<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_03_1240210</id>
	<title>Secret US List of Civil Nuclear Sites Released</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1244035980000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>eldavojohn writes <i>"Someone <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/03nuke.html?\_r=2&amp;hp">accidentally released a 266-page report</a> on hundreds of sites in the US for stockpiling and storing hazardous nuclear materials for civilian use.  While some ex-officials and experts don't find it to be a serious breach, the Federation of American Scientists are calling it a 'a one-stop shop for information on US nuclear programs.'  The document contains information about Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia, and opinions seem to be split on whether it's a harmless list or terrorist risk.  One thing is for sure: it was taken down after the New York Times inquired to the Government Accountability Office about it."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " Someone accidentally released a 266-page report on hundreds of sites in the US for stockpiling and storing hazardous nuclear materials for civilian use .
While some ex-officials and experts do n't find it to be a serious breach , the Federation of American Scientists are calling it a 'a one-stop shop for information on US nuclear programs .
' The document contains information about Los Alamos , Livermore and Sandia , and opinions seem to be split on whether it 's a harmless list or terrorist risk .
One thing is for sure : it was taken down after the New York Times inquired to the Government Accountability Office about it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "Someone accidentally released a 266-page report on hundreds of sites in the US for stockpiling and storing hazardous nuclear materials for civilian use.
While some ex-officials and experts don't find it to be a serious breach, the Federation of American Scientists are calling it a 'a one-stop shop for information on US nuclear programs.
'  The document contains information about Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia, and opinions seem to be split on whether it's a harmless list or terrorist risk.
One thing is for sure: it was taken down after the New York Times inquired to the Government Accountability Office about it.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195247</id>
	<title>hfuck?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244041680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">superior To slow, obsessed - give</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>superior To slow , obsessed - give [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>superior To slow, obsessed - give [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195423</id>
	<title>hey guys...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244042400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I accidentally the whole 266-page report. Is that dangerous?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I accidentally the whole 266-page report .
Is that dangerous ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I accidentally the whole 266-page report.
Is that dangerous?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194827</id>
	<title>Secret Open Government</title>
	<author>azior</author>
	<datestamp>1244039760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice juxtaposition:</p><p>Open Government Brainstorm Defies Wisdom of Crowds<br>Secret US List of Civil Nuclear Sites Released</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice juxtaposition : Open Government Brainstorm Defies Wisdom of CrowdsSecret US List of Civil Nuclear Sites Released</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice juxtaposition:Open Government Brainstorm Defies Wisdom of CrowdsSecret US List of Civil Nuclear Sites Released</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194935</id>
	<title>incompetent government agency of an incompetent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244040180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>government releases said secrets of incompetent government, and this is news?</p><p>then again, calling out the fact it was on the net isn't exactly helping matters is it.</p><p>So, why was this supposed to really distract us from focusing on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>government releases said secrets of incompetent government , and this is news ? then again , calling out the fact it was on the net is n't exactly helping matters is it.So , why was this supposed to really distract us from focusing on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>government releases said secrets of incompetent government, and this is news?then again, calling out the fact it was on the net isn't exactly helping matters is it.So, why was this supposed to really distract us from focusing on?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28202493</id>
	<title>Re:jesus</title>
	<author>sillybilly</author>
	<datestamp>1244027820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>   Some people in the Dept of Fatherland Security are really bored, because there is not enough action, and it's hard for them to justify their jobs. They can't find people skilled enough to build a bomb, who can be motivated or pissed off enough to do so, even with superhuman effort on their part.
   People who are smart enough simply won't do it. Because if they did that would be the ultimate excuse to take all your freedoms away, because the antiterrorism message today is falling on deaf ears, and people prefer having their freedoms instead.
<br> <br> Even terrorists fight for some kind of cause, and sometimes the price is too high to pay for advancing your cause. I don't see homegrown US nuclear terrorists, because of the few that happened, one denied things, so that might have been a setup, another did a manifesto and just wanted attention, and the rest all came from the middle east. The only place I can really see that much hatred between neighbors is the middle east, and they might come over here, if they were angered enough, and had the technology in hand. Iran might be cocky and demanding at international conferences, but for them to pull the trigger would be an immediate suicide. The real issue is them supplying others who are angered enough, and whatever will be will be. India and Pakistan have been going at it, and they could have used the stuff, and they continue to get angered against each other, but the nuclear trigger hasn't been pulled yet, and hopefully never will be.
  Ideally people should stop angering each other to the point where they are willing to kill each other. There should be a way where both you and I can find room and place in this world to coexist or be far enough to leave each other alone. That means sacrifice and compromise on both side. <br> <br>For instance, me, I really believe in reducing dependence on oil, and driving less, but unfortunately the only way to really find peace is to run away far from any neighbours, and driving a lot over it. That's a large sacrifice, but still preferable to standing your ground and fighting, or trying to convince someone to change their mind. I prefer peace at almost any sacrifice. And I'd like to think so do most people in the world, it takes a tremendous amount of either tresspassing for people to generate enough hate, or selfishness for yourself/family/tribe/nation/etc.. uncaring of those outside of it, for committing enough trespassing so that killing to starts happening as a retaliation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some people in the Dept of Fatherland Security are really bored , because there is not enough action , and it 's hard for them to justify their jobs .
They ca n't find people skilled enough to build a bomb , who can be motivated or pissed off enough to do so , even with superhuman effort on their part .
People who are smart enough simply wo n't do it .
Because if they did that would be the ultimate excuse to take all your freedoms away , because the antiterrorism message today is falling on deaf ears , and people prefer having their freedoms instead .
Even terrorists fight for some kind of cause , and sometimes the price is too high to pay for advancing your cause .
I do n't see homegrown US nuclear terrorists , because of the few that happened , one denied things , so that might have been a setup , another did a manifesto and just wanted attention , and the rest all came from the middle east .
The only place I can really see that much hatred between neighbors is the middle east , and they might come over here , if they were angered enough , and had the technology in hand .
Iran might be cocky and demanding at international conferences , but for them to pull the trigger would be an immediate suicide .
The real issue is them supplying others who are angered enough , and whatever will be will be .
India and Pakistan have been going at it , and they could have used the stuff , and they continue to get angered against each other , but the nuclear trigger has n't been pulled yet , and hopefully never will be .
Ideally people should stop angering each other to the point where they are willing to kill each other .
There should be a way where both you and I can find room and place in this world to coexist or be far enough to leave each other alone .
That means sacrifice and compromise on both side .
For instance , me , I really believe in reducing dependence on oil , and driving less , but unfortunately the only way to really find peace is to run away far from any neighbours , and driving a lot over it .
That 's a large sacrifice , but still preferable to standing your ground and fighting , or trying to convince someone to change their mind .
I prefer peace at almost any sacrifice .
And I 'd like to think so do most people in the world , it takes a tremendous amount of either tresspassing for people to generate enough hate , or selfishness for yourself/family/tribe/nation/etc.. uncaring of those outside of it , for committing enough trespassing so that killing to starts happening as a retaliation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>   Some people in the Dept of Fatherland Security are really bored, because there is not enough action, and it's hard for them to justify their jobs.
They can't find people skilled enough to build a bomb, who can be motivated or pissed off enough to do so, even with superhuman effort on their part.
People who are smart enough simply won't do it.
Because if they did that would be the ultimate excuse to take all your freedoms away, because the antiterrorism message today is falling on deaf ears, and people prefer having their freedoms instead.
Even terrorists fight for some kind of cause, and sometimes the price is too high to pay for advancing your cause.
I don't see homegrown US nuclear terrorists, because of the few that happened, one denied things, so that might have been a setup, another did a manifesto and just wanted attention, and the rest all came from the middle east.
The only place I can really see that much hatred between neighbors is the middle east, and they might come over here, if they were angered enough, and had the technology in hand.
Iran might be cocky and demanding at international conferences, but for them to pull the trigger would be an immediate suicide.
The real issue is them supplying others who are angered enough, and whatever will be will be.
India and Pakistan have been going at it, and they could have used the stuff, and they continue to get angered against each other, but the nuclear trigger hasn't been pulled yet, and hopefully never will be.
Ideally people should stop angering each other to the point where they are willing to kill each other.
There should be a way where both you and I can find room and place in this world to coexist or be far enough to leave each other alone.
That means sacrifice and compromise on both side.
For instance, me, I really believe in reducing dependence on oil, and driving less, but unfortunately the only way to really find peace is to run away far from any neighbours, and driving a lot over it.
That's a large sacrifice, but still preferable to standing your ground and fighting, or trying to convince someone to change their mind.
I prefer peace at almost any sacrifice.
And I'd like to think so do most people in the world, it takes a tremendous amount of either tresspassing for people to generate enough hate, or selfishness for yourself/family/tribe/nation/etc.. uncaring of those outside of it, for committing enough trespassing so that killing to starts happening as a retaliation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194903</id>
	<title>Scary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244040000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am I the only one that thinks this is a very odd list to have "accidentally" released?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am I the only one that thinks this is a very odd list to have " accidentally " released ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am I the only one that thinks this is a very odd list to have "accidentally" released?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194985</id>
	<title>Wasn't North Korea demanding more info....</title>
	<author>yourassOA</author>
	<datestamp>1244040360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>about the US nuclear program? Or was it the other way around?</htmltext>
<tokenext>about the US nuclear program ?
Or was it the other way around ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>about the US nuclear program?
Or was it the other way around?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195443</id>
	<title>Re:Scary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244042520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but only because you are on Slashdot where Obama and other liberals can do no wrong. Who cares that Obama released secrets with the only benefit being the appeasement of our enemies? The liberals here sure don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but only because you are on Slashdot where Obama and other liberals can do no wrong .
Who cares that Obama released secrets with the only benefit being the appeasement of our enemies ?
The liberals here sure do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but only because you are on Slashdot where Obama and other liberals can do no wrong.
Who cares that Obama released secrets with the only benefit being the appeasement of our enemies?
The liberals here sure don't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198367</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>trytoguess</author>
	<datestamp>1244054340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I vote for letting Seoul and Tokyo decide that on their own. It's not like the Japanese and Koreans are ignorant savages that need smart white man to tell them how much their lives are worth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I vote for letting Seoul and Tokyo decide that on their own .
It 's not like the Japanese and Koreans are ignorant savages that need smart white man to tell them how much their lives are worth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I vote for letting Seoul and Tokyo decide that on their own.
It's not like the Japanese and Koreans are ignorant savages that need smart white man to tell them how much their lives are worth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198413</id>
	<title>DOE ....Thanks for update...</title>
	<author>FirstOne</author>
	<datestamp>1244054520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A quick scan of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pdf file indicates..</p><p>Prototype Sodium cooled Fast reactor is wayyy off in the distant future 2020-2030 depending on funding.  (Joint project with France and Japan.)</p><p>No projects involving thorium are on the drawing board.<br>A couple of projects involving reprocessing spent fuel.</p><p>That indicates that Nuclear power industry will likely be SOL by the end of the century, as the higher grade U-ore depsoits are mined out.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A quick scan of the .pdf file indicates..Prototype Sodium cooled Fast reactor is wayyy off in the distant future 2020-2030 depending on funding .
( Joint project with France and Japan .
) No projects involving thorium are on the drawing board.A couple of projects involving reprocessing spent fuel.That indicates that Nuclear power industry will likely be SOL by the end of the century , as the higher grade U-ore depsoits are mined out .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>A quick scan of the .pdf file indicates..Prototype Sodium cooled Fast reactor is wayyy off in the distant future 2020-2030 depending on funding.
(Joint project with France and Japan.
)No projects involving thorium are on the drawing board.A couple of projects involving reprocessing spent fuel.That indicates that Nuclear power industry will likely be SOL by the end of the century, as the higher grade U-ore depsoits are mined out.
     </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195909</id>
	<title>Work of Jack Bauer.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244044560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Jack Bauer released the list as a ploy to lure the terrorists in...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jack Bauer released the list as a ploy to lure the terrorists in.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jack Bauer released the list as a ploy to lure the terrorists in...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196189</id>
	<title>Re:hey guys...</title>
	<author>Kryis</author>
	<datestamp>1244045640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The last person to the whole 266-page report had to spend 3 weeks before they finally.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The last person to the whole 266-page report had to spend 3 weeks before they finally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last person to the whole 266-page report had to spend 3 weeks before they finally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194849</id>
	<title>I don't understand</title>
	<author>Einmaliger</author>
	<datestamp>1244039760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does that mean, it's not on Wikileaks anymore?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does that mean , it 's not on Wikileaks anymore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does that mean, it's not on Wikileaks anymore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194957</id>
	<title>Re:jesus</title>
	<author>Tukz</author>
	<datestamp>1244040240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not really "leaks".<br>It's Obama doing a spring cleaning after Bush' mess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not really " leaks " .It 's Obama doing a spring cleaning after Bush ' mess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not really "leaks".It's Obama doing a spring cleaning after Bush' mess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196719</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>richard.cs</author>
	<datestamp>1244047920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While it's defiantly much harder to make a bomb from civilian nuclear material it's still possible and I'd guess a few skilled engineers (with no regard for their long-term health) could make one in less than 6 months. Spent nuclear fuel contains plutonium which is far easier to separate than the different isotopes of uranium as it can be done by chemical means. The plutonium would be heavily contaminated with Pu-240 which would cause some, not insurmountable, problems.</p><p>Implosion devices are out since they're so complicated to design and build which leaves us with the gun type bomb. This is usually considered impractical since the spontaneous fission of the Pu-240 causes the core to blow apart before it's maximum density is reached (fizzle), however a gun type device can be made, it just has to be much longer in order to bring the halves of the core together in a short enough time. This makes it impractical to drop from an aircraft or mount on a missile but such a device could be assembled inside, for example, a high rise office block on a floor chosen to match the airburst altitude for expected yield.</p><p>The bomb would probably still fizzle and produce a yield maybe a tenth that if pure Pu-239 could be used but that would be enough, maybe somewhere in the region of one kilo tonne.</p><p>Having said that I don't think that this list leaking is of much significance, all of this information was already available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While it 's defiantly much harder to make a bomb from civilian nuclear material it 's still possible and I 'd guess a few skilled engineers ( with no regard for their long-term health ) could make one in less than 6 months .
Spent nuclear fuel contains plutonium which is far easier to separate than the different isotopes of uranium as it can be done by chemical means .
The plutonium would be heavily contaminated with Pu-240 which would cause some , not insurmountable , problems.Implosion devices are out since they 're so complicated to design and build which leaves us with the gun type bomb .
This is usually considered impractical since the spontaneous fission of the Pu-240 causes the core to blow apart before it 's maximum density is reached ( fizzle ) , however a gun type device can be made , it just has to be much longer in order to bring the halves of the core together in a short enough time .
This makes it impractical to drop from an aircraft or mount on a missile but such a device could be assembled inside , for example , a high rise office block on a floor chosen to match the airburst altitude for expected yield.The bomb would probably still fizzle and produce a yield maybe a tenth that if pure Pu-239 could be used but that would be enough , maybe somewhere in the region of one kilo tonne.Having said that I do n't think that this list leaking is of much significance , all of this information was already available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it's defiantly much harder to make a bomb from civilian nuclear material it's still possible and I'd guess a few skilled engineers (with no regard for their long-term health) could make one in less than 6 months.
Spent nuclear fuel contains plutonium which is far easier to separate than the different isotopes of uranium as it can be done by chemical means.
The plutonium would be heavily contaminated with Pu-240 which would cause some, not insurmountable, problems.Implosion devices are out since they're so complicated to design and build which leaves us with the gun type bomb.
This is usually considered impractical since the spontaneous fission of the Pu-240 causes the core to blow apart before it's maximum density is reached (fizzle), however a gun type device can be made, it just has to be much longer in order to bring the halves of the core together in a short enough time.
This makes it impractical to drop from an aircraft or mount on a missile but such a device could be assembled inside, for example, a high rise office block on a floor chosen to match the airburst altitude for expected yield.The bomb would probably still fizzle and produce a yield maybe a tenth that if pure Pu-239 could be used but that would be enough, maybe somewhere in the region of one kilo tonne.Having said that I don't think that this list leaking is of much significance, all of this information was already available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Alascom</author>
	<datestamp>1244048340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its all fun and politics until Seoul and Tokyo and its 20 million residents disappear in a flash of light.</p><p>I vote for taking out North Korea today.  I'd rather have a 100,000+ casualties today if it can prevent the likely horrific death of 20 million+ later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its all fun and politics until Seoul and Tokyo and its 20 million residents disappear in a flash of light.I vote for taking out North Korea today .
I 'd rather have a 100,000 + casualties today if it can prevent the likely horrific death of 20 million + later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its all fun and politics until Seoul and Tokyo and its 20 million residents disappear in a flash of light.I vote for taking out North Korea today.
I'd rather have a 100,000+ casualties today if it can prevent the likely horrific death of 20 million+ later.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200151</id>
	<title>Re:jesus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244062500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>how in the hell have there been so many serious leaks like this recently? why is no one being held accountable?</p></div><p>The first answer is : Its the Government<br>The second answer is: see first answer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>how in the hell have there been so many serious leaks like this recently ?
why is no one being held accountable ? The first answer is : Its the GovernmentThe second answer is : see first answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how in the hell have there been so many serious leaks like this recently?
why is no one being held accountable?The first answer is : Its the GovernmentThe second answer is: see first answer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200817</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1244021940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dirty bombs are a joke.  All the radiation goes away after some basic clean up.  I suspect the dirty bomb was invented by the CIA to trick the jihadis.</p><p>A better plan is just get untrained jihadis to hide the shit all over NYC, like the chairs in cinemas, stoves of fancy restaurants, the cart of some guy selling pizza on the street, shove it down the pipes in hotels, stick it up the ass of a police horse, etc.  You then wait 6 months and call the press.  A few people have actually been mildly irritated by then.  Instant panic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dirty bombs are a joke .
All the radiation goes away after some basic clean up .
I suspect the dirty bomb was invented by the CIA to trick the jihadis.A better plan is just get untrained jihadis to hide the shit all over NYC , like the chairs in cinemas , stoves of fancy restaurants , the cart of some guy selling pizza on the street , shove it down the pipes in hotels , stick it up the ass of a police horse , etc .
You then wait 6 months and call the press .
A few people have actually been mildly irritated by then .
Instant panic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dirty bombs are a joke.
All the radiation goes away after some basic clean up.
I suspect the dirty bomb was invented by the CIA to trick the jihadis.A better plan is just get untrained jihadis to hide the shit all over NYC, like the chairs in cinemas, stoves of fancy restaurants, the cart of some guy selling pizza on the street, shove it down the pipes in hotels, stick it up the ass of a police horse, etc.
You then wait 6 months and call the press.
A few people have actually been mildly irritated by then.
Instant panic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200917</id>
	<title>Re:Not secret!</title>
	<author>secretcurse</author>
	<datestamp>1244022300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article has a man page?  Couldn't they just put it in the article?  See, this is why *NIX will never work on the desktop...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article has a man page ?
Could n't they just put it in the article ?
See , this is why * NIX will never work on the desktop.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article has a man page?
Couldn't they just put it in the article?
See, this is why *NIX will never work on the desktop...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196023</id>
	<title>Re:jesus</title>
	<author>notarockstar1979</author>
	<datestamp>1244045040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can only answer one of those.  There are so many serious leaks because people aren't being held accountable.  Hang someone in the public square for it (figuratively) and make an example of them.  Others will secure their data pretty quickly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can only answer one of those .
There are so many serious leaks because people are n't being held accountable .
Hang someone in the public square for it ( figuratively ) and make an example of them .
Others will secure their data pretty quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can only answer one of those.
There are so many serious leaks because people aren't being held accountable.
Hang someone in the public square for it (figuratively) and make an example of them.
Others will secure their data pretty quickly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28197151</id>
	<title>Nuclear tourism</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1244049660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Not only are most of those places well known, there are even tours.  There's a nostalgic interest in <a href="http://www.nuclearvacation.com/destinations.html" title="nuclearvacation.com">nuclear tourism</a> [nuclearvacation.com], visiting the interesting Cold War spots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only are most of those places well known , there are even tours .
There 's a nostalgic interest in nuclear tourism [ nuclearvacation.com ] , visiting the interesting Cold War spots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Not only are most of those places well known, there are even tours.
There's a nostalgic interest in nuclear tourism [nuclearvacation.com], visiting the interesting Cold War spots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196051</id>
	<title>Re:it is kind of a no big deal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244045100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>none of the material is easily weaponized. well, you could build a dirty bomb.</p></div><p>I was thinking the simpliest "bang" for your buck would be a conventional bomb set off at one of these sites, which results in a cheap dirty bomb with no risk of detection getting nuclear material in place, as it is already there.</p><p>Our government is retarded.  Why some in this country think the best solution is to make if bigger astonishes me.  It is just a matter of time before we are hit again and those "betting" on talk over action will starting singing a different tune or perhaps they will just continue to blame Bush.</p><p>Those who suggest this is not a big deal because it could be compiled through leg work, let me ask you this: Just because people can scan for opens ports on your firewall, does that mean there is no harm in you publishing your IPs and ports?</p><p>Seriously, we're doomed if we rely on the Federal Government to protect us, I mean a terrorist just shot two US soldiers in our country and the President hasn't even addressed it.  What better way to terrorize our nation then to shoot soldiers are random when they should be safe.  The stress of being in Iraq/Afghanistan is bad enough, but now they need to worry about getting shoot back at home?</p><p>BR&gt;<br>I got news for you.  1).  We are at war and 2).  We're losing it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>none of the material is easily weaponized .
well , you could build a dirty bomb.I was thinking the simpliest " bang " for your buck would be a conventional bomb set off at one of these sites , which results in a cheap dirty bomb with no risk of detection getting nuclear material in place , as it is already there.Our government is retarded .
Why some in this country think the best solution is to make if bigger astonishes me .
It is just a matter of time before we are hit again and those " betting " on talk over action will starting singing a different tune or perhaps they will just continue to blame Bush.Those who suggest this is not a big deal because it could be compiled through leg work , let me ask you this : Just because people can scan for opens ports on your firewall , does that mean there is no harm in you publishing your IPs and ports ? Seriously , we 're doomed if we rely on the Federal Government to protect us , I mean a terrorist just shot two US soldiers in our country and the President has n't even addressed it .
What better way to terrorize our nation then to shoot soldiers are random when they should be safe .
The stress of being in Iraq/Afghanistan is bad enough , but now they need to worry about getting shoot back at home ? BR &gt; I got news for you .
1 ) . We are at war and 2 ) .
We 're losing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>none of the material is easily weaponized.
well, you could build a dirty bomb.I was thinking the simpliest "bang" for your buck would be a conventional bomb set off at one of these sites, which results in a cheap dirty bomb with no risk of detection getting nuclear material in place, as it is already there.Our government is retarded.
Why some in this country think the best solution is to make if bigger astonishes me.
It is just a matter of time before we are hit again and those "betting" on talk over action will starting singing a different tune or perhaps they will just continue to blame Bush.Those who suggest this is not a big deal because it could be compiled through leg work, let me ask you this: Just because people can scan for opens ports on your firewall, does that mean there is no harm in you publishing your IPs and ports?Seriously, we're doomed if we rely on the Federal Government to protect us, I mean a terrorist just shot two US soldiers in our country and the President hasn't even addressed it.
What better way to terrorize our nation then to shoot soldiers are random when they should be safe.
The stress of being in Iraq/Afghanistan is bad enough, but now they need to worry about getting shoot back at home?BR&gt;I got news for you.
1).  We are at war and 2).
We're losing it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28199161</id>
	<title>Nothing to see here...</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1244057940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently even though something like this makes you cringe, it has been dubbed as not really that critical in nature, and even though<br>you would have at the most materials to make a dirty bomb, it would take too much effort to counter all the security in place, as well as the motion activated satellite images of surroundings, leading you to know about an intrusion way before it is a problem.<br>Usually, the MIB answer these calls, and they are usually very quick to intercept.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently even though something like this makes you cringe , it has been dubbed as not really that critical in nature , and even thoughyou would have at the most materials to make a dirty bomb , it would take too much effort to counter all the security in place , as well as the motion activated satellite images of surroundings , leading you to know about an intrusion way before it is a problem.Usually , the MIB answer these calls , and they are usually very quick to intercept .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently even though something like this makes you cringe, it has been dubbed as not really that critical in nature, and even thoughyou would have at the most materials to make a dirty bomb, it would take too much effort to counter all the security in place, as well as the motion activated satellite images of surroundings, leading you to know about an intrusion way before it is a problem.Usually, the MIB answer these calls, and they are usually very quick to intercept.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196289</id>
	<title>So that is how Luke found out.</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1244046060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always wondered how Luke figured out where the secret entrance to the nuclear reactor providing power to the shield to the Death Star during construction. Now there is a plausible scenario how he got it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always wondered how Luke figured out where the secret entrance to the nuclear reactor providing power to the shield to the Death Star during construction .
Now there is a plausible scenario how he got it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always wondered how Luke figured out where the secret entrance to the nuclear reactor providing power to the shield to the Death Star during construction.
Now there is a plausible scenario how he got it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195561</id>
	<title>Outrageous!</title>
	<author>netscan</author>
	<datestamp>1244043060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Los Alamos has nuclear materials?!? I just don't believe it...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Los Alamos has nuclear materials ? ! ?
I just do n't believe it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Los Alamos has nuclear materials?!?
I just don't believe it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813</id>
	<title>jesus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244039700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>how in the hell have there been so many serious leaks like this recently? why is no one being held accountable?</htmltext>
<tokenext>how in the hell have there been so many serious leaks like this recently ?
why is no one being held accountable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how in the hell have there been so many serious leaks like this recently?
why is no one being held accountable?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103</id>
	<title>it is kind of a no big deal</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1244041020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>say the list was kept perfectly secret. as if no one who intends harm couldn't ferret out where the sites are. its not as if the sites are very mobile, most have been there for decades</p><p>and none of the material is easily weaponized. well, you could build a dirty bomb. but if you were building a dirty bomb, it would be easier to shop used medical equipment. perhaps from outside the country. i'm sure you could find some old radiology equipment in latin america and sneak it over the mexican border undetected. line it with lead and drive it in. pack it with some dynamite in a city center: boom, instant radioactive times square</p><p>finally, even if the sites were kept secret, they still need to be guarded. that's the real safeguard</p><p>although the list does allow those who intend to do harm confirmation of sites, and an ability to triage which is easier than another to attempt to breach</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>say the list was kept perfectly secret .
as if no one who intends harm could n't ferret out where the sites are .
its not as if the sites are very mobile , most have been there for decadesand none of the material is easily weaponized .
well , you could build a dirty bomb .
but if you were building a dirty bomb , it would be easier to shop used medical equipment .
perhaps from outside the country .
i 'm sure you could find some old radiology equipment in latin america and sneak it over the mexican border undetected .
line it with lead and drive it in .
pack it with some dynamite in a city center : boom , instant radioactive times squarefinally , even if the sites were kept secret , they still need to be guarded .
that 's the real safeguardalthough the list does allow those who intend to do harm confirmation of sites , and an ability to triage which is easier than another to attempt to breach</tokentext>
<sentencetext>say the list was kept perfectly secret.
as if no one who intends harm couldn't ferret out where the sites are.
its not as if the sites are very mobile, most have been there for decadesand none of the material is easily weaponized.
well, you could build a dirty bomb.
but if you were building a dirty bomb, it would be easier to shop used medical equipment.
perhaps from outside the country.
i'm sure you could find some old radiology equipment in latin america and sneak it over the mexican border undetected.
line it with lead and drive it in.
pack it with some dynamite in a city center: boom, instant radioactive times squarefinally, even if the sites were kept secret, they still need to be guarded.
that's the real safeguardalthough the list does allow those who intend to do harm confirmation of sites, and an ability to triage which is easier than another to attempt to breach</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28197487</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Boronx</author>
	<datestamp>1244050980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dirty bomb requires significant expertise if you want to avoid being killed transporting the bomb.  Imagine material so hot that its mere radioactivity could endanger a wide area, then concentrate it into the size of a bomb.  Plus, dirty bombs are very easy to detect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dirty bomb requires significant expertise if you want to avoid being killed transporting the bomb .
Imagine material so hot that its mere radioactivity could endanger a wide area , then concentrate it into the size of a bomb .
Plus , dirty bombs are very easy to detect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dirty bomb requires significant expertise if you want to avoid being killed transporting the bomb.
Imagine material so hot that its mere radioactivity could endanger a wide area, then concentrate it into the size of a bomb.
Plus, dirty bombs are very easy to detect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195951</id>
	<title>list nuclear sites</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244044680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Media is humiliating to americans who know better than what they hear or read.  what about your lame brain follow the content and subject of this blog. Why is it every time some GOV dont get it goof ball publishes somthing even they should not have ( hint  , hint ) they turn around and say oh its really no problem. Truth of the matter we have people picking up trash alot brighter than are Washington Hoggs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Media is humiliating to americans who know better than what they hear or read .
what about your lame brain follow the content and subject of this blog .
Why is it every time some GOV dont get it goof ball publishes somthing even they should not have ( hint , hint ) they turn around and say oh its really no problem .
Truth of the matter we have people picking up trash alot brighter than are Washington Hoggs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Media is humiliating to americans who know better than what they hear or read.
what about your lame brain follow the content and subject of this blog.
Why is it every time some GOV dont get it goof ball publishes somthing even they should not have ( hint  , hint ) they turn around and say oh its really no problem.
Truth of the matter we have people picking up trash alot brighter than are Washington Hoggs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>dubiago</author>
	<datestamp>1244042220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>There were some pretty hefty reassurances during the Clinton Administration about the nature of nuclear proliferation when they gave North Korea nuclear reactors; they'd never make nuclear weapons as a result of having the reactors. Flash forward to a week ago, and they've detonated a ~20KT nuclear device.

Some of this may just be the government playing C.Y.A., and flashing a "Don't Panic" sign. And, as you point out, dirty bombs aren't that hard to make. They may not have the bang that their fission/fusion cousins have, but they'll certainly make you miserable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There were some pretty hefty reassurances during the Clinton Administration about the nature of nuclear proliferation when they gave North Korea nuclear reactors ; they 'd never make nuclear weapons as a result of having the reactors .
Flash forward to a week ago , and they 've detonated a ~ 20KT nuclear device .
Some of this may just be the government playing C.Y.A. , and flashing a " Do n't Panic " sign .
And , as you point out , dirty bombs are n't that hard to make .
They may not have the bang that their fission/fusion cousins have , but they 'll certainly make you miserable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There were some pretty hefty reassurances during the Clinton Administration about the nature of nuclear proliferation when they gave North Korea nuclear reactors; they'd never make nuclear weapons as a result of having the reactors.
Flash forward to a week ago, and they've detonated a ~20KT nuclear device.
Some of this may just be the government playing C.Y.A., and flashing a "Don't Panic" sign.
And, as you point out, dirty bombs aren't that hard to make.
They may not have the bang that their fission/fusion cousins have, but they'll certainly make you miserable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194869</id>
	<title>Not secret!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244039880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Geez person writing the submission. RTFM. The list was not "secret". The guy clearly says that the list was only "sensitive" and could have been compiled from various public sources. He also clearly says that the breach was more embarrassing than a security problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geez person writing the submission .
RTFM. The list was not " secret " .
The guy clearly says that the list was only " sensitive " and could have been compiled from various public sources .
He also clearly says that the breach was more embarrassing than a security problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geez person writing the submission.
RTFM. The list was not "secret".
The guy clearly says that the list was only "sensitive" and could have been compiled from various public sources.
He also clearly says that the breach was more embarrassing than a security problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195177</id>
	<title>Let's be really honest here...</title>
	<author>DragonTHC</author>
	<datestamp>1244041380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If a clandestine organization has the funds, logistics, and operatives to carry out an attack on these facilities, they already know about them.</p><p>Who didn't know about los alamos, livermore, or sandia?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If a clandestine organization has the funds , logistics , and operatives to carry out an attack on these facilities , they already know about them.Who did n't know about los alamos , livermore , or sandia ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a clandestine organization has the funds, logistics, and operatives to carry out an attack on these facilities, they already know about them.Who didn't know about los alamos, livermore, or sandia?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194821</id>
	<title>Terrorist's response...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244039700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>tl;dr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>tl ; dr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tl;dr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28205623</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244049060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't you really mean ~2KT?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you really mean ~ 2KT ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you really mean ~2KT?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835</id>
	<title>"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244039760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>there is a huge difference between nuclear material for civilian use, and weapons grade stuff. Even if some terrorists were able to get a-hold of civilian nuclear material they probably wouldnt be able to make a nuke. Having said that, a dirty bomb requires no expertese atall</htmltext>
<tokenext>there is a huge difference between nuclear material for civilian use , and weapons grade stuff .
Even if some terrorists were able to get a-hold of civilian nuclear material they probably wouldnt be able to make a nuke .
Having said that , a dirty bomb requires no expertese atall</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there is a huge difference between nuclear material for civilian use, and weapons grade stuff.
Even if some terrorists were able to get a-hold of civilian nuclear material they probably wouldnt be able to make a nuke.
Having said that, a dirty bomb requires no expertese atall</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196897</id>
	<title>The real problem here</title>
	<author>Joebert</author>
	<datestamp>1244048580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Someone accidentally released a 266-page report on hundreds of sites in the US for stockpiling and storing hazardous nuclear materials for civilian use.</p></div> </blockquote><p>

I think the real problem here is that there are nuclear materials being stockpiled for civilian use !</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone accidentally released a 266-page report on hundreds of sites in the US for stockpiling and storing hazardous nuclear materials for civilian use .
I think the real problem here is that there are nuclear materials being stockpiled for civilian use !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone accidentally released a 266-page report on hundreds of sites in the US for stockpiling and storing hazardous nuclear materials for civilian use.
I think the real problem here is that there are nuclear materials being stockpiled for civilian use !
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198441</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>LandDolphin</author>
	<datestamp>1244054580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, I have a couple things to say about this:
<br> <br>
1) It sounds like a problem for South Korea and Japan, not the USA or the rest of the world.  IF Japan, South Korea, or any other Country i nthe region wants to take out N. Korea's nuclear program, go ahead.
<br> <br>

2) What do you mean by "take out North Korea"?  Kill every citizen?  That's a lot more then 100,000K.  An Invasion/war?  They have ~ 1 million strong army.  Going to be a few more then ~100,000K deaths there.   And then what do you do once you've "liberated" them?  Sure, they are less of a pile of issues then Iraq.  However, you are going to have a power gap and a struggle to fill it.  Over throwing a country is costly business that is going to have a high failure rate unless it is done through it's own people from within.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I have a couple things to say about this : 1 ) It sounds like a problem for South Korea and Japan , not the USA or the rest of the world .
IF Japan , South Korea , or any other Country i nthe region wants to take out N. Korea 's nuclear program , go ahead .
2 ) What do you mean by " take out North Korea " ?
Kill every citizen ?
That 's a lot more then 100,000K .
An Invasion/war ?
They have ~ 1 million strong army .
Going to be a few more then ~ 100,000K deaths there .
And then what do you do once you 've " liberated " them ?
Sure , they are less of a pile of issues then Iraq .
However , you are going to have a power gap and a struggle to fill it .
Over throwing a country is costly business that is going to have a high failure rate unless it is done through it 's own people from within .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I have a couple things to say about this:
 
1) It sounds like a problem for South Korea and Japan, not the USA or the rest of the world.
IF Japan, South Korea, or any other Country i nthe region wants to take out N. Korea's nuclear program, go ahead.
2) What do you mean by "take out North Korea"?
Kill every citizen?
That's a lot more then 100,000K.
An Invasion/war?
They have ~ 1 million strong army.
Going to be a few more then ~100,000K deaths there.
And then what do you do once you've "liberated" them?
Sure, they are less of a pile of issues then Iraq.
However, you are going to have a power gap and a struggle to fill it.
Over throwing a country is costly business that is going to have a high failure rate unless it is done through it's own people from within.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28205203</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Mr. Slippery</author>
	<datestamp>1244044440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>I vote for taking out North Korea today. I'd rather have a 100,000+ casualties today if it can prevent the likely horrific death of 20 million+ later.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>And you call a nuclear attack from Norther Korea "likely" based on what, exactly?

</p><p>The cease-fire between North and South has held for decades. They are unlikely to start such aggression.

</p><p>The U.S., on the other hand -- the world's leader in the use of weapons of mass destruction, and the only nation to ever use nuclear weapons -- has recently demonstrated a willingness to engage in wars of aggression against small nations. Every country not an ally of ours, or of another nuclear power, now has strong incentive to obtain a nuclear deterrent. Attacking North Korea would only make that stronger.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I vote for taking out North Korea today .
I 'd rather have a 100,000 + casualties today if it can prevent the likely horrific death of 20 million + later .
And you call a nuclear attack from Norther Korea " likely " based on what , exactly ?
The cease-fire between North and South has held for decades .
They are unlikely to start such aggression .
The U.S. , on the other hand -- the world 's leader in the use of weapons of mass destruction , and the only nation to ever use nuclear weapons -- has recently demonstrated a willingness to engage in wars of aggression against small nations .
Every country not an ally of ours , or of another nuclear power , now has strong incentive to obtain a nuclear deterrent .
Attacking North Korea would only make that stronger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I vote for taking out North Korea today.
I'd rather have a 100,000+ casualties today if it can prevent the likely horrific death of 20 million+ later.
And you call a nuclear attack from Norther Korea "likely" based on what, exactly?
The cease-fire between North and South has held for decades.
They are unlikely to start such aggression.
The U.S., on the other hand -- the world's leader in the use of weapons of mass destruction, and the only nation to ever use nuclear weapons -- has recently demonstrated a willingness to engage in wars of aggression against small nations.
Every country not an ally of ours, or of another nuclear power, now has strong incentive to obtain a nuclear deterrent.
Attacking North Korea would only make that stronger.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195787</id>
	<title>Hi, wikileaks!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244043960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/confidential-list-of-us-nuke-sites-ends-up-on-wikileaks.ars" title="arstechnica.com" rel="nofollow">already on Wikileaks</a> [arstechnica.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's already on Wikileaks [ arstechnica.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's already on Wikileaks [arstechnica.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195339</id>
	<title>First Blame Bush Post</title>
	<author>smitty\_one\_each</author>
	<datestamp>1244042040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is all clearly a plot by lingering Bush loyalists to discredit the Preshizzle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is all clearly a plot by lingering Bush loyalists to discredit the Preshizzle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is all clearly a plot by lingering Bush loyalists to discredit the Preshizzle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196505</id>
	<title>Re:jesus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244047140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's called an <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/03/1155221" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Open Government.</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's called an Open Government .
[ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's called an Open Government.
[slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195397</id>
	<title>No nuke's protest</title>
	<author>ItsPaPPy</author>
	<datestamp>1244042340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Great now I am going to get stuck in traffic everywhere, because of dumb "No nukes" protestors!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Great now I am going to get stuck in traffic everywhere , because of dumb " No nukes " protestors !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great now I am going to get stuck in traffic everywhere, because of dumb "No nukes" protestors!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195097</id>
	<title>Re:glad they took it down.....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244041020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so they accidentaly the whole list ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so they accidentaly the whole list ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so they accidentaly the whole list ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196155</id>
	<title>Someone accidentally released a 266-page report</title>
	<author>alxkit</author>
	<datestamp>1244045520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>it wasn't a problem until someone else posted a link to it from slashdot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>it was n't a problem until someone else posted a link to it from slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it wasn't a problem until someone else posted a link to it from slashdot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196033</id>
	<title>Re:it is kind of a no big deal</title>
	<author>dave420</author>
	<datestamp>1244045040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wouldn't it make more sense to disperse the radioactive material without a large explosion causing people to notice something's going on?  The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goinia\_accident" title="wikipedia.org">Goi&#226;nia accident</a> [wikipedia.org] is a good example of how people spread radiation without even knowing something dangerous was going on.  That way you'd have people unwittingly spreading the radiation all over the place, and by the time someone figured out what was going on, it'd be too late - the amount of contamination would be off the chart.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't it make more sense to disperse the radioactive material without a large explosion causing people to notice something 's going on ?
The Goi   nia accident [ wikipedia.org ] is a good example of how people spread radiation without even knowing something dangerous was going on .
That way you 'd have people unwittingly spreading the radiation all over the place , and by the time someone figured out what was going on , it 'd be too late - the amount of contamination would be off the chart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't it make more sense to disperse the radioactive material without a large explosion causing people to notice something's going on?
The Goiânia accident [wikipedia.org] is a good example of how people spread radiation without even knowing something dangerous was going on.
That way you'd have people unwittingly spreading the radiation all over the place, and by the time someone figured out what was going on, it'd be too late - the amount of contamination would be off the chart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198627</id>
	<title>whew!</title>
	<author>mattwarden</author>
	<datestamp>1244055360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whew... at least only the list was secret and not the nuclear sites. That would have been embarrassing!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whew... at least only the list was secret and not the nuclear sites .
That would have been embarrassing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whew... at least only the list was secret and not the nuclear sites.
That would have been embarrassing!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195823</id>
	<title>Re:glad they took it down.....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244044080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Obama\_IAEA\_nuclear\_sites\_declaration\_for\_the\_United\_States\%2C\_draft\%2C\_267\_pages\%2C\_5\_May\_2009</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //wikileaks.org/wiki/Obama \ _IAEA \ _nuclear \ _sites \ _declaration \ _for \ _the \ _United \ _States \ % 2C \ _draft \ % 2C \ _267 \ _pages \ % 2C \ _5 \ _May \ _2009</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Obama\_IAEA\_nuclear\_sites\_declaration\_for\_the\_United\_States\%2C\_draft\%2C\_267\_pages\%2C\_5\_May\_2009</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195627</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Qzukk</author>
	<datestamp>1244043300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Having said that, a dirty bomb requires no expertese atall</i></p><p>Having said that, a dirty bomb requires nothing more than a few dozen smoke detectors, and if They didn't want to pay for it, the wal-mart down the street almost certainly has lower security than any of the facilities listed.</p><p>"The List" doesn't tell most people anything they couldn't already find out themselves if they wanted to (oh look, I can buy this stuff <a href="http://www.unitednuclear.com/uranium.htm" title="unitednuclear.com">online</a> [unitednuclear.com]).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having said that , a dirty bomb requires no expertese atallHaving said that , a dirty bomb requires nothing more than a few dozen smoke detectors , and if They did n't want to pay for it , the wal-mart down the street almost certainly has lower security than any of the facilities listed .
" The List " does n't tell most people anything they could n't already find out themselves if they wanted to ( oh look , I can buy this stuff online [ unitednuclear.com ] ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having said that, a dirty bomb requires no expertese atallHaving said that, a dirty bomb requires nothing more than a few dozen smoke detectors, and if They didn't want to pay for it, the wal-mart down the street almost certainly has lower security than any of the facilities listed.
"The List" doesn't tell most people anything they couldn't already find out themselves if they wanted to (oh look, I can buy this stuff online [unitednuclear.com]).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195259</id>
	<title>Civil Nuclear Sites?</title>
	<author>vampire\_baozi</author>
	<datestamp>1244041740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As the Times article pointed out, and from the looks of the PDF, most of this stuff was public domain already.  All they did was assemble it into a nice condensed form for the IAEA.  While documents that aren't supposed to be getting released getting released is clearly a process failure, this one doesn't seem particularly serious.  On the scale of data leakages, far less harmful than the British government's loss of data discs containing personal information.</p><p>Given that most of the data was already public domain, beyond knowing specifically where the stuff is, what is new here?  Figure out where the publication process went wrong, and how it got approved, and then take steps to fix the problem.  Gov't snafu's are par for the course, and givin it was a civil report for the IAEA, looks like a minor leak if that.</p><p>I hardly forsee people trying to make dirty bombs from this stuff.  As WikiLeaks notes, this information is far more useful to environmentalists than terrorists or foreign governments (to whom we're handing the info anyway via IAEA).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As the Times article pointed out , and from the looks of the PDF , most of this stuff was public domain already .
All they did was assemble it into a nice condensed form for the IAEA .
While documents that are n't supposed to be getting released getting released is clearly a process failure , this one does n't seem particularly serious .
On the scale of data leakages , far less harmful than the British government 's loss of data discs containing personal information.Given that most of the data was already public domain , beyond knowing specifically where the stuff is , what is new here ?
Figure out where the publication process went wrong , and how it got approved , and then take steps to fix the problem .
Gov't snafu 's are par for the course , and givin it was a civil report for the IAEA , looks like a minor leak if that.I hardly forsee people trying to make dirty bombs from this stuff .
As WikiLeaks notes , this information is far more useful to environmentalists than terrorists or foreign governments ( to whom we 're handing the info anyway via IAEA ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the Times article pointed out, and from the looks of the PDF, most of this stuff was public domain already.
All they did was assemble it into a nice condensed form for the IAEA.
While documents that aren't supposed to be getting released getting released is clearly a process failure, this one doesn't seem particularly serious.
On the scale of data leakages, far less harmful than the British government's loss of data discs containing personal information.Given that most of the data was already public domain, beyond knowing specifically where the stuff is, what is new here?
Figure out where the publication process went wrong, and how it got approved, and then take steps to fix the problem.
Gov't snafu's are par for the course, and givin it was a civil report for the IAEA, looks like a minor leak if that.I hardly forsee people trying to make dirty bombs from this stuff.
As WikiLeaks notes, this information is far more useful to environmentalists than terrorists or foreign governments (to whom we're handing the info anyway via IAEA).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195013</id>
	<title>This is a good thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244040480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As it shows how much of a hypocrite America is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As it shows how much of a hypocrite America is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As it shows how much of a hypocrite America is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195603</id>
	<title>Re:it is kind of a no big deal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244043180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be much easier then that. Just get a job as an ndt tech. I know some couyons with 6th grade educations that get hired for these jobs so you might not want to look too smart.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be much easier then that .
Just get a job as an ndt tech .
I know some couyons with 6th grade educations that get hired for these jobs so you might not want to look too smart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be much easier then that.
Just get a job as an ndt tech.
I know some couyons with 6th grade educations that get hired for these jobs so you might not want to look too smart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28232315</id>
	<title>Declassification is nearly non-existent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244298900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a former DoE contractor:<br>I was being interviewed to work at a "facility". I found a copy of what was essentially "the" manual for the "facility" I would be working at in the University Library in the governments documents section with an inside cover note that the document could be purchased for $16.95 from the Government Printing Office. I bought it. I was hired for the job.<br>When I went to find a copy of the document in the "facility" library, I was informed that I could not see the document because it was "classified" above my clearance level. Whereupon I brought in MY copy from the GPO with the purchase receipt and asked my supervisor, her supervisor, his "manager" and the deparment PHD head WHY it could NOT be immediately declassified so that I did not have to buy copies of documents from the GPO to do the job which they hired me for.<br>GO FIGURE.<br>BEST non-sequiter of the DoE in my not-so-humble opinion: UCNI - Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information B-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a former DoE contractor : I was being interviewed to work at a " facility " .
I found a copy of what was essentially " the " manual for the " facility " I would be working at in the University Library in the governments documents section with an inside cover note that the document could be purchased for $ 16.95 from the Government Printing Office .
I bought it .
I was hired for the job.When I went to find a copy of the document in the " facility " library , I was informed that I could not see the document because it was " classified " above my clearance level .
Whereupon I brought in MY copy from the GPO with the purchase receipt and asked my supervisor , her supervisor , his " manager " and the deparment PHD head WHY it could NOT be immediately declassified so that I did not have to buy copies of documents from the GPO to do the job which they hired me for.GO FIGURE.BEST non-sequiter of the DoE in my not-so-humble opinion : UCNI - Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information B- )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a former DoE contractor:I was being interviewed to work at a "facility".
I found a copy of what was essentially "the" manual for the "facility" I would be working at in the University Library in the governments documents section with an inside cover note that the document could be purchased for $16.95 from the Government Printing Office.
I bought it.
I was hired for the job.When I went to find a copy of the document in the "facility" library, I was informed that I could not see the document because it was "classified" above my clearance level.
Whereupon I brought in MY copy from the GPO with the purchase receipt and asked my supervisor, her supervisor, his "manager" and the deparment PHD head WHY it could NOT be immediately declassified so that I did not have to buy copies of documents from the GPO to do the job which they hired me for.GO FIGURE.BEST non-sequiter of the DoE in my not-so-humble opinion: UCNI - Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information B-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195183</id>
	<title>Welp</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244041380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They accidentally the whole thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They accidentally the whole thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They accidentally the whole thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198559</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Reziac</author>
	<datestamp>1244055000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or go out into the California desert and mine your own. No one will notice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or go out into the California desert and mine your own .
No one will notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or go out into the California desert and mine your own.
No one will notice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195061</id>
	<title>/. wants the terrorists to win</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244040780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love the barely contained glee on slashdot  whenever America fucks up somehow and helps the terrorists.</p><p>As far left as it's ever been.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love the barely contained glee on slashdot whenever America fucks up somehow and helps the terrorists.As far left as it 's ever been .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love the barely contained glee on slashdot  whenever America fucks up somehow and helps the terrorists.As far left as it's ever been.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195255</id>
	<title>Obama releases secrets to appease enemies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244041740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The headline for this article should have been: "Obama releases secrets to appease enemies"</p><p>FTA: Obama has opened the US "up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise."</p><p>Again, Obama and Democrats display this deeply flawed and truly dangerous mentality that if we just please our enemies, by making the US less secure in this case, they will no longer hate us or want to kill us. Liberals think that we have created all of our enemies and therefor we have the power to make them our friends. In reality, it matters little what we do. Iran, North Korea, and the rest of our enemies will continue to develop and acquire nuclear weapons. They will continue to hate us for what we stand for and for the allies we support. As proven time and again by history, they need nothing else to continue hating and killing us. How many times do liberals like Obama have to make us less secure before we will learn? How many more al-Qaeda terrorist attacks will it take? How many more broken UN resolutions? How many more dead Americans?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The headline for this article should have been : " Obama releases secrets to appease enemies " FTA : Obama has opened the US " up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries , especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms , will do likewise .
" Again , Obama and Democrats display this deeply flawed and truly dangerous mentality that if we just please our enemies , by making the US less secure in this case , they will no longer hate us or want to kill us .
Liberals think that we have created all of our enemies and therefor we have the power to make them our friends .
In reality , it matters little what we do .
Iran , North Korea , and the rest of our enemies will continue to develop and acquire nuclear weapons .
They will continue to hate us for what we stand for and for the allies we support .
As proven time and again by history , they need nothing else to continue hating and killing us .
How many times do liberals like Obama have to make us less secure before we will learn ?
How many more al-Qaeda terrorist attacks will it take ?
How many more broken UN resolutions ?
How many more dead Americans ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The headline for this article should have been: "Obama releases secrets to appease enemies"FTA: Obama has opened the US "up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.
"Again, Obama and Democrats display this deeply flawed and truly dangerous mentality that if we just please our enemies, by making the US less secure in this case, they will no longer hate us or want to kill us.
Liberals think that we have created all of our enemies and therefor we have the power to make them our friends.
In reality, it matters little what we do.
Iran, North Korea, and the rest of our enemies will continue to develop and acquire nuclear weapons.
They will continue to hate us for what we stand for and for the allies we support.
As proven time and again by history, they need nothing else to continue hating and killing us.
How many times do liberals like Obama have to make us less secure before we will learn?
How many more al-Qaeda terrorist attacks will it take?
How many more broken UN resolutions?
How many more dead Americans?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198943</id>
	<title>Re:"for civilian use"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244056920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the nuclear reactors were never delivered to the North Koreans.  It was proposed the US would deliver 2 Light Nuclear Reactors that wouldn't have the capacity for building weapons-grade nuclear material but these reactors weren't even delivered nor created.  The South Koreans and Americans never funded it and it never got off the ground.  (Source: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/10/9/132140.shtml)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the nuclear reactors were never delivered to the North Koreans .
It was proposed the US would deliver 2 Light Nuclear Reactors that would n't have the capacity for building weapons-grade nuclear material but these reactors were n't even delivered nor created .
The South Koreans and Americans never funded it and it never got off the ground .
( Source : http : //archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/10/9/132140.shtml )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the nuclear reactors were never delivered to the North Koreans.
It was proposed the US would deliver 2 Light Nuclear Reactors that wouldn't have the capacity for building weapons-grade nuclear material but these reactors weren't even delivered nor created.
The South Koreans and Americans never funded it and it never got off the ground.
(Source: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/10/9/132140.shtml)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194773</id>
	<title>glad they took it down.....</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1244039580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now nobody will ever be able to find it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now nobody will ever be able to find it ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now nobody will ever be able to find it ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198065</id>
	<title>I misread this as...</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1244053140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Secret US List of Civil War Nuclear Sites Released</p><p>---</p><p>Abraham Lincoln scowled and told his generals, "I don't care if it will give us a quick victory to nuke Atlanta.  I will not condone the use of nuclear weapons on the continent!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Secret US List of Civil War Nuclear Sites Released---Abraham Lincoln scowled and told his generals , " I do n't care if it will give us a quick victory to nuke Atlanta .
I will not condone the use of nuclear weapons on the continent !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Secret US List of Civil War Nuclear Sites Released---Abraham Lincoln scowled and told his generals, "I don't care if it will give us a quick victory to nuke Atlanta.
I will not condone the use of nuclear weapons on the continent!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194881</id>
	<title>Mirror</title>
	<author>Eddy Luten</author>
	<datestamp>1244039940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since there's no link in TFA, here it is on <a href="http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Obama\_IAEA\_nuclear\_sites\_declaration\_for\_the\_United\_States\%2C\_draft\%2C\_267\_pages\%2C\_5\_May\_2009" title="wikileaks.org" rel="nofollow">WikiLeaks</a> [wikileaks.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since there 's no link in TFA , here it is on WikiLeaks [ wikileaks.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since there's no link in TFA, here it is on WikiLeaks [wikileaks.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194831</id>
	<title>oops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244039760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>oops</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>oops</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oops</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28197487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198943
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28202493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28205623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195097
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28205203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_1240210_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196289
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195177
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194881
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195909
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196189
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195103
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196033
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196051
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195183
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195627
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28197487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195369
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200817
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28205623
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198943
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196809
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28205203
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198441
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198367
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194935
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196897
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195013
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196505
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28200151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28202493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28196023
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195823
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28198065
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195061
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_1240210.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28194903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_1240210.28195443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
