<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_19_1438235</id>
	<title>ACLU Sues DHS Over Unlawful Searches and Detention</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245432060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>gavron writes <i>"The ACLU has <a href="http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&amp;STORY=/www/story/06-18-2009/0005046676&amp;EDATE=">filed suit against DHS</a> to stop the TSA from conducting illegal searches and detention. In the case at hand, TSA detained a Ron Paul staffer who was carrying $4,300 in cash in a metal box. The suit seeks to focus TSA searches on things having to do with increasing security on aircraft, instead of their current practice of 4th-amendment-violating searches, such as those of laptops, iPods, etc."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>gavron writes " The ACLU has filed suit against DHS to stop the TSA from conducting illegal searches and detention .
In the case at hand , TSA detained a Ron Paul staffer who was carrying $ 4,300 in cash in a metal box .
The suit seeks to focus TSA searches on things having to do with increasing security on aircraft , instead of their current practice of 4th-amendment-violating searches , such as those of laptops , iPods , etc .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gavron writes "The ACLU has filed suit against DHS to stop the TSA from conducting illegal searches and detention.
In the case at hand, TSA detained a Ron Paul staffer who was carrying $4,300 in cash in a metal box.
The suit seeks to focus TSA searches on things having to do with increasing security on aircraft, instead of their current practice of 4th-amendment-violating searches, such as those of laptops, iPods, etc.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395461</id>
	<title>Re:United States of America v. $124,700</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1245404700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah you need more judges like the dissenting judge.<br><br>Sure he flew one way. But if one way is cheaper, he's expecting to be driving a truck back right?<br>And why should he tell potentially crooked cops that he has 124 kilobux in the car?<br><br>In fact his fear was justified- he has lost 124,000 because of the cops and a bunch of judges.<br><br>The fucked up system might have created more criminals as a result.<br><br>After all that is a lot of money to the average guy. Worse - much of it was borrowed money from personal individuals.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah you need more judges like the dissenting judge.Sure he flew one way .
But if one way is cheaper , he 's expecting to be driving a truck back right ? And why should he tell potentially crooked cops that he has 124 kilobux in the car ? In fact his fear was justified- he has lost 124,000 because of the cops and a bunch of judges.The fucked up system might have created more criminals as a result.After all that is a lot of money to the average guy .
Worse - much of it was borrowed money from personal individuals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah you need more judges like the dissenting judge.Sure he flew one way.
But if one way is cheaper, he's expecting to be driving a truck back right?And why should he tell potentially crooked cops that he has 124 kilobux in the car?In fact his fear was justified- he has lost 124,000 because of the cops and a bunch of judges.The fucked up system might have created more criminals as a result.After all that is a lot of money to the average guy.
Worse - much of it was borrowed money from personal individuals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394177</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392271</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>Lovedumplingx</author>
	<datestamp>1245436320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?</p></div><p>Well the article states that he was returning from a Campaign for Liberty event with the ticket sales, concessions, etc. so maybe he didn't have time to convert it to anything else.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , why did n't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check ? Well the article states that he was returning from a Campaign for Liberty event with the ticket sales , concessions , etc .
so maybe he did n't have time to convert it to anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?Well the article states that he was returning from a Campaign for Liberty event with the ticket sales, concessions, etc.
so maybe he didn't have time to convert it to anything else.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392729</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1245438240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I hate the ACLU with a passion</i></p><p>Then you hate liberty and freedom. The ACLU's entire purpose is the protection of YOUR liberty.</p><p><i>Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?</i></p><p>Google "Ron Paul".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate the ACLU with a passionThen you hate liberty and freedom .
The ACLU 's entire purpose is the protection of YOUR liberty.Finally , why did n't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check ? Google " Ron Paul " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate the ACLU with a passionThen you hate liberty and freedom.
The ACLU's entire purpose is the protection of YOUR liberty.Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?Google "Ron Paul".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392951</id>
	<title>How forfieture should work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245439140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Forfeiture is rife with conflicts of interests.  Those seeking forfeiture should never have more than a token stake in the outcome of the proceedings:  enough to cover the marginal legal bills of prosecuting the forfeiture but not much beyond that.</p><p>For cash, burn it and destroy the ashes beyond recovery.</p><p>For everything else, sell it in a truly open auction then burn the money you raise.</p><p>Of course, this should only be done after all proceedings are final.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Forfeiture is rife with conflicts of interests .
Those seeking forfeiture should never have more than a token stake in the outcome of the proceedings : enough to cover the marginal legal bills of prosecuting the forfeiture but not much beyond that.For cash , burn it and destroy the ashes beyond recovery.For everything else , sell it in a truly open auction then burn the money you raise.Of course , this should only be done after all proceedings are final .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forfeiture is rife with conflicts of interests.
Those seeking forfeiture should never have more than a token stake in the outcome of the proceedings:  enough to cover the marginal legal bills of prosecuting the forfeiture but not much beyond that.For cash, burn it and destroy the ashes beyond recovery.For everything else, sell it in a truly open auction then burn the money you raise.Of course, this should only be done after all proceedings are final.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392719</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa...</title>
	<author>conspirator57</author>
	<datestamp>1245438180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a lot of people like goldschlager.  that has real gold in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a lot of people like goldschlager .
that has real gold in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a lot of people like goldschlager.
that has real gold in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395025</id>
	<title>I'm Confused!</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1245403140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know I'm supposed to hate the DHS because they're a bunch of evil government bureaucrats that want to take away our rights. But aren't I also supposed to hate the the ACLU because they're a bunch of stupid liberal do-gooders who sue you for discriminating against left-handed dwarfs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I 'm supposed to hate the DHS because they 're a bunch of evil government bureaucrats that want to take away our rights .
But are n't I also supposed to hate the the ACLU because they 're a bunch of stupid liberal do-gooders who sue you for discriminating against left-handed dwarfs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I'm supposed to hate the DHS because they're a bunch of evil government bureaucrats that want to take away our rights.
But aren't I also supposed to hate the the ACLU because they're a bunch of stupid liberal do-gooders who sue you for discriminating against left-handed dwarfs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392367</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why. - Indeed.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245436620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?</i> </p><p>Unless you have an account with a bank, they won't do it.</p><p>Two, that's NOT for you to say. I agree carrying that much cash isn't the wisest thing to do, but unfortunately, the way the banks are, cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check, regardless of who issues it, means at least a ten day hold on the funds. Also, maybe this guy wanted to make a political statement and actually have grounds to sue the TSA. He actually put his ass on the line and is doing something about it; which more than I can say about your typical Slashdot pontificating whiner.</p><p>Three, <i>I hate the ACLU with a passion</i>. </p><p>Why?!? Did they defend a certain segment of the population that you hate? Like a black person? Or a homosexual? Or is it because they fought a town for putting up a nativity scene? Or is it because of their stance on gun rights? Even then, to <b>hate</b> them over that?!</p><p>You listen to AM radio, don't you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , why did n't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check ?
Unless you have an account with a bank , they wo n't do it.Two , that 's NOT for you to say .
I agree carrying that much cash is n't the wisest thing to do , but unfortunately , the way the banks are , cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check , regardless of who issues it , means at least a ten day hold on the funds .
Also , maybe this guy wanted to make a political statement and actually have grounds to sue the TSA .
He actually put his ass on the line and is doing something about it ; which more than I can say about your typical Slashdot pontificating whiner.Three , I hate the ACLU with a passion .
Why ? ! ? Did they defend a certain segment of the population that you hate ?
Like a black person ?
Or a homosexual ?
Or is it because they fought a town for putting up a nativity scene ?
Or is it because of their stance on gun rights ?
Even then , to hate them over that ?
! You listen to AM radio , do n't you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?
Unless you have an account with a bank, they won't do it.Two, that's NOT for you to say.
I agree carrying that much cash isn't the wisest thing to do, but unfortunately, the way the banks are, cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check, regardless of who issues it, means at least a ten day hold on the funds.
Also, maybe this guy wanted to make a political statement and actually have grounds to sue the TSA.
He actually put his ass on the line and is doing something about it; which more than I can say about your typical Slashdot pontificating whiner.Three, I hate the ACLU with a passion.
Why?!? Did they defend a certain segment of the population that you hate?
Like a black person?
Or a homosexual?
Or is it because they fought a town for putting up a nativity scene?
Or is it because of their stance on gun rights?
Even then, to hate them over that?
!You listen to AM radio, don't you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392839</id>
	<title>Good thing it wasn't O'hare</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245438720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>FTFA: "Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone."</i></p><p>That's a felony in Illinois, and the recording would have been inadmissable in court. Yes, my legislators are liars who don't want to be caught doing something dishonest because of recorded proof. Of course, my previous Governor is headed to court (then hopefully prison) and the guy before that is sitting in prison right now.</p><p>And people wonder why our country is in such bad shape...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : " Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone .
" That 's a felony in Illinois , and the recording would have been inadmissable in court .
Yes , my legislators are liars who do n't want to be caught doing something dishonest because of recorded proof .
Of course , my previous Governor is headed to court ( then hopefully prison ) and the guy before that is sitting in prison right now.And people wonder why our country is in such bad shape.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA: "Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone.
"That's a felony in Illinois, and the recording would have been inadmissable in court.
Yes, my legislators are liars who don't want to be caught doing something dishonest because of recorded proof.
Of course, my previous Governor is headed to court (then hopefully prison) and the guy before that is sitting in prison right now.And people wonder why our country is in such bad shape...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393611</id>
	<title>Re:It's a sign</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245441540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're a dumbass. Or a troll. Probably troll. The "Os^Hbama" pretty much seals that deal. But still, I would like to point out that Obama's been in office currently 1/16th the time that "Lord and Saviour Bush Jr." was in total. It takes time to undo that kind of retardery. Come back in another 6 months, when he's able to stop putting out fires from the monkey he took over from.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're a dumbass .
Or a troll .
Probably troll .
The " Os ^ Hbama " pretty much seals that deal .
But still , I would like to point out that Obama 's been in office currently 1/16th the time that " Lord and Saviour Bush Jr. " was in total .
It takes time to undo that kind of retardery .
Come back in another 6 months , when he 's able to stop putting out fires from the monkey he took over from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're a dumbass.
Or a troll.
Probably troll.
The "Os^Hbama" pretty much seals that deal.
But still, I would like to point out that Obama's been in office currently 1/16th the time that "Lord and Saviour Bush Jr." was in total.
It takes time to undo that kind of retardery.
Come back in another 6 months, when he's able to stop putting out fires from the monkey he took over from.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392305</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245436440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I hate the ACLU with a passion,</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

Oh yeah, you gotta hate those guys who spend their time trying to stop the government from trampling on people's rights.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate the ACLU with a passion , Oh yeah , you got ta hate those guys who spend their time trying to stop the government from trampling on people 's rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate the ACLU with a passion,


Oh yeah, you gotta hate those guys who spend their time trying to stop the government from trampling on people's rights.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392527</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1245437400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.</i></p><p>This is why I give money to the NRA. People like this guy are the first to form a mob when some demagogue starts telling them to go after a scapegoat. I hope if anything good is to come out of the recent wash of right-wing terrorism, it is convincing liberals of the danger of these kooks and the necessity of the second amendment to keep them in line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate the ACLU with a passion , however and as in this case , they have their uses.This is why I give money to the NRA .
People like this guy are the first to form a mob when some demagogue starts telling them to go after a scapegoat .
I hope if anything good is to come out of the recent wash of right-wing terrorism , it is convincing liberals of the danger of these kooks and the necessity of the second amendment to keep them in line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.This is why I give money to the NRA.
People like this guy are the first to form a mob when some demagogue starts telling them to go after a scapegoat.
I hope if anything good is to come out of the recent wash of right-wing terrorism, it is convincing liberals of the danger of these kooks and the necessity of the second amendment to keep them in line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398385</id>
	<title>Re:United States of America v. $124,700</title>
	<author>Kaenneth</author>
	<datestamp>1245423000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The money you could be saving with GEICO has a criminal record?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The money you could be saving with GEICO has a criminal record ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The money you could be saving with GEICO has a criminal record?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392853</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1245438720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hm absolutely wrong.
If you carry more then 10,000$ then you have to show how you got the money.  When you go to the bank and withdraw or deposit $10,000 or more they will ask you to fill out a form (you have to by law).  You get a copy of this form. Keep it with you when you go on the plane and the TSA can suck it.  Don't have this letter (e.g. you've been saving money underneath your bed) and the secret service will ask you questions.  They CANNOT take your money away from you unless they have cause that you received it illegally.  They can detaine you and make you miss your flight...so if it's worth it for you then argue with them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hm absolutely wrong .
If you carry more then 10,000 $ then you have to show how you got the money .
When you go to the bank and withdraw or deposit $ 10,000 or more they will ask you to fill out a form ( you have to by law ) .
You get a copy of this form .
Keep it with you when you go on the plane and the TSA can suck it .
Do n't have this letter ( e.g .
you 've been saving money underneath your bed ) and the secret service will ask you questions .
They CAN NOT take your money away from you unless they have cause that you received it illegally .
They can detaine you and make you miss your flight...so if it 's worth it for you then argue with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hm absolutely wrong.
If you carry more then 10,000$ then you have to show how you got the money.
When you go to the bank and withdraw or deposit $10,000 or more they will ask you to fill out a form (you have to by law).
You get a copy of this form.
Keep it with you when you go on the plane and the TSA can suck it.
Don't have this letter (e.g.
you've been saving money underneath your bed) and the secret service will ask you questions.
They CANNOT take your money away from you unless they have cause that you received it illegally.
They can detaine you and make you miss your flight...so if it's worth it for you then argue with them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393485</id>
	<title>Economic Consequences</title>
	<author>tobiah</author>
	<datestamp>1245441120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The intrusive security behavior of the TSA has all kinds of negative economic consequences, discouraging people from flying hurts the airlines, it also makes conducting business harder, and it separates families (with secondary but significant financial consequences). I'm very reluctant to take my family anywhere, it's such a great hassle to have your lunch and medications interrogated and seized.</p><p>And the difficulties of domestic travel are nothing compared to international. "Free Trade" makes no sense without the free-flow of people. A lot of what makes America economically appealing and strong is its openness and flexibility. I feel the travel clampdowns and growing hostility to foreigners plays a greater roll in the current economic meltdown than it gets credit for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The intrusive security behavior of the TSA has all kinds of negative economic consequences , discouraging people from flying hurts the airlines , it also makes conducting business harder , and it separates families ( with secondary but significant financial consequences ) .
I 'm very reluctant to take my family anywhere , it 's such a great hassle to have your lunch and medications interrogated and seized.And the difficulties of domestic travel are nothing compared to international .
" Free Trade " makes no sense without the free-flow of people .
A lot of what makes America economically appealing and strong is its openness and flexibility .
I feel the travel clampdowns and growing hostility to foreigners plays a greater roll in the current economic meltdown than it gets credit for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The intrusive security behavior of the TSA has all kinds of negative economic consequences, discouraging people from flying hurts the airlines, it also makes conducting business harder, and it separates families (with secondary but significant financial consequences).
I'm very reluctant to take my family anywhere, it's such a great hassle to have your lunch and medications interrogated and seized.And the difficulties of domestic travel are nothing compared to international.
"Free Trade" makes no sense without the free-flow of people.
A lot of what makes America economically appealing and strong is its openness and flexibility.
I feel the travel clampdowns and growing hostility to foreigners plays a greater roll in the current economic meltdown than it gets credit for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393111</id>
	<title>Re:Is it still $10,000?</title>
	<author>ckaminski</author>
	<datestamp>1245439740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right, like I want to call ahead and give someone a heads up that I'm coming in with $40,000 CASH.  It's almost as bad as putting stickers on my gun cases proclaiming (Steal me, sell me cheap in a high-crime neighborhood).  WTF?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , like I want to call ahead and give someone a heads up that I 'm coming in with $ 40,000 CASH .
It 's almost as bad as putting stickers on my gun cases proclaiming ( Steal me , sell me cheap in a high-crime neighborhood ) .
WTF ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, like I want to call ahead and give someone a heads up that I'm coming in with $40,000 CASH.
It's almost as bad as putting stickers on my gun cases proclaiming (Steal me, sell me cheap in a high-crime neighborhood).
WTF?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392917</id>
	<title>Re:TSA people are not legally informed</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1245439020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>TSA screeners are not law enforcement.</p></div><p>No, but they do watch television programs like <i>Law and Order</i> and <i>CSI</i> where unconstitutional searches of the "bad guys" and roughing up suspects in interrogation are common story elements. Unfortunately, these TSA knuckle draggers are unable to distinguish reality from fantasy when the arrive back at work the next day and so proceed to "interrogate" a suspect like the crew on <i>Law and Order</i> or <i>CSI</i> might instead of actually doing what would otherwise be a boring rent-a-cop security job.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>TSA screeners are not law enforcement.No , but they do watch television programs like Law and Order and CSI where unconstitutional searches of the " bad guys " and roughing up suspects in interrogation are common story elements .
Unfortunately , these TSA knuckle draggers are unable to distinguish reality from fantasy when the arrive back at work the next day and so proceed to " interrogate " a suspect like the crew on Law and Order or CSI might instead of actually doing what would otherwise be a boring rent-a-cop security job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TSA screeners are not law enforcement.No, but they do watch television programs like Law and Order and CSI where unconstitutional searches of the "bad guys" and roughing up suspects in interrogation are common story elements.
Unfortunately, these TSA knuckle draggers are unable to distinguish reality from fantasy when the arrive back at work the next day and so proceed to "interrogate" a suspect like the crew on Law and Order or CSI might instead of actually doing what would otherwise be a boring rent-a-cop security job.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</id>
	<title>$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>Queltor</author>
	<datestamp>1245436500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If he was carrying over $10,000 they could have reminded him of his legal obligation to file a CMIR.  But he wasn't.  Carrying $4,700 isn't a reportable event and is none of the TSA's business.  (In case you don't know banking regulations: 31 CFR 103.23 requires that a CMIR be filed by anyone who transports, mails, ships or receives, or attempts, causes or attempts to cause the transportation, mailing, shipping or receiving of currency or monetary instruments in excess of $10,000, from or to a place outside the United States.  The term ``monetary instruments'' includes currency and instruments such as negotiable instruments endorsed without restriction.  See 31 CFR 103.11(k).)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If he was carrying over $ 10,000 they could have reminded him of his legal obligation to file a CMIR .
But he was n't .
Carrying $ 4,700 is n't a reportable event and is none of the TSA 's business .
( In case you do n't know banking regulations : 31 CFR 103.23 requires that a CMIR be filed by anyone who transports , mails , ships or receives , or attempts , causes or attempts to cause the transportation , mailing , shipping or receiving of currency or monetary instruments in excess of $ 10,000 , from or to a place outside the United States .
The term ` ` monetary instruments' ' includes currency and instruments such as negotiable instruments endorsed without restriction .
See 31 CFR 103.11 ( k ) .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If he was carrying over $10,000 they could have reminded him of his legal obligation to file a CMIR.
But he wasn't.
Carrying $4,700 isn't a reportable event and is none of the TSA's business.
(In case you don't know banking regulations: 31 CFR 103.23 requires that a CMIR be filed by anyone who transports, mails, ships or receives, or attempts, causes or attempts to cause the transportation, mailing, shipping or receiving of currency or monetary instruments in excess of $10,000, from or to a place outside the United States.
The term ``monetary instruments'' includes currency and instruments such as negotiable instruments endorsed without restriction.
See 31 CFR 103.11(k).
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392707</id>
	<title>Re:$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>demonbug</author>
	<datestamp>1245438180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Was this an international trip? If not, according to what you stated above, he has no reason to file a CMIR even if he was carrying over $10,000. And if it was an international flight (and he was carrying over $10,000), it should be handled by customs, not by the TSA. TSA agents should be focused on preventing items and people from getting on flights that pose a direct threat to that flight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was this an international trip ?
If not , according to what you stated above , he has no reason to file a CMIR even if he was carrying over $ 10,000 .
And if it was an international flight ( and he was carrying over $ 10,000 ) , it should be handled by customs , not by the TSA .
TSA agents should be focused on preventing items and people from getting on flights that pose a direct threat to that flight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was this an international trip?
If not, according to what you stated above, he has no reason to file a CMIR even if he was carrying over $10,000.
And if it was an international flight (and he was carrying over $10,000), it should be handled by customs, not by the TSA.
TSA agents should be focused on preventing items and people from getting on flights that pose a direct threat to that flight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392857</id>
	<title>Re:TSA people are not legally informed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245438780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>There are standing instructions to inform law enforcement of anything including large quantities of cash. As to the performance of interrogations? Last time I was there, such things were never instructed. TSA screeners are not law enforcement.</p></div></blockquote><p>Well, hopefully this case will more clearly circumscribe their reach.</p><p>If the TSAs job is to screen for <em>aircraft safety</em>, they have <em>no</em> business whatsoever in reporting moneys which are being legally transported by citizens within the country -- they're simply over-reaching their mandate.</p><p>A lot of people won't even consider flying into, over, or through the US anymore because of this draconian security bullshit going on there.</p><p>For a non-citizen, you might as well have landed in Iran or Burma in terms of how arbitrarily they can and will detain you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are standing instructions to inform law enforcement of anything including large quantities of cash .
As to the performance of interrogations ?
Last time I was there , such things were never instructed .
TSA screeners are not law enforcement.Well , hopefully this case will more clearly circumscribe their reach.If the TSAs job is to screen for aircraft safety , they have no business whatsoever in reporting moneys which are being legally transported by citizens within the country -- they 're simply over-reaching their mandate.A lot of people wo n't even consider flying into , over , or through the US anymore because of this draconian security bullshit going on there.For a non-citizen , you might as well have landed in Iran or Burma in terms of how arbitrarily they can and will detain you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are standing instructions to inform law enforcement of anything including large quantities of cash.
As to the performance of interrogations?
Last time I was there, such things were never instructed.
TSA screeners are not law enforcement.Well, hopefully this case will more clearly circumscribe their reach.If the TSAs job is to screen for aircraft safety, they have no business whatsoever in reporting moneys which are being legally transported by citizens within the country -- they're simply over-reaching their mandate.A lot of people won't even consider flying into, over, or through the US anymore because of this draconian security bullshit going on there.For a non-citizen, you might as well have landed in Iran or Burma in terms of how arbitrarily they can and will detain you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392551</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>dave562</author>
	<datestamp>1245437520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why should he have to pay a fee to transmute the money from one form to another?  He was as a fund raising event where he was making a lot of small, cash transactions (selling t-shirts, etc.)  He wasn't doing anything illegal and the money was obtained via lawful activities.  This whole, "Assumed guilty until you pay a lawyer to prove otherwise" way of doing business in this country is a complete load of shit.  I'm glad that the Ron Paul staffer stood up for his rights and I'm glad that the ACLU is championing his cause.  The TSA is there to make sure that the planes are safe, and that the people boarding the planes aren't going to try to bring them down.  Other than that, they need to GTFO with their wanna be law enforcement procedures.</p><p>To my knowledge, the only time you have to declare currency is on international flights and on amounts over $10,000.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should he have to pay a fee to transmute the money from one form to another ?
He was as a fund raising event where he was making a lot of small , cash transactions ( selling t-shirts , etc .
) He was n't doing anything illegal and the money was obtained via lawful activities .
This whole , " Assumed guilty until you pay a lawyer to prove otherwise " way of doing business in this country is a complete load of shit .
I 'm glad that the Ron Paul staffer stood up for his rights and I 'm glad that the ACLU is championing his cause .
The TSA is there to make sure that the planes are safe , and that the people boarding the planes are n't going to try to bring them down .
Other than that , they need to GTFO with their wan na be law enforcement procedures.To my knowledge , the only time you have to declare currency is on international flights and on amounts over $ 10,000 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should he have to pay a fee to transmute the money from one form to another?
He was as a fund raising event where he was making a lot of small, cash transactions (selling t-shirts, etc.
)  He wasn't doing anything illegal and the money was obtained via lawful activities.
This whole, "Assumed guilty until you pay a lawyer to prove otherwise" way of doing business in this country is a complete load of shit.
I'm glad that the Ron Paul staffer stood up for his rights and I'm glad that the ACLU is championing his cause.
The TSA is there to make sure that the planes are safe, and that the people boarding the planes aren't going to try to bring them down.
Other than that, they need to GTFO with their wanna be law enforcement procedures.To my knowledge, the only time you have to declare currency is on international flights and on amounts over $10,000.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392243</id>
	<title>Re:Choice of cases?</title>
	<author>rhathar</author>
	<datestamp>1245436200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because that's only the first step. They picked this case for the following steps. In such an instance they question the passenger as to why they have the cash and then detain them since having large amounts of currency is 'suspicious'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because that 's only the first step .
They picked this case for the following steps .
In such an instance they question the passenger as to why they have the cash and then detain them since having large amounts of currency is 'suspicious' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because that's only the first step.
They picked this case for the following steps.
In such an instance they question the passenger as to why they have the cash and then detain them since having large amounts of currency is 'suspicious'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392179</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392745</id>
	<title>Re:Is it still $10,000?</title>
	<author>plague3106</author>
	<datestamp>1245438300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer, or plan your itinerary such that you can miss your flight.</i></p><p>No, the wise thing to do is stand up and defend your rights, because if you don't, the government will continue to trample them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer , or plan your itinerary such that you can miss your flight.No , the wise thing to do is stand up and defend your rights , because if you do n't , the government will continue to trample them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer, or plan your itinerary such that you can miss your flight.No, the wise thing to do is stand up and defend your rights, because if you don't, the government will continue to trample them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623</id>
	<title>United States of America v. $124,700</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1245437820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On a related note, see</p><p><a href="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/08/053295P.pdf" title="uscourts.gov" rel="nofollow">United States of America v. $124,700, in U.S. Currency</a> [uscourts.gov], United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit, No. 05-3295, August 18, 2006.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a related note , seeUnited States of America v. $ 124,700 , in U.S. Currency [ uscourts.gov ] , United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit , No .
05-3295 , August 18 , 2006 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a related note, seeUnited States of America v. $124,700, in U.S. Currency [uscourts.gov], United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit, No.
05-3295, August 18, 2006.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393587</id>
	<title>Re:$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245441480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think something similar occurs when you try to deposit 10k in cash at a bank as well, if I remember my AML training...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think something similar occurs when you try to deposit 10k in cash at a bank as well , if I remember my AML training.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think something similar occurs when you try to deposit 10k in cash at a bank as well, if I remember my AML training...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392327</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245436500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.</p></div><p>I too hate groups like the ACLU who stand up for our constitutional rights.  Let me guess, you're one of those right-wing fucktards who thinks the ACLU is anti-Christian even though they've defended numerous Christians against improper limiting of their right to free practice of their religion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate the ACLU with a passion , however and as in this case , they have their uses.I too hate groups like the ACLU who stand up for our constitutional rights .
Let me guess , you 're one of those right-wing fucktards who thinks the ACLU is anti-Christian even though they 've defended numerous Christians against improper limiting of their right to free practice of their religion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.I too hate groups like the ACLU who stand up for our constitutional rights.
Let me guess, you're one of those right-wing fucktards who thinks the ACLU is anti-Christian even though they've defended numerous Christians against improper limiting of their right to free practice of their religion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394995</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why. - Indeed.</title>
	<author>Itninja</author>
	<datestamp>1245403020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check, regardless of who issues it, means at least a ten day hold on the funds.</p></div></blockquote><p>Only if you have a history of writing/depositing hot checks. The 'Check 21' initiative a few years ago did away with most of the delay of posting paper checks. The only delay now is how long to takes a merchant to physically get the checks to the bank. And for large merchants, even that delay is removed with EFTs (the checks are just sent through the back after the fact for your records).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check , regardless of who issues it , means at least a ten day hold on the funds.Only if you have a history of writing/depositing hot checks .
The 'Check 21 ' initiative a few years ago did away with most of the delay of posting paper checks .
The only delay now is how long to takes a merchant to physically get the checks to the bank .
And for large merchants , even that delay is removed with EFTs ( the checks are just sent through the back after the fact for your records ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check, regardless of who issues it, means at least a ten day hold on the funds.Only if you have a history of writing/depositing hot checks.
The 'Check 21' initiative a few years ago did away with most of the delay of posting paper checks.
The only delay now is how long to takes a merchant to physically get the checks to the bank.
And for large merchants, even that delay is removed with EFTs (the checks are just sent through the back after the fact for your records).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392971</id>
	<title>Re:United States of America v. $124,700</title>
	<author>Leafheart</author>
	<datestamp>1245439200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmmm I liked the dissent reasoning on that one, too bad it was a dissent<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm I liked the dissent reasoning on that one , too bad it was a dissent : /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm I liked the dissent reasoning on that one, too bad it was a dissent :/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525</id>
	<title>TSA people are not legally informed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245437400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having spent time with the TSA, I can tell you first-hand that most TSA people are completely uninformed about their jobs, the law or just about anything they are doing.  A TSA screener with half a brain wouldn't have done anything more than call in local law enforcement to perform any interrogations.  There are standing instructions to inform law enforcement of anything including large quantities of cash.  As to the performance of interrogations?  Last time I was there, such things were never instructed.  TSA screeners are not law enforcement.</p><p>The whole idea of "Department of Homeland Security" is born of a paranoid consolidation of power.  It has done more to harm the efficiency of law enforcement and emergency services than it has done to help.  The DHS should be dismantled and the pre 9-11 condition restored.</p><p>I am okay with government security screening, but only as far as their primary mission.  If they do see anything else questionable, the ONLY proper action should be to inform actual law enforcement.  "To observe and report."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having spent time with the TSA , I can tell you first-hand that most TSA people are completely uninformed about their jobs , the law or just about anything they are doing .
A TSA screener with half a brain would n't have done anything more than call in local law enforcement to perform any interrogations .
There are standing instructions to inform law enforcement of anything including large quantities of cash .
As to the performance of interrogations ?
Last time I was there , such things were never instructed .
TSA screeners are not law enforcement.The whole idea of " Department of Homeland Security " is born of a paranoid consolidation of power .
It has done more to harm the efficiency of law enforcement and emergency services than it has done to help .
The DHS should be dismantled and the pre 9-11 condition restored.I am okay with government security screening , but only as far as their primary mission .
If they do see anything else questionable , the ONLY proper action should be to inform actual law enforcement .
" To observe and report .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having spent time with the TSA, I can tell you first-hand that most TSA people are completely uninformed about their jobs, the law or just about anything they are doing.
A TSA screener with half a brain wouldn't have done anything more than call in local law enforcement to perform any interrogations.
There are standing instructions to inform law enforcement of anything including large quantities of cash.
As to the performance of interrogations?
Last time I was there, such things were never instructed.
TSA screeners are not law enforcement.The whole idea of "Department of Homeland Security" is born of a paranoid consolidation of power.
It has done more to harm the efficiency of law enforcement and emergency services than it has done to help.
The DHS should be dismantled and the pre 9-11 condition restored.I am okay with government security screening, but only as far as their primary mission.
If they do see anything else questionable, the ONLY proper action should be to inform actual law enforcement.
"To observe and report.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394893</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa...</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1245402720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never eaten gold, but <a href="http://www.delafee.com/edible-gold.php" title="delafee.com">people do</a> [delafee.com], so it can't taste that bad. Making soup out of it is a bit much, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never eaten gold , but people do [ delafee.com ] , so it ca n't taste that bad .
Making soup out of it is a bit much , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never eaten gold, but people do [delafee.com], so it can't taste that bad.
Making soup out of it is a bit much, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28399999</id>
	<title>This needs definition</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1245531180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would like to find a public statement of what the TSA can and cannot do.  There must be a definition of where the handover takes place between capable officers and these, well, misguided wannabees.  I understand they have a function somewhere (apparently), it's just hard to pin down IMHO.</p><p>What I hear is someone who has been given special powers having no clue about what his powers are and what are the rights of the people they detain.  This is an incredibly dangerous situation, and especially the question for someone's rights ("am I required by law to answer the question") is simply not answered in an acceptable fashion.</p><p>It's interesting that his question is turned into a refusal to answer - that is not what he does.  I also like the appearance of that eternal dead duck: "if you have nothing to hide"..</p><p>I am glad this was taped - these guys need some serious correction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like to find a public statement of what the TSA can and can not do .
There must be a definition of where the handover takes place between capable officers and these , well , misguided wannabees .
I understand they have a function somewhere ( apparently ) , it 's just hard to pin down IMHO.What I hear is someone who has been given special powers having no clue about what his powers are and what are the rights of the people they detain .
This is an incredibly dangerous situation , and especially the question for someone 's rights ( " am I required by law to answer the question " ) is simply not answered in an acceptable fashion.It 's interesting that his question is turned into a refusal to answer - that is not what he does .
I also like the appearance of that eternal dead duck : " if you have nothing to hide " ..I am glad this was taped - these guys need some serious correction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like to find a public statement of what the TSA can and cannot do.
There must be a definition of where the handover takes place between capable officers and these, well, misguided wannabees.
I understand they have a function somewhere (apparently), it's just hard to pin down IMHO.What I hear is someone who has been given special powers having no clue about what his powers are and what are the rights of the people they detain.
This is an incredibly dangerous situation, and especially the question for someone's rights ("am I required by law to answer the question") is simply not answered in an acceptable fashion.It's interesting that his question is turned into a refusal to answer - that is not what he does.
I also like the appearance of that eternal dead duck: "if you have nothing to hide"..I am glad this was taped - these guys need some serious correction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393067</id>
	<title>Re:Good thing it wasn't O'hare</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1245439620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It probably IS a felony in a lot more places than just Illinois.  And, it will soon be a felony in yet more places.  That doesn't change the fact that the law is a worthless turd floating in the toilet of oppressive laws.  Law enforcement should be subject to recording, anytime, and anyplace.  The public pays for law enforcement, the public is entitled to know what law enforcement is doing.  Remember, they work for us, not the other way around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It probably IS a felony in a lot more places than just Illinois .
And , it will soon be a felony in yet more places .
That does n't change the fact that the law is a worthless turd floating in the toilet of oppressive laws .
Law enforcement should be subject to recording , anytime , and anyplace .
The public pays for law enforcement , the public is entitled to know what law enforcement is doing .
Remember , they work for us , not the other way around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It probably IS a felony in a lot more places than just Illinois.
And, it will soon be a felony in yet more places.
That doesn't change the fact that the law is a worthless turd floating in the toilet of oppressive laws.
Law enforcement should be subject to recording, anytime, and anyplace.
The public pays for law enforcement, the public is entitled to know what law enforcement is doing.
Remember, they work for us, not the other way around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392839</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392239</id>
	<title>Re:What took them so long?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245436140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh, it had to happen to someone important and/or with money.</p></div><p>Actually, it took someone with evidence; FTFA: "Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , it had to happen to someone important and/or with money.Actually , it took someone with evidence ; FTFA : " Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, it had to happen to someone important and/or with money.Actually, it took someone with evidence; FTFA: "Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392133</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392423</id>
	<title>Re:$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>lastomega7</author>
	<datestamp>1245436860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>[Citation Nee---<br> <br>Er...<br> <br>Shoot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Citation Nee--- Er... Shoot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Citation Nee--- Er... Shoot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131</id>
	<title>Whoa...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245435720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... a Ron Paul staffer with cash? I thought they all carried gold bouillon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... a Ron Paul staffer with cash ?
I thought they all carried gold bouillon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... a Ron Paul staffer with cash?
I thought they all carried gold bouillon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393119</id>
	<title>Re:$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1245439800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is a mini-version of the CMIR form.  This has been around since the late 90's if not earlier (I first encountered it in 1999). It is for amounts over 3,000.  The bank can require you to fill this out but unlike the CMIR the bank is not required to have you fill this out. I forget the name of the documentation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a mini-version of the CMIR form .
This has been around since the late 90 's if not earlier ( I first encountered it in 1999 ) .
It is for amounts over 3,000 .
The bank can require you to fill this out but unlike the CMIR the bank is not required to have you fill this out .
I forget the name of the documentation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a mini-version of the CMIR form.
This has been around since the late 90's if not earlier (I first encountered it in 1999).
It is for amounts over 3,000.
The bank can require you to fill this out but unlike the CMIR the bank is not required to have you fill this out.
I forget the name of the documentation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393605</id>
	<title>Re:TSA people are not legally informed</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1245441480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I am okay with government security screening, but only as far as their <b>primary mission</b>.</p></div>
</blockquote><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security\_theater" title="wikipedia.org">Theater</a> [wikipedia.org]?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am okay with government security screening , but only as far as their primary mission .
Theater [ wikipedia.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am okay with government security screening, but only as far as their primary mission.
Theater [wikipedia.org]?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392133</id>
	<title>What took them so long?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245435720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, it had to happen to someone important and/or with money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , it had to happen to someone important and/or with money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, it had to happen to someone important and/or with money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392513</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why. - Indeed.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245437340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unless you have an account with a bank, they won't do it.</p></div><p>Not true. I paid a security deposit with a cashier's check I got by walking up to a bank where I did not have an account and handing the teller $2800 in cash. There is a fee involved, though.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I agree carrying that much cash isn't the wisest thing to do, but unfortunately, the way the banks are, cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check, regardless of who issues it, means at least a ten day hold on the funds.</p></div><p>If your bank holds funds you have deposited via check for 10 days, you should get a new bank. I typically have access to funds deposited by check by the next day, two days at the most, without any holds.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you have an account with a bank , they wo n't do it.Not true .
I paid a security deposit with a cashier 's check I got by walking up to a bank where I did not have an account and handing the teller $ 2800 in cash .
There is a fee involved , though.I agree carrying that much cash is n't the wisest thing to do , but unfortunately , the way the banks are , cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check , regardless of who issues it , means at least a ten day hold on the funds.If your bank holds funds you have deposited via check for 10 days , you should get a new bank .
I typically have access to funds deposited by check by the next day , two days at the most , without any holds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you have an account with a bank, they won't do it.Not true.
I paid a security deposit with a cashier's check I got by walking up to a bank where I did not have an account and handing the teller $2800 in cash.
There is a fee involved, though.I agree carrying that much cash isn't the wisest thing to do, but unfortunately, the way the banks are, cash gets an IMMEDIATE credit to your account whereas a check, regardless of who issues it, means at least a ten day hold on the funds.If your bank holds funds you have deposited via check for 10 days, you should get a new bank.
I typically have access to funds deposited by check by the next day, two days at the most, without any holds.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392373</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa...</title>
	<author>Steauengeglase</author>
	<datestamp>1245436680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He was looking for one of those German, gold vending machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He was looking for one of those German , gold vending machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He was looking for one of those German, gold vending machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28404291</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245492180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gold is tasteless.  (That is not a fashion statement.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gold is tasteless .
( That is not a fashion statement .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gold is tasteless.
(That is not a fashion statement.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28428931</id>
	<title>Law enforcement officers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245665160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is any employee of TSA and by virtue that of DHS actually an officer of the law?  I am pretty sure the screeners are not.  However, if they are it would appear that they are doing their job very poorly.</p><p>Some things that truly bother me about these proceedings are)</p><p>1) the staffer was NEVER mirandized<br>2) since such questioning is by nature self incriminating, he was NEVER offered access to counsel, private or public<br>3) since when is carrying around a large sum of cash $4700 indicative of a criminal activity.  That isn't really that much cash in the grand scheme of things.  Maybe he was going to pay for a used car off of ebay?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is any employee of TSA and by virtue that of DHS actually an officer of the law ?
I am pretty sure the screeners are not .
However , if they are it would appear that they are doing their job very poorly.Some things that truly bother me about these proceedings are ) 1 ) the staffer was NEVER mirandized2 ) since such questioning is by nature self incriminating , he was NEVER offered access to counsel , private or public3 ) since when is carrying around a large sum of cash $ 4700 indicative of a criminal activity .
That is n't really that much cash in the grand scheme of things .
Maybe he was going to pay for a used car off of ebay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is any employee of TSA and by virtue that of DHS actually an officer of the law?
I am pretty sure the screeners are not.
However, if they are it would appear that they are doing their job very poorly.Some things that truly bother me about these proceedings are)1) the staffer was NEVER mirandized2) since such questioning is by nature self incriminating, he was NEVER offered access to counsel, private or public3) since when is carrying around a large sum of cash $4700 indicative of a criminal activity.
That isn't really that much cash in the grand scheme of things.
Maybe he was going to pay for a used car off of ebay?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393201</id>
	<title>Re:$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>fast turtle</author>
	<datestamp>1245440100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, if the amount is over $1,000 you are required to report it. That went into effect at the same time that the legislation creating DHS was created.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , if the amount is over $ 1,000 you are required to report it .
That went into effect at the same time that the legislation creating DHS was created .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, if the amount is over $1,000 you are required to report it.
That went into effect at the same time that the legislation creating DHS was created.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396187</id>
	<title>Re:TSA people are not legally informed</title>
	<author>StrawberryFrog</author>
	<datestamp>1245407880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Unfortunately, these TSA knuckle draggers are unable to distinguish reality from fantasy</i></p><p><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/18/1284" title="commondreams.org">Not that it's very uncommon.</a> [commondreams.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , these TSA knuckle draggers are unable to distinguish reality from fantasyNot that it 's very uncommon .
[ commondreams.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, these TSA knuckle draggers are unable to distinguish reality from fantasyNot that it's very uncommon.
[commondreams.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28420263</id>
	<title>Re:Economic Consequences</title>
	<author>Fear the Clam</author>
	<datestamp>1245678420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The intrusive security behavior of the TSA has all kinds of negative economic consequences, discouraging people from flying hurts the airlines, it also makes conducting business harder, and it separates families (with secondary but significant financial consequences). I'm very reluctant to take my family anywhere, it's such a great hassle to have your lunch and medications interrogated and seized.</i></p><p>Yeah, but on the other hand, now I don't mind that my sneakers reek. I just put them in the basket on the conveyor belt with a smile.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The intrusive security behavior of the TSA has all kinds of negative economic consequences , discouraging people from flying hurts the airlines , it also makes conducting business harder , and it separates families ( with secondary but significant financial consequences ) .
I 'm very reluctant to take my family anywhere , it 's such a great hassle to have your lunch and medications interrogated and seized.Yeah , but on the other hand , now I do n't mind that my sneakers reek .
I just put them in the basket on the conveyor belt with a smile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The intrusive security behavior of the TSA has all kinds of negative economic consequences, discouraging people from flying hurts the airlines, it also makes conducting business harder, and it separates families (with secondary but significant financial consequences).
I'm very reluctant to take my family anywhere, it's such a great hassle to have your lunch and medications interrogated and seized.Yeah, but on the other hand, now I don't mind that my sneakers reek.
I just put them in the basket on the conveyor belt with a smile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393473</id>
	<title>New iPhone Ad Possibilities</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245441060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone."</p><p>Need to make a record of your Constitutional rights being violated?<br>There's an app for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone .
" Need to make a record of your Constitutional rights being violated ? There 's an app for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Bierfeldt recorded the audio of the entire incident with his iPhone.
"Need to make a record of your Constitutional rights being violated?There's an app for that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395591</id>
	<title>Re:Economic Consequences</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1245405240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; A lot of what makes America economically appealing and strong is its openness and flexibility.<br><br>Way before the 9/11, my uncle was travelling to Canada, unfortunately for him the plane had some problems, and had to detour and land in the USA. The passengers had to get out of the plane etc.<br><br>The US immigration gave him a lot of hassle because he didn't have a visa to enter the USA. My uncle told them to the effect that he didn't even want to be in their bloody country in the first place! Fortunately he didn't get in big trouble for that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;).<br><br>Now after "9/11", I guess it's even worse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; A lot of what makes America economically appealing and strong is its openness and flexibility.Way before the 9/11 , my uncle was travelling to Canada , unfortunately for him the plane had some problems , and had to detour and land in the USA .
The passengers had to get out of the plane etc.The US immigration gave him a lot of hassle because he did n't have a visa to enter the USA .
My uncle told them to the effect that he did n't even want to be in their bloody country in the first place !
Fortunately he did n't get in big trouble for that ; ) .Now after " 9/11 " , I guess it 's even worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; A lot of what makes America economically appealing and strong is its openness and flexibility.Way before the 9/11, my uncle was travelling to Canada, unfortunately for him the plane had some problems, and had to detour and land in the USA.
The passengers had to get out of the plane etc.The US immigration gave him a lot of hassle because he didn't have a visa to enter the USA.
My uncle told them to the effect that he didn't even want to be in their bloody country in the first place!
Fortunately he didn't get in big trouble for that ;).Now after "9/11", I guess it's even worse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392483</id>
	<title>Re:$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>n00854180t</author>
	<datestamp>1245437220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He was traveling within the US, no?  I know you have to file one for amounts &gt;= $10k when traveling internationally (either arriving or leaving).</htmltext>
<tokenext>He was traveling within the US , no ?
I know you have to file one for amounts &gt; = $ 10k when traveling internationally ( either arriving or leaving ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He was traveling within the US, no?
I know you have to file one for amounts &gt;= $10k when traveling internationally (either arriving or leaving).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398285</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa...</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1245421800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>gold bouillon</i> </p><p>That would really taste awful.</p><p>rj</p></div><p>That food's too rich for me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>gold bouillon That would really taste awful.rjThat food 's too rich for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> gold bouillon That would really taste awful.rjThat food's too rich for me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28406569</id>
	<title>wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245508380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is the world turning into when a man can't walk around with cash without telling the government about it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the world turning into when a man ca n't walk around with cash without telling the government about it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the world turning into when a man can't walk around with cash without telling the government about it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392179</id>
	<title>Choice of cases?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245435900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would they go after a metal box case?  It's the one instance I could see the TSA legitimizing the search saying "we can't see what's in the box with the x-ray machine, could you come here an open it up for us."  Seems like there'd be easier cases with the other abuses in with the TSA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would they go after a metal box case ?
It 's the one instance I could see the TSA legitimizing the search saying " we ca n't see what 's in the box with the x-ray machine , could you come here an open it up for us .
" Seems like there 'd be easier cases with the other abuses in with the TSA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would they go after a metal box case?
It's the one instance I could see the TSA legitimizing the search saying "we can't see what's in the box with the x-ray machine, could you come here an open it up for us.
"  Seems like there'd be easier cases with the other abuses in with the TSA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393303</id>
	<title>Man I love stories like this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245440400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm by no means a Ron Paul supporter, but I love reading about people who actively challenge the system.  For some reason, our citizens have become more and more acclimated to surrendering their rights without question.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm by no means a Ron Paul supporter , but I love reading about people who actively challenge the system .
For some reason , our citizens have become more and more acclimated to surrendering their rights without question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm by no means a Ron Paul supporter, but I love reading about people who actively challenge the system.
For some reason, our citizens have become more and more acclimated to surrendering their rights without question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395735</id>
	<title>I want to know who the cop is-</title>
	<author>purduephotog</author>
	<datestamp>1245405780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>at the end that says "You're free to go".</p><p>That's a man that knows the law.  I admire his statement and his tone of voice.  He listened, asked 1 question, and answered.</p><p>I respect that.</p><p>The jackasses earlier in the audio recording, not so much. They're too shit-full of themselves... and they know they are breaking the law and thus avoid stating so.</p><p>This audio recording is priceless- because without it we'd have no proof.  It's a pity the audio was released now- they should have waited until the court case to display it AFTER the affidavits were taken.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>at the end that says " You 're free to go " .That 's a man that knows the law .
I admire his statement and his tone of voice .
He listened , asked 1 question , and answered.I respect that.The jackasses earlier in the audio recording , not so much .
They 're too shit-full of themselves... and they know they are breaking the law and thus avoid stating so.This audio recording is priceless- because without it we 'd have no proof .
It 's a pity the audio was released now- they should have waited until the court case to display it AFTER the affidavits were taken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>at the end that says "You're free to go".That's a man that knows the law.
I admire his statement and his tone of voice.
He listened, asked 1 question, and answered.I respect that.The jackasses earlier in the audio recording, not so much.
They're too shit-full of themselves... and they know they are breaking the law and thus avoid stating so.This audio recording is priceless- because without it we'd have no proof.
It's a pity the audio was released now- they should have waited until the court case to display it AFTER the affidavits were taken.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392477</id>
	<title>It's a sign</title>
	<author>anonieuweling</author>
	<datestamp>1245437220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That the security theatre is what it is. The country that the USA thinks it is isn't that.<br>
Since 9/11 things haven't changed for the better and Os^Hbama doesn't make change.<br>
Of course we see green shoots so we think it's over and we don't change the system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That the security theatre is what it is .
The country that the USA thinks it is is n't that .
Since 9/11 things have n't changed for the better and Os ^ Hbama does n't make change .
Of course we see green shoots so we think it 's over and we do n't change the system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That the security theatre is what it is.
The country that the USA thinks it is isn't that.
Since 9/11 things haven't changed for the better and Os^Hbama doesn't make change.
Of course we see green shoots so we think it's over and we don't change the system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396727</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1245410520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait awhile.  That $10,000 is already only worth a fraction of what it was when the law was passed.  Give it a bit of time and it will be the cost of a loaf of bread.  (OK, that's probably more time than things will continue relatively stable.  Say, then, the cost of a kitchen chair.)  It's already worth less than a tenth of what it was when I was a kid.  (Prices aren't stable relative to each other, but a coke was a nickel, a loaf of bread was a dime, and a gallon of gas was a quarter. [I'm not saying these were all in the same year.  These are the low prices that I remember.])</p><p>quote:<br>Pepsi-Cola hits the spot<br>12 full ounces, that's a lot<br>Twice as much for a nickel, too<br>Pepsi-Cola is the drink for you.</p><p>(I presume that means that cokes were 6 oz.  I remember that the price was, indeed, a nickel.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait awhile .
That $ 10,000 is already only worth a fraction of what it was when the law was passed .
Give it a bit of time and it will be the cost of a loaf of bread .
( OK , that 's probably more time than things will continue relatively stable .
Say , then , the cost of a kitchen chair .
) It 's already worth less than a tenth of what it was when I was a kid .
( Prices are n't stable relative to each other , but a coke was a nickel , a loaf of bread was a dime , and a gallon of gas was a quarter .
[ I 'm not saying these were all in the same year .
These are the low prices that I remember .
] ) quote : Pepsi-Cola hits the spot12 full ounces , that 's a lotTwice as much for a nickel , tooPepsi-Cola is the drink for you .
( I presume that means that cokes were 6 oz .
I remember that the price was , indeed , a nickel .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait awhile.
That $10,000 is already only worth a fraction of what it was when the law was passed.
Give it a bit of time and it will be the cost of a loaf of bread.
(OK, that's probably more time than things will continue relatively stable.
Say, then, the cost of a kitchen chair.
)  It's already worth less than a tenth of what it was when I was a kid.
(Prices aren't stable relative to each other, but a coke was a nickel, a loaf of bread was a dime, and a gallon of gas was a quarter.
[I'm not saying these were all in the same year.
These are the low prices that I remember.
])quote:Pepsi-Cola hits the spot12 full ounces, that's a lotTwice as much for a nickel, tooPepsi-Cola is the drink for you.
(I presume that means that cokes were 6 oz.
I remember that the price was, indeed, a nickel.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395047</id>
	<title>I worked for the TSA</title>
	<author>AnAdventurer</author>
	<datestamp>1245403200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We NEVER EVER did that kind of stuff. </p><p>
When the screeners (I was in testing) found something it became a L.E.O. issue and they called them over to handle it. I worked at ANC and people forget all the time to take their gun out of their pocket or carry on. It wouldn't even make the local news (You really need to live here to understand that for so many reasons, so I am not going into details) but even those really stupid people did not always get arrested. We just did a local and NCIC check on them and if they were clear they lost their weapon (or it was returned outside the secure area) and everyone went on their way. Go a head ask my why I quite (which is not easy to do) - Sorry I signed 3 different documents saying I wouldn't tell. BUT they have made some improvements "agency" in actual security. (jerks not with standing).</p><p>
Side note: I love going thought the check points and saying "Hey I used to work for the TSA" Then the "Why did you leave?" questions from a Screener. Followed by my "Do you really want me to say in front of all these passengers?" Always good for a laugh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We NEVER EVER did that kind of stuff .
When the screeners ( I was in testing ) found something it became a L.E.O .
issue and they called them over to handle it .
I worked at ANC and people forget all the time to take their gun out of their pocket or carry on .
It would n't even make the local news ( You really need to live here to understand that for so many reasons , so I am not going into details ) but even those really stupid people did not always get arrested .
We just did a local and NCIC check on them and if they were clear they lost their weapon ( or it was returned outside the secure area ) and everyone went on their way .
Go a head ask my why I quite ( which is not easy to do ) - Sorry I signed 3 different documents saying I would n't tell .
BUT they have made some improvements " agency " in actual security .
( jerks not with standing ) .
Side note : I love going thought the check points and saying " Hey I used to work for the TSA " Then the " Why did you leave ?
" questions from a Screener .
Followed by my " Do you really want me to say in front of all these passengers ?
" Always good for a laugh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We NEVER EVER did that kind of stuff.
When the screeners (I was in testing) found something it became a L.E.O.
issue and they called them over to handle it.
I worked at ANC and people forget all the time to take their gun out of their pocket or carry on.
It wouldn't even make the local news (You really need to live here to understand that for so many reasons, so I am not going into details) but even those really stupid people did not always get arrested.
We just did a local and NCIC check on them and if they were clear they lost their weapon (or it was returned outside the secure area) and everyone went on their way.
Go a head ask my why I quite (which is not easy to do) - Sorry I signed 3 different documents saying I wouldn't tell.
BUT they have made some improvements "agency" in actual security.
(jerks not with standing).
Side note: I love going thought the check points and saying "Hey I used to work for the TSA" Then the "Why did you leave?
" questions from a Screener.
Followed by my "Do you really want me to say in front of all these passengers?
" Always good for a laugh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395401</id>
	<title>Re:How forfieture should work</title>
	<author>DavidTC</author>
	<datestamp>1245404460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or, instead, how about you have no damn 'forfeiture' at all?</p><p>
After you're convicted of a crime, the government should be able to sue you of the proceeds from that crime. (And because they've already convicted you, all they have to prove is that specific thing came from that crime, so the bar's still pretty low, but only after a true criminal conviction.)</p><p>
And then they should either give the money to your specific victims, if they exist, or they should put it in a general fund for helping victims of crime.</p><p>
This fund should, obviously, be <b>entirely</b> outside of police control. In fact, the best thing to do might be to have a national fund, or, hell, an actual non-profit organization, or at least a quasi one like the post office. It simply attempts to reimburse people who've been victims of crimes, and don't have any insurance that would cover, the actual cost of the crime, or at least some of it. (Not 'emotional harm'.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , instead , how about you have no damn 'forfeiture ' at all ?
After you 're convicted of a crime , the government should be able to sue you of the proceeds from that crime .
( And because they 've already convicted you , all they have to prove is that specific thing came from that crime , so the bar 's still pretty low , but only after a true criminal conviction .
) And then they should either give the money to your specific victims , if they exist , or they should put it in a general fund for helping victims of crime .
This fund should , obviously , be entirely outside of police control .
In fact , the best thing to do might be to have a national fund , or , hell , an actual non-profit organization , or at least a quasi one like the post office .
It simply attempts to reimburse people who 've been victims of crimes , and do n't have any insurance that would cover , the actual cost of the crime , or at least some of it .
( Not 'emotional harm' .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, instead, how about you have no damn 'forfeiture' at all?
After you're convicted of a crime, the government should be able to sue you of the proceeds from that crime.
(And because they've already convicted you, all they have to prove is that specific thing came from that crime, so the bar's still pretty low, but only after a true criminal conviction.
)
And then they should either give the money to your specific victims, if they exist, or they should put it in a general fund for helping victims of crime.
This fund should, obviously, be entirely outside of police control.
In fact, the best thing to do might be to have a national fund, or, hell, an actual non-profit organization, or at least a quasi one like the post office.
It simply attempts to reimburse people who've been victims of crimes, and don't have any insurance that would cover, the actual cost of the crime, or at least some of it.
(Not 'emotional harm'.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394177</id>
	<title>Re:United States of America v. $124,700</title>
	<author>element-o.p.</author>
	<datestamp>1245443520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That decision was a travesty.  Quote:<p><div class="quote"><p>While the claimants&#226;(TM) explanation for these circumstances may be &#226;oeplausible,&#226;
we think it is unlikely. We therefore conclude that the government proved by a
preponderance of the evidence that the defendant currency was substantially
connected to a narcotics offense.</p></div><p>
They did nothing of the sort.  The dissenting judge did a far, far better job of dissecting the decision than I can, but the gist of it is that, while the circumstances may indeed look like they <i>could</i> be suspicious, there was no evidence proving &quot;beyond a reasonable doubt&quot; that the men involved did anything at all illegal, much less that the money seized was &quot;substantially connected to a narcotics offense.&quot;
<br> <br>
&lt;offtopic&gt;I'm actually looking forward to jury duty next month.  This kind of crap has <i>got</i> to stop.&lt;/offtopic&gt;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That decision was a travesty .
Quote : While the claimants   ( TM ) explanation for these circumstances may be   oeplausible ,   we think it is unlikely .
We therefore conclude that the government proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant currency was substantially connected to a narcotics offense .
They did nothing of the sort .
The dissenting judge did a far , far better job of dissecting the decision than I can , but the gist of it is that , while the circumstances may indeed look like they could be suspicious , there was no evidence proving " beyond a reasonable doubt " that the men involved did anything at all illegal , much less that the money seized was " substantially connected to a narcotics offense .
" I 'm actually looking forward to jury duty next month .
This kind of crap has got to stop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That decision was a travesty.
Quote:While the claimantsâ(TM) explanation for these circumstances may be âoeplausible,â
we think it is unlikely.
We therefore conclude that the government proved by a
preponderance of the evidence that the defendant currency was substantially
connected to a narcotics offense.
They did nothing of the sort.
The dissenting judge did a far, far better job of dissecting the decision than I can, but the gist of it is that, while the circumstances may indeed look like they could be suspicious, there was no evidence proving "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the men involved did anything at all illegal, much less that the money seized was "substantially connected to a narcotics offense.
"
 
I'm actually looking forward to jury duty next month.
This kind of crap has got to stop.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392395</id>
	<title>Source of $$$</title>
	<author>futureb</author>
	<datestamp>1245436800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>About 10 ounces of legalized [ahem] medication.</htmltext>
<tokenext>About 10 ounces of legalized [ ahem ] medication .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About 10 ounces of legalized [ahem] medication.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392697</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245438120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why mod Troll?
<br> <br>
The parent made some good points and sparked a lovely amount of good comment.
<br> <br>
Sometimes I think modders have their heads way up their arses and can't see the trees for the forest.  They did the same thing last night to someone who posted a decent post and generated 185 responses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why mod Troll ?
The parent made some good points and sparked a lovely amount of good comment .
Sometimes I think modders have their heads way up their arses and ca n't see the trees for the forest .
They did the same thing last night to someone who posted a decent post and generated 185 responses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why mod Troll?
The parent made some good points and sparked a lovely amount of good comment.
Sometimes I think modders have their heads way up their arses and can't see the trees for the forest.
They did the same thing last night to someone who posted a decent post and generated 185 responses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396381</id>
	<title>Re:United States of America v. $124,700</title>
	<author>lannocc</author>
	<datestamp>1245408900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I found that to be a very enlightening read, thank you. I find myself siding with the dissenting justice in that piece.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I found that to be a very enlightening read , thank you .
I find myself siding with the dissenting justice in that piece .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found that to be a very enlightening read, thank you.
I find myself siding with the dissenting justice in that piece.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396507</id>
	<title>Ha ha ha ha</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1245409440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you listen to the audio of the incident, you may notice something funny. That is how <i>FAST</i> he was let go once they found out it was political contributions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you listen to the audio of the incident , you may notice something funny .
That is how FAST he was let go once they found out it was political contributions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you listen to the audio of the incident, you may notice something funny.
That is how FAST he was let go once they found out it was political contributions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398159</id>
	<title>I am okay with government security screening</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245420720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as airports are concerned, unless government owns the airport it should not be screening people.  Now I have no problem if an airliner wants to screen people boarding their planes but not the government.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as airports are concerned , unless government owns the airport it should not be screening people .
Now I have no problem if an airliner wants to screen people boarding their planes but not the government .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as airports are concerned, unless government owns the airport it should not be screening people.
Now I have no problem if an airliner wants to screen people boarding their planes but not the government.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396185</id>
	<title>Re:Good thing it wasn't O'hare</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1245407880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is not a foregone conclusion that the evidence would not be admissible. The rule that illegally obtained evidence is not admissible only applies to law enforcement officers. While a private citizen might be separately prosecuted for breaking the law in obtaining the evidence, this does not preclude the evidence from being used in court for other purposes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not a foregone conclusion that the evidence would not be admissible .
The rule that illegally obtained evidence is not admissible only applies to law enforcement officers .
While a private citizen might be separately prosecuted for breaking the law in obtaining the evidence , this does not preclude the evidence from being used in court for other purposes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not a foregone conclusion that the evidence would not be admissible.
The rule that illegally obtained evidence is not admissible only applies to law enforcement officers.
While a private citizen might be separately prosecuted for breaking the law in obtaining the evidence, this does not preclude the evidence from being used in court for other purposes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392839</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393213</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245440100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.</p></div><p>I guess I stuck the proverbial foot into the extra wide mouth <b>that</b> time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate the ACLU with a passion , however and as in this case , they have their uses.I guess I stuck the proverbial foot into the extra wide mouth that time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.I guess I stuck the proverbial foot into the extra wide mouth that time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392809</id>
	<title>Re:Choice of cases?</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1245438600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless the metal was lead or something obscenly thick (not possible if the person carried it) why couldn't they see through it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless the metal was lead or something obscenly thick ( not possible if the person carried it ) why could n't they see through it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless the metal was lead or something obscenly thick (not possible if the person carried it) why couldn't they see through it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392179</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28403289</id>
	<title>I've worried about that myself</title>
	<author>KingAlanI</author>
	<datestamp>1245525840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In short it is called the "CSI Effect"</p><p>I've also consistently noticed that defense lawyers very often come off as slimeballs trying to get an obvious bad guy off the hook<br>I tend to notice that more than the searches and rough interrogations, sometimes they do make a point of chasing down a warrant, and I guess the warrant stuff is sometimes implied.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In short it is called the " CSI Effect " I 've also consistently noticed that defense lawyers very often come off as slimeballs trying to get an obvious bad guy off the hookI tend to notice that more than the searches and rough interrogations , sometimes they do make a point of chasing down a warrant , and I guess the warrant stuff is sometimes implied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In short it is called the "CSI Effect"I've also consistently noticed that defense lawyers very often come off as slimeballs trying to get an obvious bad guy off the hookI tend to notice that more than the searches and rough interrogations, sometimes they do make a point of chasing down a warrant, and I guess the warrant stuff is sometimes implied.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393943</id>
	<title>Re:Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245442740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, that's ONE thing they do.</p><p>How would you feel if they defended a person's right to have an abortion?  (probably good, if you support abortions...)</p><p>But how would you feel if you opposed abortion, and they not only defended the process, but asserted that you should <em>pay</em> for them (by way of taxes)?</p><p>anti-abortion activists have been told that they have made just such an assertion.  And there are other issues as well that many have questioned their stances on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , that 's ONE thing they do.How would you feel if they defended a person 's right to have an abortion ?
( probably good , if you support abortions... ) But how would you feel if you opposed abortion , and they not only defended the process , but asserted that you should pay for them ( by way of taxes ) ? anti-abortion activists have been told that they have made just such an assertion .
And there are other issues as well that many have questioned their stances on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, that's ONE thing they do.How would you feel if they defended a person's right to have an abortion?
(probably good, if you support abortions...)But how would you feel if you opposed abortion, and they not only defended the process, but asserted that you should pay for them (by way of taxes)?anti-abortion activists have been told that they have made just such an assertion.
And there are other issues as well that many have questioned their stances on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394403</id>
	<title>Re:United States of America v. $124,700</title>
	<author>nog\_lorp</author>
	<datestamp>1245444360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God, that is despicable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God , that is despicable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God, that is despicable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393601</id>
	<title>When im on business...</title>
	<author>EkriirkE</author>
	<datestamp>1245441480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't necessarily care when I get to my destination or if I miss my flight (airlines are usually flexible), so when TSA gives me shit I love to give it back...

However, if the trip is personal I try to put on the mindless drone attitude.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't necessarily care when I get to my destination or if I miss my flight ( airlines are usually flexible ) , so when TSA gives me shit I love to give it back.. . However , if the trip is personal I try to put on the mindless drone attitude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't necessarily care when I get to my destination or if I miss my flight (airlines are usually flexible), so when TSA gives me shit I love to give it back...

However, if the trip is personal I try to put on the mindless drone attitude.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa...</title>
	<author>Deadstick</author>
	<datestamp>1245436860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>gold bouillon</i> <p>
That would really taste awful.</p><p>
rj</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>gold bouillon That would really taste awful .
rj</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gold bouillon 
That would really taste awful.
rj</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489</id>
	<title>Is it  still $10,000?</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1245437280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After 9/11 I thought they lowered it to $10.000.</p><p>OK, seriously, I thought they lowered it for international travel to something like $5,000 but I couldn't find confirmation on that.</p><p>I don't think there is a limit for domestic travel BUT it would be wise to declare it with the airlines at least 24 hours before you boarded.  It's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer, or plan your itinerary such that you can miss your flight.</p><p>The bottom line:<br>Unless you are deliberately out to "test the system" you will just make your life miserable with nothing to show for it.  On the other hand, if you are out to test the system and embarrass the TSA then by all means enforce your rights.  Bonus if you have a reporter or better yet a live microphone/broadcasting cellphone with you at the time so people can listen in as its happening.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After 9/11 I thought they lowered it to $ 10.000.OK , seriously , I thought they lowered it for international travel to something like $ 5,000 but I could n't find confirmation on that.I do n't think there is a limit for domestic travel BUT it would be wise to declare it with the airlines at least 24 hours before you boarded .
It 's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer , or plan your itinerary such that you can miss your flight.The bottom line : Unless you are deliberately out to " test the system " you will just make your life miserable with nothing to show for it .
On the other hand , if you are out to test the system and embarrass the TSA then by all means enforce your rights .
Bonus if you have a reporter or better yet a live microphone/broadcasting cellphone with you at the time so people can listen in as its happening .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After 9/11 I thought they lowered it to $10.000.OK, seriously, I thought they lowered it for international travel to something like $5,000 but I couldn't find confirmation on that.I don't think there is a limit for domestic travel BUT it would be wise to declare it with the airlines at least 24 hours before you boarded.
It's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer, or plan your itinerary such that you can miss your flight.The bottom line:Unless you are deliberately out to "test the system" you will just make your life miserable with nothing to show for it.
On the other hand, if you are out to test the system and embarrass the TSA then by all means enforce your rights.
Bonus if you have a reporter or better yet a live microphone/broadcasting cellphone with you at the time so people can listen in as its happening.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392451</id>
	<title>Re:$4,700 doesn't even require a CMIR</title>
	<author>langelgjm</author>
	<datestamp>1245436980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And as you note, a CMIR only apply when you transport over $10k in or out of the U.S. Sounds like the Ron Paul staffer would have been on a domestic flight, so that should not have even been an issue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And as you note , a CMIR only apply when you transport over $ 10k in or out of the U.S. Sounds like the Ron Paul staffer would have been on a domestic flight , so that should not have even been an issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And as you note, a CMIR only apply when you transport over $10k in or out of the U.S. Sounds like the Ron Paul staffer would have been on a domestic flight, so that should not have even been an issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393815</id>
	<title>Re:Is it still $10,000?</title>
	<author>element-o.p.</author>
	<datestamp>1245442260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!<p><div class="quote"><p>I don't think there is a limit for domestic travel BUT it would be wise to declare it with the airlines at least 24 hours before you boarded.</p></div><p>
For the love of everything holy, WHY?!?!?!?  If there is no legal requirement to declare the money, then for what reason would it be wise to declare cash with the airlines before boarding a flight?  Is the passenger sitting next to you or a flight attendent possibly going to have a reasonable fear that you might bludgeon them with a wad of cash?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer...</p></div><p>
From a practical standpoint, maybe so, but why should we, as law-abiding citizens of what was once one of the freest nations in the world, be forced and willing to hand over those freedoms to a thug just because he wears a uniform?!?!?  If I don't have a legal requirement to answer the question, you don't have a legal right to detain me.  <b>PERIOD.</b>  The sooner we as a nation start getting outraged at abuses of power and start standing up for our RIGHTS the sooner we can live in a country we are proud of again.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Unless you are deliberately out to "test the system" you will just make your life miserable with nothing to show for it.</p></div><p>
Maybe.  But maybe Bierfeldt just seized an opportunity that presented itself.  I admire his courage, and hope that, should I ever be in a similar position, I would do likewise.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ! ! ! ! !
! I do n't think there is a limit for domestic travel BUT it would be wise to declare it with the airlines at least 24 hours before you boarded .
For the love of everything holy , WHY ? ! ? ! ? ! ?
If there is no legal requirement to declare the money , then for what reason would it be wise to declare cash with the airlines before boarding a flight ?
Is the passenger sitting next to you or a flight attendent possibly going to have a reasonable fear that you might bludgeon them with a wad of cash ? It 's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer.. . From a practical standpoint , maybe so , but why should we , as law-abiding citizens of what was once one of the freest nations in the world , be forced and willing to hand over those freedoms to a thug just because he wears a uniform ? ! ? ! ?
If I do n't have a legal requirement to answer the question , you do n't have a legal right to detain me .
PERIOD. The sooner we as a nation start getting outraged at abuses of power and start standing up for our RIGHTS the sooner we can live in a country we are proud of again.Unless you are deliberately out to " test the system " you will just make your life miserable with nothing to show for it .
Maybe. But maybe Bierfeldt just seized an opportunity that presented itself .
I admire his courage , and hope that , should I ever be in a similar position , I would do likewise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
!I don't think there is a limit for domestic travel BUT it would be wise to declare it with the airlines at least 24 hours before you boarded.
For the love of everything holy, WHY?!?!?!?
If there is no legal requirement to declare the money, then for what reason would it be wise to declare cash with the airlines before boarding a flight?
Is the passenger sitting next to you or a flight attendent possibly going to have a reasonable fear that you might bludgeon them with a wad of cash?It's also wise from a practical standpoint to either give up your rights and cooperate with the agents asking questions you have a right to not answer...
From a practical standpoint, maybe so, but why should we, as law-abiding citizens of what was once one of the freest nations in the world, be forced and willing to hand over those freedoms to a thug just because he wears a uniform?!?!?
If I don't have a legal requirement to answer the question, you don't have a legal right to detain me.
PERIOD.  The sooner we as a nation start getting outraged at abuses of power and start standing up for our RIGHTS the sooner we can live in a country we are proud of again.Unless you are deliberately out to "test the system" you will just make your life miserable with nothing to show for it.
Maybe.  But maybe Bierfeldt just seized an opportunity that presented itself.
I admire his courage, and hope that, should I ever be in a similar position, I would do likewise.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219</id>
	<title>Why, oh why.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245436080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.</p><p>It is not illegal to carry around large sums of money.  Of course if you do, law enforcement will take it away saying it's drug related and you have to fight to get it back.</p><p>Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate the ACLU with a passion , however and as in this case , they have their uses.It is not illegal to carry around large sums of money .
Of course if you do , law enforcement will take it away saying it 's drug related and you have to fight to get it back.Finally , why did n't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate the ACLU with a passion, however and as in this case, they have their uses.It is not illegal to carry around large sums of money.
Of course if you do, law enforcement will take it away saying it's drug related and you have to fight to get it back.Finally, why didn't he just convert the cash to a money order or cashiers check?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392695</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1245438120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think "gold bouillon" is another name for beer - you know, "liquid bread".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think " gold bouillon " is another name for beer - you know , " liquid bread " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think "gold bouillon" is another name for beer - you know, "liquid bread".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392853
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392483
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392477
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394403
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393587
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393943
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28420263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28404291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28403289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_1438235_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392179
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392243
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393485
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28420263
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393587
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392489
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392745
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392707
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392697
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392527
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392305
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392551
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392327
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392367
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392513
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392477
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393611
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398385
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392951
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395401
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394177
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394403
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395025
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392917
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396187
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28403289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393605
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398159
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392239
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392839
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393067
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28396185
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392415
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28398285
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392719
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28404291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28392695
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28394893
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28393303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_1438235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_1438235.28395047
</commentlist>
</conversation>
