<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_16_200207</id>
	<title>IBM, Intel Execs Arrested Over Insider Trading</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1255689000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes to share a report from The Register stating that <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/16/ibm\_intel\_insider\_trading/">executives from IBM and Intel have been arrested</a> as a part of insider trading allegations.  <i>"According to a report from the Associated Press, six people were arrested today as part of an insider trading case, including Bob Moffat, senior vice president and general manager of IBM's Systems and Technology Group; Rajiv Goel, director of strategic investments at Intel Capital; Anil Kumar, a director at management consultancy McKinsey &amp; Co; and Raj Rajaratnam, the founder of the $7bn Galleon Group hedge fund."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes to share a report from The Register stating that executives from IBM and Intel have been arrested as a part of insider trading allegations .
" According to a report from the Associated Press , six people were arrested today as part of an insider trading case , including Bob Moffat , senior vice president and general manager of IBM 's Systems and Technology Group ; Rajiv Goel , director of strategic investments at Intel Capital ; Anil Kumar , a director at management consultancy McKinsey &amp; Co ; and Raj Rajaratnam , the founder of the $ 7bn Galleon Group hedge fund .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes to share a report from The Register stating that executives from IBM and Intel have been arrested as a part of insider trading allegations.
"According to a report from the Associated Press, six people were arrested today as part of an insider trading case, including Bob Moffat, senior vice president and general manager of IBM's Systems and Technology Group; Rajiv Goel, director of strategic investments at Intel Capital; Anil Kumar, a director at management consultancy McKinsey &amp; Co; and Raj Rajaratnam, the founder of the $7bn Galleon Group hedge fund.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>tsotha</author>
	<datestamp>1255698600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope.  Most people don't realize it, but financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely.  Enron's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.  You can get less than that for killing somebody.  Martha Stewart got six months for lying to an investigator (while she wasn't under oath) about something that wasn't a crime.  As with drunk driving for awhile people have this idea the penalties are light, but in the meantime legislators are reacting to public anger and jacking up the sentences.  It takes awhile for reality to sink in to the public consciousness.  From <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/24/business/worldbusiness/24iht-web.1024enron.3264615.html" title="nytimes.com">here</a> [nytimes.com]:</p><blockquote><div><p>"You can certainly make the case that things have gotten too harsh," said Samuel W. Buell, a former Enron prosecutor who now teaches law at Washington University in St. Louis. "But the reason why things have gotten so harsh is we went through these years when sentences were too light. Maybe we need a correction in the other direction to get a happy medium."</p></div></blockquote><p>I think the drug laws are pretty stupid, too, but where I live first time offenders never get jail time for possession.  You can usually avoid jail on the second conviction as well if you don't have a bunch of other stuff on your record.  By the third one, well, you're an idiot who's going to jail for being an idiot.  But only for a few months.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope .
Most people do n't realize it , but financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely .
Enron 's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors .
You can get less than that for killing somebody .
Martha Stewart got six months for lying to an investigator ( while she was n't under oath ) about something that was n't a crime .
As with drunk driving for awhile people have this idea the penalties are light , but in the meantime legislators are reacting to public anger and jacking up the sentences .
It takes awhile for reality to sink in to the public consciousness .
From here [ nytimes.com ] : " You can certainly make the case that things have gotten too harsh , " said Samuel W. Buell , a former Enron prosecutor who now teaches law at Washington University in St. Louis. " But the reason why things have gotten so harsh is we went through these years when sentences were too light .
Maybe we need a correction in the other direction to get a happy medium .
" I think the drug laws are pretty stupid , too , but where I live first time offenders never get jail time for possession .
You can usually avoid jail on the second conviction as well if you do n't have a bunch of other stuff on your record .
By the third one , well , you 're an idiot who 's going to jail for being an idiot .
But only for a few months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope.
Most people don't realize it, but financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely.
Enron's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.
You can get less than that for killing somebody.
Martha Stewart got six months for lying to an investigator (while she wasn't under oath) about something that wasn't a crime.
As with drunk driving for awhile people have this idea the penalties are light, but in the meantime legislators are reacting to public anger and jacking up the sentences.
It takes awhile for reality to sink in to the public consciousness.
From here [nytimes.com]:"You can certainly make the case that things have gotten too harsh," said Samuel W. Buell, a former Enron prosecutor who now teaches law at Washington University in St. Louis. "But the reason why things have gotten so harsh is we went through these years when sentences were too light.
Maybe we need a correction in the other direction to get a happy medium.
"I think the drug laws are pretty stupid, too, but where I live first time offenders never get jail time for possession.
You can usually avoid jail on the second conviction as well if you don't have a bunch of other stuff on your record.
By the third one, well, you're an idiot who's going to jail for being an idiot.
But only for a few months.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29780827</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>epine</author>
	<datestamp>1255783020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Most people don't realize it, but <b>from time to time</b> financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely. Enron's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.</p></div></blockquote><p>There, fixed that for you.  Never thought I'd say that, but I just did.  I don't know if this link is any good, it's just the first one I found.<br><a href="http://www.alternet.org/rights/45647/" title="alternet.org">America Has Become Incarceration Nation</a> [alternet.org]<br>Circa not so long ago, America had 2.2 million people incarcerated, 5 to 8 times the rate of any other industrial nation, and <b>one guy</b> is serving a 24 year sentence for playing a critical role in putting the entire state of California one step closer to the poor house.  Harsh.  That's slightly less severe than the penalty for spitting gum onto the sidewalk in Singapore.  Or stealing video tapes in America.<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three\_strikes\_law" title="wikipedia.org">Three strikes law</a> [wikipedia.org] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Leandro Andrade, received double sentence of 25 year-to-life for 2 counts of shoplifting</p></div><p>I see your silky Skilling with my scumbag Andrade in a death wrestle of naked data points.  I hope Andrade winds up on top.</p><p>Did Skilling make one bad decision, or was he living a life of culpably bad decisions, day after day, month after month?</p><p>A proficient criminal executive makes it into his early retirement bracket before getting caught the first time, and usually has enough socked away in tax fraud havens not to resort to lifting video tapes to buy a pack of ciggies to smoke on a park bench in his golden years when his prostate starts to leak.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people do n't realize it , but from time to time financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely .
Enron 's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.There , fixed that for you .
Never thought I 'd say that , but I just did .
I do n't know if this link is any good , it 's just the first one I found.America Has Become Incarceration Nation [ alternet.org ] Circa not so long ago , America had 2.2 million people incarcerated , 5 to 8 times the rate of any other industrial nation , and one guy is serving a 24 year sentence for playing a critical role in putting the entire state of California one step closer to the poor house .
Harsh. That 's slightly less severe than the penalty for spitting gum onto the sidewalk in Singapore .
Or stealing video tapes in America.Three strikes law [ wikipedia.org ] Leandro Andrade , received double sentence of 25 year-to-life for 2 counts of shopliftingI see your silky Skilling with my scumbag Andrade in a death wrestle of naked data points .
I hope Andrade winds up on top.Did Skilling make one bad decision , or was he living a life of culpably bad decisions , day after day , month after month ? A proficient criminal executive makes it into his early retirement bracket before getting caught the first time , and usually has enough socked away in tax fraud havens not to resort to lifting video tapes to buy a pack of ciggies to smoke on a park bench in his golden years when his prostate starts to leak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people don't realize it, but from time to time financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely.
Enron's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.There, fixed that for you.
Never thought I'd say that, but I just did.
I don't know if this link is any good, it's just the first one I found.America Has Become Incarceration Nation [alternet.org]Circa not so long ago, America had 2.2 million people incarcerated, 5 to 8 times the rate of any other industrial nation, and one guy is serving a 24 year sentence for playing a critical role in putting the entire state of California one step closer to the poor house.
Harsh.  That's slightly less severe than the penalty for spitting gum onto the sidewalk in Singapore.
Or stealing video tapes in America.Three strikes law [wikipedia.org] Leandro Andrade, received double sentence of 25 year-to-life for 2 counts of shopliftingI see your silky Skilling with my scumbag Andrade in a death wrestle of naked data points.
I hope Andrade winds up on top.Did Skilling make one bad decision, or was he living a life of culpably bad decisions, day after day, month after month?A proficient criminal executive makes it into his early retirement bracket before getting caught the first time, and usually has enough socked away in tax fraud havens not to resort to lifting video tapes to buy a pack of ciggies to smoke on a park bench in his golden years when his prostate starts to leak.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775115</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255705140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of the staff at the SEC were on vacation for balance of the decade until September, 2008, when some were called back to deal with the fallout of the Lehman Brothers/ AIG/ Wachovia/ Merrill Lynch<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/Citibank unpleasantness.</p><p>Then the rest were made to return after Madoff was arrested in December.</p><p>After that, evidently the SEC buckled down and started noticing what folks on Wall Street had been doing during the late bull market, and went around asking questions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the staff at the SEC were on vacation for balance of the decade until September , 2008 , when some were called back to deal with the fallout of the Lehman Brothers/ AIG/ Wachovia/ Merrill Lynch /Citibank unpleasantness.Then the rest were made to return after Madoff was arrested in December.After that , evidently the SEC buckled down and started noticing what folks on Wall Street had been doing during the late bull market , and went around asking questions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the staff at the SEC were on vacation for balance of the decade until September, 2008, when some were called back to deal with the fallout of the Lehman Brothers/ AIG/ Wachovia/ Merrill Lynch /Citibank unpleasantness.Then the rest were made to return after Madoff was arrested in December.After that, evidently the SEC buckled down and started noticing what folks on Wall Street had been doing during the late bull market, and went around asking questions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774433</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>The Empiricist</author>
	<datestamp>1255697760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Who else here thinks both this and non-violent drug use should be NON CRIMES because in either case there is no victim and no injury?</p></div></blockquote><p>You think that there are no victims and no injuries caused by insider trading?  How about the people at the other end of those trades?  What about the former shareholder who sold stock early, not having had access to information showing that the stock was undervalued?  Or how about the new shareholder who did not have the information to know that the stock was overvalued?  Those who have access to proprietary information, or who are in a position to manipulate the value of an organization, have a fiduciary duty of loyalty to shareholders.  Insider trading violates that duty and is a subtle, but very real, method of stealing from them.  For another perspective, <a href="http://www.gbcnv.edu/~tenney/Sternberg.htm" title="gbcnv.edu">click here</a> [gbcnv.edu].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who else here thinks both this and non-violent drug use should be NON CRIMES because in either case there is no victim and no injury ? You think that there are no victims and no injuries caused by insider trading ?
How about the people at the other end of those trades ?
What about the former shareholder who sold stock early , not having had access to information showing that the stock was undervalued ?
Or how about the new shareholder who did not have the information to know that the stock was overvalued ?
Those who have access to proprietary information , or who are in a position to manipulate the value of an organization , have a fiduciary duty of loyalty to shareholders .
Insider trading violates that duty and is a subtle , but very real , method of stealing from them .
For another perspective , click here [ gbcnv.edu ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who else here thinks both this and non-violent drug use should be NON CRIMES because in either case there is no victim and no injury?You think that there are no victims and no injuries caused by insider trading?
How about the people at the other end of those trades?
What about the former shareholder who sold stock early, not having had access to information showing that the stock was undervalued?
Or how about the new shareholder who did not have the information to know that the stock was overvalued?
Those who have access to proprietary information, or who are in a position to manipulate the value of an organization, have a fiduciary duty of loyalty to shareholders.
Insider trading violates that duty and is a subtle, but very real, method of stealing from them.
For another perspective, click here [gbcnv.edu].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773853</id>
	<title>That's not too bad</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1255693200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Helping the Nazis is worse than insider trading.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Helping the Nazis is worse than insider trading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Helping the Nazis is worse than insider trading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774491</id>
	<title>Re:No, they are guilty of the ONLY crime in busine</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1255698480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's really a tossup.  +5 insightful, or +5 cynical.  Ironic that cynicism and insight are so much alike, isn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's really a tossup .
+ 5 insightful , or + 5 cynical .
Ironic that cynicism and insight are so much alike , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's really a tossup.
+5 insightful, or +5 cynical.
Ironic that cynicism and insight are so much alike, isn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776005</id>
	<title>It's Double Jeopardy Stupid...</title>
	<author>djdevon3</author>
	<datestamp>1255721940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, it's because of Double Jeopardy.  You can't be tried twice for the same crime on the same set of facts.  They have to get a slam dunk because the court (awesome pun) is completely ripped from under their feet after that.  It has absolutely nothing to do with image though most of the uneducated Jerry-Springer-watching public does think that way. Case in point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it 's because of Double Jeopardy .
You ca n't be tried twice for the same crime on the same set of facts .
They have to get a slam dunk because the court ( awesome pun ) is completely ripped from under their feet after that .
It has absolutely nothing to do with image though most of the uneducated Jerry-Springer-watching public does think that way .
Case in point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it's because of Double Jeopardy.
You can't be tried twice for the same crime on the same set of facts.
They have to get a slam dunk because the court (awesome pun) is completely ripped from under their feet after that.
It has absolutely nothing to do with image though most of the uneducated Jerry-Springer-watching public does think that way.
Case in point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1255698840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I totally agree with you.</p><p>These people are going to have the very very best investigators, experts, and lawyers.  They are going to examine every nook and cranny of the case in the attempt to find one little crack of reasonable doubt that will enable them to beat the rap.</p><p>The FBI doesn't just need to dot every i and cross every t, they need to develop a case so tight that even the most moronic juror will see the wrong clear as day, when the best lawyers in the world are trying to obscure everything.</p><p>On top of that, the US Attorneys don't like to go to trial unless they have a slam dunk.  Losing makes them (and their administration) look bad--and image is sooo important!!</p><p>Bottom line is that the FBI had to work their ass off to get the goods on these guys and we should all damn well appreciate it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally agree with you.These people are going to have the very very best investigators , experts , and lawyers .
They are going to examine every nook and cranny of the case in the attempt to find one little crack of reasonable doubt that will enable them to beat the rap.The FBI does n't just need to dot every i and cross every t , they need to develop a case so tight that even the most moronic juror will see the wrong clear as day , when the best lawyers in the world are trying to obscure everything.On top of that , the US Attorneys do n't like to go to trial unless they have a slam dunk .
Losing makes them ( and their administration ) look bad--and image is sooo important !
! Bottom line is that the FBI had to work their ass off to get the goods on these guys and we should all damn well appreciate it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally agree with you.These people are going to have the very very best investigators, experts, and lawyers.
They are going to examine every nook and cranny of the case in the attempt to find one little crack of reasonable doubt that will enable them to beat the rap.The FBI doesn't just need to dot every i and cross every t, they need to develop a case so tight that even the most moronic juror will see the wrong clear as day, when the best lawyers in the world are trying to obscure everything.On top of that, the US Attorneys don't like to go to trial unless they have a slam dunk.
Losing makes them (and their administration) look bad--and image is sooo important!
!Bottom line is that the FBI had to work their ass off to get the goods on these guys and we should all damn well appreciate it!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29778425</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255802880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only if they are up to date with their "campaign contributions."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only if they are up to date with their " campaign contributions .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only if they are up to date with their "campaign contributions.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773881</id>
	<title>Corrupt Complete.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255693380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Does this surprise anyone?  Insider trading must be commonplace at the executive level across most industries these days.  How else, but corruption, do talentless, unethical, unproductive sociopaths get paid?  These are all lucrative positions to hold, why do they need to cheat to get more bread?  Meanwhile, honest mom and pop outfits are folding like lawn chairs and hardworking people are in debt beyond hope just to from month to month.  Will somebody please flush the elitist toilet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this surprise anyone ?
Insider trading must be commonplace at the executive level across most industries these days .
How else , but corruption , do talentless , unethical , unproductive sociopaths get paid ?
These are all lucrative positions to hold , why do they need to cheat to get more bread ?
Meanwhile , honest mom and pop outfits are folding like lawn chairs and hardworking people are in debt beyond hope just to from month to month .
Will somebody please flush the elitist toilet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Does this surprise anyone?
Insider trading must be commonplace at the executive level across most industries these days.
How else, but corruption, do talentless, unethical, unproductive sociopaths get paid?
These are all lucrative positions to hold, why do they need to cheat to get more bread?
Meanwhile, honest mom and pop outfits are folding like lawn chairs and hardworking people are in debt beyond hope just to from month to month.
Will somebody please flush the elitist toilet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775099</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255704900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Martha Stewart got six months for lying to an investigator (while she wasn't under oath) about something that wasn't a crime."</p><p>Insider trading is a crime and she had insider information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Martha Stewart got six months for lying to an investigator ( while she was n't under oath ) about something that was n't a crime .
" Insider trading is a crime and she had insider information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Martha Stewart got six months for lying to an investigator (while she wasn't under oath) about something that wasn't a crime.
"Insider trading is a crime and she had insider information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773803</id>
	<title>:O</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255692900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God, the world is cruel! It's obvious they are innocent!</p><p>[Senior] Executives never do that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God , the world is cruel !
It 's obvious they are innocent !
[ Senior ] Executives never do that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God, the world is cruel!
It's obvious they are innocent!
[Senior] Executives never do that!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774315</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>spydum</author>
	<datestamp>1255696740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The SEC is overwhelmed with work -- so you can imagine that building a case against &gt;6 people took them some time..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The SEC is overwhelmed with work -- so you can imagine that building a case against &gt; 6 people took them some time. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The SEC is overwhelmed with work -- so you can imagine that building a case against &gt;6 people took them some time..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774907</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255702560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And remember that Ivan Boesky had to write a $400,000,000.00 check to the U.S. Government, and still do time.  He was actually on my prison (Lompoc FPC) farm irrigation crew humping pipe with the rest of us through tall, wet grass.</p><p>(4 digit UID posting anon. for obvious reasons.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And remember that Ivan Boesky had to write a $ 400,000,000.00 check to the U.S. Government , and still do time .
He was actually on my prison ( Lompoc FPC ) farm irrigation crew humping pipe with the rest of us through tall , wet grass .
( 4 digit UID posting anon .
for obvious reasons .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And remember that Ivan Boesky had to write a $400,000,000.00 check to the U.S. Government, and still do time.
He was actually on my prison (Lompoc FPC) farm irrigation crew humping pipe with the rest of us through tall, wet grass.
(4 digit UID posting anon.
for obvious reasons.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774229</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255696020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who else here thinks both this and non-violent drug use should be NON CRIMES because in either case there is no victim and no injury?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who else here thinks both this and non-violent drug use should be NON CRIMES because in either case there is no victim and no injury ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who else here thinks both this and non-violent drug use should be NON CRIMES because in either case there is no victim and no injury?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29794863</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>BradleyAndersen</author>
	<datestamp>1255970340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So how about we just not allow Steve Jobs to hold any Apple stock?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So how about we just not allow Steve Jobs to hold any Apple stock ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how about we just not allow Steve Jobs to hold any Apple stock?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774897</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Threni</author>
	<datestamp>1255702560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; By the third one, well, you're an idiot who's going to jail for being an idiot. But only for a few months.</p><p>Why does smoking a joint after work, taking some mushrooms, or dropping some acid make you an idiot?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; By the third one , well , you 're an idiot who 's going to jail for being an idiot .
But only for a few months.Why does smoking a joint after work , taking some mushrooms , or dropping some acid make you an idiot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; By the third one, well, you're an idiot who's going to jail for being an idiot.
But only for a few months.Why does smoking a joint after work, taking some mushrooms, or dropping some acid make you an idiot?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29778571</id>
	<title>Caught by terrorism hunt?</title>
	<author>turtleshadow</author>
	<datestamp>1255804200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/raj-rajaratnam-indicted-20-million-insider-trading-case/story?id=8845975" title="go.com" rel="nofollow">ABCnews</a> [go.com] Raj Rajaratnam is suspected to have given "$3.5 million to the Tamil Rehabilitation Organization (TRO), whose assets were frozen by the U.S. Treasury Department in Nov. 2007 because of its alleged ties to the Tamil Tigers."</p><p>I suspect that the others simply got caught by following the money and listening to the wire-taps supposedly a first time for a hedge fund case according to ABCnews.</p><p>It seems the anti-terrorism fraud and money laundering investigations are working to snare more than just directly involved terrorists but also their support system of financial cash inflow.<br>Those who are just greedy also get snared.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to ABCnews [ go.com ] Raj Rajaratnam is suspected to have given " $ 3.5 million to the Tamil Rehabilitation Organization ( TRO ) , whose assets were frozen by the U.S. Treasury Department in Nov. 2007 because of its alleged ties to the Tamil Tigers .
" I suspect that the others simply got caught by following the money and listening to the wire-taps supposedly a first time for a hedge fund case according to ABCnews.It seems the anti-terrorism fraud and money laundering investigations are working to snare more than just directly involved terrorists but also their support system of financial cash inflow.Those who are just greedy also get snared .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to ABCnews [go.com] Raj Rajaratnam is suspected to have given "$3.5 million to the Tamil Rehabilitation Organization (TRO), whose assets were frozen by the U.S. Treasury Department in Nov. 2007 because of its alleged ties to the Tamil Tigers.
"I suspect that the others simply got caught by following the money and listening to the wire-taps supposedly a first time for a hedge fund case according to ABCnews.It seems the anti-terrorism fraud and money laundering investigations are working to snare more than just directly involved terrorists but also their support system of financial cash inflow.Those who are just greedy also get snared.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774667</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1255700220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I think Intel pissed someone off with after the 3DMark <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/12/2341240/Intel-Caught-Cheating-In-3DMark-Benchmark" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">benchmark cheating</a> [slashdot.org] was discovered.
</p><p>
Interesting that the insider trading arrests come approximately a week later?
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Intel pissed someone off with after the 3DMark benchmark cheating [ slashdot.org ] was discovered .
Interesting that the insider trading arrests come approximately a week later ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I think Intel pissed someone off with after the 3DMark benchmark cheating [slashdot.org] was discovered.
Interesting that the insider trading arrests come approximately a week later?
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776529</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Antique Geekmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1255779840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever makes you think the FBI did any significant part of this investigation? Even when the FBI arrests someone, the case is often assembled by the victims, especially of fiscal fraud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever makes you think the FBI did any significant part of this investigation ?
Even when the FBI arrests someone , the case is often assembled by the victims , especially of fiscal fraud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever makes you think the FBI did any significant part of this investigation?
Even when the FBI arrests someone, the case is often assembled by the victims, especially of fiscal fraud.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776819</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>the\_womble</author>
	<datestamp>1255786740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The recession has changed attitudes. They are now using criminal, rather than civil charges, and the apologists for insider trading have disappeared: people were arguing that it is not really harmful and that it should be decriminalised. While it remained a crime, that attitude probably permeated to the authorities to some extent.</p><p>I know Raj slightly: nice enough a person socially.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The recession has changed attitudes .
They are now using criminal , rather than civil charges , and the apologists for insider trading have disappeared : people were arguing that it is not really harmful and that it should be decriminalised .
While it remained a crime , that attitude probably permeated to the authorities to some extent.I know Raj slightly : nice enough a person socially .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The recession has changed attitudes.
They are now using criminal, rather than civil charges, and the apologists for insider trading have disappeared: people were arguing that it is not really harmful and that it should be decriminalised.
While it remained a crime, that attitude probably permeated to the authorities to some extent.I know Raj slightly: nice enough a person socially.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774255</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255696200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Similarly, CHIESI obtained inside information from<br>MOFFAT concerning IBM and Sun Microsystems and shared that<br>information with KURLAND.  New Castle subsequently traded on that<br>information.  For example, in early 2009, New Castle gained<br>profits of approximately $500,000 from trades in IBM securities<br>and $900,000 from trades in Sun Microsystems securities based on<br>material non-public information."</p><p>http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/October09/hedgefundinsidertradingpr.pdf</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Similarly , CHIESI obtained inside information fromMOFFAT concerning IBM and Sun Microsystems and shared thatinformation with KURLAND .
New Castle subsequently traded on thatinformation .
For example , in early 2009 , New Castle gainedprofits of approximately $ 500,000 from trades in IBM securitiesand $ 900,000 from trades in Sun Microsystems securities based onmaterial non-public information .
" http : //www.usdoj.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/October09/hedgefundinsidertradingpr.pdf</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Similarly, CHIESI obtained inside information fromMOFFAT concerning IBM and Sun Microsystems and shared thatinformation with KURLAND.
New Castle subsequently traded on thatinformation.
For example, in early 2009, New Castle gainedprofits of approximately $500,000 from trades in IBM securitiesand $900,000 from trades in Sun Microsystems securities based onmaterial non-public information.
"http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/October09/hedgefundinsidertradingpr.pdf</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774535</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1255698840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that you George?  How much more do your neocon masters want us to deregulate?  We've already dismantled almost all the laws that were put in place after the crash of '29!  There really isn't much more we can do!!</p><p>Well, wait - we CAN allow people to trade entirely on credit, with no collateral at all.   Would that make you happy, Mr. Bush?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that you George ?
How much more do your neocon masters want us to deregulate ?
We 've already dismantled almost all the laws that were put in place after the crash of '29 !
There really is n't much more we can do !
! Well , wait - we CAN allow people to trade entirely on credit , with no collateral at all .
Would that make you happy , Mr. Bush ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that you George?
How much more do your neocon masters want us to deregulate?
We've already dismantled almost all the laws that were put in place after the crash of '29!
There really isn't much more we can do!
!Well, wait - we CAN allow people to trade entirely on credit, with no collateral at all.
Would that make you happy, Mr. Bush?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29777065</id>
	<title>Re:No, they are guilty of the ONLY crime in busine</title>
	<author>Tarsir</author>
	<datestamp>1255790220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ironic that cynicism and insight are so much alike, isn't it?</p></div><p>Not ironic, just a comment on how cynical you yourself are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironic that cynicism and insight are so much alike , is n't it ? Not ironic , just a comment on how cynical you yourself are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironic that cynicism and insight are so much alike, isn't it?Not ironic, just a comment on how cynical you yourself are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774491</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813</id>
	<title>Well now...</title>
	<author>jamstar7</author>
	<datestamp>1255692960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Per TFA, the trading took place from Jan 2007 to July 2007 and they're just making arrests now?  Interesting...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Per TFA , the trading took place from Jan 2007 to July 2007 and they 're just making arrests now ?
Interesting.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Per TFA, the trading took place from Jan 2007 to July 2007 and they're just making arrests now?
Interesting...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255693140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably wanted to make sure they had a solid case.  If they are guilty, who else thinks these guys will get away with a lower sentence then a non-violent drug user?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably wanted to make sure they had a solid case .
If they are guilty , who else thinks these guys will get away with a lower sentence then a non-violent drug user ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably wanted to make sure they had a solid case.
If they are guilty, who else thinks these guys will get away with a lower sentence then a non-violent drug user?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775021</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255703880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nope.  Most people don't realize it, but financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely.</p></div><p>I don't have a problem with the amount of punishment, but I'm pissed with how few get caught. If you follow the market and take a look at important announcements like rate cuts, economic numbers, earnings reports, etc., you could often (not always) see high volume trade before the announcements pre-announcing the result. Its sad that people almost never get caught, considering how often it happens.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope .
Most people do n't realize it , but financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely.I do n't have a problem with the amount of punishment , but I 'm pissed with how few get caught .
If you follow the market and take a look at important announcements like rate cuts , economic numbers , earnings reports , etc. , you could often ( not always ) see high volume trade before the announcements pre-announcing the result .
Its sad that people almost never get caught , considering how often it happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope.
Most people don't realize it, but financial crimes in the US are punished pretty severely.I don't have a problem with the amount of punishment, but I'm pissed with how few get caught.
If you follow the market and take a look at important announcements like rate cuts, economic numbers, earnings reports, etc., you could often (not always) see high volume trade before the announcements pre-announcing the result.
Its sad that people almost never get caught, considering how often it happens.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773809</id>
	<title>Intel</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1255692960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't Intel just a while ago discontinue some of their largest product line too?</p><p>And IBM only supports the enterprise companies.</p><p>Even if Google just today reported great increase in profits, maybe recression still has something to do with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't Intel just a while ago discontinue some of their largest product line too ? And IBM only supports the enterprise companies.Even if Google just today reported great increase in profits , maybe recression still has something to do with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't Intel just a while ago discontinue some of their largest product line too?And IBM only supports the enterprise companies.Even if Google just today reported great increase in profits, maybe recression still has something to do with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775449</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255710840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Enron's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.</p></div><p>And apparently now the Supreme Court is hearing his appeal on the basis that it may have been impossible for him to get a fair trial in Houston.  Great defense: "I f*ed up too bad to be able to get a fair trial".  Oh wait, it worked for the big finance companies!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Enron 's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.And apparently now the Supreme Court is hearing his appeal on the basis that it may have been impossible for him to get a fair trial in Houston .
Great defense : " I f * ed up too bad to be able to get a fair trial " .
Oh wait , it worked for the big finance companies !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enron's Skilling got 24 years in jail for conspiracy to defraud investors.And apparently now the Supreme Court is hearing his appeal on the basis that it may have been impossible for him to get a fair trial in Houston.
Great defense: "I f*ed up too bad to be able to get a fair trial".
Oh wait, it worked for the big finance companies!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775585</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1255713300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many other criminals don't get caught either.</p><p>As for insider trading, to me the following is just as unfair and should be as illegal.</p><p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html?\_r=1&amp;pagewanted=print" title="nytimes.com">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html?\_r=1&amp;pagewanted=print</a> [nytimes.com]</p><p>So who is going to jail for that?</p><p>In the finance trading world, knowing something 1 day before the rest of the market isn't so different from knowing something 30 milliseconds before everyone else in the market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many other criminals do n't get caught either.As for insider trading , to me the following is just as unfair and should be as illegal.http : //www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html ? \ _r = 1&amp;pagewanted = print [ nytimes.com ] So who is going to jail for that ? In the finance trading world , knowing something 1 day before the rest of the market is n't so different from knowing something 30 milliseconds before everyone else in the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many other criminals don't get caught either.As for insider trading, to me the following is just as unfair and should be as illegal.http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html?\_r=1&amp;pagewanted=print [nytimes.com]So who is going to jail for that?In the finance trading world, knowing something 1 day before the rest of the market isn't so different from knowing something 30 milliseconds before everyone else in the market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29785993</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255896480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been reading about this case on the financial blogs, they bugged Rajaratnam's phones for years. These guys better plea bargain like crazy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been reading about this case on the financial blogs , they bugged Rajaratnam 's phones for years .
These guys better plea bargain like crazy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been reading about this case on the financial blogs, they bugged Rajaratnam's phones for years.
These guys better plea bargain like crazy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776205</id>
	<title>Re:No, they are guilty of the ONLY crime in busine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255812480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say it's because they didn't have the right friends in the SEC and government. Look at what Goldman Sachs has been getting away with for the past few years and they're still front-running the stock market and getting insider information from FED/treasury. Yet they get a free pass, not even talk of an investigation, never mind people seeing the inside of the gray-bar motel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say it 's because they did n't have the right friends in the SEC and government .
Look at what Goldman Sachs has been getting away with for the past few years and they 're still front-running the stock market and getting insider information from FED/treasury .
Yet they get a free pass , not even talk of an investigation , never mind people seeing the inside of the gray-bar motel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say it's because they didn't have the right friends in the SEC and government.
Look at what Goldman Sachs has been getting away with for the past few years and they're still front-running the stock market and getting insider information from FED/treasury.
Yet they get a free pass, not even talk of an investigation, never mind people seeing the inside of the gray-bar motel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775263</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255707600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All good points, but I really, strongly feel the need to point out that it's "a while". Two words.</p><p>A. While.</p><p>Indefinite article, followed by Noun.</p><p>NOT adverb. NOT "awhile". Not "alot" either (which isn't even a word, but if you're making the former error, you should, at least for consistency's sake, make the latter).</p><p>However. Good points though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All good points , but I really , strongly feel the need to point out that it 's " a while " .
Two words.A .
While.Indefinite article , followed by Noun.NOT adverb .
NOT " awhile " .
Not " alot " either ( which is n't even a word , but if you 're making the former error , you should , at least for consistency 's sake , make the latter ) .However .
Good points though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All good points, but I really, strongly feel the need to point out that it's "a while".
Two words.A.
While.Indefinite article, followed by Noun.NOT adverb.
NOT "awhile".
Not "alot" either (which isn't even a word, but if you're making the former error, you should, at least for consistency's sake, make the latter).However.
Good points though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773845</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>riverat1</author>
	<datestamp>1255693140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably nobody cared to investigate it until last January or February.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably nobody cared to investigate it until last January or February .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably nobody cared to investigate it until last January or February.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774171</id>
	<title>Re:That's not too bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255695600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Helping the Nazis is worse than insider trading.</p></div><p>So how bad are Nazis that take part in insider trading?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Helping the Nazis is worse than insider trading.So how bad are Nazis that take part in insider trading ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Helping the Nazis is worse than insider trading.So how bad are Nazis that take part in insider trading?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775079</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1255704720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Drug crimes are often victimless, financial crimes not so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Drug crimes are often victimless , financial crimes not so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Drug crimes are often victimless, financial crimes not so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775615</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>tthomas48</author>
	<datestamp>1255713900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No they're not. Are you nuts? How much time do you think you get for robbing a liquor store? Do you know how many liquor stores you'd have to knock over to make even a million dollars? Let's assume that all liquor stores keep $5000 in the till. You knock them over after hours in a way that ensures no one could possibly get hurt, and not armed. That's 200 liquor stores to make a million bucks.</p><p>No chance in hell you're getting less than 24 years for knocking over 200 liquor stores.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No they 're not .
Are you nuts ?
How much time do you think you get for robbing a liquor store ?
Do you know how many liquor stores you 'd have to knock over to make even a million dollars ?
Let 's assume that all liquor stores keep $ 5000 in the till .
You knock them over after hours in a way that ensures no one could possibly get hurt , and not armed .
That 's 200 liquor stores to make a million bucks.No chance in hell you 're getting less than 24 years for knocking over 200 liquor stores .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No they're not.
Are you nuts?
How much time do you think you get for robbing a liquor store?
Do you know how many liquor stores you'd have to knock over to make even a million dollars?
Let's assume that all liquor stores keep $5000 in the till.
You knock them over after hours in a way that ensures no one could possibly get hurt, and not armed.
That's 200 liquor stores to make a million bucks.No chance in hell you're getting less than 24 years for knocking over 200 liquor stores.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965</id>
	<title>No, they are guilty of the ONLY crime in business</title>
	<author>spun</author>
	<datestamp>1255693860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's called, 'getting caught.' You see, when you get caught, everyone else in business has to pretend they don't do it, and that they are shocked! Shocked and appalled at the bad apples ruining the barrel. By 'bad apples,' they mean, 'people just like me except they got caught' and by 'ruining the barrel,' they mean, 'drawing the attention of the peons to our utter corruption.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's called , 'getting caught .
' You see , when you get caught , everyone else in business has to pretend they do n't do it , and that they are shocked !
Shocked and appalled at the bad apples ruining the barrel .
By 'bad apples, ' they mean , 'people just like me except they got caught ' and by 'ruining the barrel, ' they mean , 'drawing the attention of the peons to our utter corruption .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's called, 'getting caught.
' You see, when you get caught, everyone else in business has to pretend they don't do it, and that they are shocked!
Shocked and appalled at the bad apples ruining the barrel.
By 'bad apples,' they mean, 'people just like me except they got caught' and by 'ruining the barrel,' they mean, 'drawing the attention of the peons to our utter corruption.
'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776285</id>
	<title>Re:Well now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255771800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parent comment is interesting but perhaps a little inaccurate</p><p><div class="quote"><p>By 1986, Boesky had become an arbitrageur  who had amassed a fortune of more than US$200 million by betting on corporate takeovers. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigated him for making investments based on tips received from corporate insiders. These stock acquisitions were sometimes brazen, with massive purchases occurring only a few days before a corporation  announced a takeover. Boesky was on the cover of TIME December 1, 1986.</p><p>Although insider trading of this kind was illegal, laws prohibiting it were rarely enforced until Boesky was prosecuted.[5] Boesky cooperated with the SEC and informed, including the case against financier Michael Milken. As a result of a plea bargain Boesky received a prison sentence of 3.5 years and was fined US$100 million. Although <b>he was released after two years </b>, he was barred from working in the securities business for the remainder of his life.[6] He served his prison sentence at Lompoc Federal Prison Camp near Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.</p><p>Boesky never recovered his reputation after doing a stint in jail, and paying hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and compensation for his Guinness share-trading fraud role and a host of separate insider dealing scams.</p></div><p>It's not a bad life is it even getting caught and doing two years for it. Perhaps the problem is that we might do the same if we ad the same opportunities</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent comment is interesting but perhaps a little inaccurateBy 1986 , Boesky had become an arbitrageur who had amassed a fortune of more than US $ 200 million by betting on corporate takeovers .
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigated him for making investments based on tips received from corporate insiders .
These stock acquisitions were sometimes brazen , with massive purchases occurring only a few days before a corporation announced a takeover .
Boesky was on the cover of TIME December 1 , 1986.Although insider trading of this kind was illegal , laws prohibiting it were rarely enforced until Boesky was prosecuted .
[ 5 ] Boesky cooperated with the SEC and informed , including the case against financier Michael Milken .
As a result of a plea bargain Boesky received a prison sentence of 3.5 years and was fined US $ 100 million .
Although he was released after two years , he was barred from working in the securities business for the remainder of his life .
[ 6 ] He served his prison sentence at Lompoc Federal Prison Camp near Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.Boesky never recovered his reputation after doing a stint in jail , and paying hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and compensation for his Guinness share-trading fraud role and a host of separate insider dealing scams.It 's not a bad life is it even getting caught and doing two years for it .
Perhaps the problem is that we might do the same if we ad the same opportunities</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent comment is interesting but perhaps a little inaccurateBy 1986, Boesky had become an arbitrageur  who had amassed a fortune of more than US$200 million by betting on corporate takeovers.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigated him for making investments based on tips received from corporate insiders.
These stock acquisitions were sometimes brazen, with massive purchases occurring only a few days before a corporation  announced a takeover.
Boesky was on the cover of TIME December 1, 1986.Although insider trading of this kind was illegal, laws prohibiting it were rarely enforced until Boesky was prosecuted.
[5] Boesky cooperated with the SEC and informed, including the case against financier Michael Milken.
As a result of a plea bargain Boesky received a prison sentence of 3.5 years and was fined US$100 million.
Although he was released after two years , he was barred from working in the securities business for the remainder of his life.
[6] He served his prison sentence at Lompoc Federal Prison Camp near Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.Boesky never recovered his reputation after doing a stint in jail, and paying hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and compensation for his Guinness share-trading fraud role and a host of separate insider dealing scams.It's not a bad life is it even getting caught and doing two years for it.
Perhaps the problem is that we might do the same if we ad the same opportunities
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774907</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29778425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776819
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29778571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29785993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29794863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29780827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774315
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29777065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_16_200207_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_200207.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773881
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_200207.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773847
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774229
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774535
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774433
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29794863
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29778425
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774527
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29785993
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776005
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776529
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774505
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774907
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776285
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775021
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775585
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775099
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775449
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775079
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774897
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775615
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775263
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29780827
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774315
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29775115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773845
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776819
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_200207.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773965
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29778571
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774491
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29777065
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29776205
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_16_200207.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29773853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_16_200207.29774171
</commentlist>
</conversation>
