<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_16_165256</id>
	<title>Secret ACTA Treaty May Sport "Internet Enforcement" Procedures After All</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1255713060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Andorin writes <i>"Ars Technica writes about the <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/these-42-people-are-shaping-us-internet-enforcement-policy.ars">recent work on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement</a>, and reveals that while the public does not have access to the text of the agreement, a handful of lawyers representing Big Content and numerous companies and organizations do. 'Turns out that... ACTA will include a section on Internet "enforcement procedures" after all. And how many people have had input on these procedures? Forty-two. ... Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) found out in September that the US Trade Representative's office had actually been secretly canvassing opinions on the Internet section of the agreement from 42 people, all of whom had signed a nondisclosure agreement before being shown the ACTA draft text.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Andorin writes " Ars Technica writes about the recent work on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement , and reveals that while the public does not have access to the text of the agreement , a handful of lawyers representing Big Content and numerous companies and organizations do .
'Turns out that... ACTA will include a section on Internet " enforcement procedures " after all .
And how many people have had input on these procedures ?
Forty-two. ... Knowledge Ecology International ( KEI ) found out in September that the US Trade Representative 's office had actually been secretly canvassing opinions on the Internet section of the agreement from 42 people , all of whom had signed a nondisclosure agreement before being shown the ACTA draft text .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Andorin writes "Ars Technica writes about the recent work on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, and reveals that while the public does not have access to the text of the agreement, a handful of lawyers representing Big Content and numerous companies and organizations do.
'Turns out that... ACTA will include a section on Internet "enforcement procedures" after all.
And how many people have had input on these procedures?
Forty-two. ... Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) found out in September that the US Trade Representative's office had actually been secretly canvassing opinions on the Internet section of the agreement from 42 people, all of whom had signed a nondisclosure agreement before being shown the ACTA draft text.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771041</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1255719960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe you should get involved. You know actually go places and meet people.</p><p>It is our government, and I've seen it in action, i've seen it change, and it does.</p><p>Our founders intended the constitution to be adaptable.<br>States ahve rights, but the politician are afraid they might lose money so they just cave to the feds.<br>That is entirely different then the feds taking away states rights.</p><p>"anti-American flames aimed squarely at me."<br>see, that's your problem. you thing by my government means they should do what you say regardless of what most people want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe you should get involved .
You know actually go places and meet people.It is our government , and I 've seen it in action , i 've seen it change , and it does.Our founders intended the constitution to be adaptable.States ahve rights , but the politician are afraid they might lose money so they just cave to the feds.That is entirely different then the feds taking away states rights .
" anti-American flames aimed squarely at me .
" see , that 's your problem .
you thing by my government means they should do what you say regardless of what most people want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe you should get involved.
You know actually go places and meet people.It is our government, and I've seen it in action, i've seen it change, and it does.Our founders intended the constitution to be adaptable.States ahve rights, but the politician are afraid they might lose money so they just cave to the feds.That is entirely different then the feds taking away states rights.
"anti-American flames aimed squarely at me.
"see, that's your problem.
you thing by my government means they should do what you say regardless of what most people want.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772231</id>
	<title>Re:How has noone leaked this yet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255726320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is an older (2007) version available on <a href="http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Proposed\_US\_ACTA\_multi-lateral\_intellectual\_property\_trade\_agreement\_(2007)" title="wikileaks.org" rel="nofollow">Wikileaks.</a> [wikileaks.org]</p><p>The reason that the newest draft hasn't been leaked is that the only people who have access to it are politicians and greedy corporate lobbyists, and neither group particularly likes freedom of information.  If they were the only ones allowed to watch the Spiderman movies then we wouldn't be able to download those either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is an older ( 2007 ) version available on Wikileaks .
[ wikileaks.org ] The reason that the newest draft has n't been leaked is that the only people who have access to it are politicians and greedy corporate lobbyists , and neither group particularly likes freedom of information .
If they were the only ones allowed to watch the Spiderman movies then we would n't be able to download those either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is an older (2007) version available on Wikileaks.
[wikileaks.org]The reason that the newest draft hasn't been leaked is that the only people who have access to it are politicians and greedy corporate lobbyists, and neither group particularly likes freedom of information.
If they were the only ones allowed to watch the Spiderman movies then we wouldn't be able to download those either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775097</id>
	<title>Re:How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>IonOtter</author>
	<datestamp>1255704900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd keep losing sleep over this if I were you.</p><p>Because they're not going to try and make this into a law on its own?  It'd never survive as a stand-alone bill.</p><p>No, they're going to stuff it into the "Protection of Children Act", right inbetween the "Free Scholarship for African Americans" rider and the "Protection of Elderly Widows Insurance Policy" rider.</p><p>Good luck trying to kill it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd keep losing sleep over this if I were you.Because they 're not going to try and make this into a law on its own ?
It 'd never survive as a stand-alone bill.No , they 're going to stuff it into the " Protection of Children Act " , right inbetween the " Free Scholarship for African Americans " rider and the " Protection of Elderly Widows Insurance Policy " rider.Good luck trying to kill it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd keep losing sleep over this if I were you.Because they're not going to try and make this into a law on its own?
It'd never survive as a stand-alone bill.No, they're going to stuff it into the "Protection of Children Act", right inbetween the "Free Scholarship for African Americans" rider and the "Protection of Elderly Widows Insurance Policy" rider.Good luck trying to kill it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777537</id>
	<title>Re: A Secret Treaty That Will Be Opposed</title>
	<author>gink1</author>
	<datestamp>1255794000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only reasons for making a treaty secret are sensitive military content or to delay protests until the end.
Which could this be?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only reasons for making a treaty secret are sensitive military content or to delay protests until the end .
Which could this be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only reasons for making a treaty secret are sensitive military content or to delay protests until the end.
Which could this be?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774457</id>
	<title>Mass Treason by all htepeople involved</title>
	<author>CHRONOSS2008</author>
	<datestamp>1255698180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hang them period , nothing democratic going on here in the least.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hang them period , nothing democratic going on here in the least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hang them period , nothing democratic going on here in the least.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770441</id>
	<title>So much for transparency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255716960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So much for having a truly transparent administration.  This president operates the same as all the others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So much for having a truly transparent administration .
This president operates the same as all the others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So much for having a truly transparent administration.
This president operates the same as all the others.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771967</id>
	<title>Radicalize (v., trans.)</title>
	<author>Bob9113</author>
	<datestamp>1255724880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>ACTA will include a section on Internet "enforcement procedures" after all.</i></p><p>Dear Imperial Overlords,</p><p>Are you familiar with the term "radicalize"?</p><p>Are you aware that the script kiddies of the world are extremely unskilled?</p><p>Do you really think you control, or can control, the Internet?</p><p>You are guests in our world. Try reading some cypherpunk. Me, I'm interested in other things, but keep this up, and an increasing number in our community will begin to get defensive and protect our community from you interlopers.</p><p>Just the facts, not trying to be a dick or anything.</p><p>Have a good day,</p><p>Bob</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ACTA will include a section on Internet " enforcement procedures " after all.Dear Imperial Overlords,Are you familiar with the term " radicalize " ? Are you aware that the script kiddies of the world are extremely unskilled ? Do you really think you control , or can control , the Internet ? You are guests in our world .
Try reading some cypherpunk .
Me , I 'm interested in other things , but keep this up , and an increasing number in our community will begin to get defensive and protect our community from you interlopers.Just the facts , not trying to be a dick or anything.Have a good day,Bob</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ACTA will include a section on Internet "enforcement procedures" after all.Dear Imperial Overlords,Are you familiar with the term "radicalize"?Are you aware that the script kiddies of the world are extremely unskilled?Do you really think you control, or can control, the Internet?You are guests in our world.
Try reading some cypherpunk.
Me, I'm interested in other things, but keep this up, and an increasing number in our community will begin to get defensive and protect our community from you interlopers.Just the facts, not trying to be a dick or anything.Have a good day,Bob</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771515</id>
	<title>Re:Don't forget about Cybersecurity Act of 2009, t</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1255722360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice. You mean it would be like China shutting various aspects of the Internet for National Day? I have a friend in Shanghai, and it's getting more and more complicated explaining to him why China is bad and the US is better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice .
You mean it would be like China shutting various aspects of the Internet for National Day ?
I have a friend in Shanghai , and it 's getting more and more complicated explaining to him why China is bad and the US is better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice.
You mean it would be like China shutting various aspects of the Internet for National Day?
I have a friend in Shanghai, and it's getting more and more complicated explaining to him why China is bad and the US is better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770957</id>
	<title>What are they hiding?!</title>
	<author>KwKSilver</author>
	<datestamp>1255719540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If ACTA has nothing to hide, why are they hiding.  All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with anti-freedom, corrupt, vile and unconstitutional provisions. What does this pile of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... "stuff"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... do repeal the Bill of Rights and the Magna Carta (insert your nation's equivalent here)? Anyone who values whatever freedom they have should be raising a stink.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If ACTA has nothing to hide , why are they hiding .
All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with anti-freedom , corrupt , vile and unconstitutional provisions .
What does this pile of ... " stuff " ... do repeal the Bill of Rights and the Magna Carta ( insert your nation 's equivalent here ) ?
Anyone who values whatever freedom they have should be raising a stink .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If ACTA has nothing to hide, why are they hiding.
All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with anti-freedom, corrupt, vile and unconstitutional provisions.
What does this pile of ... "stuff" ... do repeal the Bill of Rights and the Magna Carta (insert your nation's equivalent here)?
Anyone who values whatever freedom they have should be raising a stink.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29778433</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255802940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then clearly you support legalizing marijuana and legalized physician assisted euthanasia because some states have passed laws allowing this.  Since you support states rights.</p><p>Bush and the Republicans sure didn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then clearly you support legalizing marijuana and legalized physician assisted euthanasia because some states have passed laws allowing this .
Since you support states rights.Bush and the Republicans sure did n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then clearly you support legalizing marijuana and legalized physician assisted euthanasia because some states have passed laws allowing this.
Since you support states rights.Bush and the Republicans sure didn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771611</id>
	<title>Re:I am definitely not a lawyer...</title>
	<author>Conspiracy\_Of\_Doves</author>
	<datestamp>1255722900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Supposedly we'll be allowed to read it <i>after</i> it's signed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Supposedly we 'll be allowed to read it after it 's signed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Supposedly we'll be allowed to read it after it's signed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770593</id>
	<title>ouch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255717620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Holy shit! I'm having a flashback to the mid-90s... Clinton administration giving away our cable infrastructure to the content monopolies... the death of local ISPs...<br>Its my original realization that the two parties are identical!<br>WOW MAN, its all coming back so FAST<br>Something must have happened shortly after the election of 2000 that completely changed the way I look at government, for roughly eight years.<br>I'm suddenly overcome with a desire to vote for Ralph Nader.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Holy shit !
I 'm having a flashback to the mid-90s... Clinton administration giving away our cable infrastructure to the content monopolies... the death of local ISPs...Its my original realization that the two parties are identical ! WOW MAN , its all coming back so FASTSomething must have happened shortly after the election of 2000 that completely changed the way I look at government , for roughly eight years.I 'm suddenly overcome with a desire to vote for Ralph Nader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Holy shit!
I'm having a flashback to the mid-90s... Clinton administration giving away our cable infrastructure to the content monopolies... the death of local ISPs...Its my original realization that the two parties are identical!WOW MAN, its all coming back so FASTSomething must have happened shortly after the election of 2000 that completely changed the way I look at government, for roughly eight years.I'm suddenly overcome with a desire to vote for Ralph Nader.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772551</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>KidCeltic</author>
	<datestamp>1255684980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, I intended to imply that the flames targeted at me would accuse me of being anti-American.  I apologize for the ambiguity.</p><p>I am encouraged, though, that the majority of replies have been in agreement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , I intended to imply that the flames targeted at me would accuse me of being anti-American .
I apologize for the ambiguity.I am encouraged , though , that the majority of replies have been in agreement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, I intended to imply that the flames targeted at me would accuse me of being anti-American.
I apologize for the ambiguity.I am encouraged, though, that the majority of replies have been in agreement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774607</id>
	<title>Re:How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1255699680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes...after we've already committed ourselves by making a binding international agreement to enforce it.</p><p>Once it's time to vote on it we will have little choice as a nation to reject it without some international repercussions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes...after we 've already committed ourselves by making a binding international agreement to enforce it.Once it 's time to vote on it we will have little choice as a nation to reject it without some international repercussions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes...after we've already committed ourselves by making a binding international agreement to enforce it.Once it's time to vote on it we will have little choice as a nation to reject it without some international repercussions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771077</id>
	<title>Re:How has noone leaked this yet?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1255720080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>since your examples our widely circulate it's not a fair comparison.. I can go to any store, pick up spiderman and put it on a torrent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>since your examples our widely circulate it 's not a fair comparison.. I can go to any store , pick up spiderman and put it on a torrent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>since your examples our widely circulate it's not a fair comparison.. I can go to any store, pick up spiderman and put it on a torrent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777135</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>iamangry</author>
	<datestamp>1255790700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah it'll be up there on Thomas.  For the last five minutes before the vote because no one wants anyone to know what it says until it's too late.  People always get after our Congress for moving so slow.  In situations like this, I think they move too fast.  It is becoming increasingly clear that the checks and balances of our government are buckling and eroding as a result of two parties that have become experts at gaming the system.  The ability of the people to control their government is but a shadow of what the framers designed, for the government has learned how to effectively control the people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah it 'll be up there on Thomas .
For the last five minutes before the vote because no one wants anyone to know what it says until it 's too late .
People always get after our Congress for moving so slow .
In situations like this , I think they move too fast .
It is becoming increasingly clear that the checks and balances of our government are buckling and eroding as a result of two parties that have become experts at gaming the system .
The ability of the people to control their government is but a shadow of what the framers designed , for the government has learned how to effectively control the people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah it'll be up there on Thomas.
For the last five minutes before the vote because no one wants anyone to know what it says until it's too late.
People always get after our Congress for moving so slow.
In situations like this, I think they move too fast.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the checks and balances of our government are buckling and eroding as a result of two parties that have become experts at gaming the system.
The ability of the people to control their government is but a shadow of what the framers designed, for the government has learned how to effectively control the people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771159</id>
	<title>I am definitely not a lawyer...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255720440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but could someone please explain to me how, apart from any concern over contempt of democracy, we are supposed in the future to abide by laws we don't even have the right to read?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but could someone please explain to me how , apart from any concern over contempt of democracy , we are supposed in the future to abide by laws we do n't even have the right to read ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but could someone please explain to me how, apart from any concern over contempt of democracy, we are supposed in the future to abide by laws we don't even have the right to read?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775781</id>
	<title>Mod points...</title>
	<author>eWarz</author>
	<datestamp>1255716240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, i'm going to waste mod points for this.  While this bill is probably over hyped, all I'm going to say is....bring it.  The day you managed to actually step on the average individuals toes will be the day that citizens of our proud country rise up and take back what is rightfully theirs.  Every since laws were repealed that prevented politicians from taking virtual bribes from corporate entities this country (the USA) has been in a downward spiral.  So yes I say, give us a reason.  Give Americans a reason to take back this country from the tyranny that is now our government.  Give us a reason to rise up and take back our freedom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , i 'm going to waste mod points for this .
While this bill is probably over hyped , all I 'm going to say is....bring it .
The day you managed to actually step on the average individuals toes will be the day that citizens of our proud country rise up and take back what is rightfully theirs .
Every since laws were repealed that prevented politicians from taking virtual bribes from corporate entities this country ( the USA ) has been in a downward spiral .
So yes I say , give us a reason .
Give Americans a reason to take back this country from the tyranny that is now our government .
Give us a reason to rise up and take back our freedom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, i'm going to waste mod points for this.
While this bill is probably over hyped, all I'm going to say is....bring it.
The day you managed to actually step on the average individuals toes will be the day that citizens of our proud country rise up and take back what is rightfully theirs.
Every since laws were repealed that prevented politicians from taking virtual bribes from corporate entities this country (the USA) has been in a downward spiral.
So yes I say, give us a reason.
Give Americans a reason to take back this country from the tyranny that is now our government.
Give us a reason to rise up and take back our freedom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770865</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255719000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?</i></p><p>No, and anyone who is could only be motivated by racism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to " sign a non-disclosure agreement " about a proposed law disturbing ? No , and anyone who is could only be motivated by racism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?No, and anyone who is could only be motivated by racism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772031</id>
	<title>Touche</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255725180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If ACTA has nothing to hide, why are they hiding.  All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with anti-freedom, corrupt, vile and unconstitutional provisions.</p></div><p>If Joe Foobar Citizen has nothing to hide, why is he encrypting his emails?  All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with terrorist plans, and corrupt and vile schemes.
<br> <br>See what I did there?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If ACTA has nothing to hide , why are they hiding .
All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with anti-freedom , corrupt , vile and unconstitutional provisions.If Joe Foobar Citizen has nothing to hide , why is he encrypting his emails ?
All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with terrorist plans , and corrupt and vile schemes .
See what I did there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If ACTA has nothing to hide, why are they hiding.
All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with anti-freedom, corrupt, vile and unconstitutional provisions.If Joe Foobar Citizen has nothing to hide, why is he encrypting his emails?
All this secrecy suggests that it is loaded with terrorist plans, and corrupt and vile schemes.
See what I did there?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770655</id>
	<title>Re:How has noone leaked this yet?</title>
	<author>boarder8925</author>
	<datestamp>1255717860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Considering the type of legislation, leaking this sort of thing isn't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.</p></div></blockquote><p>Then you truly are na&#239;ve.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the type of legislation , leaking this sort of thing is n't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.Then you truly are na   ve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering the type of legislation, leaking this sort of thing isn't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.Then you truly are naïve.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774905</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255702560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not a law, this is not even a proposed law, this is a treaty proposal. A treaty does not have force of law, it is merely a contract between nations. It is up to the signatories of the treaty to give it force of law within their individual domains. Expect to see this argument in the near future. "We know that provision X is forbidden by the Constitution, but we SIGNED a treaty, we MUST obey. And so will you... For the good of the treaty provision X must be stricken from the Constitution, there, we will NEVER speak of this again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not a law , this is not even a proposed law , this is a treaty proposal .
A treaty does not have force of law , it is merely a contract between nations .
It is up to the signatories of the treaty to give it force of law within their individual domains .
Expect to see this argument in the near future .
" We know that provision X is forbidden by the Constitution , but we SIGNED a treaty , we MUST obey .
And so will you... For the good of the treaty provision X must be stricken from the Constitution , there , we will NEVER speak of this again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not a law, this is not even a proposed law, this is a treaty proposal.
A treaty does not have force of law, it is merely a contract between nations.
It is up to the signatories of the treaty to give it force of law within their individual domains.
Expect to see this argument in the near future.
"We know that provision X is forbidden by the Constitution, but we SIGNED a treaty, we MUST obey.
And so will you... For the good of the treaty provision X must be stricken from the Constitution, there, we will NEVER speak of this again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771013</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>joeyspqr</author>
	<datestamp>1255719840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> IMHO, the problem with the "stranglehold the Republican and Democratic parties have on the machinery of government" is the result of corporate influence on those parties<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>
"We need to limit federal legislation of states and depend upon each state to make the decisions<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... "<br> <br>

when some corporations have revenue (and sometimes profits) greater than entire nations (<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/business/worldbusiness/01iht-exxon.4.9679416.html" title="nytimes.com">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/business/worldbusiness/01iht-exxon.4.9679416.html</a> [nytimes.com]), state budgets (<a href="http://www.nasbo.org/Publications/PDFs/FSSpring2009.pdf" title="nasbo.org">http://www.nasbo.org/Publications/PDFs/FSSpring2009.pdf</a> [nasbo.org]), and global influence, the various state gov'ts will be immune to this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... how?</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO , the problem with the " stranglehold the Republican and Democratic parties have on the machinery of government " is the result of corporate influence on those parties .. . " We need to limit federal legislation of states and depend upon each state to make the decisions ... " when some corporations have revenue ( and sometimes profits ) greater than entire nations ( http : //www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/business/worldbusiness/01iht-exxon.4.9679416.html [ nytimes.com ] ) , state budgets ( http : //www.nasbo.org/Publications/PDFs/FSSpring2009.pdf [ nasbo.org ] ) , and global influence , the various state gov'ts will be immune to this ... how ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> IMHO, the problem with the "stranglehold the Republican and Democratic parties have on the machinery of government" is the result of corporate influence on those parties ...
"We need to limit federal legislation of states and depend upon each state to make the decisions ... " 

when some corporations have revenue (and sometimes profits) greater than entire nations (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/business/worldbusiness/01iht-exxon.4.9679416.html [nytimes.com]), state budgets (http://www.nasbo.org/Publications/PDFs/FSSpring2009.pdf [nasbo.org]), and global influence, the various state gov'ts will be immune to this ... how?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774695</id>
	<title>Never got to my Robert Anton Wilson</title>
	<author>smchris</author>
	<datestamp>1255700460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many Illuminati are there again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many Illuminati are there again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many Illuminati are there again?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775705</id>
	<title>Re:How has noone leaked this yet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255715100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come on people... there is no such word as noone    It's 'no one'  !!</p><p>You'd think all the literate people on this blog would eventually call people who do this...</p><p>Oh, that's right, Slashdot...  grammer doesn't count, drivel does.</p><p><a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/noone" title="wiktionary.org" rel="nofollow"> noone - Wiktionary</a> [wiktionary.org]</p><p>or</p><p><a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noone" title="merriam-webster.com" rel="nofollow">  noone from Merriam-Webster dictionary</a> [merriam-webster.com]</p><p>word natzy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on people... there is no such word as noone It 's 'no one ' !
! You 'd think all the literate people on this blog would eventually call people who do this...Oh , that 's right , Slashdot... grammer does n't count , drivel does .
noone - Wiktionary [ wiktionary.org ] or noone from Merriam-Webster dictionary [ merriam-webster.com ] word natzy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on people... there is no such word as noone    It's 'no one'  !
!You'd think all the literate people on this blog would eventually call people who do this...Oh, that's right, Slashdot...  grammer doesn't count, drivel does.
noone - Wiktionary [wiktionary.org]or  noone from Merriam-Webster dictionary [merriam-webster.com]word natzy</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435</id>
	<title>Freedom of Information Act</title>
	<author>Akido37</author>
	<datestamp>1255716960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm most curious as to why nobody's yet sued to see a copy of the draft treaty.  It seems that "national security" is a bit of a stretch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm most curious as to why nobody 's yet sued to see a copy of the draft treaty .
It seems that " national security " is a bit of a stretch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm most curious as to why nobody's yet sued to see a copy of the draft treaty.
It seems that "national security" is a bit of a stretch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770873</id>
	<title>ah yes here we go again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255719060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once again the government of the US screws all consumers on purpose and gives away what little rights to media we had left, to big business.  Party affiliation has no meaning once the $ is on the table.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once again the government of the US screws all consumers on purpose and gives away what little rights to media we had left , to big business .
Party affiliation has no meaning once the $ is on the table .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once again the government of the US screws all consumers on purpose and gives away what little rights to media we had left, to big business.
Party affiliation has no meaning once the $ is on the table.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770927</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>nedlohs</author>
	<datestamp>1255719420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You just got a Change(tm), with some free Hope(tm).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You just got a Change ( tm ) , with some free Hope ( tm ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You just got a Change(tm), with some free Hope(tm).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776443</id>
	<title>ACTA will kill free software</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255777620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/acta/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.fsf.org/campaigns/acta/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/acta/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770509</id>
	<title>I for one...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255717320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...do not welcome our new corporatist overlords...</p><p>Oh, wait...they've been screwing us for the past couple of years...now where did I put my gun?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...do not welcome our new corporatist overlords...Oh , wait...they 've been screwing us for the past couple of years...now where did I put my gun ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...do not welcome our new corporatist overlords...Oh, wait...they've been screwing us for the past couple of years...now where did I put my gun?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771235</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1255720800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only thing I could find was HR 1226, which was passed by the Senate on 8/7/97... this may or not have been during the August recess... <br> <br>HR 1226 made it illegal for IRS employees to "browse" tax returns.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing I could find was HR 1226 , which was passed by the Senate on 8/7/97... this may or not have been during the August recess... HR 1226 made it illegal for IRS employees to " browse " tax returns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing I could find was HR 1226, which was passed by the Senate on 8/7/97... this may or not have been during the August recess...  HR 1226 made it illegal for IRS employees to "browse" tax returns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770535</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770707</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>pwizard2</author>
	<datestamp>1255718160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think voting is going to be enough at this stage. I agree that the federal government needs to have its power diminished severely and be given back to the states. The problem is that most career politicians see big government as a way to increase their own wealth and personal power, and these people have built such safe districts for themselves that the chances of getting them voted out are slim to nil unless they do something bad enough to wake up the average uninformed voter. At this point, I'm afraid that the only way to save our country is with a revolution. People everywhere are certainly getting angry enough for something like that to happen, and their motivations stem from a true grassroots movement with no party involvement.</p><p>I know that there are some people here who love big government and are going to disagree with me, but so be it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think voting is going to be enough at this stage .
I agree that the federal government needs to have its power diminished severely and be given back to the states .
The problem is that most career politicians see big government as a way to increase their own wealth and personal power , and these people have built such safe districts for themselves that the chances of getting them voted out are slim to nil unless they do something bad enough to wake up the average uninformed voter .
At this point , I 'm afraid that the only way to save our country is with a revolution .
People everywhere are certainly getting angry enough for something like that to happen , and their motivations stem from a true grassroots movement with no party involvement.I know that there are some people here who love big government and are going to disagree with me , but so be it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think voting is going to be enough at this stage.
I agree that the federal government needs to have its power diminished severely and be given back to the states.
The problem is that most career politicians see big government as a way to increase their own wealth and personal power, and these people have built such safe districts for themselves that the chances of getting them voted out are slim to nil unless they do something bad enough to wake up the average uninformed voter.
At this point, I'm afraid that the only way to save our country is with a revolution.
People everywhere are certainly getting angry enough for something like that to happen, and their motivations stem from a true grassroots movement with no party involvement.I know that there are some people here who love big government and are going to disagree with me, but so be it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770653</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>aicrules</author>
	<datestamp>1255717860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree.  Though some state governments are almost as big and out of touch as the federal government with large parts of their constituency, there are no cases where the federal government is more in touch.  Hopefully that will provide a small buffer between you and the flames.  Actually, I'm not sure why you think you'll get flamed...unless it's by people who think that an equal measure of push back should happen at the state and local government levels who feel left out of your argument.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Though some state governments are almost as big and out of touch as the federal government with large parts of their constituency , there are no cases where the federal government is more in touch .
Hopefully that will provide a small buffer between you and the flames .
Actually , I 'm not sure why you think you 'll get flamed...unless it 's by people who think that an equal measure of push back should happen at the state and local government levels who feel left out of your argument .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Though some state governments are almost as big and out of touch as the federal government with large parts of their constituency, there are no cases where the federal government is more in touch.
Hopefully that will provide a small buffer between you and the flames.
Actually, I'm not sure why you think you'll get flamed...unless it's by people who think that an equal measure of push back should happen at the state and local government levels who feel left out of your argument.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775737</id>
	<title>Re:How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>MacWiz</author>
	<datestamp>1255715640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i><br>I am no government scholar, but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public.</i></p><p>And spoil the whole Kafkaesque plan they have? Arrest (or fine) people for violating a law that they aren't allow to know about. It's like they're trying to do a real-life mash-up of Orwell's <i>1984</i>, Kafka's <i>The Trial</i> and Heinlein's <i>Fahrenheit 451</i>.</p><p>Seriously, though, I suppose this is why the RIAA's lobbying expenses more than tripled last year (compared to any other year since 1998) and are going to be right up there again this year. (Source: opensecrets.org)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am no government scholar , but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public.And spoil the whole Kafkaesque plan they have ?
Arrest ( or fine ) people for violating a law that they are n't allow to know about .
It 's like they 're trying to do a real-life mash-up of Orwell 's 1984 , Kafka 's The Trial and Heinlein 's Fahrenheit 451.Seriously , though , I suppose this is why the RIAA 's lobbying expenses more than tripled last year ( compared to any other year since 1998 ) and are going to be right up there again this year .
( Source : opensecrets.org )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am no government scholar, but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public.And spoil the whole Kafkaesque plan they have?
Arrest (or fine) people for violating a law that they aren't allow to know about.
It's like they're trying to do a real-life mash-up of Orwell's 1984, Kafka's The Trial and Heinlein's Fahrenheit 451.Seriously, though, I suppose this is why the RIAA's lobbying expenses more than tripled last year (compared to any other year since 1998) and are going to be right up there again this year.
(Source: opensecrets.org)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777773</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom of Information Act</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1255796400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. National security fits perfectly. But as a reason why you demand the document!<br>What else if not national security and the freedom of all people is it that ACTA is an attack on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
National security fits perfectly .
But as a reason why you demand the document ! What else if not national security and the freedom of all people is it that ACTA is an attack on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
National security fits perfectly.
But as a reason why you demand the document!What else if not national security and the freedom of all people is it that ACTA is an attack on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770535</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>TheCarp</author>
	<datestamp>1255717380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking of....</p><p>I CLEARLY remember an emergency session being called right after they went into recess a few years back (4-8 years ago I believe) because they passed a budget that contained a provision that removed privacy protections from tax return information.... and of course.... nobody read the bill.</p><p>Of course, as much as many hate the idea, it could be REALLY BAD for political figures, big businessmen etc, so they held an emergency summer session, and fixed it.</p><p>Anyway, I clearly remember it.... maybe my brain is broken in a way that makes it not interface seamlessly with google, but I can't find a single article or reference to this incident, which is too bad, because it is a link that could be really useful in say.... discussions like this.</p><p>Anyone remember this? Anyone have a link?</p><p>-Steve</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking of....I CLEARLY remember an emergency session being called right after they went into recess a few years back ( 4-8 years ago I believe ) because they passed a budget that contained a provision that removed privacy protections from tax return information.... and of course.... nobody read the bill.Of course , as much as many hate the idea , it could be REALLY BAD for political figures , big businessmen etc , so they held an emergency summer session , and fixed it.Anyway , I clearly remember it.... maybe my brain is broken in a way that makes it not interface seamlessly with google , but I ca n't find a single article or reference to this incident , which is too bad , because it is a link that could be really useful in say.... discussions like this.Anyone remember this ?
Anyone have a link ? -Steve</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking of....I CLEARLY remember an emergency session being called right after they went into recess a few years back (4-8 years ago I believe) because they passed a budget that contained a provision that removed privacy protections from tax return information.... and of course.... nobody read the bill.Of course, as much as many hate the idea, it could be REALLY BAD for political figures, big businessmen etc, so they held an emergency summer session, and fixed it.Anyway, I clearly remember it.... maybe my brain is broken in a way that makes it not interface seamlessly with google, but I can't find a single article or reference to this incident, which is too bad, because it is a link that could be really useful in say.... discussions like this.Anyone remember this?
Anyone have a link?-Steve</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771487</id>
	<title>Re:No Mainstream Media Coverage</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1255722180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The major news corporations report the news that they think will get them viewers, readers or listeners. The only possible conclusion from this is that not enough people in the US are interested in that kind of news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The major news corporations report the news that they think will get them viewers , readers or listeners .
The only possible conclusion from this is that not enough people in the US are interested in that kind of news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The major news corporations report the news that they think will get them viewers, readers or listeners.
The only possible conclusion from this is that not enough people in the US are interested in that kind of news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771629</id>
	<title>Re:How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1255722960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So by the time the democracy part actually happens the negotiations are finalized and it's just a "take it or leave it" situation? I say screw that tradition and give us openness and accountability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So by the time the democracy part actually happens the negotiations are finalized and it 's just a " take it or leave it " situation ?
I say screw that tradition and give us openness and accountability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So by the time the democracy part actually happens the negotiations are finalized and it's just a "take it or leave it" situation?
I say screw that tradition and give us openness and accountability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772099</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255725480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"States' Rights" these days are always a smokescreen for some other issue, rallied around by people who wanted to use the federal system to force something and discovered that the feds actually don't have the power to do that - but that they could get a lot of individual states to go their desired way. You may think you, personally, "get it" and have only the bests interests of citizens in mind, but the big names that push for the States don't give a damn and are merely picking the most convenient rallying cry to support their ulterior motive.</p><p>I do find it funny, though, that you try to tie the Founders to your opinions. You should perhaps review US history some more; all the powers the federal government has, it has because our *first* attempt, in which the states had those powers, was a complete failure. The same Founders who were revolutionaries, the same Founders of the failed version, are the Founders of the successful version we're still using today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" States ' Rights " these days are always a smokescreen for some other issue , rallied around by people who wanted to use the federal system to force something and discovered that the feds actually do n't have the power to do that - but that they could get a lot of individual states to go their desired way .
You may think you , personally , " get it " and have only the bests interests of citizens in mind , but the big names that push for the States do n't give a damn and are merely picking the most convenient rallying cry to support their ulterior motive.I do find it funny , though , that you try to tie the Founders to your opinions .
You should perhaps review US history some more ; all the powers the federal government has , it has because our * first * attempt , in which the states had those powers , was a complete failure .
The same Founders who were revolutionaries , the same Founders of the failed version , are the Founders of the successful version we 're still using today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"States' Rights" these days are always a smokescreen for some other issue, rallied around by people who wanted to use the federal system to force something and discovered that the feds actually don't have the power to do that - but that they could get a lot of individual states to go their desired way.
You may think you, personally, "get it" and have only the bests interests of citizens in mind, but the big names that push for the States don't give a damn and are merely picking the most convenient rallying cry to support their ulterior motive.I do find it funny, though, that you try to tie the Founders to your opinions.
You should perhaps review US history some more; all the powers the federal government has, it has because our *first* attempt, in which the states had those powers, was a complete failure.
The same Founders who were revolutionaries, the same Founders of the failed version, are the Founders of the successful version we're still using today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771655</id>
	<title>Re:Don't forget about Cybersecurity Act of 2009, t</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1255723080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kidnapping two people is enough <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October\_crisis" title="wikipedia.org">where I come from</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kidnapping two people is enough where I come from [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kidnapping two people is enough where I come from [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771107</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871</id>
	<title>Re:How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255719000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's actually a fairly old tradition that treaties are negotiated in secret.  In most democracies, that's not supposed to be the point at which things are scrutinized.  It's when you bring the treaty back that whatever branch of government responsible for ratifying the treaty does so and then the legislative branch passes laws to enact the treaty.</p><p>That's why I'm not exactly losing sleep yet.  Before most countries sign on to it, there's going to have to be a debate.  Even in the UK, where the Queen technically is the ratifier, an Act of Parliament is required, and her ratification is going to be based on the advice of Her Ministers.  In the US, the Senate does the ratification, so the terms are going to be heard anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually a fairly old tradition that treaties are negotiated in secret .
In most democracies , that 's not supposed to be the point at which things are scrutinized .
It 's when you bring the treaty back that whatever branch of government responsible for ratifying the treaty does so and then the legislative branch passes laws to enact the treaty.That 's why I 'm not exactly losing sleep yet .
Before most countries sign on to it , there 's going to have to be a debate .
Even in the UK , where the Queen technically is the ratifier , an Act of Parliament is required , and her ratification is going to be based on the advice of Her Ministers .
In the US , the Senate does the ratification , so the terms are going to be heard anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually a fairly old tradition that treaties are negotiated in secret.
In most democracies, that's not supposed to be the point at which things are scrutinized.
It's when you bring the treaty back that whatever branch of government responsible for ratifying the treaty does so and then the legislative branch passes laws to enact the treaty.That's why I'm not exactly losing sleep yet.
Before most countries sign on to it, there's going to have to be a debate.
Even in the UK, where the Queen technically is the ratifier, an Act of Parliament is required, and her ratification is going to be based on the advice of Her Ministers.
In the US, the Senate does the ratification, so the terms are going to be heard anyways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770481</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom of Information Act</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255717080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any more of a stretch than it was during the Bush administration's hiding behind "national security" for 8 long years of freedom-strangling efforts around the world? Nah, I don't think so...</p><p>Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. You got fooled againnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any more of a stretch than it was during the Bush administration 's hiding behind " national security " for 8 long years of freedom-strangling efforts around the world ?
Nah , I do n't think so...Meet the new boss , same as the old boss .
You got fooled againnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any more of a stretch than it was during the Bush administration's hiding behind "national security" for 8 long years of freedom-strangling efforts around the world?
Nah, I don't think so...Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
You got fooled againnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559</id>
	<title>How has noone leaked this yet?</title>
	<author>Hadlock</author>
	<datestamp>1255717500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$100 to the first person to post the fully draft here or on wikileaks. Seriously we can leak SpiderMan movies, crack supposedly uncrackable digital encryption schemes and share giant files, but nobody is willing to post perhaps 60kb of text? IANAL but, Considering the type of legislation, leaking this sort of thing isn't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 100 to the first person to post the fully draft here or on wikileaks .
Seriously we can leak SpiderMan movies , crack supposedly uncrackable digital encryption schemes and share giant files , but nobody is willing to post perhaps 60kb of text ?
IANAL but , Considering the type of legislation , leaking this sort of thing is n't likely to follow with litigation against the mole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$100 to the first person to post the fully draft here or on wikileaks.
Seriously we can leak SpiderMan movies, crack supposedly uncrackable digital encryption schemes and share giant files, but nobody is willing to post perhaps 60kb of text?
IANAL but, Considering the type of legislation, leaking this sort of thing isn't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774669</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255700220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure he meant the adjective "anti-american" to apply to to him and not the flame. i.e. that people would flame him for being anti-american.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure he meant the adjective " anti-american " to apply to to him and not the flame .
i.e. that people would flame him for being anti-american .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure he meant the adjective "anti-american" to apply to to him and not the flame.
i.e. that people would flame him for being anti-american.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770885</id>
	<title>Hitchhiker's Guide...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255719180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I really the first one to point out the obvious reference to "42" and the "Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy"?  "42" is the answer to everything, you know (it worked surprisingly often in calculus).</p><p>Or did I just miss an earlier reference...?</p><p>-JJS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I really the first one to point out the obvious reference to " 42 " and the " Hitchiker 's Guide to the Galaxy " ?
" 42 " is the answer to everything , you know ( it worked surprisingly often in calculus ) .Or did I just miss an earlier reference... ? -JJS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I really the first one to point out the obvious reference to "42" and the "Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy"?
"42" is the answer to everything, you know (it worked surprisingly often in calculus).Or did I just miss an earlier reference...?-JJS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771547</id>
	<title>Re:Don't forget about Cybersecurity Act of 2009, t</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1255722480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm just wondering what would constitute an emergency that's not political suicide. 9/11-style attack? North Korea launching nukes towards Alaska? Kiddy-porn? Note that I'm not even bringing up child abuse, because apparently downloading of child pornography is much worse than the creation child pornography.</p><p>Sorry, I can't think of a reason where the free flow of information would present a risk to national security.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm just wondering what would constitute an emergency that 's not political suicide .
9/11-style attack ?
North Korea launching nukes towards Alaska ?
Kiddy-porn ? Note that I 'm not even bringing up child abuse , because apparently downloading of child pornography is much worse than the creation child pornography.Sorry , I ca n't think of a reason where the free flow of information would present a risk to national security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm just wondering what would constitute an emergency that's not political suicide.
9/11-style attack?
North Korea launching nukes towards Alaska?
Kiddy-porn? Note that I'm not even bringing up child abuse, because apparently downloading of child pornography is much worse than the creation child pornography.Sorry, I can't think of a reason where the free flow of information would present a risk to national security.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771107</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772457</id>
	<title>Sure why not</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1255684440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Freedom wasn't so great anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Freedom was n't so great anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Freedom wasn't so great anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770615</id>
	<title>Looking at the list..</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1255717740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see 36 people who one one at all would miss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see 36 people who one one at all would miss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see 36 people who one one at all would miss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771107</id>
	<title>Re:Don't forget about Cybersecurity Act of 2009, t</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1255720260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guess what?</p><p>The president has the authority to shut down every think else in the event of an emergence.<br>How many times ahs the president shut down a freeway? Airline traffic? phones?</p><p>Not very often. It would be political suicide to shut down anything where there isn't a clear public emergency that impacts specifically whatever he is shutting down.</p><p>Yes, t should be open. Lets not get paranoid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess what ? The president has the authority to shut down every think else in the event of an emergence.How many times ahs the president shut down a freeway ?
Airline traffic ?
phones ? Not very often .
It would be political suicide to shut down anything where there is n't a clear public emergency that impacts specifically whatever he is shutting down.Yes , t should be open .
Lets not get paranoid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess what?The president has the authority to shut down every think else in the event of an emergence.How many times ahs the president shut down a freeway?
Airline traffic?
phones?Not very often.
It would be political suicide to shut down anything where there isn't a clear public emergency that impacts specifically whatever he is shutting down.Yes, t should be open.
Lets not get paranoid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770665</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>Wowsers</author>
	<datestamp>1255717980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They want to send the Internet back to 42BC.... (basterdised content).</p><p>All they see is (devalued) Dollars, and (devalued) Euros in front of their eyes.</p><p>The uneducated politicians pander to these people, because they give out campaign contributions / BIG brown envelopes. Maybe we should start demanding politicians with REAL degrees who understand the REAL world, not worthless cr@p subjects like English, law, art, history that politicians seem to specialise in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They want to send the Internet back to 42BC.... ( basterdised content ) .All they see is ( devalued ) Dollars , and ( devalued ) Euros in front of their eyes.The uneducated politicians pander to these people , because they give out campaign contributions / BIG brown envelopes .
Maybe we should start demanding politicians with REAL degrees who understand the REAL world , not worthless cr @ p subjects like English , law , art , history that politicians seem to specialise in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They want to send the Internet back to 42BC.... (basterdised content).All they see is (devalued) Dollars, and (devalued) Euros in front of their eyes.The uneducated politicians pander to these people, because they give out campaign contributions / BIG brown envelopes.
Maybe we should start demanding politicians with REAL degrees who understand the REAL world, not worthless cr@p subjects like English, law, art, history that politicians seem to specialise in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</id>
	<title>have you seen my representative government lately?</title>
	<author>KidCeltic</author>
	<datestamp>1255717380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love my country, I hate my government (because it is no longer "my" government).  We need a change.  We need to break the stranglehold the Republican and Democratic parties have on the machinery of government.  We need the populous to wake up and act...vote.  Vote for repealing rights that the federal government has usurped from the state governments.  We need to limit federal legislation of states and depend upon each state to make the decisions that affect the people that they know better than the federal government (you know, they way our founders intended it to be).  I'm going to stop here and get ready for the onslaught of all of the knee-jerk, anti-American flames aimed squarely at me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love my country , I hate my government ( because it is no longer " my " government ) .
We need a change .
We need to break the stranglehold the Republican and Democratic parties have on the machinery of government .
We need the populous to wake up and act...vote .
Vote for repealing rights that the federal government has usurped from the state governments .
We need to limit federal legislation of states and depend upon each state to make the decisions that affect the people that they know better than the federal government ( you know , they way our founders intended it to be ) .
I 'm going to stop here and get ready for the onslaught of all of the knee-jerk , anti-American flames aimed squarely at me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love my country, I hate my government (because it is no longer "my" government).
We need a change.
We need to break the stranglehold the Republican and Democratic parties have on the machinery of government.
We need the populous to wake up and act...vote.
Vote for repealing rights that the federal government has usurped from the state governments.
We need to limit federal legislation of states and depend upon each state to make the decisions that affect the people that they know better than the federal government (you know, they way our founders intended it to be).
I'm going to stop here and get ready for the onslaught of all of the knee-jerk, anti-American flames aimed squarely at me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763</id>
	<title>Don't forget about Cybersecurity Act of 2009, too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255718460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That bill would allow the President to shut down the private internet in the event of an emergency--a phrase so broad as to allow any excuse he chooses--along with unrestricted access to data by the Secretary of Commerce under regular conditions.  The EFF has an informative <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/cybersecurity-act" title="eff.org">overview</a> [eff.org] of the legislation.  It's currently in a committee, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored.  Thankfully, the EFF has done a good job of keeping an eye on things like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That bill would allow the President to shut down the private internet in the event of an emergency--a phrase so broad as to allow any excuse he chooses--along with unrestricted access to data by the Secretary of Commerce under regular conditions .
The EFF has an informative overview [ eff.org ] of the legislation .
It 's currently in a committee , but that does n't mean it should be ignored .
Thankfully , the EFF has done a good job of keeping an eye on things like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That bill would allow the President to shut down the private internet in the event of an emergency--a phrase so broad as to allow any excuse he chooses--along with unrestricted access to data by the Secretary of Commerce under regular conditions.
The EFF has an informative overview [eff.org] of the legislation.
It's currently in a committee, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored.
Thankfully, the EFF has done a good job of keeping an eye on things like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770859</id>
	<title>Failure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255719000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly, the blame for this thing goes to everyone. You, me, Big-Content, our elected* Representatives, our 'bought' representatives... It spans across industries, from tech giants like Microsoft, and Google Inc. , to supermarket chains and hobby shops.</p><p>Ultimately, this breaks down to ideological differences on the future of information, and 'Copyrighted Content' (not mutually exclusive by any degree), and whether Capitalism, or Corporatism if you prefer, should remain superior to the rights of the public, and private citizen.</p><p>I could argue on end about how this really started when Corporations were given the same, and possibly more, legal rights than the individual citizen, but dissecting the historical evolution of this actually does a disservice, and distracts from the present.</p><p>The simple fact is, the rights of the individual citizen, be it public or private, if left up to the wills of the legal arm of the Corporate puppeteer, will be made subservient in every sector of society for the foreseeable future. Yes to a degree, that is the case now, but in the near future, any attempts to route, subvert, or even object the will of those who we so gladly pay of incomes to, will bring forth the hammer of the gavel to such degrees, that even infants won't escape innocence.</p><p>You've been warned before, and I warn you now. YOUR future is slipping away! Do you even recognize that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , the blame for this thing goes to everyone .
You , me , Big-Content , our elected * Representatives , our 'bought ' representatives... It spans across industries , from tech giants like Microsoft , and Google Inc. , to supermarket chains and hobby shops.Ultimately , this breaks down to ideological differences on the future of information , and 'Copyrighted Content ' ( not mutually exclusive by any degree ) , and whether Capitalism , or Corporatism if you prefer , should remain superior to the rights of the public , and private citizen.I could argue on end about how this really started when Corporations were given the same , and possibly more , legal rights than the individual citizen , but dissecting the historical evolution of this actually does a disservice , and distracts from the present.The simple fact is , the rights of the individual citizen , be it public or private , if left up to the wills of the legal arm of the Corporate puppeteer , will be made subservient in every sector of society for the foreseeable future .
Yes to a degree , that is the case now , but in the near future , any attempts to route , subvert , or even object the will of those who we so gladly pay of incomes to , will bring forth the hammer of the gavel to such degrees , that even infants wo n't escape innocence.You 've been warned before , and I warn you now .
YOUR future is slipping away !
Do you even recognize that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, the blame for this thing goes to everyone.
You, me, Big-Content, our elected* Representatives, our 'bought' representatives... It spans across industries, from tech giants like Microsoft, and Google Inc. , to supermarket chains and hobby shops.Ultimately, this breaks down to ideological differences on the future of information, and 'Copyrighted Content' (not mutually exclusive by any degree), and whether Capitalism, or Corporatism if you prefer, should remain superior to the rights of the public, and private citizen.I could argue on end about how this really started when Corporations were given the same, and possibly more, legal rights than the individual citizen, but dissecting the historical evolution of this actually does a disservice, and distracts from the present.The simple fact is, the rights of the individual citizen, be it public or private, if left up to the wills of the legal arm of the Corporate puppeteer, will be made subservient in every sector of society for the foreseeable future.
Yes to a degree, that is the case now, but in the near future, any attempts to route, subvert, or even object the will of those who we so gladly pay of incomes to, will bring forth the hammer of the gavel to such degrees, that even infants won't escape innocence.You've been warned before, and I warn you now.
YOUR future is slipping away!
Do you even recognize that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776043</id>
	<title>Re:Don't forget about Cybersecurity Act of 2009, t</title>
	<author>plasmacutter</author>
	<datestamp>1255722540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand what the issue is with shutting down the internet in the case of an emergency.</p><p>We have tremendous infrastructure vital to our economy and the logistics of daily living.  I'd much rather have no WoW for a week or two than have our national infrastructure twisted in knots by a devastating cyber attack which could have been stopped by simply "blowing the bridge".</p><p>The internet is not just a conduit for speech, and it's also not the SOLE conduit for speech by far.</p><p>I had always assumed the military had the capacity to pull the plug on the intertubes before this was brought up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand what the issue is with shutting down the internet in the case of an emergency.We have tremendous infrastructure vital to our economy and the logistics of daily living .
I 'd much rather have no WoW for a week or two than have our national infrastructure twisted in knots by a devastating cyber attack which could have been stopped by simply " blowing the bridge " .The internet is not just a conduit for speech , and it 's also not the SOLE conduit for speech by far.I had always assumed the military had the capacity to pull the plug on the intertubes before this was brought up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand what the issue is with shutting down the internet in the case of an emergency.We have tremendous infrastructure vital to our economy and the logistics of daily living.
I'd much rather have no WoW for a week or two than have our national infrastructure twisted in knots by a devastating cyber attack which could have been stopped by simply "blowing the bridge".The internet is not just a conduit for speech, and it's also not the SOLE conduit for speech by far.I had always assumed the military had the capacity to pull the plug on the intertubes before this was brought up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770777</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>spun</author>
	<datestamp>1255718520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm going to stop here and get ready for the onslaught of all of the knee-jerk, anti-American flames aimed squarely at me.</p></div><p>So what you are saying is that any criticism of your ideas must not be well thought out, and must be anti-American. Wow.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to stop here and get ready for the onslaught of all of the knee-jerk , anti-American flames aimed squarely at me.So what you are saying is that any criticism of your ideas must not be well thought out , and must be anti-American .
Wow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to stop here and get ready for the onslaught of all of the knee-jerk, anti-American flames aimed squarely at me.So what you are saying is that any criticism of your ideas must not be well thought out, and must be anti-American.
Wow.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772003</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>clem.dickey</author>
	<datestamp>1255725060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?</i>

</p><p>How does the government prosecute someone who broke the law? Make the jury sign NDAs? Or maybe use a military court?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to " sign a non-disclosure agreement " about a proposed law disturbing ?
How does the government prosecute someone who broke the law ?
Make the jury sign NDAs ?
Or maybe use a military court ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?
How does the government prosecute someone who broke the law?
Make the jury sign NDAs?
Or maybe use a military court?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770469</id>
	<title>The number is... 42?</title>
	<author>sys.stdout.write</author>
	<datestamp>1255717020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Coincidence?!<br> <br>
Yes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Coincidence ? !
Yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coincidence?!
Yes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770849</id>
	<title>Re:How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>langelgjm</author>
	<datestamp>1255718940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty' make it substantially different?</p></div><p>Yes. It wouldn't become law until ratified by the Senate, and they are still in the stages of negotiating the draft text. Right now it's just a piece of paper, which apparently no one is allowed to see, despite FOIAs that have been filed, because both administrations have argued it's a matter of "national security." That's BS of course; the real reason is probably a combination of 1) public interest groups wouldn't like what was in the draft and 2) parties involved in the negotiation feel that opening up a draft text will impede honest negotiations.</p><p>Both of those are probably true, however I think that fewer people would be up in arms of the secrecy of the draft text if some public interest groups were among the stakeholders allowed to see it. As it stands now, the groups being allowed to see it are not at all representative.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty ' make it substantially different ? Yes .
It would n't become law until ratified by the Senate , and they are still in the stages of negotiating the draft text .
Right now it 's just a piece of paper , which apparently no one is allowed to see , despite FOIAs that have been filed , because both administrations have argued it 's a matter of " national security .
" That 's BS of course ; the real reason is probably a combination of 1 ) public interest groups would n't like what was in the draft and 2 ) parties involved in the negotiation feel that opening up a draft text will impede honest negotiations.Both of those are probably true , however I think that fewer people would be up in arms of the secrecy of the draft text if some public interest groups were among the stakeholders allowed to see it .
As it stands now , the groups being allowed to see it are not at all representative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty' make it substantially different?Yes.
It wouldn't become law until ratified by the Senate, and they are still in the stages of negotiating the draft text.
Right now it's just a piece of paper, which apparently no one is allowed to see, despite FOIAs that have been filed, because both administrations have argued it's a matter of "national security.
" That's BS of course; the real reason is probably a combination of 1) public interest groups wouldn't like what was in the draft and 2) parties involved in the negotiation feel that opening up a draft text will impede honest negotiations.Both of those are probably true, however I think that fewer people would be up in arms of the secrecy of the draft text if some public interest groups were among the stakeholders allowed to see it.
As it stands now, the groups being allowed to see it are not at all representative.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29778075</id>
	<title>Re:No Mainstream Media Coverage</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1255799460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now, Now, you can't just go launching Kanye without at least providing food for his trip, load a crate of fish sticks at least.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , Now , you ca n't just go launching Kanye without at least providing food for his trip , load a crate of fish sticks at least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, Now, you can't just go launching Kanye without at least providing food for his trip, load a crate of fish sticks at least.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772455</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom of Information Act</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255684440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm most curious as to why nobody's yet sued to see a copy of the draft treaty. It seems that "national security" is a bit of a stretch.</p></div><p>Here is a better idea.  Keep it secret.</p><p>Only 42 people have read this law?  Excellent!  That means we only need to perform 42 executions to make this law disappear forever.</p><p>Much easier and quicker than nuking an entire country to make the law go away!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm most curious as to why nobody 's yet sued to see a copy of the draft treaty .
It seems that " national security " is a bit of a stretch.Here is a better idea .
Keep it secret.Only 42 people have read this law ?
Excellent ! That means we only need to perform 42 executions to make this law disappear forever.Much easier and quicker than nuking an entire country to make the law go away !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm most curious as to why nobody's yet sued to see a copy of the draft treaty.
It seems that "national security" is a bit of a stretch.Here is a better idea.
Keep it secret.Only 42 people have read this law?
Excellent!  That means we only need to perform 42 executions to make this law disappear forever.Much easier and quicker than nuking an entire country to make the law go away!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770627</id>
	<title>Re:The number is... 42?</title>
	<author>boarder8925</author>
	<datestamp>1255717740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please, don't insult Douglas Adams.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please , do n't insult Douglas Adams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please, don't insult Douglas Adams.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770469</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770785</id>
	<title>And? Am I the only one who thinks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255718520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They have been getting input from a good, broad selection of people? The corporate interests listed have legitimate interests, whether we like them or not. Others, such as the three representatives from <a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/" title="publicknowledge.org">Public</a> [publicknowledge.org] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public\_Knowledge" title="wikipedia.org">Knowledge</a> [wikipedia.org], are EXACTLY who I would want representing various other interests.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They have been getting input from a good , broad selection of people ?
The corporate interests listed have legitimate interests , whether we like them or not .
Others , such as the three representatives from Public [ publicknowledge.org ] Knowledge [ wikipedia.org ] , are EXACTLY who I would want representing various other interests .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have been getting input from a good, broad selection of people?
The corporate interests listed have legitimate interests, whether we like them or not.
Others, such as the three representatives from Public [publicknowledge.org] Knowledge [wikipedia.org], are EXACTLY who I would want representing various other interests.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776863</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1255787520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?</p></div> </blockquote><p>Only those who are... disloyal. Those of us who are not disloyal understand that the giants who carry this world on their shoulders must be free to conduct their business without interference from the public which does not understand its own good. Keep up your harassment by unreasonable demands for democratic oversight and they may decide to withdraw into seclusion, no longer showering the fruits of their genius upon us.</p><p>Besides, there are <em>profits</em> at stake. Better dead than red, right? And if speaking against your financial elite doesn't make you a commie traitor, I don't know what would.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to " sign a non-disclosure agreement " about a proposed law disturbing ?
Only those who are... disloyal. Those of us who are not disloyal understand that the giants who carry this world on their shoulders must be free to conduct their business without interference from the public which does not understand its own good .
Keep up your harassment by unreasonable demands for democratic oversight and they may decide to withdraw into seclusion , no longer showering the fruits of their genius upon us.Besides , there are profits at stake .
Better dead than red , right ?
And if speaking against your financial elite does n't make you a commie traitor , I do n't know what would .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?
Only those who are... disloyal. Those of us who are not disloyal understand that the giants who carry this world on their shoulders must be free to conduct their business without interference from the public which does not understand its own good.
Keep up your harassment by unreasonable demands for democratic oversight and they may decide to withdraw into seclusion, no longer showering the fruits of their genius upon us.Besides, there are profits at stake.
Better dead than red, right?
And if speaking against your financial elite doesn't make you a commie traitor, I don't know what would.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773085</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1255688100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Maybe we should start demanding politicians with REAL degrees who understand the REAL world, not worthless cr@p subjects like English, law, art, history that politicians seem to specialise in.</i></p><p> 



Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe we should start demanding politicians with REAL degrees who understand the REAL world , not worthless cr @ p subjects like English , law , art , history that politicians seem to specialise in .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe we should start demanding politicians with REAL degrees who understand the REAL world, not worthless cr@p subjects like English, law, art, history that politicians seem to specialise in.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777231</id>
	<title>Re:Senate Better Not Pass Treaty</title>
	<author>gink1</author>
	<datestamp>1255791360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We have only 2 chances:

1) A majority of Congressmen must vote this abomination down. But the Copyright monopolies will be spreading Millions around Capitol Hill and we need to make our voice heard more loudly.

2) A majority of Congressmen must repeal it. And if you though the bribery was bad in 1) you haven't seen anything.

Chance 2) is an incredible long shot. We better hope this no vote, no input present from Obama the great Corporatist doesn't get voted in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have only 2 chances : 1 ) A majority of Congressmen must vote this abomination down .
But the Copyright monopolies will be spreading Millions around Capitol Hill and we need to make our voice heard more loudly .
2 ) A majority of Congressmen must repeal it .
And if you though the bribery was bad in 1 ) you have n't seen anything .
Chance 2 ) is an incredible long shot .
We better hope this no vote , no input present from Obama the great Corporatist does n't get voted in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have only 2 chances:

1) A majority of Congressmen must vote this abomination down.
But the Copyright monopolies will be spreading Millions around Capitol Hill and we need to make our voice heard more loudly.
2) A majority of Congressmen must repeal it.
And if you though the bribery was bad in 1) you haven't seen anything.
Chance 2) is an incredible long shot.
We better hope this no vote, no input present from Obama the great Corporatist doesn't get voted in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773099</id>
	<title>Re:No Mainstream Media Coverage</title>
	<author>peipas</author>
	<datestamp>1255688220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...tattooing "SETEC Astronomy" on his forehead, and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate.</p></div><p>"Be a beacon."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...tattooing " SETEC Astronomy " on his forehead , and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate .
" Be a beacon .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...tattooing "SETEC Astronomy" on his forehead, and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate.
"Be a beacon.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772421</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255684200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the only way to stop ACTA now is to engage in FUD.</p><p>We must engage in a long and nasty FUD campaign, of which the likes no one has ever seen.  If they will not reveal information on ACTA, we must slander it until we utterly destroy it.  The only way to counter this campaign would be to release information on ACTA, which would also be a victory.</p><p>Seriously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the only way to stop ACTA now is to engage in FUD.We must engage in a long and nasty FUD campaign , of which the likes no one has ever seen .
If they will not reveal information on ACTA , we must slander it until we utterly destroy it .
The only way to counter this campaign would be to release information on ACTA , which would also be a victory.Seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the only way to stop ACTA now is to engage in FUD.We must engage in a long and nasty FUD campaign, of which the likes no one has ever seen.
If they will not reveal information on ACTA, we must slander it until we utterly destroy it.
The only way to counter this campaign would be to release information on ACTA, which would also be a victory.Seriously.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770775</id>
	<title>we need a spy</title>
	<author>cats-paw</author>
	<datestamp>1255718520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to post something to wikileaks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to post something to wikileaks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to post something to wikileaks</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771857</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>pgmrdlm</author>
	<datestamp>1255724400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which founding father are you basing your argument on?

Thomas Jefferson?  he was all for State Rights.  Alexandar Hamilton, he thought States would be at war with each other in a matter of a few years. Or, in my case.
I HATE CALIFORNIA. Due to their size, they try to dictate to other states.

State rights, please. Most states are run by bigger idiots then what is at the national level.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which founding father are you basing your argument on ?
Thomas Jefferson ?
he was all for State Rights .
Alexandar Hamilton , he thought States would be at war with each other in a matter of a few years .
Or , in my case .
I HATE CALIFORNIA .
Due to their size , they try to dictate to other states .
State rights , please .
Most states are run by bigger idiots then what is at the national level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which founding father are you basing your argument on?
Thomas Jefferson?
he was all for State Rights.
Alexandar Hamilton, he thought States would be at war with each other in a matter of a few years.
Or, in my case.
I HATE CALIFORNIA.
Due to their size, they try to dictate to other states.
State rights, please.
Most states are run by bigger idiots then what is at the national level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776825</id>
	<title>Re:No Mainstream Media Coverage</title>
	<author>sowth</author>
	<datestamp>1255786920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The television "news" networks only report the "news" they think will attract teenagers and people casually flipping through the channels. The "news"papers now mostly publish articles to attract the crowd who reads tabloids. That's why you see stories such as: "Micheal Jackson's space alien baby gets in high speed ufo chase and blows up Brittney Spear's plastic boob factory."

</p><p>Anyone looking for real news doesn't bother with those sources anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The television " news " networks only report the " news " they think will attract teenagers and people casually flipping through the channels .
The " news " papers now mostly publish articles to attract the crowd who reads tabloids .
That 's why you see stories such as : " Micheal Jackson 's space alien baby gets in high speed ufo chase and blows up Brittney Spear 's plastic boob factory .
" Anyone looking for real news does n't bother with those sources anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The television "news" networks only report the "news" they think will attract teenagers and people casually flipping through the channels.
The "news"papers now mostly publish articles to attract the crowd who reads tabloids.
That's why you see stories such as: "Micheal Jackson's space alien baby gets in high speed ufo chase and blows up Brittney Spear's plastic boob factory.
"

Anyone looking for real news doesn't bother with those sources anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770697</id>
	<title>Re:Looking at the list..</title>
	<author>griffjon</author>
	<datestamp>1255718100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The list isn't accurate, because I'm pretty sure they would have to at least hat-tip to F. Kafka , expert on the process of making and enforcing laws using mysterious agencies and refusing to share the details about how one might go about breaking (or not breaking) the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The list is n't accurate , because I 'm pretty sure they would have to at least hat-tip to F. Kafka , expert on the process of making and enforcing laws using mysterious agencies and refusing to share the details about how one might go about breaking ( or not breaking ) the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The list isn't accurate, because I'm pretty sure they would have to at least hat-tip to F. Kafka , expert on the process of making and enforcing laws using mysterious agencies and refusing to share the details about how one might go about breaking (or not breaking) the law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770615</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771033</id>
	<title>It's not broad enough</title>
	<author>langelgjm</author>
	<datestamp>1255719900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the corporations listed have legitimate interests. Yes, it's good that there are three PK people and one person from the Center for Democracy and Technology.</p><p>However, four people total from PK and CDT are not enough to constitute adequate representation in the public interest. The reason KEI is making such a fuss about this is because there is a big concern in the access-to-medicines community that any ACTA treaty will include provisions making it easier for customs authorities to seize pharmaceuticals that are allegedly "counterfeit". There's a very active effort to confuse the distinction between counterfeit and generic medicine, and KEI and others are worried that ACTA will make it easier for shipments of generic medicines to be seized as they make their way between countries. This has already happened several times this year, and in no case that I am aware of have the accusations been substantiated - it's always turned out that the medicines are legitimate generics.</p><p>People from PK and CDT have no history of working on access to medicine or public health issues. None of the groups on that list seem to have any relation to public health issues, yet ACTA could have a very real effect on public health.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the corporations listed have legitimate interests .
Yes , it 's good that there are three PK people and one person from the Center for Democracy and Technology.However , four people total from PK and CDT are not enough to constitute adequate representation in the public interest .
The reason KEI is making such a fuss about this is because there is a big concern in the access-to-medicines community that any ACTA treaty will include provisions making it easier for customs authorities to seize pharmaceuticals that are allegedly " counterfeit " .
There 's a very active effort to confuse the distinction between counterfeit and generic medicine , and KEI and others are worried that ACTA will make it easier for shipments of generic medicines to be seized as they make their way between countries .
This has already happened several times this year , and in no case that I am aware of have the accusations been substantiated - it 's always turned out that the medicines are legitimate generics.People from PK and CDT have no history of working on access to medicine or public health issues .
None of the groups on that list seem to have any relation to public health issues , yet ACTA could have a very real effect on public health .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the corporations listed have legitimate interests.
Yes, it's good that there are three PK people and one person from the Center for Democracy and Technology.However, four people total from PK and CDT are not enough to constitute adequate representation in the public interest.
The reason KEI is making such a fuss about this is because there is a big concern in the access-to-medicines community that any ACTA treaty will include provisions making it easier for customs authorities to seize pharmaceuticals that are allegedly "counterfeit".
There's a very active effort to confuse the distinction between counterfeit and generic medicine, and KEI and others are worried that ACTA will make it easier for shipments of generic medicines to be seized as they make their way between countries.
This has already happened several times this year, and in no case that I am aware of have the accusations been substantiated - it's always turned out that the medicines are legitimate generics.People from PK and CDT have no history of working on access to medicine or public health issues.
None of the groups on that list seem to have any relation to public health issues, yet ACTA could have a very real effect on public health.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770785</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773755</id>
	<title>Re:How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1255692540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I am no government scholar, but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public.  Am I wrong about this?</i></p><p>You're right but it's not proposed legislation yet.  It could be posted Friday evening then congress could stay up late to vote for it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p><i>Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty' make it substantially different?</i> </p><p>Treaties have to be released as well, however this is not a treaty that has been submitted to congress yet.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am no government scholar , but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public .
Am I wrong about this ? You 're right but it 's not proposed legislation yet .
It could be posted Friday evening then congress could stay up late to vote for it ; - ) Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty ' make it substantially different ?
Treaties have to be released as well , however this is not a treaty that has been submitted to congress yet .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am no government scholar, but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public.
Am I wrong about this?You're right but it's not proposed legislation yet.
It could be posted Friday evening then congress could stay up late to vote for it ;-)Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty' make it substantially different?
Treaties have to be released as well, however this is not a treaty that has been submitted to congress yet.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771991</id>
	<title>It's normal</title>
	<author>DaveGod</author>
	<datestamp>1255725000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Sometimes there is also a public consultation document towards the start of the process, but the usual procedure for delegated legislation is to invite comment on a published exposure draft once it has been, uh, drafted. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes there is also a public consultation document towards the start of the process , but the usual procedure for delegated legislation is to invite comment on a published exposure draft once it has been , uh , drafted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Sometimes there is also a public consultation document towards the start of the process, but the usual procedure for delegated legislation is to invite comment on a published exposure draft once it has been, uh, drafted. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>Late Adopter</author>
	<datestamp>1255723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not a proposed law yet.  It's a pile of paper that may someday become a proposed law.  When it becomes a proposed law it'll be up there on Thomas with everything else.  Meanwhile it's just a thought, an intermediate position in international negotiations, and negotiating requires a party to be mum about its desires and willingness to compromise until it decides it's in its interest to reveal them.
<br> <br>
Maybe that's not how *governments* should negotiate (at least not ours), and if I heard a strong enough argument I might even agree with that position.  But it's not a sign of sinister intent.  It's the status quo for treaties.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a proposed law yet .
It 's a pile of paper that may someday become a proposed law .
When it becomes a proposed law it 'll be up there on Thomas with everything else .
Meanwhile it 's just a thought , an intermediate position in international negotiations , and negotiating requires a party to be mum about its desires and willingness to compromise until it decides it 's in its interest to reveal them .
Maybe that 's not how * governments * should negotiate ( at least not ours ) , and if I heard a strong enough argument I might even agree with that position .
But it 's not a sign of sinister intent .
It 's the status quo for treaties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a proposed law yet.
It's a pile of paper that may someday become a proposed law.
When it becomes a proposed law it'll be up there on Thomas with everything else.
Meanwhile it's just a thought, an intermediate position in international negotiations, and negotiating requires a party to be mum about its desires and willingness to compromise until it decides it's in its interest to reveal them.
Maybe that's not how *governments* should negotiate (at least not ours), and if I heard a strong enough argument I might even agree with that position.
But it's not a sign of sinister intent.
It's the status quo for treaties.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771651</id>
	<title>Re:What are they hiding?!</title>
	<author>MooseTick</author>
	<datestamp>1255723080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't the Bill of Rights and entire Constitution made in a secret meeting not privy to the public by a very small group of men?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't the Bill of Rights and entire Constitution made in a secret meeting not privy to the public by a very small group of men ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't the Bill of Rights and entire Constitution made in a secret meeting not privy to the public by a very small group of men?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579</id>
	<title>No Mainstream Media Coverage</title>
	<author>BabyDuckHat</author>
	<datestamp>1255717620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The lack of mainstream media coverage of this issue is telling. They're not afraid to pass up a story if it's in their best interest to do so. I propose we force them to report on ACTA by kidnapping Kanye West, stripping him naked, tattooing "SETEC Astronomy" on his forehead, and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The lack of mainstream media coverage of this issue is telling .
They 're not afraid to pass up a story if it 's in their best interest to do so .
I propose we force them to report on ACTA by kidnapping Kanye West , stripping him naked , tattooing " SETEC Astronomy " on his forehead , and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lack of mainstream media coverage of this issue is telling.
They're not afraid to pass up a story if it's in their best interest to do so.
I propose we force them to report on ACTA by kidnapping Kanye West, stripping him naked, tattooing "SETEC Astronomy" on his forehead, and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659</id>
	<title>How can this be secret?</title>
	<author>raddan</author>
	<datestamp>1255717920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am no government scholar, but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public.  Am I wrong about this?  Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty' make it substantially different?  People signing NDAs to participate in the legislative process is not a good thing.  Whose eyes are they shielding this from?  Us?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am no government scholar , but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public .
Am I wrong about this ?
Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty ' make it substantially different ?
People signing NDAs to participate in the legislative process is not a good thing .
Whose eyes are they shielding this from ?
Us ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am no government scholar, but I was under the distinct impression that legislation was required to be made public.
Am I wrong about this?
Or is it the fact that ACTA is a 'treaty' make it substantially different?
People signing NDAs to participate in the legislative process is not a good thing.
Whose eyes are they shielding this from?
Us?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772537</id>
	<title>Re:How has noone leaked this yet?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1255684980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>$100 to the first person to post the fully draft here or on wikileaks. Seriously we can leak SpiderMan movies, crack supposedly uncrackable digital encryption schemes and share giant files, but nobody is willing to post perhaps 60kb of text? IANAL but, Considering the type of legislation, leaking this sort of thing isn't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.</p></div><p>It's not litigation we're worried about.  Governments that try to do the people's normal business secretly are more likely to do abnormal business (silencing dissent) secretly too.  $100 is not enough reward to gamble ruination for.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 100 to the first person to post the fully draft here or on wikileaks .
Seriously we can leak SpiderMan movies , crack supposedly uncrackable digital encryption schemes and share giant files , but nobody is willing to post perhaps 60kb of text ?
IANAL but , Considering the type of legislation , leaking this sort of thing is n't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.It 's not litigation we 're worried about .
Governments that try to do the people 's normal business secretly are more likely to do abnormal business ( silencing dissent ) secretly too .
$ 100 is not enough reward to gamble ruination for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$100 to the first person to post the fully draft here or on wikileaks.
Seriously we can leak SpiderMan movies, crack supposedly uncrackable digital encryption schemes and share giant files, but nobody is willing to post perhaps 60kb of text?
IANAL but, Considering the type of legislation, leaking this sort of thing isn't likely to follow with litigation against the mole.It's not litigation we're worried about.
Governments that try to do the people's normal business secretly are more likely to do abnormal business (silencing dissent) secretly too.
$100 is not enough reward to gamble ruination for.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405</id>
	<title>Senate likely to  pass treaty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255716720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They seem to like to vote on things that no-one has read.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They seem to like to vote on things that no-one has read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They seem to like to vote on things that no-one has read.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770581</id>
	<title>*sigh*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255717620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know the world's in trouble when the Business Software Alliance is at the head of a list of representatives privy to secret international treaties about the Internet that the US is going to sign off on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know the world 's in trouble when the Business Software Alliance is at the head of a list of representatives privy to secret international treaties about the Internet that the US is going to sign off on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know the world's in trouble when the Business Software Alliance is at the head of a list of representatives privy to secret international treaties about the Internet that the US is going to sign off on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771207</id>
	<title>The Administration and Congress are both worse</title>
	<author>Shivetya</author>
	<datestamp>1255720620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but what really compounds the issue is that the Press is still enthralled with Obama and Co that they press on nothing.  The Administration showed their hand, using their own people to bash news companies that report in a manner they don't like, while patronizing wholly sold out organizations like MSNBC.</p><p>What does that leave us with?  A bunch of right wing talk show hosts? They are even easier to box than the traditional broadcasters because if they truly do become a threat they will diversified/regulated out of a job.  Let alone the fact a few are just too grating to pay attention too.</p><p>We have gone from having watchdogs to having lap dogs and it shows.  Hell it amazes me all the calls for information on this bill from people here who don't even blink at universal health care being crafted in just as much darkness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but what really compounds the issue is that the Press is still enthralled with Obama and Co that they press on nothing .
The Administration showed their hand , using their own people to bash news companies that report in a manner they do n't like , while patronizing wholly sold out organizations like MSNBC.What does that leave us with ?
A bunch of right wing talk show hosts ?
They are even easier to box than the traditional broadcasters because if they truly do become a threat they will diversified/regulated out of a job .
Let alone the fact a few are just too grating to pay attention too.We have gone from having watchdogs to having lap dogs and it shows .
Hell it amazes me all the calls for information on this bill from people here who do n't even blink at universal health care being crafted in just as much darkness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but what really compounds the issue is that the Press is still enthralled with Obama and Co that they press on nothing.
The Administration showed their hand, using their own people to bash news companies that report in a manner they don't like, while patronizing wholly sold out organizations like MSNBC.What does that leave us with?
A bunch of right wing talk show hosts?
They are even easier to box than the traditional broadcasters because if they truly do become a threat they will diversified/regulated out of a job.
Let alone the fact a few are just too grating to pay attention too.We have gone from having watchdogs to having lap dogs and it shows.
Hell it amazes me all the calls for information on this bill from people here who don't even blink at universal health care being crafted in just as much darkness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611</id>
	<title>Re:Senate likely to pass treaty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255717680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?</p><p>This makes republishing a law that's "copyrighted" look like a free and open society.</p><p>Back-room, off-the-record, tit-for-tat haggling over laws' formation is bad enough as it is.  The only possible reasons for this NDA are <b>precisely the reason it should be blasted out over public loudspeakers.</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to " sign a non-disclosure agreement " about a proposed law disturbing ? This makes republishing a law that 's " copyrighted " look like a free and open society.Back-room , off-the-record , tit-for-tat haggling over laws ' formation is bad enough as it is .
The only possible reasons for this NDA are precisely the reason it should be blasted out over public loudspeakers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't anyone bothered by government asking commentators to "sign a non-disclosure agreement" about a proposed law disturbing?This makes republishing a law that's "copyrighted" look like a free and open society.Back-room, off-the-record, tit-for-tat haggling over laws' formation is bad enough as it is.
The only possible reasons for this NDA are precisely the reason it should be blasted out over public loudspeakers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771749</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1255723680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are some fundamental problems that cannot be fixed with voting, but rather would require a constitutional convention. Good luck dissolving the current Congress, and good luck finding honest men to form a new one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some fundamental problems that can not be fixed with voting , but rather would require a constitutional convention .
Good luck dissolving the current Congress , and good luck finding honest men to form a new one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some fundamental problems that cannot be fixed with voting, but rather would require a constitutional convention.
Good luck dissolving the current Congress, and good luck finding honest men to form a new one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771711</id>
	<title>Re:No Mainstream Media Coverage</title>
	<author>thomasdz</author>
	<datestamp>1255723440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The lack of mainstream media coverage of this issue is telling. They're not afraid to pass up a story if it's in their best interest to do so. I propose we force them to report on ACTA by kidnapping Kanye West, stripping him naked, tattooing "SETEC Astronomy" on his forehead, and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate.</p></div><p>my god, that is the funniest comment I've seen on Slashdot this week.<br>(already at +5 Funny)</p><p>Well done, sir.  Well done.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The lack of mainstream media coverage of this issue is telling .
They 're not afraid to pass up a story if it 's in their best interest to do so .
I propose we force them to report on ACTA by kidnapping Kanye West , stripping him naked , tattooing " SETEC Astronomy " on his forehead , and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate.my god , that is the funniest comment I 've seen on Slashdot this week .
( already at + 5 Funny ) Well done , sir .
Well done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lack of mainstream media coverage of this issue is telling.
They're not afraid to pass up a story if it's in their best interest to do so.
I propose we force them to report on ACTA by kidnapping Kanye West, stripping him naked, tattooing "SETEC Astronomy" on his forehead, and launching him in a homemade balloon purchased by John Gosslin with the money he stole from Kate.my god, that is the funniest comment I've seen on Slashdot this week.
(already at +5 Funny)Well done, sir.
Well done.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770783</id>
	<title>Re:have you seen my representative government late</title>
	<author>multipart/mixed</author>
	<datestamp>1255718520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, don't blame me. I voted for Kodos!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , do n't blame me .
I voted for Kodos !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, don't blame me.
I voted for Kodos!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773875</id>
	<title>So much hand wringing...</title>
	<author>DocHoncho</author>
	<datestamp>1255693320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So much hand wringing so little time...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So much hand wringing so little time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So much hand wringing so little time...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775097
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771235
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776825
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29778433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29778075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770783
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_165256_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771611
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770785
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771033
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771207
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771107
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771547
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776043
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770849
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770871
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771629
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774607
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775097
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770665
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770535
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772003
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771773
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774905
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777135
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777231
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776863
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770865
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771487
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29776825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29778075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29773099
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771651
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772031
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770627
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770885
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29777773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770481
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771013
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29778433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770777
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29774669
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770783
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770581
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770509
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_165256.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29770655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29771077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29775705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_165256.29772231
</commentlist>
</conversation>
