<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_17_0038253</id>
	<title>Obama Talks Internet Freedom, China Censors</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1258473840000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:my/.username@@@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">eldavojohn</a> writes <i>"In a town-hall-style Q&amp;A with (hand-picked) Chinese students in Shanghai, President Obama <a href="http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/obama-on-chinas-great-firewall/">made several statements knocking China's firewall and censorship</a>. Quoting: 'I am a big believer in technology and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information. I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable. They can begin to think for themselves. That generates new ideas. It encourages creativity. And so I've always been a strong supporter of open Internet use. I'm a big supporter of non-censorship. This is part of the tradition of the United States that I discussed before, and I recognize that different countries have different traditions. I can tell you that in the United States, the fact that we have free Internet &mdash; or unrestricted Internet access &mdash; is a source of strength, and I think should be encouraged.' The Washington Post notes that the event was broadcast only on the local level, and in fact Chinese authorities <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/16/AR2009111601512.html?hpid\%3Dtopnews&amp;sub=AR">removed from view what little coverage it had gotten</a>, after about an hour. But at least <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120450377&amp;ps=cprs">American news media are gobbling it up</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " In a town-hall-style Q&amp;A with ( hand-picked ) Chinese students in Shanghai , President Obama made several statements knocking China 's firewall and censorship .
Quoting : 'I am a big believer in technology and I 'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information .
I think that the more freely information flows , the stronger the society becomes , because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable .
They can begin to think for themselves .
That generates new ideas .
It encourages creativity .
And so I 've always been a strong supporter of open Internet use .
I 'm a big supporter of non-censorship .
This is part of the tradition of the United States that I discussed before , and I recognize that different countries have different traditions .
I can tell you that in the United States , the fact that we have free Internet    or unrestricted Internet access    is a source of strength , and I think should be encouraged .
' The Washington Post notes that the event was broadcast only on the local level , and in fact Chinese authorities removed from view what little coverage it had gotten , after about an hour .
But at least American news media are gobbling it up .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "In a town-hall-style Q&amp;A with (hand-picked) Chinese students in Shanghai, President Obama made several statements knocking China's firewall and censorship.
Quoting: 'I am a big believer in technology and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information.
I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.
They can begin to think for themselves.
That generates new ideas.
It encourages creativity.
And so I've always been a strong supporter of open Internet use.
I'm a big supporter of non-censorship.
This is part of the tradition of the United States that I discussed before, and I recognize that different countries have different traditions.
I can tell you that in the United States, the fact that we have free Internet — or unrestricted Internet access — is a source of strength, and I think should be encouraged.
' The Washington Post notes that the event was broadcast only on the local level, and in fact Chinese authorities removed from view what little coverage it had gotten, after about an hour.
But at least American news media are gobbling it up.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126358</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>loteck</author>
	<datestamp>1258399260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know between this and the Education speech, Obama must be getting kind of tired of having radical extremist political parties censoring his otherwise basic and principled messages. Good thing that kind of thing doesn't happen over he... <i>wait</i>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know between this and the Education speech , Obama must be getting kind of tired of having radical extremist political parties censoring his otherwise basic and principled messages .
Good thing that kind of thing does n't happen over he... wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know between this and the Education speech, Obama must be getting kind of tired of having radical extremist political parties censoring his otherwise basic and principled messages.
Good thing that kind of thing doesn't happen over he... wait...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125908</id>
	<title>Obama had it wrong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258393980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>China is doing the firewall NOT just to censor. That firewall is TWO ways. It allows them to protect their military when it appears that an attack is about to occur, say, right after they launched their own attacks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>China is doing the firewall NOT just to censor .
That firewall is TWO ways .
It allows them to protect their military when it appears that an attack is about to occur , say , right after they launched their own attacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is doing the firewall NOT just to censor.
That firewall is TWO ways.
It allows them to protect their military when it appears that an attack is about to occur, say, right after they launched their own attacks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>twostix</author>
	<datestamp>1258397700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm getting mighty tired of these quite frankly disgusting comparisons between China and western liberal democracies (mostly the US) on sites like this by western middleclass individuals living lavish lifestyles in soft liberal democracies whenever China comes up.</p><p>It's not clever, it's not rational in fact it's offensive to the people who are suffering under the boot of whatever the hell China is these days (some sort of techo communist/fascist/authoritarian hybrid that we haven't seen before) simply for being so "evil" as to be pro-democratic or to have an opinion contrary to the local party official and/or state apparatus.  Or pehaps even wanting to work in the city rather than being a peasant sorry to bad, no permit for you to leave your district.</p><p>Truly the white collar middle class have become like petulant children in the west.  That you find yourself having to advocate for the free flow of images and video of babies and children being sexually molested in an attempt to find something to criticize about the US is pretty damn telling about A) How damned wonderful it is to live in our respective western countries and B) How absolutely morally and intellectually bankrupt you are that you cannot see that but rather prefer to believe that your freedom is somehow impuned to even within 0.1\% of the average Chinese persons day to day existence is to be honest rather disgusting.</p><p>Educate your self a little you ignorant hick.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human\_rights\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human\_rights\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm getting mighty tired of these quite frankly disgusting comparisons between China and western liberal democracies ( mostly the US ) on sites like this by western middleclass individuals living lavish lifestyles in soft liberal democracies whenever China comes up.It 's not clever , it 's not rational in fact it 's offensive to the people who are suffering under the boot of whatever the hell China is these days ( some sort of techo communist/fascist/authoritarian hybrid that we have n't seen before ) simply for being so " evil " as to be pro-democratic or to have an opinion contrary to the local party official and/or state apparatus .
Or pehaps even wanting to work in the city rather than being a peasant sorry to bad , no permit for you to leave your district.Truly the white collar middle class have become like petulant children in the west .
That you find yourself having to advocate for the free flow of images and video of babies and children being sexually molested in an attempt to find something to criticize about the US is pretty damn telling about A ) How damned wonderful it is to live in our respective western countries and B ) How absolutely morally and intellectually bankrupt you are that you can not see that but rather prefer to believe that your freedom is somehow impuned to even within 0.1 \ % of the average Chinese persons day to day existence is to be honest rather disgusting.Educate your self a little you ignorant hick.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human \ _rights \ _in \ _the \ _People 's \ _Republic \ _of \ _China [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm getting mighty tired of these quite frankly disgusting comparisons between China and western liberal democracies (mostly the US) on sites like this by western middleclass individuals living lavish lifestyles in soft liberal democracies whenever China comes up.It's not clever, it's not rational in fact it's offensive to the people who are suffering under the boot of whatever the hell China is these days (some sort of techo communist/fascist/authoritarian hybrid that we haven't seen before) simply for being so "evil" as to be pro-democratic or to have an opinion contrary to the local party official and/or state apparatus.
Or pehaps even wanting to work in the city rather than being a peasant sorry to bad, no permit for you to leave your district.Truly the white collar middle class have become like petulant children in the west.
That you find yourself having to advocate for the free flow of images and video of babies and children being sexually molested in an attempt to find something to criticize about the US is pretty damn telling about A) How damned wonderful it is to live in our respective western countries and B) How absolutely morally and intellectually bankrupt you are that you cannot see that but rather prefer to believe that your freedom is somehow impuned to even within 0.1\% of the average Chinese persons day to day existence is to be honest rather disgusting.Educate your self a little you ignorant hick.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human\_rights\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126810</id>
	<title>At least they know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258448820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I sometimes envy the Chinese, they at least know that they're being censored. Here in the "west", it's just getting started and people in general have no idea what's going on.<br>The first step to defeating censorship is public awareness of censorship. China has us beat here. By the time China stops censorship, the western countries will have become what they demonzied.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sometimes envy the Chinese , they at least know that they 're being censored .
Here in the " west " , it 's just getting started and people in general have no idea what 's going on.The first step to defeating censorship is public awareness of censorship .
China has us beat here .
By the time China stops censorship , the western countries will have become what they demonzied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sometimes envy the Chinese, they at least know that they're being censored.
Here in the "west", it's just getting started and people in general have no idea what's going on.The first step to defeating censorship is public awareness of censorship.
China has us beat here.
By the time China stops censorship, the western countries will have become what they demonzied.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130788</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1258481760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, but there have recently been a rash of "if it looks like a minor" or "even if no child was harmed" or "stupid minor takes picture of self" cases where the result was more oppression. How does the excuse of preventing children from being harmed justify that?</p><p>Censorship is a slippery slope. Better that it doesn't happen at all, than try to stop somewhere halfway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , but there have recently been a rash of " if it looks like a minor " or " even if no child was harmed " or " stupid minor takes picture of self " cases where the result was more oppression .
How does the excuse of preventing children from being harmed justify that ? Censorship is a slippery slope .
Better that it does n't happen at all , than try to stop somewhere halfway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, but there have recently been a rash of "if it looks like a minor" or "even if no child was harmed" or "stupid minor takes picture of self" cases where the result was more oppression.
How does the excuse of preventing children from being harmed justify that?Censorship is a slippery slope.
Better that it doesn't happen at all, than try to stop somewhere halfway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125942</id>
	<title>Not so fast on the creativity</title>
	<author>Trip6</author>
	<datestamp>1258394340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Chinese are noted for their LACK of creativity due to their strict caste structure - in that a person of a lower caste cannot offer up a potential improvement in any process or technology that might embarrass a superior.  This structure (or lack thereof) in the US is a big reason we develop so much new out-of-the box technology.  All the Chinese know how to do is copy, right down to our architecture.  The day they learn to think for themselves we are REALLY in trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese are noted for their LACK of creativity due to their strict caste structure - in that a person of a lower caste can not offer up a potential improvement in any process or technology that might embarrass a superior .
This structure ( or lack thereof ) in the US is a big reason we develop so much new out-of-the box technology .
All the Chinese know how to do is copy , right down to our architecture .
The day they learn to think for themselves we are REALLY in trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese are noted for their LACK of creativity due to their strict caste structure - in that a person of a lower caste cannot offer up a potential improvement in any process or technology that might embarrass a superior.
This structure (or lack thereof) in the US is a big reason we develop so much new out-of-the box technology.
All the Chinese know how to do is copy, right down to our architecture.
The day they learn to think for themselves we are REALLY in trouble.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125882</id>
	<title>All LIES</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1258393740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Talk in bold. Reality in plain.</p><p><b>I am a big believer in technology </b></p><p>American IT workers laid off, jobs outsourced.</p><p><b>and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information. </b></p><p>DMCA</p><p><b>I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes</b></p><p>Renegs on promise to release Gitmo pictures</p><p><b>because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.</b></p><p>Continue to occupy Iraq</p><p><b>They can begin to think for themselves. </b></p><p>Decimate the education system</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Talk in bold .
Reality in plain.I am a big believer in technology American IT workers laid off , jobs outsourced.and I 'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information .
DMCAI think that the more freely information flows , the stronger the society becomesRenegs on promise to release Gitmo picturesbecause then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.Continue to occupy IraqThey can begin to think for themselves .
Decimate the education system</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Talk in bold.
Reality in plain.I am a big believer in technology American IT workers laid off, jobs outsourced.and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information.
DMCAI think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomesRenegs on promise to release Gitmo picturesbecause then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.Continue to occupy IraqThey can begin to think for themselves.
Decimate the education system</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125826</id>
	<title>What's the point</title>
	<author>DrugCheese</author>
	<datestamp>1258393260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of talking to the Chinese if the Chinese people don't hear the message. It's certainly falling on deaf ears on the Chinese authorities.</p><p>And who cares if the American media is gobbling it up, the American people don't care.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of talking to the Chinese if the Chinese people do n't hear the message .
It 's certainly falling on deaf ears on the Chinese authorities.And who cares if the American media is gobbling it up , the American people do n't care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of talking to the Chinese if the Chinese people don't hear the message.
It's certainly falling on deaf ears on the Chinese authorities.And who cares if the American media is gobbling it up, the American people don't care.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127774</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258464840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Your comment still being on slashdot: that is your freedom of speech.<br>Your comment being modded troll: that is everyone else's.</p></div><p>  Modding someone "troll" is the equivalent of censorship, because it makes the comment invisible once the score drops below 1.  The proper response is not censorship.  The proper response is to click reply and say "I disagree".</p><p>As for rights, even the ancient greeks and romans recognized their existence.  Lock a man in a cage and his first instinct is to search for escape.  He has an inalienable desire (what we call a "right") to liberty, not a slave.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your comment still being on slashdot : that is your freedom of speech.Your comment being modded troll : that is everyone else 's .
Modding someone " troll " is the equivalent of censorship , because it makes the comment invisible once the score drops below 1 .
The proper response is not censorship .
The proper response is to click reply and say " I disagree " .As for rights , even the ancient greeks and romans recognized their existence .
Lock a man in a cage and his first instinct is to search for escape .
He has an inalienable desire ( what we call a " right " ) to liberty , not a slave .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Your comment still being on slashdot: that is your freedom of speech.Your comment being modded troll: that is everyone else's.
Modding someone "troll" is the equivalent of censorship, because it makes the comment invisible once the score drops below 1.
The proper response is not censorship.
The proper response is to click reply and say "I disagree".As for rights, even the ancient greeks and romans recognized their existence.
Lock a man in a cage and his first instinct is to search for escape.
He has an inalienable desire (what we call a "right") to liberty, not a slave.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126902</id>
	<title>Hope and Change</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1258449960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Chinese get no Hope and Change, instead they either get silence or the opportunity to live on several people due to the Weekly Organ van visit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese get no Hope and Change , instead they either get silence or the opportunity to live on several people due to the Weekly Organ van visit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese get no Hope and Change, instead they either get silence or the opportunity to live on several people due to the Weekly Organ van visit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30138434</id>
	<title>Censorship</title>
	<author>AniVisual</author>
	<datestamp>1258469340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> In communist China, they censor Obama on censoring you so they can censor YOU!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In communist China , they censor Obama on censoring you so they can censor YOU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In communist China, they censor Obama on censoring you so they can censor YOU!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258392780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unfortunately, in Obamas' case, words speak louder than actions.</p></div><p>Kinda what I was thinking.  When he said:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.</p></div><p>Of course, that doesn't apply if you criticize HIS government or try to hold it accountable.  Ask Fox News.</p><p>Note:  Regardless of your opinion of Fox News, it's obvious that they are being punished for daring to report on anything negative about Obama.  Remember, the Freedom of the Press is just as much a RIGHT as Freedom of Speech, or Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure (privacy) or any other RIGHT listed in the Bill of Rights.  Just because you don't like what Fox News says, doesn't mean that they don't have a RIGHT to say it!  The fact that they are being bullied by the government should scare the shit out of EVERYONE.  Saying that Fox News is NOT a news station (not the press) is the same as saying what comes out of YOUR mouth is not speech.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , in Obamas ' case , words speak louder than actions.Kinda what I was thinking .
When he said : because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.Of course , that does n't apply if you criticize HIS government or try to hold it accountable .
Ask Fox News.Note : Regardless of your opinion of Fox News , it 's obvious that they are being punished for daring to report on anything negative about Obama .
Remember , the Freedom of the Press is just as much a RIGHT as Freedom of Speech , or Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure ( privacy ) or any other RIGHT listed in the Bill of Rights .
Just because you do n't like what Fox News says , does n't mean that they do n't have a RIGHT to say it !
The fact that they are being bullied by the government should scare the shit out of EVERYONE .
Saying that Fox News is NOT a news station ( not the press ) is the same as saying what comes out of YOUR mouth is not speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, in Obamas' case, words speak louder than actions.Kinda what I was thinking.
When he said:because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.Of course, that doesn't apply if you criticize HIS government or try to hold it accountable.
Ask Fox News.Note:  Regardless of your opinion of Fox News, it's obvious that they are being punished for daring to report on anything negative about Obama.
Remember, the Freedom of the Press is just as much a RIGHT as Freedom of Speech, or Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure (privacy) or any other RIGHT listed in the Bill of Rights.
Just because you don't like what Fox News says, doesn't mean that they don't have a RIGHT to say it!
The fact that they are being bullied by the government should scare the shit out of EVERYONE.
Saying that Fox News is NOT a news station (not the press) is the same as saying what comes out of YOUR mouth is not speech.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128392</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>jbezorg</author>
	<datestamp>1258470960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Amendment I</p><p>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; <i>or abridging the freedom of speech</i>, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>abridge (verb)<br>
<br>
1. to reduce the length of (a written work) by condensing or rewriting<br>
2. to curtail; diminish<br>
3. (Law) Archaic to deprive of (privileges, rights, etc.)</p></div><p>From: ArcherB (796902)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What ever happened to "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."</p></div><p>There is no way you can make the claim that Fox's voice has been silenced when they are shouting from the highest mountain "Woe unto the Fox Network! See how we have been wronged!"</p><p>Fox News does still has access to the White House press releases, thus they still have the same access to the information just like a vast majority of smaller news agencies. They just no longer have the privileged access to the President.</p><p>Privileged access to the President is not an inalienable right. If that were true, then every news agency from Fox News to the Podunk Town Crier would be able to compel the President to do an interview. That isn't the case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ; or abridging the freedom of speech , or of the press ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble , and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.abridge ( verb ) 1. to reduce the length of ( a written work ) by condensing or rewriting 2. to curtail ; diminish 3 .
( Law ) Archaic to deprive of ( privileges , rights , etc .
) From : ArcherB ( 796902 ) What ever happened to " I may not agree with what you say , but I 'll defend to the death your right to say it .
" There is no way you can make the claim that Fox 's voice has been silenced when they are shouting from the highest mountain " Woe unto the Fox Network !
See how we have been wronged !
" Fox News does still has access to the White House press releases , thus they still have the same access to the information just like a vast majority of smaller news agencies .
They just no longer have the privileged access to the President.Privileged access to the President is not an inalienable right .
If that were true , then every news agency from Fox News to the Podunk Town Crier would be able to compel the President to do an interview .
That is n't the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.abridge (verb)

1. to reduce the length of (a written work) by condensing or rewriting
2. to curtail; diminish
3.
(Law) Archaic to deprive of (privileges, rights, etc.
)From: ArcherB (796902)What ever happened to "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
"There is no way you can make the claim that Fox's voice has been silenced when they are shouting from the highest mountain "Woe unto the Fox Network!
See how we have been wronged!
"Fox News does still has access to the White House press releases, thus they still have the same access to the information just like a vast majority of smaller news agencies.
They just no longer have the privileged access to the President.Privileged access to the President is not an inalienable right.
If that were true, then every news agency from Fox News to the Podunk Town Crier would be able to compel the President to do an interview.
That isn't the case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128038</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>QCompson</author>
	<datestamp>1258468020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Relax, Mr. Angry.  I wasn't making a comparison to China, nor the Soviet Union, nor Nazi Germany.  I was simply saying that a lot of American politicians will bark about a free internet and the freedom of speech all day long, but will be the first to support censoring certain information when it is an easy boogieman target.
<br> <br>
But I'm glad I gave you an opportunity to vent.  Hope it felt good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Relax , Mr. Angry. I was n't making a comparison to China , nor the Soviet Union , nor Nazi Germany .
I was simply saying that a lot of American politicians will bark about a free internet and the freedom of speech all day long , but will be the first to support censoring certain information when it is an easy boogieman target .
But I 'm glad I gave you an opportunity to vent .
Hope it felt good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Relax, Mr. Angry.  I wasn't making a comparison to China, nor the Soviet Union, nor Nazi Germany.
I was simply saying that a lot of American politicians will bark about a free internet and the freedom of speech all day long, but will be the first to support censoring certain information when it is an easy boogieman target.
But I'm glad I gave you an opportunity to vent.
Hope it felt good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130066</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258478340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anything taken out of context can be funny.</p><p>Please place these comments in the context where they were spoken, if they really were said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything taken out of context can be funny.Please place these comments in the context where they were spoken , if they really were said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything taken out of context can be funny.Please place these comments in the context where they were spoken, if they really were said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126108</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258396320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oblig. Pres. of Madagascar: SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oblig .
Pres. of Madagascar : SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oblig.
Pres. of Madagascar: SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30136792</id>
	<title>What a crock!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258459620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a crock!  This from the administration that wants to control and shut down the internet at his whim.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a crock !
This from the administration that wants to control and shut down the internet at his whim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a crock!
This from the administration that wants to control and shut down the internet at his whim.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125814</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>dragonxtc</author>
	<datestamp>1258393140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a republican and even I found that funny</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a republican and even I found that funny</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a republican and even I found that funny</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30131920</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1258485900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Meanwhile some republicans can't take jokes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile some republicans ca n't take jokes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meanwhile some republicans can't take jokes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126028</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126022</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258395240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you fucking kidding me? Fox News is critical of Obama because he's from The Other Team, not because they have nuanced and serious criticisms of his policies. They raise asinine complaints and conspiracy theories, they outright lie, hell, they're even backing political protests. Stop drinking the Konservatism Kool-Aid and open your eyes. Fox is not the shining beacon of hope and reason in a world gone madly socialist. Fox is the living incarnation of all that is wrong with American politics. The "us vs. them" mentality, the willingness to do absolutely <b>anything</b> to take the other guy down, ethics or reason be damned, the pervasive religious bullshit--Fox is all that and more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you fucking kidding me ?
Fox News is critical of Obama because he 's from The Other Team , not because they have nuanced and serious criticisms of his policies .
They raise asinine complaints and conspiracy theories , they outright lie , hell , they 're even backing political protests .
Stop drinking the Konservatism Kool-Aid and open your eyes .
Fox is not the shining beacon of hope and reason in a world gone madly socialist .
Fox is the living incarnation of all that is wrong with American politics .
The " us vs. them " mentality , the willingness to do absolutely anything to take the other guy down , ethics or reason be damned , the pervasive religious bullshit--Fox is all that and more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you fucking kidding me?
Fox News is critical of Obama because he's from The Other Team, not because they have nuanced and serious criticisms of his policies.
They raise asinine complaints and conspiracy theories, they outright lie, hell, they're even backing political protests.
Stop drinking the Konservatism Kool-Aid and open your eyes.
Fox is not the shining beacon of hope and reason in a world gone madly socialist.
Fox is the living incarnation of all that is wrong with American politics.
The "us vs. them" mentality, the willingness to do absolutely anything to take the other guy down, ethics or reason be damned, the pervasive religious bullshit--Fox is all that and more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30131410</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258484340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to Chinese</p><p>Bill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the Chinese</p><p>Glenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</p></div><p>TYPICAL SLASHDOT READER:</p><p>I know everything.  Enuf said.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United StatesTYPICAL SLASHDOT READER : I know everything .
Enuf said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United StatesTYPICAL SLASHDOT READER:I know everything.
Enuf said.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125684</id>
	<title>Anti-censorship, huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258391640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So that's why he's opposing and releasing all of the information about the ACTA treaty as well as allowing the pictures of the "POWs" that were enhanced interrogated to be shown.  It's great to know that he got rid of all those national security and state secrets defenses in the courts, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So that 's why he 's opposing and releasing all of the information about the ACTA treaty as well as allowing the pictures of the " POWs " that were enhanced interrogated to be shown .
It 's great to know that he got rid of all those national security and state secrets defenses in the courts , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So that's why he's opposing and releasing all of the information about the ACTA treaty as well as allowing the pictures of the "POWs" that were enhanced interrogated to be shown.
It's great to know that he got rid of all those national security and state secrets defenses in the courts, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128732</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>ahankinson</author>
	<datestamp>1258472640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."</p></div></blockquote><p>I've always wondered how that would stand up when what is being said is half-truths, willful deception and twisting of facts. Do we still have to defend their right to say it?</p><p>In rational discourse, where each party acts in good faith to uncover the truth and facts, I completely agree with you. But what I've seen isn't particularly rational discourse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I may not agree with what you say , but I 'll defend to the death your right to say it .
" I 've always wondered how that would stand up when what is being said is half-truths , willful deception and twisting of facts .
Do we still have to defend their right to say it ? In rational discourse , where each party acts in good faith to uncover the truth and facts , I completely agree with you .
But what I 've seen is n't particularly rational discourse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
"I've always wondered how that would stand up when what is being said is half-truths, willful deception and twisting of facts.
Do we still have to defend their right to say it?In rational discourse, where each party acts in good faith to uncover the truth and facts, I completely agree with you.
But what I've seen isn't particularly rational discourse.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130946</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>BitHive</author>
	<datestamp>1258482420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is retarded.  You are retarded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is retarded .
You are retarded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is retarded.
You are retarded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126028</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125796</id>
	<title>With so much time for speeches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258393020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>how does Obama find time to work at all?</htmltext>
<tokenext>how does Obama find time to work at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how does Obama find time to work at all?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125990</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258394820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So is it complete coincidence that Fox News began "doing it's job" meaning being completely critical of the actions of the President only once George Bush left office?</p><p>That same Bill of Rights also grants the government the right to criticize a news organization that seems to relish making the news as well as covering it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So is it complete coincidence that Fox News began " doing it 's job " meaning being completely critical of the actions of the President only once George Bush left office ? That same Bill of Rights also grants the government the right to criticize a news organization that seems to relish making the news as well as covering it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So is it complete coincidence that Fox News began "doing it's job" meaning being completely critical of the actions of the President only once George Bush left office?That same Bill of Rights also grants the government the right to criticize a news organization that seems to relish making the news as well as covering it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30129614</id>
	<title>Leon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258476540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is not the Chinese censoreship that bothers me.  they are open abotu the fact they sensor.  It is the internet censorship in Germany and Australia that bothers me.  Even people in those contries are unaware that it is going on, and that it is often polically motivated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not the Chinese censoreship that bothers me .
they are open abotu the fact they sensor .
It is the internet censorship in Germany and Australia that bothers me .
Even people in those contries are unaware that it is going on , and that it is often polically motivated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not the Chinese censoreship that bothers me.
they are open abotu the fact they sensor.
It is the internet censorship in Germany and Australia that bothers me.
Even people in those contries are unaware that it is going on, and that it is often polically motivated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126076</id>
	<title>Re:Anti-censorship, huh?</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1258395900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>---insert typical, "when my party does it it's ok" defense here---</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>---insert typical , " when my party does it it 's ok " defense here---</tokentext>
<sentencetext>---insert typical, "when my party does it it's ok" defense here---</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126008</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>user4574</author>
	<datestamp>1258395000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration."</i> <br> <br>
What are you talking about? Even The Daily Show regularly criticizes the Obama administration. Fox is just the only network going full-on Joseph Goebbels with their coverage. And while I'm happy that the Bill of Rights exists and allows such free speech, Fox news perpetually fails at even its self-stated goal of delivering "fair and balanced" news coverage. But if by "doing its job" you mean going above and beyond to create a manufactured atmosphere of bigotry and fear, then yeah, I totally agree.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration .
" What are you talking about ?
Even The Daily Show regularly criticizes the Obama administration .
Fox is just the only network going full-on Joseph Goebbels with their coverage .
And while I 'm happy that the Bill of Rights exists and allows such free speech , Fox news perpetually fails at even its self-stated goal of delivering " fair and balanced " news coverage .
But if by " doing its job " you mean going above and beyond to create a manufactured atmosphere of bigotry and fear , then yeah , I totally agree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration.
"  
What are you talking about?
Even The Daily Show regularly criticizes the Obama administration.
Fox is just the only network going full-on Joseph Goebbels with their coverage.
And while I'm happy that the Bill of Rights exists and allows such free speech, Fox news perpetually fails at even its self-stated goal of delivering "fair and balanced" news coverage.
But if by "doing its job" you mean going above and beyond to create a manufactured atmosphere of bigotry and fear, then yeah, I totally agree.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738</id>
	<title>A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258392360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm glad that in the United States, the president agrees that an open and uncensored internet is important to ensure the free exchange of ideas.  Sometimes, to ensure true freedom of speech, you have to allow that which you may find objectionable or offensive, because once you start blocking some information, you start to... OMG what's that?  Child pornography?!?  BLOCK EVERYTHING, ARREST EVERYONE, MONITOR ALL TRAFFIC!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad that in the United States , the president agrees that an open and uncensored internet is important to ensure the free exchange of ideas .
Sometimes , to ensure true freedom of speech , you have to allow that which you may find objectionable or offensive , because once you start blocking some information , you start to... OMG what 's that ?
Child pornography ? ! ?
BLOCK EVERYTHING , ARREST EVERYONE , MONITOR ALL TRAFFIC !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad that in the United States, the president agrees that an open and uncensored internet is important to ensure the free exchange of ideas.
Sometimes, to ensure true freedom of speech, you have to allow that which you may find objectionable or offensive, because once you start blocking some information, you start to... OMG what's that?
Child pornography?!?
BLOCK EVERYTHING, ARREST EVERYONE, MONITOR ALL TRAFFIC!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125714</id>
	<title>Free Internet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258392120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They block it and we sniff it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They block it and we sniff it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They block it and we sniff it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126296</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258398780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm getting mighty tired of these quite frankly disgusting comparisons between China and western liberal democracies (mostly the US) on sites like this by western middleclass individuals living lavish lifestyles in soft liberal democracies whenever China comes up.</p><p>It's not clever, it's not rational in fact it's offensive to the people who are suffering under the boot of whatever the hell China is these days (some sort of techo communist/fascist/authoritarian hybrid that we haven't seen before) simply for being so "evil" as to be pro-democratic or to have an opinion contrary to the local party official and/or state apparatus.  Or pehaps even wanting to work in the city rather than being a peasant sorry to bad, no permit for you to leave your district.</p><p>Truly the white collar middle class have become like petulant children in the west.  That you find yourself having to advocate for the free flow of images and video of babies and children being sexually molested in an attempt to find something to criticize about the US is pretty damn telling about A) How damned wonderful it is to live in our respective western countries and B) How absolutely morally and intellectually bankrupt you are that you cannot see that but rather prefer to believe that your freedom is somehow impuned to even within 0.1\% of the average Chinese persons day to day existence is to be honest rather disgusting.</p><p>Educate your self a little you ignorant hick.</p><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human\_rights\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human\_rights\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China</a> [wikipedia.org] </p></div><p>Uh... twostix...</p><p>I don't think QCompson was really comparing the US to China, I think he was just talking about the paradox of trying to create an open society when you ban things that offend you.</p><p>Of course then again, I suppose most of us support some form of censorship or another...</p><p>Copyright == Legal monopoly on the sale of an idea in order to encourage the creation of ideas.  (At least in theory...)</p><p>Still, you could argue that the idea of copyright itself it outdated...</p><p>Regarding the kiddie porn statement, I am not sure if QCompson was stating that there are silly laws out there under the whole "Protect the children" campaign, or if he believes that it's silly for other depictions of illegal events to be shown but not this one.</p><p>In any case....  Let the flame war begin.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm getting mighty tired of these quite frankly disgusting comparisons between China and western liberal democracies ( mostly the US ) on sites like this by western middleclass individuals living lavish lifestyles in soft liberal democracies whenever China comes up.It 's not clever , it 's not rational in fact it 's offensive to the people who are suffering under the boot of whatever the hell China is these days ( some sort of techo communist/fascist/authoritarian hybrid that we have n't seen before ) simply for being so " evil " as to be pro-democratic or to have an opinion contrary to the local party official and/or state apparatus .
Or pehaps even wanting to work in the city rather than being a peasant sorry to bad , no permit for you to leave your district.Truly the white collar middle class have become like petulant children in the west .
That you find yourself having to advocate for the free flow of images and video of babies and children being sexually molested in an attempt to find something to criticize about the US is pretty damn telling about A ) How damned wonderful it is to live in our respective western countries and B ) How absolutely morally and intellectually bankrupt you are that you can not see that but rather prefer to believe that your freedom is somehow impuned to even within 0.1 \ % of the average Chinese persons day to day existence is to be honest rather disgusting.Educate your self a little you ignorant hick .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human \ _rights \ _in \ _the \ _People 's \ _Republic \ _of \ _China [ wikipedia.org ] Uh... twostix...I do n't think QCompson was really comparing the US to China , I think he was just talking about the paradox of trying to create an open society when you ban things that offend you.Of course then again , I suppose most of us support some form of censorship or another...Copyright = = Legal monopoly on the sale of an idea in order to encourage the creation of ideas .
( At least in theory... ) Still , you could argue that the idea of copyright itself it outdated...Regarding the kiddie porn statement , I am not sure if QCompson was stating that there are silly laws out there under the whole " Protect the children " campaign , or if he believes that it 's silly for other depictions of illegal events to be shown but not this one.In any case.... Let the flame war begin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm getting mighty tired of these quite frankly disgusting comparisons between China and western liberal democracies (mostly the US) on sites like this by western middleclass individuals living lavish lifestyles in soft liberal democracies whenever China comes up.It's not clever, it's not rational in fact it's offensive to the people who are suffering under the boot of whatever the hell China is these days (some sort of techo communist/fascist/authoritarian hybrid that we haven't seen before) simply for being so "evil" as to be pro-democratic or to have an opinion contrary to the local party official and/or state apparatus.
Or pehaps even wanting to work in the city rather than being a peasant sorry to bad, no permit for you to leave your district.Truly the white collar middle class have become like petulant children in the west.
That you find yourself having to advocate for the free flow of images and video of babies and children being sexually molested in an attempt to find something to criticize about the US is pretty damn telling about A) How damned wonderful it is to live in our respective western countries and B) How absolutely morally and intellectually bankrupt you are that you cannot see that but rather prefer to believe that your freedom is somehow impuned to even within 0.1\% of the average Chinese persons day to day existence is to be honest rather disgusting.Educate your self a little you ignorant hick.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human\_rights\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China [wikipedia.org] Uh... twostix...I don't think QCompson was really comparing the US to China, I think he was just talking about the paradox of trying to create an open society when you ban things that offend you.Of course then again, I suppose most of us support some form of censorship or another...Copyright == Legal monopoly on the sale of an idea in order to encourage the creation of ideas.
(At least in theory...)Still, you could argue that the idea of copyright itself it outdated...Regarding the kiddie porn statement, I am not sure if QCompson was stating that there are silly laws out there under the whole "Protect the children" campaign, or if he believes that it's silly for other depictions of illegal events to be shown but not this one.In any case....  Let the flame war begin.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126178</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>jjohnson</author>
	<datestamp>1258397340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bwahahahahahah!</p><p>mod parent +1 Hilariously delusional.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bwahahahahahah ! mod parent + 1 Hilariously delusional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bwahahahahahah!mod parent +1 Hilariously delusional.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30132048</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1258486320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think liking freedom of speech causes you to be a childporn loving pervert which makes you rape children which leads to eating babies from there you join the RIAA and start a cellphone company.<br> <br> As Glenn beck would say: "I'm not saying they are I'm sure they are good people. But isn't it interesting that these freedom lovers want child porn to be legal? It makes you think doesn't it. And I ask you why WHY am I the only many with enough balls to ask these questions??<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. Its the liberal agenda and media that keep tiptoeing around the filthy rapist freedomofspeachers!!."<br> <br>At least he's not as bad as micheal savage (3rd most listened to radio show) who would simply suggest we form lynch mobs and kill anyone that suggests freedom of speech is good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think liking freedom of speech causes you to be a childporn loving pervert which makes you rape children which leads to eating babies from there you join the RIAA and start a cellphone company .
As Glenn beck would say : " I 'm not saying they are I 'm sure they are good people .
But is n't it interesting that these freedom lovers want child porn to be legal ?
It makes you think does n't it .
And I ask you why WHY am I the only many with enough balls to ask these questions ? ?
.. Its the liberal agenda and media that keep tiptoeing around the filthy rapist freedomofspeachers ! ! .
" At least he 's not as bad as micheal savage ( 3rd most listened to radio show ) who would simply suggest we form lynch mobs and kill anyone that suggests freedom of speech is good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think liking freedom of speech causes you to be a childporn loving pervert which makes you rape children which leads to eating babies from there you join the RIAA and start a cellphone company.
As Glenn beck would say: "I'm not saying they are I'm sure they are good people.
But isn't it interesting that these freedom lovers want child porn to be legal?
It makes you think doesn't it.
And I ask you why WHY am I the only many with enough balls to ask these questions??
.. Its the liberal agenda and media that keep tiptoeing around the filthy rapist freedomofspeachers!!.
" At least he's not as bad as micheal savage (3rd most listened to radio show) who would simply suggest we form lynch mobs and kill anyone that suggests freedom of speech is good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127490</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258459980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's sad that that right now, <b>Fox News is</b> the only <b>network</b> that is critical of the Obama administration. In other words, <b>Fox News is</b> the only <b>network</b> that is DOING ITS JOB! I find it sad that so many like yourself will openly mock the only <b>network</b> that separates the American media from the Chinese.</p></div></blockquote><p>I find it funny that you refer to Fox News as a "network" rather than a "<b>news network</b>". Very carefully put. Nice one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sad that that right now , Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration .
In other words , Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB !
I find it sad that so many like yourself will openly mock the only network that separates the American media from the Chinese.I find it funny that you refer to Fox News as a " network " rather than a " news network " .
Very carefully put .
Nice one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sad that that right now, Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration.
In other words, Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB!
I find it sad that so many like yourself will openly mock the only network that separates the American media from the Chinese.I find it funny that you refer to Fox News as a "network" rather than a "news network".
Very carefully put.
Nice one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125858</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>narcberry</author>
	<datestamp>1258393560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're one of those Bill of Rights truthers aren't you. When will you weirdos ever realize no such rights actually exists?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're one of those Bill of Rights truthers are n't you .
When will you weirdos ever realize no such rights actually exists ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're one of those Bill of Rights truthers aren't you.
When will you weirdos ever realize no such rights actually exists?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125756</id>
	<title>He likes openness... and yet......</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258392600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>he likes to hide the 3 strike rule using the 'we cant tell you about it due to national security' ruse.... bowing down to his corporate leash holders...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>he likes to hide the 3 strike rule using the 'we cant tell you about it due to national security ' ruse.... bowing down to his corporate leash holders.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>he likes to hide the 3 strike rule using the 'we cant tell you about it due to national security' ruse.... bowing down to his corporate leash holders...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130418</id>
	<title>Re:What's the point</title>
	<author>gtall</author>
	<datestamp>1258479960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point is that Obama gets to tickle the American media with thoughts of "There, I showed the flag." Still, it is better that he said it than Richard Nixon kissing Mao's ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point is that Obama gets to tickle the American media with thoughts of " There , I showed the flag .
" Still , it is better that he said it than Richard Nixon kissing Mao 's ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point is that Obama gets to tickle the American media with thoughts of "There, I showed the flag.
" Still, it is better that he said it than Richard Nixon kissing Mao's ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125900</id>
	<title>Sure, poke the dragon in the eye...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258393920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope someone else is standing ready to buy next months $30B worth of treasury bills...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope someone else is standing ready to buy next months $ 30B worth of treasury bills.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope someone else is standing ready to buy next months $30B worth of treasury bills...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125946</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258394400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your comment still being on slashdot: that is your freedom of speech.</p><p>Your comment being modded troll: that is everyone else's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your comment still being on slashdot : that is your freedom of speech.Your comment being modded troll : that is everyone else 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your comment still being on slashdot: that is your freedom of speech.Your comment being modded troll: that is everyone else's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644</id>
	<title>we'll see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258391280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, in Obamas' case, words speak louder than actions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , in Obamas ' case , words speak louder than actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, in Obamas' case, words speak louder than actions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258393680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to Chinese</p><p>Bill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the Chinese</p><p>Glenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</p></div><p>As I sit here and read all these comments about how great it is that we live in a free country and how terrible it is that the Chinese don't, I am shocked by your comment.  The primary tool of the Chinese government is the control of the media.  As long as they control the media, the rest doesn't matter.  They can even give their people the absolute freedom of speech.  It won't matter because the only information that the people receive will be good news about the people in power.  How can they say anything negative when they don't know of the government doing anything negative.  Sure, the party leaders don't read every news cast that every reporter reads, but if a reporter says something they don't like, they are whipped back in line with a quickness.</p><p>Fortunately, here we have the Bill Of Rights.  It guarantees your right to say whatever you want.  Just as importantly, it guarantees the right of Fox News to say whatever they want.  It's sad that that right now, Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration.  In other words, Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB!  I find it sad that so many like yourself will openly mock the only network that separates the American media from the Chinese.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United StatesAs I sit here and read all these comments about how great it is that we live in a free country and how terrible it is that the Chinese do n't , I am shocked by your comment .
The primary tool of the Chinese government is the control of the media .
As long as they control the media , the rest does n't matter .
They can even give their people the absolute freedom of speech .
It wo n't matter because the only information that the people receive will be good news about the people in power .
How can they say anything negative when they do n't know of the government doing anything negative .
Sure , the party leaders do n't read every news cast that every reporter reads , but if a reporter says something they do n't like , they are whipped back in line with a quickness.Fortunately , here we have the Bill Of Rights .
It guarantees your right to say whatever you want .
Just as importantly , it guarantees the right of Fox News to say whatever they want .
It 's sad that that right now , Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration .
In other words , Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB !
I find it sad that so many like yourself will openly mock the only network that separates the American media from the Chinese .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United StatesAs I sit here and read all these comments about how great it is that we live in a free country and how terrible it is that the Chinese don't, I am shocked by your comment.
The primary tool of the Chinese government is the control of the media.
As long as they control the media, the rest doesn't matter.
They can even give their people the absolute freedom of speech.
It won't matter because the only information that the people receive will be good news about the people in power.
How can they say anything negative when they don't know of the government doing anything negative.
Sure, the party leaders don't read every news cast that every reporter reads, but if a reporter says something they don't like, they are whipped back in line with a quickness.Fortunately, here we have the Bill Of Rights.
It guarantees your right to say whatever you want.
Just as importantly, it guarantees the right of Fox News to say whatever they want.
It's sad that that right now, Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration.
In other words, Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB!
I find it sad that so many like yourself will openly mock the only network that separates the American media from the Chinese.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30133454</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258491000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Modding someone "troll" is the equivalent<br>&gt; of censorship, because it makes the comment<br>&gt; invisible once the score drops below 1.</p><p>The persecution complex of the far right wing is absolutely hilarious!  Almost as funny as their mentally challenged understanding of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.</p><p>We're not stopping you from speaking, we're just tuning you out --same as that homeless guy that keeps telling me about the govn. robots controlling his brain.  Could it be that we just don't want to hear the stupid things you're saying?</p><p>And the Whitehouse doesn't need to entertain the questions of outrageously partisan, pretend news orgainzations either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Modding someone " troll " is the equivalent &gt; of censorship , because it makes the comment &gt; invisible once the score drops below 1.The persecution complex of the far right wing is absolutely hilarious !
Almost as funny as their mentally challenged understanding of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.We 're not stopping you from speaking , we 're just tuning you out --same as that homeless guy that keeps telling me about the govn .
robots controlling his brain .
Could it be that we just do n't want to hear the stupid things you 're saying ? And the Whitehouse does n't need to entertain the questions of outrageously partisan , pretend news orgainzations either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Modding someone "troll" is the equivalent&gt; of censorship, because it makes the comment&gt; invisible once the score drops below 1.The persecution complex of the far right wing is absolutely hilarious!
Almost as funny as their mentally challenged understanding of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.We're not stopping you from speaking, we're just tuning you out --same as that homeless guy that keeps telling me about the govn.
robots controlling his brain.
Could it be that we just don't want to hear the stupid things you're saying?And the Whitehouse doesn't need to entertain the questions of outrageously partisan, pretend news orgainzations either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130478</id>
	<title>ACTA?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258480320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'I am a big believer in technology and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information. I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable. They can begin to think for themselves. That generates new ideas. It encourages creativity. And so I've always been a strong supporter of open Internet use. I'm a big supporter of non-censorship. This is part of the tradition of the United States that I discussed before, and I recognize that different countries have different traditions. I can tell you that in the United States, the fact that we have free Internet &mdash; or unrestricted Internet access &mdash; is a source of strength, and I think should be encouraged.'</p><p>Guess that someone forgot about ACTA amongst other things in that trite little piece...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'I am a big believer in technology and I 'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information .
I think that the more freely information flows , the stronger the society becomes , because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable .
They can begin to think for themselves .
That generates new ideas .
It encourages creativity .
And so I 've always been a strong supporter of open Internet use .
I 'm a big supporter of non-censorship .
This is part of the tradition of the United States that I discussed before , and I recognize that different countries have different traditions .
I can tell you that in the United States , the fact that we have free Internet    or unrestricted Internet access    is a source of strength , and I think should be encouraged .
'Guess that someone forgot about ACTA amongst other things in that trite little piece.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'I am a big believer in technology and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information.
I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable.
They can begin to think for themselves.
That generates new ideas.
It encourages creativity.
And so I've always been a strong supporter of open Internet use.
I'm a big supporter of non-censorship.
This is part of the tradition of the United States that I discussed before, and I recognize that different countries have different traditions.
I can tell you that in the United States, the fact that we have free Internet — or unrestricted Internet access — is a source of strength, and I think should be encouraged.
'Guess that someone forgot about ACTA amongst other things in that trite little piece...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125978</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>Profane MuthaFucka</author>
	<datestamp>1258394640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea, whatever happened to it.</p><p>Because Fox News isn't broadcasting anywhere anymore. It's obvious that their rights aren't protected, and they were shut down.</p><p>Wait, What???? Oh sorry, here's Fox News on my TV right here!</p><p>I guess their rights to say whatever shit they want are indeed being defended. My bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , whatever happened to it.Because Fox News is n't broadcasting anywhere anymore .
It 's obvious that their rights are n't protected , and they were shut down.Wait , What ? ? ? ?
Oh sorry , here 's Fox News on my TV right here ! I guess their rights to say whatever shit they want are indeed being defended .
My bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, whatever happened to it.Because Fox News isn't broadcasting anywhere anymore.
It's obvious that their rights aren't protected, and they were shut down.Wait, What????
Oh sorry, here's Fox News on my TV right here!I guess their rights to say whatever shit they want are indeed being defended.
My bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126014</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>brainfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1258395060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>People mock Fox News because it <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane\_Akre" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">lies</a> [wikipedia.org] and gives so much airtime to pundits who are <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/nov/12/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-claims-health-care-bill-includes-insura/" title="politifact.com" rel="nofollow">clearly</a> [politifact.com] <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/oct/27/bill-oreilly/oreilly-accuses-media-not-following-foxs-lead-anit/" title="politifact.com" rel="nofollow">divorced</a> [politifact.com] <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/27/rush-limbaugh/limbaugh-circumcision-obama-cdc/" title="politifact.com" rel="nofollow">from</a> [politifact.com] <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/oct/15/glenn-beck/beck-says-45-percent-physicians-would-quit-if-heal/" title="politifact.com" rel="nofollow">reality</a> [politifact.com].
<br> <br>
But I'm sure you knew that already.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People mock Fox News because it lies [ wikipedia.org ] and gives so much airtime to pundits who are clearly [ politifact.com ] divorced [ politifact.com ] from [ politifact.com ] reality [ politifact.com ] .
But I 'm sure you knew that already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People mock Fox News because it lies [wikipedia.org] and gives so much airtime to pundits who are clearly [politifact.com] divorced [politifact.com] from [politifact.com] reality [politifact.com].
But I'm sure you knew that already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126028</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1258395300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meanwhile some liberal somewhere makes up:</p><p>On Fox News  The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to Chinese</p><p>Bill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the Chinese</p><p>Glenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile some liberal somewhere makes up : On Fox News The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meanwhile some liberal somewhere makes up:On Fox News  The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127884</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>QCompson</author>
	<datestamp>1258466520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well said. I find the lack of decency expressed by the 'child porn market = free speech' crowd to be staggering. As if the opportunity to sadistically destroy children, or leer from a safe distance while other people do it for you, is a human right.</p></div><p>Ah yes.  "...sadistically destroy children."  Typical inflammatory speech used whenever the topic of child pornography comes up, hoping to silence all debate on the subject.  That's also how politicians use it to pass misguided laws and pander to voters.
<br> <br>
So when a 16 year old sends a nude video of herself to her boyfriend, which one is sadistically destroying children?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .
I find the lack of decency expressed by the 'child porn market = free speech ' crowd to be staggering .
As if the opportunity to sadistically destroy children , or leer from a safe distance while other people do it for you , is a human right.Ah yes .
" ...sadistically destroy children .
" Typical inflammatory speech used whenever the topic of child pornography comes up , hoping to silence all debate on the subject .
That 's also how politicians use it to pass misguided laws and pander to voters .
So when a 16 year old sends a nude video of herself to her boyfriend , which one is sadistically destroying children ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.
I find the lack of decency expressed by the 'child porn market = free speech' crowd to be staggering.
As if the opportunity to sadistically destroy children, or leer from a safe distance while other people do it for you, is a human right.Ah yes.
"...sadistically destroy children.
"  Typical inflammatory speech used whenever the topic of child pornography comes up, hoping to silence all debate on the subject.
That's also how politicians use it to pass misguided laws and pander to voters.
So when a 16 year old sends a nude video of herself to her boyfriend, which one is sadistically destroying children?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126316</id>
	<title>Re:A tradition of the United States</title>
	<author>shadowofwind</author>
	<datestamp>1258398960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said.  I find the lack of decency expressed by the 'child porn market = free speech' crowd to be staggering.  As if the opportunity to sadistically destroy children, or leer from a safe distance while other people do it for you, is a human right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .
I find the lack of decency expressed by the 'child porn market = free speech ' crowd to be staggering .
As if the opportunity to sadistically destroy children , or leer from a safe distance while other people do it for you , is a human right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.
I find the lack of decency expressed by the 'child porn market = free speech' crowd to be staggering.
As if the opportunity to sadistically destroy children, or leer from a safe distance while other people do it for you, is a human right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720</id>
	<title>Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>MosesJones</author>
	<datestamp>1258392240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to Chinese</p><p>Bill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the Chinese</p><p>Glenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main headline : Obama SELLS American Freedom to ChineseBill O'Reilly - Obama is betraying all Americans by giving away the secrets of freedom to the ChineseGlenn Beck - Obama is raising a Chinese Army to take over the United States</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126256</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>maglor\_83</author>
	<datestamp>1258398420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's sad that that right now, Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration. In other words, Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB!</p></div><p>Fox News would be doing its job if they would have given the same report had a republican given that speech instead of Obama.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sad that that right now , Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration .
In other words , Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB ! Fox News would be doing its job if they would have given the same report had a republican given that speech instead of Obama .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sad that that right now, Fox News is the only network that is critical of the Obama administration.
In other words, Fox News is the only network that is DOING ITS JOB!Fox News would be doing its job if they would have given the same report had a republican given that speech instead of Obama.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128678</id>
	<title>bleh</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1258472400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, because internet censorship is the most egregious form of oppression going on in China right now.  Sheesh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because internet censorship is the most egregious form of oppression going on in China right now .
Sheesh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because internet censorship is the most egregious form of oppression going on in China right now.
Sheesh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898</id>
	<title>Re:we'll see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258393920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Note: Regardless of your opinion of Fox News, it's obvious that they are being punished for daring to report on anything negative about Obama. Remember, the Freedom of the Press is just as much a RIGHT as Freedom of Speech, or Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure (privacy) or any other RIGHT listed in the Bill of Rights. Just because you don't like what Fox News says, doesn't mean that they don't have a RIGHT to say it! The fact that they are being bullied by the government should scare the shit out of EVERYONE. Saying that Fox News is NOT a news station (not the press) is the same as saying what comes out of YOUR mouth is not speech.</p></div><p>It's a sad day when the Bill of Rights is modded "Troll".</p><p>What ever happened to <b>"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."</b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Note : Regardless of your opinion of Fox News , it 's obvious that they are being punished for daring to report on anything negative about Obama .
Remember , the Freedom of the Press is just as much a RIGHT as Freedom of Speech , or Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure ( privacy ) or any other RIGHT listed in the Bill of Rights .
Just because you do n't like what Fox News says , does n't mean that they do n't have a RIGHT to say it !
The fact that they are being bullied by the government should scare the shit out of EVERYONE .
Saying that Fox News is NOT a news station ( not the press ) is the same as saying what comes out of YOUR mouth is not speech.It 's a sad day when the Bill of Rights is modded " Troll " .What ever happened to " I may not agree with what you say , but I 'll defend to the death your right to say it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note: Regardless of your opinion of Fox News, it's obvious that they are being punished for daring to report on anything negative about Obama.
Remember, the Freedom of the Press is just as much a RIGHT as Freedom of Speech, or Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure (privacy) or any other RIGHT listed in the Bill of Rights.
Just because you don't like what Fox News says, doesn't mean that they don't have a RIGHT to say it!
The fact that they are being bullied by the government should scare the shit out of EVERYONE.
Saying that Fox News is NOT a news station (not the press) is the same as saying what comes out of YOUR mouth is not speech.It's a sad day when the Bill of Rights is modded "Troll".What ever happened to "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125806</id>
	<title>I just don't know.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258393020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an admittedly confused emotional being in this crazy world we live in - I just don't know what to believe anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an admittedly confused emotional being in this crazy world we live in - I just do n't know what to believe anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an admittedly confused emotional being in this crazy world we live in - I just don't know what to believe anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130364</id>
	<title>Re:All LIES</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258479720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is something funny about a hard core rightwinger like yourself who defended W's invasion/occuption of Iraq, Gitmo, etc, now carping that Obama is not moving fast enough on doing the things that he is doing and accusing him of basically neo-con actions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is something funny about a hard core rightwinger like yourself who defended W 's invasion/occuption of Iraq , Gitmo , etc , now carping that Obama is not moving fast enough on doing the things that he is doing and accusing him of basically neo-con actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is something funny about a hard core rightwinger like yourself who defended W's invasion/occuption of Iraq, Gitmo, etc, now carping that Obama is not moving fast enough on doing the things that he is doing and accusing him of basically neo-con actions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130118</id>
	<title>China's control, bad.  FCC control...</title>
	<author>gedrin</author>
	<datestamp>1258478640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most people here seem to agree that China's policy of censorship is a bad thing.<br> <br>Most people at Slashdot also seem to believe it's a good idea to allow the US government's FCC greater authority over network communications.<br> <br>I'm not saying that the same sort of control is currently proposed.  I'm just saying that it's funny to see Slashdotters who believe that the FCC will only use regulatory authority to prevent traffic shaping won't attempt to expand that authority or use it for purposes other than those desired.  But yeh, the fact that China can just shut down a network because it's not conforming to government standards is bad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people here seem to agree that China 's policy of censorship is a bad thing .
Most people at Slashdot also seem to believe it 's a good idea to allow the US government 's FCC greater authority over network communications .
I 'm not saying that the same sort of control is currently proposed .
I 'm just saying that it 's funny to see Slashdotters who believe that the FCC will only use regulatory authority to prevent traffic shaping wo n't attempt to expand that authority or use it for purposes other than those desired .
But yeh , the fact that China can just shut down a network because it 's not conforming to government standards is bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people here seem to agree that China's policy of censorship is a bad thing.
Most people at Slashdot also seem to believe it's a good idea to allow the US government's FCC greater authority over network communications.
I'm not saying that the same sort of control is currently proposed.
I'm just saying that it's funny to see Slashdotters who believe that the FCC will only use regulatory authority to prevent traffic shaping won't attempt to expand that authority or use it for purposes other than those desired.
But yeh, the fact that China can just shut down a network because it's not conforming to government standards is bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125972</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile on Fox News</title>
	<author>bjourne</author>
	<datestamp>1258394580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cry me a river. The medias role is to enlighten and educate, not being a bunch of whiny bitches presenting whatever "view" their corporate masters want them to. If they can not plainly state that Obama's speech is the closest thing to "fuck you China" any US president has ever come, then they don't deserve to be called media because they have thoroughly failed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cry me a river .
The medias role is to enlighten and educate , not being a bunch of whiny bitches presenting whatever " view " their corporate masters want them to .
If they can not plainly state that Obama 's speech is the closest thing to " fuck you China " any US president has ever come , then they do n't deserve to be called media because they have thoroughly failed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cry me a river.
The medias role is to enlighten and educate, not being a bunch of whiny bitches presenting whatever "view" their corporate masters want them to.
If they can not plainly state that Obama's speech is the closest thing to "fuck you China" any US president has ever come, then they don't deserve to be called media because they have thoroughly failed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128630</id>
	<title>derivative in calculus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258472160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every time I checked, China seems to sport a positive derivative and the US has a negative derivative.</p><p>What make you think that they think that the US have something useful to say?<br>If your system appears to be failing, you're not going to get a very receptive response.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every time I checked , China seems to sport a positive derivative and the US has a negative derivative.What make you think that they think that the US have something useful to say ? If your system appears to be failing , you 're not going to get a very receptive response .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every time I checked, China seems to sport a positive derivative and the US has a negative derivative.What make you think that they think that the US have something useful to say?If your system appears to be failing, you're not going to get a very receptive response.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30143906</id>
	<title>What's NOT being said here...</title>
	<author>KudyardRipling</author>
	<datestamp>1257092460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So far, I have read nothing on this subject about the intractable DEBT that BHO (as well a majorities in the House and Senate) has incurred and how that ill affects USA policy vis-a-vis liberty issues around the world. It appears to me that all who are reading Slashdot (save myself) either are either not US citizens or US citizens that have (access to) an alternate citizenship. This would explain why the Bill of Rights has become a troll.</p><p>"Who is the President?" is not only a question, it is also a statement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So far , I have read nothing on this subject about the intractable DEBT that BHO ( as well a majorities in the House and Senate ) has incurred and how that ill affects USA policy vis-a-vis liberty issues around the world .
It appears to me that all who are reading Slashdot ( save myself ) either are either not US citizens or US citizens that have ( access to ) an alternate citizenship .
This would explain why the Bill of Rights has become a troll .
" Who is the President ?
" is not only a question , it is also a statement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So far, I have read nothing on this subject about the intractable DEBT that BHO (as well a majorities in the House and Senate) has incurred and how that ill affects USA policy vis-a-vis liberty issues around the world.
It appears to me that all who are reading Slashdot (save myself) either are either not US citizens or US citizens that have (access to) an alternate citizenship.
This would explain why the Bill of Rights has become a troll.
"Who is the President?
" is not only a question, it is also a statement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30131410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30132048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30133454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30131920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_17_0038253_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130364
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128678
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130418
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30132048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126202
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126316
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127884
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126810
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126028
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30131920
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30131410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126022
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127490
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126178
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125990
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30126008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30130066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_17_0038253.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125898
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128392
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125946
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30127774
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30133454
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30128732
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125978
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_17_0038253.30125858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
