with sperm.
They will foul the white man's women with their slanty eyes, and then waddya gonna do when we all look the same?
Who're *you* gonna hate now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161567</id>
	<title>And the secret sauce is...</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1243767960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>secrecy.</p><p>It isn't ubiquitous surveillance that does the trick, it's ubiquitous <em>potential</em> surveillance.   Likewise iron fisted rule is crude and inefficient. The true art is to rule without rules.  China has high sounding and extremely vague legal principles.  Put the two together and you are never (a) sure if you are not being watched nor (b) if what you are doing is legal.</p><p>When you've achieved this, you don't need Big Brother.  Every citizen is his own Big Brother.</p><p>You almost have to admire this system.  It is tyranny, perfected.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>secrecy.It is n't ubiquitous surveillance that does the trick , it 's ubiquitous potential surveillance .
Likewise iron fisted rule is crude and inefficient .
The true art is to rule without rules .
China has high sounding and extremely vague legal principles .
Put the two together and you are never ( a ) sure if you are not being watched nor ( b ) if what you are doing is legal.When you 've achieved this , you do n't need Big Brother .
Every citizen is his own Big Brother.You almost have to admire this system .
It is tyranny , perfected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>secrecy.It isn't ubiquitous surveillance that does the trick, it's ubiquitous potential surveillance.
Likewise iron fisted rule is crude and inefficient.
The true art is to rule without rules.
China has high sounding and extremely vague legal principles.
Put the two together and you are never (a) sure if you are not being watched nor (b) if what you are doing is legal.When you've achieved this, you don't need Big Brother.
Every citizen is his own Big Brother.You almost have to admire this system.
It is tyranny, perfected.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28169767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28165597
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28168871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28167859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163967
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163263
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164785
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28186875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28166595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28184153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162293
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163263
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162179
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_31_2131256_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161829
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163903
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28184153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179127
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164785
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163847
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161655
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162179
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161885
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163707
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161767
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161877
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163549
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28169767
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162583
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161989
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164025
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28186875
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164931
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161799
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163369
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179087
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162639
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162563
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161665
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28167859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161623
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162047
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28165597
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162389
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162995
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162059
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28164187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162293
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28166595
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28179199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28162223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28168871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28163699
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_31_2131256.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_31_2131256.28161547
</commentlist>
</conversation>
